UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050517 Firefox/1.0.4 (Debian package 1.0.4-2) IP: 64.81.113.168 URI: http://wesnoth.slack.it/?FrequentlyProposedIdeas - - - - - Index: FrequentlyProposedIdeas =================================================================== RCS file: /home/wesnoth/cvsroot/wikiroot/FrequentlyProposedIdeas,v retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.6 FrequentlyProposedIdeas --- FrequentlyProposedIdeas 19 Mar 2005 23:26:50 -0000 1.6 +++ FrequentlyProposedIdeas 8 Jun 2005 14:54:20 -0000 @@ -1,4 +1,26 @@ -* Castles should be more difficult to attack +There is a forum thread about this, but it isn't being updated: http://wwwwesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1158&start=0 + + +If you have a new entry for the list, edit the page, but first make sure it deserves to be on the list. + + +||Dave wrote|| + +Since we often have many of the same ideas posted again and again, we've decided to gather some of the more commonly +repeated ideas into this thread, so that people with ideas can check to see if they have already been posted, and what +the outcome was. + +This is not to say that people are forbidden from reposting any ideas from this thread, if they feel they can look at in +a new light, or have anything to add, but by the same token, people posting previously mentioned ideas should note that +people may not want to rediscuss old topics. + +Another good reference is the 'Wesnoth Philosophy' page: http://wesnoth.slack.it/?WesnothPhilosophy + +Also a more general reference is the Wesnoth FAQ: http://www.wesnoth.org/faq.htm + +FREQUENTLY PROPOSED IDEAS: + +||Castles should be more difficult to attack.|| Background: this discussion has taken place on numerous occasions, with references to the difficulty to besiege a castle in the real world, how the game would be more interesting if castles were harder to attack, and so on and so @@ -8,23 +30,31 @@ 'Castles' in the game are a somewhat abstract notion, and one shouldn't dwell heavily on how 'realistic' it is if a castle is only moderately more defensible than other terrain. -* Units that occupy multiple tiles + +||Units that occupy multiple tiles.|| Background: this idea involves large monster-type units that can occupy multiple tiles in the game. Result: the developers feel that while such units might be appropriate for games where battles take place on a smaller scale, in a game where an entire village is a single tile, it is not appropriate. Also, it would substantially -complicate the game mechanics for little real benefit. Images that can extend into surrounding tiles are being -considered. +complicate the game mechanics for little real benefit. Images that can extend into surrounding tiles are being considered. -* Better Graphics +||Better Graphics.|| Background: some people think the game should have better graphics. -Result: the developers concur. However the developers live in the real world and have limited resources. If resources -to produce better graphics are acquired they will likely be used to produce such graphics. +Result: The game already has good graphics, especially considering it's a Free game. The developers feel that improving +the games graphics even further, where possible, would be great. However the developers live in the real world and have +limited resources. If resources to produce better graphics are acquired they will likely be used to produce such graphics. + +||Stacking Units.|| + +Background: suggestions to be able to place multiple units in a single hex -* More Units +Result: The developers feel that this would make the game more complicated, and distort the game rules alot from what +they are currently. + +||More Units.|| Background: some people think the game should have more units (and often more advancement paths). @@ -32,7 +62,16 @@ the game. The game has well over one hundred types of units, so it cannot be considered to only have a few units. People are welcome to submit ideas for specific types of new units. Ideas that have graphics are more likely to succeed. -* Magic spell system with mana/magic points etc +||New Races/Factions.|| + +Background: many people have proposed new races or factions, for various reasons, sometimes with art, usually without. + +Result: Only one race made by a user has been added, and that was over a year ago. The developers mostly feel the game +has enough races as it is, although a few more might be accepted, if they fit the feel of the game; the more outlandish +the race or faction idea, the less likely; a barbarian or easterling variation on humans, for example, is more likely to +get in than dark elves, which are more likely to get in than insect warriors. + +||Magic spell system with mana/magic points etc.|| Background: there have been numerous proposals of magic spells, either global or per unit, involving magic points/mana, etc @@ -40,7 +79,7 @@ Result: the developers direct attention to the Wesnoth Philosophy page (http://wesnoth.slack.it/?WesnothPhilosophy) which outlines why Wesnoth's system for magic is different. We are fairly happy with our magic system. -* Sides should be able to build buildings +||Sides should be able to build buildings.|| Background: it should be possible to build various buildings on the battlefield @@ -48,7 +87,7 @@ that although every other strategy game seems to be moving toward having a 'building' component, there is no reason why we should follow. -* There should be different/more types of resources and types of buildings that provide them +||There should be different/more types of resources and types of buildings that provide them.|| Background: people suggest different types of resources (e.g. lumber) and buildings that provide them (e.g. lumbermill, gold mine which gives lots of gold, towns, healing fountains) @@ -56,31 +95,37 @@ Result: the idea of Wesnoth is not to be about resources. The resource system is intentionally as simple as possible. Some special buildings like healing fountains could be placed by a scenario designer at their discretion. -* There should be (more) special items for units to get that make them more powerful +||There should be (more) special items for units to get that make them more powerful.|| Background: suggestions of various kind of special items (powerful bows, swords, etc) that make units more powerful. Various methods of acquisition have been suggested, including forging them at one's keep, finding them, or buying them -at a shop +at a shop. A related idea is adding many more items of the same manner that exist currently. Result: although the Wesnoth engine supports a reasonably sophisticated system for items that make units more powerful, the developers feel that keeping these items few and far between is better than creating a 'collect the -power-ups' game. +power-ups' game. Any user made campaign could have as many items as it wants, but most have less than one per scenario. -* Ranged weapons should be able to reach across multiple hexes +||Ranged weapons should be able to reach across multiple hexes.|| Background: suggestions that units such as archers (or perhaps catapults) should be able to fire their weapons across multiple tiles -Result: although the game engine does support this, the developers do not feel it would enhance the game, since among -other things, it would be very difficult to protect units from dying +Result: although the game engine originally supported this, the developers did not feel it enhanced the game, and, since +the feature caused many bugs, it was removed. Even when it was supported, it was rarely used, since commonly using it +would fundamentally change the nature of combat in the game. Among other changes, it would be very difficult to protect +units from dying + +||There should be more traits.|| -* There should be more traits +Background: many different traits have been suggested, with some gaining a fairly large amount of support. Result: Most traits that have been suggested sound contrived, overly-powerful, lacking in variety, confusing, or awkward. The current traits are all fairly simple, and the developers agree that only simple traits should be added. Suggestions for new traits are welcome, but it is noted that unless they are very simple, they are unlikely to make it. +Also, they must not be overpowered; loyal was the first trait added that did not exist originally, and it was removed +from general use, now being only available for campaign heroes, because it was too good. -* Healing should give experience +||Healing should give experience.|| Background: it is felt that levelling-up some units with healing abilities is too difficult, and they should get experience through healing. @@ -88,16 +133,86 @@ Result: it is felt that allowing units to gain experience without risk would make levelling-up of such units inevitable. Further, one of the motivating examples of this is so that units such as shaman can have a hope to level up in multiplayer. It is pointed out that if the experience gains were high enough to allow shaman to level up in a single -multiplayer game, then it would be trivial to gain the best type of healing unit in a campaign very quickly. +multiplayer game, then it would be trivial to gain the best type of healing unit in a campaign very quickly. Also, +playing with low experience settings will allow you to possibly get a few advanced shamans. -* There should be ships in the game +||There should be ships in the game.|| -Background: there have been various proposals on ships/boats being present in the game as units, that perhaps can -carry other units +Background: there have been various proposals on ships/boats being present in the game as units, that perhaps can carry +other units. Result: the developers feel that the RPG-party skirmish feel of the game does not allow for ships being a regular unit in the game, as they would be too large a scale for the individual character feel of the game. Ships and boats can and are scripted parts of various campaigns, but are not planned as a regular unit. + +||There should be transportation units in the game that can carry other units.|| + +Background: there have been various propsals of units that can carry other units + +Result: the developers feel that this would unnecessarily complicate the game, and its interface, and has little point +other than to circumvent a unit's slow movement or poor movement on particular terrain. + +||There should be a fear/morale system in the game.|| + +Background: there have been a number of different suggestions for a fear/morale system in the game. The implementation +suggestions have been varied, but generally include the concept of units becoming 'afraid' based on various heuristics +that calculate how much danger they're in. 'Afraid' units would be made to make certain movements, or have restrictions +on what movements they can make + +Result: After lengthy discussion, it has been decided that this would over-complicate the game, and frustrate players. +It is felt that this kind of idea is more suited to a 'wargame' than a simplified fantasy-strategy game which aims for +simplicity and fun. + +||Most units should have more than 3 levels of advancement.|| + +Background: lots of people think that the typical 3 levels of advancement for each unit is insufficient, and that most +units should have 4, 5, or even more levels of advancement. + +Result: The developers feel that 3 levels is enough. Avoiding the creation of 'super units' is high on the developer's +priority list, and even if there were level 4+ units, the most powerful units wouldn't be more powerful than the current +level 3 units. This would also drain art resources, as well as reduce the contrast between units -- too many units would +seem like boring repetitions of other units. + +It is thought that a better, more interesting way to do things would be to have more alternate paths of advancement +within the 3 levels rather than have 4+ levels of advancement. + +||There should be a 'deterministic', 'non random' mode which one can play in.|| + +Background: some people, apparently frustrated at losing their units in random battles, feel that there should be a +non-random way of playing the game. + +Result: the developers feel that randomness is a large part of the game, and that taking the randomness out of the game +would be somewhat akin to taking the randomness out of most card games. Some patches are available on the forums that +will produce a non-random version of wesnoth, although use of them will make you unable to play multiplayer, and the +patches are not supported by the wesnoth development team. + +||Movement or combat calculations should be based on a combination of the two hexes across which they occur.|| + +Background: some people have suggested that, for instance, archers firing down from mountains onto a unit on grassland +below should gain an advantage from firing from a higher terrain than a grassland. Likewise, some people have suggested +the concept of a 'canyon' terrain that is difficult to move into or out of, but moving from one canyon hex to another is +easy. (Note that the idea of canyon terrain has not been rejected, but the idea of cliffs on the edges that operate like +this has). + +Result: the developers feel that the current system of each hex operating as a seperate entity is simple, elegant, and +works nicely. + +||Units levelling up should not get full healing.|| + +Background: many people have suggested different formulae for allowing partial healing or no healing at all when a unit +levels up. + +Result: many developers agree with this, however many developers and users also disagree. I (David) prefer it the way it is. + +||Transferring gold between allies in multiplayer.|| + +Background: some people have suggested that allies should be able to transfer gold to each other in multiplayer + +Result: The developers feel that this would reduce the semantics of a team game to little more than players sharing +control of a single side. Part of the strategy of a team game is to manage your gold resources and the position of your +leaders. One player might have alot of gold, but can't use it, because their leader doesn't have access to a keep. This +is simply part of the strategy to decide if it's worth giving up access to your castle for some time while you perhaps +migrate your leader or use her to attack enemies. Allowing transfers of gold would disintegrate most of this strategy. ||See Also||
_______________________________________________ Wesnoth-wiki-changes mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/wesnoth-wiki-changes
