Stories of Tarlyn v0.1.1: 2 intertwined campagins

Discussion and development of scenarios and campaigns for the game.

Moderators: Developers, Forum Moderators

Stories of Tarlyn v0.1.1: 2 intertwined campagins

Postby AI » January 31st, 2008, 9:37 pm

Latest version is 0.1.1

Current state:
-The Irna Chronicles: 3 scenarios, needs balancing+playtesting
-Tarlyn's Heroes: 6 scenarios that are mostly done
Scenarios:
T01: should be okay
T02: playtesting needed
T03: playtesting needed
T04: serious playtesting needed, especially with turn limit and crossing the river
T05: serious playtesting needed
T06: might work, might not
T07: should work now, will need playtesting
I01: reworked, needs playtesting
I02: reworked, needs playtesting
I03: balancing?
Last edited by AI on September 7th, 2008, 2:23 am, edited 6 times in total.
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Re: As yet unnamed campaign

Postby zookeeper » January 31st, 2008, 10:05 pm

AI wrote:Current problems:
-Multiple units with canrecruit=1 on the same side cause massive recruitment failure (This may just be impossible with my version of wesnoth (1.2.8, ubuntu won't go to 1.3.x until 8.04))

It's simply not supported. One recruiting leader unit per side only. You can search for "multiple canrecruit=1" or something to find several past threads about it, if you're looking for a workaround (no perfect one exists).
User avatar
zookeeper
WML Wizard
 
Posts: 9381
Joined: September 11th, 2004, 10:40 pm
Location: Finland

Postby AI » January 31st, 2008, 10:50 pm

k, then, any help with the rest?
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Postby Blueblaze » February 1st, 2008, 3:41 am

-Multiple units with canrecruit=1 on the same side cause massive recruitment failure (This may just be impossible with my version of wesnoth (1.2.8, ubuntu won't go to 1.3.x until 8.04))


Work around: Make a right click menu (called: set_menu_item) so that when the right type of unit lands on the select terrain, then it'll enable a menu to allow it to recruit. Downside is, it's only for dev branch, so you'll have to wait on this.

By the way, you might want to ask around, as other ubuntu users tend to compile their own version of the dev line, so you might find someone who can upload their build for you.

unit on keep can recruit on turn 1


Easiest work around: Make the keep terrain start off as regular castle, and then whenever you want the recruitment to be enabled, change the terrain into a keep.


The rest of the stuff, I am unsure what you mean as I didn't get a chance to play it yet, but hopefully that'll help guide you a little.
Newest Releases:
Conquest 1.0
Empires 1.1

User avatar
Blueblaze
 
Posts: 418
Joined: June 24th, 2007, 12:16 am

Postby AI » February 1st, 2008, 6:44 am

I could compile my own, that's not a problem, but I don't like working against a changing API. (nor do I like my games changing under my nose)

the "can recruit on turn 1" thing was (part of) a description of the problem, not a wishlist ;)

anyway, I'll try to be a bit more clear now:
1. multiple canrecruit basically fails, so I've removed it from all but the first scenario (where the problem doesn't surface, or doesn't surface in the way I play (I should test that))
2. on scenario 3, the player's side (#1) fails to persist, possibly because side 2 is also persistent. I could of course, simulate persistance by throwing all the units into a store, but that's just a workaround.
3. I'd like some input on the existing work

So, #1 is basically a lost cause unless I write my own menu or fix the game (why is this such an issue anyway?)
#2 I have a workaround for, but again, why is this a problem?
#3 should be obvious ;)

Are there good explanations as to why #1 and #2 don't work? (game internals-wise) I'm starting to feel like checking out the latest svn and fixing it myself, but I haven't done any serious C++ in a while...


edit: on a rather unrelated note, I found that share_view does nothing if the side sharing it doesn't have fog. Is this known? Is it intentional?
edit2: now that I'm posting bugs here, in 1.2.8, it seems to me that having a null side causes savegame failure (it refuses to load as it can't touch a non-existant recall list, or something)
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Postby AI » February 1st, 2008, 9:55 am

I fixed the persistance issue, it was a typo in "decription"...

now to merge my two versions back together... (one with persistance, one with stores AND a few new things)
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Postby AI » February 10th, 2008, 8:46 am

version 0.0.4 on the server, first post edited.
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Postby Exchelsia » February 11th, 2008, 4:12 am

Well, I played it all on Easy, and I really liked it! It could use some balancing, and I really messed up on the third scenario because I was thinking I could wipe out the enemy by turn 10, and then his reinforcements popped out of nowhere. Maybe you should put a little schpiel at the beginning with him saying that he is getting reinforcements soon or something.

Also, on the fourth one, the AI seemed a little wonky, because there were a lot of level 3's pretty randomly there, which seemed a lot different from the other scenarios, but for the most part they left me alone, which I thought was strange. Maybe put less Level 3's and make the AI more aggressive?

Note that I was only playing this on easy, because I suck.

Other than that, it seems like a great campaign!

P.S. - Minor idea on the 2nd scenario, that I just remembered, is that there was a LOT of swamp between you and the enemy leaders. Maybe put a couple of grassland 'islands' in the swamp, like there is in most of the mainline campaigns?[/url]
Exchelsia
 
Posts: 17
Joined: January 21st, 2008, 12:14 am

Postby AI » February 11th, 2008, 11:40 am

Exchelsia wrote:Well, I played it all on Easy, and I really liked it! It could use some balancing, and I really messed up on the third scenario because I was thinking I could wipe out the enemy by turn 10, and then his reinforcements popped out of nowhere. Maybe you should put a little schpiel at the beginning with him saying that he is getting reinforcements soon or something.

Heh, I do that all the time and I WROTE the darn thing ;)
Maybe I'll do that.

Also, on the fourth one, the AI seemed a little wonky, because there were a lot of level 3's pretty randomly there, which seemed a lot different from the other scenarios, but for the most part they left me alone, which I thought was strange. Maybe put less Level 3's and make the AI more aggressive?

You noticed the ambushers right? All the non-moving units are ambushers that aren't hidden for some reason, I'm not sure what the cause is.

Note that I was only playing this on easy, because I suck.

Other than that, it seems like a great campaign!

P.S. - Minor idea on the 2nd scenario, that I just remembered, is that there was a LOT of swamp between you and the enemy leaders. Maybe put a couple of grassland 'islands' in the swamp, like there is in most of the mainline campaigns?

Maybe, the big idea here is that the militia charged right into a trap and the saurians have taken some well defensible positions in the middle of a swamp. On the other hand, it takes a lot of time (and units on harder difficulties) to cross the swamp, time you probably don't even have on hard.
Which of the saurians did you attack by the way?
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Postby Exchelsia » February 14th, 2008, 5:24 am

I attacked the Saurian to the left, simply because my faster guys that could move two hexes in swamp were over there. And it seemed a little bit closer overall, at least to me.

I found that the Peasant Mages were really useful, and I really liked the idea of them in it. It would be cool to maybe have a scenario focused on their training place or something, like it being under attack or some such thing. They were a tiny bit overpowered, maybe, at least for the attack, but their low health balanced it out. It was nice to have mages that could deal decent melee attacks for once.

Oh, and I pretty much only leveled up Halberdiers, Peasant Silver War Mages, and my leaders, though I'm not sure how well that would have worked out if the campaign was longer.
Exchelsia
 
Posts: 17
Joined: January 21st, 2008, 12:14 am

Postby AI » February 14th, 2008, 7:03 pm

Well, I have 2 more scenarios almost ready (the things that aren't finished yet are the maps and the AI for 06).

I think I'll make the east saurian easier to reach to balance that out a bit.

current problems are still:
-fort guards all appear in the west fort on 03
-about half of the ambushers on 04 aren't hiding

I have 3 more scenarios planned in this campaign, with probably a few in between.
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Postby AI » February 26th, 2008, 4:53 am

0.0.6 is on the server

I might release 0.0.7 really soon if I can get T06's bugs worked out.
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Postby AI » February 26th, 2008, 10:47 pm

T06 is fixed, 0.0.7 is on the server, details in first post.
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Postby jyrierik » February 27th, 2008, 6:10 pm

I'm having a problem with the Defense of Tarlyn scenario. On turn 5 when Mayla appears, I keep getting "Error when playing the game: game-error: Unknown unit type 'Darsil'". Any fix?

Jyri
jyrierik
 
Posts: 62
Joined: May 23rd, 2004, 10:12 pm

Postby AI » February 27th, 2008, 6:51 pm

Which wesnoth version are you using, 1.2.x?

LOYAL_UNIT may have changed, because it works perfectly fine in 1.3.19 (and has for a few versions)
AI
UMC-Dev Cultist
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: January 31st, 2008, 8:38 pm

Next

Return to Scenario & Campaign Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests