| Re: Your thoughts on Galaxy Clumping? |
Thu, 06 November 2008 11:39   |
|
 vonKreedon |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 610
Registered: March 2003
Location: Seattle, WA USA | |
|
| skoormit wrote on Thu, 06 November 2008 08:08 |
Yes. Clusters give you clear gaps and choke points. That's kind of my point. Without clusters, you don't have such obvious "features," so your tactical analysis must be a lot less binary. Without clear choke points, you don't know where the enemy will come from. You must do more scouting, prepare for more contingencies. Without clear gaps, borders are not so easily defined. Maybe I can take that planet, maybe not. It's not nearly as clear cut.
|
Our difference of opinion on GC seems to come down to either liking the presence of well defined terrain features or preferring a more chaotic strategic environment. I, coming from a love of tactical to operational level gaming, really like terrain. I like that it forces choices on the combatants. I like that it creates predictable vectors for offensives. I like that while the vector may be predictable, a clever opponent may find a back door vector I didn't recognize in my focus on the obvious.
For me Stars! already has so much strategic micro-management that I almost need the reduction operational level micro-management that GC provides. Also, because diplomacy is one of my core strengths as a player, I like the clearly defined border features that GC provides.
[Updated on: Thu, 06 November 2008 11:41] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
