How do I get better at this game?

[Uncle Jon]

I'm playing through the south guard campaign which is was labeled as a easy campaign. Playing through it wasn't very difficult so far until I reached the Choice in the fog mission and lost a few times. What am I doing wrong? I can take out the bandit leader, but then I would get overwhelmed by the undead and then lose. Also at the beginning there aren't a whole lot of villages to generate revenue close by, there is one to the right of the encampment but still it's not a whole lot/

[Konrad2]

Sorry, but this isn't a whole lot of information to go on. But IIRC, this one is played for the first part mostly with your starting gold. So don't worry about negative income and recuirt to your hearts content. Preferably elves, since they have mobility that your human units lack in this scenario.

[Konrad2]

(But if you are going to choose the Bandit side, don't recruit elves at all, just use Merfolk to scout, so you meet the Bandit leader soon.)

[dtt.scanner]

I think it is important to do a lot of recruiting early on, protect the loyalists and make sure they can level up (worth a restart if you lose one) so that you can field the largest army possible. I also save and reload when recruiting to get the perks that I want (different people have different priorities) and I usually go for resilience and either strong or dexterous depending on the class. This gives you paid followers who are generally able to both attack and defend, regardless of class. This is by no means a necessity, but it does make them more survivable, and less prone to needing replacement in later scenarios.

Recruit lots of healers... you probably want at least six leveled up to max. Shyde (elven druid upgrade) are awesome because they have heal, slow, magic attack, and fly... so they are fast and can hobble the enemy strength, while at the same time provide a rally point for anyone who needs healing, and are good against undead after they slow the heavy hitters.

Have a handful of riders to scout and capture resources quickly (on most maps).

Use terrain to protect yourself and put the enemy at a disadvantage whenever possible.

Different races have different strengths and weaknesses, so you have to figure out combinations of attackers/defenders that works for you. For instance Lancers can often kill an opponent in one round (massive potential damage) but are very vulnerable to ranged counterattacks and have real problems in certain terrain (water and cave). Dwarven Stalwarts make a really good line defense on almost all terrain, especially if they have healers backing them up. Skirmishers like Rogues/Assassins are also very deadly.

If you are doing water crossing scenarios, don't recall anyone with less than 6 movement, so that they still have 2 movement in the water. This will get everyone to safety more quickly.

About the choice in the fog scenario: you have to decide who to ally with in the future. I chose to not betray my current allies, but Rogues as I said can be very deadly: excellent defense on all terrain, poison, skirmish, and backstab, so going the other way could prove interesting They are also chaotic so receive bonuses in the same rounds as the undead enemy, but would receive penalties from friendly Mages of Light.

It seems to me that I sent out a few merfolk and shyde to uncover the waterways and found several villages that could be easily taken. Shyde actually make very good scouts, especially if you have enough to send them in pairs to reinforce (heal) each other. There are actually quite a few villages on that map, so if you get to them fast, you can support a fairly large army before running out of coin. If you look in the top bar on any scenario, it shows next to the house symbol exactly how many villages are on the map (and how many you control). The early completion bonus is the amount of gold that controlling all of the towns would generate for that number of turns. Villages are a bit hidden in the swamps. Keep an eye out for them and search the map edges for ones that you might have missed. The more you have, the more you can recall and recruit.

Don't forget that after you take out a stronghold, you can use that position to recall other troops that you may not have had the coin to recruit earlier. LET the rogues fight the undead for you, and only take them out if they become a problem. You can focus on the undead stronghold directly south first, and let the other undead position and rogues beat each other up for a while. Once weakened, they will both be easier to take out. When you get into the caves, level up the trolls and you will have a strong attack against the forces in the caves, without having to sacrifice your followers.

[greenghost2008]

I've been playing this on and off for years and still suck

[LarryP]

Originally posted by green_ghost08:

I've been playing this on and off for years and still suck

Honesty, a rare virtue! Me too, I suck at this game. :)

[skinnzer]

Originally posted by LarryP:

Originally posted by green_ghost08:

I've been playing this on and off for years and still suck

Honesty, a rare virtue! Me too, I suck at this game. :)

As brutal as the RNG is, nobody's good at it, some of us just get lucky

[The Shadow]

Getting the norandom mod will help greatly to reduce RNG, but I suspect some of the original campaigns were meant to be cheesed with save scumming and praying the RNG lords you get lucky. However as said before for this campaign you just need to save units and make them level up to ease your chances for victory in later stages. If you play in the lowest difficulty it's just a matter of time then. And it's best to save often and to try to learn from mistakes to improve. It's not an easy game, even in easy mode.

[Konrad2]

I honestly dislike your attitude of handwaving the difficulty of the game with 'only doable with luck/savescumming', because that's simply not true. I can't speak for other people, but I can assure you that I've played every mainline campaign and I've done so without relying on luck or savescumming. There've actually been people doing Iron Man runs.
Learn from you mistakes instead of ascribing them to bad luck. Bad luck does happen, but it pretty much can't kill you on its own.

[MegaMrFreeman]

Originally posted by Konrad2:

I honestly dislike your attitude of handwaving the difficulty of the game with 'only doable with luck/savescumming', because that's simply not true. I can't speak for other people, but I can assure you that I've played every mainline campaign and I've done so without relying on luck or savescumming. There've actually been people doing Iron Man runs.
Learn from you mistakes instead of ascribing them to bad luck. Bad luck does happen, but it pretty much can't kill you on its own.

You ever had to do a campaign or a scenario against saurians? Saurians are the most unfair race of the game. Their magic attacks have a litteral 70% chance of hitting. They ALWAYS hit at least once. Also they have 60% defence on half the terrains. I dare you...I DARE YOU do a campaign or a scenario without savescumming against these little bastards.

And overall, whenever I see your comment in any discussion, its "Git gud, not game's fault" no matter what the discussion is about. Are they paying you to spout this nonsense? Are you a dev of this game, thats why you are defending it so much?

[derricks7]

Your only comment in this thread ends with a rant against the devs. Who do all of this for free I might add.

[Konrad2]

Originally posted by MegaMrFreeman:

You ever had to do a campaign or a scenario against saurians? Saurians are the most unfair race of the game. Their magic attacks have a litteral 70% chance of hitting. They ALWAYS hit at least once. Also they have 60% defence on half the terrains. I dare you...I DARE YOU do a campaign or a scenario without savescumming against these little bastards.

And overall, whenever I see your comment in any discussion, its "Git gud, not game's fault" no matter what the discussion is about. Are they paying you to spout this nonsense? Are you a dev of this game, thats why you are defending it so much?

Okay, now you dared me. Luckily I don't have to anything now, because I've already played plenty scenarios vs Saurians without savescumming. (Prominent examples are the saurian scenarios in LoW, 3-5 times each, hardest difficulty. You can find my replays on the forums.)

I'm not being paid for trying to talk sense into you or anyone else. Wesnoth is a free game, and I enjoy playing it. I also want other people to enjoy it, preferably without them savescumming. Sure, some people actually enjoy savescumming, but many seem to think that it is necessary to play the game. Which is not the case.

Btw, why you quite often see me saying pretty much the same thing, it's because no matter what the discussion is about, someone comes up and says 'the RNG is biased/at fault/noone can be good at this/savescum is necessary'.

Last but not least, I like this game, so why wouldn't I defend it against bias and misinformation?

TL;DR: Completed your dare a couple of times, and I just like the game.

[MegaMrFreeman]

Originally posted by Konrad2:

Originally posted by MegaMrFreeman:

You ever had to do a campaign or a scenario against saurians? Saurians are the most unfair race of the game. Their magic attacks have a litteral 70% chance of hitting. They ALWAYS hit at least once. Also they have 60% defence on half the terrains. I dare you...I DARE YOU do a campaign or a scenario without savescumming against these little bastards.

And overall, whenever I see your comment in any discussion, its "Git gud, not game's fault" no matter what the discussion is about. Are they paying you to spout this nonsense? Are you a dev of this game, thats why you are defending it so much?

Okay, now you dared me. Luckily I don't have to anything now, because I've already played plenty scenarios vs Saurians without savescumming. (Prominent examples are the saurian scenarios in LoW, 3-5 times each, hardest difficulty. You can find my replays on the forums.)

I'm not being paid for trying to talk sense into you or anyone else. Wesnoth is a free game, and I enjoy playing it. I also want other people to enjoy it, preferably without them savescumming. Sure, some people actually enjoy savescumming, but many seem to think that it is necessary to play the game. Which is not the case.

Btw, why you quite often see me saying pretty much the same thing, it's because no matter what the discussion is about, someone comes up and says 'the RNG is biased/at fault/noone can be good at this/savescum is necessary'.

Last but not least, I like this game, so why wouldn't I defend it against bias and misinformation?

TL;DR: Completed your dare a couple of times, and I just like the game.

Well in my opinion, savescumming is necessary and RNG is biased, especially when it comes to saurians, and especially saurian mages. And if you dont like this opinion you can f the right off.

I also like how you said "talk sense into you or anyone else" as if everyone who disagrees with you are insane or something. Love that one.

And for the replays - I actually went and looked at my own replay, where I definitely savescummed. And guess what - the game doesn't show you if the person used saves or not.It's just straight up clean game. So you didn't prove anything. You didn't complete a single dare, and until you can prove to me that you didn't savescum once, you are a fraud.

[Konrad2]

Originally posted by MegaMrFreeman:

Well in my opinion, savescumming is necessary and RNG is biased, especially when it comes to saurians, and especially saurian mages. And if you dont like this opinion you can f the right off.

I also like how you said "talk sense into you or anyone else" as if everyone who disagrees with you are insane or something. Love that one.

And for the replays - I actually went and looked at my own replay, where I definitely savescummed. And guess what - the game doesn't show you if the person used saves or not.It's just straight up clean game. So you didn't prove anything. You didn't complete a single dare, and until you can prove to me that you didn't savescum once, you are a fraud.

Okay, that's your opinion. I don't like it. No need to be rude about it though.

Fair, I really choose the wrong words there. I apologize for that. (FTR, I do think that you going way beyond my words and what they can imply with the 'insane or something' part.)
Actually I'm not sure how to put it into words. Maybe something along the lines of explaining why I think they are wrong? Giving a second perspective?

You can check expected damage and compare it with actual damage done, and then take some educated guess whether the player reloaded often during that scenario to dodge 'bad' outcomes. It's not a sure thing, that's true. Calling me a fraud is questionable though, although I do agree with you that I didn't prove anything, fair.
But what makes me a fraud? Making a claim that I can't back up (the way you want)? Because that means you are fraud too by claiming that the RNG is biased, and that I didn't complete the dares (you only dared me to play them without savescumming, you never said I'd have to prove it to you, so I did complete them :D).

What would convince you? Me streaming me playing wesnoth vs saurians?

On a side note, what is 'not savescum even once' to you? Iron man? Reloading the whole turn when you make a mistake? Restarting the whole scenario when you lose said scenario?

PS: Sorry to everyone else in the thread, especially the OP, although his questions have already been answered. Feel free to mute the thread.

[MegaMrFreeman]

Originally posted by Konrad2:

Originally posted by MegaMrFreeman:

Well in my opinion, savescumming is necessary and RNG is biased, especially when it comes to saurians, and especially saurian mages. And if you dont like this opinion you can f the right off.

I also like how you said "talk sense into you or anyone else" as if everyone who disagrees with you are insane or something. Love that one.

And for the replays - I actually went and looked at my own replay, where I definitely savescummed. And guess what - the game doesn't show you if the person used saves or not.It's just straight up clean game. So you didn't prove anything. You didn't complete a single dare, and until you can prove to me that you didn't savescum once, you are a fraud.

Okay, that's your opinion. I don't like it. No need to be rude about it though.

Fair, I really choose the wrong words there. I apologize for that. (FTR, I do think that you going way beyond my words and what they can imply with the 'insane or something' part.)
Actually I'm not sure how to put it into words. Maybe something along the lines of explaining why I think they are wrong? Giving a second perspective?

You can check expected damage and compare it with actual damage done, and then take some educated guess whether the player reloaded often during that scenario to dodge 'bad' outcomes. It's not a sure thing, that's true. Calling me a fraud is questionable though, although I do agree with you that I didn't prove anything, fair.
But what makes me a fraud? Making a claim that I can't back up (the way you want)? Because that means you are fraud too by claiming that the RNG is biased, and that I didn't complete the dares (you only dared me to play them without savescumming, you never said I'd have to prove it to you, so I did complete them :D).

What would convince you? Me streaming me playing wesnoth vs saurians?

On a side note, what is 'not savescum even once' to you? Iron man? Reloading the whole turn when you make a mistake? Restarting the whole scenario when you lose said scenario?

PS: Sorry to everyone else in the thread, especially the OP, although his questions have already been answered. Feel free to mute the thread.

Well, I guess you got me there, maybe we are both frauds. You for saying that you never savescum but you have no proof, and me for saying RNG is biased also without proof.

And yeah, streaming would convince me.

And, at least personally, I think savescumming means restarting the scenario, campaign or using any save, turn or otherwise.

[Konrad2]

Originally posted by MegaMrFreeman:

Well, I guess you got me there, maybe we are both frauds. You for saying that you never savescum but you have no proof, and me for saying RNG is biased also without proof.

And yeah, streaming would convince me.

And, at least personally, I think savescumming means restarting the scenario, campaign or using any save, turn or otherwise.

I'll try to look up how to stream then. Do you perhaps have Zoom?

I see... I always thought of savescumming as a means to work around the RNG, which is not the case when you restart a scenario or even a campaign. I do think that you need to make allowances for attempting different strategies. Expecting perfection on the first try is a recipe for immense frustration.
I'm willing to try Iron Man for the 'normal' difficulty, but not so much for 'hard'.