Topic: Efficiency of Scouting

Another pro (which I also mentioned already) is that it gives the player some more control over what his scouts do. Currently you have no control over them except the placement of the scout's house.

Another pro: You can also send scouts from places where only flags but not even small buildings can be built. Unless there are any maps designed to allow building fortresses that can be detected not even by scouts (are there? unlikely) this is another advantage of the proposed feature.

And this is not really an argument, imho, because one has to do this exactly with military buildings. Is this also annoying? Should that be fixed also?

There was a proposal about automatic soldier capacity and preference regulation some time ago but it did not result in consensus. But this is not "exactly" the same thing: You also need milsites to keep vision over the land so you can build more buildings (unless they're tightly packed already) – does anyone use scouts for that? And you also need to keep some military presence especially around your perimeter so your houses won't burn down when an enemy expands nearby (if there is a canal or lava between your border and that enemy, you need neither military strength nor scouts there but still need to have a few milsites).
When you can safely dismantle some milsites there is no real need to do so – some remain useful, and even if you forget about them they do not harm you as they don't need food or anything, especially if you set them to Prefer Rookies and a capacity of 1 initially. (Personally I never dismantle any milsites except on maps with extremely limited space.)

I think there should be no need for arguments against this feature, but for implementing it.

IMHO a good democratic solution is to gather all pros and cons and then decide.

If every non-bugfix change that was merged into master recently had been discussed like this first, development would be very slow indeed…

Note to self: What do I learn from this thread, yet again? Less forum discussion, just implement stuff ^^

Top

Quote

Nordfriese wrote:

Note to self: What do I learn from this thread, yet again? Less forum discussion, just implement stuff ^^

If this is really your attitude you might get even less reviewers on github. Thinking this any further: why even bother about reviews just commit / merge them. Do you want this really?

I really believe although Widelands is a doocracy in terms of deciding what is worth working on. It should not go into this direction. At least I would feel very uncomfortable with it.

Top

Quote

WorldSavior wrote:

Nordfriese wrote:

WorldSavior wrote:

kaputtnik wrote:

WorldSavior wrote:

Changing scouts or sight ranges of buildings is not necessary at all.

Changing scouts would probably be a waste of work; not necessarily improving the game, maybe making it worse

It's your opinion, but an opinion without arguments is useless.

What a useless opinion of you here, not even supported by arguments

I don't think that an opinion needs arguments. A vote is still a vote.

Please stop with this hick-hacking

I didn't really hick-hack, but: +1

You do hick hacking world savior, and especially you do not give any reasons just saying no

So we don't have consent

You're the only one who is really opposed to the change as far as I can see. Unless you provide good reason why we should not change scouts as proposed, the change will probably be implemented.

Fixing bugs would be more useful

No, making the game better is wanted by all

kaputtnik wrote:

What about having a watch-button for a scouts hut which shows the watch window following the scout?

That could be useful, because this would be easier than setting that window up manually

Thats another good Idea, adding to the cost efficiency problem of scouting at the beginning of the thread

Top

Quote