Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 556

Thread: V1.21 Rebuild-ProblemFixer BETA testing thread

  1. #31
    Senior Member Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,461

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    I get bored too fast.
    Join the club, i've never seen mongols TBH, get bored too quick, might stick my Byzantine campaign out though, it's being good so far.

    I'm actually trying to raise rep to the same importantce as individual faction standings and the pope and such like, i've allready had some ideas whilst writing stuff TBH.

    Attacking factions isn't too big a hit I don't think, but it adds up (some of the rep hits arn't detailed in the files we have acess to if people are to be belived).

    heavy assasin/spy use also cuts your rep badly.

    Wiping out a faction is a MASSIVE rep hit too.
    Last edited by Carl; 03-08-2007 at 04:29.
    Find my ProblemFixer Purehere.

    This ProblemFixer fixes the following: 2-Hander bug, Pike Bug, Shield Bug, Chasing Routers, Cav not Charging, Formation Keeping Improved, Trait Bugs, and Ancillary Bugs.

    BETA Testers needed for the current version of RebuildProblemFixer. Thread here

  2. #32
    Amphibious Trebuchet Salesman Member Whacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    in ur city killin ur militias
    Posts
    2,934

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Hey Carl? A question sir. It would just seem by reading what you've said for v1.14 so far that the items covered appear to be more... balance related? For example the AI recruitment, and your comment about 'slowing the game down'. I thought your Problemfixer was just about fixing bugs, not about balancing the game. Is this not the case or am I just confused?


    "Justice is the firm and continuous desire to render to everyone
    that which is his due."
    - Justinian I

  3. #33

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    An extreme example would be the one the Romans built at Masada. Literally a huge pile of dirt that your infantry can just march up, maybe drop a bridge for the last twenty feet. It would need to cost a ton of seige points to be balanced, but would be really cool.

    Whacker, I would argue that some of the balance issues are bugs.

  4. #34

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Great ideas Carl. I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on this.
    A couple questions/comments...

    Honest/Dishonest and Rep Changes
    So the idea is to create two different strategies, chivalrous or dreadful, that a player can follow, but tied to his ruler so that he can shift back and forth between strategies as rulers come and go. Each strategy should bring its own successes and repercussions and should be balanced with each other.

    A Chivalrous strategy tend towards economic growth and diplomatic alliances and only really allow conquest against other religions.

    Dreadful strategy tends toward geographic growth with no real diplomatic element and allows conquest against anybody.

    Is this the general idea and would you expect a player to stick with one strategy throughout the game or switch back and forth with rulers?

    Siege Changes
    It sounds like assaulting castles is going to be way way harder for the player. However, since the AI is incompetent, we'd really have to autoresolve sieges for the AI to give it any chance at all, so the AI won't have a harder time assaulting castles. I imagine that'll feel weird... but I'll really have to play it before passing judgement. Just something to keep in mind.

    Rebel Strength
    You modified castle assaults so that it's harder for the player to advance against other factions. Is it really necessary to increase rebel strength on top of that? Won't the changes to the castle assaults make it hard enough to capture rebel settlements?

  5. #35
    King Philippe of France Senior Member _Tristan_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Reigning over France
    Posts
    3,264

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    As said in a earlier post on another thread...

    Count me in...

    Didn't have time to see if you released your 1.2 patch ? Did you ?

    If so, i'll install but will have to wait this WE to test...
    King Baldwin the Tyrant, King of Jerusalem, Warden of the Holy Sepulchre, Slayer of Sultans in the Crusades Hotseat (new write-up here and previous write-up here)
    Methodios Tagaris, Caesar and Rebelin LotR
    Mexica Sunrise : An Aztec AAR



    Philippe 1er de France
    in King of the Franks

  6. #36

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Hi Carl

    Please can I be considered for testing your new Fixer.

    I am half way through my second long campaign.
    I play on vh/vh patch 1 no other mods at present.
    First time I play as England and won very easily.
    Currently playing as the Moors. I have supreme power, despicable reputation. I am holding off wining the game as I am waiting for the new world.
    Not sure who I will lay as next time.

    Having read some of your previous posts I may try to play keeping my reputation high. I take it this will stop me from assassinating everyone?

    Can I load the fixer half way through a campaign?

    Regards

    Richard
    The £40,000,000 nhs computer system has a use!

  7. #37
    Member Member Erik Bloodaxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    -A position or point in physical space.
    Posts
    54

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    I have to say Carl, this is looking very promising! One question though, when we get your FixerMod, this may have been asked before but I'll ask anyway, it is required that we only upgrade this from vanilla M2TW right? A bit noobish I know

  8. #38
    Senior Member Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,461

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    I have to say Carl, this is looking very promising! One question though, when we get your FixerMod, this may have been asked before but I'll ask anyway, it is required that we only upgrade this from vanilla M2TW right? A bit noobish I know
    Depends really. First, you don't need any other mods so your Okay there. Second, you can run it without the V1.1 officio CA patch but some text may be missing I'm afraid. You'll also miss out on a few V1.1 fixes that aren't in my ProblemFixer.

    So yes you can run it on a fresh copy of M2TW with nothing extra added on (not even patch 1.1), and it will work. But it's best to add patch 1.1. Other than that their are no advisable add ons.

    Great ideas Carl. I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on this.
    A couple questions/comments...

    Honest/Dishonest and Rep Changes
    So the idea is to create two different strategies, chivalrous or dreadful, that a player can follow, but tied to his ruler so that he can shift back and forth between strategies as rulers come and go. Each strategy should bring its own successes and repercussions and should be balanced with each other.

    A Chivalrous strategy tend towards economic growth and diplomatic alliances and only really allow conquest against other religions.

    Dreadful strategy tends toward geographic growth with no real diplomatic element and allows conquest against anybody.

    Is this the general idea and would you expect a player to stick with one strategy throughout the game or switch back and forth with rulers?

    Siege Changes
    It sounds like assaulting castles is going to be way way harder for the player. However, since the AI is incompetent, we'd really have to auto-resolve sieges for the AI to give it any chance at all, so the AI won't have a harder time assaulting castles. I imagine that'll feel weird... but I'll really have to play it before passing judgment. Just something to keep in mind.

    Rebel Strength
    You modified castle assaults so that it's harder for the player to advance against other factions. Is it really necessary to increase rebel strength on top of that? Won't the changes to the castle assaults make it hard enough to capture rebel settlements?
    Your summary isn't bad, I would point out though that unprovoked attacks vs. other religions still incur a rep hit, it's just worse if your a catholic and it's a fellow catholic. Islam vs. Islam, or orthodox vs. orthodox just gets the basic penalty.

    Good point about castles, bear in mind when I say castles I man the actual "Stone Castle" wall upgrade level, not Wooden or Motte and Bailey Castles.

    Which brings me onto your last point. They got buffed mainly because their are a fair number of Motte and Bailey, Villages, and the odd small town/wooden castle that whilst harder to attack because of the changes, are still somewhat easy, the buffing helps keep you from simply walking all over these in the early game without concentrated effort on the part of the player.

    An extreme example would be the one the Romans built at Masada. Literally a huge pile of dirt that your infantry can just march up, maybe drop a bridge for the last twenty feet. It would need to cost a ton of siege points to be balanced, but would be really cool.
    Ahh, thanks for the explanation, I'm not sure how I could add that TBH as it needs graphical people and some way of actually adding new siege engines to the list of those build-able, something we don't know how to do. If we did I'd add sap points again.

    @Whacker:

    It's a bit complex, but at heart the purpose of ProblemFixer is to fix any aspects of the game a large number of people are complaining about. So a number of changes have made their way in that are perhaps not bugs worthy of the bug-list, but they are what people want by and large (wish list style stuff basically). I know you your yourself have expressed worries over assassins, and I myself have sometimes found them lacking, so have other. As a result I've buffed assassins slightly;y.

    At the same time I always try to prevent the game getting exploitable features added on in the process, and at times (especially with the tech tree changes), I've made changes for other reasons that have also, (IMHO), improve game balance. 99% of the things in V1.2 that I say "improves balance" with where added for other reasons first, the improved balance is just an extra.


    Finally I need another volunteer to check the auto-extractor I created. the one I sent to Chikenhawk last night had a couple of bugs, (all Copy and paste gremlins, wrong shortcut, and wrong backup files pasted in a couple of places), Chikenhawk is now offline however so I need another tester, although I'm confident it should work now.

    Sorry for the delay guys, and thanks to the extra volunteers.

    Many Thanks.

    Carl.
    Last edited by Carl; 03-08-2007 at 14:34.
    Find my ProblemFixer Purehere.

    This ProblemFixer fixes the following: 2-Hander bug, Pike Bug, Shield Bug, Chasing Routers, Cav not Charging, Formation Keeping Improved, Trait Bugs, and Ancillary Bugs.

    BETA Testers needed for the current version of RebuildProblemFixer. Thread here

  9. #39
    Ricardus Insanusaum Member Bob the Insane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl
    though that unprovoked attacks vs. other religions still incur a rep hit, it's just worse if your a catholic and it's a fellow catholic. Islam vs. Islam, or orthodox vs. orthodox just gets the basic penalty.
    While I am obviously happy to test all as is, I would have thought it would have been useful to maintain the extra penalty for attacking factions of the same religion to encourage religion based power blocks...

    I mean the Catholic nations already have to deal with the extra issue of the Pope getting involved when they fight each other...

    Additionally do woud it be fair easy to alter your mod to the timescale for 0.5? I know about setting the value, it was the other events stuff I was refereing to?

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl
    Finally I need another volunteer to check the auto-extractor I created. the one I sent to Chikenhawk last night had a couple of bugs, (all Copy and paste gremlins, wrong shortcut, and wrong backup files pasted in a couple of places), Chikenhawk is now offline however so I need another tester, although I'm confident it should work now.
    I will be home from work in around 4-5 hours and am willing if you don't get anyone before then...
    Last edited by Carl; 03-20-2007 at 11:32.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,461

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    I would have thought it would have been useful to maintain the extra penalty for attacking factions of the same religion to encourage religion based power blocks...
    I agree actually, but CA didn't include triggers for that I I forgot to think to add them. I definitely will though next time I'm tweaking.

    Additionally do woud it be fair easy to alter your mod to the timescale for 0.5? I know about setting the value, it was the other events stuff I was refereing to?
    I think your asking "can i change the game to 0.5 timescale easily". The answer is yes, just change the value in the Descr_Strat file. The events stuff is so that things like Gunpowder and Mongols don't take too long to show up.

    I will be home from work in around 4-5 hours and am willing if you don't get anyone before then...
    Right. Just drop a reply in here when your ready.

    Thanks.

    Carl.
    Last edited by Carl; 03-08-2007 at 14:47.
    Find my ProblemFixer Purehere.

    This ProblemFixer fixes the following: 2-Hander bug, Pike Bug, Shield Bug, Chasing Routers, Cav not Charging, Formation Keeping Improved, Trait Bugs, and Ancillary Bugs.

    BETA Testers needed for the current version of RebuildProblemFixer. Thread here

  11. #41
    King Philippe of France Senior Member _Tristan_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Reigning over France
    Posts
    3,264

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    A note about Heavy spy/heavy assassin use...

    Wouldn't it more "realistic" if only the botched attempts had an effect on your rep ?

    See it as the modern CIA... They do "bad" things everyday but only when they fail do they get notice and thus give a bad rep to the US Gov't...

    So why not in MTW2 ?

    It's just a different kind of war which just as much dedication as with gaining a general your battle stars...

    What do you think ?

    You could be perceived as a chivalrous leader and be a behind-the scene master of assassins...
    King Baldwin the Tyrant, King of Jerusalem, Warden of the Holy Sepulchre, Slayer of Sultans in the Crusades Hotseat (new write-up here and previous write-up here)
    Methodios Tagaris, Caesar and Rebelin LotR
    Mexica Sunrise : An Aztec AAR



    Philippe 1er de France
    in King of the Franks

  12. #42
    Senior Member Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,461

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    True enough, i think it's more a case of their allways being some clues as to who did it. in a way the poor tech of those times would have made it harder to cover up the murder of a King, or to cover up how information was aqquired. Even if they don't know who murdered the person killed or blew up their building, they have a good idea who might.

    Character assasination if you like.

    On the other hand it's a good set of points, I'd probably still include penalties for just doing it, (so honest rulers don't use too many spies), but i'd cut the pnalty a lot. On the other hand i'd raise the penalty for being caught heavilly.

    Reputation is somthing I really want to tweak and play with TBH.
    Find my ProblemFixer Purehere.

    This ProblemFixer fixes the following: 2-Hander bug, Pike Bug, Shield Bug, Chasing Routers, Cav not Charging, Formation Keeping Improved, Trait Bugs, and Ancillary Bugs.

    BETA Testers needed for the current version of RebuildProblemFixer. Thread here

  13. #43
    Ricardus Insanusaum Member Bob the Insane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,911

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Right, on my way home, eta 10-20 minutes...

    If you want I will give your 1.2 install a try...

    Edit: Home now, ready any time...
    Last edited by Bob the Insane; 03-08-2007 at 22:02.

  14. #44

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Hello Carl, I have given 1.2 solid go this morning and happily report that everything works very well.

    I am playing as the English on VH/VH. The game is running very smoothly, I am having no actual game mechanic issues or CTDs. The AI is playing the best that I have ever seen in a total war game. I beat the Scotts to Inverness, left a small garrison and went to take Dublin. The Scotts promptly marched out and took it back before I could take Dublin and get back. I am very impressed. I have not noticed any problems with the balance of any units in battles.

    You said somewhere above that you were changing to one year per turn. The version I have does not seem to have that done, it is showing a 225 turn campaign and I am not going to get done that quickly at this pace.

    Very well done!

  15. #45

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    incredabilly silly question - can i access the beta now?

  16. #46
    Amphibious Trebuchet Salesman Member Whacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    in ur city killin ur militias
    Posts
    2,934

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl
    @Whacker:

    It's a bit complex, but at heart the purpose of ProblemFixer is to fix any aspects of the game a large number of people are complaining about. So a number of changes have made their way in that are perhaps not bugs worthy of the bug-list, but they are what people want by and large (wish list style stuff basically). I know you your yourself have expressed worries over assassins, and I myself have sometimes found them lacking, so have other. As a result I've buffed assassins slightly;y.

    At the same time I always try to prevent the game getting exploitable features added on in the process, and at times (especially with the tech tree changes), I've made changes for other reasons that have also, (IMHO), improve game balance. 99% of the things in V1.2 that I say "improves balance" with where added for other reasons first, the improved balance is just an extra.
    Ahh, this is somewhat what I expected you to say. Before I make this request I'd like to repeat my thanks for your good hard work, it's obvious the community appreciates it greatly.

    That said, I'd like to lobby for a separate version of Problemfixer that only fixes bugs, and doesn't do any rebalancing. Sure I've complained enough about assassins and Inquisitors and stuff, but those arguably are not bugs, for all we know CA intended for it to be this way. Clearly items like the 2-hander and shield deal are bugs, which need to be fixed. I guess I'd like a version of your problemfixer that only fixes what we're dead positive are bugs such as those, and doesn't try to fiddle with the AI or "rebalance" anything? Does this make sense? Please consider.

    Respectfully

    "Justice is the firm and continuous desire to render to everyone
    that which is his due."
    - Justinian I

  17. #47
    Senior Member Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,461

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Right Bob the Insane.

    i'll send it now, was on MSN and I can't run the net and MSN together so just seen your post.

    I'll reply to everyoe else shortly.
    Find my ProblemFixer Purehere.

    This ProblemFixer fixes the following: 2-Hander bug, Pike Bug, Shield Bug, Chasing Routers, Cav not Charging, Formation Keeping Improved, Trait Bugs, and Ancillary Bugs.

    BETA Testers needed for the current version of RebuildProblemFixer. Thread here

  18. #48

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    A few more little things Carl

    1. A beset by a plague of pirate ships. I can't keep a ship out of port for anything. this maybe harcoded into a VH campaign but it makes life difficult.

    2. Is their anything that can be modded to make throwing a lot of ladders on the walls and charging up them any harder. It seems to me that the first couple of units to do that should get shredded.

    3. I am still in shock from watching the AI do something exactly right at Inverness. CA should hire you today!

  19. #49
    Senior Member Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,461

    Default

    @Whacker: No offense taken at all. I fully intend to do this anyway. In fact the V1.13 linked to in my Sig is almost exactly that. Their are a few tweak in their to units that needed it post 2-hander/pike/shield fixes as most 2-handed swords and JHI where severely underpowered now. The odd tweak to Pikes/2-hander may still be made, but by and large that is fairly close to the the final bugs only version.

    @Chikenhawk. looks like it must be another copy and paste gremlin. Sorry about that, it's definitely 1 turn per year in the one I sent to bob the Insane though.

    How are sieges going, they too bloody now, or are they actually Okay?

    Also, what you described with Scotland should happen more. in effect if they don't have the forces to beat you they'll try to build up the forces to do so. Combined with changes to how defense is done (all in one place Rather than spread out so much), and you'll have a harder time, I've seen the Italian factions block every single pass in and out of northern Italy with forts full of full stacks even. Enjoy.

    p.s. we need a maniacal evil laugh emicon guys.

    @ The Teacher: I'm currently sending out test versions of my Quick Installer method for it. if that works then you and every other volunteers will get it ASAP via PM.

    1. A beset by a plague of pirate ships. I can't keep a ship out of port for anything. this maybe harcoded into a VH campaign but it makes life difficult.
    It sounds like you've got the defualt Descr_Strat File here. Give me a minute and i'll PM you a link for the download I sent Bob the Insane.

    I'll look into ladders, but my options are limited i'm afraid, the towers do make walls dangerous places to linger though so...

    Glad your still in shock:lagh4:.

    @ Chikenhawk. Clear some space in your PM folder, I can't send it because you have too many messages.
    Last edited by Carl; 03-20-2007 at 11:33.
    Find my ProblemFixer Purehere.

    This ProblemFixer fixes the following: 2-Hander bug, Pike Bug, Shield Bug, Chasing Routers, Cav not Charging, Formation Keeping Improved, Trait Bugs, and Ancillary Bugs.

    BETA Testers needed for the current version of RebuildProblemFixer. Thread here

  20. #50

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    open now

  21. #51
    Senior Member Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,461

    Default

    Thanks.

    2 extra point I forgot to list earlier.

    1. Pirate ships have taken a slight nerfing interms of overall power. they are still really good, but worse than before, so you don't need 2-1 odds anymore.

    2. the upkeep of ALL naval units has been dropped 100 florins, you can now have a decent sized navy without bankrupting yourself.

    p.s. What difficullty setting are you playing on Chikenhawk?
    Last edited by Carl; 03-20-2007 at 11:34.
    Find my ProblemFixer Purehere.

    This ProblemFixer fixes the following: 2-Hander bug, Pike Bug, Shield Bug, Chasing Routers, Cav not Charging, Formation Keeping Improved, Trait Bugs, and Ancillary Bugs.

    BETA Testers needed for the current version of RebuildProblemFixer. Thread here

  22. #52
    Member Member Bongaroo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    92

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    the anticipation is killing me!!! can't wait!

    oh, I've made it home so I'm ready to take a crack at this installer.

  23. #53
    Ricardus Insanusaum Member Bob the Insane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,911

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Right, downloaded and installed... All very easy...

    I started a game as the HRE (Hard Campaign, Very Hard Battles) as Chikenhawk started as England...

    Starting positions are familar and I see the year is showing and progressing 1 year at a time...

    Tried to blitz Bern... Lost horribly with Prince Henry cut down in the field... And and Rebels executed 92 prisoners!! They'll get their's!!!

    Allied with Venice (with miltary access), Hungry and France (marrying 5 charm French princess to lucky old Prince Leopold)...

    Settlements are hugely under developed and I note you get a lot more free spots on lower level city walls.

    All so good so far...
    Last edited by Bob the Insane; 03-09-2007 at 00:50.

  24. #54
    Senior Member Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,461

    Default

    Settlements are hugely under developed and I note you get a lot more free spots on lower level city walls.
    Settlement development level hasn't changed, but I doubled the number of free recruit slots, I did this in preparation for adding a smaller number to castle, this way all castle can have some free units, but have significantly less than before. The code isn't implemented yet for castle though. One of a few things still on my to-do list, But I'm more concerned about the diplomacy and sieges, which is why it's out to test. that and now I've sent it out 50 odd ideas have popped up.

    I'll get it out to everyone else now ASAP.

    p.s. LOL@Bern, how much damage did you do before you went down?

    Everyone should have recived their PM's with the link in now. If you haven't get in touch.

    If you want to become a tester, add your name, just because i'm sending it out dosen't mean i'll stop accepting testers.
    Last edited by Carl; 03-20-2007 at 11:35.
    Find my ProblemFixer Purehere.

    This ProblemFixer fixes the following: 2-Hander bug, Pike Bug, Shield Bug, Chasing Routers, Cav not Charging, Formation Keeping Improved, Trait Bugs, and Ancillary Bugs.

    BETA Testers needed for the current version of RebuildProblemFixer. Thread here

  25. #55

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Okay, installed it. Had to "fix" a couple installation things.

    My problem, not yours. My "good" .cfg file isn't the default one since I put 1.13 with my tweaks into its own folder, and that uses the good and separate .cfg. You grab the default one which isn't current in my case.

    I just played 34 turns of Turks with the old setup, so think I'll try them with 1.2 and see how badly it goes. I had 17 regions and was trying to slow myself down!

    Heh! You scum! I can't call an immediate jihad! :P

    Okay, time to put the imam to working converting the peasants to up his piety.

    Hmm, the Turks' horse archer basis is gutted. I don't agree with making the horse archers stable only for HA-based cultures. It means I am forced to build castles and stables to get what the Turk's army is based on in vanilla. Haven't checked yet, but if this applies to Russians and Iberians, you've decreased the variation, not increased it, in armies. Is this intent or oversight?
    Last edited by vonsch; 03-09-2007 at 02:34.

  26. #56
    Ricardus Insanusaum Member Bob the Insane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,911

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Battle of Bern...

    I had besieged the castle with two generals, one of the Prince Henry... The number where equal but their troops superior.

    I had two generals, two peasant archers and four Spear militia, they had two mailed knights, two peasant crossbowmen and four Sergeant Spearmen.

    By the end Prince Henry was dead and only a few battered survivors of there of the four spear militia unit along with most of the archers returned to Staufen with one general. The rebels in bern had suffered some minor casualties amoung their Sergeant Spearmen...

    It is now, 1094 and I have taken Florance (a fair easy task even with limited HRE forces in Italy) and Hamburg (a 10 year seige!). The Pope has agreed to an Alliance as have the Polish. My reputation is up to Trustworthy...

    The Untrustworthy Venetions have betrayed our alliance and besiged and blockaded Bologna.

    Most of the other factions have repuatations of either Mixed or Dubious with the sole exception of the Reliable Hungrians.

    Using toggle_fow I see that there are still a lot of grey areas out there...

    The Engish have taken Wales, the Spainish Bordeaux but that is it... The Danish look in real trouble as they are decimating their armies against Antwerpt but making no progress...

  27. #57

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Playing VH-VH

    Confirmed latest version will install and run. have not had a chance to do anything else. Continue to be thrilled with your work.

  28. #58

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    Yes, I have real issues with the missile cav changes. I see the Iberians still get jinettes from bull rings, but the Turks don't get turkomen (or was it sipahis?) from horse tracks. And Kazaks require stables in Russia too. This forces the player to build a lot of castles and avoid cities to play the cultures as they are designed in vanilla. I haven't checked the Egyptians or Poles yet.

    I also noticed at the high end stable there are only 2 kazaks available, versus 6 earlier. Seems wrongs. Jinettes are not that way. Once they hit 6 they stay 6. (Okay, in vanilla it's 4/6/6/6/6.)

    The signature units were designed in to be ubiquitous. Thus you can build jinettes, Turkomen/Sipahis, Kazaks, etc. from a lot of buildings you wouldn't expect to be able to (especially, but not only, castle walls). That encourages their use since they can be built and replenished in a lot of places. It creates a cheap throwaway, but effective, unit that both the player and AI are thus encouraged to use. Suddenly they are hard to find unless the player wants to reverse the ratio of cities to castles.

    I suspect this applies to other units of like nature, but am just reacting to the missile cav changes. Since I was just playing the Turks (and have played the Iberians a lot... and recently tried the Ruskies), I noticed.

    It's a show-stopper for me to run it "as is."

    I will swap to something infantry-based to test a bit. I suspect Turkey and Russia, at least, will be a LOT harder without those easily available units, especially considering they need to expand to be able to have a chance to survive the hordes.

    Broken Lances and Dismounted Broken Lances appear to be completely gone from Milan also, since they were wall-built units. I sure hope the above are unintended.

    Yeah, all the wall-built units are gone, which means you can't have cities (nor can the AI) marginally defended based on organic units without significant upteching. While it may make it a bit harder on the player, it also does on the AI. And it loses a lot of the diffferentiation among cultures. Also, removing all the wall units, and not adding back that production capacity, is going to significantly reduce overall output of units for everyone, I'd think that's undesireable.

    Same diminishing returns with increased barraks size with Genoese Crossbow Militia. Goes 0/0/6/6/4/2/2 in yours. It's 0/0/4/6/6/6/6 in vanilla. If the idea is to force the AI to build something else, that MAY work, but it also limits the player's choices of continuing to use an effective and efficient unit. And that's ignoring the parallel effect of removing wall units (replacing them with peasants IS removing them, in my book, I won't use peasants, they are meant to farm!), which also would normally be widely available to all factions in some form. The loss of the archer militia to Egypt and Russia, for one example, will dramatically affect their city defenses.


    While I like the idea (haven't tested yet) of the diplomacy changes, and perhaps even the tweaks seiges and funds available to the AI, not at all happy with changing the unit mix this much.


    Hmm, the tower changes look interesting. With the larger control radius, should be more shooting too. Yeah, that will hurt. Hmm, doing that AND boosting the sturdiness. Ouch. Higher ROF and more time exposed. Assaults on walls will definitely be more costly.
    Last edited by vonsch; 03-09-2007 at 03:56.

  29. #59
    Senior Member Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,461

    Default

    The Untrustworthy Venetions have betrayed our alliance and besieged and blockaded Bologna.

    Most of the other factions have repuatations of either Mixed or Dubious with the sole exception of the Reliable Hungrians.

    Using toggle_fow I see that there are still a lot of grey areas out there...

    The Engish have taken Wales, the Spainish Bordeaux but that is it... The Danish look in real trouble as they are decimating their armies against Antwerpt but making no progress...
    Yeah, I noticed the Venetians seem to be pretty bad, they've just done the same to me. I've checked the files and you need them at Very good or perfect relations with you and they need to have the same relations towards you (it seems based on the AI file that these are totally separate values). However I do tend to find alliances to be very strong in general. Venice breaking one just now is the first time I've seen it happen with either myself or the AI when the rep and relations have been good enough.

    Regarding the Rebels, It is a slight worry but it is in large part down to how poorly developed most provinces are at he start. Generally most factions lack much in the way of barracks and as a result it can take them considerable time and effort to get the appropriate barracks built to build semi-decent early units. In other words it's going to take several turns for the AI to put together stacks capable of attacking rebel settlements. On the other hand, once they get going they tend to really take off an take them all in short order.

    Regarding the Danes. Thats an annoying and unfixable bug in the army strength calculator. As far as the AI is concerned all those danish stacks where more powerful than the defending stack. However the strength is just (attack+defense)*number of men in the unit.

    This means the Flemish Pikes in that settlement are about 10 times more effective when the battle is actually fought than the strength calculator says they are. Their isn't much besides swapping the pikes for spears that I can do about that one I'm afraid. It needs a fix from CA.

    Heh! You scum! I can't call an immediate jihad! :P

    Okay, time to put the imam to working converting the peasants to up his piety.

    Hmm, the Turks' horse archer basis is gutted. I don't agree with making the horse archers stable only for HA-based cultures. It means I am forced to build castles and stables to get what the Turk's army is based on in vanilla. Haven't checked yet, but if this applies to Russians and Iberians, you've decreased the variation, not increased it, in armies. Is this intent or oversight?
    Woops, I increased the required Piety for Cardinals to make players put more effort in as I've had small groups of 3-4 priests all turn into cardinals within a couple of turns. By increasing it i hoped to increase the Piety required. To keep things fair i increased the required Jihad Piety but forgot to edit the Imams to have enough when starting. Thanks for spotting that Little bug.


    Regarding issues with HA.

    Bear in mind that ALL factions have this problem.

    If you want ANY unit in this game at all except peasants for any faction you have to invest in the appropriate line of Barracks/Stables/Archery Ranges. A few buildings, (guilds for example), can build other stuff too. But that's it.

    The reasons where 3 fold:

    1. The AI places a bigger importance on barracks buildings than walls. In vanilla this means it's often well behind you in recruitment stakes in vanilla as you will have gone for walls sooner and got better units sooner. It was actually Lusted that pointed this one out. His solution was to cut everything except aztecs and counquistidors from walls.

    2. As Lusted also pointed out. With all but the very best non-gunpowder available from city walls/castle walls their was no point to the barracks and stables lines as as just about every unit actually needed to beat the AI could be recruited from wall. This set of changes throws renew emphasis on the actual troop production buildings, and not just the walls that allow access to those buildings.

    3. Their was a tendency because of when things became available for anyone with a Stone walled castle to be able to get the best or second best f their heavy Cav/heavy infantry/HA. Byzantines with Dotti where the worst offenders. They could literally from the very start of the game get access to their very best HA rendering the lower levels Pointless. The same happened with DFK/Mounted Feudal Knights for Catholics however. Likewise the first 3 barrack levels where nearly pointless in cities as walls gave you spear and town militia anyway. Thats something else I've tried to correct by spreading out the different levels. That means you now need fortresses and Citadels for your elite and ultra elite troops, stone castles just give you the basic Pro troops these days.


    So yes it takes a lot of time and effort to get your HA up and running as Turks. But with the exception of basic spears and town militia, exactly the same is true of Heavy infantry, Heavy Cav, Light Cav, Foot Archers e.t.c for everyone else as well, so I would hope it would balance out in the long term as no one gets any upsides or downsides really. Add to that that most factions have a castle to begin with or a Motte and Bailey in conquering range that they can upgrade as soon as they capture it. so all told it should be about 5 turns after capturing to your basic HA. Not bad if you ask me. Especially when you consider it would take most factions a lot longer to get access to their best foot infantry.

    By veriaty I was partially talking about the way many factions have gained a number of units they only have in custom battles. On the flip side units that where two similar have had one unit cut. Coupled with the way the tech tree is re-arranged so as to make you build up to get your best units you will no longer see armies composed mostly of one or two diffrent units, (i.e. all Vardorti armies), you start having to settle for a mix of your best and your not so best units.

    On the other hand I am NOT an Islamic/Iberian faction expert. Thats why I wanted testers and I may well have missed some vital point in my explanation. If I have please feel free to criticize my argument and explain the flaws in it.

    The signature units were designed in to be ubiquitous. Thus you can build jinettes, Turkomen/Sipahis, Kazaks, etc. from a lot of buildings you wouldn't expect to be able to (especially, but not only, castle walls). That encourages their use since they can be built and replenished in a lot of places. It creates a cheap throwaway, but effective, unit that both the player and AI are thus encouraged to use.
    Thats the point of the changes actually, to STOP you using just he one or two units and actually makes your armies consist of more than 1 unit spam. For me no army should be composed of just a couple of units. I can happily live with pure HA/Heavy Cav running round. but I expect a verity of heavy Cav and HA in those armies, not 10 Byzantine Lancers and 10 Vardariotai.

    I also noticed at the high end stable there are only 2 kazaks available, versus 6 earlier. Seems wrongs. Jinettes are not that way. Once they hit 6 they stay 6. (Okay, in vanilla it's 4/6/6/6/6.)
    This is because their are replacments of better quality than the Kazaks available..

    To use Byzantines as an example. Byzantine Cav are better than Sythikon, so Byzantine Cav should now become the major unit produced, Sythikon are still needed as you need a backup and cheap Garrison. Vardariotai then become available. AT this Point Sythikon are now heavily outclassed and retraining aside aren't needed, Byzantine Cav should be taking over, whilst Vardariotai become the big boys now.

    It's also partly to really push the AI into recruiting good stacks too.

    Broken Lances and Dismounted Broken Lances appear to be completely gone from Milan also, since they were wall-built units. I sure hope the above are unintended.
    I'd have to check but it probably is intended. Their where a number of Italian mounted and dismounted units that where effectively identical to each other in stats, their simply wasn't any point to including any of these units for some of the factions as their was no difference and they thus duplicated the same tech tree position and role. For example when i added Dismounted Chivalric Knights to France, I found them conflicting with DFK and gave DFK the boot, they where duplicating a role without one coming along earlier than the other so their was no point to having both.

    Yeah, all the wall-built units are gone, which means you can't have cities (nor can the AI) marginally defended based on organic units without significant upteching. While it may make it a bit harder on the player, it also does on the AI. And it loses a lot of the differentiation among cultures. Also, removing all the wall units, and not adding back that production capacity, is going to significantly reduce overall output of units for everyone, I'd think that's undesirable.
    I have added most wall specific units back in BTW. However it's the feeling of both myself and Lusted who I've got ideas off that you should have a good reason to build barracks and work towards Fortresses and Citadels. Right now they aren't much use as everything comes from the walls. If you want defense for your cities your going to have to build up the military infrastructure. You can't have good troops construction abilities and still concentrate everything on your economy anymore. You have to make a decision. Leave the city with just peasants for defense, or build a few barracks levels and work on their ability to defend themselves.

    Bear in mind that Gunpowder adds a LOAD of city units, so whilst many units taper off at cities, others appear, and the Italians still have near castle quality Militia available. I tapered off the city missiles because a lot of people where saying that their was no point to Genose Crossbows as the militia variant could do it all far more easily. Now theirs a very good reason. You don't get enough to build Field armies out of it late on.
    Last edited by Carl; 03-20-2007 at 11:35.
    Find my ProblemFixer Purehere.

    This ProblemFixer fixes the following: 2-Hander bug, Pike Bug, Shield Bug, Chasing Routers, Cav not Charging, Formation Keeping Improved, Trait Bugs, and Ancillary Bugs.

    BETA Testers needed for the current version of RebuildProblemFixer. Thread here

  30. #60

    Default Re: BETA Testers needed for latest version of ProblemFixer

    I liked it better when the conquered areas kept producing the same units, it was not so faction dependent. I don't know what the new engine will let you do, but if it were possible to have large scale destruction of the military buildings but get back to jinnettes or scottish pikes when rebuilt it would improve the feel in my opinion.

    If buildings had to be rebuilt almost from scratch it would slow things down a lot for the player. it would also create some of the real problems of trying to pump out enough soldiers to ensure that things stayed conquered.

    Just my two cents on recruitment.

Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 12345612 ... 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