Org Mobile Site
Thread: prisoners are back!
linkage: http://www.computerandvideogames.com....php?id=142571
... surely that won't happen in game i thought they were going to improve the AI to make battles more realistic... all the game companies care about is the graphics which annoys me
GMM
Originally Posted by :
Mercilessly slaughter the prisoners you capture during a battle (a feature reprised from the original Medieval) and your general's 'dread' rating will rocket, making enemies fearful on the battlefield and civilians more obedient within cities.
there is some very good news in there apart from:Mercilessly slaughter the prisoners you capture during a battle (a feature reprised from the original Medieval) and your general's 'dread' rating will rocket, making enemies fearful on the battlefield and civilians more obedient within cities.
Originally Posted by :
What strikes me most though isn't the French tactical naivety, but the breathtaking level of detail that these battles contain. Gone are the clone armies of Rome, replaced by rows of unique soldiers, their armour acquiring blood and mud as they duel with their opponents, before visibly scanning their surroundings for their next victim.
they were talking about a group of cavalry charging into some spikes What strikes me most though isn't the French tactical naivety, but the breathtaking level of detail that these battles contain. Gone are the clone armies of Rome, replaced by rows of unique soldiers, their armour acquiring blood and mud as they duel with their opponents, before visibly scanning their surroundings for their next victim.
... surely that won't happen in game i thought they were going to improve the AI to make battles more realistic... all the game companies care about is the graphics which annoys meGMM
Originally Posted by GiantMonkeyMan:
they were talking about a group of cavalry charging into some spikes ...
No, they weren't.they were talking about a group of cavalry charging into some spikes
... The cavarly never charged into the spikes, they tried to flank through the woods.
"the French infantry launch an audacious bid to turn themselves into gallic kebabs as they march straight onto a row of spikes placed down by his archers"
Ok, it's not the Knights, but just as stupid
Ok, it's not the Knights, but just as stupid
oops my bad... but still, cavalry may be surprised by spikes and not manage to stop in time if they are charging full pelt, but infantry should be able to stop or even go through spikes unheeded...
i'm more happy that they decided to include prisoners but whatever, bully me for my crappy observation skills
GMM
i'm more happy that they decided to include prisoners but whatever, bully me for my crappy observation skills
GMM
The colourful phrasing of the "kebab" line suggests to me that the reviewer should not be taken as literally saying attacking stakes causes casualties to infantry. If I were CA, I would have the stakes negate the cavalry charge bonus, not cause casualties and until I hear definitively otherwise, that's what I'll assume is going to happen.
Extending that negate charge effect to infantry would be defensible - pallisades, field entrenchments, abatis etc have been used throughout history to take some of the bite out of an assault. If you had a choice between receiving an infantry charge in the open or behind stakes, which would you choose? In game, the effect would probably be mild as infantry charge bonuses are modest.
Extending that negate charge effect to infantry would be defensible - pallisades, field entrenchments, abatis etc have been used throughout history to take some of the bite out of an assault. If you had a choice between receiving an infantry charge in the open or behind stakes, which would you choose? In game, the effect would probably be mild as infantry charge bonuses are modest.
Yay! Prisoners! Time for my dread rating to skyrocket.
Yes, the stakes would slow down infantry. They are best used against knights because knights cannot stop too fast and horses/knights would get implaed, scared horses would buck riders off and amidst the confusion, the Archers could shoot the calvary.
Yes, the stakes would slow down infantry. They are best used against knights because knights cannot stop too fast and horses/knights would get implaed, scared horses would buck riders off and amidst the confusion, the Archers could shoot the calvary.
Originally Posted by IrishArmenian:
Yay! Prisoners! Time for my dread rating to skyrocket.
Yes, the stakes would slow down infantry. They are best used against knights because knights cannot stop too fast and horses/knights would get implaed, scared horses would buck riders off and amidst the confusion, the Archers could shoot the calvary.
Yay! Prisoners! Time for my dread rating to skyrocket.
Yes, the stakes would slow down infantry. They are best used against knights because knights cannot stop too fast and horses/knights would get implaed, scared horses would buck riders off and amidst the confusion, the Archers could shoot the calvary.
I'm pleasantly surprised that the article didn't refer to prisoners as a "new feature" like all the other stuff from MTW that are returning.
Good thing I took another look at the article, as I was ready to make a sarcastic post about that very detail.
Good thing I took another look at the article, as I was ready to make a sarcastic post about that very detail.
I always used to butcher my prisoners and laugh as the enemy king and all his heirs were wiped out instantaneously. 
Too bad you got a battlefield morale penalty if you did it too often...
Too bad you got a battlefield morale penalty if you did it too often...
Originally Posted by IrishArmenian:
Yay! Prisoners! Time for my dread rating to skyrocket.
Yes, the stakes would slow down infantry. They are best used against knights because knights cannot stop too fast and horses/knights would get implaed, scared horses would buck riders off and amidst the confusion, the Archers could shoot the calvary.
General VladimirYay! Prisoners! Time for my dread rating to skyrocket.
Yes, the stakes would slow down infantry. They are best used against knights because knights cannot stop too fast and horses/knights would get implaed, scared horses would buck riders off and amidst the confusion, the Archers could shoot the calvary.
...
Dread:
...
Sorry to disappoint you, but it appears that Dread is not included in MTW2.
It appears that the less Chivalry you have the more "feared" you will be.
It appears that the less Chivalry you have the more "feared" you will be.
Originally Posted by Ignoramus:
Sorry to disappoint you, but it appears that Dread is not included in MTW2.
I would guess that a negative chivalry rating equals a positive dread rating, whereby if you go below zero chivalry, the chivalry meter switches to the dread meter. Sorry to disappoint you, but it appears that Dread is not included in MTW2.
That sounds great, Usually when I played MTW I had good generals and bad ones (usually based on which vices they had), the good ones never killed prisoners while the other ones slaughtered all they captured.
Now it will show the nice ones too, not just the evil ones. I hope there are positive (as well as negative) effects for both. Does anyone know the specific effects of chivalry?
Now it will show the nice ones too, not just the evil ones. I hope there are positive (as well as negative) effects for both. Does anyone know the specific effects of chivalry?
Wonderful news then again I don't mind making a dollar or two from my captives as well.
Originally Posted by Ignoramus:
Sorry to disappoint you, but it appears that Dread is not included in MTW2.
It appears that the less Chivalry you have the more "feared" you will be.
"Authority" would probably also have a dread like effect. Accumen seems to have been omitted also.Sorry to disappoint you, but it appears that Dread is not included in MTW2.
It appears that the less Chivalry you have the more "feared" you will be.
I didn't think much of that article. The reviewer describes princesses as being "prostituted", which is way over the top.
This seems promising though. I only hope it really works.
Originally Posted by :
"In Medieval II, the AI will not only remember previous dealings you've had with it but your dealings with other factions, too. It'll then base its stance towards you on all of those factors."
"In Medieval II, the AI will not only remember previous dealings you've had with it but your dealings with other factions, too. It'll then base its stance towards you on all of those factors."
Authority trait only faction leaders posses. For all others instead of Authority they have Loyalty.
Originally Posted by 4th Dimension:
Authority trait only faction leaders posses. For all others instead of Authority they have Loyalty.
Ahhh... So it's similar to "Influence" then.Authority trait only faction leaders posses. For all others instead of Authority they have Loyalty.
Originally Posted by Caravel:
"Authority" would probably also have a dread like effect. Accumen seems to have been omitted also.
Ya, how do you know how good he is at finances? That's how I choose my governors, by how much money they make me. Are those traits similar to the ones in R:TW? I certainly don't agree with the ones they chose."Authority" would probably also have a dread like effect. Accumen seems to have been omitted also.
Originally Posted by Vladimir:
Ya, how do you know how good he is at finances? That's how I choose my governors, by how much money they make me. Are those traits similar to the ones in R:TW? I certainly don't agree with the ones they chose.
Maybe generals will be graded in their economic savvy by use of traits, in groups like "Trader", "Farmer", and "Taxman", with levels of expertise ranging from "Terrible" to "Excellent". That would mean that you'd have to choose cities for your governors carefully. Maybe a province with great farming yields would be an excellent environment for a good "Farmer", a city that makes its wealth through maritime trade would flourish under a good "Trader", and good "Taxmen" would reap huge profits from cities with large populations. It would be a more comprehensive way of rating economic ability, and might give some more individuality to your generals and governors.Ya, how do you know how good he is at finances? That's how I choose my governors, by how much money they make me. Are those traits similar to the ones in R:TW? I certainly don't agree with the ones they chose.
But I have a nagging feeling that you'll just get more money from a city if you put a governor with a high Authority in it.
At last they have given me stakes
Originally Posted by Perplexed:
Maybe generals will be graded in their economic savvy by use of traits, in groups like "Trader", "Farmer", and "Taxman", with levels of expertise ranging from "Terrible" to "Excellent". That would mean that you'd have to choose cities for your governors carefully. Maybe a province with great farming yields would be an excellent environment for a good "Farmer", a city that makes its wealth through maritime trade would flourish under a good "Trader", and good "Taxmen" would reap huge profits from cities with large populations. It would be a more comprehensive way of rating economic ability, and might give some more individuality to your generals and governors.
But I have a nagging feeling that you'll just get more money from a city if you put a governor with a high Authority in it.
Maybe generals will be graded in their economic savvy by use of traits, in groups like "Trader", "Farmer", and "Taxman", with levels of expertise ranging from "Terrible" to "Excellent". That would mean that you'd have to choose cities for your governors carefully. Maybe a province with great farming yields would be an excellent environment for a good "Farmer", a city that makes its wealth through maritime trade would flourish under a good "Trader", and good "Taxmen" would reap huge profits from cities with large populations. It would be a more comprehensive way of rating economic ability, and might give some more individuality to your generals and governors.
But I have a nagging feeling that you'll just get more money from a city if you put a governor with a high Authority in it.
Looking again though...
A regular guy has Command, Chivalry, Loyalty and Piety.
A faction leader (King) has Command, Chivalry, Authority and Piety.
So in this case Authority seems to replace Influence (from MTW rather than RTW) which affected the loyalty of all generals and rumour has it diplomatic transactions too.
Loyalty is seemingly obvious and Piety is how visibly religious you are. Command is again obvious which leaves only Chivalry which does not seem to fit well against 'Management' or the older 'Acumen'.
I like the idea that traits have more of an effect in this regard. But they seem to have added the Piety attribute to the varied religious traits available in BI... So it's anyones guess at the moment...
Loyalty is back? That's good news.
Concerning the effects of Chivalry and Dread asked for earlier in this thread I can just once again quote the Medieval 2 TW.com FAQ:
Cheers!
Ituralde
Originally Posted by :
Q. What effects do Chivalry and Dread have?
A. Chivalrous types will inspire loyalty in those around them. Dread lords meanwhile can terrify their followers and the enemy alike.
And like everybody else, I'm wondering what happende to Acumen/Management.Q. What effects do Chivalry and Dread have?
A. Chivalrous types will inspire loyalty in those around them. Dread lords meanwhile can terrify their followers and the enemy alike.
Cheers!
Ituralde
Originally Posted by Ludens:
Loyalty is back? That's good news.
Well loyalty also existed in BI so it's not back with M:TW2Loyalty is back? That's good news.
Something I would have liked is the ability to pick off certain members of my batch of prisoners.
eg: "Slaughter all prisoners" "Slaughter all generals" "Slaughter Faction Leader"
Which could lead to V/Vs such as "Scant Mercy" "Social Worker... I mean Family Destroyer" "King Killer"
Just an idea...
(Seriously, I've had some bad experiences with social workers. I reckon they have incentive schemes along the lines of "5 families broken apart - £100" "10 families split and destroyed - £500" "20 families utterly ravaged, so that the children are taken from their parents, so both suffer huge phycological damage - £10,000")
eg: "Slaughter all prisoners" "Slaughter all generals" "Slaughter Faction Leader"
Which could lead to V/Vs such as "Scant Mercy" "Social Worker... I mean Family Destroyer" "King Killer"
Just an idea...
(Seriously, I've had some bad experiences with social workers. I reckon they have incentive schemes along the lines of "5 families broken apart - £100" "10 families split and destroyed - £500" "20 families utterly ravaged, so that the children are taken from their parents, so both suffer huge phycological damage - £10,000")
Originally Posted by :
Something I would have liked is the ability to pick off certain members of my batch of prisoners.
Yes, and maybe including the nnumber of prisoners you want to kill. For example if you have 800 prisoners, maybe you can choose to kill 400 instead of all of them.Something I would have liked is the ability to pick off certain members of my batch of prisoners.
Originally Posted by The Fwapper:
Something I would have liked is the ability to pick off certain members of my batch of prisoners.
Well, in the first MTW, you could choose to execute the ringleaders in rebellions, or every single rebel so its feasible that they will extend this option for when you are dealing with other factions.Something I would have liked is the ability to pick off certain members of my batch of prisoners.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO