My feedback

3 results found

1. Vacations by number of days instead of number of vacations

   245 votes

   vote vote vote

   vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   5 comments  ·  Warzone Features  ·  delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   AdminFizzer (WarLight Creator, WarLight) responded

   I agree this is a good idea. However, it’s a very low priority feature compared to many others on this forum, and it’s unlikely to happen in the near future.

   Kris supported this idea  ·  03 August, 2019

2. Allow local deployment with overlapping bonuses

   42 votes

   vote vote vote

   vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   13 comments  ·  Warzone Features  ·  delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   AdminFizzer (WarLight Creator, WarLight) responded

   The issue with local deployments and overlapping bonuses comes up when you think about deploying. When players deploy an army to a territory that is part of two bonuses and they control both of those bonuses, the game would need to know which bonus you want to take the army from.

   Imagine three territories: 1, 2, and 3. There’s a bonus A made up of territories 1 and 2, and a bonus B made up of territories 2 and 3. Both bonuses give 1 army per turn and therefore the player gets 2 income. Imagine a player controls all three territories (and therefore both bonuses), and then tries to deploy an army on territory 2. The game needs to know if it should allocate that army from bonus A or B.

   There are a few strategies it could use to decide:

   Strategy 1: It could just pick one at random. The problem is if it picks the wrong one, then the player can’t deploy to the other territory of that bonus. For example, it if picks bonus A and then the player decides to deploy their second army on territory on territory 1, the game wouldn’t let them and the player is confused and doesn’t know what’s going wrong.

   Strategy 2: It could stop and ask the player which bonus they’re trying to deploy to. This is confusing to new players, weird, micro-managey, and breaks the flow of the game. It’s counter to WarLight’s idea of being a simple-to-play game when you confuse players with these kind of micro-management details.

   Strategy 3: It could just pick one at random, then later if the player decides to deploy somewhere that would have been legal but isn’t because of our random choice, go back and re-allocate previously deployed armies to make the new deployment possible. I tried to write this algorithm back when local deployments was being introduced but unfortunately I could not get it working correctly and ultimately had to abandon it. It may still be possible to make this work but it needs more thought and development.

   The issue with local deployments and overlapping bonuses comes up when you think about deploying. When players deploy an army to a territory that is part of two bonuses and they control both of those bonuses, the game would need to know which bonus you want to take the army from.

   Imagine three territories: 1, 2, and 3. There’s a bonus A made up of territories 1 and 2, and a bonus B made up of territories 2 and 3. Both bonuses give 1 army per turn and therefore the player gets 2 income. Imagine a player controls all three territories (and therefore both bonuses), and then tries to deploy an army on territory 2. The game needs to know if it should allocate that army from bonus A or B.

   There are a few strategies it could use to decide:

   Strategy 1: It could just pick one at random.… more

   Kris supported this idea  ·  04 July, 2019
   An error occurred while saving the comment
   Kris commented  ·  04 July, 2019  ·  Edit…  ·  delete…

   Although the problem in general might not be easy to fix in an elegant way, there is a partial fix for plenty of maps with superbonuses, using the same strategy as you must have already implemented with "free armies" that can be deployed everywhere.

   Suppose that there is a hierarchy of bonuses: if bonuses A and B overlap, then one of them (the superior bonus) contains all territories of the other (the inferior bonus). Then the armies from the most inferior bonus are deployed first. In this approach, the "free" army could be thought as coming from the most superior bonus. You could even list the deployed armies in a tree-like structure instead of a list, so that it's easy to track what is deployed and what is not.

   Of course, this does not help with maps that have bonuses overlapping partially (Poland Big and the "coast bonus" comes to my mind) or maps with progressive bonuses (Biomes of America, Gotham City, Elitist Africa, etc.). However, it could be a great extension to the current system anyway.

   Save Submitting...

3. Teammate takes over for booted/surrendered player

   468 votes

   vote vote vote

   vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   25 comments  ·  Warzone Features  ·  delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   AdminFizzer (WarLight Creator, WarLight) responded

   Teammates leaving a game is certainly frustrating. Allowing another teammate to enter orders for them is definitely a possible way to address that problem.

   We could use some feedback on the following potential issues with this feature:

   1. In teams of more than 2 players, who gets control of a player that’s left? Just first to click the button, or assign a team captain or something?
   2. Could this slow down real time games? Imagine if one person has to enter orders for 3 teammates that have left plus themselves.
   3. Would this encourage someone to boot their teammates, just to take control over them?
   4. It needs to be very clear who is playing who for every turn. If someone that’s under control starts sabotaging their team, like gifting stuff to an enemy or attacking teammates, it needs to be clear it isn’t really them and you shouldn’t necessarily blacklist them.
   5. If used too much, do you feel this could diminish the value of team games? If one person is controlling an entire team, what’s the point of even playing team games?
   6. If used too much, would it become cumbersome to enter orders for teammates all the time, causing people to become burnt out and be reluctant to join team games in the future?

   Teammates leaving a game is certainly frustrating. Allowing another teammate to enter orders for them is definitely a possible way to address that problem.

   We could use some feedback on the following potential issues with this feature:

   1. In teams of more than 2 players, who gets control of a player that’s left? Just first to click the button, or assign a team captain or something?
   2. Could this slow down real time games? Imagine if one person has to enter orders for 3 teammates that have left plus themselves.
   3. Would this encourage someone to boot their teammates, just to take control over them?
   4. It needs to be very clear who is playing who for every turn. If someone that’s under control starts sabotaging their team, like gifting stuff to an enemy or attacking teammates, it needs to be clear it isn’t really them and you shouldn’t necessarily… more

   Kris supported this idea  ·  08 February, 2019