A Vision Blinded (15 scenarios, all complete and working)

[dalan94]

Just read the last three pages of this thread, and you will find a lot of discussion about the difficulty of that scenario.
A lot of thoughts and questions.

Sorry I had not seen this

I've completed scenario 11 and thought about it a few days and determined I really liked it because of it's difficulty. I think all campaigns should have at least one really tough scenario in it (including intermediate difficulty campaigns). These are the ones we tend to remember.

I agree with you.

Scenario 11 is difficult but doable (not discouraging) and that's the trick. It forces you to accept some losses and to really concentrate on strategy. I finished the scenario on normal with the 3 heroes and 2 level 3 elves. I only lost a half dozen or so high level units and plenty of fodder. It help that I had a huge gold bonus from the previous scenario (easily doable in 20/40 turns). I'm not sure if this set up was intentionally, but it helps greatly for this scenario.

Here I do not agree. The first time I've played this scenario I was discouraged and I stopped this campaign for a while whereas I played the beginning in one go. Why ? Because in some campaign if you lose many units in a level, the next level would be very difficult because we need level 3. So lose 3/4 of your high level can discourage some people (in any case that discouraged me).

Hey, I'm glad to hear that.
That is great.

I started but I don't know how long it will take.

[Chief_Chasso]

The first time I've played this scenario I was discouraged and I stopped this campaign for a while whereas I played the beginning in one go.

But were you discouraged? Sounds to me you got complacent and was shocked out of your comfort zone. You had a cakewalk from the beginning then all of a sudden you were faced with a real challenge. I don't call that being discouraged. I call it good game design. Here's why- you came back.

You stopped for awhile, but came back. And that's the important thing (we need you back). Same as me, but I wasn't discouraged, just the opposite. I was determined to beat this legendary* tough scenario. Over the course of a few days, even away from my computer, I was thinking of possibly strategies, etc. Eventually, I did beat it and I'm a better player for it. And that's good game design (doable, but not discouraging). You have to come back to the game even after seemingly impossible challenges, determined to overcome them. If you're discouraged, you don't come back.

Because in some campaign if you lose many units in a level, the next level would be very difficult because we need level 3.

Say's who? Level 3's just sit on your recall list (at least for me, for the most part) I prefer level 2's, less costly and can be just as effective in most situations. Don't over rely on level 3's. Plus you have time to rebuild your army.

So lose 3/4 of your high level can discourage some people (in any case that discouraged me).

Don't play EI Evacuation with that mindset.

Sorry for the rant... but that's how I feel. I will say that I think it's really cool you're undertaking the translating task. I gotta chalk that up to good game design.

*I call it legendary, because that's what it is in my own mind.

[Adamant14]

Somebody here who wants to add a review for AVB to this page: Player Reviews?

[dalan94]

But were you discouraged? Sounds to me you got complacent and was shocked out of your comfort zone. You had a cakewalk from the beginning then all of a sudden you were faced with a real challenge. I don't call that being discouraged. I call it good game design. Here's why- you came back.

Maybe, but I don't think that everybody think like that. And that's the problem.

You stopped for awhile, but came back. And that's the important thing (we need you back). Same as me, but I wasn't discouraged, just the opposite. I was determined to beat this legendary* tough scenario. Over the course of a few days, even away from my computer, I was thinking of possibly strategies, etc. Eventually, I did beat it and I'm a better player for it. And that's good game design (doable, but not discouraging). You have to come back to the game even after seemingly impossible challenges, determined to overcome them. If you're discouraged, you don't come back.

If you think that this scenario is really difficult, some people who are yet not very good might not succeed whereas the rest of the campaign is easy...
But for me, I find that when you know that it is normal to loose many units, there is not big problem. I had not recruit all my high level and I win with some units...
And I repeat, you can be discouraged...

Say's who? Level 3's just sit on your recall list (at least for me, for the most part) I prefer level 2's, less costly and can be just as effective in most situations. Don't over rely on level 3's. Plus you have time to rebuild your army.

I play also with level 3 because they are really strong and not so expensive (one gold a round more expensive). I agree that I play with level 2 because that build an army. But we mustn't play the same campaign. I often play campaign with a few gold and few unit. And in this campaign, it is useless to have many high level because you cannot use them all together. Worst it is more difficult when you use level 2...
I think it is only habit, and that's not our problem.

Don't play EI Evacuation with that mindset.

I don't know this campaign but if I know that it is normal to loose a lot of units there is no problem. The problem here is that we are not prepare and use to it.

Sorry for the rant... but that's how I feel. I will say that I think it's really cool you're undertaking the translating task. I gotta chalk that up to good game design.

Sorry, I don't know what you mean.

Somebody here who wants to add a review for AVB to this page: Player Reviews?

I will do it, but not now because I have no time.

[Chief_Chasso]

Question:
What do you think about scenario "13_For_Auld_Lang_Syne"
To find and rescue the Wose leader is pretty hard, it would be hard enough only to rescue him.
So I consider to remove the Fog of War from this map/scenario, but I am not sure.
I am not the origin author, and I don't want to make to big changes.
Can you tell me what you think about it?

I had to go back and refresh my memory on this one...

You don't have to find the Wose leader, do you? The Wose leader's keep is clear of fog where as the remainder of the map is shrouded in fog. I would suggest you keep the Fog of War intact as is (but that's just my opinion). As far as rescuing him, he pretty much held his own when I played.

Edit: Sorry forgot to mention on other topic- I think the map for scenario 08_Disobedience can use some work (the one with the zig-zag path through the mountains). It's kind of bland and an overuse of the rough hills hex tile (IMHO). I would like to see it more livelier or more natural looking. I know you're not the original author, but could I make some recommendations to change this map? I would be happy to "touch up" this map and submit it for consideration.

[Adamant14]

You don't have to find the Wose leader, do you?

No, but it is much easier to protect a unit that you can see.

The Wose leader's keep is clear of fog where as the remainder of the map is shrouded in fog.

The Wose leader is covered by fog until the player reach him with a unit.

As far as rescuing him, he pretty much held his own when I played.

I can not second that. My experience says he needs urgently help, especially on Hard difficulty.

I would suggest you keep the Fog of War intact as is (but that's just my opinion).

The latest version available on the server contains this scenario without Fog of War.
But if you folks don't like this change, then I can change it back easily.

Edit: Sorry forgot to mention on other topic- I think the map for scenario 08_Disobedience can use some work (the one with the zig-zag path through the mountains). It's kind of bland and an overuse of the rough hills hex tile (IMHO). I would like to see it more livelier or more natural looking. I know you're not the original author, but could I make some recommendations to change this map? I would be happy to "touch up" this map and submit it for consideration.

Why not, this map is really quiet ugly.
Post your modified map, and I will have a look into it.

[Chief_Chasso]

Attached is my attempt to enhance the scenario 8 map. I kept the original design intent the same. I basically added in mountains and forests for color and texture. I've also changed the path slightly, making it more worn and natural looking. There still is plenty of green hill tiles for ambushing enemy units. I've tested this map out a few times and it seems to work well. Let me know what you think.

[Adamant14]

Good job.
I replaced the old map with your revised map.
I will upload it after a test play.

[gooby]

The message "These caves are not for tree-shagging elves! ..." fails to trigger in "New Mutiny". "Guard1" only works when you're playing on Easy. I made the following changes. It should be obvious where they fit in:

Code: Select all

#ifdef EASY
        [unit]
            type="Dwarvish Guardsman"
            id="Guard1"
            side="2"
            x="18"
            y="31"
            ai_special=guardian
            [modifications]
                {TRAIT_STRONG}
                {TRAIT_QUICK}
            [/modifications]
        [/unit]
        [unit]
            type="Dwarvish Guardsman"
            id="Guard2"
            side="2"
            x="20"
            y="32"
            ai_special=guardian
            [modifications]
                {TRAIT_QUICK}
                {TRAIT_INTELLIGENT}
            [/modifications]
        [/unit]
#endif

#ifdef NORMAL
        [unit]
            type="Dwarvish Stalwart"
            id="Guard1"
            side="2"
            x="18"
            y="31"
            ai_special=guardian
            [modifications]
                {TRAIT_STRONG}
                {TRAIT_QUICK}
            [/modifications]
        [/unit]
        [unit]
            type="Dwarvish Stalwart"
            id="Guard2"
            side="2"
            x="20"
            y="32"
            ai_special=guardian
            [modifications]
                {TRAIT_QUICK}
                {TRAIT_INTELLIGENT}
            [/modifications]
        [/unit]
#endif

#ifdef HARD
        [unit]
            type="Dwarvish Stalwart"
            id="Guard1"
            side="2"
            x="18"
            y="31"
            ai_special=guardian
            [modifications]
                {TRAIT_STRONG}
                {TRAIT_QUICK}
            [/modifications]
        [/unit]
        [unit]
            type="Dwarvish Stalwart"
            id="Guard2"
            user_team_name= _ "Darffrel"
            side="2"
            x="20"
            y="32"
            ai_special=guardian
            [modifications]
                {TRAIT_QUICK}
                {TRAIT_INTELLIGENT}
            [/modifications]
        [/unit]
        [unit]
            type="Dwarvish Steelclad"
            id="Guard3"
            user_team_name= _ "Derffrel"
            side="2"
            x="16"
            y="32"
            ai_special=guardian
            [modifications]
                {TRAIT_STRONG}
                {TRAIT_LOYAL}
            [/modifications]
        [/unit]
        [unit]
            type="Dwarvish Steelclad"
            id="Guard4"
            user_team_name= _ "Dyrffrel"
            side="2"
            x="18"
            y="33"
            ai_special=guardian
            [modifications]
                {TRAIT_LOYAL}
                {TRAIT_RESILIENT}
            [/modifications]
        [/unit]
#endif

[Adamant14]

@ gooby:
You are completely right.
This will be fixed with the next update.
Thank you gooby.

@ Chief_Chasso:
I updated today, and the new version includes your map.

[gooby]

@ gooby:
You are completely right.
This will be fixed with the next update.
Thank you gooby.

Glad to be working with you again in some capacity. I only wish I had the time to do more.

Good job.
I replaced the old map with your revised map.
I will upload it after a test play.

I'm getting the message that "Ggf" is an invalid tile. I found more info on this here:

http://forums.wesnoth.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=37489

I am indeed running 1.11. The map now works since I replaced every instance of "Ggf" with "Gg^Efm".

[Adamant14]

I'm getting the message that "Ggf" is an invalid tile.
I am indeed running 1.11.

Thank you for the report gooby.
But strange, I can not reproduce the error.
I tested the new version (AVB version 1.0.1) with BfW 1.11.0 and BfW 1.11.2, and everything works fine for me.
Can you please tell me which AVB version you have installed?
Which BfW version you use?
And do you use Windows?

[Chief_Chasso]

@ Chief_Chasso:
I updated today, and the new version includes your map.

Thanks Adamant14. I'm glad you decided to use it.

[gooby]

I'm getting the message that "Ggf" is an invalid tile.
I am indeed running 1.11.

Thank you for the report gooby.
But strange, I can not reproduce the error.
I tested the new version (AVB version 1.0.1) with BfW 1.11.0 and BfW 1.11.2, and everything works fine for me.
Can you please tell me which AVB version you have installed?
Which BfW version you use?
And do you use Windows?

I use 1.11.2, compiled from source, on Ubuntu.

Anyhow, "And the River Ran Red" wiped out all my gold. (Was able to win handily once I gave myself 200 extra gold. )

EDIT - In "Auld Lang Syne", Diludryen issues the message from the second scenario: "I die, but with honour. Avenge me!" rather than what was planned in "Auld Lang Syne". Very strange!

[Adamant14]

Anyhow, "And the River Ran Red" wiped out all my gold. (Was able to win handily once I gave myself 200 extra gold. )

You think it is still too hard, though I reduced already the enemies gold?

In "Auld Lang Syne", Diludryen issues the message from the second scenario: "I die, but with honour. Avenge me!" rather than what was planned in "Auld Lang Syne". Very strange!

Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean.
Can you please explain what you exactly mean?
EDIT:
I understand now what you mean.
I moved all death-messages in a separate folder, and messed up that part.
It will be fixed with the next update.
Thank you for pointing this out.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

I'm getting the message that "Ggf" is an invalid tile.
I am indeed running 1.11.

Thank you for the report gooby.
But strange, I can not reproduce the error.
I tested the new version (AVB version 1.0.1) with BfW 1.11.0 and BfW 1.11.2, and everything works fine for me.
Can you please tell me which AVB version you have installed?
Which BfW version you use?
And do you use Windows?

I use 1.11.2, compiled from source, on Ubuntu.

@ gooby:
Strange.
Using BfW 1.11.2, AVB runs without any problem on my machine.
I have no idea what's the problem (since I can not reproduce it)


@ Chief_Chasso:
Can you please test the new AVB version (version 1.0.1) on BfW 1.11.2 for me?
And tell me if you have any problems?

@ all:
Please tell me about your experience.
Does AVB version 1.0.1 run on your engine or not?
And if not, then please post me your stderr file


EDIT 2:
I've updated AVB
Now the latest AVB version is 1.0.2