aikiwarrior的最近内容

It didn't crash though, it froze. I had to restart my comp to get out of the game, thus I have no crash texts to send. I can however give them my savegame, thanks

cascinova 说:

aikiwarrior 说:

Love the look of the changes, unfortunately I cant play it

When I enter a battle the screen is very choppy. On top of that my game froze completely to the point I had to restart my comp after I decapitated someone. This was loading a game I have used since 1.02, not starting a new game.

点击展开...

What do your expect? don't complain if your not willing to start a new game. I can't think of any game out there that lets you keep using the same save through 2 patches.

点击展开...

I can think of many, including the base M&B Warband. On top of that, it sais it should be savegame compatible, meaning it transfers. I know its still beta, that's why Im saying upfront what the issues are, but there are tons of games that let you play the same file through multiple patches.

Love the look of the changes, unfortunately I cant play it

When I enter a battle the screen is very choppy. On top of that my game froze completely to the point I had to restart my comp after I decapitated someone. This was loading a game I have used since 1.02, not starting a new game.

JuJu70 说:

FelipeII 说:

aikiwarrior 说:

being able to trade with other lords/cities for their slaves.

点击展开...

I liked this idea.

Besides if you are having difficult to recruit prisoners, you can improve your persuation skill

点击展开...

An easy exploit

点击展开...

What if slaves were very expensive? Im thinking 4 or 5 times the amount you sell them for, maybe even upwards of 10x. That way its like hiring expensive mercenaries, but their not recruited into your party, there taken as prisoners, which can still desert after recruitment?

Also, and this is completely unrelated, but can you please please please enable the "move up, move down" buttons on the units in your castle. Im nit-picky about how my units are organized, and I hate having to take out half or all of my units to reorganize my castles lol.

thats a pretty good video. They are pointing out the exact point I was trying to make. Gotta say though, I didn't expect the pigs head to explode like hat vs the Daneaxe.

I have some issues with those vids. The guys don't know how to actually use a lot of those weapons. The javelins were by no means thrown properly. If you pay attention in most of the throws the javelin is sideways. Though I doubt a javelin would really pierce mail, I doubt that with the way he threw them it would even pierce much of a persons skin.

The guy in the first vid wasn't much better. Some of his strikes were pretty solid, but his grip was wrong, his body was too tense, and a lot of the time the blades were coming in slanted (cutting edge not perpendicular to the body). If the cutting edge is off by a few degrees it stops being a cut and turns into a smack, which is exactly what happened with the spear, most of his false cuts, and his upward angled cuts with the sword. False cuts done properly indeed do cut flesh a lot more than that. His only good strikes seemed to be the ones angled downwards. I can garunteee this is due to his grip and the timing with which hes turning his body. Theres a reason you need daily practice to be good at using bladed weapons, and he wasn't. I believe Vikings practiced regularly, as they were a warlike culture.

I've studied swordsmanship for 4 years, so this opinion isn't coming from nowhere.

If as a scientist you want to do a study on the efficiency of weapons, please hire people that practice with them regularly.

I have to agree about that. Ive been able to train up a few huscarls and hersirs, though not many a all. Ive started storing anyone that gets promoted to veteran or thegn and putting them in my territories untill I have over 100, then I take them both out and raid some cities or conquer. The more vetrans and thegns you have in your pary the easier hersirs and huscarls are to promote. Even then I only get one or two of each by defeating a 300-400 strong army.

So even if they stay as they are it would be very easy to implement them into a troop tree. If you did sailor-vikingr-elite vikingr you could even keep the ship speed bonus from the sailors, since vikingr are all experienced sailors anyway. Though in that case I could see the imbalance effects. Heck even if you want to keep sailors a separate entity (and I would understand why you would want to do this) you could still make vikings stem from the ruffian tree:

Ruffian - Footpad (Or bandit, since that doesnt have any upgrades) - Vikingr - (Region) Elite Vikingr - (possibly) ship captain

I cant imagine it being hard to do, nor can I see the negative effects of doing so.

It wouldnt matter if the troop lines are identical if you already have the troop line:
Sailor - Vikingr - Elite Vikingr

All the troops are already present in the game.

Either way, if the troops would be too similar you could always make the Viking line a light infantry line. All the current Norse lines end with heavily armoured soldier. Viking line could be the light armoured line of norse. Vikings were known to avoid prolonged and pitched battles anyway, so it would make sense.

reiksmarshal is precisely correct. By naked I meant the ones with tunics and a seax. I dont think ELITE vikings should have them. Regular Vikingr though Im perfectly fine with having tunics. Either way, its besides the point, Elite Vikings having better equipment was only a side note to my main point: Viking troop tree. All the bandit types have troop trees, farmers have troop trees, peasant woman have troop trees, and with every troop tree comes progressively better equipment. In addition you already have multiple types of vikings, so it should be easy to link together into a troop tree, with regular Vikingr underneath Elite Vinkingr. I understand your point that Elite Vikingr are elite units that should be hard to obtain, and I believe my suggestion actually makes them harder to obtain. How many reavers or highwaymen do you see in the average bandit group? Not many, precisely due to having a progressive troop tree. The same is not true for viking groups, which can have many many elite vikings, thus making them in truth easier to obtain. Besides, there are mercenary units which do the same job much better (Svear Warriors for example).

In addition, vikings arent necessarily bandits, there a collection of norsemen who are going raiding, a very legal and legitimate profession among the Norse nations. A Norse Huskarl could be bodyguard to Jarl, then be a viking on a raid the coming spring, as could a Hersir or Jarl. In this sense I dont see how comparing Vikings to Nobles is much different, as they could be one in the same. Given the norse tendancy to go on raids (thus being remembered as Vikings even though not all Norse actually were vikings), being able to hire "Pagan Raiders" or something that evolves into vikings and elite vikings isn't lore breaking or un-historic. If anything, it should fit right in to the basic ideas the game represents.

I still fail to see why making a viking troop tree defies game balance. Even if it does, like I mentioned previously, you could add a negative reputation requirement with the christian faith to hire them. Personally I think this more than balances it as every christian kingdom will end up attacking you, which makes sense if you want to be a viking.


My Suggestion is as follows -
Make a viking troop tree
Make the lowest tier of vikings able to be recruited in pagan cities by a ship captain by the harbour
Be able to join the ship captain on a raid where your character is but a humble soldier among other viking raiders.

Think of it this way:

You start a new character and want to be a Norse Viking, not Jarl, not a bandit, but a raider of the seas. How do I start this off? Well, I need troops and a ship. How do I get troops and ship? Pull some favours for the local lords, Go to the villages and recruit. Or if I want to be a bandit, find a group of ruffians, beat them, and recruit them as prisoners. But ruffians and their respective troop tree are not vikings. I still need to progress in the game until I am able to obtain a ship, defeat a crew of vikings and recruit the prisoners, or earn enough money from raiding to bribe them to your side. This is dissapointing from a story element. If I obtain some ruffians, they are my first soldiers, I have investment in watching them grow and trying to make them bandit cheifs. We fight together and grow together from the beginning. This cannot be done with vikings. Theres less sentimental value attached to them because you dont really invest in getting them, making them a lot more expendable. In addition, once you get a viking or elite viking, thats it, they cant improve. This basically makes them cannon-fodder. Elite, expensive cannon fodder. With troops that have trees you have more investment to keep them alive because you want to see them grow, you want them to improve. Then when you get that nice shiney huskarl, your proud of the work you put into attaining it, so its still not expendable. Heck a sailor could even be the 1st tier unit to the viking troop tree. Sailor ->vikingr -> (Nation) Elite Vikingr / Ship captain. Then you dont have to add anything.

Besides, raiding and being a viking is one of the primary points of the game. I would love to go kill some monastaries with my new forged crew, a crew which I can raise. I think it would also be amazing to be able to go on raids with a ship captain, following him around and attacking merchant vessles and raiding villages and/or monastaries. Doing this would lower your rep with the christian faith. This could provide a way early on to lower your rep with christians enough to make your own crew of vikings.

You could even make a little side-quest where by following a group of vikings you can become a ship captain yourself, and be awarded a small crew and small ship (upon completion ending the quest permanently so it cant be abused for ship/troop spam).

Anyway, what do you think of the suggestion itself?

I was reffering to Danish, Svear, and Northmathir elite vikingr, which are often naked, some moreso than others. Ive also never seen a vikingr naked, despite them being lower lvl than Elite Vikingr. In addition Viking were of all facets, some nobles some not. Ragnarr himself went on viking raids, as did many other Jarls (most notibaly Bjorn Ragnarsson). Vikings weren't mere bandits to the norse, just to the rest of the world.

I agree with Prince De Radzivil. Adding a little will not diminish the focus on the invasion of england, and still make the game a little more dynamic. As it stands, if conquer Frisia, Danemark, or Northveger you become extremely wealthy because nobody ever invades you. This would add a little more balance to the game, more options in the invading of england, and give you more options to just be a viking, or even a defender of the faith repelling vikings form the french coast/coast of Brittany. Heck you even have troop line for them already - Cantabrian Warriors/Frankish Cavalry. Im all for options that make the game even more dynamic, and this certainly would without taking the focus off the invasion of england.

Yes all units have some variability, but what Im asking for isnt necessarily a tank troops with the best armour and weapons. Take for example the danish troop tree, it has a lot of variation on armours, however the more upgraded the character the less variation. Hersirs can have a sword or a seax, but they always have decent armour, as do Huskarls and Thegns. Same is true for the saxons, the more upgraded they are they always have mail for Thegns and huskarls,  and mail for companions. Im not against variation. Having the elite vikings have gambesons or mail is fine, but naked seems silly to me, especially considering Highwaymen (also bandits) are never naked. Neither are Veterans, or any other top tier mercenary unit, despite their variation.

If all I wanted was an elite tanking unit for bandits, I would use highwaymen, as that is what they currently are. What I actually want is viking pillagers, and a little variation regarding them.

As far as balance goes, Im sure there are ways to calibrate that, such as negative relations with the christian faith to hire them (say -40), or the necessity to be pagan to hire them (but not recruit them from bandit lairs or use already currently implemented methods to recruit them). You could also make them lose moral faster than other units to encourage more monastery raiding. In that sense I would still only be on good terms with the norse, and would be immediately attacked when in any other nation (which is most of the map).

Honestly though, I dont see where the balance issue here lies. Are they really so much better than highwaymen that they cant have similar armour variations and a small tree to encourage their promotion?

JuJu70 说:

And, you can already recruit them at their lairs so why expand it?

点击展开...

he wants the best soldiers and not to pay any price for it

点击展开...

This is not at all true.

You would still have to pay a considerable amount to replace low tier troops that die off, and the time investment to raise them up is far greater. Its easy to get money: raid a city or a couple of villages and you have enough money to hire a decent band of vikings in a half hour or less. Trying to raise them from infancy takes a much more valuable resource: time. In addition hiring them from their lairs as bandits lowers your reputation, which is fine if you want to play with a low rep, but not if you want to play with a high rep. It makes sense that you should be able to hire the lowest tier of viking soldier as a mercenary without reputation loss from a norse city. Losing reputation even among pagans from hiring vikings is silly. That way you can still play a relatively well reputed viking, and you dont have to use silly moral loopholes to keep viking soldiers (hiring a horde of prisoners next to a monastary, raid the monastary to replenish moral, then store them in a temporary camp over the night to prevent desertion). This is in no way shape or form avoiding spending resources to attain good troops, in fact I would argue that its quite the opposite. As it stands right now, you dont have to spend any resources to gather the viking because of the above reason: Hire prisoners, raid monastery, store in camp. The way its currently designed does the exact thing you admonish me for. This is a solution.

In addition, it could separate the vast division of equipment between vikings. As it stands if you want an elite troupe of vikings, you have to hope for the best when they spawn, as they can spawn with quite literally almost anything, from no armour to an armoured and bladed behemoth. this can at least separate equipment into categories so you can have a reliable viking unit. As Ivan Khan stated, he stayed away from using vikings as bandits because of their unpredictable equipment spawns. This can still maintain a decent variation among viking troops and increase their consistency at higher levels.

As far as how is this making a troop tree thats different from the Norse troop tree, I ont know the answer to that, but the game already has vikings and elite vikings, which are already pretty similar to the troop tree. This simply diversifies the line, makes what are supposed to be good troops more consistent, and makes Elite Vikings a little harder to obtain. ITs simply taking something that already exits and making improvements on it.

The additional suggestion of raiding east for pagans or marching south for christians also adds an extra element to the game and how you can play your characters. March south with a band of christians and return with cantabrians, or go east with norse and return with some varangians. It adds a lot of depth to how you can play your characters.