From: Justin S. <jus...@ho...> - 2003-01-16 15:06:31
|
What I am saying is they even out overall, obviously different races get different bonuses in different areas. Or are you sugggesting that we make 1 race better then another with these Racial Abilities? Like give one race a 200% increase in EXP as a bonus and another race a 1% Discount on Light guns? All I am saying was try to make the bonuses equal, ie not like that example I just used. Anyways I think I have done this and they are good. Carnaugh << Entire point is "The numbers DON'T have to even out" look at player styles instead. Player A is predominantly a trader he selects the race with the best race advantages for that particular job. Player B is predominantly a Player Killer he don't give a tats arse about trading other than a means to get higher XP so he gets more proficient in killing. Player C is predominantly a warrior but also trader for himself and his alliance he will select the race that are good to average to both but leans mostly to good war attributes. Player D is predominantly a loner and want to do everything himself, and he will be extinct faster than a bat out of hell, so we don't have to bother about him at all. Player E is predominantly a politician / organizer this is the trickiest one because he might choose the best all round race that has average overall abilities, but can swing either way. The rest of the player categories fall where they may, they either don't care / understand and simply live with either what others tell them or what they happened to choose. This is not to make the racial attributes balance out but to make em counteract as efficiently the above player styles. Don't be afraid of letting the numbers count. /Wiz >> _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup |