Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 56 of 56

Thread: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

  1. #31

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by gallum View Post
    Hi Brandy Blue, there is, in fact. You can open the 'drawer' behind the mini-map on the top left corner - if memory serves, and the option is there.

    I really liked that option, it basically made you a 'servant' of the AI - you could think of him as the king and yourself was like his minister or something, so you had to make do and manage with the things that he decided.
    Unfortunately, part of the fun is managing the empire, which you hand over to the AI. That's the cost of getting better battles in that way. Sounds like I should have tried it anyway. Unfortunately I never got around to it.
    In those simple times there was a great wonder and mystery in life. Man walked in fear and solemnity, with Heaven very close above his head, and Hell below his very feet. God's visible hand was everywhere, in the rainbow and the comet, in the thunder and the wind. The Devil too raged openly upon the earth; he skulked behind the hedge-rows in the gloaming; he laughed loudly in the night-time; he clawed the dying sinner, pounced on the unbaptized babe, and twisted the limbs of the epileptic. A foul fiend slunk ever by a man's side and whispered villainies in his ear, while above him there hovered an angel of grace . . .

    Arthur Conan Doyle

  2. #32

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandy Blue View Post
    Unfortunately, part of the fun is managing the empire, which you hand over to the AI. That's the cost of getting better battles in that way. Sounds like I should have tried it anyway. Unfortunately I never got around to it.
    Its also part of the chore too..

    But yes, i know what you mean. Again, for me it was as if i was a lowly minister at the service of superiors, much more like a real life scenario actually than you having all the strings in your hands

    If memory serves, perhaps there were two option boxes: one let the AI build what he wants and another one let him train what he wants

    MTW has way to many options in the campaign game and the time frame/number of turns it covers is not ideal either - its way too long mostly in order to justify all these options and offer different starting periods - yet from a gameplay/challenge point of view none of this variety options adds to the game. I guess the developers were thinking that most people would play the game superficially - which is true - hence were just giving them superficial reasons to restart a campaign or offering more 'hooks' to their imaginations to buy the game -which from their point of view - commercially speaking - was probably correct.

    Something like 130-140 turns, a smaller map offering less cultural divergences and making the possibility of lands conquered more plausibly realistic with less factions and less options would have helped the AI greatly and enhanced his performance helping make the game more challenging/on the same footing as the AI, and hence more fun
    Last edited by gallum; 01-05-2019 at 04:01. Reason: adding material

  3. #33

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by gallum View Post

    Something like 130-140 turns, a smaller map offering less cultural divergences and making the possibility of lands conquered more plausibly realistic with less factions and less options would have helped the AI greatly and enhanced his performance helping make the game more challenging/on the same footing as the AI, and hence more fun

    But ... but ... OK, I'm confused. Hadn't they already published that game under the name Shogun Total War?
    In those simple times there was a great wonder and mystery in life. Man walked in fear and solemnity, with Heaven very close above his head, and Hell below his very feet. God's visible hand was everywhere, in the rainbow and the comet, in the thunder and the wind. The Devil too raged openly upon the earth; he skulked behind the hedge-rows in the gloaming; he laughed loudly in the night-time; he clawed the dying sinner, pounced on the unbaptized babe, and twisted the limbs of the epileptic. A foul fiend slunk ever by a man's side and whispered villainies in his ear, while above him there hovered an angel of grace . . .

    Arthur Conan Doyle

  4. #34

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandy Blue View Post
    But ... but ... OK, I'm confused. Hadn't they already published that game under the name Shogun Total War?
    If memory serves, MTW was initially meant to be called "CrusaderTW" or something, and to have a campaign map covering the Holy Land, something that was realised much later in the Crusades campaign in M2TW

    As the project grew in ambition and scope, probably they decided to include all of Europe and all of middle Ages, again as commercial attention hooks to customer interest i suppose..

    If you are - say - Russian, you can play as the Russians throughout your medieval history, the same if you are Spanish, Polish, French, German, Italian etc, the scope commercially increases tremendously than having only a crusades campaign

    Something similar happened in RTW - it meant to have only the conquests of Caesar, again as the project increased in scope it included all the ancient world and the individual campaigns became the Roman factions of Julii, Scipii and Brutii

    Equally - as with the crusades campaign - the campaigns of Caesar were realised much later in R2TW

    Last edited by gallum; 01-05-2019 at 04:51. Reason: added info

  5. #35

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Interesting. I always assumed that they shifted the focus from crusades because the fashionable point of view these days is that the crusaders were bad guys, but your explanation makes better sense since it explains the development of RTW as well.

    Been nice chatting with you. Haven't "seen" you in ages.
    In those simple times there was a great wonder and mystery in life. Man walked in fear and solemnity, with Heaven very close above his head, and Hell below his very feet. God's visible hand was everywhere, in the rainbow and the comet, in the thunder and the wind. The Devil too raged openly upon the earth; he skulked behind the hedge-rows in the gloaming; he laughed loudly in the night-time; he clawed the dying sinner, pounced on the unbaptized babe, and twisted the limbs of the epileptic. A foul fiend slunk ever by a man's side and whispered villainies in his ear, while above him there hovered an angel of grace . . .

    Arthur Conan Doyle

    Member thankful for this post:

    gallum 


  6. #36

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandy Blue View Post
    Interesting. I always assumed that they shifted the focus from crusades because the fashionable point of view these days is that the crusaders were bad guys, but your explanation makes better sense since it explains the development of RTW as well.

    Been nice chatting with you. Haven't "seen" you in ages.
    Been nice chatting with you too BB nice to see all you lot are well and around

  7. #37

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    On the automatic options, there were the following (from memory only):

    1) auto assign titles

    The player can assign titles intelligently, select high acumen governors for those lucrative provinces, assign titles to high/low piety and/or high/low dread governors to better manage provincial happiness (loyalty) and back this up with some of the secondary titles. The AI cannot do this, it often selects the worst candidates. So if the goal is to level the field, this one at least should be on.

    Opinion: These fall into the "Civ style game", micromanagement base building category and detract from what the games should be all about - the battles.

    2) auto manage taxes

    The AI manages taxes by setting them as high as possible, but as I recall, it does not maintain the 120% needed to avoid faction reemergence. So to put the player on the same level, must be on.

    Opinion: For me it's another base building option. (I preferred STW's single tax rate setup, but that also got annoying at times)

    3) auto construct buildings

    This is where we get into the realm of what should the player actually do? To even it out between the player and the AI, I would say that yes this has to be on.

    Opinion: I feel that as the player interacts with the game, moves units around strategically, etc that if you remove the dynamic of being able to construct the buildings you want, you are not far from just surrendering the whole thing to AI control and just playing battles.

    4) auto train units

    As above - even more so.

    5) tidy up units after battle (default on, but I suspect many turn it off)

    Turning this one off stops the "auto merge" of units after battle, whereby partial units in a stack get merged together automatically immediately after the battle ends - e.g. you go into battle with four units of whatever troop type and you return from the battle with battered units, some with higher valour than others. The "merge" results in three more complete units.

    However the game does not differentiate in terms of how it merges the units. So perhaps two might have taken around 50% losses and gained some considerable valour from a lot of kills, so manually merging them together would make a single strong unit and keep (averaged) valour high. However with this option on, it would probably result in the high valour units being dumped into some 0 valour green unit, thus "diluting" their valour.

    The AI doesn't have this manual merging option, so for the purpose of evening up and removing advantages, this would certainly need to be left on.

    Opinion: This is a difficult one. It's nice to develop your "veteran" units and see them progress, but there comes a point where they can become an unstoppable force. I've played games in the past where I had cautiously micromanaged unit merges and it gets the point where you can have some seriously unstoppable units. This, for me, leads to a decrease in strategy. Inevitably - I get bored, there is too much reliance on these supermen and immaculately they will get wasted in a bum rush. Balanced units and combined arms and "using what you get" is more satisfying, hence why in later years I started turning this off and ended the micromanagement.

    In conclusion

    The problem with leaving options 1 to 4 as defaults and turning opinion 5 off, is that the AI is left at the biggest disadvantage.

    The caveat with enabling 3 and 4, is that you're handing over some of the most important elements of the campaign game to the AI. You don't know what it's building, you have to constantly check what it's building and it all becomes a bit "blind leading the blind".

    I have never seriously played the game with all of options 1 to 4 enabled. However I have done some testing, during my modding days and seen just how badly the AI manages things (hence my reluctance to let the AI manage things...) and first started noticing how the AI tried to tech up to the provincial valour bonus unit (even when it's not available yet or their faction will never be able to train it anyway).

    There was someone at the .commie, back in around 2005 who referred to the "AI" as the "programmed opponent" (the PO). This is the best kind of terminology for it, but I'll call it "the AI", as that's what we've always called it...

    It is not "intelligent". The AI simply reacts to conditions, performs conditional checks. It does not think, it does not learn. It has no concept of "the game" it's playing.

    The campaign map game AI (as per STW) was simply not developed enough for the options and features presented in MTW. The AI cannot really handle the "bells and whistles" of the generals dynamic - e.g. loyalty, piety, dread, acumen, stats, etc and the v&vs which can be crippling factors.

    The player can weed out the cowards and exploit such v&vs as the attacker/defender lines, the AI cannot. The AI is unaware that the v&vs even exist.

    To put it simply - the AI is still playing STW. It doesn't know about the general's stats, or the v&vs and it when given agents which it is expected/allowed to use on it's own agents/generals, it does just that - indiscriminately.

    There is still the argument that the options are there to be used and there is nothing wrong with using them, which is of course true. But if the aim to increase the challenge, for those that want to increase the challenge, then observing some iron man rules and playing with at least options 1, 2 and 5 enabled seems like a good start.

    The arguments regarding "modding the game" certainly apply. It's one way, but not the only way and a combination of some modding, changing these options and self imposed rules should have the desired affect for those that want it.

    Modding for example cannot stop the AI doing silly things on the campaign map - that's hard coded. It cannot give certain units or buildings to the AI factions and make them unavailable to the player and it cannot change the behaviour of such things as v&vs and killing prisoners.

    Modding can do quite a lot within battles.

    You can also mod unit stats for ever, but you have to mod all units stats, otherwise you easily create under/over powered units/factions. You also can't get away from the fact that there are too many units to start with and this makes balancing all these units extremely difficult, the problem of obsolete units, units which are redundant from the start, too expensive or require too much expenditure on infrastructure to train, or units which are available from high/late, but which are redundant by the time you can train them.

    Units should have specific purposes and counters, as per the RPS system of STW (swords beats spears beats cavalry beats swords). In MTW the RPS is there, but is broken by several additional unit types and by the sheer numbers of different units and imbalances between the factions. The only way around this is to remove and go generic.

    In the past, on forums such as this one and the other two - the historical reenactment fans have usually shouted down these kind of arguments as "unrealistic", but a game is a game when all is said and done. The history fans want and encourage these imbalances so long as they are "historic".

    Member thankful for this post:

    gallum 


  8. #38

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandy Blue View Post
    But ... but ... OK, I'm confused. Hadn't they already published that game under the name Shogun Total War?
    This is all hindsight and we are talking about an old game, but in some respects it still applies.

    I must confess that I was never a fan of the Europe/Asia minor/north Africa map design.

    If MTW had been a "crusader states" (Levant) style set up, with a smaller more detailed map and less factions, in my opinion it would have been a better game "out of the box".

    It would also have been better to have perhaps two or three games in one - i.e. a few campaign map games, such as the Crusades, Norman conquest of England, Charlemagne, Reconquista, Fall of Byzantium, and whatever else.

    The same mistakes were repeated with RTW, M2TW and I believe some of the newer ones. There is this tendency for "more, more, more..." which isn't necessarily always a good thing. But the marketing for such games is usually fulls of such boasts which play on the "hundreds" of this or the "thousands" of that...
    Last edited by caravel; 01-07-2019 at 13:34.

    Member thankful for this post:

    gallum 


  9. #39

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by caravel View Post
    It would also have been better to have perhaps two or three games in one - i.e. a few campaign map games, such as the Crusades, Norman conquest of England, Charlemagne, Reconquista, Fall of Byzantium, and whatever else.
    Some nice ideas there.. Reconquista, Charlmagne either making the empire or warring of the empire's heirs', Norman conquest of England and some more on the same line: the 100 years' war, The Teutonic wars, Byzantine-Turkish wars during the Komnenian period, Byzantine territories after the 4h crusade waring states [venetians, crusaders, turks, bulgars, byzantine heir states], Italian city states

    The AI could be progressively made aware of interaction between the various features, as well as having a 'stability index' of his management of the game, by which to make decisions.

    Such an index would include such key things as:

    -heir availability and use
    -kingdom province based wealth, and relative kingdom province based wealth in comparison to neighbouring kingdoms' province based wealth
    -appraisal of trade generated wealth potential [can be computed=how many ships, in how many sea squares can bring in how much wealth through the various routes available]
    -wealth/provinces held to armies in th field ratio - and comparison of the same ratio against that of enemy kingdoms
    -province strategic significance identification [based on wealth+location] as a potential target for conquest and keeping
    -principle of maximum held area by minimum province number, which would greatly increase AI kingdom stability

    These could be used to make specific plans for expansion at one or more fronts, or decide periods of consolidating already conquered areas and providing waterproofing stability before the next cycle of expansion

    Various parameters in the AI 'profiles' in the game files can also be tinkered with good result, i remember changing for the caravel mod the AI preferences for inquisitors trained, that lowered the number of inquisitors, yet still having them around. The same was made with many battle units to produce better AI stacks
    Last edited by gallum; 01-08-2019 at 06:43. Reason: adding material

  10. #40
    Member Member dimitrios the samian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Hellas Down Under
    Posts
    606

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    this thread is so interesting ...
    Imagine if the owners of the code (CA) , would listen in & give us a new patch !! awesome .

    Member thankful for this post:

    gallum 


  11. #41

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by dimitrios the samian View Post
    this thread is so interesting ...
    Imagine if the owners of the code (CA) , would listen in & give us a new patch !! awesome .
    They won't, there have been many, many indications over the years that MTW wont be touched again.. some more explicit others less.. however its a nice (day)dream..

    Member thankful for this post:



  12. #42

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    It has been patched in fact - the steam release. Unfortunately those of us without steam are left out in the cold despite buying the game many years ago.

    However, it is my understanding that the patch only addresses the Windows platform/hardware compatibility issues and does not fix any game play bugs or add any enhancements.

    The only way to get real improvements into the game would be via a source code release. That was talked about quite a lot over the years, but there is still no sign of it ever happening. It's now even less likely since the steam release and the fact that the game is presumably generating revenue again?

    It's been said before that the STW/MTW source was too legally tied up by a few different companies to be released. Not sure if that is still the case, or if indeed it ever was, but it seems like a poor excuse regardless. CA/SEGA are completely missing the benefits of a source release and giving the old games a new lease of life. There are no tangible realistic commercial reasons for not doing so, the old games (coming on for 20 years) are simply no competitor to the new, will not affect sales of the newer titles and can only be good press/PR and expand the existing community of players.

    When I was on the staff here, I had it on good authority that source code would never be released. I can't say much more as the person who informed me requested that it be kept confidential and truth be told, I can't remember the specifics or who exactly it was who made that statement.

    The only feasible way to improve on STW and MTW would be via a reimplentation of the game engine(s) (akin to reverse engineering). It has been done before for some other old games (Transport Tycoon, the Monkey Island series, Baldur's Gate, to name some notable ones) and it could probably be achieved for MTW, especially for the campaign map game, but it would require someone with the skills, the time and the motivation to sit down and do the work (for free). Thus far no one has taken up the challenge.
    Last edited by caravel; 01-08-2019 at 12:01.

  13. #43
    Member Member Stazi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    440

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by caravel View Post
    It has been patched in fact - the steam release. Unfortunately those of us without steam are left out in the cold despite buying the game many years ago
    Anyone that can connect to the internet in any way can have Steam and the game. Steam version also works offline and even without running steam app. Of course, one has to pay for the game again but that's how it works nowadays.
    "Do not fight for glory. Do not fight for love of your lord. Do not fight for hatred, honor or faith. Fight only for victory and you will succeed." - Uji sensei.

  14. #44
    Arrogant Ashigaru Moderator Ludens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    8,974
    Blog Entries
    1

    Lightbulb Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by dimitrios the samian View Post
    this thread is so interesting ...
    Imagine if the owners of the code (CA) , would listen in & give us a new patch !! awesome .
    It would be nice, but... I think you underestimate just how much work it will be on CA's end. For starters, the game is 15 years old now, so the programmers (assuming that they are still working at CA) are no longer familiar with the original code. Secondly, creating a competent A.I. requires more than just adding a few conditional requirements - it's a challenging part of game design.

    As this is an old game, it cannot be sold for full price and there is a limited market for it, so there's practically no incentive (and quite a bit of disincentive) for CA to do so. The patch would be mostly appreciated by people like us, who already own the game and won't shell out for it a second time.

    (So how does the Steam patch fit into this? Well, I guess it was simply a compatibility fix to allow CA to sell a few more copies via Steam - something that could be done quickly and cheaply.)

    Quote Originally Posted by caravel View Post
    The only way to get real improvements into the game would be via a source code release. That was talked about quite a lot over the years, but there is still no sign of it ever happening.
    It's been talked about by fans, but was there ever any indication that CA was even considering it?

    I am also kinda sceptical that, even if CA does release the source code, a programmer will volunteer to fix M:TW's flaws - given the amount of work it is likely to take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stazi View Post
    Anyone that can connect to the internet in any way can have Steam and the game. Steam version also works offline and even without running steam app. Of course, one has to pay for the game again but that's how it works nowadays.
    I don't quite agree with the "of course", but I see your point. All the same, you understand that some of us feel a bit miffed that we have to pay again a simple compatibility fix? Why doesn't CA* put that fix on their website as well?

    (* This is, of course, assuming that CA created the fix themselves, rather than it being done by Valve or an intermediary.)

  15. #45

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by Stazi View Post
    Anyone that can connect to the internet in any way can have Steam and the game. Steam version also works offline and even without running steam app. Of course, one has to pay for the game again but that's how it works nowadays.
    Some of us just don't want steam and don't want to pay for the same game again. That's how it works [for me] nowadays.

    I'm fortunate in that I now have a PC which can run both games very well. It's actually the same old PC, but getting hold of Windows 7 to replace Windows XP resolved my problems (it's important to state that Windows has not been my main OS for over 10 years - I keep that (offline) Windows installation for that particular purpose). Unfortunately that PC is kind of "stored away" and to get it out I would have to move a mountain of stuff... who knows, things might change in a few months...

    (I can't download, install and pay for anything to fix that second problem)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludens View Post
    It would be nice, but... [...]
    Agreed on all counts, it's really down to the slim chance of a source code release, or some even more unlikely reverse engineering attempt - otherwise you've got what you've got - which isn't that bad all things considered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludens View Post
    It's been talked about by fans, but was there ever any indication that CA was even considering it?
    To my knowledge: None at all. CA have remained silent. There was the "something" I referred to above and if that is still the "current" policy, then you've no chance whatsoever of seeing the source. Well maybe not zero, but you are talking decades... bear in mind that there are many thousands of titles going back to the MSDOS, Amiga, Atari and before era, where source code has not been released.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludens View Post
    I am also kinda sceptical that, even if CA does release the source code, a programmer will volunteer to fix M:TW's flaws - given the amount of work it is likely to take.
    I'm less pessimistic on that count, but it is indeed a moot point. I would suggest that more than a few would be willing to seize on it. If you look at the game engines from ID software, those were forked into independent free projects which added new features, functionality, etc - and used none of the original media. In my opinion there would be a lot of appetite for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludens View Post
    (* This is, of course, assuming that CA created the fix themselves, rather than it being done by Valve or an intermediary.)
    I would not be at all surprised if the work was outsourced under an NDA, but honestly no idea.

    I have to say, that it's very good to see many of you still here.


  16. #46
    Member Member DEB8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Near Bristol England
    Posts
    322

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by phred View Post
    I remember always having a hard time with the Turks starting in the High period.
    There may be a trick to it, but I don't think the Turks have the provinces/infrastructure to deal with the Mongols.
    And the Mongols have a tendency to make a beeline for the Turks.
    It is possible - but it is hard. Pin them in Armenia as a start...

    Member thankful for this post:

    gallum 


  17. #47

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by Clifton View Post
    After High Russia - what do you suggest?
    I'd say, play the French in early, and try to establish the outremer kingdoms/principalities [crusader kingdoms and principalities] in the Holy Land by - say 1187 [date of the fall of Jerusalem to Saladin]..[Antioch, Tripoli, Jerusalem, Edessa]

    Should be pretty challenging, especially if you limit yourself to that goal [maintaining those four provinces], as the Crusades will bleed you from armies and money for normal expansion in Europe. It will also be challenging to establish a kingdom surrounded by enemy muslim kingdoms battle wise..

    To make it more challenging and more role playing, you can load your King in one of the Crusades and send him to the Holy Land..that should make it even more dfficult to hold your European core terrotories..
    Last edited by gallum; 01-13-2019 at 00:05. Reason: typos

  18. #48

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Another interesting house rule i saw once posted was: do not start a war - fight only when others start a fight.

    Before you say that this is hard, you can actually play with that rule and provoke aggression from neighbours you want to fight [leaving provinces deliberately unguarded to provoke attacks]

    It should make the game considerably more challenging..

  19. #49
    Member Member dimitrios the samian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Hellas Down Under
    Posts
    606

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludens View Post
    It would be nice, but... I think you underestimate just how much work it will be on CA's end. For starters, the game is 15 years old now, so the programmers (assuming that they are still working at CA) are no longer familiar with the original code. Secondly, creating a competent A.I. requires more than just adding a few conditional requirements - it's a challenging part of game design.
    .....swaying it slightly off topic again , but here goes ..
    Yes on all yr points Luden , but taking into consideration how intricate this 15 yr old code may be ....
    Many dont do's could have been added back then even a year or two after its release
    eg Do not allow the King to sail away from homeland to attack an island of no worth & get stranded !
    Dont build artillery if peices already exist and have not been used ...
    and many of the silly AI spamming it does etc etc
    Im sure if they allowed the talented blokes here still modding, access to the code , we could perfect it ..(as it stands)without adding new features or changing it much .
    Their mistake was that game to game as they progressed they kept adding n adding new features n never really sorted any of the incompetence of the AI ( or their own) .
    They just gave the buying public a few patches to avoid total embarassment & left it up to the modders to fix .hmmmmm , thats why its moddable
    Last edited by dimitrios the samian; Yesterday at 01:36.

  20. #50
    Member Member dimitrios the samian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Hellas Down Under
    Posts
    606

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    hello again ..... slightly offtopic but related , so i post here .
    I found this information by Axalon over at another site .
    ......................
    for MTW specifically... On "hard", all AI units get a +15% bonus in combat. Also, the AI will start to use more "advanced" tactics and manoeuvres in the field. No morale bonus whatsoever and no penalties on you. This happens first at "expert", here the AI units get +4 morale and a +30% bonus in combat. And possibly use even more advanced tactics in the field - this part is still under debate. So I can't tell for sure.
    ..........................
    My thoughts after reading Axalons words are these ....
    A "more challenging game" must be played on hard because "the AI uses advance tactics & manouvres "
    but for those who like to play mods & create them ... Perhaps designing them to be played on Expert only " is the way forward ...providing that the manouvres & tactics" are better still ( thats the catch)..
    This sounds like the optimum challenge but ofcourse if required we can bump the players morale & bonus in combat to balance it out .
    Your thoughts guys ?
    cheers
    Last edited by dimitrios the samian; Yesterday at 02:06.

  21. #51

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Morale saturates after a certain point - so its better to go easy on morale bonuses from the campaign, high base morale and expert difficulty.

    'Saturates' means that units will stay on and fight to the death [as if you were playing starcraft] - essentially morale is largely detracted as a gameplay element..

    For morale workings in MTW/VI, read this thread:
    https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...-Affects-Units

    morale>14[correction] is the saturation point.. after it the unit will stay and fight to the death unless against really overwhelming odds..
    Last edited by gallum; Yesterday at 11:51. Reason: typos

    Members thankful for this post (2):



  22. #52

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Refer also to the numerology thread for the more complete info: https://forums.totalwar.com/discussi...war-numerology

    Members thankful for this post (2):



  23. #53
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,651

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Just wow on both links. I always had a healthy respect for both Puzz3D and Maeda for their in-depth knowledge of the game. I learned a lot from both of them.

    @Puzz3D & Maeda Toshiie
    High Plains Drifter

  24. #54

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    Quote Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai View Post
    Just wow on both links. I always had a healthy respect for both Puzz3D and Maeda for their in-depth knowledge of the game. I learned a lot from both of them.

    @Puzz3D & Maeda Toshiie
    Maeda was a really decent member and a very good compiler of whatever of value was being posted..

    Puzz was like a TW encyclopeadia, and a pretty decent mp player..

    had great time with both, especially though with Puzz during the Samurai Warlords mp sessions and in various chat sessions in-between. Tosa was also there and he was fun to be and play with too.. we used to end up in the same team often, especially during 2v2's..

    good times..

  25. #55

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    My memory is failing, but I'm still not sure that expert level does anything other than add the AI's morale bonus and increase the combat effectiveness bonus further over what hard difficulty does - as should be detailed in Obake Date's and longjohn's archived posts... this was from the info originally provided by either longjohn or giljaysmith (developers).

    As I recall, only easy difficulty "nerfs" the battles and makes the AI pretty hopeless - "practice mode".

    //edit: here

    +4 Morale to your troops on Easy
    +4 Morale to AI faction troops on Expert
    +12 Morale to ALL units if Morale is turned off in realism settings
    On easy its combat effectiveness is reduced by 30-40% (can't remember the exact figure).
    On hard it's increased by 10-15%, and on expert its 30%. 30% being around 75% of the increase you'd get from 1 valour upgrade."
    Here is a list provided by GilJaySmith, one of the developers of Total War:
    - On expert the AI gets a morale bonus - on easy the player gets one
    - On hard and above, AI skirmishers will try to avoid being pincered
    - On easy the AI will not consider going into loose formation to avoid being shot at
    - On easy the AI will not consider outflanking, double-envelopment, or stop-and-shoot tactics
    - On easy the AI won't move troops out of the way of castle walls that may be about to collapse
    - On easy the AI will try to hide rather than flee if the battle is going badly
    - On easy the AI will not try ambushes
    - On easy the AI will not try the 'appear weak' battle plan
    - The AI is more likely to deploy in woods on harder difficulties, and less likely to camp near the red zone on easier difficulties
    - The AI is more likely to consider scouting the map to find the rest of your army if it can't see it all on higher difficulties
    - On easy the AI will not skirmish
    - On higher than easy, the AI will specifically consider sh00ting at your artillery
    - On easy the AI will generally attack rather than defend, and will not consider withdrawing for a much longer time
    - On higher than easy, the AI will check to see if it's marching into enfilade fire when attacking your main body
    - On easy the AI may come out of a wall breach to chase you if you attack and are repulsed
    Last edited by caravel; Yesterday at 15:01.

  26. #56
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,651

    Default Re: Any suggested house rules to make the game more challenging? (VI expansion)

    The AI is more likely to consider scouting the map to find the rest of your army if it can't see it all on higher difficulties
    This was one of the more fun aspects of playing at higher difficulties. In bad weather, particularly dense fog, it was a gas to set traps for the scouts who were usually light cavalry of some kind. Wipe the scouts out completely, then move the units involved in the trap to a different location. Peek-and-Sneak gave me as much enjoyment as winning an epic, 2 hour battle.





    Last edited by ReluctantSamurai; Yesterday at 16:11.
    High Plains Drifter

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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