| Author |
Message |
|
|
Some people prefer the uncertainty that comes from not being able to undo one's turns.
For those who feel undo worsens the game, I suggest that there be an option (similar to the Fog of War on/off option) for "no undo".
Regarding the technical details:
Obviously, paid undo is easy to disable.
To disable free undo, I can think of two options:
1:
When it is a player's turn in a 'no undo' match, when they first open the match to take their turn, UniWar sends a signal to the central server indicating that the player has accessed that game. The server does nothing. If the player switches accounts and comes back, and opens the same match again, then UniWar sends the signal again, because as far as it can tell, this is the first time. If the server receives a second such signal for a given game, then it sends a signal back to UniWar, saying "this is not the first time that this player has opened this particular turn." UniWar then forces 'end turn' on that game, effectively skipping the player's turn.
NOTE: This would only apply to games in which the players have VOLUNTARILY selected the "no undo" option. It would NOT be triggered by a player's phone dying, closing and reopening UniWar, etc. It would ONLY happen on "NO UNDO" games, and ONLY if the player attempts to account switch, which would be cheating in a "NO UNDO" game.
2:
When a player logs into their UniWar account to play online, UniWar checks to see if the cache has been reset (i.e. if the player has switched accounts) since the last login. If UniWar detects upon login that an account switch has happened, then any open "NO UNDO" turns are forcibly skipped.
This has the advantage of being 100% client-side (meaning that it can be accomplished without ANY modification to the behavior of the UniWar server), but has the disadvantage of potentially being activated if a player who is playing both "undo allowed" and "no undo" games logs out and in again.
Please vote!
|
|
|
Following from the discussion on this forum about what to do about the "undo turn" option, since we are told that turn undo via multiple accounts well soon be disabled, I thought a poll might be in order.
To briefly recap the issues:
Arguments in support of the option to pay for the ability to undo turns:
Paid undo helps raise money for game development.
Players who have already purchased unlimited turn undo deserve consideration.
The ability to undo turns helps remedy mistakes like clicking on the wrong thing.
Some players enjoy this style of play, and the process of finding an optimal solution.
Arguments against paid undo:
It gives players who spend money a very significant advantage, and makes the game at least somewhat pay to win.
It removes strategic elements of bluffing and deceit / negates fog of war.
The options:
Proceed with making paid undo the only option.
This will raise money, and keep the game essential the way it is now.
Don't just get rid of free undo, get rid of ALL undo.
This essentially reverts the game to its original form, and completely restores the importance of fog of war / possibility of ambushes.
Keep paid undo, but instead of undoing a turn all the way back to the start, permit only the most recent action to be undone (i.e. after an action, a player may undo that action, but if they make another action then the previous action may no longer be undone).
This gives players who paid for turn undo something of value, and raises money, without breaking fog of war nearly as badly. It still breaks fog of war significantly, but not quite as much. Ambushed will still be pretty impossible.
Permit free undo, but add advertisements or a delay.
This addresses the pay to win aspect, and keeps paid undo as a fundraising means.
Last two options: Either keep paid undo as is, or "action undo", but restrict its use do that it can't be used to circumvent fog of war. After each action, when fog of war I'd is updated, check if any enemy units were revealed that were previously unseen. If so, the turn / action can no longer be undone.
|
|
|
Ok, I can agree with you on some points. I certainly agree that move undo is preferable to turn undo, since it doesn't essentially negate fog-of-war and the element of surprise.
I can also get behind the idea of making undo a selectable option, like FoW is now. Although personally, I would very, VERY strongly prefer that all ranked games be "no undo."
But if it's feasible, I think your suggestion of "unlimited action undo" may actually be the best compromise solution I've heard so far. It can much more easily be implemented in a way that doesn't break FoW, it means that players who purchased unlimited undo still have something of value, it still raises money for Xavi, and it still helps deal with misclicks and other annoyances.
|
|
|
I'd like to add my own voice here...
PLEASE JUST GET RID OF UNDO ALTOGETHER.
Reasons:
1: It's not really necessary for the game to be fun.
2: It makes games longer.
3: It almost certainly frustrates new players who don't know about it / why it's important yet: It's one more (invisible) reason why they're getting creamed by every player they meet.
4: It is CERTAINLY not the only way to make money.
5: It leaves a bad taste in many players' mouths, particularly if they feel like they have no choice but to use undo, because their opponents probably are.
6: Getting rid of undo solves the FOW issues very easily.
ALTERNATIVE IDEAS FOR MAKING THE GAME PROFITABLE:
1: Charge a few dollars for new content. New units, new races... Like an expansion. But only accessible in games where both players have the expansion. This is the model followed by the game Star Realms, and it really seems to work pretty great there. Plenty of players who have the expansions still play games with players without the expansions. And as a bonus, choosing to play a game with or without expansion content gives players some additional choices about what style of games they want to play. And in non-expansion games, everyone is ALWAYS on a completely equal footing.
2: Charge for access to tournaments.
3: Develop (and charge for) better AI opponents.
4: Create a large database of replays (call it "The Archive" or something), and charge a one-time fee for Archive access. It's something that many people would enjoy, or find useful as a way of developing strategy, but isn't an advantage in the way that undo is.
5: Sell passes to be a beta tester for new features.
6: Sell Uniwar merchandise. Coffee mugs with the Uniwar logo, phone cases. Or, even cheaper to produce: Nicely designed paper reference sheets (on nice paper), art prints, etc.
Seriously, think about it. The game doesn't NEED turn undo. And strategy has always meant planning in a way that accounts for uncertainty.
|
|
|
SAPIENS!
NAME: Dart
TYPE: Aerial
COST: 300
VISION: 3
MOBILITY: 15
VS LIGHT GROUND: 11
VS HEAVY GROUND: 11
VS AERIAL: 6
VS AQUATIC: 10
RANGE: 1
DEFENSE: 0
REPAIR: 0
ACTIONS: 1
ATTACK AFTER MOVE: yes
SPECIAL ABILITY: Dies immediately upon attacking (optional)
CAPTURE BASE: no
It's basically a missile. Make a bunch, stockpile 'em, wreck someone's day.
NAME: Commando
TYPE: amphibious
COST: 700
VISION: 4
MOBILITY: 8
VS LIGHT GROUND: 11
VS HEAVY GROUND: 10
VS AERIAL: 4
VS AQUATIC: 4
RANGE: 1
DEFENSE: 6
REPAIR: 1
ACTIONS: 1
ATTACK AFTER MOVE: yes
SPECIAL ABILITY: Has buried underling ability to ignore ZOC, at all times. Can also "bury" and additionally become invisible.
CAPTURE BASE: yes
Expert assassins and saboteurs. Very bad men and women who enjoy their jobs more than is healthy.
|
|
|
TITANS:
NAME: Skyfort
TYPE: aerial
COST: 350
VISION: 6
MOBILITY: 4
VS LIGHT GROUND: 4
VS HEAVY GROUND: 8
VS AERIAL: 4
VS AQUATIC: 4
RANGE: 2
DEFENSE: 12
REPAIR: 2
ACTIONS: 1
ATTACK AFTER MOVE: no
SPECIAL ABILITY: none
CAPTURE BASE: no
Slow, but ugly.
This is the kind of aerial unit the Titans would come up with. Big, slow, armored, slow. Very slow. Not that hard a hitter, but carries almost as much armor as a plasma tank. If you're a Titan player, embrace your slowness. You can build a skyfort or two and use them to establish a defensive line for your hydronauts. Slowly. Or use them to discourage rover madness. Slowly.
NAME: Ram
TYPE: amphibious
COST: 300
VISION: 5
MOBILITY: 16
VS LIGHT GROUND: 10
VS HEAVY GROUND: 10
VS AERIAL: 0
VS AQUATIC: 8
RANGE: 1
DEFENSE: 4
REPAIR: 0
ACTIONS: 1
ATTACK AFTER MOVE: yes
SPECIAL ABILITY: none
CAPTURE BASE: yes
They're cheap, they're unpleasant, they're a blatant ripoff of the speeder, they sometimes spontaneously explode, but the operators have been programmed to love them. They function mostly by aiming themselves at something and running into it. Sometimes they accidentally hit a base and capture it.
|
|
|
A suggestion, attempting to stick to the limits of the original post:
Many of the suggestions so far seem focused on breaking stalemates by damage dealing.
I would like to offer some suggestions for ways to use new units to break stalemates by introducing more ways to create uncertainty.
So, a few suggested units:
Khraleans:
NAME: Arakhas
TYPE: heavy ground
COST: 800
VISION: 2
MOBILITY: 9
VS LIGHT GROUND: 11
VS HEAVY GROUND: 8
VS AERIAL: 0
VS AQUATIC: 0
RANGE: 1
DEFENSE: 10
REPAIR: 2
ACTIONS: 2 (does not include ability to re-burrow after emerging)
ATTACK AFTER MOVE: no
SPECIAL ABILITY: Underling burrow (still has mobility 9 while buried)
CAPTURE BASE: no
This thing is not the thing that helps take out walkers, this is the thing that the enemy wants to take out. This is the Khraleans 'drop what you were doing and try to kill it right now' unit.
2:
NAME: Bleckling
TYPE: amphibious (built at LAND bases only, however)
COST: 500
VISION: 4
MOBILITY: 9
VS LIGHT GROUND: 10
VS HEAVY GROUND: 4
VS AERIAL: 0
VS AQUATIC: 6
RANGE: 1
DEFENSE: 6
REPAIR: 1
ACTIONS: 1
ATTACK AFTER MOVE: no
SPECIAL ABILITY: Plague-like effect, BUT affects all races, INCLUDING KHRALEANS
CAPTURE BASE: yes
This guy, also, helps to break stalemates. He's an offensive weapon, and he smells offensive. Titan players who hunker down behind tanks and walkers may not have noses, but they don't need them to know that this thing is a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
This kind of stinks. If I'm not going to have any guarantee that opponents aren't going to redo turns after making a tactical error... Honestly, I'd sooner just find a different game to play. The game isn't fun if mistakes don't mean anything to anyone with cash.
|
|
|
A few thoughts I'd like to throw in:
Most of the talk seems to be about addressing balance primarily through changing attack ratings & such. I think it's worth raising the question of whether there are other ways to balance things out besides just balancing the damage the races can inflict.
My personal opinion is that the update made Khraleans weaker against both sapiens and titans. The Khraleans are liable to get blocked in by ground heavy units that they can't adequately damage. They have very limited ability to deal with an established defensive line.
Rather than increase their ability to dish out damage in that situation, I would argue that perhaps that disadvantage could be compensated for by, e.g., increasing the mobility of some units. Increased pinzer mobility would make it easier to counter a strong defensive line by being able to feint more effectively, or capitalize on a weakness. Increasing buried underling mobility would make buried underlings more of a serious threat in an offensive capability than they are now.
Increasing wyrm mobility could also make it harder to definitively attack-proof a defensive position, and make it easier to shift offensive focus by surprise.
Additionally, vision could be adjusted. Because it is currently normal for a lot of the map to be in view, I would actually suggest slightly DECREASING vision of some titan and human units, to make maintaining view of the enemy's movements more of a practical concern, while giving the Khraleans a bit more of an advantage.
|
|
|
![[Search]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_search.gif){kind=icon}
![[Recent Topics]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_recentTopics.gif){kind=icon}
![[Login]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_login.gif){kind=icon}
Login
