Important Dates

Latest Posts

Topic: Wincondition: Cold War

stonerl
Avatar
Joined: 2018-07-30, 00:03
Posts: 191
Ranking
Widelands-Forum-Junkie
Location: Earth
Posted at: 2019-03-13, 17:48

WorldSavior wrote:

Mixing the win conditions sounds good.

Is there a difference between "everybody loses" and "the game ends in a draw"?

Yes there is a difference. A draw means every faction has the same amount of points. Everybody loses means one faction has been eradicated. (The idea for this comes from the actual Cold War. The elimination of one faction is like a nuclear strike. You completely destroyed one block, but in return you destroyed the planet.)

Edited: 2019-03-13, 18:29
Top Quote
WorldSavior
Avatar
Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10
Posts: 1090
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: GER
Posted at: 2019-03-13, 18:35

stonerl wrote:

WorldSavior wrote:

Mixing the win conditions sounds good.

Is there a difference between "everybody loses" and "the game ends in a draw"?

Yes there is a difference. A draw means every faction has the same amount of points. Everybody loses means one faction has been eradicated.

Yes, that's a difference. Though "everybody loses" looks like a draw for me and many people would play accordingly.


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

Top Quote
einstein13
Avatar
Joined: 2013-07-29, 00:01
Posts: 1030
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Poland
Posted at: 2019-03-13, 20:46

I like the idea very much! Probably points will need some tweaking, but for sure it is a very good start.

Unfortunately "Cold War" term seems not to be perfect one. For some people it will remind probably the worse time in their life. For the others it will be only historical / political term. For me it is acceptable, but please remember about the others face-smile.png .

Maybe "Economic War" will be slightly better? And the description will target main things: it is a mixture of all economic win conditions, while fighting is penalized.


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

Top Quote
WorldSavior
Avatar
Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10
Posts: 1090
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: GER
Posted at: 2019-03-13, 21:18

I agree, "Cold War" might be not the best name, your "Economic War" is better.

By the way, what's the point of giving minus-points for fighting instead of simply forbid fighting - which could be also very useful for most other winconditions?


“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: 2862
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: RenderedRect
Posted at: 2019-03-13, 22:36

"Simply" forbidding fighting would need an engine change, a points penalty change can be done via Lua. So, it is a matter of who will write and review the code.


Busy indexing nil values

Top Quote
Nordfriese
Avatar
Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07
Posts: 381
Ranking
Tribe Member
Location: 0x55555d3a34c0
Posted at: 2019-03-14, 09:43

Forbidding fighting will be possible when bug 1794959 is solved. I´m intending to implement it some time soon.

The plan is that peaceful win conditions like Collectors and Woodgnome actually forbid battle, right? IMHO this new win condition should allow fighting though (especially as it has territorial aspects) and merely penalize it.


Top Quote
stonerl
Avatar
Joined: 2018-07-30, 00:03
Posts: 191
Ranking
Widelands-Forum-Junkie
Location: Earth
Posted at: 2019-03-14, 10:04

IMHO this new win condition should allow fighting though (especially as it has territorial aspects) and merely penalize it.

That's the idea. Balancing the penalty points is crucial, though.


Top Quote
WorldSavior
Avatar
Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10
Posts: 1090
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: GER
Posted at: 2019-03-14, 16:51

GunChleoc wrote:

"Simply" forbidding fighting would need an engine change, a points penalty change can be done via Lua. So, it is a matter of who will write and review the code.

Okay

Nordfriese wrote:

Forbidding fighting will be possible when bug 1794959 is solved. I´m intending to implement it some time soon.

Sounds good.

The plan is that peaceful win conditions like Collectors and Woodgnome actually forbid battle, right?

Not exactly. Peaceful mode should always be optional because current mode can be interesting.

IMHO this new win condition should allow fighting though (especially as it has territorial aspects) and merely penalize it.

In case that there will be a peaceful mode - why not. But I would like to mention that it could be a good strategy to place constructionsides almost everywhere, especially at the border, in order to increase the number of lost civilian buildings. This somewhat spoils the win condition, as well as the fact that it can be useful to build many small military buildings in order to increase the number of lost military buildings. Military buildings don't even have to be manned.

Edited: 2019-03-14, 16:52

“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: 2862
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: RenderedRect
Posted at: 2019-03-15, 20:41

The lost buildings could be scored by whether they finished building and/or size.


Busy indexing nil values

Top Quote
teppo
Joined: 2012-01-30, 09:42
Posts: 337
Ranking
Tribe Member
Posted at: 2019-03-16, 18:16

GunChleoc wrote:

The lost buildings could be scored by whether they finished building and/or size.

What about re-claiming one's old territory? Should there be similar or lesser penalty if I had "historical rights" to that spot?

If the penalty is counted for non-military buildings: If I lose a building because enemy has a military building nearby and I just dismantled mine, then will the enemy get a -300 points onto his balance sheet (assuming that no fighting takes place during entire game)?

What happens to the wares of warehouse lost in battle? Should its contents stay in the "collectors" balance sheet? (idea level, excluding the amount of associated coding)?

I would assign the military loss/victory points as relative to size of economy. other points as suggested.

Regardless, thanks for the idea.


Top Quote