Ever hear of a boardgame called "Melee" ?

[dreampilot]

This game is an abstraction to use many different types of terrain in a smaller space then would normally be required. This provides strategic points when you choose where to put your units and where to line up your defence/offence.

If companies or squads were used it'd be much harder to distinguish them aswell as less interesting units.

The abstraction goes for ranged combat aswell I think, in order to let the combat system work conclusive it's better to let both attacker and defender hit if they can. Not only does this seem to speed up the game but also provide an interesting combat concept.

I'm not a developer or coder here. I just play this game because I find it fun.

What you are suggesting are major changes in game play. Personally I think major changes have the least chance of being accepted but maybe I am wrong.

I've not been on the forum for very long at all and played for little over a month. This is the idea forum and I think you're ideas are valid, you just have to consider what was written by other and what I think applies to any project like Wesnoth. 90% of the ideas will probably not be taken on.

If you make 100 ideas then chances are some might

[Zebulon]

The whole point of bows is to urt the other guy before he can close on you and hurt you.

You can!

If the other unit doesn't have ranged weapon, he can't attack you.

[Yogibear]

In one of the posts it was stated that if ranged combat were to be allowed you would end up with lines of infantry in front of a lin of archers shooting at the enemy. That's exactly what happened in real battles, and it was called strategy (or at least tactics). That was declared a bad thing, so now I have to propose achange without ranged combat. I propose a choice in defence weapons. That is declared to be cutting down on the strategy of the game.

I guess that refers to my last two posts. Read it carefully and you will find that i am not bashing your ideas in general. I just try to imagine what they would mean to wesnoth in its current state.

I haven't played melee, so i can not judge what those ideas would add. That is up to you since you probably know that game much better than any of us . Maybe you can give us a short description of major strategic issues and point out some differences to wesnoth. I mean i know what your ranged attack is supposed to be like but i have no clue what the consequences are.

One aspect seems to be a change in grouping your units, having archers in the back. What else is there? Or do you think that is too hard to describe and i have to play melee to get an idea of it?

[Alice]

This gets back to my question from the first post. Have any of you ever played Melee? My guess is no. The full rules are at http://www.deiker.net/tft . I do not expect anyone to play it, even though it would only take an hour or so, and it might give you insight into someone elses conception of a game with much in common with Wesnoth. I do not expect Wesnoth to change. All the ideas I read in this forum seemed minor or cosmetic. I don't believe anyone wants to change the basic game. I really like this game, but I can see some changes that might make it even better. Maybe we'll meet in a game on the web someday. Later.

Alice

[Alice]

I'm sorry, I did not respond to Yogi's polite request.

Yes, I'm afraid it would take too long to explain Melee in this forum. It would be like trying to explain Wesnoth in 500 words or less.

[autolycus]

This gets back to my question from the first post. Have any of you ever played Melee? My guess is no.

You'd be wrong. I played Melee and the whole TFT range way back in the early 1980s. Nice mechanics, and the next step was T&T, in parallel with D&D. But Wesnoth, as has often been said, is a whole different kettle of mermen.

[Alice]

I was really talking about the people who sent replies to my post before you. Most seemed to want to shoot holes in my suggestions rather than try a "new" old game to see if it had anything worth stealing. You are the first one to say you had actually played it.

I agree that it is a different kettle, but in some ways I think the games are very similar, and some good modifications could come from exploring the game. It looks like that isn't going to happen. Oh well, I enjoy Wesnoth anyway.

Thanks for the reply. I hope you had as much fun playing Melee, Wizard, and TFT as I did.

[deserter]

Interesting...

Of course the first idea is officially shot down or something but the second one:
Choosing your weapon everytime is IMO just not possible because it would take SO much more time to finish multiplayer game. (Which already does take a long time) The way I see the idea reasonable is that ranged units could have a shot at charging melee unit and then change to their melee weapon. This would of course be anybody's first choice compared to sitting with your bow waiting for enemy to slash you first... (Computer would still make the choice, not me)

Everything else I want to strip from your idea.

There is some problems, though. What if the unit was surrounded, attacked by many units at the same time. Realisically it could shoot only one of the attackers before changing to melee weapon. (This is bit absurd anyway (NOT complaining though...) so it's not a big promblem. Actually not problem at all...) Main issue would rather be balancing. This change would make all the ranged units a lot more powerful (imagine for example Dark Adept or thunderer ) and everything would be messed up and therefore the change would involve a LOT of work.

KISS-wise I don't see any problem. Not anything more than with the new Slow-system anyway...