Scenario Review: (UTBS) 3. A Stirring in the Night

Feedback for the mainline campaign Under the Burning Suns.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

User avatar
Content Feedback
Battle for Wesnoth
Location: #wesnoth @ chat.freenode.net
Contact:

Scenario Review: (UTBS) 3. A Stirring in the Night

Post by Content Feedback » March 20th, 2006, 6:39 am

1) What version and difficulty level did you play the scenario on? Please do not submit feedback from pre 1.4.
2) Do you think the difficulty is adequate to the level? If not describe the issue that made the scenario to easy/hard.
3) Was there any event that caused you to almost instantly lose, or made the scenario unplayable without reload?
4) Do you like the storyline and the dialogues? If not what part/character lags behind or what would you like changed?
5) Do you think the scenario was fun? Please write down some thoughts about gameplay, mood etc.
Mainline Campaigns: Scenario FeedbackDevelopment & Overall Feedback
User-made Add-ons: Feedback

SmokemJags
Posts: 580
Joined: February 14th, 2006, 3:24 am
Location: New Avalon
Contact:

Post by SmokemJags » March 23rd, 2006, 4:22 am

1. 102 challenging 112 normal
2. 7 in 102 , 5 in 112
3. good dialogue makes the objectives very clear
4. clear and interesting enough... gg garak though
5. Dealing with possessed Garak proved quite difficult.
6. 7, having the extra task of holding onto the camps made it more fun than usual
7. The dialogue seems to have gotten messed up because I killed the bottom leader too soon. I was playing the easiest mode, which is why I was able to do that though... maybe tell the player just to 'last until sunrise' and not kill the enemy leaders in the initial objectives window? that way people dont try and kill them and do kill them and sort of ruin the dialogue.
8. 370 gold
"A wise man speaks when he has something to say. A fool speaks when he has to say something."

Big Bad Joe
Posts: 258
Joined: January 26th, 2005, 11:07 pm
Location: You really do not want to know

Post by Big Bad Joe » March 23rd, 2006, 2:45 pm

1. 102 chalenging
2. 6 - depends on the behavior of the undead lords and their recruiting.
3. very clear
4. like it very much
5. I think that the orcs on challenging are a real problem, because all your units are fighting undead and if you do not know about the orcs, they will take your keep and then kill you. Maybe just show their scout one or two turns before the main force come in.
6. 8
7. point 5
8. more than 350g
I recalled my units, held all 10 villages and was able to kill the undead leader, orc leader and then possesed elf, but I got no significant early finish bonus and so I lost all my funds and went to the sc. 4 with just 100g and that means that I am very probably screwed :wink: . I was trying UTBS W102 on normal ( easy) and have plenty of gold in the sc. 4. Seems to me that the difference between normal and chalenging is really big, trust me, I will never try UTBS on hard :lol: .
Just bored..

quartex
Inactive Developer
Posts: 2258
Joined: December 22nd, 2003, 4:17 am
Location: Boston, MA

Post by quartex » March 23rd, 2006, 3:53 pm

Big Bad Joe,

Challenging is difficult, that's why I called easy "normal". However I intended scenario 3 to be difficult, and for you to end with very little gold. So I don't think you're screwed, scenario 4 is a bit of a breather. I can't be sure though, because I wasn't able to get very far in Challenging myself.

You saved 10 villages? I'm impressed! You did really good. There is no early finish bonus, however saving more villages causes the recruiting price of your units to go up a lot less. In your case the price doesn't go up at all.

Finally, I encourage you to try Wesnoth 1.1.2, with the newer version the campaign is better balanced and some minor bugs have been ironed out. Your post does remind me that I should go back and make some changes with the Wesnoth 1.0.2 version.

dthurston
Posts: 65
Joined: February 13th, 2006, 7:15 pm

Re: Scenario Review: (UTBS) 3. A Stirring in the Night

Post by dthurston » March 26th, 2006, 6:11 pm

(1) What difficulty levels and game versions have you played the scenario on?
112a, Sentinel (challenging)
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
5, not too bad. I probably over-recruited and may regret that later.
(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Quite clear.
(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
Good and clear. Somewhat of a shock to lose Garak.
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
I stupidly forgot that the orcs could recruit and let the leader get to the keep. Otherwise not hard with my excess troops; I saved 10 villages and had my choice of whether to beat Garak or the second undead leader.
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
8
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
Perhaps let the possessed Garak recruit? In my game I let Garak defeat the orcs, and he ended up in the keep; it would have made sense if he could have then recruited.
I noticed that after his death, Garak spoke from his position where he was possessed, not from the position where he died when possessed.
(8) How much gold did you have at the start of the scenario?
554

Sly
Posts: 258
Joined: October 10th, 2005, 11:59 am
Location: Montrouge (Fr, 92)
Contact:

Post by Sly » March 29th, 2006, 3:23 pm

1 - 1.1.2a - Normal
2 - 6, rather difficult : the orcish appearance plus the unexpected turning
3 - Clear
4 - Rather interesting, you do'nt really grasp the fight btw undeads but it's clear.
5 - Completing it without using too much units at first, reaching the keep in time to recruit archers (best vs orcs)
6 - 7, fun because it's challenging
7 -
8 - 580

cordobatim
Posts: 17
Joined: January 27th, 2006, 4:19 pm
Location: Texas

Post by cordobatim » April 3rd, 2006, 3:47 pm

(1) What difficulty levels and game versions have you played the scenario on?
Easy on 1.0.2
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
8. This one was tough; took me several tries
(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Clear enough.
(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
Both clear and interesting
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Holding onto the villages; being prepared for the orc's appearance
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
6. This one is pretty fun. Seems short compared to the others.
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
It's frustrating to lose such a large percentage of the villages so quickly. Maybe add a few villages?
( 8 ) How much gold did you have at the start of the scenario?
424

Nyxl
Posts: 25
Joined: February 12th, 2006, 6:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Scenario Review: (UTBS) 3. A Stirring in the Night

Post by Nyxl » April 8th, 2006, 2:20 pm

quartex wrote:(1) What difficulty levels and game versions have you played the scenario on?
Wesnoth 1.1.2a; difficulty medium.
quartex wrote:(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
A good 7. I had to revert to the old attrition strategy to endure the onslaught, and lost a few good units that had already levelled up in the former scenario.
quartex wrote:(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
No trouble there : surviving is always a clear objective! Protecting the villages was also rather obvious.
quartex wrote:(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
As interesting as the previous ones. Though I'd make the story [parts] shorter : I think most players don't have the patience to read long snippets of text before starting a scenario. Maybe cutting some of the longest [parts] into more pieces would do nicely.
quartex wrote:(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Keeping enough strong units alive to allow reinforcements to reach the keeps of the undead duellists.
quartex wrote:(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
I would say 6. Not as fun as "Across the Harsh Sands", but here is a matter of personality : I don't like attrition, when you win a battle just by sacrificing units until the opponent can't hold the onslaught. I find it frustrating when you're used to building winning efficient tactics.
quartex wrote:(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
The Orc phalanx should appear from farther than the border of the desert, to give some time to react. All I could do when it happened, was recruit three desert warriors to block their advance while I brought back a few units from the northern undead keep. It added to the attrition-frustration.
quartex wrote:(8 ) How much gold did you have at the start of the scenario?
More than 400. All was spent at the end of the battle! :roll:

Edit :

Okay, I replayed the whole campaign from the start. Knowing the events in advance helps a lot and I finished "A Stirring in the Night" in a much better state than the first time (same difficulty). I anticipated the loss and managed to sacrifice only level 1 units.

Beorn
Posts: 3
Joined: October 14th, 2005, 9:22 pm

Post by Beorn » April 14th, 2006, 10:19 pm

Playing at the easiest level, I was doing well when all of a sudden I got an error message "cannot find orcish leader" or something similar, and the game crashed. I reloaded, and the same thing happened again.

Since I had just downloaded the campaign, I can assume it is the most up to date version.

quartex
Inactive Developer
Posts: 2258
Joined: December 22nd, 2003, 4:17 am
Location: Boston, MA

Post by quartex » April 15th, 2006, 3:57 am

Beorn wrote:Playing at the easiest level, I was doing well when all of a sudden I got an error message "cannot find orcish leader" or something similar, and the game crashed. I reloaded, and the same thing happened again.

Since I had just downloaded the campaign, I can assume it is the most up to date version.
What version of wesnoth are you running? There was a bug in Wesnoth 1.1.1 wher ethe Orcish Leader unit was removed by mistake. This was fixed in 1.1.2. Make sure you're using the most up to date version of Wesnoth and that should fix your problem.

Beorn
Posts: 3
Joined: October 14th, 2005, 9:22 pm

Post by Beorn » April 16th, 2006, 1:21 pm

That did fix the problem. Thanks.

One further comment. When Garath becomes possessed, the objectives specifically change not to include protection of the "towns." At that time, I owned all of them, and none of them had ever been lost.

However, when freed from this objective, I ignored my opponents' taking of towns and just went after the remaining undead leader. Then, at the end of the level, I was informed I had only held 7 of them.

It seems that these two things should match: either maintain protection of towns as an objective, or give credit for the number of towns held when this ceases to be an objective.

quartex
Inactive Developer
Posts: 2258
Joined: December 22nd, 2003, 4:17 am
Location: Boston, MA

Post by quartex » April 16th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Beorn, you have a point. I will go back and reconsider the objectives.

Edit: In case things weren't challenging enough, I have changed the scenario so that you still have to protect 6 villages even after Garak gets corrupted. This helps remind the player to still protect his people despite the new mission objective.

pjr

Re: Scenario Review: (UTBS) 3. A Stirring in the Night

Post by pjr » April 20th, 2006, 8:09 pm

quartex wrote:(1) What difficulty levels and game versions have you played the scenario on?
1.1.2+svn, Easy
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
7.
(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?
Good.
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
It's tricky to hold enough villages without making hero units vulnerable at the start.
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
8.
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
None.
(8) How much gold did you have at the start of the scenario?
1126. (This huge surplus from scenario 2 made the warnings in more than one scenario about the cost of recruiting meaningless.)

Pater-Brown
Posts: 10
Joined: May 26th, 2006, 6:53 pm

Post by Pater-Brown » May 27th, 2006, 8:11 am

1. hard in version 1.1.2
2. uhhh, 7, I think. It was a bit tricky, but at the and i haven't lost a single unit.
3. Good.
4. The death of Garak is a bit unclear, but I hope at the end of the whole scenario it will be explained.
5. Not to loose my units, as I went so near the bases.
6. 6.
7. I don't know. Maybe the leaders are too aggressiv, only because they attacked both in round 6, I could kill them in round 7.
8. 256.

I was amused, as I read in the scenario.cfg, how unlikely it is, that a player manage to kill both leaders before turn 12. At least I didn't kill them before 12, but in round 7, where there weren't the Orks yet. And this at difficulty hard. Ok, next scenario I had only 100 gold, but who cares?
Please don‘t care for mistakes. I'm a German.

Shakiko
Posts: 25
Joined: March 13th, 2006, 10:14 am

Post by Shakiko » July 12th, 2006, 9:21 pm

(1) What difficulty levels and game versions have you played the scenario on?
normal, 1.17


(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
It was challenging - especially the arrvial of the orcs proved to be difficult to counter, but I made it back to my keep just in time to recruit some more defenders

6


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


(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
I liked the idea of the undead duelling - something innovative.
Kinda didn't like the orcs messing up w/o any serious reason later though. It feels like you were trying to give the undead some sort of motivation why they fight (and not just b/c they are evil) but then you created some single-sided orcs =/

Still a plus overall


(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
The norther undead leader recruiting only ghosts and taking 4 villages in Turn 2 -> lots of zombies to fight while ghosts are already a pain in the arse :oops:

Second major challenge was Garak getting possesed - as he was holding my single frontline to the south withc just 1 other archer he and his new minion easily killed 2 more villages (down to 6 then *phew*) before I could get reinforcements down there.


(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
I really enjoyed it desite the "orcish incursion" :wink: - the changes of plot were surprising and in this case it's cool that you are totally surprised that your commander gets possessed. Big thumbs up here


(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
dunno if it would be more "fun", but see point 5


(8 ) How much gold did you have at the start of the scenario?
480

Post Reply