A radical balance proposal

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

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Skizzaltix
Posts: 1114
Joined: December 9th, 2005, 2:38 am

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Skizzaltix »

Knew I was missing something--Somehow I thought he only had five :/
It's a valid point--Next step would be to do some replays...

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

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by JW »

Doc Paterson wrote:
Fosprey wrote:here is my opinion.
Drakes have a slight advantage over loyalist imo, and the reason is that the drakes rush is very hard to stop for loyalist.
That's unless loyalist have tenient, then rush don't work and lategame is loyals game, so in summary.
Loyal have tenient, they have an edge on every matchup.
Loyal don't have tenient, drakes have a slight advantage.
I can't believe wesnoth is this far and loyals still have tenient
Agreed on all points. :)
TL wrote:It's not just the leadership, it's his 6 movement points, which is in itself a tremendous advantage for a leader; you can grab villages more easily early on and can cover a wider area while still remaining close enough to recruit. Having 6 MP and leadership gives the lieutenant two great bonuses with excellent synergy (not only can you move farther than most leaders, but the leadership effect lets you contribute to an attack without even having to get adjacent to the enemy, boosting your range even further!) Most 6 MP leaders are very fragile to make up for their mobility and other advantages, but lieutenants are reasonably sturdy.
I still don't understand why he's the only unit you can pick as a leader without an option to level into it.

Skizzaltix
Posts: 1114
Joined: December 9th, 2005, 2:38 am

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Skizzaltix »

Neither do I, actually... But I seem to recall that it had something to do with there being no mainline level-0 Loyalist units. Maybe if he were to be an option from the Spearman? But then you have a unit with four advancement options :hmm:

User avatar
Turuk
Sithslayer
Posts: 5283
Joined: February 28th, 2007, 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Turuk »

Technically he is the advancement of the sergeant, which cannot currently be recruited in a regular faction (some campaigns let you recruit them).

The idea for making sergeant an option to recruit has already been brought up, here.
Mainline Maintainer: AOI, DM, NR, TB and THoT.
UMC Maintainer: Forward They Cried, A Few Logs, A Few More Logs, Start of the War, and Battle Against Time

Skizzaltix
Posts: 1114
Joined: December 9th, 2005, 2:38 am

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Skizzaltix »

Knew I'd seen a topic on this before--In fact, I'm fairly sure that post of mine in there was the first one I made after coming back.

Anyway, I'm not necessarily advocating making him a recruitable unit or whatever, and I don't really like the idea of having a unit that is the result of two different advance trees, but I was just throwing the idea out there... Maybe we'll come up with something good. Probably not--There's no real need to make him recruitable, anyway.

On a side note, why not just lower the default-era Lieutenant's MS by one, and buff him a little, or keep his MS but nerf his health a little or something, if he's a balance issue? :hmm:

User avatar
Thrawn
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 2047
Joined: June 2nd, 2005, 11:37 am
Location: bridge of SSD Chimera

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Thrawn »

I'm for bringing his movement down to 5, maybe giving him slightly more hp would be useful--it would make his leadership less powerful, as he can't "slide" his AoE as far in a turn, while making him more committed to a front-- not being able to retreat to keep/another group of units as easily, while in turn making him slightly more durable.
...please remember that "IT'S" ALWAYS MEANS "IT IS" and "ITS" IS WHAT YOU USE TO INDICATE POSSESSION BY "IT".--scott

this goes for they're/their/there as well

Fosprey
Posts: 254
Joined: January 25th, 2008, 8:13 am

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Fosprey »

(yes when i said tenient i meant leutenant or something)
why buff him if you remove one mp from him? i mean is not like loyal have no leader options. Knalgan on the other side have terrible leader options and nobody is complaining. They still have red and white mage, wich is the best other sides have..

Since we are on this, i wonder how bad is having drake flare for drakes, personally in most matchups it don't make a big difference since drakes are so offensive anyway. but against northerns i feel drake flare is key. I have some problems in drakes vs northers without drake flare, but with it, i fell it's one of the best matchups for drakes.

Skizzaltix
Posts: 1114
Joined: December 9th, 2005, 2:38 am

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Skizzaltix »

Buff him up because he's no longer anywhere near as effective a leader. Just because they have a lot of options doesn't mean that one should be less effective than the others ;)

User avatar
Doc Paterson
Drake Cartographer
Posts: 1973
Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
Location: Kazakh
Contact:

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Doc Paterson »

Skizzaltix wrote:Buff him up because he's no longer anywhere near as effective a leader. Just because they have a lot of options doesn't mean that one should be less effective than the others ;)
:augh:
Skizzaltix wrote:I don't actually play Wesnoth very much
Skizzaltix wrote:I'm playing against the default AI, rather than a skilled human opponent :hmm:
It would still be their best leader, hands down.

Also, I don't think it's asking too much for you to actually spend some time playing MP with good, human players (in order to experience, first hand, the way in which the Lietenant gets abusive), before claiming that others have got it wrong and that the Lieutenant is balanced. Wouldn't you agree?
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses.
-Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme

Skizzaltix
Posts: 1114
Joined: December 9th, 2005, 2:38 am

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Skizzaltix »

I think I've been coming off as a little more self-assured than I mean to in this thread--Anything I say regarding balance and gameplay is completely theoretical, and I've been trying to show that, but... Clearly I haven't been doing a good job ;)

I don't play much because I like Wesnoth's game system enough that I know that if I did start playing again, I'd end up sinking a lot of time into it every day--Seeing as next semester I'm going to be taking a full college courseload as well as trying to juggle learning to play two different musical instruments with several music theory and composition type classes, now is hardly the time for me to start wasting time in yet another way... Of course, one could argue that I should stop spending time on the forums, but I like hanging out here and I (very) occasionally have something useful to say :/

Anyway, of course I agree with you, Doc Paterson--I was merely stating the reason why one might buff him up. I don't know if it would be necessary or not, and I don't claim to ;)

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

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by JW »

Doc Paterson wrote:It would still be their best leader, hands down.
So what's your opinion of removing a move from it?

User avatar
Doc Paterson
Drake Cartographer
Posts: 1973
Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
Location: Kazakh
Contact:

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Doc Paterson »

JW wrote:
Doc Paterson wrote:It would still be their best leader, hands down.
So what's your opinion of removing a move from it?
I think it would be a good idea. :)
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses.
-Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme

User avatar
Doc Paterson
Drake Cartographer
Posts: 1973
Joined: February 21st, 2005, 9:37 pm
Location: Kazakh
Contact:

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Doc Paterson »

Skizzaltix wrote: I'm going to be taking a full college courseload as well as trying to juggle learning to play two different musical instruments with several music theory and composition type classes, now is hardly the time for me to start wasting time in yet another way...
Well best of luck with your studies. Music theory classes are very interesting, but always seemed to level me. :P (EDIT: I don't mean that they leveled me up, I mean leveled like this.)


And yes, I think it's wise to keep tabs on your Wesnoth usage....Many is the time that I've put away the maps or signed off of MP and thought "Ug, that was too big a piece of my day." :augh:
I will not tell you my corner / where threads don't get locked because of mostly no reason /
because I don't want your hostile disease / to spread all over the world.
I prefer that corner to remain hidden /
without your noses.
-Nosebane, Sorcerer Supreme

Skizzaltix
Posts: 1114
Joined: December 9th, 2005, 2:38 am

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by Skizzaltix »

"Remove your library from the game".
Yeah, that pretty much sums it up ;)

User avatar
suvorov
Posts: 90
Joined: July 30th, 2006, 11:35 pm
Location: Outer Siberia

Re: A radical balance proposal

Post by suvorov »

TL wrote: If you come across any good drake vs. loy replays that feature drakes winning without a lot of luck or a dumb move from loys be sure to send them my way; I'll keep an eye peeled for them myself. If anyone cares to educate me in practice I'm up for a game from either end of this matchup (I'm hella rusty with loys, but I'm leaning towards switching to loys primarily anyhow at this point.)
I completely agree with TL's argument that loyals have an advantage over drakes, at least on any of the 1v1 maps except maybe meteor lake. I have made the same argument several times in the past and immediately got booed down by a lot of, with all due respect, programmers, (spare me great masters from your wrath!) most of whom I have never even seen in a multiplayer game. I would really like to see a game where loyals lose to drakes in 1on1 with two evenly balanced players and no great dissonance of luck distribution.

On the other hand, I have to admit that I haven't seen the new saurian changes. And I think making the saurians slightly stronger is better way to go about it than the changes TL suggests, such as taking away the drake pierce weakness and adding arcane damage to the mage. I think more games need to be played on the dev server to test the new balance before any additional changes are made. So far, however, I have found it rather difficult to find a game on the dev server.
It is good that war is terrible, lest we grow too fond.

-Robert E. Lee

Post Reply