Hero - coward

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:
Post Reply
emdot
Posts: 66
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 4:01 pm
Location: pl
Contact:

Hero - coward

Post by emdot » February 23rd, 2006, 1:12 pm

Idea is to set unit/army attitude in battle for hero-coward.

Hero - is current behavior when game is suggesting weapon which could deal most damage.
Coward - suggest weapon in which unit will get the least damage.

Settings are to be set in battle dialog and remembered.

Similar settings are in roguelike games.

Deathblower
Posts: 146
Joined: February 14th, 2006, 11:22 pm
Location: England

Post by Deathblower » February 23rd, 2006, 1:17 pm

I'm not sure if or how it will save much or any time for anyone when playing the game. When you play, it's not like you attack with whatever weapon it chooses - you usually weigh up the options yourself.

ie. even if the attack it suggested would mean you took less damage, you would still be inclined to look at the other attack option. Meaning that no time would be saved by implementing this feature.

Of course, this is just my opinion and others may feel differently. At least you're thinking of fresh ideas.

DB
Just a short dude with a lot of time . . .

SmokemJags
Posts: 580
Joined: February 14th, 2006, 3:24 am
Location: New Avalon
Contact:

Post by SmokemJags » February 23rd, 2006, 7:57 pm

I have a sneaking suspicion this topic is covered in:
* There should be a fear/morale system in the game
Background: there have been a number of different suggestions for a fear/morale system in the game. The implementation suggestions have been varied, but generally include the concept of units becoming 'afraid' based on various heuristics that calculate how much danger they're in. 'Afraid' units would be made to make certain movements, or have restrictions on what movements they can make
Result: After lengthy discussion, it has been decided that this would over-complicate the game, and frustrate players. It is felt that this kind of idea is more suited to a 'wargame' than a simplified fantasy-strategy game which aims for simplicity and fun.
Heroic = high morale
Coward = low morale/fear
"A wise man speaks when he has something to say. A fool speaks when he has to say something."

Noy
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1321
Joined: March 13th, 2005, 3:59 pm

Post by Noy » February 23rd, 2006, 8:05 pm

Smokem has a point... its already been covered.

thread locked.

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

Post by Dave » February 23rd, 2006, 8:10 pm

Err...I unlocked this again since it is actually a fundamentally different suggestion to what has been proposed before.

The idea is an interface change that doesn't modify gameplay at all.

That said, it adds a new option, and I think it's of marginal benefit, so I doubt it'd get added.

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

SmokemJags
Posts: 580
Joined: February 14th, 2006, 3:24 am
Location: New Avalon
Contact:

Post by SmokemJags » February 23rd, 2006, 8:25 pm

Just call me Jags. :)
Why do people say Smokem? It's uglier and longer to type... *shrug*

As I mentioned, it was only a sneaking suspicion and not a dead set viewpoint.
Upon re-reading it I think Noy and I were a little misled though. It isn't a change towards how much damage is dealt, it's just a display of...

"What action will result in (possibly) dealing the most damage."
"What action will result in (possibly) receiving the least damage."

An interesting idea, but I lack support for it. As a beginner's aid, it makes sense. When you're first learning the game and getting the hang of it, it might be of some use to have a more detailed description of the damage system rather than... 7-3.
Still the time it takes to learn how the damage system works, and eventually understanding slightly more advanced facets such as resistances really is very short.
Doesn't really warrant such a feature that I see as 'training wheels'.
"A wise man speaks when he has something to say. A fool speaks when he has to say something."

Deathblower
Posts: 146
Joined: February 14th, 2006, 11:22 pm
Location: England

Post by Deathblower » February 23rd, 2006, 9:26 pm

I'm pretty sure he just means that instead of the computer automatically highlighting the weapon that does the most damage on the weapon selection screen, you can choose to make it highlight the weapon that results in you taking less damage.

Can we have the author's view on this? Who's interpretation is right?

DB
Just a short dude with a lot of time . . .

Assasin
Posts: 956
Joined: March 15th, 2005, 3:51 am
Location: Where ever my mind takes me
Contact:

Post by Assasin » February 24th, 2006, 4:23 am

Deathblower wrote:I'm pretty sure he just means that instead of the computer automatically highlighting the weapon that does the most damage on the weapon selection screen, you can choose to make it highlight the weapon that results in you taking less damage.

Can we have the author's view on this? Who's interpretation is right?

DB

i think you're close, but he means for the whole army.

Hero/Coward aren't, IMHO, the best names. Who want's a cowards army? Sure, he who run's away, lives to fight another day, but there is no running in Wesnoth.

Reckless/Cautious are more appropriate terms.
I speak what's on my mind.

Which is why nothing I say makes sense.

Deathblower
Posts: 146
Joined: February 14th, 2006, 11:22 pm
Location: England

Post by Deathblower » February 24th, 2006, 8:17 am

:) Agreed! I was a little put off by the names.

DB
Just a short dude with a lot of time . . .

emdot
Posts: 66
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 4:01 pm
Location: pl
Contact:

Post by emdot » February 24th, 2006, 12:21 pm

Deathblower wrote: Can we have the author's view on this? Who's interpretation is right?
Your interpretation is right :-)

I know names are a bit offensive but what others do you want? Courageous - cautious?

Usefullness of this option depends on campaign/scenario. In more RPG-style it is good thing to protect your precious units. I suggested this because I was badly hit several times when pressed Enter accidentally...

Deathblower
Posts: 146
Joined: February 14th, 2006, 11:22 pm
Location: England

Post by Deathblower » February 24th, 2006, 5:12 pm

I see, so it's to help when you're in a rush. I know that in multiplayer people can annoyingly rush you to take your go. I don't see why this whould be hard to program at all. The existing code would need very little modification.

I may look into it.

DB
Just a short dude with a lot of time . . .

Ask_
Posts: 25
Joined: November 4th, 2005, 10:46 am
Location: Russia

Post by Ask_ » February 26th, 2006, 3:26 am

On a slightly off-topic note, what about making it WML-settable AI option? Or is there already such a setting?

Post Reply