is "fast" a bonus or malus ?

Multiplayer Scenarios / Campaigns · Post by **Rhuvaen** » July 6th, 2007, 9:12 pm

Velensk wrote:There is an english word that is pronounsed malas (not sure how it is spelled), meaning hatred or something simular

Malice. I don't think "malus" is meant in an emotional or affective sense here.

Elvish Pillager wrote:"Malus" is a pseudo-word commonly used on the Wesnoth forums when an opposite of "bonus" is needed. Presumably it's based on the Latin origin of the word (where "bonus" means "good", and "malus" means "bad")

I'm just guessing that Lorbi is German (?

), because these Latin words are freely used in German (among gamer geeks anyway

). I didn't want to sound linguistically smart-assed, but on another mailing list some English speakers complained about the use of this specific word (simply because it didn't make any sense to them).

Lorbi · Post by **Lorbi** » July 6th, 2007, 10:43 pm

It is meant as the opposite of "bonus". Nothing else.
And Rhuvaen guessed right. I am german and because the word is latin i thought it is also known to english native speakers. ( and others )

btt:

I find it annoying when I get all quick units, and I find it equally annoying when I get no quick units.

i don't find it annoying when all my units are resilient.
another example: Isars Cross is one of the most played MP maps on the server. to me every fast unit i get seems to have a more negative influence to my armys strength then positive.

am i just a too bad wesnoth player to see how i can profit more from 1mp then the -10%hp does srikes me? a "guide how to use fast/quick units" would be interesting

Elvish_Pillager · Post by **Elvish_Pillager** » July 6th, 2007, 11:05 pm

Lorbi wrote:Isars Cross

AUGH, I have no idea why people like to play on Isar's Cross.

Post by **Doc Paterson** » July 6th, 2007, 11:41 pm

Lorbi wrote: another example: Isars Cross is one of the most played MP maps on the server. to me every fast unit i get seems to have a more negative influence to my armys strength then positive.

That's because Isar's Cross was made for quick and dynamic but not necessarily balanced games. It's probably as balanced as it could possibly be, but it's never going to be up to the level of more serious 2v2 maps.

It's an exception to the standards that we hold most maps to, and is allowed to remain in the map pack because a lot of users have fun with it. It certainly should not be cited as an example of the quick trait being a negative draw.

Pladio · Post by **Pladio** » July 7th, 2007, 12:29 am

Off-topic :

Bonus <-> 'Malus'

--> Advantage <-> Disadvantage.

zaimoni · Post by **zaimoni** » July 7th, 2007, 1:08 am

Lorbi wrote:am i just a too bad wesnoth player to see how i can profit more from 1mp then the -10%hp does srikes me? a "guide how to use fast/quick units" would be interesting

Agreed, it would be interesting...but such a guide would be most naturally part of opening strategy.

E.g., with Loyalists and flat terrain (adapting from one of Elvish Pillager's posts):
* Check for whether leader can grab village on turn 1; if so, schedule doing this last.
* Turn 2 calculations.
** Heavy Infantry: range 4, quick range 5 (do not recruit if not otherwise indicated)
** Spearman/Bowman: range 5, quick range 6
** Fencer: range 6, quick range 7
** Calvaryman/Horseman: range 8, quick range 9
** Dragoon/Cavalier: range 9, quick range 10
** Lancer: range 10, quick range 11

Note that you can only rely on quick when recalling.

* Turn 3 calculations: any village not grabbed on turn 2, and Threat not close yet.
** Ignore Heavy Infantryman, unless recalling Quick (range 10)
** others: double both default and Quick ranges.

Generally, in the village-grabbing phase when your force is otherwise balanced, you want to use the slowest unit that can get there the fastest. In particular, if you do not want/cannot recall a Dragoon, Cavalier, or Lancer: it is worth using Spearman/Bowman/Quick Heavy Infantryman for range 10, Quick Spearman/Quick Bowman/Fencer for ranges 11-12, and Quick Fencer for ranges 13-14, to avoid overrecruiting Calvarymen/Horsemen.

Also: when faced with "rough terrain", Quick imparts more of a practical speed bonus for base move 5 light foot units [difference between 2 and 3 hexes in hills, 1 and 2 hexes in mountains] and base move 8 mounted non-flying units [2 vs 3 hexes in forest] than would be expected.

Xandria · Post by **Xandria** » July 7th, 2007, 7:13 am

Well, quick is always a handicap for an ulfserker - a strong resilient one does about half as much damage before dying than the quick intelligent variant.

Post by **Soliton** » July 7th, 2007, 7:43 am

Xandria wrote:Well, quick is always a handicap for an ulfserker - a strong resilient one does about half as much damage before dying than the quick intelligent variant.

Especially when he can barely reach that adept.. Incidentally some people want(ed) to remove the quick trait from Ulfserkers because it's too advantageous for them.

Clonkinator · Post by **Clonkinator** » July 7th, 2007, 9:15 am

Quick is a very useful trait imo. This extra MP can be really useful, and it usually makes more than up for the -10% HP (not on every unit though). I always try to level units in a way that they end up with 6 MP. Take the spearman as an example: When I get a quick-resilient one, I level it into a javelineer. When I get a quick-'any other trait' one, I level it into a halbedier. And when I get a non-quick one I level it into a royal guard. This way the spearman always ends up at 6 MP.

P.S: Strong-resilient royal guards rock

P.P.S: You wouldn't want to face a quick berserker.

Weeksy · Post by **Weeksy** » July 7th, 2007, 9:40 am

In campaigns, which it seems quite a few of the posts have in mind when coming up with solutions to the 'problem', there are many units I wouldn't want to have quick, as there will be many units getting to high levels, where that 10% becomes quite a large amount of hp. This is all fine, but as THE GAME IS BALANCED FOR MULTIPLAYER, it is up to the campaign designer to make changes to the traits your recruited units get.

FireMaster · Post by **FireMaster** » July 8th, 2007, 8:01 am

quick is good in units that have high hp and slow movement. (sorry if someone already mentioned this,i didn't bother reading the other posts)

it is also good in scenarios where there is 'bad' terrain

Xandria · Post by **Xandria** » July 8th, 2007, 9:48 am

Well - units with lots of HP will lose a LOT due to being quick. Usually, they are those who are supposed to take the heavy punishment. A troll warrior will have some 64 HP if quick, about 80 if resilient... a world of difference.

Quick may be a mixed blessing, but I suggest the trait stays as it is.

AThousandYoung · Post by **AThousandYoung** » July 8th, 2007, 10:12 am

I use it extensively. I refuse to allow 5 MP units in my army if I can possibly avoid it.

jonadab · Post by **jonadab** » July 8th, 2007, 12:22 pm

I prefer all of my mages to be quick if possible. They just need that extra movement point if the terrain is pretty much anything other than grassland. There's not much point taking a non-quick mage into mountains, hills, caves, forests, ... most terrains. Even crossing rivers can be problematic. Even with quick they're still just about the slowest thing in the army typically, and without it they just plain can't keep up. If you don't hold everyone back for them, they take 2-3 extra turns to get to the front, by which time the front has usually moved. If you do hold everything back, your whole army is at a tactical disadvantage. It's also a serious problem during strategic retreats: you either leave the non-quick mage behind to die alone, or you retreat your whole army only 2-3 hexes per turn and get your whole force decimated.

In campaigns, if I recruit a non-quick mage, I usually treat it as a throw-away unit. I don't let them kill anything if it can possibly be avoided, because it would be a complete waste of XP. And I never recall them. (The big exception is if I'm given a loyal one, in which case I try to make do even if it's not quick, because in some scenarios the lack of upkeep charges can make the difference between being able to afford a unit or not.)

It's different for high-hitpoint units (woses, trolls, ...), because they make up for their poor movement in other ways (and you don't recruit/recall them unless the benefits outweigh the lack of mobility, or unless they're loyal like the three HI in TRoW). For them, quick is less essential (though it can still be useful).

I agree that quick units would be more desirable if the trait didn't reduce HP, but that might be rather overpowered.

OTOH, some units don't _need_ the quick trait. Gryphons, for instance, only need it if you're planning to use them underground. (Otherwise they can already outrun just about everything.) A quick gryphon is still viable, but a different trait would almost always be preferable, and resillient is especially nice.

For most units, though, I find the mix you typically get at random to be about right. For instance, with elvish archers you normally get a quarter or a third of them quick, which is about right. The quick ones come in handy at times for their extra reach (which can be the difference between being able to feather that troll from three sides or only two), but there's no need for all of them to be quick. I think on the whole most units fall into this category, which to me says that the trait is fairly well balanced, on the whole.

Post by **Velensk** » July 8th, 2007, 8:52 pm

Of all my units I least prefer mages to be quick, because it makes them even easier to kill (especialy at higher lvls) and keeping your lvled mages alive is an important thing in campains.