Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Making civilians more interesting
There was some discussion on IRC since the latest email. Some of these ideas are mine, some are IRC consensus Here's the line-up as i see it Townsman: lawful: staff or cudgel to spearman or fencer, or something Woodsman: (formerly huntsman) neutral: bow and knife to bowman or poacher Henchman: chaotic or neutral: club: to footpad and thug Peasant (unchanged) The Extended Era "henchman" graphics make little sense as the L0 to footpad and thug it looks like a small barbarian warrior. I'm going to undertake better graphics. The UMC can use it or not, as they wish. But i believe the concept is identical. XE has duplicates for almost all our units so it will cause them no hardship. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Making civilians more interesting
Selon Lari Nieminen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > My latest idea: > > Name Alignment GP HP Melee Ranged > - -- -- -- - > Townsman Lawful 8 18 4-3 stave (pierce) - > Huntsman Neutral 8 18 - 4-3 bow > Henchman Chaotic 8 18 4-3 cudgel (impact) 4-1 sling About the stats : - keep in mind that 4-3 (5-3 on melee if strong) means a powerful unit (for a level 0). I'd say with these stats the Henchman should rather cost 9. I you compare to the Footpad, it has a superior melee attack. For me it is a problem. While there is no RIPLIB problem, i don't see any background reason why the Henchman should loose some melee power while advancing to the Footpad. - i don't like to have a unit that isn't special in its background without a melee attack. This should be reserved for special units such as the Dark Adept or the mudcrawlers... Giving it a small blade attack (like 3-1 dagger for example) would do the trick and won't cause RIPLIB problems (since both the Poacher and the Bowman would be strictly superior. About the names : - To me 'Huntsman' sound like a levelup of the 'Poacher' - For the 'Henchman' there is already a widespread UMC outlaw unit (Currently for 1.3.x only in the Extended Era, but also in a some popular campaigns that will proably be ported to 1.3), that is similar but with a few differences (in particular: no ranged attack, more different graphics). IMHO we should either : - pick the UMC unit as a base (perhaps resize the graphics to the new human size, tweak the stats if necessary) or - get a different name > Townsmen advance to Spearman(, Fencer?)(, Sergeant?). > Huntsmen advance to Poacher, Bowman. > Henchmen advance to Thug, Footpad(, Thief?). > > Peasant would be dropped entirely. The Townsman would be the equivalent > of the old Peasant, just without the rural implications (and ranged > attack?). The art would be easy to adapt. Although Townsman does have > urban implications, it might still work in all the cases Peasants are > currently used in. Alternatively, we just won't touch Peasant, except > it's advancement options; this sounds like a very viable option. I don't like the idea of replacing the Peasant with those civilians. I find the current peasant better if you want a unit for in rural context, especially something like a farmer. While the new units would be better in some more urban context (for which the Peasant was not made). > So, with this suggestion we'd basically have one melee/lawful peasant, > one ranged/neutral peasant and one outlaw/chaotic peasant. The one thing > I didn't like about the previous proposal(s) was the overlap in the > advancement options which this system eliminates, as well as having one > unit of each alignment (personally, I'd find having three neutral lvl > 0's a bit boring). Having advancement overlap isn't that bad to have, > but I don't think it should be done if the whole thing can be done in a > clearer and simpler way. In any case, this is just a proposal and I'm > not hugely interested in how it ends up being done. > > Obviously, the stats are sketchy. The Townsman/Peasant/Villager/whatever > is the biggest problem, since IMO Fencer and Sergeant are a bit funny > advancements (mostly Fencer; Sergeant sound reasonable enough) and > having only Spearman would be boring (Spearman itself having three > advancements helps a bit, though). > Current Peasants can advance to the Bowman too... IMHO that's fine (for the Peasant): - 2 advancements is enough - they are the only two that mesh well... The other lvl 1 loyalist units suppose some wealth the peasants don't have. About all this : IMHO it looks like a problem with NR, i've never really felt it was wrong in other campaigns like TSG. I think it might be good to make these as NR-specific unit, at least at the begining. Do other campaigns really need this ? ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Making civilians more interesting
My latest idea: Name Alignment GP HP Melee Ranged - -- -- -- - Townsman Lawful 8 18 4-3 stave (pierce) - Huntsman Neutral 8 18 - 4-3 bow Henchman Chaotic 8 18 4-3 cudgel (impact) 4-1 sling Townsmen advance to Spearman(, Fencer?)(, Sergeant?). Huntsmen advance to Poacher, Bowman. Henchmen advance to Thug, Footpad(, Thief?). Peasant would be dropped entirely. The Townsman would be the equivalent of the old Peasant, just without the rural implications (and ranged attack?). The art would be easy to adapt. Although Townsman does have urban implications, it might still work in all the cases Peasants are currently used in. Alternatively, we just won't touch Peasant, except it's advancement options; this sounds like a very viable option. So, with this suggestion we'd basically have one melee/lawful peasant, one ranged/neutral peasant and one outlaw/chaotic peasant. The one thing I didn't like about the previous proposal(s) was the overlap in the advancement options which this system eliminates, as well as having one unit of each alignment (personally, I'd find having three neutral lvl 0's a bit boring). Having advancement overlap isn't that bad to have, but I don't think it should be done if the whole thing can be done in a clearer and simpler way. In any case, this is just a proposal and I'm not hugely interested in how it ends up being done. Obviously, the stats are sketchy. The Townsman/Peasant/Villager/whatever is the biggest problem, since IMO Fencer and Sergeant are a bit funny advancements (mostly Fencer; Sergeant sound reasonable enough) and having only Spearman would be boring (Spearman itself having three advancements helps a bit, though). -- Lari Nieminen [EMAIL PROTECTED] +358443758373 ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Making civilians more interesting
Benoit Timbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Peasants advance to any of: Spearman, Bowman, Thug*, or Poacher*. > > Hunters advance to Thug, Poacher. or Outlaw. > > Citizens advance to Spearman or Bowman. > > This causes a RIPLIB* problem with the Hunter : > - Advancing to the Thug : no ranged attack > - Advancing to the Footpad or to the Poacher : looses the pierce melee attack > and the melee attack is not strong enough to cover the difference > The Henchman don't have this problem since at least one of his advancements > (both in fact) are stricly superior. Good point. Zookeeper just made a couple of valid suggestions on IRC, which I integrate with yours as follows: We take away the Hunter's melee attack and the Citizen's missile attack, mess with the alignments, and change the advancement tree. Name Alignment GP HP Melee Ranged --- - -- -- - - Peasant Neutral*8 18 5-2 pitchfork 4-1 pitchfork HunterNeutral 8 18 - 4-3 bow Townsman Neutral 8 18 4-3 cudgel - Peasants advance to any of: Spearman, Bowman, Poacher*, Thug*. Hunters advance to Poacher or Bowman Townsmen advance to Spearman or Thug This takes care of the RIPLIB problem. The advancemnt tree is cleaner, too, and Townsman is more distinguished from a weak spearman. Hmmm...this is actually *much* better than my original proposal. I wonder if it makes Hunter and Townsman a bit too weak, though. Maybe they should go to 5-3 on their attacks? -- http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Making civilians more interesting
For information, there is a lvl 0 unit called "Henchman" in the L3_Outlaws pack. If i recall correctly it is a chaotic unit who has a 4-2 or 5-2 melee impact attack and no ranged attack. It can advance to either the Thug or the Footpad. You can find a modified version of the unit in the Extended Era (i modified the price, perhaps a few other stats, because i found the L3_Outlaws version a little too weak. By the way, Selon "Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Wherefore, I propose that we modify the Peasant slightly and add two > new level 0 units. Here's a table. Changes from the existing > Peasant class are marked with *. > > Name Alignment GP HP Melee Ranged > --- - -- -- - - > Peasant Neutral*8 18 5-2 pitchfork 4-1 pitchfork > HunterChaotic 8 18 4-1 spear 5-2 bow > Citizen Lawful 8 18 4-2 spear 5-1 bow > > Peasants advance to any of: Spearman, Bowman, Thug*, or Poacher*. > Hunters advance to Thug, Poacher. or Outlaw. > Citizens advance to Spearman or Bowman. This causes a RIPLIB* problem with the Hunter : - Advancing to the Thug : no ranged attack - Advancing to the Footpad or to the Poacher : looses the pierce melee attack and the melee attack is not strong enough to cover the difference The Henchman don't have this problem since at least one of his advancements(both in fact) are stricly superior. (*) Reduction In Power while Leveling Is Bad : none of the levelups are stricly superior ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
