Campaign Creations

thebrowncloud wrote: Weak...... I had 5 seconds left on the defense portion of the first map and then died...... And the worst part is that I hadn't been saving like the map told me 

If the maps says that you must save the game, save it. Really. Even if you think that map is super-easy and you felt like you can take care of an entire zerg swarm with a single marine. You can never be 100% what's gonna happen after the warning... Believe me, I suffered this same problem many times long time ago.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: Heheheh, in my case I tend to oversave. Probably out of fear of losing ANY progress. On more difficult situations or cases, I can easily save on every single corner.

Just for the campaigns of this contest, my average is like 100 saves per campaign tested.

Well, better oversaving that undersaving, I'd say. Specially if you're one of the judges of the contest and you want your testing log to be carefully wiritten, with as most details about bugs, gameplay, etc, etc. :p

True, true. It was my first play through (besides a few early mishaps in the first part). I played through it again, saving often this time, and finally beat it. Unfortunately, my internet has been phasing in and out today (again with the computer problems.... *sigh*) so I haven't been able to download the second mission yet.

I like what I've seen so far and have been taking mental notes for my review. Since it seems like your triggering and such are solid, I am focusing more on your characters, dialogue, etc. The only gameplay glitch I have found (and this probably doesn't always happen) but in the ending sequence of map 1 when Imrian, Khashilar, and Rastadon move for the gateway to warp out, Rastadon gets stuck behind the other two heroes and ends up not making it to the "warp out zone". Other than that, it has been seemless and very enjoyable. I can tell you've put alot of effort into this project. 

thebrowncloud wrote: -Rastadon move for the gateway to warp out, Rastadon gets stuck behind the other two heroes and ends up not making it to the "warp out zone". Other than that, it has been seemless and very enjoyable.

JFH*%Y*(#&*(YDIAHRFKJT.

Okay, I'm just going to switch their spots so that Imrian doesn't slow everyone down.


EDIT: Okay, fixed.  New version of Map 1 will be uploaded eventually.  Thanks for your observations. 

Critical Aspects

-> YES - Campaign's storyline is between Starcraft 1 and Starcraft 2.

Comments related to the direct scoring

===TEXT
-> + Grammar seems fine overall.
-> + Informs the player correctly of events.
-> + Text properly formatted for reading.
-> + Text modified greatly enhanced to fit the characters' speech.
-> + Great character dialog.
-> + Interesting text animation in map 1.
-> - Few typos (considering the length of the campaign's text).
-> - A phrase in the campaign is pretty much 18+ (considering the campaigns should be fully acceptable for an audience of 16 years old or less).
  Note : Part of the phrase in question : "smackdown on some h*es" (focusing on the word "h*es")

===PROFESSIONNAL
-> + Lots of extra sounds are added and played at the right time.
-> + Have a proper credits section at the end of the campaign.
-> + Spectacular amount of thread updates including screenshots, videos and music.

===TRIGGERING
-> + Decent overall and very functional overall. No critical bugs.
-> + High use of switches and locations.
-> + Proper use of hyper triggers.
-> + Commented triggers.
-> - Some minor bugs/issues (usually isolated specific cases)

===MAPPING - LAYOUT
-> + Terrain is very fluid.
-> + Had no trouble maneuvering the maps

===MAPPING - BEAUTY
-> + Decent overall (looks good, doesn't look rushed, terrain isn't "plain")
-> + Decent placement of doodads such as debris at all the right places, etc.

===Brownie Points
Note : This doesn't influence directly the scores but might improve it

-> + Graphical modding for the characters' faces.
-> + Unit modding
-> + Decent voice acting overall
-> + Custom music
-> + Interesting story greatly enhanced by a great combination of voices/music/dialog.
-> + Lots of hints for players all the right place.

===Drawbacks (outside the score system)
Note : Might potentially influence negatively the campaign's scores.

-> Might be way too difficult at times even if this version is considered as "Easy" to Laconius' claims.

===INDIVIDUAL MAPS=====

GENERAL

-> Complain : The healing items should not be unavailable because a probe picked them up by accident instead of the concerned hero. This concerns map #1 and map #2.

MAP #1

-> Praise : Nice text animation/effects to show the campaign's title in the briefing

-> Praise : A nice set of diverse gameplay for this map.

-> Complain : One of the Galleon can end up being "stuck" by another in front near the first checkpoint thus greatly handicapping the player until it gets "unstuck" eventually.

-> Complain : The first part is very heard since even a few seconds switching between reinforcing your Nexus and controlling your Galleons' guardians can easily lead one of your Galleons to death. Worse is when a broodling can jump from the side on your unprotected probes very early and might lead too much penalty on the player.

-> Bug : In the second part, it's easy to pick up the healing item via a probe by accident, losing the heal benefits of it since it became a plain mineral piece carried by the probe.

-> Bug : During the third part, it is possible to send the scouts outside the combat zone. Worse, it is possible to kill the immobile blue AI units of Imrian, Khashilar and Rastadon back in their bases. The heroes' whole base should be invincible during that part.

-> Typo : "meagre" instead of "meager" (said by Imrian in [Section 1c] Interlude 2)
-> Typo : "recieved" instead of "received" (said by Imrian in [Section 1c] Interlude 2)
-> Typo : "number" (not plural) instead of "numbers" (said by Scout(Amprysus) in [Section 1d] Additional Zerg Strikes)


MAP #2

-> Praise : Quite an interesting and disturbing briefing.

-> Praise : Some nice special effects with the observers exploding for the teleport of the 3 evil dark templars.

-> Praise : Interesting to see the "side" things while the main dialog goes on (troops going into the gateway and such).

-> Odd : Might sound odd when generic units talks when there is none of that type under your command.

-> Praise : Nice handicap idea and effect for the boss battle (2nd part).

-> Complain : Boss battle in second part feels kind of too long. The boss should probably have less HP but more damage.

-> Complain : Might be very annoying for those that lost their forces from their first force especially if they spent lots of resources on an army out of habit thus potentially handicapping them on the 3rd part of this map since they wasted resources on them.

-> Suggestion : On the fourth part (where you can switch your bases), there should be a hint regarding quick keys setups to quickly select your probe (CTRL + 1 on probe and then 1 to select probe).

-> Praise : General hints there and there to help the player win the various parts of the campaign.

-> Complain : On the fourth part (where you can switch your bases), it should have a hint that your static defenses are more compact (stacked) since many foes that seems to die easily might lead to false security as the player direct other bases and then a swarm kills their early defenses.

-> Complain : On the fourth part (where you can switch your bases), same as above but for the stacked enemy sunken colonies since some players tend to be more aggressive in general (with a motto of "the best defense is offense") which might lead them into defeat more than anything.

-> Complain : The heroes should keep their blue colors instead of switching to brown-like (color of buildings) when switching bases.

-> Complain : No timer for fourth part. Should have a vague estimation of how long you are supposed to defend if you don't want to be precise since it can influence defensive strategies.

-> Bug : "Unit Unplacable (Protoss Tempest)" did show up near the end of fourth part.

-> Complain : Protoss Tempest's selection circle is small compared to the Carrier's.

-> Complain : It can be noticed that the reinforcement scouts are hitting the red Zerg's hidden stack of Overlords at the top-middle of the map.

-> Big Issue : One of the secondary scouts says "smackdown on some h*es", the word "h*es" is too 18+ for a contest campaign that should have text fully acceptable for 16 years old or less.

-> Odd : After the fourth part, it looks odd when the arbiter briefly cloak his hero allies as he goes away.

-> Typo : "obcurred" instead of "obscured" in [Section 1b] Mithras - Demistify
-> Typo : "strikeforce" instead of "strike force" (said by Rastadon in Section 1 [Intro])
-> Typo : "intervetion" instead of "intervention" (said by (unknown speaker) in Section 2 [Island Onslaught Initiate])
-> Typo : "soliditary" instead of "solidarity" (said by Khashilar, Section 2 [Island Onslaught Initiate])
-> Typo : "contigent" instead of "contingent" (said by Imrian, Section 2 [Island Onslaught Conclusion])


MAP #3


-> Complain : Should be more initially clear at the start of the map that the troops should go right considering they start at the middle of the bridge. Despite the left is barred with hidden dark templars, some ignorant players could easily wonder why they can't go left and such. Thus, your troops should be placed on the left-side of the bridge while in a formation pointing more towards right.

-> Praise : A more interesting first boss battle compared to the one in map #2.

-> Suggestion : Give a hint of quick keys to easily alternate between the probe and Rastadeon during the boss battle.

-> Suggestion : Mention the ESC key is on the upper-left of the keyboard for the more technically-challenged.

-> Suggestion : Give a hint of quick keys to alternative between the gateway (to easily build troops), all 4 heroes (quick view of health) and each individual hero.

-> Praise : On the third part including the four heroes, it's sure is an epic battle. Mesk's Zerg AI was clearly useful in this.

-> Issue : Archon merge should be instant (since all other troops are instant build).

-> Minor Issue : In the final battle, the game menu's mission objectives doesn't update to mention the current boss to kill (kind of minor since the previous one is "kill all enemies" and the carnage type of general situation that you end up killing them accidentally more than anything.)

-> Praise : An awesome final battle, the right modded unit with iscript modifications, the right music, the right enemy foes and so on.

-> Praise : Exceptional mimic of Artanis' voice.

-> Typo : "strenous" instead "strenuous" (said by Imrian, Section 2 [Onslaught Prelude])
-> Typo : "note" instead of "not" (said by Adrastea. Section 2 [Final Boss Initiate])
-> Typo : "assunder" instead of "asunder" (said by Knoradis, Section 2 [Inquistor's Finale])
-> Typo : "tramautic" instead of "traumatic" by Epilogue

Wow, this review turned out to be a lot more lenient than I had imagined.  Anyhow, time to tackle some of the complaints and bug reports:


General:

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> - A phrase in the campaign is pretty much 18+ (considering the campaigns should be fully acceptable for an audience of 16 years old or less).
  Note : Part of the phrase in question : "smackdown on some h*es" (focusing on the word "h*es")

I don't recall there ever being a censorship clause regarding material suited for mature viewers.  Plus, the regulars of this forum are exposed to cursing on a normal basis, so I don't see how this could be deemed a penalty.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Might be way too difficult at times even if this version is considered as "Easy" to Laconius' claims.

I tried my absolute BEST to re-organize the campaign difficulty to meet Lavarinth's standards after watching various SC replays involving our devious Administrator.  However, your judgment seems to gesture that I more or less failed in that aspect.  Cocks.


Map #1

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Complain : The healing items should not be unavailable because a probe picked them up by accident instead of the concerned hero. This concerns map #1 and map #2.

For map 1, I ended up using just about all the protoss-based powerups; hence, that's why I resorted to mineral chunks as a final resort.  It got carried over to map 2 to make it more recognizable by players.  The other powerups were sacrificed for custom graphics and whatnot, so I had little choice here.  I guess I could issue a warning statement regarding this in future updates.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Complain : The first part is very heard since even a few seconds switching between reinforcing your Nexus and controlling your Galleons' guardians can easily lead one of your Galleons to death. Worse is when a broodling can jump from the side on your unprotected probes very early and might lead too much penalty on the player.

I have nuked this mission about thirteen times in terms of difficulty since its initial run-through.  I am also still receiving complaints that this segment is too "easy."  The hell? 

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Bug : During the third part, it is possible to send the scouts outside the combat zone. Worse, it is possible to kill the immobile blue AI units of Imrian, Khashilar and Rastadon back in their bases. The heroes' whole base should be invincible during that part.

I don't see this as a bug tbh.  If the player finds VE to be a satisfying experience, I don't see why they would bother exploiting silly aspects, such as killing NPCs, in the first place.  Going outside the combat zone is also encouraged in order to dispatch incoming Zerg Guardians, and to explore the terrain that I spent hours crafting.  I understand that it's your responsibility to test bugs and whatnot, but I think most players would sway from this course of action; unless the campaign is an utter disappointment for them and they cannot find anything better to do.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Typo : "number" (not plural) instead of "numbers" (said by Scout(Amprysus) in [Section 1d] Additional Zerg Strikes)

The "enemies arrive in greater number" line was viewed as proper grammar.  It doesn't necessarily have to be "numbers" in this case, because "number" substitutes as a plural in said line.  Or maybe I'm just high? 


Map #2

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Suggestion : On the fourth part (where you can switch your bases), there should be a hint regarding quick keys setups to quickly select your probe (CTRL + 1 on probe and then 1 to select probe).

I was under the assumption that this would be a natural instinct to most players.  I guess I thought wrong. 

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Complain : The heroes should keep their blue colors instead of switching to brown-like (color of buildings) when switching bases.

This was tried and tested.  However, due to the heroes constantly moving around, there was a chance that the burrowed zergling created to rescue the hero units would end up being misplaced due to said erratic movements by the player; hence, this would cause a bug where the zerglings would not be removed.  Simply put, the heroes are reverted to the player's color because I got pretty goddamned tired of trying to bypass several trigger limits just to make the heroes "blue." 

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Complain : No timer for fourth part. Should have a vague estimation of how long you are supposed to defend if you don't want to be precise since it can influence defensive strategies.

Imo, a timer would kill the anticipation of how long you have to wait.  The timer, along with previous aspects, was tried and tested.  I concluded that the unknown ETA would keep players on their feet.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Odd : After the fourth part, it looks odd when the arbiter briefly cloak his hero allies as he goes away.

The blue units are either controlled by the computer or a rescuable force.  The arbiter hero remains rescuable while the cutscene is active, but I obviously had to give him the computer player to make him move, since rescuable units can't be given orders.

Overall, I'm quite disappointed by the fact that the summit onslaught segment received only negative remarks.  I poured my soul into making this part a tribute to past works from various CC Legends, but when I see a list of nothing but complaints, it is very dejecting.



MAP #3

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Complain : Should be more initially clear at the start of the map that the troops should go right considering they start at the middle of the bridge. Despite the left is barred with hidden dark templars, some ignorant players could easily wonder why they can't go left and such. Thus, your troops should be placed on the left-side of the bridge while in a formation pointing more towards right.

Hmm, I issued a mini-map ping to occur at the destination zone after the mission objectives were stated.  Guess that wasn't enough.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Suggestion : Mention the ESC key is on the upper-left of the keyboard for the more technically-challenged.

I hope said technically-challenged individuals never touch Vile Egression. 

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Issue : Archon merge should be instant (since all other troops are instant build).

I considered this, but it's simply not realistic.  Sure, troops can be warped in fast due to prior preparations.  However, I don't believe High Templars should magically be able to reduce their merging time just because the situation is urgent. 

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Minor Issue : In the final battle, the game menu's mission objectives doesn't update to mention the current boss to kill (kind of minor since the previous one is "kill all enemies" and the carnage type of general situation that you end up killing them accidentally more than anything.)

This was intentional.  Boss units count as enemies, so I didn't see why changing the mission objectives to accommodate their appearances was necessary. 


All other complaints and typo reports that I did not dissect were concluded to be accurate beyond reasoning and are being fixed/re-adjusted in their correspondent maps.  Aside from that, thank you very much for constructing this thorough review, Mr. Honejasi. 

-> - A phrase in the campaign is pretty much 18+ (considering the campaigns should be fully acceptable for an audience of 16 years old or less).
  Note : Part of the phrase in question : "smackdown on some h*es" (focusing on the word "h*es")

Wow, if you think that's 18+ I would be curious to what you think our vent convos are like.

Hmm. There were a couple of things here I found odd.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Suggestion : Mention the ESC key is on the upper-left of the keyboard for the more technically-challenged.

...

Was this serious? OK I am baffled. Doing that would have actually made this a better campaign?

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Odd : Might sound odd when generic units talks when there is none of that type under your command.

Not at all. It conveys the feeling that the protoss are scattered and each army is fighting their own battles. Good atmosphere, imo.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> - A phrase in the campaign is pretty much 18+ (considering the campaigns should be fully acceptable for an audience of 16 years old or less).
  Note : Part of the phrase in question : "smackdown on some h*es" (focusing on the word "h*es")

Videogame ratings change constantly between teen and mature rating. At some point Starcraft was rated teen, but I've seen boxes say rated mature. Due to this confusion alone, I'd say Laconius cannot lose points for this!

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Praise : Fairly good mimic of Artanis' voice.

Whoops, typo there yourself, Ricky! I think "Fairly" should say "Exceptionally"!

Cheers!

BadManners! wrote:

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Odd : Might sound odd when generic units talks when there is none of that type under your command.

Not at all. It conveys the feeling that the protoss are scattered and each army is fighting their own battles. Good atmosphere, imo.

Holy shit, I didn't even think of that!  Absolutely brilliant, sir. 

BadManners! wrote:

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Praise : Fairly good mimic of Artanis' voice.

Whoops, typo there yourself, Ricky! I think "Fairly" should say "Exceptionally"!

Haha, quoted for truth

Laconius wrote: Overall, I'm quite disappointed by the fact that the summit onslaught segment received only negative remarks.  I poured my soul into making this part a tribute to past works from various CC Legends, but when I see a list of nothing but complaints, it is very dejecting.

I wouldn't worry about that.  People complaining is part of the territory when doing something like this.  Actually, I think most people here are quite forgiving.  The 'masses', if they were to ever come here, would probably chew out most of our work and spit it out in defiance and disgust.  I'm talking about the eternally unsatisfied Youtube type masses who criticize everything harshly.

Laconius wrote: Wow, this review turned out to be a lot more lenient than I had imagined.  Anyhow, time to tackle some of the complaints and bug reports:

Well, I didn't have THAT many negative things to say. It might be also possible that many bugs escaped me as well.

I don't recall there ever being a censorship clause regarding material suited for mature viewers.  Plus, the regulars of this forum are exposed to cursing on a normal basis, so I don't see how this could be deemed a penalty.

There is no clause. However, I felt you might have pushed it just the tiny bit beyond what should be acceptable for this contest according to me. The word could have been replaced by endless other words that would have been fine.

If it was a common contest or in about any other setting, I wouldn't cared one bit about it.

Ultimately, it's up to Lavarinth to decide about it.

I tried my absolute BEST to re-organize the campaign difficulty to meet Lavarinth's standards after watching various SC replays involving our devious Administrator.  However, your judgment seems to gesture that I more or less failed in that aspect.  Cocks.

Well, I did said "at times" which honestly it's mostly the first part of the first map that I really had high difficulty (if many find it easy than it's maybe me that screwed over in the worst ways possible over and over). While occasionally other parts of the map might be instead difficult for specific other people.


Map #1

For map 1, I ended up using just about all the protoss-based powerups; hence, that's why I resorted to mineral chunks as a final resort.  It got carried over to map 2 to make it more recognizable by players.  The other powerups were sacrificed for custom graphics and whatnot, so I had little choice here.  I guess I could issue a warning statement regarding this in future updates.

I know it is what pretty much happened but I still got to report it anyway.

I don't remember all the specifics about the BW's Trigger Editor but it might be possible that you detect if it was picked up by a probe (no longer at its position and not picked up) then to remove the mineral chunk and recreate a new one.

I guess even if it just respawn a new one over over due to probes getting them instead of the hero, it's probably less handicapping than having losing the health item.

That's considering you can't cheese that badly by using all 4-5 probes to pick up them over and over since you can't automatically make them deposit them in the Nexus while making them go on patrol.

I have nuked this mission about thirteen times in terms of difficulty since its initial run-through.  I am also still receiving complaints that this segment is too "easy."  The hell?  :-\

As mentioned above, it's quite possible I tried this mission the worst ways possible to accomplish it.[/quote]

Probably I tried to finish it the worst way possible or always made that critical mistake that nobody else does. Can happen but it can give the impression that it is too hard.

I don't see this as a bug tbh.  If the player finds VE to be a satisfying experience, I don't see why they would bother exploiting silly aspects, such as killing NPCs, in the first place.  Going outside the combat zone is also encouraged in order to dispatch incoming Zerg Guardians, and to explore the terrain that I spent hours crafting.  I understand that it's your responsibility to test bugs and whatnot, but I think most players would sway from this course of action; unless the campaign is an utter disappointment for them and they cannot find anything better to do.

As a tester, I always do that sort of thing. I did it for Desler and killed the unremoved NPC templar, I killed Tipereth's Dropshop in advance and probably forgot one or two other cases like that.

In specific of your case, I say that you should at the very least put invincibility on the heroes.

Also, I consider you don't need that much space for scouts to protect correctly. Only the immediate grounds + a good chunk of water around it and that's it.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote: -> Typo : "number" (not plural) instead of "numbers" (said by Scout(Amprysus) in [Section 1d] Additional Zerg Strikes)

The "enemies arrive in greater number" line was viewed as proper grammar.  It doesn't necessarily have to be "numbers" in this case, because "number" substitutes as a plural in said line.  Or maybe I'm just high?

Well, I could easily be wrong. Since French is my primary language, I don't know all the specifics for the English language for sure.

Even then, I tend to report anyway since to the worst, the subject in question can always be corrected or ignored in the end.


Map #2

I was under the assumption that this would be a natural instinct to most players [... about quick keys ...]).  I guess I thought wrong.

I always to presume that a novice or ignorant player might play campaigns. Heck, in my case I played Starcraft for 2-3 years before even knowing how to use quick keys.

This was tried and tested.  However, due to the heroes constantly moving around, there was a chance that the burrowed zergling created to rescue the hero units would end up being misplaced due to said erratic movements by the player; hence, this would cause a bug where the zerglings would not be removed.  Simply put, the heroes are reverted to the player's color because I got pretty goddamned tired of trying to bypass several trigger limits just to make the heroes "blue."

I am pretty much sure something like that happened but I still report it as "non-perfection". However, ultimately it can be lessen due to the fact that you can keep heroes in the back the whole time to avoid mix ups for what is the most important aspect anyway.

Imo, a timer would kill the anticipation of how long you have to wait.  The timer, along with previous aspects, was tried and tested.  I concluded that the unknown ETA would keep players on their feet.

Knew it was for that reason although I still bat you anyway. I can complain all I want but it doesn't mean it's that bad.

The blue units are either controlled by the computer or a rescuable force.  The arbiter hero remains rescuable while the cutscene is active, but I obviously had to give him the computer player to make him move, since rescuable units can't be given orders.

About the same reason as above.

Overall, I'm quite disappointed by the fact that the summit onslaught segment received only negative remarks.  I poured my soul into making this part a tribute to past works from various CC Legends, but when I see a list of nothing but complaints, it is very dejecting.

I guess I have the most horrible memory ever to remember the specifics of past campaigns to see how each part was tied to. Although I do remember that part as being very good otherwise.



MAP #3

Hmm, I issued a mini-map ping to occur at the destination zone after the mission objectives were stated.  Guess that wasn't enough.

Not everyone got their eyes on the mini-map. Personally, I tend to use the mini-map as a relative guideline rather than a radar to check at all times.

I hope said technically-challenged individuals never touch Vile Egression [... about ESC key ...].  

Well, sometimes people only just the mouse at their beginnings but ultimately it's nothing that I would honestly hold you back especially when I said nothing on similar cases in other campaigns.

I considered this, but it's simply not realistic.  Sure, troops can be warped in fast due to prior preparations.  However, I don't believe High Templars should magically be able to reduce their merging time just because the situation is urgent.

I considered it more in the gameplay aspect although archons might be less recommended due to his splash that can hit allies.

This was intentional.  Boss units count as enemies, so I didn't see why changing the mission objectives to accommodate their appearances was necessary.

I reported as minor instead of normal mostly due that you need to kill them to eventually win the battle (the sake of having it updated since it influences) while considering you will kill them accidentally in the end.

All other complaints and typo reports that I did not dissect were concluded to be accurate beyond reasoning and are being fixed/re-adjusted in their correspondent maps.  Aside from that, thank you very much for constructing this thorough review, Mr. Honejasi.  

You are welcome although keep in mind that I tend to obviously be much more negative than positive in the reviews. Usually, I do like the campaigns despite all the negative comments. I did love yours quite a lot and the last battle is probably the most memorable aspect of all my testing so far.


Now about BadManners' comments ...

Not at all. It conveys the feeling that the protoss are scattered and each army is fighting their own battles. Good atmosphere, imo.

Well, you found a good excuse about it while on my side, I did mention that since in most cases it happened in commando missions in other campaigns which it would be fully legit for me to say it.

Whoops, typo there yourself, Ricky! I think "Fairly" should say "Exceptionally"!

Okay, I guess my ears became deaf at that point so I will change that.

I had "fuck" and "shit" in mine and I don't think I got any points off.... weird. 

putting a penalty for one mild curse word is dumb. This is a very good campaign, I've barely started it and am already amazed. If the script contains a lot of verbal abuse then ok, but ONE word? both SC2 and WCIII used a swear word once or twice in the dialog.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote:

Laconius wrote:I don't recall there ever being a censorship clause regarding material suited for mature viewers.  Plus, the regulars of this forum are exposed to cursing on a normal basis, so I don't see how this could be deemed a penalty.

There is no clause. However, I felt you might have pushed it just the tiny bit beyond what should be acceptable for this contest according to me. The word could have been replaced by endless other words that would have been fine.

If it was a common contest or in about any other setting, I wouldn't cared one bit about it.

Ultimately, it's up to Lavarinth to decide about it.

Actually, I believe he can use whatever word he want. As Krazy said, even Blizzard used such words in some dialogues. Those words add a bit more of realism to any dialogue. They give a more real impression. After all, everything can’t be ‘purity’ and ‘chastity’-like words.

Of course, I'm not suggesting verbal abuse. It's good to use just a few, not to have one of these words in each dialogue. :p

Ricky_Honejasi wrote:

Laconius wrote: I tried my absolute BEST to re-organize the campaign difficulty to meet Lavarinth's standards after watching various SC replays involving our devious Administrator.  However, your judgment seems to gesture that I more or less failed in that aspect.  Cocks.

Well, I did said "at times" which honestly it's mostly the first part of the first map that I really had high difficulty (if many find it easy than it's maybe me that screwed over in the worst ways possible over and over). While occasionally other parts of the map might be instead difficult for specific other people.

I’ve played even more difficult maps, and some of them are on this site. Some of VOTF, FK, AOTH or LOTC missions were more difficult for me than this. Because of that the reason I asked Laconius in one of my previous post when he was going to release the difficult version.

Laconius wrote: This was tried and tested.  However, due to the heroes constantly moving around, there was a chance that the burrowed zergling created to rescue the hero units would end up being misplaced due to said erratic movements by the player; hence, this would cause a bug where the zerglings would not be removed.  Simply put, the heroes are reverted to the player's color because I got pretty goddamned tired of trying to bypass several trigger limits just to make the heroes "blue."

Instead creating a zergling, create a zealot (or another protoss unit; a probe for example). Then remove another one from the base you have selected. A suggestion. It’s very painful to look for the heroes while your army is being slaughtered by the zerg (thank god I used quick keys).

Laconius wrote: Imo, a timer would kill the anticipation of how long you have to wait.  The timer, along with previous aspects, was tried and tested.  I concluded that the unknown ETA would keep players on their feet.

Totally agreement. Moreover, with a timer, the entire scene wouldn’t make sense (for example, why’d Imrian give up all hopes of survival if he knew when would the reinforcements arrive?

Laconius wrote:Overall, I'm quite disappointed by the fact that the summit onslaught segment received only negative remarks.  I poured my soul into making this part a tribute to past works from various CC Legends, but when I see a list of nothing but complaints, it is very dejecting.

And you did a great work with it. I remembered Urust from VOTF, Mytradites from FK and Zeran from The Fenix. I liked this scene very much, as well as the previous battle in where you must switch bases. However, in my opinion, the stacked orange sunkens are REALLY annoying. Specially on Imrian’s base, where you must watch over all your units to don’t exit the base entrance (Once you’re out, you enter the damned sunkens’ attack range). You must even watch where you build photon cannons. Build them in the wrong place and… goodbye cannon! Goodbye resources! I believe you placed those in order for the player to don’t attack the red base before the reinforcements’ arrival. However, I think that a better solution would be to make the entire red base invincible. Then, once the reinforcements appear, disable invincibility. If you want stacked sunkens, stack the red ones (they aren’t as dangerous as the others, as they’ll only attack you once you’re very near the zerg base). Another suggestion.

Ricky_Honejasi wrote:

Laconius wrote: Hmm, I issued a mini-map ping to occur at the destination zone after the mission objectives were stated.  Guess that wasn't enough.

Not everyone got their eyes on the mini-map. Personally, I tend to use the mini-map as a relative guideline rather than a radar to check at all times.

Perhaps centering view on the Ankhara waypoint (I think it was called like this) would be a good solution.

Laconius wrote:I considered this, but it's simply not realistic.  Sure, troops can be warped in fast due to prior preparations.  However, I don't believe High Templars should magically be able to reduce their merging time just because the situation is urgent.

I considered it more in the gameplay aspect although archons might be less recommended due to his splash that can hit allies. [/quote]

Not necessary. Those who want to be the Archon merge to be faster just type ‘operation cwal’. They’ll be punished by their impatience, of course (the computer’s also affected by this cheat, so if you use it, be prepared to counter an almost never ending wave of zerg attackers! ).

Whoops, typo there yourself, Ricky! I think "Fairly" should say "Exceptionally"!

Indeed, hehehe.

chris wrote: putting a penalty for one mild curse word is dumb. This is a very good campaign, I've barely started it and am already amazed. If the script contains a lot of verbal abuse then ok, but ONE word? both SC2 and WCIII used a swear word once or twice in the dialog.

What I said.

omega20 wrote:

Laconius wrote: This was tried and tested.  However, due to the heroes constantly moving around, there was a chance that the burrowed zergling created to rescue the hero units would end up being misplaced due to said erratic movements by the player; hence, this would cause a bug where the zerglings would not be removed.  Simply put, the heroes are reverted to the player's color because I got pretty goddamned tired of trying to bypass several trigger limits just to make the heroes "blue."

Instead creating a zergling, create a zealot (or another protoss unit; a probe for example). Then remove another one from the base you have selected. A suggestion. It’s very painful to look for the heroes while your army is being slaughtered by the zerg (thank god I used quick keys). Wink

I don't think you understand.  When the summit defense starts, there is an initial base select system for the player's first choice at selecting the base.  THAT'S when all the heroes are initially blue.  However, all base select toggles after the first removes control of all the player's units atop the summit, and then gives them control of the corresponding base that they chose.  I TRIED reverting the heroes back to the rescuable force (blue), but there's apparently a bug where if you rescue the same unit over and over again, there's a chance of it breaking and not becoming rescuable.  So this issue, topped with the movement bug that I referred to previously, is why giving the heroes to the player's default color (tan) was chosen as a FINAL resort.  I apologize if it's THAT inconvenient, but you can blame StarEdit's homosexual limits for this drawback.

Spoiler

Furthermore, your hero units have their shields and hitpoints constantly regenerated when the fleets arrive, so you don't have to worry about them dying. 

omega20 wrote:

Laconius wrote: Imo, a timer would kill the anticipation of how long you have to wait.  The timer, along with previous aspects, was tried and tested.  I concluded that the unknown ETA would keep players on their feet.

Totally agreement. Moreover, with a timer, the entire scene wouldn’t make sense (for example, why’d Imrian give up all hopes of survival if he knew when would the reinforcements arrive?)

YES, that's what I was trying to communicate to the player!  Thanks for pointing this out. 

omega20 wrote:

Laconius wrote:Overall, I'm quite disappointed by the fact that the summit onslaught segment received only negative remarks.  I poured my soul into making this part a tribute to past works from various CC Legends, but when I see a list of nothing but complaints, it is very dejecting.

And you did a great work with it. I remembered Urust from VOTF, Mytradites from FK and Zeran from The Fenix. I liked this scene very much, as well as the previous battle in where you must switch bases. However, in my opinion, the stacked orange sunkens are REALLY annoying. Specially on Imrian’s base, where you must watch over all your units to don’t exit the base entrance (Once you’re out, you enter the damned sunkens’ attack range). You must even watch where you build photon cannons. Build them in the wrong place and… goodbye cannon! Goodbye resources! I believe you placed those in order for the player to don’t attack the red base before the reinforcements’ arrival. However, I think that a better solution would be to make the entire red base invincible. Then, once the reinforcements appear, disable invincibility. If you want stacked sunkens, stack the red ones (they aren’t as dangerous as the others, as they’ll only attack you once you’re very near the zerg base). Another suggestion.

Two problems with this suggestion.  First, making their base invincible would look totally unrealistic.  (And yes, I hold this same opinion for the last BW Terran mission's sunken colony gig.)  Secondly, the sunkens were placed atop the temple battlements because Mucky was a fag during beta testing and whored reavers at Imrian's base; soon afterwards, he actually managed to kill the entire goddamn Zerg base BEFORE reinforcements arrived.  After he reported this, I lost any hope of future players cooperating with the "defense" notion and hence, the stacked sunken colony suggestion was utilized (also courtesy of Mucky).  Therefore, if you have any complaints regarding the defense segment and its annoying trinkets, please feel free to drop Mucky a letter of hate-mail regarding his abrupt faggotry.  Thank you. 


Aside from that, I appreciate the massive amount of support that you have all given me.  *tips hat*

Krazy wrote: I think the only campaign I found on the whole easier was Jim_Raynor's. 

Well, I'm not that surprised. I'm a fairly inexperienced Starcraft player (never ever played battle.net before) so I made it hard for me. For me it was very difficult. (At least later missions.) For other players it was easy. I hope Starcraft Sundays makes me a bit better...