The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Discussion of all aspects of multiplayer development: unit balancing, map development, server development, and so forth.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
User avatar
Doc Paterson
Drake Cartographer
Posts: 1973
Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
Location: Kazakh
Contact:

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Doc Paterson »

grrr wrote:
Zlodzei wrote: Unless p2 knows what faction he faces he is forced to direct 1 fodder + 1 scout east direction whilst p1 can afford to buy 1 scout for west and send the rest in eastern direction. This can cause problems for players who are addicted to ridiculously aggressive style with first night attacks (me for instance :P).
It's that part of the "guessing game" I find ultimately frustrating in some 1v1 maps (CotB, Freelands, Weldyn Channel), as P2. Lose unit and/or village(s) because your opponent deviates from splitting his forces? Oh tough luck, you lose. Better luck next time!
Oh come on, you must know that that's a huge exaggeration. :P

Generally speaking P2 can do the same thing....Having your leader to use as an added defensive unit is a huge deal, and it takes away a lot of the pressure to split your forces equally. That's why, for example, I try to make it easier for both players to use their leader defensively on maps like Weldyn (the extended sides of the castles, with keeps on each end). There are loads of other P2-safeguarding balancing features in most maps that we've discussed many a time- I probably don't have to rehash them here. If a map facilitates un-fun or generally overpowering guessing games, and evidence/player testimonials etc. backs it up, measures are taken. The finetuning process is ongoing, as you know.

That said, I think that almost all of the maps are fine for P2....On the whole, you see good players losing as player one just about as often as when they're player two.

Weldyn however is one of the ones that I've never been completely comfortable with. I don't think it's that bad at all for P2, but every once in a while you get a situation where the P1 pressure makes for a small advantage. I've had this feeling occasionally when playing as P2 Knalgan, and to much lesser degrees, P2 Rebel or Loy. The problem with this map though is that I feel I've done almost all I can do without making more radical changes, changes that would probably also increase the likelihood of stalematish games. This issue would not be so difficult if it wasn't for the "defining" characteristic of the map, the fact that it pretty much has to have a very large body of water in the center. That is a very difficult boundary to work within, trying to keep the factional balance aligned without facilitating situations where P1 might have slightly better options, pressure, etc. or, conversely, where the dynamic suffers and you get a lot of boring/stalemateish/strategically linear games.

So it comes down to this: I'll keep tinkering, but people who are particularly concerned should make specific suggestions. Post a screenshot of your idea, and we can discuss it.
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses.
-Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme

User avatar
F8 Binds...
Saurian Cartographer
Posts: 622
Joined: November 26th, 2006, 3:13 pm
Location: Mid-Western United States

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by F8 Binds... »

I remember that you (Doc) were "forced" to use cave terrain to prevent the drake blademaster from getting to the inner keep at turn 2 on castle hopping.

Now that there is a non-cave mushroom, wouldn't it be more appealing to remove the cave and to replace it with the dirt mushroom?

Just a thought. 8)
Proud creator of 4p- Underworld. Fascinated by Multiplayer design and balance.
I am the lone revenant of the n3t clan.

Jozrael
Posts: 1034
Joined: June 2nd, 2006, 1:39 pm
Location: NJ, USA.

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Jozrael »

*Had an off-topic axe to grind*.
Last edited by Jozrael on September 25th, 2008, 2:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
F8 Binds...
Saurian Cartographer
Posts: 622
Joined: November 26th, 2006, 3:13 pm
Location: Mid-Western United States

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by F8 Binds... »

That's a bit off topic. :|
Proud creator of 4p- Underworld. Fascinated by Multiplayer design and balance.
I am the lone revenant of the n3t clan.

User avatar
Doc Paterson
Drake Cartographer
Posts: 1973
Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
Location: Kazakh
Contact:

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Doc Paterson »

About Castle Hopping: Thanks for the reminder. Here's the update that I just did to that one. :)
Attachments
4p_Castle_Hopping_Isle.map
(12.27 KiB) Downloaded 277 times
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses.
-Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme

grrr
Posts: 252
Joined: May 25th, 2007, 9:49 pm

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by grrr »

Doc Paterson wrote:
grrr wrote: It's that part of the "guessing game" I find ultimately frustrating in some 1v1 maps (CotB, Freelands, Weldyn Channel), as P2. Lose unit and/or village(s) because your opponent deviates from splitting his forces? Oh tough luck, you lose. Better luck next time!
Oh come on, you must know that that's a huge exaggeration. :P
(...)
So it comes down to this: I'll keep tinkering, but people who are particularly concerned should make specific suggestions. Post a screenshot of your idea, and we can discuss it.
Well yes, it was an exaggeration of course. For Weldyn Channel, I tried to create the situation in a replay, in which I would feel a bit hopeless as P2. The solution could be to move the outpost village (8mp keep dist) a bit to the SW, or make it so the scout can help to prevent ZOC for one turn while the "cannon fodder" moves onto the village (currently, you need 6mp cannon fodder for that ...). It would be OK if you are forced to give up the village at turn 4, but not turn 3, with the full night still ahead.
Attachments
__fordoc.gz
Weldyn Channel, turn 3 (P2, save)
(15.86 KiB) Downloaded 240 times
Weldyn Channel, turn 3 (P2)
Weldyn Channel, turn 3 (P2)

Zlodzei
Posts: 44
Joined: January 6th, 2007, 10:31 am
Location: Belarus, Minsk
Contact:

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Zlodzei »

you play...without...grid...aww :)
I can see you!...

svek
Posts: 33
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 5:36 pm

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by svek »

For some reason the replay seems a bit corrupted, so I can't see exactly what moves lead up to the position, but I think I get the idea.

I don't think this shows any advantage for p1 for several reasons...
1) It looks more hopeless than it is. A bold p2 can steal a village next turn with the horseman. (a madly bold one could take another with the fish...)
2) I think the reason p2 can't defend the forward village this turn is a combination of mistakes and bad luck. Had either the mage or spearman been quick - np. I don't understand why the mage is placed where it is - would be more useful pretty much anywhere else. And since p2 don't have enough gold to recruit anyways, why not take the back village with the leader instead of placing it on the keep?
3) I also think that p1 isn't getting much for all his troubles. He's using a high risk strategy for a very minor gain. (It seems like he's taking one of his villages a turn later for the opportunity to take one from p2 a turn earlier, thus reducing the gain)

OTOH, all IMHO, so YMMV...

Fosprey
Posts: 254
Joined: January 25th, 2008, 8:13 am

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Fosprey »

I have been playing on weldyn channel a lot in the ladder, to try learn about the map, but don't have any advice yet.

I want to talk a little about the 1v1 maps.

First i will tell what are the most played maps on ladder.

Tier 1.
1.Weldyn channel
2.Freelands

Tier 2.
3.Cave of the basilisk
4.Hamlets.

Tier 3.
5.Fallenstar lake
6.Hornshark island
7.Den of onis

Tier 4.
8.Silverhead crossing
9. Sullar ruins
10. Sablestone delta
11.Cynasun battlefield

My opinion on the best maps to worst

Tier 1. Best map
1.Silverhead crossing

Tier 2.
2. Hornshark island
3. Sullar ruins
4. Cynasun battlefield

Tier 3.
5. Freelands
6. Den of onis
7. Fallenstar lake
8. Caves of the basilisk

Tier 4
9. Sablestone delta
10. Weldyn channel
11. Hamlets

I know that every map needs a discussion in itself. BUt i want to point one of the reasons some maps, despite how good they are, are vastly underplayed than worst maps.
I felt, because it somehow my case (it was definitly my case when i started on wesnoth) and is still problem today. Something that may surprise some. But's thematic.
Visually, the green color and trees of maps like channel and hamlets. look nicer and fresher than maps like sablestone delta, silverhead crossing. I always hated how sullar ruins look, and that alone make me hate to play it. I know it's stupid, but it happens.

Wesnoth is not the first game to suffer from this or will be the last, generally the most played maps on RTS are maps that look nicer, grasslands on AOM, Lost temple on warcraft 3, people hate to play in snow or wasteland environments, we like grass, green grass. I remember to be so in some C&C games. I know it's flavorfull, it's cooler to have different terrains. But i think it's killing some maps popularity.
I propose to do a GREEN version of every look dark map.
Silverhead crossing, sullar ruins, den of onis, and why not , sablestone delta.
I've tried to do it with silver head crossing, but it looks all messy and confusing.

(i want to note i didn't try the new versions)

User avatar
Wintermute
Inactive Developer
Posts: 840
Joined: March 23rd, 2006, 10:28 pm
Location: On IRC as "happygrue" at: #wesnoth-mp

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Wintermute »

Fosprey wrote:(i want to note i didn't try the new versions)
I agree with your points about asethics and map selection. I also find sullas ruins interesting (but ugly) to play on, personally. However, not using the latest versions basically kills what you are trying to do with this post (as does to a lesser extent not playing on the development branch), since almost all of the maps mentioned have changed, some of them substantially and some less so. Since you have done this for the older versions, it would be great to do it again with the new versions and note your impressions of the differences - to observe any changes in your opinon (I.E. "progress"). It's subjective of course, but detailed feedback is always useful I think.
"I just started playing this game a few days ago, and I already see some balance issues."

User avatar
Doc Paterson
Drake Cartographer
Posts: 1973
Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
Location: Kazakh
Contact:

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Doc Paterson »

I have a lot to say about this, but I haven't the time to do a long response today (or, probably, tomorrow). Soon though.

:)
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses.
-Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme

User avatar
Des
Posts: 116
Joined: November 7th, 2007, 7:58 am
Contact:

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Des »

Hello.

I'm having trouble balancing a 1v1 map.

It's a 1v1 version of Clash. Each player starts with 200 gold and enough castle tiles to recruit twice as many units. The idea is that with more units the front is extended, slightly lessening the influence of overall luck and having a lot more going on.

I am not sure where to go with it. Originally, I wanted a long vertical front to fit all these units, but Doc has told me that this leads to Drake advantages without tiles like impassible mountains and isolated castle hexes.

I'm not sure where exactly to put impassible mountains and castle tiles. Here is my latest attempt:
http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 09#p316109
Redrock Gulch (Winter 2009 Map Contest Submission)

To rely on rustics and not prepare is the greatest of crimes; to be prepared beforehand for any contingency is the greatest of Virtues. - Sun Tzu, The Art of War

User avatar
Doc Paterson
Drake Cartographer
Posts: 1973
Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
Location: Kazakh
Contact:

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Doc Paterson »

Deciero wrote:Hello.

I'm having trouble balancing a 1v1 map.

It's a 1v1 version of Clash. Each player starts with 200 gold and enough castle tiles to recruit twice as many units. The idea is that with more units the front is extended, slightly lessening the influence of overall luck and having a lot more going on.

I am not sure where to go with it. Originally, I wanted a long vertical front to fit all these units, but Doc has told me that this leads to Drake advantages without tiles like impassible mountains and isolated castle hexes.

I'm not sure where exactly to put impassible mountains and castle tiles. Here is my latest attempt:
http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 09#p316109
I haven't forgotten about you, and I do have a lot to say about this newest version. I've been very busy recently though, so if anyone does want to help out (in the meantime) that would be great.
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses.
-Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme

Gallifax
Posts: 131
Joined: October 23rd, 2006, 5:36 pm
Location: Who cares?

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Gallifax »

Hi Doc,

why did you make the keeps on sullas ruins smaller? I think it was a nice strategical feature , a lot of flavour that opponent could steal the keeps.

Thats not really attractive anymore. Made one of your maps shine less:(

User avatar
Doc Paterson
Drake Cartographer
Posts: 1973
Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
Location: Kazakh
Contact:

Re: The Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest

Post by Doc Paterson »

Gallifax wrote:Hi Doc,

why did you make the keeps on sullas ruins smaller? I think it was a nice strategical feature , a lot of flavour that opponent could steal the keeps.

Thats not really attractive anymore. Made one of your maps shine less:(
I think that it was, without a doubt, necessary to cut down on people saving 100+ gold and dropping it all on an attacking opponent. I've seen this (and done this, and experienced this) enough to say that it can get very un-fun, and is more facilitating to turtling than I'm comfortable with. It's also not as though that stealing the keep is no longer a viable strategy- In fact it ought to be easier now, to be able to strike that area without worrying about the defender spitting out 4 units a turn, all of which are one move away from any of the region's attacked villages.

Being able to recruit only two units per turn on either advance keep there is quite fine in my opinion. To reiterate, the money saving and turtling was so much more effective on this map (compared to any other 1v1) because the 4 recruited units could almost always reach the area under attack in one move. You've probably seen these matches, and I'm not saying that they were perfectly played, but take a look at the Bec/Cackfiend ladder match, and Yogi's TOC match against Baufo. On no other map could so many fighter-unit reinforcements be instantly recruited for a next turn counterattack, and I believe that nerfing that option was absolutely the right thing to do.
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses.
-Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme

Post Reply