What do people think of the traits system?

General feedback and discussion of the game.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply

Does the traits system work well?

Yes! Keep it as it is!
46
35%
Yes! But add more traits! (specify ideas below)
69
53%
Yes, but it's a little unbalanced (specify why below)
9
7%
Well, it needs serious modifications (specify why below)
4
3%
No. It should be removed from the game.
2
2%
 
Total votes: 130

Dave
Founding Developer
Posts: 7071
Joined: August 17th, 2003, 5:07 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Dave »

tadpol wrote: I am curious about the reasons why woses do not get traits. I grant quick would be a major unbalencing, but is there a flavor of the game answer?
It's pretty much that quick is too powerful for them, and just 3 traits isn't much to choose from.

There was some talk that Woses should get entirely their own traits system based on what type of tree they are. They'd probably just get one trait, and it'd be like "Oak", "Willow", etc. They could have traits that could make them stronger, make them move faster in certain terrain, and traits that give them better resistance to certain types of attacks.

I'm still in favor of this system if anyone wanted to implement it. :)

David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming

User avatar
appleide
Posts: 1003
Joined: November 8th, 2003, 10:03 pm
Location: Sydney,OZ

Post by appleide »

Wose, Trait. For them, quick, will be , plus 1 movement only in forests.
Why did the fish laugh? Because the sea weed.

Wush
Posts: 49
Joined: March 24th, 2006, 11:51 am
Location: Germany,near Neuss

Post by Wush »

Just a thought, but maybe their could be an option called "Elite units". You would pay 20% more and in exchange you could choose your traits and get access to a larger variety of traits.

DaviddesJ
Posts: 18
Joined: March 27th, 2005, 9:57 am
Location: Mountain View CA
Contact:

Post by DaviddesJ »

I think there's way too few traits. I'd like to see at least a dozen or more. There are plenty more things one could add (e.g., increased chance to hit, chance of some special effect when hitting, chance of resisting some special effects, increased resistance to some particular form of attack, improved movement in some terrain, increase in healing rate, etc., etc., etc.). "Balance" is overrated (especially since the existing traits aren't particularly balanced---some traits are way better for some units and almost useless for others).

Disto
Posts: 2039
Joined: November 1st, 2004, 7:40 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Post by Disto »

If everything was perfectly balanced then there would be no difference between the factions. What you strive for is *almost* balanced so that no unit will have a huge advantage over another of its type so no lvl. 1 warrior of 1 race which is equivalent to another will be able to destroy its counterpart easily. It may be able to beat it regulary but not easily and everytime, unless this is the specific use of the designer.

Some of these traits your suggesting are very probably in the FPI. Read it.
Creator of A Seed of Evil
Creator of the Marauders
Food or Wesnoth? I'll have Wesnoth

DaviddesJ
Posts: 18
Joined: March 27th, 2005, 9:57 am
Location: Mountain View CA
Contact:

Post by DaviddesJ »

Disto wrote:If everything was perfectly balanced then there would be no difference between the factions. What you strive for is *almost* balanced so that no unit will have a huge advantage over another of its type so no lvl. 1 warrior of 1 race which is equivalent to another will be able to destroy its counterpart easily. It may be able to beat it regulary but not easily and everytime, unless this is the specific use of the designer.
I don't understand what this comment has to do with the traits system. You're talking about differences between factions---different thread?

I wouldn't add any traits that give a unit with a trait a "huge advantage" over another unit without that trait. That still leaves plenty of room.
Some of these traits your suggesting are very probably in the FPI. Read it.
Actually, the FPI says "Suggestions for new traits are welcome." Maybe you should read it. :D

Seriously, it's not hard (imho) to come up with simple traits that would seem to work fine in the game system, and not be overpowering. Unit heals 25% faster. Unit regenerates 1 hp/turn. Unit hits +5%. Unit is hit -5%. (Maybe the exact percentages aren't right, tweak them if you don't like the exact numbers.) And then there's stuff like, "X% chance of poisoning when hitting," which doesn't seem to violate anything in the FPI, although I haven't micro-analyzed the details.

The question was, "What do people think of the traits system?" and what I think is that there's way too few traits. The exact list isn't so important. If there was serious interest in expanding the list (which it seems pretty clear there isn't) we could have a separate discussion about what exactly those traits might be.

Disto
Posts: 2039
Joined: November 1st, 2004, 7:40 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Post by Disto »

DaviddesJ wrote:
Disto wrote:If everything was perfectly balanced then there would be no difference between the factions. What you strive for is *almost* balanced so that no unit will have a huge advantage over another of its type so no lvl. 1 warrior of 1 race which is equivalent to another will be able to destroy its counterpart easily. It may be able to beat it regulary but not easily and everytime, unless this is the specific use of the designer.
I don't understand what this comment has to do with the traits system. You're talking about differences between factions---different thread?

I wouldn't add any traits that give a unit with a trait a "huge advantage" over another unit without that trait. That still leaves plenty of room.

Racial traits.

Some of these traits your suggesting are very probably in the FPI. Read it.
Actually, the FPI says "Suggestions for new traits are welcome." Maybe you should read it. :D
Well I'm very sorry that I haven't read it but I have been around long enough to have seen all of those.
DaviddesJ wrote: Seriously, it's not hard (imho) to come up with simple traits that would seem to work fine in the game system, and not be overpowering. Unit heals 25% faster. Unit regenerates 1 hp/turn. Unit hits +5%. Unit is hit -5%. (Maybe the exact percentages aren't right, tweak them if you don't like the exact numbers.) And then there's stuff like, "X% chance of poisoning when hitting," which doesn't seem to violate anything in the FPI, although I haven't micro-analyzed the details.
Most of these I have seen time and time again. I'm quite surprised to see that none of the devs have stamped on them. The devs as a common consensus have put down a standard that only the terrain which the unit standing on changes how likely they'll be hit. Thats 2 Down. Healing 25% faster as a trait could be amazingly overpowering. Think of say a ghost, getting that extra 4hp from a village would heal up nearly half it's health every turn. Another 1 down. What happens with your regenerates idea when it happens to a troll. You'd have to mod the system so it's cumalative otherwise its unfair. X% chance of poisoning when hitting isn't balanced. Imagine you had a Elvish Fighter, you try to fight it with anything, say it's 5% chance which would also be just useless tactically. Lets say you attack this Elvish Archer with 5 Bats, statiscally at least 1 would be poisoned, but statsically you'd need double that for 1 bat to get poisoned using a Orcish Grunt. Virtually impossible to balance, so not simple. As an ability this would be better, but then again, who would want it when you have the good old normal poison.

I've seen this all before, even if your taking care to stop them being too overpowered.
Creator of A Seed of Evil
Creator of the Marauders
Food or Wesnoth? I'll have Wesnoth

kiet
Posts: 155
Joined: February 11th, 2006, 6:56 pm
Location: Sweden,Kungsor
Contact:

Post by kiet »

I have problely suggested this idea before but there should be an ability unique for the mages and necromancers that give them +1 to their ranged attack.

DaviddesJ
Posts: 18
Joined: March 27th, 2005, 9:57 am
Location: Mountain View CA
Contact:

Post by DaviddesJ »

Your reply is pretty nonsensical. A trait can't be both unbalanced AND useless; those are contradictory. Of course "5% chance to poison" is better for some units than for others. So are all of the current traits, such as "+1 to melee damage". A trait doesn't have to be equally valuable to every unit that might have that trait---that's completely unrealistic and not at all how the game presently works.

You don't like my opinions. Fine. I don't expect you to. That doesn't mean you have to try so hard to suppress them.

User avatar
zookeeper
WML Wizard
Posts: 9742
Joined: September 11th, 2004, 10:40 pm
Location: Finland

Post by zookeeper »

Disto wrote:Most of these I have seen time and time again. I'm quite surprised to see that none of the devs have stamped on them. The devs as a common consensus have put down a standard that only the terrain which the unit standing on changes how likely they'll be hit. Thats 2 Down.
I fail to see what such a standard would be based on. Units can have abilities that affect their chance to hit the opponent, so having an ability that affects their chance to be hit themselves isn't very different. Of course, the devs might have decided something like that anyway.
Disto wrote:Healing 25% faster as a trait could be amazingly overpowering. Think of say a ghost, getting that extra 4hp from a village would heal up nearly half it's health every turn. Another 1 down.
Not down. Ghosts don't get traits, and not every race needs to get every trait.
Disto wrote:What happens with your regenerates idea when it happens to a troll. You'd have to mod the system so it's cumalative otherwise its unfair.
Don't let trolls get it, for example.

Personally, I'd like to see much more racial traits. The problem is that hardly anything that affects the balance in any way has a very high chance of getting accepted, AFAIK.

torangan
Retired Developer
Posts: 1365
Joined: March 27th, 2004, 12:25 am
Location: Germany

Post by torangan »

That some traits are more usefull for specific units than others is a good thing. Wesnoth is supposed to have a certain amount of randomness and if you don't like the traits of a unit use it as a sacrifice (you need some in most cases anyway) or simply accept it as a tiny challenge.
The only trait that's really too important in some cases is quick but that's more a problem of some scenarios.
WesCamp-i18n - Translations for User Campaigns:
http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/WesCamp

Translators for all languages required: contact me. No geek skills required!

Soliton
Site Administrator
Posts: 1609
Joined: April 5th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Location: #wesnoth-mp

Post by Soliton »

DaviddesJ wrote:Actually, the FPI says "Suggestions for new traits are welcome." Maybe you should read it. :D
<...>
If there was serious interest in expanding the list (which it seems pretty clear there isn't) we could have a separate discussion about what exactly those traits might be.
Stunning logic there.. anyway, the specific traits have not much to do with the trait system which was discussed in this thread. If you have great ideas for traits please propose them in another thread. (and make sure they haven't been proposed before, which I think most that you mentioned here have been)
"If gameplay requires it, they can be made to live on Venus." -- scott

Disto
Posts: 2039
Joined: November 1st, 2004, 7:40 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Post by Disto »

zookeeper wrote:
Disto wrote:Most of these I have seen time and time again. I'm quite surprised to see that none of the devs have stamped on them. The devs as a common consensus have put down a standard that only the terrain which the unit standing on changes how likely they'll be hit. Thats 2 Down.
I fail to see what such a standard would be based on. Units can have abilities that affect their chance to hit the opponent, so having an ability that affects their chance to be hit themselves isn't very different. Of course, the devs might have decided something like that anyway.
Disto wrote:Healing 25% faster as a trait could be amazingly overpowering. Think of say a ghost, getting that extra 4hp from a village would heal up nearly half it's health every turn. Another 1 down.
Not down. Ghosts don't get traits, and not every race needs to get every trait.
Disto wrote:What happens with your regenerates idea when it happens to a troll. You'd have to mod the system so it's cumalative otherwise its unfair.
Don't let trolls get it, for example.

Personally, I'd like to see much more racial traits. The problem is that hardly anything that affects the balance in any way has a very high chance of getting accepted, AFAIK.
Racial traits are good, and also they can be engineered to be more balanced. True Ghost don't get traits, I really should actually play Wesnoth sometime. I think it's partly a programming issue about the chance to be hit.
Creator of A Seed of Evil
Creator of the Marauders
Food or Wesnoth? I'll have Wesnoth

DaviddesJ
Posts: 18
Joined: March 27th, 2005, 9:57 am
Location: Mountain View CA
Contact:

Post by DaviddesJ »

Soliton wrote:Stunning logic there.. anyway, the specific traits have not much to do with the trait system which was discussed in this thread.
Sure, that's why I don't think we should discuss the particular alternatives here. My suggestion for the trait system is just to add a lot more traits. That's the main issue. I don't exactly care what they are (but I gave a bunch of obvious ideas just to illustrate the point that there are plenty of good alternatives). I'm not wedded to any particular trait: I just think there should be at least 10 or 12, each (on average) of roughly the (average) power of the existing traits.

Noy
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1321
Joined: March 13th, 2005, 3:59 pm

Post by Noy »

DaviddesJ wrote:
Soliton wrote:Stunning logic there.. anyway, the specific traits have not much to do with the trait system which was discussed in this thread.
Sure, that's why I don't think we should discuss the particular alternatives here. My suggestion for the trait system is just to add a lot more traits. That's the main issue. I don't exactly care what they are (but I gave a bunch of obvious ideas just to illustrate the point that there are plenty of good alternatives). I'm not wedded to any particular trait: I just think there should be at least 10 or 12, each (on average) of roughly the (average) power of the existing traits.
Adding traits for the sake of adding traits is ridiculous, and potentially very dangerous for the unit balance. Giving a wose +1 movement would be unbalancing, given its power and ability. Giving an ulf extra resistances would be another example. Even slight increases to Dwarven resistances to would make units unkillable. On the other side, it could potentially detract from units. We've had the problem of "strong dark adepts," what about a ranged trait for the dwarves (when only one unit has an effective ranged attack).

It also damages the flavour of the game. Only elvish units get dextrous, given their faction's prediliction towards ranged combat. These little features add nuances to the factions which is good.

So any "system" to add traits by necessity must be carefully implemented, based on gameplay and esthetic issues. Adding them recklessly would not be a bonus for the game at all. Suprise suprise, thats what we've got now. We consider different ones. The reason why we can shoot down possible suggestions so easily is because we've problaly seen it before, or can immediately tell where there will be problems. If you want to dredge up other ideas, do so, but be prepared for the fact that we have likely seen it, or will immediately dismiss it because its unbalancing.

Post Reply