[Historical] Legend of Wesmere (add-on version)

This is the place for discussing development of mainline campaigns, reporting bugs in them and providing overall feedback.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Locked
fabi
Developer
Posts: 1220
Joined: March 21st, 2004, 2:42 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by fabi » February 7th, 2009, 6:24 pm

LordAzamath wrote:Hmm.. Played this campaign again and found out that in LOW-The Northern Battle when I have to take out all enemies, while I kill Landar, it tells me
Landar: I can finally rest now
Kalenz: Noo. We can't continue without Landar
and it says I lost..

/me hopes it's not a double report. Using 1.5.9
Thank you, the bug is fixed for 1.5.10.

berserker
Posts: 2
Joined: February 15th, 2009, 6:51 am

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by berserker » February 15th, 2009, 7:55 am

Hi all

i desperately wanted to play this campaign, but am unable to find a link to download it for my ubuntu system. i downloaded the wesnoth-low(legend of wesmere) and wesnoth-core (dependency for wesnoth-low) packages from the debian repositories, but when i try to install wesnoth-core it says dependency wesnoth-data not satisfiable, even though that package is already installed. Please help!!!

fabi
Developer
Posts: 1220
Joined: March 21st, 2004, 2:42 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by fabi » February 15th, 2009, 5:39 pm

berserker wrote:Hi all

i desperately wanted to play this campaign, but am unable to find a link to download it for my ubuntu system. i downloaded the wesnoth-low(legend of wesmere) and wesnoth-core (dependency for wesnoth-low) packages from the debian repositories, but when i try to install wesnoth-core it says dependency wesnoth-data not satisfiable, even though that package is already installed. Please help!!!
Sounds like broken debian repository. Which version of Debian or which derivate (eg Ubuntu) are you using?

berserker
Posts: 2
Joined: February 15th, 2009, 6:51 am

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by berserker » February 15th, 2009, 7:41 pm

fabi wrote:Sounds like broken debian repository. Which version of Debian or which derivate (eg Ubuntu) are you using?
I am using ubuntu 8.10, wesnoth 1.4.5, all packages upgraded and up-to-date. The packages i got from the debian repositories were wesnoth-low_1.5.9-1_all.deb and wesnoth-core_1.4.7-3_i386.deb(first package depends on this one). When i try to install the core package, i get a message "error:dependency not satisfiable:wesnoth-data". Hope i have put up all the relevent information... thanks in advance :)

AI
Developer
Posts: 2394
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by AI » February 15th, 2009, 10:28 pm

Your problem is that you're mixing different versions, best choice for you is probably to download the 1.5.9 sources and compile them yourself.

Sneezy
Posts: 61
Joined: May 15th, 2007, 8:57 pm
Location: northern NJ, USA

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by Sneezy » February 27th, 2009, 5:00 pm

Hi-- I recently downloaded BfW 1.5.11 and started up the mainline version of LoW. Playing on win2k SP4. I played this campaign several years ago, and remember it fondly -- I liked it a lot, and kept good notes about it.

At scenario 2, Hostile Mtns, I found some unexpected behavior.

Around turn 5, the trolls ran across hexes 6,22 and 7,22 without angering Olurf. But around turn 18, when an elf stepped on either of those hexes, the dwarves got angry.

I looked at the WML, and it appears like those hexes count as Olurf's land for both teams, and a similar event ought to fire for either team. I couldn't believe it, so I've replayed the beginning of the scenario several times, and it is repeatable: the trolls can use either of those hexes without angering the dwarves. But if a troll steps on 8,23 the dwarves get angry. This doesn't seem to be the intent. (And it leaves the elves on their own to face all the trolls until late in the game, when a unit finally gets the dwarves angry. Makes it really tough.)

Possibly related is the odd recruitment of both Olurf and the troll boss. Using the troll as an example, the WML suggests that there can be a mix of units: rocklobbers, trolls, & whelps. But in several passes through the scenario, the troll boss each time got 2 rocklobbers and then big trolls exclusively from then on. In Olurf's case, it was 2 berserkers and then thunderguards exclusively from then on. Seems odd, and worth mentioning.

Thanks for the work on this campaign; as I said, it's been one of my favorites for a long time.
--sneezy

fabi
Developer
Posts: 1220
Joined: March 21st, 2004, 2:42 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by fabi » February 28th, 2009, 11:13 am

Sneezy wrote: At scenario 2, Hostile Mtns, I found some unexpected behavior.

Around turn 5, the trolls ran across hexes 6,22 and 7,22 without angering Olurf. But around turn 18, when an elf stepped on either of those hexes, the dwarves got angry.

I looked at the WML, and it appears like those hexes count as Olurf's land for both teams, and a similar event ought to fire for either team. I couldn't believe it, so I've replayed the beginning of the scenario several times, and it is repeatable: the trolls can use either of those hexes without angering the dwarves. But if a troll steps on 8,23 the dwarves get angry. This doesn't seem to be the intent. (And it leaves the elves on their own to face all the trolls until late in the game, when a unit finally gets the dwarves angry. Makes it really tough.)
The Wesnoth engine doesn't allow to filter for units that cross a tile, one can only filter for units on hexes after they moved. That's an old feature request that has not been implemented yet.
So I don't see a chance to fix that right now. Or did I misunderstand your report?
Possibly related is the odd recruitment of both Olurf and the troll boss. Using the troll as an example, the WML suggests that there can be a mix of units: rocklobbers, trolls, & whelps. But in several passes through the scenario, the troll boss each time got 2 rocklobbers and then big trolls exclusively from then on. In Olurf's case, it was 2 berserkers and then thunderguards exclusively from then on. Seems odd, and worth mentioning.
Olurf is recruiting thunderguards because they are the most effective weapon against the trolls which don't have any ranged attack except of the rocklobbers. The same for the trolls, for some reason the ai decides that it's best to recruit trolls and not whelps for fighting elves and dwarves.
Thanks for the work on this campaign; as I said, it's been one of my favorites for a long time.
--sneezy
:D

Sneezy
Posts: 61
Joined: May 15th, 2007, 8:57 pm
Location: northern NJ, USA

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by Sneezy » February 28th, 2009, 7:37 pm

Fabi-- thanks for the explanation about the WML engine.
It fully explains what I saw: the trolls ran *across* the island,
and later one of my elf-heros stepped *onto* the island.

User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8129
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by Elvish_Pillager » March 4th, 2009, 2:19 am

Hi. I played the first two scenarios in the campaign and started on the third before quitting. Fabi asked me to post my concerns here.

1) "Hi, we're orcs. We're going to kill all of you." There's no story excuse for the orcs. It's okay if the idea is that the elves don't yet know why the orcs are coming, but if that's the case, they should say that instead of just accepting the presence of orcs. Compare HttT: a huge backstory for why the orcs are attacking, plus dialogue from them that supports the notion that they have a reason to attack, rather than just the race-stereotype "reason" that they attack because they're orcs.

2) Ridiculous defeat messages. "Nooooo! We cannot continue without Landar" - eh? Nothing so far has suggested that Landar is of any importance whatsoever. Again, compare HttT: we may not have liked it that we lost when Konrad, Delfador, or Kalenz died, but at least there was a reason given why they were vital to Konrad's cause. Same issue for losing on time (especially in the second scenario when time is a major issue and there's not even a defeat message.)

3) A first scenario that's a carbon-copy of HttT's first scenario, without any new twist or excuse.

4) A hidden, un-guessable condition in the second scenario, the knowledge of which is vital to playing optimally. (I'm referring, of course, to
Spoiler:
Plus the dwarves who are ridiculously territorial just because they're dwarves.

5) Two elves-vs-L2-orcs-in-forest scenarios in the first three scenarios. Plus, why did we flee here when the elf captain that's here barely has more troops than the guy in the forest we just fled from?
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.

fabi
Developer
Posts: 1220
Joined: March 21st, 2004, 2:42 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by fabi » March 4th, 2009, 1:29 pm

Elvish Pillager wrote:Hi. I played the first two scenarios in the campaign and started on the third before quitting. Fabi asked me to post my concerns here.

1) "Hi, we're orcs. We're going to kill all of you." There's no story excuse for the orcs. It's okay if the idea is that the elves don't yet know why the orcs are coming, but if that's the case, they should say that instead of just accepting the presence of orcs. Compare HttT: a huge backstory for why the orcs are attacking, plus dialogue from them that supports the notion that they have a reason to attack, rather than just the race-stereotype "reason" that they attack because they're orcs.
The orcs do have a reason to attack the elves in Wesmere, but I don't know why they are attacking the forest of Lintanir. This reason is discussed later, but not that clearly (for my taste). Surely the campaign needs more explaining text, in nearly all scenarios.
Spoiler:
2) Ridiculous defeat messages. "Nooooo! We cannot continue without Landar" - eh? Nothing so far has suggested that Landar is of any importance whatsoever. Again, compare HttT: we may not have liked it that we lost when Konrad, Delfador, or Kalenz died, but at least there was a reason given why they were vital to Konrad's cause. Same issue for losing on time (especially in the second scenario when time is a major issue and there's not even a defeat message.)
Yes, you spotted a very weak point of the campaign. Most of the death/defeat messages concentrate in one file and it seems that it has been forgotten to be converted to mainline quality. But there is nothing I can do at this time (the string freeze). Of course It's on the TODO for after 1.6.
3) A first scenario that's a carbon-copy of HttT's first scenario, without any new twist or excuse.
Very true, do you have any suggestion for a replacement?
4) A hidden, un-guessable condition in the second scenario, the knowledge of which is vital to playing optimally. (I'm referring, of course, to
Spoiler:
Plus the dwarves who are ridiculously territorial just because they're dwarves.
Yes, the dwarves are rather cliché. They are acting like in a tale that is told, maybe a Legend that is told between some elves. I can live with that.
But I total agree that it's very odd to have a secret condition in the scenario. I like the idea behind the scenario and I don't want to drop it. But it's not that easy to balance that scenario. In earlier versions of the campaign the avoid for the trolls was just a constant on HARD. That leaded to no help from the dwarves at HARD no matter what happens and nearly sure help from them at EASY or MEDIUM.
If the new coding is an improvement for the balance or gameplay I would like to keep it and explain the mechanism to the player after the string freeze.
5) Two elves-vs-L2-orcs-in-forest scenarios in the first three scenarios. Plus, why did we flee here when the elf captain that's here barely has more troops than the guy in the forest we just fled from?
A replacement for scenario 1 could avoid the dense of wood against orc scenarios. Maybe the campaign can be started with the saurians invading Lintanir, they see their chance because in the meanwhile Wesmere is attacked by the orcs. The Ka'lian is protected with more soldiers at normal, I believe Galtrid tells Kalenz that he had expected the elvish army instead of him coming to aid.

Silverfang
Posts: 1
Joined: March 14th, 2009, 6:56 pm

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by Silverfang » March 14th, 2009, 7:09 pm

Im currently on Bounty hunters scenario.

Played before West,but not this campaign.
Am playing on medium .

I have feeling that its 2 easy,as if on easy mode.
I did lose few times by neglecting to look for Landar.

Only semidifficult one is 2nd with dwarfs and trolls.... lost 1 lvl 1 unit there..by just waiting them in forest before island.That scen is ok for me difficulty but rest seems 2 easy.

Btw I like Elves ,so am enjoying any campaign with me.



EDIT: Think ,maybe slight work on story is needed.(Im bad at it so dont have sugestions).
In retrive bank scenario,wiould be nice if you wrote inscription over `saurian bank` so people know where it is right from start.

Snarius
Posts: 18
Joined: May 16th, 2007, 4:30 am

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by Snarius » March 24th, 2009, 3:09 am

Hello. Nice campaign! I remember playing it years ago.

One nitpick: I believe that Landar and Andulias from the 1st scenario are supposed to be loyal. If so, they have at least 3 traits and only 2 are displayed due to lack of space. Maybe it's a bug, but perhaps loyal could be the 1st trait displayed. Maybe 3 traits are too many.
Attachments
Screenshot.png

User avatar
santi
Lord of Wesmere
Posts: 1320
Joined: April 6th, 2004, 12:32 pm

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by santi » March 30th, 2009, 1:20 pm

Some thoughts on Elvish Pillager's comments:
1) Reason for the orc attack. You have to wait for the first hints till scenario 7 and for a full
explanation till scenario 12. Remember, the orcs DO NOT HAVE to explain why they are attacking, the elves do not have Jessica as in TROW to tell them why they are attacking. Those of us who played TROW already know the reason, but the elves do not. Finding out things as you go along is a plus IMHO, not a minus. According to TROW the orcs know that the elves have the ruby, but they have no idea which elves, so attacking all elves makes sense. Just imagine: "I will be the one who finds the ruby and I will become great chief!"
2) Landar's death message. If I recall correctly, Jessica's death is also a loss condition in TROW(apart from the first two scenaria where she cannot die). You can imagine that Kalenz is too heartbroken to go on if Landar falls, or that elves panic and flee or whatever was the case for Jessica(so who cares if the wesfolk do not follow and are left to rot in the swamps or to be butchered by the orcs?). The point is that Landar is important for the story as was Jessica in TROW. I agree that the loss message can/should be improved, but I think the criticism of a loss if Landar falls is unjustified-at the very least one should critisize TROW similarly about Jessica. One could make alternative histories with Landar dying or not,
but that would affect too much of Wesnoth and other campaigns, like SoF. Landar is CENTRAL in explaining why the elves survived the orcish attack, but failed to win decisively, thus creating a balance o terror with all races coexisting, which led to the events of HttT. Otherwise, how on earth can you explain that the orcs are there, but do not attack or attack, but neither win nor lose?
3)First scenario a carbon copy of HttT?
No. The Velon angle and the discord between elders and young warriors is not in HttT.
In fact most campaigns(such as HttT, TROW, EI, IfTU, ...) start with one or several escape scenarios. The only twist in say TROW is that the escape starts on the second scenario.
If one had preferred to have another preparatory scenario with initial clashes and a first victory, that would probably displease others who do not like length campaigns. So we cannot please everybody(though we try).
4)Secret condition in scenario 2. This scenario has been rebalanced many times, both fabi and I spent a lot of time trying to find out the best way to do this. Personally my preference is that dwarves do not help at all. The scenario is still winnable. But there have also been many complaints "the scenario is too hard". I think the solution found is a reasonable compromise and actually a good solution. You do not expect to win the scenario without killing a single troll, do you?
As for dwarves being territorial. Yes, we already know from TROW they do not like anyone
elves, trolls or orcs much. So what is strange about wanting all these strangers out or their land?

5)Two elves-vs-L2-orcs-in-forest scenarios in the first three scenarios.

Yes, the elves are fighting a defensive war. Which is to be fought on THEIR terrain. What's strange about that?

Plus, why did we flee here when the elf captain that's here barely has more troops than the guy in the forest we just fled from

Kalenz could not have known that, could he? Plus the elves now have TWICE the numbers,
not to mention many times the villages to get gold from

RedLTeut
Posts: 63
Joined: October 6th, 2005, 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by RedLTeut » May 18th, 2009, 6:35 pm

I would suggest to use normal victory conditions on "Alliance with humans", as the player always has the alternative to hit turn done ten times in order to earn income from villages. Or maybe one would need a more configurable calculation of the gold bonus.

KeljanZ
Posts: 1
Joined: August 24th, 2009, 1:42 pm

Re: Legend of Wesmere-Elvish(Kalenz) Campaign

Post by KeljanZ » August 24th, 2009, 1:51 pm

Have a problem during the interlude: LOW-News_from_the_front a following error occurred:
An error due to possibly invalid WML occurred
The error message is:
The maximum text width is less than 1.

Code: Select all

Condition 'max_width > 0'failed at src\marked-up_text.cpp:397 in function 'word_wrap_text'.
How can I fix it, or skip the interlude to continue campaign.

Locked