Allowing units to swap places

[scottie]

Hey all, I read the frequently proposed ideas thread, and noticed

* Stacking Units
Background: suggestions to be able to place multiple units in a single hex
Result: The developers feel that this would make the game more complicated, and distort the game rules alot from what they are currently.

Whilst I fully agree with the developers here, I feel that occasionally in the game units can get congested, especially in caves or other bad terrain. I feel that allowing two units to simultaneously swap positions (assuming they both have enough movement to do the swap) would improve the game.

So yeah, I'm just throwing that out there to see if others agree

[zookeeper]

It's been discussed before several times, start here for instance (seems like the forum search doesn't work properly since I had to dig that thread up manually).

[Dave]

Basically this would require a new interface design for a feature that is rarely useful. Also it can be considered part of the strategy: maneuvering units around when congested is difficult, just as it should be!

David

[Sapient]

Personally, I think this would be a really nice feature to allow you to swap places with an allied unit in a two phase process. First one moves nect to the allied unit, then select it as if attacking it (this requires a special icon). The "goto" is set to the ally location. Then when the ally's turn comes, his unit (if it still lives) is flashing or something hopefully less annoying. If the ally chooses to do so, he may complete the swap. (If the ally already died then nothing would happen of course.)

Turn order can be a really big deal in 2 v 2 and it is make or break for some tactics due to an inability to swap places. For example, can you retreat and allow your ally to guard a position? In typical side 1221 maps, the first ally can do this but the other can not. This creates a real unnatural feel to some 2v2 situations ... I think such a swap feature would alleviate that effect a bit. The biggest problem is that it needs to look good and clean and be intuitive to use. That is hard but not impossible.

Swapping spaces with your own side's units is another related concept, and it probably could be solved in a similar fashion, but then it becomes important to make sure the AI understands it... personally I find Dave's "more strategy" argument to be a poor one here. The idea of units passing freely through their allies is already apparent principle in Wesnoth so swapping (i.e. moving your own units simultaneously in such a fashion) is a natural extension to that principle. It's mainly a user interface and AI problem in my view.

[HomerJ]

Hey I have a completely strange idea.
Player 1 to Player 2: "Hey, I think it would be better if my unit was in X,Y..."
Player 2 to Player 1: "Yeah sounds cool, I will move to W,Z and zoc X,Y."
Player 1 to Player 2: "Cool!"


Probably someone could implement that in brain.exe.


Greetz
HomerJ

[Sapient]

Hey I have a completely strange idea.
Player 1 to Player 2: "Hey, I think it would be better if my unit was in X,Y..."
Player 2 to Player 1: "Yeah sounds cool, I will move to W,Z and zoc X,Y."
Player 1 to Player 2: "Cool!"


Probably someone could implement that in brain.exe.


Greetz
HomerJ

Funny, but if you are retreating from a front then that means the likelihood of holding enemies ZoC'd at a location even more advanced on that front is going to be suicidal.

[A Guy]

Create a few spearman.
Put them in a line.
Move HI 5 spaces by swapping.
Use up the rest of the HI's moves.

[zookeeper]

Create a few spearman.
Put them in a line.
Move HI 5 spaces by swapping.
Use up the rest of the HI's moves.

..?

[thespaceinvader]

Create a few spearman.
Put them in a line.
Move HI 5 spaces by swapping.
Use up the rest of the HI's moves.

Each swap uses up 1MP (or however many it would normally take to move on the terrain in question, if more).

[HomerJ]

Hey I have a completely strange idea.
Player 1 to Player 2: "Hey, I think it would be better if my unit was in X,Y..."
Player 2 to Player 1: "Yeah sounds cool, I will move to W,Z and zoc X,Y."
Player 1 to Player 2: "Cool!"


Probably someone could implement that in brain.exe.


Greetz
HomerJ

Funny, but if you are retreating from a front then that means the likelihood of holding enemies ZoC'd at a location even more advanced on that front is going to be suicidal.

I know, I know... it just came to my mind like that... and I like that brain.exe-thing.


Greetz
HomerJ

[Ivan_D]

+1 vote for swapping units. Not stacking.

[Ken_Oh]

-1 for thread necromancy.

[5dPZ]

-1 for thread necromancy.

a. Players are directed to the "search" button rather than the "new thread" button.
b. Players searched and found a similar topic;
c. Players found that the original thread was non-conclusive;
d. Players wanted and showed thier support to the previous idea raiser, instead of creating a duplicated topic - an unwanted action by devs/mods.
e. Players get negative feedback for "thread necromancy"

[Ken_Oh]

c. Players found that the original thread was non-conclusive;

The original thread wasn't non-conclusive. David and Sapient concluded there are hurdles of UI and AI.

If the necro-bump offered anything useful, like how to overcoming these roadblocks or offering to help code such an idea, I wouldn't have said what I did.

It's not like I don't want this feature myself. I would love it. However, a +1 bump doesn't help.

[Ivan_D]

It's not like I don't want this feature myself. I would love it. However, a +1 bump doesn't help.

Then what do you want me to do? A patch?