Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

[Zbyll]

New map designed for balanced 1 vs 1 - "Conquest Dative"
and i think final version "Conquest Poland" with teleports (N/S, W/E) and several changes to balance map more.
(Thanks to SlowThinker! - i have used his teleports code)
Both maps in one .zip:

polandndative.zip

Two maps

(9.58 KiB) Downloaded 287 times

[Gwledig]

Zybll maybe get your maps in the main conquest addon, or put them online separately on the Addon server, if you are doing a lot of work on them this might be easier to maintain. See what Lich says..

[Gwledig]

does anyone know where to get the old, original conquest/empires map? not Europe, but the big world map... if anyone got it, can they post it here?

thx

[SlowThinker]

(Thanks to SlowThinker! - i have used his teleports code)

It is not mine, I stole it and slightly changed.

Zybll maybe get your maps in the main conquest addon, or put them online separately on the Addon server, if you are doing a lot of work on them this might be easier to maintain. See what Lich says..

What Lich says?

There are too many Conquest maps now (spread in threads), some better, some worse...

Maybe Lich should start a new thread (so that he has the access to 1st post(s) and can edit it/them later), and in that thread he could maintain

• a list of links to all Conquest maps
• a list of links to all Conquest threads (including the Jinnaraka's and Gwledig's clones)
• a link to my teleport post
• ...

(Gwledig, then you could keep the info about your clone in your thread, I think it is somewhat spread in both threads now)

[Gwledig]

yes I should keep my posts to the thread I made in multiplayer development
http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=31975

And if I wanna comment about the main pack or ask anything I'll come back...

Just gona add something in other threat now...

[Mabuse]

The idea behind the shock trooper is that it would be better at defence than a general, but almost useless at offense.

i get what you say. i just wanted to mention that i wouldnt use the shock trooper for that purpose (because of its terrain defense (although it looks cool), i suggest using a halberdier or royalguard. i would base them then at 20 gold.

however there is another point to consider:
---------------------------------------------

By reconsidering the unit stats I meant:

- There is a stone-scissors-paper situation between normal unit-general-assasin, but the result is in favor of knights: knights took the role of generals.

- There are several types of units - infantry (militia, infantry, elite, lieut, general), cavalry (cav, lancer, knight), village defender (pike), and there is not too much of logic in the system:
for example there are 3g, 8g, 15g infantries, and I would expect their killers (5g, 10g, 20g cavalry) would be at same fixed margin. But 5g is 166% of 3g, 10g is 125% of 8g and 20g is 133% of 15g.

- The mounted units are usually better than infantry. One way how to balance them is to change stats, another way is to make another terrain impassable for cavalry (besides mountains), or to slow down cavalry on a non-flat terrain much more.

- The militia / infantry ratio is only very slightly better for an infantry, and so the militia is usually better because of its blocking abilities.

i agree with these points.
to make infanry in general better, i suggest to give them a "fortify" ability.


Fortify:

i suggested this before:
------------------------
if you decide to fortify an infantry unit (militia would not be able to fortify, also generals cannot fortify), i loses all remaining movement points, and will also not get new movement points on a new turn as long it is fortified.

if you "unfortify" an infantry unit, it will recover its movement on the next turn

the benefit of "fortify" would be a bonus of +15% on defense (up to a maximum of 80%, so elves dont get > 80% in forests).

with 75% defense on a village a lieutenant would be able to defend versus a grand knight

(infantry, elite, lieut wuld be better)

[Gwledig]

Wow I really like the sound of 'fortify' .. perhaps limit the ability to certain classes of "feudal" type infantry such as pikes...

I'm incidentally uploading the script I used/hacked for merchants, in case anyone is interested..

I'm adding a few merchant vilas to some maps to test (like the outlaw outpost), it's not intended to work for every vila on the map.

You can simply add a certain vila to a map, then add in the macro to a map scenario with the terrain code/vila you used for the merchant, e.g. in the example below I have added some snow elf vilas to a map to represent merchant (and added labels for them in the scenario file "Merchant"):

Code: Select all

	{WORK}
	{SELECT_LENGTH}
	{REINFORCE}
	{RECRUIT_MENU_TRIBAL Hh^Vc}
	{RECRUIT_MENU_BEASTMASTER Re^Vct}
	{SHOP Aa^Vea}
	{BOAT_MENU}
	{GAME_MODES 77}

Note - I re-uploaded the shop code it was checking gold > not =>

(see later posts for latest shop code upload)

[Mabuse]

ok, so i also will join the ranks of conquest designers (beside lich lord)

first step i do is getting the newest version of conquest.

then i plan to add lt. cavalry for humans and also infantry for elves and orcs
(and whatever is there left, if lich lord hasnt done it yet)

then i will add the fortify ability (it will be a simple "dummy" ability)
to the infantry unit types.


- as said i wil make it unexploitable, to be able to fortify units need 1 attack left, and at least 1 move. will be activated via right-click menu.

- upon fortifying its defense will be increased by 15% (or 10%), it will lose its attack and all remaining moves (max def is capped to 75%, in case it was lower than 75% by default, so dwarfes on mountains will just get a +5% bonus (elves are already nerfed to 60% on forests).

- on the next turn it wil get an attack but no moves as long it is fortified.
(unfortified units recover their moves as usual on the next turn)

- to unfortify, unit needs just to be fortified, you can unfortify any time on your turn
(via right click)

- fortifying is only available to infantry type units (infantry, pikemen, elite-infantry, lieutenants)
no militia or generals wil be able to fortify.

as a ittle nerf, lieutenants will have only 7 moves

----------------------------------
----------------------------------


some math for +15% variant
----------------

fortified lieutenant on city
200HP
180 damage (36x5)
75% defense

vs

grand knight
250HP
264 damage (44x6)
40% def

=

250 / (180x0.6) = 2.31 rounds to kill grand knight
200 / (264x0.25) = 3.03 rounds to kill lieutenant

odds clearly in favor for lieutenant, grand knight has friststrike though
so lieutenant will get some damage



vs

general
300HP
360 damage (45x8)
40% defense (assuming worst case that general attacks from flat terrain)

=

300 / (180x0.6) = 2.77 rounds to kill general (or more if general atacks from hills/woods)
200 / (360x0.25) = 2.22 rounds to kill lieutenant


odds favor general, which will be left badly wounded


conclusion
-----------
in the +15% version i see a need to nerf the lieutenant somewhat, since all infantry types have 7 moves or less, lieutenant will get 7 moves then

however, lieutenants and infantry types will be useful for holding villages then

----------------------------------
----------------------------------


math for the 10% variant

fortified lieutenant on city
200HP
180 damage (36x5)
70% defense

vs

grand knight
250HP
264 damage (44x6)
40% def

=

250 / (180x0.6) = 2.31 rounds to kill grand knight
200 / (264x0.3) = 2.52 rounds to kill lieutenant

odds clearly in favor for lieutenant, grand knight has friststrike though
so we can say its a draw here, depend on luck



vs

general
300HP
360 damage (45x8)
40% defense (assuming worst case that general attacks from flat terrain)

=

300 / (180x0.6) = 2.77 rounds to kill general (or more if general atacks from hills/woods)
200 / (360x0.25) = 1.85 rounds to kill lieutenant


odds clearly favor general, which will be left wounded


conclusion
-----------
in the +10% version i see a gamble. lieutenant cannot effectively hold a village versus a grand knight. and that decreases the usefulness of fortify option a lot

overall, 10% seem to weak


higher boni then 15% seem to be too strong, on 20% a lieutenant has a fair chance to win even versus general, which isnt intended.



opinions ?

[Mabuse]

I plan to polish the Conquest code. But it will take some amount of time.

Now it contains really fun parts. For example

Spoiler:

Code: Select all

[if]
	[variable]
		name="random"
		equals=militia
	[/variable]
	[then]
		{VARIABLE garrison militia}
	[/then]
[/if]
[if]
	[variable]
		name="random"
		equals=dwmilitia
	[/variable]
	[then]
		{VARIABLE garrison dwmilitia}
	[/then]
[/if]
[if]
	[variable]
		name="random"
		equals=infantry
	[/variable]
	[then]
		{VARIABLE garrison infantry}
	[/then]
[/if]
[if]
	[variable]
		name="random"
		equals=dwinfantry
	[/variable]
	[then]
		{VARIABLE garrison dwinfantry}
	[/then]
[/if]
[if]
	[variable]
		name="random"
		equals=cavalry
	[/variable]
	[then]
	{VARIABLE garrison cavalry}
	[/then]
[/if]

in place of

Code: Select all

{VARIABLE garrison $random}

yes, that seem good to me, i will do that also.

[Mabuse]

Wow I really like the sound of 'fortify' .. perhaps limit the ability to certain classes of "feudal" type infantry such as pikes...

I'm incidentally uploading the script I used/hacked for merchants, in case anyone is interested..

I'm adding a few merchant vilas to some maps to test (like the outlaw outpost), it's not intended to work for every vila on the map.

You can simply add a certain vila to a map, then add in the macro to a map scenario with the terrain code/vila you used for the merchant, e.g. in the example below I have added some snow elf vilas to a map to represent merchant (and added labels for them in the scenario file "Merchant"):

Note - I re-uploaded the shop code it was checking gold > not =>

btw, sorry for triple posting -
i will also make the conquest assasins take care of your "special" generals
but in an easier way than you suggested some pages before (you can use a "list" within one ability, no need to add a new ablity for every type)

fortify will be availabe for all (almost all) infantry types. i will represent the ability to prepare special defenses (even in open field, like a wall of sharp wooden poles sticked in the ground)


about the shop:
------------------

be careful with the armor, also, the armor currently does NOT increase the resistance, it increases the terrain defense.

i suggest you increase not the defense, instead you really increases the resistance (blade resistance that is), but of course not in the amounts that are displayed in the shop, instead i suggest you increase by 10% and 20%

also the flying thingy shoudl also reduce the movement costs of ALL (accessible) terrains to 1 (not just unwalkable , or can the units not fly over hills for example ?)



btw, the use and balance of the shop is debateable, but this could be a first step into a direction where oyu may finfd special items in special locations (guarded by special enemies).
so that you may find special items that give similar boni like you suggested in your shop.
(however, hard to balance). so i wouldnt go for a shop, instead if you make your map you may want to place special items here and there.



EDIT:
-------

btw, this reminds my that i wanted to make the veteran boni a bit cheaper (experiencewise, so you dont need 16 XP for a rank, instead "just" 12 or something like that

opinions ?



EDIT II:
----------

also i plan to add a score table at the start of each players turn, which displays the income of all players in a "ranked" order (so strongest players first) (for some seconds)

this may not be loved by some, but currently you can see the income anyway (if you know how), so why not make it officially displayed. it wil help to make strategic decisions and debates more solid

it dont show everything though, you may have peasants on your cities, which boost your income "secretly"

[Gwledig]

thanks for the feedback Mabuse, I was aware of the ability list, but had a bug and couldn't be bothered fixing it but if you are making the list anyway I'll wait for this new version of the main code.

The shop seems to have gone down pretty well in tests, with players bargaining over them, sharing access and so on, so fairly interesting.. it didnt get used much at the begining but was used more by about turn 8 when ppl have more money.. then the Gold sound effect could be heard by everyone so you knew it was being used..

I'll build the stuff you mentioned in, yes I used terrain because I wasn't 100% sure about modifying the blade resistance, but I agree this is a lot simpler.

I'm not so good right now with WML so I used set values instead of filtering and adding+ e.g. damage to weapons, the use of marksman/magical also seemed simpler and less overpowered, so it kind of moderates what players can do with the shop but adds a valuable ability to the unit.

I didnt want the flight skill to be overpowered so described as ability to 'fly over impassible terrain' only.

Got to dissapear someplace now but will be back on here laters..

[SlowThinker]

1)
Mabuse, do you intend to change the main Conquest download, or to create a clone like Gwledig did?
I think there should be only one responsible maintainer, who will decide which changes will be incorporated. And the maintainer is Lich Lord now. (For example I suggested Lich added the teleport code in the utils, but it is upon Lich's decision).

2)
Best procedure would be to polish the code first, before any changes will be done (including Lich's new units). The code is really terrible, and any editing is very laborious.
I think the code may be reduced to 15-25% of the original size. And it is not only about a shorter and more tabular code, it looks there are hidden bugs inside. for example:

• the polished .cfg code (lotr map ver 1.10 here) doesn't work for an uncomprehensible reason. What is worse - sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't (=the human units are not placed on the map)
• When Gwledig annouced a Conquest for 8 players, I tried to make this part of the code independent on the constant 6:
  Spoiler:

  Code: Select all

  {CALCULATE_INCOME_BONUS_CRUSADES 1}
  {CALCULATE_INCOME_BONUS_CRUSADES 2}
  {CALCULATE_INCOME_BONUS_CRUSADES 3}
  {CALCULATE_INCOME_BONUS_CRUSADES 4}
  {CALCULATE_INCOME_BONUS_CRUSADES 5}
  {CALCULATE_INCOME_BONUS_CRUSADES 6}	 
  

  I created a simple loop from 1 to 6, but it didn't work!?

[SlowThinker]

then i plan to add lt. cavalry for humans and also infantry for elves and orcs

I think differences between races are good

Fortifying

If the decision was upon me then I would hesitate whether to incorporate the fortifying: The idea is very interesting, but it goes somewhat against the simple Conquest battle system.

(max def is capped to 75%, in case it was lower than 75% by default, so dwarfes on mountains will just get a +5% bonus (elves are already nerfed to 60% on forests)

This way the fortifying will be more effective for some units and less for others.
A more natural idea would be if the fortification would always strengthen the unit let us say by 15%: You want to reduce the damage taken by 15%: an elf takes 40% damage on a 60%-defense terrain, so after fortifying it should take 0.85*40%=34%. So the new defense should be 66%.
(wesnoth allows such precise defenses, doesn't it?)

[Gwledig]

Regarding the 8 player I just did an 8 player hack of the main code (latest version is in a pervious post on here).

I found it easier to use 2 addons, because using a 6p map with 8p code results in all kinds of errors, you get the AI on player 7 even if you override the AI side as 9 in the map. It would certainly be nice to support 8 players for the main pack.

As far as my 'clone' is concerned, I'll be keeping it up to date with the main Conquest code. My usual method is to DL the latest Conquest addon, then add my extra stuff.

I think the code may be reduced to 15-25%

Maybe look first at easy options like get rid of the boats list and use a wildcard (no filter at all), then filter out standard units which cant board (obviously boat types).

I also wonder if the same could be done for reinforce...

make your map you may want to place special items here and there.

I like the sound of it, but I'm conscious a lot of folks like to keep the conquest "concept", so I would compare adding a few outlaw outposts or shops vs an RPG element like a guardian / special item.. to me the outlaws & shops fit in closer with conquest as it's all about capturing territory and diplomacy, e.g. players the other night were negotiating about the shops/ outlaws. The special items sound cool, but this would need to "fit" conquest somehow I think... You also have a limted time to make turns. Also the opponent needs to be able to assess enemy units at a glance, this may not be as easy for a unit with special items (I'm trying to show upgrade stats for upgraded shop units).

On the other hand I can imagine a map which combines both conquest and RPG elements such as caves with an AI monster, which 'drops' a special object when killed, like a weapon.
I agree that this is going away from 'Conquest' BUT if players like it, who is to say what is right or wrong? Some people thought a shop would be way out of sync with Conquest but just about everyone in the game seemed to like the idea and didnt affect gameplay too much, including some old players which surprised me. Maybe there is room for the traditional 'Conquest' map, but also some different types (teleports here now too..)

Incidely I'm also thinking of adding yet another faction, Summoners.. they would be able to recruit units.. giving them a tactical advantage so question how to balance this..

another idea instead of a new faction, just give the magus the ability to summon some low level units, and maybe also dispell other summoned units, like a massive filtered attack which basically wipes the summoned unit.

I also like the idea of allowing the 'worker' to build structures for gold cost, like Warcraft, like a defensive wall/pallisade with 0 movement and a terrain tile overlay, like the core tower and other tiles. The worker could even 'repair' damaged structures by standing alongside, and structures could be attacked as normal and destroyed. You could even build a mobile 'gate' which could move around very slowly. The defensive structures could be set to have no attack but a defense. But it's back to the question of whether this would work in conquest or be desirable at all and if so would need a big map with plenty of open spaces between regions to allow building a defensive wall and stuff.

I've re-uploaded the shop below ..changed to blade resistance for armor and added 2 heals, not tested yet but cant seen any probs.

..and uploaded again to set true flight with all 50% terrain defences and 1 movement.

[Mabuse]

1)
Mabuse, do you intend to change the main Conquest download, or to create a clone like Gwledig did?

of course the changes will go into the main conquest upload

I think there should be only one responsible maintainer, who will decide which changes will be incorporated. And the maintainer is Lich Lord now.

well, not that it is very important what you think how things should be:

FYI:
----
but if you are interested to know - i gave lich lord the pbl-files to maintain conquest, as well as i got the pbl files from ALDA who simply took the opportunity the transfer conquest to 1.8 first.

and of course the fact that alda gave me the pbl files, doesnt disallow him to add content to conquest, and as well the fact that i gave lich lord the pbl files to add content, doesnt disallow me to add content, even if you might think so.

you have nothing to decide on this matter anyway.
(infact i planned also to give pbl. files to you initially (if you would have asked for them), but i think this would just bring up a lot of trouble i see right now).

cooperation on this matter surely should not be a big problem, if somebody wants to add things, he just loads down newest version, adds his things and there we have it.
i agree though that a limited circle of people is good so we are fine with alda, lich lord and me.

Best procedure would be to polish the code first, before any changes will be done (including Lich's new units). The code is really terrible, and any editing is very laborious.

well, beside the fact that i agree that the code was mostly done by several people by simple copy and paste and thus isnt very optimized (there are tons of things that come immediatly to my mind where oyu can reduce the size of the code and use more macros for example (which WILL NOT reduce the code which is used INGAME though, since all macros are "unfolded/expanded" by the game engine before play anyway) - the CODE actually WORKS

and since the code works and is not very space and time consuming anyway (no ones care if the conquest upload is 100kb or 50kb), optimizing the code (for better looks only) is atm simply WASTE of time, so no priority for me to work on this.
(but as i said: if you want to work on this: go ahead)
so i decide to spend my time of other things (concerning conquest)

I think differences between races are good

well, yes.
you actually know that i added the races, do you ?
of course there a good reasons to give lit vav and infantry to humans, elves:

it was kinda always planned to give a light cav to the humans since players who start out on human territory are not able to expand as fast (which is bad on start).

reason to give infantry to elves (and orcs) is: on a low income fight among elves, we have the paradox situation the elven 3 gold unit who is attacking a city from woods has better chance then a 3 gold unit in a city. of course this isnt right. elves need to have a 3gold defensive option that grabts 60% def on city

the only thing that kept me me from editing elves infantry is simply the lack of a proper lvl1 unit (the archers simply look too small, ok, i SHOULD have used archers for militia and elven inf for infantry then, but changing it now would confuse people, so i left it out for now)

i can live with the fact though that "differences between races are good", but its not balanced though and may lead even to paradox situations (attacking a city from woods is better than defending the city with the same unit/unit costs)

If the decision was upon me then I would hesitate whether to incorporate the fortifying: The idea is very interesting, but it goes somewhat against the simple Conquest battle system.

nah, it is simple enough. or do you wanna tell me that conquest is just played by a bunch of idiots. it will be a good add and will make conquest battles more interesting, and more imortant: it offers new options and give some units more weight.

fortified units wil be marked with an overlay (hero overlay) and will get (slight change from the orgiginal concept) 1 move per turn. the 1 move per turn will enbale fortified cities to recruit troops still (by moving the fortified unit off them)

This way the fortifying will be more effective for some units and less for others.
A more natural idea would be if the fortification would always strengthen the unit let us say by 15%: You want to reduce the damage taken by 15%: an elf takes 40% damage on a 60%-defense terrain, so after fortifying it should take 0.85*40%=34%. So the new defense should be 66%.
(wesnoth allows such precise defenses, doesn't it?)

lol, nah units wil just get a simple +15% defense.
(not: they take -15% damage, in fact the damage which is taken less (by a +15% add to the defense) depend a lot on the "original" terrain they stand on: for example, the step from 40% def to 55% def is a damage reduction of 25%, the step from 60% to 75% is a reduction of 37.5 %. so we dont have a -15% damage taken, infact the damage reduction is a lot higher than 15% and is increasing with a higher base terrain)


btw, you did know that the elven units already get "just" 60% def in woods ?
(like elven sylph for example ?), because 70% def is just too high in conquest.

so the only units which would be disadvantaged by a 75% cap would be ... dwarfen units ... on mountains.
how bad would that be ?
not really bad. right.

in fact i already thought about reducing dwarfen def on mountains to 60%, but then again, they have just 30% in open field, so it evens out.
still fortifying wont allow to go higher than 75%, so some units (dwarfs on mountains only) dont get as much as other units. who cares anyway ?

this is done to keep the game balance, fyi. a step from 70% to 85% is a damage reduction by 50%, which will break the game balance, since nobody wants a 15 gold unit be able to smash a 25 gold unit (without luck)





@GLEDWIG:
i will take a look at your stuff and if its ok, there is chance that it can go into the main conquest upload also. i see np with this (of course the shop thingy wont get added so far)

beside the shops i see one thing which could be added also that is: "unit training", so units may get a veteran rank (which gives +5HP and +1 damage) per 1 gold spend, of course its still better to buy lets say a higher priced unit than stacking veteran ranks on a certain hit, but it may be a useful option in rare cases.

but thats just a thought for now