Grnk the Mighty: Parts 1 & 2 now on 1.12 and 1.14 server

[Grummel]

I've just finished part 2 and I must say this was the best add-on campaign I've played so far. Thank you for the Great work!

Minor kludges:
In the end, it displays this, including the HTML tags (On Wesnoth 1.12):

Code: Select all

<span font='48'><span color='#A050A0'>Maybe there is hope for the world yet.</span> (Grnk)
————————————
Thank you for playing Grnk the Mighty!</span>

Spoiler:

Vanak died in battle at the old age of 7.

Did you mean 70? Old age for orcs may not mean the same as for humans, but 7 sounds totally unreasonable.

[mattsc]

Thanks for taking the time to post here, it's great to hear that you enjoyed the campaign!

I thought I had checked that the ending message works correctly in both Wesnoth 1.12 and 1.14, but you're right, it does not in 1.12. I'll fix that for the next update. Thanks for reporting.

Spoiler:

Vanak died in battle at the old age of 7.

Did you mean 70? Old age for orcs may not mean the same as for humans, but 7 sounds totally unreasonable.

Spoiler:

I do mean 7, and it is supposed to sound ridiculous. This is meant to reiterate one of the minor running themes throughout the campaign that most orcs get killed very early on in combat (so it has nothing to do with their natural life span). Making it through 5 or 6 years of battle is extraordinary. [Of course, this also assumes that orcs in Grnk's universe mature extremely quickly compared to humans, but that's the nice thing about this being a fantasy world, I don't have to be entirely realistic. And I also state at the beginning that I am not following Wesnoth canon, which uses very different numbers e.g. in SotBE.] If I'd said something more realistic like 27, or even 17, the player would just shrug and think "that's kind of young", but not think more about it. 7 really brings across the point I want to make, so I am taking the artistic license here.

So, while I don't disagree with you (and appreciate the comment; I've, in fact, been waiting for somebody to point this out), I am not going to change it.

[denispir]

Hello @mattsc!

I have tried several times to pass S3 Treasure (on Challenging diff I guess) and actually managed to do it the second time (first time not quick enough), albeit as my further attempts retrospectively showed, only with several amounts of sheer luck:

• On initial attack (see below) and counter attack.
• About inner guards who must move out of treasure AND corridor, which seems strangely unpredictable and unprovokable (also we have much more to do fighting).
• On first turn attack from by Faulorn's troops.
  I managed to do it once, flee north, then also deal with the couple of hunters (actually footpads) coming from the north (very hard since all my units half dead).

But it was all so unsatisfying that I retried; and never could do it again... I also thought at restarting for a big battle, with Gertburt staying on keep until last drop of gold, then only rushing, all this troop indeed to help containing the waves of Faulorn L2s while trying to unlock the treasure from the outer and inner guards... but too lazy.

I have read nearly all of the thread, very interesting in general, also to maybe find useful things about that scenario or others. (The first one also needed 2-3 tries, but far less difficult, though for any reason I cannot really figure out the outlaw vs orcs battle seems especially luck-sensitive, indeed about first turn mainly. I mean, a Wesnoth battle is extremely unstable by nature because of positive feedback loops, thus even more dependant on the very first events, as in 1 HP +/- can change all; but this battle seems even more, as if things did not also average; but all in all I always manage.) I finally stepped on what may be the key trick, last point below, albeit very far in the thread, I will try in a moment. But also realised two other elements of info That are problematic for me to understand, all from the last wave of info & orders by Gertburt:

This part I just do not understand:

-- Very good. Our goal is actually not Faulorn's castle itself, but his fortress a little to the north. That's were he keeps his money.
-- That's a rather odd setup. Why would he do it that way?
-- Two reasons, really. First, this was all built a long time ago. I don't think the people who built the castle knew of the hidden valley behind where the fortress is now. But the main reason is that Faulorn is, how do I put this nicely ... a megalomaniac idiot who has no concept of how the real world works.
-- Put very nicely indeed.

I do not understand the "setup"; that people could ignore the valley (???), the reason for keeping the treasure there, the sheer relation with megalomany, and why or if we are concerned at all with all that... Yes, it makes many ununderstandings, really, it's all mental FoW for me .

That's not too bad then. Faulorn is going to charge as soon as we step out of the forested mountains, but these guards are cheap mercenaries who only care about their pay. They will stay in place unless we provoke them by attacking them or stepping into the fortress.

All right, this seems clear. However, I could not take this point literally. Why then bring a troop to the fortress, and indeed align them all at the closest, but still invisible, places from the guards? If this is not to attack, then what for? If it is only to later protect the flight of both heroes, then we do not need all that positioning, do we? [And as an aside I could not not note (!) that you to gave the bandit the quick trait without which not all of our units can have the fortress in range, the guards actually, from the nearest foresty patches; I also had to select quick ones from recruits, the others delaying the "woodsmen". To sum up, there is for me a contradiction between the info (if we don't attack all is fine) and all the rest of the situation. I cannot just simply take it as "no attack".

But then, how do we get to the money?
That's where little Grnk here comes in. I bet he knows how to sneak by them and take the gold.
I can do that!
I suspected that you have some talents to that effect. Be warned though that the chest is almost certainly alarmed. As soon as you open it, the guards will be chasing after you. So you better move in and out as quickly as possible.

This info, I can only understand it as evoking the skirmisher ability --which Grnk indeed has! However, I discovered in the thread (in a late post with a series of play screenshots, and your reply) that it does not mean (only) that but also

Spoiler:

that Grnk apparently can just stand beside enemies, in fact right between enemies, and not be attacked; even by enemies who know well that he is an enemy and comes to steal the treasure, and who do say so.

?????????????????????

I will try again and come back with more feedback if ever...
diniz

[mattsc]

Hi denispir,

Since you say you read most of the thread, you have probably seen that this is not my favorite scenario. It's somewhat more "scripted" (at least the part about stealing the treasure) than I like it to be. But you may have also seen that I want some of the scenarios to be tricky (with an emphasis on how to solve it; a puzzle, in effect) more so than outright difficult, and it does serve that purpose. And I can win this scenario (and all of them, in fact) consistently, once I (re)figure out how to do them, so my claim is that it is not strongly dependent on luck. It is not supposed to be easy though.

Anyways, as for your questions:

This part I just do not understand:

-- Very good. Our goal is actually not Faulorn's castle itself, but his fortress a little to the north. That's were he keeps his money.
-- That's a rather odd setup. Why would he do it that way?
-- Two reasons, really. First, this was all built a long time ago. I don't think the people who built the castle knew of the hidden valley behind where the fortress is now. But the main reason is that Faulorn is, how do I put this nicely ... a megalomaniac idiot who has no concept of how the real world works.
-- Put very nicely indeed.

I do not understand the "setup"; that people could ignore the valley (???), the reason for keeping the treasure there, the sheer relation with megalomany, and why or if we are concerned at all with all that... Yes, it makes many ununderstandings, really, it's all mental FoW for me .

This is just banter to put the somewhat strange map and scenario objectives into the context of "Grnk's universe." It has no effect on how to play the scenario at all, it's only the back story. Whether it makes sense or not in that context, well, everybody can decide that for themselves.

That's not too bad then. Faulorn is going to charge as soon as we step out of the forested mountains, but these guards are cheap mercenaries who only care about their pay. They will stay in place unless we provoke them by attacking them or stepping into the fortress.

All right, this seems clear. However, I could not take this point literally. Why then bring a troop to the fortress, and indeed align them all at the closest, but still invisible, places from the guards? If this is not to attack, then what for? If it is only to later protect the flight of both heroes, then we do not need all that positioning, do we? [And as an aside I could not not note (!) that you to gave the bandit the quick trait without which not all of our units can have the fortress in range, the guards actually, from the nearest foresty patches; I also had to select quick ones from recruits, the others delaying the "woodsmen". To sum up, there is for me a contradiction between the info (if we don't attack all is fine) and all the rest of the situation. I cannot just simply take it as "no attack".

Sorry, I do not understand where the problem lies here. There are two enemy sides: Faulhorn's troops in the south who attack as soon as you step out of the forest/hills. And then the guards in the castle in front of the treasure. The latter do not attack until you either actively try to steal the treasure or attack them. That's because they are hired mercenaries that will not do anything unless they absolutely have to.

I did not give the bandit the quick trait for that reason. While it helps, it's not necessary. You can step out of the hills and trigger Faulhorn's troop and block them off from the south, without reaching the guards/treasure that turn. And then on the next turn you can steal the treasure and block the guards. So the "purpose of all the positioning" is to put them into place to be able to block Faulhorn's troops in the south for long enough to steal the treasure (on the next turn) and then run off to the north. So, yes, you can simply not attack. That's how I do it and it's the only way (that I have found) to consistently win this without having to rely on luck. It needs to be played very defensively.

But then, how do we get to the money?
That's where little Grnk here comes in. I bet he knows how to sneak by them and take the gold.
I can do that!
I suspected that you have some talents to that effect. Be warned though that the chest is almost certainly alarmed. As soon as you open it, the guards will be chasing after you. So you better move in and out as quickly as possible.

This info, I can only understand it as evoking the skirmisher ability --which Grnk indeed has! However, I discovered in the thread (in a late post with a series of play screenshots, and your reply) that it does not mean (only) that but also

Spoiler:

that Grnk apparently can just stand beside enemies, in fact right between enemies, and not be attacked; even by enemies who know well that he is an enemy and comes to steal the treasure, and who do say so.

?????????????????????

Indeed. This is explained in the previous comment that you quote above: "They will stay in place unless we provoke them by attacking them or stepping into the fortress."

So, anyways, I think it is all there, and one of the challenges of this scenario is specifically that you are supposed to figure out how to do that. It's supposed to hard overall and you are meant to lose pretty much all non-loyal units by the end of the scenario, and maybe one or two of the loyals also (although I can make it through keeping all of them alive most of the time, at least on the lower two difficulties). I'm sorry if you don't like this, but overall that's fine (we all have different preferences). As I said, it is not my favorite either, but I am not going to change it. Let me know though if I did not explain something well enough, maybe I misunderstood something you said.

If you want, I can send you a replay of how I play this.

And thanks for the feedback, I always appreciate that.

For the record, if players don't enjoy a scenario but want to see the rest of the campaign, I have no issue with them using debug mode to cheat their way through it. I do that sometimes when I am in that situation. After all, why should I spend time/effort on something that I don't enjoy just because the scenario author set it up that way. Just killing a couple of the guards with shift-k will make this scenario much easier.

[denispir]

Thank you very much for your nice and complete answer. Actually, I played and passed it some hours ago, now well using the fact that guards just don't move. I thus also discovered that I was wrong about Grnk's mysterious ability (the spoiler section above) that was evoked somewhere in this thread: Grnk just died . I then did it in two steps, just as you relate above, anyway there is no other choice it seems.

(Except what I did not try, namely going for a big battle with all recruits Gertburt could hire with the initial gold. I'm sure we could do it, block Faulorn's troops and massacre the fortress garrison, then flee, if it were not for the other "hunter" ennemies coming from the other side, too much probably. Have you or someone else tried? By the way, is the reason of the hate by those hunter somewhere told? If yes I missed it?)

[mattsc]

denispir: Good to hear that you figured it out.

I thus also discovered that I was wrong about Grnk's mysterious ability (the spoiler section above) that was evoked somewhere in this thread: Grnk just died .

Yeah, he does do that occasionally. Of course, it's your job to try to avoid that.

(Except what I did not try, namely going for a big battle with all recruits Gertburt could hire with the initial gold. I'm sure we could do it, block Faulorn's troops and massacre the fortress garrison, then flee, if it were not for the other "hunter" ennemies coming from the other side, too much probably. Have you or someone else tried?

I have tried that and I did not find a way to make that work reliably, at least on the higher difficulties. In fact, as you figured out correctly, I tried to set up the woodsmen coming around the other way so as to make the "standard brute-force strategy" not work (at least not always), and to add some sense of urgency to the scenario.

By the way, is the reason of the hate by those hunter somewhere told? If yes I missed it?)

You did not miss anything. It's an off-hand comment thrown in for flavor. There are quite a few hooks like that in the campaign that could be used for potential sequels/prequels/spin-offs. Not that I have any plans to do so (although some of them establish loose links between Grnk and Galuldur).

[denispir]

Thank you again for your reply. So, I passed it all right, twice in fact, even if the flight is not that easy: I have to count on leveling (2-3) and sacrifice recruits (2), fortunately I had enough. I guess everyone recruits 2x3 units at startup? Just for info, how I deal:

Spoiler:

I recruit twice one unit of each L1 type, since footpads help a lot with their high defense & speed, as usual, but I also need others to take part in the assault. In the travel phase I try to use the second round of recruits to block & delay the "hunters" but always need an additional footpad, which I place in a village. Last time, it finished more than halfway to L3! and may even have gone further on XP, had I not chosen the mountain pass village so that enemies also had good defense...

For the assault, I place "soldier" units of both weapon ranges so as to be able to attack the opposite range guard, and Grnk/Gertburt/footpads in remaining forest patches, but in fact now it is useless since we will just feign to assault (proceed in 2 times). Units just move forward uncovering themselves, Grnk placed to be able to reach the treasure in 1 "hop" (as you call it in AI code ). This turn and the next one, I try to crush the most dangerous enemies already present. The remaining dangers being mostly the skirmishing+backstabbing assassins, it seems.
[PS: I wait for the slow trapper to be in place and ready, so that the (fake) assault cannot start before turn 11, I guess. But in fact since the first move is fake, and he can reach the swordman in 1 "hop" if rightly placed, then I could proceed 1 turn earlier, which would obviously help the retreat a lot, see below, since Faulorn's treasure chase troop would fall on my commando 1 turn later.]

The retreat is always delicate, with important units so wounded that thay would die in 1 attack (even from an L0: Faulorn's startup peasant killed a nearly levelled poacher, the one who had murdered the swordman guard). As possible my 2 nearly dead startup L2s flee toward villages. I use the remaining fit units to ZoC or otherwise protect, namely footpads. Since I need Gerburt to help, he cannot just rush to the keep and recruit, anyway those recruits would be far too late for the critical phase of the retreat. (As a side note, your mention of Grnk giving the treasure to recruit seems strange since Gerburt has > 200.) This is when leveling up saves me, since several enemies are also ready to die: 2-3 units advance (take no risk! if a unit fails to kill, not only it but other units behind will die...). Now Gertburt can finally jump on the keep and recruit, which is indeed highly needed both for further blocking the mass of Faulorn's mostly L2 soldiers, and dealing with the "hunters" now nearly on my back.

Hum, cannot imagine playing that on higher difficulties. I have not even tried to retreat westwards instead, since "hunters" would be on my back (literally!) earlier and more numerous, but I read in the thread that some manage to do it.
I remark right now that we are not very used to that precisely, are we? such mass retreats during or after a strong (successful) combat phase. Or maybe, being a not-so-good player, I do not retreat often enough in big or small battles when bad ToD arrives... (As Fred does well ) Anyway I guess there are very few scenarios of a commando assault followed by a difficult retreat, instead of just end-of-scenario or flight.

OT: I may (depends on energy) contact you later by PM about AI.

[mattsc]

I guess everyone recruits 2x3 units at startup?

I don't really know what other people do, but looking at my most recent replay (from porting to 1.13/1.14) I recruited 3 full keeps (9 units total), expecting that at least some of the last keep will be lost to the woodsmen but will slow those down a bit in the process.

Just for info, how I deal:

Spoiler:

That seems about right, except for some minor details. The main difference seems to be that I am apparently playing more defensively than you. You use the word "assault". I do no such thing. I just move everybody (as a group) as fast as possible toward the current goal (incl. Rutburt toward the second keep for recruiting), simply blocking the enemies with other units and only attacking when either necessary or really advantageous, retreating my back line slowly behind the important units. The only exception for that are the woodsmen coming around the north-west, which are in the way and a path through them needs to be cleared.

Hum, cannot imagine playing that on higher difficulties.
[...]
I remark right now that we are not very used to that precisely ...

Well done figuring out how to solve this and yes, it's supposed to require a somewhat unusual play style. I, and some others, have played this scenario (and in fact all of Grnk) on both medium and highest difficulties, so I know it's possible. It's not easy though.

Again, thanks for the feedback!

[denispir]

Spoiler:

That seems about right, except for some minor details. The main difference seems to be that I am apparently playing more defensively than you. You use the word "assault". I do no such thing. I just move everybody (as a group) as fast as possible toward the current goal (incl. Rutburt toward the second keep for recruiting), simply blocking the enemies with other units and only attacking when either necessary or really advantageous, retreating my back line slowly behind the important units. The only exception for that are the woodsmen coming around the north-west, which are in the way and a path through them needs to be cleared.

Oh, isn't it incredibly crazy how the human mind can mistake itself --and stick at mistakes?! (Or should I say the civilised, modern, occidental, human mind?) From my previous wrong and failed attempts, I had kept a general idea which I express above as assault (in a very vague sense, but still). So that even after having learnt that

Spoiler:

Grnk can just freely move and steal the treasure and then move out on next turn

I went on wanting to get rid of the fortress guard, at least the L2 guardians, just as for my previous attemps. However, such an naughty attack is no more needed indeed. It is clear instead that if we just form a defensive retreat line from the very turn (would be 11 or 12) when Grnk hops out of the fortress, instead of actively fighting, actively to the point of wanting to kill them, and preferably them all, then all should be much easier. If only because all defenders have full health at start of the retreat. (Another point is to move forward 1 turn earlier, at turn 10 I guess, since the trapper, our slowest start unit, does not need anymore to be ready to attack.) I may try later today...

Now, I get it better how better players can win this scenario on higher difficulties.

Thank you very much,
diniz

[seldon71]

I haven't tried on "hard" yet (as I am very new & inexperienced Wesnoth-player), but I have found Treasure-scenario very easy to get through (and with few sacrifices) with these tactics...

Only send Grnk, two original footpads and 3 more footpads (which you recruit as a first patch) towards the keep. The rest of the gang (including trapper, bandit & Rutbert) stay back with the rest of recruits and engage / wipe out woodsmen while your swiftest guys make a run for a fortress. Going with footpads only also take you much faster to the position on the eastern slopes of Vashorn Valley range. Makes no sense to bring slower guys for the raid.

Stealing the gold happens exactly as described. a quick dash between two guards and out of there on same turn. Then I sacrifce the 3 footpad-recruits as passive blockers and outrun everybody Faulorn has got with Grnk & two footpads of the original gang. They will easily get 5-6 hexes headstart and are good as gone. Rutbert, trapper and bandit wait for them on the other side of Northern mountain pass with the rest of survivors from extermination of the woodsmen & everyone gets easily back to Shmaltupp. Tried this 3-4 times now in order to maximise the remaining gold and foul-proof the method. At the WORST case you sarifice 1-2 more recruits (no original gang members) for 2nd stage of delaying on mountain pass (if the pursuers are uncomfortably close for our slow-footed trapper). Usually that is not needed, but it exists as a safety valve.

[mattsc]

Hi seldon71, thanks for the feedback and welcome to the forums! That's interesting and an approach I had not tried before. I'm actually quite happy that that option exists (and that you found it). As I have said before in this thread, this is not my favorite scenario because parts of it feel too "scripted" for my taste, so it's great to see that it can be done in different ways. I'll have to try this next time I play through Grnk.

[seldon71]

Need to say that as that tactic minimises the amount of fighting, you should go for a mission only after Grnk has killed 3 rats in Shmaltupp. Preferably he would have also been in position to finish a villager who is badly enuff injured from some local feud.

If you have to upgrade Grnk during the treasure-hunt - let him finish one of the 1st woodsmen who will come after the gang. Just a quick spear-strike to a badly-wounded prey & then fast-forward towards valley.

[seldon71]

After numerous tries I start to get close of winning the final battle of the 1st Grnk-campaign (Wizards). But still have got a problem - how the heck are you able to keep Rutbert alive long enough??? I have tried to get him running towards South on map edge & prayed for him not to get noticed, but he does...

And there is no one anywhere around to help him either...

[mattsc]

"Wizards" is meant to be a pretty tough and complex scenario, so having some trouble with it is kind of expected. Concerning Rutbert:

Spoiler:

By the time Gertbert slaps and converts him, Rutbert should have recruited quite a few units, which you use as shields to run along the southern border of the map to the west. You'll lose a few of those units, but the two Berts are fast enough that they should be able to outrun the enemies to the area where the skeletons appeared. By the time you get there, the mages need to have cleared that area, or be close at least, so that you can combine them with whoever is left of Rutbert's units.

Does that help and answer your question?

If you want to see it, I've attached my replay from when I ported Grnk to Wesnoth 1.13/1.14.

On your other comment on "Treasure": Yeah, I figured that something like that would be needed, but not everybody might, so thanks for mentioning that.

[seldon71]

Well, by the time Gertbert slaps Rutbert, those other ruffians are way too scattered and way too far on the field so I rather use most of them to help wizards around the castle... Some of them even manage get into there to bolster the defense (especially the sole ranger has done it in several of my efforts).

But indeed - I found a way (took several re-loads and required crazy amount of late luck) by

1) running Rutbert towards 1st South, then West.
2) keeping Gertbert safely concealed close to the 3 enemy camps for a while. This, of course, required keeping Wyssauba WAY back and away from all the action in main battlefield. Still - more room to run with just one outlaw.
3) then finally having Gertbert to attack Karcyn at the point when there is only Karcyn, Koorzhar & skeleton guards anywhere close-by. That makes Karcyn disappear with his guards and Gertbert only needs to survive the running battle with Koorzhar (until he manages to outrun the slower officer over the river).
-I hoped that when Gertbert finally blows his cover he will also lure some of the pursuers of his brother to turn back North. Nope, didn't happen...
4) Despite my best efforts to avoid confrontations (and sacrificing one footpad & one thug to slow the pursuit) Rutbert was caught upon (on several turns) by an orcish warlord and had to endure cumulative damage (luckily it was on mountain terrain) while keeping on run to prevent rest of Koorzhar's / Karcyn's army to catch him up.
5) I managed to use my two remaining gryphons to lure quite a few enemies away from Rutbert and towards (finally) advancing mages - for their demise.
6) And still - on the very last turn - it was a sheer luck of dice as the very last orcish grunt had two swipes on Rutbert who had just 4 HP left (and it was on open plain). He missed though and was then exterminated by a combination of gryphon-claws & Rutbert's sling.


Few questions about this last scenario :

a) Is the amount of the skeletons which appear on the heels of Grnk, Wyssauba, ox-cart & the gang directly related to the amount of skeletons alive at the end of "Prunes"? In other words - does the effectiveness of orcish defense there have a consequence for "Wizards"???

b) I didn't see a point of trying to lure ALL the concealed skeleton guards away from the water on early turns. It is completely ok to have 1-2 of them still submerged when Grnk arrives. They have firepower to remove them easily out of the way. Yes - gryphons should get few of them out of the way - but it is IMO more important to save the ultra-mobile gryphons for the main battle than risking/sacrificing them for "emptying the river". Opinion?

c) as said - I'm still very much novice here (started to play Wesnoth about 3 weeks ago) and I played it on "easy". On harder settings - would Rutbert have more gold for recruiting? 'Cause IF he still has had gold on the turn before Gertbert gets to slap him... Then there should be three guys on Rutbert's camp and they could immediately be deployed as "an assassination squad" against Koorzhar???