The global view

[stas]

I don't think you need to upset existing gameplay to make it work; it's enough for the server to have the option of enabling, say 'realistic world geometry'. The impact on gameplay, to me, appears small enough not to even warrant a separate game mode.

By your argument, the Big World mode in Defcon could be a neat game, though not really Defcon (because it changes the time it takes for units to get from point A to point B). I might even buy it.

P.S. I used a capital 'X' in your name because it was at the start of a sentence. Please don't take personal offense.

[xander]

By your argument, the Big World mode in Defcon could be a neat game, though not really Defcon (because it changes the time it takes for units to get from point A to point B). I might even buy it.

Incorrect. All of the units currently move at a constant speed. If, on the map, points a and b are x distance apart and it takes t time for a unit to get from a to b, then it will take time t for a unit to get from a' to b', where a' and b' are another set of points that are x distance apart, no matter where a' and b' are on the map. Bigworld just scales the amount of time, but does not change the predictability of units moving across a flat map. Your suggetion not only scales the speed with latitude, but makes it far more difficult to predict where units are going to by after an amount of time, and drastically changes the dynamic of the game. Defcon is a very, very mechanically simple game (emphasis on game, not simulation). Your suggestion adds unnecessary complexity to the game.

You stated that I wouldn't notice the change, and that it would not drastically change the way in which the game is played. Right now, it is nearly impossible for the Soviet Union to have subs off of North America's Artic coast by the beginning of Defcon 1. With your change, it would be possible. Now, this is only a minor difference, but there are many such minor differences that would dramatically change the gameplay. I have not once said that this change would be a bad thing, only that it would detract from what Defcon is. If you think it is such a great idea, why not build your own game? or hire someone to do it for you? And remember, Defcon is not meant to simulate the real world. It is meant to be a very simple to learn, hard to master game in the tradition of Chess or Go. Not a war simulation.

xander

[BrianBlessed]

Aren't both Chess and Go supposed to be war simulations anyway?

[xander]

Aren't both Chess and Go supposed to be war simulations anyway?

Exactly my point. They are supposed to be war games, of a kind. Chess is a "tactical" battle between units, while Go is a "strategic" battle to gain territory. Neither is particularly realistic, no? Why should Defcon be any different?

xander

[BrianBlessed]

http://www.leweyg.com/lc/freedgo.html
The mathematical possibilities.....they burn

[donpsychote]

like google earth

hmmm maybe someone should try to mod google earth for that purpose. maybe introversion, they have the AI. it would be hard to do it otherwise, but i can see how an overlay could be implemented over the globe in GE, and then several data overlays (network links) added to represent various units and missiles, if at all possible.
the interface would be web-based and therefore awkward, but at least it's a thought experiment if nothing else.


btw i went to google earth community and found out interesting links:

http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showthreaded ... age/0/vc/1
This set contains more than 1,000 placemarks arranged into folders by missile type and location. It contains every location of an ICBM of current and past weapons, except for those at Patrick AFB. (Cape Canaveral) It is noted on each placemark if it is active or not and if there was a fatal accident. (and also in some cases, when there was a non-fatal accident)

http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showthreaded ... ber=440691
Russian nuclear ICBM bases

There are overlays for AFBs and ports too.

The units overlays could be done like this:
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showflat.php ... D=&fpart=1

I'm not really a programmer and I don't know the exact limitations of GE, but so far only IC port it to GE because of game logic.

[The First Person]

so many killer strategy games would be awesome on google earth. it'll happen. and uh, plz xander relax about the idea of defcon on a globe, it's implied by introversion in the wireframe menu animation. didn't they have that in goldfinger or some other old bond film? anyways defcon rules.
-the first person

[dfg872]

I think an interesting thing to do would be use spherical geometry to calculate the shortest path and then overlay it to the mercator map. The paths would be weird, but interesting.

[xander]

I think an interesting thing to do would be use spherical geometry to calculate the shortest path and then overlay it to the mercator map. The paths would be weird, but interesting.

Stab! Stab! Stabbity stab stab stab!

xander

[jollyreaper]

I think it would be an excellent idea. That is expressly not what the devs said they were going for. It sounds like this would look like the strategic map view for X-Com: UFO Defense. For those who haven't played the game, it's a Global strategy/isometric view squad combat game. Your strategic view lets you build bases around the world and hunt UFO's while researching new technology, recruiting new squaddies, etc. You have a time slider that lets you go from realtime to 24x speed. When you spot a UFO, you scramble interceptors. If you are lucky and shoot it down, you now have a crash site you can investigate and that begins the squad combat mode.

I would love to see a global combat game like this with a 3D world. It'd be cool if you could switch on the fly between a globe and 2D map view, see the orange peel of the earth stretched out and flattened as a map or go back to 3D.

That kind of interface would be a lot of fun for this sort of abstract "icons on black screens" kind of game.