SOD Warlords - Suggestions & Discussions Thread

Users who are viewing this thread

wouldn't happen as a bow is a two handed weapon.

technically though some missile units are shielded when firing, but only from the back (I think this works) an unequipped shield actually absorbs damage. So with certain units (like Marinian crossbowmen) they may be shielded from the back. I have seen it work with my character. We need to give them a 'spin load' order that makes them turn their back to the enemy when loading :grin:
 
Isnt there a way to make them deploy their shields and crouch when reloading? then again warband is retarded with LoS and it would probably just blind your archers  :cry:
 
You couldn't hold a shield and reload because of crossbow as a two hand weapon. there is a pavisse deployable shield mod comp if that is whwat you are thinking of.
 
LibSpit said:
wouldn't happen as a bow is a two handed weapon.

technically though some missile units are shielded when firing, but only from the back (I think this works) an unequipped shield actually absorbs damage. So with certain units (like Marinian crossbowmen) they may be shielded from the back. I have seen it work with my character. We need to give them a 'spin load' order that makes them turn their back to the enemy when loading :grin:
The NPCs don't get any use of the shield on their back, if I remember correctly. The game does simulate it for the player, however, magically the arrow will partially damage you through a shield on your back (it acts as increased armor, not a thing that absorbs damage on it's own health pool). Basically, I believe, it adds the shield's Resistance value to your armor, if you are shot at the back portion of your torso hitbox. For large or small shields, it's the same effect... mods that have bucklers with really high resistance are really great back protectors...

The Villanese noble troops occasionally have shields. In general, the AI is better in melee if it has a shield handy. Since they use a one-hand sword anyway, they only use three slots (most archers do, though). Shields are surprisingly useful, for absorbing arrows, to taking couched lances (as a shield will always fully absorb the attack that breaks it)...
 
LibSpit said:
You couldn't hold a shield and reload because of crossbow as a two hand weapon. there is a pavisse deployable shield mod comp if that is whwat you are thinking of.

Yes i meant the troop would deploy the shield and take cover behind it while they reload. Ive never really used a mod with that feature but i envisioned the shield as a prop the troop could deploy so crossbows being two handed wouldnt be an issue.
 
I think it works for the player. The AI is too silly to understand, if it figures out the prop is blocking its shots, it will move to the side and then proceed to stay there.

The missile troops are like Napolean-era line infantry that just shoot reload shoot etc etc
 
Yeah i thought so as well , siege are bad enough so having an object would probably make archers behave like infantry.
 
Hi guys, I'm glad this great mod is still in development, I can't wait to play the newest version :wink:.
By the way I have a question that bothers me quite long time. Let's say I've got a weapon(e.g. an Axe) which is described as 'Thrown/One-handed', so how can I use it as one-handed, because all what I can do is to throw it?
 
AizenSousuke said:
Hi guys, I'm glad this great mod is still in development, I can't wait to play the newest version :wink:.
By the way I have a question that bothers me quite long time. Let's say I've got a weapon(e.g. an Axe) which is described as 'Thrown/One-handed', so how can I use it as one-handed, because all what I can do is to throw it?
X, it switches it to a one hander, and press it to switch it back.
 
I was wondering if you could add some siege options. Here are some examples:

-Poison a town/castle's water supply. Success means X amount of soldiers/people get "wounded"/sick or killed, meaning less defenders. You can do it once a day, but it only works maybe 2-4 times. Afterward the game should tell you "The garrison has caught onto this, and it won't work anymore as they're testing the water on animals first for the poison." to prevent you from just poisoning everyone to death. A healthy population with a hospital reduces the effect of this option.

- Hurl carcass into town/castle. You'll need to have some cows following you for this option, and nothing happens initially. But it will sicken the town/castle defenders, meaning X amount of soldiers will be "wounded" or killed after X amount of days. A town with a healthy population and upgrades such as a hospital will either be resistant or outright immune to this, as opposed to a town that has a sickly population. A spy can tell you if the town has such upgrades so you can decide if this option is worth it. The wounded get better after a few days, so you should use this to soften them up before you assault.

-Bribe a guard to open a gate. How well this works depends first on your relationship with the faction, and secondly, how well the town likes you (start buying them booze in the tavern and doing guildmaster quests!) The lower your faction relationship, the higher the cost, although if it's really low, say -50 or less, this option won't appear (they won't like you killing their kin, even if they like you personally). Your relationship with the town will lower the cost if the first factor allows this option. The base cost for this option should also be really high, say 50,000-100,000.

If successful, when you assault the town, you fight on the second siege map, the one you normally go to where you kill some of the town defenders. While the defenders still have their numbers, you also don't have to climb a ladder or wait for a siege tower, so it'll be harder for them to defend against your army.

- When besieging a town/castle, a third option appears (instead of just "surrender" or "assault them"). The defenders will wait X amount of days for a relief force to show up. If no one comes, they'll leave the castle/town peacefully, and the attackers will gain control of it. The factors for this will be how far away the fort is from the faction's main lands, and the ratio of attackers to defenders. So if you're being besieged by a marshal-led force of 1500 men, and you only have 150 to defend with, it'll be very favorable to the defenders to let them have the fort without the fight that normally occurs (though don't stick around too long, or they'll attack you normally), and the attackers don't have to sacrifice their men to take it.

This will also present an interesting scenario for both players and NPC empires, especially if you're at war on multiple fronts. Do you send a relief army out to the eastern frontier which will take days to reach? Or do you abandon it in favor of buffering your southern and western borders first against the three empires attacking you there? A fort that's in the far outskirts of your empire and isn't of much strategic value due to its distance may not be worth losing men over. But as you start to lose lands and they creep closer to your main towns/castles, suddenly the attackers are approaching wealthy towns that you could reach within a couple of hours with a relief army, and now they face a similar situation, if defending a castle/town far from their lands is worth the hassle.

This may also help in that it may help influence where you're more likely to get attacked. If they're dumb enough to assault a town/village that's in the middle of your empire, they deserve the beating you're going to give them.  But on the other hand, the towns/castles/villages that are right on their borders will be very tempting, and if you're at war on multiple fronts, you'll be hard pressed to defend every area, so some areas will seesaw back and forth, unless they really ticked you off, and you conquer all of their lands just to wipe them out, at the expense of the other nations attacking your other areas.

There should be options to turn this off if you want your tiny garrison to fight to the death against overwhelming odds. But it adds a nice option in case you don't want to lose them and have them retreat to a more defensible position.

Just some ideas I had. Hopefully they won't be too difficult to implement.
 
Ash45 said:
I was wondering if you could add some siege options. Here are some examples:

-Poison a town/castle's water supply. Success means X amount of soldiers/people get "wounded"/sick or killed, meaning less defenders. You can do it once a day, but it only works maybe 2-4 times. Afterward the game should tell you "The garrison has caught onto this, and it won't work anymore as they're testing the water on animals first for the poison." to prevent you from just poisoning everyone to death. A healthy population with a hospital reduces the effect of this option.

- Hurl carcass into town/castle. You'll need to have some cows following you for this option, and nothing happens initially. But it will sicken the town/castle defenders, meaning X amount of soldiers will be "wounded" or killed after X amount of days. A town with a healthy population and upgrades such as a hospital will either be resistant or outright immune to this, as opposed to a town that has a sickly population. A spy can tell you if the town has such upgrades so you can decide if this option is worth it. The wounded get better after a few days, so you should use this to soften them up before you assault.

-Bribe a guard to open a gate. How well this works depends first on your relationship with the faction, and secondly, how well the town likes you (start buying them booze in the tavern and doing guildmaster quests!) The lower your faction relationship, the higher the cost, although if it's really low, say -50 or less, this option won't appear (they won't like you killing their kin, even if they like you personally). Your relationship with the town will lower the cost if the first factor allows this option. The base cost for this option should also be really high, say 50,000-100,000.

If successful, when you assault the town, you fight on the second siege map, the one you normally go to where you kill some of the town defenders. While the defenders still have their numbers, you also don't have to climb a ladder or wait for a siege tower, so it'll be harder for them to defend against your army.

- When besieging a town/castle, a third option appears (instead of just "surrender" or "assault them"). The defenders will wait X amount of days for a relief force to show up. If no one comes, they'll leave the castle/town peacefully, and the attackers will gain control of it. The factors for this will be how far away the fort is from the faction's main lands, and the ratio of attackers to defenders. So if you're being besieged by a marshal-led force of 1500 men, and you only have 150 to defend with, it'll be very favorable to the defenders to let them have the fort without the fight that normally occurs (though don't stick around too long, or they'll attack you normally), and the attackers don't have to sacrifice their men to take it.

This will also present an interesting scenario for both players and NPC empires, especially if you're at war on multiple fronts. Do you send a relief army out to the eastern frontier which will take days to reach? Or do you abandon it in favor of buffering your southern and western borders first against the three empires attacking you there? A fort that's in the far outskirts of your empire and isn't of much strategic value due to its distance may not be worth losing men over. But as you start to lose lands and they creep closer to your main towns/castles, suddenly the attackers are approaching wealthy towns that you could reach within a couple of hours with a relief army, and now they face a similar situation, if defending a castle/town far from their lands is worth the hassle.

This may also help in that it may help influence where you're more likely to get attacked. If they're dumb enough to assault a town/village that's in the middle of your empire, they deserve the beating you're going to give them.  But on the other hand, the towns/castles/villages that are right on their borders will be very tempting, and if you're at war on multiple fronts, you'll be hard pressed to defend every area, so some areas will seesaw back and forth, unless they really ticked you off, and you conquer all of their lands just to wipe them out, at the expense of the other nations attacking your other areas.

There should be options to turn this off if you want your tiny garrison to fight to the death against overwhelming odds. But it adds a nice option in case you don't want to lose them and have them retreat to a more defensible position.

Just some ideas I had. Hopefully they won't be too difficult to implement.
Don't forget that they don't have good medical care back then.
 
Make lords less pissy when I award fiefs to lords that don't have any? I'm currently stomping the vaegerians into paste and only have three lords two hired beyond the land and a third that came from sultanate and in order to keep the fiefs managed well and build improvements in a timely manner I'm keeping them (and getting a massive head ache in the process of managing them as well lol) till the vaegerians are gone and I can start /recruting hiring lords.

Make it easier to track which villages have bandits in them would be a big help.
 
Switch places of a few factions.

I.E. The Antarians wear full metal armours and they are in the snow? They'd freeze to death! Haha, I would put them like this:

Snowy areas: Nords (West) Vaegirs (Centre) Zerrikanian (East)
Immediately under the snowy areas: Antarian and Swadian
Between the former 2 empires and the desert: Aden, Villianese, Marinian, Rhodoks
Desert: Sarranid, Khergit, x*

I dislike the Imperials a lot. In my mind I pretend that Aden, Villianese, Marinian and Rhodoks used to be parts of the Imperial Empire and then they just divided into 4 kingdoms because of politics and religion! I would love to see them being replaced by a Chinojapanokorean empire at the easternmost part of the map, stretching from the beginning of the desert to the beginning of the steppes. But that's just my daydreaming. The position swapping though is just to get closer to reality.

 
Hey, I have a slight problem. How do i hire the guy who handles the treasury? It asked me if i wanted to earlier but i said no. How do i re-Hire him. Please help  :sad:
 
If you have a minister, try talking to him, if it is the minister you don't have, then I really don't know, never been in that situation.

If you have a mnister but don't have the option, try making one of your companions the Minister.
 
Back
Top Bottom