Not just "more random"
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
- Midnight_Carnival
- Posts: 836
- Joined: September 6th, 2008, 11:08 am
- Location: On the beach at sunset, gathering coral
Not just "more random"
The "problem" - there is none, I'm happy with Wesnoth, if I wasn't I'd just play something else or write my own mod.
The proposal is easy to read as "let's make Wesnoth more random for fun" - but that is not totally it.
I propose a "fluke shot" which could happen either when a unit is attacking or defending - there is a something like 1/1000 chance of it happening, unrelated to anything else. The unit would do 7x normal damage - resistances and such would still apply - so an attack which would normally do 1 damage would now do 7
Reason - well, I'd look stupid if I said "becasue it would make the game more random, and thus more fun" - there is the chance that it would make the game more addictive - like the lottery, a very small chance that something extrordiary could happen, that there is no "impossible" situation, just varying degrees of improbability and the idea that there is something new (there could be many great new animations made for the fluke shots!)
Problems I can forsee:
Well, there is always the chance that some idiot will reload the same attack 9000 times to get the fluke shot, but seriously, this already happens in Wesnoth, I'm as guilty of it as anyone else.
There is the "more work" problem - but that applies mainly to my stuggestion of the flashy animations - which are not neccesarry in any case in terms of coding, it would probalby not be too difficult.
And then there is "it doesn't really add anything to the game" - well, for some, no, it won't, for others it will, my suggestion doesn't really change the way the game works at all (provided the chance is large enough that it does happen, but small enough that you can't count on it happening)
Anything I have missed?
Suggestion: try it, in a mod or something, see if it really changes things and "ruins" the game - if not, well it's a suggestion of an optional extra, like idle animations, as I see it it can't really hurt.
The proposal is easy to read as "let's make Wesnoth more random for fun" - but that is not totally it.
I propose a "fluke shot" which could happen either when a unit is attacking or defending - there is a something like 1/1000 chance of it happening, unrelated to anything else. The unit would do 7x normal damage - resistances and such would still apply - so an attack which would normally do 1 damage would now do 7
Reason - well, I'd look stupid if I said "becasue it would make the game more random, and thus more fun" - there is the chance that it would make the game more addictive - like the lottery, a very small chance that something extrordiary could happen, that there is no "impossible" situation, just varying degrees of improbability and the idea that there is something new (there could be many great new animations made for the fluke shots!)
Problems I can forsee:
Well, there is always the chance that some idiot will reload the same attack 9000 times to get the fluke shot, but seriously, this already happens in Wesnoth, I'm as guilty of it as anyone else.
There is the "more work" problem - but that applies mainly to my stuggestion of the flashy animations - which are not neccesarry in any case in terms of coding, it would probalby not be too difficult.
And then there is "it doesn't really add anything to the game" - well, for some, no, it won't, for others it will, my suggestion doesn't really change the way the game works at all (provided the chance is large enough that it does happen, but small enough that you can't count on it happening)
Anything I have missed?
Suggestion: try it, in a mod or something, see if it really changes things and "ruins" the game - if not, well it's a suggestion of an optional extra, like idle animations, as I see it it can't really hurt.
...apparenly we can't go with it or something.
Re: Not just "more random"
I love this idea.
LOLMidnight_Carnival wrote:Well, there is always the chance that some idiot will reload the same attack 9000 times to get the fluke shot, but seriously, this already happens in Wesnoth, I'm as guilty of it as anyone else
F:tGJ, Saurian Campaign
The Southern Chains, a fanfic
“The difference between winners and champions is that champions are more consistent."
~Sierra
The Southern Chains, a fanfic
“The difference between winners and champions is that champions are more consistent."
~Sierra
Re: Not just "more random"
And then you have units that have higher or lower chances of scoring those critical hits, and units that have higher or lower critical hit multiplicator...
Although I think it's pretty reminiscent of the base mechanics and wouldn't add that much more to the game...
Although I think it's pretty reminiscent of the base mechanics and wouldn't add that much more to the game...
Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny - Frank Zappa
Current projects: Internet meme Era, The Settlers of Wesnoth
Current projects: Internet meme Era, The Settlers of Wesnoth
Re: Not just "more random"
I would not like to see that too. Let's suppose that I don't reload at all (that is not right, but I am usually trying to limit reloading), an enemy would score this thing to an important unit of mine slaying it instantly and without possibility to foresee it (motivating me to reload the game). This fluke shot would let any hero of yours die at any time, preparing you bad surprises, motivating you to reload, because it is the ultimate way to avoid getting your units randomly devastated by this (level 1 Orcish Grunt suddenly slaying an Elvish Champion).
To sum up, yes, it would allow you to deal with some problems unexpectedly, but it would make the game too unpredictable and make it impossible to keep your units safe.
To sum up, yes, it would allow you to deal with some problems unexpectedly, but it would make the game too unpredictable and make it impossible to keep your units safe.
Re: Not just "more random"
I don't know, 7x damage just seems a little much to me. That would be pretty much instakill in many unit matchups. I usually try to make sure that no important unit can die even if all attacks hit, but something like this would mess that up (and you know it'll always happen at the worst time).
Doubled damage would be as high as I'd go with this, but that would also mean that the probability should be higher to have any relevance (about 5% or something, like e.g. the crit system in Pokémon), but that still makes it almost impossible to have a unit survive for sure. As Dugi said, that would really only encourage reloading and make it way more frustrting. So, in general, I don't think something like this would work well in Wesnoth.
Doubled damage would be as high as I'd go with this, but that would also mean that the probability should be higher to have any relevance (about 5% or something, like e.g. the crit system in Pokémon), but that still makes it almost impossible to have a unit survive for sure. As Dugi said, that would really only encourage reloading and make it way more frustrting. So, in general, I don't think something like this would work well in Wesnoth.
Co-Creator of The Fellowship of the Clay (BfW 1.10) ~~ Maintainer of the German Code of Conduct
How to isolate problematic WML code ~~ WML error messages and their reasons
How to isolate problematic WML code ~~ WML error messages and their reasons
- Pentarctagon
- Project Manager
- Posts: 5527
- Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
- Location: Earth (occasionally)
Re: Not just "more random"
I don't see what this really adds besides making it even harder to make sure that important units survive.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
-
- Posts: 706
- Joined: January 6th, 2004, 10:42 pm
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: Not just "more random"
This proposed change would give added impetus and power to the attacker, a change which would lead to more lop-sided multi-player matches. Plus, however you spin it, it does add more "random" to this strategy game, something which, in my own opinion, is only a necessary evil of TBS games. If you want to gamble, put it in another genre. Or go to Vegas.
- Midnight_Carnival
- Posts: 836
- Joined: September 6th, 2008, 11:08 am
- Location: On the beach at sunset, gathering coral
Re: Not just "more random"
<shaking head sadly> no.Insinuator wrote:This proposed change would give added impetus and power to the attacker, a change which would lead to more lop-sided multi-player matches. Plus, however you spin it, it does add more "random" to this strategy game, something which, in my own opinion, is only a necessary evil of TBS games. If you want to gamble, put it in another genre. Or go to Vegas.
I did specify that this could happen at any time: meaning it might happen while defending, please read a post (however long, boring or waffling) before trying to rebut it, it just makes you look silly.
As for the 'problem' of more random: ...well, Wesnoth is a pretty random game as well (think someone once posted something about mages and trolls) _ I think there are people who will jump for joy at the suggestion of making it more random, and then there are those who will grumble malcontentedly about how it should be made less random, so they can know for certain... Wesnoth is in my opinion a nice balance between chess and poker -going one way or another would ruin it for me too. It is just that I personally don't like a certainty (such as my hero having 40 hp left and the orc having missed it's first attack, so he has to survive) - I actually think it would make multiplayer way more fun - especially since ... well it's not always considered polite to reload! I didn't say it had to be in vanilla Wesnoth, or in every campaign.
What does it add?
Ok, you got me there, not a great deal, and I do now see how some might find it very annoying in campaigns. I feel that giving units the (remote) chance of attacking or counter-attacking beyond the normal max ammount of damage for that unit would improve the game, some don't, some feel that Wesnoth would be dramatically "improved" by making it either 100% random or 100% deterministic - I do not.
I'm also not too keen on the suggestion that the chance of a 'fluke shot' be increased or decreased for some units, but whatever works...
<exasperation> ...well, I don't promise anything, and last time I checked I really didn't know what the hell was going on with the way WML now works, but suggesting that anyone who like me feels that it would be an improvement perhaps help somehow write it into the code for a MP senario and then NB extensively play test it (can't help with that, intenet problems) - if it fails to impress anyone to the extent where they see any benifit to it, then I will simply appologising for wasting people's time and go home with my tail between my legs. -
-it's a challange
<starts looking for time, energy and mostly inspiration to write this code into a senario >
...apparenly we can't go with it or something.
-
- Posts: 706
- Joined: January 6th, 2004, 10:42 pm
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: Not just "more random"
I did read that. It is not relevant to my point. If this CAN happen on the first strike, it means whoever strikes first CAN get a massive advantage. And if something CAN happen, it will happen. Attackers are already given the slight advantage of the first strike to offset the terrain defensive positioning. So even if you give equal compensation to the defenders, it is accentuating the bonus to attackers. That will make a difference, particularly in MP.Midnight_Carnival wrote:<shaking head sadly> no.Insinuator wrote:This proposed change would give added impetus and power to the attacker, a change which would lead to more lop-sided multi-player matches. Plus, however you spin it, it does add more "random" to this strategy game, something which, in my own opinion, is only a necessary evil of TBS games. If you want to gamble, put it in another genre. Or go to Vegas.
I did specify that this could happen at any time: meaning it might happen while defending, please read a post (however long, boring or waffling) before trying to rebut it, it just makes you look silly.
Re: Not just "more random"
Would this "fluke shot" really differ from, say, fencer's 4/4 hit against 70% defense?
- Midnight_Carnival
- Posts: 836
- Joined: September 6th, 2008, 11:08 am
- Location: On the beach at sunset, gathering coral
Re: Not just "more random"
A lot of things can happen... In different situations whoever strikes first can have a massive advantage anyway, and then there is the firststrike ability - so sorry for like flaming you needlessly then, but I still don't see what you have said as really huge anywayInsinuator wrote: I did read that. It is not relevant to my point. If this CAN happen on the first strike, it means whoever strikes first CAN get a massive advantage. And if something CAN happen, it will happen. Attackers are already given the slight advantage of the first strike to offset the terrain defensive positioning. So even if you give equal compensation to the defenders, it is accentuating the bonus to attackers. That will make a difference, particularly in MP.
jumpgate wrote:Would this "fluke shot" really differ from, say, fencer's 4/4 hit against 70% defense?
Exactly! thank you - the real difference is that this would allow a small chance that something completely unexpected might happen in this case, damage inflicted which could be more than the max damage possible - maybe not 7x - just an unexpected ammount. I sometimes find Wesnoth too... cold? all about calculation and certainties. I don't think certainties entirely fit in a game with % chances. I like the idea that you can not say even if all 5 trolls get all of their attacks in, my unit will survive. I'd love to be like all what the hell happened there! some people don't, some people's day is ruined if somebody puts one of their socks in the underwear drawer.
...apparenly we can't go with it or something.
-
- Posts: 103
- Joined: March 19th, 2011, 3:30 am
Re: Not just "more random"
The fencer's 4/4 hit has a probability of .0081, or 0.81%. It's a hair under 1/100, and the fluke shot being discussed is to the tune of two orders of magnitude less likely. Similarly, said shot drastically changes the end result: The damage dealt is increased by more than the total possible damage in almost every case, with the only exceptions being non-multiplayer units. In the case of the fencer's 4/4 hit, it's more like 10 damage beyond the expected value*. This effect adds a whole new dynamic extremely rarely that utterly tosses previous strategies, the 4/4 hit is a somewhat unlikely event that needs to be taken into account. They are very different.jumpgate wrote:Would this "fluke shot" really differ from, say, fencer's 4/4 hit against 70% defense?
*I didn't bother calculating this, but it should be approximately correct.
Re: Not just "more random"
They're still very similar in that nobody would ever take either of two into account when planning their strategies. Rogue fencers hitting important units much more than they should to do may sometimes win battles, just as those "shots". If you want too add a feature pure fun into the game, meaning something unexpected and yet unrelated to the ordinary hit-damage calculation, why not try to introduce a more original rule like "in the beginning of a turn each unit stationed in the mountains have 1/1000 chance to fall off a cliff and die"? It also would not in any way affect the gameplay, just, in case of happening, bring much joy to your opponent, instead of you. Imagine the scream sound!TheCripple wrote:...They are very different.
-
- Posts: 706
- Joined: January 6th, 2004, 10:42 pm
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: Not just "more random"
Apparently some people think they speak for everyone when they try to define what is "fun", as you just did. Now, I am not arrogant enough to speak for everyone, but I will speak for myself and say that throwing increased randomness into Wesnoth is NOT fun. In fact it is the very opposite of fun. Whether you agree with me or not, doesn't matter. Just don't tell me how I should have fun.jumpgate wrote:If you want too add a feature pure fun into the game, meaning something unexpected and yet unrelated to the ordinary hit-damage calculation,
Would not in any way effect gameplay, eh? Gameplay in Wesnoth is not just about rules and stats. Particularly in multiplayer, it is about emotions. About fear and patience. You see a Horseman descending on your Footpad, you know fear. Your example adds an additional element of fear. It doesn't matter that it is a tiny chance of happening. The FEAR of it happening will alter player's behaviors. Mountains would be avoided even more than they are now and the few times that this did happen would accentuate the outrage we on the forums so often hear already (i.e., the RNG is biased arguments).jumpgate wrote:why not try to introduce a more original rule like "in the beginning of a turn each unit stationed in the mountains have 1/1000 chance to fall off a cliff and die"? It also would not in any way affect the gameplay, just, in case of happening, bring much joy to your opponent, instead of you. Imagine the scream sound!
I feel the same would hold true with the original poster's idea for a fluke shot, though not nearly in as particular a manner as burdening one particular terrain type with such a liability. I'd be interested to see it in an Era, though, and might even test it out.
- Midnight_Carnival
- Posts: 836
- Joined: September 6th, 2008, 11:08 am
- Location: On the beach at sunset, gathering coral
Re: Not just "more random"
-damn! you knew I'd be a sucker for something like this! will be sure to add it when/if (but preferably when) I get round to it. Just really glad people are seeing that it was more about being able to almost count on it not happening, thus not determining strategy, but sometimes against all odds thwarting it.jumpgate wrote:They're still very similar in that nobody would ever take either of two into account when planning their strategies. Rogue fencers hitting important units much more than they should to do may sometimes win battles, just as those "shots". If you want too add a feature pure fun into the game, meaning something unexpected and yet unrelated to the ordinary hit-damage calculation, why not try to introduce a more original rule like "in the beginning of a turn each unit stationed in the mountains have 1/1000 chance to fall off a cliff and die"? It also would not in any way affect the gameplay, just, in case of happening, bring much joy to your opponent, instead of you. Imagine the scream sound!TheCripple wrote:...They are very different.
...apparenly we can't go with it or something.