Scenario 1: Rooting out a Mage

[otzenpunk]

I feel like your entire post is just RNG frustration.

The very FIRST round of combat with the enemy in this SUPPOSEDLY ‘beginner scenario’ went BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM YOU’RE DEAD YOU LOSE, HAH HAH HAH MY THIRD DARK ADEPT DIDN’T NEED ITS LAST SHOT AND MY FOURTH DARK ADEPT DIDN’T EVEN NEED TO MOVE, SUCKER! - without the enemy taking a single pip of damage. At that point, I immediately deleted Wesnoth from my computer, despite everything else I’d seen that made me want to love it.

Yeah, RNG frustration...

Well, as I understood it, he rushed to the front with his leader and used the first opportunity to expose him at night to attacks from four adepts. Of course, 5 successful hits in a row were indeed pretty unlucky, but 5 out of 8 were not, so I wouldn't particularly blame the RNG, but rather having perhaps not paid enough attention to the tutorial part 2 (regarding time of day, protecting the leader, etc.).

I also don't understand, why a beginner scenario apparently has to be so easy that every new starter would be able to win it in the first run. That wasn't the case back in the days, when I played a lot of games. What's that supposed to be for a challenge then?

When I started to play Wesnoth, 'Heir to the Throne' was still the recommended beginner's campaign, and I'm glad that was changed in the meantime, because apart from other reasons it's way too long.

In my opinion 'Tale of two brothers', 'Orcish Invasion' and 'South Guard' all qualify as entry level campaigns, and all three of them provide new players with their own difficulties.

In ToTB it's probably that you start with this lot of loyal troops, who are not particularly well equipped for an undead scenario with their piercing weapons. AOI gives you a nice and easy 1st scenario, but already in the 2nd, there is lots of poison, and the 3rd doesn't even have any villages for healing, so if you haven't levelled a druid by then, you're probably pretty screwed as well. I can easily imagine people complaining that it's impossible to win these scenarios under these circumstances. (I haven't played SG on easy level for a long time, but I think the 2nd scenario for example might also not be a cake run, if you're new to the game.)

The reason why I would still have recommended ToTB from these three as first campaign for beginners so far, (apart from being the shortest,) is simply that it didn't have a 'middle' difficulty level, so if you've mastered SG and AOI, beginner ToTB is probably already too easy for you, but challenging ToTB is still far out of range, and you had to skip the whole campaign for quite a while.

Maybe this would change that, if mainlined (haven't tested):

I feel like this is another chance to plug my version of AToTB (which, unfortunately, I haven't gotten around to porting to 1.16 yet): https://github.com/cooljeanius/Two_Brothers_With_A_Third_Difficulty
Besides adding a middle "Normal" difficulty, it also makes the "Easy" difficulty more explanatory and tutorial-like, as seems to be the request.

[mal_shubertal]

(1) What difficulty levels and game versions have you played the scenario on?
1.16.2 . Challenging
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
2
(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
very
(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
I liked it. I like the tension between the brothers and the mystery of why they had their falling out
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Deciding when to move the leader forward, deciding who to give the xp.
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
6. It's not a tense resource-management showdown like most of the first scenarios of campaigns, since you get such a huge number of loyal troops. It's mostly about picking which units are best against each enemy and managing time of day.
As a more experienced player coming back to this campaign years later, I like the flexibility to impose different 'challenges' on this scenario to make it more difficult and replayable. You can try to play the campaign using only the original loyal troops, or only one single kind of unit like horsemen or spearmen, or impose other kinds of restraints to make it more of a challenge.
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
I like it as is.

[egallager]

Maybe this would change that, if mainlined (haven't tested):

I feel like this is another chance to plug my version of AToTB (which, unfortunately, I haven't gotten around to porting to 1.16 yet): https://github.com/cooljeanius/Two_Brothers_With_A_Third_Difficulty
Besides adding a middle "Normal" difficulty, it also makes the "Easy" difficulty more explanatory and tutorial-like, as seems to be the request.

Well, I've uploaded it to the 1.16 add-on server now at least

[f1guy]

(1) Hard, 1.1.1
(2) About 8-9
(3) Clear
(4) I like the storyline of the scenario, so it's pretty much interesting to me
(5) Beating up skeletons I think
(6) 5
(7) I would not change anything

[grimstang]

new player to wesnoth as of a week and a half. i neglected the tutorial, opting to play the first campaign i saw. this was it.

i scoffed at Horseman(Easy) difficulty and took the mantle of Knight(Challenging). some blessed rng allowed arvith to decimate a ghost during his first attack.

i found this deeply amusing having come from age of wonders where a wraith is immune to conventional weapons. the necromancer died soon afterwards, fell upon by my horsemen.

the next scenario defeated me via turn timer. alas, i was not swift enough into the elvish woods. my ragged band was turned away at the last objective.

i returned to it after playing an excessive amount of random map scenarios v.s ai, clearing the lot for closure's sake.

i found the storyline enjoyable, but it is also colored by catharsis. i suppose what i am trying to say is, 10/10, all fields. truly gaming

[HenryY2020]

(1) What difficulty levels and game versions have you played the scenario on?
1.16.9 . Challenging
(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
7
(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?
I liked it. I like the tension between the brothers and the mystery of why they had their falling out
(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
Deciding who to give the xp and had to restart once due to horrible RNG for multiple turns.
(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
6. It's fun to have loads of loyal units but most of them are not that effective against undead units.
(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
No changes needed.

[JL42]

What difficulty levels and game versions have you played the scenario on?

v. 1.16.10
Grand Knight / Challenging

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

4 – Most of the difficulty comes from the awkward, clunky terrain that makes it hard to set up good defensive lines, plus the enemy having flanking units. Beginners who don't know a lot about mechanics would probably struggle with all the different types of enemies that the scenario throws at you.

How clear did you find the scenario objectives?

Very clear.

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

Clear, but not really interesting. It could definitely benefit from a bit of rewriting to provide greater narrative depth, and (for beginners) to add dialogue discussing the units' strengths/weaknesses.

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

Dealing with the awkward terrain and getting flanked by ghosts and bats.

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

2 – I didn't like this one very much; it just felt clunky and frustrating – not really any interesting challenges, just awkwardness and chaos.

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

First, I would revise the terrain to provide clearer defensive lines. This seems crucial especially in a campaign oriented toward beginners. I would also severely limit the enemy units, to skeletons and maybe some Walking Corpses and Dark Adepts (to give the horsemen something squishy to run down). The use of bats and ghosts is indefensible here. It's enough for beginners to have to learn about combat with skeletons, without also throwing in drains, poison, magical attacks, and flankers all on the very first map. I would also add some dialogue explaining the unit strengths and weaknesses, why we have turned to the local Footpads for help, etc.

(Personally I also don't like starting with a huge pile of loyal units with random secondary traits, but that part does actually make sense for beginners.)

About the Overall Campaign:

New players are directed to this one right after the tutorial. But I don't think it works very well as an "Intro" campaign, at least not in its current form. The first couple of maps are awkward and frustrating, effective combat requires an extensive knowledge of game mechanics, and the storyline is decidedly blah. There's basically nothing in the way of explanatory dialogue or introduction to the units and the game setting, as can be found in Heir to the Throne. The characters and context don't have much depth to draw people in. If this was my first introduction I would not come away with a very good impression of Wesnoth as a whole. It makes sense to have a short-and-simple campaign as the first one, but this just isn't it.

The campaign could benefit from extensive text rewriting to provide better narrative and more explanation of the units for beginners. Give that task to whoever wrote The South Guard or Heir to the Throne, both of which are much better in that regard. I also think some adjustment to the first two maps to provide simpler, more defensible terrain and more straightforward challenges (different enemy units) would be useful. Should note that I'm playing it on the harder difficulty – does anyone actually play on easy? – so that might possibly affect the unit distribution, but it certainly doesn't affect the terrain or dialogue writing.

In its current form I have to give the campaign 1 out of 5 stars. I would nudge beginners toward starting with Heir to the Throne, or maybe The South Guard, rather than this one.

[gnombat]

Should note that I'm playing it on the harder difficulty – does anyone actually play on easy? – so that might possibly affect the unit distribution, but it certainly doesn't affect the terrain or dialogue writing.

A lot of the issues you've talked about are actually addressed if you play on the easier difficulty level. (For example, there are fewer enemies, no ghosts, and some hints for beginners.)

[octalot]

For anyone remembering that the campaign menu used to say "the Hard version may challenge more experienced players", those memories come from Wesnoth 1.8/1.9, and it hasn't said that for more than a decade. However, if we weren't in string-freeze then I'd open a PR to add something along those lines. "The two difficulty levels of this campaign are vastly different, the easier one is playable with just the knowledge from Battle Training, while the harder one is intended for experienced players, and is comparable to the hardest levels of Liberty and Heir To The Throne."

Better writing would be good, but I disagree about changing terrain. Formations and choosing defensive terrain have more effect during the enemy turn, so for its purpose as a beginner campaign, I think it's better to have just enough to show that enemies are harder to hit when they're on a forest hex.

[JL42]

I was surprised to learn that the actual dialogue/hints might be different in various difficulties – something I hadn't considered. Probably should have tried the lower difficulty before opining so extensively on beginner-relevance! Still, I know I'm probably not the only one who tends to start out new games on harder settings. (I've tinkered with Wesnoth occasionally for years, but don't think I've ever played it on easy.) I would think that difficulty preferences vs. being new are two separate issues, with being new requiring an introductory process regardless.

Anyway, though, I'm glad to have prompted a bit of discussion. I'm going to try to add comments on the other campaigns as well as I gradually work my way through them again. I would still maintain that, on the hard difficulty at least, this one is rather lackluster – I've played the other campaigns on hard settings in previous versions and didn't feel the same way about most of them. It's not just the difficulty but more the awkwardness/clunky factor. Like how in the second scenario all the significant fighting is in the first few rounds, and then you just walk through an empty map.

Perhaps one option for AToTB might be to remove the hard difficulty completely, leaving just the beginner setting. (Or, revise it to Very-Easy plus Normal-Easy.) In any case, I'm not involved in all that and just giving one bloke's feedback Playstyle and personal preferences are likely a part of it.

[gnombat]

Perhaps one option for AToTB might be to remove the hard difficulty completely, leaving just the beginner setting. (Or, revise it to Very-Easy plus Normal-Easy.) In any case, I'm not involved in all that and just giving one bloke's feedback Playstyle and personal preferences are likely a part of it.

I wouldn't want to see the hard difficulty removed, because sometimes experienced players might wish to play the campaign, probably for a second (or third...) time, and they probably wouldn't want to play on "Beginner"-level difficulty (and they wouldn't have any need to see a bunch of hints intended for beginners).

I do think it would be a good idea to modify the UI to better steer new players toward the easy difficulty level. Probably the best thing to do would be to add something like octalot suggested above:

...I'd open a PR to add something along those lines. "The two difficulty levels of this campaign are vastly different, the easier one is playable with just the knowledge from Battle Training, while the harder one is intended for experienced players, and is comparable to the hardest levels of Liberty and Heir To The Throne."

I've also pondered whether it might be a good idea to initially have the higher difficulty "locked" (disabled), and to "unlock" it only after the player has completed the campaign on the easier difficulty. But I'm not sure that would work very well...

[egallager]

Would just like to take this opportunity to plug my "A Tale of Two Brothers With a Third Difficulty" add-on that adds a middle "Normal" difficulty between Easy and Hard; I keep meaning to submit some of the changes from it back to mainline sometime...