Borrowing future movement
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
-
Trestles
Borrowing future movement
This is my first post to a Wesnoth forum. Before I say anything else I'd like to thank everyone who has contributed to this project. Wesnoth is the only computer game I've played in quite some time, period.
Now that I have buttered you all up, here is my suggestion
One frustrating problem I run into is when my units need to travel over terrain with a movement cost of 3. This effectively separates my units into 2 groups: Those with movement >= 6, and the rest. Suddenly the first group can move twice a turn while the second group can only move once, and is left with 2 unused movement points each turn. This effectively makes the slower units useless in some scenarios.
My idea is to allow units to borrow movement points. This would allow a unit to make one final move if it would give them negative movement points, as long as their current number of moves is >= 1. The negative movement will be borrowed from the next round.
Here's an example. A unit with 5 moves is travelling over hills costing 3 moves. First turn it would have 5 moves, and use 6 (moving twice) leaving it with -1 moves. Next turn it would have 4 moves and use 6 (moving twice) leaving it with -2. Next turn it would have 3 moves and use 3 (moving once) leaving it with 0. And repeat.
Sorry for the terminology, hope it made sense. This might not be the best way to handle the problem, but I feel that this is one aspect of the game that could use improvement. Any other ideas?
Thanks!
-- Trestles
Now that I have buttered you all up, here is my suggestion
One frustrating problem I run into is when my units need to travel over terrain with a movement cost of 3. This effectively separates my units into 2 groups: Those with movement >= 6, and the rest. Suddenly the first group can move twice a turn while the second group can only move once, and is left with 2 unused movement points each turn. This effectively makes the slower units useless in some scenarios.
My idea is to allow units to borrow movement points. This would allow a unit to make one final move if it would give them negative movement points, as long as their current number of moves is >= 1. The negative movement will be borrowed from the next round.
Here's an example. A unit with 5 moves is travelling over hills costing 3 moves. First turn it would have 5 moves, and use 6 (moving twice) leaving it with -1 moves. Next turn it would have 4 moves and use 6 (moving twice) leaving it with -2. Next turn it would have 3 moves and use 3 (moving once) leaving it with 0. And repeat.
Sorry for the terminology, hope it made sense. This might not be the best way to handle the problem, but I feel that this is one aspect of the game that could use improvement. Any other ideas?
Thanks!
-- Trestles
Hi Trestles,
It's always nice to hear from users who like the game (or who know how to butter up developers for feature request
)
Wesnoth, like most turn-based strategy games contain many illogical inconsistencies like the one you describe. Real time strategy games don't contain these paradoxes.
I think there are two main courses a turn based strategy game can take: try to minimize these paradoxes, or accept them as part of the game, and force strategizing to take them into account.
Wesnoth takes the latter approach. We recognize that there are such 'inconsistencies', that change a 20% movement advantage into a 100% movement advantage in some contexts, but we accept it as part of the game.
So, while your suggestion is a good one for trying to minimize these paradoxes, that's not quite what we're trying to achieve. Instead our attitude is that part of the advantage of a 6 movement unit over a 5 movement unit is that on 2-cost terrain, the movement advantage is magnified to 50% and on 3-cost terrain, to 100%.
I have had an idea for a game that plays like a TBS with respect to time given to thinking, but like a RTS with respect to calculations, for some time, and I may try to implement it some day, but that game isn't Battle for Wesnoth.
David
It's always nice to hear from users who like the game (or who know how to butter up developers for feature request
)Wesnoth, like most turn-based strategy games contain many illogical inconsistencies like the one you describe. Real time strategy games don't contain these paradoxes.
I think there are two main courses a turn based strategy game can take: try to minimize these paradoxes, or accept them as part of the game, and force strategizing to take them into account.
Wesnoth takes the latter approach. We recognize that there are such 'inconsistencies', that change a 20% movement advantage into a 100% movement advantage in some contexts, but we accept it as part of the game.
So, while your suggestion is a good one for trying to minimize these paradoxes, that's not quite what we're trying to achieve. Instead our attitude is that part of the advantage of a 6 movement unit over a 5 movement unit is that on 2-cost terrain, the movement advantage is magnified to 50% and on 3-cost terrain, to 100%.
I have had an idea for a game that plays like a TBS with respect to time given to thinking, but like a RTS with respect to calculations, for some time, and I may try to implement it some day, but that game isn't Battle for Wesnoth.
David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
Hmm... I know something which might work:
Instead of "borrowing", if a unit has >1 move left at the end of a turn, give it +1 movement next turn, and explain that it's well rested or something.
Works better IMO, has a different reason behind it, and I agree that that 20% advantage should not become 100% due to some freaky terrain.
Instead of "borrowing", if a unit has >1 move left at the end of a turn, give it +1 movement next turn, and explain that it's well rested or something.
Works better IMO, has a different reason behind it, and I agree that that 20% advantage should not become 100% due to some freaky terrain.
How about this, if a unit end a turn with extra moves those moves may be used to pay off the cost of their first move the next turn.Circon wrote:Hmm... I know something which might work:
Instead of "borrowing", if a unit has >1 move left at the end of a turn, give it +1 movement next turn, and explain that it's well rested or something.
My contributions to the Wesnoth Project over time are inversly proportional to the number of registered forum users!
Piet Hein wrote:Knowing what thou knowest not is in a sence Omniscience
How about not changing anything?
I really like it the way it is now. Dwarfes and Trolls are good in mountains, some other units are not. Mages are super slow on tundra, but that's a good thing. If my opponent can have things like resting units, gaining unexpected movement points, etc. then how can I build my strategy?
It would also complicate AI (when should it "rest" and gain mov. points, and when not, etc.)
I find movement system great as it is now: simple and predictable. Please don't complicate it.
I really like it the way it is now. Dwarfes and Trolls are good in mountains, some other units are not. Mages are super slow on tundra, but that's a good thing. If my opponent can have things like resting units, gaining unexpected movement points, etc. then how can I build my strategy?
It would also complicate AI (when should it "rest" and gain mov. points, and when not, etc.)
I find movement system great as it is now: simple and predictable. Please don't complicate it.
Milan Babuskov
http://home.gna.org/vodovod
http://home.gna.org/vodovod
No. I don't want to carry over all movement points. I'm suggesting that if a unit has more than 1 it may carry over 1.Kamahawk wrote: How about this, if a unit end a turn with extra moves those moves may be used to pay off the cost of their first move the next turn.
If one can only carry over 1 move point and only if one has more than 1 from the previous turn, there are no situations in which resting to gain movement points is a good idea. For example: across grass, a 6 move unit would have to move 4 spaces in order to move 7 the next turn, and would end up moving 1 space shorter.mbabuskov wrote:How about not changing anything?
If my opponent can have things like resting units, gaining unexpected movement points, etc. then how can I build my strategy?
It would also complicate AI (when should it "rest" and gain mov. points, and when not, etc.)
With the "If MP>1 then add 1 next turn" the huge advantage of 6-move over 5-move units is reduced, while 4-move units still move slowly in 3-move terrain, as it should be.
The concept is simpler than my examples. Loads of movement left=slightly faster next turn.
-
Viliam
- Translator
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: January 30th, 2004, 11:07 am
- Location: Bratislava, Slovakia
- Contact:
quick units
Adding 1 move in next turn may sometimes have an unexpected side-effect. But I would prefer to see this implemented, because it would reduce the big differences between quick and non-quick elven units in underground scenarios.
When Dwarves move much faster in underground than Elves, it is OK. But when quick Elven Something moves in underground twice as fast as another Elven Something with the same bitmap, the difference seems too big to me.
When Dwarves move much faster in underground than Elves, it is OK. But when quick Elven Something moves in underground twice as fast as another Elven Something with the same bitmap, the difference seems too big to me.
You mis-understood me Circron, my sugestion was that the extra movemt be able to pay off any EXTRA cost (the first move must cost at least 1 point even after the unused points from last round are subtracted) for the FIRST move. That way no unit would be able to exceed its actualy movement rate and it would make the movement imbalce bettween 5 and 6 less noticable in mountains and other terain (but still there).
Example: elf archer moves 2 spaces for 3 points each, the fighter moves 1 space for 3 points and has 2 left over.
Next round: elf archer moves 2 spaces for 3 points each, the fighter moves 1 space (wich costs 3-minus the 2 left over from last round) for a movemt cost of 1 and make a scond move for 3 points and has 1 left over.
Next round: elf archer moves 2 spaces for 3 points each, the fighter moves 1 (wich costs 3-1 the one left over form last round) for a cost of 2 and makes a seconds move a cost of 3 (with none left over).
Repeat.
Over three turns the archer moves 6 spaces and the fighter moves 5.
Example: elf archer moves 2 spaces for 3 points each, the fighter moves 1 space for 3 points and has 2 left over.
Next round: elf archer moves 2 spaces for 3 points each, the fighter moves 1 space (wich costs 3-minus the 2 left over from last round) for a movemt cost of 1 and make a scond move for 3 points and has 1 left over.
Next round: elf archer moves 2 spaces for 3 points each, the fighter moves 1 (wich costs 3-1 the one left over form last round) for a cost of 2 and makes a seconds move a cost of 3 (with none left over).
Repeat.
Over three turns the archer moves 6 spaces and the fighter moves 5.
My contributions to the Wesnoth Project over time are inversly proportional to the number of registered forum users!
Piet Hein wrote:Knowing what thou knowest not is in a sence Omniscience
To show "where enemy can move" (mouse over or recently implemented view mode) clients would have to share left over points to be able to show the information correctly.
Some units would then sometimes move 1 and sometimes 2 on rough terrain (or 2 and 3)... where it is now easy to visualize movement when building tactics it would come more complex.
I don't like it. Let's keep it as it is.
- Miyo
Some units would then sometimes move 1 and sometimes 2 on rough terrain (or 2 and 3)... where it is now easy to visualize movement when building tactics it would come more complex.
I don't like it. Let's keep it as it is.
- Miyo
-
Christophe33
- Posts: 826
- Joined: January 21st, 2004, 1:10 am
- Location: San Diego, CA
An alternate way is to make smoother mvt cost variation. For example using cost of 1.5 instead of 2 in some case. Right now BfW doesn't seem to use such numbers (if you change a move to 1.5, it will use 1) but it should be simple to modify. An other alternative would be to increase both the number of mvt per unit and the cost (like basically double both) to allow for greater scale of variation and reduce disparities. It would also allows to finally give a bonus for travelling on real road rather than on plain.
While I would like a system that take in account unused mvt for next turn, it coud be so easilly abused... You could voluntary not move an unit for a turn while it can such as to be able to move more the next turn and "jump" on an enemy whicch was thinking be safely out of reach. Imagine what an horseman could do like that.
Of course the simplest and most likely solution is to change nothing to the mvt system. You will have to adapt your strategy by recalling only elf units with a move of 6 or more when you have to deal with rough terrain.
While I would like a system that take in account unused mvt for next turn, it coud be so easilly abused... You could voluntary not move an unit for a turn while it can such as to be able to move more the next turn and "jump" on an enemy whicch was thinking be safely out of reach. Imagine what an horseman could do like that.
Of course the simplest and most likely solution is to change nothing to the mvt system. You will have to adapt your strategy by recalling only elf units with a move of 6 or more when you have to deal with rough terrain.
Never tell a dwarf that he shortchanged you!