SXC Development
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Re: SXC Development
OK
First roaming BOSSES: (they all have same attacks & hp now @ default maps)
Situation now:
30-3 & 30-3 attacks
1000 hp total
+10 resistances extra
so 90 damage = max possible they can do
Master at Arms: +9-2 both strikes gives
7-5 becomes 16-7 = 112 max
20-1 becomes 29-3 = 87 max
For a based melee fighter that looks possible...
This will bring the characteristics of any type of BOSS back in the game!
Those equal both strikes roaming bosses from Wesnoth version 1.6.x doesnt make sence
Examples:
If they attack u:
and u stand @ 30% defense and 15% resistances vs that attack
melee: 0,7 x 0,8 x 16 x 7 = 62,72 average, 89,6 max (if all hits)
ranged: 0,7 x 0,8 x 29 x 3 = 48,72 average, 69,6 max (if all hits)
If they attack u:
and u stand @ 40% defense and 15% resistances vs that attack
melee: 0,6 x 0,8 x 16 x 7 = 53,76 average, 89,6 max (if all hits)
ranged: 0,6 x 0,8 x 29 x 3 = 41,76 average, 69,6 max (if all hits)
If they attack u:
and u stand @ 60% defense and 15% resistances vs that attack
melee: 0,4 x 0,8 x 16 x 7 = 35,84 average, 89,6 max (if all hits)
ranged: 0,4 x 0,8 x 29 x 3 = 27,84 average, 69,6 max (if all hits)
If they attack u:
and u stand @ 70% defense and 15% resistances vs that attack
melee: 0,3 x 0,8 x 16 x 7 = 26,88 average, 89,6 max (if all hits)
ranged: 0,3 x 0,8 x 29 x 3 = 20,88 average, 69,6 max (if all hits)
This shows us: the difference between both attacks isnt so big.
(But the practical calculations looks ofcourse different then this theoretical example...)
While the BOSS keeps its unique profile, what makes the game more interesting.
This simple calc can been used for balance roaming-bosses, and what attacks it should have
at certain turns in the game. With weapons specials or some NEW abilities things looks
ofcourse different. LMAO xD
It's often more a feeling what is good or not, basicly.
Last thing, this also shows us:
30% def ~50-60 avg. damage received (our poor small dwarven brother @ flat)
60% def ~30-35 avg. damage received (a simple footpad @ flat)
This this this this isssss amazing.....
So... terrain defenses (footpad) can be godly good (if enemy keeps missing, or +1 def-ring)
while high armor on dwarven, does lower received damage but it get hit so much more !!!
We need more evaluations and idea's of these kinda calcs,
so we can make one workable situation.
The new system doesnt have to be perfect... it never will be..
The characteristics of units @ start of scenario should remain more in-tact i think,
else picking units doesnt make sence, for certain maps with other enemy & terrain.
There is no rush at this global major wesnoth problem for SXC-games.. none has done it so far,
we just need more time for completer calcs and such... (and we just started a few weeks ago)
Just my 2 cents...
PS:
Can u put #define WEAPON_SPECIAL_SXC_FURY back in file, then with 5 rounds.
So we can have: Frenzy (2) Rage (3) Fury (5) & maybe later we can set Berserk (10).
The 5 & 10 rounds can then been used on lower strikes "roaming bosses" or leaders.
First roaming BOSSES: (they all have same attacks & hp now @ default maps)
Situation now:
30-3 & 30-3 attacks
1000 hp total
+10 resistances extra
so 90 damage = max possible they can do
Master at Arms: +9-2 both strikes gives
7-5 becomes 16-7 = 112 max
20-1 becomes 29-3 = 87 max
For a based melee fighter that looks possible...
This will bring the characteristics of any type of BOSS back in the game!
Those equal both strikes roaming bosses from Wesnoth version 1.6.x doesnt make sence
Examples:
If they attack u:
and u stand @ 30% defense and 15% resistances vs that attack
melee: 0,7 x 0,8 x 16 x 7 = 62,72 average, 89,6 max (if all hits)
ranged: 0,7 x 0,8 x 29 x 3 = 48,72 average, 69,6 max (if all hits)
If they attack u:
and u stand @ 40% defense and 15% resistances vs that attack
melee: 0,6 x 0,8 x 16 x 7 = 53,76 average, 89,6 max (if all hits)
ranged: 0,6 x 0,8 x 29 x 3 = 41,76 average, 69,6 max (if all hits)
If they attack u:
and u stand @ 60% defense and 15% resistances vs that attack
melee: 0,4 x 0,8 x 16 x 7 = 35,84 average, 89,6 max (if all hits)
ranged: 0,4 x 0,8 x 29 x 3 = 27,84 average, 69,6 max (if all hits)
If they attack u:
and u stand @ 70% defense and 15% resistances vs that attack
melee: 0,3 x 0,8 x 16 x 7 = 26,88 average, 89,6 max (if all hits)
ranged: 0,3 x 0,8 x 29 x 3 = 20,88 average, 69,6 max (if all hits)
This shows us: the difference between both attacks isnt so big.
(But the practical calculations looks ofcourse different then this theoretical example...)
While the BOSS keeps its unique profile, what makes the game more interesting.
This simple calc can been used for balance roaming-bosses, and what attacks it should have
at certain turns in the game. With weapons specials or some NEW abilities things looks
ofcourse different. LMAO xD
It's often more a feeling what is good or not, basicly.
Last thing, this also shows us:
30% def ~50-60 avg. damage received (our poor small dwarven brother @ flat)
60% def ~30-35 avg. damage received (a simple footpad @ flat)
This this this this isssss amazing.....
So... terrain defenses (footpad) can be godly good (if enemy keeps missing, or +1 def-ring)
while high armor on dwarven, does lower received damage but it get hit so much more !!!
We need more evaluations and idea's of these kinda calcs,
so we can make one workable situation.
The new system doesnt have to be perfect... it never will be..
The characteristics of units @ start of scenario should remain more in-tact i think,
else picking units doesnt make sence, for certain maps with other enemy & terrain.
There is no rush at this global major wesnoth problem for SXC-games.. none has done it so far,
we just need more time for completer calcs and such... (and we just started a few weeks ago)
Just my 2 cents...
PS:
Can u put #define WEAPON_SPECIAL_SXC_FURY back in file, then with 5 rounds.
So we can have: Frenzy (2) Rage (3) Fury (5) & maybe later we can set Berserk (10).
The 5 & 10 rounds can then been used on lower strikes "roaming bosses" or leaders.
Re: SXC Development
just some quick notes on hero balance:
terrain def: can be increased along with the terrain training (set it to 40%)
it makes also sense this way
in SXRPG there is an ability that allows you to rise all terrain defs by 20% up to a max of 50%
i also suggest this to SXC. a problem might be the fact that abilities are only available at max lvl.
however, this will make many heroes with weak terrain def more useful
with these two possibilities there should be no worry to make heroes not able to adapt with a few gold coins spend
armor:
240% as max is good. i think that a maximum of 150% to distribute will cover up most things.
(in my version its 140%, but i think about raise it to 150%)
it keeps high armor heroes useful, while also offering new alternatives.
for example a Human General has a default armor of 80% (4x20%) with 150% to distribute, it can reach a max of 230%.
this is lower than 240% max, but he is still much more versatile to distribute his armor.
(also he has 6 movement base (but higher terrain movement cost, which may be equalized though))
however, higher values in that section may strongly affect balance among the armored heroes
of course there wil be ALWAYS units that are simply not as good as others.
lets look at the 0% heroes.
only reason to take a 0% hero is that he may offer something else very useful. in case of the fencer it may be high terrain def and skirmisher.
an orcish warrior with 0% overall has no great terrain def and also nothing else.
you wont be able to make it as useful as other heroes.
ok, he has no initial weak resistances.
possible solution:
-----------------
you might want to catch indicators if a unit has 0% positive and nothing else to offer.
if it has noting else to offer you might raise the mumber of free armor to 180%
having 180% freely to distribute can be a good thing and an advantage over other, 0% units that have other advantages.
regards, Mabuse
terrain def: can be increased along with the terrain training (set it to 40%)
it makes also sense this way
in SXRPG there is an ability that allows you to rise all terrain defs by 20% up to a max of 50%
i also suggest this to SXC. a problem might be the fact that abilities are only available at max lvl.
however, this will make many heroes with weak terrain def more useful
with these two possibilities there should be no worry to make heroes not able to adapt with a few gold coins spend
armor:
240% as max is good. i think that a maximum of 150% to distribute will cover up most things.
(in my version its 140%, but i think about raise it to 150%)
it keeps high armor heroes useful, while also offering new alternatives.
for example a Human General has a default armor of 80% (4x20%) with 150% to distribute, it can reach a max of 230%.
this is lower than 240% max, but he is still much more versatile to distribute his armor.
(also he has 6 movement base (but higher terrain movement cost, which may be equalized though))
however, higher values in that section may strongly affect balance among the armored heroes
of course there wil be ALWAYS units that are simply not as good as others.
lets look at the 0% heroes.
only reason to take a 0% hero is that he may offer something else very useful. in case of the fencer it may be high terrain def and skirmisher.
an orcish warrior with 0% overall has no great terrain def and also nothing else.
you wont be able to make it as useful as other heroes.
ok, he has no initial weak resistances.
possible solution:
-----------------
you might want to catch indicators if a unit has 0% positive and nothing else to offer.
if it has noting else to offer you might raise the mumber of free armor to 180%
having 180% freely to distribute can be a good thing and an advantage over other, 0% units that have other advantages.
regards, Mabuse
The best bet is your own, good Taste.
Re: SXC Development
I redownloaded it and I received the same error. Should I be deleting scenarios because there appears to be a limit to the number of cfgs that can be included in an add-on? Is there some other reason for deleting 2 from each?
edit: Deleting 6 cfgs worked.
odd
edit: Deleting 6 cfgs worked.
oddMy_Own_Minion: get rid of the scientist, i can take the blind guy
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
Re: SXC Development
Golbeeze :
Yes that is why i sugested deleting 2 from each. I figure it is the scen_def. But just in case it was good idea to try the others. try once more with only 1 less scenario in scen_def. that will probably work.
I still dont know what is causing the bug. Possibly a game engine bug. But a workaround seems to be limiting the number of scenarios in a dir. Lester found that.
Yes that is why i sugested deleting 2 from each. I figure it is the scen_def. But just in case it was good idea to try the others. try once more with only 1 less scenario in scen_def. that will probably work.
I still dont know what is causing the bug. Possibly a game engine bug. But a workaround seems to be limiting the number of scenarios in a dir. Lester found that.
Re: SXC Development
I can't justify it by blaming the number of scenarios though. My "Golbeeze's Maps" add-on has 18 scenarios and works just fine. I've never had anyone tell me it caused an error and it works fine for me. 
This is quite perplexing. Have you tried taking the issue to the #wesnoth-dev? Perhaps they can shed some insight into the issue.
This is quite perplexing. Have you tried taking the issue to the #wesnoth-dev? Perhaps they can shed some insight into the issue.
My_Own_Minion: get rid of the scientist, i can take the blind guy
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
Re: SXC Development
well you're right it *should* not be a problem. There are other add-ons with more scenarios. It is probably a combination of factors, linked to something specific about SXC. But i've had no luck finding the problem as i am unable to recreate it.
Reducing the scenarios is not a fix, but it is a temp work-around. I will leave it to -stf- to sort it out.
Reducing the scenarios is not a fix, but it is a temp work-around. I will leave it to -stf- to sort it out.
Re: SXC Development
Yesterday someone asked me about the error. He has Windows 7 and he got problem with error in SXC. I told him to erase both SXCollective, if he still has it, and SXCollection, and erase all files in the cache directory, reinstall SXCollection and then recache. He returned after some time saying all is ok afterwards. There is probably something left in the cache from SXCollective, causing duplicate macros names and because many of them were changed, they are not compatible with each other. I had similar problem in Linux when I updated Wesnoth to 1.8.4, but after deleting files in cache directory (some yet named as 1.8.0), all worked again. Hopefully this can help you too.
Re: SXC Development
Well, I deleted the cache and reinstalled SXC and the error still occurred. I am using 1.8.3 at the moment.
My_Own_Minion: get rid of the scientist, i can take the blind guy
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
-
SpoOkyMagician
- Posts: 281
- Joined: September 5th, 2008, 8:04 am
- Location: I have no idea...
Re: SXC Development
I wanted to post a map I am designing for SXC. I believe it is complete. (Unless I missed something) I thought that it turned out pretty well. (I may have to edit this map later so this may not be the final edit. Although, this is the general idea...) The scenario/map will be entitled "SXC SpoOky Forest". (lol)
It's gonna take me some time to understand/learn all the new changes to the sxc macros and whatnot. (but than again, I never made a sx scenario...) However, I should be able to create the scenario. (Maybe not everything working but, functional. I'll ask -stf- as needed.) For now, I will show you the map. (This will be a preview of the scenario.)
See either of these...
screenshot
or...
edit: Okay, I got a very basic/simple working version... But, I just copied another scenario and modified it... I need to add a lot of other things in, test it, balance it, etc... I will keep you posted. Also, let me know if you think I need to modify the map any. Although for now, I need to go to bed. I will see you tomorrow.
It's gonna take me some time to understand/learn all the new changes to the sxc macros and whatnot. (but than again, I never made a sx scenario...) However, I should be able to create the scenario. (Maybe not everything working but, functional. I'll ask -stf- as needed.) For now, I will show you the map. (This will be a preview of the scenario.)
See either of these...
screenshot
or...
SXC_SpoOky_Forest.map- SXC SpoOky Forest (map file)
- (35.58 KiB) Downloaded 483 times
"You don't have to understand me, I'm just there!" ~ SpoOkyMagician
Creator of: Unwelcome Guests Series, Modifiable Android Project, SpoOky's Survivals, and many more... (Most of my old stuff is gone.)
(User Page)
Creator of: Unwelcome Guests Series, Modifiable Android Project, SpoOky's Survivals, and many more... (Most of my old stuff is gone.)
(User Page)
Re: SXC Development
I can't reproduce you're errors with mappack version 0.2.22 with Wesnoth version 1.8.4 & WinXP prof.Golbeeze wrote:Well, I deleted the cache and reinstalled SXC and the error still occurred. I am using 1.8.3 at the moment.
I use a really old 15,4" notebook, but it works here. We had earlier troubles with those "random" errors, and by remove 1 or 2 maps, it worked again. We also altered, by splitting into 3 submap for map-scn. But i guess that there is some other, incompactible issue with other packs..? what occours these strange errors, or some sort of limitations, or just some "hidden" errors we haven't discover yet. I donno.
But try it on a clean wesnoth & then <only> SXCollection installed.. if it still gives errors we may have more clues about this situation. Or try wesnoth 1.8.4 just incase....
What also surprises me, that those errors only occour on Windows compiled Wesnoth systems.
But then again, it works here... ?!
This is all i know about it, i hope it helps u a bit.
Fantastic map, you're a real artist at layouts. U really did this map in less then a day/hours? WOWspookymagician wrote:I wanted to post a map I am designing for SXC. I believe it is complete. (Unless I missed something) I thought that it turned out pretty well. (I may have to edit this map later so this may not be the final edit. Although, this is the general idea...) The scenario/map will be entitled "SXC SpoOky Forest". (lol)
Let the haunted "SXC SpoOky Forest" be fun for us all. I really like the idea & name.
Re: SXC Development
Were rings of darkness entirely removed from SXC? I just went to 19,17 in SXGE_Attack and did not obtain the ring. The ring did not go away, either. I know the other map I placed one in was SXGE_Rush, but I didn't test it to see if it was there.
EDIT: I tested more maps and apparently NONE of my items work. Please fix these ASAP! Without any of my bonus items, there is absolutely no reason to stray from the path. There are no bonuses given to strong teamwork in beating back the optional bosses. If you want my input on balancing these optional bosses (I never did get around to balancing them
), then I will help. However, these extra items should be included. Now the sprites are on the map and lure players in without giving them any reward. None of my rings, weapons, amulets, etc. function.
Thank you
EDIT: I tested more maps and apparently NONE of my items work. Please fix these ASAP! Without any of my bonus items, there is absolutely no reason to stray from the path. There are no bonuses given to strong teamwork in beating back the optional bosses. If you want my input on balancing these optional bosses (I never did get around to balancing them
), then I will help. However, these extra items should be included. Now the sprites are on the map and lure players in without giving them any reward. None of my rings, weapons, amulets, etc. function. Thank you
My_Own_Minion: get rid of the scientist, i can take the blind guy
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
Re: SXC Development
All is fixed and updated over time, so I will get to it soon or later, I am currently at cloak in the item macros
Re: SXC Development
Thanks 
Also, I will be gone from wesnoth for a while due to my computer dying.
Also, I will be gone from wesnoth for a while due to my computer dying.
My_Own_Minion: get rid of the scientist, i can take the blind guy
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
Talkative: You're like the Wizard of Oz, but evil.
Add-ons in 1.8: Golbeeze's Maps, Golbeeze's RPGs, Evolving Era
Contributor to and Maintainer of Mercenaries
-
SpoOkyMagician
- Posts: 281
- Joined: September 5th, 2008, 8:04 am
- Location: I have no idea...
Re: SXC Development
while working on my sxc spooky forest scenario, I noticed something... in the macro: #define SXC_ENEMY_MODIFICATION_2 MP HP MA MD RA RD RES W1 W2 W3 W4
I don't see anywhere for the side= attribute... how do you expect for the game to know what the side number is? (unless you write it manually within the side tag...) if it is, just add side={SIDE} to the macro and this would make it work properly... (I am surprised it even works as of right now without this...)
edit: nevermind... i was right... i checked advanced and it had: side=6. (just make this an argument so you only need 1 single macro within the side tag. so make it this...)
#define SXC_ENEMY_MODIFICATION_2 SIDE MP HP MA MD RA RD RES W1 W2 W3 W4
edit: unless there is some reason for this... (like using it elsewhere... if so, let me know.
) But for now, I will write it the way you have it... (just in case there is a reason for this...)
edit: continues to work on SXC SpoOky Forest...
edit: I decided to add comments to this scenario. (Making this a 'example' scenario. -stf- planned to make this stuff so I decided to help him out on it. This should help others to understand what the code is doing... If you find any mistakes within my comments/code, please let me know -stf- whenever this is finished. I should send it to you in a PM or something.)
edit: if you are wondering, here is what I have thusfar... I need to do the bosses, items, etc. event, fix some minor things with the map, and add some extra stuff as needed... Although, I think this would make a wonderful example scenario... (but not complete yet anyway...) Anyway, here is the scenario... Note that this is somewhat of a spoiler... don't look at it if you don't want to be surprised when it comes out and is finished.
(removed file for version 0.9)
note: Some of these macros may be deprecated in the future or going to be with an upcoming update. (-stf- will have to tell me if they are/are not so I can change them and re-comment my code and go from there...)
note: Also note that this scenario is untested as well... it should work though... (if i followed the macros right.) However, I will give it a test right now to be sure...
edit: it works... as long as you have the map... (lol... look about 5 posts back. I posted my map in there.)
edit: found a wml typo: change the image="... .jpeg" to background="... .jpg" in the part tag... my bad...
edit: ignore the comment on the version translation... I think it should be fine. (I am not an expert on the matter but, when it comes to variables/macros, I don't believe you should put them in strings... unless, you have to... but, that's just my opinion anyway...)
edit: I am gonna take a break from this for now. I made some minor changes/fixes but, I don't see the need to upload it yet. I will continue to fix/update and post the rest tomorrow or so...
edit: Nearly finished with SXC SpoOky Forest. I just need to add environmental items, a few events, and some balancing/testing. (It should be done after that.)
edit: I think this should be enough for you to work with... (sxc team) Hopefully, I didn't make this over the impossible limit... (I believe I did... this scenario needs testing/balancing... Whenever we have some time, please test this...) *uploads*
I don't see anywhere for the side= attribute... how do you expect for the game to know what the side number is? (unless you write it manually within the side tag...) if it is, just add side={SIDE} to the macro and this would make it work properly... (I am surprised it even works as of right now without this...)
edit: nevermind... i was right... i checked advanced and it had: side=6. (just make this an argument so you only need 1 single macro within the side tag. so make it this...)
#define SXC_ENEMY_MODIFICATION_2 SIDE MP HP MA MD RA RD RES W1 W2 W3 W4
edit: unless there is some reason for this... (like using it elsewhere... if so, let me know.
) But for now, I will write it the way you have it... (just in case there is a reason for this...)edit: continues to work on SXC SpoOky Forest...
edit: I decided to add comments to this scenario. (Making this a 'example' scenario. -stf- planned to make this stuff so I decided to help him out on it. This should help others to understand what the code is doing... If you find any mistakes within my comments/code, please let me know -stf- whenever this is finished. I should send it to you in a PM or something.)
edit: if you are wondering, here is what I have thusfar... I need to do the bosses, items, etc. event, fix some minor things with the map, and add some extra stuff as needed... Although, I think this would make a wonderful example scenario... (but not complete yet anyway...) Anyway, here is the scenario... Note that this is somewhat of a spoiler... don't look at it if you don't want to be surprised when it comes out and is finished.
(removed file for version 0.9)
note: Some of these macros may be deprecated in the future or going to be with an upcoming update. (-stf- will have to tell me if they are/are not so I can change them and re-comment my code and go from there...)
note: Also note that this scenario is untested as well... it should work though... (if i followed the macros right.) However, I will give it a test right now to be sure...
edit: it works... as long as you have the map... (lol... look about 5 posts back. I posted my map in there.)
edit: found a wml typo: change the image="... .jpeg" to background="... .jpg" in the part tag... my bad...
edit: ignore the comment on the version translation... I think it should be fine. (I am not an expert on the matter but, when it comes to variables/macros, I don't believe you should put them in strings... unless, you have to... but, that's just my opinion anyway...)
edit: I am gonna take a break from this for now. I made some minor changes/fixes but, I don't see the need to upload it yet. I will continue to fix/update and post the rest tomorrow or so...
edit: Nearly finished with SXC SpoOky Forest. I just need to add environmental items, a few events, and some balancing/testing. (It should be done after that.)
edit: I think this should be enough for you to work with... (sxc team) Hopefully, I didn't make this over the impossible limit... (I believe I did... this scenario needs testing/balancing... Whenever we have some time, please test this...) *uploads*
- SXC_SpoOky_Forest.map
- SXC SpoOky Forest map file...
- (35.58 KiB) Downloaded 445 times
- SXC_SpoOky_Forest.cfg
- SXC SpoOky Forest config file...
- (28.75 KiB) Downloaded 450 times
"You don't have to understand me, I'm just there!" ~ SpoOkyMagician
Creator of: Unwelcome Guests Series, Modifiable Android Project, SpoOky's Survivals, and many more... (Most of my old stuff is gone.)
(User Page)
Creator of: Unwelcome Guests Series, Modifiable Android Project, SpoOky's Survivals, and many more... (Most of my old stuff is gone.)
(User Page)
-
Clonkinator
- Posts: 676
- Joined: July 20th, 2006, 4:45 pm
- Location: Germany
Re: SXC Development
Are you guys still updating this? I've been trying to play this for a while now, but the version uploaded on the add-on server seems to be broken - when I download it, restart Wesnoth and then try to play it, it loads for about four minutes and then simply gives me an error message about some [then] tags not being closed. This makes the entire add-on completely unplayable - it doesn't even show up in the map list. (Yes, I did download the Mercenaries era as well before trying it. I'm using Wesnoth 1.8.5)
Now, someone hosted SXAdventure on the multiplayer server and it seemed to work, so I joined that at around turn 10 and was able to play it at last. However, some changes that have been done since I last played SX (which was when Wesnoth's newest version was still something 1.6-ish) seem to make no sense to me.
First of all, the fact that killing units of side 6 and 7 no longer yields any gold whatsoever after a certain amount of turns has passed. What exactly is the point of this? At first glance, it seems like it's supposed to encourage the players to push forward and kill the enemies of those sides as quickly as possible - however, the fact that the leaders of these sides respawn (and thus continue to spawn enemies later on in the game) hasn't been changed. This means that later on in the game, you have to deal with a ton of very powerful creeps, half of which are better off being ignored completely because killing them gives you absolutely nothing.
I originally made enemy leaders respawn at certain points in the game to ensure that the enemy types remain varied, to ensure that not a specific type of enemy, resistance or damage type becomes too dominant. However, since the creeps of those sides pose just as much of a challenge to the players as the later sides do - they spawn less creeps, but the creeps themselves have the same strength - I see absolutely no point in making them give no gold upon being killed.
I would prefer it if you just changed it back the way it was, that being all sides' creeps giving gold for the entirety of the game. Camping side 6 to gain gold is pointless anyway, as this means that all enemy leaders continue to spawn creeps all the time. To make killing an enemy leader more rewarding, simply increase the income bonus gained, and maybe reduce a side's income to 0 while its leader is dead to prevent them from pulling out massive waves of enemies when they respawn later on.
Also, why do all player units seem to have had their resistances tempered with? I can see the point of removing overpowered weapon specials like drain, but why reduce resistances of units with good resistance and increase the resistance of units with bad resistance? Units with bad resistance often have something else to make up for it, like high defense and/or good move types. This removes each unit's specialties to a certain degree, and makes them more and more the same.
I also noticed that all player units seem to have had their defense upped to at least 40% on each terrain. While I don't mind this quite as much, I still think that it would be better to have buyable defense upgrades rather than just outright boosting all units' defense. Bad defenses would be much cheaper to raise (something like 20% to 25% would probably be something like 5 gold), while raising already high defenses would be very expensive (60% to 65% could be something like 30 gold already). You could also prevent the players from raising their defense beyond a certain degree to prevent it getting out of hand; 70% to 80% would probably be optimal as a cap. Platypus' Colloseum does it, too.
However, I must also say that I'm kinda happy to see that people seem to still be playing and enjoying SX even today, and that the other work you did on this, like adding an inventory to store the potions in, is quite nice. I've stopped working on SX myself, but I still want to help improve it by giving feedback like I'm doing right now. Keep up the good work.
Now, someone hosted SXAdventure on the multiplayer server and it seemed to work, so I joined that at around turn 10 and was able to play it at last. However, some changes that have been done since I last played SX (which was when Wesnoth's newest version was still something 1.6-ish) seem to make no sense to me.
First of all, the fact that killing units of side 6 and 7 no longer yields any gold whatsoever after a certain amount of turns has passed. What exactly is the point of this? At first glance, it seems like it's supposed to encourage the players to push forward and kill the enemies of those sides as quickly as possible - however, the fact that the leaders of these sides respawn (and thus continue to spawn enemies later on in the game) hasn't been changed. This means that later on in the game, you have to deal with a ton of very powerful creeps, half of which are better off being ignored completely because killing them gives you absolutely nothing.
I originally made enemy leaders respawn at certain points in the game to ensure that the enemy types remain varied, to ensure that not a specific type of enemy, resistance or damage type becomes too dominant. However, since the creeps of those sides pose just as much of a challenge to the players as the later sides do - they spawn less creeps, but the creeps themselves have the same strength - I see absolutely no point in making them give no gold upon being killed.
I would prefer it if you just changed it back the way it was, that being all sides' creeps giving gold for the entirety of the game. Camping side 6 to gain gold is pointless anyway, as this means that all enemy leaders continue to spawn creeps all the time. To make killing an enemy leader more rewarding, simply increase the income bonus gained, and maybe reduce a side's income to 0 while its leader is dead to prevent them from pulling out massive waves of enemies when they respawn later on.
Also, why do all player units seem to have had their resistances tempered with? I can see the point of removing overpowered weapon specials like drain, but why reduce resistances of units with good resistance and increase the resistance of units with bad resistance? Units with bad resistance often have something else to make up for it, like high defense and/or good move types. This removes each unit's specialties to a certain degree, and makes them more and more the same.
I also noticed that all player units seem to have had their defense upped to at least 40% on each terrain. While I don't mind this quite as much, I still think that it would be better to have buyable defense upgrades rather than just outright boosting all units' defense. Bad defenses would be much cheaper to raise (something like 20% to 25% would probably be something like 5 gold), while raising already high defenses would be very expensive (60% to 65% could be something like 30 gold already). You could also prevent the players from raising their defense beyond a certain degree to prevent it getting out of hand; 70% to 80% would probably be optimal as a cap. Platypus' Colloseum does it, too.
However, I must also say that I'm kinda happy to see that people seem to still be playing and enjoying SX even today, and that the other work you did on this, like adding an inventory to store the potions in, is quite nice. I've stopped working on SX myself, but I still want to help improve it by giving feedback like I'm doing right now. Keep up the good work.