Stw Mp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TosaInu

I recall that we wanted to increase the spear vs cav bonus a tad in 103, but that's a hardcoded value.

That's a problem with STW: solve a problem at one end and you get another one. This was one of the reasons it took so long to make. Ysam is still about fine, but YA would be a better unit if the spearbonus was 5 or 6 instead of 4. MTW and VI introduced these individual tweaks and put an end to some other pesky loopholes (upgrade cost, number of upgrades and battlefieldupgrades to mention a few).

---

The yari bonus is +4 attack for the yari and -4 attack for the cavalry when fighting yari armed inf. So the bonus is 8 points for yari inf vs cav and 4 points for yari cav vs cav.

v102 YS = 0/2 (att/def)
v103 YS = -1/2

v102 WM = 5/2
v103 WM = 4/4

The YS is 20% weaker in v103 while the WM is 20% stronger. I see this was done so that the YS remains weaker than the WM at equal cost. The H2 WM (550 koku) will also have the additional advantage of +4 charge and +2 morale over the H5 YS (549 koku).

v102 H5 YS = 5/7 (att/def)
v103 H5 YS = 4/7

v102 H2 WM = 7/4
v103 H2 WM = 6/6

The YS is cast into more of an anti-cav role in v103 than it is in v102 where it can double as a line unit. That's something to keep in mind when purchasing a v103 army since you don't need H5 YS to beat cav.

Wooha! Feels good to be back online again ~:)

And I can host now! :balloon2: :balloon2:

The so called nag/monks army was not really just a 2 unit type army.
I remeber playing games with many different versions, but yes, the core was based on monks, more than 6 naginata and at least 2 musks(for the morale drope).
If you wanna, why don't u try these ones?
-1 musk hon 1, 1 musk hon 2;
-4 monks hon2;
-9 Nag hon2;
-1 Nag hon1.

-2 musks hon1;
-4 monks hon2;
-3 HC hon 1(they will charge frontally the enemy YS, in hold formation);
-7 Nag hon2.

and my favourite:
-2 musks hon1;
-3 monks hon2;
-2 YC hon 2(against opposite HA, and musks);
-2 HC hon 1(they will charge frontally the enemy YS, in hold formation);
-7 Nag hon 2.

In 103 the YS standard is hon4. The tactic to rout it, is based on a combined mounted troops charge on them, frontal(hold) and on flank(at will), with musks shooting on.
Result? 2 seconds after there will not be anymore that unit.
If the opponent uses his mounted troops to intercept your horses and he/she moves the YS into the melee againt your horses...than just do the same, with monks intercepting the YS.
I think this was the basic tactic used. Naturally games were preatty fast, pointing out players with more unit control.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

The yari bonus is +4 attack for the yari and -4 attack for the cavalry when fighting yari armed inf. So the bonus is 8 points for yari inf vs cav and 4 points for yari cav vs cav.

---

Right, there are two Yuuki. To make only Yari infantry stronger you have to change only the latter.

Yari samurai are about as strong vs NagCav in 103 as 102: both plain combat were decreased by 1 point. The cavalry gained a bit more charge than required to compensate with other units though. Yari infantry is not going to suffer much/at all from that frontally, but they'll when backstabbed.

VI has those neat cav def & cav att values for every individual unit in txt stat. Think of -2 cavdef for guns and the holdtrick does no longer work.

I'm going to try those PaolinoPaperino.

Grrr...finally made it in here...been having probs with the forum all day today.

For the next 1-2 hours I'll be waiting in the lobby for anyone that wants to play :)

The forums are a nightmare today, I was going to move a couple of things tonight but didn't get anything done. :(

The fakeserver is up from now on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PaolinoPaperino

The so called nag/monks army was not really just a 2 unit type army.
I remeber playing games with many different versions, but yes, the core was based on monks, more than 6 naginata and at least 2 musks(for the morale drope).
If you wanna, why don't u try these ones?
-1 musk hon 1, 1 musk hon 2;
-4 monks hon2;
-9 Nag hon2;
-1 Nag hon1.

In 103 the YS standard is hon4. The tactic to rout it, is based on a combined mounted troops charge on them, frontal(hold) and on flank(at will), with musks shooting on.

---

Total equivalent melee combat points for that army neglecting the muskets is 170 with a loss of -4 for each NC vs YS matchup and equivalent -4 melee for each charge negated by a YS.

I would still say a counterarmy to that is:

3 H2 HC = 45
5 H4 YS = 45
4 H3 NI = 56
4 H1 SA = 0

for a total of 146 equivalent melee combat points with an additional 4 points for each YS vs NC matchup. Three such matchups will even the melee power of the armies without considering charge negation, and I have 2 SA free to shoot at monks. The other 2 SA will engage the muskets. If I arrange the YS so there are no exposed flanks, I think the monks will have to be used to break my formation, and they will have HC to contend with. Of course, it depends on how well the units are used, but the counter seems to be there without simply resorting to the same army. This counter army is slower, so you have to play defensively.

I don't get how there are more people playing now than there were when I got this game. I guess it's because there's a working server...

Anyways, does anyone play the original STW, without MI? I've heard all bad things about MI, with kensai and battlefield ninja and such, but I would buy it either way, for the opportunity to play STW online. Only, I have no cash, I'll be broke until after Christmas. So if anyone's interested in playing a game of original STW v. 1.12 with me, let me know.

Cheers!

Well well, problems...

When I got to the main menu, everything was really laggy, could have something to do with my system, but I also couldn't move the mouse anywhere on the lower half of the screen, it like it could only move around an invisible window on the upper half.
That sucks. Anyways, I'll try to get a hold of MI as soon as possible, maybe things'll be better then.

One question. I need to create an online name for me to be able to play, right?

Not on the fakeserver, no. Just type it in.

Allright, cool! Anyone wanna play a game of oldschool STW without the expansion, give me a holla...

Great SOS day ~:)

Had some excellant 1.03 games with grizz, don't think I'm going to want to play 1.02 much anymore...

:charge:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hugh Jazz

Allright, cool! Anyone wanna play a game of oldschool STW without the expansion, give me a holla...

---

Both types of game can use the same FakeServer and we can have a chat together. I still have the original STW installed and can play that. I'm MizuTosaInu in the foyer, just say you like to play STW and I'll swap games.

I got old STW installed too ~:)


CBR

Had some excellant 1.03 games with grizz, don't think I'm going to want to play 1.02 much anymore...

they were fun (if a bit painful at times) i much prefer 1.03 with 2 max it makes for fun varied games.

Hi All.........

Looks like I'm going to have to hunt the bargain basements to see if I can find an old STW disc.

I have heard some good reports about how good this version was to play.

Seems I started playing games too late.

Yes Mim...some good games SOS...and some I could have done without. heh

Jochi :bow:

So, is the fakeserver up only on SOS? I was thinking that I could host a fakeserver, I did so once when I wanted to play with a friend from my site once, but I couldn't conect to it myself for some reason. Either way, my computer could be online most of the time, all around the clock. Anyone interested in me creating a fakeserver? Actually, I'll get right on it, and I'll post an edited config file here as well.

Cheers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hugh Jazz

So, is the fakeserver up only on SOS? ..Anyone interested in me creating a fakeserver? Actually, I'll get right on it, and I'll post an edited config file here as well. Cheers!

---

Thx m8, but could you check this as well?
http://p200.ezboard.com/fbrotherhood...picID=47.topic
Methos has already started during the week already a server. :bow:

His is not always up though...

So how many actually play?

......Orda

Were 17 there yesterday...methos server hasn't picked up yet, most I saw was 5 or so. They both seem to run pretty much lag free, for me at least.

Well, I could still put up a fakeserver to be my site's "official" server, as it's not too much of a hassle. It'll be there in case any of our members wanna play, and they can get a hold of me if something's wrong. I'll just post the new config file there, and if anyone's interested, they can go there.

A friend has just purchased a new PC and has mentioned to me that he might convert his old one to a dedicated 24/7 STW fakeserver. His only concern was that it might not be used much. He is an aspiring IT technologist and gets lab credit for doing things like this.

If it actually happens, I'll let everyone know about it. I should know in a couple of weeks.

Hello,

Interest in playing this seems to be picking up, so the server at 212.238.194.39 is up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TosaInu

Hello,

Interest in playing this seems to be picking up, so the server at 212.238.194.39 is up.

---

~:)

Im there with YogoBear now. Need more! ~:)

Edit: and none of us can host ffs

CBR

I can't host on Tosa's server either which is unusual because I could host on the EA server and I can host MTW and RTW. I also get dropped after every battle, and have to change my name to log back in because my old name is greyed out and never goes away. I saw two other names permanently greyed out as well yesterday.

Yes, there are problems. My guess is that the EA server had additional features compared to Fakeserver. The inability for some people to host puzzles me most.

Hi,

I couldn't host either, neither port forwarding or DMZ worked, the latters inability to host suprised me.

However, I have noticed some ports are still being blocked ie DOS (denial of service).

The server at 212.238.194.39 is up.

I'm wondering whether the host has to open ports? But I fail to see the logic of that. If a port at the host was the problem, no one should be able to host?