| theFarWilds.com http://thefarwilds.com/forum/ | |
| Movement Types http://thefarwilds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=270 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Kremik [ Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Movement Types |
One thing that has surprised me in The Far Wilds is that Mountain Folk move slowly in mountains, and many a Sylvan is slowed bo wood. As a suggestion, perhaps the implementation of Move Types might be good (for example, Battle For Wesnoth uses them). So might an unit with the move type NormalFoot treat all hexes as costing the normal amount of movepoints, NormalAloft as costing 1 each. A Dwarf with DwarfFoot movetype would pay more in swamp, as he is short, but less in hills and mountains. An unit with ElfFoot would pay only 1 in forest, but suffer some reduction in... desert? Also a feature I would implement that a land unit can always move to an adjacent land hex, regardless of its actual move cost. I've had games where my Epic Veteran simply could not assault a building on a forested mountain or some hex like that. Blunderbusses are notoriously known for not being able to move into half the terrain on the map. If you want an unit to be prohibited from a terrain, for example the Crushing Wheel, then simply make a Movetype RollFoot that treats difficult terrain as ocean. |
|
| Author: | VeratilEladamri [ Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Movement Types |
In almost all of my games where I've pulled out Crushing Wheel, I've never been able to get it to the opponents side because of terrain cost. |
|
| Author: | Altren [ Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Movement Types |
Desertstride, Foreststride and Mountainstride. |
|
| Author: | Kremik [ Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Movement Types |
Then more dwarves should actually get that mountainstride, and more elves that foreststride. The point about having to be able to move at least 1 hex stands. |
|
| Author: | mindstheatre [ Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Movement Types |
Kremik wrote: Then more dwarves should actually get that mountainstride, and more elves that foreststride. I disagree. Why do elves need foreststride when presumably they're walking on the same legs? Most of the treents do, and it makes sense for them. I like the proportion the way it is. That being said, it'd be nice to see cards that add the ability if they don't already exist. I particularly remember a MTG zombie-lord-type-card that gave all of your zombies swampwalk. Things like that, or world enchantments, or whatever (there are all manner of ways to achieve it) would make the strides more of a strategy element, less of the factor-of-life they are now. Kremik wrote: The point about having to be able to move at least 1 hex stands. Agreed. Look, it's a valid strategy to lure a slow but powerful creature into the mountains to trap him there, but only for so long. Presumably the creature hasn't had its legs sawed off. Plus, every so often the map gives you two flux points in crappy terrain to start with. I'm not sure that preventing casting of creatures because they could never leave your base was what was intended. |
|
| Author: | RedFlag [ Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Movement Types |
Not being able to attack a building sitting on a forested mountain sucks bigtime. That said, don't you think Mountainstride should encompass Hillstride as well? Does it already do so? |
|
| Author: | hammy [ Thu Nov 13, 2008 1:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Movement Types |
While this seems good from a flavor perspective, it's really bad from a game play perspective. You may notice that maps tend to be dominated by one kind of terrain. Sometimes, you get a map with all plains, or one with no forest; and already, that can make a huge impact on how your match plays out. The random vagueries of what map shows up should not matter more then they already do, which would be the effect of the proposed change. |
|
| Author: | Kremik [ Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Movement Types |
That's as simple as telling the random generator it HAS TO place 4-10 mountains, and between 5 - 15 forests... And my point about always having to be to be able to move at least one hex stands. |
|
| Author: | jed [ Thu Nov 13, 2008 2:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Movement Types |
The reason we didn't want creatures to always be able to move one space is that it seems more interesting if terrain is a bigger part of the game. We want you to have to pay attention to where you place your crushing wheel. It seems cool that a well played Naturescape can trap slow enemy units but still let your treents pass through. The speed of creatures is factored into their cost. The crushing wheel couldn't have attack of 6 if it wasn't effected by the terrain. But this rule seems to constantly frustrate people so maybe it isn't so good? |
|
| Author: | hammy [ Thu Nov 13, 2008 2:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Movement Types |
Having differing terrain can radically alter a game and is a good thing. Initial terrain is one of the things I think about when coming up with a plan to victory when a new game starts. A game with plains terrain goes differently then one with swamp and mountain terrain. That said, if you want people to play with crushing wheel, it needs to be better on a random map. I don't think that a minimum 1 hex move is going to hurt other things too much and will help the inclusion of things like crushing wheel as viable cards to play. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ | |