Advancement choice on enemy turn

[Imp]

Very eloquently expressed, tsr!

As for dborg's suggestion in your link, that also sounds like a good GUI way of implementing this.

[zookeeper]

I have little choice but to agree with tsr.

[Ken_Oh]

I still think that EP's suggestion here is the best one yet.

I'll stop there before I get another threatening PM like last time I discussed the topic.

[tsr]

Ok, I'm going to write a feature request for this, but I would like to ask those that are heavily opposed to the zookeeper[1] suggestion to please comment on that.

So far the arguments against this proposal that I've heard of are:
1. randomly advancing enemy units is part of the strategy
to wich I respond - well yes now it is since we haven't come up with a good way of handling it.
2. it will take too much time if all players are going to micromanage all their units every turn
to wich I respond - a) what is too much time? b) I think that most reasonable players will set it for units that are about to level and nothing more, much like you name some special units and not all of them

How to allow a player in MP games to choose the advancement for his units if they level up during enemy turns.
1. add a variable 'in_training_for' that if set to any of the values in the 'advance_to' variable forces the unit to advance to that unit during enemy turns.
2. create some GUI to handle this. (much like the renaming of units is handled - so this will be on a per unit setting that can be changed at anytime during your own turn)

Ok, what am I missing (apart from the obvious coding skills to do this )?

/tsr

[1] Zookeeper is the first one that suggested this AFAIK, if it actually was someone else please let me know.

[dborg]

I would suggest to also have an "ask" setting, which should be default. Never asking would force the player to think about this all the time and always asking would make this feature rather pointless (and potentially confusing) in non-networked games. For the same reason I would suggest not to use the term "training" anywhere in the GUI, since it would suggest that it actually makes a difference.

[tsr]

I would suggest to also have an "ask" setting, which should be default. Never asking would force the player to think about this all the time and always asking would make this feature rather pointless (and potentially confusing) in non-networked games.

I'm not sure what you mean here, but I suspect that you want something impossible: that the player should be asked what to level into.

If I'm wrong (which I assume - since you seem to be a reasonable person), pls explain.

If I'm correct, pls reread this thread and all threads that have been suggested as further reading in this thread.

For the same reason I would suggest not to use the term "training" anywhere in the GUI, since it would suggest that it actually makes a difference.

Ok, good point, the naming of the feature should be thought about more.

Considering some other suggestions (previously mentioned here too) maybe it would be best to merge 'rename unit' and this in the right-click menu to something like: 'modify unit'.

As for the internal variable maybe something like 'will_advance_to' is better.

But still, those are details (important details), what I'm after is more to get comments on the basic idea as it is stated above.

/tsr

[dborg]

I would suggest to also have an "ask" setting, which should be default. Never asking would force the player to think about this all the time and always asking would make this feature rather pointless (and potentially confusing) in non-networked games.

I'm not sure what you mean here, but I suspect that you want something impossible: that the player should be asked what to level into.

No, more like an "Ask (if possible)" setting, which would simply act like the status quo. So as soon as you pick another option, the game wouldn't ask you anymore, even if it's your turn. But if you don't change the setting, it will ask if it's your turn or a local game. Just another detail.

[Sapient]

2. it will take too much time if all players are going to micromanage all their units every turn
to wich I respond - a) what is too much time? b) I think that most reasonable players will set it for units that are about to level and nothing more, much like you name some special units and not all of them

3. (closely related to #2) It may violate the "keep it simple" Wesnoth Philosophy if players are encouraged to micromanage their units through the right-click menu?

[torangan]

I think the easiest solution is to make the RIPLIB advancement choosen when the player can't control it. This may not always be the best choice but at least it prevents the case where you loose an important ability of a unit. Like a
Spearman leveling into a Swordsman and then getting attacked by archers only. Other proposals should be made as text describing a patch.

[Ragwortshire]

3. (closely related to #2) It may violate the "keep it simple" Wesnoth Philosophy if players are encouraged to micromanage their units through the right-click menu?

Is it really so complicated? It seems to me to be just as simple as deciding what to level a unit to when it happens on your own turn.

So as soon as you pick another option, the game wouldn't ask you anymore, even if it's your turn.

What would be the point of that? Granted, in most cases you won't be changing your mind about what to level to, but in a few cases you might - and then you risk forgetting you've set the flag and getting a unit you were no longer looking for.

[Imp]

I think you've covered everything, tsr.

Oh, and I don't think the ask option is really necessary - as Turin would say, "OAB".

Now, Sapient, this is keeping it simple - the player is not encouraged to micromanage or anything. In fact, the player is not even encouraged to use this feature. However, it will be there whenever it is necessary. And as Ragwortshire said, it would be no different to choosing what you unit levels to when it advances on your turn. So a feature that is as simple as what is already in place, but with an added benefit to the player? Score!

Tsr also makes a good point against the argument of "this is part of the strategy". I use this "tactic" when necessary, but it always feels so cheap. Just because it is possible and people use it does not mean it is desireable. For example, bug exploitation is rampant in many games and when it is patched to set things right, people complain.

[dborg]

So as soon as you pick another option, the game wouldn't ask you anymore, even if it's your turn.

What would be the point of that? Granted, in most cases you won't be changing your mind about what to level to, but in a few cases you might - and then you risk forgetting you've set the flag and getting a unit you were no longer looking for.

Always asking would be another option of course, but then what would be the point of this feature in campaigns? And a feature that has no apparent purpose might leave players puzzled and drawing wrong conclusions.

[Darth Fool]

There are two solutions that I would find acceptable, but probably only one of them that others would find acceptable. I don't claim that these are originally my ideas, just the ideas that I view as reasonable. The first, which I like the best, is to move leveling to the begining of the units' turn. This takes care of two gripes at one time. Players would be able to choose their units advancement without interupting other players turns. Also, when attacking an enemy unit, I don't have to worry that despite the fact that I have it surrounded with enough power to destroy it with attacks from 3 or four of my units, it will level up in the middle of my turn defeating my whole assault. There are possible variations that could be acceptable such as leveling up at the end of the turn, or only leveling up under certain conditions like having not moved the previous turn, being on a village, etc, ... If this was done, it probably would be good to make it specifiable in the scenario/era wml such that different campaigns could be made using the different options.

The second acceptable possibility is to have a default level-up for each unit type and possibly unit. Initially this would be set to random. When you level up a unit, the dialogue will have a checkbox to "make this the default" which then sets it so that all units of that type will level up to the chosen option if it happens on the enemies turn, and also sets it so that the default is highlighted first on your turn. Such defaults could be saved in preferences so that you would build up over time your favored advancement paths and not have to worry too much. Finally, as a refinement to the above, you could have individual units' level ups defined in the "unit details" screen. This would override the normal default, but only for that one unit.

I imagine that the first option, while the best one in my mind, will have greater resistance than the second one.

[tsr]

Just to make things clear, does this

The second acceptable possibility ... Finally, as a refinement to the above, you could have individual units' level ups defined in the "unit details" screen. This would override the normal default, but only for that one unit.

mean that you could consider the above proposal acceptable?

/tsr

[jb]

Darth Fool (restating others)

The first, which I like the best, is to move leveling to the begining of the units' turn.

I may be misinterpreting here, but this is just absolutely silly and unaccaptable.

I may level an enemy unit with my first attack. But my remaining units can still kill the now level 2 unit. If my enemy can't level his unit until the begginning of his turn do I miss out on 16 XP? Or will the level 1 simply die before it can advance, despite having enough xp for advancement? The order of opperations cannot be changed.

Furthermore: This whole thread, though not a bad idea, isn't drastically game changing. (For the record i support the pre-advancement check-box). How often will my enemy level my defending unit? 1 in every 20 games maybe? How often will that unit be one that has multiple advancement paths? 1-30 games maybe? And of those leveled units with mutliple advancement paths how often will i advance to an undesireable unit? 1-50 games maybe? So if every 50th game my spearman fighting drakes advances to swordman, I can live with that.