[Freeciv-Dev] Re: more complex unit and battle system

["Dalibor Perković" <pdalibor@xxxxxx>]

Ok, I think you're mixing two basically different questions:
1. Gaining XP ("from your HP lost" vs. "from enemy stats")
2. Keeping XP while upgrading ("yes" vs. "some").
They are somewhat connected, but should be completely separated for gamesystem
purposes.

>Again, mine is just an approximation, (...). Much easier to 
>implement (right now, I'm preparing to play my first
>game with xp. The patch is way too rude to be submitted, so it 
>won't take any public life. I'm not a developer. I've patched 
>the game in a blind way. I don't even know if xp are going to 
>be saved in save files. And at the same time, I've broken the 
>protocol so you need a patched client: mine already show XP: 
>instead of '(veteran)', but the patch was really
>quick and dirty. No server options.)

Well, you *could* count me in, but the (1st) problem is I'm new to all this,
and haven't even figured out how to utilise patches (not that I tried very much,
though, but there'll come a day...). The 2nd problem is I'm doing all this at
Win95, which may be a cause for the 1st problem too.
(Let me guess, I should at least have a C compiler, right?) Well, don't look
at me at taht tone of voice, I'm doing all this at my workplace, not at home.
Not that I can influence the hardware or software configuration)


>We can discuss forever since we have different meaning 
>of 'experience'. You still see it as a kind of skill. 

But... Expirience *is* a practical knowledge whose sole purpose of existence
is to utilise it as a skill...

>I agree there are skills you can learn only in battlefield. 
>But I think they are 10% of what you get. The remaining 90% is 
>something hard to describe: it's 'being in troubles
>and managing to get out of it'.  Next time you'll be in 
>troubles again, you'll act better. 

Yes, because of the skill you gained the previous time - the expirience. Now,
your example with warriors vs. mech.inf. is a good one. But, it is a so small
possibility that in the first approximation it's lost. However, there is 
something
to what you're saying that expirience should be gained depending on how much
trouble you got out of. You just convinced me that the amount of HP lost chould
be calculated into the expirience. I'm just not sure how much. Therefore, 
another
example:
Again, mech.inf. vs. warriors :) The mech.inf. does something really stupid
and *almost* gets killed. But it manages somehow to kill the warriors, but loses
90% HP in the process. Now, how much XP do they get? Your system, a lot. My
system, a little or none. Now, let's barter :)
Both these events are "lowly probable", but mine is a bit more probable (mech
wins). So, as a suggestion, suppose a unit gains 1/3 XP from HP loss, and 2/3
from enemy stats, defeated or retreated from.

>And it applies almost to *any* kind of troubles. It doen't 
>really depend on what weapon you are holding (or the enemy is).

Now we go to the "do upgraded units keep their XP". I say yes, 1/3 to 2/3, but
maybe more, depending on what the upgrade is.

>I've been trained to use a rifle. But (luckily) I've never 
>been in the battlefield. This means that no matter how good I 
>am at firing, or moving on different terrains, or whatever, 
>I'll never know how good I am in a real battle. (Not that I 
>want to know...) I can't even imagine how it would be. It 
>could be panic, or fury, who knows?
>Think of that. Being able to kill a man is something 
>completely different from being able to use your weapon. It's 
>something completely orthogonal to the kind of weapon or 
>battle tactic...

Yes, that is why I think that you should keep at least 1/3 XP when upgrading
from phalanx to musketeers. Otherwise, there'd be no reason at all. But, your
reasonong is good so we can argue over ratios :)

>The rationale for my system is: the harder the battle, the 
>more the gained experience. 

See above.

>You can't simulate (in FreeCiv) all details of a battle. While 
>computing experience, you should count terrain, relative
>power of unit types and of particular units involved (a nearly 
>dead unit my be easy to kill even for weak units), and a lot 
>of other factors.
>My approximation is: all factors sum together, and make one 
>single parameter: how difficult for you the battle has been. 
>In the game, there is almost direct way to map that parameter: 
>the damage you took during the battle... which leads to the 
>hp==xp formula. Easy and quite accurate, for the level of 
>details we already have.

There is another direct way - the computed strength itself (what I was refering
to as "stats"): basic_strength*HP*terrain of an enemy unit. But again, I agree
you should put your own HP loss into it.
This way you don't have a long chain "stats->lost_HP->XP". XP *should* depend
on the outcom of combat, but it already does - if the unit is killed, it gets
no XP :) My idea is that both the XP and imidiate HP loss depend on stats.

>Well, I think these are, pardon me, 'technical details', 
>suitable for a real combat simulator game. (...)
>I do agree with you, in RL. I just think FreeCiv should hide such details.


I don't think this is too detailed. It's only *one* more feture and only *one*
more equation.

Greetings.
      ?
     /|\                           Izitpajn
    /?|\?                       pdalibor@xxxxxx
      |

--
Besplatni e-mail - http://www.iskon.hr/mail/