View Full Version : New units for SP campaign - Suggestions?
R'as al Ghul
04-16-2007, 10:57
Hello,
we've made some major progress with beta_8 and we can now take care of further improvements. One thing that's frequently mentioned is the low number of units that the original Shogun and our mod features.
I do see the point in wanting more units but I also think that the simplicity, the minimalistic variety does offer a special gameplay. We'll restrict the discussion to single player for the time being and only if we discover a very special unit that fits into the balanced gameplay for MP we'll include it there, too.
I'd suggest that everybody posts their suggestions here. I'd be interested in the function you see for the proposed units as well as a techtree recommendations, faction recommendations etc.
Personally, I could imagine a Yumi-Ashigaru unit. It's an authentical unit and is the only one we miss from the historical canon.
Furthermore I think we could use a siege unit. That may be a ranged unit with pavise like shields or even artillery.
R'as
Furthermore I think we could use a siege unit. That may be a ranged unit with pavise like shields or even artillery.
The AI inappropriately uses siege units in field battles.
Hello R'as al Ghul,
Siege engines were not used in typical Japanese warfare, trickery, fire and just assault were more common, but they did exist and were used. Ranging from very heavy carriage mounted arquebusses to small canons and bombards.
What Yuuki mentions could prove to be an issue. The Napoleonic TW mods features mobile artillery. Perhaps SamWars should have the mobile mounted arquebus. This can be used in both sieges and battles.
Yumi-ashigaru is authentical indeed, there are more options for units.
R'as al Ghul
04-16-2007, 13:44
I've my info from Turnbull's Samurai Sourcebook. He mentions all kinds of siege equipment: catapults slinging rocks or thundercrash bombs, ladders, towers, sapping, flooding, setting fire, shooting with arquebuses of various caliber, even mortars, having ninjas open the gates, etc. Most of these tactics can't be considered standard. I think the standard procedure was just sitting it out.
Siege artillery- I know about the problems with that. I guess the only way to reduce this problem may be to set these values to zero:
;BlastRadius Radius in which troops can be killed by a artillery hit on the ground
;BlastKillChance The percentage kill chance of a soldier in the blast radius being killed
and I can make it less likely for the AI to build them. I can not prevent the Ai from using them in a siege field battle.
If we want to use the pavise shields for archers or teppos in sieges then we can perhaps use the dismount function. Iirc, some units are able to dismount in sieges. cegorach has succesfully used this feature for a variety of units in his P&M mod. So, by dismounting, the unit would gain a higher defense. (shield).
A mobile arquebus would be nice. :beam:
The good thing with so many of the shogun bifs is the infantry often have multiple combat animation sets,
so you can have more than one unit from a bif with different weapons and different fighting style
I am trying some recolourings, plus Aokubi gave us some infantry already recoloured as well,
all thats is need is weapon modding in those ones...
IDEAS
katana weilding sams would be good,
they would take a fair amount of time to make though,
(we need a volunteer)
ashi archers would be easier,
maybe base them on the ashi-xbow men hidden inside the samurai unit bif in Warlords versions of shogun?
(volunteers??)
ashi's with pole-axe are almost complete
(barocca making - also using different combat action set)
monks with pole-axe would also be good
(barocca gonna try and make em - may take longer than I can afford to spend on them - so someone wanna volunteer i not complain)
monks on horseback - actually may not be too hard,
turkscav and burncav both lend themselves to being monks,
they would simply need sashimono added (copy/paste from existing)
(volunteers??)
NEED MORE IDEAS FOR SAMURAI UNITS
MONGOLS
there are a TON of possible mongol units from the Medieval Bifs, a ton...
ideas??? (unit name and type, weapon, action set and bif please)
mongol, korean, chinese - the "mong" bifs look very chinese to me
Siege artillery- I know about the problems with that... I can not prevent the Ai from using them in a siege battle.
You mean cannot prevent the AI from using artillery in a field battle. The AI would be less formidable in field battles if it's saddled with siege artillery.
If we want to use the pavise shields for archers or teppos in sieges then we can perhaps use the dismount function. Iirc, some units are able to dismount in sieges. cegorach has succesfully used this feature for a variety of units in his P&M mod. So, by dismounting, the unit would gain a higher defense. (shield).
That's an interesting idea. Perhaps these archers which 'dismount' and thereby acquire the pavise in sieges can be designated as artillery so that the AI will use them to shoot fire arrows at the structures. The AI doesn't use fire arrows against troops, so that would work out nicely in field battles. Right now the towers can be destroyed by fire arrows, but not the walls. The walls could be changed to suffer damage by fire.
I've my info from Turnbull's Samurai Sourcebook. He mentions all kinds of siege equipment: catapults slinging rocks or thundercrash bombs, ladders, towers, sapping, flooding, setting fire, shooting with arquebuses of various caliber, even mortars, having ninjas open the gates, etc.
Yes, they were available and used.
Most of these tactics can't be considered standard. I think the standard procedure was just sitting it out.
Yes. So, limiting siegeweapons is worth to consider.
If we want to use the pavise shields for archers or teppos in sieges then we can perhaps use the dismount function. Iirc, some units are able to dismount in sieges. cegorach has succesfully used this feature for a variety of units in his P&M mod. So, by dismounting, the unit would gain a higher defense. (shield).
Sounds good.
A mobile arquebus would be nice. :beam:
The battlefield ninjas has some options. Ninjas did exist, the classic costume was probably used too, they did fight both totally covert and more open in battle. Deception and elite are keywords here. Instead of one odd, stereotypical unit, battlefieldninja could be anything and look like something harmless, just better/more succesfull than you would expect.
-Ninjas disguished as yariashigaru. Use the same sprites. But morale and combatstats would be much higher. The unit can be given an extra trick by giving it a thuderbomb (explosives was something they had and used).
-Ninja teppo. You can make one or more versions: a small unit pretending to be an ordinairy teppo unit, blends in with a gun line (it's possible to adjust the mouseover description?, if not it already adds some chaos in battles).
Or a very skilled individual (very small team) having long range and accuracy. There are handgunner stats and arqs, you could modify the first for a sniper.
About any other unit can be used to make a ninjaunit: smaller size, better stats.
This won't make one unit in twelve different costumes, but several different types. A yari ninja is anti cav, but also fights well against infantry. A sharpshooter ninja can fight, but his specialism is long range shooting.
While this did either exist or could be used like that, it shouldn't color every battle, so it should be limited.
That's an interesting idea. Perhaps these archers which 'dismount' and thereby acquire the pavise in sieges can be designated as artillery so that the AI will use them to shoot fire arrows at the structures. The AI doesn't use fire arrows against troops, so that would work out nicely in field battles. Right now the towers can be destroyed by fire arrows, but not the walls. The walls could be changed to suffer damage by fire.
The mobile arq also has a bit of this idea. It would work against the gate/wall, but can be repositioned and act anti-personel.
I once had the idea to make a passive "artillery" piece - this can be based on the higher art's that the MTW AI builds less often than the cheap ones (like the catapult, that is insisting on spamming all the time). This may give the commander the ability to place it at will on the battlefield providing artificial protection - essentially capturing something of raw field fortifications much like the pallisade the Oda/Tokugawa armies erected in Nagashino. It may be proved useful tactically. What comes close to it are the "warwagons" of Cegorach in P&M.
To make it useful to the AI as well, the crew may be archers or teppos.
The pavise idea of Ra's is good and historically accurate/in the spirit of the era - in Kagemusha (the film by AK), the assaulting Takeda troops are advancing towards the walls of Takatenjin castle protected by bamboo/wood panels, placed inclined to provide protection from enemy missiles.
Barocca's idea of standard units wielding different weapons is also interesting: can have Ashigaru Naginata (less heavily armoured) for example, that is also a historically accurate unit.
Another idea is to provide a more "developing" roster to mirror military advances of the period that reflected technology and tactics. For example yari cavalry is an invention that was credited to Takeda Shingen - Yari cavalry essentially fullfiled the role of "modern" skirmishing cavalry like the Hussaria of the Napoleonic era. There are almost no accounts of its use prior to the late Sengoku Jidai (1565- onwards). This may be included, as well as the use of very long yaris ( essentially pikes based on pikemen) and of course guns.
An alternative approach is to use provincial distinctions for the standard units and alter the stats/animations/cards accordngly ie Satsuma - No Dachi, Shinano Yari Cavalry etc.
Another approach would be to personalise rosters for factions (that would be unlocked by certain expensive buildings signifying the acquiring of that technology) for example the Oda may have an Ashigaru based roster with larger than normal units (much like Wes has done for the Muslims/Mongols in MedMod) to signify their emphasis in logistical strength.
The Hoganji clan on the other hand may be consisting of almost exclusively foot units based on a mob/monk combination. Monks may be using guns but without the ability for revolving firing ranks (fire once in a while). Monk archers may be included. Finally the "mob" unit may be a larger than normal unit of multiple fighting abilities ie a combination of yari and naginata say.
All this being nice and fine for a SP game, however the MP game is - if not perfect - very close to it, as far as i am concerned.
:bow:
Tomisama
04-17-2007, 03:16
"katana wielding sams" long overdue, yes!
“ashi archers” might get some use, good.
“shielded teppo” are seen in many battle paintings, I’m sure will be very popular.
“hand cannon” units to destroy walls and gates.
They still practice firing these guns today (have picture but cant get to it right now).
“ronin sam units” very possible I think.
"monks" in any roll, very real!
I don’t know about the axe thing, but their might be both yari and pike units of both ashi and sams.
Some stuff to look at :bow:
http://www.geocities.com/nobukaze23/army.htm
http://jgrebet.club.fr/samurai/sam_base.htm
http://japan-cc.com/samurai_figure2.htm
cegorach
04-17-2007, 10:09
Good to see this thread. Finally.
When I spoke to R'as al Ghul about the small number of options I hoped for more additions and here they are, very well.
Of course it comes from a kind of 'unit fetishist' or extremist because in my incoming PMTW 2.0 I will have at least 1100 different units....:laugh4:
I am in favour of any additions mentioned above - especially the ninja marksmen - always recall Sekigahara when I think about them.
Small units with much better accuracy and limited to some provinces will add some flavour for sure, perhaps even in the MP, but it is minor issue here.
One word about the limits - the crusader file allows 256 units , but it doesn't include agents, mounts, ships and 'dismounted' options as well as 'custom mode only' units.
In other words units which are recruited in the strategic mode are limited - ONLY those.
For this reason I can safely propose to add 'core' and 'vassal' units idea.
I think that in order to well re-create the complicated situation of the samurai wars it will be reasonable to add entire new set of units to show the difference between easier to get vassals and hard core supporters.
Vassal units would have higher numbers, but weaker morale.
Of course here comes a question how to allow them without too many problems involved.
I think the key issue would be to have new 'buildings' to represent the bonds between families which gradually would grow after some time under 'foreign' reign.
I propose to use the indestructable structures such as 'forest clearing' which would be set at the beginning of a campaign without a possibility to build them at all or with so high requirements that these would appear only in most developed provinces.
I actually believe combining BOTH would be a good thing.
So the structure would represent very important clans or just important regions which would become 'core' supporters' if conquered and the entire rest of the map would be left to potential 'turncoats'.
Now is the question how this would work in the campaign, so here is an example.
A clan starts with one 'core' province (with indestructable 'forest clearing') and two vassal provinces (no such structures). The vassal provinces might become core ones if these are developed to certain level - perhaps by setting castle requirements high enough.
A different solution might be to add faction unique structure called for example Takeda jikishindan ( second word used to describe close followers - I am not sure if only by Takedas, maybe that is a general term) which would take some time to erect and which combined with the 'forest clearing' would allow recruitment of 'core' units.
Anyway the clan expands and conquers new regions where it can only recruit vassal troops - at least untill it develops close ties with their clans, except the 'forest clearing' regions which either immediatelly or after the jikishindan structure is added will become its new 'cores'.
I hope I didn't make the whole thing too complicated to read.;)
Final thing - if space is an issue in the crusader_build files (limited number of buildings) the jikishindan structures might be not faction unique, but same for closely related factions so these might rise 'core' troops from the families they had some strong bonds in the reality.
As suggested icon/info pic I would use faction's mon or combine a couple if the structure will be used by more than one faction.
Of course the system is not perfect, but perhaps will slow down the conquest to some degree showing how complicated could be political life in Japan at that time.
Another use for the 'forest clearing' structure would be to serve as recruitment requirements to faction unique units such as Tokugawa's 'Red Devils' or Takeda's cavalry, but those in my opinion should be limted to certain provinces no matter how close these would become in later years.
Finally addressing the main question.
Perhaps more mercenary-only options such as the Japanese pirates limited to only some provinces - I know that the MTW VI engine allows hiring them very far away from home, but by setting the initial recruitment zone in one province or two these guys wiouldn't appear too often.
Maybe more brigands too - only appearing as bandits or during rebellions ?
And the last thing - maybe some existing units such as Yari Samurai can get 'dismounted' options such as 'katana' samurai making them more interesting to use.
Overall the dismounted options are extremely useful if you want to make certain units unique and as added bonus the dismounted option doesn't take any unit slots as all.
I hope some of these ideas are worth considering.
Regards Cegorach
GOOD ideas - but i dont have the time to make all of them,
gonna need some help here guys...
There is an unused resource included in the hard code that we are going to use for Yamashiro province to make that region produce some unique units
(forest resource)
There are two additional unit folders available in the textures men,
so we can have a massive number of bif files,
(i posted how to activate them in a thread here somehwhere...)
currently we have a couple of folders "in use", that are not.
space is, currently, not a problem.
I have Three versions of ashigaru units colouring,
grey-shirts, (original)-shirts and primary faction colour-shirts
I have also added to their weapon array,
they now have three weapons available to them
(this is an enlarged pic of the array)
https://img172.imageshack.us/img172/6144/weaponarrayrw7.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
Need some ideas for these guys,
we have three types of clothing and weaponry can be scaled up and down,
i have chosen 3 lengths for the yari, and 2 each for the halberd and naginata on the basis of what does, and does not, look too outrageous,
basically there is a "man sized" version, another around 2.5 "man sized" and one yari that is extra long for Late Era Ashigaru.
BUT, whoe gets what colour and what weapons?
do we make some faction specific? and if so who andwhat???
(too many choices....)
(PLEASE please - some ideas....)
Final comment the ashi have several combat animation sets that are not used,
One in particular where the man passes something from one hand to the other behind his back - reminds me of nun-chuk displays i have seen...
anyone want to have a look see if they can work with it?????
(there is still room for one more weapon in the bif file,
MAX SIZE 130 pixels long and 6 pixels deep)
cheers,
B.
Hello barocca,
A naginata, that's nice.
The Oda clan had very long (the longest?) pike used by ashigaru. Reserve the longest yari and largest unit for Oda.
Like Noir mentioned, Takeda would do with some cavalry, maybe limit the (better) YC or NC to them? Maybe the BIF can contain some yari variation?
That extra animation could be useful for a disguished ninja (a ball and chain weapon may be hard to animate). There are also slashing animations that fit the naginata.
cegorach
04-17-2007, 13:34
There is an unused resource included in the hard code that we are going to use for Yamashiro province to make that region produce some unique units
(forest resource)
Why not use the warrior_hold as industractable resource type structure ?
'Forest' can be kept for something else...
It is more useful than the 'forest' because can attact mercenaries, decrease happiness (which will make the AI to add large garrison force there) etc.
R'as al Ghul
04-17-2007, 13:36
I can't possibly answer all points at the moment.
For the laymen among us:
The idea to use the dismount function works so that a unit, once dismounted, completely changes its looks/animations and its combat values. A simple example would be to have the Nodachi as the dismounted version of the Heavy Cavalry. Another feature is that you can determine if the unit can always dismount or only in castle battles.
The pavise shields could therefore be reduced to castle battles.
Similarly, we can have a teppo unit dismount into an artillery piece, restricted to castle battles it won't interfere with classic field battles.
However, I can't predict if the AI will make use of such a unit's ability. I need to test that with a napoleonic or medieval cannon first.
R'as
Yumi Ashigaru could be used in MP. Aren't Samurai Archers already using Katana? It was a Samurai's standard sidearm AFAIK.
CBR
The Hatamoto, Heavy Cav, Cav Archer, Battlefield Ninja and Kensai also have a katana.
Katana Sams
most of the units are old school,
the weapons are permanently attatched,
i can cut some weapons away, but i have never added all the parameters to add new weapons to the units MTW style (all weapons seperate from men) (in short that is not an area i specialise in)
Samurai Archers already use a katana for hand to hand,
but all other animations of them have a bow and quiver in,
so we cannot simply designate them as katana sams unless we go and edit out the bow, the quiver and the shadow,
once you cut them away you have to repair the animation
(and you have to add the katana to standing, walking, running)
if some one wants to have a go please do, but it is a TON of work that i do not have time to do.
Kensai use no-dachi animations, but we have 3 different bif files for no-dachi,
red armour, grey armour and faction coloured armour,
We could designate
No-Dachi as always Red Armour,
Kensai as always Grey Armour,
and Katana Sams as always Faction coloured Armour,
then it would be a simple matter (to make Katana Sams) of go in and shorten the sword for each animation in each frame.
comments/directions??
Im just wondering why there is a need for a Katana Samurai. What role would they have that isn't already filled by current units?
CBR
mostly for single player mode,
there have beena number of requessts for extra unit depth in single player,
so we are seeing what we can do readily with what we have to flesh out the SP roster,
the yari-ashi are finished artwork wise,
now we just need uses for them
EARLY period
Yari ashi, (in faction colours) with weapon#1 all clans
Halberd Ashi, (in Maroon) with Halberd weapon #4 for ODA
HIGH period
Yari ashi, (in faction colours ) with yari weapon #2 all clans
Yari ashi (in Maroon) with yari weapon size #3 for ODA (enhanced anti-cav stats)
Nagi ashi, (in faction colours ) with Nagi weapon #6 all clans
Halberd Ashi, (in grey) with Halberd weapon #4 for REBELS
LATE period
Yari ashi (in faction colours ) with yari weapon size #3 for all clans (enhanced anti-cav stats - but not as good as Oda)
Halberd Ashi, (in faction colours ) with Halberd weapon #4 for all clans
cheers
B.
There is some space between YA and YS to put in some new YA units. The YA are faster than YS, but lower morale and armor.
YA (cost 200) -2 melee and +8 vs cav (existing)
YA (cost 300) -2 melee and +10 vs cav (new)
YA (cost 300) +0 melee and +10 vs cav (new)
YA (cost 400) +0 melee and +12 vs cav (new)
YS (cost 400) +2 melee and +12 vs cav (existing)
We also have available a bow stat that could be used for the yumi ashigaru.
There is room between no-dachi and naginata for a sword unit (katana infantry) which has more balance between its offensive and defensive capabilities than no-dachi or naginata. The price of the naginata should be raised to 800. The melee cav HC, YC and NC are also priced too low and should be raised.
ND (cost 600) +3 melee, armor 1, speed 12 (existing)
KI (cost 700) +4 melee, armor 3, speed 10 (new)
NI (cost 800) +6 melee, armor 5, speed 8 (existing)
WM (cost 900) +7 melee, armor 1, speed 12 (existing)
YC and this new KI would be equal in melee, but the YC should be able to beat it with a good charge. NC would beat it fairly easily. This relationship between YC and KI would be very similar to the relationship between NC and NI. Likewise, HC beats NI. HC also beats WM which is why the cost of HC at 800 is much too low. I would say a better cost structure for the melee cav would be NC 900, YC 950 and HC 1000 or even NC 900, YC 1000 and HC 1100.
These costs are SP costs. The MP costs of some units are different because they were empirically adjusted to improve playbalance in MP.
Tomisama
04-18-2007, 03:52
http://www.clanwarscomp.org/samurai/hayashi.gif
Hand Cannon Practice
Tomisama
04-18-2007, 04:19
Im just wondering why there is a need for a Katana Samurai. What role would they have that isn't already filled by current units?
CBR
For a moment consider the kensai, not as an impossible giant fantasy lone superman, but as a real sword master. The master accompanied by his student entourage could compose a samurai sword unit. This unit would have the armour of the yari sam, and the fervor of a warrior monk. The no-dachi figure could possibly be modified to create this very formidable, and I believe reasonably realistic new unit.
nice ideas all round puzz
Tomisama
- hand cannons - not hard, simply grab the yarisam bif from a Warlords copy,
and make the little black x-bowmen in it into handcannon bif,
(cutaway/mod the xbow they carry)
BUT they have NO h2h animation,
SIMPLE FIX, copy the H2H animation From the Musket bif into the new handcannon bif,
REMEMBER to reduce the size of the anim characters from the musket bif as you import,
and remember to use nearest neighbour as the resample method for reduction.
AND they have no "face flash" when cannon goes off - similar method to above might work...
it's more work than i have time for at the moment,
Who wants to give it a shot??
(and i want yumi-ashi, i just do not have the time to make em...)
R'as al Ghul
04-18-2007, 11:21
barocca,
when we make different eras, we could have different unit sizes.
Tosa suggests that the late ashi units should be larger than in early and perhaps the CA smaller in late. It would reflect a change of battlefield tactics.
I also noticed that readbif has problems to load the animation rectangle for the naginata bif. There's another unit that also gives me an error.
I was trying to find out which animation sequences are unused.
R'as
an error? (the nagi dont normally use the rolling weapon animation)
is that what you mean??
R'as al Ghul
04-18-2007, 12:46
Im just wondering why there is a need for a Katana Samurai. What role would they have that isn't already filled by current units?
CBR
We all know that you want wardogs. You can as well admit it. :grin:
https://img128.imageshack.us/img128/3929/sono05030558image0020yp9.gif
readbif says
" is not a valid integer
ok, any character (or string of characters) that RSW did not think to program into readbif will generate that error,
fight, run, charge etc will BE recognised,
i think fight2 will even be recognised,
but "new fight" or even "//" will generate that error
hmm - now if that was a hotdog in armour it would be even funnier....
(gimme a wardog with extra relish...)
cheers
B.
I can see adding a few units to SP, and maybe even a couple to MP like the yumi ashi or a sword unit between no-dachi and naginata, but the engine doesn't support a large number of significantly different units. You can make lots of combinations of attack/defense stats, but the AI is only looking at the attack+defense and comparing that to the attack+defense of the enemy unit, so that limits the number of units that to the AI are significantly different. We have the 60 man infantry units (not including teppo) at -2, 0, 2, 3, 6, and 7. The units at 3 and 7 have high charge, so they are closer to 4 and 8 in performance which would give an effective distribution of -2, 0, 2, 4, 6, 8. You can see that the balance achieved in the unitset has a mathematical basis. Likewise, the 60 man cav units are at 1, 4, 6 and 8. It's possible that the cav unit at 1 could be moved to 2. The cav unit at 4 has +4 anti-cav making it equal the top cav at 8. Again there is a uniform mathematical sequence here. The unit at 4 was originally at 5 with a +5 anti-cav, but it's performance in multiplayer resulted in the adjustment to 4 with +4 anti-cav. (This has to be fixed in the SO stat because it's still set to +5 anti-cav.) So, you can see that the value arrived at empirically is also more uniformly placed mathematically. You can't slip significantly different units inbetween those because a diffence of 1 combat point will only result in a win 6 out of 10 times.
Pavise units would be fine for sieges because then the towers could be knocked out with fewer losses to the ranged units. Right now it's very costly for the attacker to take out a tower with archers, but I can't reduce the strength of the towers without making it too easy to knock them out with a melee unit. However, I don't think the AI will use these pavise units against the structures unless they are designated as artillery units.
The VI stat does allow several though, certainly for SamWars where only a dozen are used at this moment.
VI easily allows to create 100 or more unique battleunits when all options are used. The <10% balancing required for MP will be hard though.
i agree, for MP only a couple of things are missing from the mix,
for SP tho' the sky is the limit, the idea is for players to have fun,
(anyone here any good at fiddling the build priorities so an AI will build decent troops mixes??)
Pavise
when "dismounting" you can dismount to an entirely different troop type
(from cav to infantry) so i think it might work to go from cav to artillery
but will the AI "dismount" at all??
cheers
B.
The AI won't dismount at all in my experience.
VI easily allows to create 100 or more unique battleunits when all options are used.
Those 100 units will not be significantly different from one another. You need a 2 combat point difference between units for the AI to offer strong opposition, and the useful operational range for melee units is about 12 points.
They won't be in terms of use - but they will be in terms of flavour. Even having a different grpahic or a different name or a different artwork in the unit info BIF makes all the difference in the world for SP enthusiasts as it excites the imagination and enhances immersion.
cegorach
04-19-2007, 07:55
Pavise
when "dismounting" you can dismount to an entirely different troop type
(from cav to infantry) so i think it might work to go from cav to artillery
It works any way you want to cavalry to cavalry, infantry to infantry, artillery to cavalry etc.
but will the AI "dismount" at all??
No.
R'as al Ghul
04-19-2007, 09:26
No.
:wall:
R'as al Ghul
04-19-2007, 09:47
So, if we enable any kind of artillery the AI will most probably spam it.
If we enable a unit that only dismounts to artillery in castle battles, the Ai won't use it.
Brilliant! Why go through the hassle of creating this units, then?
It will only give the player an advantage and it's not as if we play any castle battles in MP.
I think the only possibility is to make an artillery piece, make it expensive, make it take 2 or more turns to build and make the build priorities so that the Ai hopefully doesn't spam it too much.
I'm confident that I can reduce the numbers of built artillery pieces but I'm frustrated that the pavise idea will probably not work out.
It will work if you make it useful for field battles as well ie make it a more proper missile unit with protection. Then there's no need for dismount neither the AI will spam it as it won't be in the "art" list. The other thing is that the spamming rate can be regulated by building preferences to my experience.
The idea is good, but it needs time and testing to become an integrated part of the SP game. The MP game is an entirely different story, and i'll leave the experts speak on that as i find it almost perfect as it stands.
The idea behind many things in the SP game is to provide flavour for the player - its not to increase satisfaction in the tactical field. Most mods for MTW i know are built around that perspective. So advantages over the AI are cherished if not huge and if they add to immersion.
Hello Yuuki,
I agree with that. There are however more tricks in the bag than straight combat only.
The anti-cavalry bonus for example can be applied to any unit (or not), consist of two parts (defensive or offensive) and can have any value. There are 3 bowstats (two shortbow, one longbow) which can be made totally different. Two firearm stats together with several other missiles that can be used somehow. Each man can carry an unique supply of ammo, morale, speeds, unitsize, rankbonus etc can be applied, as well as overkill stats which are only overruled by more overkill.
Let's say the melee ranges from 0 till 20, and 0,2,4..20 are used to create normal units. A special unit (we neglect the realistic question) has a defense value of 20. That means that even the normal 20 melee unit can hardly dent it. To make a tailored melee anti-unit you have to give it 40 melee so it kills 40-20=20. You can use the is afraid off parameters as well as other combat, morale, cost and speed values to avoid the last unit to be the only relevant one. Think the first to be an ultra defensive unit and the latter the destroyer of that defense.
It is true, that it will be very difficult to balance this for MP; to avoid having only a fistfull of units that will prove to be the best bang for bucks and thus become the only used ones. The more units in a game, the harder it is to achieve the MP required <10% balance. Even for a game like VI, which is pretty well equiped.
What Noir said is also true, even a clan using some sickle yari for its ashigaru, instead of the plain one, but having the same stats is great for flavour (the sickle adds options to drag a samurai from his horse, so more anti-cav makes a new unit).
The nice thing is that the more minimalistic roster and the extensive one can both become part of the same modification, by using era files and if need to, unique stat files.
Each individual/group of player(s) can then decide what to use in his/her campaign or online games. Or maybe even tweak it.
So, if we enable any kind of artillery the AI will most probably spam it.
If we enable a unit that only dismounts to artillery in castle battles, the Ai won't use it.
Brilliant! Why go through the hassle of creating this units, then?
It will only give the player an advantage and it's not as if we play any castle battles in MP.
Mobile heavy calibre arq. Apart from the foundation, Japanese castles weren't the yards thick massive stone constructions like in the West. So, it's not odd to see a weapon like that doing damage to a wall/gate as well as units.
Do the hitstone/hitwood parameters in Projectiles.txt work?
I recall you could make any missile effective agaist the wall. A method to assault a castle is to set fire. You could make the torch more effective or adjust the grenade.
I think the only possibility is to make an artillery piece, make it expensive, make it take 2 or more turns to build and make the build priorities so that the Ai hopefully doesn't spam it too much.
That will be good to do.
A different thing: is it possible to make a working supply train or a unit that hands out extra ammo?
cegorach
04-19-2007, 11:40
A different thing: is it possible to make a working supply train or a unit that hands out extra ammo?
No.
But you can use such as an objective in MP battles e.g. a supply train is ambushed and needs to be saved and so on.
About siege units - just make it
a) infantry not artillery so the AI will NOT spam them together and use too extensivelly in field battles
b) make it hard to build - perhaps by adding an unique structure (one per faction) so the number of such units will NEVER be too large.
c) make it not too cheap or too expensive - both affect AI choice somehow - it produces too many cheap units in the beginning and too often the expensive ones if it is advanced enough...
Making it hard to build detracts fun from the campaign in my opinion. I dislike having to considerably tech up to get all units and also it works lawys for teh advantage of the player. Alternative solution is to make its production building unique and attach a low AI preferance value.
Katana wielding unit long overdue. If you can build a building named Katana-Kaji, you'd naturally assume you'd be able to make a unit that wields a katana!
Bah! I'm too angry right now, I need to lay down. :shame:
Katana wielding unit long overdue.
yes.
if you build it they will come...
otherwise you have to wait for me to have a whole free week...
(me? with three sons under 10 :dizzy2: - i got buckleys mate...:wall: )
(for all non ozzies - buckleys chance (http://www.anu.edu.au/andc/ozwords/Oct%202000/Buckley's.html))
Think the first to be an ultra defensive unit and the latter the destroyer of that defense.
The AI will use the defensive destroyer on every other unit, and so will a human player. A WM can beat an NI in 60 seconds, but that same WM beats a YA in 5 seconds. Certainly 5 seconds is the low end of the scale for combat resolution time. That 5 seconds is being achived with a difference of 9 combat points (6 points, 5.6% chance to kill, for the WM striking the YA) + good charge. That's about the range you have to work with before combat resolution time becomes too short or too long. Two NI fight for about 3 minutes (-6 points on the strike, 0.6% chance to kill). In addition, a good part of the -20 to +20 dynamic range of melee combat has to be left for combat bonuses.
Likewise the usable speed range is limited by fatigue on the low end and controlability and scale factor on the high end. The lowest usable speed in Samurai Wars was found to be 6, and the highest 24. We tried a walking speed of 4 for NI and the unit incured too much fatigue on large maps. Once again it was found that to be tactically significant within the scale of the game a difference of about 20% in speed is necessary. You also have to allow for cavalry to run something like 2x the infantry running speed. So we have infantry walking at 6 or 7, running at 10 or 12 and charging at 12 or 14. The ninja walks at 8, runs at 14 and charges at 16. The cavalry walks at 8 or 10, runs at 20, 22 (hatamoto) or 24. and charges at 22, 24 or 26.
Morale is another parameter with a limited usable range. In Samurai Wars we found the usable range to be 0 to 10. The lowest we could make a melee unit and still have it functional was morale 6. You can go below 6 with a pure shooter. The highest is about 10 before you simply have units fighting to the last man.
The AI will use the defensive destroyer on every other unit, and so will a human player.
That's why you have to use the other tools too. Make it slow so it 'can't' catch anything, but the equally slow defensive unit, give it a low defense, so even if he engages another unit he'll suffer, make him afraid of all other units, make the defensive unit afraid of him (there will be an optimum somewhere), give the offensive unit very low armour, a negative anti cav defence bonus so even one crippled horse will ruin it.
I'm not claiming -^ all this will make a nice unit, just throwed in some options to bypass the 'limits'.
I doubt the AI being foolish enough to make spamarmies with such a unit, let alone human players (which is btw not an issue at all, as the extra units are intended for the SP era).
what effect does the formation width and depth have on combat capability, or missile survivability?
could we use width and depth to reduce manouverability?
Hi,
Talking about other units, just wondering what it is that helps an ally decide to assist you attack a province that you are attacking ?
What about this for a suggestion, not an alliance that was made with a emissary, but rather an alliance that was made with the marriage of a princess would give a fifty percent chance of the daimyo helping you. Maybe the princesses could have ratings which increase or decrease this percentage chance.
Could we be asked if one of our allies were about to attack a province if we wanted to send troops to help him ?
Is there a tech tree for the Samurai warlords ?
Is there also a province description chart, listing benefits of the province plus other info ?
Talking about other units, just wondering what it is that helps an ally decide to assist you attack a province that you are attacking ?
Your ally isn't deciding to help you. He's just deciding to attack that province. Being an ally just reduces his chance of attacking you.
Could we be asked if one of our allies were about to attack a province if we wanted to send troops to help him ?
I don't think so. If you want to help an ally take out a clan, you can just attack that clan yourself and help weaken it. You can sometimes make a pretty good guess at where the AI is going to attack, and attack the same province.[/QUOTE]
I doubt the AI being foolish enough to make spamarmies with such a unit, let alone human players (which is btw not an issue at all, as the extra units are intended for the SP era).
There is a human player in the SP era. If the units are given qualities that the AI doesn't recognize, then the AI will make mistakes when using those units.
There is a human player in the SP era. If the units are given qualities that the AI doesn't recognize, then the AI will make mistakes when using those units.
I see what you mean. Indeed, the dismount function f.e. would be a nice solution, if it wasn't for the AI not to use it :(
The AI does recognise other stats such as anti-cavalry bonus though.
If it means that the mod has only units that requires a human player to use it properly, then we would indeed have a campaign that isn't good (in the long run) for anyone.
Even if the AI fails to use the full potential of some units, it's rarely so that it's totally apathic. The AI does have an edge over human users too (it can micromanage 16 units at the same time). The 90+% fairness required for MP isn't such an huge issue in SP. Quite some is of course, but you have more elbow room.
this is based on what i can find around the web,
in my humble opinion japanese did not go "cannon-crazy" like the europeans did,
i see far more references to large caliber hand guns (hand-cannon) than to regular cannon (european style)
all we make cannon for is the human players who want some form of artillery
(a big bang)
my idea (mentioned in the poll too) is only hand cannon,
make them very low rate of fire, and very lousy accuracy,
(if people then want to unbalance the mod on their own machines they can)
make these hand cannon dismount from mounted ashi-xbow,
make the mounted x-bow a very high tech unit, make em expensive,
make them unlikely for ai tobuild (unit preferences),
make them very lousy accuracy and very low rate of fire
??
My humble opinion:
yes, but please don't do mounted xbow ashigaru. They sound/feel way off the spirit of the era to me.
Large cannons were striped off Dutch ships in order to end the Siege of Osaka (last stand of those loyal to Hideyoshi) from the part of Ieyasu. I think they were used in a similar fashion to suppress a major peasant rebellion again from Ieyasu at roughly the same time.
There are no accounts of them taking part to sieges or battles prior to Sekigahara as far as i know.
Noir
R'as al Ghul
04-23-2007, 14:05
Just found this ~:thumb:
It's important that you know the truth.
http://www.computersonline.se/webpic/_pictures/fact1.jpg
http://www.computersonline.se/webpic/_pictures/fact2.jpg
http://www.computersonline.se/webpic/_pictures/fact3.jpg
http://www.computersonline.se/webpic/_pictures/fact4.jpg
http://www.computersonline.se/webpic/_pictures/fact5.jpg
[QUOTE=TosaInu
That extra animation could be useful for a disguished ninja (a ball and chain weapon may be hard to animate). There are also slashing animations that fit the naginata.[/QUOTE]
Gothic Nights USE Mace's that might work..
i think we already talked about this too but maybe we add HERO units.
only hirable base on what era it is.
like the kenesai but with a diffrent WEAPON specialist..
thats pretty much the only thing i can think of and wish to alter with the japense units.
---------------------------------
i been playing dynasty warriors,legends,and empires since first one came out for ps2 (dynasty warriors 3)tell now with empires 5 i know alot of chinese units of what they could be..
i'll added them now..
(chinese elite unit evenly match to winning not winning easly Agasint 1v1 Kenasi) Tiger General (based on the 5 generals of wu,wei,and shu standards.
the chinese didn't have the choku no tell the later days of the kings and queens of england but they did have standard archer units like the first one you get from MTW non mod style and there xbow came later but only shot one arrow but there dmg and speed was better then the europeans rate of fire. for this next version archer could be called chinese archers and the xbows could be called cho ku no light . next verision or this version cho ku no heavy im not sure on there calvary units but im sure only generals used bows.
infantry it gets a lil harder cause of there method of war play is way diffrrent then the world. they consit of group battles organized war fare.. men of 5-10 would go at it. to minize losses and test to see who could be gifted for spec trainin..
standard sword/spear/building and ther unit production.
Chinese infantry
chinese spear
Chinese Pike/pole
---
2-3 building coould be nanman units like the
Nanman Guard (sword/spear/pole,pike..
---
towards the end of the building tech tree are these.
Chinese Guard (sword)
Chinese Enforcer (spear/skirmisher non-missle)
Chinese shock troops (pike/polearm)
-----------------------------------
As for calvary there eperiance in the feild of calavary units weren't normaly used by everyday units but mainly used for Generals/heir commanding officers and there personal Guards. no missle calavary though (bummer)
-----------------------------------
Seige units (they did use Seige)
they had what is called a wooden Ox wouldn't fight but would bring supplys etc i can see just having this on the battle field would increase Morale.
and since they are the inventors of gun powder i can see a napath like unit being made they didn't use it with guns tell after the mongols were dispanded
(which at this time the europens had trade routes to china)
so seige equipement they did have battery rams.
they also had a juggernaut which used a flame throw like method its was a big wooden mettal tank that spined in a 360 degree and shot fire out.
they also had elephants and fire tatics..
and a very unique seige unit that would build a bring over rivers.. and WAlls.
i've seen them use it for walls alot in dynasty warriors 4. in the battle of XU chang they used it to assualt cao cao directly which it worked but cao cao used battle feild mines to deystroy the advancing attacking army.
also i would like to mention since the chinese have been around longer then the egyptians as far as government and religion.. (budism)-christanity didn't take flight tell after WORLD War I. for the longest time christian Followers would be killed hang and beaten to death for there beleaf.
chinese are the only ones to hold on to buddism the longest. and to this day still are. in some way..
anyways wha ti was gonna say...
(since the chinese are organized military to the utmost carefuly style.)
3/4ths of there units should be displined
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.