Naked_Lunch
Erudite
<strong>[ Game -> Interview ]</strong>
<p><a href="http://www.armchairempire.com" target="_self" title="s">Armchair Empire</a> sat down with the groovy guys at <a href="http://www.colossai.com/" target="_self" title="asd">Colossai Studios</a> and chatted about <a href="http://www.colossai.com/forum/index.php?c=2&sid=c06885350de69b897d67811c4d2157e2" target="_self" title="dd">Frontline Nation</a>, which you already know from <a href="http://www.tacticularcancer.com/content.php?id=4" target="_self" title="lol"><em>my</em></a> <a title="dd" target="_self" href="http://www.tacticularcancer.com/content.php?id=4">interview</a> is looking pretty damn awesome. But, they did ask some questions I missed so here you go:</p><blockquote><p><strong>Will nations excel in different areas of combat?
(ie. Certain countries are renowned as sea powers, or as an air power.)</strong></p><p> </p><p>We’re
evaluating letting some nations have better stats on specific unit
types. Whether it makes it to the final game or not remains to be seen.</p></blockquote><p>I think I may have touched on this in the RTS: What's Your Thoughts? thread. It might be cool to play as a disadvanted nation, or specialized nation (sea, air, whatever) because of the challenges it offers and, really, what's the fun of just plowing your enemies (Not in the good way)? It's fun to have some variety. For instance, I think it might be a tad unrealistic and just plain silly if say, Romania had the same firepower and resources as Great Britain or Germany. Of course, this wouldn't work well for multiplayer where the point is to win, rather than have fun. The addition of multiplayer in FN may nuke those specific unit advantages, though I don't know if FN will have multiplayer yet. Either way, the game is at the very top of my MUST-HAVE NOW ARRRAGHBLBLB list.</p><p>See for yourself <a href="http://www.armchairempire.com/Interviews/frontline-nation.htm" target="_self" title="lol">here</a>. </p><p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.armchairempire.com" target="_self" title="s">Armchair Empire</a> sat down with the groovy guys at <a href="http://www.colossai.com/" target="_self" title="asd">Colossai Studios</a> and chatted about <a href="http://www.colossai.com/forum/index.php?c=2&sid=c06885350de69b897d67811c4d2157e2" target="_self" title="dd">Frontline Nation</a>, which you already know from <a href="http://www.tacticularcancer.com/content.php?id=4" target="_self" title="lol"><em>my</em></a> <a title="dd" target="_self" href="http://www.tacticularcancer.com/content.php?id=4">interview</a> is looking pretty damn awesome. But, they did ask some questions I missed so here you go:</p><blockquote><p><strong>Will nations excel in different areas of combat?
(ie. Certain countries are renowned as sea powers, or as an air power.)</strong></p><p> </p><p>We’re
evaluating letting some nations have better stats on specific unit
types. Whether it makes it to the final game or not remains to be seen.</p></blockquote><p>I think I may have touched on this in the RTS: What's Your Thoughts? thread. It might be cool to play as a disadvanted nation, or specialized nation (sea, air, whatever) because of the challenges it offers and, really, what's the fun of just plowing your enemies (Not in the good way)? It's fun to have some variety. For instance, I think it might be a tad unrealistic and just plain silly if say, Romania had the same firepower and resources as Great Britain or Germany. Of course, this wouldn't work well for multiplayer where the point is to win, rather than have fun. The addition of multiplayer in FN may nuke those specific unit advantages, though I don't know if FN will have multiplayer yet. Either way, the game is at the very top of my MUST-HAVE NOW ARRRAGHBLBLB list.</p><p>See for yourself <a href="http://www.armchairempire.com/Interviews/frontline-nation.htm" target="_self" title="lol">here</a>. </p><p> </p>
