Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Battle for Westnoth

Johannes

Arcane
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
10,535
Location
casting coach
Are stalemates like that (between ~equal players) common in all matchups, or just some? Also I wonder if just making better maps could fix the issue...

Haven't played this game in mp much at all, so don't know.
 

felicity

Scholar
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
339
I didn't even write the name of the game in my post, do you know what game i'm talking about that you are making such brave statement? I'm talking about PoxNora and idea that any of these three have nothing to do with formation or board control is laughable.

I was talking specificly Wesnoth and tactical games that don't want to rely on fancy spells/abilities etc. I think I said those features are often overpowered, not always, and I want to emphasize that spells/abilities that can break stalemate under a temporal stack of doom turn system are necessarily too powerful for a chess-like gameplay. Using PaxNora is a bad example I mean it is a fucking collectible mmo. I checked out their website; I didn't read a lot but what I have seen are very powerful like freezing multiple units for turns. Not to mention you have like dozens of them which will require a great deal of memorization. It just proves my point that addition of spells/equipments/abilities often shifts the focal point of the game. As I said before I am not principally against these features but they are not for every game. If you add a shit ton of abilities/spells/equipments clusterfucks to chess or go, it MIGHT improve the game for some people, but will it be the same experience? Will it be a game that chess or go players want to play? Can you not see that a lot of attention which could otherwise be spent on planning moves will be diverted to the abilities and shit?

I didn't say its problem, i just gave simple example of why importance of board control is lower with such system. Changing turn order doesn't change core principles of the system.
Well I don't understand your point then. In your scenario none of the B units can take out a single A unit. B1 B2 can't deal enough damage, B3 B4 are blocked, and A1 A2 can retreat unharmed, such are your premises. Obviously A1 and A2 are not under any threat so how is it that A1 and A2 are in idiotic positions? Of course it would be bad if the turn order was different but that just means you have to pay attention to turn order as well. A good moves can be a bad moves under different circumstances - is what you are basically saying - which is true for all chess games and isn't a problem.
 

Archibald

Arcane
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
7,869
Using PaxNora is a bad example I mean it is a fucking collectible mmo.

And i here thought that we were talking about battle systems.

I checked out their website; I didn't read a lot but what I have seen are very powerful like freezing multiple units for turns. Not to mention you have like dozens of them which will require a great deal of memorization. It just proves my point that addition of spells/equipments/abilities often shifts the focal point of the game.

So you took 10 minutes to read official site and decided that you know what is and what is not "focal point" in specific game? I wonder how much time you spent with Wesnoth before you started sharing your "awesome" insight? 1 hour?

As I said before I am not principally against these features but they are not for every game.

And i said otherwise?

If you add a shit ton of abilities/spells/equipments clusterfucks to chess or go, it MIGHT improve the game for some people, but will it be the same experience? Will it be a game that chess or go players want to play? Can you not see that a lot of attention which could otherwise be spent on planning moves will be diverted to the abilities and shit?

What are you babbling about? I gave a specific example of a game where turn based battles are played out in A/B format and other mechanics than units are used to break down possible stalemates. Never did i say that every game should have such mechanics.

Well I don't understand your point then. In your scenario none of the B units can take out a single A unit. B1 B2 can't deal enough damage, B3 B4 are blocked, and A1 A2 can retreat unharmed, such are your premises. Obviously A1 and A2 are not under any threat so how is it that A1 and A2 are in idiotic positions?

Point is simple, it's easier to get away with slight punishment for bad moves in turn based game where turns are taken based on speed/initiative. And if units do not get killed it doesn't mean that move wasn't bad, thats should be obvious for everyone, or so i thought before reading your posts.

But please go on with your insight on games that you haven't even played, not going to bother anymore.
 

felicity

Scholar
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
339
And i here thought that we were talking about battle systems.
We are talking about battle system of which the premise of balance doesn't rest on having to collect bajillion e-items.

So you took 10 minutes to read official site and decided that you know what is and what is not "focal point" in specific game? I wonder how much time you spent with Wesnoth before you started sharing your "awesome" insight? 1 hour?
So you can't answer my questions and have to resort to lame excuse. Do you have to play oblivion from start to finish to know that the level scaling mechanic it has in place is bad? How is freezing multiple units for multiple turns not extremely powerful? Adding a shit tons of powerful abilities/equipments/spells like these affects the focal point of a game for the simple reason that no amount of careful movement and positioning can make up for the cost of overlooking these bloated features.

What are you babbling about? I gave a specific example of a game where turn based battles are played out in A/B format and other mechanics than units are used to break down possible stalemates. Never did i say that every game should have such mechanics.
But you said cluttering the game with shit does not shift the focal point away from movement and positioning, which I argue against. Yet again you evaded my questions.


Point is simple, it's easier to get away with slight punishment for bad moves in turn based game where turns are taken based on speed/initiative. And if units do not get killed it doesn't mean that move wasn't bad, thats should be obvious for everyone, or so i thought before reading your posts.

But please go on with your insight on games that you haven't even played, not going to bother anymore.
You said fucking nothing to backup your claim. This is such a gem: "if units do not get killed it doesn't mean that move wasn't bad". Yes but it doesn't mean it was bad either. I am seriously amazed by your dumbfuckery. And surprise, didn't respond to my questions, again. Your response is about as non-responsive as it can get.
 

Emily

Arcane
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
3,068
Are stalemates like that (between ~equal players) common in all matchups, or just some? Also I wonder if just making better maps could fix the issue...

Haven't played this game in mp much at all, so don't know.
yes they are very common
Main problem is that there is no strategic point in the middle, so unless you hold one of your oponents villages you gain nothing by atacking.
When pro players play it is not unusual to see 20 turns of doing nothing, just back and forth : (
I think better maps could fix a lot of the issues, just one village in the center could change metagame radicaly
 

DakaSha

Arcane
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
4,792
One village is to much of an advantage.
Thats why this game is sadly shit for competitive gaming
 

Taka-Haradin puolipeikko

Filthy Kalinite
Patron
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Messages
19,322
Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Bubbles In Memoria
https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/599390/view/3287088771787899068
World Conquest: Wesnoth with friends
One of the joys of Wesnoth is amassing an army of high-level recruits over a long campaign. When playing with friends, though, most multiplayer games are short, one-off encounters. When the scenario ends, you can say goodbye to that Red Mage you painstakingly leveled up.

Wouldn't it be great if you could play a whole campaign with friends? Well you can with
World Conquest
, a randomly-generated Co-op campaign for 1-3 players. Since including it in our 1.16 release, it's become the second-most popular game on our multiplayer server.

What to expect
A game of
World Conquest
works like most other Wesnoth campaigns. You'll need to seize villages and kill enemy leaders to win. But there's a twist. When you recruit your first unit, you can choose bonuses for your side by giving them artifacts, training and heroes.

113b3c6cf6bbf79fa5587336df07323467acedfd.png


Every time you win and start a new scenario, you'll get to choose another set of bonuses. Choose carefully! The right bonus combos can really increase the power of your units.

A different campaign every time
Every scenario in
World Conquest
is randomly generated -- random maps, random enemies, random heroes, random bonuses. It's a great way to try out a new strategy or faction, like the Dunefolk we introduced in the last release.

9b7b5fc6f0f49acbe1b654ecec58e5c0a9d63062.png


How to play
To start a new Co-op game of
World Conquest
, follow these steps.

1. From the Main Menu click
Multiplayer
.
2. Select
Join Official Server
and click ok.
3. Once you're in the lobby, click
Create Game
.
4. Find the dropdown that says
Scenarios
and change it to
Multiplayer Campaigns
.
5. Select
World Conquest 2p
(two players) or
World Conquest 3p
(three players) and click
Create Game
.
6. Select your difficulty and click
Play
. (Start on Easy if you're not sure -- World Conquest is
really hard
.)
7. Tell your friend your game room's name so they can join you, or wait for another player.
8. Click
I'm Ready
to start the game.

Remember, this is a campaign and you'll need more than one sitting to finish it!
When you're ready for a break, be sure to save the game before quitting. Go to
Menu > Save Game
and give it a name you can remember.

To resume a saved campaign, follow these steps.

1. From the Main Menu click
Multiplayer
.
2. Select
Join Official Server
and click ok.
3. Once you're in the lobby, click
Create Game
.
4. Click
Load Game
on the left.
5. Find your saved game and click
Load
.
6. Tell your friend your game room's name so they can join you, or wait for another player.
7. Click
I'm Ready
to start the game.

Want to play by yourself?
You can play
World Conquest
by yourself. Follow the steps above, but join the
Local Game
in step 2 and select
World Conquest 1p
in your game room.
 

ValeVelKal

Arcane
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
1,605
"What's wrong with that tactical game is that it is not a strategy game with RPG elements."
 
Last edited:

thesecret1

Arcane
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
5,847
I played that campaign about 2 years ago (I think it was an user made mod rather than anything official?). Pretty good, actually, but the fact you cannot turn off turn limit is a big minus. Means that if you fuck up (or one of your teammates fucks up, which is likely as the difficulty is really high), you have no time to reposition your battle line and recover. I guess it's to prevent XP grinding, but they really should give that as an option. Nothing feels more disappointing than losing not because you were defeated, but because the timer ran out.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom