Scenario 6: The Siege of Elensefar

[vodot]

So, you play your first-ever Wesnoth campaign and expect to beat it on hard?

Well, of course I expect to beat it- why else would I be playing? But I do expect it to be hard. You can't label a game mode "challenging" and expect me to play, content, on one of the lesser modes- I was sorely provoked!

Nonetheless I am learning my limits. This scenario was a severe instructor.

1. Difficulty: Challenging (hard); 1.8.6; my first campaign ever; 220g.
2. Challenge: 10. For about a day, it was an 11.
3. Clarity: 10. Murder, Death, Kill.
4. Dialog: 2. Look, Konrad's cause here is desperate- even with 220g, he has no hope of a frontal assault on the city, let alone of effecting a meaningful siege. The AI is simply not going to play this one the way the dialog is written. It should be called "The Liberation of Elensefar," or "The Second Battle of Elesefar" with hints to the player that the Ocrs are going to break out of the city and attack Konrad's forces at night. Also, per the norm, the writing continues to be unconvincing and a little lame. It's good, but it's rarely great. Needs a rewrite.
5. Obstacles: 10. This scenario broke me, and my forces. My recruited horsemen fell to the Orcs, delaying and distracting them. I eventually lost all my thieves to the undead in my 'assassinate-the-warlord and delay the horde' strategy. Konrad was pushed back across the river by the Undead with great loss and I had to resort to an immersion-breaking promotion to save him. I lost what few loyal mermen I had kept from The Bay of Pearls. I lost a Shyde. It was painful.
6. Enjoyment: 2. I felt like I had to resort to cheating the AI to defeat the Orcs; and that's not very fun. Why would the Orcs charge out from a nigh-unassailable position? I did learn a lot about the AI and about my own forces, however.
7. Changes: Rewrite the dialog; or script the AI to hold in the castles rather than pour out of the city.
8. Restarts: Ugh. I restarted this scenario A BUNCH. 10+ times; and my losses were severe even in the save I kept. I hope they are not campaign-destroyers. At the end of this final attempt, I stood my new Archmage (granted, bad idea, but he was suck a badass-machine-of-undead-destruction in this scenario!) forth in the cave, and kabow, the lvl2 undead spawn. W. T. F. I was weary from restarting, and I was cussing like a sailor, so I confess: I did reload 3-ish times from a save at this point. I tried a few variations with hideous casualties, and finally I tried a desperate gamble with my last loyal thief + Konrad vs. Sorceror and got lucky; I lost the Thief but Konrad finally cut down that S.O.B... and I called it a day.

This is my first campaign ever, and this scenario was simply seminal in it's teaching value- and in it's capacity to make me pound my mouse on the table in frustration! This game has that X-COM quality about it, where the recruit you have lovingly nurtured, and named (ok, I am a dork), and tracked, and carefully positioned (so you think, you noob!)... dies with sudden finality to a lucky shot! I love Thieves, and I tried so many times to keep them; yet my skill is simply not up to snuff to keep them alive and bring down the warlord and delay the undead. Argh!

Yet I love it. I am learning to accept losses of advanced (and, *sigh* even loyal) units as a realistic part of the experience.

[taptap]

So, you play your first-ever Wesnoth campaign and expect to beat it on hard?

Well, of course I expect to beat it- why else would I be playing? But I do expect it to be hard. You can't label a game mode "challenging" and expect me to play, content, on one of the lesser modes- I was sorely provoked!

Imagine if you play it on normal now, and on hard later. You have at least twice the fun. If you have to reload a scenario 10+ times I would say it simply is too hard for you now on hard. (Although you won't accept that after finally beating it.) The same goes for valley of the dead. A game that shows you your limits (and this one did to me even on normal, although I didn't need ten restarts as it was a little easier there) but leaves you space to grow later on is much more satisfying to me than one I beat on hard the first time I ever play.

[vodot]

I like playing games that keep me consistently on the ragged edges of my abilities, rather than games that allow me a slow progression from poor to excellent. I don't want to feel coddled- I want the game to be dangerous, and perhaps punishingly so, early. I like losing to the AI much more than beating the AI by variable degrees. Does that make sense? And there are always more difficult campaigns to play, to provide me that sliding scale of difficulty when I'm ready for it.

EDIT: I like Megaman 3 more than Mario 64. Does that make sense? Both are fantastic; difficult to over-appreciate; but they have extremely different philosophies about difficulty.
Not trying to take the thread off topic.

[zookeeper]

What I frankly don't get is why people find this scenario so much more difficult than the preceding ones. On hard, I already find it hard to clear Blackwater Port and Isle of the Damned as well as trying to keep most of the mermen alive in Bay of Pearls. SoF is hard, yes, but I've never found it to be that much harder than the preceding ones.

Also note that while on easy/beginner it should be possible (not easy) to beat each scenario basically without any carryover gold or a recruit list and on normal it should be possible with very little carryover gold and a poor recall list, on hard/challenging you're far more likely to get stuck if you arrive to a scenario with little gold and not so many good recalls.

[taptap]

You win Isle of the Damned even if you don't manage to kill both liches. That isn't so hard.

[zookeeper]

You win Isle of the Damned even if you don't manage to kill both liches. That isn't so hard.

Right, I forgot to mention that I always try to kill both. Just surviving isn't indeed very hard.

[Wesbane]

• 1) Level/version? Hard/1.9.4
  2) Difficulty? 5 But I played this long time ago...
  3) Objectives? Very clear.
  4) Dialogue? Really fine.
  5) Challenges? Huh? I mean what challenge? Battle was shorter then assembling an army... But I guess as always it was applying right strategy to chosen troops.
  6) Fun? 8 Maybe even more fun than I played it first time!
  7) Changes? Now you got me. This is a joke, right? Since this is one of oldest and best balanced campaign ever for wesnoth, but maybe I'm wrong.
  No restart and reloads replay is attached. When out of sync error appears check ignore all and choose no.

4. Dialog: 2. Look, Konrad's cause here is desperate- even with 220g, he has no hope of a frontal assault on the city, let alone of effecting a meaningful siege. The AI is simply not going to play this one the way the dialog is written. It should be called "The Liberation of Elensefar," or "The Second Battle of Elesefar" with hints to the player that the Ocrs are going to break out of the city and attack Konrad's forces at night. Also, per the norm, the writing continues to be unconvincing and a little lame. It's good, but it's rarely great. Needs a rewrite.

Oh my I had only 204... It so true, I mean what siege? Look at this picture...

What I frankly don't get is why people find this scenario so much more difficult than the preceding ones. On hard, I already find it hard to clear Blackwater Port and Isle of the Damned as well as trying to keep most of the mermen alive in Bay of Pearls. SoF is hard, yes, but I've never found it to be that much harder than the preceding ones.

That is only my personal theory, but maybe it will helps wondering no more for those who care too much. This is because of superior strategy and unstoppable force.

Superior strategy:

Strategy of truly great commander is out of discussion. Since it is not something that can be adjusted accordingly to situation the only conclusion is that only battles are wrong not generals.

Unstoppable troops:

There are mythic best troops in wesnoth that are good in every battle conditions. I did not recruit them myself but I hope that I will master this game to such a degree that someday I will manage that too.

Actually there is a lot of similar topics about it – scenario is to hard or need tweaks. And it is not important that the only thing that need tweak is unfortunately not tweak-able easily. That is leader mind. At least reading what was written lately about Infested Caves in Northern Rebirth convinced me to that.

[vodot]

What I frankly don't get is why people find this scenario so much more difficult than the preceding ones.

This scenario feels like a puzzle. It feels like it has a "solution." Finding the solution seems more important than employing a dynamic strategy; and finding a "solution" takes time and trial and error; whereas a dynamic strategy can be adjusted fluidly without restarts. Trial and error is tedious. Maybe it's just me.

On hard, I already find it hard to clear Blackwater Port and Isle of the Damned as well as trying to keep most of the mermen alive in Bay of Pearls.

Well, so do I. My mermen were slaughtered in Bay of Pearls. But when I finally won, I felt like the problem all along had been my bad strategy and general noobishness.

The perfect counter-argument to what I'm saying would be to set this scenario before an excellent strategist and then have him, with no outside information, beat this scenario on his first try (regardless of losses). However, I personally feel that the information given the player is simply so incomplete, or so misleading that the first time it is attempted even an excellent player will always have to restart this scenario at least once.

Maybe that's really the point: I want the player to have enough information that they should be able to win without immersion-breaking reloads. This is the same reason I dislike Valley of Death. I think that this fact is why we have lots of new (and old!) players talking about SoE "tricks."

[taptap]

Oh my I had only 204... It so true, I mean what siege? Look at this picture...

Come on, it is not about your superior strategy in this scenario but your superior play in earlier levels which is helped big time by the fact you know what is awaiting you. You have 4 knights and 2 lancers despite going to Isle of the Damned (Vodot went the other way) because of your better xp management. Vodot recalled one knight that has 70xp already, that is, he sacrificed nearly 2 new knights to put this experience into that one knight. He has a red mage, a shyde (one level 3, instead of 2-3 druids and no white mages in sight), an elvish captain, two mermen, ... and some elvish level2 he didn't recall. What was your recall list?

[vodot]

Vodot recalled one knight that has 70xp already, that is, he sacrificed nearly 2 new knights to put this experience into that one knight. He has a red mage, a shyde (one level 3, instead of 2-3 druids and no white mages in sight), an elvish captain, two mermen, ... and some elvish level2 he didn't recall.

Ah, so true! Alas for my depleted, noobish forces!

Is it really possible to approach this scenario with 4 Knights and 2 Lancers... AND other advanced units? I almost cannot believe it. Suffice it to say that having that much firepower would make this scenario much easier, and would, more importantly, greatly reduce the player's susceptibility to the misinformation of the dialogue/theme that was so frustrating to me. My little weenie-elves were desperately lacking good situational intelligence!

[Wesbane]

Come on, it is not about your superior strategy in this scenario but your superior play in earlier levels which is helped big time by the fact you know what is awaiting you.

Sorry for inconvenience I just did not type not what now has been corrected. Since it change sense of a sentence to exactly opposite to what I had on my mind. That there is nothing like strategy that give you success every time. And players using their earlier experience sometimes do not make good choice. But all in all this is not a scenario in which previous knowledge helps that much like for example Pursuit from NR. And really I do not remember exactly each level in each campaign. I just thought that since HttT has so many flat terrain on maps is just perfect to play with horseman.

I think that this fact is why we have lots of new (and old!) players talking about SoE "tricks."

You are right there are tricks, game wide, and they are pointed out in tips on title screen. That is experience leaders first, then healers, then whatever you find useful, but remember more middle level units is better than one highly advanced. That is why leadership is a great boon. And if you really want to master your skill as player difficulty level is second first is always that you reload on losses or not.

You have 4 knights and 2 lancers despite going to Isle of the Damned (Vodot went the other way) because of your better xp management.

Nice that you pointed this out. Since Muff Malal’s Peninsula is much better for leveling units.
Now I will strip myself from my newly gained title of a decent player.(Its a pity because I started used to it ) I played DW on normal. And finally my most disappointing recall list.

Recall list for scenario The Siege of Elensefar:

Elvish Captain auto recall
First turn recall
Loyal units:
Moremimru, white mage - reward for Isle of the Damend (Fifth scenario)
Haldiel, knight - Initial unit (horseman) from Blackwater Port (Second scenario)
Simyr, knight - reward for Blackwater Port (Second scenario)
Regular units:
Elvish druid
Knight
Lancer
Total:

• 1 - white mage,
  1 - elvish shaman
  3 - knights
  1 - lancer

Second turn recall
Loyal units:
Elrian, mage (14xp to level) - unit that joins you on Alduin (Third scenario)
Regular units:
Elvish Captain - (26xp to level)
Two horseman (3xp and 14xp to level)
Total:

• 1 - mage
  2 - horseman
  1 - Elvish Captian

Overall 10 recalled units + 1 auto recall

Full recall list (Only level 2 units)

• 2 - Elvish captains
  1 - Elvish Druid
  3 - Knights (2 loyal)
  1 - Lancer
  1 - White Mage (loyal)
  1 - Outlaw
  1 - Trapper
  2 - Mermen Warriors (1 Storm Trident)
  1 - Mermaid Priestess

[Faello]

6. Enjoyment: 2. I felt like I had to resort to cheating the AI to defeat the Orcs; and that's not very fun. Why would the Orcs charge out from a nigh-unassailable position? I did learn a lot about the AI and about my own forces, however.

If you're not skilled enough yet to beat it w/o save scumming, just change the difficulty level.

If you want to check how to do it with balanced forces, check one of my 1.9.6 hard diff lvl replays of this scenario.

btw. there's nothing wrong with inability to pass this scenario on hard if your adventure with wesnoth has just begun.

[zookeeper]

What I frankly don't get is why people find this scenario so much more difficult than the preceding ones.

This scenario feels like a puzzle. It feels like it has a "solution." Finding the solution seems more important than employing a dynamic strategy; and finding a "solution" takes time and trial and error; whereas a dynamic strategy can be adjusted fluidly without restarts. Trial and error is tedious. Maybe it's just me.

On hard, I already find it hard to clear Blackwater Port and Isle of the Damned as well as trying to keep most of the mermen alive in Bay of Pearls.

Well, so do I. My mermen were slaughtered in Bay of Pearls. But when I finally won, I felt like the problem all along had been my bad strategy and general noobishness.

The perfect counter-argument to what I'm saying would be to set this scenario before an excellent strategist and then have him, with no outside information, beat this scenario on his first try (regardless of losses). However, I personally feel that the information given the player is simply so incomplete, or so misleading that the first time it is attempted even an excellent player will always have to restart this scenario at least once.

Maybe that's really the point: I want the player to have enough information that they should be able to win without immersion-breaking reloads. This is the same reason I dislike Valley of Death. I think that this fact is why we have lots of new (and old!) players talking about SoE "tricks."

Well, sure, I agree that every scenario should be possible to beat on the first try simply by utilizing the information you are given and good strategy.

Unfortunately, there's at least two reasons why that is very difficult to achieve: the difficulty of most scenarios depends on the behaviour of the AI and the way you have to make your recruiting decisions on the first 2-3 turns. If there's no fog or shroud then you can dynamically adjust your recruits based on the type of units the AI gets, but not the type of strategy the AI will employ. Also, dropping hints about the AI's behaviour isn't that easy either; if we'd tell the player that in SoE it might be a good idea to lure the orcs out of the city, that would probably give the newbie the impression that he should hole up in the forests and wait for the orcs.

Valley of Death would probably be a lot easier to correct, and I think that is the more legitimate case of misinformation given to the player; it's never a good idea to just do what you're told and stay in your castle.

[Faello]

5. Obstacles: 10. This scenario broke me, and my forces. My recruited horsemen fell to the Orcs, delaying and distracting them. I eventually lost all my thieves to the undead in my 'assassinate-the-warlord and delay the horde' strategy. Konrad was pushed back across the river by the Undead with great loss and I had to resort to an immersion-breaking promotion to save him. I lost what few loyal mermen I had kept from The Bay of Pearls. I lost a Shyde. It was painful.

I took a liberty of playing with your savegame and played this scenario with no saving/reloading and with 1 restart (after my loyal knight died). You've plenty of gold and (as you will see) you can look strong enough to intimidate AI and gain upper ground when necessary.

I'd end in turn 23 but my troops failed a leader-kill attack thus I've finished it at turn 26. No mass-knights is necessary. It's basically the same strategy I've used in my previous replays, but it was easier here since on 1.9 Siege of Elsenefar minimal gold amount was changed to 100 and here minimal gold amount is still 200, thus even with kind of weak troops you've brought to this senario, you're able to win it without much of a fuss if you'll adapt a correct strategy.

So, for the third time:
- no loyal units losses
- only 3 losses
- hard difficulty level
- no save/reloading
- 220gp replay

Have fun watching!

[taptap]

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?

Medium (Normal) + Champion (Challenging), 1.9.9

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)

Depends. 8.

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?

Very clear.

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?

Well, why exactly is the Queen of Wesnoth (even if it is the evil one) always sending orcs?

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?

The first night. Keeping loyals alive. The cave.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)

8

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?

No changes necessary.

About the replay - the anti-how-to

This time on challenging I played the reckless afternoon rush as Wesbane did. I had slightly less cavalry than him (four knights, two horsemen without experience = big difference), on my recall list were further two white mages, two druids, three rangers, red mage. I recalled white mage, druid, the knights, recruited two horsemen, two fighters, a shaman and a mage and moved Konrad himself forward.

If you watch the replay you see that to make the rush work I am doing all that what you shouldn't do against orcs, rushing at afternoon while hoping to crush them in time before it is night, with the thieves coming to help once I am in. I wouldn't recommend this as a strategy. A little bad luck in the afternoon rush can kill you. You have a very unhealthy economy (because you have literally no time to take villages), and even a unit that dies to a single knight charge can dodge two knights on 40%, hell even if it dodges only one, it is a big setback. If anything like this happens, you will have huge trouble. If you look at my statistics, I was lucky. This is not due to save-loading (I restarted once though) - but when your strategy is a crazy rush from turn 1 the difference between save-loading and restarting the scenario really blurs (that is one reason why it is not healthy to start a scenario ten times). Getting the three lucky knight charges extra makes a huge difference. Likely there are many mistakes in my gameplay, both micromanagement during the rush and endgame, but I am sort of a beginner myself. I play since September.

A more sound approach - the one with which I played on normal - would take the villages, won't recall all the knights (upkeep) on turn 1 for a crazy rush but later preparing the attack, waiting the night - which is easier with the better army - have the thieves and an elvish rider distract the opponent (while still keeping the thieves safer than behind the enemies line). Also being too heavy in cavalry units isn't so useful against the undead you have to face next.

Losses: 1 knight, 2 thieves, 1 fighter
Kills: 42