On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 02:29:33PM -0600, Richard Kettering wrote: > I think this is a dangerous *absolute* to throw around. It can be > good, but having similar factions can also be good. > Perhaps this is something that should be dependent on ERA, not a fixed > feature of the game. > > Otherwise there isn't a terrible lot of point in having eras - eras > exist to completely redefine the basic dynamics of the game, through > the sole mechanism of providing different unit lists.
Right, I concur. We need more eras :) > In some eras, like default, factions seem to tend towards being > similar, and have units which achieve analogous functions. > Wose=Troll/Heavy Infantry/Guardsmen Naga=Merman=Gryphon=Bat Well, I wouldn't object to Naga=Merman, but there are clear differences between those and gryphons and bats ! All of them have key characteristic, that make them unique, and that make the faction unique. I've never played much with naga/mermen, so this judgment may not be totally accurate, but I find those 2 races to be really too similar - maybe by looking closer I'd find out what really differences them, but when I first saw the nagas, my feeling was they were only introduced to counterballance the mermen in water maps in httt, and maybe it could have been done with less similar units - at least less similar-looking in the drawing. -- Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Debian-related: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Support Debian GNU/Linux: | Freedom, Power, Stability, Gratis http://ydirson.free.fr/ | Check <http://www.debian.org/>