Save time - the DIY luck thread post

[Turuk]

Complaint: something that is the cause or subject of protest or outcry.

Feedback: the transmission of evaluative or corrective information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source.



Feedback can be positive or negative in nature, and yes, it can be constructive either way. Complaints are only negative, and serve little constructive purpose. Many users mix the two up in their posts and trying to pick out what is relevant from what is not is often hard to do.

[Frezycus]

OK, I'll bite: How are complaints not (or:not part of the of the) feedback?

I agree. Complaints might sometimes be less well thought out and presented than praise, but then again sometimes praise is just as ridiculous.

There is also a difference between respectfully choosing to and not follow particular feedback and disrespecting people for it.

'Critique' posts can be disrespectful themselves, but is it wise to drop to that level in return? Doesn't that make you just like the people you aren't listening to?

Also, not listening to critiques increases the chances of turning into a less powerful version of 'W'....

Oh My God.

I'm in love with your post here JW. So well said.

[Darkmage]

Dear

[ ] Dave
[ ] The developers
[ ] Forum Regulars
[ ] The Wesnoth Community
[ ] Morons
[ ] Retards
[x] Father Christmas(yes i've chosen this one)

I wish to complain about the luck system because:

[ ] It's not realistic
[ ] It's counterintuitive
[ ] I think it means the better player doesn't always win
[x] It allows for ridiculous outcomes such as peasants killing liches in single combat, it's true, honest
[x] I keep losing because of luck, because when I play I know I'm always the better player
[ ] It ruins single-player mode because obsessive players can just reload until they get their preferred outcomes

My evidence to back up my argument is:

[ ] A careful analysis of the existing arguments, and some new point I feel haven't been raised before
[ ] A replay where I believe one player played better but lost
[x] A replay where my vampire-bat spam ought to have won
[ ] A long essay about realism, even though there are just as good arguments the other way round
[ ] A detailed statistical analysis, and I've almost got a GCSE in Maths so I know exactly what I'm on about.
[ ] A long list of sweeping generalisations
[x] It's the responsibility of the devs to present the evidence to me. And no, I refuse to waste three clicks to read any on the numerous threads explaining things before
[x] Evidence? Back up arguments? Don't be stupid

I am supported by:

[ ] I'm speaking for myself
[ ] The other people posting on the forum saying the same thing
[ ] The silent majority of Wesnoth players
[ ] A secret syndicate of the best Wesnoth players around, so secret, in fact, I won't tell you who they are
[x] Am i supported by anyone?
My preferred system would be:

[ ] Development of the accuracy era
[ ] A luck offsetting system
[ ] A "deck of cards" system
[x] Some confusing proposal that would actually put more luck into the game, but that's okay, because I can then complain some more
[x] Any system, as long as it allows me to win every time, because I'm such a good player(especially when debug mode is activated)

I demand

[ ] The devs include an option for less luck
[x] The devs change the system and forces the noisy minority who like the game as it is to do it my way
[x] Wesnoth is changed into a clone of the proprietary game I want to play really, except I don't want to pay for it, or make any contribution towards developing it
[x] The devs resign immediately, revoke the GPL, and sell the game to Microsoft and the wise benevolent Steve Ballmer. And get rid of those pesky Linux users(every word written here hurts and scares me, really)[don't even think about this(please)]
[ ] That the devs give me some advice on how to create a mod that enables me to play the game the way I want, the same way they give advice to UMC developers who are willing to put in their own work, which I can do under GPL, and then [Now, now, this is just getting silly.]

Yours sincerely the peasant who killed my ancient lich and now is a nice archer...


Really funny tread

[Lord_Aether]

Dear

[ x ] Dave
[ x ] The developers
[ ] Forum Regulars
[ x ] The Wesnoth Community
[ ] Morons
[ ] Retards
[ ] Father Christmas

I wish to complain about the luck system because:

[ ] It's not realistic
[ ] It's counterintuitive
[ ] I think it means the better player doesn't always win
[ ] It allows for ridiculous outcomes such as peasants killing liches in single combat, it's true, honest
[ ] I keep losing because of luck, because when I play I know I'm always the better player
[ ] It ruins single-player mode because obsessive players can just reload until they get their preferred outcomes
[ x ] It is perfect

My evidence to back up my argument is:

[ ] A careful analysis of the existing arguments, and some new point I feel haven't been raised before
[ ] A replay where I believe one player played better but lost
[ ] A replay where my vampire-bat spam ought to have won
[ ] A long essay about realism, even though there are just as good arguments the other way round
[ ] A detailed statistical analysis, and I've almost got a GCSE in Maths so I know exactly what I'm on about.
[ ] A long list of sweeping generalisations
[ ] It's the responsibility of the devs to present the evidence to me. And no, I refuse to waste three clicks to read any on the numerous threads explaining things before
[ x ] Evidence? Back up arguments? Don't be stupid

I am supported by:

[ x ] I'm speaking for myself
[ x ] The other people posting on the forum saying the same thing
[ x ] The silent majority of Wesnoth players
[ ] A secret syndicate of the best Wesnoth players around, so secret, in fact, I won't tell you who they are

My preferred system would be:

[ ] Development of the accuracy era
[ ] A luck offsetting system
[ ] A "deck of cards" system
[ ] Some confusing proposal that would actually put more luck into the game, but that's okay, because I can then complain some more
[ ] Any system, as long as it allows me to win every time, because I'm such a good player
[ x ] Go play a few games instead of whining constantly

I demand

[ ] The devs include an option for less luck
[ ] The devs change the system and forces the noisy minority who like the game as it is to do it my way
[ ] Wesnoth is changed into a clone of the proprietary game I want to play really, except I don't want to pay for it, or make any contribution towards developing it
[ ] The devs resign immediately, revoke the GPL, and sell the game to Microsoft and the wise benevolent Steve Ballmer. And get rid of those pesky Linux users
[ ] That the devs give me some advice on how to create a mod that enables me to play the game the way I want, the same way they give advice to UMC developers who are willing to put in their own work, which I can do under GPL, and then [Now, now, this is just getting silly.]
[ x ] The devs force all the idiots to leave.

Yours sincerely
Lord Aether

[Araja]

I'm amazed you even need a thread for this, are there really people who register and immediately complain about the way the game works?
Isn't complaining about luck in wesnoth a rather pointless thing to do on any serious front?
I myself take great pleasure from making fun of the AI when it lucks out, but I'd never put on the forums...
There must be some colourful characters in the world

[Caphriel]

The AI getting lucky can be funny. Losing a game you've been playing for an hour or two because of a round of terrible luck is incredibly frustrating.

[Araja]

I just like the moments where your orc is crossing a frozen river and you find out the snow forest a couple of hexes away has an Elvish Ranger hiding in it.

The Elf then misses with all of his attacks

[Rigor]

very nice post hahahaha

[Zigg]

Dear

[ ] Dave
[ ] The developers
[ ] Forum Regulars
[ ] The Wesnoth Community
[X ] Morons
[X ] Retards
[ ] Father Christmas

I wish to complain about the luck system because:

[ ] It's not realistic
[ ] It's counterintuitive
[ ] I think it means the better player doesn't always win
[ ] It allows for ridiculous outcomes such as peasants killing liches in single combat, it's true, honest
[ ] I keep losing because of luck, because when I play I know I'm always the better player
[ ] It ruins single-player mode because obsessive players can just reload until they get their preferred outcomes
[X ] I feel like complaining


My evidence to back up my argument is:

[ ] A careful analysis of the existing arguments, and some new point I feel haven't been raised before
[ ] A replay where I believe one player played better but lost
[ ] A replay where my vampire-bat spam ought to have won
[ ] A long essay about realism, even though there are just as good arguments the other way round
[ ] A detailed statistical analysis, and I've almost got a GCSE in Maths so I know exactly what I'm on about.
[ ] A long list of sweeping generalisations
[ ] It's the responsibility of the devs to present the evidence to me. And no, I refuse to waste three clicks to read any on the numerous threads explaining things before
[X ] Evidence? Back up arguments? Don't be stupid

I am supported by:

[X ] I'm speaking for myself
[ ] The other people posting on the forum saying the same thing
[ ] The silent majority of Wesnoth players
[ ] A secret syndicate of the best Wesnoth players around, so secret, in fact, I won't tell you who they are

My preferred system would be:

[ ] Development of the accuracy era
[ ] A luck offsetting system
[ ] A "deck of cards" system
[X ] Some confusing proposal that would actually put more luck into the game, but that's okay, because I can then complain some more
[ ] Any system, as long as it allows me to win every time, because I'm such a good player

I demand

[ ] The devs include an option for less luck
[ ] The devs change the system and forces the noisy minority who like the game as it is to do it my way
[ ] Wesnoth is changed into a clone of the proprietary game I want to play really, except I don't want to pay for it, or make any contribution towards developing it
[ ] The devs resign immediately, revoke the GPL, and sell the game to Microsoft and the wise benevolent Steve Ballmer. And get rid of those pesky Linux users
[ ] That the devs give me some advice on how to create a mod that enables me to play the game the way I want, the same way they give advice to UMC developers who are willing to put in their own work, which I can do under GPL, and then [Now, now, this is just getting silly.]
[ ] That the devs give me a reason to complain more

Yours sincerely

[Cloud]

Dear

[ ] Dave
[ ] The developers
[ ] Forum Regulars
[ x ] The Wesnoth Community
[ ] Morons
[ ] Retards
[ ] Father Christmas

I wish to complain about the luck system because:

[ ] It's not realistic
[ ] It's counterintuitive
[ ] I think it means the better player doesn't always win
[ ] It allows for ridiculous outcomes such as peasants killing liches in single combat, it's true, honest
[ ] I keep losing because of luck, because when I play I know I'm always the better player
[ ] It ruins single-player mode because obsessive players can just reload until they get their preferred outcomes
[ x ] It leave the game too open to Murphey's Law

My evidence to back up my argument is:

[ ] A careful analysis of the existing arguments, and some new point I feel haven't been raised before
[ ] A replay where I believe one player played better but lost
[ ] A replay where my vampire-bat spam ought to have won
[ ] A long essay about realism, even though there are just as good arguments the other way round
[ x ] A detailed statistical analysis, and I got an C grade in A-level, but totally flunked Stats, so I know exactly exactly what I'm on about
[ ] A long list of sweeping generalisations
[ ] It's the responsibility of the devs to present the evidence to me. And no, I refuse to waste three clicks to read any on the numerous threads explaining things before
[ ] Evidence? Back up arguments? Don't be stupid

I am supported by:

[ ] I'm speaking for myself
[ ] The other people posting on the forum saying the same thing
[ ] The silent majority of Wesnoth players
[ ] A secret syndicate of the best Wesnoth players around, so secret, in fact, I won't tell you who they are
[ x ] An even more secret scet of the ultimate Wesnoth players, so secret, in fact, that I shall die within 24 hours of submitting this post and the existance of such a sect will be pubilically denied by Gordon Brown (or David Cameron, if our other plans work)

My preferred system would be:

[ ] Development of the accuracy era
[ ] A luck offsetting system
[ ] A "deck of cards" system
[ ] Some confusing proposal that would actually put more luck into the game, but that's okay, because I can then complain some more
[ ] Any system, as long as it allows me to win every time, because I'm such a good player
[ x ] Who cares? You're damned if you do and your damned if you don't

I demand

[ ] The devs include an option for less luck
[ ] The devs change the system and forces the noisy minority who like the game as it is to do it my way
[ ] Wesnoth is changed into a clone of the proprietary game I want to play really, except I don't want to pay for it, or make any contribution towards developing it
[ ] The devs resign immediately, revoke the GPL, and sell the game to Microsoft and the wise benevolent Steve Ballmer. And get rid of those pesky Linux users
[ ] That the devs give me some advice on how to create a mod that enables me to play the game the way I want, the same way they give advice to UMC developers who are willing to put in their own work, which I can do under GPL, and then [Now, now, this is just getting silly.]
[ x ] The devs sell their souls to Satan, give ownership of the game to me and change the code to allow every single person who plays to have to enter their bank details and PIN numbers (including a passing buried deep in the EULA allowing any 'fraudulant' use of these) so I can buy everything I've ever wanted, and legally too.
[ x ] To help with that point, I have comprimsing photographs, old hardrives and other such materail and am not afraid to release it into the public domain.

Yours sincerely

Anon.

Hmm perhaps I should request a way to kill Turuk too?

Disclaimer - all the above is purely in jest, the user who may have posted this is not liable for any damamge caused, lack of funds or other such inconvinience caused by this post.

[Araja]

MmmmmmmOK.

I suspect this really belongs in off-topic, but with this debate going on I'll let this get on here.

With countless posts about luck, maybe it's now time to go to mass production. Here is a form I proposed gets used for future posts about luck.

CROSS ALL THE BOXES THAT APPLY

Dear

The Wesnoth Community

I wish to ask how to kill Turuk because:

It's been a subject I find as interesting as anything else on the forums.

My evidence to back up my request is:

A quote from Turuk saying he is immune to everything, so he must be bluffing.

I am supported by:

Errrrrrrrr.

My preferred weapon would be:

A weapon with the stones, firstrike, and circle specials.

I demand

Nothing, I'm simply requesting.

Yours sincerely

The descendant of the Armageddon Drake that was turned into a statue for asking the exact same question, and now uses it as his Avatar.

[Turuk]

2 in a row, I'm starting to have concerns for my health.

[fareley]

Dear

[ ] Dave
[ ] The developers
[ ] Forum Regulars
[ ] The Wesnoth Community
[ ] Morons
[ ] Retards
[x] Father Christmas (this is my top-secret-wish-list)

I wish to complain about the luck system because:

[ ] It's not realistic
[ ] It's counterintuitive
[ ] I think it means the better player doesn't always win
[x] It allows for ridiculous outcomes such as 6 archers not hitting a horsemen at night when launching a full attack with every single one of them shooting 3 arrows at the horse (which has only 30% defense)
[ ] I keep losing because of luck, because when I play I know I'm always the better player
[ ] It ruins single-player mode because obsessive players can just reload until they get their preferred outcomes
[x] It's just painful, either for me or the opponent. One lucky turn can save up to half of the units one player has and gives him undeserved victory

My evidence to back up my argument is:

[ ] A careful analysis of the existing arguments, and some new point I feel haven't been raised before
[ ] A replay where I believe one player played better but lost
[ ] A replay where my vampire-bat spam ought to have won
[ ] A long essay about realism, even though there are just as good arguments the other way round
[ ] A detailed statistical analysis, and I've almost got a GCSE in Maths so I know exactly what I'm on about.
[ ] A long list of sweeping generalisations
[ ] It's the responsibility of the devs to present the evidence to me. And no, I refuse to waste three clicks to read any on the numerous threads explaining things before
[ ] Evidence? Back up arguments? Don't be stupid
[x] 2 days ago, I lost the first scenario of SotB (well i was playing it on hard but it shouldn't have been that much of a problem) because i had -30%/+5% dealed damage after round 10 (i had 7 archer and didn't use them the dumbest way. Also my grunts were pretty bad at retaliating the enemy...). At 2nd try i won the level coming out with 4 leveled bowmen and lost only 1 wolve rider (and my leader was also nearly leveled up).

I am supported by:

[x] I'm speaking for myself
[ ] The other people posting on the forum saying the same thing
[x] The silent majority of Wesnoth players
[x] A secret syndicate of the best Wesnoth players around, so secret, in fact, I don't even know who they are or if they exist but i believe in them

My preferred system would be:

[ ] Development of the accuracy era
[ ] A luck offsetting system
[ ] A "deck of cards" system
[ ] Some confusing proposal that would actually put more luck into the game, but that's okay, because I can then complain some more
[ ] Any system, as long as it allows me to win every time, because I'm such a good player
[x] A system that keeps the luck but gets more fair when it's about to get REALLY unbalanced (let's say at about +10%). Or at least that helps me comitting faster suicide when having a bad time.

I demand

[x] The devs include an option for less luck
[x] The devs change the system and forces the noisy minority who like the game as it is to do it my way
[ ] Wesnoth is changed into a clone of the proprietary game I want to play really, except I don't want to pay for it, or make any contribution towards developing it
[ ] The devs resign immediately, revoke the GPL, and sell the game to Microsoft and the wise benevolent Steve Ballmer. And get rid of those pesky Linux users
[ ] That the devs give me some advice on how to create a mod that enables me to play the game the way I want, the same way they give advice to UMC developers who are willing to put in their own work, which I can do under GPL, and then [Now, now, this is just getting silly.]
[x] World peace

Yours sincerely
an unknown player (and don't come trough the chimney Father Christmas since i won't clean up afterwards!)

[KKSlider]

Dear

[ ] Dave
[ ] The developers
[ ] Forum Regulars
[ ] The Wesnoth Community
[ ] Morons
[ ] Retards
[ ] Father Christmas
[X] Cthulhu

I wish to complain about the luck system because:

[ ] It's not realistic
[ ] It's counterintuitive
[ ] I think it means the better player doesn't always win
[X] It allows for ridiculous outcomes such as peasants exterminating a whole army of spearmen, at night!!
[ ] I keep losing because of luck, because when I play I know I'm always the better player
[ ] It ruins single-player mode because obsessive players can just reload until they get their preferred outcomes

My evidence to back up my argument is:

[ ] A careful analysis of the existing arguments, and some new point I feel haven't been raised before
[ ] A replay where I believe one player played better but lost
[ ] A replay where my vampire-bat spam ought to have won
[ ] A long essay about realism, even though there are just as good arguments the other way round
[ ] A detailed statistical analysis, and I've almost got a GCSE in Maths so I know exactly what I'm on about.
[ ] A long list of sweeping generalisations
[ ] It's the responsibility of the devs to present the evidence to me. And no, I refuse to waste three clicks to read any on the numerous threads explaining things before
[X] Evidence? Back up arguments? Don't be stupid

I am supported by:

[X] A nerd like me, that loves metal like me, that dresses like me, that... Basically, by no-one else than myself.
[ ] I'm speaking for myself
[ ] The other people posting on the forum saying the same thing
[ ] The silent majority of Wesnoth players
[ ] A secret syndicate of the best Wesnoth players around, so secret, in fact, I won't tell you who they are

My preferred system would be:

[X] Development of the accuracy era
[ ] A luck offsetting system
[ ] A "deck of cards" system
[ ] Some confusing proposal that would actually put more luck into the game, but that's okay, because I can then complain some more
[ ] Any system, as long as it allows me to win every time, because I'm such a good player... NOT

I demand

[ ] The devs include an option for less luck
[ ] The devs change the system and forces the noisy minority who like the game as it is to do it my way
[ ] Wesnoth is changed into a clone of the proprietary game I want to play really, except I don't want to pay for it, or make any contribution towards developing it
[ ] The devs resign immediately, revoke the GPL, and sell the game to Microsoft and the wise benevolent Steve Ballmer. And get rid of those pesky Linux users
[ ] That the devs give me some advice on how to create a mod that enables me to play the game the way I want, the same way they give advice to UMC developers who are willing to put in their own work, which I can do under GPL, and then [Now, now, this is just getting silly.]
[X] To be executed for whining too much about the luck system

Yours sincerely,
Me, myself and I

[Rigor]

you can extend the list with several scoldings:

i contribute the most common one: "cheater" (heard thousands of times already XD)