Latest Posts

Topic: Fair and Balanced Start

blind3rdeye
Avatar
Joined: 2020-03-26, 08:47
Posts: 49
Ranking
Pry about Widelands
Posted at: 2020-09-22, 13:29

Well, I agree that the 'struggling outpost' starting conditions may not be carefully balanced for competitive multiplayer; and I also appreciate that it would be nice to have balanced starting conditions that are less generous that the 'normal' HQ starting conditions. ... But, I don't think it's a good idea to completely replace the existing 'struggling outpost' conditions - because those existing conditions already meet their intended purpose; which is that they are near-minimalist starting conditions without the 'lose conditions' that exist the the true minimum 'poor hamlet' conditions.

So... perhaps it would be better to frame the ideas of this thread as a alternative starting conditions, rather than replacements. And perhaps, if they work well, they could later aim to become standard in some way. (I have no comment on the actual balance of them right now.)

Edited: 2020-09-22, 13:30

Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1540
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-09-22, 14:12

Well,
Balance in terms of Starting conditions is difficult to judge on. Currently we assume the HQ SC to be mostly balanced. (minor tweaks needed due to results of the last single player challenge and some tournament results). I think we could try and most probably achieve to get the fortified Village SC and the Trading Outpost balanced as well simply based on congruence of factors between tribes ( I'll add an excel sheet tonight to show what I mean). This concept could also be used to balance village SC.
Poor hamlet and struggling outpost, however are not meant to be balanced as they are meant as single player puzzles / challenges. The same is with the discovery SC.
MAybe we could analyze if new World can be balanced based on the concept described above.


Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 634
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Posted at: 2020-09-22, 14:43

hessenfarmer wrote:

Well,
Balance in terms of Starting conditions is difficult to judge on. Currently we assume the HQ SC to be mostly balanced. (minor tweaks needed due to results of the last single player challenge and some tournament results). I think we could try and most probably achieve to get the fortified Village SC and the Trading Outpost balanced as well simply based on congruence of factors between tribes

I know that it is quite difficult to balance, its just the fact that almost every player plays atlantean steals the game a lot of potential. Imagine, we would have games where a player choses the Empire Tribe and wins against Atlantean, this year i havent seen 10% of games like this.

( I'll add an excel sheet tonight to show what I mean). This concept could also be used to balance village SC.

The other possibility is that we add this as new start, one called rush the other economy

In my opinion 2 things are important

  • balance between the tribes, that atlantean are not too strong

  • tool smith should make sence, i have to build a toolsmith everytime my two mills are at 50% because the 2 bakerys. I have only tools to build max 2 bakerys.

it would be great also to have 2 starts, players can chose from to have an exciting game no matter how experienced they are


Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1540
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-09-22, 16:54

the-x wrote:

hessenfarmer wrote:

Well,
Balance in terms of Starting conditions is difficult to judge on. Currently we assume the HQ SC to be mostly balanced. (minor tweaks needed due to results of the last single player challenge and some tournament results). I think we could try and most probably achieve to get the fortified Village SC and the Trading Outpost balanced as well simply based on congruence of factors between tribes

I know that it is quite difficult to balance, its just the fact that almost every player plays atlantean steals the game a lot of potential. Imagine, we would have games where a player choses the Empire Tribe and wins against Atlantean, this year i havent seen 10% of games like this.

that is what I described in brackets above.Maybe I'll come up with a proposal from my side as well. Idea is to have as minimal changes to achieve but not overachieve the goal.

( I'll add an excel sheet tonight to show what I mean). This concept could also be used to balance village SC.

The other possibility is that we add this as new start, one called rush the other economy

Adding new SC is always an option but I prefer working on balancing the existing ones

In my opinion 2 things are important

  • balance between the tribes, that atlantean are not too strong

In an ideal world none of our currently 5 tribes would be too strong. However there might be (and are intended) differences in suitability of tribe on a specific map.

  • tool smith should make sence, i have to build a toolsmith everytime my two mills are at 50% because the 2 bakerys. I have only tools to build max 2 bakerys.

Well this makes sense from my point of view. Every building should be needed to run an economy that supports the constant production of trained soldiers.

it would be great also to have 2 starts, players can chose from to have an exciting game no matter how experienced they are

I don't understand we already have 8 of them. Where we might manage to get 5 of them balanced to certain level.
Together with our various win conditions there are already a nice couple of permutations available.


Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1540
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-09-22, 20:34

Ok here is the excel sheet that I mentioned in my post above


Attachment: Start_cond.zip (26.3 KB)

Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 634
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Posted at: 2020-09-22, 23:24

So fast - atm i cant open the document

hessenfarmer wrote:

the-x wrote:

  • tool smith should make sence, i have to build a toolsmith everytime my two mills are at 50% because the 2 bakerys. I have only tools to build max 2 bakerys.

Well this makes sense from my point of view. Every building should be needed to run an economy that supports the constant production of trained soldiers.

Yes, i also think we can change this single point, like smelter and baker +1, so a minimal change that we have 3 of them at the hq start at the beginning

it would be great also to have 2 starts, players can chose from to have an exciting game no matter how experienced they are

I don't understand we already have 8 of them. Where we might manage to get 5 of them balanced to certain level.
Together with our various win conditions there are already a nice couple of permutations available.

Sure, we have 8 different starts. But only "Headquarters" is used, very rarely seen there has been "Trading Outpost" and never have i played or some one else I know with any other start in multiplayer -

my idea was to make a start, for example if trimard wants to have a challenging game against me, i will give him a little stronger start, like +30% or something like this.

Minimal and struggling outpost are low with 1 or 2 soldiers at the start, its practically not possible if the other one plays the next higher start which is hq.


Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1540
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-09-23, 08:04

the-x wrote:

So fast - atm i cant open the document

well I had to zip the excel as xlsx is not allowed to be uploaded.

hessenfarmer wrote:

the-x wrote:

  • tool smith should make sence, i have to build a toolsmith everytime my two mills are at 50% because the 2 bakerys. I have only tools to build max 2 bakerys.

Well this makes sense from my point of view. Every building should be needed to run an economy that supports the constant production of trained soldiers.

Yes, i also think we can change this single point, like smelter and baker +1, so a minimal change that we have 3 of them at the hq start at the beginning

I believe you got me wrong. I was talking about not delaying the need for the toolsmith, I think it is good like it is now. Cause adding additional tools /workers would make it possible to not build a toolsmith at all on small maps.

it would be great also to have 2 starts, players can chose from to have an exciting game no matter how experienced they are

I don't understand we already have 8 of them. Where we might manage to get 5 of them balanced to certain level.
Together with our various win conditions there are already a nice couple of permutations available.

Sure, we have 8 different starts. But only "Headquarters" is used, very rarely seen there has been "Trading Outpost" and never have i played or some one else I know with any other start in multiplayer -

But that is just a matter of communication with the opponent to use a different start condition. E.g. Fortified Village might be nice. And if both players have the same tribe balancing does not matter. Or if you prefer a more economy driven game try village against village

my idea was to make a start, for example if trimard wants to have a challenging game against me, i will give him a little stronger start, like +30% or something like this.

Minimal and struggling outpost are low with 1 or 2 soldiers at the start, its practically not possible if the other one plays the next higher start which is hq.

This is not correct. next SC after struggling outpost (from a military strength perspective) is peaceful Village, where you start with 5 soldiers but more wares.


Top Quote
the-x
Avatar
Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23
Posts: 634
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Posted at: 2020-09-23, 08:51

hessenfarmer wrote:

the-x wrote:

So fast - atm i cant open the document

well I had to zip the excel as xlsx is not allowed to be uploaded.

I dont have excel on my PC to open it

hessenfarmer wrote:

the-x wrote:

  • tool smith should make sence, i have to build a toolsmith everytime my two mills are at 50% because the 2 bakerys. I have only tools to build max 2 bakerys.

Well this makes sense from my point of view. Every building should be needed to run an economy that supports the constant production of trained soldiers.

Yes, i also think we can change this single point, like smelter and baker +1, so a minimal change that we have 3 of them at the hq start at the beginning

I was talking about not delaying the need for the toolsmith, I think it is good like it is now. Cause adding additional tools /workers would make it possible to not build a toolsmith at all on small maps.

Well the most challenging point is that you have to think wether / if you want to build a toolsmith. Best thing would be a player trying to rush and if the other defends nicely its time to build a toolsmith. Tooly could be a lot more expensive in wares so its really a strategical decision. On most games i see it been setted at the beginning.

Smelter we definitely need +1, since my economy is not running or i need to hardly pause my armorsmith or prduction in the moment i want to build a toolsmith. Then every game its the same procedure, a lot of problems arise in a circle cause the immense lack of iron.

it would be great also to have 2 starts, players can chose from to have an exciting game no matter how experienced they are

I don't understand we already have 8 of them. Where we might manage to get 5 of them balanced to certain level.
Together with our various win conditions there are already a nice couple of permutations available.

Sure, we have 8 different starts. But only "Headquarters" is used, very rarely seen there has been "Trading Outpost" and never have i played or some one else I know with any other start in multiplayer -

But that is just a matter of communication with the opponent to use a different start condition. E.g. Fortified Village might be nice. And if both players have the same tribe balancing does not matter. Or if you prefer a more economy driven game try village against village

Yes, there are combinations if you set the same start and the same tribe. But there are no combination in between

my idea was to make a start, for example if trimard wants to have a challenging game against me, i will give him a little stronger start, like +30% or something like this.

Minimal and struggling outpost are low with 1 or 2 soldiers at the start, its practically not possible if the other one plays the next higher start which is hq.

This is not correct. next SC after struggling outpost (from a military strength perspective) is peaceful Village, where you start with 5 soldiers but more wares.

5 soldiers compared to 45 is an incredible increase. I know noone who given 5 soldiers at small or medium maps wants to play on an enemy that has 45.


Top Quote
hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 1540
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2020-09-23, 10:52

the-x wrote:

hessenfarmer wrote:

well I had to zip the excel as xlsx is not allowed to be uploaded.

I dont have excel on my PC to open it.

Ok, I'll add an odt version tonight.

Yes, i also think we can change this single point, like smelter and baker +1, so a minimal change that we have 3 of them at the hq start at the beginning

I was talking about not delaying the need for the toolsmith, I think it is good like it is now. Cause adding additional tools /workers would make it possible to not build a toolsmith at all on small maps.

Well the most challenging point is that you have to think wether / if you want to build a toolsmith. Best thing would be a player trying to rush and if the other defends nicely its time to build a toolsmith. Tooly could be a lot more expensive in wares so its really a strategical decision. On most games i see it been setted at the beginning.

I believe that is the current situation. Your change would just favor the rushing player a bit, rendering the toolsmith useless in a small/short game.

Smelter we definitely need +1, since my economy is not running or i need to hardly pause my armorsmith or prduction in the moment i want to build a toolsmith. Then every game its the same procedure, a lot of problems arise in a circle cause the immense lack of iron.

Managing this better then your opponent (acting on this proactively) should be the challenge of the game, Imho.

But that is just a matter of communication with the opponent to use a different start condition. E.g. Fortified Village might be nice. And if both players have the same tribe balancing does not matter. Or if you prefer a more economy driven game try village against village

Yes, there are combinations if you set the same start and the same tribe. But there are no combination in between

that is why I want to try to balance (harmonise) them between tribes, based on a balanced HQ start.

This is not correct. next SC after struggling outpost (from a military strength perspective) is peaceful Village, where you start with 5 soldiers but more wares.

5 soldiers compared to 45 is an incredible increase. I know noone who given 5 soldiers at small or medium maps wants to play on an enemy that has 45.

I was talking about a match struggling outpost vs village.
Another combination not too far away would be HQ vs fortified Village (some buildings already built) or HQ vs Trading outpost.
However we might have a new SC in between. If we can base them on the other sc's balance.


Top Quote
teppo
Joined: 2012-01-30, 09:42
Posts: 404
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2020-09-23, 19:41

the-x wrote:

I know that it is quite difficult to balance, its just the fact that almost every player plays atlantean steals the game a lot of potential. Imagine, we would have games where a player choses the Empire Tribe and wins against Atlantean, this year i havent seen 10% of games like this.

This is why I made the an empire strikes back map. Symmertric and fair in that sense, blatantly favors Empire (which seems to be least used), not particularly good for Atlanteans.


Top Quote