Requesting permission to modify/update A New Dawn

Slawek56703 said:

Ohh thank you for answer i appreciate this and i tracking this thread too to see what's going on but i have yet unanswered tweaks considering units and some unused items by them for you when i was lurking in files

- Berserker units are naked they have thier armor but they dont use him . Thier armor is starting with word "Berserker" if u find that please give them thier unused armor

-Berserker units are in more than one faction can rest of factions except nords have thier berserker's naked or weaker i think only Nords should have TRUE berserker units with proper armor in thier faction.

-Rhodock faction have two cavalry unit's can u check them and maybe rename them and make them on foot instead of cavalry units ?
It seems not fit for this faction to have cavalry units i tell u one which trp_mounted_javelineer and trp_horse_crossbowman

-Veagir Crown item (1448 in items.txt) is unused i suggest to give this crown to Veagir King Emperor Yaroglek . This item is little bugged becouse it dont have set flags ewentually use Morg's editor or something.

-trp_celestial_master dont have helm but after checking in Morg's Tool he have set flag telling he has helm . he can use khergit_war_mask2, khergit_war_mask3 like Spirit Champion

-Pretenders have set armor but when they join player they use only thier dress instead of appropriate armor please fix this

Click to expand...

I think you are looking at the Crazed Berserker units, which wear no armor.  The regular Berserkers, in my game at least, wear their armor and I'm having no issues, maybe double check that they aren't Crazed Berserkers and let me know. Also yes, other armies can have Nord troops in their armies.  If a lord defected or they control a few villages from Nords or even they rescued a few then they can have them in their ranks.  Morale penalties for being at war still apply to the computer though so those Nord troops can cause morale issues with the cpu just like they do you.

I'll double check the other troops and see if they are using equipment correctly as soon as I get a chance.

lonewolf3135 said:

chronic1484 said:

Accuracy on bows should be working correctly now.  Just curious, were crossbows affected as well?  Never really used them so have no clue what their accuracy should be like.

Click to expand...

Oh god yes, crossbows are pretty much useless with how inaccurate they are in New Dawn. I personally like using a crossbow in the beginning of the game as I do not have to put in points to power draw and I can take a pot shot in the beginning of a battle or while doing a siege.

Also thank you for this update. I love this mod and enjoy seeing some improvements done to it!

Click to expand...

I'll see what I can do, bows still aren't perfect yet by far but you can kind of work with what I've done until a more permanent solution is found.  I'll try the same with XBows.  Right now the biggest problem with accuracy is directly linked to the engine coding and not a lot I can do about it, it seems TaleWorlds set the engine to apply a small accuracy penalty for each point of base damage (the bow's damage not counting arrows) which causes a big problem in mods like this that up damage.  You should see some small change already where I edited the code that was in the mod to set everyone's accuracy from 80% back to 100% but you'll notice bows have a little extra after my tweaks.  The only thing the accuracy on a weapon means is MAX accuracy, which turns out you need Power Draw requirement +3ish and a few hundred profs to see.  After you take damage (even one point the way it is working right now) you're accuracy will drop to around 90% (of YOUR max accuracy) and keep slowly dropping until you die, where it will be around 40%.  I was able to lessen the impact of accuracy dropping mainly by lowering bow damage and putting that missing damage on arrows.  All bows are -15 and all arrows are +15.  The difference is very small, but it IS there, trust me I spent 3-4 hours screen capping then compared screenshots of reticule sizes after making various tweaks and checking to see if equipment etc. had any impact.  I'm hoping to find something a little more.... shall we say elegant... before it is over and done with but take it as it comes so they say. 

The one weapon set I can't do anything about will be throwing weapons, seems there isn't really anything that can be done to increase their accuracy, if there is even a problem (again haven't used throwing weapons either so not sure) with it in the first place.

I think you are looking at the Crazed Berserker units, which wear no armor.  The regular Berserkers, in my game at least, wear their armor and I'm having no issues, maybe double check that they aren't Crazed Berserkers and let me know. Also yes, other armies can have Nord troops in their armies.  If a lord defected or they control a few villages from Nords or even they rescued a few then they can have them in their ranks.  Morale penalties for being at war still apply to the computer though so those Nord troops can cause morale issues with the cpu just like they do you.

Click to expand...

Yes my mistake  Crazed Berserkers im sorry i confused you

Crazed berserkers are naked they have armor in files that they dont use now.

How are other mods like Persino and PoP handle bows? Bows are very powerful in those mods and they work very well.

Thanks Chronic I will try it later when I'm home from work 

Hapuga said:

How are other mods like Persino and PoP handle bows? Bows are very powerful in those mods and they work very well.

Click to expand...

You actually read my mind, I'm playing through PoP now to see if I can get any ideas.  From what I can see so far though none of the bows even come close to doing the level of damage (PoP 30-32 dmg max so far, New Dawn a couple push nearly 70+) in New Dawn, and that's where the problem is from what I've read/gathered.  The engine penalizes accuracy for each point of damage the bow does, if the damage on these is getting boosted through scripts on top of them being high damage to begin with I really don't see a way to fully implement  an accuracy fix that would work perfectly.  I'm going to look into reworking the bows etc. completely again and in a more stable fashion with accuracy set back to their default values but it might be a bit before I figure out an decent solution.  I also don't see a way (at least not a good/stable way) to take out the accuracy fall off as you take damage, at least not without re-writing every bit of the code which I just don't have time to do even if I did go through teaching myself over the next couple weeks. (I've already picked up quite a bit, but not writing my own lines just yet)  This is kind of the reason I want to make initial accuracy higher and lessen the accuracy penalty from taking damage, then we can leave the old system in place as a simulation of your character becoming less effective in combat due to injuries.  This would also push players who wanted to be archers to actually avoid combat and damage since you would have to remain fairly "healthy" in order to make any shots that count.  The way it works now is actually very close to the way I want it to work when I'm not using a massive shortcut, I just want to reduce how much you lose off that first point of damage.  I've already managed to reduce the "crosshairs" to about 65% of the original size but I want to reduce that even further to be sure.  If I run into anything in PoP I'll try mimicking their code and see what happens, should it work out that there is something I can use, I'll definitely put it in and let you guys have a crack at the results.

Hmm I see. So here's a question. Perhaps instead of trying to tweak the damage we can tweak the accuracy? For example, have you tried setting accuracy above 100%? Such that if the bow accuracy is 100% and bow damage is 50, but you hit target chance is actually 50% assuming Gaussian Distribution, would setting bow accuracy to 150% Affect your accurately positively? Is it a linear curve?

Alternatively, is it possible to provide custom distrbution of points for skills? Such that, for example, for every point spent in bows and xbows, you get, lets say, 5 times more points? Such that, for example, if you have 5 points to spend, and your archery is 75 and your swords is 75 (no penalty), if you put 5 points in swords you will get 80, but if you put 5 points in bows you get 100?

Hapuga said:

Hmm I see. So here's a question. Perhaps instead of trying to tweak the damage we can tweak the accuracy? For example, have you tried setting accuracy above 100%? Such that if the bow accuracy is 100% and bow damage is 50, but you hit target chance is actually 50% assuming Gaussian Distribution, would setting bow accuracy to 150% Affect your accurately positively? Is it a linear curve?

Alternatively, is it possible to provide custom distrbution of points for skills? Such that, for example, for every point spent in bows and xbows, you get, lets say, 5 times more points? Such that, for example, if you have 5 points to spend, and your archery is 75 and your swords is 75 (no penalty), if you put 5 points in swords you will get 80, but if you put 5 points in bows you get 100?

Click to expand...

There is no way I know of to alter skill points distributed, I'll double check this to make sure in a bit but I'm pretty sure that's once again in the engine.  I could set the bows to 150% accuracy or give bow very high accuracy (150 instead of 98 for example on the bow's stats) but this creates whole new problem....  The engine doesn't just give these changes to the player.  Every bot on the field using bows/xbows now becomes a super sniper that can hit a gnat in the **** while riding a horse, shooting backwards from across the map.  Basically go fight Kolkar, now imagine pretty much every archer on the field having that accuracy, I'm sure you can see the possible issues with a fix like that but let me know if you have a different opinion.  I'm pretty decent at coming up with workarounds and solutions so I'm fairly confident I'll come up with something before it's over with but yeah, the accuracy issue is for sure going to be the biggest challenge so far in terms of fixes.

I honestly don't see how DW was planning to address this, even with a slider.  To break it down the script only contains 2 references to accuracy, the problem is somewhere in HOW one of those references is used.  Below are the lines of code concerning accuracy, directly from .py files.

agent_set_damage_modifier, ":script_param_1", "$g_damage_multiplier"),
(assign, ":var_8", "$g_damage_multiplier"),
(val_mul, ":var_8", 9),
(val_div, ":var_8", 10),
(agent_set_ranged_damage_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":var_8"),
(agent_set_accuracy_modifier, ":script_param_1", 100),
(try_begin),
(try_begin),
(eq, ":value", "fac_player_supporters_faction"),
(faction_slot_eq, "fac_player_supporters_faction", slot_faction_state, 0),
(eq, ":value_2", "fac_commoners"),
(assign, ":value_2", ":value"),
(try_end),
(eq, ":value_2", ":value"),
(is_between, ":value_2", "fac_player_supporters_faction", "fac_kingdoms_end"),
(try_begin),
(agent_is_human, ":script_param_1"),
(faction_get_slot, ":value_23", ":value", 23),
(val_add, ":value_23", "$g_damage_multiplier"),
(agent_set_damage_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),
(faction_get_slot, ":value_23", ":value", 24),
(val_add, ":value_23", "$g_damage_multiplier"),
(val_sub, ":value_23", 10),
(agent_set_ranged_damage_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),
(faction_get_slot, ":value_23", ":value", 27),
(val_add, ":value_23", "$g_damage_multiplier"),
(val_sub, ":value_23", 20),
(agent_set_accuracy_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),
(agent_set_reload_speed_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),
(faction_get_slot, ":value_23", ":value", 25),
(store_agent_hit_points, ":agent_hit_points_script_param_1_1", ":script_param_1", 1),
(val_add, ":agent_hit_points_script_param_1_1", ":value_23"),
(agent_set_max_hit_points, ":script_param_1", ":agent_hit_points_script_param_1_1", 1),
(else_try),
(faction_get_slot, ":value_23", ":value", 26),
(val_add, ":value_23", 100),
(agent_set_speed_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),
(agent_set_max_hit_points, ":script_param_1", ":value_23", 0),
(agent_get_rider, ":rider_script_param_1", ":script_param_1"),
(agent_set_horse_speed_factor, ":rider_script_param_1", ":value_23"),
(try_end),

The first line of code is what sets your accuracy (in %) at the start of battle.  Initially the number value on that line was 80, which means the script was only allowing you to use 80% of your characters actual accuracy, I set it to 100 as the initial adjustment.  Below that line, in the same group of code that has the 2nd accuracy parameter you'll notice it has several lines that set up modifiers.  That 2nd accuracy adjustment is, from what I can tell, the one that kicks in once you take damage, and/or sets your accuracy based off what you have the damage multiplier set to in the mod options.  Through searching you can find that the value of "value_23" is set to 80 (the same as the initial line was before I changed it) when the accuracy string uses it.  Here is where it gets fun though, no matter what I do to that line (or any other in that group) NOTHING changes the hit you take to accuracy after the first 1 HP of damage you take.  I can boost it to the max of 1000% accuracy, I'll start the battle with the default accuracy working correctly (100% of bow+prof. from 1st setting) and take 1 HP damage (should start running from 2nd string) bam right back where we started, no change in reticule size at all.  You can actually change out the "value_23" in that group for pretty much any valid number you want up to 1000% and it has absolutely no affect on anything that I can see what so ever.  I've went through the script and found the assigned values for the tokens and nothing looks out of place, it uses the exact numbers I would use if I was setting the value manually.  And that is where I've hit a wall with it, I've went through several .py files and can find nothing else addressing accuracy.  The code used to change things like that are very specific so a ctrl+f search would turn them up if they were there, but besides those 2.... nothing.

Anyone who reads this and has any thoughts or info feel free to chime in, I'm no expert at coding but I'm far from a novice so I'm pretty sure I've covered all my bases and it has to be somewhere in the engine or perhaps the modifiers coding... but again, that shouldn't affect accuracy so awkwardly from taking 1 HP damage.  Basically I could solve this entire problem if I could take away the drop-off from taking that 1 HP damage, but I can't find any other line besides that 2nd line that would even affect the accuracy a 2nd time. (after you take damage)

I've got a few ideas, just have to get the time to sit down and try them.

People who name their variables like script_param_1 and value_23 should burn at the stake  Ok, rant //off

Can you PM me the code? I will take a look at home today, see what my programmer monkey brain tells me.

If nothing changes in that group, it means that try block is probably never executed. Does the script language have a debug print? Print is your friend. Put a print("foo") in if and print("bar") in else, see which one is being executed in game.

Hapuga said:

People who name their variables like script_param_1 and value_23 should burn at the stake  Ok, rant //off

Can you PM me the code? I will take a look at home today, see what my programmer monkey brain tells me.

If nothing changes in that group, it means that try block is probably never executed. Does the script language have a debug print? Print is your friend. Put a print("foo") in if and print("bar") in else, see which one is being executed in game.

Click to expand...

I feel you on the naming tokens **** like that.  It accomplishes absolutely nothing because anyone who wants your code can get your code, and little dinky crap like that doesn't stop anyone who actually knows what they are doing... hell, barely slows progress down at all honestly.

I'll get a copy of the scripts code in a PM and send it on over now, maybe a second pair of eyes will pick up something mine have missed.  As for the debug report you can see all that directly from in game.  When the launch window opens click settings and enable "debug mode" in the options.  Any time the game executes a script it will give you a full report of what is being executed.  I know for a fact the first line executes because you can change that value and it visibly affects (compared via screenshot) the size of the aiming reticule when you reload the game.  Actually haven't checked (but will) via debug mode to see what, if anything, executes once you take damage but I will try to take a peak later tonight since I'm off the next couple days.  Just let me know if anything pops into your head about what the issue could be, I want to try executing the line of code for accuracy AFTER the HP string to see if maybe it is just a bad logical order but again it will be later tonight or in the morning before I have a chance to test it.  Right now I'm hoping that if people are correct and the HP strings are somehow affecting it that executing the code to set accuracy %'s after that will clear it up.  I doubt it will be that simple, but start with the easy **** first I always say... you never know.

I briefly went over the file. The file is procedurally generated, thus the terrible names. This complicates things a lot in terms of trying to understand what comes from where. This also explains silly code like
        (assign, ":var_8", "$g_damage_multiplier"),
        (val_mul, ":var_8", 9),
        (val_div, ":var_8", 10),

It is possible that they do not support floating point operations from interpreted scripts, but that's just poor craftsmanship. Additionally, there are tonns of magic numbers thrown everywhere, like
              (val_add, ":value_23", "$g_damage_multiplier"),
              (val_sub, ":value_23", 20),

As far as I see, the main goal of the code section you provided is to set parameters for either player or a horse. Does this script run every frame? Or does it run after an action was taken?
I also see some commands that are not clear to me in terms of execution/final result. For example:
(agent_is_human, ":script_param_1"),

What does this accomplish? I assume it is a boolean check, what if it is true? What if it is false?
Also this is mighty interesting for me:
  (agent_set_accuracy_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),
  (agent_set_reload_speed_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),

Does this mean that agent_set_accuracy_modifier and agent_set_reload_speed_modifier are affected from the same modifier? Are those intrinsic functions, or are they defined somewhere where we can modify their behavior?

All in all, it looks like the section does some modification to the parameters that are defaulted above.

How about a radical check: comment out the code section for try_begin for player? See what happens. I am really curious. I do not know where to plug in this code, so I cannot test myself.

Basically: we have to understand what affects the accuracy. For that we have to break the behavior to see the extremes. We should test 2 extremes:
Have 100% accuracy all the times with all bows.
Have 0% accuracy with all bows.

Once we understand what drives the extremes, we can write code to properly adjust the accuracy.

Quick update, sorry for being delayed a couple days but my Step Dad's brother died so I've been helping them get things together funeral arrangement wise and everything.  Finish up with visitation and all that fun **** tomorrow so hopefully I can get back to this.

Hapuga said:

I briefly went over the file. The file is procedurally generated, thus the terrible names. This complicates things a lot in terms of trying to understand what comes from where. This also explains silly code like
        (assign, ":var_8", "$g_damage_multiplier"),
        (val_mul, ":var_8", 9),
        (val_div, ":var_8", 10),

It is possible that they do not support floating point operations from interpreted scripts, but that's just poor craftsmanship. Additionally, there are tonns of magic numbers thrown everywhere, like
              (val_add, ":value_23", "$g_damage_multiplier"),
              (val_sub, ":value_23", 20),

As far as I see, the main goal of the code section you provided is to set parameters for either player or a horse. Does this script run every frame? Or does it run after an action was taken?
I also see some commands that are not clear to me in terms of execution/final result. For example:
(agent_is_human, ":script_param_1"),

What does this accomplish? I assume it is a boolean check, what if it is true? What if it is false?
Also this is mighty interesting for me:
  (agent_set_accuracy_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),
  (agent_set_reload_speed_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),

Does this mean that agent_set_accuracy_modifier and agent_set_reload_speed_modifier are affected from the same modifier? Are those intrinsic functions, or are they defined somewhere where we can modify their behavior?

All in all, it looks like the section does some modification to the parameters that are defaulted above.

How about a radical check: comment out the code section for try_begin for player? See what happens. I am really curious. I do not know where to plug in this code, so I cannot test myself.

Basically: we have to understand what affects the accuracy. For that we have to break the behavior to see the extremes. We should test 2 extremes:
Have 100% accuracy all the times with all bows.
Have 0% accuracy with all bows.

Once we understand what drives the extremes, we can write code to properly adjust the accuracy.

Click to expand...

Yeah the whole file is kind of a mess.  Some of the values for those are set something like 4000 lines of code apart which did give me a laugh.

I'll send you over the header file for the scripts.py.  It basically just contains all the commands and what they do.

The "agent_is_human" is a check to see if the unit is human (or a horse) and it then applies the value of script_param_1 to their accuracy, which at that point is set at whatever you have the "Damage Multiplier" option set to in the mod options.  Mine is set to 100, so  (val_add, ":value_23", "$g_damage_multiplier"), sets value_23 to 100 or whatever my multiplier option is set to in game.  The next line (val_sub, ":value_23", 20), tells it to take the number from value_23 and subtract 20 from it (leaving 80) and then the agent_is_human line applies value_23 to accuracy with the number acting as a percentage multiplier.  So that line would set player accuracy back to 80, although again, nothing I change in that group of coding has any affect on the drop off from damage... or any effect what so ever that I can see.

If you want to mess around with accuracy on bows you can use Morgh's Editor but the only thing accuracy on a bow dictates is the bow's max accuracy, which no matter what  I set it to the 1st HP damage still drops off.  Increasing bow accuracy DOES reduce the drop off but again we face the problem of all archers being Kolkar if we aren't careful.

  (agent_set_accuracy_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),
  (agent_set_reload_speed_modifier, ":script_param_1", ":value_23"),

Yes these use the same modifier, which if you dig around goes back to the Damage Modifier again.  Those lines of code tell it to set accuracy to the value of "script_param_1" and to insert the value of "value_23" into "script_param_1".  No clue why it is done like that instead of just setting the values.

Funeral is over (BLAH, HATE THOSE THINGS) will start getting back to the fixes now.  Work the next couple days but I'll update if I manage to make any progress on the accuracy issues.  Have asked for a little help from a couple modders here on the forums with identifying what the issue might be, so we'll see.  2nd/3rd pair of eyes would help a lot with all the lines of code but I just won't release very much of it until I have permission from DW so it is still just me editing the system files themselves.  As per the norm I'll post and keep everyone updated with any progress (or lack there of) as it is (or isn't lol) made.

I've been terribly busy with work, sorry for not responding. I got the header, thanks! Sorry for your loss. I'll try to get back to investigation in the nearest days.

It's been about the same here, had a couple people quit and been swamped at work.  No replies from any of the modders (they are active, been keeping check) I asked for help.  Shouldn't be surprised, lot of these "coders" on here are are very hostile and wouldn't help with a line of code if basic human decency depended on it.  I came across a page a few days ago of a guy getting hard flamed for releasing TWEAKS (like Tweak MB) for a mod I won't name.  **** pitiful, TW owns all the rights to mods anyways so why coders act like this is beyond me as long as they get credit.  You'll never catch me sitting around, head too stuck up my own ass to help someone who needs it and these "community" modders should be ashamed of themselves for the way they act.  Half of them steal the code from another mod or reverse it anyways.  You wouldn't believe all the code I've seen between mods here that are pretty much copy/paste, but they act like they did it all themselves and won't share or help even when the tables turn. 

I remember why I quit working with so called "Community" modders a few years ago, toxic bull**** environment with a bunch of backstabbing nobodies stealing code from each other while refusing to give any assistance back and acting like some kind of "god".  Still gives me a good chuckle, makes me really sad at the same time though.

Sorry for the rant, just disappointed at what these guys call a "community"... what a joke.

We'll get it worked out, screw em, used to doing **** mostly myself anyways.

I am sorry to hear that. I got the impression that TW community is pretty friendly, at least on the surface. I never developed any mods, so of course, I cannot comment on how the mod devs actually go on about their work.

Hey i went through files and i find out that every faction have alliance with some minor faction for example Swadia have Questing Knights , Rhodocks have Iron Order , Nords have Valkyries , Khergihts Khanade have Amazons , Veagir have Bogatyrs and Sarranids have Sarranids Irreagulars . What i want to say is that if we join one of these factions the minor ones dont like me . I have a question : Can u make these minor factions freindly to player if we join faction or we are under contract with this faction ?

2) when Leader of New Faction shows up on map and take some castle can u make this new faction is neutral to player also is there a way to speed up time when Lords of new creation faction shows up on map again if they are defeated ?

3) Pretenders to throne have bugged armor most of them use only dress instead of armor they have in files this happens when they join player . I hope u can fix it this is quite annoying .

4) I want to make all companions friendly to each other how can i do this ?

5) Is script "special troops" is working properly and how this work ? Some lords can get special troops i checked Party Templates  and this is starts from

6) Please make arrows and bolts faster but thier shoot speed slower to balance it . Bolts need damage boost except Sniper ones

Edit:
Bugs i found


These two have bugged stats


Edit2: I found bug with Bounty Hunters . Every time i speak with them i don't get dialog with them but automatically my characters says he didn't see any bandits but i can't get out from dialog scene with them and i'm forced to restart game

Whole Kingdom Reports in Reports section seems bugged or when i want to change diplomancy some duble names and black parts of screen also sometimes some triggers still are bugged some 111 trigger when i was fighting with Balion .

It happend when I make from widescreen to window mode and opposite screen additionaly had black backround

Sometimes when enemy have too big forces i have on battlefield only like 8 guys don't know why.

Bigger battlefields are so bad for Cavalry units plenty of hills . It should depend on what type of units player and enemy have .

Some of these bugs didn't exist in previous patchs

IIRC the battlefield bugs can be resolved sometimes by retreating and starting the battle again, each time you do this 2 other random maps will appear on rotation as well as the first.

I still haven't DL yet I will try again today.

Alright, I've tested this submod long enough to give a first report I think.

The largest problem that sticks out like a sore thumb is the missing textures for much of the heraldic equipment. It will just appear invisible on anyone using it.

There are also UI problems. The UI in tournament isn't displaying correctly (I've gone ahead and turned it off as a result). The UI after a tournament round isn't showing correctly, and the UI for the military academy has the same problem (Nope, the military academy is fine. It's the same in 0.62.). The UI for changing equipment auto-upgrades for your companions also isn't working correctly, as you cannot click on apply to all and have to choose the settings each time you get a new companion. The UI for the chests in castles and towns is also bad, with the words still there but the background invisible.

None of these so far are game breaking and I've tolerated them.

The archer siege fix seems to have barely helped. I don't really notice a difference so I will try the normal New Dawn for a while to see if there's a difference. Thank you so much for making everything save compatible. I didn't like the modified AI at first, but after playing enough with it on I came to like it. I think I'll only turn it off for when I'm training the peasants in villages. The biggest improvement would be increased bow accuracy for sure, but to be honest right now that's the only draw of this submod for me. I think I will probably use it for my bow characters, but keep using normal New Dawn for my other characters.

Like someone else said, the game does get stuck when you talk to bounty hunters or glory seekers and the like in the field. It also crashed when I clicked on the upgrade tree for the Rhodoks.

As far as I can see, the main problem with this submod is likely that a lot of things have been edited without doing it properly, hence things like missing textures and errors here and there. If an error exists its because you didn't edit a related file that needed to be edited as well or you forgot to change the value of something that needed to be changed as a result of the edits, etc etc. M&B is finicky if you don't do things just right. Not trying to be overly critical here. I'm just saying you might want to start from scratch as far as the file edits. It's not so far along that you can't do that yet. If you run with what you have rather than redoing it, a lot of these problems are going to stay or more problems will pop up.

If you need another programmer I'd be down to help out.

The Archer bug in sieges seems due to the proximity of the defenders and attackers to the ladders so if you move all your troops away from the ladders (back into the castle) then the archer attackers that were stuck will move up the ladders.

If your units get stuck at the bottom around ladders when attacking try the command : follow me - (press 10-F1-F2 iirc) they should follow you up the ladders.

The normal pressing and holding F1 to move troops around won't always work in castle battles.