Consider making 'very weak AI' as standard for new games

[kaputtnik]

Currently a new game is always started with 'Normal AI', which means the best AI is used. For beginners this is maybe a too hard decision. So it should be considered to make 'very weak AI' as standard for new games. But because experienced players have then always to set the AI to 'Normal AI' for a new game, there may could be a mechanism to store the setting of AI for new games. Two solutions come to my mind:

1. Add an Option either in Options menu or in the 'new Game menu'
2. Save the last setting automatically, e.g. if a user set 'normal AI' for a new game, use this setting for every new game

Maybe related: bug 1516785 "Redefine difficulty levels"

I mark this as confirmed because of a statement in the forum: https://wl.widelands.org/forum/topic/2817/

[GunChleoc (gunchleoc)]

2. might be a bit difficult - how do you define the last setting if multiple AIs were set to different levels?

So, I am in favour of 1 and implementing it in the Options menu at the moment, because it's the easiest to implement. I am a bit stalled with the overhault of the launch game menus; once that's finished we can consider adding a save option there.

[kaputtnik (franku)]

Don't know if it's feasible but 2. was meant only for the human player slot. Of course it should not apply for multiplayer games then.

But option 1 is maybe the better solution, because it is not a 'hided' setting which must be explained somewhere.

[SirVer (sirver)]

I am against adding options! This is not a text editor and each option is only used by a few percent of players.

If this button is changed to be a drop down like the win condition, would this not elegantly solve the problem? No matter what AI you want, two clicks is all you require.

[GunChleoc (gunchleoc)]

That would definitely make things easier. I already have a branch for pictorial dropdowns, but I'm still struggling with getting things to behave for multiplayer.

[kaputtnik (franku)]

SirVer, i understand your point. But i think making a general rule like "No options!" is to restrictive. Can we call it "No useless options!"? In a wider sentence: "Do not add options which are useless for players!"

In general i agree to your point. Adding an Option just because it is possible to add should be prevented.

[SirVer (sirver)]

> But i think making a general rule like "No options!" is to restrictive.

I think "No options unless proven otherwise" is my stance. I do think options are always the easy way out in tool design - Alla, we cannot find a good solution, so implement two mediocre ones and add an option. I think Widelands has too many options because we did this too often.

> Can we call it "No useless options!"? In a wider sentence: "Do not add options which are useless for players!"

What is the definition of this? Most options are useless for most players. UI options are basically never changed - by nobody. And even gameplay options are rarely changed: most people only ever play Autocrat and do not dabble in other play modes.

So every option that is added requires code, maintenance, UI space, adds complexity to menu or game and give very limited gain - since they go basically unused. So if the choice is add an option or change the UI to make the common cases easier, changing the UI it is every time.

[GunChleoc (gunchleoc)]

Migrated to https://github.com/widelands/widelands/issues/2068