'quick' trait and the -10% HP penalty

JW · Post by JW » November 21st, 2005, 9:09 am

Dave wrote:I've regretted somewhat that I didn't "hide" traits, making them work internally and simply say "a unit's attributes will vary slightly from the attributes for its type". I think it'd stop people from getting so caught up as to whether a trait is 'fair' or not.

David

You could always change this. I kinda like the idea as it would be really easy to figure out which traits you had if you either a) knew most of the units stats already by heart (most of the pros I'm sure) or b) simply looked at the units profile and made a simple comparison (the easiest thing to do).

The one thing that would make it odd would be undead units and other units that only get 1 or 0 traits. I don't remember which units they are, but I do remember that there are some.

I'm wondering, why is it that some units don't have the standard 2 traits?

Nicolas · Post by **Nicolas** » November 21st, 2005, 10:58 am

I think removing 10% is too much,but 1 movement point is much,
i thinkit can be good -5%.

unsung · Post by **unsung** » November 21st, 2005, 11:38 am

Eleazar wrote: It suggests that quick people are better off running away, than standing there and getting walloped. This is true.

yes, I know. Its something ive used in larp fights before.

-> What i might be working on · Post by **Eleazar** » November 21st, 2005, 1:44 pm

JW wrote:I'm wondering, why is it that some units don't have the standard 2 traits?

In scenarios "loyal" units are usually only given one that one trait, though IIRC it's possible to do otherwise. I suppose it's felt that "loyal" is equal in value to 2 other traits.

JW · Post by JW » November 21st, 2005, 2:55 pm

Eleazar wrote:
JW wrote:I'm wondering, why is it that some units don't have the standard 2 traits?
In scenarios "loyal" units are usually only given one that one trait, though IIRC it's possible to do otherwise. I suppose it's felt that "loyal" is equal in value to 2 other traits.

It's not only them. Wose have no traits, although they do have the two abilities Ambush and Regeneration. I can see how that's balanced, but I'm sure I've seen a unit with 1 trait before (that wasn't Loyal - it was in MP).

I'm just curious as to which units were chosen to have fewer traits and why. I'm just a curious guy like that.

Post by **Dragonking** » November 21st, 2005, 2:59 pm

Guardsman has one trait. Some traits combinations (especialy quick + resilient) were really powerful for this unit.

scott · Post by **scott** » November 21st, 2005, 4:02 pm

We're starting to give loyal units an additional trait now, but I am of the opinion that loyal units are (perhaps literally) worth their weight in gold.

The increase in value that 2 traits give you are much less than the increase in value that loyal gives you, so giving a loyal unit a trait is like adding insult to injury.

But, you could use that to argue the other direction: traits are a small incremental increase so giving a trait to an already highly valuable unit isn't a big change.

Casual User · Post by **Casual User** » November 21st, 2005, 4:15 pm

Good morning!

When I started playing, I remember quick was my favorite trait. Now, it's my least favorite trait (still beats loyal, but you no longer get it randomly, so it doesn't count).

My favorite trait is strong with resilient a close second, intelligent a more or less distant third and quick a more or less different last. It is because of the hp decrease.

However, I think quick is well balanced, but it doesn't fit in with everyone's playing style. It definitely doesn't fit with my usual 'savage charge' strategy (it's not really a strategy, but that's beside the point).

toms · Post by **toms** » November 21st, 2005, 5:35 pm

You should think logical:

I know that WINR, but a quicker unit canÃ‚Â´t be as strong as a not so quick unit in combat.
Other thing a quick unit could run away better if itÃ‚Â´s hurt...

unsung · Post by **unsung** » November 21st, 2005, 8:27 pm

toms wrote:You should think logical:

I know that WINR, but a quicker unit canÃ‚Â´t be as strong as a not so quick unit in combat.
Other thing a quick unit could run away better if itÃ‚Â´s hurt...

this is not true.

speed requires enough muscle to swiftly propel yourslef, which means more muscle to account for your mass.
Strength is from muscle.

a fast person is likely to be less capable o ftaking a blow because they are smaller in size, but is by no means weak.

In fact, they likely have stronger legs than someone who's slower than them.

guest · Post by **guest** » November 22nd, 2005, 1:50 pm

Casual User wrote:my usual 'savage charge' strategy (it's not really a strategy, but that's beside the point).

OT:

Post by **Thrawn** » November 22nd, 2005, 8:55 pm

being quick=slim=weaker not sensical, but think of it this way. I sacrifice maybe my heavy-chainmail to quilted leather padding. I can now move quicker, yet it is much easier to gey wounded wearing leather than chainmail.

Master of BS reasons strikes again

toms · Post by **toms** » November 24th, 2005, 5:42 pm

unsung wrote:
toms wrote:You should think logical:

I know that WINR, but a quicker unit canÃ‚Â´t be as strong as a not so quick unit in combat.
Other thing a quick unit could run away better if itÃ‚Â´s hurt...
this is not true.

speed requires enough muscle to swiftly propel yourslef, which means more muscle to account for your mass.
Strength is from muscle.

a fast person is likely to be less capable o ftaking a blow because they are smaller in size, but is by no means weak.

In fact, they likely have stronger legs than someone who's slower than them.

I meant in Wesnoth if you play it!