View Full Version : Knights of the Round Table - Romano-British PBM (Goth mod - WoS style)
Table PBM FAQ (Work in progress)
The premise: This is a Romano-British PBM using Goth's All Factions Mod for BI. The aim of the PBM is to re-establish the Roman Empire as a Christian one, well defended against pagan invaders. If you have seen the film King Arthur, you'll get an idea of the premise (yes, it was a mediocre film - this will be a better PBM!). Each King will reign for 10 years (20 turns). Other players will each be assigned a general - a knight of the Roundtable - and be given quests to achieve. They will play out any battles that their general gets into.
Victory conditions: (1) Control all of Britain and Ireland; Rome; + ???
(2) All controlled provinces to be Christian.
The mod:
Goth mod 2.4.1: you can download it here:
http://www.g-unleashed.com/index.php?cat=34&pid=634&page=goth's_bi_mod
You can find the mod discussed here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=41879
And also on the RTR forums.
Settings
Difficulty level: H campaigns; M battles.
Large units.
Timer on.
Pirate and bandit spawn =100.
Note: Edited descr_strat.txt file to make both starting generals Christian and to change the temples into churches:
http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/descr_strat.zip
On my computer, the file goes in:
C:\Program Files\Activision\RTW-Goth mod\bi\data\world\maps\campaign\barbarian_invasion
Only the first player needs to bother with this.
Playing arrangements
1. There will be two kinds of players - knights and elders.
2. Knights assume leadership of the Round Table (become "King") for 10 years (20 turns) on a rotating basis. They control actions on the campaign map, buildings etc.
3. Zimfan40 is the first King. Thereafter, Kingship and assignment of generals is determined by the order in which players post to confirm interest in this thread.
4. Knights will be represented by a general (elders too when there are enough). Where there are more generals than players, extra generals could be assigned to players based on family affiliation.
5. When the general of a knight gets into a battle, the King uploads the savegame and the knight has 48 hours to complete the battle. Failure to do so, leads to dishonour and exile from the Roundtable.
6. Elders will join in debates on policy and help decide on quests. An in-character thread (Rountable deliberations) will be created for such discussion. Decision making around the Roundtable will be consensual - the King should act according to the majority wishes of the knights and elders, weighted by half their generals influence. Formal votes (posts with polls) can be arranged for particuarly contentious matters, but the Kind should aim to build a consensus and rely more on informal shows of hands etc.
Houserules:
1. No extermination or enslavement (we're the good guys).
2. No retraining, except ships and full units (for upgrades).
3. 1 ship can only carry 1 unit.
Roleplaying and write-ups
Players should try to act in accordance with the vice and virtues of their generals. Where these permit, they are to roleplay brave knights, aiming to restore a Christian Roman Empire and protect it from invasion.
Subject to demand, we could have a Round Table thread for Will of the Senate type deliberations. If we go this route, perhaps the King should act according to the majority wishes of his knights (ie act like a chairman, rather than a dictator).
The playlist:
The Knights
Zimfan
econ21
Galagros
Ultrawar
DukeofSerbia - TBC
Wonderland
The Elders
GeneralHankerchief
El Diablo
Tiberius
Csar
****************************************************************
Original post:
In the Vandal PBM thread, Zimfan40 posted:
By the way, I don't suppose anyone would be interested in playing another pbem with me using Goth's All Factions mod? I gave it a try recently and you guys are right, it's fantastic!
I'm partial to the Romano british, or one of the other factions that's had a major unit roster revamp. :2thumbsup:
This started me thinking: to be honest, playing these vanilla PBMs does make me appreciate the realism mods more. Goth mod is beautiful mod for BI - it has excellent re-skins of units, tones down the combat to be slower and more realistic (it's less hardcore than EB or RTR, but not far off), introduces more factions, bigger hordes, a bigger map etc and crucially, in my experience is very stable. (Apparently, Goth's temporarily retired from modding, so there won't be any changes soon). Here's a taster of what it looks like (WRE vs Berbers):
https://img74.imageshack.us/img74/5316/goth3xt2.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
Thinking about the Romano-British, it seemed that, like a lot of small factions, they might be great fun at the beginning, as you struggle to get established but possibly get bland as you get bigger.
So I was wondering what would make characterful objectives? Watching the movie King Arthur, I rather liked the idea of Arthur as a starry-eyed admirer of the ideal of an egalitarian Christian Rome. Maybe the aim of the Romano-British could be to establish a Christian Empire, including Rome? I'm even wondering if, to play in character as good guy King Arthur's, we rule out both extermination and enslavement[1]? That will make it much tougher, as squalor is a big problem in the WRE. But Goth's mod tends to be generous with money and, correct me if I am wrong, but I think the Romano-British should have the Roman type infrastructure to control it.
My imagination starts to run riot at this point - we could even have a "will of the Senate" type Round Table. Each player takes a knight, a general, and the King assigns them quests (battles, or even limited campaigns - take province X, defeat army Y). My inclination would be to get rid of the Consul election/voting on motions aspects of Will of the Senate and the wordy deliberations etc, but make this a more personal, small scale affair focussed around individual quests and stories of brave deeds. We could still have a deliberations type thread for in character comments, if people like, but it would be a council of war advising the King and we would be role playing loyal and brave knights not politicking Senators.
I believe factions branch into four families - so if we had four players, each controlling 1/4 of the generals. If we have more players, we could fit them in. If we have five players, the King could control only himself; if 6+, we could branch out further. I'd see the King as having more of management role, similar to the later Consuls in the Will of the Senate game - managing the economy, passing on savegames to players. A 20 turn reign determined by a fixed play order would probably be fine. I'd like Zimfan40 to take the first reign, if he's up for it, as it was his idea.
Playing a Will of the Senate type game would require a sustained commitment from the players, but in the original campaign that has not proved to be a problem: unless it's your reign, you just have to play out a battle occaisionally and keep up to date with current events. We would only be looking for serious players who could play out battles within 2 days of the savegame being posted (otherwise: dishonour!).
Anyone interested or want to suggest further ideas/houserules?
Galagros
09-30-2006, 16:46
Sounds like loads of fun (I've been keeping up with the Will of the Senate for a while now). I'd join, but I literally just got RTW and BI last night, so as you can imagine, I'm simply not familiar enough with the game yet (though I've been playing MTW for many years).
Zimfan40
09-30-2006, 18:06
:bow: I'd be honored to play the first reign.
Would each player have his own family member to control when it comes to battles like in the Senate game?
If so I should warn you, the roman brits' family is pretty anemic at the start, with only two members and no children. Once you conquer a few settlements, though, the babies and adoptions start rolling in.
Dutch_guy
09-30-2006, 18:31
Having trouble with your Acount Zimfan(40) ?
On Topic, I'm gonna pass on this one. I scarcely even have the time to post in the Will of the Senate PBM - let alone participate in a completely different,new, PBM.
Good luck anyway.
:balloon2:
UltraWar
09-30-2006, 19:24
I am intrested in joining but I will need to do some looking at the WoS rules first
DukeofSerbia
09-30-2006, 20:32
Where can I download Goth mod? I'm interested.
Would each player have his own family member to control when it comes to battles like in the Senate game?
That's what I was thinking - each player would have their own general to control and the reigning player would give out quests to them. I'd be inclined to make the quests alternate - so each player gets a fair crack at the whip (I'm envisaging less politics in this one than in the Will of the Senate). But players could suggest characterful quests to the king.
I would not worry about there only being two generals at first - I think this will be a smaller affair than the Will of the Senate (partly because the Will of the Senate has recruited most of the active players and they may not want to commit to a second campaign). But hopefully we can entice a few more prospective players. If we make a good job of it, we may be able to attact more players as we play along (as the Will of the Senate has done).
I will need to do some looking at the WoS rules first.
The WoS rules are overly complex. We should start thinking up rules for this PBM.
I'm thinking about the following:
Victory conditions: (1) Control all of Britain and Ireland; Rome; + ???
(2) All controlled provinces to be Christian.
Playing arrangements
1. Players assume leadership as the Head of the Round Table ("King") for 20 turns. They control actions on the campaign map, buildings etc.
2. Each player is represented by a general. When their general gets into a battle, the King uploads the savegame and they have 48 hours to complete the battle. Failure to do so, leads to dishonour and exile from the Roundtable.
3. Zimfan40 is the first King. Thereafter, Kingship and assignment of generals is determined by the order in which players post to confirm interest in this thread. Where there are more generals than players, extra generals could be assigned to players based on family affiliation.
Houserules:
1. No extermination or enslavement (we're the good guys).
2. No retraining, except ships and full units (for upgrades).
3. 1 ship can only carry 1 unit.
Settings
Difficulty level: VH campaigns; M battles.
Large units.
Timer on.
Pirate and bandit spawn =100.
Roleplaying and write-ups
Players should try to act in accordance with the vice and virtues of their generals. Where these permit, they are to roleplay brave knights, aiming to restore a Christian Roman Empire and protect it from invasion.
Subject to demand, we could have a Round Table thread for Will of the Senate type deliberations. If we go this route, perhaps the King should act according to the majority wishes of his knights (ie act like a chairman, rather than a dictator).
Any reactions?
PS:
Here is the Mod Download:
http://www.g-unleashed.com/index.php?cat=34&pid=634&page=goth's_bi_mod
You can find the mod discussed here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=41879
And also on the RTR forums.
Looks good, still, I don't think I'll have time to take part.
Well, when I get my main comp. to play medieval, you may seeing a themed Byzantine late campaign.
Zimfan40
09-30-2006, 22:31
Here is the Mod Download:
http://www.g-unleashed.com/index.php?cat=34&pid=634&page=goth's_bi_mod
Patch 2.4.1 fixes some minor bugs with 2.4 download here
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/...opic=18386&st=0
Extract with Winrar then copy\paste the files into your bi\data folder
You can find the mod discussed here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=41879
And also on the RTR forums.
:2thumbsup: Sounds good to me, just a few quick notes.
1. The patch link is broken, or at least I can't open it. However, Goth has kindly included it in the latest main install of the game. Just scroll down at that first link to:
MAIN:
Click here to download Goth's Mod v.2.4.1 full
2. Both starting members are pagan. Luckily, public order is very high in starting territories and conversion will be easy. I say we make the first Christian family member the new faction heir.
3. Have you played the Romano-brits in Goth's mod before? Their best infantry can only be made in Britain with a huge city level barracks. Their mainstay unit, the Pedites Romanii is pretty strong but won't hold well to the better Roman infantry. This means the huge advanced armies Rome will throw at us on very hard may prove troublesome for those of us who fall short of a Hanibal or Belisarius. I suggest that depending on the comfort level of prospective players high difficulty levels we consider putting the game at "hard" campaign difficulty. WoS has attracted most of the hardcore members, so this may make recruitment easier. More experienced players can adopt some extra iron man rules for their reigns.
Zimfan40
09-30-2006, 22:42
I took the liberty of starting a test game. Doesn't have the appropriate difficulty etc. It's just to make sure everyone who wants to play has the same version of Goth's mod.
File name KingArthurtest http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/
GeneralHankerchief
10-01-2006, 01:16
Could there possibly be an Upper House version of this game? Perhaps a "Council of Elders" or something of the like? If there is, I believe that more people will take an active interest in this game (including myself, I'll pass on the battles for now).
2. Both starting members are pagan.
OK, I've amended the descr_strat.txt file to make them both Christian and to change the temples into churches[1]. I don't know how to change the religion of the population, but conversion will be quick.
3. Have you played the Romano-brits in Goth's mod before? ... I suggest that depending on the comfort level of prospective players high difficulty levels we consider putting the game at "hard" campaign difficulty.
I'm happy to go with hard campaign. In WoS, some players were pushing for hard battles too, but I much prefer medium.
[1]I've uploaded the file as:
http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/descr_strat.zip
On my computer, the file goes in:
C:\Program Files\Activision\RTW-Goth mod\bi\data\world\maps\campaign\barbarian_invasion
I wonder, are there any other issues we need to work out? One idea I had was some constraints on our aggressiveness. Some possibilities:
(1) We do not delcare war for 10 turns - let the AI build up.
or:
(2) We do not declare war full stop - we wait to be attacked and turn the tables on our aggressors. This would imply that we do not target Rome and the WRE - ideally, we try to rescue it from pagan invaders.
or:
(3) We do not declare war on fellow Christians - ie factions headed by a Christian (sort of like with the Pope in MTW).
On the quest business - I've been wondering about letting the general do more than fight the battle. ie give them control of the game, at least so they can move their general around. The King could still determine the build queues, taxes, give instructions about the other armies etc. But let's see how it goes. I guess the closest analogy with the quest is with a Senate mission. We might even set a time limit.
Could there possibly be an Upper House version of this game? Perhaps a "Council of Elders" or something of the like?
I guess so. The Council could help direct policy as in WoS. But perhaps also assign quests. The more creative ideas we have about quests, the better.
So far the playlist is:
Zimfan
econ21
Galagros
Ultrawar - TBC
DukeofSerbia - TBC
Wonderland
Any more ideas or potential players?
Zimfan40
10-01-2006, 04:23
More annoying questions from Zimfan. ~:)
Do we have to wait on the Celts to attack us, too? ~;p If so the first reign reign might be a bit dull, for me and the generals. And without some semi quick expansion, getting more family members will be tough. We already start at war with the Saxons and in my last RB game they were aggressive in trying to invade Britain, so that should give us another avenue for expansion. Perhaps we should put it to a vote for our current gauranteed and prospective members. Kind of a first chance to see our council in action. :2thumbsup:
How should we divide the starting characters? As thie first two players, one for Econ21, one for me? Then as we get new characters, divy them up to the players in the order they sign up?
Not trying to be nitpicky. Just want to make sure everything is clear. It may take some more effort to set up than a normal pbm, but I think this is gonna be really fun. :knight:
Galagros
10-01-2006, 07:43
Hmm, you know I couldn't resist downloading the mod and trying out this faction. I'm playing a H/M campaign and doing pretty well. I easily took the Celt city up towards Scotland, but later got smashed assaulting Ireland, even my heir got killed. The Celtic heavy cavalry unit is really good, especially when the majority of troops you have to fight it aren't spearmen....
I was pleased when I adopted 2 generals and later I built plenty of ships (I think I have 14 right now) and no one has dared attack me at sea. Trade is booming and it seems like no matter what I do I have plenty of cash (60,000). I finally finished the Celts a year ago am glad to get another city. It's very near the 12,000 mark (I just upgraded London a few year ago). Population is really low to start in Brittain.
In any event, I think I'm doing pretty well for only having RTW for less than 2 days and would like a go at this PBM sometime. :2thumbsup: (But I'm still not the best with battles)
On a side note, how do you take in-game pics in RTW?
Zimfan40
10-01-2006, 09:53
Hmm, you know I couldn't resist downloading the mod and trying out this faction. I'm playing a H/M campaign and doing pretty well. I easily took the Celt city up towards Scotland, but later got smashed assaulting Ireland, even my heir got killed. The Celtic heavy cavalry unit is really good, especially when the majority of troops you have to fight it aren't spearmen....
I was pleased when I adopted 2 generals and later I built plenty of ships (I think I have 14 right now) and no one has dared attack me at sea. Trade is booming and it seems like no matter what I do I have plenty of cash (60,000). I finally finished the Celts a year ago am glad to get another city. It's very near the 12,000 mark (I just upgraded London a few year ago). Population is really low to start in Brittain.
In any event, I think I'm doing pretty well for only having RTW for less than 2 days and would like a go at this PBM sometime. :2thumbsup: (But I'm still not the best with battles)
On a side note, how do you take in-game pics in RTW?
Welcome aboard! ~:)
To take a pic, press the Print Screen on your keyboard. Pics will show up in your Tgas file in your Rome folder(or in your BI folder, I think). You'll have to convert them to jpgs to put them up here. Econ21 uses a free program called Irfanview to do it. I was lucky enough to get a program that can do it with my new computer.
Yay, I'm in. Love Romano-British, wanted a good BI mod PBEM, econ's in, sign me up!
Good - we now have (EDIT) five confirmed players: Zimfan, Galagros, UltraWar, Wonderland, me; and we are waiting to hear from DukeofSerbia.
Do we have to wait on the Celts to attack us, too? ... Kind of a first chance to see our council in action.
It's a tricky one. I would be inclined to let the Celts attack (do they attack eventually?) or (if they don't attack) keep them as a potential menace - it sounds more fun and more in character than just steamrollering them from turn 1. Indeed, we could even have a houserule that we can never capture a Celtic settlement - to represent their constantly present lurking threat to the north. (Victory conditions would just be for our two starting settlements, Rome +?? maybe all WRE and WRE rebel starting settlements?) We did something like that in the WRE campaign with a rule that the Romans could never take barbarian settlements. It kept us confined within the borders of the Empire and made for a tight campaign.
I think there is quite a lot of building we may want to do. In terms of enemies, I was wondering about making the WRE rebels fair game? We are trying to restore the Empire. Popping over the sea to take them on might be more characterful than immediately invading the Saxons.
About the lack of generals: we do have the option to edit the descr_strat to create some more. If it was just another two (Galagros and Wonderland), it would not be a big deal.
First turns often risk being boring but they are important in terms of getting the campaign off on the right foot. I'm happy to take it if you want - the other starting character is much younger (19), so would be around for longer. Vortigern will only last around 2 reigns. (Goth mod is a not a 4 turn per year mod, is it?)
How should we divide the starting characters? As thie first two players, one for Econ21, one for me? Then as we get new characters, divy them up to the players in the order they sign up?
That was what I was thinking, but I'm flexible as above.
Not trying to be nitpicky. Just want to make sure everything is clear.
Absolutely - this is a period of brainstorming. There's a side of me that just wants to tell you to start playing. But spending a little more time discussing ideas and being open to the ideas of newcomers, should improve the campaign. TinCow and others provided a lot of input into setting up the Will of the Senate rules - it's a shame he's off on a work trip.
Any reactions? I've never played the Romano-British, so I don't know the practicalities of what I'm suggesting.
UltraWar
10-01-2006, 12:55
I'm ready to protect the heritage of the Round Table
Galagros
10-01-2006, 17:19
So if one of the goals is to restore Christianity, I take it that we can't build temples that increase paganism, etc?
Zimfan40
10-01-2006, 19:16
So if one of the goals is to restore Christianity, I take it that we can't build temples that increase paganism, etc?
That's right. So it'll only be our enemies getting those nasty experience upgrades. :sweatdrop: Maybe we'll be lucky and get "excalibur". I think it happened to me once in a vanilla campaign.
Econ21 I'm not sure if it'll be a problem or not. I'll try a test game to day for ten years and see what happens. My only fear is that since # of generals tends to be tied to number of territories(more cities=more adoptions/births) that two passive a first couple of reigns will preclude any new family members and hurt the every player gets his own character thing we have going.
I'm perfectly happy playing Vortigern the Elder. so long as I can reserve the right to lead him into battle against the dreaded Saxons when they invade. :skull:
Conquering will be left to Segovax the Chivalrous. These old bones have enough trouble with the damp without heavy travel.
only specialy difficulty for the Roman Brits I can think of is that the regular Romans on hard+ difficulty(with all the money cheated to them) will churn out higher tech armies. Our best unit(British legionary) can only be produced in Britain, and with a very high barracks at that.
Galagros
10-01-2006, 19:49
Every single heir/son/adopted son of mine has been Pagan and several have gone on to develop more pagan increasing traits. The saxons finally invaded Britain once I sent my main army into the mainland. They caught me off guard and landed an army before I could sink their fleet. I had to fight them twice before I finished them off, but they immediately wanted peace. I'm a little confused by the WRE. One turn they asked for an alliance and map info, which I accepted. And literally the next turn they besieged my main army on the mainland with a full stack... I think it's going to be a very tough fight.
Also, Vertigern lived until 395 in my game. I haven't been able to build the British Legionaries yet, but the few we start with got easily slaughtered by some heavy cavalry early in the game (though they stood up to infantry very nicely.)
Zimfan40
10-01-2006, 19:53
Ok, test done. In ten years Londinium can be turned into a gold mine(especially if you build real mines in it! :P). Not only are mines extremely valuable in the city, but as its population grows trade profit increases immensely.
Interestingly the king's son Segovaz gained the pious man(never built a church), astute wife, and causal adulterer traits. :laugh4:
The celts did zip. Just like they do so often in vanilla BI, they sat around scotland building immense armies. I played a bit longer, and finally, after having sent a lone townwatch type near their border for a few years, they attacked in 387. Since the celts showed no trouble boating men from Tara to Scotland, my vote on the council is to either free Dal Riada's people from the "yoke" of paganism (~;) No offense to real pagans, just a bit of roleplaying!), thus uniting Britain, and letting them keep Tara to simulate the constant threat.
Saxons also did zilch, rather disappointedly(although we start at war with them). I kept the fow turned off for the test and they were obsessed with taking campus Frisii(never did), then the slavs came and kicked their butts.
Zimfan40
10-01-2006, 19:55
Every single heir/son/adopted son of mine has been Pagan and several have gone on to develop more pagan increasing traits. The saxons finally invaded Britain once I sent my main army into the mainland. They caught me off guard and landed an army before I could sink their fleet. I had to fight them twice before I finished them off, but they immediately wanted peace. I'm a little confused by the WRE. One turn they asked for an alliance and map info, which I accepted. And literally the next turn they besieged my main army on the mainland with a full stack... I think it's going to be a very tough fight.
Also, Vertigern lived until 395 in my game. I haven't been able to build the British Legionaries yet, but the few we start with got easily slaughtered by some heavy cavalry early in the game (though they stood up to infantry very nicely.)
British legionaries require a pretty high level barracks, Londinium will be the first city to be able to build them.
Econ21 played with the strat file, so the family members will start Christian.
Yeah, the perfidious Romans are sneaky like that. They never keep alliances. Allows us to to keep to our goal of not starting fights, though, conveniently enough. :2thumbsup:
Galagros
10-01-2006, 21:04
I also played a test VH/M game. The Celts did nothing to me, too. They built 2 full armies and never attacked, but eventually they asked for trade rights. :wall:
The Saxons did land an army of 1000 fairly early, but they just let it sit beside my city for 2 years without besieging me. Once I built up a sizable army I attacked and defeated them. I already had a big navy and had sank their ships. My diplomat showed me that the Saxons now had at least 3 territories. I have only sat in my cities and built them up so far. I have about 10 ships, about 1300 soldiers, am in the process of building the 12000 population upgrade in Londinium and have all of the other available buildings built except for the temples. There is around 12000 in the bank and am always getting a decent sized profit. The question is, what are we going to do with an ideal situation like this?
(Note: I've found that have 3-4 units of archers in battles is a very good idea)
Um, OK, from Zimfan's trial, it sounds like Romano-Britain maybe a little sleepy under our current settings.
What do you think the best way to proceed is?
I'm thinking:
(1) Edit the descr_strat to give us 3 extra starting generals for Ultrawar, Wonderland and Galagros. If Zimfan or Galagros have spawned 3 generals in any of your games, Zimfan, can you post screenshots of them? Then I'll copy their names and stuff. This will solve one problem of us not having enough generals.
(2) As Zimfan suggests, leave Ireland as a no-go area but liberate Scotland.
(3) Forget about non-aggression rules and enforced inactivity rules? It sounds like the British Isles are a sleepy backwater - we are going to have to get to the continent and make things happen.
(4) Also, I hesitate to suggest it, but how about VH campaigns? The Saxons sent quite significant armies to Britain in my VH WRE campaigns.
Any thoughts on the above? On any other houserules etc?
Galagros
10-01-2006, 23:02
I can post screens of some generals that were adopted/married into the family tree. (I'll edit them in)
My last post was on very hard and the saxon army was a push-over. It was bigger than mine to start, but they just sat there without besieging the city, so I had time to prepare a defence.
Zimfan40
10-01-2006, 23:09
Econ21
Ok, did another test on Very hard.
Things of note:
1. The Saxons struck hard and fast two years in, with a near full stack, with a mix of lower and very high quality troops. Only superior generalship allowed me to pull off a win. A smaller force was sent in a few years later. Even it was an annoyance with most of my army ocupied in Scotland. They stopped after that. I found out at the end of the test after removing fow that this was solely because the slavs were kicking their butts all over northern Germany and Denmark.
2. Went agressive against the celts, attacking a small band of theirs and forcing them to flee. Ever since they've played very aggreesively. Goth's speedy recruitment system for celts meant I faced lots of large lower quality armies, kind of like fighting the Gauls as the Julii in RTW. After taking Dal Riada they constantly sent fair sized stacks to take it back
3. The large amounts of money cheated towards teh computer factions on very hard ensured the Celts would trade large sums of money(5000 or so denarii) for a ceasefire, only to break it the next turn or so. Not sure if this is an exploit or not, but I'd leave the option open to those somewhat overwhelmed on Very Hard difficulty(myself among them).
4. By the end of the ten year test, Two hordes(slavs and then horded Burgundii) were about to have a field day in Northern France, and would have allowed us a great chance to "take the cities back for Rome".
5. Only one adoptee offered. His name was Ivonagus Areagius, 20 yrs old, with the Obsessional Trainer and Christian traits. I can post a screen shot if you'd like. No starts or management scrolls.
Zimfan40
10-01-2006, 23:11
I can post screens of some generals that were adopted/married into the family tree. (I'll edit them in)
My last post was on very hard and the saxon army was a push-over. It was bigger than mine to start, but they just sat there without besieging the city, so I had time to prepare a defence.
Did the Saxons send a diplomat with their army asking for a ceasefire? Figuring that gunboat diplomacy would be insulting to anyone with a shred of honor, I refused it and wiped their army out. :knight: :laugh4:
Galagros
10-01-2006, 23:22
Hmm, I don't know if the Saxons tried to send a diplomat or not, I kept sinking their skips before they could offload. Eventually one found my diplomat on the mainland nad asked for peace, though.
My screenshots aren't working right. The TGAs are just a big black box, anyone know why that is or how I can fix it?
In my VH campaign I haven't had any more heirs yet, but in the hard campaign I had a ton. Unfortunately, 2 died and 1 has taken over a leader, so I can only give you the info from the other 2.
Ambiorix Arpagius
Command: 2
Management: 0
Influence: 2
Retinue: None
Traits: Confident Commander, Good Ambusher, Sharp, Pagan
Cadwaldus Castus
Command: 1
Management: 0
Influence: 1
Retinue: Architect (not sure if he was present at time of adoption)
Traits: Confident Commander, Pagan, Good Ambusher, Lover of Beauty
I have noticed that almost every person adopted or married into the faction had the Pagan and Good Ambusher traits.
Zimfan40
10-01-2006, 23:29
You probably don't have a program on your comp that can read tgas. This one's free and works for me. http://www.irfanview.com/ It has the added advantage of beign able to convert those tgas to jpgs, making putting them up here much easier.
New family members have something like a 90% of belonging to the same religion as your faction leader.
Hmm, I don't know if the Saxons tried to send a diplomat or not, I kept sinking their skips before they could offload. Eventually one found my diplomat on the mainland nad asked for peace, though.
My screenshots aren't working right. The TGAs are just a big black box, anyone know why that is or how I can fix it?
In my VH campaign I haven't had any more heirs yet, but in the hard campaign I had a ton. Unfortunately, 2 died and 1 has taken over a leader, so I can only give you the info from the other 2.
Ambiorix Arpagius
Command: 2
Management: 0
Influence: 2
Retinue: None
Traits: Confident Commander, Good Ambusher, Sharp, Pagan
Cadwaldus Castus
Command: 1
Management: 0
Influence: 1
Retinue: Architect (not sure if he was present at time of adoption)
Traits: Confident Commander, Pagan, Good Ambusher, Lover of Beauty
I have noticed that almost every person adopted or married into the faction had the Pagan and Good Ambusher traits.
Galagros - what age were your two new generals when they were adopted?
On the black tgas, I think it is a bug with your graphics card. And, and many others, have the same problem. I think if you change a setting (anti-aliasing off? or something), you can fix it - you could search or ask the apothecary for information. I've never fixed it - instead, I just use the free program fraps available off the internet to take screenshots (install it, start it up before your game, press F10 and it stores the tga in the folder of your choice).
Zimfan - based on your trials, what's your judgement about difficulty levels? From what you write, the VH one sounds more intense. I like the idea of having to fend off stacks of Celts and Saxons, while trying to shore up the Roman Empire from barbarian hordes. But I'll go along with whatever you decide.
Galagros
10-02-2006, 01:02
I have been using infranview for years now, so that's not my problem, but I do still have my anti-aliasing on from when i played MTW a few days ago ... I'll try fraps, too. Thanks.
I'm not positive about their ages. I think the first one might have been 31, but all I can remember about the other is that he was really young. I started a VH campaign again and attacked the Celts on turn 3, it's making the game a lot harder. The first battle was in some woods and I killed about 550, only losing about 60. Then I besieged and assaulted the last 150-200 in their city, again with small losses. After that things got worse... I'm besieged in the same city this by the Celts, but am about to sally because they won't assault. And at the same time the Saxons landed. I didn't have a spy nearby so I had no idea what type of troops they had, but I could see that it was only 300 or so. I attacked it with thr troops I had lying around (3 of the militia spearmen and 3 archers). Boy was that a mistake! The enemy was almost all Dugath heavy swordsmen and I really got beaten badly, but that Saxon army still won't do anything but sit beside my port and wait for me to attack them. :inquisitive:
Zimfan40
10-02-2006, 01:24
Zimfan - based on your trials, what's your judgement about difficulty levels? From what you write, the VH one sounds more intense. I like the idea of having to fend off stacks of Celts and Saxons, while trying to shore up the Roman Empire from barbarian hordes. But I'll go along with whatever you decide.
I wouldn't mind a very hard campaign. Troop management will be key, though. And the Romans will betray us, if we ever have a city bordering their's.
I don't feel strongly on the issue of the campaign difficulty. Shall we have a quick poll on difficulty levels from prospective players?
Econ21: VH/M (campaign/battle)
Zimfan:?
Wonderland:?
UltraWar:?
Galagros:?
We can pick the most popular from the votes within the next 48 hours.
Galagros
10-02-2006, 15:59
I'll go along with VH/M, but would also settle for H/M. I'm afriad I wouldn't be able to handle some battles on a higher difficulty than medium, though.
I second Galagros. I'll go with VH/M, but would not be opposed to H/M.
El Diablo
10-02-2006, 22:55
I would be keen for an elder role (if that is as I assume a non-ruling, non fighting role) as I have little experiance in fighting battles particularly in BI or any mods. And if I am really bad you lot can just assassinate the old man in his sleep (-err... ion the game that it!!!)
I would be keen for an elder role (if that is as I assume a non-ruling, non fighting role) as I have little experiance in fighting battles particularly in BI or any mods. And if I am really bad you lot can just assassinate the old man in his sleep (-err... ion the game that it!!!)
I'd personally like to have people play who aren't so used to the game that they breeze through every battle. It adds spice to the campaign, story, roleplay, everything. A bad general here, a few losses there, sounds like fun! :skull:
Hope you change your mind and decide to play as an active warrior :2thumbsup:.
El Diablo
10-03-2006, 02:26
I will download all the mods now and see if my comp "can handle the truth" and then have a few battles.
With my kind of luck I would end up on the end of the first arrow tossed our way... But hey if there enough players I am in (pending computer working).
Galagros
10-03-2006, 21:12
I've got a few questions about the rules of this PBEM, just to clarify some things.
1) Someone mentioned no retraining. Now is this no retraining of full units to get upgrades or no retraining at all?
2) We have to occupy all conquered settlements, correct?
3) Do we have to let the AI control building and recruiting in settlements without a faction heir in them?
4) I think it's been established that we can take Del Raida (sp?) from the Celts, but must leave Tora alone. Are we not to sink Celtic ships also?
I've been playing a VH/M Saxon campaign and it's not been easy. The Lombardi and Slavs hordes both picked my land to settle in. I was left with the starting territory and the two Romano-British cities. Soon enough the Celts decided to come south with almost 2 full armies, though, and since they had so much time to build up they were quite hard to defeat. Most of their troops were higher in the tech tree and ALL had good experience, weaponry, and armor. I just thought you guys would like to know that since it could happen in this campaign.
1) Someone mentioned no retraining. Now is this no retraining of full units to get upgrades or no retraining at all?
This is just retraining of full units to get upgrades. Ships can be retrained without restrictions though.
2) We have to occupy all conquered settlements, correct?
Yes. :sweatdrop:
3) Do we have to let the AI control building and recruiting in settlements without a faction heir in them?
No we can control all settlements. NB: I'm thinking that as we may want low taxes to get the population up, we may want to keep characters out of towns so they don't get ruined by bad vices.
4) I think it's been established that we can take Del Raida (sp?) from the Celts, but must leave Tora alone. Are we not to sink Celtic ships also?
Ships are free game. Also we could land and fight in Ireland - e.g. for a quest - but just not take the settlement.
Galagros
10-04-2006, 01:37
Okay, thanks for clearing those questions up. :2thumbsup:
Victory conditions: (1) Control all of Britain and Ireland; Rome; + ???
(2) All controlled provinces to be Christian.
Ireland is out now, but I thought about something else that I had no idea about. How are we going to get the settlements to be Christians? I know traits can change religion over time, but the temples would go against us and won't be able to be built, so how are we going to go about it?
Zimfan40
10-04-2006, 02:08
Okay, thanks for clearing those questions up. :2thumbsup:
Ireland is out now, but I thought about something else that I had no idea about. How are we going to get the settlements to be Christians? I know traits can change religion over time, but the temples would go against us and won't be able to be built, so how are we going to go about it?
Raze the temple to the ground, build a church, and hope the population converts before it rebels. Things can be sped along by including a couple family members in the stack occupying the city(some agents also add +5% to conversion).
Econ21 Can we maybe train one unit per city per turn? That way, no insta retraining whole armies is out. Alternatively, assuming the unit is near full(say, 75%), can we retrain for weapons upgrades? I'd hate to not be able to upgrade that British Legionaire unit to silver attack because it lost 5 men in a fight against rebel peasants(well, no peasants in the mod, but insert appropriate lowest level infantry unit).
Galagros
10-04-2006, 04:08
Can the Romano-British build churchs? I've never seen that option.
Zimfan40
10-04-2006, 05:23
Can the Romano-British build churchs? I've never seen that option.
Just about everyone can build churches except the Saxons(at least in vanilla BI) and perhaps the Huns and Sasanids(never played them). However, each city can have only one temple/church.
To build a church you have to knock down any existing temples and vice versa.
Avicenna
10-05-2006, 21:25
I would like to request eldification please lord simon.
Absolutely - this is a period of brainstorming. There is a side of me that just wants to tell you to start playing. But spending a little more time discussing ideas and being open to the ideas of newcomers, should improve the campaign. TinCow and others provided a lot of input into setting up the Will of the Senate rules - it is a shame he is off on a work trip.
Ok, I have got an idea if you would like one. I have seen quests mentioned in an offhand manner in this thread, but it appears that these are nothing more than an informal term for WOTS style legislation. Yet, this campaign is trying to be something of a mythical Arthurian crusader style game. Why not try including actual holy quests?
The great thing about the quests of myth and legend is that they were never something that people simply decided to do... they were always mandated by heaven and usually irrelevant to the running of daily affairs and often times actively inconvenient for those who embarked upon them. These aspects of true questing will not often crop up from legislative style decision making.
So... quests should not be assigned by the voting body, they should be assigned by an independant and otherwise neutral person. This person can take the title Archbishop or some similar priestly name to help roleplay the quests as messages from God. The quests should vary in difficulty and objective and be oriented towards Christian goals that are totally unrelated to the strategic and economic status of the empire. The Archbishop will have no other role or power in the game and will not speak except during discussions about the quests (to keep the position truly neutral from all political dealings and such). To keep this simple, I suggest that one quest be assigned at the beginning of the reign of each King. If the King accomplishes the quest during his reign, then the reward is bestowed upon him. If the King does not succeed, then the quest is over and a new one is assigned for the next King. The King can accomplish the quest however he wants (i.e. personally or by assigning a knight to do it).
Examples of quests:
Story: A piece of the true cross has been lost by a group of monks who were attacked and killed while crossing the Danube.
Quest: To recover the relic, a group of christian priests must arrive on the easternmost bridge over the river Danube and then return to a friendly province.
Reward: Piece of the True Cross relic is given to the king via console.
Story: The pagans captured a group of Christians in Corduba and massacred them at the temple of Mars as an offering to their false god.
Quest: Destroy the temple of Mars in Corduba.
Reward: Treasury increased by 30,000 gold via console to reflect plundered wealth of the false god.
Story: The Christian city of Reallyfarfromhere has been conquered by Pagan hordes.
Quest: Capture the city of Reallyfarfromhere and build a Cathedral in it.
Reward: King is given trait X and 5 units of Paladins via console (is it possible to spawn units with the console?).
If you would like, I would be happy to play the role of Archbishop, or whatever name the position is given.
Avicenna
10-05-2006, 21:54
Brilliant! By the way, I think taking out the Saxon pagans might be nice. Also, is there any kind of Anglo-Gallic rivalry at this stage that can be made into an objective?
At the relevant times, places like Nicea where some kind of historical event concerned with Christianity happened should be taken. When we're strong enough, Jerusalem is also a prime target. Are Egypt and Constantinople also important to Christians?
Very interesting ideas, TinCow. :bow: I think quests will be central to whether this is a distinctive PBM. Getting a neutral, creative person to dream them up is one way to go, but the downside is that we lose that person as an active player. Are you too busy with your work to want to take on a general? If you would like a general, we could find a substitute for a single Archbishop[1] - for example, the Council of Elders (and full members of the Round Table) could focus on dreaming up quests rather than directing state policy (which could be left to the king). I suspect the Archbishop model may work better, although he could always take ideas from elders and players.
I was thinking of tying quests to knights rather than to the King. The idea would be to give players other than the reigning king more to do. We could still have that only one quest was to be assigned at any one time (in order of seniority). But it might mesh well with your ideas, because if the quests are wholly religious and unconnected with the economic/strategic situation, the King can worry about the overall situation while the knight fixates on their idiosyncratic quest. I'm inclined to say the knight can move his stack around on the strategic map and not just fight the battles. Quests could even be custom designed for individual knights - based on their vices and virtues. The reward for the quest might best be virtues or an ancillary, if we can spawn them, rather than a unit or cash. The main reward would be full entry to the RoundTable, although I have not quite worked out what that would mean in-game. (Maybe Errants have no voice in debate until fully admitted?)
Tiberius - you are welcome to join the Elders. Yes, Jerusalem is an obvious focal point for Christians. I did wonder about requiring Constantinople to be conquered, but if the ERE are Christian (no idea if they are), it does not seem right. If it falls, it could be an objective though.
Let's discuss this a little longer - it will also give other people a chance to join. I don't think this needs to start off as a big PBM as we start with only 2 generals. I am going to create more starting generals for those who sign up before we begin but late comers may face a long wait before getting avatars.
[1]If we stick with the Archbishop idea, might I suggest he be called Merlin rather than Archbishop? It has more of a ring to it. (It's cheesy, but we're calling this Knights of the Roundtable, so let's go with it).
I was not planning on participating in this campaign due to various time constraints (yes, I admit it... I'm replaying the Baldur's Gate saga again) but I certainly have enough time to write up a short story and create some interesting quests every few weeks. So, you wouldn't be losing a player either way.
There's no need for the 'Holy Quests' to replace the quest system you created for the Round Table either. It seems to me that they could both operate perfectly well together. Regardless, it won't bother me one bit if you don't want to use it. I look forward to reading this campaign as it progresses... I have to admit, I'm a fan of British factions, no matter what game or mod they are in.
Oo, sounds good, can't wait to get this started!
(Oh man, for a minute I thought the PBM was going to be using the Arthurian mod. All these ideas would be awesome for it. Perhaps sometime in the future.)
There's no need for the 'Holy Quests' to replace the quest system you created for the Round Table either. It seems to me that they could both operate perfectly well together.
I was thinking of merging the two systems together: the knights will each (sequentially) get a quest. But it will be a Holy Quest from the Archbishop/Merlin. I don't think it's necessary to run the two simultaneously.
I was not planning on participating in this campaign due to various time constraints (yes, I admit it... I'm replaying the Baldur's Gate saga again) but I certainly have enough time to write up a short story and create some interesting quests every few weeks. So, you wouldn't be losing a player either way.
OK, I'll give other people a chance to comment, but I am inclined to take you up on your generous offer. ~:cheers:
BTW: what character are you running through Baldur's Gate and how far have you got? I took a fighter through BG1 and emerged from the Underdark with her in BG2, but then burnt out. I find the central story arc of BG2 about the best role-playing experience there is - I really like the whole Irenicus/rescue Imoen arc; the dreams and cut-scenes etc
Oh man, for a minute I thought the PBM was going to be using the Arthurian mod.
That's a thought. Maybe later when the mod is more done?
Galagros
10-06-2006, 00:32
Yeap, these ideas sound like fun. How many people do you want to start the PBM with? Would there really be enough resources to allow everyone to be active in the beginning with many people?
We have about five or so people signed up to be active players (not elders) right now. That's a good number for a small faction - I'm not really looking for more (mainly just waiting to hear from DukeofSerbia). I could create three more generals in the descr_strat.txt withouth unbalancing things too much. The missions and battles might come around a little slowly at first when we may have only one field army, but sooner or later all 5 should have a chance to be king. (Based on past experience, one or two may drop out before then but others may take their place).
BTW: what character are you running through Baldur's Gate and how far have you got? I took a fighter through BG1 and emerged from the Underdark with her in BG2, but then burnt out. I find the central story arc of BG2 about the best role-playing experience there is - I really like the whole Irenicus/rescue Imoen arc; the dreams and cut-scenes etc
My wife and I have been playing it multiplayer with one character each (starting at BG1) and we're about to go into the underdark. We're running a ton of mods that weren't around when we last played though (several years ago) so it's almost like a new game. When we're done, I'm actually going to do another runthrough with even more mods, including a few player made NPCs that look fun. Did you know they made a mod to let you play BG1 on the BG2 engine? That's right, BG1 with dual wielding and more than 640x480 resolution!
Avicenna
10-06-2006, 17:41
Could the knights have their own pieces of territory if they conquer it? Obviously the major cities like Rome go to the direct control of the king, but what if a knight conquers some Celtic held Scottish settlement (small one) as part of a quest, can he become some kind of a duke? He'd have to invest a lot of time of course, running his little estate... Perhaps he can even raise his own army!
I have thought about the Holy Quests a bit more and I think there is plenty of room to make it fully interactive for player discussion. How about instead of the Holy Quests simply being created for different Knights, they are made totally generic with no specific recipient. There would simply be a pool of Holy Quests available and the Round Table would have to figure out amongst themselves who will attempt them, if anyone.
If so, I would recommend that there always be several active Holy Quests, but never enough for every last general to have one. There needs to be a bit of competition for them if they are to remain prestigious, so let the Knights prove who is more worthy. Also, it should be easy to make a variety of difficulty levels for the quests with proportional rewards. For instance an easy quest could involve simply destroying a nearby army or marching to a place within the empire, but the reward would be a minor trait or retinue member. An extremely difficult quest could involve a very long trip through hostile terrain under a time limit and could even cause war with a nation that the empire does not want to be at war with. The reward for this in turn could be a major trait, a large quantity of gold, or some other unusual and rare bonus (is it possible to modify the age of a family member? That would make an extremely powerful reward for a Fountain of Youth type quest).
As quests are completed and the number of Knights increases, more Holy Quests will be created to keep the pool of available tasks steady. This would allow for a more continual allocation of quests to Knights and for extensive discussion of the quests in the in-character thread. Perhaps the Knights could vote on who gets what quests or perhaps the King could simply assign them. If we want to create some tension and crisis on a few occassions, there could even be a significant penalty for the entire Empire if the quest is not completed.
Example of Crisis Quest:
Story: Mordred has uncovered an ancient tome which describes a powerful weapon hidden in a far away land. He is attempting to obtain this weapon to use against the Knights.
Quest: Reach the mountain pass near Reallyreallyfarawaycity before X date.
Reward: Major trait bonus + other goodies.
Penalty for Failure: Mordred destroys Londinium (Camelot?) - All destroyable buildings in Londinium are destroyed (with funds gained from destruction deducted from treasury) and all units stationed in Londinium are disbanded.
Would I be able to be an Elder?
Interesting ideas, TinCow. :2thumbsup:
I am starting to have some doubts about letting knights move their own armies. I think it would slow things down too much. The Will of the Senate seems to be moving along pretty slowly right now, whereas the traditional PBMs romp along at a much faster pace. If the WoS had finished, then I can see the value in setting up a suitably grand replacement. But given that the two PBMs will move along simultaneously and this will be the smaller scale one, then I think just letting generals fight their own battles is enough. The other things in the back of my mind are the imminent arrival of M2TW and EB 0.8, which will surely lead to more PBMs being set up.
On the quests, I was intending for this PBM to move away from the politicking style of the WoS, back towards the more cooperative model of traditional PBMs. So, I am not keen on knights scrambling for quests. But I do see the need for player interaction and specifically to give the elders something to do. So, I am wondering about the following:
We keep TinCow's latest ideas about quests - there can be several on the go; they are not initially assigned to specific knights; they can vary in scope and rewards etc. But how about we say that the role of the Council of Elders is to assign the quests to knights? The King will then set up the knight with an army for the job, move him on the strategic map etc with the knight fighting the battles. Other knights will be busy serving the King in furthering the factions mundane economic and strategic goals.
Knights can petition elders with arguments for why they should be given a quest. Elders can also look at knights battlefield performance, stats, traits, experience etc in deciding who to give the quest to.
I would like there to be some sharing out of quests, so I propose that each knight only do one quest initially. This will make them full knights of the Round Table and give them a voice among the Council of Elders in deciding which other knights do what quests. When everyone has done a quest, then we can startover - perhaps the Elders along deciding who does the quest etc.
One other thing - I am inclined to make the rewards for the quest hidden; maybe just major or minor. The punishments might be public. That way, we will minimise self-interest among the knights, but everyone will know the stakes if we fail.
Zimfan40
10-14-2006, 21:37
Bump
Other commitments have made me put this idea on hold - I'm off for a couple of weeks travelling and then when I return M2TW (& probably EB) will soon be out. Maybe we should return to this when the Arthurian mod is a little more developed?
Apologies.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.