Dunefolk balancing rework ideas - discussion.

[Hejnewar]

@Celtic_Minstrel I plan to test them but I just don't have enough time to do this on as big scale as Elder probably could.

@Pentarctagon, ghype I already have era for that and it is just waiting for changes.

@The_Gnat Dunesfolk could require big changes if simple change of statistics won't work that being said I can quite easly bring them to around 100% of strength of average other factions units with exception of firearcher (undead), falcon and herbalist using only math.

I just don't like current Dunesfolk naming.

[sunset]

@Henjewar i will send to you some modification this day for the era

Edit: i want to change liminal too [dawn/dusk +25% and night/day -25%]

[ghype]

I plan to test them but I just don't have enough time to do this on as big scale as Elder probably could.

once this project comes to the mp servers, more people will be interesting in testing. Me included, and i have plenty of time too.
So i dont think the testing will be a problem

@Pentarctagon, ghype I already have era for that and it is just waiting for changes.

OK i didn't knew this.

I just don't like current Dunesfolk naming.

well i think renaming them AGAIN would cause some outrage since i think there was ha 10 page thread discussion its naming.
https://forums.wesnoth.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=47704
if you have improvements for they naming, maybe they can be considered too. just let us know what you had in mind.

[Elder2]

@The_Gnat i have considered ulf as well, and I came to the conclusion that its less abusable and breaks less important rule of not continuing the combat after all attacks have been fired. Meanwhile an unit being immobilised after attacking is a more fundamental rule, I think I would be fine with disengage ability that gives it 1 mp, i think its probably as gimmicky as berserk, but making it consume moves is just way more crazy, and more abusable as well, eg attacking and taking villages, therefore its way more gimmicky.

[The_Gnat]

@The_Gnat Dunesfolk could require big changes if simple change of statistics won't work that being said I can quite easily bring them to around 100% of strength of average other factions units with exception of firearcher (undead), falcon and herbalist using only math.

That is true. As you point out the faction can largely be balanced just through math. I feel like this is the option we need to take first because making large changes to the alignment may not be anymore effective then changing the stats such as HP, damage, defense, but would take considerably more time to test and balance correctly. If we change the stats first then I believe we can get a better idea of what exactly needs to be done on a larger level.

For example the dunefolk may need another unit. Alternatively a unit's attack type could need to be changed. Or maybe a unit needs to be removed. These are larger changes but we can't fully determine that yet because it struggles in balance in numerous different areas.

once this project comes to the mp servers, more people will be interesting in testing. Me included, and i have plenty of time too.
So i dont think the testing will be a problem

I agree

i have considered ulf as well, and I came to the conclusion that its less abusable and breaks less important rule of not continuing the combat after all attacks have been fired. Meanwhile an unit being immobilised after attacking is a more fundamental rule, I think I would be fine with disengage ability that gives it 1 mp, i think its probably as gimmicky as berserk, but making it consume moves is just way more crazy, and more abusable as well, eg attacking and taking villages, therefore its way more gimmicky.

Very valid points. I believe that the changes suggested with the falcon would definitely be an interesting but not the sort of major and complex changes we should be making to balance the faction. In balancing the dune folk we should be adding a MP to the falcon or changing the HP of units or (as someone suggested and I believe is very valid) increasing the defenses of some of the terrains.

[Pentarctagon]

I think that going with Celtic_Minstrel's proposal that I linked to previously would be good. A couple of things that have come up with the Dunefolk are that they both have no good time to attack and also tend not to deal a whole lot of damage in general, and the linked change would help with both by effectively buffing all liminal units' damage by 25% compared to currently. I think it would also be more intuitive for newer players in particular for liminal units to have 4 neutral times and 2 positive times, rather than 4 negative times and 2 neutral ones, in terms of deciding how the unit should be used - a unit that has -25% damage the majority of the time just kind of seems like a bad unit, even if it does actually have other things making up for it.

And even if this specific change isn't what's done, I'd definitely rather change liminal's bonuses to be more (or at all) positive rather than buffing individual units' damage to achieve the same effect.

[The_Gnat]

The main problem in my mind with making changes to the liminal alignment is that we have the potential for doing things that:

- do not directly improve the balance of the faction
- cause imbalances in other ways (such as against other factions)
- create things that are hard to test and prove
- remove the strategic uniqueness that currently exists with the dune folk's unique alignment
- spend time without actually moving closer to the goal of having the faction balanced against the others

Really what we need to do is identify specifically the key problems and weaknesses that the dune folk have. Only from there will we be able to actually suggest a change that would address the issues in the long term and avoid the above problems mentioned.

A couple of things that have come up with the Dunefolk are that they both have no good time to attack and also tend not to deal a whole lot of damage in general,

Nice! Even while I was typing you were already listing the key problems of the dune folk! I definitely agree and think that if we consider the full implications of a change with the alignment to ensure it is going in the right direction it has potential.

and the linked change would help with both by effectively buffing all liminal units' damage by 25% compared to currently. I think it would also be more intuitive for newer players in particular for liminal units to have 4 neutral times and 2 positive times, rather than 4 negative times and 2 neutral ones, in terms of deciding how the unit should be used - a unit that has -25% damage the majority of the time just kind of seems like a bad unit, even if it does actually have other things making up for it.

I absolutely support this idea! I actually thought it had already been committed for a future version. As I see it this is a foundational initial change to get the dune folk back into the same league as the other factions.

And even if this specific change isn't what's done, I'd definitely rather change liminal's bonuses to be more (or at all) positive rather than buffing individual units' damage to achieve the same effect.

I think that after this change is made then we should have a better sense of where exactly the dune folk stands in relation to the other factions.

However, along with this I believe individual units definitely need changes to allow them to be better balanced as a whole and better balanced against the other factions specifically.

[ghype]

The main problem in my mind with making changes to the liminal alignment is that we have the potential for doing things that:

- do not directly improve the balance of the faction
- cause imbalances in other ways (such as against other factions)
- create things that are hard to test and prove
- remove the strategic uniqueness that currently exists with the dune folk's unique alignment
- spend time without actually moving closer to the goal of having the faction balanced against the others

I agree with penta, right now liminal seems very counter-intuitive and it would help the DF to feel more "wesnoth-ish" if we address first before changing everything stats-wise. If the falcon has disengage or not is secondary ( or any other similar change to other units), but Liminal should really be addressed first before anything.

The link provided by celtic/penta seems intuitive enough and probably would make DF feel more "natural" when playing. especially for veteran players who have the hardest time to find their peace with DF

[Celtic_Minstrel]

The main problem in my mind with making changes to the liminal alignment is that we have the potential for doing things that:

- do not directly improve the balance of the faction
- cause imbalances in other ways (such as against other factions)
- create things that are hard to test and prove
- remove the strategic uniqueness that currently exists with the dune folk's unique alignment
- spend time without actually moving closer to the goal of having the faction balanced against the others

The linked proposal more or less change nothing for the faction's balance, since the units' damage would be tweaked so that it comes out the same with the altered bonuses. Okay, so the math of how the bonuses work would mean it wouldn't be absolutely the same, but I doubt it would be enough to make a difference.

The liminal alignment is and always has been an alignment where units perform better during twilight hours. At the moment, that's implemented by coding their best damage into the unit, then giving them a malus when it's not twilight. The linked proposal reverses that – you would code their worst damage into the unit, then give them a bonus during twilight. This makes fluff and mechanics match up better without appreciably changing the actual damage output.

[The_Gnat]

The liminal alignment is and always has been an alignment where units perform better during twilight hours. At the moment, that's implemented by coding their best damage into the unit, then giving them a malus when it's not twilight. The linked proposal reverses that – you would code their worst damage into the unit, then give them a bonus during twilight. This makes fluff and mechanics match up better without appreciably changing the actual damage output.

Yes I have always been in favour of this because of the confusion in stats. I believe I actually made this recommendation a long time ago and I fully support it.

It foundational has to be the first step because otherwise any and all changes will be part of the confusing current system were bonuses are hard coded into the units.

[Pentarctagon]

The main problem in my mind with making changes to the liminal alignment is that we have the potential for doing things that:

- do not directly improve the balance of the faction
- cause imbalances in other ways (such as against other factions)
- create things that are hard to test and prove
- remove the strategic uniqueness that currently exists with the dune folk's unique alignment
- spend time without actually moving closer to the goal of having the faction balanced against the others

The linked proposal more or less change nothing for the faction's balance, since the units' damage would be tweaked so that it comes out the same with the altered bonuses. Okay, so the math of how the bonuses work would mean it wouldn't be absolutely the same, but I doubt it would be enough to make a difference.

The liminal alignment is and always has been an alignment where units perform better during twilight hours. At the moment, that's implemented by coding their best damage into the unit, then giving them a malus when it's not twilight. The linked proposal reverses that – you would code their worst damage into the unit, then give them a bonus during twilight. This makes fluff and mechanics match up better without appreciably changing the actual damage output.

It sounds like we'd going to need to re-increase at least some units' damage output separately then, but otherwise I don't think anyone is opposed to the change.

[Nobun]

I never liked dunefolks, and the liminal alignment is a very bad idea, imho.
I mean... chaotic, neutral and lawful were the perfect combination of all possible (and balanced) bonus/malus system that works fine in a strategy game based on time of day.
You have (except neutral vs neutral) two turns with bonus, one turn balanced, two turns with malus and another balanced turn. This allows you to plan an attack trying to figure when it is a good time to attack and you can figure when it could be the time to retreat before the malus could be an issue.
This is not the case about liminal. It is not a matter wether is balanced or not, but liminal introduced a bad mechanic even if you consider it balanced. Infact you have 4 turns with mauls, two with bonus. The turn with bonus are SINGLE and you immediately will have a next turn with the malus. This means that you CAN'T reasonably plan a strategy related to time of day, but the 'bonus' works like a luck factor more than a planning factor.
I mean: you have not the time to calculate when to attack and when to retreat, so if you end to attack during the time of 'bonus ' (meaning the +0 as a sort of bonus) it ends to be a coincidence and not a component of your attack plans (including the advancement/retreat time).

[The_Gnat]

The problem is that we have too many topics and no agreement. I personally acknowledge the arguments against the liminal alignment and understand the logic behind them but do not agree because I believe variety, uniqueness, and theme are all benefited by the dawn-dusk alignment.

That said there is a topic currently active Here that is planning on making some changes to the liminal so they are not so lousy.

I agree with you that the liminal struggles with attacking because its TOD bonus is so short lived. I also believe the proposed change of making the liminal have +25% and then 0% at the other times would be a massive improvement for clarity and cohesion with the other factions.

[Pentarctagon]

Moved the two recent posts from this thread.

Also, PR #2664 has been merged, so liminal is now +25% during dawn/dusk and 0% otherwise, rather than -25% during day/night and 0% otherwise. Unit attacks were also decreased to keep them mostly the same as prior to the PR.

[ghype]

The problem is that we have too many topics and no agreement.

we are intensivly working on best options and suggestion, which we will present here soon enough.

since multiple umc devs work on this, i am considering to merge all "modified DF" eras into one, so you can choose which version you want to play rather then have them all scattered around the server. currently there are two and soon there will be more once our suggestions are published.