New user feedback/questions

[MDG]

Hi, I want to point something. Most of the campaigns, have not level. For an experimented player no problem, but for a user like me, there are sometimes too hard at "expert" level. It's better, if the people show the challenge level. Like this more people, can test the campaigns.

You've already started a whole topic about your concern here, and you received an answer for it. Why spam this into a topic that it has nothing to do with?

[ydcl]

Sorry, but I really thins this kind of question, is a feedback. People, who just are simple usersl like me, don't finish the campaigns, because they are too hard. Giving some levels, so the people, can really enjoy the campaigns. At time, wer're sure, we're not perfectly idiots ! Sorry for my simple english, but it's not my first language.

[Sangel]

I'm not sure that I understand your complaint.

Is the problem that the campaigns are too hard? Because Wesnoth has a lot of campaigns available which have "Easy" and "Normal" difficulty levels; some also have "Beginner", which is even easier. If you're not experienced, then playing a campaign on Challenging or Difficult setting is not going to be much fun.

Or is the problem that there is too big a gap in difficulty? That going from "Normal" to "Challenging" is too much of a jump?

You can post your concerns in your own language, if you like. If it's a common language, it's likely that someone will be able to translate your concerns for you - the Wesnoth forums have helpful players from many, many countries.

Either way, you must be aware that balancing the difficulty level of a campaign is not easy; campaign developers spend a lot of time making changes, trying to get the difficulty correct, but everyone plays in a different way, so striking the right balance is hard.

[MDG]

@Sangel, ydcl is complaining that some UMC campaigns only have one level and therefore different difficulties aren't available (check the other thread I linked to. Velensk gives him an answer there).

[Kalajel]

I've gotten used to "5-4", so I'd find a change weird, but it would definitely make more sense as something like:

5×4

And even if it wouldn't be the "best" for a specific group, it would probably have significantly more people understanding what it meant than the current system. It would also be uglier, though.

Yeah, eventually, I also got used to it… and yeah, I know the Tutorial explains this, but I've found myself sometimes during the heat of battle, or when I went away for Wesnoth for a while, becoming terribly confused at which was the damage adn which was the number of attacks. But would it really be uglier?

Well let's compare a few possible solution and see…

5-4
5x4
5X4
5 x4
(D)5-(A)4
(d)5-(a)4
(D)5, (A)4
5 (4)
5; 4
5: 4
5 • 4
5|4


M'kay, after the ones with the "d" and"a" for "damage" and "attacks" in parenthesis start looking funky, so I'd say "no go" to those… The ones with teh letters in parenthesis would make it clearer, but they do take up a lot of space… So far, I think the best choice would be the "5 x4" one…

[Gambit]

I like the dot. It means multiplication but it doesn't look as [censored] as the x.
Still no better than the hyphen however IMO.

[Zarel]

Looks a bit uglier than the hyphen, but it's far better than the hyphen in the sense that it wouldn't be confused with a range or subtraction.

[Kalajel]

Actually, I was inspired by the CCG Emmerlaüs in whic the the "•" basically meant "equal to" your power level…

So basically a card could say "d8 X your power level", while another card would say "d8 • your power level"…

[Yoyobuae]

How about something similar to dice notation, for example:

Code: Select all

7s3

Which would read 7, strikes: 3.

I guess it is not that clear from the notation itself. But at least it would be harder to confuse the notation for something else (the biggest issue with 7-3 notation).

[Caphriel]

Actually, if you use the same structure as dice notation, 7s3 would be seven 3-damage strikes, wouldn't it? The number before the d in dice notation is the multiplicity, the number after is the size.

[Gambit]

Crazy idea here... bear with me, we could refer new players to that tutorial thinger whence they would learn about the hyphonated notation.

[Zarel]

Crazy idea here... bear with me, we could refer new players to that tutorial thinger whence they would learn about the hyphonated notation.

It's called "KISS". Tutorials should not be necessary unless you have no other way of making something less ambiguous. Or would you like "5-3" to mean "You do 5 times the cosine of 5 degrees, 3 factorial times"?

[Gambit]

The tutorial should be THE FIRST THING anyone does anyway. If you have a question about the game:

1. Tutorial
2. Manual
3. Stickied Threads
4. Forum Search
5. Forum Thread
[...]
178. Propose a change to the game to suit.

[Kalajel]

Crazy idea here... bear with me, we could refer new players to that tutorial thinger whence they would learn about the hyphonated notation.

Yeah, eventually, I also got used to it… and yeah, I know the Tutorial explains this, but I've found myself sometimes during the heat of battle, or when I went away for Wesnoth for a while, becoming terribly confused at which was the damage adn which was the number of attacks.

[Zarel]

The tutorial should be THE FIRST THING anyone does anyway. If you have a question about the game:

1. Tutorial
2. Manual
3. Stickied Threads
4. Forum Search
5. Forum Thread
[...]
178. Propose a change to the game to suit.

...again, it's called KISS. Just because you have a tutorial is no reason to make the game hard to understand for no reason.