搜索结果: *

Instead of double clicking the .py files to open them (or hitting enter etc.), you have to right click them. Then instead of choosing "Open" choose "Edit with IDLE". Annoying I know!

That's assuming you've installed Python (and IDLE comes with that) and have got that working. Look for one of the tutorials on here (there's one stickied I believe) on how to get Python working in Vista.

Thanks for the reply, that gives me some possibilities. But is there any way to make this faction specific? So if I wanted to battle against the English on a scene, King Richard would spawn, but if I went up against the French, King Louis would spawn (or for the native Swadian King etc.).

Perhaps some "if clause" like try_begin, if faction is "English" then "spawn Richard" (via SonKidd's method above) ... try_else, if faction is "French" then "spawn Louis".

What command can I write to compare factions? For example, what should I put in the bold part here:
(eq, faction?, fac_kingdom_england) -- I'm trying to write the "if faction is "English"" part here.

I have exactly the same problem as vuk.

I modded the game as follows, then transferred the edited files (i.e. scripts.txt) to 2 of my friends computers. At first, it seemed to work perfectly. I hosted the game, all the new equipment was there to choose, and I spawned (as the host) with all my new equipment.

My friends connected to the game, selected the team, and all the equipment was there to choose. However when they spawned, they spawned without ANY of the equipment they selected, new or old, so they spawned naked (apart from that brown rag they wear underneath). It was only me who had any equipment. All the bots had equipment though.

Then my friends took turns hosting, they spawned with all their equipment, but me and anyone else who joined didn't. This only occured on the troops we edited, playing as another class or faction was fine.

I don't know why this is, so sadly it seems this method does not work (unless someone knows a correction).

So I'm having to look for this module editor. I have a module editor called Mod Tools, it's the one everyone uses and it edits the text files (troops, item_kinds1, factions, parties, party_templates) and all the python files people talk about. But where the hell are these .py files??? Do I have to download them?

I agree with you on that, Lotus Dragon, Oskatat, Beserker Pride; and you are right, I think I have overlooked weapon proficiencies as far as single player goes (if weapon speeds increase with levels then there is no problem there). As for warband (i.e. multiplayer, no single player yet - that I know of - so I cannot comment); this is where I feel the hand to hand combat is lacking. You can't level up, and it feels as if you're stuck forever on the most basic weapon proficiency level.

You've drawn to my attention then that perhaps the problem is with the standard proficiency level of a player in warband (multiplayer, beta). It is surely too low. I would propose it be increased to make things feel and look more realistic and exciting.

So for multiplayer, shouldn't I expect to play as a soldier with at least some training rather than, in medieval terms, forever as a peasant; yet dressed in heavy armour and commanding an army; who acts like they have never held a sword before? As an example, consider even a complete novice lumberjack/timbersports person - they would know that if the aim is to chop a block into two in the shortest amount of time; and that it can be achieved in a matter of a few seconds, they shouldn't 'charge' their axe for 2 seconds by their side before each swing. Now give that block arms, legs, a brain, and a weapon and know that if you wait around like you have to in warband before your attack actually gets thrown, its going to hit you! Only in warband (multiplayer), it doesn't, because it's just as slow as you are.

Being able to kill a horse then the knight immediately afterwards sounds awesome, albeit a little extreme! I am hoping the weapon speeds get increased to more practical levels in warband multiplayer - at the moment those actions seem to take about 8-10 seconds... I've tried it a few times in the beta (killing a horse, then going to kill its knight), but I usually get stabbed in the back with my sword in the air waiting patiently for it to finally thrust towards the knight.

My realism doubtful?? Have you ever watched a lumberjack competition?? Heres one for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Z21xymLUho&feature=related "Championship" - How many swings was that in 13 seconds?? And they moved around to the other side of the block in between!

Lumberjacks can swing an axe, dislodge it from the wood, and have it swinging again in less than one second (proof? watch the link). Did you notice how they charged the axe for a second or two to the right before swinging it to the left of the block? What about that "second" whilst the "muscle [groups] are reversing?" (thats a relatively instant process by the way). You don't - that's because that doesn't happen in real life 'battle' or competition contexts where speed is vital.

And in chopping a block of wood, you would hold the axe above your head for a second to take in as much breath as possible to exert a more efficient downward strike. You usually only do it on a downward strike because having your arms above your head naturally expands your lungs. That 'second' you see is not a biological limitation of the muscles! It is effectively 'taking a breather'. Its easy to see why this wouldn't happen in a battle or in a lumberjack competition.

If you want to know realism in sword fighting, try watching Kendo or Fencing or some other swordmanship. That's as real as it gets today. Still, i've seen 70 year old men deliver 3 - 4 slices to a bamboo stick in one second.

Refer back to the link I posted of "Mount & Blade melee fight", can you now see why the hand to hand combat in this beloved game needs some improvements? The speed at which the attacks are delt is, i'm afraid, far from realistic, and as a result, it misses out on vital aspects of hand to hand combat such as reaction, leaving only timing of an apparent limitation in a game animation for the player to master and enjoy...

Go to youtube and search for "mount and blade melee fight" etc. I don't understand how you can say the attack speeds are fine? Those with swords wait so long prepping their attack, it looks and feels like a bug to me.

For example, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88okaasi-pc "Mount & Blade melee fight". Watch the opponent at ~30-50 seconds. See how you have to raise your sword above your head before you attack? That part seems to take about a second to complete, it's as if your arm momentarily freezes above your head.

As I practice this game I realise the skill/trick involved in warband melee combat is actually about timing your attack with respect to this prepping of the sword, i.e. clicking the mouse to attack 5 metres before your oppenent then you will deliver your blow when you reach him. It's not about reacting as actual sword combat or any other melee game ive played is (Colosseum: Road to Freedom is a good multiplayer melee one), it's about timing this 'charge' before the attack.

I'm saying combinations would help this as we wouldnt have to pull the sword back and wait for each attack to happen, and would no longer be inclined to this 'let's take turns throwing attacks and blocking' policy I find all to often in warband: Once my opponent has thrown their attack, I know it will be a good 2 seconds before they'll ever hit me again so that is when I make my move.

Drizzlin and Oskatat, I have tried swing left/right but usually I find my attack direction is difficult to choose properly (it's usually chosen with respect to the position of my opponent although ill experiment with the other non-default settings) and it still feels far too slow than it should be.