Features for 0.8

[turin]

Cursors, The Wesnothpedia, Variable XP in multiplayer, Chat in multiplayer, more info on the minimap, Graphs after missions end, Real time Graphs during replay, and some more visual pizzaz

Hm, i just noticed this post. I am interested, what would a graph be 'after missions end', and what would a 'real time graph' be? what information would be displayed?

my next idea-

Make replays viewable event if the save was from another version. I still want to be able to view my replays from 0.6.99.2, even though many changes have been made in between, such as mages move slower. As it is, replays get corrupted when you try to view them from a different version.

[Dave]

my next idea-

Make replays viewable event if the save was from another version. I still want to be able to view my replays from 0.6.99.2, even though many changes have been made in between, such as mages move slower. As it is, replays get corrupted when you try to view them from a different version.

Uhh....sure, this'd be great to have -- but very difficult to implement. What if the other version has completely different units, or units with vastly different stats? The game rules could have even changed. I can't see any way that replays should be expected to work, without storing much much more data with them.

David

[Dave]

I might as well resurrect old ideas:

Selecting and moving multiple units in one go

A more interesting and more usable campaigns list

A better framework for the map shown in between scenarios

They're all issues that I think give the game a lack of polish.

I agree with the campaigns list and better map. Those are much needed.

I'm not sure about moving multiple units in one go. I'm not entirely sure it makes sense in a turn-based game which doesn't allow stacking.

David

[turin]

my next idea-

Make replays viewable event if the save was from another version. I still want to be able to view my replays from 0.6.99.2, even though many changes have been made in between, such as mages move slower. As it is, replays get corrupted when you try to view them from a different version.

Uhh....sure, this'd be great to have -- but very difficult to implement. What if the other version has completely different units, or units with vastly different stats? The game rules could have even changed. I can't see any way that replays should be expected to work, without storing much much more data with them.

David

Well, i'm not a programmer, so i don't know if this is just a stupid idea, but couldn't you make it so the replay showed what happened even if it was against the rules? it would be more like a movie in that it just said what happened, and showed that, even if that was not part of the rules. I agree it would be hard to do, but it might be worth it.

If replays are not supposed to work, why do you have them?

[Dave]

Well, i'm not a programmer, so i don't know if this is just a stupid idea, but couldn't you make it so the replay showed what happened even if it was against the rules? it would be more like a movie in that it just said what happened, and showed that, even if that was not part of the rules. I agree it would be hard to do, but it might be worth it.

This is feasible, however the main problem is that it requires alot more data to be recorded with replays, and it would require much more programmatic effort. For instance, now when a replay specifies that someone moves, it says "move this unit from (10,12) to (24,8)". It relies on the program to be able to work out the path for that unit, and move them.

If Wesnoth sees that, according to its rules, the unit cannot move from (10,12) to (24,8) then it generates a sync error. It can't really just move the unit anyway, because how does it know what path the unit should move along? The unit might now be able to reach that position because its movement has been changed, or its movement type, or it can now teleport, or it is now a skirmisher.

The only way to do it would be to specify the exact steps the unit has to take, but that's going to be complicated code-wise, and will make save files insanely big.

If replays are not supposed to work, why do you have them?

Replays are supposed to work, it's just difficult to make them work across versions. I wish they'd work as much as anyone, but it'd be alot of effort -- effort that I'm not willing to put in, although if anyone else wants to, they're welcome.

As Wesnoth matures, it is likely that users will use the same stable version for much longer periods of time, and cross-version issues will become less and less of an issue.

David

[DarkOx55]

I downloaded Wesnoth a few weeks ago and have been enjoying it ever since. The graphics have the same charm as the Heroes of Might and Magic series did, the races are unique and distinct and the strategy is deep. Perhaps most importantly, Wesnoth doesn't bury me in menus screens the way some turn-based strategy games do.

One thing that I would like added to the game though, would be a simpler map editor or a map editor tutorial. For an example, I could modify terrain in the editor easily enough, but I couldn't place events or character dialogue at all. A tutorial on how to use it would help me a lot.

[cedric]

One thing that I would like added to the game though, would be a simpler map editor or a map editor tutorial. For an example, I could modify terrain in the editor easily enough, but I couldn't place events or character dialogue at all. A tutorial on how to use it would help me a lot.

Currently, to build scenarios, add events, dialogs, etc., the only way is through a text editor.
http://wesnoth.slack.it/?BuildingScenarios

--
Cedric

[Dave]

One thing that I would like added to the game though, would be a simpler map editor or a map editor tutorial. For an example, I could modify terrain in the editor easily enough, but I couldn't place events or character dialogue at all. A tutorial on how to use it would help me a lot.

The current map editor is just that -- a map editor (and not a particularly good one). It would be a scenario editor that allows you to edit things like events and dialog.

There currently is no scenario editor -- you have to go and edit the files by hand using a text editor. You can see http://wesnoth.slack.it/?BuildingScenarios for a guide on building scenarios.

There may be a scenario editor in the future, however writing such a program is certainly non-trivial, and we have to use our resources wisely.

David

[Lithorien]

How complex do you need this scenario editor to be, Dave?

[charlieg]

1. More levels for units. I get my units up to level 3 very quickly and end up with a massive stack of them.
2. Displacing friendly units; if two units are placed next to eachother and both have movement left, one should be able to displace the other.
3. Wenothpedia (like in Civilization 2).
4. Somehow improve the minimap and also indicate which villages belong to which player.
5. More unit characteristics:
   • Fleet of foot
     Gain 1 extra movement after attack which can be used to retreat.
   • Beserk
     When defeating an enemy unit, a 'beserk' unit moves into the space occupied by the enemy unit and, if there is another enemy unit in the following space (ie in a straight line), the 'beserk' unit attacks again.
     (I'm not keen on the term 'beserk' but I'm tired and can't think of a better one at the moment.)
   • ...think of some more!

[charlieg]

Campaigns that follow campaigns.

For instance, after completing the 'Heir to the Throne' campaign, perhaps two more campaigns should come available which you then take your levelled-up units on.

And spells that work on friendly units. White mages being able to bless units to improve their effectiveness against the undead, or red mages giving friendly units firey weapons. Such spells might last for a period of maybe 3 or 4 turns.

[jmosher]

A second tutorial to explain other key concepts: healing, zone of control, poison, slowing, skirmish, ambush, recalling, picking up special items.

I have this capture-the-flag idea for explaing ZoC. You have two units in a narrow passage and you have to stop a scout from getting past you to capture a village.

Most of the rest would be simple enough. For demonstrating skirmishing, you could play capture the flag again, but against a skirmisher that slips past you. For ambush, you would be sent to a village in the forest would run into rangers.

[turin]

1. More levels for units. I get my units up to level 3 very quickly and end up with a massive stack of them.
2. Displacing friendly units; if two units are placed next to eachother and both have movement left, one should be able to displace the other.
3. Wenothpedia (like in Civilization 2).
4. Somehow improve the minimap and also indicate which villages belong to which player.
5. More unit characteristics:
   • Fleet of foot
     Gain 1 extra movement after attack which can be used to retreat.
   • Beserk
     When defeating an enemy unit, a 'beserk' unit moves into the space occupied by the enemy unit and, if there is another enemy unit in the following space (ie in a straight line), the 'beserk' unit attacks again.
     (I'm not keen on the term 'beserk' but I'm tired and can't think of a better one at the moment.)
   • ...think of some more!

First of all- more levels for units means more graphics, and more statistics. in the end, many units will become very similar. it is better how it is, with each unit leveling twice. even if more levels were added, they would not become more poewrful; the highest level would become like the current highest level is now. what we need are more second and third level units. too many units like the gryphon rider cannot advance at all, and this is kind of a waste.

We should have displacing units on the same team; this would be very useful in cave scenarios. you should not be able to displace units on different, allied teams.

wesnothpedia-cool! but should probably change the name. it should be only accessible from menu bar and, when clicking 'describe unit', should go to that unit's page.

'fleet of foot'- bad idea, because this would be too powerful. if ever, it should be used for a fast not powerful third level unit. it would be useful in caves; maybe a dwarvish unit could get it. however, it would still be very powerful.

berserk- not a great idea, because it would be too powerful, but also because it gives the player too little control. if anything, it would make it so, if it kills the enemy, it regains the movement it had left and can use it any way it wants. an upgrade of dwarvish berserker, if any, could get this.

[turin]

Campaigns that follow campaigns.

For instance, after completing the 'Heir to the Throne' campaign, perhaps two more campaigns should come available which you then take your levelled-up units on.

And spells that work on friendly units. White mages being able to bless units to improve their effectiveness against the undead, or red mages giving friendly units firey weapons. Such spells might last for a period of maybe 3 or 4 turns.

what is the point of campaigns that follow campaigns? this is one feature that was in HoMM that i hated. also, if there are campaigns to follow, why not just have them as additional scenarios in the current campaign? there is no real point in campaigns that lead into campaigns; have them be the same campaign.

spells are not supposed to be spells you can cast. they are integrated into the game, not part of it. white mages are powerful enough against undead; no need to make them more powerful. spells are not cast, should not be cast. spells should not have lingering effects; they should happen, in an attack, and be done with.

[turin]

A second tutorial to explain other key concepts: healing, zone of control, poison, slowing, skirmish, ambush, recalling, picking up special items.

I have this capture-the-flag idea for explaing ZoC. You have two units in a narrow passage and you have to stop a scout from getting past you to capture a village.

Most of the rest would be simple enough. For demonstrating skirmishing, you could play capture the flag again, but against a skirmisher that slips past you. For ambush, you would be sent to a village in the forest would run into rangers.

tutorials can have multiple scenarios; it seems that this would be a better way to do it than to have multiple tutorials you can choose. i am working on a separate, several scenario tutorial that will explain healing, ZoC, specialties in general, recalling, and picking up items.
NOTE: i think it is a bad idea to explain individual specialties. part of the fun in the game is learning about the different specialties; do not take this away by putting it in the tutorial. for example, i think skirmishing and backstab should somewhat suprise you by having the enemy do more damage or go places you thought they couldn't, it makes the game more exciting.

My own idea is to have the AI recognise specialties like drain and backstab, and how they will effect attacks. the AI does not use backstab even when it can for no clear reason. also, when attacking a unit with drain it does not realize that the enemy might actually gain health from the battle. it would be good if the AI knew how to use and defend against these specialties.