Topic: Slightly increasing atlantean and imperial attack to make defensive promotion more viable

21 — 30 of 32 Posts ‹‹ previous 1 2 3 4 next ››

einstein13 Joined: 2013-07-28, 23:01 Posts: 1118 One Elder of Players Location: Poland	Posted at: 2017-02-02, 10:09 Yes, I agree that this changes are rather minor. I guess that this will change a few things: Barbarians should train level 2 soldiers (evade only) and next train level 10 soldiers (level 9 are not worth to train) Level 9 soldiers in other tribes are less powerful to level 10 soldiers, but they are still as powerful as before to other level 9 soldiers. Atlanteans level 2 soldier is more equal to others (against high level soldiers) than before. So my opinion is to change the values for the soldiers. The bad thing about balance level 2 - level 10 is that before we need 4 level 2 soldiers to kill level 10, now it is 5 (this situation was only for Barbarians before). einstein13 calculations & maps packages: http://wuatek.no-ip.org/~rak/widelands/ backup website files: http://kartezjusz.ddns.net/upload/widelands/ Top Quote

SirVer Joined: 2009-02-19, 14:18 Posts: 1445 One Elder of Players Location: Germany - Munich	Posted at: 2017-02-06, 07:21 That are so many numbers einstein13, thanks for doing all the work. However I found them very hard to navigate and understand - there are just so many of them. Changes makes Barbarian's level 9 soldier much weaker than others level 9 soldiers This is the only concerning item IMHO in the rundown. Can we avoid this somehow? Top Quote

king_of_nowhere Topic Opener Joined: 2014-09-15, 17:35 Posts: 1668 One Elder of Players	Posted at: 2017-02-06, 13:41 SirVer wrote: That are so many numbers einstein13, thanks for doing all the work. However I found them very hard to navigate and understand - there are just so many of them. Changes makes Barbarian's level 9 soldier much weaker than others level 9 soldiers This is the only concerning item IMHO in the rundown. Can we avoid this somehow? I can't think of any way, but I don't think it is a real problem. the only real weakness is in 9(Bb)vs9(S/Bb). 9(Bb)vs10(S) has exactly the same chances it should have, and how many fights 9(S)vs9(S) do you really see? Also keep in context, this change is supposed to only affect games of highly skilled humans. Those can micromanage to get always 10(S). Even if they accidentally get distracted and get a 9(S) occasionally, the chances of 9(S)vs9(S) are very low. And in games of everyone else, 9(S)vs9(S) are also going to be very unlikely because they are very specific promotions. In fact, if one does not micromanage the training sites, when the resources dwindle the most expensive promotions are those skipped first, so rather than getting a 9(Bb)(5/0/2/2) one is more likely to get a 9(Bb)(4/0/3/2). The only way to get a 9(Bb)(5/0/2/2) is to actively micromanage to get one, which would not be done if getting a 10(Bb) is more cost-effective. Top Quote

einstein13 Joined: 2013-07-28, 23:01 Posts: 1118 One Elder of Players Location: Poland	Posted at: 2017-02-06, 17:44 As I remember my games, creating level 9 soldier is a bit harder than creating level 10 soldier. OK, now the system works a bit different (we can set number of target resources to 0). I understand that getting level 10 soldiers needs more resources, but my micromanagement is very simple: run when you have enough resources. Before the first changes, level 10 and 9 Barbarians soldiers were much weaker than others, but we accepted to make levels 10 equals: 10(S)vs10(S) ~= 0.53. New numbers keeps that. Also we agreed that Barbarians should be stronger in early game, weaker in late game. Their soldiers costs a lot, but also they are not as strong as others: 2-9vs2-9 < 0.5. Maybe I don't understand well your idea, SirVer, but for me it is OK. I like the idea to bring at most level 10 soldiers. Can we avoid this somehow? Yes, there is a possibility to make any solider equals to the other (level9 soldiers will all have the same stats), but I guess that this is not the perfect solution we want From my point of view, diversity is a plus for the game. However I found them very hard to navigate and understand I know. I also have some small problems. But as you (and others) wanted, I prepared several tables, also smaller ones, to show only one change/ case (f.e. 2(S)vs2(vs) ). einstein13 calculations & maps packages: http://wuatek.no-ip.org/~rak/widelands/ backup website files: http://kartezjusz.ddns.net/upload/widelands/ Top Quote

SirVer Joined: 2009-02-19, 14:18 Posts: 1445 One Elder of Players Location: Germany - Munich	Posted at: 2017-02-07, 06:30 I know. I also have some small problems. But as you (and others) wanted, I prepared several tables, also smaller ones, to show only one change/ case (f.e. 2(S)vs2(vs) ). Yes, thanks for doing that - this is invaluable, as it gives us data to discuss instead of just opinions. And all the data we desire is in these tables, I just wonder if there is a better way to visualize them that is easier to consume for humans. The last two posts convince me that this is a good change proposal. I filed a bug here and targetted it for b20: https://bugs.launchpad.net/widelands/+bug/1662425 I did not propose a change right away, because I realized that the numbers we talked about are way to small: A Widelands lvl 0 soldier has a base of 13000 health and 1300 attack value. So the numbers above must probably be multiplied by 100 or so. Top Quote

king_of_nowhere Topic Opener Joined: 2014-09-15, 17:35 Posts: 1668 One Elder of Players	Posted at: 2017-02-07, 11:09 SirVer wrote: I did not propose a change right away, because I realized that the numbers we talked about are way to small: A Widelands lvl 0 soldier has a base of 13000 health and 1300 attack value. So the numbers above must probably be multiplied by 100 or so. yes. the values were multiplied by 100, I don't know why. Top Quote

SirVer Joined: 2009-02-19, 14:18 Posts: 1445 One Elder of Players Location: Germany - Munich	Posted at: 2017-02-07, 18:00 yes. the values were multiplied by 100, I don't know why. I remember doing the scaling to make healing in military buildings more fine grained. All values have to be integer internally, so a scaling seemed sensible, but I did not remember the scale value. Top Quote

king_of_nowhere Topic Opener Joined: 2014-09-15, 17:35 Posts: 1668 One Elder of Players	Posted at: 2017-06-30, 17:35 I opened a bug report for this https://bugs.launchpad.net/widelands/+bug/1701684 Top Quote

Johnhunt Joined: 2017-07-28, 10:43 Posts: 3 Just found this site	Posted at: 2017-07-28, 10:44 Barbarian soldiers are still the weakest. Top Quote

einstein13 Joined: 2013-07-28, 23:01 Posts: 1118 One Elder of Players Location: Poland	Posted at: 2017-07-28, 12:38 Johnhunt wrote: Barbarian soldiers are still the weakest. As it should be. Barbarian soldiers (level 1) are the cheapest in production, and the level 10 is very expensive. But if you manage to do that, we want to be more equal, but weaker. einstein13 calculations & maps packages: http://wuatek.no-ip.org/~rak/widelands/ backup website files: http://kartezjusz.ddns.net/upload/widelands/ Top Quote

‹‹ previous 1 2 3 4 next ››