31st December 2003, 5:37 PM
Hmm, I don't see how that is contradictory...
What I mean there is just restating what I said in that long post -- if you add RPG elements to a game, you necessarially change the game... and it generally results in less pure strategic depth and more "stuff" in the game. If FE took away the base-building, large unit groups, etc. and didn't add anything, it'd be a simpler game than AW. It still very well could be good, and small unit tactics definitely have a lot of strategy to them too, but it would be simpler in gameplay and strategy. But they didn't do that, they added things... maybe not quite enough to make up for what they lost, but enough to get close and to make FE a deep game in its own (and different) right.
What I mean there is just restating what I said in that long post -- if you add RPG elements to a game, you necessarially change the game... and it generally results in less pure strategic depth and more "stuff" in the game. If FE took away the base-building, large unit groups, etc. and didn't add anything, it'd be a simpler game than AW. It still very well could be good, and small unit tactics definitely have a lot of strategy to them too, but it would be simpler in gameplay and strategy. But they didn't do that, they added things... maybe not quite enough to make up for what they lost, but enough to get close and to make FE a deep game in its own (and different) right.
![[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]](https://www.tendocity.net/logo_bos_79x76.jpg){kind=logo}