Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

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

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

User avatar
Ravana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2450
Joined: January 29th, 2012, 12:49 am
Location: Estonia
Contact:

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Ravana »

I have not managed to understand all of the text walls, but from what I can see main argument against changes is that ^Uf has same look as ^Tf, but different behavior. That can be solved by deprecating ^Uf, so it shows up with D on it.
User avatar
UnwiseOwl
Posts: 489
Joined: April 9th, 2010, 4:58 am

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by UnwiseOwl »

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the major point is that the behaviour of ^Uf was fine as it was, and that a change so that in some situations (ie with different underlying layers) ^Tf will have different behaviour is not a good change. Elder would prefer that all mushrooms have the same properties, regardless of the underlying layer, and have the underlying layer be only a visual difference.
Maintainer of the Imperial Era and the campaigns Dreams of Urduk, Epic of Vaniyera, Up from Slavery, Fall of Silvium, Alfhelm the Wise and Gali's Contract.
But perhaps 'maintainer' is too strong a word.
User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4490
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Pentarctagon »

Elder2 wrote:
March 9th, 2020, 5:51 pm
Pentarctagon wrote:
March 9th, 2020, 5:48 pm
Maps that aren't updated will continue to use ^Uf while maps that are updated will use Tb^Tf, and those two terrains are identical in every way aside from visually, correct?
Yeah. And that is a problem. They don't look the same, ^Tf looks like ^Uf but works differently. Tb^Tf and ^Uf work the same but look differently. ^Uf and ^Tf look the same but work differently. Utter madness, as if 3 shrooms wasn't enough.
So functionally, it sounds like the existing map balance is unchanged, and having a mushroom base terrain as well as a mushroom overlay gives UMC authors a little additional flexibility in 1.15+.

Visually that does sound confusing though, especially given that the deprecated mushroom terrain will still be around in maps that aren't updated.
UnwiseOwl wrote:
March 9th, 2020, 6:08 pm
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the major point is that the behaviour of ^Uf was fine as it was, and that a change so that in some situations (ie with different underlying layers) ^Tf will have different behaviour is not a good change. Elder would prefer that all mushrooms have the same properties, regardless of the underlying layer, and have the underlying layer be only a visual difference.
I believe that's correct. My understanding is that the main reason to do this change for mushrooms was that it didn't follow the same rules as other composite terrains.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
User avatar
UnwiseOwl
Posts: 489
Joined: April 9th, 2010, 4:58 am

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by UnwiseOwl »

Pentarctagon wrote:
March 9th, 2020, 6:25 pm
I believe that's correct. My understanding is that the main reason to do this change for mushrooms was that it didn't follow the same rules as other composite terrains.
His argument is that there is not consistent rules for composite terrains, as there are many exceptions as given in his first post, and that having mushrooms always act the same simple way is an advantage for multiplayer, especially given that mushroom is a terrain type that gives advantage to a number of otherwise disadvantaged unit types.
Maintainer of the Imperial Era and the campaigns Dreams of Urduk, Epic of Vaniyera, Up from Slavery, Fall of Silvium, Alfhelm the Wise and Gali's Contract.
But perhaps 'maintainer' is too strong a word.
User avatar
octalot
Developer
Posts: 493
Joined: July 17th, 2010, 7:40 pm

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by octalot »

The visual confusion could be solved by changing ^Uf's graphics to the new ones for Tb^Tf. That could be done without needing changes to the individual map files.
User avatar
Elder2
Posts: 393
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 2:13 pm

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Elder2 »

UnwiseOwl wrote:
March 9th, 2020, 6:08 pm
...
Basically main thing im arguing is that old mushrooms (and only one of them not 3) were fine.
Pentarctagon wrote:
March 9th, 2020, 6:25 pm
...
I mean, is the point that random terrains should be added just so that UMC authors have "a little additional flexibility in 1.15+."? Thats silly. Why don't we make say 3 versions of ford each having different properties, it makes as much sense as 3 mushrooms. An UMC creator can easily make his own terrain. And honestly, I have seen special cave tiles, flat tiles, castle tiles, but I am yet to see a special mushroom tile.
octalot wrote:
March 9th, 2020, 7:25 pm
The visual confusion could be solved by changing ^Uf's graphics to the new ones for Tb^Tf. That could be done without needing changes to the individual map files.
Lol so we have come a full circle haven't we? First I don't understand the change because ^Uf will be deprecated and now suggesting to get rid of the deprecated ^Uf anyway and change all of them to Tb^Tf.
User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4490
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Pentarctagon »

octalot wrote:
March 9th, 2020, 7:25 pm
The visual confusion could be solved by changing ^Uf's graphics to the new ones for Tb^Tf. That could be done without needing changes to the individual map files.
Would that be possible with ^Uf being just an overlay while Tb^Tf is the base terrain + overlay?
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
User avatar
octalot
Developer
Posts: 493
Joined: July 17th, 2010, 7:40 pm

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by octalot »

Pentarctagon wrote:
March 9th, 2020, 9:20 pm
Would that be possible with ^Uf being just an overlay while Tb^Tf is the base terrain + overlay?
Yes. Quick proof-of-concept in terrain-graphics.cfg:

Code: Select all

# Make all of the deprecated non-mixed mushrooms look like Tb^Tf or Tb^Tfi
# Quick proof-of-concept: disable transitions to make the effect easier to see on single-hex mushrooms, as otherwise the Tb is only visible in the center, where there's a lot of cover from the overlay mushrooms
{DISABLE_BASE_TRANSITIONS     *^Uf*}
{NEW:BASE                *^Uf*                             forest/mushroom-base LAYER=-319}
Mawmoocn
Posts: 138
Joined: March 16th, 2019, 3:54 pm

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Mawmoocn »

I thought your problem with mushroom is that it has a different working system compared to other composite terrain.

I don’t know if you wanted to use lower defense or higher defense to work with units on composite mushroom terrain, so I assumed that you wanted mushroom (lower defense) to use lower default defense, which I thought you’re going for.
Elder2 wrote:
February 28th, 2020, 11:05 pm
so that loyalist horse units would get their old mushroom defense on shrooms (20%).
Elder2 wrote:
February 28th, 2020, 11:05 pm
So many of these units would have way higher defense on mushrooms, 40% or more, compared to loyalists horses 20%.
Elder2 wrote:
February 28th, 2020, 11:05 pm
Some people ask “Why mushrooms don’t have composite properties?” after the change many others might as well ask “Why some maps have new mushrooms and others don’t?”.
You either want mushroom to retain it as a normal terrain or don’t want mushroom to give higher defense on other units, because mushroom originally wasn’t a composite terrain.

Elder2 wrote:
February 28th, 2020, 11:05 pm
Since every other unit in mainline has better or equal defense on forest compared to grass, in every single case the unit will have forest defense when standing on forest, the exception is loyalist horses that break the composite properties and have forest defense anyway.
Elder2 wrote:
February 28th, 2020, 11:05 pm
Ford - normal composite terrain takes the higher terrain defense and worse terrain movement out of the two, ford takes higher defense and better movement.
I got confused on what Ford is, so I guess whether mushroom terrain uses defense cap or becomes a composite terrain, composite terrains should be consistent.

So your main point is that mushroom should not be a composite terrain because it will be confusing and it wasn’t a composite terrain originally.

Though I think composite terrain in general is quite confusing without that.

I don’t know but I guess if your point was mushroom wasn’t originally a composite terrain and should stay as it is, I agree only if, that was the default behavior... besides the confusing forest composite terrain.
User avatar
Elder2
Posts: 393
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 2:13 pm

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Elder2 »

Mawmoocn wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 8:52 am
I thought your problem with mushroom is that it has a different working system compared to other composite terrain.
Not mine, it was an argument some people were making over the years for changing how mushrooms work. I show that there are many terrains that have unique properties.


I think you miss a lot of things. I thought the premise of my post is clear, I make my intent clear at the beginning of the post. Well tho, maybe some people aren't aware of the development in 1.15 so yeah... Basically mushrooms got changed and they are no longer like they were before.

"I don’t know but I guess if your point was mushroom wasn’t originally a composite terrain and should stay as it is, I agree only if, that was the default behavior... besides the confusing forest composite terrain."

Thats how it was since forever.
Mawmoocn
Posts: 138
Joined: March 16th, 2019, 3:54 pm

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Mawmoocn »

Elder2 wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 10:04 am
Not mine, it was an argument some people were making over the years for changing how mushrooms work. I show that there are many terrains that have unique properties.
That makes sense, thanks for clearing it up!

Elder2 wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 10:04 am
I think you miss a lot of things. I thought the premise of my post is clear, I make my intent clear at the beginning of the post.
I wasn’t able to create a summary from your long post therefore I jumbled what you want to say, the title is clear but after reading your post a lot of times, I apologise in advance because it may hurt, your intention is not as clear as it seems, you did list the points that you think is the problem but, I wasn’t able to get your intention because it abruptly ended at point 5.

I’ll admit I’m not good at explaining things so I think it would probably be good if you made a recap of what your 5 points contain.

I thought your points are probably 2-4 and is about the old to new mushroom terrain, new players having hard time to understand these changes, composite terrains and how it affects things, and the mushroom art.

However, the information is there which is good.

I won’t really comment if you didn’t mention about new players and composite terrain, because the art can always have multiple variations and I’m not interested on mushroom terrain.
Elder2 wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 10:04 am
I think you miss a lot of things.
This is accurate. I did read your post but I concentrated on composite terrains and didn’t research further about mushroom terrain.

I always thought mushroom terrain was composite until today..... :doh:

Thank you for clarifying how mushroom terrain works! :D
User avatar
Elder2
Posts: 393
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 2:13 pm

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Elder2 »

Mawmoocn wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 1:43 pm
"I wasn’t able to create a summary from your long post therefore I jumbled what you want to say, the title is clear but after reading your post a lot of times, I apologise in advance because it may hurt, your intention is not as clear as it seems, you did list the points that you think is the problem but, I wasn’t able to get your intention because it abruptly ended at point 5.
Ok, its not the first time somebody says im not clear, but the first line of the post is "This will be a sort of a rant about why the mushrooms change was a bad idea."
Mawmoocn wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 1:43 pm
I’ll admit I’m not good at explaining things so I think it would probably be good if you made a recap of what your 5 points contain.
Well alright.

1 - This one references Sergey's thread where he suggested introducing a defense cap for some horse units. It basically focuses on debunking that idea and I argue there that idefense cap would be counterproductive.

2 - The practical aspects of introducing the mushroom change. I argue that there are many maps that would need to be changed, so it could be hard to do. But still even if all mainline maps would be changed there will be many add on maps that will have different kinds of mushrooms than the mainline maps, so its just confusing and bad, which defeats the purpose of the change if there are no other arguments for the change than the 2 I have mentioned (and I haven't heard any)

3 - The confusion factor. I mentioned before in the post that confusion is one argument I heard that was used against the old mushrooms. 2 kinds of mushrooms with different properties and looks is bad, but 3 is even worse, and there will be 3. Its a change that makes everything workse, and there is no valid argument that supports it.

4 - If mushrooms are inconsistent with other terrains then what is consistent? There are no consistent rules, I made a list illustrating how various terrains behave to show that there really no rules, many terrains have unique properties, not just mushrooms.

5 - New mushrooms terrains is ugly.

Mawmoocn wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 1:43 pm
I always thought mushroom terrain was composite until today..... :doh:

Thank you for clarifying how mushroom terrain works! :D
It wasn't but your comment confirms one of my points which is that players are unlikely to notice the "weird" mushroom properties, thank you I guess.
Mawmoocn
Posts: 138
Joined: March 16th, 2019, 3:54 pm

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Mawmoocn »

Interesting, I first thought that your point 1 was to supplement information to your point 2 and point 3 is your conclusion to points 1 and 2. I jumbled the info there... :doh:

Anyways, I’ll get straight to the point.
Elder2 wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 6:32 pm
It basically focuses on debunking that idea and I argue there that idefense cap would be counterproductive.
Defense cap is counterproductive only when there are 2 existing overlap of rule sets for terrain priority.

I agree?

I thought defense cap for composite terrains could be good as a detriment on wading through Fords and other types of composite terrain.

The idea for defense cap is interesting to see and I look forward on using it someday and somewhere.

Elder2 wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 6:32 pm
But still even if all mainline maps would be changed there will be many add on maps that will have different kinds of mushrooms than the mainline maps, so its just confusing and bad, which defeats the purpose of the change if there are no other arguments for the change than the 2 I have mentioned (and I haven't heard any)
They can use similar portrait/art for it, if they have the exact properties as before.

Though it could be improved or create another variation and show on the help documentation on the main mushroom and its variants.

Well assuming that it’s not the same as before and it becomes a composite terrain (I don’t know), I assume that the new default mushroom terrain would work, as they don’t use another composite terrain properties like what Ford’s do currently.

Anyways, any modified mushroom terrain (I assume) would be unaffected because they use a special terrain code that Wesnoth doesn’t directly or indirectly affect.

Err... well I assume the new default mushroom terrain would not mix with other terrains, so unless they replace it to the new composite combination for mushroom terrain code, it’ll be unchanged because the new code for other variants will probably use a different code.

That’s assuming other variants for the default mushroom terrain won’t get affected by the new code by default.

(Still unsure on what would happen so probably disregard my comment on point 2.)

Well if I have to be honest, there are two types of mushroom terrain on the map editor, small mushroom() and mushroom farm() which acts like a decoration and the mushroom terrain (fungus).

So it’s still confusing whether it becomes a composite terrain (?).


Elder2 wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 6:32 pm
3 - The confusion factor. I mentioned before in the post that confusion is one argument I heard that was used against the old mushrooms. 2 kinds of mushrooms with different properties and looks is bad, but 3 is even worse, and there will be 3. Its a change that makes everything workse, and there is no valid argument that supports it.
If you have time, can you elaborate on the types of mushroom terrain? (For all 3)

Or maybe I'm overthinking and what you mean was for the (2) mushroom decoration and (1) mushroom (fungus)?

I don’t understand what mushroom terrain originally is.

Based from your info, first mushroom terrain was composite, second wasn’t composite, third was turned back to composite with defense cap.

Is it correct to assume that you wanted to retain (second) mushroom or does it have something more in mind?


Elder2 wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 6:32 pm
4 - If mushrooms are inconsistent with other terrains then what is consistent?
I agree but I thought the composite part of the terrain wasn’t part of the game.

There was no formal documentation and forest doesn’t follow it so... I agree.


Elder2 wrote:
March 10th, 2020, 6:32 pm
5 -
I didn’t look at the new terrain so, it's probably up to personal taste?
User avatar
Elder2
Posts: 393
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 2:13 pm

Re: Remove new mushrooms terrain and remove composite terrain properties from the old mushrooms

Post by Elder2 »

Yeah, but as far as I can see thats basically the same as leaving 2 kinds of mushrooms in mainline, while the deprecated ones will still be in all add ons, so 3 everywhere else.
Post Reply