the poacher needs balancing

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

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
jb
Multiplayer Contributor
Posts: 499
Joined: February 17th, 2006, 6:26 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by jb »

Vendanna
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.
Well I have no idea what you're talking about here. In short, your post sounds like a bunch of mad ramblings without focus. Please put some thought into long/combative posts next time.

A simple question was asked, is the poacher going to change? The answer is no as it is already considered balanced. There was no question about balance from the previous post, as there are already 3 pages here discussing said balance. The question was has a change been considered.

As for all your arguments about balance for new players I could care less. If the game were balanced for new players, why would anyone keep playing the game? Learning depth and subtle strategy is one of the most fun and rewarding parts of growing as a wesnoth player. The game is easy to learn, hard to master. What's wrong with that?

As for explanations, I notice you offer NO explanations yourself, only complaints and comparisons to other games for which you more complaints.

Here is a quick breakdown of why the poacher is a great unit in my opinion.
-Great HP for an archer
-Great Defense to balance out dwarfs non-hill hexes (especially the 60% village/woods and 50% swamp)
-Multi-hit ranged pierce (opposed to single hit thunders)
-Chaotic unit to give Knalgans a boost of power at night.
-Very low XP to level up (this is perhaps the greatest asset of the unit, as I see more level 2 poachers in MP than nearly any other unit)
-cheap 14 gold unit.

Here is a quick breakdown of weaknesses.
-average move type
-lower-end damage
-14 gold may be better spend on a dwarf

As you can see, the Pros far out way the Cons. Still, personal preference in playing style may lead one to believe the poacher is not a good unit for them.
My MP campaigns
Gobowars
The Altaz Mariners - with Bob the Mighty
Noy
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1321
Joined: March 13th, 2005, 3:59 pm

Post by Noy »

Vendanna wrote:
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.
True, its not "balanced for inexperienced players" its intended to be balanced towards experience players. then again I don't know how you can have a balance for inexperienced players either, as there is no commonly accepted skill level.

Vendanna wrote: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?
Thats EXACTLY what we do. Its not our problem though. Everything is a trade off, and the best one is to make the game balanced for the top players, as this will keep the most number of people in the long term. Balancing for inexperienced players would likely make for a poorer game overall.

And let me say this, its never going to be perfectly balanced, but we can watch the top players and look for strategies that are unbalanced. All in all I'm fairly happy with our track record. IF someone comes out with a grand new strategy, that is undefeatable, then well we'll rebalance the game accordingly. Several months ago a player brought out a new drake strategy that initially won a majority of the games he played. We watched it, critiqued it, and after a debate decided to make a slight change, but not to rebalance the game, because it was defeatable given alternative strategies. People adapted to his strategy and started to win against him consistently. Thats how the balance is conducted.


Vendanna wrote: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.
Does not follow. There are units in certain factional balances that are not useful. You don't buy woses against Drakes. Does not mean that rebels are unbalanced vs drakes because of all of its other units.

Vendanna wrote:Also, if all factions were perfectly balanced the game would be very boring because there isn't an excitement.
So, doesn't this refute your earlier statement that we should balance for inexperienced players.
Vendanna wrote: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.
We've been clear right from the start that this game is balanced towards
experienced players and there is a steep learning curve.

Vendanna wrote: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.
So I'm supposed to balance towards that?
Vendanna wrote: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.
Does it have to exist to prove balance? I don't think it does. That entails extra time and effort, something people don't want to do. We do have a how to play series, done by JW. Its not complete, partly because people don't want to spend all their time compiling how it is balance, and rather play the balance.

http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11161


Vendanna wrote: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.
This is not diablo 2. Different game, hell even different type of game.


Vendanna wrote: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.
How often do we have to do that? Do you know how many threads we actually see on this topic? Its a waste of my time to be honest.
http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 282#246282
I suspect having one foot in the past is the best way to understand the present.

Don Hewitt.
User avatar
Sorrow
Posts: 230
Joined: July 25th, 2006, 12:07 am
Contact:

Post by Sorrow »

It took almost as much self-control as I have to not post poacher-only games in here.
User avatar
Vendanna
Posts: 624
Joined: September 16th, 2006, 10:07 pm
Location: Spain

Post by Vendanna »

jb wrote:Here is a quick breakdown of why the poacher is a great unit in my opinion.
-Great HP for an archer
-Great Defense to balance out dwarfs non-hill hexes (especially the 60% village/woods and 50% swamp)
-Multi-hit ranged pierce (opposed to single hit thunders)
-Chaotic unit to give Knalgans a boost of power at night.
-Very low XP to level up (this is perhaps the greatest asset of the unit, as I see more level 2 poachers in MP than nearly any other unit)
-cheap 14 gold unit.

Here is a quick breakdown of weaknesses.
-average move type
-lower-end damage
-14 gold may be better spend on a dwarf

As you can see, the Pros far out way the Cons. Still, personal preference in playing style may lead one to believe the poacher is not a good unit for them.
That's what I was asking an explanation of why it was considered balanced, thank you very much.
"Mysteries are revealed in the light of reason."
User avatar
TL
Posts: 511
Joined: March 3rd, 2007, 3:02 am

Post by TL »

Noy wrote:
Vendanna wrote: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.
Does it have to exist to prove balance? I don't think it does. That entails extra time and effort, something people don't want to do.
Plus, I don't think it would really be feasible. You can't look at mechanical comparisons like the ratio of HP and damage to gold cost etc. as a good measure of balance, because statistics like that exist in a vacuum. A unit might be underpowered and practically useless in one faction but completely ridiculously unbalanced in a different faction, in spite of having the exact same stats. It's the context that matters.

This entire thread is a case in point: I think looking at the poacher it's pretty clear that yes, it is a little disadvantaged mechanically (even taking into account the often underrated terrain defense and low experience to level), but this is not a balance problem because it performs well enough in its role for the Knalgans. You can look at the Elvish Fighter and the Poacher and say that yes the elf is probably a bit more effective overall (even if you assign greater weight to ranged damage) but this is a pretty irrelevant comparison since they're in different factions.
Whiro
Posts: 2
Joined: August 19th, 2007, 2:52 pm
Location: The Underworld

Post by Whiro »

jb wrote:Vendanna
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.
Well I have no idea what you're talking about here. In short, your post sounds like a bunch of mad ramblings without focus. Please put some thought into long/combative posts next time.

A simple question was asked, is the poacher going to change? The answer is no as it is already considered balanced. There was no question about balance from the previous post, as there are already 3 pages here discussing said balance. The question was has a change been considered.

As for all your arguments about balance for new players I could care less. If the game were balanced for new players, why would anyone keep playing the game? Learning depth and subtle strategy is one of the most fun and rewarding parts of growing as a wesnoth player. The game is easy to learn, hard to master. What's wrong with that?

As for explanations, I notice you offer NO explanations yourself, only complaints and comparisons to other games for which you more complaints.

Here is a quick breakdown of why the poacher is a great unit in my opinion.
-Great HP for an archer
-Great Defense to balance out dwarfs non-hill hexes (especially the 60% village/woods and 50% swamp)
-Multi-hit ranged pierce (opposed to single hit thunders)
-Chaotic unit to give Knalgans a boost of power at night.
-Very low XP to level up (this is perhaps the greatest asset of the unit, as I see more level 2 poachers in MP than nearly any other unit)
-cheap 14 gold unit.

Here is a quick breakdown of weaknesses.
-average move type
-lower-end damage
-14 gold may be better spend on a dwarf

As you can see, the Pros far out way the Cons. Still, personal preference in playing style may lead one to believe the poacher is not a good unit for them.

It's "I couldn't care less." And cut an 'English is not my first language' speaker some slack, will ya? Let's see you write in Spanish. :lol:
User avatar
jb
Multiplayer Contributor
Posts: 499
Joined: February 17th, 2006, 6:26 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by jb »

Whrio
It's "I couldn't care less." And cut an 'English is not my first language' speaker some slack, will ya? Let's see you write in Spanish.
Nit-picking followed by asking not to nit-pick. Great way to lead by example. Also great to see how incredibly meaningless your post has been which makes no context to any actual data/thoughts that are being discussed here.

Please waste more time.
My MP campaigns
Gobowars
The Altaz Mariners - with Bob the Mighty
whatnoth
Posts: 21
Joined: December 11th, 2006, 1:43 pm

Post by whatnoth »

hey guys, thanks for the feedback. just wanted to reiterate that my original points were not just that the poacher is fairly weak in terms of its cost compared to costs of similar units on other teams that have similar function, such as an elvish fighter, but also that the poacher's uses are eclipsed by other knaglan units, which limits its usefulness. this is different than something like a merman creature, who, no matter the cost, can have a use due to its extraordinarily unique function. ive argued that the poacher is not only underpowered, but that other knaglan units are better at almost everything you might use the poacher for.

being good at fighting burners at night (one unit at a certain time of day), ghosts at night (one unit at a certain time of day), or elvish archers in the forest (one unit on a particular terrain type) does really matter when the unit otherwise sucks compared to other knaglan units. you may as well remove the unit if you only can think of a handful of very narrow uses, or change the unit to make it more universally useful. a unit which is 5% better at 95% of tasks will be purchased 100% of the time, even though it is only 5% better. niche units are supposed to have specials (such as water terrain, charge, poison, slow, etc) but the poacher has the makeup of a generalist unit with no generalist ability.
Weeksy
Posts: 1017
Joined: January 29th, 2007, 1:05 am
Location: Oregon

Post by Weeksy »

The poacher has good defense in swamp. That's a bit of a niche, for a land unit. It's needed in certain matchups, but it's not a main player. I wouldn't consider it a niche unit so much as a makeshift answer for certain battles, a unit that could be better, but would probably be too powerful for knalgans in forest then. It's weak compared to similarly costing units, but that's because if it were cheaper there would be less need for the footpad's ranged. There's also the fact that they level very easily. I've probably seen more trappers than any other level 2 in standard MP play. They're crappy level 2's, but still better than any level 1, and so you're investing in what could be a quick chance at a powerful weapon.
If enough people bang their heads against a brick wall, The brick wall will fall down
Velensk
Multiplayer Contributor
Posts: 3991
Joined: January 24th, 2007, 12:56 am

Post by Velensk »

The pouchers funtion is not eclipsed by any knalgan unit. Knalgans olny have one other primary ranged unit (the thunderer) and it can't defend itself in forest or swamp (I consiter P&T to be equal in mobility). Pouchers are also also cheaper than thunderers and have multiple shots. As has been said before they lvl easily, and although pouchers arn't great they arn't awfull either, and can hold forest hexes well. They are usefull units that fill a definate nich in the knalgan arsenal.
"There are two kinds of old men in the world. The kind who didn't go to war and who say that they should have lived fast died young and left a handsome corpse and the old men who did go to war and who say that there is no such thing as a handsome corpse."
User avatar
Sapient
Inactive Developer
Posts: 4453
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 7:41 am
Contact:

Post by Sapient »

The poacher has its uses, as other people here have stated. Night is something you are guaranteed to encounter, even if you don't encounter swamps. And there are times when you wish to place a ranged unit on forest. If so, you know a poacher will do a lot better on that spot when it comes to defense than a dwarven thunderer (which costs more and takes longer to level up).

When you look at how many L1 units the Knalgans have, it's hard for one of them *not* to be a niche unit. Is the poacher a niche unit? Yes. But, the developers are perfectly OK with that role. If you could recruit tons of poachers and still expect to win, then what fun would that be? Or if the poacher were made far more powerful in some tactical area that other Knalgans lack, can you see how that would upset the inter-faction balance? If the poacher is made more powerful in one area, then it would be to address an inter-faction imbalance. Otherwise, some other Knalgan unit would have to be nerfed to compensate (and then you'd likely say that unit was too much of a niche unit). All in all, I think you're just failing to see reason. If some of the top players use poachers in competition, then obviously they have a real tactical value.
http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/User:Sapient... "Looks like your skills saved us again. Uh, well at least, they saved Soarin's apple pie."
User avatar
TL
Posts: 511
Joined: March 3rd, 2007, 3:02 am

Post by TL »

Personally I think the thunderer is almost more of a niche unit than the poacher. People are saying "the poacher is better at night and in forests/swamps", but really, I see it as more "the thunderer is better at day and in hills/mountains". The poacher has better defense than the thunderer everywhere else, and has better HP and ranged damage relative to its cost (even without nighttime bonus). The thunderer's resists and melee attack are nice but in my opinion aren't really worth shelling out the extra money for all the time unless you have lots of spare cash to burn (which means you're probably winning decisively anyhow).
User avatar
HODOR
Hodor
Posts: 8
Joined: February 10th, 2007, 2:38 pm
Location: Hodor
Contact:

Post by HODOR »

Sapient wrote:If you could recruit tons of poachers and still expect to win, then what fun would that be?
HODOR! Hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor, hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor.
Yoda Man
Posts: 8
Joined: August 10th, 2006, 4:59 am

Post by Yoda Man »

HODOR wrote:
Sapient wrote:If you could recruit tons of poachers and still expect to win, then what fun would that be?
HODOR! Hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor, hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor.
Image
MDG
Posts: 378
Joined: June 7th, 2007, 11:18 am
Location: UK

Post by MDG »

Goldfish!
Post Reply