1 move per turn

[Yogibear]

With current settings i am very sure that the games will take much longer. A game will come to an end as soon as one team gets a sufficient advantage over the other, which will happen by killing units mainly. The bigger the advantage, the faster the game will be ended.

If it gets more difficult to kill units, it will be more difficult to get an advantage. At least with current map defaults.

Things might become totally different, though, if you simply take away the villages (or maybe limit them to one or two) . Now healing will take place only in a very limited way. Of course you can still replace wounded units but not forever. And as your income is very limited, too, you won't be able to throw fresh units into the battle. Thus you will have to fight with what you have and use your resources wisely.

The limited number of units will also make the game shorter overall.

Recruiting with fog is a guesswork of course, not much possibilites to adapt if you know what you face. But wait, you don't have to spend all your money in the beginning, just get a scout and see what is there on the other side of the map . No villages to get, no haste to recruit people .

Edit:
Terrain bonus might become a problem for a successful attack . Heh, i remember to have seen maps where the terrain changes all of a sudden .

Btw, you can make this happen already without any change at all. Just play a game and hit "end turn" after you moved a unit .

[Wintermute]

I think that the talk about game length is obsucring the larger issue: the game would be broken, without complete redesign of the factions. I have played other games with broken systems like this. The big problem with moving one unit at a time is that the side with a few powerful units is way better than any side with less powerful units but more of them. Chess deals with this by having exactly the same units. In Wesnoth, drakes vs. northerners is just silly to think about. I buy some burners, you by more grunts. If we want to both take our villages at about the same time, you have to move approximatly the same number of units to the front line as I do, so then you have 5 drakes vs 5 grunts. Or if you want to move more of your units up front, then you are not able to advance as far, giving me more of the map (and probably your villages). This is not to mention the fact that you CANNOT trap a unit in your backfield that does not want to be trapped, since it will constantly move out of any attempt to ZoC. So given that, have fun trying to deal with my one glider or bat wandering around the map.

If you would like to test this out, I would be happy to play the drakes.

[Iron_Force]

hmmmm.... Wesnoth with 1 move per turn... Is really a longer game (more of now) But, you can make a era or a map using your post name

But, You played before elven chess? its nice game using your rule

[JW]

I think that the talk about game length is obsucring the larger issue: the game would be broken, without complete redesign of the factions.

Indeed, other significant changes would have to be made. Imagine what some of those changes would have to be and how you would fix them. What are they?

[Zachron]

With current settings i am very sure that the games will take much longer. A game will come to an end as soon as one team gets a sufficient advantage over the other, which will happen by killing units mainly. The bigger the advantage, the faster the game will be ended.

If it gets more difficult to kill units, it will be more difficult to get an advantage. At least with current map defaults.

Things might become totally different, though, if you simply take away the villages (or maybe limit them to one or two) . Now healing will take place only in a very limited way. Of course you can still replace wounded units but not forever. And as your income is very limited, too, you won't be able to throw fresh units into the battle. Thus you will have to fight with what you have and use your resources wisely.

The limited number of units will also make the game shorter overall.

Recruiting with fog is a guesswork of course, not much possibilites to adapt if you know what you face. But wait, you don't have to spend all your money in the beginning, just get a scout and see what is there on the other side of the map . No villages to get, no haste to recruit people .

Edit:
Terrain bonus might become a problem for a successful attack . Heh, i remember to have seen maps where the terrain changes all of a sudden .

Btw, you can make this happen already without any change at all. Just play a game and hit "end turn" after you moved a unit .

I actually disaggree over when it would be decided. I'd be the jerkoff who recruited only 1 unit on turn 1 and went around taking a crapload of villiages. Then I'd slowly put together a ZOC line of fighters with healer support. It would give a whole new meaning to Isar's Cross Forever, I'll tell ya that much.

[A Guy]

Northerners would be so horribly unbalanced... their strategy thrives on having more units than their opponents, so doing this would reduce their offensive power compared to other factions.

For this same reason, drakes would own, and no one would bother to recruit a L0 unit.

[Mica]

So basically, we get a new game.

No thanks, I like Wesnoth the way it is, such a huge change is not going to keep my interest. [I know it wouldn't be mainline]

[bert1]

So basically, we get a new game.

No thanks, I like Wesnoth the way it is, such a huge change is not going to keep my interest. [I know it wouldn't be mainline]

Yeah, in discussing this stuff I'm assuming it's with a view to potential forks of wesnoth. I think wesnoth could have stopped developing at version 1.2 and been a great game. Improvements since then have been excellent but non-essential.

[Yogibear]

I'd be the jerkoff who recruited only 1 unit on turn 1 and went around taking a crapload of villiages. Then I'd slowly put together a ZOC line of fighters with healer support. It would give a whole new meaning to Isar's Cross Forever, I'll tell ya that much.

That is exactly why i proposed to remove all (or at least most) villages .

[JW]

So basically, we get a new game.

No thanks, I like Wesnoth the way it is, such a huge change is not going to keep my interest. [I know it wouldn't be mainline]

Yeah, in discussing this stuff I'm assuming it's with a view to potential forks of wesnoth. I think wesnoth could have stopped developing at version 1.2 and been a great game. Improvements since then have been excellent but non-essential.

Indeed. This game won't change. That's fine. And, it's fine to post your opinions, it's encouraged, but if you're going to post an opinion please also attempt to describe why you have it so that it can help in the discussion.

As for having fewer villages on the maps, I'm thinking the whole income system would need to be reworked. Perhaps just a steady, nonvariable income? Income that accrues at the start of every day (every X# of turns)? Mines instead of villages, where mines are few?

[peet]

It occurs to me that this type of modification would work best if the game worked in "phases" that are subdivisions of a given turn.

Each phase, each player would get to move 1 unit. However, no unit could move more than once per turn. Likewise no unit would get to heal or regenerate more than once per turn.

So the number of phases you get per turn is the number of units you have on the board. If player A has more units than player B then he will get more phases.

It effectively would simulate simultaneous turns. It would be a pain against other players, but fine against the computer.

I know it's not what you were originally thinking about but it's an interesting idea, and changes the game less overall.

Peet

[JW]

It occurs to me that this type of modification would work best if the game worked in "phases" that are subdivisions of a given turn.

Each phase, each player would get to move 1 unit. However, no unit could move more than once per turn. Likewise no unit would get to heal or regenerate more than once per turn.

So the number of phases you get per turn is the number of units you have on the board. If player A has more units than player B then he will get more phases.

It effectively would simulate simultaneous turns. It would be a pain against other players, but fine against the computer.

I know it's not what you were originally thinking about but it's an interesting idea, and changes the game less overall.

Peet

Actually, that is an interesting variation. I rather kind of like it. Well done!

[Velensk]

That might lead to a diskwars-like activation problem. (Though that went in groups of three rather than one, and it won't have the problem of some units requiring to not be activated to shoot arrows)