The Shield Problem(s)

[Ulstan]

Hmmm looks like everyone who thought it was a bug was right, while Zhukov was wrong.

Great work guys, really good bug-spotting :) The reason that we don't usually comment is that - to be brutally frank - there just isn't much to say about these things. We try hard to prioritise core gameplay bugs, but it's a huge piece of software with many people working on it, and obviously a few things have slipped the net that shouldn't have.

Oh, we understand the difficulty in making a completely bug free product. I'm not interested in 'gotchas' or assigning blame to the developers, nor is anyone else, I think.

We just want assurance that what we are seeing actually is a bug, and that CA is aware of it, and working to correct it.

Icing on the cake would be an ETA on the fix :)

[Kraggenmor]

Hmmm looks like everyone who thought it was a bug was right, while Zhukov was wrong.

The opening shot at member who posted a completely valid point was totally unnecessary.

Especially considering that this

We just want assurance that what we are seeing actually is a bug

Was essentially Zhukov's point to start with: That just because you're seeing something you don't think is working as it should, doesn't necessarily mean its a bug.

[Carl]

@Kraggenmor:

I agree that was a cheap shot, but also, if you read my last reply to Zurkovs last post in this thread you'd see that i'd pointed out how it made fixed 2-handers work with origonal stats, (and thus in auto-calc), and also made late era sheild units competetive with all other late era units. This proved it was bug to me as it brought everything back into balance. The effects of getting working bracing, have only added to this extra balance where seeing.

[Kraggenmor]

@Kraggenmor:

I agree that was a cheap shot, but also, if you read my last reply to Zurkovs last post in this thread you'd see that i'd pointed out how it made fixed 2-handers work with origonal stats, (and thus in auto-calc), and also made late era sheild units competetive with all other late era units. This proved it was bug to me as it brought everything back into balance. The effects of getting working bracing, have only added to this extra balance where seeing.

I did read it and you've done excellent work!

My comments weren't directed across your bow.

[Carl]

I knew they wern't directed at me BTW, I was just pointing out that I can understand the frustration that caused the post, no matter how "bad" a post it might have been.

Also, whilst I must say thanks for your thanks, i played only a very small part in this issue, running a few tests and noticing the odd thing. Foz did all the real work really. I'm just very long winded and vocal, so i get noticed a lot, and thus get more praise than i deserve...

[General Zhukov]

[which] was essentially Zhukov's point to start with: That just because you're seeing something you don't think is working as it should, doesn't necessarily mean its a bug.

Of course that is true Kragg, and nice of you to point it out. But, really, one can understand the compulsion that drives our hosts in this thread to improve the world, based on the evidence as they see it. Is not progress always driven by the unreasonable man? Nay, better to observe quietly as Carl and Foz4 work their mad schemes in Mod Manor, with Ulstan, ready, with ears perked, guarding the gate. When they have figured out exactly how shields should work, and exactly what balance the game should have, we will be able to eat the sweet fruits of their toil. And if they err in eradicating error? Then at least they have brought the issue to the attention of the TW gods, and for that we should be grateful at least.

[Ulstan]

I'm not sure how much of your post is sarcasm and such Zhukov, but I would like to remind you, if you don't like the mod they make and think it goes overboard, you are always free not to download it. You are quite protected from overzealous modders

And once CA patches the game to fix the problem, but you want your old hurting you in melee shields back, you can still choose not to install the patch.

You have a lot of options to wind up playing the exact same kind of game you want.

Granted, if you do install the patch I don't think it would be possible to mod back in the 'harmful in melee' shields, the same way we can't really mod them out without a patch.

[Blademun]

Alright, I'll accept Foz's explanation.

However, this..

...Then you get smashed. As you should...

Seems way out of line to me. I don't know what your thinking Carl, but alot of us don't want balance We want Historical Accuracy. Thats why we're playing this game, for the historical effect. Of all the medieval units that ever existed, only two survived well into the age of gunpowder..do you know what those two are? Light Cavalry and Horse Archers. Muslim and Native American cultures used horse archers effectively long after the age of bows and swords had died off. This is purely due to the fact that a good horse archer is an extremely versatile and effective weapon. Why is it that they can take on mixed-arms armies? Because, unlike in the 20th century, mixed arms were not nearly as effective in the 14th century. It creates weak and strong spots, and a general has to constantly cover for one while striking with the other. Remembering the most of his troops are on foot, and can't move from point a to b quickly. The general has to reconfigure his army to take into account his enemy every single time he engages them. Whereas the leader of a HA horde knows what they have to do, they've done it a million times before, and they're going to do it again. You think europe was the only country fielding mixed arms? China did too, and they got stomped by Mongolia. Rome was reknowned for their mixed armies. The Huns made them look like fools. Little Bighorn was suppose to be the battle to break the back of indian power...and we know that isn't exactly what happened..

I'd say of all of europes armys, the only one that could effectively counter a powerful HA army at its prime is that of Englands. Not because they fielded mixed arms, but because their longrange longbows and bodkin arrows would make short work of the shorter ranged, light armored cav archers. (Indeed, in a battle between spain and England, Longbowmen made a superior army of jinettes into a shooting gallery.)

Anyway, I feel that the current dominance that a strong army of Mixed HA(heavy/light) is justified. They rightfully are one of the most fearsome, and expensive, armies to be used on the battlefield. The Byzantines, Mongols and Turks rely on their horse archers almost exclusively for cavalry.

This is not to say cav archers are a noob-tube weapon that makes any noob a good player. It takes alot of skill and finnesse to use HA.

Nope, the only time I’ve ever fought against HA on the battlefield was those tests furthar up the thread.

Perhaps your lack of experience with them is the primary reason you don't know this. In fact, Carl, until you've actually played a campaign as one of the HA heavy nations, I really think you ought not be denouncing HA as unbalanced. You've never dealt with the cost, and micromanaging, that it takes to field a effective HA army. I kinda wish Orda Khan would get involved in this post. He's having his beloved mongol HA neutered even moreso then they already are..


P.S. sorry for going sort of off topic. I know this thread is suppose to be about a bug, not discussing the finer points of medieval warfare. To bring it in line with this topic; I would just like to reiterate that game balance is not what all of us want. If you reallllly feel that HA and other units are overpowered in multiplayer, increase their price. Don't neuter their abilities, as for the first time they've been realisticly modeled.

[Carl]

This is off topic.

However.

This is basically a case of preferring different game types.

or me I love historical accuracy, but it HAS to take a backseat to a fun game, a game is only fun for me when it is balanced. A balanced game means taking any too armies, (say a pure infantry and pure HA army), putting them in equally skilled hands, and expecting, (on average), an equal number if wins and losses over the course of a number of games.

Everybody admits that won't happen, and that means to me the game isn't balanced. At heart it seemingly boils down to, (if you have good HA), build economy, spam HA, use well, decimate everyone.

If I want that type of game play I’ll go back to playing DoW:WA, it's pretty much the same play style and requires even less brainpower as it doesn’t require the micro-management of HA, (which I find boring anyway).

I got RTW and M2TW because I liked how they played out in the demos, it felt like the kind of game I’d been looking for, for years. It seemed ok on balance, (cav was a bit OTT in both mind), with good combined arms and a general feel of balance and strategic depth that’s been lacking in any other RTS I’ve played. It's the challenge of wits I love so much.

On the flip side my point about combined arms was meant to apply to those armies capable of it. Just as Scots lack effective heavy archers and cav, the Mongols lack effective Infantry and Heavy cav.

In these kinds of cases, it's OK for a 90% HA army to do great. They don't really have much else to rely on, and thus need HA that can do well if they are to have a chance of winning. The same Logic Applies to Scotland, they don't have much beyond Melee infantry, so they need really good melee infantry. They still have to use combined arms to a degree. But nowhere near as well as anyone else. The comment was really aimed at factions like Byzantine and the Turks who according top most people can get away with littlie besides HA in their armies 90% of the time. They have other very good units and they are their to be used, the game shouldn't be set up so that a competent HA player has no need for them, and nerfing the HA stats any more would only increase the Auto-Calc discrepancy.

As I said, it's different styles, I want a game that’s fun for me, I don't find it fun when all I have to do is build one unit all the time and use it well to win. I like the challenge of using combined arms and making it work.

So no offence meant by anything, we just have different views on what’s fun, and now that’s cleared up we can go back on topic.

[Musashi]

Not to nitpick, but both the Byzantines and Turks have really terrible spearmen and other infantry until the middle to late period.