The Wesnoth.org website and forums will be taken down for maintenance this September 28 at 8 am UTC for 1-8 hours.

You can find more information about affected services in the News post. ― Iris

Less random game

General feedback and discussion of the game.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Ambegen
Posts: 7
Joined: September 24th, 2005, 5:45 pm

Less random game

Post by Ambegen »

Hi
I'm new around there, just several days ago i found about this game and loved it. But when i lost my best unit ( Defliador ) in fiirst mision HttT due to bad luck i realized that i don't want game where i need to save/load often.
I didn't want to mess with code so i mess with units, i multiplied units number of attack by 4 and their hitpoints by 5 ( i want to make units a little harder to kill ), changed also traits and general options. This way i got more balanced but still random battles.
Just wonder if anyone would be interesed about this modification and where i eventualy can place it.
Last edited by Ambegen on September 24th, 2005, 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Academicus
Posts: 56
Joined: July 31st, 2005, 12:19 am

Post by Academicus »

there is no difference if you multiply the hit points by 4 but the attacks also by 4, the chance to die is the same, just now with higher numbers. If you wanted them to be harder to kill all you needed was raise the hit points, there is no need to also raise the attack.
User avatar
turin
Lord of the East
Posts: 11662
Joined: January 11th, 2004, 7:17 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by turin »

It reduces the luck factor, which some people think is good.

Here's a tip for you, though: if Delfador keeps dying because of "bad luck", it's because you are putting him in a vulnerable position. It's not because of bad luck, it's because of your own bad tactics. Try to protect him more.
For I am Turin Turambar - Master of Doom, by doom mastered. On permanent Wesbreak. Will not respond to private messages. Sorry!
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
unsung
Posts: 708
Joined: May 15th, 2005, 5:54 pm
Location: Raging somewhere..

Post by unsung »

turin wrote: It's not because of bad luck, it's because of your own bad tactics.
now that needs to be the standard argument against unrandomization from now on.
Oh no look out its a ray gun.
You should move to avoid the rays
the rays are coming out of the gun
if you are hit by the rays
you will be shot by the rays
the rays are fast so you should be fast to
can you win against the fast rays from the gun?
Academicus
Posts: 56
Joined: July 31st, 2005, 12:19 am

Post by Academicus »

turin wrote:It reduces the luck factor, which some people think is good.
If you attack 4 times, each attack dealing 10 damage and 50% hit chance to a 40hp enemy, it have no difference of you attacking 4 times, each attack dealing 20 damage and 50% hit chance to an 80 hp enemy.
(S)elfish weirdo
Posts: 94
Joined: March 30th, 2005, 4:10 pm
Location: Trying to finish Mystery campaigns without losses, have completed 0% of the maps so far.

Post by (S)elfish weirdo »

Do you see difference to 8 attacks, 10 damage, 50% chance of hitting a 80 hp enemy then? (compared to 4 attacks, 10 damage 50% to hit and 40 hp enemy) if you don't, you're [censored], but on second thought, wouldn't this make healing next to useless?

Now this would make playing without losses far too easy for my taste...
A statement within a signature is a body of absolutist assertions designed to shelter those who cannot abide the cold, hard realities of actually having to prove their claims.
Ambegen
Posts: 7
Joined: September 24th, 2005, 5:45 pm

Post by Ambegen »

(S)elfish weirdo wrote:but on second thought, wouldn't this make healing next to useless?
you can increase healing rate as well
(S)elfish weirdo wrote: Now this would make playing without losses far too easy for my taste...
it's just a personal preference...you still can lose units because of bad strategy, but a lot less chance to lose unit because of very bad luck
(S)elfish weirdo
Posts: 94
Joined: March 30th, 2005, 4:10 pm
Location: Trying to finish Mystery campaigns without losses, have completed 0% of the maps so far.

Post by (S)elfish weirdo »

True, but a good strategist should be able to prepare for the worst and survive anyway, without the posibility of suddenly losing a unit it would be too easy for my right brain half's taste.
A statement within a signature is a body of absolutist assertions designed to shelter those who cannot abide the cold, hard realities of actually having to prove their claims.
User avatar
Casual User
Posts: 475
Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm

Post by Casual User »

People have been fighting about randomness since I got on this forum. Here's the first sensible idea ever.

It doesn't involve any new coding, just a lot of repetitive tasks : multiply number of attacks, hitpoints, healing, poison, etc... by x. Very interesting, a fork after 1.0 would be great.

A few suggestions :

1 - Four times would be too much if you ask me. Twice would be good.

The best would be making it an option. 'Randomness smoother', a sliding scale, from 1 to 6, which would change the multiplication. But to make it simpler, twice or at mose thrice would be best.

2 - Careful with traits. You'll need to double resilient, but strong and dextrous will stay the same (practically).

3 - Maybe some units could get double damage instead of double number of attacks. I'm mostly thinking about thunderers. but there might be others.

4 - Don't make them harder to kill. Make it just a randomness smoother.

Maybe the idea will get some people fired up about it. I would like to see what it would be like. Too often, you will lose a battle because you had bad luck once. And save/loading is a pain. Not to mention that it adds to the frustration.

P.S. The 'randomness smoother' sliding scale could be implemented in 'standardnoth' too...
breversa
Posts: 112
Joined: August 10th, 2005, 10:32 am
Location: France
Contact:

Post by breversa »

Academicus wrote:there is no difference if you multiply the hit points by 4 but the attacks also by 4
He would multiply the HP by 5 (FIVE), not 4.
Academicus
Posts: 56
Joined: July 31st, 2005, 12:19 am

Post by Academicus »

breversa wrote:He would multiply the HP by 5 (FIVE), not 4.
So he should just leave attack the same and raise hp a little, I said that there is no reason to raise both. But that's pointless now since what he meant was to raise the attack number, not the damage.
Dave
Founding Developer
Posts: 7071
Joined: August 17th, 2003, 5:07 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Dave »

What he is saying is that he would multiply the hitpoints each unit has by 4, and the number of attacks each unit has by 4, leaving the damage inflicted the same.

This would indeed reduce the luck factor in the game. Before if you needed 1/3 attacks to hit with a 70% chance of each one doing so, you would now need 4/12 attacks to hit. The latter has a higher chance of happening than the former.

The problem with the idea is that it reduces the difference between units. There really is alot of strategic difference between a 12-2 attack and a 6-4 attack. They both have the same damage potential, but one is more reliable, with the other doing alot of damage quickly. If two such attacks meet each other, the 12-2 attack has the potential to wipe the other out quickly if they are low on hp, while the 6-4 attack has the advantage of being more reliable.

With the change we would have a 12-8 attack, and a 6-16 attack. Now sure, the 6-16 attack would still be more reliable, but with everyone having so many attacks now, the difference wouldn't be very noticeable.

David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8129
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Post by Elvish_Pillager »

It would be different, though. Doing damage quickly would be more important.

For instance, if two units with 48 HP left fought, and one had a 12-8 attack and the other had a 6-16 attack...
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.
Ambegen
Posts: 7
Joined: September 24th, 2005, 5:45 pm

Post by Ambegen »

Dave wrote: The problem with the idea is that it reduces the difference between units. There really is alot of strategic difference between a 12-2 attack and a 6-4 attack. They both have the same damage potential, but one is more reliable, with the other doing alot of damage quickly. If two such attacks meet each other, the 12-2 attack has the potential to wipe the other out quickly if they are low on hp, while the 6-4 attack has the advantage of being more reliable.

With the change we would have a 12-8 attack, and a 6-16 attack. Now sure, the 6-16 attack would still be more reliable, but with everyone having so many attacks now, the difference wouldn't be very noticeable.

David
Sure, it can rebalance the game, the other problem i found is that slow is almost useless now.
The unit with 12-8 still would be better to finish wounded unit, bacuse it will inflict damage faster but it will take some damage though. You also cannot count for lucky hits ( like unit with 12-2 attack lands two hits on enemy ), landing all 8 hits is a lot harder to happen.
Also the units become more uniwersal, for example if enemy has 13 HP and you attacking with 12-2 unit with 60% chance to hit, you got only 36% chance for killing oponent, after the mod chance will be a lot greater ( i think more that 50% ).
But this is open source game, so everyone can modify it to suit his own needs ( i'm really very grateful programmers for letting players modify their game so easy )

I don't plan to do other modification ( like attack x2 ), i spend several hours editing every single unit file and won't do this again.

If anyone is interesed or want try this mod, please tell where could i upload this. To use this you only need to replace your older units files with new ones ( do backup before doing that), and it probably won't work with already saved games. ( not sure though )
User avatar
xtifr
Posts: 414
Joined: February 10th, 2005, 2:52 am
Location: Sol III

Post by xtifr »

Ambegen wrote:Sure, it can rebalance the game, the other problem i found is that slow is almost useless now.
Well, obviously you have to make slow remove four moves as well.

The problem with this (as with most attempts to reduce the luck factor in Wesnoth) is that it removes good luck along with bad. It also has the disadvantage of making battles take much longer, without having any significant impact on their outcome. Frankly, I'd rather take my chances the way it is. If I wanted a deterministic game, I'd play chess.
"When a man is tired of Ankh-Morpork, he is tired of ankle-deep slurry" -- Catroaster

Legal, free live music: Surf Coasters at Double Down Saloon, Las Vegas on 2005-03-06. Tight, high-energy Japanese Surf-Rock.
Locked