do a scotland single player campaign and use 18 border horse + 2 artillery armies. the art is so u can siege castles and such. i took over all of western europe, north africa, british isles.
CA made a totally balanced game.![]()
![]()
do a scotland single player campaign and use 18 border horse + 2 artillery armies. the art is so u can siege castles and such. i took over all of western europe, north africa, british isles.
CA made a totally balanced game.![]()
![]()
Wow.....Large armies and a competent player can own AI. Seriously, it is not that impressive and what difficulty were you playing on in what turn?
"I do not know what I may appear to the world; but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me." - Issac Newton
Now try it with the shield fix.
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
LOL! Good call HoreTore. Even junk like town militia should provide stiff competition for border horses if their shields aren't holding them back, and that's saying nothing of actual spear units that are anti-cavalry specialists. Border horses lose to even spear militia a lot of the time, even when they get a perfect charge, and are quite outclassed by them in protracted melee - the anti-cavalry bonuses basically make them a horse-meat grinder.Originally Posted by HoreTore
Still remember my first shock with the shield fix - generals bodyguard getting slaughtered by a unit of italian spear militia...
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
Quite Horetore,
Shield fix is an absolute must.
But rather than Border horses why not try an all peasant army, that would also work without shield fix. Possibly better.
Such is life- Ned Kelly -his last words just before he was hanged.
Amen.Originally Posted by Razor1952
Lusted was saying something about CA basically reverting the units to their pre-testing stats for the 1.2 patch, due to shields being fixed now. Apparently they tested the units in the engine w/ the shield bug (of course, since it wasn't discovered until months later), and ended up tweaking stats as a result. It should be interesting to see just how different, and in what way, the various unit stats end up now. I'm thinking it's likely we'll end up with even better dynamics than the shield fix is currently giving, since the unit stats were bent around the then-unknown problem to at least some extent. If everything in the combat engine runs correctly now, it seems safe to assume that things will improve a lot - it's likely a good amount of careful work went into CAs initial plotting of the unit stats, and that work should pay off bigtime with those initial plans being reinstated fully now.
Coincidentally we may also end up with better AI recruitment as a result - it's entirely possible the tweaks they applied to balance the units threw off the AI's perception of what value each one has, so the reversion to original stats may actually fix up AI's perception of unit values as well.
No i didn't, i was most likely referring to mods having to revert their stats once 1.2 comes out. My observations with the shield bug workaround show the game to be pretty well balanced, and im guessing CA will not adjust stats too much.Lusted was saying something about CA basically reverting the units to their pre-testing stats for the 1.2 patch, due to shields being fixed now.
Creator of:
Lands to Conquer Gold for Medieval II: Kingdoms
I swear I read it somewhere, and definitely not about mods. Maybe I'm falsely attributing the comments to you when they were someone else's. Oh well, the world may never know.Originally Posted by Lusted
Well i don't know what CA is doing in regards to unit stats since the shield bug has been fixed, but i don't think they've done anything major.
Creator of:
Lands to Conquer Gold for Medieval II: Kingdoms
Bookmarks