Lich Terror campaign 0.1.0 demo release!

[pawles22]

Hey Guys!

We're really excited that we can release the demo version of our campaign! We hope you'll enjoy playing it!

We want this campaign to be fun to play. We try to make it different than the usual Battle for Wesnoth campaigns. This means we don't want most of the levels to be levels where player just recruit and the objective is to kill the enemy leader. There aren't really many differences in the demo, although there is one thing : shroud covering part of the map instead of the whole map. We plan a lot more differences, so stay tuned for the full version if you like our ideas!

We value any feedback! Thanks to anyone who wants to share their opinion with us!

If you encounter any issues/problems or have any ideas, please let us know in the comment section below!

[Konrad2]

I don't mean to dim your happiness, but shroud covering part of the map instead of the whole map isn't exactly a new thing.. >.<

[pawles22]

I don't mean to dim your happiness, but shroud covering part of the map instead of the whole map isn't exactly a new thing.. >.<

Probably I didn't say it understandably, sorry.
I meant the non add-ons campaigns IIRC there isn't really anything like this. I'm sorry if I'm wrong, I didn't really have time to play the campaigns again
Also, I said "usual Battle for Wesnoth campaigns" and I think that's not what you see in every single campaign.
Thank you for your feedback!

[Konrad2]

SotA is using it in one scenario. ^^

EDIT:
Some small things.
I like the map. (Even though it might be a bit overboard to have elvish and orcish villages there.)
The ai leader was very aggressive, that means I can easily bait him away from his keep.

The saves I have from this scenario are useless for playing on when you update the campaign with a 2nd scenario.
Reason:
When you start a scenario, it uses the code (obviously). The .gz file and all savefiles you created by playing from the .gz file basically contain the scenario code from when the file was created. Let's say I have a .gz file. Then I update, the update containing some changes regarding the scenario I have the .gz file for. Now I start playing using the .gz file. I'll be playing the preupdate version of the scenario, instead of the updated version.
Why is that a problem here:
Normally your scenario file contains a 'next scenario = something', basically saying how the next scenario is called. Yours says 'next scenario = null'. That means, my save files do not contain any information on ever advancing to a next scenario. So I won't be getting to the 2nd scenario with those save files ever...no matter how much I update it.

Maybe set it to 'next scenario = name' and that scenario file would for now only contain a 'this campaign isn't finished yet ... '. That way the player can update, reload the last turn of the scenario, win, and advance to the new 2nd scneario.

[Konrad2]

Just so you can see I added something. Will delete this comment after you answered.

...welp, forgot that it doesn't work like that. xD

[pawles22]

SotA is using it in one scenario. ^^

EDIT:
Some small things.
I like the map. (Even though it might be a bit overboard to have elvish and orcish villages there.)
The ai leader was very aggressive, that means I can easily bait him away from his keep.

The saves I have from this scenario are useless for playing on when you update the campaign with a 2nd scenario.

Oh, I didn't know about SotA.

the elvish and orcish villages remained after the first idea of the campaign, I replaced most of them. Well, I didn't notice the elvish village there. ^^

I know the saves are useless and I know exactly how does it work. I just didn't add the second scenario because of the major change we are planning to the first scenario, which will probably change the gameplay. We didn't want players to just skip the first scenario after change. Though maybe the change isn't even needed... That's also why are we asking for any feedback. We want to know if players find the first scenario enjoyable.

Also our first idea was to release the demo with the first scenario and next, when we finish, upload the whole campaign. But we haven't really decided yet if we should release the whole campaign in one update, or upload scenario after scenario.

[Konrad2]

I know the saves are useless and I know exactly how does it work. I just didn't add the second scenario because of the major change we are planning to the first scenario, which will probably change the gameplay. We didn't want players to just skip the first scenario after change. Though maybe the change isn't even needed... That's also why are we asking for any feedback. We want to know if players find the first scenario enjoyable.

Also our first idea was to release the demo with the first scenario and next, when we finish, upload the whole campaign. But we haven't really decided yet if we should release the whole campaign in one update, or upload scenario after scenario.

I don't think you had to worry about it. Or maybe you should. Depends on wheter you upload a small changelog with the add-on and a post a big changelog here.

Both is fine. But, if you release is scenario for scenario (whenever one is finished), don't do it like you did with the 1st scenario, make sure that the save files can be used to advance to the next scenario without any problems. (You don't know 100% in advance if you will rework a scenario or if you will change the name of the next scenario, but that's fine.)

[pawles22]

Both is fine. But, if you release is scenario for scenario (whenever one is finished), don't do it like you did with the 1st scenario, make sure that the save files can be used to advance to the next scenario without any problems. (You don't know 100% in advance if you will rework a scenario or if you will change the name of the next scenario, but that's fine.)

I know. As I said, I didn't create the next scenario just because I wanted to make a major change, but now we might leave the first scenario as it is. I will create the second scenario and update the campaign today then

[Konrad2]

I'm just leaving this here.

[pawles22]

I feel so bad at this game after watching this replay

[Konrad2]

Uh. Why?

[pawles22]

I am the tester of the scenarios, and I decided than I'm gonna finish this campaign on Difficult. It wasn't really that super difficult to beat, though I always killed the enemy leader on the last turn. But maybe it remained after the first time when I tried it. 3-4 dread bats were attacking in the early stage, and maybe that's the case. That I still fortify and wait for the enemy to come, like I used to do before I changed it

[pawles22]

Okay, so. I won't update the demo with the second temporary scenario just yet. Me and Serpent7776 must decide whether we change the first scenario or not. When we decide, I will post on this forum our plans.

[Inky]

Nice replay by Konrad2!
When I attempted the scenario I ended up running out of turns, probably because I played too passively at the beginning. I think something to consider would be widening the 1-hex cave bottlenecks to 2 hexes, to make it a bit easier to break through, otherwise you can get held up for several turns there.

[Konrad2]

The thing with bottlenecks and ais is, you can just step back from the bottleneck for a turn. Then the ai follows you. Then you wipe the ai with your units and put a plug on the bottleneck. Heal your units. And repeat.