Scenario Review: SotBE 17 - Human Horde

[Content Feedback]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
(9) If you know a bit of the Wesnoth Markup Language - do you think that the WML of this scenario is clear and well commented? If not which part would you like to be documented better?

[sabalzen]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
Easiest setting, 1.6
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
Impossible if you follow the scenario objectives, relatively easy if you don't
(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Not clear - the characters' dialogue would suggest you are expected to attack, but the scenario objectives say hold out as long as possible, which of course suggests you are supposed to defend. First time through, I followed the stated objectives, and defended. I got slaughtered, as the humans really get a lot of reinforcements. Second time through I ignored the objectives and sent my entire army at the human fort and took the Earl down on turn 7.
(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
The campaign storyline is pretty good, there isn't all that much in this scenario though.
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
I found it impossible to defend against endless waves of level 2 and 3 units. My allies were cut to ribbons by the first wave. I don't have a clue how it could be possible to beat this scenario by staying put and defending, by mid-way, you are outnumbered about 10 to 1 by better quality troops.
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
5, there's nothing very much to think about once you've decided to attack or defend.
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
Make it clearer that you are supposed to go for all out attack, or give the allied orcs more gold (or both!)
(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
Yes, the human reinforcements are way too strong for it to be possible to defend out the turns.

[Darkaros]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
Easiest (Challenging), 1.6
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
...A 2. All I did was recall my strongest veterans in anticipation of a difficult, bloodthirsty siege. I hid them right behind my allies' sides on Dusk, letting them human shield themselves, and on First Watch, I basically slaughtered the humans. Slurbows to melee units, Warlords/Troll Warriors to ranged units, and Flankers/Direwolves to Mages/Calvary. Honestly, by Second Watch, none of my veterans were dead and yet most of the attacking army + some of the front guards had been killed. The human leader actually tried to attack a Flanker outside of the fort, failing to kill it and exposing himself. He was quickly mobbed to death, and I won by turn 7, barely after the humans spawned at the bottom.
(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Very clear, if the map didn't even have dialog, I could've figured out what to do.
(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
Meh, the setup of the map itself and the storyline/dialog from the scenarios before already make me know what to expect.
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
There were none, at all.
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
8. I liked the tactical plan I made.
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
None I can see, it was enjoyable.
(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
Nope. Course, this was easist difficulty.

[lotsofphil]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on? 1.7.1 medium
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10) 8 with high losses; impossible otherwise
(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives? Clear.
(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario? Fine.
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario? The reinforcements.
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10) 2
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun? I think the reinforcements are too much.
(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario? The first time my strategy was recruit veterans, march behind the allies and then swoop in for the kill. This didn't work. What happened was that the march took until daylight, I was able to stop the first wave of reinforcements but that weakened me too much to deal with the second wave. Game over.

The way I beat this was to spend every bit of gold I could. I recruited all my veterans and then tons of new recruits. Mixed between cannon fodder and trying to level them. I got slightly fortunate on turn 13 as the Earl came a little bit out of his keep and I was able to pick him off.

I don't like the levels where there are 60+ units on the map.

[Benefuchs]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
medium, 1.6

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
7 to survive
9 -without losing most veterans
10+ -without losing your allies.
attacking: ~7

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
clear

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
Not much talking, but not that clear, it sounds a bit like Kapo'e wants to attack.
Storyline is straightforward until that other human arrives.

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Extremely strong reinforcemets for my enemy (troops + gold), stupid allies.
In my first attempt, I recalled all veterans I had and mainly tried to hold the outer wall with some attacks at night. Around turn 15, I had to retreat to the inner wall and in the end, only Kapo'e, Grüü and a warlord, that was recruited as grunt some 15 turns ago, were left and I had no gold.
In my second attempt, I played more offensive in the beginning, defeating the first wave, and retreated earlyer (~ turn 12). This way, most veterans survived (but still hardly any gold left). Only problem: when I retreat, my allies don't join my in my center castle, but go for a mad dash and, of course, die.
Third attempt: recalled every veteran I had in turn 1, using center and wall keep, spent all my gold the second turn using two wall keeps and rushed, attacking at dusk. By turn 6, Lanbech made the deadly mistake to attack personally. (If he would have retreated towards the arriving, he may have won.) => not many losses, some leveling, allies living, 400+ gold.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
6. really challenging

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
Cleverer allies or maybe put their base inside the inner wall?
And, I think, just the troops without gold would be enough reinforcement for the enemy.

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
Loss of many veterans, see (5).

(9) If you know a bit of the Wesnoth Markup Language - do you think that the WML of this scenario is clear and well commented? If not which part would you like to be documented better?
N/A

EDIT: third attempt

[calmon]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
1.7.12 on hardest difficult
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
v. hard
(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
clear
(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
its ok
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
not losing all troops AND prevent ally to self destruct
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
4
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
Set the ally fortress more into th north of the city because you're forced to fight on first city wall because ally leaders make suicide attacks
(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
The biggest problem is that you need to fight on the first wall the whole battle because you can't prevent the ally leaders to move out of the castles and attack an opponents in range = dead of ally = loss of game.
(9) If you know a bit of the Wesnoth Markup Language - do you think that the WML of this scenario is clear and well commented? If not which part would you like to be documented better?

Please set the ally fortresses a lot more into the north to stop this stupid suicide attack. The scenario is very hard enough on highest difficult level! (only losses in 6 tries)

[shadowblack]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
1.8.4, Warrior (Difficult), i.e. (what I consider) Normal difficulty

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
2 if you don’t care about losses, 3 to 4 if you want to avoid significant casualties.

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Now that I think about it: Not really clear. I just assumed that killing the enemy leader would be enough, and did just that.

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
Good, with a nice little twist at the end.

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
The level 3 enemy guards and not losing many units. If I had taken longer to kill the enemy leader the reinforcements would have been a problem too, but I was fast enough to avoid dealing with the reinforcements.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
8 – nice little bloodbath *evil grin*

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
Make it clear that killing the enemy leader is also an option

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
Extremely bad luck made me restart a couple of turns. Apart from that – nothing.

[Maiklas3000]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
Nightmare; 1.9.2; 564 starting gold (minimum is 400)

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
7

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Totally vague. "Hold off the humans". Should add "until end of turns" plus "Alternate victory: defeat Earl Whatshisface".

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
Complicated and not very interesting. It felt contrived that my killing blow on the Earl was negated and he was restored to full HP later in the dialog.

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
I attacked and crushed the enemy forces. Then the Earl got reinforcements while he simultaneously recruited on every hex! That seemed like it tripled his force in an instant. It was rough going. I lost a Great Troll. Finally, the Earl darted out again, and this time I had enough force in the area to take him down.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
7

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
Probably should make the Earl stationary. That would have put me in a tough spot. Also reduce the number of his recruiting hexes.

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
No.

(9) If you know a bit of the Wesnoth Markup Language - do you think that the WML of this scenario is clear and well commented? If not which part would you like to be documented better?
There are no comments.

* * *

Replay comes up corrupt, so not attached.

[Faello]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?

Nightmare (Warlord), 1.8.5, no saves/reloads, 568 starting gold (+ 925 allies gold)

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)

5.

It's a wannabe-survival scenario that in fact can be played as a push&pull battle. It's truly epic considering the fact that total Great Horde forces in my game were worth about 1500gp at the beginning and Earl Lanbec'h gets initial 1000gp and another 800gp+200gp in standing reinforcements another three times during this scenario (turns 7, 13 and 19 - always at the dawn) thus it's about 1500gp + income vs +4000gp loyalist army battle

First several turns are very easy - you just need to push and use your allies units to kill as much as you can, later it's a good idea to steal Al'Brock and Flar'Tar villages, since our allied warlords like to waste their gold pieces on useless wolves that mess with the flow of enemy attack, that should be fluid for the sake of good planning If things will get hot, player can summon some lvl2 and 3's but grunts as always should be the core of players army.

It's also important to notice that enemy unit waves almost always reach Dorset walls at dusk, so most of the combat takes place in the favourable, chaotic powerphase.

I was able to slice&dice Earl to 0hp in the last turn, but it was bloody battle

36 deaths, 104 kills + allied d/k

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?

They're clear, more or less Earl can't be decisively defeated in this scenario for the sake of final campaign scenario (still, it was good to beat him up to 0hp )

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?

It's clear and quite interesting, but considering the size of the battle and size of the allied orcish forces, it would be nice to add some comments from Flar'Tar and Al'Brock.

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?

Keeping my veterans alive.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)

8.

It's a long but very interesting advance&retreat/defensive battle scenario, perfect for training some manouvers, there'a also a lot of killing in this one too

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?

No changes, it's great as it is.

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?

No.

Replay attached:

[cph]

(1) Warrior, 1.8.5
(2) 6. Completed on the second attempt on turn 12, with the loss of one L3 unit. Starting gold 555.
(3) Clear.
(4) Good.
(5)
I was sitting comfortably, manning the walls of Dorset and watching the fight in the plain below. The allies were kicking ass so well that I thought I should set off in pursuit before they won it for me. Then, BAM, 1000GP of reinforcements show up, with my forces in the middle of the plain. Fortunately the newcomers mostly went for my allies, and when the second night came my troops broke through their weakened units and killed the enemy commander. But 1 more turn and I would have struggled to survive against another 1000GP of reinforcements.

I did not recruit enough units for tackling heavy infantry. The defensive terrain near the enemy is not ideal for me; and defending until they exhausted themselves was not a playable strategy anyway.

I really didn't know how to play the level initially; I was expecting defence and had a total change of plan on turn 3-4 when it became apparent that defence was not needed, and again on turn 7 when I realised that a knock-out attack might be the only way to win in a sensible time.

(6) 5.

On the positive side, this level achieves what few do: it is a big battle that forces the player to attack. Usually a Wesnoth level involves defending a good line in the terrain for 3-5 turns and, once the flood of enemies subsides, then sweep over to the enemy keep. By having such huge reinforcements arriving, the player has to attack, and to attack in the teeth of some serious enemy troops.

On the downside, the plot and setup of this level (bear in mind that the entire campaign has been building up to this scenario, the big human invasion) has set it up as a defence-against-the-big-human-attack, and instead it turns into an attacking level. This seemed strange. It is also a level where a player could easily play the wrong strategy and have to replay, although that did not happen to me.

I'm not a fan of levels with really big camps like this, I feel that makes for less interesting terrain.

I'm also not keen on levels where I end up having to play like the AI plays: overstretched attacking, trying to kill as much as possible and accepting some losses in return. I also dislike that I was overstretched on several turns and knew that I could lose experienced units, but got away with it because the allies were more exposed so the enemy went after them; I don't like playing in a way that intentionally risks my experienced units. But I guess it doesn't hurt me to be a bit less defensive once in a while .

This type of level highlights the AI's limited tactics; the enemy would be much better off defending, and if they just stuck lots of shock troopers in the camp tiles and defended then they would be tough as hell to beat.

(7)
* try to change the story, or reposition this level in the campaign, so this isn't the much-hyped defence-against-the-horde scenario.
* change the dialogue in the scenario itself to explain that the humans have a strong force already but that more will be arriving every day, so the player knows up front and can recruit accordingly.
* give the enemy more gold to begin with, so the allies don't just walk all over the first wave and do need the player to help; and give the allies a bit more income or reduce the enemy reinforcements to keep the balance.

(8) I lost Kapou'e once, to poor placement.

[cph]

I've been thinking about this one some more.

(6) 5.

On the positive side, this level achieves what few do: it is a big battle that forces the player to attack. Usually a Wesnoth level involves defending a good line in the terrain for 3-5 turns and, once the flood of enemies subsides, then sweep over to the enemy keep. By having such huge reinforcements arriving, the player has to attack, and to attack in the teeth of some serious enemy troops.

That's really positive, and I stand by it. But I think the 5/10 is right too, so I need a better explanation of what it was that made me not really like this level. I gave some reasons but none of those are really major things.

I think the main problem is that I spent 6-7 turns watching allies fight, then had to drag my large army across the plain without much fighting to do, and then had only really 2 turns of frantic fighting at the end of it. The ratio of walking to fighting is too high.

The next level, despite having an even longer watching-allies-fight period before you get stuck in, worked as a better version of this level (albeit it suffered from being a rerun of this one, and with the weaker enemy it didn't have the pressure on the player that forced the strategy in this one).

I think my ideas for improving it would make me like it more; no guarantees whether anyone else would . If the dialogue really hammered home that your allies are strong but the enemy are expecting huge reinforcements and you have to all out attack asap then I might have recruited a small elite army, ridden the wave of allies and struck for the leader on day 1; and I would have had no complaints.

[Groggy_Dice]

Earl Lanbec'h gets initial 1000gp and another 800gp+200gp in standing reinforcements another three times during this scenario (turns 7, 13 and 19 - always at the dawn)

Actually, Lanbec'h was supposed to get reinforcements on the last dawn as well, but the line reads name=25 instead of name=turn 25.

I finished off Lanbec'h a couple turns early after noticing he hadn't gotten his last round of reinforcements, and didn't realize that was a bug until I looked at the scenario file.

[zookeeper]

Earl Lanbec'h gets initial 1000gp and another 800gp+200gp in standing reinforcements another three times during this scenario (turns 7, 13 and 19 - always at the dawn)

Actually, Lanbec'h was supposed to get reinforcements on the last dawn as well, but the line reads name=25 instead of name=turn 25.

I finished off Lanbec'h a couple turns early after noticing he hadn't gotten his last round of reinforcements, and didn't realize that was a bug until I looked at the scenario file.

Good catch; fixed.

[line]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
Warlord (Nightmare) 1.10.3
501 starting gold (allies: 464/461), enemy: 1000
Finished turn 7/30

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
4. It was very easy. The only difficulty faced, was to give xp to my recruits. I think my allies had way too much money, so we ran over the humans.

{ALBROCK_SIDE}
{GOLD 300 250 200} It should have been 200 gold for each ally – is that a bug or is there any sort of carryover for the allies?

Faello had obviously the same starting gold for both allies as me:

(+ 925 allies gold)

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Not clear. What means: “Hold off the humans”? Do I lose once a human steps into my castle? I couldn’t find anything to clarify in the file, so it seems that only the death conditions can make me lose. So in fact, the scenario objective is “Survive until the turns run out”.
There should be another losing condition like in the 1st scenario of “Descent into Darkness”, where you lose, once the orcs break your defences:
[objective]
condition=lose
description=_ "Orcs break through the river fort defenses"
[/objective]

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
“This name sounds oddly familiar” is a very poor reaction if you actually realised, who was involved in your father’s death.

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Distributing xp.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
9,5. Even without the strong allies it would have been interesting and challenging to approach to the Earl’s keep and lure out the units defending it.
Having the strong allies, it was quite easy to hammer everyone down and again the enemy leader was forthcoming and left his keep.

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
Weaker allies.

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
None.

Edit: Scenario is named Human Attack, not Human Horde

[Anonymus]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?

1.10.6
Easiest

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)

1, Lanbec'h had 800 starting gold, me 762 and the other orcs 821 and 826. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have had to recruit anything, but I recruited grunts in the first turn anyway. Nearly Killed enemy leader in turn 7 who survived with 1hp before the scenario ended, so his reinforcements were useless.

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?

very clear

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?

very clear and interesting

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?

none

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)

3, I love slaying humans, but it was just too easy

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?

less gold for me and my allies. I think the allies could use my recall list, which made my a little angry beacause they killed some high-lvl units. Also don't let the enemy leader go away from his keep, I nearly killed him.

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?

no

(9) If you know a bit of the Wesnoth Markup Language - do you think that the WML of this scenario is clear and well commented? If not which part would you like to be documented better?

don't know