Latest Posts

Topic: Balancing around the tempo tournament

JanO
Avatar
Joined: 2015-08-02, 11:56
Posts: 139
Ranking
At home in WL-forums
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 19:12

Now, as a contrast to those huge posts, just two short ideas:

  • Give Soldiers experience. Gained by winning fights, needed for higher promotions (maybe 0 experience -> all lvl 1 promotions possible, 1 experience -> all lvl 2 promotions possible etc.)
  • increase training time for higher promotions (lvl 1 promotions stay as now, lvl 2 promotions double (or even more) the time, lvl 3 double lvl2 time etc.)

Another idea, that was mentioned before, would be maintenance costs. Probably the hardest to implement and at the moment I haven't even a clue how to design this theoretically.


Top Quote
Nordfriese
Avatar
Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07
Posts: 824
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: 0x55555d3a34c0
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 21:23

by the way, I think I got the perfect easy idea for making first hero unimportant. Giving EVERYONE heroes FROM THE START!

Think about it: your starting stock of soldiers will include 10 heroes, and a few more with lesser promotions. Oh, you made an 11th after only 20 minutes? It hardly matters.

I would not want this to be the norm. So I think we could add a new starting condition - elite army, or something like this.

Sound good in theory, might seem pretty pointless in practice to give players free heroes IMHO. But if we'd have a starting condition like this, perhaps it would be possible to balance this special MP starting condition without changing the actual tribes? If so, I'd support this proposal.

JanO wrote:

Now, as a contrast to those huge posts, just two short ideas:

  • Give Soldiers experience. Gained by winning fights, needed for higher promotions (maybe 0 experience -> all lvl 1 promotions possible, 1 experience -> all lvl 2 promotions possible etc.)

Counter suggestion: Play Wesnoth face-wink.png
This would just make the game much more military-focused, because it would force players to start many battles so the higher part of the economy can even start working. -1

  • increase training time for higher promotions (lvl 1 promotions stay as now, lvl 2 promotions double (or even more) the time, lvl 3 double lvl2 time etc.)

I like this idea face-smile.png This would keep supersoldiers the strongest while giving more importance to medium-trained soldiers.

Another idea, that was mentioned before, would be maintenance costs. Probably the hardest to implement and at the moment I haven't even a clue how to design this theoretically.

Wouldn't fix the problem that a good atlantean player has a free win against any frisian player on early-contact maps…


Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 446
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 21:49

Nordfriese wrote:

  • increase training time for higher promotions (lvl 1 promotions stay as now, lvl 2 promotions double (or even more) the time, lvl 3 double lvl2 time etc.)

I like this idea face-smile.png This would keep supersoldiers the strongest while giving more importance to medium-trained soldiers.

+1 good idea, but how to code?

Another idea, that was mentioned before, would be maintenance costs. Probably the hardest to implement and at the moment I haven't even a clue how to design this theoretically.

Wouldn't fix the problem that a good atlantean player has a free win against any frisian player on early-contact maps…

nice concept - It might be rarely difficult how exactly does the maitenance work?


Top Quote
JanO
Avatar
Joined: 2015-08-02, 11:56
Posts: 139
Ranking
At home in WL-forums
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 21:54

Nordfriese wrote:

JanO wrote:

Now, as a contrast to those huge posts, just two short ideas:

  • Give Soldiers experience. Gained by winning fights, needed for higher promotions (maybe 0 experience -> all lvl 1 promotions possible, 1 experience -> all lvl 2 promotions possible etc.)

Counter suggestion: Play Wesnoth face-wink.png

Done face-wink.png Already two times. But they have not enough unit-levels.

This would just make the game much more military-focused, because it would force players to start many battles so the higher part of the economy can even start working. -1

I'm not sure about that. Think about the additional micromanaging (or at least time, once the micromanaging is reduced by better options) to get half-trained soldiers back to the trainingsites. This could help to encourage players to just deal with half trained soldiers.

Another idea, that was mentioned before, would be maintenance costs. Probably the hardest to implement and at the moment I haven't even a clue how to design this theoretically.

Wouldn't fix the problem that a good atlantean player has a free win against any frisian player on early-contact maps…

Only if you want to use this as stand-alone solution face-wink.png
You could also introduce mud-pits to frisians, where enemy soldiers get stuck for some time and go back home afterwards.


Top Quote
Nordfriese
Avatar
Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07
Posts: 824
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: 0x55555d3a34c0
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 22:07

JanO wrote:

Nordfriese wrote:

JanO wrote:

Now, as a contrast to those huge posts, just two short ideas:

  • Give Soldiers experience. Gained by winning fights, needed for higher promotions (maybe 0 experience -> all lvl 1 promotions possible, 1 experience -> all lvl 2 promotions possible etc.)

Counter suggestion: Play Wesnoth face-wink.png

Done face-wink.png Already two times. But they have not enough unit-levels.

Play the Legend of the Invincibles add-on campaign, that will keep you so busy that you'll never want to think about military experience in Widelands thereafter face-wink.png

This would just make the game much more military-focused, because it would force players to start many battles so the higher part of the economy can even start working. -1

I'm not sure about that. Think about the additional micromanaging (or at least time, once the micromanaging is reduced by better options) to get half-trained soldiers back to the trainingsites. This could help to encourage players to just deal with half trained soldiers.

Edit: that's another reason against face-wink.png It would force players to micromanage soldiers a lot to get even some training steps. It would reward micromanaging extremely. (end edit)

Another idea, that was mentioned before, would be maintenance costs. Probably the hardest to implement and at the moment I haven't even a clue how to design this theoretically.

Wouldn't fix the problem that a good atlantean player has a free win against any frisian player on early-contact maps…

Only if you want to use this as stand-alone solution face-wink.png
You could also introduce mud-pits to frisians, where enemy soldiers get stuck for some time and go back home afterwards.

face-grin.png Nice idea, but also goes too far towards military strategy face-wink.png

the-x wrote:

Nordfriese wrote:

  • increase training time for higher promotions (lvl 1 promotions stay as now, lvl 2 promotions double (or even more) the time, lvl 3 double lvl2 time etc.)

I like this idea face-smile.png This would keep supersoldiers the strongest while giving more importance to medium-trained soldiers.

+1 good idea, but how to code?

Easy, we'd only have to increase a few numbers in the data/buildings/trainingsites/*/*/init.lua

Another idea, that was mentioned before, would be maintenance costs. Probably the hardest to implement and at the moment I haven't even a clue how to design this theoretically.

Wouldn't fix the problem that a good atlantean player has a free win against any frisian player on early-contact maps…

nice concept - It might be rarely difficult how exactly does the maitenance work?

The idea (already pretty old) was that milsites frequently need to be supplied with food or something or they stop working. There was no real agreement on it as far as I remember.

Edited: 2020-04-27, 22:17

Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1330
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 22:23

from all the discussion so far I couldn't see any agreement on not even a description of the problem. So I try to ask again can we agree on the 3 points that me and KoN were proposing.

  1. 1st hero should not be possible without having most of the economy
  2. times to reach that point should be balanced among tribes
  3. Changes to achieve that should be as minimal invasive as they could be

some sort of agreement would be fine. So far a lot of new features were proposed which are not in every case suited to overcome the early contact improtance of heroes problem which are mostly not minimal invasive with the legacy of this game and might end in a completely new game which just keeps some graphics and the name.

If we can't agree what the problem is and what should be aimed to achieve I'd rather vote to not change anything.
This doesn't mean that the above points are complete nor are they unchangeable I am open for proposal of other goals for this discussion, but without any goal it is hard to stay on the topic and the result maybe exactly nothing.

And yes the proposal above was made cause I believe it is doable in this way.


Top Quote
Nordfriese
Avatar
Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07
Posts: 824
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: 0x55555d3a34c0
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 22:31

hessenfarmer wrote:

from all the discussion so far I couldn't see any agreement on not even a description of the problem. So I try to ask again can we agree on the 3 points that me and KoN were proposing.

  1. 1st hero should not be possible without having most of the economy
  2. times to reach that point should be balanced among tribes
  3. Changes to achieve that should be as minimal invasive as they could be

I agree face-smile.png

some sort of agreement would be fine. So far a lot of new features were proposed which are not in every case suited to overcome the early contact improtance of heroes problem which are mostly not minimal invasive with the legacy of this game and might end in a completely new game which just keeps some graphics and the name.

If we can't agree what the problem is and what should be aimed to achieve I'd rather vote to not change anything.

Most of these suggestions are not that drastically, but yes we shouldn't change too much about this game for the sake of balance.

This doesn't mean that the above points are complete nor are they unchangeable I am open for proposal of other goals for this discussion

I would additionally mention that heroes are and should be important, but perhaps they are too important as it is, so I would also propose
4. Take some focus away from making supersoldiers towards using medium-trained soldiers (without making supersoldiers cost-inefficient)


Top Quote
kaputtnik
Avatar
Joined: 2013-02-18, 20:48
Posts: 1857
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Germany
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 22:51

Nordfriese wrote:

hessenfarmer wrote:

from all the discussion so far I couldn't see any agreement on not even a description of the problem. So I try to ask again can we agree on the 3 points that me and KoN were proposing.

  1. 1st hero should not be possible without having most of the economy
  2. times to reach that point should be balanced among tribes
  3. Changes to achieve that should be as minimal invasive as they could be

I agree face-smile.png

Me too face-smile.png

I would additionally mention that heroes are and should be important, but perhaps they are too important as it is, so I would also propose
4. Take some focus away from making supersoldiers towards using medium-trained soldiers (without making supersoldiers cost-inefficient)

+1


Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1330
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 22:57

Nordfriese wrote:

hessenfarmer wrote:

from all the discussion so far I couldn't see any agreement on not even a description of the problem. So I try to ask again can we agree on the 3 points that me and KoN were proposing.

  1. 1st hero should not be possible without having most of the economy
  2. times to reach that point should be balanced among tribes
  3. Changes to achieve that should be as minimal invasive as they could be

I agree face-smile.png

some sort of agreement would be fine. So far a lot of new features were proposed which are not in every case suited to overcome the early contact improtance of heroes problem which are mostly not minimal invasive with the legacy of this game and might end in a completely new game which just keeps some graphics and the name.

If we can't agree what the problem is and what should be aimed to achieve I'd rather vote to not change anything.

Most of these suggestions are not that drastically, but yes we shouldn't change too much about this game for the sake of balance.

This doesn't mean that the above points are complete nor are they unchangeable I am open for proposal of other goals for this discussion

I would additionally mention that heroes are and should be important, but perhaps they are too important as it is, so I would also propose
4. Take some focus away from making supersoldiers towards using medium-trained soldiers (without making supersoldiers cost-inefficient)

Ok noted. However I don't have a glue how to achieve this yet as the last weapon is already expensive and adds just the same amount of hitpoints as the previous one (which is spoken in percentage to less then the previous one). In the end everbody playing seriously and competitive would only do what is cost efficient. This is sad but I believe it is the truth. Sadly we are educated in this way in real life as well aren't we


Top Quote
Nordfriese
Avatar
Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07
Posts: 824
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: 0x55555d3a34c0
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 23:08

Ok noted. However I don't have a glue how to achieve this yet as the last weapon is already expensive and adds just the same amount of hitpoints as the previous one (which is spoken in percentage to less then the previous one). In the end everbody playing seriously and competitive would only do what is cost efficient. This is sad but I believe it is the truth. Sadly we are educated in this way in real life as well aren't we

In real life, I would not be so sure that people only do what's efficient… but in Widelands, certainly. As I stated elsewhere there will only ever be 1 strategy to play perfectly, and pro players will always use this one way. So our only freedom is to outline what this strategy should look like. IMHO a desirable outline would be that a mixture of a few heroes plus many medium soldiers is stronger than many medium soldiers and also stronger than heroes only. Let me phrase it like this: if three players turn the same amount of ores into a) only heroes, b) only medium soldiers, or c) use half the ores for heroes and the rest for mediums – then C is stronger than A, and A stronger than B (and B weakest of the three). This would not be trivial to ensure, but perhaps it could be done by fiddling with the upgrade costs and a non-linear level increase system. I'm not a balancing expert though so I have no idea whether this is really possible in practice.


Top Quote