GCI/Playtesting/An Orcish Incursion/Normal - Revision history

Egallager: link cleanup

2023-04-24T02:33:29Z

link cleanup

Aethaeryn: categorizing

2011-03-06T02:58:26Z

categorizing

Bouncy93 at 19:02, 5 December 2010

2010-12-05T19:02:46Z

Bouncy93 at 18:22, 5 December 2010

2010-12-05T18:22:25Z

Bouncy93 at 14:24, 5 December 2010

2010-12-05T14:24:37Z

Bouncy93: /* Scenario 2: Assassins */

2010-12-05T12:24:06Z

‎Scenario 2: Assassins

Bouncy93 at 08:09, 5 December 2010

2010-12-05T08:09:53Z

Bouncy93 at 22:45, 4 December 2010

2010-12-04T22:45:59Z

Bouncy93 at 22:27, 4 December 2010

2010-12-04T22:27:33Z

Crab: Created page with '(to be filled out by playtester)'

2010-11-24T15:03:07Z

Created page with '(to be filled out by playtester)'

New page

(to be filled out by playtester)

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 Google Code-In 2010.
 This page shows the results of testing The Battle for Wesnoth 1.9.2 - campaign "An Orcish Incursion" on Normal (Medium) difficulty.
-I followed the guidelines on [http://wiki.wesnoth.org/GCI/Playtesting this page] for the analysis.
+I followed the guidelines on [[GCI/Playtesting|this page]] for the analysis.
 The following has been quoted from the page for reference purposes:

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:58, 6 March 2011
Line 107:		Line 107:

	“An Orcish Incursion” is one very good campaign. I had a lot of fun when I played it. It’s well made, has good storyline(some dialogs are short but that could be fixed) and has no major bugs or glitches(only small problems mentioned above). The campaign is helpful for novice players and it makes great introduction in “The Battle for Wesnoth”.		“An Orcish Incursion” is one very good campaign. I had a lot of fun when I played it. It’s well made, has good storyline(some dialogs are short but that could be fixed) and has no major bugs or glitches(only small problems mentioned above). The campaign is helpful for novice players and it makes great introduction in “The Battle for Wesnoth”.
		+
		+	[[Category: GCI]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 == Preamble ==
 Google Code-In 2010.
-This page shows the results of testing The Battle for Wesnoth 1.9.2 -  Campaign "An Orcish Incursion" on Normal (Medium) difficulty.
+This page shows the results of testing The Battle for Wesnoth 1.9.2 - campaign "An Orcish Incursion" on Normal (Medium) difficulty.
-I followed the guidelines on this page [http://wiki.wesnoth.org/GCI/Playtesting this page] for the analysis.
+I followed the guidelines on [http://wiki.wesnoth.org/GCI/Playtesting this page] for the analysis.
 The following has been quoted from the page for reference purposes:
@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 </blockquote>
-== Scenario 1: Defend the Forests ==
+== Scenario 1: Defend the Forest ==
-#Campaign difficultly: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
+#Campaign difficulty: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
-#Scenario difficultly: 2. Normal for first scenario in the campaign.
+#Scenario difficulty: 2. Normal for first scenario in the campaign.
 #Clear scenario objectives.
 #The dialog makes very good introduction to the rising battle between orcs and elves.
@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 == Scenario 2: Assassins ==
-#Campaign difficultly: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
+#Campaign difficulty: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
-#Scenario difficultly: 5.
+#Scenario difficulty: 5.
-#Clear scenario objectives.
+#Very clear scenario objectives.
 #Clear and good dialog.
 #The assassins caused me bad headache until I find the way to beat them. But the rest was easy.
-#Fun: 6. The enemy forces have quite different abilities, and it’s very fun when you find the correct strategy to fight them.
+#Fun: 6. The enemy forces have quite different abilities, and it’s very fun until you find the correct strategy to fight them.
 #No changes needed.
 #I restarted the scenario 2-3 times until I find the right strategy for these nasty assassins.
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 == Scenario 3: Wasteland ==
-#Campaign difficultly: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
+#Campaign difficulty: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
-#Scenario difficultly: 4.
+#Scenario difficulty: 4.
 #Clear objectives.
-#The dialog is fine but it could be included more descriptions of the landscape as the previous scenario.
+#The dialog is good. The description of the landscape is very impressive.
 #The major challenges in meeting the objectives of this scenario were high level enemy units, but with good strategy it’s easy to defeat them.
 #Fun: 5.
@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 == Scenario 4: Valley of Trolls ==
-#Campaign difficultly: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
+#Campaign difficulty: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
-#Scenario difficultly: 7. The hardest scenario in the campaign.
+#Scenario difficulty: 7. The hardest scenario in the campaign.
 #Clear scenario objectives.
 #Not so good dialog. It could be more interesting.
@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 == Scenario 5: Linaera the Quick ==
-#Campaign difficultly: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
+#Campaign difficulty: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
-#Scenario difficultly: 6.
+#Scenario difficulty: 6.
 #Very clear scenario objectives.
 #Good dialog, the longest in the campaign.
-#First time when I played the scenario was very hard to eliminate enemies, but when I learned to use the mages properly it wasn’t so difficult.
+#First time when I played the scenario was very hard to eliminate enemies, but when I learned how to use mages properly it wasn’t so difficult.
 #Fun: 7.
 #No changes. The scenario is very good.
@@ Line 75: / Line 75: @@
 == Scenario 6: A Detour through the Swamp ==
-#Campaign difficultly: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
+#Campaign difficulty: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
-#Scenario difficultly: 5.
+#Scenario difficulty: 5.
 #Clear. The hint was very useful
 #Short, but well-written.
-#Easy scenario. I had 3 level 3s and it wasn’t difficult to defend all lower level units from the scenario. I had 3 mage from the previous level and they were very helpful against the undeads.
+#Easy scenario. I had 3 level 3s and it wasn’t difficult to defend all lower level units . I had 3 mages from the previous level and they were very helpful against the undeads.
 #Fun: 7. Very enjoyable.
 #No changes. Again good scenario.
@@ Line 86: / Line 86: @@
 == Scenario 7: Showdown ==
-#Campaign difficultly: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
+#Campaign difficulty: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
-#Scenario difficultly: 3. For last scenario in the campaign it’s very easy. For increasing the scenario difficultly I think it would be good to begin only with 2 additional Rangers instead of 4.
+#Scenario difficulty: 3. For last scenario in the campaign it’s very easy. For increasing the scenario difficulty I think it would be good to begin only with 2 additional Rangers instead of 4.
 #The objectives were clear, and the hint was very helpful.
 #Compared with the previous scenarios the dialog at the beginning was very short. It would be good to insert additional dialog.
@@ Line 93: / Line 93: @@
 #Fun: 9. The funniest scenario in the campaign.
 #This scenario was too easy. Increasing the difficultly by giving the enemy stronger units (some level 3s), and decreasing the Rangers in the beginning will make the scenario more fun (10). The dialogs and the cutscenes need to be extended.
-#None.
+#No problems.
 == Bugs ==
-In this campaign there were no bugs at all but I find few mistakes.
+In this campaign there were no bugs at all but I found several small mistakes.
-#When I played the game for first time the default language was Bulgarian. The title bar of the window was “???????????” but when I changed the language at English the title changed correctly – “The Battle for Wesnoth”.
+#When I played the game for first time the default language was Bulgarian. The title bar of the window was “???????????” but when I changed the language at English everything went right – “The Battle for Wesnoth - 1.9.2”.
-#Before scenarios 6 and 7 when the map appeared there was no text or description on what’s happens next. May be this isn’t bug but the previous scenarios have text when the map is shown.
+#Before scenarios 6 and 7 when the map appeared there was no text or description on what’s happening next. May be this isn’t bug but I was confused because previous scenarios had text below the map.
-#I had Elvish Marshall in one of the scenarios . When I right-clicked on it and then “Unit Description” Strikes were: sword(10-4) and bow(8-3). Meanwhile in the right menu characteristics were sword(8-4) and bow(6-3). After 2-3 turns everything was fine.
+#I had Elvish Marshall in one of the scenarios. When I right-clicked on it and then “Unit Description” Strikes were: sword(10-4) and bow(8-3). Meanwhile in the right menu characteristics were sword(8-4) and bow(6-3). After 2-3 turns everything was fine.
-#When there is some cutscenes I can’t click on Menu.
+#When cutscene appears I can’t click on Menu.
-#In fullscreen  mode the graphic was a little bit blurry in my resolution(1280x1024)
+#In fullscreen mode the graphic was a little bit blurry in my resolution(1280x1024)
 == Summary ==
-“An Orcish Incursion” is one very good campaign. I had a lot of fun when I played it. It’s well made, has good storyline(some dialogs are short but it could be fixed) and has no major bugs or glitches(only small problems mentioned above). The campaign is helpful for novice players and it makes great introduction in “The Battle for Wesnoth”.
+“An Orcish Incursion” is one very good campaign. I had a lot of fun when I played it. It’s well made, has good storyline(some dialogs are short but that could be fixed) and has no major bugs or glitches(only small problems mentioned above). The campaign is helpful for novice players and it makes great introduction in “The Battle for Wesnoth”.

@@ Line 67: / Line 67: @@
 #Scenario difficultly: 6.
 #Very clear scenario objectives.
-#Good dialog.
+#Good dialog, the longest in the campaign.
 #First time when I played the scenario was very hard to eliminate enemies, but when I learned to use the mages properly it wasn’t so difficult.
 #Fun: 7.
@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 #Scenario difficultly: 5.
 #Clear. The hint was very useful
-#Not as much as the others, but well-written.
+#Short, but well-written.
 #Easy scenario. I had 3 level 3s and it wasn’t difficult to defend all lower level units from the scenario. I had 3 mage from the previous level and they were very helpful against the undeads.
 #Fun: 7. Very enjoyable.
@@ Line 94: / Line 94: @@
 #This scenario was too easy. Increasing the difficultly by giving the enemy stronger units (some level 3s), and decreasing the Rangers in the beginning will make the scenario more fun (10). The dialogs and the cutscenes need to be extended.
 #None.

@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 #No changes needed.
 #I restarted the scenario 2-3 times until I find the right strategy for these nasty assassins.
 == Scenario 7: Showdown ==

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 #No events caused me to lose the game or reload the scenario.
 #I don’t know nothing about WML so I can’t give a comment. In the scenarios below I will miss this point.
 == Scenario 7: Showdown ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:27, 4 December 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	(to be ~~filled out~~ by ~~playtester~~)	+	== Preamble ==
		+	Google Code-In 2010.
		+	This page shows the results of testing The Battle for Wesnoth 1.9.2 - Campaign "An Orcish Incursion" on Normal (Medium) difficulty.
		+	I followed the guidelines on this page [http://wiki.wesnoth.org/GCI/Playtesting this page] for the analysis.
		+
		+	The following has been quoted from the page for reference purposes:
		+	<blockquote>
		+	#What difficulty levels and what version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
		+	#How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)
		+	#How clear did you find the scenario objectives?
		+	#How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?
		+	#What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?
		+	#How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)
		+	#What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?
		+	#Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?
		+	#If you know a bit of the Wesnoth Markup Language - do you think that the WML of this scenario is clear and well commented? If not which part would you like to be documented better?
		+	</blockquote>
		+
		+	== Scenario 1: Defend the Forests ==
		+
		+	#Campaign difficultly: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
		+	#Scenario difficultly: 2. Normal for first scenario in the campaign.
		+	#Clear scenario objectives.
		+	#The dialog makes very good introduction to the rising battle between orcs and elves.
		+	#No challenges to meeting objectives.
		+	#Fun: 4. It wasn’t so interesting, but for first scenario it’s expected.
		+	# Nothing to change. The first scenario is good to begin slow and easy. No needed using special abilities and tactics, just introduction to the campaign.
		+	#No events caused me to lose the game or reload the scenario.
		+	#I don’t know nothing about WML so I can’t give a comment. In the scenarios below I will miss this point.
		+
		+	== Scenario 7: Showdown ==
		+
		+	#Campaign difficultly: Medium. Version: 1.9.2.
		+	#Scenario difficultly: 3. For last scenario in the campaign it’s very easy. For increasing the scenario difficultly I think it would be good to begin only with 2 additional Rangers instead of 4.
		+	#The objectives were clear, and the hint was very helpful.
		+	#Compared with the previous scenarios the dialog at the beginning was very short. It would be good to insert additional dialog.
		+	#There were no challenges. With the reinforcements it was very easy to complete the objectives.
		+	#Fun: 9. The funniest scenario in the campaign.
		+	#This scenario was too easy. Increasing the difficultly by giving the enemy stronger units (some level 3s), and decreasing the Rangers in the beginning will make the scenario more fun (10). The dialogs and the cutscenes need to be extended.
		+	#None.