What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Discussion of all aspects of multiplayer development: unit balancing, map development, server development, and so forth.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Does the new mushroom graphics in 1.15 look better than in 1.14, worse or they look just as good?

1.15 looks better
2
6%
1.14 looks better
27
82%
No difference
4
12%
 
Total votes: 33

User avatar
Krogen
Posts: 245
Joined: January 1st, 2013, 3:43 pm

What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by Krogen »

Does the new fungus graphics in 1.15 look better than in 1.14, worse or they look just as good?

For comparison, here are the screenshots of Swamp of Dread map with 1.14 and 1.15 mushroom groves:

1.14
1.png
1.15
2.png
"A lion doesn't concern himself with the opinions of the sheep." - Tywin Lannister
User avatar
MoonyDragon
Posts: 96
Joined: November 29th, 2017, 5:46 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by MoonyDragon »

Krogen wrote: October 13th, 2020, 10:09 pm Does the new fungus graphics in 1.15 look better than in 1.14, worse or they look just as good?
The fungus graphics are identical - but the maps are not.

If only the *^Uf overlay was changed to *^Tf, there would be no visual difference between the maps. The change which you describe is really that the base layer was changed from Ss / Wwf / Hh to Tb, for the sake of balance. As a matter of fact, I also think that the 1.14 map looked better, but please let us be clear that we are discussing the base layer terrain, not the fungus graphics.
Default L0 Era - Level 1 leaders with level 0 recruits!
User avatar
lhybrideur
Posts: 149
Joined: July 9th, 2019, 1:46 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by lhybrideur »

I don't know how the code looks like, but the images look like two different terrains. The 1.14 one looks like an overlay and the 1.15 one looks like a full fungus terrain.
And both looks strange two me. The 1.14 because fungus on deep water ? WTF. The 1.15 one because that much mycelium only for one hex looks strange.
Pilauli
Posts: 82
Joined: August 18th, 2020, 12:56 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by Pilauli »

The "full" version is actually the old mushrooms, but with a new mycelium underlayer. If you look closely, you should be able to see the caps.
(Side note: you can hold shift to place only the mushroom cap part without the mycelium.)

I don't personally really like the new mycelium as an underlayer to the existing mushroom grove, because it's too spreading and strongly-patterned, even though it looks sort of cool in isolation. But the hold-shift-to-place-mushrooms-by-themselves behavior means that the mycelium doesn't bother me too often.
User avatar
Krogen
Posts: 245
Joined: January 1st, 2013, 3:43 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by Krogen »

I don't think the new mushroom would look terrible, in fact i believe there is potential in it, i can think of a map with a cave-like theme where it might look good. In fact, until now it was just plain cave under the mushrooms, so i guess this would be a positive change, if it weren't for one thing...
The problem is, the way the terrian works also changed. On the example above, if we'd use the hold-shift option, the terrain wouldn't fulfill it's intended purpose anymore (slowing down fishes), therefore the serious playability of this otherwise extremely well-balanced map would go down on the drain. We can't have that, so we're left with... whatever this is.
Basically it's a choice between bad and worse.
When this change was made, i don't think it was considered how much this would impact the balance or aesthetics of already existing maps. You shouldn't just change the rules after like a decade, when everything before has been created with that system of rules. Otherwise it will cause massive side effects. And in this case, the benefits of this change are dwarfed by the damage it causes.
"A lion doesn't concern himself with the opinions of the sheep." - Tywin Lannister
User avatar
lhybrideur
Posts: 149
Joined: July 9th, 2019, 1:46 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by lhybrideur »

AFAIR it has actually be made because of that. Because fungus were not exactly working as an overlay although it looked like one or the other way around
User avatar
octalot
Developer
Posts: 507
Joined: July 17th, 2010, 7:40 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by octalot »

Krogen wrote: October 14th, 2020, 8:38 pm the terrain wouldn't fulfill it's intended purpose anymore (slowing down fishes), therefore the serious playability of this otherwise extremely well-balanced map would go down on the drain. We can't have that, so we're left with... whatever this is.

An idea for a terrain that would fit that purpose better - something that looks like swamp or deep water with mangrove trees growing out of it, like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rhiz ... ngtree.jpg . Description "Very few units can move easily through a mangrove swamp. The roots hinder without being strong enough to stand on, aquatic races can't swim under them, and elves say that the footing is completely different to a forest. The undead seem to have some affinity for moving among the bone-like protrusions, and explorers familiar with fungus terrain find their skills applicable too."

Edit: I mean a new terrain that uses the existing movement stats for fungus, not a completely new terrain type.
User avatar
Krogen
Posts: 245
Joined: January 1st, 2013, 3:43 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by Krogen »

Introducing a new type of terrain is a possible solution i think. If it looks good and fulfills it's purpose, then i'd be fine with it. There is another problem though: while swamp+mushroom is the most common combo that suffers from this change, it's not the only one. Hill+mushroom is seen almost as often (on SoD it barely appears, but it's very important on other maps) and i doubt one new terrain would fit in place of both. Maybe if there would be a hill-variant, then it would cover the two most important types.
Any other combination, like mushroom in castle, water or ice is really uncommon, so i guess we could live without those.
"A lion doesn't concern himself with the opinions of the sheep." - Tywin Lannister
User avatar
MoonyDragon
Posts: 96
Joined: November 29th, 2017, 5:46 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by MoonyDragon »

Introducing a new terrain type to solve a minor(!) graphical problem is a horrible solution, in my opinion, and will create many more problems than it solves. The rework of the mushroom terrain was a necessary and overdue change, and is here to stay. This leaves us with 2 options concerning the already existing maps:

1. Balance > Visuals. This option overwrites the base terrain with Tb. Some maps will look worse, but others might stay just the same or even improve.
2. Visuals > Balance. This option keeps the base terrain as it is. The balance will shift a little, but the extent varies depending on the map in question.

As a general rule of thumb, I'd chose 1 to avoid breaking maps by accident. But if some experienced player is willing to make a case-by-case study of the maps, 2 is a valid choice for maps whose balance is either unaffected - or even improved by mixed mushroom terrain.
Default L0 Era - Level 1 leaders with level 0 recruits!
User avatar
Krogen
Posts: 245
Joined: January 1st, 2013, 3:43 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by Krogen »

76% says its not a minor issue. And it's not. Many nice maps look terrible now. Aesthetics are important to many of us. Again, what exactly is the clear benefit of this change, other than it makes more sense this way? Because i don't see any. It breaks aesthetics of nicely made maps... and for what? Why is this exactly better than it was before?
As a top 10 one on one player, probably in the history of the game, i say there is no way for the second "solution" to work, it just breaks balance. It might be possible in one or two cases, where there is little of this terrain involved, but no way it's good for all of them. (Even when it works, it'll never make the map more balanced or look better, but the change would be so small it's almost unnoticeable. Example: those 2 tiles of hill+mushroom on Swamp of Dread, they are pheripherical, might aswell be just hill or mushroom on flat.) Making this suggestion just goes to show how some players have no clue about balance and how much that would impact gameplay in a negative way.
These are not campaign-maps made in under 10 minutes, 'cause that's good enough. Everything has a reason, terrains are not just randomly thrown on the board. It took the mapmakers serious work and many hours, sometimes years to get these done and make them good looking and well balanced to play on at the same time. All crippled with the stroke of a pen.
Games on the highest levels take place on these carefully made, tested and balanced maps, so yeah, i'd totally introduce a new type of terrain to keep those games in good quality, both visually and balance wise. Anyone who visits the server can see which games are the most observed by others.
"A lion doesn't concern himself with the opinions of the sheep." - Tywin Lannister
User avatar
Elder2
Posts: 401
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 2:13 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by Elder2 »

MoonyDragon wrote: October 17th, 2020, 9:50 pm Introducing a new terrain type to solve a minor(!) graphical problem is a horrible solution, in my opinion, and will create many more problems than it solves. The rework of the mushroom terrain was a necessary and overdue change, and is here to stay.
Im not sure what do you mean by this, and how is this supposed to make sense.

"Introducing a new terrain type to solve a minor(!) graphical problem is a horrible solution in my opinion, and will create many more problems than it solves."

The new mushroom Tb^Tf terrain is the new terrain that is being introduced. And some say it was introduced to fix an alleged graphical issue with the 1.14 mushroom terrain. I could elaborate on why that issue is not really a problem, I have written an entire thread about it.

"The rework of the mushroom terrain was a necessary and overdue change, and is here to stay."

Why was it necessary and overdue? And I kinda don't understand the logic here as your first sentence seems to undermine your point.
User avatar
octalot
Developer
Posts: 507
Joined: July 17th, 2010, 7:40 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by octalot »

MoonyDragon wrote: October 17th, 2020, 9:50 pm Introducing a new terrain type to solve a minor(!) graphical problem is a horrible solution, in my opinion, and will create many more problems than it solves.
I meant adding a new terrain (terrain-code, graphics and description), but still using the existing movement stats for fungus. Not a whole new type that would need all units' movement stats to be updated for it.
User avatar
Crimson_Conure
2019 Amateur Fast Champion
Posts: 26
Joined: March 24th, 2016, 12:15 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by Crimson_Conure »

I want to save the mushrooms! ❤️
User avatar
MoonyDragon
Posts: 96
Joined: November 29th, 2017, 5:46 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by MoonyDragon »

octalot wrote: October 18th, 2020, 12:48 pm I meant adding a new terrain (terrain-code, graphics and description), but still using the existing movement stats for fungus. Not a whole new type that would need all units' movement stats to be updated for it.
Thanks for clearing that one up. I didn't see at first how the mangrove-like terrain relates to the mushroom terrain type - and misunderstood it as a brand new terrain alias.
I am not opposed to new variants of mushroom terrain, although a little change of the Tb graphics might also do the job by making them less "full"/"crowded", as Pilauli implied. Do as you wish.
Krogen wrote: October 17th, 2020, 11:30 pm [...]
76% say that the 1.15 map looks worse, but nowhere in the poll is there an indication of severity (e.g.: "terrible"-"bad"-"same"-"good"-"perfect"). I called this issue "minor" because it (at least option 1) does not affect gameplay and the graphics are, though worse than in 1.14, still okay for my taste.

If you want to learn the reasons for the change, you can look up the respective threads discussing it: [1] [2]. The argument that convinced me was that the discrepancy between the old terrain visuals and terrain stats - is confusing and unintuitive.

As for option 2 being impracticable or unnoticeable, I disagree. Take the Caves of the Basilisk, which is the second most popular core map according to last month's MP Report. I argue that in 16 out of the 26 cases of fungus terrain, once can leave the base terrain as it is without effect on gameplay. The other 10 instances of Tb^Tf are (9,14) (15,21) (17,13) (21,13) (23,15) and their mirror coordinates. Prove me wrong if I am, but to me, the balance and visuals remain just as good as they were before.
Elder2 wrote: October 18th, 2020, 8:10 am Im not sure what do you mean by this, and how is this supposed to make sense.

The new mushroom Tb^Tf terrain is the new terrain that is being introduced. And some say it was introduced to fix an alleged graphical issue with the 1.14 mushroom terrain. I could elaborate on why that issue is not really a problem, I have written an entire thread about it.

Why was it necessary and overdue? And I kinda don't understand the logic here as your first sentence seems to undermine your point.
The first sentence was a misunderstanding of ocalot's proposal. I used the word "necessary" because I consider it a bugfix, and the word "overdue" reflects on how long that bug remained in the game. I hope that explains it better.
Default L0 Era - Level 1 leaders with level 0 recruits!
User avatar
Elder2
Posts: 401
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 2:13 pm

Re: What do you think about the looks of new mushroom grove terrain in 1.15 Wesnoth?

Post by Elder2 »

MoonyDragon wrote: October 19th, 2020, 11:42 am
Elder2 wrote: October 18th, 2020, 8:10 am Im not sure what do you mean by this, and how is this supposed to make sense.

The new mushroom Tb^Tf terrain is the new terrain that is being introduced. And some say it was introduced to fix an alleged graphical issue with the 1.14 mushroom terrain. I could elaborate on why that issue is not really a problem, I have written an entire thread about it.

Why was it necessary and overdue? And I kinda don't understand the logic here as your first sentence seems to undermine your point.
The first sentence was a misunderstanding of ocalot's proposal. I used the word "necessary" because I consider it a bugfix, and the word "overdue" reflects on how long that bug remained in the game. I hope that explains it better.
Well, thats a pretty bad misunderstanding then, when it also makes it look like your point makes no sense. Anyway, I don't think the way mushrooms work in 1.14 can be considered a bug, its as much a bug as cavalryman having 30% on forest, instead of 40% like it "should" have on a flat/forest terrain is a bug. Its hardcoded, with mushrooms it was never necessary to make such concessions as it wasn't a composite terrain. I don't think its self-evident that composite terrains are superior to non-composite terrains when there exist "supposedly" composite terrains like ford or villages that don't work like composite terrains at all. In fact villages work in a similiar way to mushrooms in a sense that units will always have village movement in a village, although defense can be higher, which is a difference. So instead of worst movement cost and best defense, its village movement cost always and best defense. I am yet to see somebody advocating for changing how villages work.
Post Reply