Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Dwarvish Runemaster and Wesnothian Philosophy

[Joseph Simmons]

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.