Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Discussion of all aspects of multiplayer development: unit balancing, map development, server development, and so forth.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
Mabuse
Posts: 2130
Joined: November 6th, 2007, 1:38 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Mabuse »

cant think of such a situation.
seriously, i dont know what you mean.

host a 2 player game, create such a situation artifically (one turn before the city can be taken due to the use of disband), post the savegame (not the replay) here, and tell me what which player has to do in order to get the city due to the use of disband.

imo, disband cannot be used in that way.
The best bet is your own, good Taste.

SlowThinker
Posts: 876
Joined: November 28th, 2008, 6:18 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by SlowThinker »

a simple example:
Imagine this corridor (an impassable terrain around):
an empty defender's village, 2x empty hexes, a defender's lancer, an attacker's militia (it will take the village), an attacker's pike (to be disbanded), an attacker's knight, a dead end (an impassable terrain)

an example without the dead end:
A corridor:
def empty village, 4x def horse, def lancer, att horse (it will take the village), att pike (to be disbanded), 4x att elite infantry, att knight
I work on Conquest Minus • I use DFoolWide, Retro Terrain Package and the add-on 'High Contrast Water'
I moved to Nosebane's corner (Doc Paterson's signature); I am spending my time there, so PM me if I don't answer your post in forums

Mabuse
Posts: 2130
Joined: November 6th, 2007, 1:38 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Mabuse »

ok. i see. :mrgreen:

well, in cases where there are 1 hex wide corridors, a pikeman just in range not to be able to take the enemy city, just exactly enough own troops to kill the defending units and ONE other unit who is able to take the city, may make it nessesary to disband the pikeman, in order to give attacking space.

however, this will never happen on a normal map. on a normal map, you may simply move the pikeman away. no need to disband it.

i say, in these cases, mentioned by slowthinker, the use of disband is awesome. :mrgreen:
The best bet is your own, good Taste.

Nauzhror
Posts: 23
Joined: September 14th, 2011, 4:01 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Nauzhror »

If anyone is interested I've launched a conquest tournament. Everyone is free to register for it.

http://forums.wesnoth.org/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=35011.

Hex
Posts: 161
Joined: June 15th, 2010, 6:08 am

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Hex »

Spectres are too good, they should cost 25 gold, they can travel over anything, have 50% def everywhere. Like other racial high ends except drake, are a bit lower in attack compared to generals to compensate for their lack of assassin weakness.

But the difference in strength is not that great between spectres and generals, add in the spectres manoeuvrability and defense on offence anywhere and I see no reason for spectres to cost 20% less gold then generals.

SlowThinker
Posts: 876
Joined: November 28th, 2008, 6:18 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by SlowThinker »

(I talk about Conquest Minus now)
There are more unbalanced units than spectres - for example trolls are weak, especially in villages; elven/orcish 8g units are clearly worse than 9g units. And the spectres' combat advantage affects mainly neighbouring villages (it is quite inefective to travel several turns with them).
Anyway these unbalances have a relatively low effect (in comparison with the types of Neutrals in villages for example).
So the undead villages have slightly higher value than other villages (but rather because of ghosts than spectres), and therefore the value of the villages is slightly shifted: it adds rather an interesting point to the game: players must often decide whether they prefer to hurry for the undead village which is more distant (and get a strategic advantage) or they prefer an earlier gold income from near villages.
I work on Conquest Minus • I use DFoolWide, Retro Terrain Package and the add-on 'High Contrast Water'
I moved to Nosebane's corner (Doc Paterson's signature); I am spending my time there, so PM me if I don't answer your post in forums

Mabuse
Posts: 2130
Joined: November 6th, 2007, 1:38 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Mabuse »

in the actual conquest version trolls got therefore +20HP (normal 20 gold units have 250 HP, trolls have 270). 55% city def (+5%) and 40% flat def (+10%)

therefore trolls are good offensive units (they have like MOST 20 gold units 40% def on flat, but can take 1 more hit from other 20 gold units (normal 20 gold unit takes 6 hits before dying versus another 20 gold unit: 250/44 = 5.6 = 6 hits - troll pack a punch more 270/44 = 6.1 = 7 hits)

but slightly weaker in city defense since they have only 55% def and usually weaker other terrain defenses. however, they have regeneration, whatever that worth is.

this change can easily applied in minus too, i suggest it
as it is in minus - troll with 250HP and normal troll defenses is clearly inferior
elven/orcish 8g units are clearly worse than 9g units.
about that "problem" i can only say that in normal conquest, infantry makes always sense to buy because it is able to fortify and therefore no1 choice when it comes down to defend cities or other important locations. if you fortify an elite inf (8 gold) on a city you can well defend versus 9/10 gold cavalrys.

Cavalry is useful because of the speed and their strengh.

since fortify doesnt exist in minus it comes down to pure strengh and so the cav is usually always the better choice.
The best bet is your own, good Taste.

Hex
Posts: 161
Joined: June 15th, 2010, 6:08 am

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Hex »

Spectres are unbalancing, with ghosts and other fliers you can build stronger units to defend against them, but spectres have near general strength and can attack anywhere, so you have to put forces everywhere. A single spectre against a general in town has pretty close to 50% chance of a kill chance I think, and certainly stronger then generals out of town.
And the spectres' combat advantage affects mainly neighbouring villages (it is quite ineffective to travel several turns with them).
How do you figure that? Their speed is 8, the fastest unit speed is 10. They have move 1 over everything but deep water which is move 2, which puts them ahead of most move 10 units in getting from point A to point B almost anywhere on a map.

Also, some maps have undead villages more isolated from the rest of the map, but some they aren't very isolated at all. One I played, the undead village was in the middle top of the map. Maybe some maps with some hard barriers (stuff even fliers can't pass) around undead villages. Or perhaps a unit that specialises in killing ghosts/spectres, that has a bonus against them in the same way assassins do against leaders? But it would be simpler just to make them more expensive.

Drakes non fliers could use some looking at, they don't have good def anywhere and even worse on open ground (you'd figure at least they could get 40% on open ground considering that is what their town def is from what I recall)

SlowThinker
Posts: 876
Joined: November 28th, 2008, 6:18 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by SlowThinker »

Hex wrote:A single spectre against a general in town has pretty close to 50% chance of a kill chance I think, and certainly stronger then generals out of town.
I don't think so. The spectre has a very low chance against a general (the 25g unit).
("general" is somewhat confusing, because the 15g Wesnoth unit type is General too; I plan to change the units in later versions)
Hex wrote:
And the spectres' combat advantage affects mainly neighbouring villages (it is quite ineffective to travel several turns with them).
How do you figure that? Their speed is 8, the fastest unit speed is 10. They have move 1 over everything but deep water which is move 2, which puts them ahead of most move 10 units in getting from point A to point B almost anywhere on a map.
A transport that lasts several turns is costly because of a very high inflation in Conquest. If you spend 40g in 2 spectres and move them 3 turns then you will pay for that missing 40g gold in other map areas.
Or perhaps a unit that specialises in killing ghosts/spectres, that has a bonus against them in the same way assassins do against leaders? But it would be simpler just to make them more expensive.
I agree that altering costs/ combat stats would be better than assassins.
I plan some unit adjustments (details in the Conquest Minus thread) later, but I don't think little unit imbalances is a problem now, as they bring a flavour to the player's planning (I explained in my previous post)

Hex
Posts: 161
Joined: June 15th, 2010, 6:08 am

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Hex »

A transport that lasts several turns is costly because of a very high inflation in Conquest. If you spend 40g in 2 spectres and move them 3 turns then you will pay for that missing 40g gold in other map areas.
Transport? Inflation?

One can not underestimate the value of being able to shift strong units where they are needed and back. Rather then having to put defending and attacking units spread out everywhere, you can shift em back and forth in key areas and do more with less.

Also, it is somewhat risky to mass units at the front lines because units can be attacked on open ground, that doesn't matter with spectres.Plus with towns with nonflat terrain around them, you are more limited in how many you can produce from a town at once because many units can shifted onto only flat terrain their first turn.

Mabuse
Posts: 2130
Joined: November 6th, 2007, 1:38 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Mabuse »

1) specters lose versus generals (they also lose versus fortified lieutenants, and as well fortified 20 gold units)

2) in normal conquest specters are among the best offensive 20 gold units. but they cannot fortify, so their defensive ability extremely lmited. other 20 gold units like troll, giant spider, elvish sorceress, seaserpent, siegetrooper can fortify (spectres and knights cannot)
The best bet is your own, good Taste.

SlowThinker
Posts: 876
Joined: November 28th, 2008, 6:18 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by SlowThinker »

Hex wrote:Transport? Inflation?
Inflation: let us say if you obtain 40g in turn X it is equal like you get 80g in turn X+3. (of course the number varies very much).
Transport: the spectre is approaching the battle front through allied lands and so endangers nothing and the enemy can ignore it.
I work on Conquest Minus • I use DFoolWide, Retro Terrain Package and the add-on 'High Contrast Water'
I moved to Nosebane's corner (Doc Paterson's signature); I am spending my time there, so PM me if I don't answer your post in forums

Hex
Posts: 161
Joined: June 15th, 2010, 6:08 am

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Hex »

I still don't understand that transport thing.


And I didn't see any option for fortification then, where is it? What does it do?

SlowThinker
Posts: 876
Joined: November 28th, 2008, 6:18 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by SlowThinker »

Transport: you need to be more concrete. I don't understand what you don't understand.

Fortifications work in Mabuse's Conquest only, not in Conquest Minus.

Mabuse
Posts: 2130
Joined: November 6th, 2007, 1:38 pm

Re: Conquest 2.0 - on 1.8 server

Post by Mabuse »

FORTIFY is available in normal conquest. not in minus

the option is called FORTIFY (not fortification), and means that infantry (or similar) troops can dig themselves in, use sharp stakes for defense, use city walls etc. spiders may create nets.

useable via right click, you can see in the UNIT RECRUIT menu which units are able to fortify.

fortified units cannot attack and have only two moves unless they become UNFORTIFIED (=leave their defensive positions)
but get +15% on terrain defense
The best bet is your own, good Taste.

Post Reply