Burning Souls

Discussion and development of scenarios and campaigns for the game.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

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

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Pewskeepski »

Version 0.5 is on the add-on server! It includes - You guessed it - scenario 5, Which is probably one of the most intense talk-only scenarios ever :D

Feedback is welcome. So, come on, say what you think. Critisism will help me fix what needs to be fixed, And support will keep me devoted.
User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Pewskeepski »

At long last, Burning Souls version 0.6 is on the add-on server! Scenario 6 took so long because I kept changing it around. But now I've got it the way I want it, It's stable, It's fun (IMO), And it's what everybody has been waiting for right?( :roll: ) No, Not really. (I wish someone would give me feedback, the rest of the campaigns sure get a lot) :(
User avatar
Mountain_King
Translator
Posts: 569
Joined: May 31st, 2010, 7:54 pm

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Mountain_King »

You'll probably get some feedback once the campaign is complete. I had the same problem (no feedback) until my campaign was scenario-complete. Then, lo and behold, I got some feedback. I'm sure you'll start getting some then. I know I won't have a chance to play through and give feedback until after the next couple weeks are over at least (getting swamped by schoolwork). Hope this helps.
Best Regards,
Mountain_King
Projects: Ice Age Fun, Japhel's Journey (same link), Shameless Crossover Excuse (Maintainer), and Age of Dinosaurs!
Is cothabhálach an aistriúcháin Gaeilge mé.
EXTERMINATE!!!!
User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Pewskeepski »

Okay, I'll make the rest of the scenarios, then I'll release it again. Thanks :)
User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Pewskeepski »

I've finished all of the scenarios! Burning Souls 1.1 is on the add-on server!

The campaign should be fully playable from beginning to end. I have only tested it on the "Normal" difficulty because I can't beat it on any of the others, (Not sure if that's a good thing, but we shall see :mrgreen: ) So I could really use feedback from anybody who has played it on "Challenging" or "Difficult."

Oh, btw, I discovered that scenario 6 was unplayable in the old version and I fixed it now.
User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Pewskeepski »

... :cry:

Should I post this campaign on the add-on feedback thread? I would've liked to see other people play it first, but I guess they don't want to tell me if it's bug free or buggy. (I hope the fact that '1.9' is in the title has nothing to do with it) Would posting it the feedback thread be a good idea?
Rowanthepreacher
Posts: 126
Joined: March 3rd, 2011, 7:14 pm

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Rowanthepreacher »

Sorry, I've been avoiding it, since I can't stand drakes. If you're really not getting any of feedback you so richly deserve, I'll play through it and give my thoughts -bias.

EDIT:
Language feedback:
The language is a bit off. for instance, the phrase "...the drakes killed earlier was indeed graced by the presence of a Kai's son. "Indeed" in such a sentence only really makes sense if the possibility of there being a Kai's son has already been raised. The sentence "And kill the drakes." is too short. It looks and sounds wrong. Just turn the full stop before it into a comma and decapitalise the A. speaking of decapitalisation, only pronouns and new sentences begin with a capital, although titles may be capitalised at your leisure.

Witness has no h.

"Weapons crafter" in the first scenario should have a comma after it.

Ok. I'm going to stop here, because my inner grammar nazi needs to rest.

Graphics feedback:
The map for "Mysterious Raid" doesn't work.

Gameplay feedback:
You launch us directly into non-standard recruitment, without knowing when or where our troops are. Fantastic. It immediately gripped my attention, because it's not just a standard "here's your castle, here's his, now go at it until one of you is dead". As the drakes came in dribs and drabs, it really felt like mustering a bunch of scattered warriors to face a new threat, rather than just being told that that's what we were doing by a couple lines of text. Given that gameplay is the most important part of a campaign, I think you've succeeded so far.
Last edited by Rowanthepreacher on April 3rd, 2011, 5:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mountain_King
Translator
Posts: 569
Joined: May 31st, 2010, 7:54 pm

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Mountain_King »

That's right, I did play through this. Here's some thoughts (played on the middle difficulty in 1.9.5):
First scenario was quite easy, despite being unable to recruit. Maybe you should give the lieutenant a few pikeman guards or something.
Second scenario was too much. The bats...TOO MUCH!!! The skeletons... TOO MUCH!!! The way the cave is set up means you still have many drakes way in the back before you need to escape, meaning the skeletons are triggered before you can even try and escape. Unfortunately, this was the first of several times I used debug mode to survive.
Third scenario was interesting, as was the fourth, albiet slightly cliché.
The scenario with the yetis was overdone. The yetis end up killing your allied drake, whose minions do absolutely nothing but sit in jail. The dwarves pour out endlessly, meaning even your best drakes get turned into mincemeat.
And, the skeletal dragon wasn't
Spoiler:
Overall, I felt there were too many "get to the signpost" scenarios for my taste, and too many "You didn't quite kill me" scenarios. There were several few spelling errors (mostly along the lines of too/two/to), but I didn't really pay attention to those. The story wasn't bad, and most of the maps weren't either.

Best Regards,
Mountain_King
Projects: Ice Age Fun, Japhel's Journey (same link), Shameless Crossover Excuse (Maintainer), and Age of Dinosaurs!
Is cothabhálach an aistriúcháin Gaeilge mé.
EXTERMINATE!!!!
Rowanthepreacher
Posts: 126
Joined: March 3rd, 2011, 7:14 pm

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Rowanthepreacher »

Ok, I've got some more thoughts, having tried to play the second scenario. All melee units are utterly crap. Worse than crap, since they use up gold. Unfortunately, the units with ranged attacks aren't great, except drake burners, which I suspect may be the only unit worth having. All of your foes have drain, enhanced by the darkness and on 60-70% hit chance, because drakes have such shite defences. The bats weren't too bad. I fought through them without too much difficulty by switching drakes in and out, but the ghosts are doing 6-3 with 70% to-hit. This is ludicrous.
User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Pewskeepski »

Thanks for the feedback :D
Rowanthepreacher wrote:Language feedback:
The language is a bit off. for instance, the phrase "...the drakes killed earlier was indeed graced by the presence of a Kai's son. "Indeed" in such a sentence only really makes sense if the possibility of there being a Kai's son has already been raised. The sentence "And kill the drakes." is too short. It looks and sounds wrong. Just turn the full stop before it into a comma and decapitalise the A. speaking of decapitalisation, only pronouns and new sentences begin with a capital, although titles may be capitalised at your leisure.

Witness has no h.

"Weapons crafter" in the first scenario should have a comma after it.
I'm not good at dialog so thanks for pointing out the errors. I'll fix them soon :)
Rowanthepreacher wrote:Graphics feedback:
The map for "Mysterious Raid" doesn't work.
I guess you mean the villages and the mountains look different because they're randomly generated. I made it have it's own map purely because of laziness. I didn't want to have to use coding to make the water villages not spawn drakes, but I'll look into it now :mrgreen:
Rowanthepreacher wrote:Gameplay feedback:
You launch us directly into non-standard recruitment, without knowing when or where our troops are. Fantastic. It immediately gripped my attention, because it's not just a standard "here's your castle, here's his, now go at it until one of you is dead". As the drakes came in dribs and drabs, it really felt like mustering a bunch of scattered warriors to face a new threat, rather than just being told that that's what we were doing by a couple lines of text. Given that gameplay is the most important part of a campaign, I think you've succeeded so far.
Thanks, glad you liked it :)
Mountain_King wrote:First scenario was quite easy, despite being unable to recruit. Maybe you should give the lieutenant a few pikeman guards or something.
Hmm... I think I'll put Spearmen on easy, Pikemen on normal, and Javelineers on hard.
Mountain_King wrote:Second scenario was too much. The bats...TOO MUCH!!! The skeletons... TOO MUCH!!! The way the cave is set up means you still have many drakes way in the back before you need to escape, meaning the skeletons are triggered before you can even try and escape. Unfortunately, this was the first of several times I used debug mode to survive.
I always thought this scenario was to hard. I think I'll lower the enemies, and/or put more lava which helps you because it illuminates.
Mountain_King wrote:Third scenario was interesting, as was the fourth, albiet slightly cliché.
I'm having trouble figuring out which scenario you're talking about. There are two talk only scenarios at the beginning (Scenario 2/4, and 5.) could you specify which ones.
Mountain_King wrote:The scenario with the yetis was overdone. The yetis end up killing your allied drake, whose minions do absolutely nothing but sit in jail. The dwarves pour out endlessly, meaning even your best drakes get turned into mincemeat.
Your actually not suppose to defeat the dwarves. You're suppose to basically let the yetis kill them and try to save Elik Dolhem. I think I'll make the yetis avoid the jail so they won't attack your friends until they leave. (And maybe remove a yeti?)
Mountain_King wrote:And, the skeletal dragon wasn't
Spoiler:
Overall, I felt there were too many "get to the signpost" scenarios for my taste, and too many "You didn't quite kill me" scenarios. There were several few spelling errors (mostly along the lines of too/two/to), but I didn't really pay attention to those. The story wasn't bad, and most of the maps weren't either.
Garish isn't the skeletal dragon. I thought I had something like that, though... Nope I guess I didn't :hmm:
Rowanthepreacher
Posts: 126
Joined: March 3rd, 2011, 7:14 pm

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Rowanthepreacher »

Ah, about the map: I meant that the little parchment-y map that shows up before every scenario, with the little red dots and flags wasn't showing up. We get an image of crossed swords at the location, but we have no idea what the location is, because it's entirely black.

The maps were actually pretty good. I wouldn't say that adding more lava was the way to go. Just reduce the number of ghosts around, since one turn of tangling with a ghost is enough to seriously injure a drake, and if you actually want it dead, you're going to have to sacrifice an awful lot of hitpoints.
User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Pewskeepski »

The death knight has a good income and starts with zero gold so I think I'll lower his base income. That should make him not recruit so many units. I'm also going to add some more villages in the path that leads to the ankh.

As for the map: Thats strange, I works for me. You should check to see if "farnorth.png" is in the images folder, and see if there's anything wrong with "journey.cfg" (Does it happen in the other scenarios?)
User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

Re: Burning Souls (for 1.9!)

Post by Pewskeepski »

Version 1.2 is on the add-ons server!

Changes included:

-Human guards have been added to scenario 1
-Scenario 3 is easier :)
-There's now a prize for defeating the purple bat in scenario 3! Check it out ;)
-Badguy leaders (Not Qwunvon) can be killed in scenario 6, and they won't come back in scenario 12
-Yetis target dwarves more in scenario 9 (and)
-Prisoner drakes try to escape by themselves
-Mal-Velekal does something horrible in scenario 12 :twisted:
-Spelling mistakes were fixed
-Placement Portraits were added for Qwunvon and Rax (However, there are no drake portraits in any of the mainline campaigns so Kezek and Garish still don't have any)

Thanks for the feedback that brought those, now fixed, errors to my attention!
User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

Re: Burning Souls

Post by Pewskeepski »

I hope this isn't the start of more silence :|

Anyway, Version 1.3 is on the add-ons server! It includes new branch that can be taken from scenario 13.
Spoiler:
Changes included:

-A new branch has been added
-Placement Portrait has been added
-Other various improvements
User avatar
Pewskeepski
Posts: 353
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 6:24 pm
Location: The Dungeon

Re: Burning Souls

Post by Pewskeepski »

Just popping in to say that 1.4.2 is on the add-on server! But the changes are so minor, I won't bother mentioning them.
Post Reply