Three little ideas

Brainstorm ideas of possible additions to the game. Read this before posting!

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
User avatar
Casual User
Posts: 475
Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm

Three little ideas

Post by Casual User » March 11th, 2005, 5:35 pm

Hello. I just thought of three little things that would make good additions:

1. some units gaining xp without actually fighting. I know it's been discussed, but I really think it could be a good idea. Some units in an army (or warband) aren't primarily there to fight. I'm thinking of generals, doctors, ... I have thought a "support" special could be used. The way it would work would be that if an unit adjacent to a "support" unit made a kill, the "support" unit would get a small amount of xp (say, equal to the killed unit's level) because they did their job and supported the attack. It's not a big enough change to seriously alter game mechanics, but it would add some flavor and also help leveling units like elf shaman or white mage who are practically impossible to upgrade.

2. ranged attacks should get a penalty at night, regardless of alignment (but cumulative with alignment). Archers are IMHO overpowered as it is, and besides, realistically speaking, at night, by the time you see an enemy well enought to shoot at him, he's often too close for that (a little less with rifles or pistols, but, as one who practices archery, a bow or crossbow is useless at night).

3. I personally think bowmen/crossbowmen should not do pierce damage, or more precisely shouldn't be classed as if they used spears. I understand that, technically speaking, a arrowhead functions by concentrating the force in a point, like a spear, but technically speaking, so does a dagger and a sword is also used this way. The way I see it, pierce damage with its bonus against cavalry should be restricted to spears and lances, dwarvish thunderers should deal 'fire' damage (or maybe impact) and bows/crossbows should be a new category. The problem with the current mechanic is that it makes archers a good choice against cavalry (I learned that when I charged orc archers with horsemen and they shot me to pieces the next turn), whereas historically, cavalry has always been known as perticularly effective against missile units.

Sorry about the long post and thanks for reading!

P.S. I'm relatively new to Wesnoth, so be charitable.

AT
Posts: 476
Joined: May 6th, 2004, 9:44 pm

Post by AT » March 11th, 2005, 5:43 pm

Welcome to Wesnoth!

Number 1 and 2 are good ideas, but violate the KISS guidline. Genreally, we like to keep things as simple as possible, and pure support units getting XP would be a balance and complexity issue. Imagine a white mage getting XP without risking itself.
For arrows in the night, it would be realisitic, but just too complex for the dynamic we're going for. Day/night is a factor in battles, but we don;t want it to be that much of a factor, i don't think.

For Three; I think its good as it is. Archers are good against Cav, but only if you get the chance to shoot. A group of horseman charging archers is devestating to the archers, while a group of archers ambushing a column of horses while ranged is devestating to the Cav.
Good point on 4, though, I'm going to check it out to make sure what I just said is right.
Gandalf-"I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the Flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udun. Go back to the Shadow. You cannot pass!"
AT- "That sounds like more trouble than it's worth."

User avatar
Tomsik
Posts: 1401
Joined: February 7th, 2005, 7:04 am
Location: Poland

Re: Three little ideas

Post by Tomsik » March 11th, 2005, 5:48 pm

Casual User wrote: 2. ranged attacks should get a penalty at night
what with skeletons,orcs and all other chaotic archers?
chaotic units see better in night than in day.

User avatar
Dragonking
Inactive Developer
Posts: 591
Joined: November 6th, 2004, 10:45 am
Location: Poland

Post by Dragonking » March 11th, 2005, 5:50 pm

By the way - skeletons have eyes? And I think elvish archers have infravision, so night isn't scary for them. About rest - I tottaly agree with AT

Dave
Founding Developer
Posts: 7069
Joined: August 17th, 2003, 5:07 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Dave » March 11th, 2005, 5:56 pm

Welcome to Wesnoth!

Personally I don't think archers are that overpowered. Lots of people seem to think they're underpowered and should be able to shoot across multiple hexes. :)

Also, archers really aren't that powerful against cavalry. If anything, I would say archers are less powerful against cavalry in Wesnoth than in real life. Sure, if the archer hits first, they can do alot of damage, but cavalry can generally do more damage if they hit first, and they usually can hit first, since they can move faster over most terrain. Horsemen in particular are devastating against archers because they can charge them and the doubling of the archer's damage isn't significant, because archers don't have a very good melee attack anyway.

David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming

Tieom
Posts: 35
Joined: September 10th, 2004, 1:35 am

Post by Tieom » March 11th, 2005, 6:00 pm

I always viewed pierce attacks as, well, piercing the opponent (which bullets and spears and arrows all do), and blade attacks being more 'slashy slashy'. Which makes it odd for the Fencer/Duelest to have a Blade attack. Same with the Thief/Rogue/Assassin line... I can't imagine a Skeleton taking as much damage from a Duelest (with a Rapier) as from an Elvish Fighter bashing away with his sword.

Dave
Founding Developer
Posts: 7069
Joined: August 17th, 2003, 5:07 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Dave » March 11th, 2005, 6:05 pm

Originally more units had piercing attacks, but it was decided that 'piercing' should only really refer to things that can 'impale' a unit -- i.e. run them through -- and would be good against cavalry.

It was decided that the fencer, and assassin and so forth shouldn't have effective attacks against cavalry, so their attacks were changed to bladed. This does make them more effective against skeletons, but skeletons still do have decent resistance to bladed attacks.

Generally, 'blade' is the most generic physical attack, while pierce and impact are each more specialized.

David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming

User avatar
Tomsik
Posts: 1401
Joined: February 7th, 2005, 7:04 am
Location: Poland

Post by Tomsik » March 11th, 2005, 6:05 pm

someone proposed yet "heavy blade" and "light balde" atack

romnajin
Posts: 1067
Joined: February 26th, 2005, 7:26 pm
Contact:

Post by romnajin » March 11th, 2005, 11:28 pm

I think that fighters should have a "stab" attack that does piercing damage. If a normal blade attack did 6-3, the pierce should be 7 or 8-2. Just an idea.
Sorry for the meaningless post

User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8129
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Post by Elvish_Pillager » March 11th, 2005, 11:32 pm

Fencers, in particular, could be able to use various different techniques with their rapiers. e.g. "slash" 4-4 blade and 'thrust' 7-2 pierce.
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.

User avatar
Casual User
Posts: 475
Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm

Post by Casual User » March 12th, 2005, 3:23 am

Thanks for all the replies. About n.2, it was only something I felt was odd... As a side note, chaotic units see better in the dark??? I always thought they got their bonus because they set traps or something. About n.3, I understand pierce damage means impaling someone, not just thrusting; my point was that you can't impale something (or someone) with arrows, or bullets... which is why I thought bows/crossbows/rifles don't belong in this category...

In any case, rapiers shouldn't get pierce damage, but they should get multiple attack types (perhaps a disarm attack?). The idea of heavy vs light blade is good IMHO because they handle quite differently and have different usages.

About n.1, agreed... it probably creates a host of difficulties I can't even imagine (my programming experience being very limited though not nonexistant). On the other hand, making up game mechanics is a hobby of mine and I've developed an eye for balancing, so I'm willing to argue 'till we drop dead it wouldn't imbalance the game. Let's let it die...

My real point about cavalry vs archers is that the archers rarely die during the charges (though they hang on by about 1hp each time)... but then they shoot the cavalry dead. I realize in a game with orcs and elves, historical evidence is less useful, but you are wrong David: archers are a lot better against cavalry in Wesnoth than they were in real life (trust me on this one). The only times I can think of where archers really kicked cavalry ass are Crecy and Agincourt, and it was always a combination of very powerful archers (genoese arbalests or english longbows) and very, very bad tactics on the cavalry side.

By the way, anyone has any good suggestions about the duelist, because I only have vague ideas.

P.S. sorry again for the long post and thanks for reading...

AT
Posts: 476
Joined: May 6th, 2004, 9:44 pm

Post by AT » March 12th, 2005, 4:31 am

Yes, I think archers are better against Cav than in real life, but in my expirence, Horseman can slaughter Elvish Archers in one charge, two max. In large groups, they will take casualties, but thats the way we want Wesnoth; having it any other way would make Archers far too easy to kill.
Gandalf-"I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the Flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udun. Go back to the Shadow. You cannot pass!"
AT- "That sounds like more trouble than it's worth."

Dave
Founding Developer
Posts: 7069
Joined: August 17th, 2003, 5:07 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Dave » March 12th, 2005, 4:31 am

A traitless horseman charging a traitless bowman at dawn will do 18-2 damage vs the bowman's 10-2. The bowman has 33 hitpoints, so if the horseman hits both times, the horseman will kill the bowman.

On the bowman's turn, he will do 7-3 damage against the horseman. The horseman has 38 hitpoints, so to kill, the bowman would have to hit on all 5 of his attacks.

The situation is similiar with an elvish archer: the archer will be killed by two strikes of the horseman, while she will have to make 6 of 6 attempts to kill the horseman.

Cavalry and Elvish Scouts don't fare so well against archers, but these are closer to being 'scout' units than fighting units.

David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming

User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8129
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Post by Elvish_Pillager » March 12th, 2005, 10:13 am

Archers are way better against cavalry in real life. Think about it: Take a crossbow, and you can shoot someone off a horse at ten rods just by pulling a trigger. In Wesnoth, take a crossbow with a level 2 unit in a favored time of day and you can't kill the horseman even in one turn, and the horseman is guaranteed to be able to attack you as well.
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.

shevegen
Posts: 230
Joined: June 3rd, 2004, 4:35 pm

Post by shevegen » March 12th, 2005, 4:20 pm

"and should be able to shoot across multiple hexes"

I think that some units like level 3 elvish sharpshooter should be able to do this
maybe only 2 squares, and you can reduce its accuracy greatly too

that does not seem to be against the KISS, and it isnt making SUCH a great advantage (you can still charge those archers with riders quickly!)

Post Reply