New Campaign: Survival
Moderator: Forum Moderators
-
Casual User
- Posts: 475
- Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm
Good afternoon!
Well, it's been awhile, but Survival version 0.35 is up on the campaign server.
Changelog:
-shepherd toughened by 1 hp.
-woodcutter weakened by 1 hp.
-torch-bearer now has illuminates and a halo (sorry
!)
-The Blue Woods:Brigand has less units and now uses custom thief
-Battle for Burbank:no change, but I've playtested it again and it works
-Cave of Shadows:Layout of the cave changed, torches added,more time
-The Wild Lands:Less ennemied by far
-Revenge:Less ennemies
-An Old Friend:Less ennemies
-Coming Home:Less ennemies and custom thief
In any case, try it out if you want to...
Now, to answer a few questions.
The units caught in solid rock is a problem that should be fixed in version 0.35. I've also relaxed the time period, as per your suggestion.
I will, however, keep the dark adepts in the ennemy's army. To balance things out, I've sprinkled the cave with torches. You might find them... illuminating.
I've kicked around the idea of adding a white mage-like character ... but I find it less and less likely I'll do it, for a number of reasons. You alway have shepherds for... oh sorry
.
Thanks for the encouragement, it's quite nice every now and then...
Well, it's been awhile, but Survival version 0.35 is up on the campaign server.
Changelog:
-shepherd toughened by 1 hp.
-woodcutter weakened by 1 hp.
-torch-bearer now has illuminates and a halo (sorry
!)-The Blue Woods:Brigand has less units and now uses custom thief
-Battle for Burbank:no change, but I've playtested it again and it works
-Cave of Shadows:Layout of the cave changed, torches added,more time
-The Wild Lands:Less ennemied by far
-Revenge:Less ennemies
-An Old Friend:Less ennemies
-Coming Home:Less ennemies and custom thief
In any case, try it out if you want to...
Now, to answer a few questions.
Well, it's for 1.0 right now (I've made this more clear). I play and write on 1.0, so for now... If I make it 1.1-compliant (which I'm not sure I will), it will only be after all the bugs have been worked out and the balancing is fine.Taurus wrote:Is this campaign going to be strictly for version 1.0, or are you planning on having it work on 1.1 and above?
Finally, someone who doesn't have problems with Battle for Burbank.l'ultimo cruco wrote:The campaign works fine for me until "the cave of shadow" scenario. The scenario works but I get slaughtered...
The units caught in solid rock is a problem that should be fixed in version 0.35. I've also relaxed the time period, as per your suggestion.
I will, however, keep the dark adepts in the ennemy's army. To balance things out, I've sprinkled the cave with torches. You might find them... illuminating.
I've kicked around the idea of adding a white mage-like character ... but I find it less and less likely I'll do it, for a number of reasons. You alway have shepherds for... oh sorry
.Thanks for the encouragement, it's quite nice every now and then...
Haven't tried it again yet, but I plan to. Made the switch to 1.1 and have been enjoying some of the original campaigns again. Now stuck in Rise of Wesnoth (just can't beat one of the scenarios) so it might be time to try Survival againCasual User wrote:So, did it work?ecla wrote:Thank you for your replay and comments, Casual User. I'll give it another try!
-
Casual User
- Posts: 475
- Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm
-
Casual User
- Posts: 475
- Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm
Good afternoon!
I wanted to say(brag) that I have just finished 'Survival', version 0.35, without any cheating/debugging involved.
I played the version that's up on the campaign server, on the easy difficulty level.
So, yes, it is feasible.
WML seems to be okay in that all scenarios are doable, but there are still 'cosmetic' bugs
My own (personal) comments on the scenarios I've played (as a changelog for the future).
-An annoying bug:Dead ennemy leaders no longer stick around to say their death speeches in most cases. I'll probably have to see how I'll fix this.
-Another annoying bug:Roles sometimes are ill-fixed, so some speakers don't, well, speak... This is particularly jarring in 'Counsel', as two of the councilmen sometimes won't speak, although their parts are essential...
-I am, personally, reasonably satisfied with 'Cave of Shadows', 'Blue Woods' and 'Coming Home'.
-Without wanting to toot my own horn, I am also quite proud of 'Alert', 'The Battle for Burbank', 'Wild Lands' and 'Epilogue'.
-However, 'Counsel' has the bugs I mentionned above. Furthermore, the two wrap-up scenarios, 'Revenge'(spoiler:kill orcish warlord that raided the village) and 'An Old Friend'(spoiler:kill Sir Galdry) both feel a little tacked on and contrived. I'll have to see how to spice them up a little.
-The branchings don't feel balanced to me. I'm thinking the javelineer, ranger, torch-bearer and skirmisher will never get used. I'll beef them up a little.
-The villager types don't really feel balanced either. The shepherd seems a little weak, for one thing...
-The text blurbs also need improving.
In any case, these things will come along in future updates. Also, as I think there are no major bugs left (i.e. that truly take away from the gameplay), I'll try to make Survival 1.1-compliant as soon as possible.
If anyone else has any feedback, it can only help...
I wanted to say(brag) that I have just finished 'Survival', version 0.35, without any cheating/debugging involved.
I played the version that's up on the campaign server, on the easy difficulty level.
So, yes, it is feasible.
WML seems to be okay in that all scenarios are doable, but there are still 'cosmetic' bugs
My own (personal) comments on the scenarios I've played (as a changelog for the future).
-An annoying bug:Dead ennemy leaders no longer stick around to say their death speeches in most cases. I'll probably have to see how I'll fix this.
-Another annoying bug:Roles sometimes are ill-fixed, so some speakers don't, well, speak... This is particularly jarring in 'Counsel', as two of the councilmen sometimes won't speak, although their parts are essential...
-I am, personally, reasonably satisfied with 'Cave of Shadows', 'Blue Woods' and 'Coming Home'.
-Without wanting to toot my own horn, I am also quite proud of 'Alert', 'The Battle for Burbank', 'Wild Lands' and 'Epilogue'.
-However, 'Counsel' has the bugs I mentionned above. Furthermore, the two wrap-up scenarios, 'Revenge'(spoiler:kill orcish warlord that raided the village) and 'An Old Friend'(spoiler:kill Sir Galdry) both feel a little tacked on and contrived. I'll have to see how to spice them up a little.
-The branchings don't feel balanced to me. I'm thinking the javelineer, ranger, torch-bearer and skirmisher will never get used. I'll beef them up a little.
-The villager types don't really feel balanced either. The shepherd seems a little weak, for one thing...
-The text blurbs also need improving.
In any case, these things will come along in future updates. Also, as I think there are no major bugs left (i.e. that truly take away from the gameplay), I'll try to make Survival 1.1-compliant as soon as possible.
If anyone else has any feedback, it can only help...
It should be possible to use [time_area] for the "time" change and [item] to display the torch and the halo. (you can look into the scenario file 3Night.cfg from the user campaign Under the burning suns, which uses campfires to illuminate, to see an example of its use).
I think i know the role problem: [recall] recalls the first unit matching the standard unit filter, but [role] searches types first. An example: If the first unit in your recall list is a Bowman_s
[recall]
side=1
type=Woodcutter_s,Hunter_s,Swordsman_s,Torch-bearer_s,Bowman_s,Ranger_s
x,y=11,12
[/recall]
will recall it, but if you have a Woodcutter_s (other than Logan)
[role]
role=advisor1
type=Woodcutter_s,Hunter_s,Swordsman_s,Torch-bearer_s,Bowman_s,Ranger_s
[not]
description=Logan
[/not]
[/role]
assigns the role to the first Woodcutter_s it finds.
An easy fix: first the [role] part then
[recall] side=1 role=advisor1 x,y=11,12 [/recall], same with advisor2
Looking at the scenario survival5 you use an victory event for the victory speach. I would be surprised, if the Necromancer took part at the speech. You should use a die event instead. ([event] name=die [filter] description=Nemeah [/filter] ...
Unit balancing: I liked the ranger, because of the additional movement point and the fast forrest movement (in survival7 i managed to get 2 rangers into the keep of the right goblin in turn 1, which made him useless, was an older campaign version).
A few torch bearers seem to be a must have with the illuminates (you are lawful and most opponents are chaotic), when i played i made two to fight the undead and the rest swordsman, but that was before they got illuminates.
The skirmisher, to be honest, i made none, because the hillsman had faster hill movement and his stats looked better.
Leveling your hero to javelineer seems pretty good especially if you do it before or during survival6 (one more movement point is pretty good in get your hero to the sign missions). If normal farmers are not quick, they can not keep the speed of the rest of your army. (In other words: I leveled quick farmers to spearman, but the rest to javelineer)
I think i know the role problem: [recall] recalls the first unit matching the standard unit filter, but [role] searches types first. An example: If the first unit in your recall list is a Bowman_s
[recall]
side=1
type=Woodcutter_s,Hunter_s,Swordsman_s,Torch-bearer_s,Bowman_s,Ranger_s
x,y=11,12
[/recall]
will recall it, but if you have a Woodcutter_s (other than Logan)
[role]
role=advisor1
type=Woodcutter_s,Hunter_s,Swordsman_s,Torch-bearer_s,Bowman_s,Ranger_s
[not]
description=Logan
[/not]
[/role]
assigns the role to the first Woodcutter_s it finds.
An easy fix: first the [role] part then
[recall] side=1 role=advisor1 x,y=11,12 [/recall], same with advisor2
Looking at the scenario survival5 you use an victory event for the victory speach. I would be surprised, if the Necromancer took part at the speech. You should use a die event instead. ([event] name=die [filter] description=Nemeah [/filter] ...
Unit balancing: I liked the ranger, because of the additional movement point and the fast forrest movement (in survival7 i managed to get 2 rangers into the keep of the right goblin in turn 1, which made him useless, was an older campaign version).
A few torch bearers seem to be a must have with the illuminates (you are lawful and most opponents are chaotic), when i played i made two to fight the undead and the rest swordsman, but that was before they got illuminates.
The skirmisher, to be honest, i made none, because the hillsman had faster hill movement and his stats looked better.
Leveling your hero to javelineer seems pretty good especially if you do it before or during survival6 (one more movement point is pretty good in get your hero to the sign missions). If normal farmers are not quick, they can not keep the speed of the rest of your army. (In other words: I leveled quick farmers to spearman, but the rest to javelineer)
-
Casual User
- Posts: 475
- Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm
Good afternoon!
I changed it to this for a few reasons, mostly because instead of getting just an illuminated glow in the surrounding squares, two more squares got illuminated because of Wesnoth's hex-based system.
Incidentally, the torch system is from another campaign (which is why torches are torch_r.cfg rather than torch_s.cfg).
While I could always switch back, using torches as units is an elegant and simple way of doing things. Furthermore, it restricts even more movement, and one of my basic ideas about 'Cave of shadows' was to restrict movement as much as possible and create as many chok-points as possible.
.
The skirmisher does need to be beefed up a little, though, and maybe the shepherd as well...
BTW,
Thanks for the feedback.
It is, I used to do it that way...claus wrote:It should be possible to use [time_area] for the "time" change and [item] to display the torch and the halo.
I changed it to this for a few reasons, mostly because instead of getting just an illuminated glow in the surrounding squares, two more squares got illuminated because of Wesnoth's hex-based system.
Incidentally, the torch system is from another campaign (which is why torches are torch_r.cfg rather than torch_s.cfg).
While I could always switch back, using torches as units is an elegant and simple way of doing things. Furthermore, it restricts even more movement, and one of my basic ideas about 'Cave of shadows' was to restrict movement as much as possible and create as many chok-points as possible.
I have implemented both WML changes, and the next update (in about a few days) should have them implemented. Thanksclaus wrote:WML
.Interesting. As a general rule, I tend to like 'big & tough' units over 'fast & versatile' ones. As such, I guess I found some of the branchings useless while others might not...claus wrote:Unit balancing:
The skirmisher does need to be beefed up a little, though, and maybe the shepherd as well...
BTW,
Strategic choices are your own, but let me point out that a strong and resilient spearman is very useful. Sure, he can lag behind your army a little, but most of your troops sorely lack hp (hey, armor is rare...), and such a spearman is perhaps the only one at your disposal that can take a lot of fighting and not fall down.claus wrote:I leveled quick farmers to spearman, but the rest to javelineer
Thanks for the feedback.
-
Casual User
- Posts: 475
- Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm
Good afternoon!
Survival 0.4 is up on the campaign server. It is still for Wesnoth 1.0 as I haven't downloaded Wesnoth 1.1 yet, and I haven't yet added the fancy cut-scenes I had wanted to. However,
Changelog:
-BIG re-balancing:villagers now need only 32 xp to level instead of 40
-shepherd, ranger, hillsman and skirmisher all toughened up
-some new WML (thanks, claus) for a few scenarios
Otherwise, nothing new on the western front...
Survival 0.4 is up on the campaign server. It is still for Wesnoth 1.0 as I haven't downloaded Wesnoth 1.1 yet, and I haven't yet added the fancy cut-scenes I had wanted to. However,
Changelog:
-BIG re-balancing:villagers now need only 32 xp to level instead of 40
-shepherd, ranger, hillsman and skirmisher all toughened up
-some new WML (thanks, claus) for a few scenarios
Otherwise, nothing new on the western front...
I think you should consider splitting your start events into prestart events and start events. Prestart events are normally used to do things which are hidden for the player, such as putting items and units on a map and recalling units.
You might also use [clear_variable] to delete variables you do not need any more, such as the store for the units of the knight in scenario3. (If you want to test code, it is better not to delete variables, but if everything is okay i prefer to delete variables which are not needed anymore.)
One more comment for scenario3: It should be possible to use [modify_side] side=2 team_name=2 [/modify_side] to declare war between side 1 and side 2 (add a gold=... to change the gold of side 2 too). (You would not need side 4 this way)
You might also use [clear_variable] to delete variables you do not need any more, such as the store for the units of the knight in scenario3. (If you want to test code, it is better not to delete variables, but if everything is okay i prefer to delete variables which are not needed anymore.)
One more comment for scenario3: It should be possible to use [modify_side] side=2 team_name=2 [/modify_side] to declare war between side 1 and side 2 (add a gold=... to change the gold of side 2 too). (You would not need side 4 this way)
-
Casual User
- Posts: 475
- Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm
Good afternoon!
Survival version 0.5 is up on the campaign server.
changelog:
-removed time limits in most scenarios
-difficulty level no longer changes the starting gold for either friend or foe
-difficulty level now changes the number of xp required for advancing
-split start and prestart events
-minor bugs fixed
-minor WML changes
Incidentally, version 0.5 is the one I was planning to release once I felt all the technical stuff had been figured out. All in all, it has gone according to schedule, and I believe the technical details are now fixed and most (if not all) bugs are fixed. However, if there still are, please report them...
So now, I have to start working on storyline, dialogue, balancing and general flavor and gameplay.
Suggestions would really be useful. Right now, I have no idea if people generally think it's crap or not...
I'd also like suggestion on how to improve the dialogue a little. I don't want to make this Shakespearian, but the dialogue really feels a little tacky at times, and the dramatic tension seems to be lacking in a number of scenarios.
And, we have time for one comment...
P.S. I haven't made it 1.1 compliant yet because I haven't upgraded to 1.1 yet... It's on my to-do list.
Survival version 0.5 is up on the campaign server.
changelog:
-removed time limits in most scenarios
-difficulty level no longer changes the starting gold for either friend or foe
-difficulty level now changes the number of xp required for advancing
-split start and prestart events
-minor bugs fixed
-minor WML changes
Incidentally, version 0.5 is the one I was planning to release once I felt all the technical stuff had been figured out. All in all, it has gone according to schedule, and I believe the technical details are now fixed and most (if not all) bugs are fixed. However, if there still are, please report them...
So now, I have to start working on storyline, dialogue, balancing and general flavor and gameplay.
Suggestions would really be useful. Right now, I have no idea if people generally think it's crap or not...
I'd also like suggestion on how to improve the dialogue a little. I don't want to make this Shakespearian, but the dialogue really feels a little tacky at times, and the dramatic tension seems to be lacking in a number of scenarios.
And, we have time for one comment...
I do it that way now. I had no idea you could use that...claus wrote:One more comment for scenario3: It should be possible to use [modify_side] side=2 team_name=2 [/modify_side] to declare war between side 1 and side 2 (add a gold=... to change the gold of side 2 too). (You would not need side 4 this way)
P.S. I haven't made it 1.1 compliant yet because I haven't upgraded to 1.1 yet... It's on my to-do list.
-
Casual User
- Posts: 475
- Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm
-
Casual User
- Posts: 475
- Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm