搜索结果: *

I'm having this issue.

I recently installed on a new computer.

When I try to launch the game from Steam, the Launcher doesn't even show up.

I've verified the cache, restarted, checked DirectX and drivers, reinstalled... nothing.

Considering I put almost 500 hours into the game before, this is extremely frustrating.

Hey, Sylke, this is a bit off-topic, but I think this is what you're looking for: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,130287.msg3142512.html#msg3142512

I was looking for them too.

The issue here really has nothing to do with difficulty. I always play at the maximum difficulty possible, and I typically wipe my save whenever I get defeated. If the game was simply too hard, I'd just turn it down. On the contrary, the issue is that the mechanic seems unfair and doesn't make much sense logically.

noosers, I understand what you're saying, but it doesn't really work out that way in practice. The AI isn't actually sophisticated enough to throw skirmishers at you. Almost every time the "join battle" mechanic occurs, it's when my party is chasing a smaller one, not vice versa. Furthermore, even if the enemy did throw skirmisher parties at me as a deliberate holding tactic, exactly how long do you think they'd survive? In real time, my battles are over in less than five minutes. Even if we're generous and assume that the battle takes longer than that, I'd be hard pressed to believe that some huge army covers several miles to attack me from the very beginning without even giving me a chance to retreat. This is especially true since my army is almost always much faster than whatever army joins my battles.

If I was given a time limit or something similar to defeat my enemies before the next wave arrives, thus simulating the distance they're covering, then I'd think it'd be a great feature. Unfortunately, I don't think the engine allows for that possibility, and, as it is, it's just frustrating.

SCGavin 说:

It's quite unrealistic though, if a 400-men-strong party joins a skirmish in a matter of seconds. That army needs to march to the battlefield first and by that time a skirmish would be already over. Even smaller parties can't immediately join the site of a skirmish, if it's too far away. So maybe the distance in which enemies are able to join a battle should be lowered.

点击展开...

This.

I should have mentioned it, but this is definitely one of the things that bothers me about the mechanic the most. Not only can armies join battle outside your spotting range, but you're not given any warning or option to avoid the conflict once you find out they're within range. Combined with the fact that you often can't flee, even if your party's map speed is much higher than your enemies', and you can find yourself unavoidably in a hell of an unfortunate predicament.

Hey folks, I was just wondering if anyone saw my last question.

Hinotori 说:

Is it possible to tweak the game so that you can enter battle without your troops?

Specifically, when it asks you whether to order your men to attack, send them in without you, or surrender/leave, it'd be nice if there were another option to have your troops let you go in alone. Ideally, if you win, you'd get the appropriate renown for defeating the enemy single-handedly.

点击展开...

Is it possible to tweak the game so that you can enter battle without your troops?

Specifically, when it asks you whether to order your men to attack, send them in without you, or surrender/leave, it'd be nice if there were another option to have your troops let you go in alone. Ideally, if you win, you'd get the appropriate renown for defeating the enemy single-handedly.

I'm going to have to bow out, unfortunately. I'm having some computer trouble, and I'm not sure I'll be able to play again by the time my turn is up.

No matter what happens from here on out, last night was a historic night.

As someone who has shed real tears over the plight of my country, I look to the future with cautious optimism, and with a healthy dose of hope.

I did vote for Obama, but more important than the man himself or his policies is what he represents. As it stands, Obama will not have many options regarding the problems facing this nation, and neither would McCain. But overnight, I've seen attitudes change across the world. I've seen the cynic rejoice, and the spiteful take hope. That is something McCain could never do, and that is why I voted Obama.

It's a long, painful road ahead of us. But maybe, just maybe, we can begin to repair the damage we've left in our wake.

Hey, I signed up at the bottom of page 3. Hope I wasn't too late.

Sign me up again. 

If this is restarted, please let us play as short as we like. This will allow people to hop on, get some play time in, and pass the game along without dragging it out. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm sure a lot of people would be content to participate even for just a few game days or so. I have a hunch that the fact that each player has such a long turn is tripping people up. That said, in my opinion, long turns are fine as long as the person's regularly updating and playing.

More specifically, here: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,47399.0.html

Retirement is just to give yourself a little epilogue if you're finished with your game (or if you want to check how you're doing). It doesn't serve any mechanical purpose.

There was a thread a while back that advocated the option of adding visible boundaries. I supported it and still do. Alternatively, some kind of warning when you're getting too far from the battle would work as well.

Next to trees, the map edges are my number one cause of fatality. 

TheMageLord 说:

Hinotori,
The script that updates the center notes doesn't even reference the player relation, so it would be a more complicated change. You'd have to go into the center_update_notes script and add a line to get the player's relation to the center and assign it to a reg#, and then you'd have to edit that line to include whatever reg# you assigned it to. Is this really necessary, though? It gives the number in the town menu, and it's not difficult to find the town to see your relation.

点击展开...

It's not particularly necessary, but it would be helpful, yeah. I tend to do a lot of village quests all over Calradia, and I often forget which villages like me and which are indifferent. However, I understand now why it's a pain, so if it's too much trouble, no worries.

Count, I asked earlier if it'd be alright if we play less than the allotted 30 days. I might not be able to finish that much in two days, but I'd still like to hop in for a bit. We can play as short as we like, right?

Zaro 说:

American media? I'm sorry but no-one outside of the US watches American media. Capitalistic consumerism? Americans didn't invent greed.

点击展开...

No one outside the US watches American media? Are you serious? I wasn't referring to the press, incidentally. You may call it a virus, which is a matter of taste, but culture is an export like any other product and it does have an effect on the countries that import it. If you don't notice it, it's only because it's become so accepted as to become the norm.

lol: Sorry, but Capitalism has been abundant in most significant cultures, and the US didn't really do anything to spread democracy, and don't actually live in a democracy (but rather a democractically-elected government). The US didn't set up 'democracries', it tried to set up pro-Western puppet regimes.

点击展开...

You misread my statement. I even started out by saying that the US did nothing to originate democracy or capitalism. They were certainly not original concepts. However, during the Cold War, the survival and spread of both ideologies was not a guaranteed thing, especially in an age where a few missiles in a small island off the coast of Florida could have meant a nuclear war. The United States was instrumental in winning the Cold War, for better or worse, through tactics that could, at best, be considered highly questionable, and, at worst, reprehensible. But that does not diminish the fact that it succeeded.

I've often thought that the United States will be remembered similarly to the Roman Empire as a few others have mentioned. Great in some ways, shameful and terrible in others. Such is the nature of power.

Those who have downplayed the US's impact on the world and history due to the length of its existence are not taking into account that the modern world and the ancient world are extremely different with regards to the progress of civilization. Take a look at the difference between the early 20th and 21st centuries (computers, the internet, and nuclear power being the first of many examples that come to mind) and compare the difference to that of, say, the first and second centuries CE, and you'll realize that a straight comparison doesn't make any sense at all. The US's role as a hegemonic power in this day and age in the world, and not just the Western one, is an unparalleled feat, and has had an undeniably profound impact both culturally and politically.

Though neither originated in the United States, it will likely be remembered for being the key influence in the spread of democracy and capitalism through its victory in the Cold War.

It will be remembered for introducing the nuclear age, forever changing the nature of diplomacy and military power, and it will be remembered for the information age through the internet, which was born here through ARPA and grew to maturity in Harvard, MIT, and other universities across the country.

Anyone can say what they like about American culture, but no other culture today has exerted as much of a globalizing force as have the American media and capitalistic consumerism. McDonalds, Coca Cola, Hollywood, Microsoft, these companies have not just exported products but lifestyles, and while the emphasis on materialism and quantity over quality are surely troubling outlooks, they have also contributed, in their own way, to stronger relations between nations out of the growing mutual dependence on trade and profit.

In the end, and this may very well be my own bias as an American who sincerely loves his country for all its tragic missteps through history, I believe it will be remembered more for the good than for the bad, if for nothing else, because history is often written from the perspective of those in power, and though the US's power is in decline and global sentiment is turning against it, it has already left its mark on cultures and history books around the world. Rome was unfortunate in that Christianity would evolve to be the true force that would emerge from its ashes, and Christian tradition does not paint ancient Rome in a good light (with good reason). Though much of Rome's legacy was indeed filled with vice and arrogance, I don't think Rome would ever have been judged objectively given the influence of the Church that succeeded it. While I don't believe in the "good intentions" of the United States, or, frankly, of any country beyond caring for its own self-interests, I do believe that, given the massive power it has wielded in its time, it could have been far worse. A look at the many only recently declassified documents of what went on within the Soviet Union can provide a sobering view on what the world could have ended up like.

I just noticed, but I also asked if the relation the player has with locations could also be shown in the encyclopedia. I'd assume it'd be something similar.

I'm guessing you'd add the text at the end of the following line:


but I'm not sure which variable to use in the relation line.