Author Topic: Viking Conquest Reforged Edition Female Char Power Gaming Guide(minor spoilers)  (Read 6575 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tingyun

  • Knight at Arms
  • *
  • Hooded Horse Inc., an Indie Game Studio in Texas
    • Steam - hoodedhorse
    • Twitter - @HoodedHorseInc
    • View Profile
    • Hooded Horse
  • Faction: Neutral
Kalarhan: again I agree with most most of your comments, but your historical list, impressive as it is, has many examples where the background is far far more powerful than even the VC "Noble" background.

Phillip laid the groundwork for Alexander, he was essentially a royal sandbox start. And the Kings who fought over England in 1066 were kings.

Turning to the exceptions, the rise of a commoner to Roman Emperor in the later imperial period was generally through the power of institutions--the military--and in any event many of those upstarts only rules for a blink of an eye. Napoleon's rise came at a time when the rise of Nationalism and modern rebellions made the entire political landscape into something very different than a medieval world.

You could find historical examples, however, in Ancient China, generally at the head of peasant rebellions, so I'm not contesting that in all of world history you can't find commoners rising to great power.

What I'm saying is that seeing that happen in the context of Dark Ages Britain in rapid time through the mechanism of lords everywhere letting you recruit armies from their lands and march them through with nary a word of protest, and because mayors who have no reason to trust you hand you kidnapped daughter money with full confidence, and because riskfree trading of some wine brings huge profits out of all proportion to the effort and capital involved, etc etc, is completely unrealistic.

Every bit as unrealistic as a skilled player, wearing top of the line armor, slaying many enemies in personal combat. Indeed, that feels like the least unrealistic path to power for the player, as it requires only one unrealistic assumption (godlike talent for the player) vs many constant unrealistic assumptions (this mayor is crazy, these trade prices make no sense, this lord is insanely permissive, etc).

Really, the closest thing to a realistic commoner background playthrough would be working in a logging camp or farm for a couple of years. ;)

So when we need a mechanism for the player to do the near-impossible in terms of political rise to power, overhwelming combat talent is probably the least unrealistic means Warband offers, compared to the constant silliness that is trade prices/quests/etc.

On the calendar, though--Viking Conquest borrows our real world calander, months and seasons and all, no? Have I not been paying enough attention and missed a distinction? I understand the travel speeds are a bit too fast and the North Sea is shrunk, and changes occur to quickly, but given the seasons, listed calander days, day-night cycle, I'm inclined to interpret days as exactly the same as real-world, absent some compelling reason not to. The issue boils down to making a few unrealistic assumptions (travel speed) and then playing coherently with them in place, vs having to constantly make new unrealistic judgements as you go (pretending every night/day cycle was actually 4 days, and then the calander display is wrong as well, would be a constant breaking of immersion for me).

I had thought about modding the partyspeed script in python to slow everyone down by 50% and compiling my own version, but after looking into it got overwhelmed with the complexity. I lack computer skills, and was afraid to risk breaking things even with the excelent guidance available. ;)
« Last Edit: January 09, 2018, 04:16:31 PM by Tingyun »

kalarhan

  • Python Saint
  • Count
  • *
  • Use Q&A thread, not a PM :)
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNWVCWF&S
On the calendar, though--Viking Conquest borrows our real world calander, months and seasons and all, no?

VC simple uses Warband calendar with names we would recognize, it didn`t change the under the hood mechanic. Game is still acelerated to keep the action flowing way faster than it should if you tried to copy our world.

Bannerlord is suppose to make their calendar even faster (one year = 12 in game weeks), so it doesn`t seems like they will try to replicate history and keep the more arcade aspect (as it works well for players).

Strategic games like Total War and Paradox titles also can't or don't try to replicate our calendar. They go arcade+gameplay+heavy action first.

Cheers

Tingyun

  • Knight at Arms
  • *
  • Hooded Horse Inc., an Indie Game Studio in Texas
    • Steam - hoodedhorse
    • Twitter - @HoodedHorseInc
    • View Profile
    • Hooded Horse
  • Faction: Neutral
Right, but we are talking about "realistic" from the player's perspective, so under the hood mechanics take a backseat to what is displayed to the player. When Viking Conquest says "hey, it just turned March, now winter has ended, your morale improves, and all the snow in the world map and scenes melts", then the most realistic choice for the player is take the calendar at face value, even if parties are still moving too fast and the economy is changing a bit too rapidly.

The alternative, of assuming somehow every game day is 3 or 4 real days, would end up being a pretty nutty situation for a player to roleplay, requiring constant adjustments and rationalizations around the day/night cycle, calendar, and seasons.

kalarhan

  • Python Saint
  • Count
  • *
  • Use Q&A thread, not a PM :)
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNWVCWF&S
The alternative, of assuming somehow every game day is 3 or 4 real days

never said that players should consider anything but what they see. It was a simple counter point to your argument that the game is too fast as you go from nothing to conquer the world in 1000 days. As showed above, that is by design (original MB design). It is what it is. We are still playing the consequence of that design from 13 years ago  :D

Tingyun

  • Knight at Arms
  • *
  • Hooded Horse Inc., an Indie Game Studio in Texas
    • Steam - hoodedhorse
    • Twitter - @HoodedHorseInc
    • View Profile
    • Hooded Horse
  • Faction: Neutral
On that we agree Kalarhan--and the same is true of the powerful personal combat player. In the same way it is a consequence of warband design imported into VC. The player conquors the world in a few years, the player slays 50 men in a battle, both are unrealistic, and both are very fun.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2018, 06:03:49 PM by Tingyun »

kalarhan

  • Python Saint
  • Count
  • *
  • Use Q&A thread, not a PM :)
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNWVCWF&S
both unrealistic, but in very fun ways.

that is why talking about "realistic" or "unrealistic" is silly. Just look at the discussions on Bannerlord threads lol.

to me it is a simple question: does this makes sense to me or not? If it does not, then it is a exploit (bad design, limit of the AI, bug that was never fixed, etc) and so I will simple avoid it. Like you mentioned above, it is a way of setting in-house rules for your sandbox.

a example from Warband that was plugged in VC RE: recruitment of prisoners (it was severly limited on the DLC, as it simple broke the entire design of non-elite armies by the devs). That feature, common used on Native to easily form a elite army, simple did not fit with the VC design. Of course it was a point of contention with the community, as any nerf.

mods are more free to experiment with balance and alternative features. The "official" games suffer from Native-expectation. Look at feedback that games like Caribbean, VC and MBFS got when they tried to change core features (or nerf them) from Native (even when said features made no sense in the context of the new game), simple because the new format was breaking what people expect of a MB title.

That is why modding VC, as a example, is fun. You can do stuff your way, forget about what people expect (you are not worried about TW feedback or sells)  :D

Tingyun

  • Knight at Arms
  • *
  • Hooded Horse Inc., an Indie Game Studio in Texas
    • Steam - hoodedhorse
    • Twitter - @HoodedHorseInc
    • View Profile
    • Hooded Horse
  • Faction: Neutral
Yes, what I have been arguing throughout is realism from the perspective of the player, not true realism. Really we should call it versilimitude. Hence the focus on the information presented to the player, and the need to minimize extraneous assumptions and rationalizations.

a exploit (bad design, limit of the AI, bug that was never fixed, etc)


Anyway, to clarify and to bring this back to the beginning of the discussion, good personal combat play, even leading to great results, is most certainly not an exploit. It requires lots of player practice and skill on full difficulty settings.

If a player kills 50 vikingr solo because the player is an expert at timing strikes and dodging in and out, they have earned their victory. They have certainly done something more challenging than simply clicking back and forth to recruit men until they have enough to overwhelm them with an army.

Now, there are exploits possible: If instead the player abuses the inventory chest reloads of infinite ammo to simply throw infinite javelins until everyone dies, then that is an exploit. If they abuse the fatigue system by riding back and forth until the vikingr are all too tired to move, then that is an exploit. That is taking a mechanic and using it outside its intended functioning in a way that removes the importance of player skill, and so is an exploit. It is very different than the use of skill, judgment, and timing to achieve heroic combat results, where player ability is paramount.

« Last Edit: January 09, 2018, 06:47:58 PM by Tingyun »

kalarhan

  • Python Saint
  • Count
  • *
  • Use Q&A thread, not a PM :)
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNWVCWF&S
If they abuse

well we will need to agree on disagree on this point  :P, as walking in reverse to kill a bunch of npcs, or using a horse to kill 50 enemies (AI can't handle your movement and organize a counter), or moving behind the enemy army to make them turn around (so yours can hit them with missiles without a shield), etc, are, in my opinion, a clear abuse of the game mechanics/weak AI. The AI agents can't do that (no matter their level or equipment), while the player can do that even if at a low level and naked  :mrgreen:  It is not about superior skill.

The game in response needs to exploit others elements (like how bandits just spawn from nowhere, created by magic, in infinite numbers). The AI needs to cheat to compensate for its limitations  :lol:

I am not saying that other people should stop doing that. In single player game the player can do whatever he wants to have fun, as noone cares. And as I don't play MP, I don't care about MP exploits  :P

Have you ever see the Youtube guides on the cheesy tactics to always win a battle on Total War? Like putting your army back/flank to the map border? That is a example of the human player exploiting the game mechanics. The funny thingy is that you can also do that in Warband (and see similar Youtube guides).

Cheers
« Last Edit: January 09, 2018, 07:11:09 PM by kalarhan »

Tingyun

  • Knight at Arms
  • *
  • Hooded Horse Inc., an Indie Game Studio in Texas
    • Steam - hoodedhorse
    • Twitter - @HoodedHorseInc
    • View Profile
    • Hooded Horse
  • Faction: Neutral
We don't disagree that there are exploits--I listed 2 in my post, infinite ammo or abusing fatigue.

Using a horse to kill 50 enemies (AI can't handle your movement and organize a counter)

Not true at all. The AI mostly stays bunched up and tries to fight back, and it is only with a huge amount of practice, a calm head, and great timing that a player can achieve this. One wrong move and down goes the horse and player.

You have a distorted sense of the difficulty of player mounted combat in VC. The low armor of horses, lack of lances, and short sword length vs spears all create risk.

I see this odd attitude sometimes from command-oriented players--they think what they do (recruit units, form up with terrain, position carefully) is the uniquely hard challenge in warband, and mounted melee combat is easy. That is obviously wrong. Even at the highest skill levels, personal combat is dangerous and requires constant attention lest you fall, whereas a player can click click recruit units click click use memorized formations to guaranteed victory much more easily.

Anyway, we may indeed have to disagree--because anyone who has actually slain 50 vikingr with nothing but a low armor VC horse and a basic sword knows the great skill and danger involved. ;)
« Last Edit: January 09, 2018, 07:42:17 PM by Tingyun »

kalarhan

  • Python Saint
  • Count
  • *
  • Use Q&A thread, not a PM :)
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNWVCWF&S
Anyway, we may indeed have to disagree

Cheers  :P

Tingyun

  • Knight at Arms
  • *
  • Hooded Horse Inc., an Indie Game Studio in Texas
    • Steam - hoodedhorse
    • Twitter - @HoodedHorseInc
    • View Profile
    • Hooded Horse
  • Faction: Neutral
Indeed, have a nice afternoon Kalarhan, and I enjoyed our discussion!

kalarhan

  • Python Saint
  • Count
  • *
  • Use Q&A thread, not a PM :)
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNWVCWF&S
Tips on making and saving money:

going back to the original post, if any player wants to focus on this sort of a campaign (and it is not your first sandbox VC game), then I recommend visiting the modding section for Tweaks.

a few examples:
  - change number of recruits from villages (less grind to form your armies)
  - change economy values (like taxes and rent) to adjust how much you want to depend on money making activities x conquest
  - replace defenders on villages (a lot more fun to attack a village with a few soldiers)
  - escape chance for lords (so you can do strategic wars and force the enemy to sue for peace)
  - battle continuation (if your "weaker" character dies the battle continues)
  - increase battle size and decrease number of waves (less arcade battles)
  - change garrison size for centers (you can set a different limit, to make them have more or less defenders than vanilla)
  - chance of capturing ships (so you can conquer a fleet, not only buy one)

these are some examples of popular tweaks (and that are part of VC Tweaks Tool) that, to me, would make sense on a commander centric campaign.

zhoumu

  • Recruit
  • *
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
Nice discussion here :P :P

Hmm, I like to ride in at a sharp angle--so instead of charging directly at the leader, I ride to the side of the formation, and then race parallel to their battle lines and cut the leader down as I go.

As long as my direction of riding is at close to a 90 degree angle to direction of the incoming thrown spears, they always seem to miss.

Then again, I do have a riding skill of around 8 by the time I do this, as I pump Agility up pretty fast, so it is indeed possible it only works with such a high riding.

Which horse did you use? I tried this tactic when I was wearing down the enemy spear throwers, and I still got speared down. Maybe I was too close to the lines. My riding skill was 5, so probably that made the difference. My other char had 10 in riding, but still theres no bulletproof way of gunning down the leader. Success rate was around 50%-60% for my warrior char, and less than 30% for my female char.

kalarhan

  • Python Saint
  • Count
  • *
  • Use Q&A thread, not a PM :)
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Neutral
  • WBNWVCWF&S
gunning down the leader

IIRC that is still a issue with vanilla VC, as most armies have little to no cavalry units, and that makes the crazy lord commit suicide by charging alone  :mrgreen:

one simple solution is to force the lord to dismount at start of a battle, so he sticks with the rest of the army.

there are also mods that create a duel system, where you can challenge the enemy commander to a duel while already inside the combat scene/mission. Or a simpler alternative would be to use VC system of dueling (battle menu), that happens BEFORE the battle.

Tingyun

  • Knight at Arms
  • *
  • Hooded Horse Inc., an Indie Game Studio in Texas
    • Steam - hoodedhorse
    • Twitter - @HoodedHorseInc
    • View Profile
    • Hooded Horse
  • Faction: Neutral
Which horse did you use? I tried this tactic when I was wearing down the enemy spear throwers, and I still got speared down. Maybe I was too close to the lines. My riding skill was 5, so probably that made the difference. My other char had 10 in riding, but still theres no bulletproof way of gunning down the leader. Success rate was around 50%-60% for my warrior char, and less than 30% for my female char.

Usually heavy, sometimes champion. There definitely is a critical distance at which spears become much less dangerous.

With leaders, I rush him early,  while he is still parading in front of his men giving speeches and leading them in cheers, or whatever it is their taunts and war cries consist of. I usually throw a javilin or spear as I go, then to a sword and cut him down as I pass. Generally coming in parallel to his battle lines, but several feet further along to create more distance, then turning closer at a slight diagnal just in time to get the lord, then again creating some distance. Always cutting along the side further from his men, so he stands between me and them. Not 100% success by any means--as soon as he gets spooked he generally runs into his men for cover.

Your 50% success rate about matches my own with this--because you can't try too hard, you have to abort when it looks too dangerous. The important thing is to make that 50% of the time it fails, be an abort, rather than your horse going down. ;)

There is a downside to doing this I think--if you cut him down you turn off his surgery skill, so less wounded guys to capture, unless I misunderstand something.

IIRC that is still a issue with vanilla VC, as most armies have little to no cavalry units, and that makes the crazy lord commit suicide by charging alone  :mrgreen:

No, not from what I've seen. VC lords generally seem to hang back, whether they have horsemen in their army or not. Generally their horsemen charge, but they stay with their men.

When you charge them, they stop their parading and go among their men for cover. When you engage normally, they either fight alongside their men near the shieldwall, or they pick a spot on the battlefield and kind of watch from there. Only real exception is sometimes if the battle moves a bit, they end up being sticky in their choice of spot and end up a bit separated from their men, not too often though.

I can't guarantee it isn't something about my behavior causing this--it is possible a highly defensive player might provoke different behavior, or if a player turned on the cheat option "make enemy always charge" then the lords would probably be suicidal, I don't know. It is also possible it has something to do with their shield taunts or war cries--but whatever the origin, the suicidial lord so familiar from other mods isn't what I see in VC.

In sum, on Good AI settings and full difficulty, in general VC lords behave pretty intelligently to protect themselves, making it a fun and worthy challenge to kill them.


« Last Edit: January 10, 2018, 01:30:07 AM by Tingyun »