That's actually a good point...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior
Printable View
That's actually a good point...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior
Well, as long as I am on a roll ...
Now that I'm thinking about it, I think the Cav that have low charge values are because they aren't equipped with a lance. They attack with swords and the what not. This is especially true with mounted missile units, when they charge into melee, they typically are charging with swords drawn not Lances levelled. I can think of the Jinettes as an example of that sort of thing.
Of course you were talking about the Knightly units, but I threw the thing about the Missile Units as more of a comparison.
Very true. The gothic Knights lack the high charge of Kataphraktoi and others due to their not wielding a lance. The problem is that historically they would have charged with lances, then switched to maces, swords or hammers for melee. In MTW there are no secondary weapons (bows are not secondary weapons, the bow is part of the unit animation, when bowmen charge and engage in melee their swords appear, once they're standing or walking, running or shooting the swords disappear and their bows are visibile again.) so there's not alot we can do about it. The horse archers are the exception. They wouldn't have charged with lances, so their charge should always be about 4. With the Gothic Knights we either assume they're equipped with lances and give them an 8 charge bonus, reduce their charge back to 4, making them pointless IMHO, or up it to 6 and increase some of their other stats. I will have to look at their dependencies and those of Lancers. I am also thinking of creating another Gothic Knights type of unit using the Late Ghulam Bodyguards unit icons (Knight in Gothic Armour). These could be Milanese Knights and allocated to the italians instead of the GKs, too late for the MTW timeframe, but then Gothic Knights are probably also too late.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior
Another change I've made is that Byzantine Toxotai are now clothed as Ottoman Infantry and Bulgarian Brigands instead of the old Western European Peasant Tunic Archer unit.
I've settled on these stats for Gothic Knights for now:
Gothic Knights:
Charge: 6 (+2)
Melee: 6 (+2)
Defense: 7
Armour: 9
Honour: 8
I have only increased their charge by 2 to take the lack of a lance into account. The melee I've increased to give them an edge over Lancers in that respect.
Sounds good to me. :thumbsup: . Keep up the good work.
Cool. :2thumbsup: What about their build requirements? Are you going to leave them as is for now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
They'll be left as is for the present.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martok
I've just finished modding Vanilla Horse archers, the result is that they no longer exist. Vanilla Horse Archers are now replaced with Desert Horse Archers (generic Berber/Arab/Saharan Horse Archer unit) and Steppe Horse Archers. Both have exactly the same stats as the old vanilla horse archers.
Desert Horse Archers are recruited in any of the desert provinces on the map from Edessa, Syria and Antioch southwards, and westwards as far as Sahara and Morocco. They can be trained by the Turks, Almohads and Egyptians. Desert Horse Archers dismount to Desert Archers.
Steppe Horse Archers can be recruited in the same provinces as Steppe Cavalry and Steppe Heavy Cavalry. They can be trained by the Mongols, Russians, Novgorod, Byzantines, Turks and Hungarians. Steppe Horse Archers dismount to Archers.
Both units have visually changed with Desert Horse Archers looking the part, and Steppe Horse Archers looking much like Steppe Cavalry but with bows of course. The info pics now suit the units perfectly.
I thought I'd make a quick pop in regarding possible new bow types. I know you are probably not thinking about it now, but when you do:
In the repository, in the projectile stats thread, pg. 2, there is a post from GilJaySmith (one of the guys from CA) saying that you can't extend the file to add new types.
Clicky to the thread
Here's a link if you want the reference in context. The thread is a pretty good read, as long as you skip over the references to tactical nukes ~;) .
Anyways that's it for now. If I'm being a bother tell me to bugger off.
So it's hardcoded then... I will modify the ninja star if possible. I'm still lost as to what type of stats are needed for this projectile?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior
It's true that MTW don't use secondary weapons, but this aspect can be easily moddified. The key is in the Unit_W.txt file and in the Items folder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
In the Unit_W.txt file is defined the weapon of the unit and you can add a secondary weapon here in the same way that the javelin-armed units (Jinetes, Kerns...). But you want see the secondary weapon when the unit fight in close combat. Then you need make some changes in the Items folder. On one hand suppose that our unit uses the number 4 for its first weapon, a lance. Open the Weapon4 folder and search our unit folder, open it and delete the fight.txt file. On the other hand suppose that the unit uses the number 2 for his secondary weapon, for example a sword. Open the Weapon2 folder and make a new folder with our unit name. Into this folder will be the fight.txt file of our unit based in the fight.txt file of a unit that uses the same bif but bear a melee weapon. It's very simple with the Hospitallers, Santiago Knights, Teutonics and High Royal Knights because we have the Templars for the new fight.txt file. Excuse me for my complicated explanation
Good progress being made here, (more than I can say for myself). Great Work Caravel.
Do you mean what types of stats you need for a new bow type? Thats up to you. You could look at the other entries to get a rough idea on how the file is set up. I suggest GnomeEditor, the file os ugly like the unit file.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
If your looking for suggestions for what the stats should be, there are probably better people to ask than me, I promise.
If I missed what your asking altogether then I am confused and you'll have to clarify.
That is what I would wondering. In relation to a shortbow, crossbow, longbow or arbalest how would it stand?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensei Warrior
@Belisario: That looks to be a good idea. I may try it. It would be good to have most knights charge with a lance then switch to a mace or pole arm in melee.
:2thumbsup:
@Rythmic: It's hard going at times, but we're getting there slowly but surely. I have just changed the probability of siege equipment appearing revolts again after seeing a loyalist revolt in Wallachia consisting of one catapult. The AI training influences are working better in that that the pope has stopped building armies of ballistas and has instead opted for Militias. These modifications take up a lot more time than many people realise. Adding a new units for example is an absolute chore. It's not difficult once you're used to it, but you can so easily forget something. Then even if you remember it all you've got to ensure that every needed file gets into the distribution. :dizzy2:
One annoying point I'm working on at the moment is the unit icons for the Ghulam Bodyguards. I've done them all but I'm not happy with them so I'll have to do them over again.
:wall:
It's most annoying, I get constant CTDs. Like in my first attempt. I guess that's the problem of adding an entirely new unit list.
I know what you mean. You only have to make one omission, get distracted or forget something, and you end up with Byzantine Toxotai that hold their swords by the point rather than the hilt, as I had a few days ago.
I confess that conjured up quite the amusing image in my head. :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
In all seriousness, though, I applaud what you guys (Caravel & Rythmic) have done -- indeed, *all* modders deserve our praise and appreciation. I know modding isn't exactly a walk in the park, and your efforts are definitely to be commended. :bow:
Incidentally, I'm greatly enjoying my Fatamid campaign -- I've finally crushed the Turks, and the Byzantines are next on my list. :thumbsup:
I'm in the middle of a Byzantine Campaign myself. Of course I'm playing with what will be v1.0.6, which still needs some more fine tuning. Another gripe I have is the armoured spearmen. They look far too "viking" for the Byzantines...
You'll have to redo their localisation name, otherwise it will change their appearance in VI too, (but you would already know that so this becomes a redundant statement :laugh4:).
Yes, I'd take Armoured Spearmen from the Byzantine altogether. There needs to be a separate Byzantine Spearmen unit. I'm wondering whether it may be better to mod Byzantine Infantry into Spearnmen... to do this would involve taking the ahistorical Saracen Infantry from the Turks and Egyptians and giving them to the Byzantines as spearmen, and renaming them as Byzantine Infantry. The original Byzantine swordsmen would then be removed. Alternatively they could be renamed as Byzantine Spearmen reassigned to the Byzantines and the Byzantine infantry retained. The next stage then would be to reduce the starting command stars of the Byzantine royalty, and weaken their position in the early era.
A new spear unit would need to be devised for the Turks and Egyptians, based around Feudal Sergeants and not chivalric sergeants. Alternatively the Turks and Egyptians could be left to rely on the basic spearmen only, which would be more accurate than giving them a unit that is equal to Chivalric Sergeants.
I will try to get organized enough to download and install this weekend (not that I expect my input to be even remotely insightful, I just figure the more feedback you get, the merrier)....
What I have read thus far is hugely impressive - I am really looking forward to having a tinker with it.
Any feedback, whether positive or negative, would be greatly appreciated. I'm pretty clueless about many aspects, especially the types of units that were used by factions during certain periods. That sort of information would be greatly appreciated. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by bamff
:2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by bamff
I have been looking at the Saracen Infantry again and can't work them out? Going purely on the info pic, what are they supposed to be? They look more so late medieval Ottoman than early Seljuk or anything from the Fatimid or Ayyubid dynasties, though I'm not 100% sure of course. I need to get them sorted one way or the other.
The Byzantine Spearmen issue also needs resolving. I will have to give them a unit that looks like Byzantine Infantry (on the field, not the info pic) except with a spear, and with stats similar to Feudal Sergeants. What I want to avoid is giving the eastern factions any spearmen of Chivalric Sergeants Calibre. The Turks in particular need to be much more cavalry based.
The Vanilla Vikings, now known as the Drangar have had a facelift. Their units now looks much the same as Tegnar (the old Landsmenn) except with a smaller shield (the ones used by the armoured spearmen). They now look more in keeping with the rest. (they previously used the peasant unit animations).
Limiting the Eggies and Turks to vanilla spearmen is probably not a good idea, even if it would be historically accurate. Doing so would simply put them at too much of a disadvantage, unless you were going to completely nerf Katanks. I understand not wanting the Muslim factions to have the equivalent of CS, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
Think I mentioned it earlier in this thread or in the other thread about this mod, but would it be possible to add some sort of Scandinavian peasant unit? Like less effective crossbowmen with high charge and armour-piercing stats but pretty bad defence? This could be a really interesting unit as it could first be used to shoot up the enemy, then work like Woodsmen or Militia Sergeants (although perhaps with better stats). Trainable by the Danes in High/Late and in Norway, Sweden and Finland. Another interesting aspect could be added; the recruit cost should be really low, while the upkeep is rather (or very) high so that they can't be used extensively, and to simulate their unwillingness to stay in service for very long.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
The in-game pic could be crossbowmen and for the info-pic one could recycle the Woodsmen unit.
Historically, these units would be very accurate as the swedish peasants - a very misleading word as swedish "peasants" generally had a lot more rights than in the rest of Europe - levy was a dominant part of the army, particularly during the unstabile 15th century. In fact it could be taken even further, so that there's one form of unit in High and another one that works in the same way although better (Swedish peasant armies in the 15th century were really quite professional and well-equipped thanks to the many conflicts), just like the upgrade from FS to CS.
Anyway, I don't want to put too much work on you, and it's merely a suggestion. You've done some great work with the viking units already!:2thumbsup:
I'm thinking vanilla spearmen would be a disaster also. This is why I wanted to give armoured spearmen to the byzantines in the first place. I think a purpose build byzantine spear unit is needed. As to the Saracens I'm still not sure. Something needs to be done though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martok
I remember this. A militia sergeants/crossbow hybrid using the pictish crossbows info pic??? This should be easy but they'll have to use the militia sergeants/crossbowmen unit graphics. The crossbowman already attacks with an axe in melee. If you look closely you'll see it. The instant they attack the crossbow switches to an axe. It would be a simple matter of using this unit as it is and modifying it's stats to give it a true armour piercing weapon. Something like Ghazis though more extreme perhaps. Hopeless fighting in melee though with a woodsmen like charge and other stats?Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
:bow:
Didn't know that about crossbowmen and axes:book:Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
Hmm...I wouldn't say hopeless melee, rather just below average. I'm not quite sure how all the stats work (although I've modded a few units on my own in the GnomEditor), but their defence should be very low, so that they can't take any charges or be used as clog units etc. It really would be easier if split up into two units:
High unit: Toned-down crossbow as range attack. High charge, bad melee and hopeless defense. High honour and slightly below normal armour.
Late unit: Toned-down crossbow as range attack. Very high charge, decent melee and bad defence. Very high honour and slightly below normal armour.
The units could still look the same as the MS is actually wearing a chest plate, despite being recruitable in Early. One of MTWs few downsides.
Edit: the building dependancy though is a tough one. Really all it should require is a fort, but that'd make them way too easy to reach.
So would it be available from the high period only? A post-Viking unit?Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
The toned down crossbow would be a problem as it would involve a new projectile type. It would have to be the standard crossbow. Personally I have no problem with that as it's not exactly overpowered anyway. The only other way to tone it down would be to reduce the number of bolts they carry?
I would have to disagree somewhat over some of the stats, though. I think it would be better to have the high unit as slightly better morale than the later unit, but give the late unit a bit more armour and better overall stats.
I need to do an experiment with these also. I've just remembered this (an experienced modder may know better on this issue). It appears that if two or more units have the same name in the language file and the same building dependencies they may support "updating" from one to the other in different eras. This works with the Royal Knights and is based solely on their language file name in names.txt as far as I can tell. It may be hard coded to the bodyguard units only, but it could possibly work for any unit. I've never tested it! :dizzy2: I know this is the case for Royal Knights because the player is able to update "Royal Knights" (known internally as "EarlyRoyalKnights", "HighRoyalKnights" and "LateRoyalKnights".) from one era to the next when they were called "Royal Knights" in names.txt, but once renamed as e.g. "Not So Royal Knights" they would no longer update. If the game only checks the text string name in the language file when upgrading, then many units could be updated from one to the next when the new era begins and they expire. This would be a brilliant feature but I somehow doubt it would work. :thumbsdown:
Like many units in MTW the Saracen Infantry info pic is based on an illustration from an Osprey book (Saladin and the Saracens by David Nicolle, if I remember rightly) that represents a 13th century Anatolian infantryman from the Seljuq Sultanate of Rum or Iconium. A possible alternative could be reduce it to a 60 men unit and on the other hand increase the Turk and Egyptian light cavalry -especially the horse-archers- to 60 men units.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
I've made a new unit icon for the Late Ghulam Bodyguards, but I have some problems when I try convert it to Bif and Lbm files. I've asked for help in the Alchemist forum.
Well, as this was a predominantly Swedish thing (Danish peasants had the same "rights" as most of Western Europe) and Sweden didn't exist by 1087 I'd say yes. Of course there were peasant levies before, but they would be more interested in keeping the king away than serving him. Generally, Swedish peasants revolted (although often under the command of or by request from the nobility) against the king if he wasn't fit or they weren't happy with him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
Can't it just be edited in the projectilestats-file? If it can't I agree that lowering the ammo to say...24 (what a peasant was required to carry with him in times of war actually) would be a good idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
If for balance reason then I completely agree, but really the morale of the levies had increased by the 15th century as they were becoming more and more aware of their capability of defeating professional armies (although using their own rather sneaky tactics).Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
I'm sure I can help with this, and if I can't Ras will be able to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belisario
High an late periods it is then. Only trainable in Sweden, and often present in revolts there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
Unfortunately new projectiles can't be added to that file. I would have to mod the unused projectile. To be honest though I would use the crossbow as it is. Toning it down may make it virtually useless. The ammo can be decreased. At present it is at 28, and could easily lowered to 24.Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
In view of that I would suggest a modest increase in armour, a good increase in morale and few other changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
Now, that is a very good idea. It has never occurred to me to increase unit sizes for horse archers, but it makes perfect sense! :wall: The Turcoman, horse, Ottoman Sipahi (horse archers in this mod), Faris, Mamluk Horse Archers and Desert/Steppe Horse Archers could all be increased to 60 man units.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belisario
For the Saracen Infantry a renaming to Seljuk Infantry would be in order and reassigning them to the Seljuks/Ottomans only. They would also have to be available from the high to late periods and not in early.
For the Byzantines it's either a conversion of Byzantine Infantry into spearmen or the creation of a separate unit of Byzantine Spearmen.
I'll get over there. I've been having problems with LBMs myself and have been meaning to ask for a while. I find that though paintshop pro supports them it saves the file much larger than the original. also enabling the compression makes a mess of the image. The biggest problem I have with that program is that it doesn't preserve palettes properly either. With the bifs there is always the black spot editing annoyance a far as I know. I don't know any way around this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belisario