Just one small thing...
Byzantine Varangian Guards become available, when spearmakers' guild is build, which does not seem very logical to me. Does not sword production have closer connection with axes (both have blades).
I am not sure if this is that simple, but I would advise to change the condition for Varangian Guards from spear to sword guild.
Yes, that is a bit odd. I will look into it.Originally Posted by [b
Quote[/b] (kgasuns @ July 14 2004,17:58)]Just one small thing...
Byzantine Varangian Guards become available, when spearmakers' guild is build, which does not seem very logical to me. Does not sword production have closer connection with axes (both have blades).
I am not sure if this is that simple, but I would advise to change the condition for Varangian Guards from spear to sword guild.
I'm just wondering whether the Spearmaker's Guild requirement for the Varangian Guard is part of the original game and not a fault of this mod?
The Spearmaker's Guild requirement is part of the original game, so it's not a fault in the mod. It's funny that the Varangian Guard needs a Spearmaker's Guild, when the Huscarles needs a swordsmith.
Will the Serbs be getting any sword-wielding troops?
Jepp the sebs, lithuanians and other factions will get sword units. I think it will make the game more fun and give the buildings some use.
I just hope I am not too late with my advices and do not bother You VH.
Hearing about more swords is greatBut there is one thing that keeps on troubling me. Why is this such a problem for most cavalries to dismount before any battle?
E.g., dismounting Druzina Cavalry You get awesome swordsmen(feudal knights) from a crap cavalry... and for cheap price. This is already in a way disbalanced.
Should not Polish Retainers and Lithuanian Cavalry (and others) be available for dismounting for any battle just as well. And as these are minor nobility units should they not be shock troops - sword or axe - after dismounting. The example of Druzina cavalry shows, that You can get not only a better class infantry from lower class cavalry (which is quite right, since in Europe horses would be a luxury, thus making almost any cavalry in a way upper class), but also a different weapon. (I am not speaking about hobilars or steppe cavalry and like.)
One more thing about dismounting - chivalric foot knights look somewhat too similar to halebardiers. Those are no weapons of nobility I understand, that halebards give them armour piercing advantage, but this advantage is available also to some swordsmen (if I am not mistaken).
I also think that broader dismounting ability, especially for chivalric cavalries, would introduce more of feudal balance in infantry battles.
Though I am sure You have already cared for similar kind of balancing in version 2.0, I hope some of this can still be useful.
Hi kgasunsQuote[/b] (kgasuns @ July 16 2004,10:15)]I just hope I am not too late with my advices and do not bother You VH.
Hearing about more swords is great
E.g., dismounting Druzina Cavalry You get awesome swordsmen(feudal knights) from a crap cavalry... and for cheap price. This is already in a way disbalanced.
Should not Polish Retainers and Lithuanian Cavalry (and others) be available for dismounting for any battle just as well. And as these are minor nobility units should they not be shock troops - sword or axe - after dismounting. The example of Druzina cavalry shows, that You can get not only a better class infantry from lower class cavalry (which is quite right, since in Europe horses would be a luxury, thus making almost any cavalry in a way upper class), but also a different weapon. (I am not speaking about hobilars or steppe cavalry and like.)
One more thing about dismounting - chivalric foot knights look somewhat too similar to halebardiers. Those are no weapons of nobility I understand, that halebards give them armour piercing advantage, but this advantage is available also to some swordsmen (if I am not mistaken).
I also think that broader dismounting ability, especially for chivalric cavalries, would introduce more of feudal balance in infantry battles.
Though I am sure You have already cared for similar kind of balancing in version 2.0, I hope some of this can still be useful.
A lot of knight units can dismount before battle in 2.0. I have added a lot of Order footknights so that they dismount and don't look like chivalric foot knights. Some swordsmen have armour piercing advantage, having a two hand sword. Maybe chivalric foot knights should have this. When I have added all the units, I will proberly change the dismount units of cav for better balance.
Should the Druzina Cavalry change into another dismount unit than feudal knights, or should the price go up?
What kind of dismount unit should Polish Retainers and Lithuanian Cavalry change into?
Maybe dismounted Polish Retainers could be Feudal Men-at-Arms?
I am not sure about historical period, but I remember seeing some Rusians halebardiers on pictures. I just had an idea they were very different from the western ones. They were much less armoured and they were professional soldiers. If I am not misteken, later that developed into mixed axe and early musket unit called strelky or something like that, but I am not sure about the period again.
I will try to find out, if You are interested. If You would be, that could mean new kind of halebard unit with less armour, but more morale and attack ability. (I always find it disgusting to see too many units of the same kind for different cultures.)
Speaking about russians - the vision of their swordsmen I have (at least the one seen in pictures) would look very much like armoured spearmen, but with a sword.
The eastern cultures all together are made somewhat too unarmoured. That would not be the metal plate armour of West, but chain-mail, leather or leather-metal armour was not uncommon for the wealthy and professional soldiers.
Could be cool. I have added one serb one, a unit like billmen but with less armour.
Im very interested, specially if you could find the original name so that I don't have call them Rushalebard or something like that
It's a lot like I had in mind. It's good to get a secound wiev on things
Jepp, with extra mobility. I know that the lithuanians did not have heavy cav, so the rus are proberly the same.
I did not notice Your reply and question about dismounted cavalries before, so I answer after another post.
Druzina - I think that is a fine unit that adds a lot of strength to Russians, so leaving it would be nice, but then the price should go up. It also depends on overall balance in Your new mod and new units. My personal opinion is, that dismounted Druzina should be more like chivalric men-at-arms.
1) There is another way. I just made the point, that Eastern Europe (and perhaps further East) should have some specific swordsmen (at least High and Late), that are not so greatly dependant on feudal system, but would be more like professional soldiers or free farmers (depending on historical period), probably wearing chain-mail, leather or leather-metal armour. Something very much like Viking Carls or Armoured Spearmen (just with swords), or like Mongol Warriors for further East.
2) You also could link these new kind of swordsmen to minor eastern nobility or just seasoned mounted units, that could dismount. This way the problem of dismounted minor nobility units could be solved, because making them feudal men-at-arms would make them too low-classed, but feudal foot knights - too western and heavily armoured.
3) Or You could make this specific kind of swordsmen on their own or as dismounted professional cavalries, plus have feudal foot knights for minor nobility (just like Druzina is now).
Puting this simple - Eastern Europe had a different cultural (and military) flavour and feudal order advanced slower, changing all the structure of armed forces. (Just like Scandinavians in Early.) And I think we should not disregard it, because official game is entirely based on western pattern of development, you can see it by the buildings - most of them were useless for Pagan, some Eastern European and Muslim (non-Turk) cultures. Should that mean that their armies were so simple and uniform - I am afraid they were not
Because of this reason I would also make Feudal Sergants unavailable for Scandinavians and Eastern Europe in Early, but leave Armoured spearmen for them.
Great info kgasuns, thanks), so that I can release it very soon. If you find any cool names for the units, please let me know, becouse I hate having to call them Rus Infantry and so on
You are always welcome
I admire Your work - the amount and the result of it.
But I am afraid I won't be able to gather exact information about those slavic and other eastern armies that soon. Perhaps release v 2.0 first, and then make an update (if it is possible). Whatever, I can still share my impressions.
My (perhaps not historically exact) vision or Rus halbardiers looks very much like Szelky, but with other weapons and non-mounted.
Those Rus infantry should be there for sure. Actually word Druzina is one of the best ones - it means something like unit, this word has a flavour of community, but not quite. Then make them just Druzina or Druzina infantry, swordsmen or whatever.
(But You should not use the same word for non-slavic Eastern Europe, like Lithuanians or Hungarians, not sure if it would be OK even for Poles.)
A beard is an important element of image of any Rus armies Actually the units that look most Rus of all are Szelky, Lithuanian cavalry and Armoured spearmen...
Cool, I will remember this info when making the units. I have added a lot of units last night and it's looking OK.Quote[/b] (kgasuns @ July 17 2004,18:31)]You are always welcome
I admire Your work - the amount and the result of it.
But I am afraid I won't be able to gather exact information about those slavic and other eastern armies that soon. Perhaps release v 2.0 first, and then make an update (if it is possible). Whatever, I can still share my impressions.
My (perhaps not historically exact) vision or Rus halbardiers looks very much like Szelky, but with other weapons and non-mounted.
Those Rus infantry should be there for sure. Actually word Druzina is one of the best ones - it means something like unit, this word has a flavour of community, but not quite. Then make them just Druzina or Druzina infantry, swordsmen or whatever.
(But You should not use the same word for non-slavic Eastern Europe, like Lithuanians or Hungarians, not sure if it would be OK even for Poles.)
A beard is an important element of image of any Rus armies Actually the units that look most Rus of all are Szelky, Lithuanian cavalry and Armoured spearmen...
Thanks for the help again
Hi
First of all: Very Nice MOD I'm Loving it
I Just want to tell you guys that i am Translating this MOD into German, so it is more Fun to Play for Germans. I will sent the Language Files to you if I am Finished.I Hope V2.0 will be Released soon
With Greetings, Teutonic
Im from Germany, so my English isn't very well. ;)
Wellcome to the Org. Teutonic
It's cool that you are translating the files. I would had like to have all languages, but im not good at french or spanish and my German skills have not been used for some time
My e-mail is miguel_k@jubiimail.dk
The 2.0 version will be out soon, just need to add some more units and final balancing (not much balancing needed).
75% Finished Already
It would be Nice if you can do something for me: After v2.0 is Finished, it would be Nice if you can make a TXT File for me where you write down how i can Manually add the changes of v2.0, because i do not want to translate everything again.
I Just asked my brother to help me, so the Files for v1.2 could be Finished this Evening.
Keep on working, Im Loving this MOD
Im from Germany, so my English isn't very well. ;)
Thats great. I can use the files to for the 2.0 version too, becouse there are not that big differens in most of the info. I just need to find my Danish/German bookQuote[/b] (Teutonic @ July 18 2004,18:16)]75% Finished Already
It would be Nice if you can do something for me: After v2.0 is Finished, it would be Nice if you can make a TXT File for me where you write down how i can Manually add the changes of v2.0, because i do not want to translate everything again.
I Just asked my brother to help me, so the Files for v1.2 could be Finished this Evening.
Keep on working, Im Loving this MOD
Thanks for help
EDIT: I proberly need some help on unit info, but i'll let you know
Unit Info-> no problem
With the Help of my Brother i will manage that
First Version of MTW_XL_German finished, E-Mail is on its way.
Im from Germany, so my English isn't very well. ;)
Thanks for the help, very usefull stuff. I'll let you know once im finished adding units.Quote[/b] (Teutonic @ July 18 2004,19:49)]Unit Info-> no problem
With the Help of my Brother i will manage that
First Version of MTW_XL_German finished, E-Mail is on its way.
Hello again
I don't want to bother You with additions in the last moment, but there is one more thing that troubles my MTW conscience - halberdiers.
They are somewhat overpowered in High and Late. The bonuses they get against cavalry and any other armoured (and at this time anything is armoured) units make them in a way invincible. Well, bonuses are quite adequate, but there is nothing in the game reflecting the need of cohesion - one thing balansing their power. Here is a quote from Britannica.com (the adress to took it from is http://www.armadilloarmory.com/hxpikes.htm):
The halberd was the only significant medieval shock weapon without classical antecedents. In its basic form, it consisted of a six-foot shaft of ash or another hardwood, mounted by an axe blade that had a forward point for thrusting and a thin projection on the back for piercing armour or pulling a horseman off balance. The halberd was a specialized weapon for fighting armoured men-at-arms and penetrating knightly armour. With the point of this weapon, a halberdier could fend off a mounted lancer's thrusts and, swinging the cutting edge with the full power of his arms and body, could cleave armour, flesh, and bone. The halberd's power was counterbalanced by the vulnerability of taking a full swing with both arms; once committed, the halberdier was totally dependent upon his comrades for protection. This gave halberd fighting a ferocious all-or-nothing quality and placed a premium on cohesion.
While the halberd could penetrate the best plate armour, allowing infantrymen to inflict heavy casualties on their mounted opponents, the lance's advantage in length meant that men-at-arms could inflict heavy casualties in return. The solution was the pike, a staff, usually of ash, that was twice the length of the halberd and had a small piercing head about 10 inches (25 centimeters) long. Sound infantry armed with the pike could fend off cavalry with ease, even when outnumbered. As with the halberd, effectiveness of shock action with the pike was heavily dependent upon the cohesion and solidity of the troops wielding it.
I have noticed that halberdiers often are marked as evenly mached or winning even if attacked from all sides, thus there is no cohesion, but they keep on having all the bonuses.
So I say that requirement for deep formation or less defensive points given could solve this problem. On the other hand I have read other players' comments about pikemen being pretty useless, at least not better than other units in any aspect. Perhaps it is not true, but if it is, their defensive value should be raised to match their historical role.
Kind regards,
Kaspars[B]
hmm, its been a while since i was last on the org, and its the first time i have heard of this mod, seems very promising.
Just a quick question VH, why should i download this mod and play it, instead of sticking with BKB's super mod. I'm not trying to take anything away from the effort of your modding, but it seems that your's and BKB's are very similar in style. You have worked around the same area of the game, and focused on many of the same things, so what really makes this different.
What i'm really trying to say is, is there enough space for two near identical mod's in MTW. With so little time left until RTW, who will really have the time to play a mod with which they have already experienced most of it with BKB??
As i said before i am not trying to undermine you and i apologise for any offence i may cause in this post, to both you, and your supporters, but i belive it a question that needs to be answered.
"You know me, Marge. I like my beer cold, my TV loud, and my homosexuals fa-laming!" -Homer
Here is a quote from http://www.aemma.org/training/pollaxe/pollaxe_top.htm
..However, a good portion of attention was reserved for the family of staff weapons which offered a great variety of forms, each with its own domain in terms of usage and social status. Staff weapons described include halberds, partisans, pikes and bills were evident in the battlefields of Europe where they enabled the foot soldiers to deal effectively with cavalry opposition while at the other end of the social scale, the pollaxe was a chivalric weapon achieving primacy during the 15th century amoungst armoured fighting knights within the lists.
Well, it appears that polearms did come into use by chivalric knights, but only Late Middle Ages.
@kgasuns: Thanks for the info. I have allready been working on the stats and have made some ajustments to them.
@Duke Dick
The mod will have GA mode and the new music for a start. A lot of people play GA mode, so thats one of the places my mod come in. My mod will have new unit stats for all units to enhance gameplay in battles, other graphics, units and stuff. The only thing I can say is try it once it comes out. Allso, the mod is allmost done and not all people will buy RTW when it come out (RTW will need a big computer).
I allso mod for fun, becouse I whant to see how far I can push it.
i never once said i wouldn't download the mod, i just wanted have something cleared up thats all. Your's and BKB's are very similar, and it would be just like somebody creating a hellenic mod even though there already is one out.
However, your's seems to have stuff that BKB's currently does not have, such as GA mode, and BKB's has many things that your's doesnt have, including period specific maps, so i suppose there is room for both. it will probably come down to personal taste.
At least you are actually trying new things, which is something i like to see, unlike certain people who see fit to remove land area's, some of which i believe to be important to the game and only bothering to add units(how can i call it adding units, all he is doing is copying and pasting).
Keep up the good work
"You know me, Marge. I like my beer cold, my TV loud, and my homosexuals fa-laming!" -Homer
The mods might look the same, but I hope that they will not be. I have not studied BKB's mod that much, so can't say how much they look alike. It was kind of a bommer when I found out BKB made new maps for his mod, becouse I was allready about 14 days in the process of making a new map. However my map dosn't look like his at all, so theres no problems there. Im working on improving battles and AI on the strategic map, so I hope my mod will give a new feel there. Im allso using a lot of shields that change color, allways having the faction colors. This will make the look inbattle different. It's good enogth you ask about the mod, becouse how will people ever know the difference of them.
Hey Viking Horde, a question regarding GA - will the homeland score for factions be based around what they were trying to do or what actually happened in history? for example, obviously for the crusader states the reconquering of Jerusaleum and Edessa are obvious 'goals'. However, this did not happen in RL. Same with the Teutons and Lithuania/Poland. Instead will it represent what happened in history ie. after the fall of acre (forgot the date)the crusader states will stop recieveing points for homelands totally, kinda like the Sicilians. Either way is good IMHO, just wondering.
CHIVALRY TOTAL WAR - A medieval mod for RTW
http://www.stratcommandcenter.com/chivalry/
It will be based on what happened in history so that factions will stop reciving GA points when they lost the province in reallife. I find it more fun this way, becouse the fight for points gets harder. I think it was made this way in the original MTW(?). The goals will still be there, becouse factions did have goals, but not all had succes in RL.
awesome, thanks for clearing that up, I look forward to the mod
CHIVALRY TOTAL WAR - A medieval mod for RTW
http://www.stratcommandcenter.com/chivalry/
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
MTW XL version 3.0 out now! Get it here: 
Bookmarks