Printable View
Just a short poll to see whether people would prefer Kingdoms for the new game, as it could affect faction and mod choices. Obviously if we used Kingdoms we would be doing the Grand Campaign with a mod (say, the Kingdoms Grand Campaign mod for example) and not one of the mini campaigns.
Kind of what I expected so far. It's too bad, I think modwise Kingdoms has huge advantages over vanilla. However, if there are players that don't have Kingdoms there isn't much we can do.
This might be a good thread for mod discussion. As far as vanilla mods I'm a fan of BC but am guessing that would go against the requirement of more familiar faction choices for the upcoming game.
Vanilla mod is excellent and retains much of the feel of the original game.
Does anybody have some ideas for mod choice?
if we go kingdoms: SS 6.1?
Kingdoms is available in stores here for like 3-5 euro.
So go get it! :p
If you wish to go with BC, you could still play the Latin Kingdom, Armenia or Georgia those were almost carbon-copy of the setup in the Western kingdoms but with a different settings....
And some might be willing to RP the Leper King...
I'm okay with any setup, and have a prefernce for LTC or Vanilla Mod, mostly LTC (and LTC Gold in particular).
English or Danes for me though, although I will also play as French if thats the Faction choice.
Actually, change my vote to "willing to do both but would prefer Vanilla".
So, what mods do people think might be appropriate?
I don't know the mods for Vanilla very well, although I do know Lands to Conquer and Vanillamod are good.
Edit: My idea is that if we can decide on a mod fairly early on we'll have a good idea of factions in the region we want to play in, and can start thinking about that more as well. :yes:
Deus Lo Vult would be very good. It has additions to increase the difficulty of the player faction, as well as slow it's expansion. There's also a very nice career system for generals that would be very nice for RP purposes.
Sounds interesting. Does it have anything that could cause problems (for instance, someone had tried the Long Road and told me you lose loyalty as you move away from the capital. SS seemed to have something similar, with Ammonathas rebelling on one of my turns as Megas. I had to reload).
No that you mention it, I believe the Vanilla version did have the 'Civil War' system. I would gladly volunteer to edit and redistribute the necessary files, or we could delete the traits as the appear. I don't know if the earlier Vanilla version has it, but there is an option to imprison rebellious generals in the dungeon at the capital, which would be fun I think.
As long as that's the only issue we can fix or work around it as needed. Are the movement rates in it ok (that being one complaint in LotR, small movement rates and large provinces...)? One of the other issues was that SS wasn't quite complete in it's vanilla incarnation...
I can test out any mods we choose a bit but for the most part I'd prefer to defer to people who have played them longer.
It'd be great if we could find a good mod for the game. :2thumbsup:
I tried to push BC for the last game but people preferred a map with Europe. Funny we never really even went that far west of where the map ended. :laugh4:
I'll definitely put it as an option when we decide on mods. The longer move rates would solve some of our SS problems and as you say a few of the factions would work.
I figure we should iron out the mod (I'll put a poll in a day or so) and then pick a faction. :yes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan de Castelreng
When I looked at Deus on the TWC I remember it having a monetary penalty for having multiple generals in 1 stack. If that is indeed the case, then Deus is probably not a good choice.
If we need to do customization of an existing mod my LotR-mod installer script is available for anyone bothering to use it. It's quite easy to customize for new mod(s).
If you use SS (4.1 or 6.1), I very strongly suggest that you strip out the entire civil war trait system with a custom mod before the game starts.
OR,
We could use VanillaMod or LTC without actually having to mod the game before hand, just a thought.
Also, as to RPing, that should be something we players do, not something as part of the mod where we are forced into it, IMO.
It's been a while since I've dealt with the blindingly colored units of vanilla and mods close to it, or the arguably weaker gameplay, but it's certainly an option. ~;p
Roleplaying is something players do within the confines of the rules and limitations of whatever game they happen to be playing. If players believe that mod x or y offer them better options for roleplaying, or are even just more fun there's nothing wrong with that.
Last game we had people who hated the vanilla Byzantine color scheme so much that it would break all sense of verisimilitude for them. Whether SS changed that was a big part in whether anyone was willing to play that faction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by YLC
True, but I believe we can acquire a mod to relieve some of that. If it's okay, allow me to look around for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zim
Also, LTC's gameplay is some of the best available.
It was only an opinion, and mine at that ~;p. And I understand where your coming from, but say we pick another mod with loyalty draining traits or civil war traits. This, again IMHO, subtracts from the ability to roleplay.
I'll be avoiding mods with civil wars like the plague. :yes:
I don't like the ones with loyalty reducing traits for distance either (especially when it means reloading turns as Megas because somebody rebelled :furious3:) although TheFlax made an interesting point that of all the traits loyalty is generally the one we roleplay the least, preferring to decide for ourselves how loyal our characters our. I think this could be partly because it's the one trait that's very difficult to affect. You can work to get chivalry, dread, piety, etc but not so much loyalty. I wonder if anyone else had the same experience?
I admit not having played LTC much. I was thinking of it in terms of a "vanilla improved" like Vanilla mod. Would you say it's one of the better mods?
So am I the only one who like's Vanilla's colors and SS's Hellenized names? :clown:
Yes, we seem to agree there :yes:. I find Loyalty gained ingame is actually more in relation to how close the avatar is to being like the King/Duke/Emperor, rather then anything a player does himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zim
LTC uses Kingdoms gameplay balances with what is considered by many to be the best battlefield and campaign AI.
LTC Gold
There is also Grand Unit Add On which works well with Lusted's AI's (which can be obtained separately) and expands on unit availability as well (adding Kingdoms units and CA's unfinished units to the Grand Campaign) and has the same Kingdoms game balance.
I don't mind SS hellenized names, nor do I mind the colors of Vanilla either :beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecil XIX
-Edit: Don't forget LTC 3.1 for M2TW Vanilla!
I didn't mind the vanilla colors for the Byzzies so much, although I can see why people disliked them (that was a lot of purple). I never did and still don't quite get the difficulty with names, but I've come to assume it was a problem for a lot of people, judging by posts on the subject.
So far it mods mentioned (last one by a player on msn) have been:
BC
vanilla mod
Lands to Conquer
Dues lo Vult
The Long Road
The last one has a loyalty lowers at distance thing we'd want to mod out, and second to last civil wars.
Any more? We could do a poll to pick the mod pretty soon and start thinking more about factions again...
*sniffs and points above* Don't forget the Grand Unit Add On...it is really good...
Also, we can edit movement rates for the game by about 25-50%, which should help with Civil Wars.
Well, we've got a decent chunk of players who can't play Kingdoms (I'm kind of assuming people who chose that option don't have it, since if they did they'd be less likely to care which we used. Should have done different poll options I think...).
If we were to use Kingdoms I'd have a few more suggested mods...
Most of the mods suggested are for Kingdoms as far as I am aware :inquisitive:
LTC 3.1 is the only non-kingdoms one suggested so far, as far as I know.
I suggest Deus Lo Vult for either.
Do you have a link for Dues Lo Vult for M2TW only? I'd like to look it over first before being an utter LTC fanboy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecil XIX
YLC, The Long Road, BC and Vanilla mod are all for Vanilla and not for Kingdoms. I don't know for Deus Lo Vult, but I trust Cecil knows what he's talking about.
Deus lo Vult has versions for both, here's the vanilla one.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=114748
BC: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=140857
The Long Road: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=98729
*Proceeds to commit Sepukku*Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFlax
Me and my mouth...mmm...tasty foot...
Deus Lo Vult is very polished, adding many new features designed to slow down player growth by charging him boatloads of extra fees in order to expand, as well as forcing each character to focus on being a govenor or general. I've played a bit of one version of Vanilla, though I don't remember which one, and the recent 6.1 version for Kingdoms. The Kingdoms version may be a bit too restrictive for game meant to be shared among many, but on the other hand we can selectively choose which of it's 8 scripts to run. The Vanilla version is less restrictive, but only because it has less feature implemented. The Vanilla campaign I played also had me going broke from uncontrolled Family Tree expansion, but I'm not sure if that was a feature as I haven't heard it mentioned in the literature.
The main points of contention are that the extra fees may slow down growth too much, players may not like being forced to pick between general and govenor, and the civil wars. However, the first two may not turn out to be problems. They might even be plusses depending on the consensus. Also, the last two are implemented via traits and thus are easily correctly, either in the mod's files or on an ad hoc basis via the console.
It's pros are that it provides a superb roleplaying environment, mainly in the form of it's career path for generals. Each avatar who is not the FL or FH has one of five ranks, the progression being "Squire > Knight > Knight Banneret > Knight Commander > Knight Grand Cross" for Catholic factions. The surest way to climb up the path is to end your turn outside a settlement, but winning battles and Heroic Victories in particular can also help. Squires and Knights receive penalties to morale, with Knight Banneret and above gaining a bonus in the form of special Battle Standards. There is actually a limit to the number of standards for each rank, such that there can only be four Knights of the Grand Cross in any faction at a given time. Deus Lo Vult also has legendary swords as ancillaries.
There's a guide to many of the features here.
Many of the features in the guide are not in the vanilla version, such as the point system for cities and castles amongst others. The features not in vanilla are listed in this post under the lists of features added, including those for old releases at the bottom.
Cecil just sold me on Deus lo vult. I think it would actually suit the game if you had to be either a great general or a great governor. Builders and destroyers again :yes:
the kingdoms version would be really cool to play yeah.
Why can't ppl just grab the expansion? You can buy it for an apple and an egg in stores these days! :p
Lots of people hate Securom, which I guess isn't always taken off your computer even if Kingdoms is uninstalled...
hmm.. Beats me.
Never bothered me atleast.
Me neither but I noticed it was a huge deal when Kingdoms came out.
So Kingdoms is pretty cheap now? I've never had much money so it was tough on me buying it when it came out. Luckily I was able to save by skimping on unimportant things, like food. :laugh4:
last time I saw it in stores here, it was 3€.
And games are utterly expensive in this country :D
Well since Kingdoms brings some awesome mods with it, I'd pick it up if I didn't have it already.
Although I like some of the parts of DLV, I am not sold on it. There are some good parts, but there are some bad parts such as unit and building restriction that we shouldn't play with - such things should be decided by the ingame bickering of the players, not ingame scripts.
Also, I will try my :daisy: to break the "Governer" and "General" system - I dislike how it can force people to play in a way they will dislike simply because of where they spawned on the first turn. It has good points, but I don't like the inability to not be able to choose. If we pick it, we need to pick where we start, and have some control over it.
I'll have to test it out when I can.
i think we can choose what script to run and what not, no?
Maybe we can modify the scripts we want to use aswel?
This is indeed a point of contention, but I think we can come to a consensus that's agreeable. I should have pointed out that you choose career and education paths in Deus lo Vult by where your avatar is placed at the end of his turn. In such cases, I'm sure we'd use the console so that people are always able to make the choices they want. I mean, there's no IC reason an avatar has to come of age in any one place. It's easy to roleplay as the avatar being sent to get the education he needs/wants before reaching 16.Quote:
Originally Posted by YLC
Also, I got my copy of Kingdoms new for $20.
Just a thought guys.
What about having a hot seat style campaign.
It could work with a few members taking the ruling places of a couple of factions. Which in turn means no compromising on the battles - they happen and not delete units after to simulate losts.
The politics and behind the scenes politics that happened throught europe could be played out. factions can war or ally in game and use the forum for terms and negotiating. It would also keep things simpler to keep track of as huoses are then dominant families of different factions.
Maybe there's something there.
Although a good thought MA, it's just not in the style of WotS/KotR, which is what I signed up for (and I feel so sad because I stood and watched KotR instead of jumping in ~:mecry:, so will not happen again)
Fair enough. What does WotS and KotR stand for?
WotS = Will of the Senate and KotR = King of the Romans, those two games being the predecessors of LotR.
WellQuote:
Originally Posted by YLC
You could combine it :)
A hotseat with a few playable factions, and in each playable factions we have a few players doing it Lotr-style :p
We create one big subforum, with smaller subforums for each faction.
Each faction will have a setup like Lotr.
That borders on being a little to complex and too much work for one GM, IMO. Also, a major disadvantage of that kind of setup is a lack of IC interaction coupled with the inability to fight defensive battles (or to have way to much PvP).Quote:
Originally Posted by mini
One master GM and for each faction a smaller GM :p
A lot of PVP = true. Ppl not willing to play pvp battles should therefore stay away.
pvp battles will have to be decided in multiplayer.
IC can be solved in numerous ways.
perhaps a general subform for 'world IC' where each faction can have an embassy among other things for example.
You will have to IC both national and international :p
But agreed on the amount of work. I was just spitting the idea :)
Oh, indeed, continue! All ideas are good so long as you take the time to refine them and think them out. An idea can only be bad if you simply act on it, without thinking :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by mini
Which is what this tread is all about, discussing the possibilities for the next game. Heck who knows, if we continue to refine your idea, then it could be possible to reduce the work load through rules or simplified implementation.
Well, I think the work aint so bad
One big Subforum
- World (with threads like faction X embassy, faction Y embassy etc, places where ppl can RP internationally, should be the main RP site. Maybe threads like: English stories, English battles and so on, for each faction. And the main OOC thread)
- Faction X (official politics and a small ooc thread)
- Faction y (official politics and a small ooc thread)
.
.
.
Each faction will ofcourse work differently in its political system.
Which can be decided by the lower-GM of each faction.
The big rules, which apply for the world can be set by a master GM.
Most of these rules can be taken from previous PBM's.
pvp however, will be in multiplayer. tabletops etc take to long.
Workign with this kind of GM structure has it's advantages: the lower-GM's only have to worry about their own faction = less work
The head GM only handles cases which have been brought to his attention by the lower GM's = less work.
haven't got any further than that though.
Too many GM's, not enough players, thats the main issue, and a hard one to solve.
point taken :)
Its not only "not enough players" but by asking for only MP battles you're alienating a wide range of players (I think), plus MP really stinks. YLC and I couldn't even join each others' game in M2TW MP lobby...
Also by broadening the scope like that, you change the essence of the game. Things become much less personal at such a scale and most likely everyone in a faction will more or less play nice with each other because of external threats.
Anyways, the idea is not without merit but its widely ambitious and at the risk of presuming too much, I don't think that's what people are looking for in a successor for LotR.
wasn't implying this should be implemented, just got carried away :P
The main idea I was thinking of was, to add dimensions to the game.
Shortly after I joined I found the pace extremely slow.
I found player interaction to be near catatonic and couldn't work out what the houses did because there were so few messages.
Basically politics is hard without some history. And every player and city being the same colour made it tough for me to work out what House asteri had let alone what my role was. Before my comp died I found myself waiting a month just to get to my post. No battles insight and people generally talking nonsense about minor rules and a dog as next emperor.
Also the houses seem to have little co-ordination.
This brought me on to the idea that using hot seat. We could fight the battles online like your having to do anyway. The politics are now internal and external. The houses are factions with their own money and hierarchy. They can work together like sister factions of a greater empire or against each other (this is what rtw had three roman factions for).
The GM can check the house (faction) forums but the only members of that faction can otherwise view and post so that's the internal politics. Regions can be gifted, money exchanged and protectorates granted with a little imagination. Also player interaction can happen through a forum embassy and transactions made or withheld like in real life history by the ruling members.
Yes PvP will happen but you guys were fighting a power battle when I arrived and not a lot seemed to happen apart from that for weeks. This way it can be fought or not and the consequences are real to the factions.
It's just an idea but it is expandable and I think it may work.
If I'm missing the point of Lotr please enlighten me as I was trying to get the gist before my comp failed but was only getting bits and pieces
Either way I do look forward to seeing the next game.
The point of LotR is to create dynamic IC interaction. Creating multiple "playable" factions, while braoding possibilities, reduces this because players from one faction will be far more interested in fighting everyone else then themselves because of the threat level - remove the horrible AI and replace it with a human, and you create a greater threat. Make external threats weak, and everyone turns inward. Human nature at it's finest.
In summary, the larger game lacks the IC tension that the smaller game does.