[Historical] Under the Burning Suns - Dev Version (1.3.8+)

This is the place for discussing development of mainline campaigns, reporting bugs in them and providing overall feedback.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Shimrod
Posts: 20
Joined: February 28th, 2006, 9:22 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

A change in Stirring In The Night.

Post by Shimrod »

I wonder if this change in Stirring In The Night is intended:
The undead lords used to possess Garak if any of them survived 'till turn 12. But now (1.3.9) after killing any of them Garak is possessed immediately. Is it a bug or a feature?
Let your religion be less of a theory and more of a love affair.
Gilbert Keith Chesterton
Rhuvaen
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Post by Rhuvaen »

It's intended. They still possess Garak on turn 12 if none of them have died.

Story-wise it's because when one of them dies, the other would have no reason to fight on. Also. Garak must be possessed so there would be a problem if the player killed first one, then the other undead leader.
Mr. Wednesday
Posts: 14
Joined: June 3rd, 2007, 11:04 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Post by Mr. Wednesday »

There's bug -- after Garak was possessed, I promptly killed the other leader, only to see the scenario loop back through the Garak possession text and tell me I had to kill him or kill the remaining undead leader (who just died).

I think I'm playing with a copy that was downloaded from trunk ca. Friday.

I've attached pre- and post- autosaves. I'd obviously much prefer to kill the other undead leader, because he's been weakened and Garak is tough and has really nasty attacks.
Attachments
A_Stirring_in_the_Night_Turn_12.zip
Savegame from afterwards.
(95.09 KiB) Downloaded 899 times
A_Stirring_in_the_Night-Auto-Save12.zip
Autosave from before.
(96.22 KiB) Downloaded 855 times
Shimrod
Posts: 20
Joined: February 28th, 2006, 9:22 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Post by Shimrod »

Rhuvaen wrote:It's intended. They still possess Garak on turn 12 if none of them have died.

Story-wise it's because when one of them dies, the other would have no reason to fight on. Also. Garak must be possessed so there would be a problem if the player killed first one, then the other undead leader.
It seems you don't know how the old scenario ('till 1.3.8 ) worked. If player managed to kill both undead leaders befor turn 12, (s)he won immediately (only Garak was killed by revenge of the lords). And (s)he was treated as if all villages survived (according to future costs of recruitment). So there was no turn 12, no possessing Garak.
Now the behaviour is inconsistent - after killing one lord Garak is possessed. The objectives say to kill either second lord or possessed Garak without indicating any difference on decision who to kill. But if you kill Garak, the number of villages which survived is taken into account. If you kill the second lord (no matter on which turn) the number of villages doesn't matter. I don't believe it was intended.
Let your religion be less of a theory and more of a love affair.
Gilbert Keith Chesterton
turska
Posts: 20
Joined: October 8th, 2007, 12:40 pm

Post by turska »

Played on 1.3.9+svn.

Kaleh's new advancement tree is nice, but I was a bit disappointed to see a normal AMLA when I leveled him up the fourth time.

The recall list duplicates every time I move Nym, Zhul or Garak.

The second scenario can be easily completed with only Kaleh if he has the ability that gives him invisibility on dunes and an improved melee attack. The first bandit encounter is easily avoided with the invisibility, the undead can be outran and then you can sneak through the top dunes to the outlaw leader and kill him.

Edit: In the third scenario the possessed Garak scene takes place at turn 12 even if you have triggered it before by killing an undead leader.
Rhuvaen
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Post by Rhuvaen »

turska wrote:Played on 1.3.9+svn.
Good. A short feedback cycle helps :).
turska wrote:Kaleh's new advancement tree is nice, but I was a bit disappointed to see a normal AMLA when I leveled him up the fourth time.

The recall list duplicates every time I move Nym, Zhul or Garak.
Yuck. Normal AMLA's? How did they get in there? Recall list duplication in which scenario?

Please... a savegame... :)
turska wrote:The second scenario can be easily completed with only Kaleh if he has the ability that gives him invisibility on dunes and an improved melee attack. The first bandit encounter is easily avoided with the invisibility, the undead can be outran and then you can sneak through the top dunes to the outlaw leader and kill him.
You get a cookie for originality. I will need to adjust the tree so that this ability comes at a later time, then. I think it would only be a problem in this scenario, not any of the others.
turska wrote:Edit: In the third scenario the possessed Garak scene takes place at turn 12 even if you have triggered it before by killing an undead leader.
Thanks for reporting this.
Shimrod wrote:Now the behaviour is inconsistent - after killing one lord Garak is possessed. The objectives say to kill either second lord or possessed Garak without indicating any difference on decision who to kill. But if you kill Garak, the number of villages which survived is taken into account. If you kill the second lord (no matter on which turn) the number of villages doesn't matter. I don't believe it was intended.
Ah, inconsistency is bad... and certainly not intended.
Shimrod wrote:It seems you don't know how the old scenario ('till 1.3.8 ) worked. If player managed to kill both undead leaders before turn 12, (s)he won immediately (only Garak was killed by revenge of the lords). And (s)he was treated as if all villages survived (according to future costs of recruitment). So there was no turn 12, no possessing Garak.
Well, all the changes in this scenario that I made were:
  • - fixed the bug in the filter for corpse spawn
    - some cosmetic changes (special terrains)
    - cleaned up some duplication
It's possible that I lost something in the last part - some distinction in the different event outcomes or an unintended change in the flow of the events. I tried to follow the scenario logic as I found it, not try and change it. And what I found was that Garak was to be possessed in 100% of all cases (even if only at the end to kill him). You couldn't get away with Garak surviving this scenario.

Shimrod, I greatly appreciate your close look at scenario balancing / flow and hope to stay in discussion here. :)

I hope I'll get a chance to look at it thoroughly and see what's a bug and what's intended, but I can't promise it will make it into the next release which is due soon.
turska
Posts: 20
Joined: October 8th, 2007, 12:40 pm

Post by turska »

The recall list duplication when moving Nym, Garak or Zhul seems to occur on every scenario except the first one (presumably because your recall list is empty in that scenario). I've attached a save that also includes some really weird bandit behaviour.

I was wrong about the AMLA, it was a special AMLA (ranged attack improvement) but I didn't get the option window, just a flash on the unit like with a normal AMLA.
Attachments
UtBS_Scenario2_1.3.9+svn-bugs.zip
(113.54 KiB) Downloaded 868 times
Shimrod
Posts: 20
Joined: February 28th, 2006, 9:22 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Post by Shimrod »

Rhuvaen wrote:Well, all the changes in this scenario that I made were:
  • - fixed the bug in the filter for corpse spawn
    - some cosmetic changes (special terrains)
    - cleaned up some duplication
It's possible that I lost something in the last part - some distinction in the different event outcomes or an unintended change in the flow of the events. I tried to follow the scenario logic as I found it, not try and change it. And what I found was that Garak was to be possessed in 100% of all cases (even if only at the end to kill him). You couldn't get away with Garak surviving this scenario.
I'll try to be more elaborate. First objectives of the scenario are to survive until dawn or defeat both undead leaders. Dawn is expected at turn 12. So there are 3 possibilities:
  1. None of the undead leaders is killed 'till turn 12. Nym sees Naia but the undead leaders stop it from rising. One of them possesses Garak and they say that the sun won't rise until one of them is victorious. Player has to kill either the remaining undead lord or possessed Garak. On victory the number of defended villages determines the costs of recruitment in following scenarios.
  2. One of the undead leaders is killed before turn 12. He says he'll come back in more powerful form, the other leader gets angry with Kaleh for interfering and fights to punish him. On turn 12 the killed leader returns, possesses Garak and stops the sum from rising. Player has to kill either the remaining undead lord or possessed Garak. On victory the number of defended villages determines the costs of recruitment in following scenarios.
  3. Both undead leaders are killed before turn 12. As a "farewell gift" they kill Garak. Kaleh is congratulated that thanks to his courage they didn't have to wait until dawn. Player is given a bonus: the cost of recruitment in next scenarios is as low as possible, no matter how many villages survived.
Possessing Garak immediately after death of undead leader without changing (almost) any other conditions causes some problems:
Sun tries to rise when the undead leader is killed instead of turn 12.
Bonus rules are unclear and hidden (kill both undead leaders, no matter how long it takes).
I see two solutions to the problem: either restore death events of Azkotep and Ystara (just not possess Garak) or rethink when player should get his bonus and how should the sun behave.
Let your religion be less of a theory and more of a love affair.
Gilbert Keith Chesterton
Shimrod
Posts: 20
Joined: February 28th, 2006, 9:22 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

1.3.10 has come.

Post by Shimrod »

I looked at it and see another surprise. When Elyssa leaves, she offers a flaming sword. If player has chosen to ally with dwarves, the sword is magical, if with trolls it's not.
And back to 'Across the Harsh Sands' - on hard when Elyssa is found, a chasing revenant says ' Now you shall die! And I shall personally make it slow and painful, to thank you for that scorching you gave me'. It's left from times when she was chased by a wounded draug. But now it makes no sense.
Let your religion be less of a theory and more of a love affair.
Gilbert Keith Chesterton
Jozrael
Posts: 1034
Joined: June 2nd, 2006, 1:39 pm
Location: NJ, USA.

Post by Jozrael »

Signed on the duplicate recalls for whenever the mentioned units move. The recall list doubles each time :x
Mr. Wednesday
Posts: 14
Joined: June 3rd, 2007, 11:04 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Post by Mr. Wednesday »

Based on posts in tech support and WML workshop, I think the problem has been found and is in the process of being addressed.
SkeletonCrew
Inactive Developer
Posts: 787
Joined: March 31st, 2006, 6:55 am

Post by SkeletonCrew »

Indeed I found the cause of the duplication problem and we're looking into fixing it.
Mr. Wednesday
Posts: 14
Joined: June 3rd, 2007, 11:04 pm
Location: South Bend, IN

Post by Mr. Wednesday »

Has #6 been adjusted to make the dwarves more competitive? I was reading through the campaign feedback thread for it, and everyone there seemed to think that it was a lot easier to play siding with the trolls. I just played 1.3.10+svn on the easiest difficulty, and the initial wave of dwarves was overwhelming, to the point where I think they might want to be scaled back a little.
Sly
Posts: 258
Joined: October 10th, 2005, 11:59 am
Location: Montrouge (Fr, 92)
Contact:

Post by Sly »

Just a litle note about Kaleh new advancement : I think he could get a second level before getting all the choice and/or getting commandment as an aption too ;)
Sly
Posts: 258
Joined: October 10th, 2005, 11:59 am
Location: Montrouge (Fr, 92)
Contact:

Post by Sly »

Just another thing : it seems that Kaleh camoflage don't work on sand but only on sand dunes :?
Locked