Swap

Infinisearch · Post by **Infinisearch** » August 23rd, 2006, 1:34 am

The ability to click on a friendly unit, so that they swap places with the currently selected unit. Both units would need the same amount of movement points as if nothing special was taking place, both units will have the appropriate amount of movement points subtracted and both units will still have the ability to attack post swap. (Same ZOC rules apply) Potentially limit it to adjacent friendly units, although I personally don't like that limitation.

For when one is trying to hold a tight formation and am currently engaged in such a manner that you'd end up having a unit out of place due to ZOC limitations.

zol · Post by **zol** » August 23rd, 2006, 2:16 am

The difficulty you describe is an element of gameplay just as being unable to move through all terrains equally well is.
It is not a limitation of the interface, but one of the challenges that the game presents.

Website · Post by **Sapient** » August 23rd, 2006, 3:05 am

This is a frequently proposed idea. The possibility has not been entirely ruled out, IIRC.

ranek · Post by **ranek** » August 23rd, 2006, 7:45 am

Yeah it can be annoying trying to move an old unit back and a new one forward especially if they can only move 1 space a turn.

Post by **zookeeper** » August 23rd, 2006, 8:53 am

Would be useful, but might still have some problems that need solving first. I might write a more up-to-date FR about this in a while, if good solutions for the potential issues are found.

My suggestion for the UI would simply be drag-and-drop. Select a unit, hold down the mouse button and hover over a friendly unit, release. If swapping with a unit that's several hexes away, the other unit should move to the adjacent hex through which the swapping unit "entered" it's hex, not automatically run all the way to from where the swapping unit started from (and besides, it wouldn't always be possible). A modifier key (hold the key down while moving normally to activate the "swap mode") and a context menu shortcut ("Swap places with") in addition to the drag-and-drop would be needed too, but those would be easy to add.

Potential problems: WML moveto events. My suggestion: if both units trigger moveto events when you swap them, process them in order - first the events of the "swapping unit", then the events of the "target unit".

Attached is even a swap cursor that would be needed.

Oreb · Post by **Oreb** » August 23rd, 2006, 11:06 am

This is a pretty good Idea, it can work two ways. Saving an allied unit from certain death or stealing their kill

Elvish_Pillager · Post by **Elvish_Pillager** » August 23rd, 2006, 11:07 am

There would also be the problem of teaching the AI to use this feature.

Oreb · Post by **Oreb** » August 23rd, 2006, 11:13 am

Elvish Pillager wrote:There would also be the problem of teaching the AI to use this feature.

The Ai in Wesnoth is already very limited, alot of Map Makers like Roze, really wishes that they could program ai to a further extent

Post by **turin** » August 23rd, 2006, 12:03 pm

Sapient wrote:This is a frequently proposed idea. The possibility has not been entirely ruled out, IIRC.

Um... yes it has... isn't that what being an FPI usually means?

zol · Post by **zol** » August 23rd, 2006, 1:06 pm

turin wrote:
Sapient wrote:This is a frequently proposed idea. The possibility has not been entirely ruled out, IIRC.
Um... yes it has... isn't that what being an FPI usually means?

Not all frequently proposed ideas are FPIs.

Post by **Maeglin Dubh** » August 23rd, 2006, 1:09 pm

My understanding of the FPI is....
"Here's a list of things we're sick of hearing dumb ideas about. If you have a dumb idea that appears on this list, keep it to yourself. If, however, you have a new way of looking at the problem that may provide a decent solution to the issue in question, proceed with caution."

JW · Post by JW » August 23rd, 2006, 1:24 pm

Actually, I don't like this idea for 1 reason, and to demonstrate this reason I'll go to the extreme and hope you understand my reasoning:

Let's say I have 2 enemy units in adjacent hexes completely surrounded by my units in the 8 hexes next to them. Under the current rules I've completely immobilized them. They can't do squat except for attack the units I allowed them to attack. Well, with the new "swap" rule in place they could switch sides and perhaps get more favorable matchups than I intended - and there would be no way to stop such a manuever.

Now, I know that's really extreme, but let's say I'm just trying to ZOC a hurt unit from a strong unit by trapping a weaker one to block him. Let's say I trap a thief next to my hurt mage in daytime so an ulfserker can't get to him (most likely on a failed attack attempt). Well, with the new "swap" rule the ulf could just switch places with the thief and go to town on the mage that I had to strategically place units to protect. Well, now you reduce the strategy of risk-management on offense and make counter-attacking stronger.

Something to chew on.

Post by **zookeeper** » August 23rd, 2006, 1:41 pm

JW wrote:Let's say I have 2 enemy units in adjacent hexes completely surrounded by my units in the 8 hexes next to them. Under the current rules I've completely immobilized them. They can't do squat except for attack the units I allowed them to attack. Well, with the new "swap" rule in place they could switch sides and perhaps get more favorable matchups than I intended - and there would be no way to stop such a manuever.

Now, I know that's really extreme, but let's say I'm just trying to ZOC a hurt unit from a strong unit by trapping a weaker one to block him. Let's say I trap a thief next to my hurt mage in daytime so an ulfserker can't get to him (most likely on a failed attack attempt). Well, with the new "swap" rule the ulf could just switch places with the thief and go to town on the mage that I had to strategically place units to protect. Well, now you reduce the strategy of risk-management on offense and make counter-attacking stronger.

Limits the techniques the overwhelming attacker can use and adds one that the overwhelmed defender can use. I understand the problem on the attacker's part that you depict, but IMO the inability to swap units is far more annoying for the defender than having to use a more careful (and thus less effective) surrounding technique is for the attacker. I'd be all for giving the poor defender a bit more options in that situation.

zol · Post by **zol** » August 23rd, 2006, 2:49 pm

I've considered the 'gridlock' situation before, in which a group has no free cells through which to shuffle units, although I've never actually seen it used against a group of more than two units.

More generally, careful play can prevent some units in a group from changing position, except perhaps by seriously breaking formation. This applies not only to immobilisation, but sufficient restriction for a given purpose as in most ZOCing.

This is a tactical option worth keeping - one of the more satisfying ones to acheive in fact.

Allowing in-place swapping would weaken the positional aspect of every front. It's a big change that can't be 'toned down'.
Also, it's not particularly limited to overwhelming odds, i.e. it doesn't only kick-in when there is a clear difference in total forces, and may actually be used defensively, as well.

It is difficult for me to summarise all of the situations I am imagining, sorry. Just think about what happens in combat; what goes on at the front line, terrain, villages, damage, resistance etc.

One other problem is gameplay simplicity.
You now have a choice about how to move a unit from A to B, whether it is useful or not.
Will you just move it? Or will you examine your other units for small savings or other benefits to be gained by swapping them pairwise instead?
If I had the choice, I'd feel that I ought to exploit it, but that would not be much fun most of the time.

scott · Post by **scott** » August 23rd, 2006, 3:13 pm

I agree that this is a frequently proposed idea, and even though it has been shot down every time (including when I proposed it in my first post), it hasn't made it onto the FPI list. Getting the AI to use it is probably sufficient by itself to block the idea, but you might be able to somehow get the AI to "see" swappable spaces as open. I proposed the idea as a way to move about more easily in tight situations, but I am fanatically against the idea if it can negate ZOC. (edit: not that this proposal is saying it should negate ZOC)