## About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

Brainstorm ideas of possible additions to the game. Read this before posting!

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Ferk
Posts: 6
Joined: December 19th, 2008, 9:55 pm

### About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

I know that this is a silly little stupid thing... but since the first time I played Battle for Wesnoth the format "damage"-"number of strikes" that is displayed in game has been confusing me.
Now it's not so confusing because I've come to get accustomed, but I still think that its not very descriptive to use the "-" as a separator for the two values. There's no clear indication that shows that the second number is the number of strikes, and in fact normally seeing "7-3" would make me think of an interval stating that it refers to a number between 7 and 3.. or that there's a subtraction.

I'm just wondering why is this format used. wouldn't be more intuitive to use something like 7 x3 ..or something like 7(3)? I know that the strikes are not exactly multiplicated, but it's more intuitive than using the subtraction symbol.
In fact, I think that almost any other kind of character or icon would be less confusing as separator. 7·3 ... 7;3 ... 7|3 ... 7~3 maybe a tiny icon depicting two crossed blades in X shape would look cool.

I'm sure that most people here are accustomed to this format already and for some of you it will be weird to change... but I wanted to point out this issue, since it's something that has been bugging me and some friends back when we were introduced to this game

JW
Posts: 5046
Joined: November 10th, 2005, 7:06 am
Location: Chicago-ish, Illinois

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

This actually confused me too when I first played the game opening HTTT. I didn't read the manual though either, though I have an *extensive* history with video games. I figured it out rather quickly, but the notation does seem a bit strange, and I've always thought 7x3 would be better, though it really hasn't struck me as something that needs change.

Others may differ, but that is my opinion.

Joram
Posts: 366
Joined: September 2nd, 2008, 5:36 am

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

I never had any problems with it. In fact, to my mind, it is the most natural symbol to use.

But then, I've played a fair number of boardgames that use that symbol to separate numbers.
The Fires of Pride 0.3, a heavily story based campaign.
On hold while I try and finish my book

HomerJ
Posts: 812
Joined: April 25th, 2008, 1:22 pm
Location: Hannover, Germany

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

Isn't there anything in the tutorial about it? Has been a while since I played that. If it is in the tutorial there is no need for a change at all.

Greetz
HomerJ
Six years without a signature!

Turuk
Sithslayer
Posts: 5283
Joined: February 28th, 2007, 8:58 pm
Contact:

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

Tutorial wrote:Unfortunately, you've used up your turn attacking the quintain. The quintain will now get a turn."

"The DUMMY gets a turn?"

"Yes. It's a magical quintain. Now, this quintain gets 5 chances to hit you for 3 damage each.

Later on......

"But before you send your fighters against the quintain, you should know they have two kinds of attack..."

"I'll tell them to use the one that does the most damage!"

"And which would that be? The sword (5-4) or the bow (3-3)? I suppose you'll find out..."

"Your elf used a sword (5-4; or 5 damage, 4 attacks), which is a melee attack. Quintain defended with its melee attack (3-5). The ranged attack was safer."

Your elf used a bow, which is a ranged attack (3-3; or 3 damage, 3 attacks). The quintain has no ranged attack, only a melee attack, so it could not defend itself."
HomerJ wrote:If it is in the tutorial there is no need for a change at all.

The tutorial walks you through the set-up of the numbers and what they mean.
Mainline Maintainer: AOI, DM, NR, TB and THoT.
UMC Maintainer: Forward They Cried, A Few Logs, A Few More Logs, Start of the War, and Battle Against Time

Simons Mith
Posts: 784
Joined: January 27th, 2005, 10:46 pm
Location: Twickenham
Contact:

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

A notation of Damage[space][times]Attacks e.g. 7 x3 would instantly make something that does sometimes puzzle newbs into something much clearer. I think it's a very helpful idea.

Turuk
Sithslayer
Posts: 5283
Joined: February 28th, 2007, 8:58 pm
Contact:

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

7x3 might also make them think that they are going to hit for 21 damage, and not hitting at maximum 7 damage-3 times.
Mainline Maintainer: AOI, DM, NR, TB and THoT.
UMC Maintainer: Forward They Cried, A Few Logs, A Few More Logs, Start of the War, and Battle Against Time

Simons Mith
Posts: 784
Joined: January 27th, 2005, 10:46 pm
Location: Twickenham
Contact:

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

Turuk wrote:7x3 might also make them think that they are going to hit for 21 damage, and not hitting at maximum 7 damage-3 times.
Yes, I think including the space character is necessary. "7 x3". Else there's no benefit over the current notation.

drwilly
Posts: 7
Joined: March 12th, 2009, 9:25 pm

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

Turuk wrote:7x3 might also make them think that they are going to hit for 21 damage, and not hitting at maximum 7 damage-3 times.
I dont think so. If a unit would hit for 21 damage i'd expect its damage to display as 21 and not 7x3.

That said I support the idea. 7-3 is quite confusing.
I'd suggest 7(3) or just stick with the initial 7x3

Edit: oh hey, first post.

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

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

Simons Mith wrote:
Turuk wrote:7x3 might also make them think that they are going to hit for 21 damage, and not hitting at maximum 7 damage-3 times.
Yes, I think including the space character is necessary. "7 x3". Else there's no benefit over the current notation.
I'd be receptive to this. It's a good idea.

It is interesting to see many people open to a possible change with just over a small thing like this. I think that's great.
Wesnoth BestiaryPREVIEW IT HERE )
Unit tree and stat browser
CanvasPREVIEW IT HERE )
Exp. map viewer

Dalkor
Posts: 8
Joined: March 27th, 2009, 8:04 pm

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

ancestral wrote:
Simons Mith wrote: Yes, I think including the space character is necessary. "7 x3". Else there's no benefit over the current notation.
I'd be receptive to this. It's a good idea.

It is interesting to see many people open to a possible change with just over a small thing like this. I think that's great.
Realistically ancestral, it's the small changes that by nature are going to gather the most support because they require relatively little effort to change.

On topic though, Simons Mith's idea seems sound. It's a clearer method to denote the amount of damage the unit can/will do than the current dash. In fact, would anyone mind cluing me in on how to make this change in my own client so I don't need to wait for an official patch?

Livor
Posts: 24
Joined: August 9th, 2008, 6:27 pm
Location: Texas

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

Is it really that confusing? I've never had any problems with it, and it never dawned on me that people could have problems with it until this thread. It's just something I never thought twice about.
The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion. -Arthur C. Clarke, science fiction writer (1917-2008)

Max
Posts: 1449
Joined: April 13th, 2008, 12:41 am

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

there's already a (mouse over) tooltip - for 15-3 it reads "15 damage, 3 attacks". that should at least help when you're looking at the unit stats on the right side.

Turuk
Sithslayer
Posts: 5283
Joined: February 28th, 2007, 8:58 pm
Contact:

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

A small change is indeed possible and the easiest to make, but changing things solely for the sake of changing them is also never a good idea.

A space would help if you made it 7 x3, but given that the game currently explains 7-3, which it would still do with 7x3 or 7 x3 or 7 x 3, is the change worth it? I was with Livor when really it did not seem that terribly confusing at all, and this damage indication has been used for a while. That does not make it right per say, but how many players who do not read the forums and just update their games will wonder what the sudden change from 7-3 to 7x3 means?
Mainline Maintainer: AOI, DM, NR, TB and THoT.
UMC Maintainer: Forward They Cried, A Few Logs, A Few More Logs, Start of the War, and Battle Against Time

Simons Mith
Posts: 784
Joined: January 27th, 2005, 10:46 pm
Location: Twickenham
Contact:

### Re: About the format of attacks ( damage-strikes )

I remember getting caught out first time I met a cuttle fish, and I wouldn't have been had its attack been displayed as 5 x10.