Ever hear of a boardgame called "Melee" ?

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

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Alice
Posts: 14
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 10:45 pm
Location: Portales, NM

Ever hear of a boardgame called "Melee" ?

Post by Alice »

I have just discovered Wesnoth, and I am enjoying playing it greatly. Part of my enjoyment is because it closely resembles a game I first played about 30 years ago called Melee. It was published by Steve Jackson games, and was played with a paper hex map, some cardboard counters, 3 dice, and about 20 small pages of rules. I got it at a science fiction convention for $2.95.

The reason I mention this, is because this game is really simple, and the mechanics "feel" real to me. It is incredibly similar to Wesnoth, with acouple of exceptions. I believe these exceptions would make great additions to Wesnoth. I have read your reasons for doing the game the way it is, and I understand KISS and belive in that principal as well. However, I believe this game could be improved using some of Melee's features and I would be glad to share the rules if anyone is interested in reading them. I do not beleive there is a copyright problem, but I will check into it further just in case.

Just like Wesnoth's creator, I always wanted to write a version of this game, mainly to take care of housekeeping. A few players on each side was great to play, but many more than that became an accounting problem. Even after saying that, we had many a late night game with over 100 fighters.

Let me know if any of you have heard of this game, or would like to see the rules.
scott
Posts: 5243
Joined: May 12th, 2004, 12:35 am
Location: San Pedro, CA

Re: Ever hear of a boardgame called "Melee" ?

Post by scott »

Alice wrote:I believe this game could be improved using some of Melee's features.
Well, what did you have in mind?
Hope springs eternal.
Wesnoth acronym guide.
Alice
Posts: 14
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 10:45 pm
Location: Portales, NM

Ranged Weapons

Post by Alice »

My first suggestion would to be to make bows a truely ranged weapon. The whole point of bows is to urt the other guy before he can close on you and hurt you. Melee had a system of ranges based on bow type where you could hit an enemy at some distance. This sounds complicated, but I think Wesnoth could use a simple version of this nicely.

The second suggestion would be to allow the defender to choose which weapon type to defend with. This is a gut reaction, and it would supplant a basic tactic that Wesnoth uses (and which I kinda like). Now you pick an attacker based on the kind of weapons the defender uses. I pick bow attacks if the enemy has only melee weapons if I want to conserve hit points. However, why would a master archer put down his bow and defend with a dagger just because an attacker is using a sword?

If bow attacks occured at range, this could not happen, and then the archer might possibly be forced to change to a melee weapon when his attacker entered his zone of control.

These are just a couple of things I thought about while playing, and enjoying Wesnoth.
Emmanovi
Posts: 266
Joined: October 21st, 2005, 4:24 pm
Location: In a galaxy, far, far away........

Post by Emmanovi »

FPI Thread wrote:* Ranged weapons should be able to reach across multiple hexes
Background: suggestions that units such as archers (or perhaps catapults) should be able to fire their weapons across
multiple tiles
Result: although the game engine does support this, the developers do not feel it would enhance the game, since among
other things, it would be very difficult to protect units from dying
If white was black and black was white, what would happen to zebra crossings?
User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8137
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Ranged Weapons

Post by Elvish_Pillager »

Alice wrote:My first suggestion would to be to make bows a truely ranged weapon. The whole point of bows is to urt the other guy before he can close on you and hurt you. Melee had a system of ranges based on bow type where you could hit an enemy at some distance. This sounds complicated, but I think Wesnoth could use a simple version of this nicely.
Yeah, READ THE FPI. It's amazing how many people still propose this, even though it's in the FPI.
Alice wrote:The second suggestion would be to allow the defender to choose which weapon type to defend with. This is a gut reaction, and it would supplant a basic tactic that Wesnoth uses (and which I kinda like). Now you pick an attacker based on the kind of weapons the defender uses. I pick bow attacks if the enemy has only melee weapons if I want to conserve hit points. However, why would a master archer put down his bow and defend with a dagger just because an attacker is using a sword?
When someone is standing two feet from your face, swining his sword like crazy, you want to try to shoot him with your bow? Besides that not being possible, he would hack your bow to pieces.

Also, we have a saying here, WINR - (Wesnoth Is Not Realistic)
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.
scott
Posts: 5243
Joined: May 12th, 2004, 12:35 am
Location: San Pedro, CA

Post by scott »

I knew this was coming as soon as I read the reply. I would have to say that this was #2 on the list of deliberate developer design decisions (d^4), right behind defense is only determined by defender terrain. Ideaicide is very common around here; don't let it get to you.
Hope springs eternal.
Wesnoth acronym guide.
Alice
Posts: 14
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 10:45 pm
Location: Portales, NM

I'll try to explain

Post by Alice »

You're a friendly bunch, aren't you. Thank you Scott for your civilized posts. I stated up front that I am a newcomer to Wesnoth, and I haven't had time (or inclination) to read thousands of posts before I made my suggestions. I have read quite a bit about your philosophy and design decisions. I'm a glutton for punishment, so here goes some explanations of where my suggestions are coming from.

First my original post asked if anyone had played Melee. I think if someone were to look at this game, it might bring up some good ideas to improve Wesnoth.

Second, and this is my fault, two ideas were mixed together that should have been kept seperate. The first applies only to Wesnoth as it is now. This is the idea that the attacker gets to chose which weapon the defender will use to defend himself. I used the example of the archer having to abandon his primary weapon because he is attacked with a melee weapon. It was pointed out that it is very difficult to defend oneself with a stick with a string on it from an attacker hacking away at him with a sword. Totally true, but it makes just as much sense as a defender with no bow standing right next to a guy filling him with arrows and not being able to strike back with his melee weapon. If you allowed the defender to choose the weapon he defends with it would channge tactics to how an individual would attack and defend, not which individual should be used.

The second part of the second part is the issue of ranged weapons. This is related to the first discussion because it would fix the bpoblem of a unit using his bow in melee combat. If ranged combat were to occurr the bowman would be at a distance from the sworsman, so there would be no conflict about being able to use a bow in melee combat. The game Melee took this one step farther. When the swordsmad did enter the zone of control of a bowman, the archer had to make a decision. He could take one last shot with the bow in hopes that the swordsman would go down, or he would switch to a melee weapon and continue the fight. If the last shot worked, and the enemy fell, the bowman could continue to use the bow. If the enemy was not killed by the last shot, the swordsman got one free swing at the archer while he was trying to drop his bow and pull his melee weapon while engaged with an enemy. The most interesting part of this system is that the tactics became a dance between the arched and the melee units. The archers were always trying to get cloe to the enemy so there arrows could do maximum damage, but never so close that the swordsmen couuld close with them and force them to use a weapon they were not as proficient with. Then the calvery would appear and really get everyone moving. It was really neat.

Third issue is in reply about ranged combat killing all the characters. They're getting killed now! Ranged combat adds another layer of strategy to the game by making a unit retreat to heal far enough from the battle that the archers can't reach him. Don't wat to retreat that far, want to stay in the battle line to plug a hole, thats the gamble you have to take.

Last issue. Wesnoth is not realistic. No kidding! I am not proposing totallt reality, but when the total concept is based on reality it makes the game play much better. An example I use are the Indiana Jones movies. The first one in particular was very good at streching reality farther and farther, but without going so far as to break your connection with reality. For me, a good example of how not to do this is the second movie. They stretched reality farther and farther, but when they jumped from an airplane in a life raft and lived, that connection snapped for me. After tat the rest of the movie didn't feel as "true". I believe when the game is firmly based in reality, but reality is stretched real good, it makes for a great game. This is why some of the above changes were suggested.

To summarize, I really didn't intend to write "War and Peace", but specific points were brought ought out that made me be specific in reply.
Alice
Posts: 14
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 10:45 pm
Location: Portales, NM

Ran out of space

Post by Alice »

I came to this forum because it implied you were looking for ideas. If no ideas are wanted, I suggest you remove the forum.

If there are posts that have alredy discussed this topic that I should read, please direct me to those posts instead of ragging me about not having read them (I did say I was new).

While I have played Melee and enjoyed it immensly, it may be your cup of tea. I would suggest that any of you that are willing to try it a couple of times might see the basis for some of the changes I propossed. However, this would require you to use pen and paper, and I'm finding fewer and fewer computer users willing to do that these days. If you are intrested you can find the rules at http://www.deiker.net.tft . I am not trying to pull anyone away from Wesnoth, just offering up a great old game.

Thanks for listening to me, and I hope to be able to continue adding to this forum.
scott
Posts: 5243
Joined: May 12th, 2004, 12:35 am
Location: San Pedro, CA

Post by scott »

You mean http://www.deiker.net/tft

It's not that the project isn't open to ideas, rather the project isn't open to certain ideas, namely those listed here: http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1158 As for discussion of them, the relevant topics are buried way down in the list. Search might bring them up, but not always. There are a lot of good reasons to have true ranged combat, but the decision was already made on this one a long time ago. From your POV, it might be unsatisfying to have to take it on trust from the regulars, but from the developers' POV, it's not the most fun thing to have to roll out the entire argument again each time a different person brings it up. There actually used to be true ranged combat in the game, but it turned out to be incompatible with other [fundamental] aspects of the game (such as setting up battle lines). Also, hexes are possibly miles across - the use of an abstraction resists reality based arguements. Finally, having a separation between ranged combat and melee combat (or type A attacks and type B attacks when abstracted) was the subject of several old flame wars. Since we're so curmudgeonly around here, we value peace and the security provided by deliberate design decisions since flame wars are so tiring. There's really no way to gently bring a new person into this system of thinking unless he or she observes the newbie "indoctriniation" happen to someone else.
Hope springs eternal.
Wesnoth acronym guide.
User avatar
Casual User
Posts: 475
Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm

Post by Casual User »

Good afternoon!

Actually, this forum is for proposing ideas so others can then destroy them. It feels unfair at first, but then you start doing it on others and you realize the fun!

So, let me proceed to doing that.

1) About giving archers real range :

Yes, real range has been proposed before, and it used to be supported. In fact, the lack of real range in ranged attacks jarred me too at first. Consider a few advantages of the current system :

- I understand the AI was unable to use real range. In fact, the AI doesn't do well at ANY effect which involves area, which are similar to longer-range effects (word to the wise, this means the AI doesn't know how to use either healing or leading).
- Archers are real fighters as opposed to basically 2nd line units, which goes well with the Wesnoth 'feel' of a war party.
- It avoids a lot of inconsistencies, such as an archer shooting across a castle tile into the ennemy's keep!!!
- It is a lot easier to balance. Balancing a real ranged attack would be very difficult, as the line between overpowered and useless would be VERY thin in that case.

2) About letting the player choose the strikeback weapon :

I can see how this can be useful sometimes, but I can really see how it would be tiresome.

A frequent tactic for undead is to make a horde of walking corpses (goblins can also be used in a similar fashion). They die very fast, so it's not at all impossible for an unit to have to fight up to 15 times in a turn, but the walking corpses are very cheap, so they keep on coming. I can really imagine having to choose your attack each time becoming boring...

Apart from which, 95% of units have only one attack for a specified range. And for those that have more than one, 95% of times, you would choose the same attack as the computer anyways, so...

It could be useful, however, if you would only be asked if there is more than one attack of acceptable range and that neither of those attacks is strictly superior to all the others (i.e. has >= no. attacks, >= damage and all abilities the others have).

P.S. Don't get mad, get even by trouncing someone else's ideas.
P.P.S. The forum is pretty friendly, once you get past the gruff exterior.
Alice
Posts: 14
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 10:45 pm
Location: Portales, NM

I don't get mad

Post by Alice »

This may sound rather Spock like, but it isn't fun for me to crush other peoples ideas. I thought this would be more of a scientific style of discussion instead of flame or be flamed. I am not mad, I am disappointed.

I agree with the complication of choosing the defense weapon in evey attack you are involvedin, but that's already happening in every attack you initiate. Perhaps some sort of default could be set by the user when the character is selected with a possibility to use the non default weapon in certain instances? Perhaps it is clumsy, but the inability to choose your weapon is a real liability especially when you are a melee only character.

If all the ideas are set in stone, so be it. I will still enjoy Wesnoth, and just not add my two cents worth in the this forum.

O yeah, I also like the idea of experience for healing. I can't get a healer to level up cause the die too easily, yet the guys they are keeping alive with their cures get the XP for kills they couldn't have made without yje cure.
Yogibear
Retired Developer
Posts: 1086
Joined: September 16th, 2005, 5:44 am
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: Ran out of space

Post by Yogibear »

Alice wrote:I came to this forum because it implied you were looking for ideas. If no ideas are wanted, I suggest you remove the forum.

If there are posts that have alredy discussed this topic that I should read, please direct me to those posts instead of ragging me about not having read them (I did say I was new).

...

Thanks for listening to me, and I hope to be able to continue adding to this forum.
Please excuse for the bad start you had on this forum (come on EP, you really could be a little more diplomatic, sometimes :? ). Well, even if it looks different now, most people are very friendly around here.

I would like to see you go on contributing. Your points are based on arguments and that is always welcome.
Smart persons learn out of their mistakes, wise persons learn out of others mistakes!
Duke Guillermo
Posts: 127
Joined: October 25th, 2005, 9:32 pm

Post by Duke Guillermo »

There is no need to choose what weapon you defend with. The developers, while you may not agree with them, have concluded that when an attacker initiates a melee fight, the defender must use melee and the same for ranged attacks. This system is easy, non-cumbersome and actually makes sense. As many have said earlier in discussions similar to this: if you had someone attack you with an axe you wouldn't pull out your bow and arrow, you would attack with a sword or dagger.

In the rare case of having multiple melee or ranged attacks the computer chooses the weapon which dishes out the most damage. On the defence where you aren't allowed to choose melee or ranged the choice of what weapon to use boils down to: what deals more damage. Why not just let the computer choose this for you?
In summation, you're wrong.
User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8137
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: I don't get mad

Post by Elvish_Pillager »

Alice wrote:This may sound rather Spock like, but it isn't fun for me to crush other peoples ideas. I thought this would be more of a scientific style of discussion instead of flame or be flamed. I am not mad, I am disappointed.
Around here, we know how to flame people with scientific discussion. :twisted:
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.
Alice
Posts: 14
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 10:45 pm
Location: Portales, NM

Back at cha

Post by Alice »

There is no need to choose what weapon you defend with. The developers, while you may not agree with them, have concluded that when an attacker initiates a melee fight, the defender must use melee and the same for ranged attacks. This system is easy, non-cumbersome and actually makes sense. As many have said earlier in discussions similar to this: if you had someone attack you with an axe you wouldn't pull out your bow and arrow, you would attack with a sword or dagger.
So why don't you let the computer select the weapon you attack with as well? Also, why prevent a defender from having his attack just because he doesn't have the same weapon type that he was attacked with? (I actually think I know why this is the case. It simulates ranged attacks were the defender is not in proximity to the attacker. ) Hence, my argument for true ranged attacks.

I believe weapon selection could add a subtle dimension to the game.
Post Reply