PDA

View Full Version : Building a city or building a base?


Admiral Vostok
09-15-2003, 01:09 AM
This was inspired by Sith's comment in his template thread about making the Naboo seem like they're building a city rather than a base. This got me thinking about something I've always wanted to extablish in Galactic Battlegrounds, and is worth thinking about for SWGB2. Are we building civilian cities or are we building military bases? There are three ways I can think of to look at it:

:atat: 1) We are building a city. As part of that city we need to deelop a defensive military presence. We are, for example, building Theed or building Otoh Gunga. This is the path taken by the Age series and Rise of Nations.

:atat: 2) We are building a base. There are no civilians: we are merely building something like Echo Base or the Endor Sheild Installation. This is the path taken by Westwood and Blizzard games.

:atat: 3) It depends on the civilisation. I personally think this is the best model for SWGB, and it appears to be what is currently in use or SWGB1. This would split the civs in to two groups: those building cities and those building bases. The Naboo, Gungans and Wookiees, being planetary-based (not galaxy), are the city builders. Their civs aren't just the military of the civ, they are the entire civ including civilians. The Empire, Republic, Confederacy, Rebels, and Federation are base builders, because those civs are galaxy-based (not planetary). Their bases are just military installations, wih no real civilian component to them. They are out to wage war, not deelop new communities.

The difference may seem trivial, but I think it is important to understanding how each civ works. It also relates to techs: rather than researching (they have people "inventing" new things like in Age games) the civs are merely "gaining access" to already existing technologies. They aren't developing as a societal whole (progressing through Ages) but merely as a sub-community or military outpost.

Frozted_MM's
09-15-2003, 09:52 AM
Well I think it would work best by building a city. Cause why build military if there is no city to defend? I kinda wouldnt mind having sperate planets and fighting that way :D that would be cool but far off in the gaming timeline.

Nice post it got me thinking for once :confused:

Sithmaster_821
09-15-2003, 10:56 PM
I inspired people? Wow, I feel all warm inside...

The per civ thing is the best for basically the reasons you gave. Certain civs were more base oriented and others were more city-oriented.

Frozted_MM's
09-16-2003, 12:18 AM
Yea but couldn't republic be kinda both since they had really no military bases only the jedi temple unless you count the kamino platform as a base?

Admiral Vostok
09-16-2003, 06:53 AM
Well using that logic the Trade Federation don't have a base either, except when they take over Theed Palace...

Darth Windu
09-16-2003, 01:56 PM
I voted for Military Base building. Reason being is that i originally wasnt sure, but gave it some thought. What i came up with was this-

1. You play as a General, building the military and fighting enemies
2. Cities are also in the game, and are controlled by that civ's military (ie if u are playing on a Naboo map as the Naboo, you control Theed). However, your enemy can capture cities off you and vice-versa as in Rise of Nations. This way, you get the best of both worlds. I figure that cities would give you sonme sort of bonus, such as extra pop slots or constant income.

JediMasterEd
09-17-2003, 11:24 PM
I'd say city. Don't ask why, I just like the idea of seeing little civies running back and forth while the enemy just takes a stroll down the streets trying to "blend in".

saberhagen
09-18-2003, 11:00 AM
I think it has to be a bit of both, although the military is probably more important because for the purposes of the game the economy exists purely to supply the miltary. Economic development isn't an end in itself, except in monument races and does anyone ever play those?

Admiral Vostok
09-18-2003, 11:55 AM
Saberhagen, just thought I'd say your sig is the best I've seen for a while. :lol:

Frozted_MM's
09-18-2003, 12:56 PM
yea its more military if u want to build a city go straight to a city build room.

pbguy1211
09-18-2003, 05:06 PM
you dont build to make things look pretty.... you build to be economical and to win.
power cores in open areas to make as many buildings as you can under them a turret, maybe 2 for defense... and start pumping out the workers and troopers!!! game over in t2! :D

Sithmaster_821
09-20-2003, 01:10 AM
Yeah, I agree, but we're talking about a potential sequel, and you have to think in general terms until more info is presented.

another_trooper
09-20-2003, 02:07 AM
Id go for a military base, I mean the point of the game (like many others) is to beat your opponent, so build an army and do so.
Cities should be in a Lucasart ripoff of civilization 3 or something

General Nitro
10-12-2003, 11:06 PM
building civs would be better. that way the civ u built could contribute money to your army.

Sithmaster_821
10-13-2003, 03:54 PM
This is what the bases would symbolize and the artwork would reflect, not what the focus of the game would be. So if you have cities, you play the same or atleast similarly to when you have military bases.