Reduce th difference of HP in Lieutenant and Elvish capitain

[IPS]

I saw, In the vertions 1.4 the loyalist Lieutenant had 48 HP, and Elvish Capitain had 47 HP. But, because the changes from the vertion 1.6 the loyalist Lieutenant lost 8 points of 48 HP (now have 40 HP) like a resilent spearman. But the Elvish Capitain continues to having the same 47 HP...

That difference of 7 HP its really big, I dont understand why the changes didnt affected to the Elvish Capitain too, but yes to the poor loyalist Lieutenant

My idea is "Reduce th difference of HP in Lieutenant and Elvish capitain" because the elvish capitain takes a defense of 60% in woods, and its a big bonus when you are using the leader to fight out your castle. Than the poor Lieutenant who is more weak and less useful in the battlefield because the reduction of HP from the vertion 1.6 and the Lieutenants dont haves that holy resistance of 60% in the woods, doing the lieutenant much useless.

When I play with a Lieutenant, I fight very careful with my leader, frequently I use the lieutenant only to give leadership to my units and hide it to take less dammage with the leader... When I use an elvish capitain Im to much more useful because I use the elvish capitain to clean some targets, because it dies hardly because it haves 7 more HP than the loyalist lieutant and for the defense of 60% in woods of the elvish capitain. The elvish capitain is in much less danger than the loyalist lieutenant.

See the comparations, And think both leaders are upbalanced.

I'm wanting to do more balanced these two leaders.

[Noy]

I saw, In the vertions 1.4 the loyalist Lieutenant had 48 HP, and Elvish Capitain had 47 HP. But, because the changes from the vertion 1.6 the loyalist Lieutenant lost 8 points of 48 HP (now have 40 HP) like a resilent spearman. But the Elvish Capitain continues to having the same 47 HP...

That difference of 7 HP its really big, I dont understand why the changes didnt affected to the Elvish Capitain too, but yes to the poor loyalist Lieutenant

My idea is "Reduce th difference of HP in Lieutenant and Elvish capitain" because the elvish capitain takes a defense of 60% in woods, and its a big bonus when you are using the leader to fight out your castle. Than the poor Lieutenant who is more weak and less useful in the battlefield because the reduction of HP from the vertion 1.6 and the Lieutenants dont haves that holy resistance of 60% in the woods, doing the lieutenant much useless.

When I play with a Lieutenant, I fight very careful with my leader, frequently I use the lieutenant only to give leadership to my units and hide it to take less dammage with the leader... When I use an elvish capitain Im to much more useful because I use the elvish capitain to clean some targets, because it dies hardly because it haves 7 more HP than the loyalist lieutant and for the defense of 60% in woods of the elvish capitain. The elvish capitain is in much less danger than the loyalist lieutenant.

See the comparations, And think both leaders are upbalanced.

I'm wanting to do more balanced these two leaders.

One has six movement, the other five. Thats the reason why.

[IPS]

I need to remmind the 20% of arcane resistance from the lieutenants and the -10% arcane resistance of the elvish capitain....

Other thing What I have noted:

47 x 5 (hp * move) = 235
40 x 6 (hp * move) = 240

Interesting thing... If lieutenants haves 5 MP should have 48 hp

Ok, you won.

[Thrawn]

Other thing What I have noted:

47 x 5 (hp * move) = 235
40 x 6 (hp * move) = 240

Interesting thing... If lieutenants haves 5 MP should have 48 hp

Just would like to point out that mathematical equations won't let you figure things out like that--there is no formula in wesnoth to "balance" units out.

[IPS]

maybe there is a formula to find the balance of the units, but the thing is researh them

Why it cant be tried? I didnt read a thing what make an oposition to this idea

[Sangel]

While I agree that the Lieutenant (and General and Grand Marshal) feel like they have oddly low HP, that extra movement point is extremely significant. 5->6 movement is a pretty important step (From 2->3 hexes on cost 2 terrain, from 1->2 hexes on cost 3 terrain). So a switch from 5 to 6 movement is pretty important for any unit.

However, movement is even more important for a unit with Leadership, as it allows it to lead more units in a turn, and/or reach and lead units in more crucial situations. Thus the very noticeable tradeoff in the form of HP.

That said, I suppose that the Sergeant line could be balanced differently. Perhaps one less shot with the crossbow in exchange for a bit more HP. It would require careful work to make sure it didn't upset multiplayer balance, however.

[Velensk]

maybe there is a formula to find the balance of the units, but the thing is researh them

Why it cant be tried? I didnt read a thing what make an oposition to this idea

Try searching for it. People have asked for it in the past including some people who were remarkably hard to convince that it wasn't possible.

[Caphriel]

maybe there is a formula to find the balance of the units, but the thing is researh them

Why it cant be tried? I didnt read a thing what make an oposition to this idea

Try searching for it. People have asked for it in the past including some people who were remarkably hard to convince that it wasn't possible.

Here's a recent example, since finding stuff on the forum can be hard sometimes

In my opinion, the Lieutenant is a far better leader than the Captain. The extra move point is huge, and he can put out respectable damage during the day. Not only does an extra movement point let you do more with leadership at the front line, it's often the difference between taking two turns to get from keep to battle or three turns. He definitely tends toward the more fragile side of the leader spectrum, but he's useful enough to make up for it

[IPS]

Someone tried first than me, But I got the same idea without knowing he, And he reached really far, But, he tooks his time.

If he comes to this theread, he can know someone is coverning his idea

On december I will take my time to search a generetic formula to find the balance and unbalance from the units, atleast I know Im not alone

[Velensk]

I think you missed the point.

[Daxion]

Trying to solve Balancing with equations is bound to run into troubles, for several reasons:

1) By nature such equations have to be very complex, or better put: very multidimensional, since we have alot (and I mean alot) of variables that can go in (cost, movement points, hitpoints, dmg per hit, number of hits (for both weapons), ...the list goes on)
2) The relationsship is in no way linear. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find the right form for such an equation, a polynom will most likely not do it.
3) You have to take into account recruitment lists. Other units on the list also play a role (now and this would at least increase our variable list quite a bit)
4) Other sides this unit can play against (and their specialties) also play a role. Usually every faction is balanced against all others. I'm not quite sure if it is done one by one, but you can't overlook the fact, that the possible opponents are important.
5) Terrain situation. The terrain situation plays an important role on a map. Therefore the faction itself also needs to be balanced
6) Do you want to balance it for Single Player or Multiplayer. There is a difference, Multiplayer are much more creative in finding problems with your balancing, and in Single Player an unbalanced faction isn't that much of a problem (that is, not mentioning the fact that in most campaigns you don't play a well defined faction).

I would say, Point 1&2 alone would be sufficient to be convinced that this is not possible (the others are more or less just there to give an idea about the complexity).

A really interesting question would be, if there can actually exist a well defined equation for the above stated problems. I'm not so sure about that.

-Dax

[IPS]

If the map is balanced, the terrain dont need to be a problem for the balancing of the units.

But the MP cost are indeed a very important factor, like the resistances too and the habilities. The number of the hits and the dammage you can take them with "dammage" because for an example 7-3 like to much to 11-2 or 5-4, and the difference of dammage is smaller in this example.

You need to remind when a unit haves less dammage but more strikes it will do less dammage when its diying because frequently the diying units hits 0 at 1 hits, here the dammage per hit its the important factor. But the high strikes units haves a adventage, they have more percent to kill a weak unit when is required.

So you can think: no imports how many dammage or strikes haves a unit, but if it does a N dammage, its the same thing if it haves other number of strikes or dammage per hit but if the total dammage the same, its the same thing.

[thespaceinvader]

'If the map is balanced' is a VERY big if. Map balance is one of the key points in balancing - all the formulae with unit stats in the world are irrelevant if the map has too much forest, too much mountain, too much water etc etc etc.

You are on a hiding to nothing trying to come up with a mathematical formula for balance. It is NOT GOING TO WORK.

It's possible, by the way, that you might be better posting in your own language and kindly asking someone who is bilingual to translate for you. It's a bit difficult to understand what appears to be an automatic translation.

[Zarel]

Hi. I'm balance maintainer of a real-time strategy game (Warzone 2100), and here's an excerpt from a [currently unpublished] interview with me:

As for calculations, I have formulas that give a rough estimate of DPS for each weapon (the same one is used to calculate DPS on the Warzone Guide), but I factor in mitigating factors (such as HP, weight, range, and ROF) manually and holistically. And after I get to a certain level of precision, all further adjustments are the result of playtesting and getting feedback from users.

Sure, it's for an RTS, but it applies just as well to Wesnoth. There's a (rather low) limit to which formulas can help estimate things. Beyond that, it's just guessing, playtesting, and tweaking.

[Noy]

Meh... I'm locking this thread; the person doesn't understand english or doesn't want to... either case its pointless and I'd rather the discussion end here.