MP Option: Luck-Limiter

Brainstorm ideas of possible additions to the game. Read this before posting!

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:

is a luck-limiter needed?

Yes
5
21%
No
19
79%
Other (Please Comment)
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 24

Flamie
Posts: 27
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 8:42 am

MP Option: Luck-Limiter

Post by Flamie »

The basic idea behind a luck modifier is to look at the percentual difference in the statistics (compare Average with Actual) and hiddenly add a bonus/penelty when someone's luck (bad or good) goes beyond reasonable amounts.

putting a slider option for this for each MP game you can determine how much difference is needed for it to work (go from: "don't use" to "Prevent luck").

This would allow players to set the amount of limitation on luck they want themself, and the default should be "don't use".
I'm Roze. I'm an Era and Map-maker.
User avatar
turin
Lord of the East
Posts: 11662
Joined: January 11th, 2004, 7:17 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by turin »

It's amazing how many times this idea, or one similar, has been suggested, then rejected. I advise you do a search for "removing luck" or something similar, you'll find a lot of suggests and reasons to not implement them.

And, from the FPI:
There should be a 'deterministic', 'non random' mode which one can play in.

Background: some people, apparently frustrated at losing their units in random battles, feel that there should be a non-random way of playing the game.

Result: the developers feel that randomness is a large part of the game, and that taking the randomness out of the game would be somewhat akin to taking the randomness out of most card games. Some patches are available on the forums that will produce a non-random version of wesnoth, although use of them will make you unable to play multiplayer, and the patches are not supported by the wesnoth development team.
For I am Turin Turambar - Master of Doom, by doom mastered. On permanent Wesbreak. Will not respond to private messages. Sorry!
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
scott
Posts: 5242
Joined: May 12th, 2004, 12:35 am
Location: Alexandria, VA

Post by scott »

We've been here before.

Many,

many,

many times.

:(
Hope springs eternal.
Wesnoth acronym guide.
Flamie
Posts: 27
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 8:42 am

Post by Flamie »

I don't doubt that you've been here before :)
Point is though, as a setting, that's by default off, it wouldn't make the people who feel random should be the truth affected.

Also, it doesn't remove luck, it removes small,none or extreme luck depending on setting, pleasing both crowds. (except maybe the developers who would be like.. *grr* over having the code in the game).
I'm Roze. I'm an Era and Map-maker.
scott
Posts: 5242
Joined: May 12th, 2004, 12:35 am
Location: Alexandria, VA

Post by scott »

There's also been a lot of discussion on the burden of having options. Please take some time to read the developers' opinions on adding options in general and an option for this. You can do that or make them go through the effort of re-explaining it all again.

If you were to make the source code modifications yourself and compile the game that way, it may become very popular, popular enough for you to want to maintain it as a fork.

I challenged someone once that if he made deterministic mode I would play it, and he did it. However, I couldn't get the patch to build so I backed down. So my revised challenge is: if you give me something to play that has reduced-luck mode, I'll play it.
Hope springs eternal.
Wesnoth acronym guide.
ryn
Posts: 196
Joined: August 23rd, 2004, 4:01 am
Location: Israel

Post by ryn »

Really, scott? what's your platform?
:D

If anyone would play, I'd gladly compile Psyklop's patches for Windows, Linux (x86), and Mac OS X (though I only have 10.4, running on a new laptop)

edit: <off topic> wouldn't it be interesting to test different AIs by how good they are at deterministic mode? </off topic>
2B |! 2B = 3F
User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8129
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Post by Elvish_Pillager »

ryn wrote:edit: <off topic> wouldn't it be interesting to test different AIs by how good they are at deterministic mode? </off topic>
On an utterly unrelated note, wouldn't it be interesting if we had different AIs?
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.
User avatar
Ankka
Posts: 594
Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 2:40 pm
Location: Finland

Post by Ankka »

Elvish Pillager wrote:
ryn wrote:edit: <off topic> wouldn't it be interesting to test different AIs by how good they are at deterministic mode? </off topic>
On an utterly unrelated note, wouldn't it be interesting if we had different AIs?
sample_ai, idle_ai and the main one?




Sorry, bad joke.
scott
Posts: 5242
Joined: May 12th, 2004, 12:35 am
Location: Alexandria, VA

Post by scott »

10.4
Hook me up.
Hope springs eternal.
Wesnoth acronym guide.
Dacyn
Posts: 1855
Joined: May 1st, 2004, 9:34 am
Location: Texas

Post by Dacyn »

scott wrote:There's also been a lot of discussion on the burden of having options.
Added to the FPI...
Noy
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1321
Joined: March 13th, 2005, 3:59 pm

Post by Noy »

Flamie wrote:I don't doubt that you've been here before :)
Point is though, as a setting, that's by default off, it wouldn't make the people who feel random should be the truth affected.

Also, it doesn't remove luck, it removes small,none or extreme luck depending on setting, pleasing both crowds. (except maybe the developers who would be like.. *grr* over having the code in the game).
Your suggestions all require a huge amount of reprogramming for the game, which is practically unfeasable. Furthremore itwould alter the game's flavour. In all honesty, I don't mind poor luck, as long as the game isn't ruined because of it. Combat exchanges rarely go as planned and the element of chance as a replication of the multiple variables that exist in any battle that cannot be defined, is a good thing. It gives less skilled players a fighting chance against good players, and the best players an easy way to lose. In any case I would argue for its retnention as the way it is.
I suspect having one foot in the past is the best way to understand the present.

Don Hewitt.
ryn
Posts: 196
Joined: August 23rd, 2004, 4:01 am
Location: Israel

Post by ryn »

Well, scott, I'm constantly being moved around by my parents (we're flying to Israel in 6 days and all that) but I'm working on it, and deterministic 0.9.3 or at least 0.9.1 will soon be on its way. Also, I'll have to postpone x86 versions to mid-September, because that's when I'm getting my AMD (it's being shipped to Israel.. as is everything else :x ) I wonder if it will be playable on multiplayer (with other deterministic users, of course)?
2B |! 2B = 3F
KING_KONRAD
Posts: 20
Joined: July 19th, 2005, 10:39 pm
Location: alaska

Post by KING_KONRAD »

i like i like
need a cheat for a game?... than email me at LINK2@37.com!
User avatar
turin
Lord of the East
Posts: 11662
Joined: January 11th, 2004, 7:17 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by turin »

KING_KONRAD wrote:i like i like
This is spam and resurrection at the same time.

Stop it, impersonator of Kings.
For I am Turin Turambar - Master of Doom, by doom mastered. On permanent Wesbreak. Will not respond to private messages. Sorry!
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
KING_KONRAD
Posts: 20
Joined: July 19th, 2005, 10:39 pm
Location: alaska

Post by KING_KONRAD »

put a sock in it. this idea is way way better than mine
need a cheat for a game?... than email me at LINK2@37.com!
Post Reply