Battle
This is the discussion page for: battle
Edit this page like any other, or add comments at the bottom. The idea is that comments will relate to short-term issues with editing the main page (typos, formatting, etc.); while the body of the discussion page will contain different users' long-term opinions on the subject of main article (strategy for using a unit, etc.).
Damage probability
Is there a floor on the chance of damage, or can it go to zero? —Franknarf
Comments
page revision: 1, last edited: 06 Feb 2013 22:22
I'm sort of thinking this could be modeled after http://howdypedia.com/Unit, as a good enough intro for newcomers and a reference for battle rules…
Also, most of the required information is in this post: http://stoicstudio.com/forum/showthread.php?263-Your-Guide-to-Combat-(for-both-new-players-and-experts)
As of 31-Mar-2013 (build 1.6.57) the damage probability was confirmed to floor at 20%.
Minor thingie: the formula should read max{ 20% , … } instead of min{ 20% , …}, right?
Yup!
Thanks for filling in the quiz answer! I guess this one part isn't true, though:
Currently, RtF triggers only on a successful hit against a Shieldbanger that doesn't die, right?
Not sure about that one, so I'll have to trust you!
We'll have to add some clarifications about how much damage do varl (2x2 units) suffer while crossing/standing on the burning-coals. I think its double (for standing? crossing?), but, again, I'm not sure so please provide the details.
Also, what happens when Strongarmed through burning-coal? Is it the same as crossing them?
Hmm, the general rule is: Each tile does one Strength damage per turn that a unit is on it.
Maybe the wording should be changed to something like this, to cover the case of being knocked over the coals (and not just "stepping")?
Being knocked over the coals is just like stepping on them. There's no special rule for Varl; any unit starting a turn standing on coals will be hit. There really aren't separate cases to enumerate in the description of the rule, but maybe some image examples could be used, or worst-case, some examples in the text:
OK, got it. So, if a particular coal-tile does its damage in a turn, it is "virtually extinguished" while the rest-of-the-unit passes over it.
Example 1 : If a varl crosses the middle of the pit (SE-to-NW), he/she/it receives 2str damage.
Example 2 : If a varl traverses the whole length of the pit (SW-to-NE), he/she/it receives Nstr damage (where N={tile-length of the pit}).
I think a visual example would really help.
I think perhaps the description is more complicated than it needs to be: if you land on it, one damage; if you start on it, one damage. That's all there is to it. Each tile has this power, so, yes, Varl can hit more than one at a time, but…isn't that sort of implicit if the explanation is done well? Personally, I'd rather see the unit-size point illustrated in a separate (segmented or pictorial) example instead of merged into the description.
Also, this is sort of pedantic, but I wouldn't use the terms "1x1" and "2x2" without introducing them first. And in this case, I'd avoid using them altogether since they are only useful in this one instance. Instead, I'd refer to units that take up more than one tile or something like that.
You're right. A "pictorial" example would settle it beyond any doubt. Make any change you see fit, until I get my hands around a decent snapshot of a Varl walking-the-firepit!
What would you say to adding some stuff on this page, e.g. as here. The text is intact, except for
Yeah, looks good! I hope you don't mind if I rearrange how the rank is introduced; though I don't yet know if/how I would do it.
That page needs some other updating (e.g., accidentally calling ranks "levels", saying that "customizing characters is costly", and not talking about the new-ish stat info displayed for the selected unit), which I might get around to eventually, but you can go ahead with if you feel like fixing it up.
Regarding our earlier conversation, I'm now thinking the "how to use the PG" sort of fits better in Strand… Really, all the interface for each building could be described there eventually.
Looking at the Todo,
…I can't think of anything worth adding to Maps, nope.
…I think Matches is good (though I really don't think a separate Timer page is needed; and it might be kind of cool to go into the geeky details of matchmaking eventually). I think it would be easier to jump into reading it at any point (instead of having to read it from the top) without the abbreviations (MM, RM, QM, 30s) interspersed. Though maybe it would be to mention the jargon (including tourney) in a dedicated section somewhere on the page, with a link to the Glossary. By the way, the Glossary's looking a lot better now that you've filled it in!
…Strand's good, too. You can feel free to edit the todo. Maybe have an item about writing more UI stuff for each building?
Hello Frank.
(1) Battle-page / New-stuff: So, I move over the attribute-icons and the horn-pic, from the Scratch onto the battle page? Feel free to change anything you like in the text.
(2) Battle-page / Proof: When I pick-out stuff like: {miscallings, objective remarks etc}, I'll correct them; if they are not too easy/clear what to correct, I'll bring them to your attention.
(3) Introducing PGs: Your suggestion, to put all of the buildings in Strand looks fine (and compact), but should limit us to the very basics (there's not much to tell, anyways!). Else, the Strand page might become too long… I've started working on something.; when it's shaped, I'll show you.
(4) Matches-page: I didn't quite catch you there, so I'm breaking it down:
(5) ToDos: OK about more UI-stuff for the buildings. Actually, the its just the GH & PGs that are kind of "hairy". The GH is explained in Matches, so we could skip that for the time being. Else, we'll start repeating/overlapping a lot (…and if something changes it'd be difficult to track it down everywhere)
Thanks,
Alex