Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Discussion and development of scenarios and campaigns for the game.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

white_haired_uncle
Posts: 580
Joined: August 26th, 2018, 11:46 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by white_haired_uncle »

Luke the Flaming wrote:
November 27th, 2019, 11:57 pm
I had updated the campaign (to 1.14) and changed some stuff (mostly in the second half); I had only the last two scenarios (that include the "big battle") to revise when real life called.
However, maybe one day I'll finish it (for 1.16 or so, at this point ;) ).

In the meantime, thanks to Adamant14! :)
Hey, sorry, when I saw you hadn't posted in years and someone else released an update I figured you were long gone. If I'd known you were still around, I would have chosen a more polite way to express my feelings about the last scenario than I did.

Konrad2
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2471
Joined: November 24th, 2010, 6:30 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Konrad2 »

Retaliation
a messenger -> Messenger
(That's a unit name.) (Actually, why not call him a Scout instead? He isn't bearing any message 'from' someone, he is just reporting the things he found out by scouting.)
And it would be nice if that unit moved up to my leaders, then my screen doesn't have to switch between the messenger and my leaders.

The carryover dialog shows the original names of my leaders, not the ones I gave them in the setup.

Lifting the siege
The defeat conditions include the death of both allied leaders, but the note explains how many turns you lose if both of them die (something that supposedly won't happen without you losing anyway).


Any map with Selytron and Brightwood:
the Azure River -> Azure River

EDIT:
Lifting the siege
You don't actually lose if both allies die. So don't list it as defeat condition. (Said defeat condition only shows up if you decided in the previous scenario that you will hurry without resting doesn't seem to show up consistently.)

Note: if Myriel -> If

Deciding in the previous scenario to rush to help has apparently only downsides compared to resting.

The heroes say every scenario the same thing when they attack someone the first time. Maybe let them say this only once in the whole campaign?

EDIT 2:
Would you mind giving the allied sides in S3 to the player? I lose up to 12 turns because of something I can't really influence.

User avatar
Adamant14
Posts: 904
Joined: April 24th, 2010, 1:14 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Adamant14 »

Luke the Flaming wrote:
November 27th, 2019, 11:57 pm
I had updated the campaign (to 1.14) and changed some stuff (mostly in the second half); I had only the last two scenarios (that include the "big battle") to revise when real life called.
However, maybe one day I'll finish it (for 1.16 or so, at this point ;) ).

In the meantime, thanks to Adamant14! :)
Oh, you're still around here, that's cool, if quite unexpected. :D
Sorry, I made a mistake, I should have tried first of all to contact you, before I edited your campaign unsolicited, please excuse me, but after you have not been active in the forum for years, and have not published any other update of your campaign, I thought you had abandoned your project. :whistle:
Now that I know you're still here, I'll retire of course, and leave the server.pbl to you, so that you can either change the campaign version that's currently on the server, or replace it with your working version.

You'll find the server.pbl in your PM folder.
Author of Antar, Son of Rheor ( SP Campaign) | Development Thread + Feedback Thread + Replays of ASoR

User avatar
Luke the Flaming
Posts: 215
Joined: October 18th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Luke the Flaming »

Adamant14:
Don't worry, I appreciate that someone liked it enough to "keep it alive".
I still get notifications (to my old e-mail, that I check rarely), that's why I replied here.
Maybe I'll manage to have the "revised" version ready for 1.16, but I am not in a hurry to upload it (I'd have to complete it and I am not in a hurry).
You may keep going, if you like (it is not a problem for me; if it is for you, sorry! My reply had no intention to chase you away).

Konrad2:
-) the naming convention was a deliberate choice (for example, "a messenger" because Messenger it is not his nickname on the internet or something like that and his "real name" - that could be easily ranodmly generated - is of no importance for the story);
-) if you Rest at the end of Scenario 2, the foes will have more gold (since they had more time to prepare); if you March, your units may suffer an occasional Slow (1 on 3 chance eah turn, leaders unaffected) to represent that they are tired. The revised version explains it clearly, but I believe I had some dialogues about it in the old version too;
-) that's the role of "signature" battle cries. I like them and I find that one click per batttle (to dismiss them) is hardly annoying enough to include an option (at the very beginning of the campaign) to skip them;
-) I tested Scenario 3 multiple times, since I wanted the player(s) to see Selytron and Brightwood slowly "losing ground"; so the allies had to be weak enough not to steamroll the foes but not strong enough to win alone. Both the allies (sodes 8 and 9) and their foes (side 4, mainly) have little gold to prevent their turns taking ages (there are enough sides in the battle already; I did not want the player(s) to wait ages between their turns).
In the revised version, the penalty for the death of the allied leader is "demoralization" (Ywen dies = player 1 skips the next turn, except his leader since that could be dangerous. Same for Myriel and player 2. It is significant but manageable, especially since you should pay attention and know if/when the allied leaders are going to be die. It is also all clearly explained in the Objectives, so no "nasty surprises".)
Having the player(s) control the allies directly is something I would never find a "good solution" (both for gameplay and flavour).
O, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

Konrad2
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2471
Joined: November 24th, 2010, 6:30 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Konrad2 »

Lifting the siege
has been damaged -> damaged.
turbolent -> turbulent

A sad Autumn
accuses -> accusations
withint -> within

Salamander's Skull
orcisch -> orcish

User avatar
Adamant14
Posts: 904
Joined: April 24th, 2010, 1:14 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Adamant14 »

Konrad2 wrote:
November 27th, 2019, 5:22 pm
Retaliation
Hey, that sadic killer -> sadistic
fixed
Konrad2 wrote:
November 27th, 2019, 5:22 pm
Retaliation
surived -> survived
fixed
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 7:33 am
Retaliation
a messenger -> Messenger
not changed yet
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 7:33 am
Retaliation
And it would be nice if that unit moved up to my leaders, then my screen doesn't have to switch between the messenger and my leaders.
not changed
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 7:33 am
Retaliation
The carryover dialog shows the original names of my leaders, not the ones I gave them in the setup.
not changed yet, i have no idea how to fix that
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 7:33 am
Lifting the siege
The defeat conditions include the death of both allied leaders, but the note explains how many turns you lose if both of them die (something that supposedly won't happen without you losing anyway).
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 7:33 am
Lifting the siege
You don't actually lose if both allies die. So don't list it as defeat condition. (Said defeat condition only shows up if you decided in the previous scenario that you will hurry without resting doesn't seem to show up consistently.)
fixed (removed the defeat condition)
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 7:33 am
Any map with Selytron and Brightwood:
the Azure River -> Azure River
fixed
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 7:33 am
Lifting the siege
Note: if Myriel -> If
fixed
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 11:43 pm
Lifting the siege
has been damaged -> damaged.
fixed
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 11:43 pm
Lifting the siege
turbolent -> turbulent
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 11:43 pm
A sad Autumn
accuses -> accusations
There are two instances of accuses:

Code: Select all

"I laugh at your ridiculous accuses."
and

Code: Select all

"And your pathetic accuses are just an excuse to attack us and annex our lands to the barony of your boss, aren't they?"
Are both instances wrong?
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 11:43 pm
withint -> within
fixed
Konrad2 wrote:
November 28th, 2019, 11:43 pm
Salamander's Skull
orcisch -> orcish
fixed
Author of Antar, Son of Rheor ( SP Campaign) | Development Thread + Feedback Thread + Replays of ASoR

Konrad2
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2471
Joined: November 24th, 2010, 6:30 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Konrad2 »

Adamant14 wrote:
November 29th, 2019, 4:31 pm
Are both instances wrong?
I think so.

The escape
Why do the humans chasing me have the same color as my elves?

User avatar
Luke the Flaming
Posts: 215
Joined: October 18th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Luke the Flaming »

Konrad2 wrote:
November 29th, 2019, 4:55 pm
Adamant14 wrote:
November 29th, 2019, 4:31 pm
Are both instances wrong?
I think so.
In the meantime, thanks for the proofreading!
Konrad2 wrote:
November 29th, 2019, 4:55 pm
The escape
Why do the humans chasing me have the same color as my elves?
They don't (or at least, they should not...).

Side 1 (humans) is red (as usual, in the campaign).
Side 2 (elves) is green (as usual, in the campaign).
Side 3 (Barony) is gold (as usual, in the campaign).
Side 4 (wild creatures) is brown.
O, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

User avatar
Adamant14
Posts: 904
Joined: April 24th, 2010, 1:14 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Adamant14 »

Luke the Flaming wrote:
November 29th, 2019, 5:57 pm
Konrad2 wrote:
November 29th, 2019, 4:55 pm
Adamant14 wrote:
November 29th, 2019, 4:31 pm
Are both instances wrong?
I think so.
In the meantime, thanks for the proofreading!
Konrad2 wrote:
November 29th, 2019, 4:55 pm
The escape
Why do the humans chasing me have the same color as my elves?
They don't (or at least, they should not...).

Side 1 (humans) is red (as usual, in the campaign).
Side 2 (elves) is green (as usual, in the campaign).
Side 3 (Barony) is gold (as usual, in the campaign).
Side 4 (wild creatures) is brown.
Seems that the custom-team-colour (gold) did not work proper on newer BfW versions.
I noticed that behaviour on my engine too, and can second what Konrad2 mentioned.
Author of Antar, Son of Rheor ( SP Campaign) | Development Thread + Feedback Thread + Replays of ASoR

Konrad2
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2471
Joined: November 24th, 2010, 6:30 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Konrad2 »

For me wild creatures are grey, enemy humans are green, enemy wolf riders are brown.

User avatar
Ravana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2425
Joined: January 29th, 2012, 12:49 am
Location: Estonia
Contact:

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Ravana »

Unknown colors are displayed as magenta or green depending on where they are used.

Konrad2
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2471
Joined: November 24th, 2010, 6:30 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Konrad2 »

Meeting the dwarves
as we were used to do -> as we used to do
as they number augments -> as their numbers grow

Defence of the vale
volounteers -> volunteers
caring her eggs -> caring for her eggs
preys -> prey
I have to point out that the drake/dragon biology here is not exactly the canon one. Maybe replace the Dragon with an Armageddon Drake?
Turns out, the dwarves just don't know what a dragon looks like.

User avatar
Luke the Flaming
Posts: 215
Joined: October 18th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Luke the Flaming »

This is from WML wiki about [side]:
color: May be either a numeric color index or a color name (e.g. 'blue', 'purple', 'orange', etc.). The numeric form is deprecated. The default list of numbers and corresponding colors can be found in data/core/team_colors.cfg.
Is that no more true? will it be fixed? is there a workaround (since it is currently not working)?
Thanks.
O, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

User avatar
Luke the Flaming
Posts: 215
Joined: October 18th, 2006, 6:25 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Luke the Flaming »

I have downloaded the latest (stable) Wesnoth version and I am (slowly) checking the revised version (hopefully I'll complete it in the next weeks).

The Messenger in scenario 2 has a random name.

Scenario 3 offers the option to control the defenders (either one, both or none), but the AI gets double gold to compensate its inferior skill. The penalty if an allied leader dies is like I told earlier (side 1/2 skips a turn, except the leader, when Ywen/Myriel dies).

So far, all colours display correctly for me. They seem defined (as before) in ../data/core/team-colors.cfg , so I am not sure why they do not work for you (but do for me). :?
O, Wind, if Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

Konrad2
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2471
Joined: November 24th, 2010, 6:30 pm

Re: Our Longest Year (SP campaign with two playable sides)

Post by Konrad2 »

Underground
we understood while -> why

After the banter with the dwarvish guards there is a reeeeeeeeeally long delay before an earthquake hits and the scenario objectives appear. In the meantime I can actually move my cursor around, looking at the map.

Why exactly do they not just take the way back they came? (Said way was not yet blocked when the first chasm appeared.)

Units can have negative hitpoints after being hit by falling rocks.

Post Reply