I'm excited about the terrain editor and am hoping it will be a great tool for CMs to develop scenarios and such with strategic/tactical objectives.
One of the biggest issues with defining a
general strat structure is agreeing what should affect what and how much.
One solution is to make strat elements
programmable along with the terrain editor, and thereafter we can just criticize the terrain author
.
The following is a rough idea for how implement this.
First, I assume that any terrain will have associated with it a list of strategic objectives ('bridge[a]', 'convoy ship
', ...) and a list of strategic outcomes ('field - closed', 'fuel not available at field [y]', 'bridge [z] rebuild time',...).
The way it works is each strat objective has a state variable ('status=okay', 'status=blown up',...) whose value can affect any strat outcome, according to an [objective Vs. outcome] matrix (spreadsheet).
In a rudimentary approach, the terrain editor could spit out an Excel spreadsheet (or text file) with the [objective Vs. outcome] matrix and the terrain author could fill in this spreadsheet with his desired strat associations and upload the spreadsheet with the terrain.
comments?
bfield
[This message has been edited by bfield (edited 02-23-2000).]
