Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

[Gwledig]

I actually think its impossible to use 1 vilas code for 6 and 8 player maps, I tried lots of ways, so I'll be splitting my stuff into 2 addons, 6 player maps and 8 player maps.

[Gwledig]

I bit the bullet and uploaded 2 packs to addon

* 6 player maps
* 8 player maps

obviously they have my maps: Wales, Faerie, Desert Empire, Drakes and Jelwan/Euorpe/Wesnoth with new factions.

New Factions are based on core conquest multiples of dam/attack.terrain/movement

* Celts - slightly weaker than most factions but +1 movement for most units a few skills like 'salve' weak self heal
* Rift - mixture of weaker stats base with special skills like Fear, Aura of Decay and a flying scout unit
* Feudals - more like humans, raw power but some more complex units like swordsman with 'fury' + dam on attack
* Tribals - more basic, mostly based on orcs, but has an additional healer unit
* Outlaws - for 1 or 2 incidental vilas on a map, a few units with special skills like Lout (harder but less accurate damage when in a group)
* and each faction including core ones has a mage unit with weak attack and teleport and healing

A few maps don't have new factions like Desert realms with super bonus and Drakeworld which I hate but some ppl seem to want to play (strange)

The 2 packs can be found when searching for Conquest or Gwledig, you'll seem them listed as 6player and 8player maps.

It's probably a good idea to update/refresh them periodically cos I will be updating them as I get feedback

[SlowThinker]

I actually think its impossible to use 1 vilas code for 6 and 8 player maps, I tried lots of ways, so I'll be splitting my stuff into 2 addons, 6 player maps and 8 player maps.

I suppose it is possible to find out number of present players via the WML code and put it into a variable. Then you can use one code for any number of players.

{VILLAGES_DISTRIBUTIONS 900 6 8 10 12 14 16 7 9 11 13 15 9 12 15 18 12 16 20 18 26}

About "900": Do you really need such a high number?
There is a cycle from 1 to 900, it might cause a delay on slow computers.

[Gwledig]

Ye thx ST that could be cause of slowdown I seen.... it's part of the new villas.cfg, I think it was added by Lich for his massive maps. I'll set mine to 150..

ST, did you make the LOTR map??? would you mind if I took the basic map layout, changed stuff and renamed all vilas...

[SlowThinker]

ST, did you make the LOTR map??? would you mind if I took the basic map layout, changed stuff and renamed all vilas...

miati is the author, he posted it here, I only edited it. (it is in the OBJECTIVES_NOTE_MAP_BY)

[SlowThinker]

Conquest Gagarna:
Flying units are too important because of many deep water canals + mountain areas. And it depends on your starting position if you can get flyers fast.

Map topology
There are some choke points (the main is Tarsia, then Soveran, Poltovio/Pentaria), and the victory depends mostly of who gets them first.
Compare with the Middle-earth map, which has an easy development along the map edge and worse one through the center (left side of the picture attached). If you somewhat deleted Tarsia and moved the center of gravity north then you could get a similar topology like the Middle-earth map has.
Gararna is large though, and you may want a more complicated topology, but still you should ensure that players can't block opponent's development easily (and if so, then at cost of own income losses). One example is on the right side of the picture - notice red and blue can't block one another.

All maps:
Next part is about bonuses for capitol mode / 2 teams:
(BTW I think maps should have different bonuses for capitol / standard, and for 2 teams / FFA)

I think in general +9 g for a 6-village region or +13 for a 8-village region is too much (in comparison with 2g for a 2-village region).

Differences between large/small regions, which should be taken into account:

1)
If player A starts in a region with 4 2-village regions (each a 2-gold bonus) and player B starts in a region with 1 8-village region (a 8-gold bonus), then player A has a clear advantage, as he gets "partial" bonuses sooner.

2)
Another disavantage of a 8-village region is it may be broken before all the AI is killed (it depends on the map though: it is more important for corridor-shaped regions).

3)
Point 1 (and partially point 2) has a much smaller significance in the middle game, because you can kill the AI in large areas very fast.

4)
On most maps an 8-village region is more compact than 4 2-vilage regions - that makes the capture faster.

Conclusion: The game start is very important, and so the bonus should be determined in accordance with a fair start. But this way the large regions become more profitable later, and so there should not be map areas with small regions only and map areas with large regions only.

I think 2villas=2gold is worse than 4villas=6gold in terms of the game start. Let's suppose the player has 3 villas of 4 in turn 1. Gold from these 4 villas is:
gold from 2x2 villas: turn1=7 turn2=10 turn3,4,5...=10
gold from 1x4 villas: turn1=5 turn2=12 turn3,4,5...=12
It is approx. fair after turn 3 but later 1x4 villages is advantageous. I think 5g for 4 villages would be more fair (of course it may be 4g or 6g depending on a more/less central position, worse/better development, harder-easier defense...)


(The situation about bonuses is different in the standard mode: it is harder to get a large territory against human(s), than against the AI.
Also large badly defendable areas in FFA deserve a higher bonus.)

[Gwledig]

Lich this is something you might wanna add when you do your new units, or even now on the current version - ie making assassins so they can assassinate any 25 gold units, you'd need to update the assassin specials filter, like:

Code: Select all

[set_specials]
mode=append
{WEAPON_SPECIAL_BERSERK}
{WEAPON_SPECIAL_FIRSTSTRIKE}
[damage]
id=cassassin
name= _ "assassin"
description= _ "Assassin:
This attack deals 90 damage per Strike to Grand Marshall, Inferno Drake, Rift Lord, Celtic Prince, Feudal Regent, Tribal Priest-King."
multiply=6
apply_to=self
[filter_opponent]
type="Grand Marshal"
[/filter_opponent]
[/damage]
[damage]
id=cassassin2
name= _ "assassin2"
description= _ " "
multiply=6
apply_to=self
[filter_opponent]
type="Inferno Drake"
[/filter_opponent]
[/damage]
[damage]
id=cassassin3
name= _ "assassin3"
description= _ " "
multiply=6
apply_to=self
[filter_opponent]
type="Skeletal Dragon"
[/filter_opponent]
[/damage]
[damage]
id=cassassin4
name= _ "assassin4"
description= _ " "
multiply=6
apply_to=self
[filter_opponent]
type="Elvish High Lord"
[/filter_opponent]
[/damage]
[damage]
id=cassassin5
name= _ "assassin5"
description= _ " "
multiply=6
apply_to=self
[filter_opponent]
type="Royal Warrior"
[/filter_opponent]
[/damage]
[/set_specials]

[Gwledig]

ST I think the game mode is also important, because capitol can be cross-spawned on a region, maybe if Lich builds in realms he can control some of the things you mention more, on my maps all selectable realms are separated by a region or lots of sea..

[SlowThinker]

ST I think the game mode is also important, because capitol can be cross-spawned on a region, maybe if Lich builds in realms he can control some of the things you mention more, on my maps all selectable realms are separated by a region or lots of sea..

I said the game mode was important, didn't I?

[Lich_Lord]

Lich this is something you might wanna add when you do your new units, or even now on the current version - ie making assassins so they can assassinate any 25 gold units, you'd need to update the assassin specials filter

Thing is, almost all the units you are talking about are only part of the new races that you have created, which are not being used in the conquest add-on. Inferno drake might be added, but since it has such low terrain defence, I'm not sure assassins should be capable of killing them.

[SlowThinker]

I think the shock trooper should be added to conquest for the following reason:
In conquest it is very hard to defend, especially with the creation of the assassin unit. If you are threatened by a large army of knights, you would be pretty much screwed. If you make a general, the enemy makes an assassin and kills your general the next turn at a cost less than what you payed for to defend. If you make a knight or two, the enemy kills your knights with their knights and takes the village. This creates a situation where its very hard to defend your village by spending the same amount of gold as your opponent did, if they get to attack first. The tank units (for lack of a better name) should fix this problem at least partially.

This is just my personal view:

I think an "uneasy defense" is a thing that is not so uncommon in Conquest: For example:
It is hard to defend also if there is an enemy village that can endager 2-3 your villages. If you are not prepared and the enemy suddenly builds an attacking squad, you will hardly defend all 3 villages.
You must count with this weakness in advance: have some units prepared in time - either many blockers (militia) or your own attackers that will kill enemy immediately after they are recruited.

But in general I think the defense in Conquest is rather easier than the attack. If you play the capitol mode, it is usually the best strategy to spend less gold in human-human situations and spend more gold against the AI. In other words when defending you can spend less gold than your opponent who is attacking you, or spend it later, and still keep your position. The problem is to find the boundary and not to spend too low gold for human-human battles and not to be crushed.
I think it is good that there are ways how to attack (with a success), although it requires the attacker invests a bit more money / spends the money sooner:
otherwise the battle in the capitol mode would be limited to "who is faster vs AI" and "who gets the choke points first".

(Frankly said sometimes the Conquest is too defensive IMHO. I miss a surprise attack in Conquest. But it would require to change the basic concepts probably.)

Maybe I would rather think aboout making the general a bit more effective:

Thing is, almost all the units you are talking about are only part of the new races that you have created, which are not being used in the conquest add-on. Inferno drake might be added, but since it has such low terrain defence, I'm not sure assassins should be capable of killing them.

I tend to think that any assasin (water, land) should have the advantage against any general-like 25g unit (water, land; except the drake inferno), otherwise they are too special.
Also i think the advantage against the general might be a bit lower, and disavantage vs normal units a bit lower too.

-25 gold Shock Trooper for humans (70-4 with 400HP and 3MP)

In average a knight must beat a shock tropper on a 60% terrain 5 rounds in order to kill him, while a tropper must beat a knight on 40% 2.08 rounds. If we take the gold into account (20g/25g), the tropper is 1.9 times more effective and in average the attacker must spend 48g in knights to kill the tropper.

Maybe something similar to a pike should be made also in the domain of expensive units, but it should be not so effective as the shock tropper.
In fact stats of all units in Conquest should be reconsidered probably. I feel the stats were made rather casually and intuitively, without a very deep thinking about principles behind.
But that's a hard work...

[Gwledig]

...or you could make an elite pike with special attack/defense vs cavalry, I'm thinking of nerfing some of own new pike-type units do do this, so they are slightly weaker all-round but have an advantage vs cavalry units ("Phalanx" skill). A few of my units have context skills like better attack when attacking (Feudal noble swordsman "fury") or better attack when defending (Celtic Defender "repulse").

Going back to the balancing of regions and problem with capitol, I'm also thinking of making a new game mode "Teams" which simplifies setting up a team game & could be modified for a specific map, so in Wales map, you could have "Rebels vs English Crown" and sides are split tactically on map top-bottom, east-west or whatever

yes Lich I know my example had those units, was just an exmaple..

[SlowThinker]

I added teleports to the Surdmark map.
In some cases I slightly changed the map around the teleports, I didn't care about any balancing stuff.

Lich_Lord, I think the teleport stuff should be moved to utils.cfg (I marked the part in the conquest_surdmark_telep.cfg).


The teleport code is in the attachment and here.

Edit: new map versions:
version 1.02: the teleport has been replaced by a scrolling one.
version 1.03: scrolling works also if you teleport into a foggy area

Edit:
The explanation how teleports work has been moved here.

[Mabuse]

-25 gold Shock Trooper for humans (70-4 with 400HP and 3MP)

In average a knight must beat a shock tropper on a 60% terrain 5 rounds in order to kill him, while a tropper must beat a knight on 40% 2.08 rounds. If we take the gold into account (20g/25g), the tropper is 1.9 times more effective and in average the attacker must spend 48g in knights to kill the tropper.

just for the books: the trooper has a different terrain defense than normal infantry, infact a trooper is weaker than cav on open field, terrain defnse wise

so adding troopers is not the best idea unless you want to do more and unnessessary math, since its also difficult for the players to evaluate the real strengh of the trooper ingame, since the terrain defense is important to calculate in.


a 25gold shock trooper with 70-4 and 400HP and 3MP is pretty useless if you ask me
i woudl always go for the "normal" general, since the shock trooper has 40% def on a village and 30% def on open field.

general (300HP, 45-8, 8 moves) vs shock trooper (400 HP, 70-4, 3 moves) on open field:

general:
45x8x0.7= 252 (damage per round)
400/252 = 1.58 (rounds to kil a trooper)

trooper:
70x4x0.6 = 168 (damage per round)
300/168 = 1.78 (rounds to kill a general)

so general is just better in combat and also has a much higher mobility
(btw, even if trooper would have 40% def it would be just extremely slightly better then the genral, i dont understand the construct of the unit)

also general with 25 gold should be the best unit in game, which can be countered by an assassin, if you realy need a high-gold def unit (for 20 gold) i suggest to use something like the halberdier, which is more easily comparable/useable (for city defnse for example) because of similar movement type (defense)

[Mabuse]

In fact stats of all units in Conquest should be reconsidered probably. I feel the stats were made rather casually and intuitively, without a very deep thinking about principles behind.
But that's a hard work...

original conquest contained 3 units:

militia (was called infantry by then) 1g, cavalry 5g and general 25g
the other units were balanced (mathwise) after these units.

of course its clear that a general will beat 25 militias. if 25 militias would beat a general then militias would be the winning units of the game.

i completely agree with the principle that higher gold units will beat lower gold units pay-off wise, else high gold units would be useless. (low gold units can be still used to block)

so its clear that you need to spend more gold from low gold units to beat a high gold unit


anyways, the stats of the original units are debateable, the stats of the newly added units are not debateable (you would have to change them once you change the stats of the origial units of course), but im anyway curious what kind of balance you have in mind


i wouldnt mind adding new units, the ónly bad thing about that is that the recruiting lists get to large, so its alwyas a good thing to keep them as small as nessessary and only add new units if there is ned for them

there are other things that could be added to the game to increase the strategic and tactical depth