The Sojournings of Grog (3.6.1 is out)

[Feufochmar]

About the Scepter of Fire, IftU assumes Elynia disassembled it, retrieved the Ruby of Fire and attached it to her staff. See Future history, year 1092 YW.

[Elvish_Hunter]

OK, then. I give in. lets have a great ogre!

I'm sure that many players will appreciate keeping this unit - especially when Monroid will finish the new sprites.

Not played the dark hordes. we dont have to agree with anything thats not mainline but we could at least try. the sceptre of fire was purely meant to be a fun end. it could be scrapped no prob

About the Scepter of Fire, IftU assumes Elynia disassembled it, retrieved the Ruby of Fire and attached it to her staff. See Future history, year 1092 YW.

Yes, Feufochmar, effectively I remembered that page, I was just making a mistake in the timeline. No problem anyway for our purposes: the Sceptre of Fire is disassembled before The Fall, and so before UtBS and TSoG. Nothing of the stuff listed on that page is mainlined anyway, with the exception of UtBS, so as Eros said we don't have to follow what it's written here, but we can try to avoid contrast if possible. And some time ago, I thinked to replace the Sceptre of Fire with the Sceptre of Life (from the homonymous abandoned campaign).

cant comment on first but the second is good advice. nested events are a pain. they only normally cut out one variable check anyway(see A0).

About wmllint and wmlscope, the question is simple: if the output isn't clean for both, the campaign can't be mainlined. Exception: Dead Water, that have some small wmllint problems due to use of macros to create Kai Krellis exactly as we use macros to create Grog (at least, this was true some time ago).
And about nested events, I removed all of them from A0, that seems to work fine and that I'll upload in the next few days.

OK, they ought to be weak to blade whatever. a nice fleshy cactus will be weak to blade and that means we can upgrade fencers and gryphons easily.

Exactly as it is: 0% resistance to blade.

dont complicate the scenario by the multihex attack. leave it as a novelty for C2.

Really it doesn't complicate it. To use it, you just right-click on the enemy to attack and choose the corresponding menu item. And it's only one macro, that can always be commented out or removed.

Youd have to rework the story line for that to happen. have a new map with no river and you just meet two bands of saurians having a squabble. the orcs would then catch up with you in B4. I like that idea as I never liked my B3. maybe I'll give it a go when I get home. If you dont mind!

But of course I don't mind! When I have some time, I'll try as well to create a new map and post it. Of course, considering that Saurians have good movement and defense on some terrains, and are weak against impact (Trolls), fire (Shamans and Elyssa), cold (Shamans) and blade (Gryphons, Ogres and Elyssa), we need to make a map with good terrains for them: hills or swamps or caves. Maybe hills for continuity with the end of B2, and some swamp because usually Saurians live here. Avoid snow and ice at all cost!

[shadowblack]

I finished scenario 5 some time ago but forgot to post my comments. Now I finished scenario 6 too, and decided to post my comments before I forget again.

Scenario 5:

Spoiler:

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
1.8.4, Grunt (not that it matters)

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
5 initially, until you manage to get rid of enough undead, then 3, as you can easily block the undead in the narrow passages and make it impossible for them to hurt you seriously

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

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

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Clearing the initial undead so that I could block the passages.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
7 – I enjoyed smashing them bones!

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
1) The change of available turns from 10 to 24 to 40 seems kind of pointless. Why not make it 40 from the start?
2) Give some hint how long it’ll be until the tunnel is ready
3) Maybe add some level 1 (and maybe 2) undead that randomly appear behind your forces to make the player keep attention instead of just smashing the undead. An explanation would be that these are some of the previously-destroyed undead raised again by the Lich, but now weaker because of their previous destruction

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
No.

Thoughts:
An excellent way to earn a lot of (almost) free experience and level up a lot of troops (unless the RNG gods REALLY hate you).

Not much else to say, really.

Scenario 6:

Spoiler:

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
1.8.4, Grunt (not that it matters)

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
2, and only because I recalled a few level 2s in order to level them up

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Clear, except for not knowing which way to go – but I figured it doesn’t really matter.

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
Very good, especially the ending dialog with the prisoners.

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Surviving those two serpents without any losses

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
3 at first (bats are just annoying) and goes up to 6 near the end

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

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
Putting Elyssa on the wrong spot by mistake, which got her killed.


Thoughts:
The bats were simply annoying, even though they did me the favor of killing the nagas.

The spiders attacking the lava beasts was nice, though it made little difference. In the end the fight with the elemental creatures was slow-going because there were many weak enemies and little space for maneuvering.

The orcs, while levels 2 and 3, were too few and too unorganized (completely justified, of course) to pose a significant threat. Still, fighting the orcs was my favorite part – not only I finally get to fight enemies that were an actual threat (if I had been more careless or more unlucky I would’ve lost some units), but the whole thing ends with hints of a future plot development. And it looks like I’ll soon get to deal with the stupid Lich once and for all, too…

[Eros]

Yes, Feufochmar, effectively I remembered that page, I was just making a mistake in the timeline. No problem anyway for our purposes: the Sceptre of Fire is disassembled before The Fall, and so before UtBS and TSoG. Nothing of the stuff listed on that page is mainlined anyway, with the exception of UtBS, so as Eros said we don't have to follow what it's written here, but we can try to avoid contrast if possible. And some time ago, I thinked to replace the Sceptre of Fire with the Sceptre of Life (from the homonymous abandoned campaign).

IMHO, it should be, either the SoF or nothing. The SoL is in a non-mainline campaign. When Marz and I wrote the campaign outline we decided that it couldnt fit with IFTU so we wouldnt try. We therefore tried to write a campaign so that is agreed with UtBS and the mainline campaigns.

Really it doesn't complicate it. To use it, you just right-click on the enemy to attack and choose the corresponding menu item. And it's only one macro, that can always be commented out or removed.

Its less of a novelty for C-2 though. C-2 is fairly run of the mill apart from the fun of having a multihex attack. The ship isnt meant to be a powerful fighting force anyway because the mermen are guarding it. Kaleh would hardly send his most powerful galleon with a troll and a few elves he might never see again.

But of course I don't mind! When I have some time, I'll try as well to create a new map and post it. Of course, considering that Saurians have good movement and defense on some terrains, and are weak against impact (Trolls), fire (Shamans and Elyssa), cold (Shamans) and blade (Gryphons, Ogres and Elyssa), we need to make a map with good terrains for them: hills or swamps or caves. Maybe hills for continuity with the end of B2, and some swamp because usually Saurians live here. Avoid snow and ice at all cost!

Ha Ha Ha I win! The following works but needs balancing. changing the code so the saurians dont gang up on you might help.

B3:

This is what you need to do to make the scenario work.
1)The scenario is stand alone. Therefore main.cfg needs to point straight to it.
NB: the scenario is slightly harder than intended here because you dont get ormron, or the sidekicks here

And this is what you need to do to make it mesh with the rest of the campaign
1) the bit where they talk about the river road in the old B3 needs to move to B4. (But rewritten)
2) stuff between "<remove>" and "</remove>" tags must be removed
3) uncomment the recall ormron and human sidekick code

A short list of pros and cons. first the pros:
1)The new scenario gives you a break from orcs
2)Its a bit of a breather giving you a much needed break between B1/2 and B4
3)Apart from the single scenario in HttT it is the only scenario where you have to run between enemys that I can think of. As I think that that scenario in HttT is my favourite...
4)saurian on saurian warfare is good fun.

and then the cons:
1)It's hard, is that a con?
2)It is slightly random how well you do in this scenario
3)I forgot to add a few patches of snow to the map to fit with the dialog.

My Verdict: I wrote both of them but I think the second one is much the best.

I have done some thinking - again! - and have decided that new maps for A2 are necessary. Here is a possibility for A2-2. It is only half finished but tell me what you think please!

A2-2:

1) player 2 = undead, player 3 = dwarves
2) keep near to player 2 is where Grog go's to recruit.
3) When you move to the desert
Narrator: "This was once the main entrance to a thriving dwarvish kingdom. Now nearly abandoned centuries worth of wind have blown the desert into the caves."
4) when player moves into hall
Narrator: "This vast colonaded hall used to be the throne room of the great dwarvish king. The dwarves appear to have recolonised it to live in."
5) when player moves to 11,8 or 15,5
Narrator: "These pillars used to hold up the roof of the hall. Now they have collapsed into ruin."

Some comments on the rest of the campaign.
1)maybe the Gryphon and Ogre bosses should join you at the start of B2 rather than randomly appear in S2. They could arrive and say "we heard about your victory over the lich so, after the winter was past, we gathered an army and came to your aid.". This would need discussion though.
2)The gryphon unit should be the same as mainline. not a reskinned Gryphon Master.
3)the NEAREST_UNIT macro is amazing.

1) The change of available turns from 10 to 24 to 40 seems kind of pointless. Why not make it 40 from the start?
2) Give some hint how long it’ll be until the tunnel is ready
3) Maybe add some level 1 (and maybe 2) undead that randomly appear behind your forces to make the player keep attention instead of just smashing the undead. An explanation would be that these are some of the previously-destroyed undead raised again by the Lich, but now weaker because of their previous destruction

1 and 2 I agree with.
Instead of 3 howabout some undead swimmers are spawned from the water after say turn 10?

An excellent way to earn a lot of (almost) free experience and level up a lot of troops (unless the RNG gods REALLY hate you).

Trolls are interesting to level. upgrading L1's is hard but then they are easy we thought skeletons, underground, in water (most players hold the undead at the water line) would be good experience.

@ShadowBlack
Yes, I was never sure about early B6 either. I havent any good ideas to replace it though I'll have a think.

[Elvish_Hunter]

IMHO, it should be, either the SoF or nothing. The SoL is in a non-mainline campaign. When Marz and I wrote the campaign outline we decided that it couldnt fit with IFTU so we wouldnt try. We therefore tried to write a campaign so that is agreed with UtBS and the mainline campaigns.

Ok, then. So, it will remain the Sceptre of Fire; we'll try to invent something else only if and when IftU will be mainlined, fine?

Its less of a novelty for C-2 though. C-2 is fairly run of the mill apart from the fun of having a multihex attack. The ship isnt meant to be a powerful fighting force anyway because the mermen are guarding it. Kaleh would hardly send his most powerful galleon with a troll and a few elves he might never see again.

Ahhh, I see... I originally added it because I liked it, without thinking too much of its story meanings. Fine then: I'll remove it from A0.

Ha Ha Ha I win! The following works but needs balancing. changing the code so the saurians dont gang up on you might help.

I'll test it and add it for 2.10. Of course, this will mean that I'll delay again such release, if you don't mind.

1)maybe the Gryphon and Ogre bosses should join you at the start of B2 rather than randomly appear in S2. They could arrive and say "we heard about your victory over the lich so, after the winter was past, we gathered an army and came to your aid.". This would need discussion though.

We have Ogres and Gryphons in B1 also. What about having them join immediatly in A7?

2)The gryphon unit should be the same as mainline. not a reskinned Gryphon Master.

This will need to lower the Young Gryphon stats (a bit less HPs, 7-3 attack and less cost: what about 19?)

3)the NEAREST_UNIT macro is amazing.

At first, to fix the sighted events not working correctly, I had sighted + attack events. Then I changed to sighted + moveto+[filter_vision], but I was in trouble when I needed the second unit to speak. Finally, one day I found the NEAREST_HEX macro from Dead Water and started modifying it, to make it working on units instead of hexes. And this is the story of NEAREST_UNIT macro. Thanks!

ShadowBlack wrote:
1) The change of available turns from 10 to 24 to 40 seems kind of pointless. Why not make it 40 from the start?
2) Give some hint how long it’ll be until the tunnel is ready
3) Maybe add some level 1 (and maybe 2) undead that randomly appear behind your forces to make the player keep attention instead of just smashing the undead. An explanation would be that these are some of the previously-destroyed undead raised again by the Lich, but now weaker because of their previous destruction

1 and 2 I agree with.
Instead of 3 howabout some undead swimmers are spawned from the water after say turn 10?

So:
- start directly with 40 turns
- in the objective screen say "Resist for 16 turns (or whatever turns are required)"
- about undead swimmers, I can try.

@ShadowBlack
Yes, I was never sure about early B6 either. I havent any good ideas to replace it though I'll have a think.

B6 is Every Troll To Do His Duty Anyway, in due time I added back the lava monsters, added the blind tunnels and the rats. What about some other enemies, like some other Rats, some Cockatrices (in a weakened version that slows instead of stoning, or that stones only for one turn? There is a similar code for this in both IftU and FoaP, if my memory doesn't fool me again) and some Water and Air Elementals?

[shadowblack]

Scenario 7:

Spoiler:

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
1.8.4, Grunt (not that it matters)

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
Not a single save or load. I even forgot there’s a time limit until I saw the replay. Enough said

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

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

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
To my surprise – none. First I thought keeping my allies alive would be a problem – but they managed on their own. Then I thought the Yetis would be a problem – but the southern orcs did a pretty good job against them. After that nothing seemed hard anymore

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
7 – after all the cave combat and running around in previous scenarios having a simple kill-em-all mission under open sky was a nice change of pace.

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
It’s fine as it is.

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
No.


Thoughts:
This scenario was much easier than I expected, thanks to my griffon ally who did a great job against Purple’s wolves. In the end I didn’t even need all the units I recalled and could have won even with fewer units.

I would say this is a nice breather scenario, but the previous ones were not that hard.

EDIT: Scenario 8:

Spoiler:

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
1.8.4, Grunt (not that it matters)

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
7, and only because I managed to kill the green leader on turn 2, otherwise would have been 8 or even 9. Although if I had remembered to recruit at least one Young Griffon things may have been different

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Mostly clear, but why was the White Mage not mentioned in the objectives even though he was marked as a hero (i.e. someone who has to survive)?

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

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Not suffering too many losses.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
8 – it was more challenging than any of the previous scenarios, as befitting a “boss battle”.

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
Move one of the villages near Green’s castle so that it’s no longer possible for Elyssa to kill him on turn 2.

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
Just my carelessness.

Thoughts:
Well, that was a fun scenario despite my carelessness getting a few units killed. At first it seemed easy (both nearby enemies recruited only level 1s), but then the level 2s and 3s started showing up and it became clear this was going to be a challenge, as befitting a final confrontation with the Lich. To make things worse they had flyers that could ignore the chasms, further complicating things, since I only recalled units and didn’t recruit a single Griffon (I didn’t even realize I could do so until I had finished the scenario). But I liked the added challenge, so I’m not complaining.

I also liked that exploring around offered some rewards, such as that amulet and the chest of gold.

It would be better if the Ogre and Griffon join me at the start of this scenario, or at least if they give me a free ogre and griffon just to get me used to the idea of having something other than trolls.


For some mysterious reason the replay is corrupted and shows things that did not happen, such as drakes attacking undead and undead attacking undead, so I’m not posting it.

[Eros]

We have Ogres and Gryphons in B1 also. What about having them join immediatly in A7?

Hmmm, the reason they werent added to A7 in the beginning was that they were very likely to die. Maybe they could enter the caves at the end of A7. Or we could remove them from B1. Your call.

This will need to lower the Young Gryphon stats (a bit less HPs, 7-3 attack and less cost: what about 19?)

Yes, but how-about less moves to take a little of the slack?

A5 is Every Troll To Do His Duty Anyway, in due time I added back the lava monsters, added the blind tunnels and the rats. What about some other enemies, like some other Rats, some Cockatrices (in a weakened version that slows instead of stoning, or that stones only for one turn? There is a similar code for this in both IftU and FoaP, if my memory doesn't fool me again) and some Water and Air Elementals?

IMHO, No, I dont think thats the problem. Its more the map. I would leave the scenario as it is for now. Maybe the intro bit where krunk collapses the tunnel behind him needs more explanation.
NB: a few flying fire enemies like in UtBS might be worth a try.

I would say this is a nice breather scenario, but the previous ones were not that hard.

I like A6 a lot. You are playing it on easy though.

It would be better if the Ogre and Griffon join me at the start of this scenario, or at least if they give me a free ogre and griffon just to get me used to the idea of having something other than trolls.

Ideally you would have the Ogre and Gryphon bosses follow you but they would almost certainly die which is not good. A narrator quote like
Narrator: "You can now recruit Gryphons, and Ogres"
with suitable varients for how you did on the previous scenario.

NB: Your comments are really helpful.

[Daravel]

Just a heads-up. I've finished the preliminary stages of my other project (and will have something to show everyone in the next week!).

Therefore, I've decided to take a break from that and get back into my work here. I'm away until next Tuesday, but once I'm back I will make this my number 1 Wesnoth priority.

[shadowblack]

Scenario 9:

Spoiler:

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
1.8.4, Grunt (not that it matters)

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
1 to 5 depending on how much you care about losses

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Confusing. For details see comments below.

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
Good – actually that was probably the best part of the scenario.

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Fighting my boredom.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
5 – gets boring after a while

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
Clarify some things and give all the cave villages to the player (see below)

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
No


Thoughts:
About the objectives:
“Keep the dwarves at bay” – what counts as “keeping them at bay”, especially since there’s no turn limit?
“Or to move one unit near one of the three southern castles” – why, what happens if I do? And what counts as “near”? I mean, my griffon can reach there in two or three turns depending on what counts as near, but that surely won’t result in victory, so… what’s the point? From looking at the code it seems it is a better idea to NOT send any unit there

"Optional: kill the Dwarvish Rune Lord (bonus in next scenario)" – that seems pretty much impossible with level 1s against a lot of level 1s and even more level 2s. Maybe if I had not sent the griffon there and had instead fought only the initial dwarves I could have advanced some trolls, ogres and/or Griffons to level 2, which would give me a fighting chance against the dwarves that arrive on turn 12 or when enemies defeated (whichever happens first, as far as I can tell from the code)

The dialog when the level 3s arrive made no sense - it was on turn 2, so there was no way the initial dwarves could have even reached me, yet the rune lord was complaining about them having not breached the perimeter.

About the scenario:
1) How come none of the villages inside the cave belong to me and I have to capture them myself? The villages outside – I can understand. But the ones inside the cave – that seems like a cheap excuse to waste some of my time capturing villages instead of fighting the enemy
2) It was relatively easy to stall the advance of the dwarves, especially when I combined choke points with the fact that both Blue and Green had only level 1s. I finished the scenario on turn 16 because I got bored, but I could easily hold out for at least a few more turns (see replay)


One last thing: Both the Ogre and the Griffon are marked with hero icons, as if they have to be kept alive, but no such thing is mentioned in the objectives. What happens if I lose them?

Scenario 10:

Spoiler:

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
1.8.4, Grunt (not that it matters)

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
2 – with enough level 3s, at least

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

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

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
None.

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
6 – nothing special, but not boring either

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
For this difficulty it’s fine. On higher difficulties give the dwarf extra recruiting hexes: 1 more on Normal (total of 5) and 2 more on Hard (total of 6)

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
No


Thoughts:
A quick look at the list of sides revealed that dwarves will be coming and with A LOT of gold (1000). That allows the player to prepare accordingly. Maybe change it so that the dwarves seem to start with 100 gold, but when they arrive they also bring along some gold with them, increasing their initial gold to 1000 (or more on higher difficulties).

Also, I could just leave several level 3s near the SE corner and strike the dwarves when they arrive, allowing me to farm them for experience…

[Elvish_Hunter]

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
Mostly clear, but why was the White Mage not mentioned in the objectives even though he was marked as a hero (i.e. someone who has to survive)?

One last thing: Both the Ogre and the Griffon are marked with hero icons, as if they have to be kept alive, but no such thing is mentioned in the objectives. What happens if I lose them?

If you lose Ormron, you will have to play B4 and B6 differently and jump B5.
If you lose Jaash, you'll no longer be able to recruit Young Gryphons and play an alternative C1.
If you lose I-Gruk, you'll no longer be able to recruit Young Ogres.
As you can see, they're more than loyal units, but a bit less than heroes. Effectively, both overlays are wrong and maybe we need a third overlay.

It would be better if the Ogre and Griffon join me at the start of this scenario, or at least if they give me a free ogre and griffon just to get me used to the idea of having something other than trolls.

In 2.10, if you managed to keep alive Jaash and I-Gruk, you will get a free Young Ogre and a free Young Gryphon. Thanks for your suggestion.

For some mysterious reason the replay is corrupted and shows things that did not happen, such as drakes attacking undead and undead attacking undead, so I’m not posting it.

Please post it! WML should never cause corrupted replays, so I need it to see which command corrupts it and file a bug report.

Hmmm, the reason they werent added to A7 in the beginning was that they were very likely to die. Maybe they could enter the caves at the end of A7. Or we could remove them from B1. Your call.

I went for the solution suggested by shadowblack (free L1 Ogre and Gryphon in A7).

Elvish_Hunter wrote:
This will need to lower the Young Gryphon stats (a bit less HPs, 7-3 attack and less cost: what about 19?)

Yes, but how-about less moves to take a little of the slack?

I was sure that I was forgetting something, as usual... Fine: cost 18, 7 MP.

NB: a few flying fire enemies like in UtBS might be worth a try.

I added the unit, I'll place it in the scenario for 2.10.1.

Ideally you would have the Ogre and Gryphon bosses follow you but they would almost certainly die which is not good. A narrator quote like
Narrator: "You can now recruit Gryphons, and Ogres"

Done.

NB: Your comments are really helpful.

I agree!

but once I'm back I will make this my number 1 Wesnoth priority.

Thanks, Daravel! As you will see, there will be two new scenarios where you can update the dialogues.

About the objectives:
“Keep the dwarves at bay” – what counts as “keeping them at bay”, especially since there’s no turn limit?
“Or to move one unit near one of the three southern castles” – why, what happens if I do? And what counts as “near”? I mean, my griffon can reach there in two or three turns depending on what counts as near, but that surely won’t result in victory, so… what’s the point? From looking at the code it seems it is a better idea to NOT send any unit there

"Optional: kill the Dwarvish Rune Lord (bonus in next scenario)" – that seems pretty much impossible with level 1s against a lot of level 1s and even more level 2s. Maybe if I had not sent the griffon there and had instead fought only the initial dwarves I could have advanced some trolls, ogres and/or Griffons to level 2, which would give me a fighting chance against the dwarves that arrive on turn 12 or when enemies defeated (whichever happens first, as far as I can tell from the code)

The dialog when the level 3s arrive made no sense - it was on turn 2, so there was no way the initial dwarves could have even reached me, yet the rune lord was complaining about them having not breached the perimeter.

About the scenario:
1) How come none of the villages inside the cave belong to me and I have to capture them myself? The villages outside – I can understand. But the ones inside the cave – that seems like a cheap excuse to waste some of my time capturing villages instead of fighting the enemy
2) It was relatively easy to stall the advance of the dwarves, especially when I combined choke points with the fact that both Blue and Green had only level 1s. I finished the scenario on turn 16 because I got bored, but I could easily hold out for at least a few more turns (see replay)

Originally the Dwarvish boss can't be killed (it had FORCE_CHANCE_TO_HIT), I added this option after that Eros requested it. Considering that he's extremely difficult to kill anyway, should I add back this line?
About objectives, is it fine to leave only "Resist for 12 turns"?
Moving someone near the castles will make the Dwarvish boss appear on his turn, and the code was always more or less the same from 2.6.2. Should I turn off this "option" and make him appear only on turn 12?
Two questions about the new B3 for Eros, before that I upload it:
1) The attacked_saurians variable is meant to be set to yes only when a Saurian dies, or also if I attack one of them? If it is the latter, I need to add one more event.
2) I replaced the cultivated fields that you placed on the map with some swamps, for two reasons: first, to give a little more advantage to Saurians, considering how much they're weak against Trolls, and second because two Saurians busy fighting each other just don't have the time to grow crops. Is it OK for you?

[shadowblack]

For some mysterious reason the replay is corrupted and shows things that did not happen, such as drakes attacking undead and undead attacking undead, so I’m not posting it.

Please post it! WML should never cause corrupted replays, so I need it to see which command corrupts it and file a bug report.

Alright, here are my autosaves for turns 1-4 1-3 (because there's a "5 attachments per post" limit) and the replay. As far as I can see the reason is that in the replay during turn 2 a troll warrior is not moved even though I moved him in the game. It snowballs from there.

EDIT: I think I got it! The problem is the village at 8,2: in the actual game it belongs to me from the start because Elyssa is there. Thus I move a Troll Warrior there, and then move him away with no problem. But in the replay it does NOT belong to me, so when I move the Troll Warrior there he captures it and his move ends. He does not move the same way as in the actual game, and that causes all of the following errors.

EDIT2: Scenario 11:

Spoiler:

(1) What difficulty level and version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
1.8.4, Grunt (not that it matters)

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
8 if you want to avoid losses, 6-7 if you don’t care

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

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

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Avoiding losses (those skirmishers are SO annoying!)

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
7 – I enjoyed the challenge

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

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
Ormron got killed a couple of times due to me forgetting how fast skirmishers are.


Thoughts:
The scenario proved more challenging than I expected due to the large number of enemies (most of them level 2s).

Blue leader gave me an excellent opportunity to kill him at the start of turn 2 and I took it, as the west Saurians were clearly a greater threat. After finishing the scenario I’m still not sure that was such a good idea… Anyway, maybe the map should be modified a bit to prevent me from killing the blue leader so easily? Otherwise there’s no point giving him so much starting gold as he never gets a chance to spend it all…

The eastern Saurians, while weaker, proved a problem due to sheer numbers. But once I had crushed them the rest of the battle was easy. The fact that I didn't have to bring Grog to the very edge was a nice surprise.


Looking at the code I see “victory_when_enemies_defeated=no” twice. Any reason for that? Also, may I suggest changing the time over text from "This is taking to long." to something like "This has taken too long. The Orcs have caught up with us!" Or maybe the dwarves instead of the orcs. Or even both. Or at least fix the typo – it should be “too long”, not “to long”.

[Eros]

OK I have posted the first part of A2-1

A2-1:

NOTES:

1) The scenario is standalone. main.cfg must point straight to it.
2) The scenario is incomplete. There are many things that dont work
3) I need feedback.

coments on the campaign
1) why are macros like GENERIC_UNIT_WITH_ID in TSoG-deaths rather than macros?
2) why is TSoG-deaths not called common?
3) why do my roles not work in A2-1

Looking at the code I see “victory_when_enemies_defeated=no” twice. Any reason for that? Also, may I suggest changing the time over text from "This is taking to long." to something like "This has taken too long. The Orcs have caught up with us!" Or maybe the dwarves instead of the orcs. Or even both. Or at least fix the typo – it should be “too long”, not “to long”.

I agree, but not chased though because of story line)

1) The attacked_saurians variable is meant to be set to yes only when a Saurian dies, or also if I attack one of them? If it is the latter, I need to add one more event.

no when you kill. the name is a remnant of an earlier version. I did some thinking and maybe change the code so that only if you kill one leader they all attack you. somethong like
leader 1: arghhh
leader 2: Hissss, wess wontss haves yous interferings with uss. saurians are for the saurianss
and all the dead leaders remaining units change sides

2) I replaced the cultivated fields that you placed on the map with some swamps, for two reasons: first, to give a little more advantage to Saurians, considering how much they're weak against Trolls, and second because two Saurians busy fighting each other just don't have the time to grow crops. Is it OK for you?

It's ok but here's the logic behind crops.
1) the saurians dont need an advantage. There are loads of them!
2) Its high in the mountains.
3) The saurians dont live there so the crops were grown by their unfortunate predecessors
crops dont fit the time of year. maybe just changing it to a variation on grass in 1.9 will do.

Moving someone near the castles will make the Dwarvish boss appear on his turn, and the code was always more or less the same from 2.6.2. Should I turn off this "option" and make him appear only on turn 12?

No. triggering something early doesnt mean you have to change the objectives.
maybe you could make it possible to beat the rune lord so he doesnt chase you in B3.
NB: all other changes mentioned I think are an excellent improvement.

1) How come none of the villages inside the cave belong to me and I have to capture them myself? The villages outside – I can understand. But the ones inside the cave – that seems like a cheap excuse to waste some of my time capturing villages instead of fighting the enemy

I agree.

EDIT: I appear to have forgotten the altered map so Sorry. the map I posted recently should give you an idea of whats coming.

I NEED FEEDBACK ON A2-1

[Elvish_Hunter]

Blue leader gave me an excellent opportunity to kill him at the start of turn 2 and I took it, as the west Saurians were clearly a greater threat. After finishing the scenario I’m still not sure that was such a good idea… Anyway, maybe the map should be modified a bit to prevent me from killing the blue leader so easily? Otherwise there’s no point giving him so much starting gold as he never gets a chance to spend it all…

Eros modified the scenario, I bugfixed it and of course it will be in 2.10.

Looking at the code I see “victory_when_enemies_defeated=no” twice. Any reason for that? Also, may I suggest changing the time over text from "This is taking to long." to something like "This has taken too long. The Orcs have caught up with us!" Or maybe the dwarves instead of the orcs. Or even both. Or at least fix the typo – it should be “too long”, not “to long”.

Thanks for the typo report. I'll fix it.

1) why are macros like GENERIC_UNIT_WITH_ID in TSoG-deaths rather than macros?
2) why is TSoG-deaths not called common?

Simply because there were more urgent things to do. To fix this, I'll move all the other macros, except for all death macros and for HUMAN_PRISONER (that's used by one of these) in a common.cfg.

no when you kill. the name is a remnant of an earlier version. I did some thinking and maybe change the code so that only if you kill one leader they all attack you. somethong like
leader 1: arghhh
leader 2: Hissss, wess wontss haves yous interferings with uss. saurians are for the saurianss
and all the dead leaders remaining units change sides

Fortunately I asked it! That variable will be renamed as saurians_killed, to make it more clear.

It's ok but here's the logic behind crops.
1) the saurians dont need an advantage. There are loads of them!
2) Its high in the mountains.
3) The saurians dont live there so the crops were grown by their unfortunate predecessors
crops dont fit the time of year. maybe just changing it to a variation on grass in 1.9 will do.

OK.

No. triggering something early doesnt mean you have to change the objectives.
maybe you could make it possible to beat the rune lord so he doesnt chase you in B3.
NB: all other changes mentioned I think are an excellent improvement.

The rune lord can be beaten. It's just extremely hard to do this because of his amount of units.

ShadowBlack wrote:
1) How come none of the villages inside the cave belong to me and I have to capture them myself? The villages outside – I can understand. But the ones inside the cave – that seems like a cheap excuse to waste some of my time capturing villages instead of fighting the enemy

I agree.

[capture_village] will be added to B1. Maybe it's a good idea to do it for A6 and B2 as well.

3) why do my roles not work in A2-1

Are you referring to the ELF_ROLE macros, or to the [+unit] role= used for Dwarves? Of course, I'll test the scenario on my own, but if you want to check what went wrong you can type :debug :inspect and see what variables are stored inside a unit. Look for role=, and you will see if the role was assigned correctly. Also, I'm not sure if assigning the same role to multiple units works well, but only because I never tried. I know for sure that assigning multiple units the same ID gives great troubles, like units disappearing upon save-load.

[Anonymissimus]

Also, I'm not sure if assigning the same role to multiple units works well, but only because I never tried.

Yes, that's what roles are about. You can assign with [role], [unit]role= or {VARIABLE unit.role ...}.

[Elvish_Hunter]

You can assign with [role], [unit]role= or {VARIABLE unit.role ...}.

Yes Anonymissimus, I know how to assign a role, and it isn't the problem. The question is that Eros has this code:

Spoiler:

Code: Select all

    {GENERIC_UNIT 2 "Dwarvish Fighter" 13 9} {GUARDIAN}
    [+unit]
        role=lad
    [/unit]
    {GENERIC_UNIT 2 "Dwarvish Thunderer" 14 9} {GUARDIAN}
    [+unit]
        role=lad
    [/unit]
    {GENERIC_UNIT 2 "Dwarvish Guardsman" 13 10} {GUARDIAN}
    [+unit]
        role=lad
    [/unit]

and

Code: Select all

            [unit]
                side=2
                type=Dwarvish Pathfinder
                x,y=14,24
                id=patrol1
                role=patrol
            [/unit]

            [unit]
                side=2
                type=Dwarvish Steelclad
                x,y=15,24
                id=patrol2
                role=patrol
            [/unit]
    
            [unit]
                side=2
                type=Dwarvish Thunderguard
                x,y=15,25
                id=patrol3
                role=patrol
            [/unit]

            [unit]
                side=2
                type=Dwarvish Guardsman
                x,y=16,24
                id=patrol4
                role=patrol
            [/unit]

so the point is: there is any problem if two or more units have the same role?
While you're here, I know that you like Trolls : what's your opinion about the White Troll unit?
And compliments for you new Code & WML Contributor title!