Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
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:
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: October 20th, 2013, 4:07 pm
Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
There is no reason why one should know the opponent's units experience even before having fought them yet.
In real life, how can one possibly tell how experienced a unit is until one actually fights it ?
It thus should remain hidden until the unit has been first engaged.
In real life, how can one possibly tell how experienced a unit is until one actually fights it ?
It thus should remain hidden until the unit has been first engaged.
Re: Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
Wesnoth is a computer game. More specifically, it’s a turn-based strategy game, not a real life simulation.
Author of the unofficial UtBS sequels Invasion from the Unknown and After the Storm.
-
- Art Contributor
- Posts: 1700
- Joined: December 7th, 2006, 8:08 pm
Re: Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
so you should hae tokeeep track of what players has this your unit engaged and what platers has he not? no
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: October 20th, 2013, 4:07 pm
Re: Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
And why a strategy game shouldn't be realistic ?shadowm wrote:Wesnoth is a computer game. More specifically, it’s a turn-based strategy game, not a real life simulation.
I think the game would be much more interesting if one ignored enemy's experience in the first place.
Re: Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
There are elements of realism that can be injected for sure, but as a turn-based strategy game, there are already certain elements that are suspended or added for the sake of gameplay. This is not something that would be altered in core but you could try it in UMC.sacredceltic wrote:And why a strategy game shouldn't be realistic ?
Mainline Maintainer: AOI, DM, NR, TB and THoT.
UMC Maintainer: Forward They Cried, A Few Logs, A Few More Logs, Start of the War, and Battle Against Time
UMC Maintainer: Forward They Cried, A Few Logs, A Few More Logs, Start of the War, and Battle Against Time
- TheBladeRoden
- Posts: 168
- Joined: July 16th, 2007, 8:01 am
Re: Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
in 1v1 odds are they have 0 xp until first fight
Founding Father of Columbia
Re: Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
If the realism interferes with the strategy, then the game should not include it. But that's not the real issue; it would be better to ask "why should a strategy game be realistic?" (There is nothing intrinsic to "strategy game" that requires any degree of realism -- think Go or Chess.)sacredceltic wrote:And why a strategy game shouldn't be realistic ?
A strategy game can be as realistic as it wants to be. And some games develop highly intricate rules in an effort to be more realistic. Battle for Wesnoth, on the other hand, values simplicity over most other considerations. Moreover, it devalues realism to the point where the acronym WINR has been introduced. So arguments of "realism" tend to be summarily dismissed.
Re: Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
Because this is a fantasy game. I don't like the idea. There are soooooo many other things that doesn't make this realistic, so I cannot see the reason to implement this one. And I don't see how much this would bring into the game mechanics. Most of the units have 0 experience before the first fight anyways.sacredceltic wrote:And why a strategy game shouldn't be realistic ?
Re: Opponent's experience should be unknown until 1st fight
It won't be added because it wouldn't make the game any better. Whether it could be justified by some realism-based rationale or not is nowhere near enough.