Re: [Wesnoth-dev] More Thoughts on Knalgans

[Joseph Simmons]

Asa Swain wrote:

> My thoughts on dwarves:
>
>    I like the idea of dwarves getting 40% defense in
> grassland becuase dirt is an alias of grassland and
> dirt is a terrain that is often common underground.
> Why should dwarves be so terrible when fighting on
> dirt? Removing dirt limits the types of terrains a
> scenario designer can use underground if they want
> some variation besides more cave floor. But I dislike
> using dirt and then have dwarves suck when fighting on
> it.
>  
Well, it does get rather boring with dwarves the
same defence on every terrain used underground.
I don't see what is wrong with giving dwarves
worse defence in some places underground than
others.
Dwarves getting 40% on grassland might be
desirable for other reasons, but not, IMHO, for
this one. And I don't really think its desirable for
other reasons as well. Dwarves can't move very
quickly, right? So why are they suddenly being
given as good defence as the elvish fighter on the
most common terrains? There must be other ways
to balance the dwarves than making them just like
other units.

>    I like the idea of ulf/berserkers using berserk
> only when attacking. I also think that their attack
> should be buffed a bit, perhaps to 5-4 at level 1.
> Ulfserkers are killed so easily right now, if we make
> berserk only happen when attacking they will probably
> still be weak after they kill another unit and thus
> easy to kill in return, but at least the player has
> some chance of keeping them alive.
>  
Agreed. Now, one thing I've noticed while making
my dwarven campaign is that Ulf/Berserkers are
HP drainers. They kill a unit, but end up having so
little health they die and waste 8 XP. This gets
really annoying, because what ulfserkers are best
at - killing weakened units - is what they shouldn't
ever do, because it is a waste of XP that should be
given to "support" units, such as mages.

>   I don't think dwarven guardmen are as powerful
> defenders as woses, why should they be crippled to 3
> movement? Why not give them 4 movement like other
> dwarves so they can be more mobile and actually be
> useful?
>  
Agreed.

>   Dwarves still have a problem with poison, becuase
> they have no mobile healers and move slowly which
> makes it hard to retreat fast to villages.
>  
Perhaps they should be given a healer? Don't say
"that will make them like all other factions", because
it won't. Only two factions have healing units currently.
One has a regenerating unit, and one has a draining
unit. I don't think adding a healing unit to one faction
make them all homogenous.

>   Also I'm rather dubious about this new dwarven
> smith. The dwarven runemaster has been around for a
> long time and all of a sudden there's a lot of
> interest in the unit? A melee magical attack is
> different but do the dwarves really need a magical
> unit like every other race? 
>  
It is not at all a new idea. People have suggested these
dwarven runemaster lines often. They were never
seriously considered because the art wasn't good enough,
but now it is. Serious proposition of this unit has been
brewing for a long time.
IMHO it is a good idea. Not "every faction" has a magic unit.
Northerners don't.
Rebels and Loyalists use the same magical unit. That, not
this proposition, is the kind of thing that makes factions
homogenous. This unit is a melee magic unit. Its very
different from the other magic units in-game. It should not,
of course, be accepted *because* knalgans need a magic unit,
but neither should it be rejected *because* it will make all
factions homogenous. It won't.

-turin