MTW-Redux Beta Released!

[Axalon]

Glad to hear from you, Western! Now, your questions are both interesting and valid I think (you finding these things a bit odd it’s not that surprising to me, I would probably react in the same way).


First question; the reason for the ”trade galley” being a bit more expensive than the “tradeship” are based on the assumption that the slaves/prisoners required to operate it properly cost some as well. That kind of reasoning goes for all the galleys in redux. Hence it is a bit more costly to buy/build galleys (it is basically applied to support costs as well, hence tradegalleys are more expensive in every sense).

Second question; why on earth would I ever want to build something that I can get cheaper and still get the exact same quality anyways? Well, the short answer to that is; no you don’t, pure and simple. But the AI for some reason thinks its fun to do so, why? The most likely explanation for that is probably linked with the AI-build values in CRUSADERS_UNIT_PROD11.TXT and personally I think it adds little colour to the game. As in, all the ships on the stratmap are not the same kind everywhere, kind of thing. Now, before any hasty conclusions are made here, we need also to have a closer look on the answers to the next question.

Third question; why are the stats identical? The reason for that can be traced back to a flaw in the original MTW. I my experience, half of the boat stats are almost 100% cosmetic and have, with the exceptions of range and speed, no traceable effect in the game at all (for each shiptype at least, strength is similar to the “men”-value of tac-units. As in a value of “60” results in 60 men in that unit by default). Before I realized all that I did have an intricate system planned for all the ships in redux. However, when I finally found out, beyond any doubt, that the attack and defence values did not have any noticeable effect the game, what so ever, I decided to give them some “reasonable” standard values to camouflage the flaw in MTW (and redux along with it). This is hard coded stuff and I can’t do anything about it, if I could I would.

What I’m trying to say here is that you could have the value of “87” on defence and “24” on attack and it still would not matter in the game (if you or anybody else considers it worthwhile to prove me wrong, by all means do so. I would actually consider that a major breakthrough for the game and do something about it, that’s for sure). “Your supership” would most likely just get sunk anyways, sooner or later (and probably by a ship with the values of 2 or 4 or something). I tried stuff like that when still thought it there was any point in doing so, desperately trying to make the ships different from each other. As it is, the sad truth is that it does not matter, the only reason for buying a “royal warship” is that it cooler then the plain ”warship” and so on (not counting range differences here). Speed-values have a small impact on the game, but “Range” actually is the only value that really has a direct effect in redux and original MTW. Because of all this there really is no point in giving the various ships different values since they actually won’t matter much anyway. But for forget all that when your plying, because it would not be as much fun otherwise, would it?

The bottom line: when it comes to naval-power, the only thing that seems to count is quantity and “stars” basically all else have no or little effect in either redux or the original (sad but true, but it seems to be hard coded all of it).

Are there any other questions? (That offer is open to all by the way)



INTEL-REQUEST:
I am curious Western; how long have you progressed in turns with the Byz so far? How many provinces do you got? How does a typical “Western”-Byz army look like? What are you favourite units? Why? Which units do you especially hate to face etc. Why? Give me some redux-Intel here! That goes for you too von Manteuffel! That offer is also open to all by the way. Come on guys; don’t keep me in the dark here im curious! Hehe!


BUGHUNT: I you found something that you are anyway uncertain of, whether it “qualifies” or not, as a bug do post it here and I will see to it that it gets the proper treatment. If it is a valid bug (or error) I will “move it” to the “debug area” and announce the “kill”/credit confirmation. (However, if you do feel certain on your bug/error; proceed directly to the “debug area”. Oh yes, the debug thread is for MTW-VI/V.2.01 only. Any MTW-V1.1 errors and bugs; right here is the best place to post 'em.)


- Cheers

[Axalon]

Hi Wes, all that stuff is well worth discussing further and I will gladly do so, but I would like to request that we put it on hold for a short while. I really need your Intel on the Byzantine tac-unit situation (especially) and such stuff (and I know that you played the Byz so you should have an opinion by now). It would sharpen my perspective so to speak, is this ok for you?

If it is; just type “got it” below here, and you can post your Intel later (but I would prefer sooner hehe! ). Cause I would like to handle all the stuff by you and the baron at full capacity. If its not type ; “no can do”…. (Have some mercy on me man, Hehe!)

Cheers Man

[western]

Got it - intel later

[Axalon]

Over at the “debug area” Baron von Manteuffel wrote this:

“The Polish infantry could use a heavier spear unit to hold a battleline. Right now the best they have is a Basic Spearmen. Kind of strange they have Royal Knights but not Royal Spearmen, Royal Infantry, or Royal Guard. No Knights of Dobrzyn help either for poor Poland. Hungary is almost the same; they don't have any of the heavier Royal units, though they do have the Order of the Dragon.”

There are plenty of things here to comment on, I will start with the polish stuff and get back to the Byzantine things later (which is cut out for the moment). When I get some additional info from Western on the Byz I will return to your notes on that, because I want more info and a broader perspective on this before I give you my reply…. Ok, off to Poland then:


Redux & the Polish faction:
Now, what you are reacting to here is the fact that I regard the Poles as semi-external to the war-traditions that dominates western Europe by design, roughly speaking; knights, crossbows, Frankish- feudal- and royal- formations and smaller more specialized infantry units and such. On the other side we have what I categorize as “eastern”-war-traditions; horse archers, lighter cavalry, massed (often unspecialized) infantry, various types archer formations etc. (right or wrong, it does not matter much really, that’s the way I see it). I my mind and in my design Poland is caught in between of east and west, just as stated in the campaign intro-text: “the place where east meets west”.

The royal and feudal knights are an expression of that (western influence), just as the lack of most other feudal and royal units (Eastern influence). I must draw the line somewhere (because Poland can not have all tactical units, that would simply destroy designs for redux) and I have chosen to do it with the assumption that nobility is more inclined and receptive to be influenced by western traditions than the lower classes. Hence you got the knights and hence you got more “eastern”-oriented infantry.

In my effort to reflect that (my) view in redux I have obviously treated the poor Poles (and Hungary even more) differently than most other Catholic factions. Poland is more reliant on “eastern” and Slavic troops. The primary strengths of Poland the way I see it; is cavalry- and archer-formations. Infantry, although not that bad, is none the less a weaker area of her available tactical arsenal. Poland got light and basic spearmen, light and regular halberdiers (who are slightly better than the spear formations I think). There is also the solid Slavic Knight- and Infantry-formations who should be able to protect Poland fairly successful. Poland also got her two unique troops, don’t forget them.

It has never been my intension that the “tactical unit-profile” of Poland should be similar or resemble to the factions of western Catholic factions (as in Burgundy and France). It is very intentional that Poland greatly differs from all the other Catholic factions and that she relies much more on “Eastern” and Slavic-units. There is a designed and deliberate “cultural” difference applied here. We should not also forget that the opposition in the polish region is different then what is found in Frankish and Southern Europe (or at it least it should be, because I designed redux that way). And that is also reflected in the troops available to Poland.

Now, having said all this, there is another factor which you actually do have influenced me in. And I have actually considered this even before I got your post; this is the difficulty rating for Poland. Your input have further encouraged me to raising it to “Expert” instead of the current “Hard” level. The harsher economical framework in redux certainly does not make things easier for Poland. Making florins a steady concern for Poland and certainly more difficult to play. What are your views on this, now when you have more insight on my intensions for Poland? Would it not better reflect the challenges of a Polish campaign? At any rate, If this is done, it will be realized first with the release of the “formal” VI-upgrade pack. To me it seems that this would be in line with much of your presented critique regarding Poland, or what do you say good baron?


On a related note; I am also (and even more) considering to lower the difficulty rating on France to “Normal” since they usually do have florins to spare thus making things easier for them. The rich provinces in that area really show in the game, even if the crown is under “AI-management”.

Finally, regarding the Knights of Dobrzyn; I have put them in my “great ideas on stasis” box, because the idea is not bad, and I will of course credit you if I use it in the future.


- Cheers

[Baron von Manteuffel]

Hi, yes I agree with the expert difficulty rating. Florins are very hard to come by for the Poles and they are surrounded by very powerful enemies. I tried to hold coastal province Prussia for the development of shipping and trade, but while I was slowly building the Norsemen invaded. Timing is everything and unfortunately I didn't have enough units for the task. I've found with Redux the importance of having a large police army for a recently occupied province. Oh, I know historically the Polish and Hungarians (Szekely Cavalry) relied heavily on mounted archers, I just thought they could use a Slavic Armoured Spearmen or something like that. I've read the Templars where active in both countries as well. I'm sure I will enjoy what ever you come up with and I don't mean to sound to critical. As far as faction unique units, the French were famous for their heavy cavalry and Knights. How about giving them the Compagnies d’Ordonnance or some other heavy cavalry unit? The Portuguese: Knights of Aviz, The Aragonese: Knights of Calatrava, The Byzantines: Skutatoi, Kontaratoi, Menavlatoi - just some ideas.

[western]

Axalon

OK, here's my feedback on the Byzantines.

My longest campaign was 70 years on expert, at the end of which I had the Balkans, Asia Minor and Italy and had wiped out the Hungarians and Italians. I had some truly epic battles against both those factions - big, tough, lots of variety in the troops but with the Italians in particular having a definitely different feel about their mainly infantry armies. Reminded me a bit of the feel of MedMod, the first great MTW Mod, where there was a real effort to give each faction a distinctive character.

I liked
- the look of all the troops. There's a weight and substance to the icons in review and a good match with the troops as they actually appear
- the balance. No troop type seemed too overwhelming. I was worried at first that archers were overpowered but that seemed to wear off. Factions didn't seem to spam all the same type of troops, or too low a level, and nor did rebels.
- the fact that ships were fairly few on the ground. Too many ships, with instantaneous movement, and any feel that you have to work to get from a to b, or that the world has any scale, goes out of the window. Those active rebels did a small sea invasion on me, which was novel. Otherwise it was land movement until I went into italy via the toe. The commonest ships were rebel ships
- regionalisation of troops, so that my troop options expanded with my empire
- good mix of mercs: very appropriate for the Byz
- stable balance of power. I killed 2 factions, rebels killed the Pope and someone else did in the Burgundians, but otherwise everyone was left at the end and all save Lithuanians were reasonably formidable powers.
- absence of bridge battles, which in my opinion are unrealistic, silly and too hard for the AI
- rebelliousness - not so high as to be silly, but it took time to stabilise new provinces, and depleting garrisons too far caught me a couple of times (since I don't check as a matter of realism)
- no uber generals. You seem to have somehow corrected the hard coded habit of the Byz spawning multi-star heirs. No idea how this has been achieved??

I would suggest
- money is still a bit too plentiful. That's what kills my interest, when I am struggling to spend my income each year once my empire has grown
- raise requirements (and upkeep) for Byz infantry and put in a militia unit between them and peasants.
- regionalise even more. I don't like being able to raise cataphracts and Byz lancers in Hungary and Wallachia. I should be having to recruit local auxiliaries or bring troops up from my home provinces.
- not sure why cataphract numbers are so small and lancer numbers so big.
- Byz lancers are probably my favourite unit. I like saracen mercs too and I'd like to see a buildable Byz unit that is basically a copy - heavy horse archers (actually the rear ranks of the line cavalry) are a Byz thing. Let's relegate the guys in shirts to being mercs and have some buildable mailed horse archers.
- I could do with less starting variety of light cavalry. I've got peasant cavalry, light cavalry, horse archers and scouts. Byz werent known for light cavalry. I would cut down to one or two and give Byz an incentive to go looking for some regionals instead.

I didn't see anything that would qualify as a bug - this is a real quality piece of work.

Hope that is the kind of thing you were looking for.

[Axalon]

Hi again guys,

many thanks to the both of you, for the praise, additional comments and Intel. Now as promised earlier I will now give some further comments on the Byzantines. Over at the debug area Baron von Manteuffel wrote:

“The Byzantines, or Eastern Roman Empire, to me look to weak in their infantry units. They have the usual nice assortment of missile units and great looking cavalry but where's the infantry? The Palace Guard (Are they the Varangian Guard?) can only be recruited in Constantinople which really hurts, and then they have Light Spearmen, Byzantine and Armenian infantry. As you can probably tell I favor the spear units especially early in a campaign. The reason being that they're a fairly cheap unit to recruit, usually a large unit, and a defensive unit you need to hold what little you have at the start of a campaign. After I establish a trade network and can afford to do so, I will recruit elite units and have more of a balanced army.”

And below are my remarks and additional commentary.


Redux & the Byzantine faction:

If I understand you correctly you have “objections” against the fact that the Byzantines have a limited infantry arsenal available, and as you might already suspect this not a coincidence. I have designed it that way because I was interested in forcing the Byzantines to recruit auxiliary infantry formations as the game progresses. I had yet again to draw the line somewhere and it ended up the way it did. The Byzantines has a small core of solid and reliable formations of tac-units and the main problem, the way I see it, should be recruit- and support-costs, thus forcing the player to more actively have to restructure existing skeleton tactical resources and merge them to new operating formations (thus creating veteran formations).

The requirements for commissioning new Byzantine infantry formations are fairly easy, and this is intentional (this is of course linked to the tech-tree) because the main problem is designed to be the costs involved instead. I want the Byzantine armies to have a core of massive and unique formations and I want a Byzantine battle to be distinct and characterized by this core of massive infantry and cavalry formations looking mighty and disheartening to the enemy. It should have an “imperial” feel to it, so to speak. A Byzantine army of 6 full infantry and 2 cavalry formations should really have an “army” feel to it in a way that Catholic factions would have a hard time to compete with (still possible although, with the royal formations of course).

Since the Byzantines or any other faction (HRE is close however), can’t have it all in tactical resources the lines have to be drawn somewhere. I have designed it so that the Byzantines have three core units to build there armies upon: Byzantine- infantry, cavalry and lancers. Everything else is, to me at least, basically additional and auxiliary troops, regardless of what it may be (including the light spearmen. He he!).

Regarding the Byzantine palace guard then; no it’s not the Varangian guard it’s rather reduxes substitute for ‘em. They are indented to function as elite/veteran auxiliary units to support the regular infantry. These guys are good and can usually deal effectively with most things they encounter in battle. The reason for them being only available in Constantinople is based on the assumption that there the imperial palace is located; if that gets overrun, then the option of recruiting these guys won’t be available any more.
The “real” Varangian guard is supposed to be Norse mercenaries, and if my design works correctly, they should be available as mercenaries in Constantinople. Those boys could really be good “crack-troops” if properly supported.


Additional comments: (including Westerns Byzantine-Intel now)

Having reviewed the material Western posted in it is clear to me that I agree with much of it. It is also clear that the both of you are pretty keen on introducing new units to redux, and that’s fine and ok. But to put it frankly for you guys, I’m more interested in making the already existing units in redux work properly before even considering any such things myself. The door is wide open for the both of you to add and tinker with that as much as you like, privately or publicly. Now, von Manteuffel; it sounds to me that you should consider to do an “order expansion” for redux yourself since you clearly know more about that than I do anyway. And Western as far I can tell you have already two copies of redux one “vanilla” and “Western deluxe” and you are already doing some major alterations and custom stuff with redux as well. Great! Redux is supposed to be a platform for customizing your own personal game. But I would appreciate if you guys could help me out in securing a good “formal” VI-upgrade for redux first, if its ok for you guys? Since it is blatantly clear to me, no matter how much experience I have on redux and MTW, It is always a good thing to have some extra pair of eyes.

Basically what I am trying to say is that, I need your help, eyes and opinions to secure a good and sharp perspective on redux, which all leads to improving my chances to ensure a good quality on the VI-upgrade and the redux version itself. I might not always agree with your opinions, but I always appreciate your input because it helps me to keep my own perspectives on redux sharp. And there is also an ever standing possibility that I might miss something and your eyes and Intel is then the last line of defence I got in preventing such stuff to happen.


Now, having said all that I do agree with you western that some additional regionalizing could be a good thing for the Byzantines (sorry Manteuffel hehe!) and I will look in to it. It should not be too hard since it is really just 3-4 tac-units were talking about here anyways. If none of you guys have some “super ironclad” arguments for the restrictions of the Byzantine Infantry I already decided that they shall remain unchanged. That leaves the cataphracts, lancers and cavalry formations which are all currently unrestricted. That is all about to change somehow, the question is how? Now the cavalry is fairly hard to get due to the tech-tree the same is almost true for the lancers. Even if they currently are unrestricted it is not that easy to recruit them everywhere, the province must be developed as well. The cataphracts then? These are probably easier to get hold of then the other two, thus applying some restrictions are even more interesting here. Your views on this matter would be much appreciated, if nothing else to keep my perspective sharp at least. Frankly, I have not decided yet as I write this. This is one thing you guys could really influence me in.

Concerning the size of cataphracts then, the main three reasons for having them as they currently are; are cost, balance and the notion that they should be rare and few in numbers. Technically I could double their size to 20 and the over all effects would probably be rather smallish on redux-SPC. However, in doing so the cost for such a formation would be 500 florins which usually are very much when playing in solo battles or redux-MP. How about it guys? What are your views on that? Would that be a good thing? Would it serve the Byzantine faction? Don’t forget that there is a support costs involved here and that all Heirs will have these formations.

To the issue of support costs then, westerns Intel regarding the Byzantines clearly shows that my design has failed so far and that this needs some further adjustments. Currently it is cavalry 100fl./lancers 75fl./infantry 50fl. obviously it needs to be higher to some extent. I will look in to it. Concerning the light cavalry stuff for the Byzantines, they are all auxiliary troops as far as I am concerned. To me it is “the big three” that counts along with the Byzantine archers and cataphracts. Regarding the haltering of “super generals” Western, I have no idea what I did (if I did, I can’t remember, I have been working on redux for a long time). It’s probably just luck I guess hehe!


Some other unrelated remarks:

Now, if I remember everything correctly we have together played thru all the 8 factions and there have not been any obvious bugs on any of them so far, which of course is a great thing. But this also means that we probably can concentrate more on other things and that we also are one step closer to the formal release.

One thing is certain, and this is partly because of your input guys, I have decided to put in 12 additional slots in the CRUSADERS_UNIT_PROD11.TXT thus making more room for you guys to put in what ever troops you want when the formal upgrade pack is finally released. Thus there will be 24 instead of the current 12 available slots (I do know that there is a max limit of 256, but I prefer units that actually make a difference and not just adding quantity to the game). As far as I can tell there is no need to expand the CRUSADER_BUILD_PROD13.TXT so far and frankly I am bit concerned about making it to big anyways. Because I get the feeling that the game-program is not that happy about any such prospect (however I have no solid facts here). VI’s capacities for tinkering are at any rate far more greater than there ever was in V.1.1 which means that it is probably just as well to add some extra vacant slots for tac-units.

Another thing I have been considering is campaign start capital. Currently it corresponds to the original MTW but I am more and more convinced that this deserves some adjustments as well. In my book, an expert level on campaign is supposed to be expert and not the default setting for any meaningful play. Thus I am inclined to do some alterations for redux. How does this sound?

Alternative 1
--------------
Easy........8000fl.
Normal.....4000
Hard........2000
Expert.....1000

- Quite a challenge for the first 20-25 turns on expert I guess, as it should be. Imagine playing Poland or Spain now, Hell I’m interested!

or....

Alternative 2
--------------
Easy........5000fl.
Normal.....4000
Hard........3000
Expert......2000

- Still quite difficult for the first 20-25 turns I guess, expert is supposed to mean expert at least as far as I’m concerned.

Well guys what do you think?

Western I will get to your posted material as soon as we get the above sorted. For now I will start investigating your potential bug.


The OPTIONAL MISSION/experiment “1A” :
Oh yes! I got an optional mission for you guys: fire up the ol’ GnomeEditor and open up “CRUSADERS_UNIT_PROD11.TXT” and go to row:41-43/column:36 and set the ” ENGAGEMENT_THRESHOLD” to 10000. Do a least 5 battles against the English with whatever faction you want. The English must have at least 2 Longbowmen formations and the battle should be in open terrain. Then report back to me with your findings. Good luck!


- Cheers guys

[western]

Axalon

Couple of quick points in response, since I am on line.

Very happy to keep trying things out on "redux pure". Just keep telling me what would help, and I will get around to it.

I understand all your logic round the Byz - except the low build requirements for their infantry. It meant I could keep instantly spamming them out any time I took a province, however unByzantine its character.

Now I have a hangup about realism, and here it seems to me realism and gameplay go together. Shouldn't I have to socialise the province a bit, and put in a bit of infastructure, before they will line up to wear my uniform? I reckon the Byz never got any decent infantry out of Italy even though they ruled in the south for hundreds of years.

My point about adding a weak militia (which doesn't have to be a new unit - the Catholics have one already that could be cloned) is that you have nicely simulated the feel of a Byzantine field army. But those guys didn't garrison cities - and sometimes, even in the field, they had to be bulked out with quickly raised levies who could just hold a spear and stand in place.

My field regiments should be precious rather than spam, so my suggestion is to make them quite a bit more expensive and give me townsmen to do the spam jobs (but so poor that they are not good for much).

I offer this as a suggestion for the greater good of Redux (and because I like a bit of debate). Ultimately you have made it possible for us all make our own adjustments, so we don't have to fall out!

Regarding cataphracts, I would double size and restrict where they can be built. Historically their breeding grounds were Anatolia and Rum and they went extinct after the Turks took these, the last remnants having to be consolidated in one super regiment, a bit like Napoleon's cavalry officers on the retreat from Moscow.

I'm still seeing my "bug" by the way - rebel monoculture followed, eventually, by diversity. It's not a major problem, because it's possible to tweak what the monoculture will be, but it's certainly curious.