Gemma's Fortune topic?

[RobB]

First, this is my first map, what I played, with the intention of testing. (I don't know how to do it)
I really don't have many things to say. Those few:
1) I've seen a few wandering heroes with no or a few creatures with no owner. They were no threat at all. I saw no reason in them. Maybe their owner was not changed?

2) In the 4th map, at the split, you must not slip. Your heroes can fight one by one the enemy. I think that was intended, and I liked it. (only mentioned 'cos of the text shown in the begining of map.)

3) the whole campaign is a bit empty (the maps).

Your first point is spot on: I'm pretty sure I ticked "give start-up troops", but they didn't get any. I have now given them enough troops to make them a threat. I'm not quite sure what your second point means.

OK, I have added some more "pretties", but seeing that most of these are large maps, I didn't want to be tripping over gold pieces at every step and in some places - deserts, caves - I wanted to get a feeling of a long journey. Apart from anything else, Gemma is hardly short of cash or anything else most of the time, so why should she want to risk her troops to get a few coins or logs?

I find this a drawback in the game: what are the things worth fighting for? Obviously, you need mines, either for yourself or to deprive the enemy; same with creature dwellings, but those shrines that give you spells are largely a waste of time as are most potions and scrolls, particularly with high level heroes. In fact, I'm glad in the end that Gemma rarely gets past about Level 40: as it is, she quickly gets to the stage where she can summon 4 or more L4 creatures and is strong enough to tackle them bare-handed if necessary. In fact, because you are not allowed to lose a single named hero, the only danger is when you are faced with groups of 10 L4 creatures who, if they get first turn can quickly kill one or more heroes. So, many battles come down to who goes first - lose it, you only have to reload "this turn" and fight it again. I admit, that when I first submitted the game, I didn't realise quite how strong Gemma and her friends would be.

Anyhow, by the time I am ready to repost the campaign, I think you will find it quite a bit harder - in particular, the rather disappointing final battle has been bolstered. I have also added a lot more features, though I'm afraid it won't be enough for some.

Finally, I embarked on this project, because I got fed up with downloading maps that I found too hard for enjoyable playing. A lot depends on what interests you in the game. I like exploring maps; others like terrifying battles. At the moment, I am still playing Scenario 2 (out of 5), so at my rate of play, it could be a couple of more weeks before I am ready to resubmit.

[RobB]

I forgot to add: Thank you for your comments. All comments, good or bad, are helpful, and I don't ignore them. I hope you will find the new version quite a bit different from the original.

[Muszka]

The thing I wanted to say wasn't the heroes with that were easy to kill, but the fact that they were neutral. If this was intended, than forgot it. I think I remember them because of their starting troops.

My second point is about when at the 4th scenario you are told/suggested (don't remember exactly) to split, there are three red bordergates, and a red tent. So you don't have to split, you can take one by one the three enemies (Order/Might/Chaos). If I'd misunderstand something, just tell me.

My third point wasn't exactly about the mines and/or resources. Their number was satisfying. I meant the trees, copses, brushes, small rivers, inactive stuff. The deserts are OK. But this isn't such a problem, 'cos how you've said this is you're first map, and for one like that is filled.

How about your mention. I like to play on solo (heroes only), with Immo potions, if this is possible. In your campaign I could do it easyly, except the first map, when I've made my lvls.

[Koni]

My second point is about when at the 4th scenario you are told/suggested (don't remember exactly) to split, there are three red bordergates, and a red tent. So you don't have to split, you can take one by one the three enemies (Order/Might/Chaos). If I'd misunderstand something, just tell me.

I think, it would be better, if the player is FORCED to split the 3 heroes by placing three special quest-GATES, which allow only one special hero to pass through, instead of the red Bordergates. Exactly that I've suggested in my first report (in September).

[RobB]

I don't see that at all. The placing suggests the best way, but it doesn't really matter if they go a different way, although, from testing, Oris seems to find the lower road more difficult.

If the player decides to put all the heroes in one army, it is true that some scripts won't make much sense, but that's too bad. The player is given a strong suggestion to split them up; if the player wants to be perverse, then so be it.

The same thing applies in the other scenarios, where players are asked to keep heroes in the same army: some scripts will behave in a strange way and it may even be impossible to win the scenario, but if players deliberately ignore suggestions given in the game, that's on their own heads. "Heroes" is an "open" game, and although my map layouts generally force the players in certain directions, there's always another way of doing it, and I don't think it matters.

[RobB]

The thing I wanted to say wasn't the heroes with that were easy to kill, but the fact that they were neutral. If this was intended, than forgot it. I think I remember them because of their starting troops.

They were meant to be neutral. I had already used up all the colours and I didn't want to give any one of them an advantage. The error I made was in not giving them troops.

My second point is about when at the 4th scenario you are told/suggested (don't remember exactly) to split, there are three red bordergates, and a red tent. So you don't have to split, you can take one by one the three enemies (Order/Might/Chaos). If I'd misunderstand something, just tell me.

Koni has explained that to me and I have given my answer. True, I could force the issue by making the gates so that only individuals can pass, but I decided that it doesn't matter all that much. If the player ignores the game suggestion, then some scripts won't make sense, but that's the player's fault.

My third point wasn't exactly about the mines and/or resources. Their number was satisfying. I meant the trees, copses, brushes, small rivers, inactive stuff. The deserts are OK. But this isn't such a problem, 'cos how you've said this is you're first map, and for one like that is filled.

I think you'll find that the new version has a lot more in the way of scenery.

How about your mention. I like to play on solo (heroes only), with Immo potions, if this is possible. In your campaign I could do it easyly, except the first map, when I've made my lvls.

Sorry about that, but my whole plan was to have 2 (or in one case 3) heroes together. Oris gets a short section on her own to build her strength up, and Sc. 4 has them fighting on their own, but I wanted Gemma and Atholl together at the finish.

[Muszka]

How about your mention. I like to play on solo (heroes only), with Immo potions, if this is possible. In your campaign I could do it easyly, except the first map, when I've made my lvls.

Sorry about that, but my whole plan was to have 2 (or in one case 3) heroes together. Oris gets a short section on her own to build her strength up, and Sc. 4 has them fighting on their own, but I wanted Gemma and Atholl together at the finish.

No. I got myself missunderstood. Under solo I meant 'only heroes' without troops, and the more heroes, the better, and that was one thing I liked in your campaign.

And I like the 4th Scenario as it is, I wouln'd like it that much if I would have been forced to split. It was just a mention. And now I know all was intended.

[Elwin]

wow i never really liked this campaign that much but it seems to be really popular on this board! Or maybe I'm just a little tired of using nature all the time.

[Koni]

wow i never really liked this campaign that much but it seems to be really popular on this board! Or maybe I'm just a little tired of using nature all the time.

'My' Gemma is skilled to become a battle-mage with GM order magic.

[RobB]

No. I got myself missunderstood. Under solo I meant 'only heroes' without troops, and the more heroes, the better, and that was one thing I liked in your campaign.

I must admit, with such strong heroes, I was very tempted to have the last scenario that way, but with Nature heroes, it's almost impossible - every time you take your eyes off them, they've summoned up something useless like Earth Elementals or Leprachauns. The final battle in the original was far too easy and therefore disappointing. I hope now I've strengthened it up, I'm not going to find it too hard to win.

To Elwin: the reason this thread is attracting response is possibly because there have been so few new maps for H4 in a long time.

[Muszka]

I must admit, with such strong heroes, I was very tempted to have the last scenario that way, but with Nature heroes, it's almost impossible - every time you take your eyes off them, they've summoned up something useless like Earth Elementals or Leprachauns.

I play Equilibris. There you can disable the Summonings, and if not sommoned, the Creatures acumulate. So I could easyly play solo.

[RobB]

Wish I could too. Having used Windows at work, I'm not likely to change from Mac, but it is a drawback with this game because no-one is going to port any extras to Mac for such an old game.

[Muszka]

I uderstand you. That's the only drawback of diversity. Yet you may never know. H3 is an older game, still they're developing the WoG 3.59. So... hope dies last.

[Elwin]

everytime I play a "mega map" (e.g. Arisen Forces) I always start with a druid and so when I reach level 60+ (those tree of knowledges really accumulate!) I usually have no choice but to pick something useless like summoning or necromancy. That, however, was before I learned of the Equilibris Mod.

[Muszka]

everytime I play a "mega map" (e.g. Arisen Forces) I always start with a druid and so when I reach level 60+ (those tree of knowledges really accumulate!) I usually have no choice but to pick something useless like summoning or necromancy. That, however, was before I learned of the Equilibris Mod.

I admit that, not playing with Death, necromancy is kinda useless, but I like to fill as many spaces I can with GM skills. And with a big lvl hero if you don't fill one last empty slot, and you can, it's somekind of waste.
But you don't need to be lvl 60+ to fill all of them. My Gemma was about 45 and has only one empty slot, and the rest of skills were all GM.

[RobB]

I don't think I've ever got Gemma higher than 43. Anyway, I finished playing and hope to post my completed new version at CH some time tomorrow afternoon.

[RobB]

The latest version of "Gemma's Fortune" is now available at Celestial Heavens>News.

[ByteBandit]

I plan on playing Gemmas Fortune as soon as I complete my other 3 maps in the series I am making now.

[Muszka]

The latest version of "Gemma's Fortune" is now available at Celestial Heavens>News.

That's great news. As soon as I finish Ancient Empires I try the brand new Gemma's fortune. I'm curious of it's evolution.

[Koni]

In my last excurs my Gemma reached Level 45. Good idea, Rob, that you cancelled the previous max. level of 21 in scenario 1.

And thanks to Rob's agreement there is a German WoW-version available on German fansites Drachenwald (and MM-World soon. edit: meanwhile up for download, too). Have a look here for Download and here for reading my announcement. German title: "Gemma sucht das Glück"