Topic: Balancing around the tempo tournament
Posted at: 2020-04-27, 23:40
1) I'm not sure. If it leads to a deadlock, I think it's ok (but then it should be equal for all tribes).
Now you brought me back to the point with maintenance-cost:
This is just brainstorming. Pick, alter or reject whatever I write here
Posted at: 2020-04-28, 00:02
Not at all. If two half promoted soldiers cost as much as a hero and are more effective, why would I ever want to make a hero? I'll just keep making half soldiers and win with numbers.
yes, most people like the game this manner. I myself like to play it this manner every once in a while. But the thing is, nobody is stopping anyone from playing the game that manner. it's called casual gaming. it's not like if we take away a couple of starting wares here and there anyone's casual gaming will be affected. in fact, most people won't even notice. any change will only be relevant to highly competitive games. nobody is trying to forbid casual gaming.
Which is why I am most amazed to see so many casual gamers here trying to reject changes as if they would prevent them from casual gaming.
While someone else seem miffed about having to make fast heroes or lose to them. but they fail to realize that the key of the issue is that they are casual gamers and they are playing against competitive gamers. of course they are losing. if it is not by early hero rush, it will be by some different mean, but no one can pretend to play casually and stand up to a pro.
it wouldn't need any balance at all. tribes are already decently balanced when they have a full economy. it's balancing the start that is trickier.
so, in order to help focus on the economy and not on fights, we should force people to fight if they want to train their soldiers? I don't see how it would be a good idea.
easily fixed by building more training sites. aside from that, it's an artificial slow down, no different than a high number of promotions for a blacksmith.
and finally, it won't fix inequalities. if a tribe is faster, it will slow down everyone equally. if a player is faster, it will also slow down everyone equally.
maintenance cost affecting soldiers would just force one to make heroes anyway, because they'd be cheaper to maintain. unless they are super expensive to keep, in which case upkeep would make heroes useless, and people would just fight with rookies.
finally, i want to make one last remark
actually, creating heroes used to be exactly that, the exception. it was something reserved for the very latest game. something almost unseen.
it only happened after months and months of gaming that i actually figured out first that it was possible to micromanage a hero without having a full flow of resources full time. i figured it serendipitously by doing no metal challenges of trident of fire, by the way.
and then i joined the first tournament, and i surprised eveyrone by getting the first hero after... 90 minutes!
and everyone was like "oooh, this guy makes heroes so fast! he broke the game!"
and i relaxed and didn't try to improve much, though i went to about 75 minutes.
and within the next year, worldsavior started to play. I remember his first few months, he was constantly asking questions, the best order to build, how many building X for every building Y. and everyone was like, "calm down dude, what we have is good enough". and he trounced me, because i wasn't applying myself fully. and then he still defeated me, though i managed some mixed success.
since then, time kept going down.
and now everyone can make heroes in 90 minutes, and nobody realizes how difficult it was, and that it took a lot of effort to figure out how. it literally took years.
and now people are all "oh, it's too easy to make heroes, we must make it harder". it's not easy. it's just that we figured out way to do it, and then we taught it to others.
and if we make it harder, you can be sure someone will figure out something, and it will be easy again.
Posted at: 2020-04-28, 00:12
Yes i mean its crazy that they took such a long time before, today we cant just imagine it. Especially the last weeks i was so micromanaging the weekend always my atlantean hero and i am saying yes i was very happy to have a time like 19 minutes and 18:12 minutes.
But good players always come with a new way of thinking and so i see that you must have completely changed the way that is played over time.
Maybe with teaching we can so some more thing, like before tournament i only had the questions we talked about and now the replays - never thought world had almost the identical build like me, with some changes in street managegemt but the build order of mine is sligthly better if you look at times wares need to the building and which one starts.
Anyway in the actual situation i think making it harder is good way because it challanges us more
Posted at: 2020-04-28, 00:26
"and then i joined the first tournament, and i surprised eveyrone by getting the first hero after... 90 minutes!"
This one reminded me a little bit of me in Tournament 2019 when i made a build with Barbarians with only axes and beer, it was a bit of a quantity build - but it was to say after the hero build i think the second most effective build on small or medium maps. these days i organized everything to get the most out of these two wares - i mean if i had understood the game mechanics with attack values these days, like i thought every upgrade made the unit 25% stronger, it might even been very perfect. but since i took a look at the values of attack improving by 1,4 and 1,4 while shields only 1,15 in february im now also going the hero build you done first in 2015 tournemant, since it is just the best working
So i am happy to play our next match, where we can try these things out
Posted at: 2020-04-28, 08:57
Yes, that's true. I didn't realized the fact that there are 2 types of widelands gamers.
Posted at: 2020-04-28, 09:03
This was already said. Just quoting Nordfriese and put an +1 under that would have sounded much less aggressive.
From logic point of view it is more reasonable then artificial to give more complicated stuff (= production of advanced weapons, advanced training) a higher demand on time. At least more logical then having heroes falling from the sky into the starting condition, that would not fix the problem of having different fast first hero production either. But having extremely long training times for higher promotioins would promote half trained soldiers, even with more trainingsites. They are costly, space consuming and if you then have 4 or 7 of them, you still may wonder if it is more effective to train your soldiers only to lvl2 of each class.
The intrinsic maintenance cost I suggested last would precisely do that: Make (numerous) heroes expensive to keep. The model has many possibilities for adjustment, it does not necessarily make heroes useless, it can be logically explained and it would not affect balance.
Now let's shake hands, virtually of course.
Posted at: 2020-05-01, 00:04
In that tournament you only used ATL
Looks like I should read some old discussions again
This wouldn't even work. Do you know why?
I don't like it to share my insights, but this is already the case (at least if you replace "medium" soldiers by "weak" soldiers). At the other hand, we would need more matches with large distances to verify that.
How do you mean "non-linear"?
I think they are that drastically
Matches with medium-trained soldiers can be played for example on goldless maps, and heroes are still there, and very cost-inefficient
So imho this is already enough.
-1 As already stated, the current state allows more different strategies, brings more variety to the game. We have long distances and short distances between the players, which increases the depth of Widelands.
depends on how much. Does anybody play in a 1vs1 like someone played in the TTT? I don't think so.
I'd agree to
-making marble mines more clever,
+1 very good
honestly that starting condition sounds much more interesting to me than village, poor hamlet, struggling outpost and the discoveries
+1 for the -1 ( = -1 )
At the other hand, on long distances one would still make mainly heroes.
I don't like the idea
As I mentioned, we could increase gold need of Atlantean Trainingssides and remove some gold thread.
And maybe we could change the order of Frisian training?
(In that case the attack promotions look like long, long, broad, broad, double, double )
I mean, Frisians don't have the cheap evade training, so they seem to be somewhat disadvantaged.
Enough for now, I might comment pages 1-3 of this giant discussion another day.
“It's a threat to our planet to believe that someone else will save it.” - Robert SwanTop Quote
Posted at: 2020-05-05, 21:59
Back to our main topic on the chances after the main tournament, here in 1 post the 3 main ideas that were collected by players - now the question arises which ones we want to implement in the game:
A maybe nice solution to include also hektors and kapuittniks ideas might be:
maybe also some path you decide to go and then any interaction between the two competitive players
What a very fevoribly solution would be the one of kaputtnik: That a hero is the ultimative goal which good players can only achieve very rarely. It is a further challenge to us and it is something special in a game (like the goal in football, were you waiting very long for, if they defense right)