The Shield Problem(s)

[Kaidonni]

Thanks. :)

HOPEFULLY M2:TW comes to me soon...then I can download the patch and pick the mods I want to install to improve my experience (by improve, I mean fix (some of) the issues with unmodded patched vanilla).

[Musashi]

Personally I like my missile troops too much to nerf them by applying the armor based shield fix... And the skill based fix either leaves infantry too weak vs missiles or doesn't fully fix the problem.

So basically I'm just going to wait until the next patch, and then do my modding.

I need the darn mesh import/export tools anyway.

[Gen_Lee]

Sorry, I saw a post on twc and ima quoting someone«s post there (i cant log into twc right now so i cant say the name of the auhor iof the post).
Quote:
I've found that if you use the shield to armour bug fix (for shield units add their shield value to their armour value and make shield value 0).

It works not too bad with the following 2 handed fix,

Use Highland_Nobles soldier for:

billmen
heavy_billmen
bill_militia
heavy_bill_militia
dismounted_english_knights
dismounted_noble_knights
dismounted_portuguese_knights
free_company_men_at_arms

Use Viking_Raiders for:
woodsmen
croat_axemen
religious_fanatics
berdiche_axemen
varangian_guard
norse_axemen
galloglaich
Galloglaich mercs
tabardariyya
mutatawwi'a
eagle_warriors
english_huscarls


and use 270 for attack speed for all of these units except the ones using viking raider soldier these need about 300
with the lower order ones like woodsmen and croat axemen needing around 330 while leaving other stats intact.
Of course more testing is needed and the charge bonus is probably too high.

Unquote.

Unfortunalty Im not finding how I do the last phase:
and use 270 for attack speed for all of these units except the ones using viking raider soldier these need about 300
with the lower order ones like woodsmen and croat axemen needing around 330 while leaving other stats intact.

Can any explain me How do I change atack speed to those values???

[Foz]

the Foz, with all due respect to you and all the others who have done a marvelous job figuring out the intricacies of this bug, have you done any testing in multiplayer? it would remove a lot of the variability of AI control (with what goes on in the battlefield, as well as any variables difficulty settings will throw in). it means greater ease in replicating any given maneuver or circumstance. for example, the early testing (at least from what it sounded like) in this thread always had to factor in the effects of charging, when what people wanted to test was effects of the shield in melee. by doing that in multiplayer you can just have both units walk into each other, removing any effects of a charge, and of having either unit designated as the "attacker".

of course it helps to have an extra computer in the house that can actually run M2TW (i am amazed that my old computer with its radeon 8500 is actually able to).

anyway, again, props to you guys for finding this bug and so throroughly searching for the best fix until the official one comes out.

I've not done multiplayer testing, as I don't have the luxury of having a second computer around the is good enough to run M2TW. And honestly, except for this one case, I wouldn't have wanted to do it that way anyway. The AI actually makes the computer totally predictable in 1v1 combat, to the point that I could almost snap my fingers at the exact moment when the computer would choose to regroup its cavalry unit, and point on screen where it was that they would be moved to. If you control your unit scientifically, it actually makes the AI a total non-factor.

Thanks for the props!

Will this shield fix bug be compatible with other mods, such as Lusted's LTC? Oh...just occured to me that he balances units in his mod, so it'd mess with the changes he made, wouldn't it? Or would it still be compatible, just changing the units?

Lusted answered this one about LTC, but concerning other mods, it depends if and how they've modified the EDU file. If the EDU is left untouched, or changes have been made that don't affect unit offense and defense stats, then you'll get the same results I've described. If some attempt has been made to balance units, though, your results will vary (sometimes quite a lot) from what I've been describing as the results of applying it to the vanilla game file. In general you can apply the fix (via my exe that patches the file) to absolutely any EDU out there, and it will do what it's supposed to - add the shield points of each unit into their armor, and put 0 for their shield. The only difference is that if stats have been changed, then unit balance will be different from what I've told you to expect. You'd have to try it in each case to find out exactly how though.

After testing the shield fix i do not recommend it as other changes i've made unbalance things if you use the shield fix. I will be using the shield fix in 2.1, i just need to balance some other things.

I figured you'd say that, as you already took measures to harden spears against cavalry, and their fixed shields would make them OTT against cav - something like an impervious cavalry meat grinder. I'm sure horse meat is tasty and all... but that doesn't mean we should install factories to make it on every battlefield.

I'm glad to hear you're implementing the fix into LTC 2.1, it sounds promising already. I imagine you're putting back in balance a lot of the things I feel are out, and look forward to seeing it, as we seem to want the same sort of things from the game.

Personally I like my missile troops too much to nerf them by applying the armor based shield fix... And the skill based fix either leaves infantry too weak vs missiles or doesn't fully fix the problem.

So basically I'm just going to wait until the next patch, and then do my modding.

I need the darn mesh import/export tools anyway.

I guess I'm just less patient than you. I'd rather swat the shield problem, then worry about putting archers and 2HS units back in balance with the higher power level of the rest of the units, than just sit around doing nothing. It's certainly not a bad option to wait for the official patch if you can do so... but I, knowing about the problem, would be constantly bothered by it in the game... and I can't just not play it until the patch comes. That leads me to use the fix, and finish balancing disadvantaged units as I can. It sounds like Lusted is already on this particular on though... so maybe I have to just tolerate the game being slightly off until he gets 2.1 done

[Musashi]

Well, to me, it's better to have my shielded units a little nerfed in melee than completely remove the value of flanking fire from the game.

[hrvojej]

Well, to me, it's better to have my shielded units a little nerfed in melee than completely remove the value of flanking fire from the game.

I agree, it takes away too much from tactics. I am well into my campaign with skill-fixed shields, and so far things are looking good.

[Jambo]

I agree, it takes away too much from tactics. I am well into my campaign with skill-fixed shields, and so far things are looking good.

I imagine skill-fixed shields work fine for the human, but in terms of the AI I think it would have drastic effects on army composition and auto calc. In fact this option ONLY seems to benefit the human!

The armour-fixed option seems to the only real workaround to maintain a competitive and fair level of play, especially given the AI will never take advantage of enfilade fire.

[Foz]

Well, to me, it's better to have my shielded units a little nerfed in melee than completely remove the value of flanking fire from the game.

This represents a gross misunderstanding of the problem. The archers, who are far less numerous than the shield units, experience at most a 6 point difference in flanking fire from this fix, as the shield value instead becomes armor which applies against missiles from the right and rear (that's if I correctly recall the maximum shield as 6 points). Left and front archer fire should be entirely unaffected as shield already counted there.

The backwards melee shields, OTOH, affect the units in melee twice as much as the fix nerfs any flank archer fire against them. In a great many cases that is to say the 6 point flanking archer fire difference instead is a 12 point deficit from what the shield should be doing for the unit in melee. 12 points is not "a little nerfed," it is "absolutely destroyed." It's much worse of a problem too even ignoring it having a twice as harsh effect on stats and breaking more units than the fix does, as it applies to any normal melee from the front or left where the shield is supposed to be applied, situations that happen far more frequently and are more integral to the function of the game than flanking archer fire. That is not to downplay the usefulness of flanking archer fire working right by any means, but simply to say that standard melee combat is far more important to the game and thus makes the fix a good trade to make since melee affects all units that aren't archers, and archers too sometimes.

[Musashi]

This represents a gross misunderstanding of the problem. The archers, who are far less numerous than the shield units, experience at most a 6 point difference in flanking fire from this fix, as the shield value instead becomes armor which applies against missiles from the right and rear (that's if I correctly recall the maximum shield as 6 points). Left and front archer fire should be entirely unaffected as shield already counted there.

The backwards melee shields, OTOH, affect the units in melee twice as much as the fix nerfs any flank archer fire against them. In a great many cases that is to say the 6 point flanking archer fire difference instead is a 12 point deficit from what the shield should be doing for the unit in melee. 12 points is not "a little nerfed," it is "absolutely destroyed." It's much worse of a problem too even ignoring it having a twice as harsh effect on stats and breaking more units than the fix does, as it applies to any normal melee from the front or left where the shield is supposed to be applied, situations that happen far more frequently and are more integral to the function of the game than flanking archer fire. That is not to downplay the usefulness of flanking archer fire working right by any means, but simply to say that standard melee combat is far more important to the game and thus makes the fix a good trade to make since melee affects all units that aren't archers, and archers too sometimes.

It's not a gross misunderstanding of the situation. By putting the shield value into armor you create a situation where firing on a unit from the flanks or rear is EXACTLY the same as shooting them in the front. There's no benefit. AT ALL. To me, that's taking an entire aspect of the game out, and is unacceptable.