Search results

Is there any way to further improve thrust attacks through manipulating the values present in the actions text file? I want to make spears effective against face hugging ai. Increasing the animation speed doesn't have the desired effect, nor does adjusting the two values that define the range of motion for each segment of the animation. Even changing the range of motion to something absurd like -100->50 doesn't improve their close range performance. I even tried pairing it will manipulating the melee_damage_speed_power line in the module ini as I expected reducing the value would eliminate speed penalty imposed from face hugging enemies, but no luck.

I think there must be some tweak that can be done because I remember playing an old mod with an antiquity theme where spears retained their ability to damage opponents even at close range.

Any suggestions?

Fleebusia said:

I'm trying to accomplish something very similar. In my case, I would like to make it so lords stop recruiting trash non-culture troops. I've found that I have to manually remove these units from them every day, so as to avoid them getting bloated down with lots of generic units that lack cohesion with the main army.

It seems that with every major battle my lords will recruit hundreds of different unit types which makes it a nightmare for both logistics and party tooltip bloat.

Tweak 17 i) Appears to have functions to deal with this. I haven't implemented or tested it myself but it looks like we could simply lower the relation modifier for AI to get the desired effect. Probably not a perfect solution but it's all I could find.

It might also be worth mentioning that there exists a blacklist function that is currently only applied to Noldor troops. (Tweak 17 h) With that it might be possible to inject other troop indexes into the formula so it applies to other faction troops.

Edit:

Maybe you could scrap all that. See (Tweak 15 i) This relates to prisoner recruiting based on culture.

Click to expand...

Hmm if I have time next weekend I'll play around with that and see if I can get the desired result.

Edit: based on the description it might only work for player kingdom. I wouldn't know how to go about making it a global solution.

Is there any method to prevent lords from recruiting/rescuing non-faction units into their army? Right now it's not uncommon to see lords with a significant portion of their army composed of hateful faction/soldiers from the faction they're currently fighting and I find that really irritating especially when I play without banners over friendly troops and they field faction troops belonging to my faction.

I would like to suggest investigating the possibility of overhauling the current formations ai with something along the lines of the osp linked here:


For me the only negative of PoP is the absence of a more tactical battle system. Everything else is great. But current formation ai seems to barely be useful for player and breaks for Lord armies as soon as they suffer a casualty. I hope it will be considered to upgrade this before porting to BL.

It doesn't even need to be so in-depth. Utilizing horse archers as example, perhaps it possible to bake-in tactics and formations with the simple "charge" command. Where shield infantry form wall and try to tie down bulk of force and two handers attempt flank all without player intervention. Maybe create duplicates of charge order with left/right flank bias that creates formations, and preserve regular charge to be used once enemy is broken. Perhaps bake-in defensive formations to "hold position" where infantry form square around ranged units.

I hope you will consider my request, thank you.

The horse archer ai is about as good as can be expected I think. It's an extremely difficult thing to counter, and that's what makes it both enjoyable and frustrating. When I engage an army with a large percentage of mounted archers they circle my units and fire into the formations, that's exactly what I would want and expect from a mounted archer. The problem is that infantry divisions and formations are too limited to provide much counter play. For example if I want to form a defensive shield wall to encircle my more vulnerable units I have to have 4 distinct shield bearing units each assigned to their own division and then manually place their shield wall formations to form a defensive perimeter, whereas if I had a defensive square option for a formation I could use a single division. The same sort of problem arises with foot archers, if I want to make a square covering every flank I need another four divisions and four unique archers to fill them.

Ideally I'd like to see a "formation" be something that encompasses all infantry. Where if I order a "defensive perimeter" the shield bearing units form up and hold the outermost rank, followed by pikemen bracing in the rank behind, and then a few meters back the archers form the innermost ranks and cover every angle of approach. Essentially an outer square of shields and pikes, and an inner square of ranged units.

There should also be offensive oriented formations that cover the entire infantry spectrum. Basically templates for the whole army which offer more tactical depth instead of always forming up infantry to my left and archers in front and then having to micromanage individual divisions.

I think something like infantry wide formations should be doable, especially with assigning special divisions to pikemen and also two handed infantry. I've seen other mods that have been able to make certain units be placed in specific divisions without player input (sayazn banner holders and drummers for example), and the rest is just making the existing formation options include the entire army, or selective divisions to accomplish the tactical intent of said formation, and finally making the ai lords prefer to utilize an organized army instead of ordering a charge and hoping for the best.

I think it could be possible to see two ai armies march their shield walls into each other, order two handed divisions formed on the right/left flank to advance and then charge the flanking division into the side/rear of the main shield wall, however after a certain amount of casualties on either side it's determined to pull back and reform.

I know the code can read army unit composition and attempt to act accordingly, I also know other mods like tholobaria can move the entire army and employ an army wide fighting doctrine. I think it should be possible to tie the two together to get really incredible and dynamic battles.

I realize that you've probably moved away from the mod, but should you ever decide to return to it the imifir confederation faction needs some love. Their pavise infantry gets crushed in nearly every confrontation, seems to be because their spears just perform poorly in the face hugging combat warband ai loves. It also seems that the crossbowmen don't deploy their pavises when under player control. I hope the passion for this project returns, this and sayazn are my favorite mods and both are incomplete

At least this one is done enough to have a very enjoyable campaign. Great work.

Well it seems version 2 is far more playable as it lacks the population mechanic, I recommend anyone wanting to try the mod to start there. Morghs editor is a must to fix certain troops having missing items or incorrect skills though, anyone wanting to play and enjoy this mod will be able to fix most issues on their own without digging into code with morghs.

I suggest editing your chosen factions troops to have identical branches of common musket men so you can deploy them in configurations other than one giant line. Additionally outfit your character with appropriate officer equipment because the markets don't stock their respective factions attire reliably if it all.

Version 3 has the better ai and performance, so it's a shame to give that up, I do hope someone familiar with warband modding decides to fix it up someday. If you decide to try version 3, custom troops need to be edited in morghs to work properly. There are three entries for each type of custom troop one just called custom troop which needs it's skills filled in because they are blank, one named custom troop equip which you can leave alone, and one called custom troop selection which needs it's inventory management skill increased from 2 to 10 so that the missing items like boots and ammo are available for selection in game.

I may explore fixing scenes and npc spawns down the line, but that will be the extent of my contribution in repairing this flawed masterpiece. We need a coder unfortunately.

Just wanted to say this is a gorgeous mod and really enjoy the faction distinctions. Only a couple hours in but it's really great so far. Only nitpick would be the rather silly battle voices. Sounds like someone just speaking "raaaa" and "ouch" quietly into the microphone lol.

Can you at least redact the features that are the biggest bug bringers? If you just cut out some things and made a sayazn lite that would be much better than the current broken iteration. Specifically the population system seems to fail after a few months game time. The ferry system is just unneeded all together. All village elders need to be accessable from menu because their entry points in the scene are wrong.

Custom troops is an easy fix. You just need to give them appropriate skills, and give the selection troop inventory management 10 so all of the equipment is actually viewable, I fixed this for my download of the mod, but I don't understand code so can't do more than that.

Consider it please.

While discord may be the more preferred method of submitting feedback and suggestions, it's format is ill suited to the task so I'm dropping it here.

This mod needs to shift away from being a native warband module with a Warhammer face lift. The biggest thing that needs an overhaul in my opinion is troop recruitment and progression, it's impossible to get the Warhammer experience within the standard warband model.

Secondly I strongly encourage taking inspiration from the last days mod in several key areas. First certain units only being recruitable from specific locations. Second the ability to permanently destroy settlements though I'd add that faction leaders should be able to build new settlements on the razed plot though it should take months. Third the possibility for Lords to permanently die. Fourth the battle maps which are significantly larger and feel like real places because the terrain is generally flatter and transitions well into hills and valleys.

The strength of TLD is that it is an actual campaign the player can help to win or lose. That is something that is a core Warhammer experience and should be seriously considered with an eye towards TLD for inspiration.

As for troop progression, recruitment, and balance... Well right now these things are terrible because of the attempt to place them within the native warband system and the apparent goal of including every possible permutation of unit present in tabletop.

Hopefully this is something you are open to addressing. I suggest completely abandoning native recruitment, troop trees, individual soldier leveling, and companions then building systems more in line with WFB tabletop to replace them.

Here's how I'd go about it. Party size is reduced to half of your leadership skill plus a base value of 1, +1 more for mercenary, +1 more for Lord, +1 more for faction leader. So party size is literally 1(minimum)-9(maximum).

Instead of companions the player finds unit leaders to fill out their party. These are men and women who when hired as companions bring a unit of troops into battle with them.

Troops are tooled to specific roles and no longer level up, instead their unit leader levels up and has skills which increase how fast they can replenish casualties. An empire spearmen troop leader may always bring say 20 spearmen, whereas a chaos champion leader may only bring 5 champions. This system allows for the replication of something like the point system in tabletop.

This removes the need to grind high tier units and instead makes the player consider the cost and use of each unit type, the strength and weaknesses, and overall army composition. Wanna play horde? You got it! Wanna be a small elite force? You got that too!

Next I'd make tactics a head to head stat. If you engage an enemy Lord with 5 tactics and you have 6, the difference of 1 is then subtracted from his party, so his bottom unit leader will not be available to assist in that battle. No one should be reduced below 3 unit leaders or to say it another way 3 squads. When multiple Lords are fighting their tactics are added together with their allies to determine the outcome, but whoever has the lowest tactics score individually is the one whose units are denied the field down to the minimum 3 then it continues on down the line.

Severely wounded squad leaders who cannot participate in a fight cannot field their troops.

Hopefully I've provided enough detail for people to see the potential of this design, I think for anyone familiar the tabletop experience it is very obvious.

I know a tremendous amount of time and effort has already gone into this modification, and I don't know how much longer the team wants to continue developing it, but if the idea is to keep it going I hope you will adopt these suggestions.

Cheers

Leberecht Reinhold said:

Do you really think MB is broken? Care to explain? I mean, its not perfect but thats far from broken....

And I think a Sword is much better than a Bayonet. Once the bayonet has charged, if hes stuck in a long duel, he is doomed. Just as it should be. The bayonet do crazyomgnuclear damage when you are charging because of the speed bonus on a thrust with a polearm. After that, a facehug will make it do funny damage, and it can be outspammed with a sword. Not to mention the side-attacks work well with those dodgers...
And yes, you see more bayonets winning the day than swords. BTW, how many bayonets are per sword? 10? 20? 

Click to expand...

The MB melee system is terrible in multiplayer because all melee devolves into idiotic circle strafing zerg fests where organization goes out the window. The fact that you can move left and right and back all while attacking is ridiculous for any game trying to capture a semblance of reality.

The charge does tremendous damage, as it should. Even in close range I rarely need more than one or two stabs with it. And yes the saber can "outspam" the bayo, but the bayo can easily stay out of range. And the side attacks really don't do much of anything in regards to the circle strafing.

You have a point about bayonets outnumbering swords, but I am not talking about how many kill icons I see with the bayonet. I am talking about how many sword on bayo duels I have witnessed where the guy with the bayonet wins via the circle, stab, repeat method. Often times against more than one attacker.

But all of this really is not what my major complaint was. I simply feel that splitting someones skull with ANY weapon should be the end of it.

Also remove the hair from the damn hats lol. It is so ridiculous.

GerDeathstar said:

PsychoThruster said:

Also the officer's saber seems underpowered. Today was my first day playing and on two separate occasions I was able to flank and enemy position unnoticed. I came right up behind an enemy and delivered a chop to the back of his head only for him to turn around and stab me, killing me instantly with the bayonet. Not quite right imo.

Click to expand...

No.
If you think bayos are absolutely superior to swords I challenge you to a duel, bayo vs sword. I'm pretty sure you'll be convinced otherwise after that.

As it is, bayonets are very easy to block, but should you not be able to do that you should be punished - this punishment comes in form of devastating damage delivered by that weapon. The inability to perform sideswings with it is balanced out with the range and damage advantage it has.

Click to expand...

Your point is moot, I don't care about the advantages and disadvantages in a head on "duel". I think that the hit box for the head should apply to melee as well. If can flank and enemy and deliver a chop to his skull I shouldn't have to take it past that regardless of what weapon I am wielding.

It is also worth noting that even when engaged in a duel, blocking is a rare occurrence. Instead players typically try to circle strafe and side chop/stab/bash each other. I have seen far more bayos win the day than sabers too. Maybe these people aren't experts at the game, but they are the majority. Now in a duel between two players who are very familiar with the intricacies of the mount and blade melee system(as broken as it is in multiplayer) and are able to duel without interference from other players...Then yes, the saber probably is much more proficient. However this is not a game about Napoleonic dueling between an officer and a ranker. This is a game about Napoleonic warfare, and under that pretense the saber, perhaps even the entire melee system is insufficient.

I have spoken with trethmeier through private messages about my joining, and he has asked me to post here to make it official. I look forward to working with and growing with this regiment.

Information that may be useful for who's command I am placed under: I work most weekdays, some late hours are doable. Most weekends are free. I am on Eastern Standard time which I believe is UTC-4.

I plan to have Team Speak operational sometime this weekend. My headset is broken, but I doubt it will be an issue if a recruit cannot speak.

Anyway, looking forward to this.

-Regards

Remove the hair from the hats and let the player's pre-selected hair stay in its place. Kinda annoying seeing people with blond hair and red goatees.

Also the officer's saber seems underpowered. Today was my first day playing and on two separate occasions I was able to flank and enemy position unnoticed. I came right up behind an enemy and delivered a chop to the back of his head only for him to turn around and stab me, killing me instantly with the bayonet. Not quite right imo.

Looking for a regiment, new to the game but decent at infantry and willing to learn any position. I'd like to be part of a well established regiment with a large number of members who value tactics and strategy. I am on Eastern Standard Time(UTC-04). Please PM if you are interested in having me as a recruit.

I should first state that I have no experience or ability in regards to modding. This is merely an idea for those that do have such skills and would be interested in such a project.

My idea in a nutshell is a gladiator game, historically accurate, and would feature the finest of arena combat in Rome. The player would take on the role of a slave who is trained to be a gladiator and forced to fight for the amusement of the mob. There is plenty of both single player and multiplayer potential for such a project, and either direction would be very rewarding in my opinion.

Regardless the fundamentals would be as follows: Atmosphere, Depth, Immersion, Intense combat.

I feel many of Warband's existing systems would have to be heavily modded in order to truly captivate on this idea, but from other work I have seen it seems possible. 

I have many detailed ideas on how I feel the intricacies of the game should work, however this is not the place for that. If there is a mod team out there interested in this project please let me know. We can run through my ideas and plan out exactly what the mod would entail.