View Full Version : KotF KOTF mod
_Tristan_
07-01-2009, 15:10
In keeping with what existed in the previous installments of the Throne Room PBMs, it seems we will certainly need to add our own mod above/over the vanilla LTC mod.
Therefore, I propose we list here the different things we may need to change so that we can get the ball rolling that much faster :
1- making RGB availables (along the lines of LotR for the costs but with lower availability)
2- reviewing of the name file for France for added flavour
That is all I can see for now but you're welcome to add to the list.
As for point #2, could someone please upload the name file so that I may start reviewing it ?
Did you catch this post of Cecil's, Tristan?
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=2277005&postcount=8
I don't suppose anyone can make the minimod for the game? I can figure it out if needed although that may delay things a couple days...
I don't have enough time at home to make the mini-mod but looking at LotR-mod it seems that one would have to first reduce the upkeep of bodyguards in export_desc_unit.txt file. Maybe copy the generic North European entry to make a new entry for French bodyguards so that only we get the cheap BGs. Otherwise AI might spam them.
Also add rows to file export_descr_building.txt so that you can recruit the aforementioned BGs from all of the settlement walls / castles.
Edit: For both riding and walking bodyguards.
_Tristan_
07-02-2009, 10:56
I'd volunteer for the minimod but I lack the expertise required
AussieGiant
07-02-2009, 11:24
Ask FactionHeir. He's a bloody genius with that stuff.
Maybe he will help.
_Tristan_
07-02-2009, 11:34
PM sent to FH.
Thx AG, (why didn't I think of this ? :wall:)
AussieGiant
07-02-2009, 12:04
No probs. :2thumbsup:
I was the one who modded down the cost of the RBGs for LotR. I'd be happy to do it for KotF as well.
_Tristan_
07-02-2009, 16:09
Cool, then there remains only to mod the names...
I've started modifying the files pointed at by Cecil in the OOC thread, almost through with it but a contact with FH hints that I may need to mod the name strings bin file.
Could someone post said file ? I haven't reinstalled M2TW yet...
Tristan, this guide (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?p=1526725) seems to have everything you need, also check out the utility linked at the bottom.
names.txt (http://www.niksula.cs.hut.fi/~marpih/kotf/names.txt) from LTC Gold, you don't need the .bin, game creates it automatically from names.txt
Cecil XIX
07-02-2009, 19:52
I would like to propose an addition to the KotF mod.
During the debate between LTC and DLV, I noticed that the feature people seemed to like most about DLV was 'Zappa's Death Mod', which caused characters to die at any age from 50 to 110.
After looking at some research on twcenter.net (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=99991), it seems this is done by editing three variables in 'descr_campaign_db.xml'. I haven't been able to look at the file in question yet, but it seems we can just include a modified version of the file with KotF mod and have it overwrite the default file in LTC.
I would like permission to contact Zappa, who pioneered this discovery, and ask for his permission to include his work in our mod, as well as ask him if there could be any problems integrating it into LTC.
Is this acceptable to everyone/Zim?
GeneralHankerchief
07-02-2009, 19:57
I'd definitely like that. :yes:
Cecil XIX
07-02-2009, 20:17
Just to clarify, Zappa was able to deduce the formula for how likely a character is to die once they reach the 'dieable' age.
CDpY = (max_age_before_death - max_age) / (max_age - old_age) * 100%
With the latest numbers that would be:
181-180 / 180 - 40 = 1 / 140 = 0.7% chance of death per year
The default numbers are:
105-90 / 90 - 60 = 15 / 30 = ~50% chance of death per year... In other words, the vast majority will not make it past 62 years old, which is exactly what we have been seeing in the vanilla settings.
There's also some talk that the time scale a mod uses might make a difference. DLV, for which this research was conducted, progresses at 2 turns per year. LTC uses 1.5 turns per year. We could test this ourselves, but it's something I would ask Zappa about if possible.
The thing to remember is that while some, maybe most characters will live longer, some will die sooner than 61. We could use DLV's default range of 50-110, Zappa's preference of 18-100 (Not as bad as it sounds, each character only has a 1.22% of dieing per year) or whatever range we want. I wouldn't want to decide that by committee though, and would prefer DLV's default. Death at fifty would mean 68 turns of playtime if he comes of age at 61, which is pretty good.
Also, fun fact: A character who comes of age at 16 and lives to 110 lives for 188 turns. That's longer than the entirety of WotS, KotR and LotR!
AussieGiant
07-02-2009, 22:29
Why do we want this mod?
Cecil XIX
07-02-2009, 22:46
Assuming you're refering to my proposal, it's to make the age at which characters die less predictable. Right now the parameters are set up so that once characters reach age 60, they have a 50% chance of dieing each year, which is why you hardly see anyone live to 62.
If we change the three parameters to DLV's standard, this would allow characters to die at any age from 50 to 110.
This allows for some interesting RP scenarios, such as sons dieing of natural causes before their fathers, which historically could happen. Simply put, I think things will be more interesting if we don't know that our characters are going to die at 61, give or take a year.
EDIT: Experimental data from the link I provided is pretty interesting, and I'd be happy to do some tests myself if people think it's necessary.
There is a file - the descr_strat - which is read only once at the beginning of the game, but sets up the AIs starting forces and income. I don't know what Zim is planning regarding initial use of the console, but I wonder if we should either edit that file or use the console to buff up the AI forces and money at the start of the game?
With these games, we usually want to avoid rushing for OOC reasons, but there are strong IC incentives for expansion. Moreover, there is the imbalancing effect of us starting with a lot of RBGs. Fortunately, France is one of the few factions where starting off with a bunch of hotheaded knights has rather a nice historical flavour. However, RBGs are very powerful units in M2TW: they are heavy cavalry, which is uber anyway and scarce in the early period (and apparently can even dismount in Lusted's mod), but also have 2 Hit points and regenerate over time. If France starts with an extra dozen of those units at the start, it would have a big edge even if played by the AI let alone a bunch of humans striving to perform at the top of their game. I don't know what was done about about that in WotB, but some buffing of the AI might be in order. Perhaps we should increase the starting AI forces to compensate - e.g. if have one RBG, they should at least get a unit of knights or some such? But my inclination would be to buff them even more, so that their starting garrisons are at EB like levels making an initial rush is costly. e.g. rebel cities should have strong half stacks and real factions several full stacks (if you are going to start the 100 years war, build a few stacks first...).
I dont think it matters whether we buff up the starting forces by using the console or the descr_strat. But editing the file might make life a little easier when it comes to buffing the AI income. In KotR, we ended up manually giving the AI lots of money every turn using the console. This was flexible, but a little tedious. If we edit the king's purses for AI factions at the beginning to raise their default income, we can reduce some of the routine adjustments and save the console for finetunning.
I'd be willing to make the changes to the descr-strat in consultation with Zim and he could trial it before we kick off. I guess TC grappled with this issue when starting off WotB, so it would be interesting to hear his thoughts on this.
Cecil XIX
07-03-2009, 00:10
Interesting idea. I one-off increase of AI forces in Frances vicinity might cause balancing problems, but if it's for the english provinces in France then it shouldn't be a problem. Those will be almost completely surrounded by us anyway.
I definitely like the idea of editing the king's purse for AI factions. That would be easier to implement, and I suspect the AI would also have an easier time "seeing" what is going on; it might make better use of the money.
I'd be willing to make the changes to the descr-strat in consultation with Zim and he could trial it before we kick off. I guess TC grappled with this issue when starting off WotB, so it would be interesting to hear his thoughts on this.
Expansion was difficult to control in LotR (WotB is a different game that I have no part in, even though it is based on my LotR rule set). Early rapid expansion was expected and did occur a bit faster than I wanted. I eventually popped an event which spawned several large rebel armies to slow down this expansion, which effectively halted the expansion, but there was a lot of griping about the artificial nature of it. After that, expansion continued steadily, but it never really reached KotR levels. The AI in SS 4.1 was decent enough to keep inflicting regular (if infrequent) losses on us, and cities were lost and avatars killed without me doing anything to interfere in it. LotR was far, far more lethal than KotR or WotS, even if you exclude the intentional deaths, and it never had anything remotely like the Cataclysm.
I think the key to controlling expansion is not to do it by pumping the AI, but by creating mechanisms such that the players themselves reign it in. The proposed rules for KotF include some adjustments that might work towards that. As long as the mod itself has a decent AI (mods that give the AI extra cash every turn help here greatly), I think it will be fine. There are some players here who have no problems provoking civil wars and being nasty when their enemies are most vulnerable... :creep:
Lusteds AI, using LTC Gold, is far superior to that of SS4.1's, due to the fact Lusteds AI is designed around the changes made in LTC. Starting garrisons are pretty much nonexistent, and bodyguards can/will get mowed down by standard spearmen (face first charges can lose you a 1/3rd of your Bodyguard), let alone the advanced spearmen. Also, the AI is fairly aggressive in the beginning, and will seize nearby provinces almost immediately, and by turn 5 will have at least one or two full stacks of it's own.
Cecil XIX
07-03-2009, 00:52
The Throne Room has a bit of experience with LTC Gold, via my test PBEM 'Vassals & Valor'. It didn't last very long, but I did get two impressions that reiterate YLC's point.
1. When Ramses besieged Caen, the AI responded by having the garrison sally while moving almost the entire garrison of Angers to strike him from behind. Since it was Ramses it didn't work, but I was impressed regardless.
2. I also noticed that the AI was expanding pretty rapidly, although I can't remember any specifics.
Good, I suspect that combined with the game rules will be enough to keep the game interesting until the end without too many problems.
Cecil XIX
07-03-2009, 01:09
Now that I think about it though, we did retake France in less than ten turns. But that's parially because the V&V system resulting in the player faction gaining a bonus to it's income, and it may be that having to vote on expansion will also slow things down. Still, I don't think econ's suggestions could hurt us. The AI still needs all the help it can get!
KnightnDay
07-03-2009, 01:16
One way to give the AI better odds is to reduce the horse-based units allowed in our stacks. We had a limit in LOTR, and it could be pared down, especially at the beginning.
Cecil XIX
07-03-2009, 01:22
That's true, but at the same time we are playing the French. Mounted knights should play a big role.
Perhaps if we include RBG's as heavy cavalry, for say the first 30/40 years.
KnightnDay
07-03-2009, 02:12
That's a good idea. So the first conquests might involve more than one RGB in a stack. Increase the chance of someone getting off-ed early on. It also provides more opportunities for stories where multiple characters are involved.
Thanks, TinCow, that will help a lot. :yes:
Will you need to wait util you get Kingdoms to be able to modify the file?
So we have better French names and lowered upkeep and increased recruitability for rgbs being worked on. The age mod sounds fine. Is the general consensus that LTC already helps the AI enough? Adding a couple (or more) thousand to the King's Purse is easy enough.
GeneralHankerchief
07-03-2009, 07:55
I vote we give it a trial run (maybe one Chancellowship period) without any additional funds. We'll see how well we're doing and adjust accordingly.
Cecil XIX
07-03-2009, 08:50
That's more or less what happened with KOTR, right? That's fine, although I for one would be thrilled if the AI was actually defeating us in a war.
_Tristan_
07-03-2009, 09:25
Tristan, this guide (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?p=1526725) seems to have everything you need, also check out the utility linked at the bottom.
names.txt (http://www.niksula.cs.hut.fi/%7Emarpih/kotf/names.txt) from LTC Gold, you don't need the .bin, game creates it automatically from names.txt
Thanks...
There remains only to mod the descr_strat.txt file if someone would kindly upload it...
Can't seem to be able to download the utility... too bad... Scratch that, got it :2thumbsup:
AussieGiant
07-03-2009, 10:15
The age mod seems like a good idea.
As for the ongoing discussion, then any trial run would be excellent as it will more than likely allow me to get a copy of Kingdoms before we start.
Anything modification that we can do once and then leave the game to it's own devices is highly preferred in my opinion.
Anything that reduces admin work or artificial modification of the game also reduces the chance of errors. That's a must.
I vote we give it a trial run (maybe one Chancellowship period) without any additional funds. We'll see how well we're doing and adjust accordingly.
We can only edit the descr_strat before the game starts, so any adjustment later would have to be via the console. That's fine, it's just that editing the file saves a bit of donkey work for Zim.
Is the general consensus that LTC already helps the AI enough? Adding a couple (or more) thousand to the King's Purse is easy enough.
I think it is your call, but personally I dont see any downside to giving the AI cash. AFAIK, we've only lost one PBM to the AI in the throne room and I would be happy to see that increase. In KotR, I ended up giving about 10k to the AI each turn and I don't think we noticed it. I suspect it just stopped the AI lands being barren of units. It was the console spawned AI stacks that people noticed and even then, we mowed them down. Personally, I'd give an extra 5k or whatever to the King's Purse, so you can forget about it for a bit. Then adjust up (or down) via the console as you see fit. If our dozen or so extra RBGs feel like cornered rats at the beginning the game, it would be a plus in my view, but I doubt it will happen. Lusted's good at game balancing, but his mod was not balanced for the player to start off with lots of free RBGs.
5,000 sounds reasonable enough, and this is one of those rare bits of modding I can do on my own. :clown:
_Tristan_
07-03-2009, 10:55
Zim, once you've edited the descr_strat file, could you send it over to me so that I can make the necessary adjustments to the names of the starting characters ?
So that we don't end up with two mismatched files...
GeneralHankerchief
07-03-2009, 11:00
All right, 5,000 seems like a good compromise. If we need more, we'll just add it later on via the consule. :yes: As has already been said, it'll be nice to be challenged by the AI for a while.
AussieGiant
07-03-2009, 13:49
All right, 5,000 seems like a good compromise. If we need more, we'll just add it later on via the consule. :yes: As has already been said, it'll be nice to be challenged by the AI for a while.
hmph!!
5 grand. Come on guy's, have we forgotten already just how ridiculous we had to assist the AI in KotR's? I haven't played this mod, but I'd love to be struggling until even mid game with this PBM.
Giving the AI a nice fat 10k right from the beginning would be a little more concerning no?
I'd love for "us" as a playing group to be "concerned" about the AI. It would add an element of fear in something we have no control over...if it all gets too much then we can drop it back.
I just think we are trying to play it safe. Which we shouldn't do in my opinion.
_Tristan_
07-03-2009, 13:54
Tristan, this guide (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?p=1526725) seems to have everything you need, also check out the utility linked at the bottom.
names.txt (http://www.niksula.cs.hut.fi/%7Emarpih/kotf/names.txt) from LTC Gold, you don't need the .bin, game creates it automatically from names.txt
How did you find the LTC names.txt ? All I can find is the names.txt.strings.bin
I'm encountering some slight problems... While doing everything the guide asks me to, I can't seem to have the files match up in the utility...
_Tristan_
07-03-2009, 13:57
I just think we are trying to play it safe. Which we shouldn't do in my opinion.
Seconded... better be sorry than safe (at least when it concerns M2TW)...
Most players have proven themselves highly above average when fighting the AI in previous games and I think the AI will need all the help we can give it... Money is a good start :2thumbsup:
AussieGiant
07-03-2009, 14:06
Seconded... better be sorry than safe (at least when it concerns M2TW)...
Most players have proven themselves highly above average when fighting the AI in previous games and I think the AI will need all the help we can give it... Money is a good start :2thumbsup:
HIGHLY above average is perhaps even being too modest. It's amazing what you can accomplish when the pressure is on. I did things in KotR that I never dreamed of doing in normal game play.
I shocked the hell out of myself a few times.
It's an advanced group of players...and if some can't cut the standard then it creates a good level of differentiation between players.
HIGHLY above average is perhaps even being too modest. It's amazing what you can accomplish when the pressure is on. I did things in KotR that I never dreamed of doing in normal game play.
I shocked the hell out of myself a few times.
It's an advanced group of players...and if some can't cut the standard then it creates a good level of differentiation between players.
I have no idea where I stand really - maybe somewhere in the middle. I've beaten well over 2000 soldiers with 240 horse archers, I've beaten back well over 8000 mongol troops with a thousand poorly equipped militia in several sieges, yet I've had entire armies crumple under the weight of massed infantry charges, from being outnumbered with little in the way of support, and losing to superior ranged fire, always when I have a deficit in medium cavalry.
If the AI is able to catch me with superior troops, troops that have an inherent advantage over mine, and in superior numbers, and I have little in the way of cavalry or swordsmen, then the battle will either be Pyrrhic or will result in a devastating loss if I do not have terrain advantage.
Maybe thats the norm :shrug:, but I don't think it is.
AussieGiant
07-03-2009, 14:32
I have no idea where I stand really - maybe somewhere in the middle. I've beaten well over 2000 soldiers with 240 horse archers, I've beaten back well over 8000 mongol troops with a thousand poorly equipped militia in several sieges, yet I've had entire armies crumple under the weight of massed infantry charges, from being outnumbered with little in the way of support, and losing to superior ranged fire, always when I have a deficit in medium cavalry.
If the AI is able to catch me with superior troops, troops that have an inherent advantage over mine, and in superior numbers, and I have little in the way of cavalry or swordsmen, then the battle will either be Pyrrhic or will result in a devastating loss if I do not have terrain advantage.
Maybe thats the norm :shrug:, but I don't think it is.
No need to worry. You're in the highly advanced category YLC!! :balloon2:
What I want though, is for us to worry about the AI. That would make a nice change.
Thanks, TinCow, that will help a lot. :yes:
Will you need to wait util you get Kingdoms to be able to modify the file?
If someone gives me the files I can modify them now, but I won't have the files myself until the game arrives, nor will I be able to test it to see if it works.
Regarding giving the AI money, it might be worth looking for a mod. SS 4.1 used a system that gave the AI money based on the number of provinces it owned. 5,000 extra is a huge amount for a single province faction, but it's not much at all for a faction with 10 provinces. SS 4.1 scaled the AI bonus, so that the AI was always receiving enough to keep its armies strong, regardless of what size it was. I was hoping that LTC included that script as well, but if it doesn't perhaps there's a way for us to add that on as well.
No need to worry. You're in the highly advanced category YLC!! :balloon2:
What I want though, is for us to worry about the AI. That would make a nice change.
If troop quality is equal, and terrain isn't hugely favorable to one side or the other, and the Lusted AI has 2 to 1 ratio in numbers, it can be a flip of the coin sometimes for who wins.
If someone gives me the files I can modify them now, but I won't have the files myself until the game arrives, nor will I be able to test it to see if it works.
Regarding giving the AI money, it might be worth looking for a mod. SS 4.1 used a system that gave the AI money based on the number of provinces it owned. 5,000 extra is a huge amount for a single province faction, but it's not much at all for a faction with 10 provinces. SS 4.1 scaled the AI bonus, so that the AI was always receiving enough to keep its armies strong, regardless of what size it was. I was hoping that LTC included that script as well, but if it doesn't perhaps there's a way for us to add that on as well.
Campaign Map:
-1.5 Year per turn, and dates shown on campaign map again
-Building construction times and cost increased so as to fit in best with 1.5 year per turn campaign.
-Unit recruitment changed. Units now replenish slower and elite units have smaller recruitment pools. Also units no longer recruited from walls or from castle upgrade buildings.
-AI money script added in that scales according to difficulty. Ai only gets money boosts on H and VH difficulties, and then more on VH than on H. The money boost is also subtle and helps make the ai more challenging.
-Tweaks to Guilds which result in more varied Guilds in the campaign. There will no longer be the Thieves Guild spam the ai does in vanilla.
-English Armoured Sergeants, Dismounted Broken Lances, Dismounted Gothic Knights and Dismounted Mongol cavalry units added into the campaign
-AI recruits better armies. They are more balanced and have more higher tier units in them.
-More variance in the date at which the Mongols and Timurids appear.
-Merchants make more money.
-Inquisitors made less powerful.
-Increased movement distance for armies and agents.
-More recruitment slots in castles.
-More free upkeep slots in cities.
-Recruitable generals(including dismounted generals for some western factions).
-Some unused dismounted merc units added into the campaigns
-Pirate and Rebel spawn rates reduced.
-New population levels required for each level of settlement.
-Distance to captial penalty increased slightly.
-Religious Unrest increased.
-Corruption increased.
-Income from trade increased, and population growth from trade decreased.
-Population growth from farms increased.
I suggest we play on VH then :yes:
Based on that, if we play on VH I don't think we need to modify the King's Purse at all.
AussieGiant
07-03-2009, 15:06
excellent
_Tristan_
07-03-2009, 15:09
Based on that, if we play on VH I don't think we need to modify the King's Purse at all.
I fear that would not be enough considering SS had the same system IIRc and we steamrolled it all the same.
Perhaps giving the AI a boost of 5000 fl. (or whatever sum we deem reasonable) should be enough now that this has been brought to light.
Antoher solution if the GM is up to it is for him to manage all (or France neighbours' factions through the hotseat commands) so as to give the AI some good starting positions/ balanced stacks.
And why can't the GM even effectively take control of AI enemy factions once war is declared ?
The problem being that when on the offense, battles would have to be autoresolved on our part with the risks that entails.
Maybe limit the GM control to agents/cities/recruitment management, leaving the moves up the AI, thus mimicking the possible lack of communication between the governors and their generals in the field.
Just a thought.
The ball is in Zim's camp. :juggle2:
If we chose such a system, I may even offer Zim to be Assistant GM to help him manage the work load this would create.
I fear that would not be enough considering SS had the same system IIRc and we steamrolled it all the same.
Perhaps giving the AI a boost of 5000 fl. (or whatever sum we deem reasonable) should be enough now that this has been brought to light.
LTC Gold uses a more modified and newer version of Lusted's AI - not sure if this applies.
solution if the GM is up to it is for him to manage all (or France neighbours' factions through the hotseat commands) so as to give the AI some good starting positions/ balanced stacks.
And why can't the GM even effectively take control of AI enemy factions once war is declared ?
The problem being that when on the offense, battles would have to be autoresolved on our part with the risks that entails.
Maybe limit the GM control to agents/cities/recruitment management, leaving the moves up the AI, thus mimicking the possible lack of communication between the governors and their generals in the field.
Just a thought.
The ball is in Zim's camp. :juggle2:
If we chose such a system, I may even offer Zim to be Assistant GM to help him manage the work load this would create.
Due to how the game is coded, by taking control of a faction, and then giving it back, the AI resets, and then reorganizes it's priorities as if the game started.
LTC Gold's AI is also very competent at producing balanced stacks, and usually only a lack of a training facility prevents it from producing a unit.
I fear that would not be enough considering SS had the same system IIRc and we steamrolled it all the same.
I actually think the expansion rate in LotR was fine. It slowed down of its own accord after a while, and there were regular defeats and deaths to the AI right through to the end of the game. The AI problems aren't erased by money alone. If triple gold chevron armies could be killed in the Cataclysm, there's really nothing that the AI can throw at us that can't be overcome. IMO, the solution to the problem is internalizing conflict, not endlessly pumping the AI.
_Tristan_
07-03-2009, 15:32
The real first stop to expansion we witnessed was the creation of the rebel stacks in Anatolia and near Zagreb in LotR... Those gave me the creeps...
Otherwise, expansion was quite fast throughout the game in my opinion even if it was at a higher cost than in KotR.
I fully understand that pumping the AI full of cash is not the best of solutions but at least it provides it with the means to face us on a more equal footing.
The current draft rules specify hard campaign rather than very hard. (I would agree with this, if the aim is to stop diplomacy going sour so quick). I don't know the mod well enough to quantify the effects of this on AI money, but presumably it strengthens the case for increasing the payout to the AI. I'd be inclined to go for 10k per turn extra.
Cecil XIX
07-04-2009, 01:24
The current draft rules specify hard campaign rather than very hard. (I would agree with this, if the aim is to stop diplomacy going sour so quick). I don't know the mod well enough to quantify the effects of this on AI money, but presumably it strengthens the case for increasing the payout to the AI. I'd be inclined to go for 10k per turn extra.
Now that you mention it, I just realized Lusted's probably improved the Campaign AI enough that we *can* boost the Campaign Difficult up to very hard without eliminating diplomacy. And looking at the release info for LTC Gold:
Campaign AI
-Stronger alliances, and allies which help each other more. This results in alliance blocs forming which also change over the course of the game.
-More logical changes to faction standings. So you and the AI will no longer always end up terrible and untrustworthy.
-More logical diplomacy, so it is now a more useful tool in the campaign.
-Rarer Catholic - Islamic alliances.
-Better AI sense of survivability. AI factions are more likely to want peace/vassal if being beaten/beaten badly.
-Better AI garrisoning settlements, and use of forces to guard it's borders.
-More aggressive AI v Independent Factions(eg the rebels from vanilla), so the AI expands much better early on and so the AI can create powerful nations.
-Better AI invasions. It will now build up more before attacking, and attack with more stacks, and stacks which have more units in them.
-Catholic factions less likely to attack each other, but still plenty of wars going on to give that Total War and Medieval experience.
I say we should definitely play on VH/VH.
KnightnDay
07-04-2009, 03:17
I think VH/VH is fine, but I agree with TC, under those conditions we don't need to up the AI's purse. If your concern is the AI will still be disadvantaged, we can always operate with smaller stacks and weaker units.
... we can always operate with smaller stacks and weaker units.
I think that would be really hard to pull off in the game. In KotR, players tended not to like my proposals for half stack or "historical" armies - such restrictions are tedious to enforce and it's human nature not to be want to be handicapped. With a gamesmaster and events, there is a little more scope - the cataclysm made some people fight with awful armies, but the cataclysm was a major effort.
Cecil XIX
07-04-2009, 04:51
I think that would be really hard to pull off in the game. In KotR, players tended not to like my proposals for half stack or "historical" armies - such restrictions are tedious to enforce and it's human nature not to be want to be handicapped. With a gamesmaster and events, there is a little more scope - the cataclysm made some people fight with awful armies, but the cataclysm was a major effort.
Hey now, I hope you're not referring to Becker's Bohemian Militia. :clown:
I actually meant to have the game played at VH/VH...
I don't mind taking control of enemy factions during war but am wary about the supposed problems of turning them back to AI control.
Hey now, I hope you're not referring to Becker's Bohemian Militia. :clown:
Yeah, TC was really mean to poor old Becker. But at least he survived to leave the game in style. :bow:
Cecil XIX
07-04-2009, 15:16
Yeah, TC was really mean to poor old Becker. But at least he survived to leave the game in style. :bow:
Not that mean, at least he gave me a guy who could turn one of my spear militia into armored sergeants each turn. :yes:
One very minor issue I have been thinking of is how we describe the game turns in character.
Apparently, the mod has 1.5 years per turn but saying "next 1.5 years, I will attack X" sounds weird.
We had a similar issue in KotR - I ended up using the word "turn", so an edict might say "for five turns" - but "turn" is a very OOC and immersion breaking term.
I don't think we can use year as synonymous with turn, as in the bottom right hand corner of the interface, we will have the year shown and it will not increment with turns.
I am wondering about "season" as a more in character term. "Next season, I will attack X" or "Edict: the Chancellor will tread water for 10 seasons" etc. It does not sound too bad. I know a "season" may be more literally a quarter of a year, but I am thinking about a "campaign season", which is how you could regard a total war turn.
For some purposes, we could use years - "Dietrich built watch towers for 15 years" when we mean 10 turns. But often it will be more convenient to count in turns and when we do that season might be as a good a term as any.
What do people think? Turns? Seasons? Anyone got any better ideas?
BTW: I guess characters are still aging two years a turn in this mod? so our ages increment in a way that is out of sync with the game year but we can live with that.
Vladimir
07-06-2009, 04:51
Following the discussion in this forum reminds me of a couple forest and tree metaphors. Many players here may have more refined tastes but this is looking really convoluted. The only immersion I'm concerned about is how the interaction in the forum affects the play in the game. Turns, years, what does it matter? I'm happy if it's kept simple. :2thumbsup:
Ignoramus
07-06-2009, 07:43
I like the term season. I hated referring to turns - it's too gamey.
I think that a beefed up AI is necessary. In LotR, we slaughtered the AI, although that was partly due to HA's which we won't be able to get as the French. Ideally, it should be moderately difficult to conquer a province if there's spirit of cooperation between houses. Gaining that support, however, is another thing.
For those into stats, the unit stats in LTC seem to be very close - if not identical - to those in the "M2TW grand campaign with Kingdoms stats" mod. They are nicely presented in BrandyBarrel's FAUST for that mod:
http://www.mediafire.com/?4cgy1lcd1in
Although the stats don't tell the whole story (due to the effect of animations), compared to vanilla, I noticed:
(1) Spears get a big boost - armoured spears have the same ATT and DEF as DFK now :eek:
(2) Missiles have ranged attacks unaltered, but tend to have melee ATT and DEF reduced a lot
(3) Cavalry get a minor nerf in stats (but also smaller units)
(4) Swords get a major nerf
(5) France does not get many two handers, but those dismounted nobles look tasty.
Anyone know how the early/high/late thing works? Are there fixed dates at which higher tier units are recruitable? Or does it just affect the initial starting situation.
_Tristan_
07-06-2009, 11:02
Or does it just affect the initial starting situation.
That's it.
_Tristan_
07-06-2009, 14:31
Hereunder is the changelog to the different files :
1.0 :
Descr_strat.txt :
- Renamed Rheims to Reims
- Changed King Philip to Philippe
- Changed Bertrada de Montfort to Bertrade de Montfort
- Changed the heirs' names : Henry to Henri and Michiel to Charles
- Changed the order of the heirs (historically exact)
- Renamed Perrin Gassou as Alain de Rohan (Rennes)
- Renamed Guillemont de Lyon as Raymond de Provence (Dijon)
- Renamed Raoulet poitevin as Hugues de Champagne (Reims)
- Changed the king's purse for all AI factions (per Zim's request)
The three last were contemporaries of King Philippe and could be considered Duke in their own rights (particularly the first two)
Descr_names.txt :
- Deleted all surnames that didn't sound French enough
- Added some real French nobles and bourgeois surnames from the XIIth up to XVth century.
- Revised the firstnames list
- Added more than 170 references (first- and surnames)
2.0 :
- Changed the king's purse for all AI factions (per Zim's request)
Excellent! Many thanks Tristan! :yes:
_Tristan_
07-06-2009, 14:36
Now I have to check if it works....:wall:
Cecil XIX
07-06-2009, 15:14
Sounds pretty nifty Tristan, good job.
_Tristan_
07-06-2009, 17:09
Finally, i've managed to create all the files needed for the French Names Project...
I've only to playtest it but I see no reason why it wouldn't work...
:2thumbsup:
EDIT : Have to wait until tonight when I get home... :wall:
Ramses II CP
07-06-2009, 22:02
I have limited experience with LTC gold, but I'd say the main improvements to the AI are on the strategy map, in terms of tactics during actual combat it is still limited by it's failure to understand terrain and movement factors. The AI does a much better job guarding cities and bringing reasonable stacks to the fight, but it's just as easy to lead it around and surround it once the fight starts.
I don't have enough looks at the revised diplomacy to tell if it really matters at VH/VH, but I think we should play there. The road should be fairly difficult IMHO.
I will say that I'm very glad we don't have an HA heavy faction. It's just too easy. Also I recommend that people avoid charging directly into set formations of spearmen with their bodyguards. In LotR we had BGs that could butcher armies, which made it difficult to tell when your character was about to die. In LTC if you bog down after a frontal charge at spears above the militia level you will die. Pin them and hit them from behind, or run them until they'll break on impact, etc. Victories need to be won on morale more than brute force, more like what we did in KotR (when not facing 3x gold stacks).
:egypt:
. Victories need to be won on morale more than brute force, ...
I have not played the mod, but looking at the unit stats (compared to vanilla), that sounds like good advice. Morale values seem unaltered - the AI will run just as much as before. But those spears are sharp now.
Does anyone know how large the LTC is? I was not able to get to an acquaintance's comp with much better internet access today and was wondering about the feasibility of downloading it on dialup.
Does anyone know how large the LTC is? I was not able to get to an acquaintance's comp with much better internet access today and was wondering about the feasibility of downloading it on dialup.
Less then 500Mb if IIRC
86.4 MB in zipped form, apparently. It probably unzips to 500...
Anyone think any of the mini mods on the LTC site will do us any good?
This one looks neat but likely changes too much (and changes starting date)...maybe for SP sometime.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=166563
Anyone think any of the mini mods on the LTC site will do us any good?
The mini-mod you linked to is interesting - especially increased movement for agents (they crawl in M2TW) - but I agree it changes too much.
Personally, I think it would be best to stick to plain LTC. The mod is very polished (it's a gold version) and in its final form (Lusted is working at CA). Mini-mods will introduce some risk of instability, as they tend to be more works in progress. After player apathy, instability is the worst nightmare for a PBM (one thing that has put me off EB for a PBM - many players report getting so far and then get a crash they cannot go beyond). With the mini-mod for RTR that we used in WotS, IIRC we encountered a crash issue that fortunately we could work around but by the end were using an outdated version of the mod that was not available for download. It was worth using that mini-mod for the in-game Roman ranks, but since then we have developed our own ideas for ranks and titles.
_Tristan_
07-07-2009, 09:40
Updated the changelog for the KotF mod here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=2280482&postcount=64)
_Tristan_
07-07-2009, 17:37
:wall::wall::wall::wall::wall::wall:
I had almost everything working fine and now when I launch the campaign, I'm taken back to the Campaign Selection screen.
Seems there is a conflict caused by descr_strat. So I'm now doing a bit of retro-engineering to find the cause of the problem...
:wall::wall::wall::wall::wall::wall:
I had almost everything working fine and now when I launch the campaign, I'm taken back to the Campaign Selection screen.
Seems there is a conflict caused by descr_strat. So I'm now doing a bit of retro-engineering to find the cause of the problem...
It's not the coding, it's the QA that's the hard bit... hopefully you'll :smash: the bugs.
_Tristan_
07-08-2009, 11:24
Still working on it but it doesn't look good... Even when following the step by step guide...:wall:
Any people with modding experience are welcome to lend me a hand...
Any people with modding experience are welcome to lend me a hand...
You could try asking Factionheir for a hand - he was very able and helpful with kotrfix. You could also try to entice him to join us while you are at it...
I can look at it if you can't find a real modder, but I can only offer enthusiasm as opposed to experience.
FH is philosophically opposed to Securom last I heard (too bad, I'd love to have him...) but he could certainly help with the mod if so inclined. I can take a look at it, although I'm not a great modder. I do have some programming experience, I'm guessing some really tiny problem is causing your crash, it always seemed to be a single line or punctuation that crashed our programs in school.
Ibn-Khaldun
07-08-2009, 11:51
What error message do you get?
_Tristan_
07-08-2009, 14:16
No error per se, the game just won't launch even though using the utility tool listed in the guide I managed to get 0 errors...
If someone is able to mod the name files, I can send them the list of French names I have compiled...
The main problem as I see it is not having access to the Vanilla names.txt file (used by LTC) and not wanting to unpack the files.
Whenever I try to create a names.txt files from scratch, it just won't be recognised but updating a pre-existing one works.
So if anyone would care to upload a version of the Vanilla names.text file I might be able sto solve all the problems affecting my modding...
It just seemed so simple to start with...
AussieGiant
07-08-2009, 14:36
Securom...did MTWII have securom?
Securom...did MTWII have securom?
Only Kingdoms has it.
AussieGiant
07-08-2009, 17:20
Only Kingdoms has it.
:wall: I hope this doesn't screw my machine up.
_Tristan_
07-08-2009, 17:23
I never knew anyone who has had his machine screwed by Securom. Mine is doing fine though I installed from the start.
Ramses II CP
07-08-2009, 18:23
I have known people who had their machines screwed up by Securom, but that was about four years ago. The latest versions are nothing to sneeze at, but there is a reliable procedure for uninstalling the one that comes with Kingdoms now. A procedure that you can find with a quick search around the 'net. I personally wouldn't attempt it before I was ready to uninstall the game as well, although obviously it's been done by a part of the gaming community it would be ill advised to discuss here.
:egypt:
No error per se, the game just won't launch even though using the utility tool listed in the guide I managed to get 0 errors...
If someone is able to mod the name files, I can send them the list of French names I have compiled...
The main problem as I see it is not having access to the Vanilla names.txt file (used by LTC) and not wanting to unpack the files.
Whenever I try to create a names.txt files from scratch, it just won't be recognised but updating a pre-existing one works.
So if anyone would care to upload a version of the Vanilla names.text file I might be able sto solve all the problems affecting my modding...
It just seemed so simple to start with...
If you are still having trouble, maybe you could upload the current version of your mod so that people could have a look at? (And the list of new French names you wanted adding, in case it is better to start from scratch.) I will root around for the names.txt, although perhaps like you, I am not too enthusiastic about unpacking 7GB of largely redundant files.
AussieGiant
07-08-2009, 22:16
I have known people who had their machines screwed up by Securom, but that was about four years ago. The latest versions are nothing to sneeze at, but there is a reliable procedure for uninstalling the one that comes with Kingdoms now. A procedure that you can find with a quick search around the 'net. I personally wouldn't attempt it before I was ready to uninstall the game as well, although obviously it's been done by a part of the gaming community it would be ill advised to discuss here.
:egypt:
Thanks Ramses. No I'm not going to start that whole topic again. I just wanted to check before I installed that I remembered correctly.
A well. I guess I'll take the plunge.
I think my version is unpacked. At least I used to unpack everytime I had to reinstall. Where would that file be?
According to the guide Rowan linked to, the key files needed are:
1.) descr_names.txt – located in MTW2/data
2.) names.txt.strings.bin – located in MTW2/data/text
If you haven't got them (like me), you haven't unpacked.
I think I've looked in those folders before...
Ah well, I'll run the unpacker right now.
Done, getting in contact with Tristan now about the best way to get those files to him...
AussieGiant
07-09-2009, 11:43
Just a point.
Once all this mod action is set, TC did a very good step by step guide with link to patches and mod.
As a control point, there was an in game check you could do to determine if you had installed everything correctly.
At one time the check was to going into the game and go to Arnold's avatar card and determine some specific value. I have forgotten exactly, but it would be a very good idea to do the same.
You've got 20 plus players having to install about 5 to 6 different things from scratch.
We need a baseline control mechanism.
I very much believe that keeping all important information (such as rules and installation instructions) in a single stickied thread is very helpful to the game. Feel free to copy the format of the LotR info thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=103874), as I think that one worked pretty well.
Tristan, how is the names mini-mod coming on?
If you are still stuck, I would be happy to take a look at it over the weekend. If you have hit a brick wall, just zip and upload what you have (original files, modded files, word file specifying any new names you want to add or old names to delete), then I could have a go. Uploading might even entice a modder to help us out.
_Tristan_
07-10-2009, 10:08
In fact, everything should be working but it is not...
The game laucnhes itself but none of the avatars in game have names... Other factions work fine (they were left untouched)...
The problem may lie in the fact that I have deleted the names used by LTC and Vanilla (such as Gassou or Michiel) and inserted new ones. That must cause a conflict with the descr_strat file...
Today, if I can take some time I will try and re-instate the Vanilla names and see if it works... If that fail, I'll upload the excel spreadsheet with the revised French names to see if someone can get it to work.
OK, thanks, good luck. :2thumbsup:
... If that fail, I'll upload the excel spreadsheet with the revised French names to see if someone can get it to work.
If you do, please can you zip it and include the original names txt files that Zim sent you? :bow:
_Tristan_
07-10-2009, 10:36
I'll make everything available...
_Tristan_
07-10-2009, 11:51
I finally gave up... What galls me the most is that I managed to make it work up to a point and then it went astray (follish me for not making a backup...)
So here (http://rapidshare.com/files/254136142/KotF_name_mod.rar.html) are the files needed for the work to be finished. I hope someone with better modding abilities can give a shot at it...
Sorry to have kept you waitng so long for such a result...
I feel relatively confident that I can do the modding required, since I was the one who did most of the editing for LotR, however I cannot do it until I get Kingdoms. Apparently it has already shipped and was in Las Vegas yesterday, so hopefully I will get it early next week. If no one is able to do the work before then, I will do it.
In thta case I'm going to start working on some of the other elements of the mod in the meantime to avoid holding things up too much. Assuming everything works quickly, we can expect to start regruiting rgbs within the day after the mod is finished (with some testing to make sure it doesn't crash, I'll play a couple games and just hit end turn again and again...).
In thta case I'm going to start working on some of the other elements of the mod in the meantime to avoid holding things up too much.
OK, I will look at modding the names this weekend.
..I'll play a couple games and just hit end turn again and again...).
Good idea. One thing to consider is hitting end turn for, say, 10 turns and just seeing the state of AI expansion.
It may be that you decide it is better for us to start the game on turn 10, having given the AI a chance to build up, rather than on turn 2.
Of course, if the English hold Paris by turn 10, you can forget that idea. But it would intriguing to find out.
[If you want to try this, I would only spawn the RGBs on turn 9 and use the console to remove any traits the starter generals get from inactivity.]
The bottom line
Like Tristan, I have tried to mod the names but without much success. I can only change the starter character names to others already recognised by LTC. I cannot introduce new names (and don't want to drop names given that constraint). The gory details follow after the first half of this post.
Personally, I do not think we should let a naming mod hold up this PBM. No offence to anyone, but I fear only Tristan and maybe TheFlax would notice much whether or not we use it. Unless someone with modding skills can do what we want in the next few days, my recommendation would be to let Zim make his other modifications and then spawn the RBGs, so the game can start.
The very little I have done is:
- Changed King Philip to Philippe
- Changed the heirs' names : Henry to Henri and Michiel to Charles
- Renamed Guillemont de Lyon as Raymond de Provence
- Renamed Raoulet poitevin as Hugues de Champagne
- Renamed Perrin Gassou as Alan le Gris [1]
The descr_strat and descr_names with this changes for Zim are in KotF_v0.1.zip:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=199&id=4911
[1]With Perrin Gassou, neither Alain nor de Rohan - Tristan's preferred names - are in the game. I have made Alan available (it's a female name for one faction already) but am not sure which if any existing surname is better than Gassou. I plumped for Alan le Gris, as grey is suitably ambiguous that it should not hinder role-playing. However, Tristan could easily pick another surname from the descr_names and we could use that.
Rheims to Reims is something we can do in game.
----
The gory details
It is straightforward to change King Philip to King Philippe in the descr_names.txt and descr_strat.txt but I think that is because Philippe is already present in the existing names.txt.strings.bin, so that bin file does not need to be recompiled.
However, I can't change Bertrada to Bertrade. I think this is because Bertrade is a "new" name and so not in the existing names.txt.strings.bin.
From what I understand, if you want new names, you need to add them to the names.txt and then the game recompiles a new names.txt.strings.bin.
But LTC lacks a names.txt.
So I back up - keep all references to Bertrada and just see if I can add a new names.txt in order for the game to compile a new names.txt.strings.bin. I take the names.txt that was linked to at the beginning of this thread (by Rowan, IIRC) and delete the existing names.txt.strings.bin. But then starting a new campaign does not work. I select france press start and get kicked back to the menu for selecting an era. I notice that the names.txt.string.bin generated is a very different size (581 kb) from the one that comes with the mod (381 kb).
If I have understood everything, my conclusion is that the names.txt file linked to by Rowan is not the LTC names.txt file. And using the vanilla names.txt file is not going to work because:
... Lusted's descr_strat.txt uses custom names now.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?p=1795642#post1795642
So I am a little stuck. We can switch around names already listed in LTC's files - like Philippe - but we can't introduce new ones like Bertrade.
Hehehhe...I can help with this, and as I mentioned before, it's fairly easy.
LTC comes with the names.tx.string.bin, correct? If so, download python 2.5, then use Alpacas .strings.bin converter to turn that file into a normal .txt file - this will allow the editing of it with ease.
I have no real modding talent though :shame::sweatdrop:
LTC comes with the names.tx.string.bin, correct? If so, download python 2.5, then use Alpacas .strings.bin converter to turn that file into a normal .txt file - this will allow the editing of it with ease.
Thanks. :bow: I will give it another go tonight.
_Tristan_
07-11-2009, 13:20
YLC, if you can submit to me the names.txt file that you managed to extract from the strings.bin file, I'm sure I can everything to work just fine...
YLC, if you can submit to me the names.txt file that you managed to extract from the strings.bin file, I'm sure I can everything to work just fine...
Tristan, this is the unmodded LTC names.txt file I extracted following YLCs tip:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=199&id=4913
Good luck with it. I suggest you start small - just change Bertrada to Bertrade[1] and see if you can start a campaign. Then make small incremental changes.
If you get stuck, I will go back to it.
Good hunting! :bow:
[1]In names.txt, descr_names.txt and descr_strat.txt
_Tristan_
07-11-2009, 14:15
Good luck with it. I suggest you start small - just change Bertrada to Bertrade[1] and see if you can start a campaign. Then make small incremental changes.
[1]In names.txt, descr_names.txt and descr_strat.txt
This is how I went with it when I saw that all else failed but not having the right file for the job was possibly the reason for failure...
...not having the right file for the job was possibly the reason for failure...
Fingers crossed - the file I extracted is a different size from the one I tried to work with before, so maybe it will work.
_Tristan_
07-11-2009, 21:43
MOD IS UP AND RUNNING !!
Big thanks to Zim for his trust :bow:
Many thanks to Econ21 and YLC for their help in achieving that result..:2thumbsup:
Hereunder is the new changelog to the different files :
1.0 :
Descr_strat.txt :
- Changed King Philip to Philippe
- Changed Bertrada de Montfort to Bertrade de Montfort
- Changed the heirs' names : Henry to Henri and Michiel to Charles
- Changed the order of the heirs (historically exact)
- Renamed Perrin Gassou as Alain de Rohan (Rennes)
- Renamed Guillemont de Lyon as Raymond de Provence (Dijon)
- Renamed Raoulet poitevin as Hugues de Champagne (Reims)
- Changed the king's purse for all AI factions (per Zim's request)
The three last were contemporaries of King Philippe and could be considered Duke in their own rights (particularly the first two)
Descr_names.txt :
- Deleted all surnames that didn't sound French enough
- Added some real French nobles and bourgeois surnames from the XIIth up to XVth century.
- Revised the firstnames list
- Added more than 170 references (first- and surnames)
2.0 :
Descr_strat.txt :
- Changed the king's purse for all AI factions (per Zim's request)
3.0 : working edition
- made all changes appear ingame
Descr_strat.txt :
- Modded the ages of King Philippe' s children per GM request : Louis (unchanged, 21), Constance (now 16, not 19), Henri (now 12 not 2), Charles (now 8 not 1).
I played a few turns and everything seems to be working fine.
All that remains is modding the part about the age of avatars that Cecil proposed and maybe have someone put all into some kind of installer like LotR or the KotRfix of FH.
Northnovas
07-12-2009, 00:21
So how does this work we download LTC Mod and then there will be a file add on to get what Tristan changed?
So how does this work we download LTC Mod and then there will be a file add on to get what Tristan changed?
That's pretty much it.
We also need to make the changes to have the RBGs be recruitable. This is done by making RBGs recruitable from all levels of walls, since even the lowest level settlement has the most basic walls. The RBGs also need to have their recruitment cost and upkeep set to 1 florin each, and the wages need to be set to 100 instead of 200. This is required because otherwise the expense of running ~30 RBGs from turn 1 will bankrupt the faction immediately. As in LotR, wages can be restored to full once we have expanded enough to afford it (probably after two terms have passed).
To add RBGs to all walls, open this file: export_descr_buildings.txt
And add this line:
recruit_pool "NE Bodyguard" 3 3.00 1 0 requires factions { france, }
After the line:
recruitment_slots X
In ALL of the building core_building sections.
To adjust RBG hiring costs, open this file: export_descr_unit.txt
Scroll down to the section for NE Bodyguard, and change the stat_cost line to:
stat_cost 1, 1, 1, 120, 95, 1060, 1, 200
To adjust wages, open this file: descr_character.txt
Scroll down to wage_base (close to the top) and change the 200 to 100.
Ibn-Khaldun
07-12-2009, 06:03
I would propose adding a french bodyguard unit into the game. Just using "NE Bodyguard" unit as the basis.
Just copy-paste it's entry in edu file. Rename this new unit as French Bodyguard(or what ever you like) and remove france from the NE Bodyguard ownership line.
In LotR it was easy to change this since Byzantine bodyguards were used by one faction alone but here you need to change things a bit more.
EDIT: I think LTC does not change Vanilla M2TW edu entries... So, you'll have to create a unit like this(changes in bold):
type French Bodyguard
dictionary NE_Bodyguard ; General's Bodyguard
category cavalry
class heavy
voice_type General
banner faction main_cavalry
banner holy crusade_cavalry
soldier NE_Bodyguard, 16, 0, 1
mount barded horse
mount_effect elephant -4, camel -4
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, very_hardy, can_withdraw, general_unit
formation 2, 4.4, 3, 6, 2, square
stat_health 2, 0
stat_pri 13, 8, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, spear, 25, 1
;stat_pri_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 14, 4, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, sword, 25, 1
;stat_sec_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 7, 5, 4, metal
;stat_armour_ex 7, 8, 0, 0, 5, 4, 4, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 5
stat_ground 0, -2, -4, 0
stat_mental 11, normal, trained
stat_charge_dist 45
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 1, 1, 120, 95, 820, 1, 200
armour_ug_levels 3, 4
armour_ug_models NE_Bodyguard, NE_Bodyguard_ug1
ownership france
era 0 france
era 1 france
;unit_info 13, 0, 32
And in export_descr_buildings.txt you have to add this new unit just like TC suggested above.
Also, don't forget to chance starting general units in descr_strat.txt file!
New unit is necessary because(as someone explained it before IIRC) otherwise AI factions can use these changes as well.
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 08:27
I can make all the changes necessary in the above listed files once I get home and add them to the directory of files I have already compiled but not before tonight (working on a Sunday :wall:)
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 13:48
Updated changelog to the different files :
1.0 :
Descr_strat.txt :
- Changed King Philip to Philippe
- Changed Bertrada de Montfort to Bertrade de Montfort
- Changed the heirs' names : Henry to Henri and Michiel to Charles
- Changed the order of the heirs (historically exact)
- Renamed Perrin Gassou as Alain de Rohan (Rennes)
- Renamed Guillemont de Lyon as Raymond de Provence (Dijon)
- Renamed Raoulet poitevin as Hugues de Champagne (Reims)
- Changed the king's purse for all AI factions (per Zim's request)
The three last were contemporaries of King Philippe and could be considered Duke in their own rights (particularly the first two)
Descr_names.txt :
- Deleted all surnames that didn't sound French enough
- Added some real French nobles and bourgeois surnames from the XIIth up to XVth century.
- Revised the firstnames list
- Added more than 170 references (first- and surnames)
2.0 :
Descr_strat.txt :
- Changed the king's purse for all AI factions (per Zim's request)
3.0 : working edition
- made all changes appear ingame
Descr_strat.txt :
- Modded the ages of King Philippe' s children per GM request : Louis (unchanged, 21), Constance (now 16, not 19), Henri (now 12 not 2), Charles (now 8 not 1).
I played a few turns and everything seems to be working fine.
All that remains is modding the part about the age of avatars that Cecil proposed and maybe have someone put all into some kind of installer like LotR or the KotRfix of FH.
4.0 : RGB modding
-created the French Bodyguard unit in edu file as well as French Late Bodyguard and Dismounted French Bodyguard like this :
type French Bodyguard
dictionary NE_Bodyguard ; General's Bodyguard
category cavalry
class heavy
voice_type General
banner faction main_cavalry
banner holy crusade_cavalry
soldier NE_Bodyguard, 16, 0, 0.5
mount barded horse
mount_effect elephant -4, camel -4
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_withdraw, general_unit
move_speed_mod 1.1
formation 2, 4.4, 3, 6, 2, square
stat_health 2, 0
stat_pri 11, 7, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, spear, 25, 1
;stat_pri_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 12, 3, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, sword, 25, 1
;stat_sec_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 5, 5, 6, metal
;stat_armour_ex 5, 6, 0, 0, 5, 6, 6, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 7
stat_ground 0, 0, 0, 2
stat_mental 11, normal, trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 1, 1, 95, 225, 960, 1, 280
armour_ug_levels 3, 4
armour_ug_models NE_Bodyguard, NE_Bodyguard_ug1
ownership france
era 0 france
era 1 france
;unit_info 11, 0, 32
recruit_priority_offset 20
type French Late Bodyguard
dictionary NE_Late_Bodyguard ; General's Bodyguard
category cavalry
class heavy
voice_type General
banner faction main_cavalry
banner holy crusade_cavalry
soldier NE_Late_Bodyguard, 16, 0, 0.5
mount armoured horse
mount_effect elephant -4, camel -4
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_withdraw, general_unit, general_unit_upgrade
move_speed_mod 1.1
formation 2, 4.4, 3, 6, 2, square
stat_health 2, 0
stat_pri 11, 7, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, spear, 25, 1
;stat_pri_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 12, 3, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, sword, 25, 1
;stat_sec_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 7, 5, 5, metal
;stat_armour_ex 7, 8, 0, 0, 5, 5, 5, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 8
stat_ground 0, 0, 0, 2
stat_mental 11, normal, trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 1, 1, 95, 225, 960, 1, 280
armour_ug_levels 5, 6
armour_ug_models NE_Late_Bodyguard, NE_Late_Bodyguard_ug1
ownership france
era 2 france
;unit_info 11, 0, 34
recruit_priority_offset 20
type Dismounted French Bodyguard
dictionary Dismounted_NE_Bodyguard ; Bodyguard
category infantry
class heavy
voice_type Heavy
banner faction main_infantry
banner holy crusade
soldier Dismounted_NE_Late_Bodyguard, 16, 0, 0.7
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, very_hardy, can_withdraw, general_unit
formation 1.2, 1.2, 2.4, 2.4, 3, square
stat_health 2, 0
stat_pri 14, 3, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, sword, 25, 1
;stat_pri_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 0, 0, no, 0, 0, no, melee_simple, blunt, none, 25, 1
;stat_sec_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 7, 5, 5, metal
;stat_armour_ex 7, 0, 0, 0, 5, 5, 5, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 8
stat_ground 1, -2, 3, 4
stat_mental 11, disciplined, trained
stat_charge_dist 15
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 1, 1, 55, 125, 510, 1, 150
armour_ug_levels 5
armour_ug_models Dismounted_NE_Late_Bodyguard
ownership france
;unit_info 14, 0, 34
recruit_priority_offset 15
- Removed France from NE Bodyguard, NE Late Bodyguard and NE Dismounted Bodyguard (edu file)
- Added French Bodyguard to all building_core buildings and made other BG types available where NE ones where (edb file)
- reduced wages of character to 100 in the descr_character file
- Edited descr_strat file to take changes into account
Will have to playtest the changes.
What about the Age mod that Cecil submitted. Should we add it in ?
New unit is necessary because(as someone explained it before IIRC) otherwise AI factions can use these changes as well.
That's a lot of work for no reason. The "requires factions { france, }" bit of the recruitment lines prevents any faction except for France from getting NE Bodyguards from those structures.
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 14:40
That's a lot of work for no reason. The "requires factions { france, }" bit of the recruitment lines prevents any faction except for France from getting NE Bodyguards from those structures.
In fact, it wasn't so time-consuming... if it works...
Plus, wouldn't the AI get a discount to its BG due to the modding of the edu file ?
Plus, wouldn't the AI get a discount to its BG due to the modding of the edu file ?
Yes, that is true, and something I had forgotten about. Go ahead with the French Bodyguards instead of the NE Bodyguards.
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 14:44
Will playtest tonight at the earliest...
Will also upload the files from both the name mod and RGB mod so that people can begin fooling around with them
Ibn-Khaldun
07-12-2009, 14:52
I think it should work. The only thing that would be missing are the unit cards but it's easy to rename NE Bodyguard unit cards for France. (Hope you have back ups of KotF mod!)
Here is an icon for KotF, like I made for LotR. In this case, it is the Fleur-de-lis. Hopefully deguerra can use this to make one of his great auto-installers with a launch shortcut.
http://www.mizus.com/pbm/kotficon.zip
Ibn-Khaldun
07-12-2009, 14:56
I liked LotR icon. I'm using it even now instead of SS icon! :2thumbsup:
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 14:59
Here is the link (http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=93a964e75fb48987a0f2f20c509059d9e04e75f6e8ebb871) to the uploaded files. Be sure to copy the names files first then the RGB one as the descr_strat file from the name_mod has been modified for the RGBs.
And nice icon, btw :2thumbsup:
After looking at the icon again, I decided to make a second one. It's the same as the first, but instead of a white background, it has a transparent background. The second icon doesn't look as good on light backgrounds, but it does look better (IMO) on darker backgrounds. This zip has both versions:
http://www.mizus.com/pbm/kotificons.zip
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 15:17
And why not put it on a field of blue ? :yes:
deguerra
07-12-2009, 15:24
Here is an icon for KotF, like I made for LotR. In this case, it is the Fleur-de-lis. Hopefully deguerra can use this to make one of his great auto-installers with a launch shortcut.
http://www.mizus.com/pbm/kotficon.zip
:sweatdrop: I am afraid you have me mistaken. I am a man of many...well some, talents, but making installers is unfortunately not one of them. :embarassed:
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 15:57
I think it was Rowan who prvided us with the LotR mod installer (IIRC)
And why not put it on a field of blue ? :yes:
Sure thing. This zip now has 3 icons in it: white, blue, and transparent:
http://www.mizus.com/pbm/3kotficons.zip
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 16:16
I cannot choose between the blue and transparent ones... Both look quite cool !!
I'll see to making an executable version tomorrow, too busy tonight.
And it's just awesome to see all the things coming together re: the mod.
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 20:23
RGM MOD IS WORKING !!
Get ready to ROOOOOOOOLL !!!
Only problem I noticed is that we can only recruit 8 RBG on turn 1, and 6 more on turn 2 unless we conquer settlements in the first turn...
so it goes like this : turn 1 = 8 RBGs
turn 2 = 14
turn 3 = 19
turn 4 = 24 and 5 more/turn henceforth
I keep asking but get no answer : should we use the Age mod that introduces some variable into the death date of our avatars (as proposed by Cecil) ?
Ibn-Khaldun
07-12-2009, 20:40
Perhaps you should change recruitment time from 1 to 0? I think then this problem would be solved.
So, the French bodyguards worked? did you try to fight some battles with them too? Just to make sure everything is working?
OverKnight
07-12-2009, 20:42
There's got to be a work around, as I remember that TC was able to recruit a massive amount of RGBs in LotR in just one turn.
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 20:47
There's got to be a work around, as I remember that TC was able to recruit a massive amount of RGBs in LotR in just one turn.
I'll be happy to implement it once it has been pointed to me...
Will try some battles right now to see how those BG work...
_Tristan_
07-12-2009, 20:58
... And they work just fine... :charge:
Ibn-Khaldun
07-12-2009, 21:02
Good! That means we are ready! :2thumbsup:
Did you tried with 0 recruitment time thing as well??
OverKnight
07-12-2009, 21:18
I'll be happy to implement it once it has been pointed to me...
I'm afraid that this is outside my area of expertise. I searched around the old LotR threads for info pertaining to the the LotR mod, particularly RGBs, but I was unable to find anything concrete.
I know what the problem is. It requires that additional modding be done temporarily for the single turn that spawns the RBGs, and that modding then has to be undone after the RBGs have been spawned. Essentially, you have to pump the maximum recruitment slots for all settlements to 9, pump RBG spawn rate to 9, spawn as many RBGs as you can, then return the limits to their previous level.
Ignoramus
07-13-2009, 03:34
What about the "True Bloodlines" and random dying mods? I think the latter is especially needed.
I've got directions from Cecil on the age mod. I can try to implement tonight if we're ready.
Do we have dismounted guards as well? And how are we gonna get everyone's rgbs? Is it easy to do what was done (and then undone) in LOTR for turn one?
I've got directions from Cecil on the age mod. I can try to implement tonight if we're ready.
Do we have dismounted guards as well? And how are we gonna get everyone's rgbs? Is it easy to do what was done (and then undone) in LOTR for turn one?
I believe so - also, can we have the option of dismounted versus mounted? Or would the armor for the dismounted bodyguards be to anachronistic?
Cecil XIX
07-13-2009, 05:58
Dismounted bodyguards are already implemented into the mod. They are completely seperate units from mounted bodyguards, and I believe they can only be recruited with the highest level of castle barracks.
_Tristan_
07-13-2009, 07:25
Dismounted bodyguards are already implemented into the mod. They are completely seperate units from mounted bodyguards, and I believe they can only be recruited with the highest level of castle barracks.
I can confirm this having modded especially for France.
_Tristan_
07-13-2009, 11:35
OK, I've successfully modded the game to allow for recruitment of 9 RBGs per settlement on France's 1st turn...:2thumbsup:
So if Zim is OK, I hold the save at his disposal for general release. If I can manage to find time, I can also take screenshots ans upload them here to help people in getting accointed with France noblemen.:yes:
EDIT : Only problem that remains to be solved is that the English diplomat comes forward in the AI turn with a proposal for trade rights. I cannot take screenshots of the avatars without either accepting/refusing the offer. What should I do ?
OK, I've successfully modded the game to allow for recruitment of 9 RBGs per settlement on France's 1st turn...:2thumbsup:
So if Zim is OK, I hold the save at his disposal for general release. If I can manage to find time, I can also take screenshots ans upload them here to help people in getting accointed with France noblemen.:yes:
EDIT : Only problem that remains to be solved is that the English diplomat comes forward in the AI turn with a proposal for trade rights. I cannot take screenshots of the avatars without either accepting/refusing the offer. What should I do ?
I say go ahead and accept it. We'll be breaking it soon enough anyway. :laugh4:
Ignoramus
07-13-2009, 11:58
I would laugh if the English managed to take Paris.
_Tristan_
07-13-2009, 12:02
I would laugh if the English managed to take Paris.
Over my dead body... (which would cetainly be the case anyway :laugh4:)
I say go ahead and accept it. We'll be breaking it soon enough anyway. :laugh4:
My first impulse but I'd like to wait for Zim...
The initial executable version is here: KotFMod1.3.exe (http://www.niksula.cs.hut.fi/~marpih/kotf/KotFMod1.3.exe)
I have only done very preliminary testing. The paths Tristan had specified in the readme-files differed a bit from what they were on my installation so I had to do some (very minor) guesswork. :sweatdrop:
After installing the mod I can start a French early campaign and there are General's Bodyguards recruitable from towns and all levels of castles and have 1 cost and 1/turn upkeep . Bodyguards (on foot) from top of the line barracks have regular cost and upkeep, and are not available initially. Underaged FM's are older. Initial RBG Gassou is now Champagne or something.
Tristan: Could you test the exe by choosing an empty folder instead of M2TW one at the prompt and checking that all the correct files are going to all the correct places?
All others: Proceed at your own risk :skull:
I'd say it doesn't really matter. I suppose we might as well have at least one trade agreement when KOTF starts. :clown:
Not that it will last long.
My first impulse but I'd like to wait for Zim...
_Tristan_
07-13-2009, 22:21
OK then...
I will experiment with Rowan installer and play the first turn... We are nearing midnight here so don't expect the save and mugshots before tomorrow...
OK then...
I will experiment with Rowan installer and play the first turn... We are nearing midnight here so don't expect the save and mugshots before tomorrow...
If Rowan's installer works, you can simply send Zim the save, OK and I will take care of the mugshots right away. :wink:
_Tristan_
07-13-2009, 22:33
Yes but Zim wanted to try and add the Age mod... so we better for him to see if he can get it to work... That would be an addition I'm not willing to pass up.
EDIT : btw, Rowan' s installer seems to work just fine... I'm now going to re-install the files I had modded to enable the recruitment of the 45 RGBs...
Tristan and I are having some trouble with the age mod. Namely, generals young rather too frequently. I can see this causing problems if lots of players' generals are dying shortly after they get them. Perhaps we should stick with vanilla ages for now?
Perhaps we should stick with vanilla ages for now?
Seconded, I never found age of death a big problem in vanilla. Yes, the death rate is high after 60, but it did seem you usually could last that long (the gods of battle willing).
_Tristan_
07-14-2009, 00:04
The cost of uncertainty would be too high IMHO... and might ruin the fun part of the game.
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 00:07
Well, there always going to be generals dieing young. Having people die early is just as much a point of the mod as having them live longer. How did you test the age mod? What were the results?
_Tristan_
07-14-2009, 00:11
Some of the FMs and older RGBs would die around 40 (some having started at 30)... that leavesthe player only 15 turns ingame to make an impression... I know I wouldn't like it and I bet some others as well
In most of the playtests I've done King Philippe didn't survive past 1084...
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 00:32
Hmm... Sounds like more extensive testing is necessary. Of course, we could always fiddle the numbers around to give avatars more 'guaranteed life'. It's possible the range of life is on the extreme end right now.
_Tristan_
07-14-2009, 00:39
That would seem so... I'm not sure any amount of playtesting is worth the gain in uncertainty, though I hate saying it...
I would have loved to see kings of 80 years and sons dying at 30 but while it might be fun in a solo game, I don't think it is the right thing for a PBM.
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 00:58
It may be necessary to put it to a vote on what the minimum age should be. Something like:
20
30
40
50
Any
None
Gah!
With a vote for 'None' meaning you want to drop the mod.
I vote none - simply because 1) more work, 2)the uncertainty leaves player hesitant about their character, and can make people more distant to them.
woad&fangs
07-14-2009, 01:06
To be honest, I kind of just want the RBGs to be recruited and the draft to start. I'm getting really anxious to pick a character.
RGBs are set to be recruited tomorrow. :yes:
To be honest, I kind of just want the RBGs to be recruited and the draft to start. I'm getting really anxious to pick a character.
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 01:31
I would say some level of unpredictability is desirable, rather than everyone dieing at the same age +/- a year like we have now. If we set it so people lived from ages 50-70, that would allow a good deal of unpredictablility while still guaranteeing a certain minimum of time. I would still prefer it to be longer though.
ZaPPPa says that it seems more like everybody's dieing young at the start because no one's had time to reach old age. The proper method of determining the suitabilility of the mod is mod the campaign file to start with about 100 or so diplomats, all at the same age - right when the start to die. You record the dates and how long they live, repeat as necessary, and use that data to draw conclusions. I'm more than willing to take on the task myself if Zim give me the parameters he's using. I could probably get some data tonight.
OverKnight
07-14-2009, 01:35
The rather predictable nature of old age deaths never bugged me too much. I'd vote for sticking with vanilla.
The rather predictable nature of old age deaths never bugged me too much. I'd vote for sticking with vanilla.
Ditto. I always thought it was a neat idea, but not nearly important to hold up the game. If people want to die younger of natural causes, they can always say so and we'll kill off the avatar. (I know its not exactly the same, but its the best we can do in vanilla.)
deguerra
07-14-2009, 01:43
I do rather like Cecil's idea, but I do also want to get started. If the mod is implemented, I'd probably go for 50-70, but I think the general consensus seems to be that we want to get going. I suppose if you can whip up something by tomorrow, Cecil, we could give it a look.
50-70 would be fine if it can be done by tomorrow, maybe even 50-80.
Vladimir
07-14-2009, 02:20
Vanilla is fine. Characters should have a relatively short life. Characters living to 80 is too long. If you lived to 60, you had a good life.
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 02:25
All right, I've modded descr_strat so that France starts with 100 diplomats, all age 50 and named Etienne Tristram. I'll see when they drop.
Tristan and I played with a couple of age ranges, eventually settling on trying for around 35-80 or 40-80. Those are the ranges starting characters kept dying within a couple turns on.
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 05:55
All right, I finished my first test. The first column is how many turns the diplomat lived past 50, the second is how many died at the start of that turn.
<max_age uint="70"/>
<max_age_before_death uint="71"/>
<old_age uint="50"/>
1 0
2 5
3 2
4 6
5 3
6 3
7 5
8 0
9 7
10 4
11 3
12 4
13 3
14 4
15 2
16 5
17 2
18 2
19 3
20 2
21 1
22 1
23 5
24 2
25 2
26 4
27 0
28 2
29 2
30 2
21 2
32 3
33 1
34 1
35 1
36 4
37 0
38 1
39 0
40 0
41 0
42 1
The problem here is that the majority died in less than 16 turns, at the age of 57. I'm operating under the assumption that it's best if just as many people live past 60 as die before sixty, so it balances out without shifting from the normal death age. I'll try 40-80 now; do that about three times and see how it goes.
Zim, quick question: Did you set <max_age_before_death uint="81"/> For those tests? In order to spread out the deaths, it should only be one higher than 'max_age uint'. Any higher and people start dropping off really quickly once they reach the minimum age, like in vanilla LTC.
Tristan ran the tests, but I believe he did.
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 07:24
All right, second test.
1 0
2 1
3 1
4 4
5 2
6 1
7 0
8 5
9 0
10 1
11 5
12 1
13 3
14 3
15 2
16 2
17 3
18 3
19 4
20 0
21 2
22 3
23 2
24 1
25 2
26 0
27 1
28 0
29 0
30 1
31 1
32 0
33 0
34 0
35 0
36 3
37 0
38 1
39 3
40 4
41 2
42 2
43 4
44 1
45 2
46 4
47 1
48 3
49 1
50 1
51 0
52 5
53 1
54 0
55 0
56 1
57 1
58 0
59 0
60 0
61 0
62 1
63 0
64 3
65 0
66 2
Despite the change, results were similarly poor. Most diplomats were dead by age 52. Interestingly, both tests show the half-way point at about 33% through the span: 35% and 30% respectively. This suggests that if we choose a range of 40-100, or 50-80, half will die before age 60 and half will live after age 60. Gonna run another test from 40-80, 'disable_ai' sure makes this run quick.
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 08:06
Okay, the third test.
1 0
2 1
3 2
4 2
5 2
6 1
7 2
8 4
9 2
10 3
11 0
12 3
13 1
14 1
15 2
16 1
17 3
18 0
19 2
20 4
21 3
22 1
23 3
24 0
25 2
26 1
27 3
28 0
29 1
30 5
31 2
32 1
33 3
34 0
35 0
36 2
37 0
38 1
39 3
40 1
41 1
42 5
43 0
44 0
45 1
46 1
47 1
48 1
49 2
50 2
51 4
52 1
53 1
54 1
55 0
56 1
57 3
58 0
59 0
60 3
61 0
62 0
63 0
64 1
65 0
66 0
67 2
68 0
69 1
A little better than the first test under these parameters, but not by much. Again the half-way point is 35% of the range. That's three in a row, 30%-35%. I'm going to do the next 1-3 tests at 40-100. Fortunately I'm moving quickly now. Super Speed!
AussieGiant
07-14-2009, 08:09
I vote for leaving this at Vanilla levels.
This is starting to get a little leery for me.
The original idea was solid but I don't want to install this mod when we are getting results that are undesirable.
I'm not sure this is a good way to model mortality. Low life expectancies in real life usually reflect risks during childhood. In developing countries, if you make it into adulthood then - AIDS aside - you are very likely to make it to 60. Medieval Europe probably had higher mortality but still I am very leery about avatars dying of natural causes before 50.
Personally, I don't have a problem with the vanilla model of avatars reaching 60 and then croaking. In real life, once you get to 60, your days charging around the battlefield are surely coming to an end. Players are reluctant to retire in that way. So the game forces them to. :evil:
I'd consider doing the tests at the range of 50-80 next. That seems reasonable to me.
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 09:37
Yeah, I'm doing 50-80 next. 40-100 was neither useful for gameplay needs, nor realistic. It completely contradicted what econ (correctly) said. I'm not going to bother posting it, since I'm getting tired. :wall: Fortunately 50-80 will be a lot quicker to do.
Cecil XIX
07-14-2009, 11:38
Finished collecting data on 50-80; now working on a more thourough statistical analysis. Seemed to work perfectly though: After repeating the test three times with 100 characters each, when you average the data both the median and the average age of death are 60-61! Just like normal! I'm gonna see if I can calculate the range with 95% confidence, since I just so happen to be taking a class on this kind of thing this quarter.
EDIT: All right, finished. Based on three hundred samples, I can say with 95% confidence that when the age range is 50-80 the average age of death is 60-62. I'd say this is practically perfect. Since a person who dies at fifty (and the earliest anybody died was age 51) would still have about 50 turns of life, I'd say this age range is the perfect compromise.
_Tristan_
07-14-2009, 12:36
I'm not sure this is a good way to model mortality. Low life expectancies in real life usually reflect risks during childhood. In developing countries, if you make it into adulthood then - AIDS aside - you are very likely to make it to 60. Medieval Europe probably had higher mortality but still I am very leery about avatars dying of natural causes before 50.
Personally, I don't have a problem with the vanilla model of avatars reaching 60 and then croaking. In real life, once you get to 60, your days charging around the battlefield are surely coming to an end. Players are reluctant to retire in that way. So the game forces them to. :evil:
In European Middle Ages, at least ubntil the later part, you were considered lucky if you happened to live longer than 40... but I don't think this would add anything to the game though I wa all in favor before...
Ignoramus
07-14-2009, 12:41
Finished collecting data on 50-80; now working on a more thourough statistical analysis. Seemed to work perfectly though: After repeating the test three times with 100 characters each, when you average the data both the median and the average age of death are 60-61! Just like normal! I'm gonna see if I can calculate the range with 95% confidence, since I just so happen to be taking a class on this kind of thing this quarter.
EDIT: All right, finished. Based on three hundred samples, I can say with 95% confidence that when the age range is 50-80 the average age of death is 60-62. I'd say this is practically perfect. Since a person who dies at fifty (and the earliest anybody died was age 51) would still have about 50 turns of life, I'd say this age range is the perfect compromise.
I agree. It's adds a small dose of unpredictability, which can create dramatic or subtle changes to the game.
Some of you guys won't know, but my first avatar in KotR was actuall assassinated by the AI at age 42! :yes:
In European Middle Ages, at least ubntil the later part, you were considered lucky if you happened to live longer than 40...
Indeed, but I don't think that contradicts what I wrote. Low life expectancy tends to come mainly from high mortality in childhood - once you are past that, you can expect to live to late middle age. I don't have time to get a more academic link, but here's the first thing google threw up, rather for kiddies but makes the point:
The average life span in the Middle Ages was indeed shorter than today but how much smaller is often exaggerated. Average life expectancy at birth was only 35. That does not mean that people dropped dead when they reached that age! Instead many of the people born died while they were still children. Out of all people born between one third and one half died before the age of about 16. However if you could survive to your mid-teens you would probably live to your 50s or early 60s. Even in the Middle Ages some people did live to their 70s or 80s.
http://www.localhistories.org/middle.html
Cecil, your results for 50-80 sound good and get my vote. :bow:
_Tristan_
07-14-2009, 12:53
Will implement them and upload a new version of the mod tonight...
Will playtest some and if I can get Zim agreement I should be able to make the save available for mugshots and everything else at the same time.
For the record, I think avatars living to 80+ would be bad for the game. At that age, few people are going to play more than one avatar unless they die in battle. If the first King lived to be 100, he'd rule for almost the entire game. I don't think that would be a good thing.
Ignoramus
07-14-2009, 13:28
For the record, I think avatars living to 80+ would be bad for the game. At that age, few people are going to play more than one avatar unless they die in battle. If the first King lived to be 100, he'd rule for almost the entire game. I don't think that would be a good thing.
I suppose the Dauphin may get impatient and decide to "force" the issue...
AussieGiant
07-14-2009, 13:31
I suppose the Dauphin may get impatient and decide to "force" the issue...
Stop making inflammatory statements Igno!! :balloon2:
Ramses II CP
07-14-2009, 14:18
The Prince was historically highly loyal and has absolutely no intention of (telegraphing) any move against the King! :yes:
:egypt:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.