Latest Posts

Topic: Couple of suggestions

hessenfarmer
Avatar
Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16
Posts: 459
Ranking
Tribe Member
Location: Bavaria
Posted at: 2017-12-20, 14:02

WorldSavior wrote:

I think that it's really necessary for a good Widelands that there are no restrictions at dismantling/destroying/enhancing buildings.

Restricting possibilities would mean restricting tactics which would reduce some of the fun in the game. For this reason I am of the same opinion regarding this topic as WorldSavior (never thought this could happen;-)).


Top Quote
teppo
Joined: 2012-01-30, 09:42
Posts: 315
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2017-12-21, 06:52

hessenfarmer wrote:

I think that it's really necessary for a good Widelands that there are no restrictions at dismantling/destroying/enhancing buildings.

Restricting possibilities would mean restricting tactics which would reduce some of the fun in the game. For this reason I am of the same opinion regarding this topic as WorldSavior (never thought this could happen;-)).

Often, when one door closes, another opens. You can still prevent military site takeover by building the military sites close-enough to each other. This means that you would simply need more advance planning to reach the goal.


Top Quote
WorldSavior
Avatar
Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10
Posts: 919
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: GER
Posted at: 2017-12-27, 17:14

GunChleoc wrote:

Then the wares go always to the warehouse with the lowest stock number instead of beeing evenly distributed. And if you have a big number of warehouses which are like this - let's say they have zero stock - not the closest warehouses are preferred, but exactly one, as I said. Possibly the oldest, which is a suboptimal solution

Well, that is exactly the definition of evenly distributed - try to have the same stock in all warehouses.

"Evenly distributed" could also mean that the wares could also been evenly distributed regardless to their stock levels face-wink.png

(but this would be worse than the current distribution)

Of course, 0 wares is an edge case - maybe we should go with random selection when stocks are even.

0 wares is an important case imho. The random selection was my idea, yes face-wink.png

teppo wrote:

WorldSavior wrote:

IMO it would be better to forbid dismantling buildings that are under attack.

I think that it's really necessary for a good Widelands that there are no restrictions at dismantling/destroying/enhancing buildings.

Why? This is a honest question.

king_of_nowhere explained it well once:

king_of_nowhere wrote:

As for the dismantling of military buildings under attack, you are not the only one who think it should be forbidden, but it's actually a VERY important part of game balance. In this game there is no defender bonus, so careful strategic retreat and dismantling of buildings under attack is the only way a player can stall against a stronger army. Without that factor (and also the sight range on fortresses) the game would always end very fast as soon as someone gained a small military advantage, and the game would be much less interesting. In fact, I even proposed to teach the ai to do it, but turned out that there was no easy way to code for that. Regardless, the ai is at the moment not instructed to dismantle buildings, so it is a mistery why it did so to you.

.

hessenfarmer wrote:

WorldSavior wrote:

I think that it's really necessary for a good Widelands that there are no restrictions at dismantling/destroying/enhancing buildings.

Restricting possibilities would mean restricting tactics which would reduce some of the fun in the game.

Yes, probably

For this reason I am of the same opinion regarding this topic as WorldSavior (never thought this could happen;-)).

Why not?

teppo wrote:

hessenfarmer wrote:

I think that it's really necessary for a good Widelands that there are no restrictions at dismantling/destroying/enhancing buildings.

Restricting possibilities would mean restricting tactics which would reduce some of the fun in the game. For this reason I am of the same opinion regarding this topic as WorldSavior (never thought this could happen;-)).

Often, when one door closes, another opens. You can still prevent military site takeover by building the military sites close-enough to each other. This means that you would simply need more advance planning to reach the goal.

But there will be at least one building left, if the buildings are not at the edge of the enemies sight field

Edited: 2017-12-27, 17:23

“It's a threat to our planet to believe that someone else will save it.” - Robert Swan

Top Quote
teppo
Joined: 2012-01-30, 09:42
Posts: 315
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2018-01-05, 13:25

WorldSavior wrote:

But there will be at least one building left, if the buildings are not at the edge of the enemies sight field

I would like to be able to capture gamekeepers (if not Barbarian) or fish breeders (if not Atlantean). Used to be easy in the old times, more difficult now. Any ideas?


Top Quote
GunChleoc
Avatar
Joined: 2013-10-07, 15:56
Posts: 2715
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: RenderedRect
Posted at: 2018-01-05, 13:35

WorldSavior wrote:

GunChleoc wrote:

Then the wares go always to the warehouse with the lowest stock number instead of beeing evenly distributed. And if you have a big number of warehouses which are like this - let's say they have zero stock - not the closest warehouses are preferred, but exactly one, as I said. Possibly the oldest, which is a suboptimal solution

Well, that is exactly the definition of evenly distributed - try to have the same stock in all warehouses.

"Evenly distributed" could also mean that the wares could also been evenly distributed regardless to their stock levels face-wink.png

(but this would be worse than the current distribution)

Of course, 0 wares is an edge case - maybe we should go with random selection when stocks are even.

0 wares is an important case imho. The random selection was my idea, yes face-wink.png

Agreed - I have created a bug report: https://bugs.launchpad.net/widelands/+bug/1741469


Busy indexing nil values

Top Quote
WorldSavior
Avatar
Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10
Posts: 919
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: GER
Posted at: 2018-01-05, 18:36

Thanks


“It's a threat to our planet to believe that someone else will save it.” - Robert Swan

Top Quote
GunChleoc
Avatar
Joined: 2013-10-07, 15:56
Posts: 2715
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: RenderedRect
Posted at: 2018-05-02, 11:29

luitzen wrote:

  • Create a list of ships to quickly find back your ships.

The branch for this is finally in face-smile.png


Busy indexing nil values

Top Quote
einstein13
Avatar
Joined: 2013-07-29, 00:01
Posts: 1023
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Poland
Posted at: 2018-05-03, 19:37

Gun! You made lots of good changes!

Have you considered build20 freeze? How much is left to do?


einstein13
calculations & maps packages: http://wuatek.no-ip.org/~rak/widelands/

Top Quote
GunChleoc
Avatar
Joined: 2013-10-07, 15:56
Posts: 2715
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: RenderedRect
Posted at: 2018-05-03, 21:30

I am already in bug fixing mode for Build 20, but I also have 1 remaining feature branch up for code review, so we're not in official feature freeze yet. There are also some planned string fixes that we still need to do before we can do the feature freeze.


Busy indexing nil values

Top Quote