New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[TSG] Scenario redesign #3648

Merged
merged 65 commits into from Dec 15, 2018

Conversation

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@nemaara
Copy link
Contributor

nemaara commented Oct 23, 2018

Since I already redid most of TSG's dialogue, I figured I might as well make the maps prettier too. I'm not doing a redraw from scratch; I'm only making the map prettier by using embellishments and different terrain varieties (and avoiding adding villages or changing terrain in combat areas significantly, that way the gameplay/scenario design should stay pretty much the same). I'm planning to redo all of them, and will remove the [WIP] tag when done.

Edit: this is now a PR for a trial TSG revision (including gameplay). I'll be playtesting all of my scenario revisions, although anyone else is welcome to come and playtest as well.

@nemaara

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

nemaara commented Oct 25, 2018

Before I continue on this, I'd like to ask about some gameplay rebalancing. Right now, I think TSG is a little bit long for a novice level campaign and I've already mentioned some ideas regarding S6a and S8a here: #3411.

What I would like to do is revamp the scenarios a little bit by making the maps smaller and giving the enemies less gold. This way, the scenarios will feel a little more "skirmishy" and also take less time to play. Thoughts?

@nemaara nemaara changed the title [WIP] [TSG] Scenario map revamp [WIP] [TSG] Scenario redesign Oct 28, 2018

@nemaara nemaara force-pushed the nemaara:TSG_map branch from 6f40d5b to 844d641 Oct 28, 2018

#po : deplorable means awful or terrible
[message]
speaker=Absu
message= _ "Freedom! Sir Knight, please allow me to join you in fighting off these deplorable thugs."

This comment has been minimized.

@sevu

sevu Oct 29, 2018

Member

Not sure about the reasoning – I would expect that it does not matter much for them if loyalists or outlaws life around. As long as they can life their life…

Sounds more like this makes clear to the player that the Outlaws are the Always Bad Guys, and I think we don't need an other, to the actual story unrelated, reasoning for them to be the bad ones.

This comment has been minimized.

@nemaara

nemaara Nov 1, 2018

Contributor

I've changed the text here; perhaps it's reasonable now?

@jostephd
Copy link
Member

jostephd left a comment

@nemaara nemaara referenced this pull request Oct 30, 2018

Closed

The South Guard #1954

12 of 14 tasks complete
@nemaara

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

nemaara commented Oct 30, 2018

I've finished rebalancing/taking care of issues up to S5 (the branching point of the campaign). I've playtested all of the scenarios on hard mode and balanced accordingly, but it will definitely still help if other people playtest as well. Right now, I think S4 may be a bit on the easy side and S5 may be a bit on the hard side (specifically side 3's income may be a bit high), so I will adjust these accordingly with more feedback or as I test more.

Story-wise, I plan to add Ithelden to S3, and I may still need to tweak S2 a little bit (forcing Deoran to go to the citadel rather than just a normal unit).

@jostephd

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

jostephd commented Oct 30, 2018

Adding a label per @nemaara's comment.

@nemaara Please remember that TSG's easiest difficulties are "Beginner" and "Easy" and the former is meant to be winnable by first-time players. It's important to balance these difficulties appropriately: we don't want to new players to quit wesnoth because TSG on Beginner is too hard.

@nemaara

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

nemaara commented Nov 3, 2018

I've finished the bandit branch. I'll be working on the elf branch soon.

[event]
name=die
first_time_only=no

This comment has been minimized.

@sevu

sevu Nov 6, 2018

Member

This scenario already has such an event, with values of 50, 70 gold.
As there are no changes listed to that event in this PR, it means there are now too?

This comment has been minimized.

@nemaara

nemaara Nov 6, 2018

Contributor

I split the event into 2 events. Enemies now gain more gold if they kill your units, less gold if theirs die. This incentivizes keeping your units alive and also makes it easier to stay alive for longer. There is a change in that event you mentioned, overall the gold enemies gain on unit deaths should be lower.

@@ -49,21 +49,19 @@
[/if]
[/event]

#ifndef SG_DEATHS_LAST_LEVEL

This comment has been minimized.

@sevu

sevu Nov 6, 2018

Member

This exists because in S9a Ethiliel has a custom death event.

In this campaign the death events are not included as macro, but instead this whole file is included into (nearly) each scenario. This allows different tricks, like hiding it here with an #ifdef.
It's an alternative way to code it.

This comment has been minimized.

@nemaara

nemaara Nov 6, 2018

Contributor

I changed this because I removed the custom death in S9a, the reason being that after some discussion on discord and with josteph, I decided to make it a survival scenario rather than a move to target location scenario.

@jostephd

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

jostephd commented Nov 8, 2018

Linking #3410 #3411

@nemaara nemaara changed the title [WIP] [TSG] Scenario redesign [TSG] Scenario redesign Nov 8, 2018

@nemaara

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

nemaara commented Nov 8, 2018

I've finished revising all of the scenarios and a few miscellaneous things in macros (to go along with the scenarios). The whole thing should be ready for playtesting now, and I'll probably put it on the add-on server later today for convenience.

@nemaara

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

nemaara commented Nov 9, 2018

This revision is now available from the addon server, so anyone who wants to test can go there to get it as well.

@Konrad22

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

Konrad22 commented Nov 13, 2018

Sc1 (Hardest difficulty):
It is easier than the old version and here is the why:
Less gold on both sides, but you start with 50 gold, while the enemy starts with 30 gold -> you send (excluding Deoran) 5-6 units (Sir Gerrick, your loyal Spearman and 3 other lvl 1s) while your enemy sends 2 units, but maybe you can count the one unit hiding in the enemy villages, so it's 5-6 vs 3 in the night.
After the night is over, the enemy get's gold, so he is going to send 4-5 units at you. And they are going to attack once it's day, so they get the dmg penality, you get a dmg bonus. (So very easy overall)
In the old version the enemy starts with a bit more gold and does not get a boost later, so his packed units actually mostly attack at night and can deal damage instead of either getting swarmed or lacking damage because of daylight. (Easy, but not extremely hard to lose easy)
My suggestion: Move the gold boost to when you find Ser Gerrick. If the player puts visiting him off, then even the small number of enemies can spell trouble for the peasants, if the player rushes for him, the enemy reinforcements won't hit in full daylight and will be trailing closely behind the first wave.

@nemaara

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

nemaara commented Nov 14, 2018

I've put in your suggested change (moving the side 2 gold to when you get Sir Gerrick).

@nemaara

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

nemaara commented Nov 15, 2018

EoZ/Elder2 has finished a playthrough of the bandit branch. He played on the hardest available difficulty and it took him "a few hours, maybe around ~5". He said that the campaign did not seem to be a very big challenge, but probably is reasonable for a novice level campaign, and maybe the last scenario could be harder (but that there could be a lot of variance based on your performance in the previous scenario).

Based on his comments, I won't touch values for now, until more feedback comes in.

@nemaara

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

nemaara commented Nov 20, 2018

EoZ has also finished the Elvish branch, I've fixed some bugs in S8a that he reported. I think this should be ready to merge, although any extra feedback on the easier two modes is also welcome.

@nemaara nemaara force-pushed the nemaara:TSG_map branch from 6f02cbd to 0842189 Dec 8, 2018

@Pentarctagon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

Pentarctagon commented Dec 13, 2018

I will merge this on Saturday, if there are no objections and nobody else merges/backports it first.

@Pentarctagon Pentarctagon merged commit e8927ac into wesnoth:master Dec 15, 2018

2 of 3 checks passed

Codacy/PR Quality Review Codacy was unable to analyse your pull request.
Details
continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

Pentarctagon added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2018

Pentarctagon added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment