Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 389

Thread: MTW Pocket Mod: General

  1. #91
    Camel Lord Senior Member Capture The Flag Champion Martok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In my own little world....but it's okay, they know me there.
    Posts
    8,257

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Nice work, MC!

    If you need to take a break, then you should by all means do so. Whatever you've got done so far, I think there will a number of us who will be more than happy to try it out.
    "MTW is not a game, it's a way of life." -- drone

  2. #92
    Senior Member Senior Member naut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    9,103

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Quote Originally Posted by Manco Capac
    So far the changes I've made have been positive but it's early days yet, and there is still alot to do. I've started to add the Nasrid faction to the late period (FN_ANDALUS) just to see how they go, but have hit a problem when associating units and buildings to them in the crusaders and build prod files. It's ages since I've done this sort of stuff before so I can't think of what I've missed out. I've read through some of the old threads in the repositary, but to be honest that place is in a mess and I can't find any straight answers to my questions by searching. I'm feeling a little phased about all of this now to be truthful.
    Here's a great resource, helped me a bunch: http://www.box.net/public/24jcbrbxkf

    The most likely thing is something wrong with the faction association/culture specific.

    Quote Originally Posted by Manco Capac
    On December the 9th or therabouts I'll be hosting the the files I've changed so far for download to anyone that's interested.
    Definitely.
    #Hillary4prism

    BD:TW

    Some piously affirm: "The truth is such and such. I know! I see!"
    And hold that everything depends upon having the “right” religion.
    But when one really knows, one has no need of religion. - Mahavyuha Sutra

    Freedom necessarily involves risk. - Alan Watts

  3. #93

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Quote Originally Posted by Rythmic
    Here's a great resource, helped me a bunch: http://www.box.net/public/24jcbrbxkf

    The most likely thing is something wrong with the faction association/culture specific.


    Definitely.
    Thanks for that I'll take a look at that tonight, though the Nasrid faction was only an afterthought and not something I was going to add to the mod at this stage. I've yet to mod in the forestry, that's what I'll be doing this evening. Also I need to add Iron to the suggested provinces, which I haven't done as yet. I will be trying to add some other mines also.

    At present the mod is in such a condition that it will overwrite existing files. I'm going to change that so that it uses it's own dedicated crusaders, build and startpos files with it's own /loc/english/ files also.

    A few economic balancing issues need to be resolved also. The Turkish/Early campaign I was playing I have now abandoned. It was going very well.

    I had noticed the Sicilians isolated on Malta supporting a lot of Royal Knights units with a total support cost of 1200. The province was earning 320 or thereabouts. This is something that needs to be solved. Even if they were half size units, the Sicilians would still be isolated on Malta and still paying 610 in support costs while earning only 320. There is nothing economically I can do to save them from this fate, except for giving islands a ridiculously high income, and even that won't help the AI if it doesn't spend on the right things. So what is the solution? Well I've mentioned this before, but here goes:

    There are landbridges on the map that in my opinion ruin gameplay. Those are Cordoba/Morocco, Granada/Morocco and Flanders/Wessex. Cutting these landbridges does not create any 1 province "islands". There are other landbridges such as Sicily/Naples and Sardinia/Corsica that I also cut. Sicily is quite a strong province and the Sicilians overflow into Naples quite quickly if this landbridge is left intact. I often see them fighting it out with the pope and taking on the Hungarians and Italians. I once linked: Naples/Sicily/Malta/Tunisia, and watched the Sicilians spill into north Africa and wipe out the Almohads. This is partly why I isolate them.

    Sardinia and Corsica I isolate simply because they are separate islands. Nothing more than that.

    I am now rethinking some of the landbridges for this mod.

    For Finland/Sweden I like that fact that the Novgorod can expand into Scandinavia and the Danes can expand into northern Russia. The land route is there anyway, but it's off the map, so it should be there.

    Denmark/Sweden is a standard one that I've never touched. Personally I think it should stay, because without it the Danes find it more difficult to expand. The AI is stupid and would probably let Sweden get isolated from the king causing a rebellion.

    Wessex/Flanders stop the English from attacking Flanders in the same predictable route every time, and stops the French from storming Wessex and pretty much putting a stop to the English before they've even got started. It's a strategic point and needs to be a true sea crossing. Also the British Isles are a number of self sustaining provinces and not one small island.

    Cordoba-Granada/Morocco breaks up the Moorish faction into 2 parts and makes it more difficult for the Almohads to storm Spain, though they still do on occasions. The Straits of Gibraltar is a strategic point that needs exist as a natural barrier between north Africa and Europe. The downside is that Maby crusades will take the route through constantinople when crusading to morocco because they cannot cross at this point. Though often if they can use spanish, italian or other shipping they will cross. This also enables the Iberian peninsula to be more easily defended.

    Sardinia/Corsica is probably a pointless one. Allowing the two to be connected will help the AI.

    Sicily/Naples I put there to stop the Siclian expansion into Naples. The sicilians can build ships anyway, so the owner of Naples should have a chance to build his own and keep the sicilians out. The jury is still out on this one however.

    And the new ones I'm proposing are, Sicily/Malta which will stop the isolation of an AI faction on Malta.

    Nicaea/Rhodes to stop the Byzantine reappearance and isolation problem.

    Greece/Crete for the same reason.

    As to Cyprus, it borders to many provinces I'm unsure as to which province it could be linked to. It could be linked to all three though this would make it very indefensible. I'm leaning toward Antioch at the moment.

    What is needed is a landbridge that gets automatically deactivated once a ship is in the water.

    There is no reason for these islands to be isolated. Supposing I as the player secure crete and then congratulate myself for the superb victory. I now control an island in the med. I spend the next few decades developing it for income stick a peasant/spearmen garrison in there, make sure my fleets are intact, one last look at the taxes, goodbye crete, the end. Forgotten. It serves no purpose. How is it strategic? It may be navally strategic in the real world but not this game, it provides no benefit at all. If I lose all of my mainland provinces I can retreat there. If I lose all of my ships and go into the red, that strategic retreat becomes a death trap, as it does for the AI. I suppose if I was a western crusader I could launch attacks from there into the mainland, but to do that I'd have to develop it to produce decent units, by that time my navy would be so expanded I'd be able to just drop those units in from anywhere else.

    Also, even when lanbridged to a nearby territory the islands are still as defensible as a coastal province (moreso with only one neighbour that is likely to be your own province) and would act as useful strong points. The volatility of the islands could be reproduced by lowering the base happiness. This would cause scenarios like the Byzantines reappearing on Rhodes and pushing back into Nicaea to re-establish their faction.
    Last edited by caravel; 12-05-2006 at 13:47.

  4. #94
    Camel Lord Senior Member Capture The Flag Champion Martok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In my own little world....but it's okay, they know me there.
    Posts
    8,257

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    In regards to the land bridges, Manco, do what you think best. I personally can't stand the land bridge between Morocco & Granada/Cordoba (and am glad the XL mod removed it). If it's too much of a hamper to the AI, though, then there's really nothing for it but to put it back in.

    Quote Originally Posted by Manco Capac
    I've yet to mod in the forestry, that's what I'll be doing this evening. Also I need to add Iron to the suggested provinces, which I haven't done as yet.
    Where are you planning to add them, by the way? I've been meaning to ask. I know we've discussed a few provinces, but I wasn't sure where you'd actually decided to place the new mines & forestry mills.
    "MTW is not a game, it's a way of life." -- drone

  5. #95
    Camel Lord Senior Member Capture The Flag Champion Martok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In my own little world....but it's okay, they know me there.
    Posts
    8,257

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    By the way, it occurs to me that we should maybe give your mini-mod a name. I vote for "Caravel's Less-Cheese" mod.
    "MTW is not a game, it's a way of life." -- drone

  6. #96

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    The Granada-Cordoba/Morocco landbridge is staying out, it's basilcally too unrealistic to keep.

    The island landbridges I can't as yet decide on. I suppose the isolation issue is probably the highest priority.

    The forestry will have to go where wood alread exists as a trade good. A new resource, "wood", will have to be placed in this province also.

    As to the other mines I'm not sure yet. A few bottles of beer appears to have interfered with my plans...

    Oh and as to the "Caravel's Less Cheese" mod. I'm not sure, as alot of other people contributed besides myself. It sounds ok though.

    "you need to go here and download Caravel's Less Cheese mod and change those socks while you're at it!"
    Last edited by caravel; 12-05-2006 at 23:47.

  7. #97
    Camel Lord Senior Member Capture The Flag Champion Martok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In my own little world....but it's okay, they know me there.
    Posts
    8,257

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Quote Originally Posted by Manco Capac
    The Granada-Cordoba/Morocco landbridge is staying out, it's basilcally too unrealistic to keep.

    The island landbridges I can't as yet decide on. I suppose the isolation issue is probably the highest priority.

    The forestry will have to go where wood alread exists as a trade good. A new resource, "wood", will have to be placed in this province also.

    As to the other mines I'm not sure yet. A few bottles of beer appears to have interfered with my plans...
    Mmm, beer. [salivates] But I digress....
    I'm wondering about some of the wood provinces now. I don't know if if it's unique to the XL mod or not; but I noticed that in my current Fatamid campaign, Antioch (or maybe it was Tripoli, I'm blanking out now) has wood as a trade good. This makes little sense to me, as the Holy Land isn't exactly known for its abundance of trees. I didn't think to take a more extensive look last night, but I'm suddenly wondering where else wood is listed as a trade good in places that don't make sense.

    I think I'm going to load up a vanilla game tonight and see where all the wood is located on the map, because I really don't think there should be forestry resources in provinces that have no forests. I'll also try and nail down where all of the current iron provinces are located, and see where else we could place iron on the map.

    Quote Originally Posted by Manco Capac
    Oh and as to the "Caravel's Less Cheese" mod. I'm not sure, as alot of other people contributed besides myself. It sounds ok though.

    "you need to go here and download Caravel's Less Cheese mod and change those socks while you're at it!"
    Heh.

    Hmm, what about the Low Calorie Mini-mod? I know it's (another) corny name, but it reflects that it makes some relatively minor changes, mostly in the interests of game balance. Sorry; I seem to have a mental block when it comes to coming up with a decent name for the mod!
    Last edited by Martok; 12-06-2006 at 19:43.
    "MTW is not a game, it's a way of life." -- drone

  8. #98

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Quote Originally Posted by Martok
    I'm wondering about some of the wood provinces now. I don't know if if it's unique to the XL mod or not; but I noticed that in my current Fatamid campaign, Antioch (or maybe it was Tripoli, I'm blanking out now) has wood as a trade good. This makes little sense to me, as the Holy Land isn't exactly known for its abundance of trees. I didn't think to take a more extensive look last night, but I'm suddenly wondering where else wood is listed as a trade good in places that don't make sense.
    Well the new wood resource should be in the same places as the wood trade goods, but the trade good need not always be present. An inland province may have an abundance of wood for a forestry, but may not do much of a trade in it so the trade good would be absent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Martok
    I think I'm going to load up a vanilla game tonight and see where all the wood is located on the map, because I really don't think there should be forestry resources in provinces that have no forests. I'll also try and nail down where all of the current iron provinces are located, and see where else we could place iron on the map.
    I agree, we may have to go by where forests are visually in abundance, that would be much more straightforward and would enhance gameplay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Martok
    Hmm, what about the Low Calorie Mini-mod? I know it's (another) corny name, but it reflects that it makes some relatively minor changes, mostly in the interests of game balance. Sorry; I seem to have a mental block when it comes to coming up with a decent name for the mod!
    The "Now with 50% less fat than your regular MTW" mod.
    Last edited by caravel; 12-06-2006 at 23:30.

  9. #99
    Member Member Geezer57's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas USA
    Posts
    890

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Quote Originally Posted by Martok
    I'm wondering about some of the wood provinces now. I don't know if if it's unique to the XL mod or not; but I noticed that in my current Fatamid campaign, Antioch (or maybe it was Tripoli, I'm blanking out now) has wood as a trade good. This makes little sense to me, as the Holy Land isn't exactly known for its abundance of trees.
    Hmmm, thinking back to Biblical tales, wasn't Lebanon renowned for its cedar?
    My father's sole piece of political advice: "Son, politicians are like underwear - to keep them clean, you've got to change them often."

  10. #100

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    It is, so tripoli could have the wood as trade goods and a resource for a forestry. Or maybe just the former if the wood is not that abundant?

  11. #101
    Camel Lord Senior Member Capture The Flag Champion Martok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In my own little world....but it's okay, they know me there.
    Posts
    8,257

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Quote Originally Posted by Geezer57
    Hmmm, thinking back to Biblical tales, wasn't Lebanon renowned for its cedar?
    Gak! Yeah, you're right. I'd completely forgotten that, Geezer. Silly me...

    Quote Originally Posted by Manco Capac
    It is, so tripoli could have the wood as trade goods and a resource for a forestry. Or maybe just the former if the wood is not that abundant?
    I would say one or the other, yeah. Even with them being well-known for their cedar, I just don't think Tripoli/Lebanon has enough wood resources to justify both.

    EDIT: By the way, Tripoli doesn't have wood as a trade good in vanilla MTW/VI. It only has wood in XL.
    Last edited by Martok; 12-07-2006 at 17:52.
    "MTW is not a game, it's a way of life." -- drone

  12. #102

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    The "FOREST" resource is working, and I didn't have to do alot. There was already an icon for it in there (I expect the experienced modders knew this before I did). There is also an info parchment for a "forester" and upgrades, so that's pretty doable. There are also alot of others such as glassmakers, grapes as a resource and other "merchants" that would have made an income from certain resources. I don't think it would be that hard to add extra resources either. Existing trade goods may be easy to copy and add back as duplicate resources.

    The next problem is my messed up buildprod file. I've opened them in wordpad, saved them and the formatting has been wrecked. No other text editors show the problem. when I open in another editor such as Notepad++ or Crimson Editor the file looks fine, but when I try to launch MTW I get an error about "{CASTLE7" making it obvious that a line has been chopped in half (wrapped) onto another line. I can't fix it because when I open in another editor it looks fine. The problem is i'm using Win98SE here, with the old notepad that won't open large files.

    I need to edit the buildprod file in a text editor because the gnome editor won't allow me to add new lines for some reason?

    I got one file working again, then added back the Iron mine to that, and that won't work either same error. Remove the Iron mine and it works again... confusing...

  13. #103

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Well I've downloaded a mass of text editors cannot find even one that doesn't somehow mess up the formatting of the buildprod file.

  14. #104
    Camel Lord Senior Member Capture The Flag Champion Martok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In my own little world....but it's okay, they know me there.
    Posts
    8,257

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Bummer man. Is it just a problem with adding/removing iron mines, or is it more extensive than that?
    "MTW is not a game, it's a way of life." -- drone

  15. #105

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Adding a line to the file and saving it messes it up somehow. Gnome editor cannot then parse the file correctly. i'm stumped so far. I have a feeling i need the xp or 2k version of notepad as opposed to the win9x one.

    -Edt: I got the iron mine working before, but I'd edited that under XP I think...

    -Edit: I did try opening a vanilla buildprod file in wordpad, and other editors, as well and saving it. After that it wouldn't work but threw an error.
    Last edited by caravel; 12-09-2006 at 19:21.

  16. #106

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Fixed those errors and found a half decent text editor called "TextPad". My own connection is up so I've put up some screenshots. It's nothing much to look at of course, because the main differences are the unit stats, valour bonuses and other non cosmetic changes:

    Al-Murabitun Infantry
    Iron Mine
    Al-Muwahhidun Infantry
    Andalusian Infantry
    Forester

    There is a Forester, Foresters' Workshop and Foresters' Guild that can be constructed in any province with the "forest" resource.

    I've now begun adding more Iron and and Forest resources to some provinces, working from a list that Martok sent me.

  17. #107
    Camel Lord Senior Member Capture The Flag Champion Martok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In my own little world....but it's okay, they know me there.
    Posts
    8,257

    Default Re: New valour bonus regions

    Nice, Caravel. (Good to see you back to your original name, btw!)

    One question on the Forestry buildings: Do they provide a straight income just like the mines & mine complexes, or is it like farming in that it's partially based on the income of the particular province it's in? I had assumed the former, but I just realized there's no particular reason why that would be so.
    "MTW is not a game, it's a way of life." -- drone

  18. #108

    Default MTW Pocket Mod: General

    One note: after removing armenia and georgia and their respective garrisons, Byzantium gets tougher to play than expected. Shouldnt the Nicaea garrison be a bit stronger to counter this? Maybe some armored spearmen?
    Iä Cthulhu!

  19. #109

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    PD: I meant in "High" epoch. Your military assets are severely reduced as it is.
    Iä Cthulhu!

  20. #110

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    One note: after removing armenia and georgia and their respective garrisons, Byzantium gets tougher to play than expected. Shouldnt the Nicaea garrison be a bit stronger to counter this? Maybe some armored spearmen?
    I am here struggling for more ways to stop the Byzantine from taking over the whole map before the high era, and you post here saying they're now too hard (presumably starting in high?). Seems I can't win!

    Lesser Armenia (The Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia) and Georgia were historically independent for, AFAIK, the entire duration of the three eras with the exception of the Mongol conquest, and for Lesser Armenia until 1375 when it fell to the Mamluks.

    You have to remember that during the early era the Byzantine were recovering from a serious decline, retaking many old territories. Then 1204, bang, it all goes down the toilet again with the arrival of the fourth crusade, sacking of Constantinople, virtual disintegration of the empire and establishment of the Latin States. At this point they are down to Nicaea and nothing more (The Empire of Nicaea. In the high period I've left Rhodes in Byzantine control, in reality it should be rebel also). This is how it should be, a one province faction. I've actually played a campaign as the Byzantine/high/hard using this setup and found it to be one of the best campaigns I've ever played. It offers a big challenge but is not as dull as an Aragonese or Danish campaign. It's easy in some ways, as you have a good province and are surrounded by rebels.

    In early the lack of Georgia and Armenia certainly doesn't hamper the AI Byzantines anyway.

    I will review their starting units in the high period however to see that they are balanced enough. Thanks for the feedback!

    -Edit: More than enough units IMHO.
    Last edited by caravel; 01-11-2007 at 22:01.

  21. #111

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    I actually like the mod a lot more than vanilla. And a lot more than total conversions. I find it quite balanced, and it´s more interesting for Byzantium to pull out combined arms armies than to keep churning out Byzantine Infantry for both attack and defense ad nauseam.

    As for the High epoch problem: you´re stuck with a few units, barely enough to retake trebizond and constantinople, and the last is a must. The turks have enough forces to overrun you in a turn if you try to conquer anything. Rhodes, as you pointed out, is a non-historical

    Suggestion: Since Trebizond went out to became the independent, throne-claimant, Empire of Trebizond, how about turning it into a byzantine province, with a small garrison? (and remove Rhodes, which would be under the Hospitaller´s control, if I am not mistaken). Quid pro quo.

    Not that you *can´t* play in high, but it´s hard enough, as you have to take (roughly) the provinces you start with in late, and hold to them until the mongols arrive&hope that they weaken or vanquisk the turks. (For the record, in Vanilla I preferred to play in High and play a retake constantinople&trench game, than an early Pax Byzantina campaign, in which it was not too hard to hold onto Naples and Sicily, and keep Serbia, Bulgaria, Anatolia, and Trebizond as your borders in your mainland)

    A couple of questions: Did you tinker sieges? It seems to me that now the besiegers suffer more casualties while holding a province down. Also, now it seems that there are more crusades travelling around, and through different routes and to different provinces than the vanilla crusades used to do (at least, some of them. I´ve seen spanish crusades travelling through Africa to Tripoli, (and Spanish Crusades were unusual in Vanilla), as well as Italian crusades seeking to take Armenia and such (which is also not too usual)
    Iä Cthulhu!

  22. #112

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    I actually like the mod a lot more than vanilla. And a lot more than total conversions. I find it quite balanced, and it´s more interesting for Byzantium to pull out combined arms armies than to keep churning out Byzantine Infantry for both attack and defense ad nauseam.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    As for the High epoch problem: you´re stuck with a few units, barely enough to retake trebizond and constantinople, and the last is a must. The turks have enough forces to overrun you in a turn if you try to conquer anything. Rhodes, as you pointed out, is a non-historical
    You can go for Constantinople early, it is very do-able because I have done it a few times while testing, and there are also a few bribes open to you. Historically the Byzantine Emperor was in a similar predicament to the player, economically crippled and struggling to survive in a region full of enemies. When you're down you're down. Once you get it back together kick the Turks off the map, rampage through the Egyptian provinces and hold back the Horde, rebuilding the Empire to it's former glory it is very satisfying indeed.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    Suggestion: Since Trebizond went out to became the independent, throne-claimant, Empire of Trebizond, how about turning it into a byzantine province, with a small garrison? (and remove Rhodes, which would be under the Hospitaller´s control, if I am not mistaken). Quid pro quo.
    When the Empire fell apart in 1204, the only remaining major Greek states IIRC were the Empire of Nicaea, the Despotate of Epirus and the Empire of Trebizond. These were the successor states, each claiming to be the "real" Eastern Roman Empire. Trebizond and Epirus never returned to Byzantine control but remained independent. Trebizond finally fell to Mehmet II sometime in the late 1300's if I remember correctly. This would make giving Trebizond province to the Byzantines just wrong. I'm sure that Rhodes should be rebel orthodox in the high era, it passed to Hospitaller control in the early 14th century. In late it needs to be rebel garissoned by Knights Hospitallers, Hospitaller Foot Knights and perhaps some order foot soliders with a decent fortification (Citadel). The Byzantines in high will become the Empire of Nicaea to all intents and purposes. Creating a virtual Successor States faction wouldn't work any more than creating a combined muslim faction out of the Egyptians, Turks and Almohads would work. Epirus had a rather chequered history, and did eventually return to Byzantine control for a while, but that didn't last. I really feel that a single province Empire of Nicaea is the way to go. If there are issues with it being too weak I may add some armoured spearmen and maybe even a unit of Pronaioi Allagion. Bear in mind that this mod is still being developed so we'll see how things go for now.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    Not that you *can´t* play in high, but it´s hard enough, as you have to take (roughly) the provinces you start with in late, and hold to them until the mongols arrive&hope that they weaken or vanquisk the turks. (For the record, in Vanilla I preferred to play in High and play a retake constantinople&trench game, than an early Pax Byzantina campaign, in which it was not too hard to hold onto Naples and Sicily, and keep Serbia, Bulgaria, Anatolia, and Trebizond as your borders in your mainland)
    I would advise you to stick with it, you may be suprised. As I've said before, the AI now does better in early than it did before.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    A couple of questions: Did you tinker sieges? It seems to me that now the besiegers suffer more casualties while holding a province down.
    Nope. I'm not sure what's causing that one. It may be a side effect of something else? I quite honestly haven't noticed it myself.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    Also, now it seems that there are more crusades travelling around, and through different routes and to different provinces than the vanilla crusades used to do (at least, some of them. I´ve seen spanish crusades travelling through Africa to Tripoli, (and Spanish Crusades were unusual in Vanilla), as well as Italian crusades seeking to take Armenia and such (which is also not too usual)
    The reason for more crusades may be due to the fact that more are coming your way. This is because the landbridges being cut means that alot of crusades will take the land route via constantinople. Unfortunately you will sometimes get e.g. A French Crusade being declared in Toulouse for Morocco, that makes its way eastwards via Constantinople and south through Asia Minor via the Holy Land, Egypt and North Africa! Not alot I can do about this except add a landbridge between Granada and Morocco, and I really don't want to do that. If it comes down to it though, it will have to be done. The removal of landbridges may have changed the way the AI looks at the map. It now looks at different provinces due to relative distances having changed.
    Last edited by caravel; 01-12-2007 at 00:57.

  23. #113

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    - Notes on crusades 1.3: Not my imagination. More crusades going on at once, from more factions than usual (It´s rare to see Italian crusaders), and at strange places (Algeria, Armenia, even Constantinople! I spotted Spanish crusades travelling around Africa too

    - Landbridge: Why not one in Punta Tarifa? The coasts are real close there.
    (Also: Why not follow your stated idea and turn Asia-Constantinople into a landbridge battle? :p)

    - Sahara: (Wasn´t really Almohad, as they went for Western Sahara coast. And it sort of... doesn´t look right in the map. I dont know, I didnt play that campaign too throughly)

    - Modding Castile and Aragon: Castile: Gets Jinetes as exclusive, but they should need a spearmaker as well as a master horsebreeder to build. Aragon: Since the almugharavs are now unused, why not give them to Aragon?
    Iä Cthulhu!

  24. #114

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    - Notes on crusades 1.3: Not my imagination. More crusades going on at once, from more factions than usual (It´s rare to see Italian crusaders), and at strange places (Algeria, Armenia, even Constantinople! I spotted Spanish crusades travelling around Africa too
    In my experience so far, I see no more crusades than usual. I'll have to wait for more feedback. I'll be keeping a look out for this, thanks.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    - Landbridge: Why not one in Punta Tarifa? The coasts are real close there.
    I've been considering that one for a while, the problem is that it allows the Spaniards and other crusaders to decimate the Moorish factions in a matter of years.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    (Also: Why not follow your stated idea and turn Asia-Constantinople into a landbridge battle? :p)
    It is already a landbridge. If you mean a bridge battle then that can be done, but historically it wasn't a bridge battle, it was attacked from the sea, and besieged. No bridge existed across the bosphoroust back then. Constantinople was completely surrounded and existed as a city state before it finally fell in 1453. Cutting the landbridge at this point and resizing the Nicaea province would mean more crusades bypassing constantinople and going via Georgia. If this was cut, then I could use the same argument that the straits of gibraltar should also remain a true channel. Instinct tells me to do it but it's a difficult one. The same applies to Sardinia and Corsica, as well as Sicily and Naples.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    - Sahara: (Wasn´t really Almohad, as they went for Western Sahara coast. And it sort of... doesn´t look right in the map. I dont know, I didnt play that campaign too throughly)
    I have to disagree. The MTW map continues south as far as 30th parallel north latitude, being pretty much bang on the line. Virtually all of this terrain came under Almohad control circa 1200. The biggest innacuracy is in fact the Cyrenacia province, the almohads would only have conquered the western part of this, as far as roughly the 20th meridian east longitude, but this can't be helped. Otherwise though, the geography of the almohad faction is pretty bang on.

    In the early era the Almoravids would have been in parts of Western Sahara only. Again this is the limitations of the provincial map model. If the Almoravids were in Western Sahara then in MTW they will have to control all of it. The provincial map model cannot account for provinces breaking up or being merged together. Sahara was not exactly a province either, more so a territory, with no distinct borders.

    During the late era the Marinids would have been in Western Sahara and Morocco. Granada would have been a Nasrid Kingdom at that time. Algeria would have been under the control of the Hafsids and Tunisia the Ziyanids. In reality the Marinids should only start the late era with Morocco and Western Sahara (thus all of Sahara), at present they've got the Hafsid and Ziyanid provinces until I decide what to do with them. I have thought about creating all of these individual factions but that would turn the pocket mod into a "suitcase mod" and also creat alot of factions that would effectively be clones of each other. Out of these dynasties the marinids are the most impressive. They defeated the almohads and also repelled invasions from Castile, which is why I have opted to represent them in the game and not the Ziyanids, Hafsids or Nasrids.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Unknown Guy
    - Modding Castile and Aragon: Castile: Gets Jinetes as exclusive, but they should need a spearmaker as well as a master horsebreeder to build. Aragon: Since the almugharavs are now unused, why not give them to Aragon?
    Castile Leon probably should get Jinetes as exclusive, as they were developed there to combat the Moors. Almughavars I had thought about, but had decided to leave them as rebel only. They were mercenaries after all, so making them strictly aragon would be ahistorial.

    Thanks again for the feedback.

    Regards

    Caravel
    Last edited by caravel; 01-15-2007 at 00:08.

  25. #115

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    I get Novgorod as a playable faction in Early, and, at least in Grand Achievements mode, if you click in theirs you crash to desktop (anyone else getting this, or I borked on something?)
    Iä Cthulhu!

  26. #116

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    You can't play Novgorod GA. Nothing can be done about it. Modding them as playable has this side effect. To avoid this never click on Novgorod's GA goals, whether you're playing as Novgorod or not.
    Last edited by caravel; 01-15-2007 at 22:29.

  27. #117
    Camel Lord Senior Member Capture The Flag Champion Martok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In my own little world....but it's okay, they know me there.
    Posts
    8,257

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    Quote Originally Posted by Caravel
    You can't play Novgorod GA. Nothing can be done about it. Modding them as playable has this side effect. To avoid this never click on Novgorod's GA goals, whether you're playing as Novgorod or not.
    You know, I was wondering about that when I saw they were playable. Not that I play as the Novs a whole lot, but it's still good to know.

    Also been meaning to ask: When you release a new update, Caravel, is it still compatible with the previous version? Or do we have to restart our campaign(s) once we've downloaded/installed the latest one? (I just want to make sure I'm not assuming anything here.)
    Last edited by Martok; 01-15-2007 at 23:41.
    "MTW is not a game, it's a way of life." -- drone

  28. #118

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    The majority of new updates will be incompatible. It's best to finish your current campaign first then update. There will be yet another version coming soon. I spent last night fixing the harem woman info pic (then finishing an STW shimazu campaign I was playing). I found that paint shop pro messes up palettes, wheras photosop doesn't, though it is an old version of psp (5.0) I'm using. After this next release it will be back to speculating about further changes. The Unknown Guy raised the issue of the landbridge between Granada and Morocco. The problem is that the AI crusades cannot cross here, and instead take the long road (via constantinople and north africa). Replacing the landbridge leaves the Almoravids, Almohads and Marinids, and even the Fatimids, Ayyubids and Mamluks, very vulnerable to crusades as they were before. I think I will have to go with my original proposal of linking Granada/Morocco as well as Sardinia/Corsica and Sicily/Naples. This is better than the old situation where Cordoba and Morocco were also linked.

    I still haven't decided what to do about Malta, Ireland, Rhodes, Cyrus and Crete:

    Quote Originally Posted by Caravel - from the New Valour Bonus Regions thread 05/12/06
    I am now rethinking some of the landbridges for this mod.

    For Finland/Sweden I like that fact that the Novgorod can expand into Scandinavia and the Danes can expand into northern Russia. The land route is there anyway, but it's off the map, so it should be there.

    Denmark/Sweden is a standard one that I've never touched. Personally I think it should stay, because without it the Danes find it more difficult to expand. The AI is stupid and would probably let Sweden get isolated from the king causing a rebellion.

    Wessex/Flanders stop the English from attacking Flanders in the same predictable route every time, and stops the French from storming Wessex and pretty much putting a stop to the English before they've even got started. It's a strategic point and needs to be a true sea crossing. Also the British Isles are a number of self sustaining provinces and not one small island.

    Cordoba-Granada/Morocco breaks up the Moorish faction into 2 parts and makes it more difficult for the Almohads to storm Spain, though they still do on occasions. The Straits of Gibraltar is a strategic point that needs to exist as a natural barrier between north Africa and Europe. The downside is that many crusades will take the route through Constantinople when crusading to Morocco because they cannot cross at this point. Though often if they can use Spanish, italian or other shipping they will cross. This also enables the Iberian peninsula to be more easily defended.

    Sardinia/Corsica is probably a pointless one. Allowing the two to be connected will help the AI.

    Sicily/Naples I put there to stop the Siclian expansion into Naples. The sicilians can build ships anyway, so the owner of Naples should have a chance to build his own and keep the sicilians out. The jury is still out on this one however.

    And the new ones I'm proposing are, Sicily/Malta which will stop the isolation of an AI faction on Malta.

    Nicaea/Rhodes to stop the Byzantine reappearance and isolation problem.

    Greece/Crete for the same reason.

    As to Cyprus, it borders so many provinces I'm unsure as to which province it could be linked to. It could be linked to all three though this would make it very indefensible. I'm leaning toward Antioch at the moment.

    What is needed is a landbridge that gets automatically deactivated once a ship is in the water.

    There is no reason for these islands to be isolated. Supposing I as the player secure crete and then congratulate myself for the superb victory. I now control an island in the med. I spend the next few decades developing it for income stick a peasant/spearmen garrison in there, make sure my fleets are intact, one last look at the taxes, goodbye crete, the end. Forgotten. It serves no purpose. How is it strategic? It may be navally strategic in the real world but not this game, it provides no benefit at all. If I lose all of my mainland provinces I can retreat there. If I lose all of my ships and go into the red, that strategic retreat becomes a death trap, as it does for the AI. I suppose if I was a western crusader I could launch attacks from there into the mainland, but to do that I'd have to develop it to produce decent units, by that time my navy would be so expanded I'd be able to just drop those units in from anywhere else.

    Also, even when lanbridged to a nearby territory the islands are still as defensible as a coastal province (moreso with only one neighbour that is likely to be your own province) and would act as useful strong points. The volatility of the islands could be reproduced by lowering the base happiness. This would cause scenarios like the Byzantines reappearing on Rhodes and pushing back into Nicaea to re-establish their faction.
    Last edited by caravel; 01-16-2007 at 12:15.

  29. #119

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    Hi Caravel! I've detected a minor error in the mod. Some region titles does not correspond with the province, for instance "Duke of Serbia" in Greece, "Duke of Edessa" in Trebisond or "Duke of Trebisond" in Nicaea (I can't deny I enjoy playing the Byzantines, above all in the High era ).

  30. #120

    Default Re: MTW Pocket Mod

    On the topic raised in the other thread: Yes, a "season" system" would be rather nice (In fact, when I bought the game it´s the one thing that I missed from Shogun). Is there any prospect of that coming around?
    Iä Cthulhu!

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

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