Clash of Gods! - RECRUITING!

[SilverShield]

i got no idea of this kgcm thing and im not really into starting an epic thing if i got no idea of the lil hints and things that are working a thing. broken crescent surly is a unique setting and i d loved to revive the old wrath of the khan feeling but the whole east vs west scenario isnt really working if anyone is muslim anyway. im always up for another mongol vs anyone campaign but i guess the mongols are just too strong no matter the setting. defeat lastly is invietable i guess. so just going with the new stainless steel is best. thats 6.4. there is no forts in 6.2 as far as i know so 6.4 surly is the better choice. as for the setting depending on how many people are actually in there is always the chance for eastern rome to join a muslim alliance. egypt, turks, moors and east rome surly are equaling western europe. thats a fair way to go imo

[SilverShield]

Can't join this hotseat, but I can help you advertise. Click the "Content Manager" hyperlink in my sig if you want to see additional services.

i kinda was just remembering that epic map u had going in lords of the east. u know that thing with all those overlapping colors according to the territories each faction was having. that was cool. if u were coming up with such a map later in the game that was pretty cool then man

[Myth]

Stainless Steel 6.4 with toned down heretics (I'll give you guys the appropriate file to copy over), because if you haven't played SS 6.4 trust me heretics have been made so much stronger they practically ruin the AI nations. I also warn you that the autoresolve for SS is unfair towards cav and HA armies however. A stack of dism. chivalric knights and armoured sergeants will punish a full 20 horse archers stack in autoresolve, where as if you lead the HA in a battle you will reduce the foot soldiers to so much minced meat, probably beat them wtih 0 casualties.

The best way to go about it will be allowing battles to be lead but I still haven't heard yay or nay on that.

SilverShield, if you want to see what KGCM and the Hotseat patch do, you can read here: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=369925

I myself haven't played it either, but some of the .org hotseat vets have and they're happy with it.

[SilverShield]

Stainless Steel 6.4 with toned down heretics (I'll give you guys the appropriate file to copy over), because if you haven't played SS 6.4 trust me heretics have been made so much stronger they practically ruin the AI nations. I also warn you that the autoresolve for SS is unfair towards cav and HA armies however. A stack of dism. chivalric knights and armoured sergeants will punish a full 20 horse archers stack in autoresolve, where as if you lead the HA in a battle you will reduce the foot soldiers to so much minced meat, probably beat them wtih 0 casualties.

The best way to go about it will be allowing battles to be lead but I still haven't heard yay or nay on that.

SilverShield, if you want to see what KGCM and the Hotseat patch do, you can read here: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=369925

I myself haven't played it either, but some of the .org hotseat vets have and they're happy with it.

just reading about this is like reading about sports or sex or anything practical. unless u are doing it ur knowledge is still somewhat limited so if we are really pulling this off im for ss 6.4.
auto resolving always favors infantry over cav except broken crescent maybe. but if one knows about it adjusting strategy from beginning solves that. theres always pros and cons to human vs human battles fought on the field. if they are fought on the field even someone already doomed is still capable of making a comeback. 2 generals already are capable of making the difference taking out a bigger army. battles fought on the field definitely is more challenging which always is a good thing. but there is always complaints and stuff about certain things being unrealistic or whatever and i aint up for senseless discussion and stuff so... pros and cons

[Myth]

Yeah if we agree on fought battles we will do with full knowledge that whoever gets the jump has a huge advantage. Autoresolve isn't perfect as well, as proved by the Britannia hotseat I'm in. Honestly I'd go for a Stainless Steel 6.4 game with Real Recruitment off and with fought battles just for the pure carnage and for the added importance of logistics. Where you end your turn is vital now that your enemy can fight his battles. So that's two in favor, what do the rest of you guys think?

Oh also an added bonus for SS over KGCM is that there are no ranged troops with an AP property (read: Longbowmen are not the end-all, be-all of battles)

[Nightbringer]

I'm fine with whatever everyone else wants. :)

[SilverShield]

one thing for sure is that fighting battles on the field is more demanding than just auto resolving it and thus more fun. but as i said im done with complaints about tactics not being "realistic" so i guess just auto resolving is the easiest way

Yeah if we agree on fought battles we will do with full knowledge that whoever gets the jump has a huge advantage. Autoresolve isn't perfect as well, as proved by the Britannia hotseat I'm in. Honestly I'd go for a Stainless Steel 6.4 game with Real Recruitment off and with fought battles just for the pure carnage and for the added importance of logistics. Where you end your turn is vital now that your enemy can fight his battles. So that's two in favor, what do the rest of you guys think?

Oh also an added bonus for SS over KGCM is that there are no ranged troops with an AP property (read: Longbowmen are not the end-all, be-all of battles)

[Myth]

Since we will be allowing both Crusades and Jihads (but only against objectives settlements) I think fighting battles is paramount. The free heavy cav/infantry from Crusades is too strong in autoresolve.

We will be starting this game by the end of May, I'm waiting to mainly get my new PC before I continue with the recruitment etc. If anyone has any ideas, please share them.

[Myth]

Quick update and bump (double posting so the others see a new post). I got an answer of how to mod Crusades back into KGCM which makes it a more attractive option than SS in regards to Eastern faction balance (read: they are on par with the Catholics which is a major point to consider in this game)

So:

KGCM pros:

Rebalanced starting regions, turn order, autocalc and unit stats so the Catholics don't steamroll trough everything with Dism. whatever knights and Armoured Sergeants. Importance is now placed on cav and HA armies can do well in autocalc.

KGCM cons:

Not everyone is familiar with it (myself included)

SS 6.4 pros:

More historically accurate, more detailed and virtually everyone knows it. Does not require tinkering with the files to put Crusades/Jihads back in.

SS 6.4 cons:

Autocalc still favors heavy infantry over cav and archers are basically a waste of gold. Turn order will probably need rebalancing because the best factions are Catholic and they start first to boot. Some factions start with so much land they are very very good - England, France (with the rebels around it), HRE, ERE.

Note: SS 6.4 will probably be best played with fully fought battles instead of autoresolve which I favor when Crusades/Jihads are a factor.

What do you guys think?

[Ashurnasirpal II]

Hi all! I just joined these forums and phonicsmonkey just pointed me here! I've never done anything like this before, so I don't know if I'd be a weight on my team, but if you guys think a newby can pull it off, I'd like to join! I have played many total war games though, so I guess I should be more then okay!

[Myth]

So long as you know how M2TW works (recruitment, economics, logistics etc.) you'll be fine.

[Myth]

OK so I have my own PC now and I'm ready to set this game up. Who is still on board with this? We will be using SS 6.4

[Ashurnasirpal II]

I have downloaded the mod and started messing around with it It looks promising

What will be the final rules (auto-resolve or no?) and how will we chose our team?

[Myth]

SS 6.4 and fought battles (although in some cases if you find that autoresolve is more beneficial you can do that). My choice of mod comes from the ease of use for everyone (me included, as I don't have to mod crusades and jihads back in) and the historical accuracy.

Real Recruitment however is open to discussion. With it on we will recruit naught but Spear Militias for the first 100 or so years, with it off it will be more interesting unit wise but less historically accurate.

Teams will be chosen by preference as will be nations.

[slysnake]

Did I say I was free now? Exams are over, I origionally said that I would not be playing since I thought this game would have started by now ^^ And also, I would be more then happy to install KGCM if this game is going to go ahead :)

[Myth]

Ss 6.4 is better, fought battles give a whole lot of depth to hotseat games. You can actually use your HAs to devastating effects. In autoresolve Catholic nations will just spam infantry (and more so from the Crusade merc pool) and steamroll everything.

So we have two. Silver Shield expressed interest as well, I think he won't back down, so that's three. Me included - 4. Two more spots open! BTW so far, do you guys have any preferences on which side you'll play on and which nation you'll pick?

OK I reviewed the thread, Nightbringer was also up for this game, and Visorslash and Zim said they could play. I'll PM them to check.

[Visor]

Not too big a fan of SS.... I dunno. Currently got a lot on my plate. I also have to reinstall it.

[Myth]

Reinstalling is no major problem, the torrent is seeded a lot and it should DL very quickly. DL 6.3, then the 6.4 patch and you're ready to go! Otherwise, why aren't you a fan of it? I think we should play with RR turned off to have army compositions that are more fun, but that's about it.

[Visor]

Loads real slow on my comp. Plus I suck at leading battles. (Most of the time. Occasionally I do well.)

[Myth]

You could autoresolve (that will actually benefit you greatly in SS with Real Recruitment off. Just build armies that are good for autoresolve) but you'll have to be cautios and be careful to not get caught with your pants down least the enemy kills your whole stack with 3 generals and 3 HAs.

So if SS runs slowly will KGCM be better? Or Vanlla for that matter? By runs slowly do you mean overall or just turn times ('cause those don't really matter that much in a hotseat)

[Visor]

The entire game runs slow. SS6.3 runs fine. But 6.4 doesn't. :(

What factions can I choose, and what era?

[Myth]

Muslim and Catholic factions only, Early Era as i said due to Late being so horribly balanced for the Muslims in such a scenario (Mongols to the right, crusading Westerners to the left)

Make sure to read the first post (i've redone the victory conditions, they are now points based and the target towns have been changed somewhat) and chose your faction accordingly to your team's objectives.

[Visor]

I'll take last. Or maybe not. I don't want be Moors either way.

[Myth]

Since some of you have trouble picking a faction, I'll give you a short summary of my views, though they are by no means 100% accurate as I'm yet to play with every faction in SS (no time).

Catholics:

Some choices stand out a lot here:

- The big three: England, France and HRE. England has an impenetrable starting position, it has an imbalanced number of settlements on the isles and it has huge archer pools. France has the best overall unit roster and has 5-6 rebel provinces that are ripe for the plucking. The HRE starts with a button of armies, provinces and generals. It can expand much better knowing it's back is secure by two other human Catholics as allies.

- Genoa: starts with huge armies for it's size. Nay, starts with huge armies in general - enough to blitz France for example. Has the pavise x-bow militia line and the Genoese Crossbowmen that stomp on HA armies in lead battles. Even the AI will use them well and inflict casualties!

- Leon-Castille, Aragorn, Portugal - start right next to the Moors and can expand to take the whole peninsula. Some of them have jav-cav or other such light cav that does very well in lead battles.

- Poland/Hungary: have HA armies and mercs and safe paths to expand into pagan/orthodox territory.

- The Crusader States - not advisable with Jihads being legal to call AND join... They will be steamrolled in the first 5 turns by my estimation.

Muslim factions:

- The Fatamid Caliphate, otherwise dubbed the Yellow Death in the .net SS forums. One of the strongest overall factions and definitely the top dog of the Muslim world economy and unit wise.
- The Kwazremian Empire, the K-Shah is beastly early game. It can recruit Kwazremian Nobles right from the start and those guys are only inferior to Scholarii early on. Before Europe gets the Full Plate or Gothic Plate events this cav will rule the battlefield. Not to mention the K-Shah gets very good HAs, Elephants AND an awesome starting position that is the equivalent of England's in terms of defensibility and potential economy.
- The Turks have great HAs and can, if played correctly, beat the ERE and take their awesome starting cities (Constantinople!). They also hold sway over the land access into the Holy land for most of the Westerners (nobody in his right mind will trudge trough Spain and the whole of Africa to get to the Holy Lands).
- The Moors are a gamble, quite similar to the Crusaders but a bit better since they have land in Africa. If they can hold Cordoba and wipe out the Catholics on the Iberian Peninsula and fort-up the passes, they will be horrendously hard to root out. But that's only if the three Iberian factions are AI lead, and they don't get Crusaded against in the first couple of turns.

[Ashurnasirpal II]

So just to sum things up: the players are slysnake, Silver Shield, Myth, Nightbringer, Visorslash and me. How do we divvy up the factions? I don't really care who I play, though I wouldn't necessarily trust myself on a frontline role!

[Myth]

I'm waiting on Zim to answer if he will play as well, or if he can at least admin for us. Visorslash will chose last as he said. SilverShield had an interesting idea but I think it won't work due to how M2TW operates. Nightbringer, Slysnake - where art thou?

The teams are open to debate though if you are new and Visorslash has trouble leading battles on his PC we can consider you being in different teams.

As far as factions go, once we decide what the teams are and who is Muslim and who - Catholic, we can flip a coin (roll a 1d2 die on Invisible Castle) and take turns picking, this way we can adjust according to the enemy pick

[phonicsmonkey]

Myth, why not admin this yourself? It'd be great to have some new hotseat admins around here. I'm happy to be a backup if you like.

Also, is this game full now or would you like me to advertise it for you? I have a thread in the Citadel and at TWC that I use to publicise new games.

[Myth]

Seems to be full but Nightbringer has been keeping quiet. I'd rather not admin as I'm a player here and I'm rather passionate about my own idea for the game as well :)

[phonicsmonkey]

Seems to be full but Nightbringer has been keeping quiet. I'd rather not admin as I'm a player here and I'm rather passionate about my own idea for the game as well :)

Never stopped me - you just have to know how to avoid and manage conflicts of interest. It's better having a playing admin because he has more reason to keep a close eye on the game.

[SilverShield]

alright im going for the crusaders as part of the muslim team

also imo its best if we were having 8 people at least so its 4 on every side. if its just 6 total its a lot of computer bashing before things are heating up between humans. so im really in favor of making it 8