[Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

For writers working on documentation, story prose, announcements, and all kinds of Wesnoth text.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

User avatar
Drakefriend
Posts: 436
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 12:57 pm
Location: Wandering from one world to another
Contact:

[Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by Drakefriend »

I think Marksman should be renamed, as there really is no reason to use a word that is specific to ranged combat, while there is no reason, neither internal nor external, not to use it for melee attacks. And as the -I assume still now canonical- Khaliphate uses it for a melee attack (Arif line), so it cannot even be said that they only exist in UMC.
So we should take something like "accuracy" or "precision", (though theese are already used sometimes in UMC for other CTH abilities). Or some other term.
After far too long an absence, I have returned.
According to the quiz 100% Silver Mage (85% Archmage, 75% Shyde, 67% Flameheart and Ancient Wose,58% Assassin, Troll Warrior and Berserker). And my top score is exactly how I see myself.

User avatar
ancestral
Developer
Posts: 1108
Joined: August 1st, 2006, 5:29 am
Location: Motion City

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by ancestral »

I agree.

Possible alternatives to Marksman(ship):
  • Accuracy
  • Deftness
  • Finesse
  • Perceptiveness
  • Precision
  • Sharpness
Additionally, we need consistency with naming special attacks. They need to be all verbs, nouns, or adjectives, not a collection of all three.
Wesnoth BestiaryPREVIEW IT HERE )
Unit tree and stat browser
CanvasPREVIEW IT HERE )
Exp. map viewer

Insinuator
Posts: 706
Joined: January 6th, 2004, 10:42 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by Insinuator »

I like Precision.

But can Khalifate really be used as an example if they've been removed from the game and they have no mainline campaign?

User avatar
Drakefriend
Posts: 436
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 12:57 pm
Location: Wandering from one world to another
Contact:

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by Drakefriend »

I think the Khaliphate is intended to be added again if it has recieved enough rebalancing. And the problem persists nontheless whether or not there is a canonical Melee Marksman attack.
After far too long an absence, I have returned.
According to the quiz 100% Silver Mage (85% Archmage, 75% Shyde, 67% Flameheart and Ancient Wose,58% Assassin, Troll Warrior and Berserker). And my top score is exactly how I see myself.

Insinuator
Posts: 706
Joined: January 6th, 2004, 10:42 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by Insinuator »

Drakefriend wrote:And the problem persists nontheless whether or not there is a canonical Melee Marksman attack.
Uh, why? If it's only Ranged, Marksman works fine.

User avatar
alexanderthegre
Posts: 193
Joined: December 8th, 2011, 3:23 am
Location: nowhere

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by alexanderthegre »

Insinuator wrote:
Drakefriend wrote:And the problem persists nontheless whether or not there is a canonical Melee Marksman attack.
Uh, why? If it's only Ranged, Marksman works fine.
But it isn't. See the khalifate.

(are those still going mainline?)

User avatar
Drakefriend
Posts: 436
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 12:57 pm
Location: Wandering from one world to another
Contact:

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by Drakefriend »

Temuchin Khan wrote:
BasiC wrote:Are there plans to put the Khalifate in the default era? making it part of the default Wesnoth factions...
Yes, but it probably won't happen until version 1.12.
From the Khaliphate Gameplay Thread, posted yesterday.
And of course, there is no reason to limit "60% cth or more on offense" to ranged attacks.
After far too long an absence, I have returned.
According to the quiz 100% Silver Mage (85% Archmage, 75% Shyde, 67% Flameheart and Ancient Wose,58% Assassin, Troll Warrior and Berserker). And my top score is exactly how I see myself.

Insinuator
Posts: 706
Joined: January 6th, 2004, 10:42 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by Insinuator »

alexanderthegre wrote:But it isn't. See the khalifate.

(are those still going mainline?)
Oh my goodness. Read the whole thread. Already mentioned the Khalifate. But as Temuchin Khan points out, they're not mainline yet. Therefore, no need to change Marksman yet.
Drakefriend wrote:And of course, there is no reason to limit "60% cth or more on offense" to ranged attacks.
Sure there is. Is there no reason to give Resilient only to Dwarves, Submerge to Skeletons, or Backstab to Thieves? The reason is not just balance. They could be balanced in other, more boring ways. It's a flavor ability intended to make the game more interesting. What better reason can a game have, really?

Not that I'm opposed to the change in nomenclature, just opposed to illogical arguments for it. :wink:

User avatar
francophone
Posts: 393
Joined: February 20th, 2010, 2:19 pm

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by francophone »

I agree with Drakefriend.
If you need a 60% chance on melee for an extension, you can have a new ability. But it's a shame to have two for the same thing, I think.

Moreover, it has another name and a description that bother me:
For an extension, I added a description for "magical" on melee. You may say that the description of "magical" is not exclusive to the ranged attack. Indeed, in the original current. But in the French version, the description talks about the ranged attack (singular). So this is a translation problem.

The other name seems a misnomer that's swarm. Especially since I use it for units without multiple limbs. The attacks are multiple. Would not it be better to replace "swarm" by "multiple" (the description is good)? (or "numerous" ?)

User avatar
artisticdude
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 2424
Joined: December 15th, 2009, 12:37 pm
Location: Somewhere in the middle of everything

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by artisticdude »

ancestral wrote:Possible alternatives to Marksman(ship):
 • Accuracy
 • Deftness
 • Finesse
 • Perceptiveness
 • Precision
 • Sharpness
Out of all of those, Precision is my favorite, since IMO it most accurately (no pun intended :P ) describes the effect of the special. Accuracy would work well too, I think, although precision still seems like it'd work better.
francophone wrote:For an extension, I added a description for "magical" on melee. You may say that the description of "magical" is not exclusive to the ranged attack. Indeed, in the original current. But in the French version, the description talks about the ranged attack (singular). So this is a translation problem.
You should bring that to the attention of the French translation team, then. :wink:
"I'm never wrong. One time I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken."

JaMiT
Developer
Posts: 511
Joined: January 22nd, 2012, 12:38 am

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by JaMiT »

artisticdude wrote:Accuracy would work well too, I think, although precision still seems like it'd work better.
To make this more concrete, all non-magical attacks in Wesnoth are accurate, at least in the scientific sense of the word. ("Accurate" and "precise" are often used interchangeably in more colloquial usage.) In a strict sense, "accurate" means being able to land a blow roughly where you aimed it, which is something BfW assumes of all non-magical attacks (as seen by the attacker having no influence on the chance to hit). If an attack was not accurate, it would have a chance to miss even if the target somehow obtained 0% defense.

Precise, on the other hand, means being able to hit the exact same spot whenever you take the same aim as before. (The distinction from accuracy is that the spot you hit does not need to be where you aimed.) When you combine accuracy and precision, you gain the ability to regularly hit very small targets, hence the ability to strike through defenses (always finding a weak spot), around partial cover, etc. That is, in BfW's combat system where everything is accurate, a precise attack would be able to ignore a good chunk of defensive terrain. Something like always having at least a 60% chance to hit offensively.

That being said, does anyone feel that "deadeye" has a strong ranged attack connotation? (It is usually associated with hitting things at a distance, but I have seen it used sometimes in close-range contexts.) It has the same sort of meaning and has more flavor than "precision".

Insinuator
Posts: 706
Joined: January 6th, 2004, 10:42 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by Insinuator »

JaMiT wrote:That being said, does anyone feel that "deadeye" has a strong ranged attack connotation? (It is usually associated with hitting things at a distance, but I have seen it used sometimes in close-range contexts.) It has the same sort of meaning and has more flavor than "precision".
Deadeye is most certainly a word that favors ranged attacks. Snipers are called deadeyes, as were American gunslingers, both ranged attackers. In fact, Webster's dictionary defines a "deadeye" as an "unerring marksman". Obviously what we're trying to get away from.

Precision, on the other hand, is a more flavorful word than Accurate while leaving open the possibility of being melee or ranged.

User avatar
Iris
Site Administrator
Posts: 6631
Joined: November 14th, 2006, 5:54 pm
Location: Chile
Contact:

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by Iris »

Moved to Writers’ Forum for visibility.
Author of the unofficial UtBS sequels Invasion from the Unknown and After the Storm.

User avatar
Pentarctagon
Forum Administrator
Posts: 4232
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by Pentarctagon »

I'd say precision sounds best. Several UMC eras use a weapon special by that name already, but it would be pretty easy for the authors to fix.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code

User avatar
johndh
Posts: 591
Joined: June 6th, 2010, 4:03 am
Location: Music City

Re: [Terminology] Should Marksman be renamed?

Post by johndh »

ancestral wrote: Additionally, we need consistency with naming special attacks. They need to be all verbs, nouns, or adjectives, not a collection of all three.
+1. Specifically regarding "marksman/precision", the former is something the unit is while the latter is something the unit (and its attack) has, which is another thing that could stand to be more consistent.
It's spelled "definitely", not "definately". "Defiantly" is a different word entirely.

Post Reply