Re: [Wesnoth-dev] New approaches to add-ons management
The PblWML page already describes a dependencies field (see http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/PblWML), though I'm not sure if it actually has any effect on anything. But my point is, we (add-on authors) have already been told to use dependencies= in .pbl files. How would this requires= differ from dependencies=, and would it be intended to replace it? I don't see any point to changing the name of the field just for the sake of changing it. --turin On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 11:14 AM, ott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruno, On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 10:05:49AM -0500, you wrote: ott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: requires=Units:Roman:1.5,Era:HG-Welles If we are going to do a requires system, we should standardize the format of version information and what it meeans. You really want requires to match a range of versions that support the needed features in the same manner. Requiring an exact version is in most cases too specific. Agreed. I was simply thinking of the Perl require statement, which allows a minimum version to be specified. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev -- Joseph Simmons Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Campaign server redesign note
Since that service is used fairly often (for example, my school's firewall blocks the port the in-game campaign server uses so I have to use it), I think it would be worth it to maintain it if it's technically feasible. -- Joseph Simmons Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] General call for help -- I'm stumped
If I may make a humble suggestion, I've long thought it would be useful to have a before-animation death even and then an after-animation death event. Often you want dialogue with the dying character, and it really doesn't make sense for the death animation to fire _before_ his dialogue... what, is he speaking from beyond the grave? But, you also often want dialogue unrelated to the character, in which case you probably want the death animation firing first, instead of randomly at the end of the dialogue - oh, right, this dialogue was because we just killed the bay guy. In fact, often you want both of them - you want the bad guy to say argh, my comrades will avenge me, then for him to fall down dead, then for the heroes to discuss their plans for the next scenario or whatever. This can't be done easily ATM, as far as I know, but it would be easy to do with this change - you just have a before death event and a die event, in the before death event you have the enemy leader's dialogue, in the die event you have everything that happens _after_ the death animation of the enemy leader. In between is the actual death of the leader, which occurs exactly as normal - this is where the death animation occurs, where the unit with the kill levels up, if applicable, etc. Though I don't know anything about the actual code implementing this stuff, from reading what you've written here this would make the bugfix easier, AND it would actually make WML more useful, so I thought I'd throw it out there. ~Turin On Nov 25, 2007 12:54 AM, Eric S. Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John McNabb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: AIO has a die event in it for the bad guys, but it does not have an endlevel tag inside the event. Two brothers, does: [endlevel] result=victory bonus=yes [/endlevel] Thus, in AIO, the victory is declared by the default check on whether the sides have leaders, whereas in Two brothers the victory condition is set inside the event, thus throwing the end_of_level exception... Yeah, I'd say that confirms it. I've looked into this, and it isn't going to be trivial to fix. The problem is that simply moving the firing of the the die event to after the unit is deleted would solve this problem, but would make the unavailable to find by description when you're scripting death speeches. I suppose we could have the victory and defeat events do a scavenging pass that would look for units with HP = 0 and delete them. -- a href=http://www.catb.org/~esr/;Eric S. Raymond/a ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev -- Joseph Simmons Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Campaign server crash
jeremy rosen wrote: campaigns which produlce wmllint warning could have a WIP tag or old-release tag somewhere... How does it make sense for an Imperial Era campaign that has references to files that don't exist in the campaign, but are in the IE, to have a WIP or old-release tag? :/ If it's absolutely necessary to do some syntax checking with wmllint, I'd rather have it run on the campaign, send the output to the uploader, and ask them are you sure you want to proceed, or would you rather fix these bugs or something like that. That, or have some way of reading the dependencies= line so it doesn't do wmllint on the addon alone, but on the addon plus all dependencies (plus all dependencies of dependencies, etc). But it seems to me that, like zookeeper said, there are legitimate reasons to have a campaign that doesn't pass wmllint and there's no need to tag such campaigns are being WIPs or old-releases when they very well might not be either. ~turin ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] What's going on with the new end-of-scenario logic
I can answer some of your questions: * At present, EOS linger is only triggered by victory or defeat. Quit behavior is unchanged. There are a couple of other EOS states in WML that I don't understand; continue is one of them. I am not clear on whether they should put the player in linger mode. Continue probably shouldn't put the user in EOS mode, though I suppose it _could_ and it wouldn't cause major problems. Continue is used for talking scenarios, the difference between it and victory being that it doesn't display a VICTORY! Gold: Turns left: Bonus: etc message and it doesn't apply the 20% tax on retained gold. Since there's no message at the end of continue scenarios telling the user the game is over, it would probably be confusing to put them in such a situation. Continue may also be used in some scenarios as a way of removing the 20% tax, but it shouldn't be. (BTW, I would like to suggest making the percentage of gold retained customizable in WML... have an attribute in [endlevel] called retained= that defaults to 80%. Often on RPG scenarios and such you want to let the user retain all of their gold plus any they got on the current scenario, and there's no way to do that currently that I know of...) There is also a related issue about what how to change autosaves, and whether it should be changed at all. My own preference would be to abolish them entirely. When users want to save game, they can use the menu. This choice is now available at any time, including at EOS. However, it has been pointed out to me that the other developers like having autosave enabled by default because it means they are much more likely to get savefiles with their bug reports. Matters are further complicated by the fact that SP players tend to prefer start-of-turn autosaves, while MPP players tend to like end-of-turn autosaves. Autosaves are good, both for testing, bugfixing, and playing the game. They shouldn't be deleted, IMHO. It's true that we could force users to always save when they want to, but that doesn't mean we should - if we can make something more convenient for the user, we should. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Naming proposal -- the Three Sisters
The islands aren't exactly unnamed - it is the isle of the damned to which they sail - they're going there explains why there are bandits who ally with you on the island in HttT. (I realize that if those three islands are the isle of the damned, then that map in HttT covers a huge area compared to most scenarios... but that's what scott intended, I'm pretty sure. At least initially - he might have changed that later.) I suppose we could still rename them the three sisters and then have them BECOME the isle of the damned, but if we do it will be a bit confusing in HttT when you wind up on the three sisters and have them referred to as the isle of the damned. ~turin Eric S. Raymond wrote: According to the map meant to be shown at the end of Liberty, Relnan and the survivors from two villages sail off to the three unnamed islands off the Great Continent's west coast north of Alduin. The only directions he leaves Baldras are to keep going west when Baldras reaches the coast, which is not just silly but geographically wrong -- Baldras would have to sail southwest. The easiest way for Relnan to leave usable directions would be to name the islands. They do not currently have a name. I propose that we dub them The Three Sisters. To add these to the main map, I'll need a source for the font that was used for the legends on it. Sirp, jetryl, what was that? ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] script to sync wiki to about.cfg
Considering that user-made campaigns are often contributed to by people who've also done stuff for mainline, and user-made campaigns have their own credits.cfg, it seems to me that if the syntax is changed there will have to be some way for a UMC to add to the contributions= list, instead of having their own [entry] tags for each person. Or have some way for [entry]s to be combined if their id is the same. ~Turin ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Game design decisionmaking
As Noy said, I'm not interested in such a position. I wish Mythological, Noy and zookeeper well in their world-of-wesnoth project. I think a council is probably a good idea for the types of decisions your talking about; the proposed list of members makes sense to me. It seems to me that before a 5th 'tie-breaking' vote should be called upon a lot of effort should be put into a compromise solution, since having strong disagreements between two equally large parts of the council seems likely to lead to... well, bad things. ~turin ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Missing Ruby Of Fire story image in SoF
No, not to my knowledge. That line should be commented out. :/ ~Turin Eric S. Raymond wrote: For Turin: ../../data/campaigns/Sceptre_of_Fire/scenarios/3t_The_Coucil_Regathers.cfg, line 174 - story/ruby_of_fire.png Does this image actually exist somewhere? -- Joseph Simmons Known to some as Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered www.wesnoth.org ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Adding new campaigns to mainline, some guidelines
Firstly, I think the requirement that they must have animations for all new units is unnecessary, and is likely to make most UMCs - even the very good ones - unable to be added. It makes sense to require that they have decent static frames, but if you require animations no one will be able to comply - or, at least, almost no one. It is very hard to get art for user-made content. I just don't see how having this requirement accomplishes anything other than vastly reducing the number of campaigns able to be added. What exactly is wrong with having the new units not be fully animated? -- Also, it would help to have a description of _how_ a campaign would be added - meaning, what does the campaign creator have to do to get it added? Who does he submit it to for consideration? How much control will he have over it once it is included in mainline? (If they lose too much control of the creative process, many campaign devs won't want to get theirs included). Most campaign creators aren't familiar with the wesnoth development process, all they know how to do is write campaigns and use the campaign server. I personally think the system of having to email new versions of the campaign to a specified campaign dev who will then commit those changes won't work out very well, but we'll see. I don't have a better solution without giving everyone SVN access. -- BTW, do I have permission to add SoF? ~Turin -- Joseph Simmons Known to some as Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered www.wesnoth.org ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Adding new campaigns to mainline, some guidelines
I think adding SoF to mainline is a good idea. SE might be a good addition as well, but I'm not going to push for it to be added. SE would need a lot of maintenance to be brought up to snuff, I think, but SoF is pretty much set as-is. With regards to the SoF-HttT conflict, I might indeed need to add something to SoF saying this is how the dwarves tell it, but I wouldn't mind doing that - it would take five minutes. Also, the campaign Legend of Wesmere does a good job of explaining why SoF tells a different story than HttT with them both remaining factual accounts, if we want to go that way. It would require very minor changes to some HttT dialogue, which I could do as well. (It would basically be changing the basic idea of 'Garard I ordered the sceptre of fire to be forged and then, when it was never delivered, his son made finding it the key to being Heir to the Throne' to 'the sceptre was forged long ago, and then because Garard II was unsure about who his heir should be he made the Edict of the Sceptre'. I personally think it makes more sense the second way regardless of whether the campaign SoF exists or not.) ~Turin -- Joseph Simmons Known to some as Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered www.wesnoth.org ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Merge of the terrain branch
As I understand it, there's been a feature freeze for 1.2 for quite a while, and some new features for 1.3 that did not get into 1.2 have built up in the past few months. Specifically, I'm thinking about the idling animations. -turin john w. bjerk wrote: Um, this sounds like we're trying to release 1.3 (a development relase?) before adding the new terrain stuff. What do we have to make 1.3 special besides the new terrain engine? I'm assuming open GL won't be ready before 1.3. -eleazar / j.w.bjerk On Dec 29, 2006, at 1:35 PM, Mark de Wever wrote: On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 07:18:44PM +0100, Mark de Wever wrote: An update about the terrain branch. We had a little discussion on IRC about it today. The current plan is to merge before 1.3.1 and remove compability with the old format in 1.3.3 with some extra checks for the old incompatible format. This check will probably be removed in 1.3.4. Any objections, questions? Regards, Mark de Wever ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev -- Joseph Simmons Known to some as Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered www.wesnoth.org ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] No Lord.cfg for Eastern Invasion Scen.15
Actually my fix was to change the unit requested to a General... which I've committed to SVN. - turin Sylvain MAURIN wrote: No Lord.cfg for Eastern Invasion Scen.15 : # pwd /usr/local/games/wesnoth/1.1.5/share/wesnoth/data/campaigns/Eastern_Invasion/scenarios # cp ../../../tutorial/units/Lord.cfg ../units/ Sylma ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] making Balancing of campaigns easier and restructure income
Well I don't really like the changes proposed so far. The main problem is that it takes away completely the idea that you have to conserve gold from scenario to scenario. All you have to do, under this system, is finish as quickly as possible - there's no reason not to recruit and recall as many units as you can to clobber the enemy into submission. You shouldn't be able to do this - or, you should at least get some bonus for not using all of your gold. My suggestion would be: * Leave the bonus as is, having it apply before the tax is taken, and not adding gold, silver, or copper. * Make the carryover gold 30% or 40%, not 80%. * Make the carryover gold add to the minimum gold, not replace it - so, if your carryover gold is 60 (you ended with 200 gold, 30% carryover), you start the next scenario with the minimum gold (say, 300) plus 60. 360 gold. This greatly reduces the possibility of gold hoarding, although it doesn't fix it altogether. I think you'd have to play around with the settings to get something that worked right. But I like this a lot better than essentially throwing multi-scenario economics out of the game entirely. Any change will require rebalancing, obviously, but we should go for a rebalancing that doesn't change the game drastically. - turin ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] halo option
Well, personally, I always play with the floating labels off. (Why? They're annoying as hell, and don't tell me anything I can't find out myself if I really want to - they're just distractions.) So I'd prefer for the option to remain. John McNabb wrote: On 5/10/06, Patrick Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Correction: custom floating labels are now supported via WML in the [unstore_unit] tag. Might as well leave the option there, IMO. That still is something that is only available to the scenario designer, not to other players in multiplayer. So I don't see why leave the option. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Wesnoth 1.2?
This is also my sentiment. I'd like to wait until the Saracens are ready. Patrick Parker wrote: Hi, So I would like to know: * what do you think about the whole idea of a stable release soon? Seems premature. I think when some fresh content like the Saracens are ready, then it will be time to refocus on a stable release. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Campaigns: out with the cruft, in with the new shiny ones
Agreed. Now, would this mean making The South Guard into the tutorial, or removing the tutorial button altogether? Both are possibilities - the former requires more work, but I guess it has the advantage of keeping a semblance of a tutorial. David White wrote: Hogne Håskjold wrote: The main candidates here are Under the Burning Suns and South Guard which are both complete and imo among the best out there. I've played through both of them several times and found them quite enjoyable. They are also maintained, with further interest from several devs to act as co-maintainers. I think that we should consider removing our current tutorial and replace it with South Guard. I think South Guard provides a better gentle introduction to the game than the current tutorial. Agreed. I've already done this for Eastern Invasion. Of course, if we're going to make it universal, we should probably move the hero-marker.png graphic into a universal location - perhaps images/misc/. Right now there are duplicate copies in The South Guard and Eastern Invasion. I also think we should try to use the Hero Marker concept in all official campaigns. David ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Campaigns: out with the cruft, in with the new shiny ones
That sounds like a good idea. However, a relatively minor issue would be UTBS's religious references. I've heard in the past that Wesnoth is supposed to be areligious, which UTBS definitely is not. I do think adding it would contradict some of statements made in regards to holy magic, white magi, etc. If this is considered an issue, we could pick Liberty instead. IMHO, that's the next most mature campaign. -turin Hogne Håskjold wrote: Hi As talked about on the IRC for quite some time now a change in mainline campaigns is long overdue. The Dark Hordes and SotBE are both incomplete, unmaintained and atm not working due to recent changes in SVN trunk. The proposal are to remove these from mainline and replace them with new campaigns. The main candidates here are Under the Burning Suns and South Guard which are both complete and imo among the best out there. I've played through both of them several times and found them quite enjoyable. They are also maintained, with further interest from several devs to act as co-maintainers. TDH and SotBE can be posted to the forum with a req. for maintainership.
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] one more attempt at slow
It looks good, except, why do curers/healers not remove slow? Is there a
rationale behind this? It looks to me like it would confuse new players,
and does not really serve any purpose...
If there was a rationale somewhere, I missed it.
Jérémy Rosen wrote:
ok, after discussing it a little more with soliton and Dragonking, here
is one more attempt at slo
- slowed units see their movement halved
actually, movement is not halved, but movement cost is double
this effect was already here before
- slowed units emit no ZoC
- slowed units have one less attack
this effect was already there
- slow is cured when resting or being on a village
curers/healers don't help. only resting or staying on a village
slow does not interact with poison or healing in anyway.
here you go
-
Index: reports.cpp
===
--- reports.cpp(révision 8705)
+++ reports.cpp(copie de travail)
@@ -126,7 +126,7 @@
}
if(u-second.has_flag(slowed)) {
unit_status misc/slowed.png;
-tooltip _(slowed: ) _(This unit has been slowed.
It moves at half normal speed and receives one less attack than normal
in combat.);
+tooltip _(slowed: ) _(This unit has been slowed.
It moves at half normal speed , receives one less attack than normal in
combat, and does not emit a zone of control.);
res.add_image(unit_status,tooltip);
}
if(u-second.has_flag(poisoned)) {
Index: actions.cpp
===
--- actions.cpp(révision 8705)
+++ actions.cpp(copie de travail)
@@ -1219,6 +1212,7 @@
const std::vectorteam teams)
{
std::mapgamemap::location,int healed_units, max_healing;
+std::mapgamemap::location,bool unslowed_units;
//a map of healed units to their healers
std::multimapgamemap::location,gamemap::location healers;
@@ -1319,8 +1313,23 @@
}
}
+// last, add units that need unslowing
for(i = units.begin(); i != units.end(); ++i) {
+//the unit heals if it's on this side, and it's on a village or
+//it has regeneration, and it is wounded
if(i-second.side() == side) {
+if( i-second.has_flag(slowed)
+(map.gives_healing(i-first) ||
i-second.is_resting()) ){
+i-second.remove_flag(slowed);
+unslowed_units.insert(std::pairgamemap::location,int(
i-first, true));
+// add it to healed_units so it gets applied
+// note that insert won't add anything if it's already
there
+healed_units.insert(std::pairgamemap::location,int(
i-first, 0));
+}
+}
+}
+for(i = units.begin(); i != units.end(); ++i) {
+if(i-second.side() == side) {
if(i-second.hitpoints() i-second.max_hitpoints() ||
i-second.poisoned()){
if(i-second.is_resting()) {
@@ -1392,6 +1401,17 @@
const int DelayAmount = 50;
+// take care of unslowed units
+if(unslowed_units[h-first]) {
+if(show_healing) {
+events::pump();
+
+sound::play_sound(heal.wav);
+SDL_Delay(DelayAmount);
+disp.invalidate_unit();
+disp.update_display();
+}
+}
LOG_NG unit is poisoned? (u.has_flag(poisoned) ?
yes : no) ,
h-second , max_healing[h-first] \n;
Index: unit.cpp
===
--- unit.cpp(révision 8705)
+++ unit.cpp(copie de travail)
@@ -338,7 +338,6 @@
void unit::end_turn()
{
-remove_flag(slowed);
if((moves_ != total_movement()) (moves_ != NOT_MOVED)){
resting_ = false;
}
@@ -499,7 +498,7 @@
bool unit::emits_zoc() const
{
-return type().has_zoc() stone() == false;
+return type().has_zoc() stone() == false !has_flag(slowed);
}
bool unit::matches_filter(const config cfg) const
-
___
Wesnoth-dev mailing list
Wesnoth-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
--
Joseph Simmons
Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered
www.wesnoth.org
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Reorganizing images/
The point is, though, that although those units may be used in other campaigns, they _shouldn't_ be. They are character-specific. It would be like using the Li'sar portrait for some other princess. So, this reorganizing is a subtle hint for people to stop using units the wrong way. ;) Also, for the campaign-specific unit list, you forgot EI Owaec - mounted fighter, mounted warrior, horse lord Gweddry - sergeant (less sure about this, it should probably remain in core) Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 19:53:17 -0500, Richard Kettering [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of the units - the following are campaign-specific, and should be moved to respective folders: TDH Gwiti - initiate, deathmaster, demi-lich, dread lich I think the demilich is used in another campaign so you might need to be careful if campaigns are might get moved out of core. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev -- Joseph Simmons Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered www.wesnoth.org
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Reorganizing images/
That's OK, though. Those campaigns would still be able to reference images/Heir_to_the_Throne/portraits/lisar.png when they wanted the Li'sar portrait, or the Li'sar unit graphics. The problem right now is that it is really unclear what portraits/images/units are character specific, and which aren't. This reorganization would make that clearer, but it would not stop any campaign designer who wanted to use the images from using them. However, since I'm not actually going to do any of the reorganizing, and wouldn't know how if I was going to... I'll just leave the decision making to someone else. ott wrote: On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:17:30PM -0500, Joseph Simmons wrote: The point is, though, that although those units may be used in other campaigns, they _shouldn't_ be. They are character-specific. It would be like using the Li'sar portrait for some other princess. So, this reorganizing is a subtle hint for people to stop using units the wrong way. ;) Just because a portrait is character specific does not mean it has to be confined to one campaign. Most of the user campaigns are set in the same timeline and geography as the mainline campaigns, and some explicitly reuse characters: Kalenz comes to mind, as does Delfador, and some of the EI characters are at least mentioned in the two Aelius campaigns. I would not be surprised if someone did a campaign with Li'sar -- after all, how did she become such an accomplished commander? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev -- Joseph Simmons Túrin Turambar, master of doom, by doom mastered www.wesnoth.org
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Dwarvish Runemaster and Wesnothian Philosophy
Hi all. Just in response to the latter part of Dave's email. On the specific issue of the Dwarvish Runemaster line: This unit line is not something new; it has been discussed for close to a year already. I am kinda sympathetic toward it, because I have never liked the outlaws and dwarves being lumped together in the Knalgan Alliance. I think it looks contrived and silly. The outlaws were originally meant to be 'neutral units' -- weaker units that aren't really part of any faction. Well, this is my view. Right now, we have AFAICT forbidden implementation, for MP, of third level outlaws. That causes a problem for Age of Heroes. You have a faction, half of who's units cannot level. I think we need to really rethink either dwarves aligning with outlaws, or outlaws not getting third levels. I would prefer we rethink both, but. :] On the other hand, I'm not sure exactly how much closer the Runemaster will take the Dwarves to being able to 'declare independence' from the outlaws. It seems to me that we'll basically have five dwarvish units that all have similiar movement and defense values, with one being a basic fighter, one being a ranged fighter, and the other three simply having different 'cool' abilities. Is not the Gryphon Rider a dwarf? Take a careful look at the image. That's a dwarf riding it. So, we could leave the Gryphon rider with the dwarves, bringing it up to 6 units, including one scout/fighter. It would be a rather unique faction, but I think it could still compete. I might do some AI v. AI testing of a faction composed of those units. -turin- PS: um, can anyone tell me why the Ulfserker has _worse_ defences than the other dwarvish units on hills and mountains? This seems counterintuitive to me. The berserker should have less resistance to melee attack types, but not worse defence. In anything, better defence.
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Ruin terrain letters.
Hogne Håskjold wrote: On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 06:31:08PM -0500, John McNabb wrote: All, I have committed the first images for the ruined castle and its variants, the sunken and swamp castles. I would like to add the terrain types into the mainline terrain and make them available for the campaign developers to incorporate into their maps. My proposal is to use the letter 'N' for the ruin, 'O' for the sunken ruin, and 'Q' for the swamp ruin. Are there any objections or proposed alternatives to these? Thanks, John (aka Darth Fool) Hi I think 'O' is designated for orc castle, althought it seems the gfx for it never turned up. I guess it's ok to use the letter for something else. There never were any plans for the orcish castle. I once accidentally committed a terrain.cfg that had it listed, but there probably never will be an orcish castle. -turin
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] New dwarven unit proposal
I think its a good unit idea. I have graphical concerns, but I am in favor of the unit. Basic unit, for which I have not specified stats (they would make it more expensive than other dwarves, more sturdy than a thunderer, and about the same movement). 20-21 gold. Probably ~8-2 melee (remember its magic). I figure you can't swing a hammer very quickly. If you want more strokes, 6-3 maybe. Having a melee magic attack is not a new idea, AFAIK. The Shadow Mage line has it. (that's not an official unit, but its used fairly often). But that doesn't mean its not a good idea. I would also like to suggest an aura for this unit. My idea is a stoneskin aura, which would make all adjacent units subtract damage from attacks dealt to them. The level-2 smith would cause an aura which would reduce the damage of all attacks by one. Level-3 - two damage, level-4 - three damage. This sounds rather complex. Why not give them the same specialty, but do something like leadership - it is more effective for lower levels? Gives ~20% attack resistance to physical attacks per level difference. So at fourth level, it give ~60% resistance to attacks... that might be too powerful. This should, perhaps be limited to pierce/blade/impact attacks, and should not be able to reduce damage below 1 damage per strike. I think the limitation to physical attacks is good, but it might be seen as too complex. By reduce damage below 1 damage per strike, you mean it cannot make them do 0 damage, right? That is i believe already done for all damage-reducing effects (like resistance and bad time of day). Or do you mean it cannot reduce damage by more than 1? That would be odd, and I doubt its what you mean, but its how I read what you said at first. The whole point of this is to make the dwarves (and by this, I mean the dwarves alone, not the knalgans) more powerful, without sacrificing their dwarvenness. It is very dwarvish, I'll give you that. -turin
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Three level units
David White wrote: Susanna Björverud wrote: Also, it is not necessarily so that everything _needs_ to be mainline. I am perfectly fine with user campaigns havig level 3 of certain units, where mainline does not. The user campaigns are a treasure trove, and a great part of what makes Wesnoth a fun game. I think we need to emphasize more towards the community as a whole that something being implemented in a user campaign, and not in main line, does in no way is an indication of inferiority. The inclusion of a screenshot from a user campaign on the front web page is a good start. I concur with this: user campaigns are often of high quality, and quartex, Shade, and aelius in particular have done some great user campaigns. They are really seperate projects in their own right that show a great deal of creativity. Perhaps to elevate their status we should add a sub-page to the Wesnoth site for 'user-made campaigns and modifications', and try to develop a facility for campaign developers to each have a page describing their campaign? David wiki.wesnoth.org/UserScenarios already fills this purpose. Not every campaign is there, but most are, even some rather old ones. I think all that is needed is a link to that page from somewhere on the front page. If even that is necessary. Turin ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
