Attila Patches, Hotfixes, Betas and Such (B&B hotfix released)

[Hooahguy]

I guess the idea is that they should be wiping out way more settlements than they are as of now. They really are playing on the whole "bringer of the apocalypse" thing.

Looking forwards to more general units for the Long Beards factions. They were woefully underpowered.

[Bramborough]

Maybe. My general experience with Huns over two campaigns has been that they enter your territory to raid, stay in 2-3 stack groups (often more) making them difficult to attack, and are more than happy to swoop in on an undefended minor settlement within range and raze it. What I haven't seen them do (on Normal difficulty) is lay siege to a walled city, or attack a full-army-stack-defended town. One would think that's why they lug around all those onagers....

[Slaists]

Maybe. My general experience with Huns over two campaigns has been that they enter your territory to raid, stay in 2-3 stack groups (often more) making them difficult to attack, and are more than happy to swoop in on an undefended minor settlement within range and raze it. What I haven't seen them do (on Normal difficulty) is lay siege to a walled city, or attack a full-army-stack-defended town. One would think that's why they lug around all those onagers....

That's pretty much how I play with Huns, LOL.

I do lug a single onager in my horse archer armies so I can autoresolve against garrison-only defended walled settlements.

By the way, that previous pic I posed: with a burnt down AI fort. It seems, this bug applies to square-shape forts, not the barbarian round ones. If I bring arty to a battle with barbarians: they do sally out.

Incidentally, it is much easier to burn down the square-form fors. The barbarian ones seems sturdier (by the virtue of having more wall sections so fire is limited to a smaller area).

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I guess the idea is that they should be wiping out way more settlements than they are as of now. They really are playing on the whole "bringer of the apocalypse" thing.

Looking forwards to more general units for the Long Beards factions. They were woefully underpowered.

On medium campaign difficulty I have seen the Huns raze every settlement they attacked bar two.

The thing is, razing a settlement for a Horde is largely pointless unless you just want to destroy the enemy faction because, ultimately, it's easier to take and convert that to recolonise all that blasted land. Also - Razed settlements can't be raided for more loot later.

Finally it's worth pointing out that Attila only did this ONCE that we know of, whilst he devastated many cities he only razed one to the ground, arguably the Germanic Hordes were more destructive, irrc Alaric of the Visgoths destroyed Corinth such that it had to be refounded.

I'd much rather razing a settlement was this horrific thing that happened occasionally and was really devastating rather than knowing that if you lose to the Huns everyone will die - because that's what happens, unless the Huns have been (temporarily) knocked down to their last stack and think they need cash.

[Slaists]

Well, for Huns, razing settlements makes a lot of sense. Of course, it would be better for them to sack and then raze on the same turn. I do it all the time myself (playing as Huns). For one, in razed areas, settlements do not impede army movements. Second, there are no new enemy troops being raised in razed areas. Third, if Huns are playing the subjugation game, you need to get the target faction down to 1 settlement before you can subjugate them.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Well, for Huns, razing settlements makes a lot of sense. Of course, it would be better for them to sack and then raze on the same turn. I do it all the time myself (playing as Huns). For one, in razed areas, settlements do not impede army movements. Second, there are no new enemy troops being raised in razed areas. Third, if Huns are playing the subjugation game, you need to get the target faction down to 1 settlement before you can subjugate them.

I would argue it would be better for them to sack both settlements in a province, pocket the cash and then attack the walled city and sack that. This will pretty much guarantee a rebellion, which will then take one of the the settlements, and then the Huns can subjugate the rebel faction.

From the point of view of the WRE player it just means you station big armies in Illyria and Dacia and fight those sieges tooth and nail. In fact the way the Hunnic AI works means that without the script to preserve it the player would beat the faction to death because they're such a menace.

In fact, all the Hords have this problem, the "Great Migration" ended around 402 in my game after the Hordes beat themselves to death against my legions. The dangerous hordes are the ones that stay "friendly" and wander around casually raiding as they present a dilemma about whether to start a war with them or not.

[Slaists]

For those friendly hordes: an easy way to deal with them is to grant them a border region when they wander in. That way you get rid of the horde (and get an ally) and reduce your corruption a bit too.

As to that sack + wait for a rebellion: it usually takes too much time (the horde needs to keep moving in order to stay ahead of the non-stop hate entourage following it) + the other AI's shadowing Hun stacks (the player's stacks) tend to destroy the rebels before they have a chance to take anything.

[Hooahguy]

Source

Hey all,


We’ve been listening to your thoughts on the Blood & Burning pack, so we’ve spent the last few weeks re-engineering it for greater impact (yes, that does mean buckets more claret). This hotfix is live now.

There’s a bunch of changes which we hope you’ll like, in particular the much wider range of combat animations which result in copious spillage. Blood decals now appear on all terrain types and they stick around longer, too. You can find the full list of improvements below.

Incidentally, you may notice some subtle changes to the mod manager in the ATTILA Launcher. This is because we’re preparing the ground for the release of the ATTILA Assembly Kit. It’s still in the oven but it’s nearly done, so stay tuned for imminent news!


Here’s what the Blood & Burning update includes:

Added blood effects to over 140 more death and wounding animations.

With graphics settings above performance/low, decapitations are now more frequent during battles.

Improved blood effects in battles, made blood more visible and in some instances, spurts last longer.

Added 14 more decapitation/dismemberment animations in battles.

Blood will now spurt from the correct location when agents are killed on the Campaign map.

Blood will now show on top of snow.

Improved framerate when the camera is close to burning people on the battlefield.

Increased the amount of vomiting when an army is suffering from sea sickness or plague.

Greater frequency of gory animated event pictures.

Blood decals will now remain longer on units and on the ground during battles.

Improved blood effects from decapitation and dismemberment on the Campaign map after limbs/heads are severed.

Units with seasickness on transport ships will now vomit.

Units will no longer play two death animations in some cases when set alight by flaming arrows on the Battlefield.
Fixed a couple of instances where units’ weapons changed while they vomited.


Other improvements:

Local Network/LAN mode on Mac connectivity has been improved.

Zooming into the family tree while selecting a target for a political intrigue no longer lets the player select invalid targets.

Removed precursor weapons from Germanic Levy and Mercenary Saxon Spears.

Fixed a rare save game crash on Mac versions.

Improved shadows on the Campaign map on Mac.

Fixed a rare crash in the End Turn cycle during Campaigns on Mac.

[easytarget]

So, haven't seen much discussion about future patches, has this one been abandoned already?