MTW Pocket Mod: General

[Third spearman from the left]

Hi all I've been playing around with the gnome editor and want to add a few more valour bonuses to the game. I've already given Milan a crossbowmen bonus because of what is written about the italians under pavise crossbows unit description. Anyone have any good historical suggestions for bonuses in other regions?

Also I'm looking at allowing some merc units like the alans to be built by other factions not just the BYZ. Anyone like to suggest other units that should be more readily available?

[caravel]

I have Alans as trainable in Georgia and Khazar by the Byzantines the Horde and Russians/Novgorod. It may be an idea to allow all of the eastern European Christian and Pagan factions to train them. I haven't given them a valour bonus there however. I don't use inns/mercenaries in my games (removed) so this is the only way for me to get Alan Mercs. I've also thought of putting the Inn building to other uses.

The lands most lacking valour bonuses are, again, Eastern Europe. It may be an idea to put a valour bonus for vanilla horse archers and/or steppe cavalry in one of the eastern steppe provinces, such as volga bulgaria. Also it may be an idea to add bonuses for the Mongol units in their emergence provinces to give them a bit more edge when they arrive. The Mongols should sweep across Asia and eastern europe making a big mess, in MTW they penetrate the Turkish provinces and slug it out with the Russians before losing momentum and petering out.

In the west it may be a good idea to put a valour bonus for Feudal Knights somewhere in Europe. You'd have to do the research as to where, but possibly in Ille de France to replace the one for Chivalric Foot Knights.

I would also ditch the valour bonuses for all ships (portugal, wessex, Venice, Tunisia, Aragon, Denmark etc) as they're not really much cop and the AI can't exploit them. Another one is the Inquisitor and Grand Inquisitor valour bonuses in Castille. That's a particularly nasty one, as GI's are dangerous enough as it is. It also berates Castille which was not only famous for lunatic witch burners. It would do better with a valour bonus for a Spanish specific unit such as Lancers, Javelinmen or Jinetes.

Another one that I would remove is the Syrian valour bonuses for assassins and Nizaris and replace it with a more realistic one for e.g. Desert Archers, Horse Archers or Futuwwas. I am working on a mod to make the Taverns and Inns in MTW easier to upgrade, to give decent agents to all factions.

Another good one is Bedouin Camels and/or Arab Infantry for Arabia.

[Vladimir]

Good suggestion on the Mongol valor bonuses. Give all the mounted units hidden bonuses in Kazar (or lesser if an XL style map) and have one territory give a Step Cavalry bonus.

[Martok]

Some great ideas there, Third spearmen.

As one who plays the Spanish (Castille-Leon in XL) a lot, I won't disagree that Castille-trained Inquisitors are perhaps a bit overpowered. I wouldn't mind if Castille gave a bonus to Jinnettes instead, although Lancers would perhaps be more appropriate.

I personally would keep the ship bonuses in, if only because it helps lessen the odds that the AI's lone barque manages to somehow sink my 3 galleys (). If you are intent on removing the ship bonuses, however, then I'd recommend Venice's Galley bonus be replaced with a bonus for Italian Infantry.

Another would be to replace Wessex's Caravel (or was it Cog?) bonus with a bonus for Feudal Knights--the English were somewhat known for their cavalry-heavy armies until the Scots showed them the error of their ways at Bannockburn.

Denmark's Longship bonus could possibly be replaced with a bonus for Viking Carls, but I'm not sure how historically accurate that would be. (And giving the bonus to Huscarles doesn't bear considering; that would just be scary/ridiculous!)

Tunisia's ship bonus could be replaced with a bonus for Muwahid Infantry, although I'm not sure these guys need the help! Still, it could provide the Almos with another strong unit that can help them out in the later stages of a campaign.

I would also recommend Arabia give a bonus to Bedouin Camel Warriors. Not only was it home to the two largest Bedouin tribes (Aniza & Shammar), but it would also be nice if Arabia actually possessed some sort of strategic value for once.

[Third spearman from the left]

Martok, Vladimir and Caravel

thanks for the great feedback so far guys

I had not thought of getting rid of the ship bonuses but that sounds like a great idea. The idea of trying to get a good bit of historical fact behind these valour upgrades really appeals. The Arabia/Bedouin Camel Warriors valor bonus is one I'm going to go with for sure.

Do any of you guys want to suggest any units that should be more readily available to build by more than one faction?

[Galagros]

Are you doing this for vanilla or a mod? (so I can get the right units into my head and think)

[Vladimir]

I strongly suggest leaving the galley bonus intact for Venice. They were renowned throughout the world for the assembly line type shipyard they had and were able to build a huge amount of ships. Ship bonuses for England, Aragon, Denmark, and maybe Big C. would be also be historically appropriate and would give a more realistic feel to the game. All though it's all up to user choice of course.

Now, back to reading the rest of the thread...

[naut]

If Palastine doesn't have one, then maybe Ghazi bonus there.

[caravel]

I agree with what you're saying, but the point is that the naval system is already a bit of a lottery anyway. Giving the italians super valoured galleys is asking for trouble. Luckily the Sicillians don't have such a bonus in any of their home provinces!

England has the Cogs bonus in Wessex as is. Aragon has the Wargalleys(?) bonus, not alot of use to Aragon themselves. Denmark has the Longboat one, Constantinople has no ship bonus and I'm not sure if it should.

The way I see it, these bonuses can seriously imbalance a campaign. I've lost many fleets in the past to these valoured up ships, especially as regards venice. The Portugal one for Caravels isn't a problem because the place is so unstable and rebellious that the AI never manages to tech up to build a dockyard anyway.

Also if I as the Spanish can take Portugal, and tech it up to build high valour Caravels, then put together many three ship fleets with a Portuguese Caravel as their Admiral's ship at the head, the AI doesn't stand much of a chance.

To reflect the ease of production in Venice the italians should simply be able to produce the Galley type ships more cheaply, which I think they can anyway IIRC.

In reality the AI shipping needs all the help it can get. Yes there are those occasions where your fleets go down one after another, though it's rare if you manage them correctly (attacking first with like ships grouped together in groups of no more than 2 or 3!). The AI sends it's fleets to the stupidest of places, i.e. the Danes often send a loan longboat to the Black Sea instead of putting it to use guarding their coast or forming the beginnings of a trade route. Imbalancing this even further with provinces pumping out high valour ships will only make matters worse.

If Palastine doesn't have one, then maybe Ghazi bonus there.

Palestine has one for Knights Templar, but it can have Ghazis also. Though Ghazis are very generic in the game, and historically there were many Ghazis of different origins.

Basically we can mod many (not sure of the limit) units to have a valour bonus in the one province, but we can't give the same unit valour bonuses in multiple provinces AFAIK. I haven't tried putting i.e. "ID_LIBYA, ID_AFRICA" in the field for the province valour bonus for Saharan Cavalry. For all units it contains only one province (i.e. ID_LIBYA), so I somehow don't think this will work.

-Edit: I'm wrong there, I was thinking or the "ruler advantage" column. There are multiples (such as algeria and morocco for berbers, but they don't apear to work (confirmationm needed)).

[Vladimir]

England has the Cogs bonus in Wessex as is. Aragon has the Wargalleys(?) bonus, not alot of use to Aragon themselves. Denmark has the Longboat one, Constantinople has no ship bonus and I'm not sure if it should.

I was thinking about their fire galleys.

[caravel]

Is that the Valour bonus for Aragon, Fire Galleys? And it's standard Galleys for Venice right?

[Third spearman from the left]

Two points I'd like to throw on the table

1. I am playing XL mod 2.1

2. I've started using the gnome editor because of my boredom with the AI and it's silly tactics. Ships are a pet hate of mine mainly down to the AI's inability to make chains and trade. My idea is to take away the valour bonus for ships and replace each with a more useful faction bonus. but to balance I've made all things sea based cheaper and quicker to build.

Port 1 year, cost 200
Shipyard 2 years, cost 400 etc

low level ships cost 200 and take one year to build
next level 300 and 2 years build etc

I'm hoping that cheaper ships and buildings will mean more ships on the seas, more hope of chains and easy replacements when fleets are lost.

[Kralizec]

Is that the Valour bonus for Aragon, Fire Galleys? And it's standard Galleys for Venice right?

Aragon gives a bonus for gungalleys.
Venice for standard galleys.

Do the ship bonuses actually do anything? Ships don't have valour, just command stars. I could be wrong, but I think I recall building a couple of dhows in Tunesia in an Almohad campaign and most of them didn't have command stars when freshly built.
Another thing about ships: is it historical for the Italians to have acces to fire galleys? I also thought that it was kinda odd for the Byzantines not to have a single vessel that can travel through deep sea...

Trebizond archers can be recruited anywhere with the Byzantines, wich doesn't make sense. Better would be to give them a more generic name like "Byzantine toxatoi" (literally archers) and keep the bonus in Trebizond.

For more valour bonuses, perhaps:
Normandy for Feudal knights
Flanders for militia sergeants and maybe pikemen*
Algeria or Tunesia for Murabutin and/or Muwahid infantry
Arabia for Arab infantry and/or Imams and/or Bedouin camels

* the bonus in Tyrolia should be removed, it's redundant as Swiss pikemen are available so nearby. Pikemen should be reworked to be available earlier and made stronger as they're useless in vanilla. Personally I made them available with the lvl 3 militia building (at citadel level) + spearmaker lvl 3 and their stats are now 4 charge, 1 attack, 1 defense, 4 morale. They're still not uber but can usually defeat spearmen from the front.

[naut]

Rather than post this in another thread.

I was thinking of possibly using the Inn structure as a "Levy Raising Structure". By this I mean that it can hire one type of unit and one only, a militia or levy. A Levy unit would be cheap and not very effective. But this would symbolise the Feudal society, and would be a good addition in my eyes, not to mention historical.

The only way to get this working would be reduce the Merc penalties that certain buildings great (BUILD_PROD files) and increase the Inn Merc attractivity (BUILD_PROD files).

I may implement this in my game.

[caravel]

**slaughters chickens, draws pentagram, resurrects thread**

I was thinking previously of putting the Inn to some use, but couldn't think of anything. I had throught of redesigning the assassin/spy tech tree and having the Inn as the lowest building capable of producing both at 0 valour, then having the brothels and taverns for upgrades. I'd given up on that though after having the gnome editor corrupt my crusader_build_prod11.txt a few times...

Using it for basic levy troops is an idea. Personally I don't use mercs so I've usually modded Inns out of the game in the past. The AI can't make use of them so I don't bother either. Mercs always feel a bit cheap and nasty also.

I've been playing through a few campaigns with the XL mod and am quite impressed. It has improved somewhat from what I remember, though it was always a good mod. I may start to mod this, instead of modding vanilla MTW/VI, but haven't decided yet. I need to redo everything and fix a few landbridges and the Sahara province, before I get onto valour bonuses and unit availablity again.

[Martok]

**slaughters chickens, draws pentagram, resurrects thread**

Ah, but did you remember to chant backwards?

Using it for basic levy troops is an idea. Personally I don't use mercs so I've usually modded Inns out of the game in the past. The AI can't make use of them so I don't bother either. Mercs always feel a bit cheap and nasty also.

I would be inclined to agree with you there, especially since (as you said) the AI doesn't make use of mercenaries. I confess, however, that I find inns to be moderately useful--if only because they enable me to hire artillery crews early on. I'm not sure how to reconcile that, as personally I dislike restricting access to merc, particularly in the Early period. Still, I rather like the idea overall.

Also: What do you consider to be "basic levy troops"? UM and vanilla spearmen?

I've been playing through a few campaigns with the XL mod and am quite impressed. It has improved somewhat from what I remember, though it was always a good mod. I may start to mod this, instead of modding vanilla MTW/VI, but haven't decided yet. I need to redo everything and fix a few landbridges and the Sahara province, before I get onto valour bonuses and unit availablity again.

Which landbridges are you altering?

[caravel]

Ah, but did you remember to chant backwards?

I would be inclined to agree with you there, especially since (as you said) the AI doesn't make use of mercenaries. I confess, however, that I find inns to be moderately useful--if only because they enable me to hire artillery crews early on. I'm not sure how to reconcile that, as personally I dislike restricting access to merc, particularly in the Early period. Still, I rather like the idea overall.

I suppose the merc artillery thing doesn't affect me so much. I rarely fight sieges and hardly even build the siege engineer. I just don't like how MTW manages sieges at all, nor can I see much use in any of the siege equipment apart from an occasional catapult. The biggest problem I have is that archers cannot mount the walls, this to me makes the whole thing redundant. Also the stupidity of the AI while assaulting makes it quite unfair. (sending in 1 unit at a time to be shot to pieces etc, breaking the wall then walking away and coming back again, or going around the back to break the wall, then coming back to the front again... arghhhhhhhh... need I go on?). So I avoid sieges and anything to do with them.

Also: What do you consider to be "basic levy troops"? UM and vanilla spearmen?

I suppose, UM's, spearmen and peasants would be basic levy troops. Though wouldn't archers be levy troops in some cases also?

Which landbridges are you altering?

XL appears to have most landbridges altered already. I'll have to check Sicily/Naples and Sardinia/Corsica, I can't remember if they're disconnected or not (I've only played a little as the Irish, the Volga Bulgars and the Hospitallers so far). Apart from that it's ok. I need to add the Finland/Sweden one as well, and enable the Sahara province of course.

Once I get back to using my own internet connection (house move, phone line change (what a house move this turned out to be!)) I'll host whatever we come up with here for download so that people can test it out. I suppose I should work on an XL version and a non XL version, though I'm not sure I'll have the time to do the latter.

[Martok]

The biggest problem I have is that archers cannot mount the walls, this to me makes the whole thing redundant. Also the stupidity of the AI while assaulting makes it quite unfair. (sending in 1 unit at a time to be shot to pieces etc, breaking the wall then walking away and coming back again, or going around the back to break the wall, then coming back to the front again... arghhhhhhhh... need I go on?).

I wouldn't really know. The AI assaults castles so rarely in my games, it's hard to make a comparison.

I suppose, UM's, spearmen and peasants would be basic levy troops. Though wouldn't archers be levy troops in some cases also?

Well that's what I was wondering. Surely in the case of the English and the Muslim factions, I would think that at least vanilla archers would be levies. I'm no historian, however, so I couldn't say for sure.

XL appears to have most landbridges altered already. I'll have to check Sicily/Naples and Sardinia/Corsica, I can't remember if they're disconnected or not (I've only played a little as the Irish, the Volga Bulgars and the Hospitallers so far). Apart from that it's ok. I need to add the Finland/Sweden one as well, and enable the Sahara province of course.

I know that XL removed most of the landbridges (except for the one from Denmark to Skania), but I also think VikingHorde's patch restored a couple of them. I'm drawing a blank on which ones, though. Still, about the only other place where I could see having a landbridge (aside from the aforementioned Dennark-Skania link) would be Constantinople-Nicea....but that's only a maybe.

Once I get back to using my own internet connection (house move, phone line change (what a house move this turned out to be!)) I'll host whatever we come up with here for download so that people can test it out. I suppose I should work on an XL version and a non XL version, though I'm not sure I'll have the time to do the latter.

Sounds good. I'll be more than happy to try it out.

[caravel]

Summary updated:

Summary

[Oleander Ardens]

Gunpowder units should get a bonus in Tyrolia as it focused early on sharffschützen and scheibnschuetzn in english sharpshooters or marksman to defeat invading troops. In the 15th century the relationship between handguns/arks and pikes/polearms was from 4:1 to 6:1, asthonishingly high. Skirmishing in loose order, hiding behind cover and a taste for sniping the high ranking among the enemy was natural for men which hunted or shoot for the best the price of a shooting fest.
This men didn't "kill" but "took down the game" "laid them on their skin" speaking in the language of the Jaeger or Hunter.

Tyrolean sharpshooters showed their potential became later on the bane of the invanding bavarian and french troops. A nice ambush from 1703 might illustrate how they proceeded: Bavarian troops marched down a valley to pacify it. The villages didn't agree with that so the commander of the Schuetzen let destroy the bridges, construct a trench and positioned his best shooters on both hillsides of the valley well hidden. The bavarians marched by without seeing them, and in the meantime some men started to break down the bridges behind them.

As the bavarians tried to cross, havoc broke loose and many were taken down by the sharpshooters on both sides. A Deroute followed and most were killed and the rest captured. A good deal of the surrendered bavarians were cruelly cut down before the priest, which had fought with the Schuetzen intervened..

Cheers
OA

[caravel]

I'm not sure if Tyrol was famous for it's Arquebuses and Handguns between 1087 and 1453, though I do agree that it's not a bad idea to give gunpowder units some bonuses, and possibly in that region. Between the 11th and 15th century, pieces such as the Arquebus, and early handguns especially, were actually dangerous matchlock weapons that often exploded in the users face, were frowned upon by the all important clergy as "unchivalrous" and were next to useless in rain (or even fog / heavy humidity). They were also heavy, inaccurate, cumbersone, badly balanced, slow to reload, very long and poorly designed, with not much, if any, thought for ergonomics.

I know that some people will disagree with this statement, but they likely haven't actually used these types of early weapons. The weapons they've used are probably replicas of later 17th/18th century flintlocks which are a totally different animal. A replica, even if it is a replica of a 15th century Arquebus, is still a replica.

It was also terrible for a preened and handsome dandy on a fine horse and several thousand quids worth of armour, anxious to show daddy that he is a real knight, to be shot off his noble steed by nothing more than an ill trained peasant. Even the bow/longbow and crossbow had this same problem. Warfare wasn't ready to be revolutionised at that time.

From reading about this in the past, the biggest effect these types of weapons had, until they were better refined, was fear.

[Oleander Ardens]

I will post a few facts in two days, once I get the book about the Schuetzen once again in my hands..

However keep in mind that Tyrol is perfect country for shooters. Since 1400 at latest the gunpowder weapons started to overtook the crossbows, which became a domain for the nobility. The lower classes of the citiziens and farmers flocked to the gunpowder weapons, increasingly owning a personal fireweapon. The Landesfuerst did support them by organizing shooting competitions and gifting the prices, because he had an strong and fruitful alliance with them against the nobility.

Some of them even competed with the commoners which enjoyed political power and relative richness. I will post the exact details later

BTW there is a great picture where the shooters have to hit a wooden knight which is pulled from the left to the right. Fits quite nicely into the plan of the Landesfuerst do get his peasants to shoot down a noble knight

Cheers
OA

[Innocentius]

Speaking of unique ways of fighting...

Would it be possible (both theoretically and for you who are creating this mod) to add som real local units? I came to think of this while reading through some books of mine about medieval Sweden (though I guess somewhat similar troops would appear in other regions too, I just haven't heard of them).
What I mean is this: During the middle ages, the Swedish armies were quite unique for Europe. They consisted of peasants (peasants and peasants, farmers in Sweden always had more power than in wester europe, and were not in villenage) who brought pretty much everything with them to the battlefield (this depended on which part of Sweden they came from). Crossbow, polearm-like weapon (axes in the early middle ages, and the more halberd-like weapons later on) as well as a sword or axe. On top of this some light armour and usually a shield. The tactics used were mainly to ambush the enemy in the middle of some dark, deep forest. This proved efficient many times, even when fighting against much more professional troops.

The in-game unit could be somewhat like the following:
A crossbow unit, but with less efficient fire rate and damage, and much much better at melee than ordinary crossbowmen.

Unit size: 60
Cost: Cheap
Support cost: Cheap
Charge: Strong
Attack: Very good
Defence: Weak or average (depends on era, weak in early and high, and average in late)
Speed: Average
Bonus fighting in woods (disadvantage fighting in the open).
Sky-high morale.

Now, the thing would be this: This unit can only be trained in Sweden, by the Swedes, and suffers from a huuuge morale and valour drop once they leave Sweden. So, in short: is there a way of creating "patriotic" units, who can only truly be used in certain provinces?

Just wondering.

[caravel]

So, in short: is there a way of creating "patriotic" units, who can only truly be used in certain provinces?

Just wondering.

In a word no, unfortunately not.

This is what could be done. Supposing the Pictish crossbow unit is used, though based on say Highland clansmen type stats? Possibly with slightly better morale, using the "uncontrolled" discipline type. The unit could be retricted as only trainable in Sweden, and nowhere else. And only trainable as the Swedish and that's it. Also there are no specific "bonus fighting in woods" type units. The only way to do this is to make them more of a Ghazi style unit, which are entirelyu suited to ambushes. Amazing morale, fast, devastating attack, very strong or irresistable charge and again "uncontrolled" discipline type, though no armour and terrible defense. This unit would be ideal for hiding in woods and bursting out upon the enemy, or using their crossbows as a decent missile unit if no ambush opportunity presents itself. (they'd need to be turned off fire at will or they'd blow their cover when the enemy come into range).

I will post a few facts in two days, once I get the book about the Schuetzen once again in my hands..

Look forward to that.

[caravel]

Update

1) Yeoman Cavalry added to the units section of the summary. (I really don't like this name, it needs changing!)
2) Shipping updated. Ships will take 1 year for coastal vessels, 2 years for the small deep sea vessels and 3 years for the big ones.
3) Huscarles added.

The Iron mine has now been implimented. The Iron mine is not a big earner, only a bit better than a copper mine, it costs 550 and 950 to build at present, though I need to tweak that as I go along. The metalsmith and upgrades now depends on the Iron Mine except the Master Metalsmith which depends on the Iron Mine Complex. The castle levels have been preserved.

I have added roughly 50% of the homelands now. These are mainly for the Muslim factions and the Byzantine, though I have done some for the English, the Castilian Leonese, the Danes and the Italians also. I will write these up once they're finished. For now though I would appreciate any input anyone can give regarding Catholic, Novgorod and Russian faction homelands. For the Golden Horde I'm favouring no homelands at all for MHC, MHA, and MW. Their units need to be trainable anywhere.

I'm already noticing some shortcomings. The lack of UM in the early campaigns for the Egyptians and Turks make the unit roster feel rather empty, and also make the Town Guard seem pointless (despite the happiness bonus). I feel it needs some other unit training purpose, apart from simply the happiness bonus. I'm thinking that maybe the Arab Infantry should depend on the Town Watch instead of the Swordsmith. They're not the greatest infantry out there so teching up to a keep and swordsmith for these seems to be a lot. Not sure about this yet though, but if the English and Danes can get Vikings and Clansmen from a basic fort then the Egyptians and Almohads should be able to get Arab Infantry from a Town Watch.

The Square Shield Spearmen unit is also rendered rather redundant for the Egyptians and Almohads by the presence of the Nubian Spearmen. I will probably remove it again. The Turks who don't have the Nubians and use the Round Shield Spearmen anyway aren't affected.

[Martok]

Update

1) Yeoman Cavalry added to the units section of the summary. (I really don't like this name, it needs changing!)
2) Shipping updated. Ships will take 1 year for coastal vessels, 2 years for the small deep sea vessels and 3 years for the big ones.
3) Huscarles added.

1.) Very good. If you don't care for the name, we could always simply call it Militia Cavalry like we originally discussed. Possibly Merchant Guard Cavalry would work too, but that doesn't seem as realistic to me.

2.) I forget--were you changing the costs of ships as well, or just the build times?

3.) Huzzah! I did just now think of something, though. I know you've upped the build requirements for them, but had we decided on whether to make them more expensive as well? I wonder if that would be too much, or if it would help further balance them....

The Iron mine has now been implimented. The Iron mine is not a big earner, only a bit better than a copper mine, it costs 550 and 950 to build at present, though I need to tweak that as I go along. The metalsmith and upgrades now depends on the Iron Mine except the Master Metalsmith which depends on the Iron Mine Complex. The castle levels have been preserved.

Cool cool. Aside from northern Iberia, may I suggest placing an iron resource in Syria as well? Damscus was famous for its steel swords, almost--if not as--much as Spain was. I think you could also probably place a few in the Alps/northern Italy, although I'm less certain as to how realistic that would be.

I have added roughly 50% of the homelands now. These are mainly for the Muslim factions and the Byzantine, though I have done some for the English, the Castilian Leonese, the Danes and the Italians also. I will write these up once they're finished. For now though I would appreciate any input anyone can give regarding Catholic, Novgorod and Russian faction homelands. For the Golden Horde I'm favouring no homelands at all for MHC, MHA, and MW. Their units need to be trainable anywhere.

Have you made the Novgorods/Russians into seperate factions, or are they still the same? If the same, then I would recommend their homelands include Novgorod, Muscovy, and Kiev. Aside from that, I'm not sure which provinces would be appropriate to include for them.

As for the French, I would say their homelands should include all the usual suspects: Flanders, Ile de France, Toulouse, Anjou, Normandy, and Acquitaine. I would also include Champagne, Lorraine, and Provence; I would leave out Brittany, however.

If you wanted to get somewhat radical, you could even make an argument that the provinces of the Holy Land--Antioch, Edessa, Tripoli, and Jerusalem--should be Frankish Homelands as well. Of course, one could argue that they should be homelands for all the Crusading factions, and not just the French!

I'm already noticing some shortcomings. The lack of UM in the early campaigns for the Egyptians and Turks make the unit roster feel rather empty, and also make the Town Guard seem pointless (despite the happiness bonus). I feel it needs some other unit training purpose, apart from simply the happiness bonus. I'm thinking that maybe the Arab Infantry should depend on the Town Watch instead of the Swordsmith. They're not the greatest infantry out there so teching up to a keep and swordsmith for these seems to be a lot. Not sure about this yet though, but if the English and Danes can get Vikings and Clansmen from a basic fort then the Egyptians and Almohads should be able to get Arab Infantry from a Town Watch.

I think having Arab Inf being dependent on the Town Watch isn't a bad idea at all, MC. It certainly makes a lot of sense, given how they formed a significant portion of a Caliph's army. Me likey!

[caravel]

1.) Very good. If you don't care for the name, we could always simply call it Militia Cavalry like we originally discussed. Possibly Merchant Guard Cavalry would work too, but that doesn't seem as realistic to me.

Militia Cavalry is probably better until we come up with another name.

2.) I forget--were you changing the costs of ships as well, or just the build times?

Costs are all halved. I've been testing it, and it's alot better. I'm playing a Turks campaign, and the Byzantine fleets are now a real problem. Their ships are appearing every year, and engaging mine. I can no longer glut the sea with ships as I used to and easily dominate the med.

3.) Huzzah! I did just now think of something, though. I know you've upped the build requirements for them, but had we decided on whether to make them more expensive as well? I wonder if that would be too much, or if it would help further balance them....

I think the build requirement changes are ok for now. I may increase the support and training costs also. I need to have another look at that.

Cool cool. Aside from northern Iberia, may I suggest placing an iron resource in Syria as well? Damscus was famous for its steel swords, almost--if not as--much as Spain was. I think you could also probably place a few in the Alps/northern Italy, although I'm less certain as to how realistic that would be.

Syria is a good one.

Have you made the Novgorods/Russians into seperate factions, or are they still the same? If the same, then I would recommend their homelands include Novgorod, Muscovy, and Kiev. Aside from that, I'm not sure which provinces would be appropriate to include for them.

The Novgorod/Russian problem...

I'm convinced that CA struggled with this also. Originally I'm sure they were one faction, the Russians, then CA, possibly after discovering the relevance of Novgorod to the early period, went through the process of coding in another faction for early, the Novgorod, as an effort to create a northern European faction, but never finished them. Instead they assigned them the Russian faction's colours and units, with Vikings as an additional unit and left it at that. There is no real need for the Novgorod faction as the Russians can simply be renamed "Novgorod" in early and assigned the relevant provinces.

Modding in the Novgorod as they were intended to be would be a long process, involving the new campaign map flags, new units, etc. It would be good, because the Russian faction could then be included in the Early period around Kiev. To be honest though, any player wanting this sort of thing will just go for the XL mod. The aim of this mod is to be as light as possible after all.

I need to do more work on the Russian faction as a whole, but I'm leaning toward removing Novgorod and renaming the Russian faction as Novgorod in Early. The Viking Unit (the Drangar) also needs to be take away from the Novgorod and possibly a new infantry unit created for them, based on it.

As for the French, I would say their homelands should include all the usual suspects: Flanders, Ile de France, Toulouse, Anjou, Normandy, and Acquitaine. I would also include Champagne, Lorraine, and Provence; I would leave out Brittany, however.

The French are easy enough, however they don't have many unique units, so homelands for them probably won't be an issue. Units such as Hobilars and Gendarmes are the only few that I can think of. The former will need a combined Anglo-French homeland with the latter needing a somewhat larger homeland covering much of France, Iberia etc. Apart from that, there are no other semi-unique French units that I can think of.

If you wanted to get somewhat radical, you could even make an argument that the provinces of the Holy Land--Antioch, Edessa, Tripoli, and Jerusalem--should be Frankish Homelands as well. Of course, one could argue that they should be homelands for all the Crusading factions, and not just the French!

The Crusading units won't have any homeland restrictions imposed upon them. I may make it possible for units such as Order Foot soldiers and Order Knights (St. James, St. John, Templars) to depend on a chapter house and be trainable in certain parts of the east such as Palestine, Rhodes and Malta.

I think having Arab Inf being dependent on the Town Watch isn't a bad idea at all, MC. It certainly makes a lot of sense, given how they formed a significant portion of a Caliph's army. Me likey!

That will give the "Egyptians" 2 decent units early on in Arabia: Bedouin Camels and Arab Infantry.

I've noticed in my current campaign as the Turks, that the Egyptians didn't do too well after I took Antioch and Tripoli. The huge dent in their income must have placed them in the red. This is probably down to the increased support costs of Ghulam Bodyguards. I may tweak the costs a little and also try to make Egypt a richer province than it is at present.

The Byzantine's Armoured Spearmen make a big difference also.

I have renamed the Egyptians, Turks and Almohads per era. They are now known as:

Turks: Seljukid Empire / Seljukid Empire / Ottoman Empire
Egyptians: Fatimid Caliphate / Ayyubid Sultanate / Mamluk Sultanate
Almohads: Almoravid Caliphate / Almohad Caliphate, Marinid Sultanate

[Innocentius]

Iron should be added in Milan, and some southern German provinces (like Bavaria). This area was one of the main producers of weapons and armour during the medieval period, and of course even later on. Even the muslims of the Middle east often bought swords from northern Italy.

I think that Novgorod should remain at least in the High era. Afte the Mongol invasion, Novogorod lost some of its independancy as a state, but existed untill the late 15th century when the muscovites finally brought an end to them, moving the seat of power in Russia from Novogorod to Moscow. When Alexander Nevsky defeated the Swedes at Neva and the Teutonic Knights at lake Peipus, in the 1240's, he did so as a defender of Novogord.

[Kralizec]

Turks: Seljukid Empire / Seljukid Empire / Ottoman Empire
Egyptians: Fatimid Caliphate / Ayyubid Sultanate / Mamluk Sultanate
Almohads: Almoravid Caliphate / Almohad Caliphate, Marinid Sultanate

Who are they? I thought the Nasrids were the main muslim power in Iberia after the Almohads had expired.

[Martok]

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.