搜索结果: *

Lav 说:

AnuErebus 说:

Having a little trouble after adding some new companions and either i'm blind or am searching for the wrong keywords. Anyways, my companions appear in game just fine, alongside all the old ones.  I can recruit them and they all require the proper payment ect. The problem is that their dialogues are all mixed up. In the course of a ten line conversation I'll have ten lines from ten different companions. I didn't see any obvious errors when I looked back through my module_strings so I'm hoping somewhere here has some idea as to what's going on. I'm not getting any errors when I compile the module system and all the other strings in game seem fine so the issue seems localized to companion dialogues.

点击展开...

Have you modified your script_initialize_npcs to correctly assign strings to companion slots? Note that the script looks like it's supposed to support any number of companions, but actually contains a line which assumes that there are exactly 16 of them. Namely, the line:

插入代码块:

                (store_mul, ":string_addition", ":slot_addition", 16),

If it hasn't been fixed, it might provide results similar to what you describe.

点击展开...

Yeah, thought I checked that, but evidently I made a typo and had the wrong number there. Thanks for the help. 

Having a little trouble after adding some new companions and either i'm blind or am searching for the wrong keywords. Anyways, my companions appear in game just fine, alongside all the old ones.  I can recruit them and they all require the proper payment ect. The problem is that their dialogues are all mixed up. In the course of a ten line conversation I'll have ten lines from ten different companions. I didn't see any obvious errors when I looked back through my module_strings so I'm hoping somewhere here has some idea as to what's going on. I'm not getting any errors when I compile the module system and all the other strings in game seem fine so the issue seems localized to companion dialogues.

Something I would like to mention in the tournaments. It's super easy to win even with low combat skills if you do a few things. First equip A lance, bow (Or crossbow but you can't shoot backwards with a crossbow) and Horse. Then make sure everyone else in the tourney doesn't have access to any weapon set that has a shield. From there just ride around lancing whoever you can hit without getting yourself stuck. If you do get stuck, block with shield until you can escape. When there is only one other enemy team  they should all start to follow you. At this point, switch to bow, turn around and start shooting them, priority being anyone who is mounted. Doing this almost makes tournaments stupidly easy, even a level 1 character is likely to come out on top this way.

Ok, thanks for the reply. An updated source would be wonderful. Since strings.txt is one of the files I changed, trying to figure out how to fix its text file would be a major pain without the module system. Guess I'll just bide my time until then and avoid tourneys when I play.

I found an odd issue with the patch. I swapped the presentation.txt files, but when I entered a tournament in game all the names next to the sliders were missing/replaced by random letters and symbols. Do I need to more than simply update the presentation file for expanded? If so what files do I actually need?  I have a few minor tweaks I made using the Dev suite (Changed/added a few items/companions and inventory access during battle) and I'd like to keep them in game if all possible so replacing all my files isn't exactly preferable.

Not sure what everyone's issue with the lance is. Lance for me means 99% of the time guaranteed win (The other 1% being random events such as couched lances from behind). Sure you might have to do the pokey horse dance if your opponent latches onto your tail but that's usually only 2-3 pokes before their horse goes down and then a ride by to finished them off. The main tricks are, get your opponents to fight each other while you ride around and for other horse/lance users, master the thrust. Thrusting has greater reach than a couched lance and at speed with a decent polearm skill it's still almost always a 1 hit ko. It's especially good to know how to thrust for the 1v1 lance on lance events. The AI seems to usually thrust to out reach your couched lance, but if you thrust at near max range you'll outdistance them and score the quickest victory you can possibly achieve. Only problem with lance arises when you get unhorsed, in which case given how painfully slow the lance thrust is you might be better off with your firsts.

The hardest to win is foot archer vs infantry with shield. But if you shoot the legs you'll get under the forcefield and if they get close dodge that first swing and then kick/knife spam them until they die. Works best if you can pin them against a wall and facehug them.

Personally the only fights I have trouble with end up being me on foot vs a swarm.

Pro Tip: If your opponent is on a horse and you are not. Don't kill the horse. Run them into a wall and attack them from behind. Riders can't attack backwards so it's a free kill if you get them stuck. Plus if there are still other enemies you can then steal their horse and wreak havoc.

He can also be behind a random tree, inside one of the buildings with an open door, in the fields... General rule of thumb seems to be that he'll always be on the outskirts and that the further away from town something is, the more likely that's where he's hiding. And if you can't find him even in the middle of the day when everyone is walking around, try leaving and coming back. Sometimes he'll appear when he wasn't around before.

JosieJ 说:

AnuErebus 说:

Is it common for lords of an opposing faction to go out of their way to loot the player's villages? I just noticed this, since I set it up (by looting the village beforehand) so I got a village (Kulum) well out of the way of any fighting. Except, in every single war, some lord (Or in the Khergit's case the entire armed forces of the faction) heads down to my village and loots the place.

点击展开...

Yes, it's extremely common.  Enemies will bypass the entirety of the map and run the risk of engaging superior enemy forces just to prioritize your fief.

点击展开...

Silly AI. Well, thanks for the answer. Time to see if there's an easy script change to fix that or just be content with border villages.

Is it common for lords of an opposing faction to go out of their way to loot the player's villages? I just noticed this, since I set it up (by looting the village beforehand) so I got a village (Kulum) well out of the way of any fighting. Except, in every single war, some lord (Or in the Khergit's case the entire armed forces of the faction) heads down to my village and loots the place.

I ran into a problem after making a few tweaks in game (increased morale and increasing party sizes being the latest changes ontop of new troops/patrols/inventory access for sieges/bandits/companions/and there are probably a few other tweaks I've forgotten about). Some of the lords in my test game refuse to leave whatever town/castle they were in at some early point in the game. As is maybe 1/4 of the lords seem to be acting normally while the other 3/4 are just holed up "recruiting" more troops. Trying to figure out if this is a bug or the a result of my tweaks.

I read about the character over leveling that caused something similar, but all I did to start this test character was given him about 1.6 million denars, 35ish skill points and I think the highest stat increase was 21. Also, reverting him to a level 1 state didn't seem to affect the lords actions. I've done similar things for test characters without problems.

Going to start a new game to see if this is repeatable and if it is I'll revert some of my changes to see what exactly made this happened. I figured I'd post this here first though to see if anyone has any ideas.

Alyiakal 说:

Speaking of close ranged combat... What tactics and builds do you use to go up against massed AI? I was using a two-handed weapon but found that in sieges, it's pretty much useless as your own troops will rush up the ladder to facehug the enemy, meaning if you're in the front, you're going to die as you can't even get enough space to swing your weapon, while if you're in the back, you might as well pull out a bow as you wait for the traffic jam at the top of the ladder to finish.

In the field, it's not so bad because you're (possibly) mounted and can escape the facehugging, as well as being able to maneuver your men a bit better...

点击展开...

In sieges I've found the most effective strategy (But also one of the more dangerous ones.) to be the first one on the walls, so long as there's the slightest exploitable gap in the defenders up top. That includes jumping off the ladder/siegetower onto the crenellations on either side (the jump can fail but it's often a very easy way to end up on the walls and avoid the initial swarm). What I do from there is then rush through that gap, and head towards one of the towers to wipe out the archers there. Along the way I'll take swings where I can and block whatever I see but the key is to keep moving and not get boxed in. Once you've cleared the towers you can also rush back to backstab whatever swarm of enemies is currently engaged with your forces.

What I've found is this has a lot of positive effects. For one it seems to spread out the formation at the top of the ladder. That allows more of your initial wave to swarm onto the walls leading to a much more decisive initial charge, and a battle that's faster and potentially less bloody for your side. The second effect is that you can rush and take out those groups of archers that otherwise usually wind up inflicting a large number of casualties (And sometimes freeing up the units that would have otherwise have rushed the archers to assist the main force).

At the same time though in that rush you can find yourself dead or severely wounded rather fast. In other words, if it works it does so beautifully, but if it doesn't that battle will be over even faster than if it had been successful.

In terms of weapons, wheem covered it pretty well. Fast blunt weapons such as Military Hammer against armour, fast high damage cut weapons such as axes against everything else. 2hs can be useful when you have room such as on top of the towers with archers (provided they aren't actually shoot you), but otherwise I'd stick to 1h+shield and a crossbow/bow for siege assault.

Caba`drin 说:

AnuErebus 说:

Is it possible to give lords custom parties? By custom parties I mean have certain lords favor different unit types. Such as Graniwad having more knights in his army or Haringoth focusing more on infantry. Or are lords forced to follow the generic patterns of their faction?

点击展开...

'course.

Lumos 说:

@AnuErebus: Would be possible, probably with a script to customize reinforcements received by the different lords.

点击展开...

Specifically, see "script_cf_reinforce_party"

点击展开...

Thanks for the response. The "script_cf_reinforce_party" line helped immensely where general searches turned up nothing and lead me to this topic: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,137831.msg3313067.html#msg3313067

Hopefully that's what I need to do. If not I'll probably be back here asking more question.

Is it possible to give lords custom parties? By custom parties I mean have certain lords favor different unit types. Such as Graniwad having more knights in his army or Haringoth focusing more on infantry. Or are lords forced to follow the generic patterns of their faction?

MrExpendable 说:

tzlop 说:

Captured Joe 说:

...as long as the Huscarls outnumber the Knights with a good marge.

点击展开...

As much as I hate Swadia, I agree to this comment.

点击展开...

Huskarls are cheaper then knights so that shouldn't be a big problem.

点击展开...

In terms of upkeep yes, huscarls are cheaper. In terms of training, Knights are tier 5. Huscarls are tier 6. Takes longer to get the same huscarl force as knights.

Are there any warband maps that have a grid overlay showing various coordinates? Or is Thorgrims still the easiest way to find coordinates?

Somebody 说:

Say we have a companion, Borcha. By default he looks like a horse thief, and wears a khergit armor. He's a troop entity. What he's wearing and his stats are data saved in the savegame so those require a new game to update. If you place an item before the khergit armor, he'll have the new item in his armor slot (which isn't a good thing) and every item after that is also screwed up in hero inventories.
Now, your party consists of yourself, Borcha, and a Farmer. If you put something before the Farmer, he'll get bumped down and you won't see him in your party. Say you change the farmer to be also able to upgrade to a bandit. That change is a reference between the farmer and bandit which will apply in your savegame.
Slots are data much like troop inventories. Pretty much everything you'll see in module_constant is a reference, but the game doesn't care what your references were called in the module system - it's all compiled into numbers now. So if Borcha's slot_troop_morality_type had a value of tmt_honest=4, and you later shifted slots so that slot_troop_morality_type = 63, the script accessing an older savegame will instead access what was slot_troop_morality_value.

点击展开...

Ok, so entities are the troops (and items?) themselves. Data is the information that tells what an entity wears/it's stats. And References are the things that tell what data/entities are put into certain places. Hope I got that all right.

On the dialogue problem side of things, I'm still not able to find the problem. I went through each and every line of scripts/troops/strings that relates to creating a companion but there's got to be something I'm missing.

Could you expand on what you mean by reference, entity and data changes? Or point me to something that gives me a little more depth? I'm relatively new at this so I must apologize if this is a dumb question, but what you said makes very little sense to me and I would like a clear idea of what to put in place before I make a serious attempt at a playthrough.


The tutorial is here: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,130815.0.html

That's what I followed. All original companions are completely intact and my new ones are all added as options afterwards. The companion number has been adjusted accordingly, and each section of the module_strings has an additional line for each new companion. Should I be looking then for a skipped dialogue? I.e, a jump from npc 17 to 19?

Ok, so simple question which I can't seem to find an answer to by searching around the forums. For changes I make do I always have to start a new game to see them take effect? Or are there only certain things that need a new game to see?


Also, after adding companions I've noticed that the existing ones have all had their dialogue shifted slightly in regards to their likes/dislikes and home info speeches. Ie, Jeremus talking about being an old lady when leaving the company. Did I misplace/remove a comma or paratheses? Or is there something else that's causing this? I've been looking through the Module_strings file but so far I can't find anything. Knowing exactly what I should be looking for would help immensely in tracking it down.

Note: I am not running into an Error, there's just a dialogue shift.

DogSoldieR 说:

I think there are some intrigue quests on the side to provoke a war. I have never tried that way yet though so cant tell you anything. Look out for border incidents too.

Hopefully some warmonger among us here can tell you more.

点击展开...

Yeah, if you find a bloodthirsty Lord within the faction you can get missions to attack caravans and villages to provoke a faction into declaring war. It doesn't always ensure war but it seems to work fairly well on neighboring factions. Also gives you a sizeable relationship boost with the lord who gave you the mission, but pretty much everyone else within the faction will get negative relationship points. So if you don't mind the entire faction hating you it can be a way to get war going.

Hard to beat the versatility of a bastard sword. Otherwise I just like the damage output/reach of 2 handers in general.