Page 2 of 24 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 691

Thread: MTW-Redux Beta Released!

  1. #31

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Hi there Western. (This took a bit longer than I originally planned…)

    First of all, good to know that the beta appears to be stable and that the bugs so far have eluded you. I would say it is very likely that MTW 2.01 version is more stable than the 1.1 version of the game and this also has its effect on how redux is running (as in less crashes and freezes). Now, I got both short and long versions for your remarks and questions and they are as follows:


    Short versions:
    --------------
    1. The rebels: …probably a combination of reduxed things…

    2. High Costs; …it’s better and more proper that way…

    3. Excess Money: …more unlikely to happen in redux…

    4. Shared Idea: …an interesting idea and I agree with you…



    Long versions:
    -------------
    1. THE REBELS: in truth, I have no certain answers for you why they appear to do their job better in redux and it is probably a combination of reduxed things.

    Firstly, I have given the rebels some (5-10 or so) special units that are only available to them (usually categorized as “raider”-troops, ex. “raider” -infantry, -cavalry, etc.). All these special rebel troops usually are fairly easy and cheap to recruit which by itself makes it very possible for the AI to actually use them. I have also given the AI all the possible incitements I could think of to encourage the AI to use/recruit those special rebel units, and it appears to be working. I have also changed the settings/stats so that they should be able to build smaller and “rebel only” pirate fleets if they have the proper installations in place. This actually happens now and again, thus disrupting the sea routs of trade and transportation making the rebels even more troublesome to have around.

    Secondly, rebels should not build installations (buildings), they raid and plunder (building stuff are the regular factions job)! The build embargo has essentially been integrated for that very reason and I have instructed the AI that starting embargos are especially good thing to do for the rebel faction, and if your findings are correct then it seems to be working. I have also reasoned that sooner or later the rebels get their hands on a province which does have a castle in it, and that in turn will ensure that the rebels will have the possibility to raise some of those special rebel troops.

    Thirdly, I have reduxed all the rebel settings for provinces in the game, basically increased all settings by at least one step in the “startpos” entries. The direct effect being that there are greater risks of rebellions in redux. There are a few exceptions here, CONSTANTINOPLE being one among of those few. Redux also introduces, relocates or discards various rebel-hotspots in the game compared with the original MTW, the worst unruly rebel hotspots in redux are among others; CORDOBA, SAHARA, KHAZAR, FRIESLAND, SCOTLAND, LIVONIA, VOLGA-BULGARIA and NORMANDY etc. It’s all in the “startpos” entries. At the same time there are more buildings in redux that makes people happy and all the various values/stats for that have also been reduxed so all that rebel activity is basically balanced out by that. Building (and finishing) an 80 or 100%+ farmland makes the people happy in redux for instance, small taverns don’t give as much happiness boost as a great tavern etc. All the exact values are obviously in the “CRUSADER_BUILD_PROD13.TXT”-file (a Gnome editor is recommended here of course).

    A fourth note is that the rebels usually don’t go to war with everybody and thus seem be inclined to attack the weaker spots of their current and active enemies for starters, which actually happens now and again. Thus potentially forcing the player and all other factions to have garrison near a rebel strongpoint in the region I guess. If the rebels get a promising opportunity to take a rich province they might very well take it. They are at war for god sake! Well, you get the idea… I suspect that the rebel AI might be similar to the “Pope AI” in that regard.

    Lastly a more speculative note on the rebel behaviour in redux; their unusual vigor could perhaps be explained in how the redux-SPC is constructed and set up. There are plenty of rebel controlled provinces when the campaign starts. In fact it’s the lion’s share of the entire “stratmap” right? Most other major MTW-mods tend to fill these “vacant" territories with new factions of different kinds and the original game has obviously also less rebel held territories than redux does. It might be just this simple; the game program is instructed to “take back” lost provinces for the behalf of the rebels, since it was "rebel"-territory when the game started and it is merely trying to achieve this with the available means. This is of course speculation, but it might very well be just like that, personally I get that impression. (Other than these five aspects, I have not a clue…)



    2. HIGH COSTS: The high costs in redux is basically altered to what I thought was proper yet functional for the installation/building in question. Many times the final value was compared with the cost of a single unit of “royal knights”, and then I applied a little reason to it. To me taverns and inns should be cheap and easy to build since it merely is some large plain houses. Churches, palaces and such on the other hand, should be at least fairly expensive since anything else would have been ridiculous.

    Basically it is combination of reason and what also is functional in the game. Building a castle is not cheap, it has never been and it is not even supposed be it either. If you want a castle, then prepare to part with some of those precious florins of yours… You get idea. It’s as easy as that. All costs are of course listed in “CRUSADER_BUILD_PROD13.TXT”-file.



    3. EXCESS MONEY: This is indeed problematic issue. The problem can also be divided into several parts, but in the end, it all comes down to the “flow of florins” in the game.

    Part I
    As you probably are well aware of, the trade system has been changed and even more so when running redux upon v 2.01 of MTW. I have essentially cut the trade income by 50% with a few exceptions along with the obvious fact that I have redistributed, introduced or and removed some trade goods from the game (in cases this actually resulted in a seemingly more historically accurate distribution of goods and resources than in the original).

    This of course has its impact on the game, for all factions even the rebels, making it harder to get those “monster loads” of florins in the royal coffers. Thus redux offer harsher economical conditions, but at the same time prices are also higher, making it even harder. The cutting of trade income will definitely have an effect on the game, exactly how big remains to seen but there should be less florins flying around and as a result possibly smaller armies of the map, or at least fewer expensive and big formations within that army (ex. royal cavalry or infantry). That’s one part.

    Part II
    Another part of the problem is; “what should I get for running my economy responsively”. My answer to that is; “a good or at least better economy." I’m also an advocator of these ideas; "If I do handle my economy responsively and I do it long enough, I should be able to save some of my florins... If I also manage to save florins for a long period, I should also end up with plenty of florins in my coffers." And now the great separating question; "If I manage that, should I be punished for it?” My position here is; “…no, you should not!” which clashes with the opposing tradition of; "Yes you should!". In redux the “…no, you should not!”-design that has been applied. There are of course other games where the “yes, you should!”-tradition are applied. I wont name them here, but still, they are out there and quite popular some of them as well. This aspect is basically a pure design matter and the design for redux aims above all to moderate the “flow of florins”. The basic idea is to halter the player from getting ridiculously rich in an instant or that “you” should be punished for handling the economy responsively. If you manage to get rich by saving your florins, so be it. You earned it.

    Then again, saving florins are also supposed to be hard, since you are always tempted to invest your florins in some useful building so you can start recruiting some of those “cool knights” or “keep the people happy” and so on. At least, "you" probably feel the need to keep up in the arms race with the neighbouring factions and thus spend your florins on commissioning some new and powerful troops to secure your borders.

    Part III
    This in turn is linked to another part of the problem; where your faction is located in the “stratmap”. For example; Normandy is with out doubt a richer province than Cyprus is (at least according to the default redux design). Hence, if your position is Normandy your chances of getting a successful economy going are greater than doing so on Cyprus. Thus you get the incitement to conquer Normandy since you want to riches of that province. In that way rich provinces creates attention and interest of other factions that want their riches for themselves and thus the threat of potential invasions are born. Which in turn cost florins to halter and so it goes on and on.

    In these regards, there is, and it’s supposed to be, differences between the factions. Poland is economically harder to play than France because there are not the same potential riches in the vicinity that is available around France for instance. But on the other hand, the threat of invasion should be greater to France and thus she must spend florins on defending those rich provinces (Aquitaine, Anjou etc.) since they appear to be more attractive to conquer than let’s say; Silesia and Volhynia... To rule Europe you need florins, and there are of course limits and inequalities on where those florins are located.

    Conclusion
    Now if you manage to get rich, even with the obstacles that are incorporated in redux, my position is: you earned it and should rightfully enjoy the advantages that those riches bring. It’s not my intention to create some sort of symmetry between expenses and incomes. My aim is just to keep a more balanced flow of florins thru out the game (and I personally see no harm in saving some of them either). So with all this in mind, the “excess money” situation is probably more unlikely to happen in redux, but if it happens, it is supposed to be the result of how you played the game and not because the game suffers from a potentially incomplete or poor design. This have been my intensions for redux at least.



    4. SHARED IDEA: it’s a very interesting and good idea and I do buy your arguments for it all the way. But I am sure that you agree with me that florins are complex stuff (as partly discussed in the “Excess money” section), and the issued instability warning on top of it all, do make me very cautious here. So, for now I will put it in my “box of great ideas on stasis” for better and safer times. Still, it is very interesting idea.


    Happy hunting on ya!

    - Cheers
    Last edited by Axalon; 08-22-2008 at 09:06. Reason: Improved english and formating

  2. #32

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Western, when can you do some more hunting in redux next time?

    (Poland seems to be working just fine by the way)

    - Cheers

  3. #33

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Regarding higher costs and excess money: How does that affect the AI? My impression is that the AI isn´t particularly adept at managing it´s coffers (surprisingly, one could argue that this is historically accurate, Edward III of England was said to have imbursed his crown because he so desperately needed money, and Charles VII of France said of himself that he was the poorest man in his kingdom); so I´m a bit afraid that the AI will never be able to collect the means to upgrade its provinces or to use decent troops.
    Last edited by Ciaran; 08-21-2008 at 10:07.

  4. #34

    Smile Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Axalon

    Tried the Italians tonight. Everything seems good. The rebels in the papal states are Apulians when they should be something more northern like marchese or anconans- but that is probably straight from vanilla.

    I note that wars are slow to come in redux. Factions build strong armies before they finally attack. But I like that - who goes to war without a bit of planning first??

  5. #35

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Hi there Western,

    This is good stuff you are reporting here, the Apulian stuff is probably vanilla as you say. Slow wars? Hm, it’s just as well, why go to war unprepared... Right? What are you playing the next time? It would good to know, so I don’t play the same factions as you.

  6. #36

    Smile Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    I will have a go at the English next I think - and see if the vikings come after me.

  7. #37

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Western:Thanks for that info, I sure appreciate it. Good hunting!

    Ciaran: I also got some answers here for you, hello by the way. I will start from the top and work my way down here…


    “Regarding higher costs and excess money: How does that affect the AI? My impression is that the AI isn´t particularly adept at managing it´s coffers… …; so I´m a bit afraid that the AI will never be able to collect the means to upgrade its provinces or to use decent troops.”
    Well, in theory, the way you stated this, it sure makes a lot of sense. In reduxed practice however, it's a very different story...


    “How does that affect the AI?”
    Technically it doesn’t, as far as I can tell at least. However, the higher prices do have an effect on how easy it is for the AI to actually realize various things. Once the AI has its priorities stated, it follows those regardless of the cost. As far as building installations/buildings goes at any rate. If no florins are available, it simply waits.


    “…the AI will never be able to collect the means to upgrade its provinces or to use decent troops.”
    My experience with redux is that the AI (for various reasons) actually delivers more varied troops and thus armies than in the original. In these armies the AI have a tendency to also include some high quality troops such as “champion”, “feudal champions”, “Byzantine palaceguard” or ”royal guard” to name a few examples (all dependent on which faction it is of course). The fact that redux has more or less an entirely different set of “new” troops is of course a factor, but I find it very unlikely that this is the only reason for the AIs “interesting” behavior. The AI seems to prefer a mix between all arms (archer/infantry/cavalry etc.) if possible, regardless if it’s cheap or expensive troops, within the boundaries of what is currently available (this of course dependent on region, existing buildings and relevant tech-trees).

    Since the tech-trees of redux is very different from those existing in the original, the circumstances that follows are also very different. Because of that you will end up with armies that are different. All of this seems to create an end-result that is more diverse, which usually means that it is harder to face such a foe on the battlefield, regardless of the fact that prices are higher. I realize this may sound strange but this is what really happens in redux, in spite of the harsher economical frameworks applied.


    “…the AI will never be able to collect the means to upgrade its provinces…”
    Yes, it’s harder for each and every faction to get a broad and solid “high-end” war production going. Fewer castles are built, meaning fewer places to recruit troops in, meaning fewer troops running around on the “stratmap” and smaller support expenses. Fewer troops means also that the importance of quality, when available, increases. And it seems that the redux-AI corresponds fairly well to those circumstances.

    The importance of well developed provinces are vital in redux, because they usually are harder to come by. The flaw here might be that the AI does not fully recognize the need to protect these key-provinces properly in some cases, which of course is very stupid. The AI is a shameless coward, and will only fight if it “feels” sure of success. It does not fully understand that some provinces are more important than others, at least when it comes to defending them. On the offensive however, the AI is a bit wiser and usually will invade the richest (which usually means the most developed) province that are within its reach on the “stratmap”.

    However, as a redux-SPC goes on, more and more provinces do get developed and the effects of the AI’s cowardice are less and less devastating for every faction that has managed to develop other key provinces. Since the redux-AI at least, likes to build stuff even if it is expensive. Hence provinces do get developed, but in another way and not in all over the map (simultaneously). A few posts up, Western confirms that even the rebels (notoriously bad regarding economy-stuff in the original) in redux manages to get by, in spite of the harsher economical framework. And it’s not because of the build embargos (although they do help), because I checked that.

    Many territories in redux usually have plenty of buildings in place, but that does not necessarily mean that the AI also automatically places some defending castles there (even if resources for it are available). Thus making it more attractive for some one else to invade and continue to develop the area upon the costly investments already made by the enemy! This is a very common scenario. Since florins usually are in limited supply, the redux-AI seems to be quite a farmer, desperate to get some more florins for other more grand buildings perhaps?



    To sum things up then;

    I could be wrong here (by all means correct me), but to me it seems that you based your fears upon the assumption that facts retrieved from the original game would somehow be valid or the same for redux. But redux is quite different actually and therefore most of those facts become invalid and incorrect. With the result that your fears don’t add up correctly to the actual and ruling circumstances found in redux. Because of that, I suggest that you get rid of those fears, since they won’t do you any justice here.

    If you not already tried out redux, feel free to do so, and find out all about it for yourself.



    - Cheers

    (BTW, I don’t want any rep as some sort of “monster poster”, but I trying to get you guys some good answers on redux here, and that tends to get big).
    Last edited by Axalon; 03-31-2009 at 07:31. Reason: clean up...

  8. #38

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Why, thanks for your encompassing answer.

    If you not already tried out redux, feel free to do so, and find out all about it for yourself.
    I´ll do that, when I manage to get MTW to install properly again, since you definitely have piqued my interest.

  9. #39
    Member Member axel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    UK/Holland
    Posts
    676

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Hi mate
    If i use the Redux 1.0 and the beta fix do i still have to put the Islamic castle fix in as wel?
    And dose it it matter where i download this wonderfull mod ? i see a lot of download links are they all the same mod?

  10. #40

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Hi guys,

    Ciaran: when you come around to it, I hope you’ll have much fun with redux.

    Axel: All you need is MTW-REDUX 1.0 and the VI/2.01-BETA (available at the VI/2.01 debug thread). The Islamic castle bug and the “Moorish opening” problems get fixed when applying the VI-beta (which by the way seems to be very stable and have worked just fine so far). The ISLAMIC CASTLE FIX is only relevant those people who are running redux upon a 1.1 version of MTW.

    The reason for the multiple links is an old habit of mine; “always provide an extra separate backup link, for all important material, if one link should ever turn out to be bad.” That’s why there are two links to almost all redux stuff, just use ”link1” (which is filefront, no: 2 is the Atomic gamer upload) on everything if you feel uncertain here. Enjoy!


    - Cheers

    (Bughunt-update; Spain seems to be working just fine)
    Last edited by Axalon; 03-31-2009 at 07:34. Reason: clean up...

  11. #41
    Member Member axel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    UK/Holland
    Posts
    676

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    ok mate thx
    but one more question, I only need Medieval total war not with the Viking invasion? and do i patch Medieval up?
    after i install it ill play the game and let you know any bugs

  12. #42

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Ok, axel here is what you do:

    1. Install MTW
    2. Patch and upgrade original MTW as far as humanly possible (all patches and expansions)
    3. Determine what kind of version of MTW you are running. Either it is V1.1 or V2.01. (Start up “over patched” MTW and see what version it is in the upper left corner of the game menu).
    4. Now, you install MTW-Redux 1.0 according to the instructions that came with it, see the “How to install”-file.
    5. Install all the relevant extra files (Betas or fixes) for redux depending on which version of MTW you are running:

    *If you got V.1.1: You should download the ISLAMIC CASTLE FIX, and install it after you have installed MTW-Redux 1.0. Follow the instructions that came with it..

    *If you got V2.01 (Viking Invasion/gold edition etc.): You should download the VI/2.01-BETA, and install it after you have installed MTW-Redux 1.0. Follow the instructions that came with it..

    6. When all extra stuff are installed, start up and play redux…


    That’s it!

  13. #43

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    @Axalon - First, nice mod. It's unique and I'm having a lot of fun with it. I've tried 2 different campaigns. One with France and the other with England, and both campaigns played flawlessly. With England, one of the starting units in Mercia is the English Foresters. Unfortunately they are not recruitable and therefor not upgradable. I guess you don't need them anyway with the availability of the Longbows. Why are the Knights Templar the only Knights Order you can recruit? I checked the CRUSADERS_UNIT_PROD11.TXT, and they are recruitable with the { ORDER_PALACE } building. I know they're used in Crusades but why can France and England recruit the mounted Knights Templar, but not Templar Cavalry or Templar Foot Knights? The Italians cannot recruit the Hospitallers, nor can the Germans recruit the Teutonic Knights, etc.. I would prefer to recruit them all, but that's just my opinion. I like a lot of different recruitable units. I'm tempted to make Hungary playable after the bug hunting, just to give the Dragon Knights a try. Dragon Knights are recruitable too, but Hungary is a Minor Faction at this time. Anyway these aren't bugs, they're just observations. Keep up the excellent work, and I'll look forward to any future updates you may add. Thanx

  14. #44

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Quote Originally Posted by Axalon View Post
    Hi guys,

    Ciaran: when you come around to it, I hope you’ll have much fun with redux.

    Axel: All you need is MTW-REDUX 1.0 and the VI/2.01-BETA (available at the VI/2.01 debug thread). The Islamic castle bug and the “Moorish opening” problems get fixed when applying the VI-beta (which by the way seems to be very stable and have worked just fine so far). The ISLAMIC CASTLE FIX is only relevant those people who are running redux upon a 1.1 version of MTW.

    The reason for the multiple links is an old habit of mine; “always provide an extra separate backup link, for all important material, if one link should ever turn out to be bad.” That’s why there are two links to almost all redux stuff, just use ”link1” (which is filefront, no: 2 is the Atomic gamer upload) on everything if you feel uncertain here. Enjoy!


    - Cheers

    (Bughunt-update; Spain seems to be working just fine)
    Now there´s a philosophy I can easily subscribe to. I usually download anything that looks like I might need or want sometime later, because with the internet, you never know how long any given content will be available.

    By the way, which version would you suggest (when I install I´ll get MTW 1.1 before I install VI, and, after all, I can have multiple installations of MTW on my harddrive).

  15. #45

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Hi guys,

    BARON VON MANTEUFFEL: First, thanks for the praise man. Now, you just got our first valid “kill”, even if you seem to be unaware of it yourself! The “English Foresters” in VI/2.01-Beta are supposed to recruitable. This nasty bug snatches away over 30 tactical units from the redux-SPC and really damages the overall designs for it, making you guys and all factions unable to recruit all these troops even if “you” have all the right requirements to do it! Your good Intel, made me suspicious and I finally became aware of it and I’ve killed this sneaky bastard for you. Congrats and good work man!

    (Regarding the order-stuff, it is an older mistake made by me. I looked things over and decided to unlock most of them for the VI-Beta. However, due to some balance-issues I have slightly increased support costs for all the order knights. If you want foot-knights, just dismount the regular ones.)

    CIARAN: I would actually recommend you to go with the VI/2.01-Beta, in spite of what I just said to von Manteuffel. Because it appears to be far more stable than the 1.1 version, which seems to have a higher risk of potential freezes and crashes. And you want to play the game! Right? With the new tac-fix installed you and everybody else, can now play some real redux, instead of some starved and puny version on V2.01!

    WESTERN: do you have any additional info on England?



    I have already posted the fix for the bug: “MTW-REDUX 1.0 VI_TAC_FIX.zip” over at the “debug-area”. All further info is available there.

    - Cheers

  16. #46

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Thank you, Axalon.

    As I said, I´ll get round to it once I can be bothered to install MTW and VI anew. Right now my only copy is overwritten with XL and the Tyberius 2.0. I´ll see whether I can convince my computer to install MTW and VI again - the last time I tried that, it gave me cheek when I tried installing VI after sucessfully installing MTW and, being the genius I am, I failed to keep a clean copy of MTW I suppose I asked for it.

  17. #47

    Thumbs down Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Axalon

    England played fine for me. I didn't spot what the Baron spotted. But playing again as the Byz I had a rebellion in Leser Armenia made up entirely of ballistas (about 30 of the things). This is a bug I've seen before, perhaps even in vanilla. Not sure what the fix is short of denying the rebels all siege weapons.

  18. #48

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Hi guys,

    Ciaran: Im not the guy who’s trying to tell you how to run things on your PC or anything, but you could always do this;

    1. Copy your MTW-XL-Tyberius install to somewhere, uninstall the regular copy (it’s probably the reason for all the fuzz), install MTW again, and make a copy of that. Install VI on one of the copies. And then install Redux and VI/2.01-beta + Tac-fix or the ordinary version on one of the regular MTW copies (however, a bit unstable and you need the “Islamic castle fix” there).

    2. Copy your XL-Tyberius MTW and install redux over that (with VI-Beta +Tac-Fix). It should probably work just fine but you will have alot of junk within that install.

    Western: Regarding the horde of ballista’s; it’s an old bug from original MTW, had it myself, usually with mangonels. Solution; remove all entries in column: 11 for all siege weapons in the “CRUSADERS_UNIT_PROD11.TXT” using a GnomeEditor. That will do the trick, I might just do that myself for redux sometime. Thanks anyways.

    von Manteuffel: Any other info on the HRE?


    Has anyone else found some useful or interesting Intel on redux? If you have, feel free to share it with the rest of us.

    - Cheers

  19. #49

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Hi, I have not found anything else yet with the Germans. I did fight a battle in Franconia against the Norse. They attacked with a large army of Norse Bodyguard units. It seems that the AI prefers to recruit nothing but the Bodyguard units for the Norse (about 90%). While they are very powerful against other infantry, I was easily able to get Imperial Knights in their rear and flank. My infantry battleline though mauled, held long enough for my Imperial knight counterattack. The Norse King fled, and their whole army desintegrated. The point is though they are very powerful, they are not balanced. After looking at the Norse some more, I believe the Bodyguard indulgence is just caused by a lot of heirs and after a King dies, ex-heirs.
    Last edited by Baron von Manteuffel; 08-26-2008 at 02:38. Reason: New info:

  20. #50

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Hi again von Manteuffel,

    This post is based on your unedited post, but I think it might be interesting anyhow so I post it as it was, even though you clearly got new info on the matter. Regarding the heirs and such, you are probably right.
    ---

    I do appreciate your sincerity in the matter. However, I don’t recognize the scenario you’re painting here, even thou it is interesting. And because of that I will stand my ground on this one until it can be further verified that this scenario is indeed a regular occurrence in redux.

    Now, what you are describing sounds to me like one of the text-book examples on how to deal with those lethal Vikings (especially those Norse Bodyguards which are among the meanest of them all). You applied cavalry to infantry (in the flanks and in the rear?) and if there was no spears around I think you got a pretty accurate conclusion of that particular battle (given the fact that you were also facing Vikings without any spears). Add to that; you also got a healthy taste of what kind of loses you’ll have if you deploy infantry against the Norse. Infantry is their specialty, but on the other hand they have scarce options in other arms, making them vulnerable to “high-tech” factions like the HRE for instance. The HRE and “Italy” has plenty of various specialist to draw from (with the right installations in place of course) which makes them quite formidable to face if a few of these units are present in an army and you got all the “wrong” troops. Trying to improve “your” tan in front of some Frankish formation of crossbowmen will, and should, end in utter doom for the poor dumb bastard that tries it! I am pretty sure that you agree with here.

    In my experience the Norse usually throws in a few spear and cavalry units and some archers as well if they got it available in their armies. Thus usually having more balanced armies than the one you describe. For some reason the AI, thou a coward, thought it had good chances of defeating you in this case and went to the attack accordingly (Franconia being prosperous province and all). You had the right and enough tactical resources available in Franconia to defend it, and triumphed because of that (probably along with some able generalship involved as well).

    What I suspect happened in this particular case, thou I can only speculate because I have to scarce info here, is that your scenario happened fairly early in your campaign and the reason for the Norse “stubborn” recruitment of Norse Bodyguards could be linked to the fact that they may not have had the time yet to develop enough buildings to commission cavalry or archers and such. Because they usually build such troops if they can, to a far greater extent than they build Norse Bodyguards. All this based on the experience I have had with the Norse so far.

    However, if your claims turn out to be correct and accurate for longer periods in the redux-SPC, I will do something about it, rest assured about that. Now, I have few ideas on how to counter this problem, if it really is a problem. But, until I get it verified that it really is I will leave things as they are for now. None the less, carry on and keep the good stuff coming! And do hold on to that candor!


    (As stated earlier you clearly got new info here so my comments are a bit dated above.)

    - Cheers
    Last edited by Axalon; 08-26-2008 at 04:18.

  21. #51

    Smile Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Axalon

    Is there a reason why tradeships and trade galleys have identical stats but different costs? A number of factions have access to both - why ever build the more expensive?

  22. #52

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    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

  23. #53

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    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
    Last edited by Axalon; 08-29-2008 at 13:14.

  24. #54

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Got it - intel later

  25. #55

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    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
    Last edited by Axalon; 08-30-2008 at 20:14. Reason: Improved English & clarification

  26. #56

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    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.
    Last edited by Baron von Manteuffel; 08-29-2008 at 22:31. Reason: Oops!

  27. #57

    Smile Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    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.

  28. #58

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    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
    Last edited by Axalon; 08-31-2008 at 02:36. Reason: Oohh the English....

  29. #59

    Smile Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    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.

  30. #60

    Default Re: MTW-Redux 1.0 Released!

    Hi, I think I understand your intent now with the Byzantines and that's cool. I'm up for the experiment 1A. I'll try that this evening. Don't know if it is by design or not but there are two factions that start with the default 2000 florins. One is the Burgundians and the other, I'm not sure. Maybe the Lithuanians?

Page 2 of 24 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO