[Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
I have recently had the experience of watching as my friend FadeTheCat, an experianced MMORPG gamer from the Windows and Macintosh worlds, learned Battle For Wesnoth. She was kind enough to provide me with running commentary on her impressions and reactions as she was learning the interface, going through the tutorial, and playing Two Brothers. We took notes as she was learning. Her husband Rob (an expert programmer and gamer) and my wife Cathy (a gamer who has tried BfW and decided she didn't care for it) were watching during part of her learning process. All four of us discussed her reactions and performance afterwards and brainstormed on improvements her experience suggested for the game. I found this immensely educational. Fade's conclusion is that she quite likes BfW and would even like to do campaign design for it. This is an offer to take seriously; she has done game design for Steve Jackson Games and was in fact the author of the rather successful Space Pirate Amazon Ninja Catgirls game. I judge she has the potential to become an extremely effective BfW campaign designer, offering a perspective and approach quite different from those we have now. But, of course, she sees bugs and problems. Rather than presenting her observations in chronological order, I'm going to group them roughly by estimated difficulty of execution and topic. Some are just small UI teaks and help and tutorial changes, but there are a few that will require considerably more effort. I have rated them according to her reaction as Minor, Annoying, and Serious. First, some easy ones related to the tutorial. Fade thought it was quite good for its intended purpose of teaching basic game mechanics, but had these issues: 1) It's too short. She'd like the tutorial to include more scenarios. Bug: She wanted some practice on a wider selection of terrains, with more different kinds of opponents, and with more advanced units. She wanted to get this in a situation that was specifically *not* the win-or-lose context of a campaign, so she'd feel more free to do exploratory things that might be stupid. Fix: More scenarios in the tutorial, with more unit types and terrains. Fade commented that, ideally, the tutorial would have optional sections on advanced topics so first-time users wouldn't be compelled to go through all of them sequentially. Rating: Annoying. 2) Transition to campaign play could be smoother Bug: Fade didn't like the feeling of finishing the tutorial and being dumped back to the campaign selector with little or no guidance on the next step towards mastery. I explained that in trunk I had added information about campaign difficulty levels and length to the summaries. But she thinks there's another half of the cure. Fix: Attach verbiage to the tutorial's end-of-game event recommending some of the easier mainline campaigns as the next things to try. I've already done this, though not yet committed it. Rating: Minor. 3) Significance of the turn counter and time running out is not emphasized enough in the tutorial. Bug: This came as a surprise to Fade when she played TB. She pointed out that, by contrast, the tutorial does a good job on the day/night cycle. Fix: Explicit description of the round clock and the standard gold bonus in the tutorial. Rating: Minor. 4) Icons in the status line aren't explained well in the tutorial Bug: (I had actually noticed this when I started playing, too.) The status areas (turn clock/turns remaining, gold. villages, units, income debits and credits, and the time clock) are not explained well in the tutorial. Fix: Add teacher dialogue explaining these. Rating: Minor. 5) Tutorial should include an example of a loyal unit, and explain loyalty Bug: Fade was not prepared to use the lotal units in TB well because the tutorial hadn't broached the concept. Fix: Add a loyal elf in part 2 of the tutorial. Rating: Minor. 6) Tutorial should include a neutral keep. Bug: Players don't learn from it that *any* keep tile can be recruited around, and so may miss the significance of neutral keeps in campaigns, Fix: Add a neutral keep in the tutorial. Rating: Minor. 7) Tutorial should at least touch on damage types. Bug: None of the tutorial units have serious damage skew by weapon type. A player going from the tutorial to, say, TB, has no warning of the problem that piercing weapons are ineffective against Skeletons and she should probably be recruiting Footpads instead of Horsemen and Spearmen. Fix: Introduce and explain damage types in the tutorial. Rating: Annoying Next, some help-system and on-screen help issues. 8) Flavor text and mechanics should be distinguishable or separated in help. Bug: Flavor text is nice but experienced players refreshing their knowledge of the game
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 16:49:54 -0400, "Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 12) Visibility for unit types in help is too limited. > > Bug: This is the first thing that got Fade really steamed. She > *hated* the you-can't-see-help-on-it-until-you've-encountered it rule, > because it keeps her from (a) making intelligent decisions about which > of her own units to concentrate on levelling up. and (b) making > intelligent decisions about which of her opponents' units must be > *kept* from leveling up. It bugged me too when I was starting. > Fix: Fade wants every unit in the advancement tree of a unit > encountered to be accessible in help. On IRC some objected that > this would injure the present RPG-like feel where discovering the > world is part of the fun. Mordante suggested a good compromise -- > *next advances* of every encountered unit should always be > visible. I also think seeing the whole tree makes sense. How are you supposed to make intelligent decisions about your play when you don't know what things upgrade to. I think in practise, most of the surprise element comes from meeting new unit types, not having them upgrade unexpectedly. If you want that, perhaps a player should see the whole tree of units they control and just the units they meet, that they don't control. Another reasoned mentioned for doing things this way was not to overwhelm new players by seeing lots of different units, that they mostly wouldn't encounter right away. Providing a way to see units grouped together by various categories was another wya to work around this. I played with this a bit a while back, but didn't get a great system for doing it. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 16:49:54 -0400, "Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 16) Unit types topping out at level 2 makes them bad investments I don't think you can draw that conclusion. > Bug: I'd actually heard this one in my one previous extended conversation > wiith a Wesnoth newbie. Fade, when I explained the advancement tree while > she was complaining about bug 6, concurred. Why toss kills to a unit that > isn't going to advance to the power level of L3? And thus, why build it > at all? Because the L2 topout unit might be better than the L2 in your alternate choices or it might be easier to get to L2. While you don't generally want to give EPs to topouts, it doesn't mean the topout units are inferior. > Fix: L3 everything. Outlaws, ghosts, everything. There is an argument, that the fun of the game might be helped by having all branches have 3 levels. But AMLA is supposed to deal with some of that. Also are you proposing dropping the existing L4 creatures? ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 16:49:54 -0400,
"Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 17) The way names are handled is confusing.
>
> Bug: Most characters have personal names. Some have only role names
> ("Supporter", "Villager", "Guardsman") that differ from their class
> names. This leads new users to bark up wrong trees like this one
> in TB, Fade asking: "How do I recruit another Villager?" when the
> question she really wants is "How do I recruit another Spearman?"
> (This will especially confuse newbies used to games like Starcraft
> where only heroes and significant NPCs have names -- in Wesnoth, they
> think they see a distinction that isn't there.)
>
> Fix: Abolish role-based names. All units should have personal names.
> I suppose we could have the roles back as "surnames", e.g. "Alwyn
> Villager" or "Alwyn (Villager)".
It is intentional that some units (in particular most undead) don't have names.
Personally I am not attached to that behavior, but someone thought it added
color to the game, so there may be objections to some changes in this regard.
___
Wesnoth-dev mailing list
Wesnoth-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
Am Montag 04 Juni 2007 schrieb Bruno Wolff III: > > 16) Unit types topping out at level 2 makes them bad investments > I don't think you can draw that conclusion. I agree. They're simply special choices which you usually won't make. But in some situations you want them. Of course, this argues again for having the full unit tree visible so you can make an informed decision. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
Nice and useful report ! Some quick replies: On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 04:49:54PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > 2) Transition to campaign play could be smoother > > Bug: Fade didn't like the feeling of finishing the tutorial and being > dumped back to the campaign selector with little or no guidance on the > next step towards mastery. I explained that in trunk I had added > information about campaign difficulty levels and length to the > summaries. But she thinks there's another half of the cure. > > Fix: Attach verbiage to the tutorial's end-of-game event recommending > some of the easier mainline campaigns as the next things to try. I've > already done this, though not yet committed it. > > Rating: Minor. TSG does a nice job in guiding the beginner on the easy difficulty like: - it presents some of the recruitable units and what they can be used for - it presents the enemy units, their strenghts and weaknesses - it suggest a few tricks, like waiting the day before attack chaotics units with your (lawful) units That's really valuable for a new player. However TSG is long, not nicely balanced at the end, and broken. On the contrary TB doesn't help the player, but is short and simple thus good as a first camapign. Maybe adding TSG-like suggestions on TB's easiest difficulty level (disabled on higher levels not to be an annoyance) would be a great idea. > 12) Visibility for unit types in help is too limited. > > Bug: This is the first thing that got Fade really steamed. She > *hated* the you-can't-see-help-on-it-until-you've-encountered it rule, > because it keeps her from (a) making intelligent decisions about which > of her own units to concentrate on levelling up. and (b) making > intelligent decisions about which of her opponents' units must be > *kept* from leveling up. > > Fix: Fade wants every unit in the advancement tree of a unit > encountered to be accessible in help. On IRC some objected that > this would injure the present RPG-like feel where discovering the > world is part of the fun. Mordante suggested a good compromise -- > *next advances* of every encountered unit should always be > visible. > > Rating: Serious. I agree with Mordante's suggested compromise. Moreover, showing the number of level the unit can advance would be nice. Maybe showing a full tree of the advancement (something similar to , with some '?' "unknown" picture showed instead of the unknown units would be a nice thing. > 16) Unit types topping out at level 2 makes them bad investments > > Bug: I'd actually heard this one in my one previous extended conversation > wiith a Wesnoth newbie. Fade, when I explained the advancement tree while > she was complaining about bug 6, concurred. Why toss kills to a unit that > isn't going to advance to the power level of L3? And thus, why build it > at all? > > Fix: L3 everything. Outlaws, ghosts, everything. > > Rating: For her, Annoying. (I think it qualifies as Serious.) In campaigns i agree it's boring when all your units quickly reach max level. It might also depend on the unit. Some level 2 units (the Lancer in particular) are quite powerful and really are level 2.5, so that not easy to add a level 3 Some unit might be limited in level for background reasons or lack of ideas (i'm thinking about the goblins spearmens and saurian mages). That might be true for the outlaws too. Btw i think Mythological and Eleazar have the plan to add the L3 outlaws to mainline (once they get redone and probably disabled in MP mode). ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
Bruno Wolff III schrieb: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 16:49:54 -0400, > "Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> 12) Visibility for unit types in help is too limited. >> >> Bug: This is the first thing that got Fade really steamed. She >> *hated* the you-can't-see-help-on-it-until-you've-encountered it rule, >> because it keeps her from (a) making intelligent decisions about which >> of her own units to concentrate on levelling up. and (b) making >> intelligent decisions about which of her opponents' units must be >> *kept* from leveling up. >> > > It bugged me too when I was starting. > > >> Fix: Fade wants every unit in the advancement tree of a unit >> encountered to be accessible in help. On IRC some objected that >> this would injure the present RPG-like feel where discovering the >> world is part of the fun. Mordante suggested a good compromise -- >> *next advances* of every encountered unit should always be >> visible. >> > > I also think seeing the whole tree makes sense. How are you supposed to > make intelligent decisions about your play when you don't know what things > upgrade to. > Some quite long time ago I made some suggestion of how to handle the unit stuff in the ingame help. I did agree that showing all units in the way they currently would be shown would result in a real mess. My suggestion for this was basically something like this (you can find it somewhere here on the ml, no idea what the exact topic/date was...): 1) In the ingame help lets seperate the stuff among the list "units" a little further into the seperate races. IIRC we already have some "race" tag anyway, why shall we not use it? (If needed we could create a "hidden" era just to classify the races) 2) Each of these races would have a nice description about the race in general and some tactical stuff to keep in mind (I think we already have this somewhere in the wiki, would just be something like copy&paste) plus a tree for all of the units like it is shown at untis.wesnoth.org. Each of the "units-images/names" would be a link to the respective article. If we have a way to show stuff nicely sorted there is IMO no need to hide any infomation. This way it would directly be possible to see into what these units can evolve. Cheers, Nils Kneuper aka Ivanovic ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > There is an argument, that the fun of the game might be helped by having > all branches have 3 levels. But AMLA is supposed to deal with some of that. > Also are you proposing dropping the existing L4 creatures? No. But they really are rare exceptions. -- http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Maybe adding TSG-like suggestions on TB's easiest difficulty level > (disabled on higher levels not to be an annoyance) would be a great > idea. That is my judgment as well. If nothing else, TSG seems too long to be really suitable as a beginner campaign. > I agree with Mordante's suggested compromise. > Moreover, showing the number of level the unit can advance would be nice. I concur on both points. > Maybe showing a full tree of the advancement (something similar to , with > some '?' "unknown" picture showed instead of the unknown units would be a > nice thing. Nice, but trickier to implement. > In campaigns i agree it's boring when all your units quickly reach max level. Yes. > It might also depend on the unit. > Some level 2 units (the Lancer in particular) are quite powerful and > really are level 2.5, so that not easy to add a level 3 I'd actually be willing to see L2.5 units nerfed back to L2 if that's what it takes to make space for an L3 advance. > Some unit might be limited in level for background reasons or lack > of ideas (i'm thinking about the goblins spearmens and saurian > mages). I agree Goblin Spearman is a special case. Not so sure about the Saurian Mage. > That might be true for the outlaws too. > Btw i think Mythological and Eleazar have the plan to add the L3 outlaws to > mainline (once they get redone and probably disabled in MP mode). I'm in favor of that plan. I'd like to have the L3 Highwayman back in NR. -- http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
Quoting "Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I have recently had the experience of watching as my friend > FadeTheCat, an experianced MMORPG gamer from the Windows and Macintosh > worlds, learned Battle For Wesnoth. She was kind enough to provide me > with running commentary on her impressions and reactions as she was > learning the interface, going through the tutorial, and playing Two > Brothers. Cool. It is always nice to get feedback, and even nicer to get feedback as insightful and detailed as this. :) > Fade's conclusion is that she quite likes BfW and would even like to > do campaign design for it. This is an offer to take seriously; she has > done game design for Steve Jackson Games and was in fact the author of > the rather successful Space Pirate Amazon Ninja Catgirls game. I > judge she has the potential to become an extremely effective BfW campaign > designer, offering a perspective and approach quite different from > those we have now. Well, as with most Open Source projects, all she needs to do is start contributing. :) > 1) It's too short. She'd like the tutorial to include more scenarios. > 2) Transition to campaign play could be smoother > 3) Significance of the turn counter and time running out is not > emphasized enough in the tutorial. > 4) Icons in the status line aren't explained well in the tutorial > 5) Tutorial should include an example of a loyal unit, and explain loyalty > 6) Tutorial should include a neutral keep. > 7) Tutorial should at least touch on damage types. > 8) Flavor text and mechanics should be distinguishable or separated in help. > 9) The right-click menu on terrain and villages should offer an option > to go to the help for that terrain., and 'd' should work there too. > 10) There should be a word-search function for the help > 11) The mouseover texts for the top-line status areas are uninformative. I can agree with all these. I think it'd be cool if we added some code to make it possible for certain areas of the interface to be highlighted during the tutorial. For instance, a red rectangle could surround each area as it is explained. > 12) Visibility for unit types in help is too limited. This has been controversial for a long time. I think the best thing to do would be to allow access to all unit types but make some filters that can easily be set, to avoid overwhelming people with a large number of unit types. Enough people have complained about it that I can accept it is a problem though. > 13) "Press 't' to continue" is misleading Agree. > 14) Why is there a time-left panel at all in campaign mode? I made a change which shows a real-world clock in its place in campaign mode. Personally I think this works well. > 15) Where are the female leads in campaigns? I agree. I would like to point out that the original campaign, Heir to the Throne has a male 'main' character, but has a very important female character who (spoiler) ends up being the true heir to the throne. Few campaigns have female main characters though. :( It would be good if there were more. And importantly, they should be done in a sensible and mature way. > 16) Unit types topping out at level 2 makes them bad investments This is by design, and I disagree. It's a conscious strategic choice a player has to make between the long-term and short-term. Units that max out at level 2 should be easier to obtain or more powerful than counterparts that have a 3rd level. What I would like to see is more units that have a possible fourth level, to extend the strategic choice. Not that I'm excluding the possibility of some cases where extending to a third level makes some sense. > 17) The way names are handled is confusing. I think personal names for everyone works best. > Mac-specific glitches: I can't really comment on any of these, since I haven't used Wesnoth on Mac. David ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 20:06 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Quoting "Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > 1) It's too short. She'd like the tutorial to include more scenarios. I tested on newbies *without* experience in comparable games, so the tutorial was shaped by those experiences. They point in the opposite direction from this: the tutorial is too long and risks overwhelming with detail 8( We could offer an optional part 3 where small fights occur in the forest -- "There are many dangerous creatures on the edge of these woods: if you wish we can stay and practice on them"... > > 2) Transition to campaign play could be smoother This I agree with, and I think is the answer to our dilemma. The tutorial was designed to get you to HttT (Easy). As this is no longer the norm, but we should explicitly craft a "first campaign" which handles these issues as beautifully at HttT does: > > 3) Significance of the turn counter and time running out is not > > emphasized enough in the tutorial. > > 5) Tutorial should include an example of a loyal unit, and explain > > loyalty > > 6) Tutorial should include a neutral keep. > > 7) Tutorial should at least touch on damage types. The tutorial units don't really demonstrate this well so it's abstract knowledge. I think it's an excellent thing to do for the optional part 3. > > 4) Icons in the status line aren't explained well in the tutorial Yes, highlighting gui elements would be an excellent addition which wouldn't greatly add to the length of the tutorial. I balked at coding that up when I wrote the tutorial. I don't suppose you measured how long the tutorial took her? Thanks, Rusty. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
> 8) Flavor text and mechanics should be distinguishable or separated > in help. > > Bug: Flavor text is nice but experienced players refreshing > their knowledge > of the game often want to just pick out mechanics. > > Fix: Organize like Civilopedia, where mechanics cones first and > flavor > follows. Or, highlight the mechanics text so it's visually > distinctive. > > Rating: Annoying. Actually, I'm well in support of this - for one, I'd like to make it such that we have space for full-body portraits in the help pages; which we certainly don't, now. We also could use slightly more capable layout to make better use of space - an equivalent to the css "float", applied to our portraits, would be a godsend. Having the portrait, the descriptions, and, potentially, things we don't currently include, on one page, and having all the stats on another, would be grand. > 15) Where are the female leads in campaigns? Because I haven't been writing campaigns. > 16) Unit types topping out at level 2 makes them bad investments It's worth noting that for flavor reasons, Dave did not want the poacher/trapper line (which are effectively self-trained hillbillies), to be able to reasonably equal the elves (or trained human soldiers) in ranged combat (or any combat for that matter). I'd have opted for different, much more radical ways of achieving the same end (like bumping the entire elven race up a level), but this gives you the general gist of why this was done. ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
> > 16) Unit types topping out at level 2 makes them bad investments > >Bug: I'd actually heard this one in my one previous extended conversation >wiith a Wesnoth newbie. Fade, when I explained the advancement tree while >she was complaining about bug 6, concurred. Why toss kills to a unit that >isn't going to advance to the power level of L3? And thus, why build it >at all? > >Fix: L3 everything. Outlaws, ghosts, everything. > >Rating: For her, Annoying. (I think it qualifies as Serious.) > I want to answer that particular item because I'm deeply against it... I think the problem is in the way your player has looked at wesnoth, not in wesnoth itself. wesnoth is not about having the best units, it's about having the best army. LVL3 unit should be killable, they should die on a regular basis, they are not uber-units like you encounter in most ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > We could offer an optional part 3 where small fights occur in the forest > -- "There are many dangerous creatures on the edge of these woods: if > you wish we can stay and practice on them"... Aha. I think that offers us a way forward, with the advantages of both a short and a longer tutorial. I like it. > > > 2) Transition to campaign play could be smoother > > This I agree with, and I think is the answer to our dilemma. The > tutorial was designed to get you to HttT (Easy). > > As this is no longer the norm, but we should explicitly craft a "first > campaign" which handles these issues as beautifully at HttT does: I think TB with more tutorial content at Easy level might do for this. > I don't suppose you measured how long the tutorial took her? Alas, no. I think about 20 minutes, but I'm not sure. -- http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
Nils Kneuper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 1) In the ingame help lets seperate the stuff among the list "units" a > little further into the seperate races. IIRC we already have some "race" > tag anyway, why shall we not use it? (If needed we could create a > "hidden" era just to classify the races) > 2) Each of these races would have a nice description about the race in > general and some tactical stuff to keep in mind (I think we already have > this somewhere in the wiki, would just be something like copy&paste) > plus a tree for all of the units like it is shown at untis.wesnoth.org. > Each of the "units-images/names" would be a link to the respective > article. If we have a way to show stuff nicely sorted there is IMO no > need to hide any infomation. This way it would directly be possible to > see into what these units can evolve. Well, heck. If all it involves is editing the help text extensively I am quite able and willing to do that. -- http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
Re: [Wesnoth-dev] Extensive and useful feedback from a Wesnoth newbia
Eric S. Raymond wrote: >> I don't suppose you measured how long the tutorial took her? > > Alas, no. I think about 20 minutes, but I'm not sure. Maybe try to check it using stats.wesnoth.org? :) -- regards Karol 'grzywacz' Nowak -> Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> WWW: http://jabba.pl/grzywacz ___ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
