Tutorial Rework

Discussion and development of scenarios and campaigns for the game.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

uncleshelby
Posts: 427
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 7:20 pm

Tutorial Rework

Post by uncleshelby » November 16th, 2011, 12:37 am

I'm working on a revised version of the tutorial, because I've noticed that some of the concepts are explained badly, or in a bad order, etc., etc. So I've redone some of the text for it. I'd like to redo the whole thing so that it fits better with the new portraits for Konrad/Li'sar.

So, if you have any comments, please share them.
Attachments
1_Tutorial.cfg
(45.7 KiB) Downloaded 119 times
Last edited by uncleshelby on November 16th, 2011, 7:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Timshel

User avatar
averyimaginativename
Posts: 245
Joined: August 21st, 2010, 12:40 pm
Location: /dev/null

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by averyimaginativename » November 16th, 2011, 2:56 am

A typo:
The ranged attack would have been safer, because the enemy cannot deend unless it has a ranged attack.

A line that always bugged me:
And which would that be? The sword (5-4) or the bow (3-3)? I suppose you'll find out..."
By the time you've got this dialogue, you've already attacked and had it explained. I can't imagine any rule in any game where you'd expect 3-3 to be higher than 5-4 even if you didn't know the rules beforehand. In fact, the only reason I can think of for anyone thinking 3-3 could be the more powerful attack is the sentence quoted putting the idea in somebody's head in the first place.

I don't really have a suggestion about what it should be changed to though.



Not really much to add other than that - IMO, it's the second tutorial scenario that needs most work.
UMC Story Images web gallery

On an indefinite Wesbreak for health reasons - please only try to get my attention for UMC story images website issues.

uncleshelby
Posts: 427
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 7:20 pm

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by uncleshelby » November 16th, 2011, 4:12 am

averyimaginativename wrote:A typo:
The ranged attack would have been safer, because the enemy cannot deend unless it has a ranged attack.
Argh, the stupid F key on my keyboard is dying! I'll fix that.

averyimaginativename wrote:
And which would that be? The sword (5-4) or the bow (3-3)? I suppose you'll find out..."
By the time you've got this dialogue, you've already attacked and had it explained. I can't imagine any rule in any game where you'd expect 3-3 to be higher than 5-4 even if you didn't know the rules beforehand. In fact, the only reason I can think of for anyone thinking 3-3 could be the more powerful attack is the sentence quoted putting the idea in somebody's head in the first place.
I'll either remove that, or change it to make it look better...
averyimaginativename wrote:IMO, it's the second tutorial scenario that needs most work.
Yes, I agree, I'll start working on that as soon as I get the first scenario at least mostly better.
Timshel

Ceres
Forum Regular
Posts: 620
Joined: September 18th, 2010, 7:56 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by Ceres » November 16th, 2011, 12:23 pm

If I may note, I already tried to improve something here. Originally I was inspired by a guy on YouTube who apparently had problems with the tutorial, see here.
So I might just as well participate in this project :P

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

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by Pewskeepski » November 16th, 2011, 3:15 pm

averyimaginativename wrote:A line that always bugged me:
And which would that be? The sword (5-4) or the bow (3-3)? I suppose you'll find out..."
I for one had a hard time figuring out what those numbers stand for. Some explanation that the first is damage and the second is number of attacks would be nice.

And ever since I played this in the beginning there's been this silly question in my mind, does this take place before or after HttT? It makes perfect sense, if you play as Konrad, that it takes before. But not if you play as Li'sar... Meh, it doesn't really matter I suppose :P

User avatar
averyimaginativename
Posts: 245
Joined: August 21st, 2010, 12:40 pm
Location: /dev/null

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by averyimaginativename » November 16th, 2011, 5:32 pm

Pewskeepski wrote:I for one had a hard time figuring out what those numbers stand for. Some explanation that the first is damage and the second is number of attacks would be nice.
I wonder if I've been clear about exactly why it bugs me.

Here is the full section:
[message]
id=Delfador
message= _"But before you send your fighters against the quintain, you should know they have two kinds of attack..."
[/message]
[message]
id=student
message= _"I’ll tell them to use the one that does the most damage!"
[/message]
[message]
id=Delfador
message= _"And which would that be? The sword (5–4) or the bow (3–3)? I suppose you’ll find out..."
[/message]
First, Delfador is talking about types of attack, then Konrad changes the premise to damage of the attack, and thirdly, the value of attacks.

The premise was to explain the difference between melee and ranged, but this has now been confused and postponed until the next turn. We're spreading one simple explanation over two turns, and adding confusion in the middle.

Then the damage - there's no sensible mathematical option that makes 5-4 less than 3-3. Whatever the - means, be it multiply, plus, minus or divide, 5-4 is always higher. Even if the first number is damage, and the second armour value, 5-4 is still higher. It would be a very contrived rule set where 3-3 does the most damage, so 5-4 was always going to be intuitively a higher damage attack than 3-3 until this dialogue puts the idea into your head that it might not be. This is needless fluff at best, confusion at worst. If the attacks were 5-4 and 4-5 or 5-4 and 10-2 then you've got doubt, but with 5-4 and 3-3 it's intuitive that 5-4 is higher, even without knowing the rules.

Earlier in the scenario, we've already had an explanation of these numbers anyway:
{GENDER ([message]
speaker=narrator
caption= _"Attacking"
message= _"To attack the quintain, first select the attacker (Konrad) then the target (the quintain). You will see an attack description. In the attack description, there will be two options. Those options will have a number, then a hyphen, then a number, like this: 4-4. The first number means that the unit will attack and do 4 damage every time it hits. The second number meanst that it will attack 4 times. When you click <b>OK</b>, Konrad will attack." +
and again:
[message]
id=Delfador
message= _"Yes. It’s a magical quintain.
Now, this quintain gets 5 chances to hit you for 3 damage each. If it hits every time, you’ll drop from $student_hp to $future_hp hit points. Brace yourself!"
[/message]
5-4 vs 3-3 only works in a lesson about resistances, and that's more advanced than we're dealing with at this point.


Even after all that, it just bugs me, only a niggle - it's not a major issue.
UMC Story Images web gallery

On an indefinite Wesbreak for health reasons - please only try to get my attention for UMC story images website issues.

uncleshelby
Posts: 427
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 7:20 pm

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by uncleshelby » November 16th, 2011, 5:43 pm

I don't think it's a bad idea to mention the first number being damage, the second number of strikes, but pointing out that the first will do a lot more damage would be a good idea...

Ah! Edited! Here's the new draft, changing the "Which would do more damage?" line so that Delfador tells Konrad what the probability of getting each hit every time. I think I did the math right...
Attachments
1_Tutorial.cfg
(46.55 KiB) Downloaded 98 times
Timshel

uncleshelby
Posts: 427
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 7:20 pm

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by uncleshelby » November 17th, 2011, 2:36 am

Alrighty, scenario 2 has been edited. Tell me what you think.
Attachments
2_Tutorial.cfg
(64.5 KiB) Downloaded 78 times
Timshel

rjaguar3
Posts: 14
Joined: October 15th, 2011, 10:40 pm

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by rjaguar3 » November 17th, 2011, 8:12 am

I do agree that the tutorial does need some modification. I also saw the series of videos where a player has trouble with the tutorial (and especially some of its instructions).

I do have some comments on scenario 1:
  • On line 388, I don't think it's a good idea to mention terrain defense at this juncture, since the quintain has magical attacks (rendering terrain defense superfluous in this circumstance). I do believe it is mentioned later (at line 1047); that, I believe, is sufficient instruction on how defense works.
  • Line 650 has the word "you're" misspelled (it should read "Whenever your leader...")
  • "Defend" is still misspelled on line 859.
  • Line 1047 is wrong; magical attacks have a 70% chance of hitting, not 69%. (I'm guessing this must be a typo.)
From looking at the text though, I must say that it is definitely very helpful to a new player. I will get to scenario 2 eventually.

User avatar
powershot
Posts: 1193
Joined: May 7th, 2011, 3:03 am
Location: Central America
Contact:

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by powershot » November 17th, 2011, 11:14 pm

When I played the tutorial I thought ranged meant you could shoot far away. And I thought 5-4 meant four to five damage. Just a note.
My new account is: Power_Pixel_Wannabe. Yea. Yea.... Why are you still reading this? What the heck m8? You have some kind of problem? Yea. I draw. NO I'M NOT 5 ANYMORE!!! Little brats.
The heck m8? I thought you left... No seriously... go... serious...
ok bye m8. I'm serious.

User avatar
averyimaginativename
Posts: 245
Joined: August 21st, 2010, 12:40 pm
Location: /dev/null

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by averyimaginativename » November 18th, 2011, 12:34 am

I've got replays of an 8 year old and a 9 year old playing the tutorial, are these useful to you? In theory, at that age they'll have made every mistake it's possible to have made (though I haven't watched them beyond the first few turns making sure they work).
UMC Story Images web gallery

On an indefinite Wesbreak for health reasons - please only try to get my attention for UMC story images website issues.

uncleshelby
Posts: 427
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 7:20 pm

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by uncleshelby » November 18th, 2011, 3:03 am

Sure, I'd love some replays.
Timshel

User avatar
averyimaginativename
Posts: 245
Joined: August 21st, 2010, 12:40 pm
Location: /dev/null

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by averyimaginativename » November 18th, 2011, 5:05 pm

Okay, here's one of them - the other's on a different computer, I'll upload it later.

What you can't see from the replays are the number of times Li'sar died. In part one, she died endlessly when low health. At the point in the replay when she stands on her keep and doesn't move, this is after half a dozen attempts of attacking and dying first. Also, moving to the tile marked "Here" was a problem you don't see in replays. It's not clear whether it marks the hex above, below, or to the side of the title. There's not much can be done with labels, so maybe a sign post or other embellishment would be better.

Likewise, she was killed by the archers in the East in part 2 several times.

Also worth noting is it appears to be coincidence rather than planning when the shaman attacks to slow first, as demonstrated by the times it doesn't.
Attachments
Tutorial2.gz
(23.79 KiB) Downloaded 110 times
Tutorial1.gz
(12.1 KiB) Downloaded 111 times
UMC Story Images web gallery

On an indefinite Wesbreak for health reasons - please only try to get my attention for UMC story images website issues.

uncleshelby
Posts: 427
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 7:20 pm

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by uncleshelby » November 18th, 2011, 7:44 pm

Gah! I just noticed, these are unplayable. I've fixed most of the errors, but now whenever I try and start it, it comes up with this error:

Code: Select all

error general: Error loading game configuration files: 'Unexpected characters at line start, value '_' at campaigns/tutorial/scenarios/1_Tutorial.cfg:39 included from _main.cfg:101' (The game will now exit)
I've tried and tried, but I CAN"T FIND THE DANGED ERROR! :evil: It would be nice i someone could help with that. :hmm:
Attachments
1_Tutorial.cfg
(46.55 KiB) Downloaded 101 times
Timshel

User avatar
averyimaginativename
Posts: 245
Joined: August 21st, 2010, 12:40 pm
Location: /dev/null

Re: Tutorial Rework

Post by averyimaginativename » November 19th, 2011, 10:47 pm

You were missing a + sign.
Attachments
1_Tutorial.cfg
(46.56 KiB) Downloaded 83 times
UMC Story Images web gallery

On an indefinite Wesbreak for health reasons - please only try to get my attention for UMC story images website issues.

Post Reply