Does this happen to anyone else?

[Tomn]

Every time I lose a campaign game because I ran out of time, I'm always short by one lousy turn. If I had just one extra turn, my prince would have made it to the boats/sewers/cave/ultra-thingy/whatever. I thought it was just some minor annoyance at first, but after the third time it happened, it now seems odd. Why am I always short by just one damn turn?! ONE FLAKIN' TURN!

[turin]

Because scenario designers intentionally make it so the slow-and-steady strategy doesn't work. I try to time my scenarios so that unless you press your advantage, you will not win unless you get really lucky.

[Chris Byler]

Why? Fighting the enemy is fun, fighting the clock isn't. Given the early finish bonus, clearly *some* time limit is necessary, but I don't see how a short time limit that forces the player to hurry could possibly add to the enjoyment of the game.

[Yogibear]

Why? Fighting the enemy is fun, fighting the clock isn't. Given the early finish bonus, clearly *some* time limit is necessary, but I don't see how a short time limit that forces the player to hurry could possibly add to the enjoyment of the game.

Well, after all it's a strategy game. And especially in campaign scenarios you are forced to find a strategy, that matches the objectives. The challenge is not only to fight the enemy but to discover the "trick", that makes you win the scenario. Sometimes the trick is not to stand a fight like a man but to run away as fast as you can. And sometimes the scenario teaches you a new strategy, that you didn't know before. To many players that adds a lot of fun, too.

[Ambegen]

Well, the game is designed to suit developers needs. If you feel you need some backup you can just edit scenario file and give yourself more turns/gold - whatever you need.

[Tomn]

It's not so much that I lost due to lack of time. It's that I lose due to ONE TURN! It's just...annoying.

[szopen]

Well, it happened once to me - the last scenario in TRoW campaign. I just decided to delay moving this lieutanant, forgot his name, by one turn, so he would regain some health. I had no patience to reload, so I edited the scenario file

[Casual User]

Good afternoon!

Turin wrote : "Because scenario designers intentionally make it so the slow-and-steady strategy doesn't work. I try to time my scenarios so that unless you press your advantage, you will not win unless you get really lucky."

That doesn't sound too good to me. Part of a good strategy is to know when to take it slow and steady (Rommel was essentially defeated by capture-and-dig-in tactics).

Wouldn't it be more fun if some scenarios require you to press the advantage, while doing that would lead to disaster in others which would need slow and steady tactics?

[ott]

Casual User: there is room for all sorts of scenarios. Turin is expressing his opinion as one of many campaign authors. There are campaigns where slower "grind them down" methods do work, but several of the better known campaigns are quite carefully timed to push you to extend yourself. Of course, you could also come up with a new campaign which requires the approach you wish to advocate -- see http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/BuildingCampaigns for lots of information.

[turin]

Good afternoon!

Turin wrote : "Because scenario designers intentionally make it so the slow-and-steady strategy doesn't work. I try to time my scenarios so that unless you press your advantage, you will not win unless you get really lucky."

That doesn't sound too good to me. Part of a good strategy is to know when to take it slow and steady (Rommel was essentially defeated by capture-and-dig-in tactics).

Wouldn't it be more fun if some scenarios require you to press the advantage, while doing that would lead to disaster in others which would need slow and steady tactics?

Yes... but the ones where you need "slow and steady" tactics would probably be the ones where the objective was not "defeat enemy leaders", but "survive until end of turns".

Basically, sometimes the time limit is a factor, sometimes not. My point was that when it is, and the scenario designer wanted it to be, it will often cause you to lose by 1-2 turns.

[Uppi]

The problem is that if you balance a scenario that way that there is plenty time for a slow and steady attack, those managing to pull off a blitzkrieg will end up with insane amounts of gold.

[Elvish_Pillager]

Well, you just make it insanely hard to blitzkrieg. For example, by giving the opponent loads of Horsemen and defending his castle with a lot of immobile Dwarvish Guardsmen.