wesnoth-wiki-changes
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Wesnoth-wiki-changes] SceptreOfFire


From: wiki
Subject: [Wesnoth-wiki-changes] SceptreOfFire
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:22 +0100

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041107 
Firefox/1.0
IP: 83.222.160.8
URI: http://wesnoth.slack.it/?SceptreOfFire
 - - - - -
Index: SceptreOfFire
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/wesnoth/cvsroot/wikiroot/SceptreOfFire,v
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -r1.6 SceptreOfFire
--- SceptreOfFire       16 Nov 2004 14:43:56 -0000      1.6
+++ SceptreOfFire       16 Nov 2004 18:22:03 -0000
@@ -20,6 +20,17 @@
 .
  ebo: I find mages/shydes useful.  The shydes especially for their healing 
because they have 6 moves the mages if they
  have at least 6 moves, because three moves in a cave is not that slow.
+.
+ Gen. Lionel: Yes, quick mages and shydes do help a lot. I replayed the Lost 
General in a very quick way (sparing no
+ units or XP) but I couldn't arrive at a better result, so, after a very quick 
Hasty Alliance, 344 gold seems to be
+ what's available for the Sceptre of Fire...  Still, I find it impossible to 
split the troops (haven't really tried much
+ the other way, since it would be pure luck if I found the sceptre)... On one 
screen I counted *thirteen* level 1-3
+ trolls, *six* orcish warriors, four goblin knights, two ogres, and two 
saurians. And that
+ was only my left flank, after it was defeated, in fact (i.e. there were more 
opponents to begin with). A force for that
+ left flank alone would probably cost more than 344 :-( I'd appreciate any 
comments, since I got kinda addicted and
+ really want to finish that campaign... Should I start replaying from much 
further back, or actually think of that as a
+ bug and wait for the next version, where this scenario would  hopefully be 
more balanced?
+
 ||See Also||
 
 * UserForum






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]