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

Feedback for the mainline campaign Under the Burning Suns.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

FaiKHR
Posts: 9
Joined: February 28th, 2010, 4:34 pm

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

Post by FaiKHR » March 2nd, 2010, 7:39 pm

1) What version and difficulty level did you play the scenario on? Please do not submit feedback from pre 1.4.

Wesnoth 1.7.8, Easy

2) Do you think the difficulty is adequate to the level? If not describe the issue that made the scenario to easy/hard.

Yes, i managed to kill both leaders before the orcs got to do much damage, hmm a change in difficulty needed maybe XD

3) Was there any event that caused you to almost instantly loose, or made the scenario unplayable without reload?

Nope, the new warning about the orcs makes it way too easy for first time players and any 2nd time players already know. I just left Kaleh at the camp to recuit some more people when the orcs arrived to delay them until my main force got back.

4) Do you like the storyline and the dialogues? If not what part/character lags behind or what would you like changed?

Yes, however the death of Garak? seemed a bit quick. Everyone said how he was great a swiftly moved on. I felt that this might have effected the characters more.

5) Do you think the scenario was fun? Please write down some thoughts about gameplay, mood etc.

Yeah the scenario was fun, but i wish when you lost a village it actually turned into rubble like before, much easier way of keeping count, since you can re capture the villages now.

MartinHarper
Posts: 1
Joined: June 16th, 2010, 7:30 pm

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

Post by MartinHarper » June 16th, 2010, 7:53 pm

1) What version and difficulty level did you play the scenario on? Please do not submit feedback from pre 1.4.

1.8.2 / Prowler / Nightmare (this time)

2) Do you think the difficulty is adequate to the level? If not describe the issue that made the scenario to easy/hard.

Appropriate difficulty: winnable after several attempts. I did hold out for a win with all my tents intact - maybe it would have been easier if I had accepted some losses.
It was possible to "milk" the scenario for experience, especially given that it's almost impossible to go into the next scenario with bonus gold. I levelled most of my troops to level 3, and gained several levels on Kaleh and the dust devil, before corrupted Galek finally suicided himself on a horseman.

Possible solution: change corrupted Galek to attack every turn that he can, even if he is on very low hit points.

3) Was there any event that caused you to almost instantly loose, or made the scenario unplayable without reload?

When the undead generals recruited Chocobones and Wraiths in the first turn, this made winning much harder. Curiously, they didn't seem to recruit many of them in subsequent turns. Could this order be reversed?

4) Do you like the storyline and the dialogues? If not what part/character lags behind or what would you like changed?

I liked the foreshadowing of Garak's corruption. The "enchant sword with flame" spell is a little random, though, since it isn't used subsequently, and some of its properties are specific to a single enemy unit.

5) Do you think the scenario was fun? Please write down some thoughts about gameplay, mood etc.

The undead generals didn't spend any time attacking each other, with the exception of one bat on one attempt. The scenario didn't have the feel of being caught in the middle of a battle. It would have been nice to see more skirmishers running past the elven defenders to attack the opposition.

I would have preferred having the Elven Scout that warns of the orc attack die by being unable to get out of the hills before the orcs take him, rather than having it scripted.

lebluedude
Posts: 4
Joined: June 24th, 2010, 9:31 pm

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

Post by lebluedude » July 11th, 2010, 5:20 am

1. 1.82 easy

2. Seemed fine

3. seemed fine

4. The map that is brought up in this scenario is never mentioned again. I think it's supposed to give me some bonus, but I don't know what bonus. It's what we get when we kill the orc king. Does it reveal something in the next level or?

5. Yes, but that map is reaaaallly bugging me.

shadowblack
Posts: 368
Joined: April 15th, 2010, 3:03 pm

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

Post by shadowblack » August 25th, 2010, 4:11 pm

1) What version and difficulty level did you play the scenario on? Please do not submit feedback from pre 1.4.
1.8.4, Desert Sentinel (Challenging)

2) Do you think the difficulty is adequate to the level? If not describe the issue that made the scenario to easy/hard.
Yes, the difficulty is just right.

3) Was there any event that caused you to almost instantly loose, or made the scenario unplayable without reload?
No, nothing.

4) Do you like the storyline and the dialogues? If not what part/character lags behind or what would you like changed?
Yes, very good – I love it so far. Though Garak’s death seemed a bit rushed (in my case he never got possessed).

5) Do you think the scenario was fun? Please write down some thoughts about gameplay, mood etc.
Yes, it was a lot of fun. The need to protect the tents added some extra challenge, making me think the scenario would be hard, but it turned out that was not the case. I was very pleased with myself that I managed to keep all 12 camps (due to where the initial guards appeared I was able to keep the wraith from taking the one nearest to him, and none of the others were in any danger).

The experienced recruits complicated things a bit (some of them managed to level up due to bad luck on my units’ part), but not too much. Plus trying to figure out how to kill unit X with as few troops as possible so he doesn’t level up and heal was a nice tactical challenge.

Orcs were another complication. Fortunately there’s a proper warning, so I was not caught by surprise. I even managed to kill their leader (though I didn’t need to).

The only thing that disappointed me a little bit was what happened to Garak. I had read about him turning undead and was waiting to see how it happens, but it never did, to my disappointment – he just died when I killed the second undead leader. Turned out I finished too quickly (in just 10 turns) and so the whole possession thing never triggered. Not that I mind, but the whole thing seemed a bit rushed. Maybe the dialog could be expanded a bit?


6) Do you think the scenario's WML is clear and commented well enough? If not which part would you like to see improved?
Because it’s so long it’s a bit hard to keep track of where each part starts and ends. Also, one part gave me the impression Garak is supposed to get Steadfast, Berserk and Magical, but he didn’t – in my case he got only fire damage and steadfast (though I didn’t even notice the latter until I watched the replay), and lost his bow. But apart from that it’s pretty well-documented.
Attachments
UtBS-Нощно_безпокойст..._повторение.gz
(39.59 KiB) Downloaded 406 times
You are a Dark Adept: You immerse yourself in the dark arts... potentially with great rewards...

User avatar
GagarinGambit
Posts: 51
Joined: February 2nd, 2011, 12:36 pm

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

Post by GagarinGambit » March 19th, 2011, 4:00 pm

1) What version and difficulty level did you play the scenario on? Please do not submit feedback from pre 1.4.
Most difficult, 1.8.4

2) Do you think the difficulty is adequate to the level? If not describe the issue that made the scenario to easy/hard.
Yes, it's just fine. It's challenging, but if you play to the best of your ability you can win during your first play, and lose none or few villages.

3) Was there any event that caused you to almost instantly loose, or made the scenario unplayable without reload?
Other than extreme bad luck when I attacked one of the leaders, none.

4) Do you like the storyline and the dialogues? If not what part/character lags behind or what would you like changed?
I did, what I wrote about the previous two scenarios seems to be the case for the entire campaign.

5) Do you think the scenario was fun? Please write down some thoughts about gameplay, mood etc.
Just like the previous scenarios, I love the rpg elements, the modified rules, the distinct goals and strategies required, the numerous scripted events, and the fact that each scenario is unique in one way or the other. I'm also satisfied with the difficulty level. This turns out to be the best campaign I've played so far (DiD being the second best). It's good to see Wesnoth used in such creative way, and I hope to find more campaigns like this.

6) Do you think the scenario's WML is clear and commented well enough? If not which part would you like to see improved?
I'm getting in the habit of having a look after I win the scenario, in order to see what events I missed. I is well commented, so I have no difficulty understanding what's other events could have happened and when.
Linux. Space technology.

TheCripple
Posts: 103
Joined: March 19th, 2011, 3:30 am

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

Post by TheCripple » March 24th, 2011, 6:26 pm

Content Feedback wrote: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 loose, 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.
Optional
6) Do you think the scenario's WML is clear and commented well enough? If not which part would you like to see improved?
1)1.9.4, Easy
2) Its about as difficult as it should be, maybe even slightly easier. Holding the villages near the beginning was the hardest part, killing the undead commanders was easy and I only had to delay the orcs for a single turn to completely finish doing so.
3) No.
4) Very much so.
5) The tempo of the scenario was near ideal, the way it is built to put everyone near the action makes using your leader more dynamic than on many other missions, and in general everything works beautifully.

User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

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

Post by Pewskeepski » March 29th, 2011, 5:08 pm

(1) Difficulty, version? Challenging, 1.9.4 (141 gold)
(2) How difficult? (1-10) 7
(3) How clear? Crystal
(4) Dialog? Great, but I found a error: Nym says 'We We' in the victory dialog somewhere
(5) Challenges? Everything in general
(6) How fun? (1-10) 8
(7) Changes? Maybe tone the possessed Garak down a little. He's pretty brutal
(8) Reloads or restarts? Almost
(9) WML? Great
(10) Replay? Attached
(11) Map? Good
Attachments
UtBS-A_Stirring_in_the_Night_replay.gz
(51.41 KiB) Downloaded 350 times

podbelski
Posts: 151
Joined: June 7th, 2011, 8:35 pm

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

Post by podbelski » July 12th, 2011, 3:45 pm

1) What version and difficulty level did you play the scenario on?
1.9.6, top difficulty, 454gp, no reloads

2) Do you think the difficulty is adequate to the level?
9/10 to lose no more than 3 villages and to avoid losing valuable troops. A bit too hard. I think it's the hardest scenario I've ever played so far, I mean it remains very difficult even once I know what to do. Every turn is fully packed with action, I'm happy I'm not one of those elves :)

The success depends a lot on what units the undead recruits at the beginning, it's almost inevitable to lose more than 3 camps in a bad case. Lots of bats, wraiths and chocobones are the biggest threat to the camps IMO. I restarted 3 times to win the scenario, and 3 more times to win it the way I wanted. Last attempt, I was really lucky in dodging, about -20%, and it still was tough.

I reloaded once when my attempt to slow and assasinate the Lich failed, though it appeared killing him does not ease the rest of scenario.

Now I think it's best to beat both undead armies by turn 8 (not their leaders), and then deal with orcs, leaving two small contingents to hold off the steady stream of new undead recruits. Orcs should be (mostly) crushed when Garak is possessed, then you have to catch him, slow down and kill as well. You should decide which camps you are going to lose at the beginning, and not try to hold them if it costs even just one unit. On top of that, the attempt to hold most eastern camps might force the whole undead armies to fight you, not each other.

Finished in turn 14, 8 losses, 49 kills

5) Do you think the scenario was fun?
9/10
I was a bit annoyed trying to hold the camps, not lose too many elves and make the undead fight each other at the same time. Other than that everything is great.

Overall, the objective of not losing the camps looks somewhat inadequate. They say "no more than 6 camps", but in reality losing more than 3 makes the whole campaign tougher b/c of increased troops cost. I haven't played the rest obviously, but it's already clear for me it's better to replay this mission losing no more than 3 camps rather than find it impossible to win later b/c you can't afford the required number of units. In this sense, I think there is only one superior combo of camps you allowed to lose (see replay).

If it was easy I'd removed this increased cost thing completely, and just set a simple lose condition:
- 6 camps on easy
- 5 camps on medium
- 4 camps on hard

The replay is attached, though it might glitch (sometimes)
Attachments
UtBS-A_Stirring_in_the_Night_replay.gz
(51.33 KiB) Downloaded 349 times

User avatar
Maiklas3000
Posts: 532
Joined: June 23rd, 2010, 10:43 am

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

Post by Maiklas3000 » July 20th, 2011, 1:52 pm

1) Version and difficulty? 1.9.7, nightmare
2) Properly difficult? Yes, very difficult, a "nightmare". Start is too difficult (see #3.)
3) Losing events? Yes, many losses, usually on one of the first turns, restarting from start each time. On first contact with the enemy in the southeast, I had to face down three Chocobones and a Draug in a permanent night with a handful of loyal and critical troops. Game over, man, game over. Please limit Chocobone recruitment to maximum 1 or eliminate them entirely. In my final winning game, by random chance there were no Chocobones... coincidence? I think not!

4) Storyline and dialogues? Very good.

The stuff about losing tents making future scenarios harder is not clear. I lost one tent temporarily (and intentionally, falling back to a better defensive line), but I didn't realize that it would have a consequence for all scenarios to come. Shouldn't the undead trash the tent, changing the graphic to a burnt out village? Either that, or have the village disappear once you recapture it from the undead, and give a line of supporting dialog. ("Our encampment is gone. All support personnel killed, all food spoiled, nothing here but death.") Anyway, that was the only tent I lost, which seems pretty good.

5) Fun, gameplay, mood? This is a stupendously great scenario. The orcs are a great idea to stress the player just when things might be getting under control.

I didn't like that when a unit was killed and "raised" from the dead, it teleported across the battlefield. Same goes for Garak.

I second the criticism of one of the posters above, in that it doesn't feel like you're in the middle of a battle between two undead armies. Maybe start a cluster of 6 undead in the east between the undead camps, 3 undead from each camp. They could start wounded as well.

I don't like when scenarios muck with the time scale. You have your own two sun thing for this campaign, and that's fine, but it should be consistent. If you must have permanent night for this scenario, then I suggest you make it clear that the undead leaders are casting a sphere of darkness for miles around.

I'm glad I didn't listen to the walkthrough and advanced a dextrous Archer to Sharpshooter. Not only could he do some damage to ghosts in the previous scenario, but this time he got to sit in torchlight and do up 55 points of unadjusted damage with a high hit chance. Wraiths have 50% pierce resistance, but how else are you going to kill them? (With the mage, yes, but she was on the other side of the battlefield.) The Sharpshooter also helped deal with the high defense of the castle hexes.

Another interesting thing was just how useful the Ranger was with backstab, especially when paired with a skirmisher and a unit with "slow." It may have made the difference between victory and defeat, as the battle against the orcs was in serious trouble until a single Ranger backstabbed them all to death. I should rename him Chuck (Norris.) Perhaps UtBS Rangers are too good?

6) WML? Very well commented.
Attachments
UtBS-A_Stirring_in_the_Night_replay.gz
(51.14 KiB) Downloaded 329 times

User avatar
flammstrudel
Posts: 74
Joined: April 13th, 2013, 9:08 pm

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

Post by flammstrudel » April 13th, 2013, 9:18 pm

1) What version and difficulty level did you play the scenario on? Please do not submit feedback from pre 1.4.
1.10.2 - medium

2) Do you think the difficulty is adequate to the level? If not describe the issue that made the scenario to easy/hard.
5-7/10 I needed a few tries to figure things out (always started at turn 1). The difficulty of the scenario depends highly on the AI's unit roster. The lich in south always goes full on skeleton mode, pretty easy to deal with. The northern guy likes to use ghouls and zombies – also easy as they are low damage units and slow. However sometimes he recruites only bats and lots of ghosts, all of them are usually almost leveled so they get one attack for free. Either you kill them with one volley or they advance to the next level and heal. Except the mage you have no hard counter for them (archers can do it in a pinch though). If you get a bit unlucky you might face several shadows and once they decide to capture your exposed inner villages and start to spawn undead fodder behind your healers and weakend troops things can get out of hand rather fast. It was fun nevertheless and it's only a 7/10 if you try to keep almost all bases and all important troops alife and well leveled up.
It just doesn't feel right having such a huge gap in the gameplay. Maybe the northern boss should always spawn a fixed amount of both unit types.

3) Was there any event that caused you to almost instantly loose, or made the scenario unplayable without reload?
I sacrificed the loyal desert captain thinking “Ah what the heck - he wants to die anyway”. That was pretty stupid.

4) Do you like the storyline and the dialogues? If not what part/character lags behind or what would you like changed?
That desert captain. He survived space slimes and a cosmic impact. His community is in a dire situation. He is well-trained and experienced warrior. And all of a sudden he develops a deathwish, throws away his bow and wants to suicide charge in the first random undead boss available. That is ridiculously unconvincing. And wasn't the druid's ritual supposed to grant him something, attack bonus, the “fearless” trait or whatever? Well he did't get anything.
Otherwise the dialogues were good, especially verbal clash between the undead masters.

5) Do you think the scenario was fun? Please write down some thoughts about gameplay, mood etc.
9/10 It was fun. It really, really was. I had a feeling it might be better to rush things, which proved to be right. The orc's arrival was still surprising. The fear to get crushed between three armies, the constant tension, it was great. The only thing amiss was the clash between the two undead fractions. Each one sent one unit to the eastern edge of the map where they were pecking away at each other. The feeling of being cought between the lines didn't really arise.

User avatar
rmj
Posts: 253
Joined: July 4th, 2010, 5:21 am

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

Post by rmj » May 12th, 2013, 4:54 am

1.11.2 Easiest level

When the undead capture a village, there is a statement to the effect that corpses are being revived. I managed to prevent the undead from taking any village and when the orcs took a village, that same statement about corpses was given. No corpse appeared, however.

Although the two undead leaders are supposed to be fighting each other, there was not a single clash between them, even though I left room for the enemy units to move toward each other.
rmj

User avatar
Maiklas3000
Posts: 532
Joined: June 23rd, 2010, 10:43 am

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

Post by Maiklas3000 » May 27th, 2014, 2:21 pm

1) Level, version, gold? Nightmare, 1.11.12 and 1.11.15, 477 starting gold.
2) Adequately difficult? Yes, if you recruit 2 castles worth of troops, then it is the right level of challenge (8 or 9/10 on nightmare). 477 starting gold seems a bit ridiculous. 240 gold would be plenty. Another problem is that this is too much of a jump in difficulty from the first two scenarios, if you only recruit 2 castles worth. The first two scenarios need to be made harder, which should help reduce the gold.
3) Reloads? I did have some normal losses, restarting from start, but also the scenario starts with about 1 to 4 units sitting on villages, so I restart if I get only one free unit. Why not just standardize (hard code) the starting units or at least their number?
4) Dialog? Good. I'm cool with Garak wanting to die due to a dream, but it doesn't make sense to me that you lose if he dies, but he dies after you win. I think this is what is known as a "script zombie" in the film industry. That is, changes were made without updating everything, I think. It would be much better if the requirement for his survival were removed, maybe with Garak doing a better job of reassuring everyone that it is his destiny. I also think his dialog should be moved to the first turn, so that Zhul is not blessing him from across the battlefield.
5) Fun? Yes, it's fun. I like scenarios that seem impossible but are not if you fight well. Thank you for removing the Chocobones. However, this makes it less likely that undead from the different camps will fight each other. I think you'd need both a road between the undead castles and very little player gold to make it likely that they will fight each other.
Attachments
UtBS-A_Stirring_in_the_Night_replay.gz
(54.54 KiB) Downloaded 255 times

User avatar
Alarantalara
Art Contributor
Posts: 782
Joined: April 23rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Canada

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

Post by Alarantalara » May 29th, 2014, 2:33 am

Maiklas3000 wrote: 4) Dialog? Good. I'm cool with Garak wanting to die due to a dream, but it doesn't make sense to me that you lose if he dies, but he dies after you win. I think this is what is known as a "script zombie" in the film industry. That is, changes were made without updating everything, I think. It would be much better if the requirement for his survival were removed, maybe with Garak doing a better job of reassuring everyone that it is his destiny. I also think his dialog should be moved to the first turn, so that Zhul is not blessing him from across the battlefield.
As far as I can tell, he was originally intended able to die earlier in the scenario. If you read through the insane amount of WML in this scenario there is dialog to cover his early death already written. I suspect his survival became required because it avoided bugs with the turn 12 events. At any rate, I've been slowly restoring all of the lost dialog as I find it, and this is the next big target. I do need to make sure I don't break anything in the process.

User avatar
nuorc
Forum Regular
Posts: 569
Joined: September 3rd, 2009, 2:25 pm
Location: Barag Gor

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

Post by nuorc » March 1st, 2015, 1:52 pm

1) What version and difficulty level did you play the scenario on?
1.12.1, Medium

2) Do you think the difficulty is adequate to the level?
Yes.

3) Was there any event that caused you to almost instantly loose, or made the scenario unplayable without reload?
No.

4) Do you like the storyline and the dialogues?
No, I didn't particularly appreciate nor understand what happened with Garak; but I guess that's just tough luck. ;)

5) Do you think the scenario was fun? Please write down some thoughts about gameplay, mood etc.
Yes, it was a nice tactical challenge.

Objectives: I believe the '(or)' should go behind the turn counter, preferably underneath it between the two bullet points.

Edit:I think it should be explained further in the objectives that lost villages will count permanently as lost; I thought it meant 'at the same time' and it could've had an enormous impact on my strategy.

The wounded scout should have 1 hp left instead of dropping dead with full health.

When finally victorious, Zhul says 'only ten encampments remain...' while I have 12/12.
Last edited by nuorc on March 1st, 2015, 8:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I have a cunning plan.

User avatar
Alarantalara
Art Contributor
Posts: 782
Joined: April 23rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Canada

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

Post by Alarantalara » March 1st, 2015, 2:06 pm

It doesn't matter if you regain the encampment, if you lose it even temporarily it counts as gone for good.
"You lose control (even temporarily) of more than 6 villages"

Post Reply