Invasion from the Unknown 2.1.13.1 [Wesnoth 1.14.x & 1.15.12+]

[ForestDragon]

hi shadowm, i was like, 'OMG!!!', shadowm is back to updating IftU?!!! best day in ever!!!
so, btw, dwarvish flamethrowe is OP (16-3 is only fit for a full scale lvl3 range-oriented unit) maybe nerf it to either:12-3,10-3,9-3

[Inky]

Hi, so far I've played up to S20; the only thing I noticed that is possibly a bug is that plague does not work on imps or demons.

Some typos:

-The popup when you pick up the explosive arrows in S14 says they do 50% of the base damage to the target behind (should be 80%).
-S15 Line 281: It’s obvious that you’re trying to truck us to obtain cheap war-beasts to solve your own problems. -> trick

Unit Description typos:
-Chaos Invoker: ...which existed primaril throughout the eastern wastes. -> primarily
-Gutwrencher Imp: They spit it towards they victim -> their
-Forefather: shear fear -> sheer
-Bone knight: The horsemen with the most experienced rose quickly through the ranks -> experience

Very minor note: When loading a save file for Part II, the save file's description will say it's from Part I.

[Iris]

Hi, so far I've played up to S20; the only thing I noticed that is possibly a bug is that plague does not work on imps or demons.

This is intentional, actually. Or was up to this point. I don’t want to give the demons a trait or ability that identifies this aspect in the UI taking up valuable real estate that could be used by real traits or abilities, and I’ve been wondering if the original reasoning (demonkind not being creatures that Irdyan necromancers are used to working with) is really worth confusing a few players who’ve reported this as a bug in several occasions, considering that they don’t have a problem with drain and poison effects.

I fixed the scenario typos and the Chaos Invoker’s description. The other three are in the description rewrite queue, so I will probably push them to the front instead.

Very minor note: When loading a save file for Part II, the save file's description will say it's from Part I.

Oh yes, this is a thing I should work on for 1.13.x. It can’t be fixed in 1.12.x because there is simply no mechanism provided by the game engine to change the campaign’s title recorded in the saves mid-campaign, and changing the title to be neutral like the abbreviation (since 1.99.2) would affect the Campaigns menu entry as well.

so, btw, dwarvish flamethrowe is OP (16-3 is only fit for a full scale lvl3 range-oriented unit) maybe nerf it to either:12-3,10-3,9-3

Anyone else feels this way, keeping in mind that they are rather frail, don’t level up to L3, and face against foes with superior firepower?

[ForestDragon]

so, btw, dwarvish flamethrowe is OP (16-3 is only fit for a full scale lvl3 range-oriented unit) maybe nerf it to either:12-3,10-3,9-3

Anyone else feels this way, keeping in mind that they are rather frail, don’t level up to L3, and face against foes with superior firepower?

Even though they are pretty screnario-specific, i think making OP non-character units just for that is outright wrong, even because of the otherwoldly enemies in the campaign, so, here are my arguments about it:

1.dwarvish original lvl2 has only 28-1 ranged, and it's pierce (which is a kind of inferior in most cases, except drakes and horsemen) and yours has 16-3 (48 damage total, which is only fit for a full scale ranged specialist (even most lvl3s don't have primary attacks that strong)), you may say that flamethrower has 7-2 melee, while original lvl2 6-3,
2. about not having lvl3: well, it's not too uncommon for optional (and even some normal ones in some cases) branches to do so, like Lancer, or Deathblade, they are a lot stronger, sure, but still not as much as lvl3s
3.about frailness: well, they are a glass-cannon type, so
and btw, if you feel that it's because of the strong enemies, you can just weaken them a bit in those scen.s instead. about damage walues, i think 12-3 would sound reasonable, don't you think?
EDIT:btw, current russian translations are pretty old, and don't seem to translate most of the current text, except some lines periodivally, making it look pretty awkward
btw, are you planning to copy those chaos unit changes into AtS?, i mean new graphics and unit desc.s . And also, are you planning to start making an AtS sequel anytime soon? (that was an attempt to make cute eyes )

[Iris]

btw, are you planning to copy those chaos unit changes into AtS?, i mean new graphics and unit desc.s .

Yes. All of it is already there, in fact, just unreleased for reasons that will hopefully become evident before the end of the month.

And also, are you planning to start making an AtS sequel anytime soon? (that was an attempt to make cute eyes )

When people ask me this question I can’t help but wonder what their definition of “start” is. I could say I started working on it before AtS E3 was done and that wouldn’t be inaccurate at all (even without taking into account the fact that AtS E3 was originally meant to be a separate campaign and therefore the first AtS sequel).

Contrary to what some people with too much time in their hands and a glaring disregard for quality and creative cohesion might say, these things take time and a great deal of motivation, especially when you’re tasked with the mission of building what essentially amounts to a whole new game (sans the basic terrains) from scratch, and work with a story that demands far more material (visual art, music and sounds) than a single unpaid individual can possibly produce in a finite time frame and with a relatively small skillset and toolkit. I could quickly put together some kind of tech demo with half-cooked assets and gameplay and throw it out there under the oft-misused “Release Early, Release Often” principle, but it wouldn’t do justice to the story I’m trying to tell — and it’s pretty obvious that these campaigns are a narrative vehicle first and foremost.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: right now there isn’t much tangible indication that any time and energy spent on AtS’ sequel will be well spent, so my focus for the past few years when not tending to core Wesnoth (which is also rapidly declining in popularity due to a multitude of factors) has been to fix the mess that my 2007 self created and see if that rekindles other people’s interest in the series. If it does, the sequel will take substantially less time to materialize; if it doesn’t, then it would not be hyperbole to say it may take as long as I have years left to live. In either case, I can’t realistically give people an estimate release date and not feel like I’m lying to them, because the development chronology for everything starting with AtS — and including the IftU Reconstruction project — has been and continues to be subject to far too many factors beyond my control, and I can’t guarantee that things will not get worse at a moment’s notice.

I know it’s a disappointing answer, but believe me, it’s far worse for me to have to admit that it’s not going to happen soon enough.

[ForestDragon]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: right now there isn’t much tangible indication that any time and energy spent on AtS’ sequel will be well spent, so my focus for the past few years when not tending to core Wesnoth (which is also rapidly declining in popularity due to a multitude of factors) has been to fix the mess that my 2007 self created and see if that rekindles other people’s interest in the series.

'mess'?', you call it 'mess'? well, it does require quite a lot of polishing, that's true (which you seem to be doing pretty well recently), but seriouly, in my opinion this is the best campaign that currently exists, after looking at it, all mainline campaigns look like total ripoff sh** when compared to this masterpiece (the story, the art, and special effects are just best ) i am surprised you think about this masterpiece of your own as a 'mess' (you even said that you didn't like it in the favourite campaigns poll ).

I. If it does, the sequel will take substantially less time to materialize; if it doesn’t, then it would not be hyperbole to say it may take as long as I have years left to live. In either case, I can’t realistically give people an estimate release date and not feel like I’m lying to them, because the development chronology for everything starting with AtS — and including the IftU Reconstruction project — has been and continues to be subject to far too many factors beyond my control, and I can’t guarantee that things will not get worse at a moment’s notice.

I know it’s a disappointing answer, but believe me, it’s far worse for me to have to admit that it’s not going to happen soon enough.

well, ok, i just asked, and btw, when you do it,

Spoiler:

try not to go on a full scale main character genocide again, like you did in AtS (i seriouly miss Mal Keshar, he was my favorite <insert nostalgic face> the other necromancers you added after him were ripoff crap)

[Inky]

Hi, I encountered a couple small bugs in S21 Innuendo (latest campaign version):

Spoiler:

-Entering the room with the rectangular pool of water near the beginning will trigger the dialogue for the dungeon area (Galas hearing a cry for help, and Mal Keshar saying we don't have time to help all the prisoners).

-The boss drone that appeared near the end (Nemaara) ignored my units and flew off to a keep, and stayed there for the rest of the scenario.

[Iris]

Version 1.99.7 (a.k.a. 2.0 Release Candidate 8) is out now.

Thanks to Inky for the bug report above.

This will be the last 2.0 release candidate, barring any important bugs found in the meantime by people like you. Yes, you — you who are reading this forum post. Post any bugs you find. Now. NOW.

In the meantime, perhaps someone from the audience here wants to figure out why this code wasn’t working as intended and computed the second region as if it had a radius of 10 rather than 5. Because I couldn’t — I just decided to replace it with the closest equivalent instead.

The complete changelog for this version follows:

Code: Select all

Version 1.99.7 (codename Reconstruction RC 8):
----------------------------------------------
* Scenarios:
  * S14 - Bye and Behold:
    * Fixed incorrect secondary damage amount in the Explosive Runic Arrows'
      description (50% instead of the actual 80%).
  * S15 - Shadows of Time:
    * Fixed typo in prose.
  * S21 - Innuendo:
    * Make sure the Shaxthal Sentry Drone miniboss doesn't run off to the
      nearest keep.
    * Fix an inexplicable issue where a radial SLF gets doubled when [or]'d,
      resulting in the first chamber near the starting area being matched by
      a late event trigger filter.

* Units:
  * New unit type descriptions:
    * Shaxthal Sentry Drone.
  * Fixed typo in the Chaos Invoker's description.

[gfgtdf]

well, without looking at the c++ implementation i'd guess that the filter code checks [or] before radius= so that your filter is equivalent to 'all hexes at most distance 5 from

Code: Select all

x,y=50,8
[or]
x,y,radius=52,21,5
[/or]

'

[Iris]

well, without looking at the c++ implementation i'd guess that the filter code checks [or] before radius= so that your filter is equivalent to 'all hexes at most distance 5 from

Code: Select all

x,y=50,8
[or]
x,y,radius=52,21,5
[/or]

'

Okay, that’s rather counter-intuitive, but it seems the superior fix is simple enough then:

Code: Select all

[filter_location]
    x,y,radius=50,8,5
    [or]
        x,y=52,21
    [/or]
[/filter_location]

[gfgtdf]

i meant it first check all locaations that match the filter i poste d in my previous post, which is a single hex on (50,8) and a radius-5 ball.
And then i says 'all hexes for which there exists a hex within those that has a distance to at most 5 '.

Maybe its easier to write it mathematically, whats calculated is:

Code: Select all

let r1 = { (50,8) }
let r2 = { loc ∈ Map | dist(loc, (52,21) <= 5)}
let r3 = r1 ∪ r2
res = { loc ∈ Map | ∃ r ∈ r3 : dist(loc, r) <= 5}

where res are the locatiosn returned by the final filter, and r3 the result of the filter i gave im my post. So if we have a location l that is at most 10 hexes form (52,21), then there will be a hex m in the middle of l and (52, 21) that is in r2 since m is at most 5 hexes from (51, 21), l is at most 5 hexes from m so l is in res.

EDIT:
ok i saw you edited your post, but since i alrady botherd to copypase all that mathematical symbols, ill post it anyways,

@new simpler fix
Yes i think that should work.

[Iris]

Version 1.99.8 (a.k.a. 2.0 Release Candidate 9) is out now.

gfgtdf reported an issue where the supporter auto-recalls (i.e. units that get recalled for a minor speaking role) in certain scenarios become loyal forever. This releases fixes said bug by making supporter auto-recalls cost upkeep like they used to. Sorry about that, but I can’t dedicate time to implementing a proper fix covering all possible border cases right now.

The complete changelog for this version follows:

Code: Select all

Version 1.99.8 (codename Reconstruction RC 9):
----------------------------------------------
* Scenarios:
  * Rolled back change from versions 1.99.3 and 1.99.5 that causes auto-recalls
    to become loyal for the remainder of the campaign due to an engine bug in
    the implementation of [object] duration=scenario with certain effects. This
    causes auto-recalls to cost upkeep again in scenarios 2, 3, 4, 5a, 5b, 6,
    8, and 10.
  * S21 - Innuendo:
    * Cleaner (but functionally-equivalent) fix for the SLF issue fixed
      in RC 8.

[mousyack]

The Moon Valley (on normal), the pink and black orcs really don't want to fight (present as of 1.99.. (I mean 1.99.8, not a smiley). Is this intentional?

[Scaramush]

I passed two episodes one after another, but is shows that i emerged victory only in 1: http://www.picshare.ru/view/7459286/. Idk what it connected with.

[ForestDragon]

well, that's is caused due to the fact that the part 1's last scenario is linked directly with first one from part 2 (since wesnoth still thinks it's the same campaign)