Unpopular opinion: +8 healing is too strong in singleplayer campaigns

[Hejnewar]

Is heals +8 really that bad? Maybe I am a bit too defensive towards it beacuse using for years but looking on scenarios it's not like they're the only who decide on win/failure... Orc warlord or dwarf lord needs many turns to be healed even with this and don't see reason why to change.

Honestly in my opinion it isnt that healing is overpowered at this point, it is just that in single player, it is very convinient, there arent any drawbacks for getting it and generally it is easy to get, so there is never a choice if you even want to get them over some other level up, just maybe you dont want them as your first level up. Scenario length as well as length of life of units is quiet long so there is also more value in getting healing. It isnt that healing itself is broken, it is that most campaigns simply create the perfect conditions for it to be perfect tool you always want to have.

[Elvish_Hunter]

I remember that in some old versions (probably around 1.0, or even 0.9.x) healing was less powerful.
+4 healers were able to heal a maximum of 8 HPs per turn, while +8 healers were able to heal a maximum of 18 HPs per turn, distributed between all the adjacent units. It was kind of odd, so this is why I still remember it.
By version 1.2, healing became what is it now.

[egallager]

I agree that given the choice to advance to a healer vs. a non-healer, I usually choose the healer, but I don't really see that as too big of a problem. If (and only if) enough people consider it to be a problem, I would hope that the solution would be to buff the non-healer advancements, rather than to nerf healing amounts.

[skeptical_troll]

Much in agreement with the OP. Healers kill the fun and make campaigns' gameplay more monotonous than it has to be. Even more so considering that AI is not as effective in using/countering the healer-hedgehog tactic. In the UMCs I created, one of my main worries is 'how do I limit the access to healers'. Otherwise, it's just too convenient to look for alternative play styles.

One problem is also that L2+ healers are always good units on their own, even the dunefolk apothecary has a 6x4 impact which is no joke. If they were highly specialised in healing, with puny attacks and fragile constitution, maybe the choice over the alternatives would be more interesting.

I also agree that them potentially healing 6 units is the most problematic aspect, but I don't see how to remove it without a radical change in the game mechanics (e.g. healing is proactive on the player's part) without it being confusing. As it is, it's basically a value multiplier for the army, which means scenarios can only be balanced if AI enemies come in hordes.

[Hejnewar]

Healers kill the fun and make campaigns' gameplay more monotonous than it has to be.

What campaigns are less monotonous? What do they do differently? How are they supposed to look?

One problem is also that L2+ healers are always good units on their own, even the dunefolk apothecary has a 6x4 impact which is no joke.

Well thats because healing is not as good in MP as it is in SP.

If they were highly specialised in healing, with puny attacks and fragile constitution, maybe the choice over the alternatives would be more interesting.

But this wouldnt change, too much convinience, rng mitigation etc. Much was said already. Really only if healer was slower than the army it could be a problem.

I also agree that them potentially healing 6 units is the most problematic aspect, but I don't see how to remove it without a radical change in the game mechanics (e.g. healing is proactive on the player's part) without it being confusing. As it is, it's basically a value multiplier for the army, which means scenarios can only be balanced if AI enemies come in hordes.

If you heal 3 units you just get second healer. I have ideas how to do that differently but most of the solutions involve right click menu which isnt ideal (I try to avoid them at all cost actually, this is kinda something that I think is too far from KISS which I already break often enough anyway, perhaps Im wrong and we should go for right click menus but thats offtopic). Most of the other ways are just too weird of unfit for "good" factions. In the end you can simply not give player healers and see what happens.

[skeptical_troll]

What campaigns are less monotonous? What do they do differently? How are they supposed to look?

I played the mainline campaign a long time ago, so I'm sure there were lots of improvements, but many of the elves/humans campaigns tended to incentivise the healer hedgehog a lot, especially when the enemies are undead. But, for example, Liberty, DiD, SotBE, or the sudden moment in LoW when you lose healing capability are all quite refreshing in terms of playing style.

Well thats because healing is not as good in MP as it is in SP.

I'm just thinking of SP here, so I wouldn't know how to deal with potentially unbalancing MP. At least we're talking about l2+ only.

But this wouldnt change, too much convinience, rng mitigation etc. Much was said already. Really only if healer was slower than the army it could be a problem.

having them to be at least crappy units apart from healing should mitigate convenience. Like removing slow ability from druids, decreasing the attacks of white mages... etc

most of the solutions involve right click menu which isnt ideal [...] In the end you can simply not give player healers and see what happens.

Agreed and agreed. yeah, that's how UMC would solve it and that's quite clunky. The proper UI would be something like an 'attack' to friendly units that heal them, but I suppose Wesnoth is too mature as a game to consider mechanics changes like this one. Nerfing the healing amount is not an option to exclude, however, and leave +8 to a few l3 or specialised healers.