New user feedback/questions

[Zarel]

The dot is the best out of all the proposed replacements (it does actually mean multiplication).

Well, most of the other ones (like "x") do, too. "x" does look a bit ugly, though. The dash looks very slightly better than the dot, to be honest, but I think the dot is worth the extra clarity.

Still don't see the need to to replace though.

I don't see the "need" to create a game in the first place, and yet Dave did and here we are. If we only cared about needs, we'd never get anywhere.

[Gambit]

I don't see the "need" to create a game in the first place, and yet Dave did and here we are.

1. Boredom stopper?
2. Senior project? (or other school thing)
3. It looks good on a portfolio/resume.
4. It was a dare/bet.
5. His psychologist told him to get a hobby.

[Zarel]

1. Boredom stopper?
2. Senior project? (or other school thing)
3. It looks good on a portfolio/resume.
4. It was a dare/bet.
5. His psychologist told him to get a hobby.

If those count as needs, then "making the game easier to understand" is enough of a need to change the game.

[pauxlo]

The dot is the best out of all the proposed replacements (it does actually mean multiplication).

The problem with the dot is, 5·2 means "five times two", so I would read this as "five hits with each two damage", while it really is the other way around. (Yes, multiplication (of numbers) is commutative, but there still is a inherent sense, and at least when I learned this, it was this way.)

We could write it the other way around (like 2·5), but this would confuse older players.

[Daracos]

i wondered about this exact thing aswell. but after the first mission completed i had figured out how it works and now i think its okay.

i think, wenn i click a unit i want to know first: how much damage does he deal. so dmg is the first number lets say: 5 ... so there is a second number... 2 ... ahh ok 2 times.
yeah i think its ok the way it is.

[Sangel]

The dot is the best out of all the proposed replacements (it does actually mean multiplication).

The problem with the dot is, 5·2 means "five times two", so I would read this as "five hits with each two damage", while it really is the other way around. (Yes, multiplication (of numbers) is commutative, but there still is a inherent sense, and at least when I learned this, it was this way.)

We could write it the other way around (like 2·5), but this would confuse older players.

To be fair, that's just a semantic issue - 5·2 could be interpreted as "five damage, times two hits". I must say, I'm rather in favour of this change. It eliminates the "range" connotation of the current notation, without changing the notation greatly. It also looks just fine.

[doofus-01]

Is it really a problem, whatever is written? You have two numbers, separated by something that is not a number. You attack or get attacked a couple of times, you should be able to figure it out. If not, this game is going to be nothing but frustration for you, no matter what notation is used.

[ivanovic]

Or users could just play the tutorial and read the explaination in there. Or users could just have a look at http://manual.wesnoth.org where stuff is explained. Or...

[Zarel]

Or users could just play the tutorial and read the explaination in there. Or users could just have a look at http://manual.wesnoth.org where stuff is explained. Or...

We're going in circles.

Once again, how does a user playing a tutorial improve the game at all? Does the game commit improvements to SVN while users play tutorials?

[Eolith]

Once again, how does a user playing a tutorial improve the game at all? Does the game commit improvements to SVN while users play tutorials?

I do not know that the tutorial improves the game, as in Battle for Wesnoth itself, but it does improve the user's game, as we would say in chess. Of course, there are people who do not need the tutorial, and there are people who hate playing it, but it does help, or, at any rate, it helped me (as I discovered by playing it.)

[ScipioAfricanus]

For what it's worth, I'm new at the game, and I never had any trouble understanding what the attack notation meant.