Why it is not allowed to build on the roads ?
I think that to build palisades, walls or drawbridge should be realistic and sometimes very useful, also to balance the increased power of catapults.
I remember that in my last game when I attacked a castle of my enemy, I have the opportunity to have success also because there was an hole in the enemy walls due to the road.
Comments ?

Braquemart

Another question:
Why aren't we allowed to build roads?

I think the answers to both questions all revolve about the availability of our game-creator and the amount of time needed for coding.

for the same reason you cant build on the trees or rocks.

Good anwser BA..

Braq,
I almost thought to say that it is not realistic to be able to build on the roads because in real life we do not build on the roads but I forgot that we build "highway overpasses" over roads which at least caused me to reconsider my answer. I can imagine that it would be good to at least be able to build a "drawbridge" on a road so that the road can be blocked to others and it is not so unrealistic to think a section of road can not be removed so that a wall or palisade or drawbridge can be built there after the "rubble" is gone.

However certain features on the map like roads, mountains and trees are programmed differently and would probably require too much time and effort to re-program so that they can be removed so that something else can be built in their place;
and because the roads may now have similar programming as the trees and the mountains, it may very well be the reason we cannot build on them.

TR

Basically, TR's right.

Anyone who's messed around with the map editor will know you have the basic terrain, and then you dump objects on it.

Presumably, you can only have one object in a square at a time , so the game won't let you make extra 'objects' on it.

Units seem to be unique again, but then they're probably stored in a different table to the buildings/terrain features.

what about a distroy option. what if u wanted to build a drawbribge but the raod was n ur way and sent u r closest and no other player is around, u hav the choice to distroy it or not. and if u do get rid of it it turns to rubble for about 5 turns or so then turns to what ever the terrain is around it.

Well what BA states it's very logical in the programming sense, I still think that braque's question hold ground in the gameplay sense.

Not that it matters, if Req's little '5x5' kingdoms come about. Then you have a new set of rules ot worry about

actually in the programming sense, it may be fairly easy....as the unit class can move across roads, so all which has to be done is to change it so that all objects can be on roads, this would mean that if a building was destroyed the road would be unaffected, however the script which increases movement may have to be tweaked, depending on which object contains it.....now that’s probably not going to be the case exactly(knowing my luck, its going to turn out to be a completely wrong idea) but that is what I presume it would involve.....

well, in my country we never build barracks or military academies on a highway i hope that is the same in you country braq ?

My question should be intended as the following:
I think that during a war an army could find useful to stop the passage of enemy troops building a barricade on an existing road. So I believe that it is logic to think that palisades, walls and drawbridge should be allowed on a road. Sometimes a player builds walls and drawbridge everywhere around his castle, but he cannot do that on the roads so there is an hole in his defense. I think that if I would build walls everywhere I should stop FIRST the passage on the existing roads to my castle preparing a drawbridge or a walls. The hole on the road makes uneffective the other walls.

Last Edited : Sunday, 2 January 2005 - 17:27

Braq has right drawbridge is from definition for roads
And yes the first thing which you should do when you are in defence, its to block enemys communiction, so you are destroing or blocking main routes.

It may be right, and it may have annoye me in the past too, especially when I wanted to build a 'gatehouse' - but until Req either finds a way to do it (if he needs to ) or decides to spend some time on it...I doubt you'll see it

"The answer is simple"
Build walls both sides of the road,fill the road in between the walls with knights in defence mode!!!

I think that the roads are coded similarly to other passable terrain. Forests and Mountains are by definition impassable. If Req wanted us to build on roads, or even build roads themselves, he would have done it by now. From what I remember, this has come up numerous times. Using Flash, Buttons are used to allow action on any given area(s). All active terrain features are treated as buttons, I believe.

Units are more like "sprites" used in most game programming. Each unit is a separate "object" or structure containing many variables such as troop population, level, etc.

The game has to have a decision tree for what gets affected by various mouse-overs and mouse-clicks. For instance, if one clicks on an empty hex of terrain, the game checks to see if a commandeer is touching that hex. Then that information is used to put a "Build" button up on the information area to the right of the map.

I see no coding reason why one couldn't build on a road and therefore I'm sure Req made it that way to suit his ideas of the game.

Personally, I'm all for being able to build and destroy roads. It would be great. That would be a much harder coding problem than switching on the ability to build on roads. It would involve treating each hex of road with as much complexity as a building. Since the game is really great already, and most likely will be superceded in some foreseeable length of time, I wouldn't bother pushing too hard for this.