Show Posts
1
Game Design / Differences from A&A
« on: November 10, 2005, 02:56:18 PM »
Okay ... I'm intrigued. But, before I engage in a potentially debillitating "discussion" (a very loud one, I predict) with my wife regarding such a hefty game expenditure, I'd like to know a little more about how this monster game differs from A&A.
I read the naval combat example and liked what I saw. I was curious about the concept of a "light carrier" for the Japanese ... thus implying that there were multiple classes of this and, perhaps, other ships.
How does land combat work? How do economics differ from A&A? How many unit types are there? What about R&D - how is that handled? Is movement simple area to area, or is there a strategic movement concept built in as well? Special resources? (I'm sure I will have more questions as well ...)
Any info I can get will help. While I may be intrigued, before I suggest to my wife that I spend over $1,000 of my ... er, OUR (sorry, hon) money, I need to be able to see that this is a game worth possibly spending the next few years worth of game funds for ... or working a heck of a lot of overtime!
- Carl
I read the naval combat example and liked what I saw. I was curious about the concept of a "light carrier" for the Japanese ... thus implying that there were multiple classes of this and, perhaps, other ships.
How does land combat work? How do economics differ from A&A? How many unit types are there? What about R&D - how is that handled? Is movement simple area to area, or is there a strategic movement concept built in as well? Special resources? (I'm sure I will have more questions as well ...)
Any info I can get will help. While I may be intrigued, before I suggest to my wife that I spend over $1,000 of my ... er, OUR (sorry, hon) money, I need to be able to see that this is a game worth possibly spending the next few years worth of game funds for ... or working a heck of a lot of overtime!
- Carl