Soldier Fighting is uneven

[SirVer]

While playing with nasenbaer, we discussed the design decision that soldiers defending get a bonus in the fight. We are not aware if this is still the case, but it used to be (needs checking). If it is so, we vote for removing this bonus as

1) it is unexpected: a 1v1 fight, only the soldiers stat should be deciding; any non documented bonus makes the fight obscure for the players
2) it is not really needed: the one with the stronger army should win the battle. The defender already has the bonus that all soldiers inside a building are healed while the strongest always defends. Also the attacker has a long way to go back to it's building, before he starts to get the healing bonus.

So if this bonus is still existent, it should be removed.

[Raul Ferriz (raul.ferriz)]

There is not any obscure bonus on 1v1 soldier. The only ''bonus'' not documented is that first player to hit has little more chances to win (first to hit, first to blow). But I think that first soldier fighting is random selected.

[SirVer (sirver)]

How about changing the fighting in the way that attacking does not occure after each other, but at the same time (like most role playing game do). That is, the animations are played sequentially (some tricking around would be needed if for example both soldiers day, both must play an attack animation; but if none dies it is okay to play attacks sequentially, if only one dies it's enemy attacks last in battle), but the calculations for the outcome are done at the same time and the hipoints subtracted at the same time. I think this would even things out even more. What do others think?

[Nicolai Hähnle (nha)]

The role playing games I've played (I"ve only really played pen-and-paper) actually don't have simultaneous attacks. There, players roll initiative, and the one with the higher initiative goes first.

I believe that if we play animations (and we don't, at least not at the moment, or do we?), they should reflect what is actually going on in terms of battle calculations.

[Raul Ferriz (raul.ferriz)]

@Sirver: That could be done. But that feature could create a double K.O, both fighters death at same time.

At this point I prefer current implementation : What is shown is what is happening.

[SirVer (sirver)]

nicolai: why kind of play animations: the attack "walks towards" the enemey, while the defender "walks away" but without moving; kinda like a moon walk.
But why do you think that what is currently calculating should be shown? I do not see a problem pre calculating a move and then show the result of the move in an animation; then recalculate the next move. It would still be shown "what is just happening", just slightly more delayed (instead of (calc -> anim -> calc -> anim it would be calc -> calc -> anim -> anim).

The current system is a kind of initiative with 50% chance of coming first; in the sense that randomness is bad for fairness, a simultaneous attack (which could lead to a double KO) seems fairer to me and represents more the skill of the soldiers. Especially with high attack values, having the first attack can quite be a game changer in an individual battle.

I am not convinced that the current system should be kept, if you prefer it as it is, please convince me some more ;)

[Nasenbaer (nasenbaer)]

Hmm I like it simple as well, so I am for keeping it, as it is as well :).

A reason why I do not like the "both attack at the same time":
If you were a knight in that time and were attacked by another knight - would you use that situation to swing your sword as well to possibly hit him? Or would you try to defend yourself first and only after taht try to hit him?

At least for me that's a rethorical question, if it's for you as well, it should hopefully give a good reason, why we should keep the current system ;).

[Nasenbaer (nasenbaer)]

okay closing this item as invalid. Feel free to reopen it, if there is a good reason for another system :).