Topic: Carrier speed depending on carrying
|
Warnuf Topic Opener
Joined: 2011-02-26, 17:57
Posts: 16  Pry about Widelands |
Posted at: 2011-08-09, 02:59
Hello, I think it might be nice if carriers were a bit faster if they did not carry anything. This would have the following consequences:
Greetings, Warnuf 
Top
Quote
|
|
SirVer
Joined: 2009-02-19, 14:18
Posts: 1445  One Elder of Players Location: Germany - Munich |
Posted at: 2011-08-09, 09:39
I like this idea. But only for the first item in your list :).
Top
Quote
|
Marcelo_do_Pagode
Joined: 2011-07-23, 17:59
Posts: 36 Pry about Widelands Location: Brazil |
Posted at: 2011-08-09, 15:09
I like this idea too, very reasonable. Marcelo do Pagode
Top
Quote
|
Venatrix
Joined: 2010-10-05, 19:31
Posts: 449  Tribe Member Location: Germany |
Posted at: 2011-08-10, 20:40
Yes, Im in favour of it, too. Shall I make a wishlist entry at Launchpad? Two is the oddest prime.
Top
Quote
|
|
Personal_Joke
Joined: 2011-08-10, 13:39
Posts: 29 Pry about Widelands Location: New Zealand |
Posted at: 2011-08-10, 21:47
It doesn't seem game breaking, so I don't see why not
Top
Quote
|
|
hjd
Joined: 2011-06-12, 19:24
Posts: 164  At home in WL-forums Location: bugs.launchpad.net/widelands |
Posted at: 2011-08-11, 19:56
Hm. I'm not sure. Don't get me wrong, I do see why this would be useful, but I just wonder how it will change transportation in general. Let's say you have two flags; A and B, and worker between them. The worker will pick up a ware at A and carry it over to B. Then he will walk all the way back to A to pick up the next ware, without doing anything useful. So a worker will be useful 50% of the time (moving a ware) and not useful 50% of the time (walking back). However, if you have transport going in both directions, the worker will also be able to carry a ware from B to A. In this case the worker will be useful both ways (or 100% of the time) since he is always carrying a ware. It may be a matter of play style, but I most often end up with this pattern with loads of wares going back and forth and carriers who are able to carry stuff both ways. By increasing the speed of "unburdened" workers I wonder what the impact will be. Currently workers carrying wares both ways are clearly more effective for distribution of wares. What happens when the speed is changed, will it be more effective in some cases to send wares in only one direction then have the workers run back to pick up the next ware to rush them all to their destination? Then the logical "next step" (yes, I know that is not discussed here) would be to use one-way roads so that you can have one lane for carrying wares away from your HQ, and a parallel one for sending wares to it. I know this sounds a bit negative, but I'm actually not as opposed to the idea as it may sound. However, I wonder if others have thought about something similar, or know how my concerns could be addressed? Btw: this is now also in the bug tracker (https://bugs.launchpad.net/widelands/+bug/824464) Edited: 2011-08-11, 19:59
Ships!
Top
Quote
|
|
Marcelo_do_Pagode
Joined: 2011-07-23, 17:59
Posts: 36 Pry about Widelands Location: Brazil |
Posted at: 2011-08-11, 21:17
Well, when the flag loads are high, I always end up building spurious connections and parallel roads (with interconnection between them) to avoid bottlenecks and speed up transport. Since I haven't payed much attention, while I'm writing I'm not sure if I end up with roads moving wares in opposite directions, but I think that it doesn't end up like that when there is huge traffic both ways. I'm pretty sure -- although not 100% -- that I have traffic in both directions in both roads, is just a case of dividing the amount of wares by half in each one. I understand your point but I really think that although what you stressed (that one-way roads requests by users would probably derive from this novelty) is related, it seems to me that they should be treated as two separate issues. The original suggestion (relating speed with the fact of the carrier being carrying something or not)--imho-- is as fundamental as the already implemented correlation between slope angle and speed. That is, is just a question of been realistic (without being too-realistic). Mind you that although I consider this an important realistic aspect to be implemented, I wouldn't go as far as wanting that the speed should also be correlated with the weight of the good being carried, since that I consider to be "too much". I believe that "the line should be drawn somewhere". Which is also a philosophy in this game, just take the size of the workers compared to the buildings. Of curse, where the line should be drawn is subject to personal taste, but imho to implement this correlation between speed and load is not "beyond the line". Marcelo do Pagode
Top
Quote
|
|
hjd
Joined: 2011-06-12, 19:24
Posts: 164 At home in WL-forums Location: bugs.launchpad.net/widelands |
Posted at: 2011-08-13, 21:39
While I agree they are two separate issue, I think it might be wise to take it into account. If we do this right, there may not even be a need for one-way roads. The rest of your comment got me thinking. We currently have the adjustable speed based on the angle of the terrain. Let's call them flat, slope or hill or 1,2 and 3, respectively. The steeper the slope is, the slower a worker will move, so 1 is normal speed, 2 is slightly slower while 3 is even slower. Now despite there being an obvious difference between the terrains, I haven't really tried to avoid steeper terrain for roads. (I seldom build many roads in the mountains, but that's mainly because you can only place mines there). So while I know I certain road might be slightly slower for transport I will accept it. My suggestion would be to adjust this speed if the worker is not carrying anything. By adjusting all speeds as if the terrain was less steep, there will be a slight advantage but probably not game breaking. So an unburdened carrier in 3 will move as he would if he was walking in 2, a worker in 2 as in 1, and for workers on already flat ground (1) I reckon we could introduce a new state 0, which is slightly faster than 1. So instead of the three speed adjustments we have currently, we would have four. Since the current ones are fairly acceptable and gives a nice variation depending on the terrain. Its impact on the game is fairly low, so that players will recognize and be aware of it, but probably won't micromanage their roads to find the ultimate path to avoid and hills in their transport routes. This is how I think we can avoid the requests for one-way streets. By altering the speed slightly depending on whether or not the person is carrying anything, but not to the point where it becomes annoying. I realize the obvious counter-argument is why go through all this trouble to add a minor change which probably won't even be noticable? First of all I really like games where you can continually discover new details you hadn't noticed earlier. Secondly, I think giving it a too large impact may affect the game in negative ways, making players more focused on adjusting the production to keep the flow of wares running as fast as possible. I am also open to other ideas or suggestions. Edited: 2011-08-13, 21:39
Ships!
Top
Quote
|
|
Marcelo_do_Pagode
Joined: 2011-07-23, 17:59
Posts: 36 Pry about Widelands Location: Brazil |
Posted at: 2011-08-14, 01:54
hjd:
Your suggestion seems perfect to me! Great idea!
If it means anything, you have my vote for it. Edited: 2011-08-14, 01:55
Marcelo do Pagode
Top
Quote
|
Astuur
Joined: 2009-02-28, 09:08
Posts: 733 One Elder of Players Location: Frankfurt / Germany |
Posted at: 2011-08-14, 06:50
I never missed that feature, but why not? On a side note to HJD:
On some maps, mountains are my favourite terrain for road buildung.
Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills.
Top
Quote
|
