MTW-Redux Beta Released!

[Nagnar]

Hi again Axalon

For a multitude of reasons I don't like the Rebels dominating the seas in Redux, so I've done some fiddling around with unit_prod11 (mainly with ship costs pirate vs normal ships)
with the aim of getting the AI factions to dominate the seas with pirates just in fringe areas. Because of how the Rebels spam ships like crazy, (before any of my fiddling it'd be 10-20 turns before each sea region has at least 2-4 pirate ships and they'd just keep coming; unbeatable even for the player and the AI has absolutely no hope.)
But all I can achieve is rebels just taking longer to take over the seas. (Even when i reduced normal ship costs the AI produces way too few of them and no tradeships at all so they just get overwhelmed regardless)

Do you have any suggestions of what I could do?
(Ultimate goal being large AI faction fleets with good coverage, especially for factions like Italy and The Byzantines with the Rebel's pirate ships being in small number and only in fringe areas)

Nevermind:
I just removed all the rebel owned ships in the startpos, disallowed rebels from building longboats and dragonships and changed all the tradeships/galleys/dhows and pirategalleys/ships/warships to be only made by the papacy (so none are ever built).
Its a good enough solution i guess even though the AI factions still barely build any ships (except the Aragonese, wow thats more like it!) and there's no pirates to slow down/prevent absurd trade income.

[komnenos]

Hello everyone. which one of you prefer MTW than MTW2?

[Stazi]

Hello everyone. which one of you prefer MTW than MTW2?

Asking this question here?? Looks like you want to commit suicide but not brave enough to do it yourself.

[Axalon]

Hi all and Xmas folks,

Ok I’m back here at the Org and should be around for a few days anyways. I’ll start with Nagnar. Possibly, I’ll do multiple posts as to try to cover everything (and for general clarity)….

For a multitude of reasons I don't like the Rebels dominating the seas in Redux, so I've done some fiddling around with unit_prod11 (mainly with ship costs pirate vs normal ships)
with the aim of getting the AI factions to dominate the seas with pirates just in fringe areas.

Fair enough… Assuming that it is a campaign when they do dominate the seas… See below remarks.

Because of how the Rebels spam ships like crazy, (before any of my fiddling it'd be 10-20 turns before each sea region has at least 2-4 pirate ships and they'd just keep coming; unbeatable even for the player and the AI has absolutely no hope.) But all I can achieve is rebels just taking longer to take over the seas. (Even when i reduced normal ship costs the AI produces way too few of them and no tradeships at all so they just get overwhelmed regardless)

I probably should say something about this section/stuff in general as to kill whatever possible skewed impressions and misunderstandings derived from it – if any. Overall, I think you (like others before you) are way too hasty here to pass judgement on the supposed Redux AI-behaviour and circumstances on campmap – or so it seems.

I have few problems in seeing where you come from and I have seen similar scenarios as well. At times the AI of RXB1003 (and RXB1002 before it) is a bit too successful on the rebel-fleets for the game to be entertaining. Some campaigns certainly do end up like that (and when that happens it is very hard to reverse, and it takes time, but still possible), it is hard to control or to predict exactly whenever it might happen. There are several random aspects involved beyond the player and the faction played. However there are also the factors on the player-end that increases the possibility for these circumstances to materialize - like leaving the rebel-ports alone for too long, building a serious fleet too late, or not maintaining it properly etc. etc.

There is some truth to what you say, but only up to a point. Beyond that, you (and possibly others) fail to consider/grasp that Redux AI-behaviour is not static or can actually be expected to be static – perhaps other versions of MTW might be like that - but not Redux. I can, if you like, post up some screen(s) that show that beyond question – a ton of AI-ships floating around in the game with virtually no pirates anywhere, for instance – ultimately making your statement fall apart. There are plenty of such campaigns in Redux as well, what about them in your statement? Get my drift? The reality is more complex and diverse then your statement allows and because of that I feel obliged to point that out.

The point being here that the AI-behaviour and events and circumstances in Redux are ever changing from one campaign to the next. Rebel ships are no exception to this reality. The concept and circumstance might be special for Redux – I don’t know – but not one campaign are the same as the next and thus it is hard to do that reality justice whenever attempting to generalize over this stuff. I have tested Redux many, many times to know that beyond question. The results of - say 10 campaigns, some 50 turns for instance - will not be unison, but diverse, some campaigns might possibly support your statement while others will just kill it. There is truth to it, yet there is not. Anyway, you are neither the first, nor the last to make this kind of mistakes here on Redux - but that don’t mean that you can not learn from it or that you should strive to repeat it. Therefore to avoid all this fuss make sure too add “in my campaigns” the rebels do this and that etc. etc. Or some such. It does make things clearer for all, it does Redux more justice, and things are put in a more accurate light which is usually more desirable anyways. Just saying…

Do you have any suggestions of what I could do? [my emphasis] (Ultimate goal being large AI faction fleets with good coverage, especially for factions like Italy and The Byzantines with the Rebel's pirate ships being in small number and only in fringe areas)

Yeah, I might have a few ideas as this should not be that hard to solve fairly close to what you seem to be looking for. There are several things that could be done but I’ll give you the stuff that I think will create the most effect. Grab a GnomeEditor and open up fresh and clean copy of the RX-“CRUSADERS_UNIT_PROD11.TXT”-file...

1. Go down to the ships-section at the bottom and lower the costs (column 3) for all the ships you want on the seas by – say a 100 florins. Then increase the cost for the pirateships etc. etc. that you don’t want as much in the game – say 100 florins. Like this, warships 600-700 fl. etc. and pirateships 500-600 fl. etc. etc. Save a copy.

2. Open up that copy. Go to the building requirements - column 17 - and lower the requirements for all ships you want to be floating around in the game to "{ PORT, SHIPYARD1 }". Save another copy.

3. Open up that copy. Go to AI-build section… Column 15… This stuff…

"POVERTY_STRICKEN(0), DESPERATE_DEFENCE(0), CATHOLIC_EXPANSIONIST(0), CATHOLIC_NAVAL_EXPANSIONIST(0), CATHOLIC_TRADER(0), CATHOLIC_CRUSADER_TRADER(0), CATHOLIC_EXPANSIONIST_CRUSADER(0), CATHOLIC_DEFENSIVE_CRUSADER(0), POPE(0), CATHOLIC_DEFENSIVE(0), CATHOLIC_ISOLATIONIST(0), ORTHODOX_DEFENSIVE(0), ORTHODOX_EXPANSIONIST(0), ORTHODOX_STAGNANT(0), MUSLIM_PEACEFUL(0), MUSLIM_EXPANSIONIST(0), MUSLIM_DEVOUT(0), BARBARIAN_RAIDER(0), REBELS(4), CLOSE_TO_SUPPORT_LIMIT(0)"

Numbers to use (I don’t recommend you to use any others)… Replacing the zeroes (and the rebel 4)….

"4" = The AI will build large amounts of ships…
"3" = The AI will build clearly less then using a “4” but still sufficient numbers - if given time and oppourtunity…
"2" = The AI will build some amounts of ships, clearly less then assigned a 3, whenever it feels it needs them (and depending on how things look in the game, and available infrastructure and the actual possibility for it).
"1" = The AI will build some ships, when needed or it can actually afford them, but it is unlikely that they ever will be plenty in the game
"0" = The AI will not build any ships, this regardless of anything…
"8" = The AI will go on a ship-building frenzy… This is likely to wreck most faction-functionality as the AI can’t really handle too many ships at the same time; the support costs for ships are too great for it. Be advised, too many ships for any faction is likely too kill any such faction, long term. The AI can’t or won’t disband ships like you can or would as the player.

Overall, I suggest that you use “4” all over for all ships (ex. warship) you want to have in abundance in Redux. Other less important/popular ships can be assigned with a “3” or “2” all over (ex. Royal Warship). As for the hated pirateships you should be able to get what you (seemingly) want with a “2” or a “ 1” assigned all over. With “all over” I mean all the entries from POVERTY_STRICKEN(0) all the way to CLOSE_TO_SUPPORT_LIMIT(0). BTW, at least I, would not assign above “2” on either of those two particular entries… Otherwise, check “startpos”-folder and the “RX-classic”-file for specific AI-profiles to match accordingly. And, save another copy.

4. Optional, do various faction assignments and corrections… Open up that latest copy… Column 50… Assign and adjust factions as desired… Save a copy etc.

Well, I think all this will fix your ship-problems in Redux... Anyway, I have looked at the ships and the related circumstances for the future RXB1004 release and decided to make some changes due to these problems with ship-levels/frequency in the game as it is an old problem for me (on general terms). The “how to balance the pirates and AI-fleets just right” and more successfully (as well as is possible in general, that is). Anyway, I will probably reduce the number of possible ships for RXB1004 as ships like the “tradeship” or “tradegalley” etc. does present a loophole for the player that should not be there, I think. If players want fleets then they should pay as much as the AI does for it I think (many shipstats are purely cosmetic and have zero effect in reality, thus the actual distinction between ships are less then the stats would have us believe. I have discussed this many times at various points). Redux is still supposed to be tough after all…

If you (or abybody else) have suggestions and opinons on this stuff mentioned for RXB1004, by all means feel free to post it. It might be good stuff...

- A

[Axalon]

Some comments on Daigakus latest post as well…

Regarding gold/cash… You are basically making an old and classic point for me, regarding raw MTW and one of its flaws. The one that people/players are virtually swimming in florins in no time – even on expert-settings… I mean, you even start with some 4000(!) florins on expert-settings, having done nothing at all and this while the reduced prices (on everything) are in full effect. Both units and buildings are cheaper while you have more cash at your hands at the same time. The slow building and development pacing of raw MTW further accelerate the process of hording florins as our possibilities to spend them is reduced because of it - as we can not spend any cash on buildings and development as long as the current building/installation is not finished….

As a result people get ridiculously rich with little effort (this even without trade). One might wonder, "How can we then fail in such a game?" A game with such forgiving and favourable circumstances? That is not entirely easy to do actually. I would argue that the circumstances are then too forgiving and favourable to actually serve the game, instead I think it hurts it. I think a game needs at least a sporting chance of player-failure/loss somehow in order to actually be a game, an uncertainty as to what the outcome will be… If that uncertainty is virtually removed, because the circumstances are too favourable for the single player – then the outcome will no longer be uncertain, and then it will not be a game – by definition - but something that we can categorize as a process or sequence that we must work thru, which something very different - and nowhere as entertaining as an actual game, or so I believe. So… Making economics much tougher and harsher all over in Redux was an easy choice for me.

Regarding MTW-freakshows… As of MTW1, a bunch of personal traits and stuff was introduced into TW. Personally, I never truly saw the actual benefits of this, nor appreciated it, as long as it is random anyways - and if I could remove this element out of the game, I certainly would. As that is not possible (due to hardcoding), we instead get a constant and steady flow of freakish kings, princes and generals – virtually all the time - resulting in the common practice to kill off to most retarded specimens we get on our hands. I would hardly call that a successful game-element on general terms - the game would be better off without it, as it is just annoying to be forced to actually consider new possibilities and ways to rid yourself of the latest batch of drooling idiots etc. on your hands – when you should be focusing on the actual game and what happens there instead…

As for Redux and this crap, I have done what can be done on this (I think?), changing the most trait-names to be more neutral (and more agreeable to me) to lessen the impact of all this junk, as it is to me a very much unwanted and disliked element of MTW, and Redux. The game would have been five times better if you were forced to seriously fight all the troops you killed with actual armies you cared about - instead of using unwanted princes that are sent off to die anyways. It would have been a better game, to me anyways. And, I do these “suicide attacks” as well, but unlike you, all I care about is them princes dying, not how much damage I can create in the process (I still prefer serious battles/attacks for all such stuff - and I don’t want too, very possibly, waste a perfectly good assassin for an idiot... Obviously, that’s just me, but there you have it)…

Anyways, thanks for posting and sharing your experiences, as ever…

- A

[Axalon]

Hello everyone. which one of you prefer MTW than MTW2?

Salutations right back at you Kom. Anyway...?...

I assume this is intended to have something to do with mods and alterations as you would otherwise have little motive for posting such a question here? If true, let me first point out that I am hardly an expert on MTW2-modding as such or on what has been done for that engine (I heard of various stuff and seen screens, that’s all). Let me also point out that this is, as I see it, not a matter of existing content and results created by modders for either game-engine, MTW1 or MTW2 respectively. It is a matter of the actual engine however, and the traits and game-experiences it enables and delivers on general terms to the player. That is what all this is about, for me at least. And, that is also what ultimately dictates my response to your question posted here.

Now… I would not work with MTW1, if I did not prefer the game-experience delivered and enabled by that engine above the one delivered by the MTW2-engine. The game-experiences are very different, this regardless applied content, and neither one can actually duplicate or simulate the other convincingly (even if some people have certainly tried to do just that, it is not possible, because of the different traits that each engine has). Had I preferred the game-experience MTW2-engine delivers and enable – I would have worked on that engine instead. The reality is that I don’t, and so, I work on the MTW1-engine instead, because of the fact.

The reasons are plenty, one of the most obvious aspects is how respective engine handles battles - very different. Another is the general speed on how things are done on the campaign-map - also very different etc. etc. There is plenty of stuff that MTW2-engine enables that MTW1-engine lacks, and some of that I like, but on general terms all that is nowhere enough to compensate the stuff that the MTW1-engine handles better as I see it. I guess it all boils down to what we regard as truly important and what not.

Asking this question here?? Looks like you want to commit suicide but not brave enough to do it yourself.

Am I really that bad?

- A

[Axalon]

A happy new year folks... Some notes to self...


Redux & 2012
-----------------------------

Releases: RXB1003, RXB1003-VI and a hotfix...
Downloads RXB1003: 670
Downloads RXB1002: some 200-300 (prior to RXB1003)
Views: +20000-22000 (this thread)
Posts: +50 (this thread)

In reference to posts... 44 posts made prior the Org index-change in August. Overall 60% was mine. The TWC-counterpart generated 61 posts in 2012 - 16 posts made in August and beyond. I was inactive at the TWC as well for 2 months straight during that period. This is the 2nd time (first in 2010), the TWC- counterpart beats this thread in terms of generated posts. In further perspective, this very thread generated some 79 posts in 2011, and some 30 posts in 2010. So 2012 was better then 2010 but worse then 2011 in this regard. Considering actual releases I guess it all adds up somewhat.

Anyway, my inactivity here is one familiar and typical factor (as if my activity here was somehow ever needed to discuss or post about Redux?), as is the games age (10 years, more understandable), while clearly the "new" overall Org-index change by staff is yet another and new one. As I suspected it would be. The regrettable separation of "hosted mods" apart from all other MTW-stuff in 2012 (and everything else with it) did not do Redux any favours it seems - as activity here obviously and visibly took a blow somehow as a direct result. In 2012, people obviously visited this place and thread (which is great), but they did not post much (which is dull - and generally bad for Redux - as it needs posts to generate further interest and exposure to survive, as ever).

- A