Topic: Introducing a new building for the creation of untrained soldiers

41 — 49 of 49 Posts ‹‹ previous 1 2 3 4 5

Tmk Joined: 2010-05-08, 17:06 Posts: 44 Pry about Widelands	Posted at: 2016-11-05, 13:09 Hello all, I'd like to feedback the caserns. I like them. It makes it transparent to the player which wares are needed for creating soldiers, for you can see it in the barracks's interface. One doesn't need to fiddle with where to store the basic weapon and armor piece for creation of a soldier in warehouses anymore. That's a plus from me! Also I noticed, with barracks and their stored wares, I can lower the target value in economy for mentioned basic weapon and armor pieces, in turn having a higher output of advanced weapon and armor wares. +1 again. And the graphics are very nice already. I am happy to see where this gets Top Quote

kaputtnik Joined: 2013-02-18, 19:48 Posts: 2439 OS: Archlinux Version: current master One Elder of Players Location: Germany	Posted at: 2016-11-08, 21:27 Where are trainers come from? Are they build also in a casern or in a warehouse? Fight simulator for Widelands: https://wide-fighter.netlify.app/ Top Quote

GunChleoc Joined: 2013-10-07, 14:56 Posts: 3324 One Elder of Players Location: RenderedRect	Posted at: 2016-11-09, 06:36 Trainers are still built in a warehouse. I have done my first round of code review on the branch, and I think this option would best in the long run: Notabilis wrote: Maybe we could use a blend between the ware and the training queues: The black background as a hint that the player can kick workers out of the queue. The experience could be written in the hover tooltips we already have in place for ware queues or maybe written on top of the worker icon. We should not have different upgrade stages in the same queue (e.g. do not mix miners, chief miners and master miners into one queue), but experience might become important in the future. However, since we only have workers without experience here, we should not go to the trouble of adding it to the code yet - less code means less potential bugs, and options in the user interface that aren't needed will only confuse the players. If anybody wants to mod Widelands to have workers with experience here, they can always create a wishlist bug then. So, I vote for the bottom suggestion in this mockup: Busy indexing nil values Top Quote

toptopple Joined: 2013-10-30, 07:11 Posts: 156 At home in WL-forums	Posted at: 2016-11-09, 08:47 Clicking Carriers away appears nonsense, so leaving aside this option may be a wise decision for the Barracks! I'm still convinced that adding a ware -> Recruit relation would be good to make the game a bit more complex (and difficult). E.g. requiring a Cloth for a Recruit would give added importance to the Weaving section of economy and also make availability of new soldiers less trivial, e.g. in the early parts of a game. Edited: 2016-11-09, 08:51 Top Quote

GunChleoc Joined: 2013-10-07, 14:56 Posts: 3324 One Elder of Players Location: RenderedRect	Posted at: 2016-11-09, 15:07 In addition to a weapon, Atlantean soldiers already cost a Tabard, and Empire soldiers a Helmet. We might add cloth for the Barbarians, but there might be some need for rebalancing then. Once the code is in, we can start playing with the init files. Busy indexing nil values Top Quote

SirVer Joined: 2009-02-19, 14:18 Posts: 1445 One Elder of Players Location: Germany - Munich	Posted at: 2016-11-10, 06:58 The thought behind the barbarians was, that they should be able to have cheap and bad soldiers, while the other tribes need to invest a little more into making lvl0 soldiers, but they are a bit better. Adding a second requirement for barbarians makes them symmetric. In general, I would prefer making the tribes more different instead of making them more similar - of course that makes balancing harder, but it also makes the game more interesting. Top Quote

toptopple Joined: 2013-10-30, 07:11 Posts: 156 At home in WL-forums	Posted at: 2016-11-10, 18:45 SirVer In general, I would prefer making the tribes more different instead of making them more similar - of course that makes balancing harder, but it also makes the game more interesting. 1. I agree. My idea about the cloth was more of a general kind, making it an added requirement for all tribes; so a Recruit would be a new role which requires a tool named Cloth. ;) In this sense you would not have to rebalance any military strengths, but the game gains a new complexity, which I believe it can endure. 2. Perhaps you are seeing the "Barbarians" a bit too negative. In ancient time the Germanic tribes were nowhere reported to bring forth bad warriors, in particular not the Vikings where Widelands appears to hook into heavily (see the ships). :) The military setup is still very opaque to me. Perhaps I have missed it, perhaps it should pose more in the light. Anyway, I would have seen the Barbarians quite under charge with their overloaded economy, and as a compensation I expected they were slightly better (or at least cheaper) warriors. So are they only punished then and we should play Atlanteans? Top Quote

SirVer Joined: 2009-02-19, 14:18 Posts: 1445 One Elder of Players Location: Germany - Munich	Posted at: 2016-11-12, 12:10 Perhaps you are seeing the "Barbarians" a bit too negative. In ancient time the Germanic tribes ... No, I do not see them negative. I just see them stereotypical. And I would not draw any parallels to history - Widelands is entirely fictious and we steal and match iconic elements from wherever we please. Top Quote

toptopple Joined: 2013-10-30, 07:11 Posts: 156 At home in WL-forums	Posted at: 2016-11-12, 19:43 Good! - But can you answer me the following question? Are there strength / ability differences in the rookie soldiers of the three tribes? I have not experienced this so far and they seemed quite equal. Top Quote

‹‹ previous 1 2 3 4 5