Should we do something with Paladins?

[cobretti]

Both are worse units, it is not a case of tricking but of straight-out decrease in usefulness.

Do you really think what you are saying here? I doubt it. Neither of them are worse units. You could argue that under a few circumstances any of them is worse than the Knight, but not that they are worse units overall.

"No unit should get worse by leveling" doesn't mean that if there is a choice, the combined stats of those two units should be better than the downgrade. thats obvious. It means you should ALWAYS be able to chose a unit that will have the same or improved functionality in ALL areas when you level. Or else you get situations like EP's example above.

I don't agree. Upgrades must be clearly better units OVERALL, not IN ABSOLUTELY EVERY ASPECT. And you are still given the option to choose which type of overall better unit you want.

Also, by your thoughts I can argue that every non-loyal upgraded unit is worse than it's predeccessor because you have to pay more upkeep for it, and there is no alternative that keeps the same or improved functionality. (nitpicking, but as valid as the paladin's case. Now please argue why I must have "worse" units when levelling)

In short, i agree with making it 0% resistance to holy for normal units, and, if necessary, decreasing MoL's damage to compensate.

And anybody can still complain because his Paladins now do less damage to blade vulnerable units than the Knights they were before levelling. The "problem" doesn't disappear, it only goes more subtle.

[Jetrel]

"No unit should get worse by leveling" doesn't mean that if there is a choice, the combined stats of those two units should be better than the downgrade. thats obvious. It means you should ALWAYS be able to chose a unit that will have the same or improved functionality in ALL areas when you level. Or else you get situations like EP's example above.

Agreed.

In short, i agree with making it 0% resistance to holy for normal units, and, if necessary, decreasing MoL's damage to compensate.

I agree with this.

No Way. Change the paladin, DO NOT change the effect of holy attacks on normal units, unless you plan to make them even more resistant to holy damage.

I've always hated the fact that mages of light can use their holy attack to fight normal enemies. That really does bug me.

The paladin would be well-served with an added blade attack, with better damage than his holy attack. Not only does this avoid the problems listed above, but it also makes for less work.

[scott]

I don't think making all units 0% resistant to holy is a good idea either, but I would like to know why it was set this way in the first place. It would make obvious sense to make some units 20% resistant and some units 0%/some other % resistant. Maybe make all units 100% resistant except for undead. There must be some reason why it is the way it is.
*begins searching*

[turin]

It seems to me that if there is an occasion where you would rather the unit hadn't leveled at all (regardless of gold, since you always would prefer to keep your gold), there is a problem with that unit! leveling should be a good thing in all situations! (the gold issue is an important part of the game. there has to be some cost to secondary gameplay when you level. but NOT to primary gameplay!)


as for about the blade resistances.... yeah, i guess thats right... give him an alternate 8-4 blade attack, then, and leave holy at -20.

[Circon]

Neither of them are worse units. You could argue that under a few circumstances any of them is worse than the Knight, but not that they are worse units overall.
[...]
Upgrades must be clearly better units OVERALL, not IN ABSOLUTELY EVERY ASPECT. And you are still given the option to choose which type of overall better unit you want.

I can argue that every non-loyal upgraded unit is worse than it's predeccessor because you have to pay more upkeep for it, and there is no alternative that keeps the same or improved functionality. (nitpicking, but as valid as the paladin's case. Now please argue why I must have "worse" units when levelling)

I agree. Leave the Paladin as it is.

[Elvish_Pillager]

Both are worse units, it is not a case of tricking but of straight-out decrease in usefulness.

Do you really think what you are saying here? I doubt it. Neither of them are worse units. You could argue that under a few circumstances any of them is worse than the Knight, but not that they are worse units overall.

Yes, they're not worse units overall, but about a third of the time, I'd rather have a Knight than a Paladin.

Upgrades must be clearly better units OVERALL, not IN ABSOLUTELY EVERY ASPECT.

Yes, they should be better in absolutely every aspect.

And you are still given the option to choose which type of overall better unit you want.

In my opinion, this is irrelevant.

Also, by your thoughts I can argue that every non-loyal upgraded unit is worse than it's predeccessor because you have to pay more upkeep for it, and there is no alternative that keeps the same or improved functionality. (nitpicking, but as valid as the paladin's case. Now please argue why I must have "worse" units when levelling)

Ok, here's why: Because that is my opinion! It's my opinion that all units should cost 1 gold of upkeep. However, this isn't the thread to discuss that.

And anybody can still complain because his Paladins now do less damage to blade vulnerable units than the Knights they were before levelling. The "problem" doesn't disappear, it only goes more subtle.

Yes, but it seems to be generally agreed that that's not a problem. (for instance, nobody seems to be complaining that the Red Mage's attack ceases to be blade at level 3.) I'm of the opinion that any attack that becomes worse against a significant portion of wesnoth's units is bad, but I don't mind a few corner cases.

That said, I prefer for there to be no corner cases at all, which is why I support the blade rather than making holy do more damage.

[Na'enthos]

So, if we're talking about how useless Paladins and Grand Knights are.. what about Lancers? They could use skirmish and/or a sword attack.. their charging makes them deadly, but usually more they're deadly to themselves than to others.

[Elvish_Pillager]

So, if we're talking about how useless Paladins and Grand Knights are.. what about Lancers? They could use skirmish and/or a sword attack.. their charging makes them deadly, but usually more they're deadly to themselves than to others.

So what?

1) You can always upgrade to a Knight instead
2) The lancer isn't even inferior to the horseman in any way.

[cobretti]

Upgrades must be clearly better units OVERALL, not IN ABSOLUTELY EVERY ASPECT.

Yes, they should be better in absolutely every aspect.

I don't agree with your opinion. Also, what Turin said is not the same you are saying now, since he supports "that there is at least an upgrade with all the characterstics better than the unit from it is upgrading"

And you are still given the option to choose which type of overall better unit you want.

In my opinion, this is irrelevant.

Also, by your thoughts I can argue that every non-loyal upgraded unit is worse than it's predeccessor because you have to pay more upkeep for it, and there is no alternative that keeps the same or improved functionality. (nitpicking, but as valid as the paladin's case. Now please argue why I must have "worse" units when levelling)

Ok, here's why: Because that is my opinion! It's my opinion that all units should cost 1 gold of upkeep. However, this isn't the thread to discuss that.

I don't find the above statement irrelevant at all. Anyway, both are aspects of our (different) opinions about the matter.

And anybody can still complain because his Paladins now do less damage to blade vulnerable units than the Knights they were before levelling. The "problem" doesn't disappear, it only goes more subtle.

Yes, but it seems to be generally agreed that that's not a problem. (for instance, nobody seems to be complaining that the Red Mage's attack ceases to be blade at level 3.) I'm of the opinion that any attack that becomes worse against a significant portion of wesnoth's units is bad, but I don't mind a few corner cases.

In my opinion, a 6% loss in attack power in an unit which gets a lot of other important bonuses is a clear corner case, specially when you have the option to upgrade to a different unit with important bonuses also and no attack power loss (improved, in fact).

Also, why the switch of attack type is a matter for the Paladin but not for the Red Mage?

That said, I prefer for there to be no corner cases at all, which is why I support the blade rather than making holy do more damage.

To me, if it's decided to give him a blade attack, ok. If it's decided to keep him 'as is', ok too. I already feel this is a corner case, as others, and since it has been this way for many time, and nobody else has complained in all this time, I guess I'm not the only one to feel it's ok as it is.

[scott]

The paladin was 9-5 holy and was specifically weakened to make room for the grand knight branch.

Here's the proof:
http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=944

[Dave]

Yeah, Paladins used to be more powerful, but...they were over-powered and their abilities split into two.

Making a bladed attack that is as powerful, or perhaps a little more powerful than the knight's bladed attack might be an option though...

David

[Circon]

Yes, they should be better in absolutely every aspect.

Four words. Necromancer. Lich. Holy. Loyal.

[Elvish_Pillager]

Yes, they should be better in absolutely every aspect.

Four words. Necromancer. Lich. Holy. Loyal.

All four words should be changed. I support the addition of a human Necromancer upgrade, and I support the removal of the Loyal trait and the resetting of upkeep.

Making a bladed attack that is as powerful, or perhaps a little more powerful than the knight's bladed attack might be an option though...

Yeah, even an 8-4 blade would solve the problem, a possibility that I've been liking more and more.

[quartex]

"Yeah, even an 8-4 blade would solve the problem, a possibility that I've been liking more and more."

Seems like a simple and easy solution to me.

Getting rid of the loyal trait and making all units only cost 1 gold is a trickier issue, and probably should be discussed in a seperate thread.

[Invisible Philosopher]

"Yeah, even an 8-4 blade would solve the problem, a possibility that I've been liking more and more."

Seems like a simple and easy solution to me.

Well, let's do it!

In other words, since there doesn't seem to be any objection to it, could someone with CVS access do it, please?

And just to make it incredibly easy, here's the patch.

P.S. Ugh, "The Extension diff is not allowed"! Why does it restrict what extensions are allowed?