Advance on Kill

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:
Thermite
Posts: 15
Joined: July 24th, 2007, 3:33 pm

Advance on Kill

Post by Thermite »

Has it ever been looked at to allow a unit to move into th space that a enemy unit it just killed occupied?

Thoughts:
1) Only if the unit would have had enough MP to move there if the enemy unit was not present.
2) Perhaps only HTH attacks, not Ranged?
3) Perhaps only in the space is not in the ZOC of another unit?

This may have been a long thought of, discussed, and discarded idea from a gameplay perspective, but many board and counter wargames allow a one hex move after a successful attack. It allows for one to follow up on an attack in order to press forward, or just adjust position into more favorable terrain. Also would allow another unit to move in and attack an adjacent enemy unit.
User avatar
zookeeper
WML Wizard
Posts: 9742
Joined: September 11th, 2004, 10:40 pm
Location: Finland

Post by zookeeper »

Won't happen in mainline.

If someone wants to do this in their era/campaign/whatever, it'd be sort of doable with WML. Not perfectly, but almost.
Thermite
Posts: 15
Joined: July 24th, 2007, 3:33 pm

Please move this thread to Ideas

Post by Thermite »

I posted this in the wrong Forum. My apolgies. Please move it to the "Ideas" Forum.
Nebiros
Posts: 86
Joined: July 24th, 2007, 5:20 pm
Location: Charlottesville, VA, USA

Post by Nebiros »

Usually it's more useful to move a different unit into the vacated hex, since the second unit can then attack in turn (and hasn't been damaged by counterattacks, and can be a different type of unit if you so choose). Plan your turn as a whole, don't just flail away with each unit individually. You should already know how you're going to follow up on that kill before you even make the attack. (You should also know how you're going to follow up if you miss all your swings and don't make the kill - I sometimes forget this part.)
Rhuvaen
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Post by Rhuvaen »

This would make mages and adepts simply overpowered, because they can go in, kill something, and retreat back a hex to allow other units to cover.

The ZOC rules already allow for exploitation strategies after a kill. I think already the list of exception you give show that this idea violates KISS in a roundabout way.
Edward V Riley
Posts: 265
Joined: June 28th, 2007, 4:42 pm
Location: Baldwyn Mississippi

Post by Edward V Riley »

As long as this doesn't involve the ability to move backwards with remaining movement, then I say why not. When attacking, you're advancing on an opponent's position. If you kill the unit, moving into it's space should be allowed.

Some will argue this gives an unfair advantage, but it can also be a drawback as well so it balances out. Let me give an example of a drawback:

Unit 1(a grunt) attacks from it's good defensive position on a mountain to a elf fighter located on a regular grassland feature. By doing so, using the advance forward method, he moves into the grassland space. After the kill is over, the grunt is now stuck in the lesser position he advanced into, making him/her more vulnerable to an attack by the opponent next turn.

So you see, this would balance out and make for more strategic thinking. Using the above example, the player might not even want to make the kill and give up his prime positioning and instead try to goad the elf into coming into the mountains to battle. He 'might' back up a hex further into the mountains and see if the elf is stupid enough to follow.

I see a lot of "it won't work" and "it messes up the game" comments in these forums. Criticism is only good if you're prepared to offer ways it 'could' work.
Who Knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?
The Shadow knows
User avatar
Haibane
Posts: 154
Joined: June 15th, 2006, 6:38 am
Location: Old Home, Guri

Post by Haibane »

Edward V Riley wrote:Criticism is only good if you're prepared to offer ways it 'could' work.
May critism is ok, when it's currently working fine and change wouldn't bring anything worth or even would make it just worse ? Don't fix what is not broken.
Critism also shows possible or hidden problems, almost noone is able to see all consequences himself :roll:


Anyway, this changes gameplay in the favor of attacker, as he can take more favorable terrain (with attacking unit) which defender usually use. There are not real drawbags, unless you must move - otherwise you don't need move if it wouldn't be favorable.

If it would be possible to move at previously occupied space in ZOC of another unit, impact would be much greater and I would be against it. If it wouldn't be possible (condition 3), impact shouldn't be so great except some "special" cases (fe villages), so it's probably just about personal preferences. And I prefer current state, most likely not alone. Zookeeper is imho right.
If it's all a dream, now wake me up. If it's all real, just kill me.
Edward V Riley
Posts: 265
Joined: June 28th, 2007, 4:42 pm
Location: Baldwyn Mississippi

Charging through?

Post by Edward V Riley »

But wouldn't you concede that "charge" is an advancing type move? Maybe only the horse unit types with charge can advance.

Impact..hmm..The only way for logic to dictate advancement with that type of move is to stumble forward after completing it. So you have a good point there.
Who Knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?
The Shadow knows
User avatar
Haibane
Posts: 154
Joined: June 15th, 2006, 6:38 am
Location: Old Home, Guri

Post by Haibane »

Well, what if they don't kill each other ? They should end at same hex ? Or one of them should die everytime ? Or horse would stop just in the case of unsuccessful attack ?
Wesnoth is not realistic, that's not mistake, that's feature. There is not realism because it has to be simple enought. They call it KISS principe.

To make it clear, that's why I spoke just about gameplay here. I said nothing about realism. Somewhat I have bad feeling about your response.
If it's all a dream, now wake me up. If it's all real, just kill me.
Edward V Riley
Posts: 265
Joined: June 28th, 2007, 4:42 pm
Location: Baldwyn Mississippi

Post by Edward V Riley »

It's just common sense. If the charging unit fails to kill the unit it is charging, then the charge is simply stopped.

THe more I think about it, Charging is the only attack that I see would make sense to advance into the hex. All other forms of attack are just not advancing type moves.

Charging could also conceivably move the unit it is charging backwards if it fails to kill it. Even a pikeman skewering a horse is going to back up a step due to the impact of the charge.
Who Knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?
The Shadow knows
User avatar
Haibane
Posts: 154
Joined: June 15th, 2006, 6:38 am
Location: Old Home, Guri

Post by Haibane »

Edward V Riley wrote:It's just common sense. If the charging unit fails to kill the unit it is charging, then the charge is simply stopped.
More likely there is small chance for charging horse unit to stay alive in the case of unsuccessful attack IRL. It will pass and than it's success even if defender is still alive, or it's killed (at least horse) because that's only way how to stop charging horse. You can't really expect horse to stop at spot because of unsuccessful attack, at least it's not possible because of physical laws.

And I would recommend you to forget about moving of charged unit. I will give you a hint, there could be other units or impassable terrain as well ...
If it's all a dream, now wake me up. If it's all real, just kill me.
Weeksy
Posts: 1017
Joined: January 29th, 2007, 1:05 am
Location: Oregon

Post by Weeksy »

It would screw up balance, and seeing as your arguments are for realism,
WINR.

That aside, there are things like this in the Abilities Era, which is mostly an example of cool abilities people can put into THEIR OWN (not default) eras, to have fun with.
If enough people bang their heads against a brick wall, The brick wall will fall down
UngeheuerLich
Posts: 319
Joined: February 22nd, 2006, 1:10 pm

Post by UngeheuerLich »

As an elf is bigger than a mountain, realism should be discarded.

You could argument, that you move with your army (represented by the elf) into the space and fight there. But then only the ground the defender stands in should count for defenses... which will lead to a lot of problems...

What i could imagine however is a unit special for a custom unit which could be used like "magic", "poison", or "berserk" to get into a well defended position.

Maybe a "Dwarven Brawler" or something like that. (note: would not be useful into a forest square, but maybe help getting on a mountain or a keep). Drawback of the unit: cannot defend a mountain at all.

Possible twist: give it also berserk, because then you won´t have to think about what happens, when he fails to kill the unit.

Another Idea: give it to an Ulfserker alternative upgrade (not mainline - Battlerager) : these kinds of berserkers are so untamed that they wont wait till they are attacked, instead they charge into the enemy at sight and go into melee on their ground leaving any defensive formation! (unit maybe impossible to be attacked by ranged, but can be lured from any defensive position)

Possible problems: as already mentioned it could violate KISS a little bit.
sparr
Posts: 209
Joined: March 6th, 2006, 5:02 am

Post by sparr »

what if the movement was mandatory? an attack modifier, like charge. if this unit kills another unit, it MUST move forward. would make a neat charger/berserker/[some term we havent already used].

maybe even allow it to move onto impassable hexes? that would be funny, but very very rarely tactically useful.
shevegen
Posts: 292
Joined: June 3rd, 2004, 4:35 pm

Post by shevegen »

Possible problems: as already mentioned it could violate KISS a little bit.
WML violates KISS too. WML is complex and difficult for newcomers to learn moreso since you always have to do your closing tags ... I think I just hate XML ;)

I am talking about constructs such as:

Code: Select all

{IF Agamemnon_next_to_castle equals yes (
            [then]
                [terrain]
                    x=$Agamemnon_previous_x
                    y=$Agamemnon_previous_y
                    letter=c
                [/terrain]
            [/then]
        )}
How is this simple?

I understand that something similar like WML is good to have but really this looks to me like obfuscated code that could be a lot easier to write in ruby or python as a snippet.
Anyway, back to the point, my point here is that KISS shouldnt dictate everything. The philosophy should just be to be as simple as possible - but not simpler. And complexity can be fine, as long as you can manage it (else a game can become too complex).

To the point of this thread:

An option to move into the field of a slain enemy unit, is not bad. An easy example could be this:

Berserking dwarf unit, wins battle and automatically enters the field of the slain unit. (Actually, I am not sure if a berserking unit should do that... how about those fast moving lance riders instead?)
Post Reply