Topic: Makrobalancing of the Tribes

1 — 10 of 12 Posts 1 2 next ››

the-x Topic Opener Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23 Posts: 967 One Elder of Players	Posted at: 2020-04-20, 11:53 More and more the question comes how we can balance old tribes, like Imperium or Atlanteans and at the same time keep this feeling like you are settling on a completely new continent, not much clicking, tacticing, more enjoying how the wares flow and the workers do theri job, the buildings beeing completed. We have also a tradeoff between Aestetics of the gameplay, tribes that are different a Balance that seems fair when you play 1v1 Games Like king of nowhere pointed out in several threads we should avoid strategies where you just build barracs or set the focus on your economy on producing the much level 0 soldiers you can. In my opinion in the same way we should avoid of only having level 0 soldiers and level 9 soldiers. We should use the big distance inbetween. How can we do this? Maybe if one level 3 soldier wins against the opponent who has 2 lvl 2 soldiers in his barracs. I'm not a fan of doing every game the same procedure and level my hero stage to stage to full before he will ever see the world of widelands. By making the first upgrade maybe only cost one smelted iron there are so many new and open tactics possible, that will challenge everyone not only the trio of king of nowhere, the-x and worldsaviour. The other main point is, in early widelands Imperium was a tribe that challanges you really. You have so many different ways to get your hero. Atlanteans is the complete opposite, i build my strict order and have after 19 min my hero. It's also nice, just I dont understand why I always do the same procedure and have as a result such a superstrong and fast hero that noone can stand against, no matter what he does. This is okay for a speedgame, but in my opinion widelands is more complex. Since we dont want to lose all the benefits we have in Imperium as well as all the other tribes and since there has been a consensus somehow that all the time someone feels not good if you want to change their favorite tribe, maybe we really need a historical version, where everything is grown as it is and one challenging version that we use for multiplayer, its exactly the same version so everythijng except values stays the same. (changing building costs, time to produce a unit, costs for swords, amor, axes) Top Quote

Nordfriese Joined: 2017-01-17, 18:07 Posts: 2057 OS: Debian Testing Version: Latest master One Elder of Players Location: 0x55555d3a34c0	Posted at: 2020-04-20, 12:00 Did you already forget your own proposal how to fix this? https://github.com/widelands/widelands/issues/3843 The other main point is, in early widelands Imperium was a tribe that challanges you really. You have so many different ways to get your hero. Not really, you have to build the same buildings and produce the same wares. Only the order of building may vary. Atlanteans is the complete opposite, i build my strict order and have after 19 min my hero. It's also nice, just I dont understand why I always do the same procedure and have as a result such a superstrong and fast hero that noone can stand against, no matter what he does. This is okay for a speedgame, but in my opinion widelands is more complex. In early games that may be true, but on large maps it is much more important how many heroes you can produce in the time until you meet the enemy. I'm not a fan of doing every game the same procedure and level my hero stage to stage to full before he will ever see the world of widelands Well, it is in the nature of every non-random game that even when there are many ways of doing something, there always is a best way to do it. And even though you are free to play as you like it, your opponents in multiplayer may choose the better way. We have about as much influence in this fact as on the fact that you need a computer to play Widelands. Top Quote

the-x Topic Opener Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23 Posts: 967 One Elder of Players	Posted at: 2020-04-20, 12:09 I'm not a fan of doing every game the same procedure and level my hero stage to stage to full before he will ever see the world of widelands Well, it is in the nature of every non-random game that even when there are many ways of doing something, there always is a best way to do it. And even though you are free to play as you like it, your opponents in multiplayer may choose the better way. We have about as much influence in this fact as on the fact that you need a computer to play Widelands. And as soon as we have only one best way to do it, everyone will do it, at least over time Maybe a circle system can solve this, we had the triple circly system which was quite nice but in my opinion changed to much in the original widelands. But there are so many other ways, someone just needs to presesent and think about. Top Quote

the-x Topic Opener Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23 Posts: 967 One Elder of Players	Posted at: 2020-04-20, 12:37 Atlanteans is the complete opposite, i build my strict order and have after 19 min my hero. It's also nice, just I dont understand why I always do the same procedure and have as a result such a superstrong and fast hero that noone can stand against, no matter what he does. This is okay for a speedgame, but in my opinion widelands is more complex. In early games that may be true, but on large maps it is much more important how many heroes you can produce in the time until you meet the enemy. Yes, that happens especially in early game. But in late game there a two stages, if one player manages to settle up a defense that is strong enough noone will ever attack, had this in some recent games, with many fortresses but if you reach a point where both are close build it makes no sence to attack anymore, cause whoever starts the attack loses. Somehow this if funny, cause at the start the player who attacks wins and in late game the player who defends. So it will tend to either extremly short or neverending games. Where you have many defense points maybe a player can win, but many maps are buld the way that it makes sence to have one defence point. At the moment i dont know how we can solve this. Just some ideas which might be possible: having one bonus tower maybe you still know empire earth (age of empires) - you had stone for one tower you could set. You set this strategicially so that a player had a radius which was very easy to defend in the beginning, and after sometime, like 40 minutes the units of the enemy got stronger so over time it was possible wo conquer the tower and tend from a defend orientated gameplay to more open. strategies that counter the strategy you play special ressources like gold, diamond, silver that demand map control. Maybe there is only one point at the map where you can find diamond. If you manage to expand, conquer or hold this point with silver (believe me this makes so much fun in multiplayer) Top Quote

ilguido Joined: 2009-03-04, 17:19 Posts: 22 Pry about Widelands	Posted at: 2020-04-20, 13:16 Nordfriese wrote: I'm not a fan of doing every game the same procedure and level my hero stage to stage to full before he will ever see the world of widelands Well, it is in the nature of every non-random game that even when there are many ways of doing something, there always is a best way to do it. And even though you are free to play as you like it, your opponents in multiplayer may choose the better way. We have about as much influence in this fact as on the fact that you need a computer to play Widelands. The only solution to this problem is a rock, scissor, paper approach. I am not sure how to implement it in Widelands, but there are many examples in other games: e.g. maintenance costs, overspecialization risks, natural disasters etc. I think that more advanced civilizations should have more productive, but more fragile economies. That is Atlantis should be more productive than the Empire, while the Empire should be more productive than the Barbarians. On the other hand Atlanteans should have a more fragile economy, that depends critically on the supply of some resources, while the Empire a little less and the Barbarians not at all. Top Quote

the-x Topic Opener Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23 Posts: 967 One Elder of Players	Posted at: 2020-04-20, 13:39 ilguido wrote: Nordfriese wrote: I'm not a fan of doing every game the same procedure and level my hero stage to stage to full before he will ever see the world of widelands Well, it is in the nature of every non-random game that even when there are many ways of doing something, there always is a best way to do it. And even though you are free to play as you like it, your opponents in multiplayer may choose the better way. We have about as much influence in this fact as on the fact that you need a computer to play Widelands. The only solution to this problem is a rock, scissor, paper approach. I am not sure how to implement it in Widelands, but there are many examples in other games: e.g. maintenance costs, overspecialization risks, natural disasters etc. I think that more advanced civilizations should have more productive, but more fragile economies. That is Atlantis should be more productive than the Empire, while the Empire should be more productive than the Barbarians. On the other hand Atlanteans should have a more fragile economy, that depends critically on the supply of some resources, while the Empire a little less and the Barbarians not at all. Yes, this is a very nice idea for multiplayer. Maybe after time the tribes spread more and more and then they can use their specific advantage. Though im a bit afraid of suggesting balancing suggestions cause hessen goes often hard on new suggestions and critisises the person more than the subject. But your right balance is needed... "a rock, scissor, paper approach" is a very good sulution, the problem is exactly how we can do it that everybody is happy? Top Quote

hessenfarmer Joined: 2014-12-11, 23:16 Posts: 2745 One Elder of Players Location: Bavaria	Posted at: 2020-04-20, 15:02 the-x wrote: Though im a bit afraid of suggesting balancing suggestions cause hessen goes often hard on new suggestions and critisises the person more than the subject. That is simply not correct as I have commented multiple times on these suggestion, as it got repeated multiple times without any new argument. Only after you started to violate nearly every rule of discussion to promote your ideas, that got no consensus a dozen times by the way, I took the freedom to critizize this bad discussion style. So if you think that making wrong accusations to me might help your position, this might be a little short sighted. Top Quote

the-x Topic Opener Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23 Posts: 967 One Elder of Players	Posted at: 2020-04-20, 15:59 Thats what i meant ... maybe we can get to the topic. But what you write is just not true, since i was developing the ideas a lot further and what i heard of you was only personal issues. What i am actually interested in, how you would solve these problems or the other ones we were talking about? Top Quote

the-x Topic Opener Joined: 2019-01-19, 13:23 Posts: 967 One Elder of Players	Posted at: 2020-04-21, 12:40 the-x wrote: I'm not a fan of doing every game the same procedure and level my hero stage to stage to full before he will ever see the world of widelands Well, it is in the nature of every non-random game that even when there are many ways of doing something, there always is a best way to do it. And even though you are free to play as you like it, your opponents in multiplayer may choose the better way. We have about as much influence in this fact as on the fact that you need a computer to play Widelands. And as soon as we have only one best way to do it, everyone will do it, at least over time Maybe a circle system can solve this, we had the triple circly system which was quite nice but in my opinion changed to much in the original widelands. But there are so many other ways, someone just needs to presesent and think about. This is what World Saviour and me talked about in many Multiplayer Games - as soon as you are in playing some games you come fast to a point, where you only play the Optimum. And since we decide that there is only 1 Optimum, everyone will tend to that and then its only a matter of clicking. To strenghten the strategic part its better if we have many optima, depending on the starting location, on the ressources where they are over the map and of course the interaction which strategy both players choose and how to adapt ;)= Top Quote

WorldSavior Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10 Posts: 2128 OS: Linux Version: Recent tournament version One Elder of Players Location: Germany	Posted at: 2020-04-21, 23:12 the-x wrote: the-x wrote: I'm not a fan of doing every game the same procedure and level my hero stage to stage to full before he will ever see the world of widelands Well, it is in the nature of every non-random game that even when there are many ways of doing something, there always is a best way to do it. And even though you are free to play as you like it, your opponents in multiplayer may choose the better way. We have about as much influence in this fact as on the fact that you need a computer to play Widelands. And as soon as we have only one best way to do it, everyone will do it, at least over time Maybe a circle system can solve this, we had the triple circly system which was quite nice but in my opinion changed to much in the original widelands. But there are so many other ways, someone just needs to presesent and think about. This is what World Saviour and me talked about in many Multiplayer Games - as soon as you are in playing some games you come fast to a point, where you only play the Optimum. I didn't say that. So basically you opened again another thread where you can repeat your typical stuff once more and quote people wrong. Once more: Could you please stop that? Wanted to save the world, then I got widetracked Top Quote

1 2 next ››