Request for fixing: Unfair punishment of units fighting bett

[shevegen]

fighting better.

For example, in one campaign you can have a level 3 elven hero, he gets
surrounded with zombies. Now, he risks to die because he kills so many zombies that more and more zombies can take the place of the old zombie that got destroyed, and attack this melee guy too, inflicting few, but in summary deadly wounds.


I think this is unfair?
A mage that sucks in melee survives here because he wont kill the zombies like the melee guy does, and this leads to the strange situation that a mage can defend better against swarming fodder units like the weak zombies ...

[scott]

what would you do?

[irrevenant]

This is kinda unfortunate, but it's not entirely unbalanced given that he takes a lot of walking corpses with him.

[zookeeper]

That is definitely "odd", if you think it in terms of realism, for example. But I also think it's one of the more interesting strategies (kamikazeing your own units to get more hits in) in the game, although annoying when used against you. Also, it's simply just "odd" and not really unfair, since you can know if the enemy has a chance of using such a tactic successfully against you and you can then place your unit away from the reach of all those corpses.

[palloco]

Maybe there should be an option of disallowing defense. That is, the hero will receive all damage from the zombie hits but he wont attack back the zombies. Maybe this way zombies/or whatever unit should have one more attack since they dont waste time defending themselves

[Dragonking]

Maybe there should be an option of disallowing defense. That is, the hero will receive all damage from the zombie hits but he wont attack back the zombies. Maybe this way zombies/or whatever unit should have one more attack since they dont waste time defending themselves

This is double edged sword - after disallowing defence afres some number of fights (one of possibilities to implement it) I could bring my mear-to-death lvl3 unit with powerful attack and 1hp and just kill your unit cause it can't counter me.

Really bad idea IMO.

And if you would like to make ability for zombie that unit attacked by it can't counterattack, it is even worse idea.

Current way how it works is ok for me.

[JW]

Would you rather kill 12 Walking Corpses and lose your Knight, or kill 0 Walking Corpses and have your Arch Mage at 1 hp?

[irrevenant]

The last time this issue came up, the proposed solution was:

Each time a unit dies in a hex, there is a +1 cumulative movement penalty to enter that hex until the next turn ('cos it's full of bodies, impeding movement). That way, after 4 corpses have attacked, no more can get into the hex until next turn.

Personally, I don't like it - seems needlessly complicated to me - but there it is. HMBMA is also a problem.

I'm also not sure how they intended to indicate how many corpses were in a hex.

[JW]

The last time this issue came up, the proposed solution was:

Each time a unit dies in a hex, there is a +1 cumulative movement penalty to enter that hex until the next turn ('cos it's full of bodies, impeding movement). That way, after 4 corpses have attacked, no more can get into the hex until next turn.

Personally, I don't like it - seems needlessly complicated to me - but there it is. HMBMA is also a problem.

I'm also not sure how they intended to indicate how many corpses were in a hex.

That's actually a brilliant idea. It wouldn't come into play very often (except for undead - sometimes) and it makes perfectly logical sense. It shouldn't be too hard for the player to keep track of the bodies as the active player would have to.....oh wait, it would also work when defenders died....interesting....hm.......I still like the idea, but now it's more complex - although I think is STILL very intriguing AND brilliant!

I would love to see this implemented. Really - it would add another layer of strategy to the game without increasing the complexity too much.

[Kestenvarn]

The last time this issue came up, the proposed solution was:

Each time a unit dies in a hex, there is a +1 cumulative movement penalty to enter that hex until the next turn ('cos it's full of bodies, impeding movement). That way, after 4 corpses have attacked, no more can get into the hex until next turn.

Personally, I don't like it - seems needlessly complicated to me - but there it is. HMBMA is also a problem.

I'm also not sure how they intended to indicate how many corpses were in a hex.

I like this idea... as for telling hexes apart, those that have dead units could have a small number in the corner or be 'shaded/show number on mouseover'.

[Zhukov]

Each time a unit dies in a hex...etc etc

I reckon this idea has serious potential. I found the fact that strong units are more prone to swarming somewhat irksome. (Although I can't say I ever thought it any more then a minor annoyance).
Swarming, IMO, is (one of) the most unimaginative, boring and downright fun-destroying tactics one can encounter. So this limitation would be greatly welcome.
However is there any risk of putting up something that would only add a frustrating level of complexity, with little actual gameplay return? A good number of people might oppose this idea on the grounds of complexity.
Would it be an improvement if the 'corpses' were to only remain for the turn in which they died? Otherwise the presence of permanent invisible obstructions could prove a real annoyance.

Anyway, with good implementation, this idea could be good...pending the opinion of the developers, of course.

[Tomsik]

Please don't implement it! Some tactics bases on moving unit to hex where your unit died this turn. For example when ulfserker leave enemy unit with little hp and dies you may move other unit to that hex and finish it.

[JW]

Please don't implement it! Some tactics bases on moving unit to hex where your unit died this turn. For example when ulfserker leave enemy unit with little hp and dies you may move other unit to that hex and finish it.

You can still do that - it'll just take 1 more movement point...

[Tomsik]

With 4 movement points(for example dwarvish fighter)? It's very much.
You would need to keep unit, very, very close.

[guest]

However is there any risk of putting up something that would only add a frustrating level of complexity, with little actual gameplay return?

I believe the risk exists, and is substantial.

Moreover, this would further "unify" the different factions, which, IMO, is A Bad Thing. One of the things that makes Wesnoth so much fun is, that each unit / faction has its own strengths and weaknesses, and different strategies apply.