Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
not. It shouldn't require recompiling either:Dave wrote:F50: I'm not sure what it is you're trying to accomplish exactly. How do you want to change the attack calculations?
I think I want to change this (and do a similar thing to every other unit):
Code: Select all
#textdomain wesnoth-units
[unit]
id=Troll Whelp
name= _ "Troll Whelp"
race=troll
image="units/trolls/whelp.png"
ellipse="misc/ellipse"
{MAGENTA_IS_THE_TEAM_COLOR}
hitpoints=42
movement_type=largefoot
movement=4
experience=36
level=1
alignment=chaotic
advanceto=Troll,Troll Rocklobber
undead_variation=troll
cost=13
usage=fighter
unit_description= _ "Describing a troll as a whelp is something of an oxymoron, given that their bodies are already much hardier than that of a grown man. They are clumsy and not yet capable of walking properly, forced instead to shamble about on all fours, but any difficulty this causes them is more than made up for by the raw strength of their race."+{SPECIAL_NOTES}+{SPECIAL_NOTES_REGENERATES}
die_sound={SOUND_LIST:TROLL_DIE}
[abilities]
{ABILITY_REGENERATES}
[/abilities]
[attack]
name=fist
description=_"fist"
icon=attacks/fist-troll.png
type=impact
range=melee
damage=7
number=2
[/attack]
Code: Select all
#textdomain wesnoth-units
[unit]
id=Troll Whelp
name= _ "Troll Whelp"
race=troll
image="units/trolls/whelp.png"
ellipse="misc/ellipse"
{MAGENTA_IS_THE_TEAM_COLOR}
hitpoints=84
movement_type=largefoot
movement=4
experience=36
level=1
alignment=chaotic
advanceto=Troll,Troll Rocklobber
undead_variation=troll
cost=13
usage=fighter
unit_description= _ "Describing a troll as a whelp is something of an oxymoron, given that their bodies are already much hardier than that of a grown man. They are clumsy and not yet capable of walking properly, forced instead to shamble about on all fours, but any difficulty this causes them is more than made up for by the raw strength of their race."+{SPECIAL_NOTES}+{SPECIAL_NOTES_REGENERATES}
die_sound={SOUND_LIST:TROLL_DIE}
[abilities]
{ABILITY_REGENERATES}
[/abilities]
[attack]
name=fist
description=_"fist"
icon=attacks/fist-troll.png
type=impact
range=melee
damage=7
number=4
[/attack]
except to only do it within an MP era, not the global game.
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
FS0: See the accuracy era on the add-on server. Do something similar.
David
David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
How to do this the naive way:
Look in data/multiplayer and data/core/units.
Take the files, put them to an directory userdata/data/campaigns,
modify the era file (give it another ID and name, and load the new unit/faction files), modify the unit files to do what you want (give them new IDs, also for level-ups), modify the faction files to reference your units instead of the old ones.
The way with less work would be to have an event to modify all units as the get recruited (or leveled) - similar to the noluck-era someone proposed in another thread. But this way the unit help would show the regular stats instead of the new ones.
Look in data/multiplayer and data/core/units.
Take the files, put them to an directory userdata/data/campaigns,
modify the era file (give it another ID and name, and load the new unit/faction files), modify the unit files to do what you want (give them new IDs, also for level-ups), modify the faction files to reference your units instead of the old ones.
The way with less work would be to have an event to modify all units as the get recruited (or leveled) - similar to the noluck-era someone proposed in another thread. But this way the unit help would show the regular stats instead of the new ones.
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
I think there is an decent ammount of luck involved but I like it.think the impact of luck is being generally overestimated
I totally agree here....The only way to accept a huge gap of luck is to find a way to hide our own moves and make surprising attack/strategy
As Wesnoth for me is like playing Poker with open cards...Still good players are able to calculate probabilities better than bad players still many of the exciting elements of playing poker are missing.Why the difference between wesnoth and poker? Is it simply pre-rational associations? Poker is a game of cards. It is gambling. Both these have deep psychological associations with luck, and therefore luck in poker is acceptable
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
To me it's QUITE obvious. In poker you can actually bluff people because you could legitimately have a better hand than them. In Wesnoth you cannot REALLY bluff people in the same way: you both had the same resources going in, so the situation should be equal if played correctly on both sides. Also, you can mitigate your losses in a poker tournament so that you only play when you have the best chance to win. This is randomly handed to you from the deck. You can't randomly be assigned two aces in Wesnoth and then decide to fight. Your opponent will come to you, perhaps as you hold 2-7.Sombra wrote:As Wesnoth for me is like playing Poker with open cards...Still good players are able to calculate probabilities better than bad players still many of the exciting elements of playing poker are missing.Why the difference between wesnoth and poker? Is it simply pre-rational associations? Poker is a game of cards. It is gambling. Both these have deep psychological associations with luck, and therefore luck in poker is acceptable
You have far more control in poker than you do in Wesnoth, even if it is still extremely luck based. There are actual human elements to poker that are missing in Wesnoth that give poker an edge (not to mention the money you can win from it).
You may equate a bad poker hand to a bad battle, but they are really different. If you lose a battle in Wesnoth (a unit or more) you could more easily be forced into a loss than a player in poker trying to get you to put all your chips in the pot. And again, the whole difference is because you get to decide when and how you play, and the element of a TRUE bluff gives the game a unique facet that Wesnoth does not have.
This is why "luck is more acceptable" in poker.
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
In terms of comparison, Wesnoth is far more like Backgammon than like Poker.
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
Yeah, because in Wesnothh you throw the dice before attacking, right? Sorry, but in Backgammon you get the RNG results *before* you move. Quite a difference.
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
That is a difference, but Wesnoth is still much closer to Backgammon than Poker. In Wesnoth you see one set of results before selecting your next movement.grrr wrote:Yeah, because in Wesnothh you throw the dice before attacking, right? Sorry, but in Backgammon you get the RNG results *before* you move. Quite a difference.
David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
F50: It isn't as simple as doubling luck and HP. That would actually have major changes on gameplay. For one thing, attacks with the "slow" ability have a much greater chance to hit. Same thing with poison.
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
Good point, but it only applies to the shaman and pillager, the others have magical attacks or a significant amount of strikes already (dwarves in mountains usually don't dodge).
I am not saying it is "that simple" I admitted there will be some balance changes to be worked out. Those can be dealt with after some testing as there is no way to quantify exactly how much impact that will have on gameplay. I believe that most of it is that simple (and healing will have to double as well).
I am not saying it is "that simple" I admitted there will be some balance changes to be worked out. Those can be dealt with after some testing as there is no way to quantify exactly how much impact that will have on gameplay. I believe that most of it is that simple (and healing will have to double as well).
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
It would also shatter elusive-foot.
Let us all measure in milliyards, that way we can all get along.
Replay Archive: http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/Replays
Replay Archive: http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/Replays
- krotop
- 2009 Map Contest Winner
- Posts: 433
- Joined: June 8th, 2006, 3:05 pm
- Location: Bordeaux, France
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
Not more than any other movetypeSorrow wrote:It would also shatter elusive-foot.
Its chance to be hit hasn't change, his chance to survive 5+ fights and his chance to be shattered by a single or 2 units have.
Don't trust me, I'm just average player.
***
Game feedback for the Nightmares of Meloen
Art feedback by mystic x the unknown
***
Game feedback for the Nightmares of Meloen
Art feedback by mystic x the unknown
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
Ok, I suppose I'd perhaps buy that, but the disparity is still nowhere near as large as some people believe. A great many "bad luck" losses are still avoidable; even if your opponent builds up a small freebie advantage (+1-2 units) they can still very easily over-extend and hand the game back to you, so long as you're careful not to overextend yourself.JW wrote:If you lose a battle in Wesnoth (a unit or more) you could more easily be forced into a loss than a player in poker trying to get you to put all your chips in the pot.
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
. . . ?Noy wrote:Why did our captain not march at the head of the company? why did he turn command over to a wounded second-lieutenant, leaving us without a chef at a critical moment? (Wavro Franco-Prussian War Pg. 176)
I'm a newbie. Don't listen to what I say.
Re: Luck in Wesnoth: Rationale
First let me ask you a question: what is randomness? I don't think anyone can really answer that question and I don't think it can be scientifically proven that a number is random (or not).
Secondly there is no such thing as a pseudo random number generator. Either the numbers provided are random or they are not. They can't be pseudo random!
Thirdly a computer is quite unable to create random numbers, as all the results of his calculations are always completely predictable.
Now, this well understood and established, it is up for discussion to know whether the level of uncertainty in the game of BFW is satisfying or not. What do you think?
I personally think it is much too high: of course I guess the developers of the game wanted it to be so because they wanted to make the game more challenging. But one thing they didn't realize is that the attractiveness of the game does not rely on uncertainty: it relies on the story lines of the campaigns, on building up and advancing the characters and also on their skillful deployment and the strategy used for each scenario.
To conclude, I'd say that I agree with using a certain degree of uncertainty in the result of the battles, but it should be limited and much less important than it is now, because such as it is actually it only urges the player to save his games and replay the same combination again and again until he gets a satisfying result; a practise which completely ruins the game!
Secondly there is no such thing as a pseudo random number generator. Either the numbers provided are random or they are not. They can't be pseudo random!
Thirdly a computer is quite unable to create random numbers, as all the results of his calculations are always completely predictable.
Now, this well understood and established, it is up for discussion to know whether the level of uncertainty in the game of BFW is satisfying or not. What do you think?
I personally think it is much too high: of course I guess the developers of the game wanted it to be so because they wanted to make the game more challenging. But one thing they didn't realize is that the attractiveness of the game does not rely on uncertainty: it relies on the story lines of the campaigns, on building up and advancing the characters and also on their skillful deployment and the strategy used for each scenario.
To conclude, I'd say that I agree with using a certain degree of uncertainty in the result of the battles, but it should be limited and much less important than it is now, because such as it is actually it only urges the player to save his games and replay the same combination again and again until he gets a satisfying result; a practise which completely ruins the game!