Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

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

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

User avatar
Nobun
Code Contributor
Posts: 129
Joined: May 4th, 2009, 9:28 pm
Location: Italy

Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Nobun »

Hi.
I see some days ago the new version of Hornshark Island... and I had a bad impression, I have to say.

1) First thing... Normal (and good made) maps are decreasing incredibly.... so I think it is not a good idea to change one of the few very-well-made MP maps (original one was clear, balanced and opened to some kind of "backward water surprise".
This new versions erases all those nice aspects.
(note... I know that making a good and balanced map is very hard so, even if I don't like new maps, I have anything to say against them.... but why ruin the few already existing good map?)

2) Second thing... loyal units.... I think that giving starting (and different) units to both player can unbalance things. This is so true mainly if you try to load map with a non-standard era......... the player with a non-standard race will have NO LOYAL UNITS AT ALL.
Minor aspect: no "loyal icon" on loyal units.
Possible suggestion: if you want to maintain this (imho orrible) version of Hornshark Island (the old one was largely better) you should think about giving fixed loyal units regardless of starting race. For example a mermaid mage and that ogre lv1 regardless of starting faction.
If you take mind that, for example, also rebels start with Ogre, I think it is a reasonably solution that would fix the bug mentioned here.

3) Design.... well.... I have to say that the new design of the map, even if similar to the old original one, seems to me too confused :hmm:

Anonymissimus
Inactive Developer
Posts: 2460
Joined: August 15th, 2008, 8:46 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Anonymissimus »

Nobun wrote:the player with a non-standard race will have NO LOYAL UNITS AT ALL
Please make a bug report for this blocker: http://gna.org/bugs/?group=wesnoth

Personally I feel the same actually, since I like the 1.8 version and was confused and not pleased when I tested something on the 1.9 version of this scenario. Balancing changes should not require such changes.

Seems it was added/changed in r50608.
This unit-adding code looks for the unit type of the first recruit in the side's recruit list and thereby tries to "detect" the faction. This is very fragile and thus easy to break, with eras other than the default one. Does it work with AoH ? And the Khalifate Era ? Probably not.
projects (BfW 1.12):
A Simple Campaign: campaign draft for wml startersPlan Your Advancements: mp mod
The Earth's Gut: sp campaignSettlers of Wesnoth: mp scenarioWesnoth Lua Pack: lua tags and utils
updated to 1.8 and handed over: A Gryphon's Tale: sp campaign

Caphriel
Posts: 994
Joined: April 21st, 2008, 4:10 pm

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Caphriel »

As someone who played the old Hornshark a lot, I cannot disagree with your assertion that it was balanced. Chaotic rushes were pretty powerful and often claimed 2-3 villages in the first night, and P1 had a tremendous advantage in the early game, but if, through bad luck or a mistake, he failed to capitalize on it, his situation often became untenable because of how much harder his position was to defend. I like the old version because it leads to exciting, quick, dynamic games, as long as you don't care too much about who wins or loses.

I suggest you read the Bold New Maps thread and the Modern Multiplayer Map Reader's Digest thread (both sticky in this forum) for the discussion on the old and new Hornshark maps.

User avatar
Cackfiend
Posts: 436
Joined: January 28th, 2007, 7:36 am
Location: Florida, USA
Contact:

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Cackfiend »

Nobun wrote:Hi.
I see some days ago the new version of Hornshark Island... and I had a bad impression, I have to say.

1) First thing... Normal (and good made) maps are decreasing incredibly.... so I think it is not a good idea to change one of the few very-well-made MP maps (original one was clear, balanced and opened to some kind of "backward water surprise".
This new versions erases all those nice aspects.
(note... I know that making a good and balanced map is very hard so, even if I don't like new maps, I have anything to say against them.... but why ruin the few already existing good map?)
(Dont worry Doc, i got this)

First thing, hornshark was basically regarded as THE MOST UNBALANCED MAP in the 1v1 maps. It was so bad that it wasnt even worth editing into something similar... the entire map was scrapped. Loyalist vs Drakes is a good example of just how badly balanced the map was, as Drakes just absolutely stomped loyals on it when played at a very high level of skill.
Nobun wrote: 2) Second thing... loyal units.... I think that giving starting (and different) units to both player can unbalance things. This is so true mainly if you try to load map with a non-standard era......... the player with a non-standard race will have NO LOYAL UNITS AT ALL.
Minor aspect: no "loyal icon" on loyal units.
Possible suggestion: if you want to maintain this (imho orrible) version of Hornshark Island (the old one was largely better) you should think about giving fixed loyal units regardless of starting race. For example a mermaid mage and that ogre lv1 regardless of starting faction.
If you take mind that, for example, also rebels start with Ogre, I think it is a reasonably solution that would fix the bug mentioned here.


As far as the free units in the beginning thing... tbh im kinda confused about that too. Obviously Doc was trying to add some uniqueness to the map and an extra level of strategy. Personally, I dont like the idea of getting units in the beggining of a game... so i guess im on board with you on this one.
Nobun wrote: 3) Design.... well.... I have to say that the new design of the map, even if similar to the old original one, seems to me too confused :hmm:
My initial viewing of the new design is that it looks quite nice actually... id be interested in playing it if it wasnt for those free units :)
"There's no love in fear." - Maynard James Keenan

I'm the guy who's responsible for 40% Gliders in all hexes... I can now die a happy man. =D

User avatar
Nobun
Code Contributor
Posts: 129
Joined: May 4th, 2009, 9:28 pm
Location: Italy

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Nobun »

@Caphriel: Thank for suggestion.... I will read that discussion immediatly :)

@Cackfiend:
3) Design.... well.... I have to say that the new design of the map, even if similar to the old original one, seems to me too confused :hmm:
My initial viewing of the new design is that it looks quite nice actually... id be interested in playing it if it wasnt for those free units :)
Eh eh... this is a point of view.... I feel confused and you find it interesting... both 2 opinions are personal tastes ^^
First thing, hornshark was basically regarded as THE MOST UNBALANCED MAP in the 1v1 maps. It was so bad that it wasnt even worth editing into something similar... the entire map was scrapped. Loyalist vs Drakes is a good example of just how badly balanced the map was, as Drakes just absolutely stomped loyals on it when played at a very high level of skill.
Sorry but this not a point at all, imho, becouse the example confirms that the original map was a good one.
Yes... it is true that I am not a 2000+ ladder player (my ladder score is very low, but however it doesn't reflect my actual level that should be around 1600.... it is so low only becouse I rarely play ladder and only to battle against players 1900+ so a lot stronger than me)....
But this not means that I don't miss fucuses :P

First of all... Who said it is the MOST unbalanced maps?
Can we talk about Elesenfer Curtiard (I don't remember the exact name) ? It is a very big map that highly disadvantages factions without flying units.
Can we talk about (a map that I love) howling Ghostlands? Elves are highly disadvantaged due to missplaced forest tiles that doesn't allow elves to resist a long becouse to support each other you should left great part of them outside forests?
I had other better examples of REALLY unbalanced maps but now I don't remember map names... Imho who said it is the MOST unbalanced map never tried some kind of maps in some situation.
I think old hornshark was balanced, but even considering unbalanced there are truely A LOT MORE unbalanced maps for 1v1.

Morever, I have to say.... it is not a point for other reasons:
1) Normally Humans are highly advantaged against Drakes (becouse of their pierce weakness) and most (balanced) maps doesn't truely allow drakes to have benefits for they quickness.... I still continue to think that drakes are the most unbalanced faction (even if good players can use them efficiently, it doesn't mean that in absolutely way they are kinda advantaged.... if you see drake weakness, Drakes, unlike other factions, are more or less weak against everything and strong against anything (fire is not a so common kind of attack and, except for mage, all other units that uses fire has another kind of attack against dreak weakness).

2) So.... if in absolute way drakes are disadvantaged against humans, a map that ensure a little (and reasonable) advantage for drakes is not unbalanced. I have to say that I never see this so-said advantage for drakes there.... also you can take mind that humans have fishes to try to steal water villages, while drakes have drake glider that is cost more, less resistent in water and less strong so it needed to be used taking it away from opponent range to use it effectively

PS: My english is not good... if I appear in some way aggressive I'm sorry.... I tried only to say my points but it is not any kind of flame. I know that speaking "limited" english sometimes can make me appear aggressive, but trust me it is not my intention. So, to avoid any misunderstanding, I prefer to ask sorry to avoid any kind of problems ^^

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

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Doc Paterson »

What follows here is a gigantic post, but I do hope you all will read it carefully, particularly the stuff about Hornshark, towards the end. :D

*******

Thanks for the answer Cack, but there's a lot more to say here- I think Nobun is way off in his assessment of a lot of things; not just this one map. Nobun, I understand that English isn't your first language, but to me, there is something off-putting in an argument style that assumes to understand balance better than the best of the best 1v1 players (all of whom actually do play ladder, for reasons I'll get to in a bit. If you want to challenge any of them, please do.)

First of all, I don't consider the lack of starting units for non-default factions and eras to be a bug.

The reason? These factions and eras, including AOH, are unbalanced and probably unbalanceable on the default maps, which were specifically designed to be balanced for the selections and groupings of units found in default. To balance them for all of the user-made and additional non-mainline factions is an impossible and absolutely mind-boggling task. So basically, I don't feel that it's worth the time to create something that probably won't be balanced anyway. HOWEVER, if somebody such as yourself wants to take a stab at creating 2 sets of starting units, one for each player-side, for Faction X, (which could be any one of numerous factions), by all means do so. If it looks nice and at the very least has no guaranteed village steals, I'll put it in there, so that Faction X, though they are almost certainly placed into an under-or-over-powered situation, at least has something to work with.
Nobun wrote:
Cackfiend wrote: First thing, hornshark was basically regarded as THE MOST UNBALANCED MAP in the 1v1 maps. It was so bad that it wasnt even worth editing into something similar... the entire map was scrapped. Loyalist vs Drakes is a good example of just how badly balanced the map was, as Drakes just absolutely stomped loyals on it when played at a very high level of skill.
Sorry but this not a point at all, imho, becouse the example confirms that the original map was a good one.
Cackfiend is correct, and your response is very confusing. Maybe you did not understand him- He was offering an example of just one of the many imbalances, saying that Drakes almost always beat Loyalists there, in games between our best players. Imbalances like that were numerous on the old version, and that is not acceptable to me. Therefore, the map was completely erased, and then remade from scratch.
Nobun wrote:Yes... it is true that I am not a 2000+ ladder player (my ladder score is very low, but however it doesn't reflect my actual level that should be around 1600....
It seems silly to me to tell us what your score "would be." Even if you were right, that level is very average, and I will always take the opinions of 2000+ players a lot more seriously, because- part of having that high a ranking is that player's understanding and perception. It is not just about tactics. Being able to see and exploit even the smallest imbalances in a map or a faction has an influence on a person's score, even if it is not a huge influence. Surely you will agree that players that are much better than you also have a better understanding of terrain formations, p1/p2 pressure dynamics, and factional interactions on a given map.
(my rating) is so low only becouse I rarely play ladder and only to battle against players 1900+ so a lot stronger than me)....
But this not means that I don't miss fucuses :P
See above. ;) You should entertain the possibility that the assessments that you make about the game are not the best or the most insightful. If you were posting replays and making more specific arguments, and top players agreed, I would very strongly consider a change. If you do want to further your case here, I would say that replays against top players are the best way to do it. That makes it a lot easier to separate good or bad in-game choices from the actual features of the map.
Nobun wrote:First of all... Who said it is the MOST unbalanced maps?
"Who said it," is practically every top player, including several that have played this game for close to 5 years. There are also loads of replays backing up their opinions.

I do not know of any very good 1v1 players that do not play on the ladder. Maybe this isn't as it should be, but it is nevertheless the way that things have developed. If I look for a 1v1 game, and it's non ladder, the odds that it will end in a wordless disconnect are close to 4 in 5. This is because the best and most experienced players have clustered in the ladder, which pretty much ensures that you will be able to have a civil game with another player that knows how to play. Good players repeatedly playing with other good players only makes them better. They sharpen each other, to the extent that the difference in skill and game-perception between a non-ladder 1v1 player and a high-ranking 1v1 ladder player is massive. If you doubt that, play some ladder matches with high ranked players. If you end up with replays relative to this argument, that's great. Maybe you'll also learn some things, change your opinions about some things (factional balance, map balance, etc.), and/or become a better player in doing so. I'm not saying that you shouldn't have any opinions going into it, but you should keep an open mind to the possibility that you're incorrect in a number of your assessments.
Can we talk about Elesenfer Curtiard (I don't remember the exact name) ? It is a very big map that highly disadvantages factions without flying units.
Proof.....? ;) I've never heard that one before. Maybe it is even true, but you need to offer me more than just your opinion. I don't personally like that map much, and we're probably going to cut it from Conservative anyway.
Can we talk about (a map that I love) howling Ghostlands? Elves are highly disadvantaged due to missplaced forest tiles that doesn't allow elves to resist a long becouse to support each other you should left great part of them outside forests?
"Misplaced?" Again, I've never heard that, and I've never played or observed a game indicating that. Note also that the newest version (which has a few changes designed to power down horses) of that map is not in 1.8x, but is in the dev branch.

Additionally, if you have a solid understanding of terrain placement and balance, you should make a map and post it. I don't say this in a snarky way, but I do think you should give it a go, because that experience will also teach you things. If it turns out to be a great map, that's good, and will benefit the Wesnoth community.
I had other better examples of REALLY unbalanced maps but now I don't remember map names... Imho who said it is the MOST unbalanced map never tried some kind of maps in some situation.
Maybe this is getting repetitive, but post whatever evidence you think there is for these supposed imbalances. As for Cackfiend "not trying" these other maps, I can assure you that he has. Unless you're talking about non-default maps, which he probably hasn't (and are probably not balanced for default anyway).

All of that being said....:P

Let's get to the map itself.

I will try to explain this:
Nobun wrote: So my suggestion is.... instead of having different loyal units for every faction, it can be a good idea to have the same units in any case (for example a young ogre and a mermaid mage).... or, instead of having starting loyal units, giving the "unreachble" water village owned to both players at start and the most far village (reachble with young ogre) owned at start only for p2 (for balancing reasons).
The reason that this will not work is that "the same" units, added to all factions, will have varying degrees (to me, an unacceptable level) of usefulness against the other factions, considering damage types, movement, and general utility. Let's take an extreme example, and perhaps you will be able to see where I'm coming from here. Let's say the map is Howling Ghost Badlands, and every faction begins with one Heavy Infantry. As you can see, the Heavy infantry is good against some factions, and significantly worse against others.

The idea with Hornshark is that by providing just the right mix of units, each faction will have a "starting team" that is diverse and interesting against any other faction. Starting Knalgans with a Clasher and a Mage is not the same as starting Loyalists with a Clasher and a Mage. You get into issues where you're giving factions damage types that they already have easy access to, or have little access to.

The way that I'm trying to balance this map is extremely complex, but I believe that it is this complexity that also gives it great fine-tuning potential. Controlling (from a design standpoint) what units a faction starts with, and, very importantly, where on the map those units start gives a huge amount of control over any early pressure issues, potential village steals, etc. etc. We can, for example, have villages much closer to the center than we otherwise would (something that players have been wishing for for years....) without even the possibility of a village steal. We can also address player 1 pressure issues in general by having certain player 1 units start further back than their player 2 corollaries.

The map can still be adjusted of course, as far as terrain placement goes, but ***these starting units, rather than being some playful gimmick (though we have had some fun with the namings), are actually the tools that make atypical terrain formations and village placements possible. I think that this is something that even some top players have missed, and more than anything, this is the point that I'd most like people to understand.***

Games between the top players that have played here have, for the most part, produced very exciting and balanced-seeming matches. A few terrain issues have been identified and improved (giving us this current version). Several have been surprised by the fact that it plays much more balanced than it appears at a glance. That is the influence that being able to control the placement and types of starting units can have. Theoretically, it could even make certain "problem matchups" more balanced on this map than they otherwise would be. Again, I am not saying that it is perfect, but I do thank that it is about 100 times better than the old one, and that it takes a step in what could be a fresh new direction for 1v1 maps.

I realize that this is an absolutely epic post, :P, but-

I hope that you, Nobun, can understand a bit better where I'm coming from with some of the choices that I make, as far as map balancing goes. I also hope that some of these words on the new Hornshark will open some people's minds to the possibilities that it holds. :D
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

Kernigh
Posts: 107
Joined: February 13th, 2007, 10:21 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Kernigh »

Anonymissimus wrote:Please make a bug report for this blocker: http://gna.org/bugs/?group=wesnoth
No one has reported the bug. So I reported it as #19281 [Gna.org]. I wrote, "To reproduce this bug, start Hornshark Island with Age of Heroes. I try this, and find that AoH Loyalists get extra units, but no other faction gets them." I also attached a patch to only add loyal icons.

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

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Doc Paterson »

Kernigh wrote:
Anonymissimus wrote:Please make a bug report for this blocker: http://gna.org/bugs/?group=wesnoth
No one has reported the bug. So I reported it as #19281 [Gna.org]. I wrote, "To reproduce this bug, start Hornshark Island with Age of Heroes. I try this, and find that AoH Loyalists get extra units, but no other faction gets them." I also attached a patch to only add loyal icons.
Gah (!), you didn't read what I wrote. Default maps were not designed to be balanced for whatever unbalanced usermade faction or era a player uses (that includes AOH). However- I remember that Velensk did write up some sort of a "if it's none of these factions, give them x,y, and z units," (the same set of units for every non default faction) but it had some problems and wasn't integrated.

If you or anyone wants to take a look at it, let me know and I'll PM it to you.
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

mich
Translator
Posts: 134
Joined: November 11th, 2008, 8:54 am
Location: Italy

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by mich »

Doc Paterson wrote:Gah (!), you didn't read what I wrote. Default maps were not designed to be balanced for whatever unbalanced usermade faction or era a player uses (that includes AOH). However- I remember that Velensk did write up some sort of a "if it's none of these factions, give them x,y, and z units," (the same set of units for every non default faction) but it had some problems and wasn't integrated.

If you or anyone wants to take a look at it, let me know and I'll PM it to you.
Hi Doc. While I agree that they are not designed to be balanced for whatever unbalanced usermade faction or era a player uses, I think that a default map must also not be completely unbalanced/unplayable with not standard eras. Probably the idea of giving a standard set of units to all the non standard or recognized factions can be the the right middle. Probably you just need to add an [else] tag inside your [switch].

Anonymissimus
Inactive Developer
Posts: 2460
Joined: August 15th, 2008, 8:46 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Anonymissimus »

Doc Paterson wrote:Gah (!), you didn't read what I wrote. Default maps were not designed to be balanced for whatever unbalanced usermade faction or era a player uses (that includes AOH). However- I remember that Velensk did write up some sort of a "if it's none of these factions, give them x,y, and z units," (the same set of units for every non default faction) but it had some problems and wasn't integrated.
Please give up the idea of a unit set which depends on the faction used. It isn't feasible in scenario wml in a sane way. This is independent from any balancing arguments. If the scenario was unbalanced then other means of balancing it must be used.
How could the Khalifate Era possibly be made balanced with this ? Remember that the Khalifate are supposed to enter the default era at some spot and they are now an addon era to allow balancing changes. Players will use the Khalifate Era with Hornshark Island. Or AoH. One of the players happens to get Khalifate, the other doesn't, so one gets those extra units, the other doesn't -> game is screwed, players are confused and angry. Not acceptable for a stable release.
If anything, you should at least have put something like "this map can only be played with the default era" into the description. And in case the default era is not used, the game should automatically be ended with an informative message about that the default era has to be used. (This could go into the [else] block). But still not quite nice towards players to make it so.
If some dev would have had a look at the code I'm sure that it wouldn't have entered mainline in this form.

EDIT
A radical solution could be to remove the scenario from mainline. That is of course unfortunate, but serves all purposes.
projects (BfW 1.12):
A Simple Campaign: campaign draft for wml startersPlan Your Advancements: mp mod
The Earth's Gut: sp campaignSettlers of Wesnoth: mp scenarioWesnoth Lua Pack: lua tags and utils
updated to 1.8 and handed over: A Gryphon's Tale: sp campaign

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

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Doc Paterson »

Anonymissimus wrote: Please give up the idea of a unit set which depends on the faction used.
Not a chance.

Maybe it's news to you that no mainline map is balanced for non-mainline eras or factions, but this has been true for a long, long time, for reasons that are apparent to anyone who plays competitive multiplayer.
If the scenario was unbalanced then other means of balancing it must be used.
Sorry, but are you in charge of this now? That sounds kind of like an edict.
How could the Khalifate Era possibly be made balanced with this ?
Oh, come on. Just think about it for a minute. By customizing a set of units for them, just like what has already been done for the other mainline factions. If there is a real demand for a set to go with the Khalifate, I'll do it.
If anything, you should at least have put something like "this map can only be played with the default era" into the description.
Wouldn't hurt, but I guess then we'd have to put that for all default maps. Even playing AoH on default maps, opens up whole new realms of abuse. Guaranteed village steals, unfair early pressure situations, upkeep issues with village count, etc. etc. Believe me, it is hard enough pulling off a reasonable balance for the factions as they are in default era. To suggest that it could be done for multiple eras is insane, and shows no understanding of multiplayer.
If some dev would have had a look at the code I'm sure that it wouldn't have entered mainline in this form.
Several did. Multiplayer devs, who understand the way that factional balance works, and why maps cannot aim to provide non-mainline factions "guaranteed" balanced matches on mainline maps. Threads on this particular map's design and progression have been going on for a year or more. What you're only noticing now really should not be unexpected.

Again though, if people desperately want an option for Khalifate in there, for the purposes of testing them, and a generic set for all other factions, I'll do it.
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

Anonymissimus
Inactive Developer
Posts: 2460
Joined: August 15th, 2008, 8:46 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Anonymissimus »

Doc Paterson wrote:Sorry, but are you in charge of this now? That sounds kind of like an edict.
No. I'm just wary of bugs and voice my opinion.
Doc Paterson wrote:Believe me, it is hard enough pulling off a reasonable balance for the factions as they are in default era. To suggest that it could be done for multiple eras is insane, and shows no understanding of multiplayer.
Why do you assume I don't believe you ? And I don't suggest that.
I am only afraid about
Players will use the Khalifate Era with Hornshark Island. Or AoH. One of the players happens to get Khalifate, the other doesn't, so one gets those extra units, the other doesn't -> game is screwed, players are confused and angry. Not acceptable for a stable release.
They could just as well use any other era. It doesn't need to be balanced, but it should not screw their game.
projects (BfW 1.12):
A Simple Campaign: campaign draft for wml startersPlan Your Advancements: mp mod
The Earth's Gut: sp campaignSettlers of Wesnoth: mp scenarioWesnoth Lua Pack: lua tags and utils
updated to 1.8 and handed over: A Gryphon's Tale: sp campaign

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

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Doc Paterson »

About all of the above, your language initially seemed very harsh and wrong-headed ("give up this idea..." etc.), and targeted a subject that you didn't seem to know much about. If I overreacted and got a bit harsh myself, I'm sorry for that.

Anyways-

To me, they're already playing with fire by using mainline maps with eras not designed to interact with them in a balanced way. So, I think of them as already being screwed. :P Maybe what we're arguing is a matter of degrees, and you're saying "well, don't make the situation worse than it already is."

I've offered to make a set for the Khalifate, though I was holding back on that, waiting for their stats to stabilize (they were in a state of flux for quite a while, and still are to some extent). If you want to give it a go though and help to speed things along, by all means, do the WML for the Khalifate and Faction X P1/P2 unit sets, and post it here for analysis.
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
Cackfiend
Posts: 436
Joined: January 28th, 2007, 7:36 am
Location: Florida, USA
Contact:

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by Cackfiend »

Anonymissimus wrote:Remember that the Khalifate are supposed to enter the default era at some spot
OT:
god i hope not

=x
"There's no love in fear." - Maynard James Keenan

I'm the guy who's responsible for 40% Gliders in all hexes... I can now die a happy man. =D

soul_steven
Posts: 144
Joined: September 5th, 2009, 5:47 pm

Re: Hornshark Island (new)... something needed to be changed

Post by soul_steven »

so your saying we should start to make maps that are balanced towards user made eras not just focusing on default? Give me a break its already hard enough to get it right with just the default factions in mind. Mainline maps are tested and played with mainline era how hard a concept is this to understand? The user eras are interesting however trying to make maps that correspond with ALL the eras out there is just not going to happen.

Post Reply