A New Order.

Discussion and development of scenarios and campaigns for the game.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

A New Order.

Postby szopen » June 23rd, 2005, 11:25 am

This is what all you have been waiting for for many months. A new campaign!

Weeelll, actually not. I am not posting it on official campaign server since it is not finished. Far from it. I am posting here because I want a feedback from people. This is unplayable, lacks a lot of graphics, many graphics had to be corrected etc.

First three scenarios are completed and tested by me in level EASY and MEDIUM. Fourth is not even started.

What I would love to see is your criticque of story (I have a feeling it's too long, though i shortened it by few paras), idea, correcting my pinglish etc. Graphics are not finished and hence I do NOT expect comments about graphics (If you are into pixel graphic, however, you may made corrections of images, sprites etc and send me them. Bot-Fluffy, thought overburdened with real life duties, is trying to make portraits of main persons. Contact with me if interested in contribution of graphics),

In linux, untar the file into .wesnoth/data/campaigns. To uninstall, simply delete A_New_Order.cfg and A_New_Order directory.

I will make more polished version in a month or so.

So, in other words, I would be happy to find betatesters, but regular players are DISCOURAGED to try it, since it is UNPLAYABLE and I release it only to receive feedback which would hopefully help me in creating better campaign.
Last edited by szopen on May 1st, 2008, 10:42 am, edited 3 times in total.
szopen
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 614
Joined: March 31st, 2005, 12:51 pm

Postby Rhuvaen » June 23rd, 2005, 5:08 pm

Just briefly, in the first scenario, you need to replace "Lieutant" with "Lieutenant" for it to work.

I tried the first scenario, and must say while I find the story fascinating the Akladian units are all rather bland. None of them have ranged combat, and only one has any abilities, and they are all neutral. The stats are somewhat different, but they have nearly the same movetype, too. Sixty percent defense in grassland as well as hills makes tactical movement rather trivial.

I wonder if these units can sustain my interest enough to provide a challenge other than dice-rolling against enemies, and a tactical one as well...

In the story dialogue, there are a lot of references to an entity named "god", which I don't know if it's suitable to place in a fantasy-themed game.

Other than that, good to see that you're making progress, but I'd ask someone experienced with Wesnoth to help you with stats and abilities for your units (like EP or so)...

EDIT: your campaign shows a Konrad icon in the campaigns dialog...:?:
Rhuvaen
Developer
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Postby Tomsik » June 23rd, 2005, 6:48 pm

i tried it, i love store before secont scenario: ' blah blah blah' :mrgreen:
i think first scenario is a bit too easy, enemies should have other units.(easy mode, maybe you will say its should be easy beacuse its easy mode, but rest
of campaigns are bit harder)
User avatar
Tomsik
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 1401
Joined: February 7th, 2005, 7:04 am
Location: Poland

Postby szopen » June 24th, 2005, 6:40 am

Rhuvaen wrote:Just briefly, in the first scenario, you need to replace "Lieutant" with "Lieutenant" for it to work.


Thanks!

In fact this is result of last-minut corrections to made "normal" and "hard" leevls a bit harder.

I tried the first scenario, and must say while I find the story fascinating the Akladian units are all rather bland. None of them have ranged combat, and only one has any abilities, and they are all neutral.


Ranged is out of question. I guess I will try more variations with movement, resistance and alignment.

In the story dialogue, there are a lot of references to an entity named "god", which I don't know if it's suitable to place in a fantasy-themed game.


Of course it is. Are there not gods in fantasy worlds? In fact Wesnoth is first fantasy world I know which has no "gods" . Which is somehow suprising, giving human nature and history of human culture et al.

However, it is not "our" God. It is God of Akladians, who treat him quite instrumental.

EDIT: your campaign shows a Konrad icon in the campaigns dialog...:?:


Yup, it's just first non-plyabale release for beta-testing :)

But your comments are of tremendous value. I will try to change stats of units somehow (graphics right now are of second importance).

Last question: what about assassin in first scenario?
szopen
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 614
Joined: March 31st, 2005, 12:51 pm

Postby szopen » June 24th, 2005, 7:40 am

Few minor corrections made, uploaded in first post and in the website.

These do not affect gameplay much, if you already had downloaded, don't try it, but if you hadn't, just try it. Regular players are still DISCOURAGED to download it, it's not ready for normal play.
szopen
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 614
Joined: March 31st, 2005, 12:51 pm

Postby Rhuvaen » June 24th, 2005, 11:30 am

szopen wrote:In fact this is result of last-minut corrections to made "normal" and "hard" leevls a bit harder.

I played on normal and got Reme Carre-something killed. The number of enemies makes it quite hard to protect your units, and advance towards the enemy keep. The map is a bit plain, maybe there could be more different pathways to follow, or various positions on the map where you can meet the enemy. That could be interesting with the surprise appearance of the assassin, too, because if you wait somewhere closer to the map he might reach you faster (I found the assassin interesting but the Heavy Infantry quickly dispatched him with a few lucky hits).

Ranged is out of question. I guess I will try more variations with movement, resistance and alignment.

Well I guess neutral is okay if you're mostly battling lawfuls. I really, really think you need to rework the unit stats. I think going down from 60% to 50%, or even better, 40% on grassland is necessary. More on that further on.

I don't think you have a rounded-out concept for the unit stats for the Akladians yet. Let's look at Akladian Warrior, Akladian Heavy Infantry, Akladian chieftain:
Code: Select all
Warrior         Hvy. Infantry     Chieftain
 (lvl 1)         (lvl 2)           (lvl 2)

36 hp           62 hp             36 hp
 5 moves         4 moves           6 moves

8-3 pierce      16-2 blade        7-3 blade

 10% blade       10% blade         10% blade
-10% cold       -10% cold         -10% cold
  0% fire         0% fire           0% fire
  0% holy         0% holy           0% holy
 20% impact      10% impact        10% impact
 10% pierce      10% pierce        10% pierce


Grass  60% 1     ...same...        ...same...
Forest 40% 3
Hills  60% 2
Mount. 70% 3

Here's the problems I see immediately:
    1. the chieftain at level 2 is WORSE than the level 1 unit it upgrades from :shock:
    2. the Heavy Infantry doesn't make sense
    3. the warrior (and the whole Akladian line) is a wholly unremarkable unit
The first should be immediately obvious.

The unit I understood least was the "Heavy Infantry". The graphics seem to indicate a heavily armoured guy with a short blade, and the armour is reflected in the slow move (move 4?). But he still has 60% defense on grassland! How come? Also his blade damage of 16-2 would indicate a sort of greatsword, slow but damaging, not the little shortsword I see.
The HI is probably supposed to have more armour, as is reflected in higher hp and lower move, but still can dodge and move in the same way (same defense) and has lower resistances than it's level 1 counterpart!! Is it armoured now, or is it not? Overall I don't find the concept of Heavy Infantry to fit with the Akladian idea...

The third is this: the Akladians' big (?) advantage is their high defense in open terrain. This makes playing them rather unintuitive, seeing that they are so much worse in forest (40% move 3 compared to 60% move 1). Why are they so slow in forest? For all other foot units, defense in forest is as good as grasslands, for the most part even better. Your units break that logic.
And if it is because 'they need a lot of space to dodge', then why do they defend so well in mountains (70%) if they are just as slow there (3 moves)? Doesn't make much sense.
If they are so fast in dodging, why do they have such a hard time moving through forest at all (move 3 is really terrible - walking corpses can outrun them :lol: :!:)?
This doesn't look like a barbarian faction at all. And what is worse, relying on high defense makes playing them a game of chance. Against many opponents, even weak ones (such as in the first scenario), the warriors fare badly.

To give them a unique but playable feeling, I'd recommend the following changes - although these are not tried and tested but what comes to my mind now:
- give them more and slightly weaker attacks, which fits with the theme that they are agile warriors (and more likely to hit and damage their enemies!)
- change their defense to 40% grassland and 50% in forest, hills and mountains (really really)
- give them good resistances and low hp instead
- move cost of 2 in forests

The effect will be that they come more in line with other foot units concerning their movement and defense, but will be more likely to wear other units out by having higher chances to damage on attack and resisting stronger attacks better.

I'd be thinking about a Warrior such as:
Code: Select all
26 hp
 5 moves

6-4 pierce

 40% blade
  0% cold
 10% fire
 20% holy
 40% impact
 50% pierce


Give them different upgrades:
- one with 34 hp, first strike and 6-5 attack
- one with 38 hp, 11-3 blade and 30% to blade/impact and 40% pierce

EDIT: I think that having a level 4 recruitable elite unit breaks with the rest of Wesnoth and should be seriously avoided.

...references to an entity named "god"...


Of course it is. Are there not gods in fantasy worlds? ...

However, it is not "our" God.

In the story, it often says "God" and "Thank God" (which is the same spelling as the bible), which should then be written as "our god", or "the deity".
Besides, I think it's funny that you say that in Wesnoth there are no gods but the Akladians burn down all their temples :). Maybe the story dialog should say that the Wesnothians worshipped their book lore, science, and magic, and were misguided in that way, rather that they had temples everywhere...

Overall, I don't really like that the Akladians seem to be fascism introduced into the world of Wesnoth :mad:
Rhuvaen
Developer
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Postby szopen » June 24th, 2005, 11:56 am

Rhuvaen wrote:Overall I don't find the concept of Heavy Infantry to fit with the Akladian idea...


Hm, maybe I will indeed change the concept. It would have good side effect sicne my heavier armoured units really sucks.

1). Why are they so slow in forest? For all other foot units, defense in


They hate forests. That have explanation in the story plot :) If you want to know WHY they hate forests you may pm me, but that may spoil some fun in the future.

- give them more and slightly weaker attacks, which fits with the theme that they are agile warriors (and more likely to hit and damage their enemies!)


I was kinda developing in that direction. Just I was hesitating whether I would not overdone that: fastfoot had 6 attacks, which is uncomparable to any other faction 'xcept i think elves.

- move cost of 2 in forests


They hate forests :D

I will have quite a lot of time during weekend to introduce suggested changes and work over the concept more.

EDIT: I think that having a level 4 recruitable elite unit breaks with the rest of Wesnoth and should be seriously avoided.


Yes, I made that deliberately since I do not intend them to be ever introduced into mainline wesnoth.

Besides, I think it's funny that you say that in Wesnoth there are no gods but the Akladians burn down all their temples :).


Well, telling the truth it is adaptation of my old ideas for a game :D. I hesitated over introduction of this into story, then i reasoned that maybe religion was part of reason of Wesnoth collapse and why Akladians were able to take over large parts of it.

Maybe the story dialog should say that the Wesnothians worshipped their book lore, science, and magic, and were misguided in that way, rather that they had temples everywhere...


Hm, why not. It could even say that Wesnothian were defeated because they had NOT gods.

Overall, I don't really like that the Akladians seem to be fascism introduced into the world of Wesnoth :mad:


Hm, that's the biggest problems I had. How to develop Akladians to fit my concept, and yet avoid connections to fascism.

To avoid any misconceptions:

*Akladians are BAD guys
*Akladians ARE racist, chauvinists etc
*main hero is not Akladian. He is half-Akladian, and since he suffers from Akladian racism he (and, hopefully, players) should understand the absurdity of others attitude. Which brings the question how to made player to identify with main hero, and not with Akladians.
To made it more clear, I added now message "For freedom! Death to Akladian beasts!" in first scenario, and I am thinking about maybe adding some message by Gawen wondering whether in his soldiers eyes he is not an "underling" himself.
EDIT: maybe "Uhmm.. are we good guys here" line would be enough?
or something in shape of: "Mother, why do you call this people _underlings_?" "Well, because they are destiend to be our slaves" "What about me, then?" "Uhm, you are, uhm.. Let's haev this conversation later, ok?" I thought about in second story add thoughts of Gawen, but it may be already too late for that :)
*Other main hero friend, who would introduced in 6th campaign is not Akladian and I intend to make him most sympathetic character.
*Why Akladians are the way they are, should be explained in story later. THat is, why higher level units tend to be rather chaotic, lower level are not lawful, why they hate forests and why their culture is directed at violence and disregard for anything not tied to warfare.

And, remember I am Pole. I am strongly identifyin myself with Wesnothians in such scenarios, since per most definitions of our world's racisist I AM "underling".
Last edited by szopen on June 24th, 2005, 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
szopen
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 614
Joined: March 31st, 2005, 12:51 pm

Re: A New Order.

Postby Dave » June 24th, 2005, 11:58 am

szopen wrote:I am not posting it on official campaign server since it is not finished. Far from it. I am posting here because I want a feedback from people.


One of the purposes of the campaign server is to actually allow people to post unfinished campaigns and then point other people to them to try out and give feedback.

It's your choice of course, but I think it's actually a very easy and effective distribution mechanism.

David
“At Gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.” -- Ian Fleming
Dave
Lead Developer
 
Posts: 6960
Joined: August 17th, 2003, 5:07 am
Location: Texas

Postby szopen » June 24th, 2005, 11:58 am

As for advancement tree, I toyed with idea of two trees, essentially the same, however one "lawful" and second "chaotic". That would be quite unique for all other factions.
szopen
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 614
Joined: March 31st, 2005, 12:51 pm

Re: A New Order.

Postby szopen » June 24th, 2005, 12:00 pm

Dave wrote:
szopen wrote:I am not posting it on official campaign server since it is not finished. Far from it. I am posting here because I want a feedback from people.


One of the purposes of the campaign server is to actually allow people to post unfinished campaigns and then point other people to them to try out and give feedback.

It's your choice of course, but I think it's actually a very easy and effective distribution mechanism.

David


Well, I do not want common players to try the campaign and then be discouraged by errors, unfinished glitches etc. As soon as those will be corrected and story and concept will be worked out, i WILL put the unfinished campaign on server waiting for feedback not only about story and concept, but also about factual playing the campaign.
szopen
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 614
Joined: March 31st, 2005, 12:51 pm

Postby Rhuvaen » June 24th, 2005, 12:28 pm

szopen wrote:[quote="Rhuvaen"1). Why are they so slow in forest? For all other foot units, defense in


They hate forests. That have explanation in the story plot :)[/quote]
Well, okay, if it's a story element, it's a story element. It doesn't need to change some game mechanism completely.

What I mean is, if they really hate forests that badly, then leave their move at 3 in them. It's terrible enough and will make a player avoid forests. But change their defense to at least the same as on grassland. It breaks realism otherwise.
Rhuvaen
Developer
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Postby szopen » June 25th, 2005, 12:42 pm

I am busy implementing most of changes suggested by Rhuvaen.

There are few more issues:

1) Barbarians - think about barbarians like Vikings, Anglo-Saxons, Slavic people (or almost whole medieval Europe), not about Conan from Cimmeria. I think Heavy infantry can be used by Barbarians, because I use the word as description for culture and state of mind, lack of sophistication, not as sign of primitivism. So they are barbarians, because they love primitve entertainments, because they can't grasp concept of books and have primitive religion, brutal and violent, not because they are going around naked and with furs.

Also, Akladians are second or third generation living in Wesnth, so their culture is already influenced by culture of conquered people

2) religion - Wesnoth is quite unique by NOT having religions. However Akladians do believ in one god, since they are using god by "G" not g. They treat him quite instrumental: if Akladian is making a sacrifice, he is not doing it out of respect and fear, he is treating it more like a trade.

3) defense Akladians are taller and stronger than people. I wanted them to have large defense not because they can dodge the hits, but because they are skilled enough to block enemy blow OR avoid it. Also, since they do not like forests i think they should have less defense in forests (in fact, i can't understand why ANY unit should have better defense in forests. I think it merely reflects how unit is accustomed to fight in given territory, so elves, loving and living in forests should fight there better, and Akladians, who avoid them, should fight worse.

4) other races Akladians hate elves, they hate saurians (who have chief position of arch-evils in their myths, they respect orcs ('cause they know how to fight). They disregard all other humans. I don't now what should they feel about dwarfs.

5) racism and violence Akladians position is similar to that of early medeval europe. Think about medeival people all of the sudden ruling in your city and introducing all their nice customs, like taking the eyes, cutting the tongues, forcing woman to feed dogs and all other common entertainments early medieval people enjoyed. They are brutal, radical, violent (well, I hoped that remark about Gawen's mother being poisoned should be clear enough about that).

Their position is a bit more radical than say German feudals in X/XI century, more radical so while other could treat others as something a little bit better if one would get christianised, nothing can change attitude of Akladians agaisnt others. Think some of Polish nobility attitude against peasants in darkest period of Polish history (XVIII century).

Which bring me to final question: fascism. While designing Akladians, I had in mind medieval times. Only later i started to be affraid that someone may think about Stirling Drakans or fascism. That's why i touch the issue for the second time, and I hope that it will finish any misunderstandings.

You must remember taht Akladian attitude is that of Huns, Mongols, German feudals, Polish nobility, not Nazi. Akladians want to rule over the world, not to kill everyone else in sight. Other people in their opinion are suit to be their slaves and servants. You may call it "fascism" but only in sense you call Mongol fascist, Huns, Romans etc.

However, hero of story is not Akladian. It is a man, who is son of Akladian and Wesnothian, hence deemed to be "underling" by many. I hope that player will associate with hero, and not with Akladians. OTOH, i still wish to made clear that there still is something good in Akladians; hence Reme Carrenemoe, who represents what is good in nation. The story is called "A new order" because it is about how to find compromise between Wesnothians and Akladian Barbarians, so they could live together. A new order in place of chaos.

Puff, I hope it will be enough and no more questions will be raised about that.

The first version to be put on campaign server should be in about two weeks, when i will finish redesign and when I will have first six scenarios finished.
szopen
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 614
Joined: March 31st, 2005, 12:51 pm

Postby scott » June 25th, 2005, 4:08 pm

I have to say that 60% on grassland isn't cutting it. Without going into as much detail as other have, I post my agreement with them on stats more or less.

Also, 'oath' isn't a transitive verb. 'Swear', 'vow', or 'make an oath' would work better.
I like the story and atmosphere so far.

I admit that I get discouraged and frustrated when people put half-finished campaigns on the server, but only when they never FINISH THEM. There are a lot of orphans on there now and it's annoying. However, Saving Elensefar, Under the Burning Suns, and others were posted half-finshed. It's ok as long as you're going to post changes often and you don't post buggy scenarios - i.e. the campaign is complete up to scenario X of Y.
Hope springs eternal.
Wesnoth acronym guide.
scott
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 5242
Joined: May 12th, 2004, 12:35 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby Rhuvaen » June 27th, 2005, 3:04 pm

I understand that you have a detailed background and good story here. Now is the question of how to create the campaign for that story, and that might involve cutting back on some details that might seem obvious from a story-telling point of view because you are also trying to make a campaign that is fun for the player :wink:.

szopen wrote:3) defense Akladians are taller and stronger than people. I wanted them to have large defense not because they can dodge the hits, but because they are skilled enough to block enemy blow OR avoid it.

Okay, this is background information: Akladians are warriors that rely primarily on their skill at arms to avoid lethal damage in combat. Now HOW you implement this in the game isn't clear yet.
You seem to be bent on applying this fact through giving them high defense. You could do that, but you have several other choices, and some people have pointed out to you that high defense is a bad idea in terms of gameplay.

szopen wrote:Also, since they do not like forests i think they should have less defense in forests (in fact, i can't understand why ANY unit should have better defense in forests. I think it merely reflects how unit is accustomed to fight in given territory, so elves, loving and living in forests should fight there better, and Akladians, who avoid them, should fight worse.

Again, this background information is valuable, but you shouldn't let it stand in the way of playability. Trying to hit an Akladian with bow and arrow is not the same as asking whether they like being where they are. In a forest, there are trees and shrubs that get in the way of hitting things, and make it harder for the attacker to reach the defender. See it as a law of nature.

I'm sure Gryphons don't like hovering over a pool of lava in battle, yet they have the same 50% defense there as they have over most terrains (except caves where they practically can't fly or mountains where they have a specific advantage). Nobody asks the Gryphon whether it likes being there or not. But it can avoid blows there just the same as over other terrain.

Akladians will not have the same bonus in forests as elves do. That's fine. There's no need to illogically penalise them there, though. Giving them a move of 2 (or more, as you want to do) will reflect that they have a harder time moving through forest and finding their way there.

By deciding that you want to write a campaign you are, in a way, committed to presenting this story of the Akladians to the world as a game. It should therefore be a game that is fun to play, which means it's not just a way of presenting your story, but satisfies the player in other ways, too. None of the suggestions I made compromise your story, IMO. I think you have a good story here and possibly a good concept for new game units, now you need to free yourself up a bit from the (perceived) constraints of story and be ready to make adjustments to deliver a fine game challenge, otherwise you'd be using Wesnoth merely as a platform to deliver a screenplay to an audience (which it shares some aspects with, admittedly).

I can follow your arguments on most other points, BTW :).
Rhuvaen
Developer
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Postby fmunoz » June 27th, 2005, 4:34 pm

All living units get 20% resistance to holy no matters if they are evil or not (as life force makes no difference about morals).
fmunoz
Founding Artist
 
Posts: 1469
Joined: August 17th, 2003, 10:04 am
Location: Spain

Next

Return to Scenario & Campaign Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests