the poacher needs balancing

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

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
IB
Posts: 330
Joined: September 28th, 2006, 11:38 am

Post by IB »

I have seen a level 2 bat, UtBS I believe. :P

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

Post by JW »

Sapient wrote:But it does fill a role that the knalgans often need to be filled, so it remains a worthy purchase. Depending on your style, you may prefer the footpad to fill this role (good point, JW... I remember you were the one who got the footpad buffed, tho :p)
lol yes it was my suggestion, but Noy, DK, and Sol were obviously the ones to decide on implementing the change. 8) Now I find Footpads quite useful!

It's probably just a personal preference though to have the +2 moves and added defense though (along with 2x Impact damage), because Poachers have more hp, better resists, and more ranged damage.

Becephalus
Inactive Developer
Posts: 521
Joined: October 27th, 2005, 5:30 am
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, Earth

Post by Becephalus »

JW wrote:
Sapient wrote:But it does fill a role that the knalgans often need to be filled, so it remains a worthy purchase. Depending on your style, you may prefer the footpad to fill this role (good point, JW... I remember you were the one who got the footpad buffed, tho :p)
lol yes it was my suggestion, but Noy, DK, and Sol were obviously the ones to decide on implementing the change. 8) Now I find Footpads quite useful!

It's probably just a personal preference though to have the +2 moves and added defense though (along with 2x Impact damage), because Poachers have more hp, better resists, and more ranged damage.
Hehe

I like to think I also did a little work here. Although granted it was mostly just picking up and restressing what you had already been saying :)
There are three roads to ruin: by gambling, which is the quickest; through women, which is the most pleasurable; and through taking the advice of experts, which is the most certain. -de Gaulle

Yogin
Posts: 98
Joined: November 18th, 2005, 7:49 pm

Every faction has a weakest unit

Post by Yogin »

There are no true equalities that exist, so you can't have every unit equally desirable. Thus, some are going to be more desirable than others, and this will roughly correspond to how strong the unit is (however you choose to define strength). It is true that game conditions, factions, maps will also affect desirability. However, for every game condition, faction, and map, there will be a least desirable(weakest) unit to recruit. Averaged across many game conditions, opposing factions, and maps, one unit must, by definition, be the least desirable most often. This we can define as the "weakest unit." Therefore, every faction has a weakest unit.

For the Knalgans, this unit used to be the footpad. An argument was put forth that the footpad is under-powered, and it was changed. Now, this unit appears to be the poacher.

For the drakes, this unit was and still is(?) the Glider.

For the Rebels, this unit was (1.02) the shaman, now it is ... the scout?

Ye can debate amongst yourselves for the rest of the factions. Remeber, one unit may just be "the weakest" by the slimmest of margins over other units.

The point is, there will always be a weakest unit. If you buff the weakest unit, then the next weakest becomes the new weakest unit.

Thus, pointing out that a unit is weakest is not a valid reason to re-balance it, or the faction.

Looking at the Knalgans as a faction, are they weak? No.
Looking at the Knalgans as a faction, are there situations in which one would recruit a poacher? Yes.
Is the poacher the weakest unit? Yes.
Is this grounds for an argument to rebalance it? No.

-Yogin


PS> It may indeed be the case, that the magnitude of the difference between the weakest unit and the next weakest unit is great enough (on whatever strength metric you deign to use) that an argument centered around this magnitude can be used to bolster an argument to buff a unit.

Tonepoet
Posts: 184
Joined: November 18th, 2005, 2:54 pm
Contact:

Post by Tonepoet »

I actually do believe that outlaws as a whole are all a bit inferior as compared to similarly priced or purposed units in other factions. However I don't think this makes them underpowered units, I think it makes Knalgans balanced. If an explaination is to be in order, I will give one below:

I'd say that dwarves are actually a bit stronger comparitively to similarly priced or purposed units in other factions, with great resists all 'round, superior hill defense, unsurpassible mountain Defense and a superior movetype. Almost unbeatable in the mountains. However, this overall superiority has its limits as dwarves have a few weaknesses that are almost mindlessly exploitable recruitwise, such as poorer movement on open ground due to having fewer movement points and lesser defensive values on certain ground.

This may leave the game in a state of limbo. With Dwarves unwilling to leave their better ground, and their enemy unwilling to attack the whilest the Dwarves are utilizing it. To a greater or lesser degree, I'd say the first person to advance into combat would almost automatically lose on a balanced map due to the way dwarves alone are balanced. Outlaws combat the issue by giving the Dwarves a means to overcome their weaknesses and advance to the next defensible ground while at the same time, giving the opponent something they're able to combat at least somewhat easier on better ground.

Out of the Outlaws, the poacher is arguably the best forrest holder because it lacks three rather common weaknesses at only a 10% defensive disadvantage. The other two recruitable outlaws can hold forrest ground as well, yet unfortunately I must say that it's far more a risky endeavor, as even though in my experience 70% def. will usually hold out, leaving you less damaged per turn, when it doesn't the costs are rather big. The poacher also serves the much needed purpose of being a ranged inbetween to the footpad who only has up to 8 total base damage, while dealing more dependable ranged damage then a Thunderer who only has 1 rather undependable strike. 16 potential base attacking damage isn't all too far off to the Thunderer's 18 anyway, so the Poacher can deal even more damage on average then a Thunderer during the night, if you want to play Time of Day a little.

Also... 50% swamp defense man! 50%!!!!! XP
What? It's useful... when and if you ever encounter swamp anyway, it's a rather uncommon tile to say the least.

User avatar
jb
Multiplayer Contributor
Posts: 498
Joined: February 17th, 2006, 6:26 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by jb »

Tonepoet: your posts are always few, but very well thought out and insightful.

I agree with you on nearly every point except one....50% swamp DEF is very useful...as there may be more swamp on the maps than you are remembering...or at least the few swamp tiles are usually in critical locations that makes it very useful to have a poacher around.
My MP campaigns
Gobowars
The Altaz Mariners - with Bob the Mighty

mrchadt
Posts: 56
Joined: August 15th, 2006, 12:54 pm
Location: norwich uk
Contact:

Post by mrchadt »

In reply to yogin, I think true equalities do exist.
My example is the spearman and the merman fighter, both in the same faction and both the same cost, I say that one is not better then the other, therefore they are equal.

On the subject of the Poacher, I made one the other day thinking he would be useful, my main problem was his movement, 5 was not quite enough to get him where I wanted, When he was 5 hex's away fron the desired location there was a forest enroute, no problem I thought, a poacher surely has 1 move through here, NO! 2 movement points to get through when a dwarf has 1.
So maybe only 1 move to get through a forest would balance him.
no obligation

Glowing Fish
Posts: 855
Joined: October 3rd, 2004, 4:52 am
Location: Portland, OR
Contact:

Post by Glowing Fish »

mrchadt wrote:In reply to yogin, I think true equalities do exist.
My example is the spearman and the merman fighter, both in the same faction and both the same cost, I say that one is not better then the other, therefore they are equal.
Equal besides the fact that plains, forest, hills and mountains outnumber water and marsh by three to one on most maps?
Don't go to Glowing Fish for advice, he will say both yes and no.

mrchadt
Posts: 56
Joined: August 15th, 2006, 12:54 pm
Location: norwich uk
Contact:

Post by mrchadt »

Yes but the units which are good on land outnumber those good in water by more then 3 to 1.
no obligation

User avatar
appleide
Posts: 1003
Joined: November 8th, 2003, 10:03 pm
Location: Sydney,OZ

Post by appleide »

Glowing Fish wrote:
mrchadt wrote:In reply to yogin, I think true equalities do exist.
My example is the spearman and the merman fighter, both in the same faction and both the same cost, I say that one is not better then the other, therefore they are equal.
Equal besides the fact that plains, forest, hills and mountains outnumber water and marsh by three to one on most maps?
Merman has an extra move in its favorite terrain and has 60%def in shallow water and 50% def in deep water, where it is the merman's typical terrain, unlike the spearman's typical terrain, on grass, with only 40% def. The merman is also a match for the merman fisherman and the naga and the bat and is more than a match even against gryphons. This is unlike the Spearman, where it willl get owned by thunderers and dwarf fighters and drake burners and drake clashers and woses on grassland and owned by elfish fighters, elfish archers, and woses in forests. The merman can also cross onto its unfavorable terrain (grass) with 30% defense, whilst the spear man, crossing into water, receives only a 20% defense.

By Comparison, the Merman is better in the water than the Spearman is on grassland.
Why did the fish laugh? Because the sea weed.

Motrax
Posts: 38
Joined: June 22nd, 2006, 1:52 pm

Post by Motrax »

yeah lets give poach 999 hp 99x10 range dmg 1 exp point to level and 200movment!
PS
this post is a sarcasm :P
Gryphon riders should look like gryphons with a dwarf on its back not a badger or dwarf in a canooe!

IB
Posts: 330
Joined: September 28th, 2006, 11:38 am

Post by IB »

Yeah that's why you never leave a unit on grassland, you stick the spearman on a hill or forest.

whatnoth
Posts: 21
Joined: December 11th, 2006, 1:43 pm

Post by whatnoth »

has there lately been any consideration of the poacher by developers as new versions of wesnoth come out? each time a new version comes out, i am eager to see if this unit has been changed.

User avatar
jb
Multiplayer Contributor
Posts: 498
Joined: February 17th, 2006, 6:26 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by jb »

whatnoth
has there lately been any consideration of the poacher by developers as new versions of wesnoth come out? each time a new version comes out, i am eager to see if this unit has been changed.
No. In the next new version you can enjoy a perfectly balanced poacher with unchanged stats.
My MP campaigns
Gobowars
The Altaz Mariners - with Bob the Mighty

User avatar
Vendanna
Posts: 624
Joined: September 16th, 2006, 10:07 pm
Location: Spain

Post by Vendanna »

jb wrote:whatnoth

No. In the next new version you can enjoy a perfectly balanced poacher with unchanged stats.
Balanced? nothing its true balanced, and if its balanced for you it shouldn't be the case for more inexperienced players.

Or do you think that all factions are equal to "master" by a newcomer player in the first game he plays and get pounded for its poor choices?

Also, there is always a weak unit in each faction, a perfectly balanced faction wouldn't have any "perceived" weak unit, so its not balanced because perfection or balance cannot be achieved.

Also, if all factions were perfectly balanced the game would be very boring because there isn't an excitement.

Another thing for you to consider as you gently remark, in what terms do you consider a thing balanced, because as I stated previously balance depends on the viewers point of view and you cannot balance the units for a "expert player" that mastered the game and for the newplayer that still doesn't understand the roles their own units are supposed to do unit playing.

Because let's be honest, do you expect a newcomer to read "all about a faction defense attributes, etc..." before playing its first game? I can count with the fingers on my hand the number of people that preplanning that instead of just open a game and get pounded by the CPU in order to improve.

Also, if the balance were that good, there would have been a guidelines posted or similar for user made factions in order to understand the stats to gold cost correlation and HP/def/movement, etc... that obviously itsn't there.

Yes, you can argue the factions are balanced to each other the same way Blizzard can say that its 7 character classes of Diablo II or each faction of starcraft are true balanced, the point is moot you cannot succed in which others as failed previously because there are too many variables that takes into account into balance of a complex game.

So while I don't expect any changes to the unit in question, you could take at least the time and effort to give a proper explanation and facts of why he is wrong or better since you seem to understand "better than him" the balance, you can then discuss before hand what the changes proposed would overpowered the faction over the rest.

Edit: this is not an attack to the MP developers team, far from it, but I consider it bad manners to tell someone he is wrong without explaining or reasoning especially after he probably spent many time reasoning why its weak.
"Mysteries are revealed in the light of reason."

Post Reply