New Randomness !!!

[micmic]

In my opinion the "ALL OR NOTHING" randomness of wesnoth is bad.

At the Moment a unit has for example a "10 - 2" attack....
Maybe something like a "(0-10) - 2" attack or a "(4-10) - 2" attack (for wizards who cannot miss the target completely would be better !!!

I think the AMOUNT of damage should be random. At the moment the randomness is too simple , to choose just between the whole damage or nothing doesn't make sense! (every hit with a sword does the same damage???) (and zero zero's for both attacks are very often and doesn't make fun).

I know, it would be a big change (and a lot of work to do for new balance) but it would really improve the game. At the moment everyone in Single Player is doing all the time the SAVE - LOAD procedure (its hardly impossible not to do it....) I quit playing wesnoth because of this...

[Baufo]

I think this is exactly what Sauron's less luck mode is doing.
EDIT: Find it here

PS: Not everyone is save-reloading in SP, some do also use debug mode

[micmic]

thanks a lot ! i will test the mod!

[turin]

I find it insulting that you think all single-player users are using saveload. They're not. Only the ones who are either too lazy or who don't have the ability to account for luck in their strategies are.

[Gus]

Indeed. I find myself able to not use save-load in some campaigns, and unable to do that in some others if the RNG screws you (Sceptre of Fire's Closing the Gates comes to mind). That's why i wish there were more campaign-replays posted. Hardly any replay available through searching is still compatible with the recent versions =/

[JW]

FPI and I don't S/R.

[Helmet]

Personally, I'm a new player and I love the all-or-nothing approach to damage.

For example, I thinks it's great how a Wose is always going to deliver a massive smackdown to a Walking Corpse instead of a random amount of damage that might result in only 1 hp of harm. And I love how when a Wose misses your Walking Corpse, your WC takes no damage.

The all-or-nothing damage is part of Wesnoth's charm for me.

As it is, when a combat is taking place in BfW the attacking player should be shouting, "Come on! Hit hit hit!"

I like this a lot more than, "Come on! Do at least eight points of damage!"

My 2 cents.

[Dave]

In my opinion the "ALL OR NOTHING" randomness of wesnoth is bad.

Wesnoth does not have 'ALL OR NOTHING' randomness.

If you have a 5-4 attack, you might inflict 0, 5, 10, 15, or 20 damage during an attack. This is hardly 'ALL OR NOTHING'.

At the moment everyone in Single Player is doing all the time the SAVE - LOAD procedure

Uh-huh.....and in these games where every hit does varying damage, no-one save-loads, right?

David

[turin]

As it is, when a combat is taking place in BfW the attacking player should be shouting, "Come on! Hit hit hit!"

I like this a lot more than, "Come on! Do at least eight points of damage!"

This deserves to be reiterated.

[Redeth]

I think the AMOUNT of damage should be random. At the moment the randomness is too simple , to choose just between the whole damage or nothing doesn't make sense! (every hit with a sword does the same damage???)

Do not look for any signs of a realistic portrayal of combat in Wesnoth battle system, you won't find them. It's as far from a wargame as a strategy game can get. Think of it as a card game in disguise and you'll come to enjoy it a lot more. When your units fight you either get the 'right' cards or you don't, there won't be any compensation for your lack of luck.

Love it or hate it, it's the way it is (and the way it stays, AFAIK).

[Dave]

I think the AMOUNT of damage should be random. At the moment the randomness is too simple , to choose just between the whole damage or nothing doesn't make sense! (every hit with a sword does the same damage???)

Do not look for any signs of a realistic portrayal of combat in Wesnoth battle system, you won't find them. I

Errr besides, a sword hit doing 1-8 damage to a 34 hitpoint unit is hardly any more 'realistic' than the current system.

[commanderkeen]

If that system was used then we'd end up with people wanting critical hits and all sorts. Then Wesnoth would be more like Dungeons & Dragons than a fun, easy, enjoyable (did I say fun?) game using a flexible engine. This doesn't improve gameplay enough to justify making Wesnoth more complex and less newbie-friendly.

[Higher Game]

The problem is just the nature of single player campaigns. You either get loads of promotions, and win too easily, or have bad luck early on and crash at the midpoint, with very little in between. The very high experience requirements for units also makes it very hard to gain veterans, compared to most multiplayer encounters. The temptation to save and reload is just too great.

My advice is to avoid the campaigns and play multiplayer; they're completely different experiences. If you win in multiplayer, good, if you don't, you can always blame luck, so all your bases are covered there. For single player, you're messing with a weird AI that is more interested in hurting you long term than winning single matches, which is annoying and unfair. With single matches in multiplayer, you don't have to deal with this.

Don't judge Wesnoth's merits on any single factor, even luck. Sometimes it's nice to take a break from pure skill games.

[shevegen]

Errr besides, a sword hit doing 1-8 damage to a 34 hitpoint unit is hardly any more 'realistic' than the current system.

I believe you refer to DnD style.

There are other RPGs and Game Engines with more realistic systems to account
for though.

Other than that Wesnoth's approach is as simple as the DnD Style. Its hit or
no hit to deal damage.

But if you compare it, DnD at least accounts for armour AND resistances (Damage
reduction, magical weapon and so on). And DnD is also very simple compared
to most other RPG Games. Wesnoth beats them all in terms of simple rules.
And I guess it will always stay simple.

[Tropico]

The problem is just the nature of single player campaigns. You either get loads of promotions, and win too easily, or have bad luck early on and crash at the midpoint, with very little in between. The very high experience requirements for units also makes it very hard to gain veterans, compared to most multiplayer encounters. The temptation to save and reload is just too great.

I've experienced this first hand several times now, and I gotta say it's pretty much put me off the campaigns. Which is strange, because I'm a single-player campaign addict most of the time; every strategy game I get I always finish every campaign several times, download user campaigns, user maps, user scenarios, everything, it's the number 1 aspect of a game for me.

But with Wesnoth there's just a whole other weird dynamic going on where in the middle of the campaign you'll realize, "woops, I won the previous maps but I didn't win them by the right % margin of experience to gold to turns left so now the rest of the campaign is impossible". And since I am someone who does not save-reload, the result is a reluctant and slow loss of interest in the thing.

It got to the point where I winning a campaign map wasn't a feeling of "Yes!!" but rather a "Well yeah I won... but did I win with the right amount of gold? Did I level enough troops? Am I going to get stuck now... maybe I should do the map all over again and get better numbers... damn but what a drag... whatever, I'll just leave the savegame in case I need to come back to it..." feeling.

I realize (or, hope) that this will improve as my skill improves, and for now I guess I should settle for AI multiplayer maps. I really can't decide whether the whole thing is a good design (in the sense that you have to strategically plan out for levelling and gold) or just plain bad design (in the sense that it totally distracts from the enjoyment of dealing with the scenario and forces you to be constantly mentally dealing with the meta-game aspect of long-term gold and exp), all I know is it hasn't given me many happy moments so far.