Re:Games Worth Continuing to Develop (Part 6)
by annexrichmond on Thursday October 27, 2022 @11:55AM
(#33359499)
Definitely. Also there are four ages in AOE, each one increasingly expensive but opens up a lot of technology. It is a big investment and doing so without much control can you leave you very vulnerable and is a key window for your opponent to attack. It’s a unique mechanic that adds a lot of strategy to the game
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Games Worth Continuing to Develop (Part 6)
by nz on Thursday October 27, 2022 @12:40PM
(#33360218)
Yep, which creates a first-strike/second-strike trade-off. If you have enough resources to click-up an age (or to research some tech-upgrade), you have to choose whether to do _that_, or to build up your military. If you choose the latter, you are implicitly trying to cripple/destroy your opponent before they attack you. If you succeed, then well played. But should you _fail_, you have a huge problem.
The interesting thing is that the first-striker's failure implies that the opponent had built himself up enough to survive the first strike. Which implies that their economy was not vulnerable to the first strike, and might also be capable of launching a second-strike soon.
As a kid, I never really _understood_ things like Pearl Harbor -- classic first-strike/second-strike tradeoff example -- until I played this game.