woses

[Darth Fool]

Well, some of the problems with a Wose getting slower the older it gets could be ameliorated if the wose advancement tree actually branched Ok, puns aside, you could have a wose who with each advancement slowed down but got mondo melee damage, and maybe one which stayed reasonably fast, but picked up caber tossing as a ranged weapon? Of course this runs the risk of having woses forming their own race.

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of the woses being the enemy of the elves.

[Dacyn]

Ok, puns aside, you could have a wose who with each advancement slowed down but got mondo melee damage, and maybe one which stayed reasonably fast, but picked up caber tossing as a ranged weapon?

This might solve the problem of units getting worse, but this might be a problem:
the wose tree splits at the beginning, but afterward the player has no control. A new player might feel tricked when his Melee Wose advanced into a Mighty Melee Wose (which goes way too slow).
So unless the split is at level 3, we need to make sure the 2->3 advancement is an improvement.

[Dave]

IMO one of the rules for creating advancements is that there should always be at least one possible advancement choice which dominates [1] the advancing unit type.

---

A reason that I don't like woses on the Rebel's side is that to me they are large, powerful beings. Sure, you can say they are "smaller and weaker than that in Wesnoth", but to me this explanation seems contrived, and I think most users would agree.

The current implementation of woses even admits this by calling the 1st level wose a "wose sapling". I really don't like the idea of creating a powerful creature and then having to contrive some weaker 1st level form to make them fit on a side on multiplayer. IMO it just doesn't work so well.

All the other units, with the exception of troll whelps, are full-fledged units at level 1. I was reluctant to even give troll whelps to the orcs in multiplayer, because I didn't like the idea of that, but in the end I decided there was no other good option.

I think that giving the woses to the rebels has approximately as much logic as giving out units like 'baby dragons' or 'lesser yetis' to other factions.

How many woses are there in Wesnoth, anyhow? Are we saying that they are around as common as the Elves?

Perhaps in the 'Age of Heroes' or some other era, the Elves should have Woses allied with them...

David

[1] 'dominates' means 'equal or better in every possible respect'

[catpys]

Dave, is this what you're getting at:
Get rid of the Wose Sapling, and offer the Wose in Age of Heroes?
If so it sounds good to me, of course it could be that I'm just not creative enough to find a use for a Wose Sapling...

[turin]

i agree we should remove wose sapling from multiplayer, and, probably, from the whole game. I agree, it sounds odd to have 'wose sapling' be the first level unit. and woses are definitely not as common as elves. IMHO, woses should only be used in special scenarios, where the leader is an ancient wose and he can recruit woses.

Plus, this makes it so i don't have to do a graphic for wose sapling

[Dacyn]

IMO one of the rules for creating advancements is that there should always be at least one possible advancement choice which dominates [1] the advancing unit type.

[1] 'dominates' means 'equal or better in every possible respect'

I can think of some exceptions to this rule:
red mage- gets slower
spearman- loses ranged attack
necromancer- becomes undead
druid- gets worse defense
Are these units supposed to be exceptions? (And how many are like this?)

[telex4]

If removing the wose from the rebels, and using it as a special character for scenarios means it can be a little bit exceptional, I'm all for it.

Personally I still like my idea of giant (large than one hex) units that move incredily slowly, but that take a huge amount of cutting with swords to bring down. Various uses I've thought of for these include:

- Choke points that will slowly close around you if you're not quick in moving past them

- Barriers that require patience and lots of healing to pass

- Nasty surprises that rise out of forests

[Dacyn]

Afaik the only thing worse on defense that Shydes have vs Druids is 10% worse resistance to impact attacks. However this is more than offset by the 10 extra hp Shydes get.

I was referring to defense, not resistance. On most terrains Shydes have a 10% greater chance of being hit.

[Dave]

Afaik the only thing worse on defense that Shydes have vs Druids is 10% worse resistance to impact attacks. However this is more than offset by the 10 extra hp Shydes get.

I was referring to defense, not resistance. On most terrains Shydes have a 10% greater chance of being hit.

That's what I thought you were referring to, but since Shydes are better defensively in every possible respect than Druids, I thought it must have been resistance you were referring to.

The defense of Druids ('woodland'):

Code: Select all

[defense]
deep water=80
shallow water=70
swamp water=60
grassland=60
sand=70
forest=30
hills=50
mountains=40
village=40
castle=40
cave=70
tundra=70
[/defense]

The defense of Shydes ('woodlandfloat'):

Code: Select all

[defense]
deep water=70
shallow water=60
swamp water=60
grassland=50
sand=60
forest=30
hills=50
mountains=40
village=40
castle=40
tundra=60
cave=70
[/defense]

As you can see, Shydes have a 10% lower chance of being hit on deep water, shallow water, grassland, sand, and tundra. They are equal on other terrain.

David

[AT]

I just played a MP game, and Wose Saplings were used heavily by my opponent. First, they did seem slightly out of place. Second, they seemed to act alot like the loyalist Heavy Infintry. Third, they didn't seem especially weak or anything, nor especially strong.
Their ambush was fun to gaurd against and devestating to unguarded flanks. I dont see what the huge problem with them is.

EDIT: although, i agree, they shouldnt be so much slower at higher levels. But thats all I'd change. Make sure they keep ambush, too.

[turin]

I just played a MP game, and Wose Saplings were used heavily by my opponent. First, they did seem slightly out of place. Second, they seemed to act alot like the loyalist Heavy Infintry. Third, they didn't seem especially weak or anything, nor especially strong.
Their ambush was fun to gaurd against. I dont see what the huge problem with them is.

the problem is we have to contrive something to make them seem less powerful. they're wose SAPLINGS, not just woses. that, and their graphic is unwesnothish. i think the whole idea of a wose as a normal unit is bad. as a special unit, maybe, but not as a normal unit.

so the main problem is not balancing, but intuitive. woses as normal units just make no sense.

Oh, and i forgot. the problem isn't with wose saplings per se; its that the advancement of wose sapling is actually in many ways worse than the wose sapling (less speed, less strokes).

[AT]

Then is there a way to give them a 'wose sapling' type unit, but have it be somthing else? The combination of ambush and no ranged weapon makes it an interesting foil to the Rebel faction. One i think should stay.

And Horseman it shouldnt be.

EDIT: and the LVL 1 speed is good; all the other elf units are fast, giving them another fast unit would make them more powerfull than they already are.

[turin]

Then is there a way to give them a 'wose sapling' type unit, but have it be somthing else? The combination of ambush and no ranged weapon makes it an interesting foil to the Rebel faction. One i think should stay.

And Horseman it shouldnt be.

EDIT: and the LVL 1 speed is good; all the other elf units are fast, giving them another fast unit would make them more powerfull than they already are.

rebels should not have impact attacks. northerners should not have pierce attacks. dwarves should not have pierce attacks. and loyalists probably shouldn't have fire attacks.

not all of these should be true, of course, but i think the idea stands. the different factions have different weaknesses. before woses, about the only rebel weakness was they had no impact attack (and thus were weak against undead). giving them an impact attack makes them not really have a weakness, and that ruins the whole point of having different factions, which is to create variety.

[Dave]

rebels should not have impact attacks. northerners should not have pierce attacks. dwarves should not have pierce attacks. and loyalists probably shouldn't have fire attacks.

Rebels already have impact attacks: shaman (okay admittedly weak, still piercing...)
Northerners already have pierce attacks: bowmen (not to mention the newfangled lizardmen)
Loyalists already have fire attacks: mages.

What Northerners do not have are fire attacks or cold attacks...

David

[turin]

rebels should not have impact attacks. northerners should not have pierce attacks. dwarves should not have pierce attacks. and loyalists probably shouldn't have fire attacks.

Rebels already have impact attacks: shaman (okay admittedly weak, still piercing...)
Northerners already have pierce attacks: bowmen (not to mention the newfangled lizardmen)
Loyalists already have fire attacks: mages.

What Northerners do not have are fire attacks or cold attacks...

David

i mean they shouldn't have many and they shouldn't be powerful. each side has, IMHO, something they are bad at. it just so happens that the rebels are bad at impact. if you give them a powerful impact attack, it will make the rebels too powerful, unless you really take something away from them in return (like, say, no ranged attack for scout of fighter.)