Hi, thanks for checking this out. For awhile I've been working on my RPG, The Prince, the Sword, and the Gems, but I took a little break from it and made this. No need to worry, my RPG will get finished
||Role Playing Strategy
This scenario is made on a 25x25 sized map. You can play as either the Attackers oand/or the defenders if the castle.
Story is explained in-game.
-Play as the Attackers, or Defenders.
-One Castle, two villages, and a siege camp all on a 25x25 sized map.
-Take over villages, and use the populace to get more resources to build up your army.
-Two possible endings.
-Level Dynamics apply
If you see it fit, please give this game a review when you find time.
Hope you like it.
|Author||Reviews ( All | Comments Only | Reviews Only )|
The Siege of Nantu Castle is both a Defend the spot and its inverse. It offers the player the choice of which side to pick, and attempts to make both sides a challenge.
While the scenario has been well thought through with several aspects to the gameplay, it simply doesn't get going.
Its too short, it lasts for less than ten minutes in game, and half of that is the cutscene.
I was quite disappointed by this as the long instructions led me to believe it would be complex and involving.
Sadly, it turned out to be neither.
There are frequent spelling mistakes, notably in the title "Seige"(sic), and in the character's names, as "Daimyo" is spelt as such.
Lastly, sometimes archers fail to spawn until you have over 200 wood and gold.
As the defenders, this is a walk in the park.
Realistically speaking, its easier to defend a castle than it is to assault it, but clearly its foolhardy to send your leader in with the first wave.
Thats what the AI did, on the hardest difficulty.
All I had to do was move my men to surround him and I had won.
Attacking, the story is somewhat different.
On the easiest difficulty it is also easy, as the villages don't offer any resistance.
On harder settings, however, the Siege onager decimates your army as it tries to take the north village, and there's not a lot you can do to kill it. The north village revolts at exactly 3 seconds after you take it, if you only have one unit nearby. The enemy don't start in one place, they start around you, meaning if that unit is a hero you've lost the battle.
Not a lot of thought was put into the harder difficulties, just a sense of "throw everything at them and make it hard".
It needs to be toned down.
The Swordsmen seem overpriced for what they are, particularly compared to the archers.
A hugely varied game, joshua4missions shows a flair for depth of gameplay in this scenario, even if it does last a mere 5 minutes.
There's a lot going on, which makes it even more disappointing.
Map Design: 5
The map is luscious and well-defined, with plenty of eyecandy and elevation.
It decides the battle at times, especially when assaulting.
A lot of work was put in here, and it paid dividends.
The instructions were good and gave enough hints and detail to play, however the story was thin, and spelling mistakes spoiled it slightly for me.
A frustrating game, due to its short nature rather than its difficulty, The Siege of Nantu Castle needs some work before it is ready to be enjoyed.
This is the kind of scenario that begs a strong playtesting team.
I'm not a fan of dts styles like this but there was one that amused me from Lord Basse. This one had its flaws but it should be entertaining for the players who like this genre nonetheless. Entertainment for half an hour or so in total, playing each difficulty. The scenario requires the player to micro a bit at the beginning. After defeating the big threats, it's quite a walk in the park. There were some annoying things though such as how the enemies' kept respawning at my captured village. You had to place a unit on a flag or somewhere in order to stop the spawn. Another thing that bothered me was the tributes. They occur too often so making them silent would be better. Also, the colour of teal is AQUA, not CYAN, as well as why does the bottom village not have a chat but the top does? The gate on the map is a glitchy one, it's made up of two graphics. I'm not sure on the accuracy of the unit buying area but you might want to add a timer delay. In addition, if the player forces the archers back, he can get extra ATK for them. On the defenders side, it can get quite difficult, however, if the computer's hero comes close enough, you can just aim at it with your castle while the gate holds them off and win easily. Another thing that bothered me was how these asian players have plumed archers and longbowmens.
You can choose three difficulty levels and two sides so effort was made to balance the game so everyone can enjoy it. Because the map is so tight, I feel like the defender side has more of an advantage because they're on the higher elevation, they have a gate/tower/castle combo defence, and the longbowmen spawns right on the road close to the castle. The attacker side has an army and scorpions and moving them about is very annoying because of the tight path as well as having the longbowmen/tower/castle combo shooting at you or in your path. No matter which side you choose, the opposite side played by the computer has it better. If the computer played on the defender side, they get spawns of longbowmen. If they're on the attacker side, they get a lot of units to charge with. The last thing is how the defender side has to train units slowly unlike the attackers. But I guess the castle makes up for it.
There wasn't much in this area. I felt that everything was simple and nothing stood out. The story and gameplay was nothing new.
Map Design: 4
The map design was pleasing to look at. The only flaw was the crampness of the map. Also, the other scores affects how I see the map, as odd as it may sound.
The story is short, simple, and nothing to get excited about. The instructions are there and in full detail. There were a few typos here and there.
Keep in mind that this scenario is very small and short when looking at the ratings I gave.