Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Discussion and development of scenarios and campaigns for the game.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

koan
Translator
Posts: 5
Joined: May 29th, 2010, 6:23 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by koan » December 28th, 2010, 9:11 am

Luke the Flaming wrote:I'll try to look what's wrong with the Campfires.
Let me know if you need more information, such as replays or other specifics.
Luke the Flaming wrote:Have a great new year! :)
Happy New Year to you, too!

User avatar
Luke the Flaming
Posts: 196
Joined: October 18th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Luke the Flaming » December 29th, 2010, 12:57 pm

koan wrote:
Luke the Flaming wrote:I'll try to look what's wrong with the Campfires.
Let me know if you need more information, such as replays or other specifics.
If you had a save file (not replay) of any turn, I'd gladly look into it.
At a quick glance, the campfires seems to work fine (at "easy" difficulty there is a 25% chance that each of them does not lose HPs after both Disciples are dead, but you seem to have experienced a perennial non-loss), so it must be something I'm overlooking...
O, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

koan
Translator
Posts: 5
Joined: May 29th, 2010, 6:23 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by koan » December 29th, 2010, 1:37 pm

Luke the Flaming wrote:but you seem to have experienced a perennial non-loss), so it must be something I'm overlooking...
Hm I reloaded the game and tried a few turns, and where I previously thought that the campfires didn't lose any hitpoints (what the explanation text describes as "run out of combustible"), they now seem to do. But I noticed now that the maximum hit points decrease together with the actual hit points, and that's why I previously thought they didn't lose any hit points: I always saw N/N instead of M/N (with M < N) and didn't remember the number. Wouldn't it be less confusing if only the actual hit points decrease?

Anyway, sorry for wasting your time looking into it, as the bug was in my head and not in your excellent campaign :-)

User avatar
Luke the Flaming
Posts: 196
Joined: October 18th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Luke the Flaming » December 29th, 2010, 10:18 pm

Reducing the max HPs along with the current total was easier (for me at that time) to write (to avoid unwanted effects like shamans healing the campfires, etc.) and since it works fine, I'm not going to try to modify it now (with the risk of "breaking" something). ;)

Don't worry for the "false bug", after all it has been quite easy to "fix" it. :D
O, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

klein_atuin
Posts: 22
Joined: March 28th, 2009, 1:42 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by klein_atuin » April 1st, 2011, 12:20 pm

Since i liked the campaign the first time i just started it again on 'hard'. Don't stand a chance to win "Underground" on that level since although the time given is 42 rounds, actually you have 32 only. Either you've reached the exit by that time or simply get dropped to hell for the cave hasn't any ground left.
Did i miss any clou to slow down the loss of ground? Otherwise i shall hope that's a bug...

User avatar
Luke the Flaming
Posts: 196
Joined: October 18th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Luke the Flaming » April 1st, 2011, 5:12 pm

klein_atuin wrote:Since i liked the campaign the first time i just started it again on 'hard'. Don't stand a chance to win "Underground" on that level since although the time given is 42 rounds, actually you have 32 only. Either you've reached the exit by that time or simply get dropped to hell for the cave hasn't any ground left.
Did i miss any clou to slow down the loss of ground? Otherwise i shall hope that's a bug...
I've played the whole campaign a couple of times on "hard", so I know it is feasible.
Of course (as all campaigns on "hard") it supposes you are familiar with the scenario (as you are) and hence able to plan the best route.

A few notes:
-) the amount of collapsing tiles isn't fixed, it has a small variance (if you are really unlucky, you could effectively get a few turns less than average; you should still be able to do it... barely);
-) it is a difficult scenario, you may have to sacrifice some troops (i.e. account for their demise), yet you need the power (and possibily the healing skills) of some advanced units ...keep it in mind when recruiting/recalling (it may be hard to find the right balance);
-) advancing is more important than defeating enemies... try to kill only those blocking the path. Use villages for a quick healing and do not mind if they are taken by foes (their income is going to last for a few turns only, in any case). Consider sending a few "doomed" units (level 1s recruited ad hoc) to distract some enemies and keep them busy until the abyss swallows them all;
-) if you are really despaired, remember that you've only to face 2 of the 3 "dwarven quests", so you may play the campaign skipping this scenario.

It is really a tough scenario on "hard", but no bug infests it! ;)
Surpassing it will feel sweet, when you manage to do it.

P.S. I am really glad that you liked the campaign! I wish you even more fun with it. :)
O, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

klein_atuin
Posts: 22
Joined: March 28th, 2009, 1:42 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by klein_atuin » April 2nd, 2011, 9:03 am

Thx for the reply. Did the scenario yesterday after i started it completely new as the first of the quests instead as second. Don't know whether that may influence the settings (speed of ground vanishing) but i got some more rounds this time while i only needed 32 - but only with replays at one point which i don't like too much.

Some random elements are fine for me, but again this is a question of how much - with effectively 10 rounds less i find it hardly possible to reach through. there's not even time to recruit a second time with the elves and therefor little option for tactical variants like sending distracting units anywhere.

In short: maybe such random Settings, completely unbiased by the player, shouldn't have _such_ a large influence on ones chances - it's pretty frustrating to play 30 rounds to find you have no chance any more, just because the RNG rolled one single dice on the scenario start.
Guess a mininum number of really playable rounds of about 36 would still leave it tough enough.
And still i'd feel kind of betrayed when 42 rounds are shown while only 36 are really given...

User avatar
Luke the Flaming
Posts: 196
Joined: October 18th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Luke the Flaming » April 2nd, 2011, 11:42 am

klein_atuin wrote:Thx for the reply.
My pleasure. :)
klein_atuin wrote:Did the scenario yesterday after i started it completely new as the first of the quests instead as second. Don't know whether that may influence the settings (speed of ground vanishing)
No influence at all.
klein_atuin wrote:Some random elements are fine for me, but again this is a question of how much
I agree.
I wanted to avoid a fixed number of crumbling tiles to negate "gamey" tactics. The current solution gives to the scenario the uncertainity and feel of urgency ("run ,run!") that I wanted it to have.
In the end it is a matter of tastes. :)
klein_atuin wrote:In short: maybe such random Settings, completely unbiased by the player, shouldn't have _such_ a large influence on ones chances .
I do not think it has.
The "virtual die" rolled for the abyss is (on hard) "1,1,2,2,2,3"... on 30 rolls you will be very close to the average expected value most of the times (the exceptions aren't more likely than your Archamage failing all his four magical attacks or such other events that are bound to happen in a game like Wesnoth).
klein_atuin wrote:And still i'd feel kind of betrayed when 42 rounds are shown while only 36 are really given...
After you have played the scenario once (as you should if you are playing "hard"... just as you did, in fact), it should be prety clear that the timer is not the number of turns, but the advancing edge of the abyss. You should not even look at that small number close to the flag!
Besides, you could get lucky with the abyss (i.e. it advances a bit less than average) and then why should I penalize you for that by removing those few extra turns? ;)
Besides, having a few extra turns in the timer will give you a handful of gold (at the end of the scenario) that may prove useful later. A lot of campaigns have scenarios with many more turns than needed just for that (I think I've kept the limits in many of my scenarios already quite low, in comparison).


P.S. if a single element ruins your enjoyment of the scenario, feel free to edit it! I do not take responsibility for how the balance of the whole thing will go then, but it is your game so you should enjoy your time with it! :)
O, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

klein_atuin
Posts: 22
Joined: March 28th, 2009, 1:42 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by klein_atuin » April 2nd, 2011, 1:33 pm

Luke the Flaming wrote:The current solution gives to the scenario the uncertainity and feel of urgency ("run ,run!") that I wanted it to have.
Definitely. And just don't get me wrong, that far it's pretty fine that way.
Luke the Flaming wrote:
klein_atuin wrote:shouldn't have _such_ a large influence on ones chances .
I do not think it has.
I didn't mean the chances but the extent of a bad roll's effect. Given Wesnoth would surely be Murphy's favorite game i trustfully rely on the worst case happening (but that'll lead to a well known RNG-discussion not belonging here). What i asked for was simply to keep the difference between that worst case and a lucky draw a little smaller so it wouldn't result in forcing players to start the scenario over and over until finally they stand on firm ground.
It's all matters of taste like You said - guess i'd like it best, if the total number of rounds until the exit gets cut off remains constant and the number of tiles vanishing only varies from round to round. Happy if you liked the idea, if not...just your decision.
Luke the Flaming wrote:You should not even look at that small number close to the flag!
Well - first: sure didn't ask for reducing the number of rounds in general ;)
It might just be nice, to give the correct information about the time remaining. Just a question of what information one can trust. That "small number" is a basic in playing Wesnoth. Any other "timer" may make it harder or easier to win. Even additional limitations due to concrete actions (like 'save xy before round 5') are fine if clearly given. But i can't help it, to 'outnumber' the total amount of rounds without correcting that small number still feels like being intentionally misleaded.

But... after stressing your nerve three times now i shall stop arguing and just go on playing. And not forget to thank You for the nice campaign again.

User avatar
Luke the Flaming
Posts: 196
Joined: October 18th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Luke the Flaming » April 2nd, 2011, 5:36 pm

klein_atuin wrote:But... after stressing your nerve three times now i shall stop arguing and just go on playing. And not forget to thank You for the nice campaign again.
No stress here.
Some polite discussion about a game we both like is just "collateral fun" caused by the game itself.

Thanks for the nice words ...and have fun with the game!
O, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

Konrad2
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2067
Joined: November 24th, 2010, 6:30 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Konrad2 » October 12th, 2019, 9:18 pm

First of all. Thanks Adamant14 for porting this. :D

EDIT:
S1
charcteristic -> characteristic

S2
trials of the goblins -> trail(s)

Post Reply