Author Topic: Can we retire the term "Whipping Boy"?  (Read 1533 times)

Offline x4000

  • Chris Park, Arcen Games Founder and Lead Designer
  • Administrator
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,050
Re: Can we retire the term "Whipping Boy"?
« Reply #15 on: January 02, 2017, 11:40:27 AM »
I expect WBs will still be useful even with per-planet energy, because sometimes AI forces are just too strong and are likely to cause a lot of collateral damage on whatever planet they target most.  The point of the WB is that you care not-a-bit about the collateral damage on it, whereas on other defended planets you kinda want to keep the collateral damage to a minimum usually, heh.

I think we'll see a lot more defense-in-depth, which I'm really excited about.  And that may reduce the frequency of WBs and certain other tactics.  But I think they're still something that is likely to be inevitable when there's a lot of "splash damage" from an AI wave that you want to have make a mess somewhere you don't care about.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games?  Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Tridus

  • Master Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,305
  • I'm going to do what I do best: lecture her!
Re: Can we retire the term "Whipping Boy"?
« Reply #16 on: January 02, 2017, 06:49:25 PM »
WB will probably still exist in some form, even if it's only "the planet the AI has to go through before it gets to the one with the Ion Cannon". Because I sure don't want the one with the Ion Cannon to be the front line target.