Recent content by unity100

Thanks, thats going to be useful.

I already started a new game based on these results.

Here are the results:

11 navigation total (leader + party) With Dark Age mod full version which may include some balance changes

---------------------------------------

via portmaster

dorestad - tunsberg

april 12 morning - april 14 evening

tunsberg - dorestad

april 18 dawn - april 19 early morning

with skeid 10 people with 19 sailors

dorestad - tunsberg

april 24 late night april 24 evening

tunsberg - dorestad

april 24 evening - april 25 late afternoon

with skeid 10 companions with no sailors

dorestad - tunsberg

april 25 dusk - april 26 dusk

tunsberg - dorestad

april 26 dusk - april 27 evening

----------------------

Though wind conditions factor in, it seems that more sailors seem to provide a speed bonus to map speed as well.

Whoa. Ok. Thanks.

I was using a skeid with 5-10 man crew but it seemed waaaay too slow compared to sailing via portmaster. I will do some tests. Thanks.

Thanks for the info on bonuses guys.

But will i get screwed in regard to speed if i try to sail with a 50 man ship with only 5 people, for example? Or can i just take a 50 man ship with 5 people and just sail on the map just like normal?

kalarhan said:

just like traveling on land you can use the time compression shortcuts

Click to expand...

Hah. I didnt know that. Thanks. It will be useful.

Then there is no actual benefit to having a ship for trading? It feels much more convenient to just click the city name from portmaster menu and just to be taken there.

Tingyun said:

unity100 said:

Countless kings, king wannabees, warlords, have come and passed, some have been successful, some not. And a year's timeframe is not even far fetched for that.

Click to expand...

Then name 3 historical examples from dark ages europe of someone rising from unknown peasant to powerful king in a year's time.

It didn't happen.

Click to expand...

You mentioned you didnt want to discuss, yet you seem to continue. I dont have any intention, but out of courtesy and for potential benefit of those who may be interested in history, i will reply one last time.

Foremost, i advise you to do more reading in history, lest you wont need to risk your argument by doing grandstanding statements like 'it didnt happen'.

Merely the incident of great heathen army is enough to demonstrate the reality of what you are objecting, and contest various of your earlier arguments:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Heathen_Army

Great heathen army was led by 3 nobodies history has not heard before, who had no titles to mention, other than later claims to be related to an earlier viking named Ragnar, whom historians today think to possibly not have existed. It was common to claim descendancy from famous figures to get followers or assert claims in those days anyway. And as almost every norsemen in Scandinavia was at that date, they would be farmer/warriors, or raider/warriors of equal status with anyone else - since they were not able to even claim any minor nobility or kingship even at their time or in their inflated sagas.

They promptly beat and executed numerous anglo saxon kings, conquered numerous regions, including major cities like York, multiple times. From their landing in east anglia to their conquest of york, barely a year passed. Other cities followed in quick succession, along with anglo saxon kings being captured and killed swiftly.

At the moment they got York, they were already a kingdom and a faction by the game's terms - MB, Brytenwalda, or VC, whichever you pick. So this is more than demonstrative of what you object. However it goes far beyond that.

From among these 3 previously unknown nobodies leading this army,  Ivar the boneless...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivar_the_Boneless

...was not only hated, but also had a genetic disorder which caused him to be physically feeble and ridiculed for this in his time. Not only that, but also it was a noticeably important genetic disorder that affected bone structure and joins, as you will find out if you check out the reference.

Sagas praise his wisdom, intelligence and other traits. He was the person who demanded York, or according to a younger legend, London for his own from the anglosaxon kings. Its not that they had the power to object, since they already had it, but for terms for peace, not unlike in the game.

He is considered the founder of the dynasty that ruled Northumbria for ~100 years from York. He is also considered identical to the King of Dublin, Ivar, in which he becomes its king at the point he leaves the army.

So basically this previously unknown nobody had not only organized a great heathen army, possibly as his principal leader, but also ended up as a king according to our games' terms within a year.

Then there is Halfdan...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halfdan_Ragnarsson

... who is the commander of the army after Ivar left, and who invades Wessex, and captures London. Not withstanding being effective king of Northumbria, he also tries to claim Ivar's Kingdom of Dublin after Ivar's death, and gets killed while battling with earlier Norsemen who settled in Dublin area. So he got two kingdom to his name, or, if you would prefer to be precise, one kingdom and one claim to his name at the point he died.

The last leader of the army after him, Guthrum, who is another nobody other than being a warlord who came from nowhere, has become de facto king of entire Danelaw.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guthrum

I wouldnt need to tell what Danelaw signifies to any average reader of history.

However...

The most significant part of this entire deal is that that entire 'Great' heathen army is estimated to be no more than ~1000 people today. So it took an army of ~1000 collected, assorted men, under the leadership of ~3-4 previously unknown nobodies which kept changing, to bring norse rule to entire north england and even parts of Ireland, leave aside creating petty kings ruling over small kingdom-lets like in Wales.

.............

This example itself is descriptive and easily researchable enough, but reading to actual early dark ages like the times of Brytenwalda, one can easily see a worse quagmire which is indeed accurately portrayed by the Brytenwalda mold. When anybody could claim to be somebody and rise with enough wit, cunning or reputation, even through lying. The historical record of the period even shows a king in north britain who has a Gaelic name but claimed to have descended from Odin.

There are cultures and time periods where there have been metoric rises. There are a decent number of examples that involved large-scale peasant revolutions (ie, Imperial China), or a powerful institution (ie, the Roman Army). Dark Ages Europe didn't have much of that, and frankly, even in those cases the climb took many, many years--nothing at all like the timeframe of Warband.

Click to expand...

Your perception of kingdom, king, empire seems to be quite out of place for the time period. Time period of Brytenwalda or VC have nothing to do with any of these. Some small strong armed warlord owning a small city or town could name himself a king, and he would be a king. For it was the power of owning, which made a king.

Precisely the lack of any institution is what enabled such kingdoms and such kings.

And as to your specific argument on farmers rising to that status - aside from the fact that almost every norseman raiding around were farmers or traders of equal status, who returned to their earlier professions after raiding even, what separates a farmer of a place like Britain and Scandinavia was nothing more than the earlier being prevented from military training (until Alfred I, at least), expensive equipment which they couldnt afford, and a measure of bravery. Simply because it doesnt take too much training to hack at people with an axe and show a shield to protect yourself, or push people in a shield wall with a spear due to the backwardness of dark age technology.

................

In any case, this is long historical talk, and i dont have time or desire to impart large chunks of information. I recommend doing more reading on the history of that time period, especially the lives of ordinary people, and staying away from grand-standing accounts of 'magnificient kings', which were merely strongmen with an axe/sword and a shield who happened to be among a few hundred other strongmen like themselves.

I wont participate in further discussion, so good evening to you...

Tingyun said:

You are necroing a 6 month old thread to revive a debate that went on for several pages, so naturally the 3 sentences you quote of my past posts don’t capture the argument at all. For example, to your argument that a Warband hero going from peasant to king within a year is realistic, I said the below:

“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.

Click to expand...

There is no need to continue the discussion, for this is just a historic curiosity. However, i will respond:

Actually, what you describe is totally realistic, as the rule of the times was who had the biggest proverbial axe.

From last ~100 years of Roman Empire until mid 900s when feudalism settled in Western europe, especially in these zones, this was the reality of life. Countless kings, king wannabees, warlords, have come and passed, some have been successful, some not. And a year's timeframe is not even far fetched for that.

As for mayors, npcs etc be a strongman with enough brutes in your command in the region, and a lot of people would treat you a whole lot differently, mayors, priests etc not excluded. Even if there is a lord that is stronger than you who owns the region, you are still the one who has the axe handy right now and you are immediately nearby.

You cant imagine how things are still the same even today, in regions where there are conflicts. The mayor could behave totally differently when he has the backing of the lord immediately handy so that you cant hack him down with your axe, and he would behave totally differently in the opposite scenario. Alternatingly, even.

............

Other than that, i dont intend to engage in a lengthy debate, so therefore thanks for the discussion and have a nice evening. Thanks for the VC balance mod also, even though i wasnt able to use it. (Im with Dark age full now, with its own balance changes).

I wanted to chime in in this very interesting topic as it relates to realism and the possibilities of the roles we play in VC

In particular, i agree with the proposition that lone superhero play does not lend to realism and the reality of the times.

Such superhuman feats were not possible, and even if they were, someone doing such feats would meet a very swift and untimely death in battle as a stray or a well placed projectile or spear or a random hit would skewer him out of earthly existence.

There was a reason why kingdoms, allegiances and politics were so fluid in periods depicted in Brytenwalda and VC - because top nobility still fought directly in battles and frequently died, politics and governance could never be stable.

Most important example of this is how Kingdom of Mercia practically ended after ~800 Mercians got slaughtered in one of the later wars, not only killing practically entire top governing nobility caste, but also ~2 generations of warriors (ie the present warrior nobles and the warrior sons they were raising), therefore ending Mercian power.

The opposite, you see in Alfred I's act with Wessex - he didnt fight in wars, he created a militia system which provided a steady supply of able warrior stock, which not only prevented risking losing the king and top nobility and resulting instability, but also the lower risk of losing your entire warrior population in one battle and getting ended.

For those reasons, i also started to prefer more likely playstyles in any game as i learned more about history. MB, VC included.

As for the other argument:

Tingyun said:

How can a random landless nobody suddenly raise giant armies and become a powerful king in a year? And then potentially Brytenwalda of all England within a couple of years?

The thing is, the whole game is terribly unrealistic from that perspective.

Click to expand...

Thats incorrect - That era was the era of ambitious nobodies who could speedily raise masses of armies depending on their reputation and skills.

Today we have a nation called France, and actually almost every other major nation in Europe, merely because among the many small time tribal/local warlord leaders/personas dotting the post Roman landscape, one guy in Northern Gaul was more generous than others when dividing the plunder. This made masses of warriors and warlords to flock to his banner, starting the Frankish power.

And to top that, as far as i know, one of the original expeditions which colonized Vinland was organized in between a few men and women in a village in Scandinavia, with one particular, very ambitious and aggressive women playing a leading role - in the establishment of the colony and its demise.

You could raise armies, raid, and even set up kingdoms and more, if you only knew what to give to people - promises of riches, plunder, glory, and even mere land to farm were held in very high regard in that era.

Self-handicapping combat performance is sort of like making a rule for yourself where your army can't exceed 40 men, or you can't declare yourself as a king.

Click to expand...

Nope, that would make you someone like Alfred I, who was a more intellectual type, not even regarded then as someone who could fight well according to standards of his time.

................

Its not like i dont like myself some good old carnage and mayhem delivered first hand. But more knowledge of history calls the person to pursue more realistic routes. Doing superheroics in a ~20-30 man battle? Pretty realistic. Doing it over and over? Unrealistic. Doing such things in 500-1000 man battles? Someone random would shove a javelin or spear up your *** and that would be it... He possibly wouldnt have been aiming it at you and wouldnt even know he was the one who hit you...

When i install VC balance mod version 9, any fort, city etc has a 'manage this town' selection in its interface despite i am not a lord or owner of that village. (sandbox start).

This is with latest warband and VCRE 2.036

kalarhan said:

unity100 said:

Could it be that the Steam version and non steam version of VCRE are different?

Click to expand...

they should be the same, make sure you have the full download with ~1.92GB

that file, as a example, should be at /Viking Conquest/Textures folder

Click to expand...

Yep. Its only 1.28 gb. Definitely something was wrong with the download.

Thanks.

Domgordo said:

I know this topic is old, but the problem still exists and there are still peoples like me playing something like brytenwalda and when u search on google u find this here.

I think i figured out that u need to go into the Reports Menue and than go to the menue companion mission reports. After that it seems that all your companions come back after a few days, u dont need really to rest, there are coming back just like u send them out to do something.
I got all my Companions back now after a few days and i lost all my 8 , the first of them months of gameplay before (Thought there are death ) but ended up with zero, which makes it really hard, because u have no bonusses for medical, tactics, party speed and so on. But after i clicked every day into the companions menue, all the companions returned after a few days, still the old that i lost months of gameplay before.

Maybe someone playing some of the mods with that problem too and it helps them out

Click to expand...

I was having this problem, and this solution fixed it for me. thanks.

Tingyun said:

VC mods generally aren’t compatible with each other.

There are a few exceptions:

1) You can use VC Balance Mod 9.0 together with the Dark Age graphics Modpack (a smaller compatibility version of the Dark Age Mod) by following the compatibility instructions here: https://www.moddb.com/mods/vc-balance-mod/downloads/compatibility-patch-vc-balance-mod-and-dark-age  . The same would apply to using the compatibility version of Dark Age with any mod that a) doesn’t change graphics and b) either doesn’t alter module.ini or provides a compatibility version

2) You can use the shield retextures mod with any other mod by installing the shield retextures last. The download link says inactive, but it still works: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,357036.0.html

3) You can use VC Tweaks Tool 1.2 (https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,348186.0.html) together with any mod that makes its source code available in the Tweaks Tool format. VC Balance Mod 9.0 does, not sure if any others do.

In general, VC modding isn’t like playing an Elder Scrolls game where you try to shove many mods in. Insteadm you will probably end up using 1 or 2.

Click to expand...

Great thanks. That's going to be great help.