搜索结果: *

Savegame is the same I already posted, but not at that point, so... not sure it would be relevant in any way.
I'll be sure to take a screenshot if it happens again, though. Both for debug and comedy purposes

How can you "lose" a companion, in Native ?  I thought the traveler's use was to locate the companions you had met but who had left you, so you could talk to them again...

No, I know what I saw: Whichever character I talked to (except for the host, whose menus were normal), all the other (in DIFFERENT places of the mead hall) offered to join me, with as many companions, and for the same price, as the mercenary guy.

That's what's making me suspect that some pointer or whatever got mixed up following the death of the drunk.


If it happens again, I'll make sure to take a screenshot.

Thanks, Saxonation, but I'd rather have it corrected directly in the savegame, for instance (if I know what to change with a hexa editor), than have to wait for those dummies, live the hassle of transferring most of my troops to camp, then transfer them back to party after I defeated them, etc.

However, the advice is noted and appreciated, it could be a useful trick.


Here is the last savegame I use (same I posted in the LIVING DEAD post): http://dl.free.fr/rTvEGVtce

(Could a nice wizard admin/mod teleport the topic to the Support subforum, please ?)

Ok, then, but I'm still pretty sure that dead ones shouldn't rise to become adventurers, and that's what the alive ones should have done (instead of not appearing at all).

So, I guess there's merely an inversion in the condition when looking if the companion is dead or missing.

Please find my latest savegame here (I'll use it for all my current "reports", no need to DL it several times ^^): http://dl.free.fr/rTvEGVtce

Checked again the travelers, I cannot ask about my former companions, be them dead or deserters (yes, I'm very open-minded when companions abandon me )

I concur exactly with the original poster. The battle is VERY long, and, for my part, I play in hard (100% damage to me and my troops). I usually died around wave 3 or 4, especially seeing how I didn't have any troops obeying me after the first waves (it sure doesn't help that the enemy gets reinforcements but you don't until YOUR numbers get low enough, forcing the survivors to get ground to paste before numbers can be evened up a bit).

But the very tedious part is that you cannot afford to get damaged too much (else, you bleed out slowly, which, in this battle, means that you die and have to reload a previous save), you cannot afford to take many risks (a javelin in the back on wave 6, for instance, could just make you lose 2 or 3 hours of battle...), and so, you have to remain on the border of the battle. I used to go, on foot, around the shield wall, and harass enemies where I could get close without taking damage (or only a little bit, when unlucky), to help the battle. It worked quite well, but, after some time, I didn't have enough health to continue this tactic, and had to sit it out far away, looking at the AI armies without anything to do.

I had saved my horse (left it FAR away from the battle lines, for it to survive the constant arrow / javelin hailstorm), so I called it back, and spent 3/4 of the battle circling around at respectful distance, while the big boys had their fun hitting each other with sticks, and I had maybe 5% health left.
Then, when I saw that the battle seemed to near its end (lower quality troops, their shield wall dangerously approaching our side), I began hit and run tactics with lance, on horseback - aiming for the rear corner guys of the enemy wall, and being far enough before others turn on me, rinse and repeat.

Well, it worked, and I managed to finish the battle, after maybe 20 or 30 deaths, reloads, etc.


Not complaining about the difficulty, here, but the cumbersome feeling that this is a battle that I MUST go through ASAP (especially with the battleground following me around), and it being very punishing, and very long (it took me several hours to grind through it, and several near misses of several hours each, too, in addition to a lot of quick fails where I took a javelin in the 10 first minutes, or lost half my life on wave one, etc.), it might use a little reworking.

Additionally, the game speaks about two hills, but you don't really see them (there's a kind of low bump with a tree in the middle of the killing field, but it hardly counts as a "hill", in my humble opinion). I guess it's a historic fact that the battle was fought around two hills, but it could be grounds around which to split the battle in two halves, for instance. Like, first, you help around the "first" hill, then around the second one, or whatever.

To be honest, I didn't use shield wall, at the time (didn't know how), so I merely led my troops around the sides of the enemy shield wall, while they crashed against the shield wall of my allies, or I led my troops against the enemy skirmishers/archers, while the walls lumbered on, fighting each other, far away. But, as the battleground is quite small, and you control only a small portion of the forces, you see a "punish the victor" effect, in that even when you win the engagement, and start pursuing the remnants of their wall, suddenly, you get surrounded by a huge lot of enemies spawning around you, or nearly surrounded by enemies popping very near in front of you, and you have to flee quickly to avoid being slaughtered.

So, in a normal battle, it's fine, because usually you don't fight a lot near the enemy spawn point, and if everything goes wrong, you can back off, or you get stunned, etc, but here, it's a real pain.

I guess that enemy spawn mechanic cannot be modified, but it really harms the overall feeling of the battle, along with the fact that it's too damn long, and that you don't control a thing for a big part of the battle time. Why not split it in several 400-500 men each side battles (here, it was a monster 1250 vs 1250 battle), which would make it more manageable, and, more importantly, let you see a sort of "progress bar" in the battle, instead of wondering how many more waves you'll have to grind before it is through. Like, you would fight against a few waves, get a screen telling you how the enemy regroups, whatever, and you'd know you have reached a "completion threshold" in your battle. Then fight again, have another screen, and last part of the battle, or something like this.

Or, possibly, have the player be named "marshal" before the battle, in recognition of their awesome efficiency at arms, which would, at the very least, give them something to do during the whole battle, as they would be able to command all the troops, not only their own. That way, we could avoid having a lot of troops pursuing the enemy to their spawn point (where they WILL get slaughtered when enemy reinforcement pop up), move the battle away, and, overall, have a much more interesting gameplay. Plus, the possibility of changing history by having comparatively very few casualties

Yes, the kingdom is destroyed, the king has left, but some vassals remain (when looking at their "character" info sheet, in the notes, you see they are vassals of <former king name>, but when you click that name, then you get a "<former king name> has left", or disappeared, or wandered off... well, something that tells you that he's nowhere to be found, and unlikely to come back. As in, you defeated him, and he retired to create the turnip farm he always dreamed about, or something like this

As of now, I only have internet at work (problems at home), so I cannot post savegames right now, but those will come. On the support forum, when I get the net back.


[edit]
Also, thanks Saxonation for your suggestion. I guess it could work, but it would require lords to get captured a bit more consistently than they are, now (because everytime I attack them, I take a hit to relations with them, even if they were in the process of burning my village. Somehow, I guess these guys have a problem discerning right from wrong ^^). So I would need to attack them, capture them, then liberate them, and hope the bonuses I get when liberating them are higher than the relation hits I suffer when attacking and capturing them. Plus, if they're jerks, I'll only get a relation loss anyway, even if I let them go. Oh, well, I'll wait until the bug is understood before getting rid of them. Or I'll have to edit the save to change their allegiance, dunno.

I'll keep you guys posted, but I need to get the net back first.

kalarhan 说:

kzwix 说:

Too bad that's in Python

点击展开...

MBScript (Mount and Blade Scripting Language), not Python. Python is just the compiler. You can read/mod with learning just the very basic of Python (30min). Of course you can do a lot more if you invest time in the language, so you can create your own tools.

check Q&A in the modding section to learn more.

点击展开...

Yeah, I've somehow understood, in broad swaths, what goes on in the menus, for instance, or about the ship capture (if I get it right, that's a menu that's called after EACH sea battle, but is only displayed if we were the only allied force, and we still have room in the fleet, and we are lucky, etc. Right ?). It's quite strange to see each instruction as an entry in an array, but, eh, why not... I guess I'll have a look at that modding forum, yep. Thanks for the pointers.

kalarhan 说:

kzwix 说:

Where could I find those sources ?

点击展开...

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/board,416.0.html

点击展开...

Thank you kindly. Too bad that's in Python, it will make reading those a bit like learning to read on a latin codex

kalarhan 说:

a) world map, open party screen ("army"), select a group of soldiers (click them), change the division they belong to (spearman, archers, etc).

点击展开...

I specifically asked if there was a way to keep them in DIFFERENT groups, but STILL have them work together for shield wall. Like, a joint order in combat, or whatever. Well, I guess this means no, then.

kalarhan 说:

b) when you are taken prisoner the game takes a % of your purse. Same when your camp is looted. Money in the back is safe.
c) positive, neutral, negative relation with center
d) storyline is different than sandbox, as kingdom are hardcoded to exist. Sandbox has rebellions, but they are very rare
e) conquer all centers and hunt down the lords, after some time the game will detect they are landless

点击展开...

Thanks

kalarhan 说:

f) depends if you care about RP or not. Send as many as it makes sense to you. Remember you should aim to 100 RTR eventually

点击展开...

So, you're saying it's only from a roleplay point of view ?  No lord will come and complain that he was promised something by a companion, but I didn't deliver, or whatever ?  If so, then I guess I'll send everybody, especially seeing how I was deprived of the companions I would have liked to keep, like Morrigan, for instance.

kalarhan 说:

g) again RP or not. As a king is easier to be respected, as it makes diplomacy easier. As a adventurer/lord it is up to you.

点击展开...

Thanks. I guess I'll stay on the "good" side of history, then, as I fully intend to unify the area under my heels

kalarhan 说:

if you want to learn about specific numbers, mechanics, etc, the game code is available for download, so you can see how it works, the equations, etc at will

点击展开...

That's very interesting, especially considering that I'm a coder by trade. Where could I find those sources ?

kalarhan 说:

http://strategywiki.org/wiki/Mount%26Blade/Controls

VC has a few additional commands for F1-F... keys, but rest is standard WB

点击展开...

Thanks, very useful link !


I have other questions:

a) After some testing yesterday, I tried to make several groups "join" together in the shield wall, but to no avail: It seems that each troop group will make its "own" shield wall. I'd like to still have them in different groups, for better tactical versatility, but still able to form a single shield wall. Is it possible ?


b) Also, what good is the realm treasure ?  I had put money in it, but troop training by my minister is still taken from my purse, so I kinda fail to see the interest of that "bank". Unless, of course, it is used as a cheap exploit to be able to play a lot of "duel tournaments" in your turf, where those happen when you ask for a symbel which you cannot pay for (<1000 peningas will start a quick tournament, with the same rewards than "big" tournaments - I already got a nice horse and an armor from them ^^)


c) Does someone have the differences between low, normal, and high taxes ?


d) I have talked about a "respawning" kingdom (that was mostly while in story mode, I can't remember if that still happened while in sandbox, but I think it did), because it retrieved control of a fort and attached village through constant rebellions. Can that happen to fiefs in my kingdom ? If so, would that be because of very low relations between the fief and its lord ?


e) How to utterly wipe a kingdom from the map ?  I mean, sure, I need to take their fiefs, but... how to get rid of those pesky lords, who continue to come and raid my village while their faction no longer exists ?  Do I have to trounce them enough times until they get bored and leave ?  They still are adamant about not making peace with me (32 right to rule)


f) Should I send all companions for right to rule, or only those who match my "beliefs" ?  I mean, for instance, as a pagan respecting villagers (I refuse to burn and loot villages), I refused the help of Beda, who would have let people "know" I would be a good Christian queen; or the help of some other companions, advocating more rights for lords, and less for the people. Is that a mistake, or was I right in doing so, in order to not attract Christian lords, or tyrannic assholes ?


g) Is it interesting to be "hated" instead of respected ? To loot villages and monasteries on a regular basis, etc ?  I mean, sure, it grants money, but raising relations with locations is painfully slow, so... would that be a sound strategy, or was Machiavelli wrong, and being loved is much better than being feared ?

kalarhan 说:

1) pretty much

a low tax rate would help get better relations in the long term,

点击展开...

点击展开...

Ok, but... will a "high" tax rate LOWER their relations toward me ? What is the difference ? I mean, to raise relations, I build a school (+1 / week, if I'm not mistaken), and I do quests for them. So, if it costs me 10% per week to be on "low" tax, and I get, say, +2 relations / week, it might be nice, but if I lose half the income and I merely get +1 relations once per month, say, then its not interesting.

Do you have more information ?

kalarhan 说:

2) trying to make peace: yeap, raise your RTR, and the war needs to be fought for some time. The decision to accept a truce depends on several factors, like who is winning, what happened, armies strenght left, ...

点击展开...

Again, thanks for those generics, but... the kingdom in question is destroyed (Gwynedd). So, is it normal to still find lords of that faction, which is no longer "valid" ?  Isn't there a bug in the faction screen, say (like, instead of merely saying "it was destroyed", it could say that they no longer have any fiefs, but still fight on), or in the lord behavior ? Like, if their king gave up, and all is lost, maybe they should seek their fortune elsewhere ? If all is working as intended, then how to make them leave that dead faction ? Harass them until they get fed up of being beaten upon, and look for a better opportunity elsewhere ?

kalarhan 说:

4) you can train using custom battle to learn more about controlling ships

点击展开...

I'm not saying "I don't know how to control them". I'm saying I tried controlling them "finely", but that "Charge" and "Follow Me" seem to do the same thing (that is, make them charge the enemy), and that "Hold this position" doesn't seem to have any effect. Only "Stand Ground" makes them stop, it seems. Or, maybe, that's because ships tend to "station" far in front of the player ship ? Info would probably be of value, here

kalarhan 说:

5) depends on how you use them. Custom battle is a great way to try new tactics

点击展开...

Thanks, but a bit too generic, and not really what I asked. I mean, yes, from behind, javelins are VERY useful (one or two hits down even heavies), but, as I was saying, I don't know of a way to tell the troops to act "smart" (that is, for instance: do NOT get caught in melee by the big bad guys who are slow as hell, locked in their shield wall formation). Do I have to micromanage them all the time, or are they able of cleverness, once given a specific order which I do not know about ? Because, when facing said shield wall in melee, I do not have much time to give orders, usually.

kalarhan 说:

6) 1, 2, 3, ... to select a group

点击展开...

... yes, thanks. I use that all the time. But I'm not talking about giving orders to "Infantry" alone, or to "Skirmishers" alone. I'm talking about giving orders to SEVERAL GROUPS with the SAME ORDER. I've seen, on my screen, something like "Infantry AND Spearmen AND Cavalry: Charge !!!". Meaning that the order must NOT have been given to ALL troops (like after hitting '0'), but only to those three specific groups, and AT THE SAME TIME, not sequentially. That's what my question was about: How to select SEVERAL groups for orders at the same time ?

kalarhan 说:

7) up to you. Destroy them. Ignore them. Once you are playing sandbox its up to you to make the rules

点击展开...

I know I am able to let them rot on their small portion of the map (especially seeing as they don't seem to come for me), but I wanted advice on a conquest attempt, considering the given conditions. Would, say, veteran players, consider that "fair game", easy to capture, or would they consider it a tough nut to crack, better to come back to in large numbers, later on ? Or, formulated differently: Am I the one lacking skill (I play in difficult, and tend to win a large portion of tournaments I'm in, so I think I'm not that bad at fighting - but maybe I lack strategic skills, or I need to come with a huge percentage of heavies, instead of a "balanced" army, in order not to get utterly smashed by those lords...).
So, what would be your take on that situation ?

kalarhan 说:

8 ) Dead are dead

make sure you are playing latest game patch (2.02
when talking about storyline use spoiler tag

隐藏

spoilers go in here!

点击展开...

Ok, but I'm saying that people that are "dead" (or went away from me - it seems that it works the same way, and I won't be able to get them back) are said, by the game engine, to have engaged in adventuring, or have been raising their relations at a symbel, or whatever. Those are nice messages shown on the bottom-left corner of the screen, just like it would tell me that my men have drank one of my alcohol items, or whatever...

So, my question was, rather, WHERE is the bug ? Is it that a character that I know should be dead, and which is considered "dead", still generates random events about him ? Or is it that the character really isn't dead for the engine, but that it won't be displayed, even if I happen to meet him, but still will "live on" in the background ?


Hoping my reformulations were more accurate than the first time, please accept my regards, and renewed anticipated thanks for your time and answers

Hi.

1) A quick question about tax rate: I searched and found oblique references to the fact that, maybe, a low tax rate would help get better relations in the long term, but... I didn't find anything definite.
So, could someone tell me what a LOW tax rate entails, versus a HIGH tax rate ? (I don't have other options, right now, and I'm the queen and only lord of my faction, which comprises, as of now, only one fort and its attached village).

2) Also, when trying to make peace, they tell me to trip on my sword. Is it a lack of right to rule ? Or too low relations ? I ended the kingdom of Gwynedd (by capturing their only fort, which they only managed to keep through repeated rebellion against their conquerors), but I still see lords of their faction, which I get to defeat, but nobody will make peace with me. Any pointers ?  (Right to rule about 30, I guess)

3) Is there really a cap on the number of boats I can own ?  I had read about being able to name the height first ships, but I saw something about a 7-boat cap, and now I have just that number of Snekkjas... Do I need to sell one of them to make some room for the next war trophy ? (yup, captured most of them in battle, as befits a true conqueror).

4) Is there a way to make boats obey more "intelligently" ?  I mean, the "follow me" command looks like they understand "Charge !", and the only way to make them stop is to use the STAND GROUND command (F1-F4), because F1-F1 doesn't even work.

5) Are skirmishers worth it against lords ? In fortress assault, or, better, defense, they do just fine, because of crossfire on ladders, but against shield walls, they seem utterly inefficient, and even high-level skirmishers are stupid enough to get "charged" (that is, painstakingly slowly walked upon by the shield wall troops), then cut to ribbons. I couldn't find a command for them to "harass" (like, get in range, fire, then retreat), and, unless micromanaging them, can't make them try to get in the enemies back (behind the shields, obviously), where they can do real damage. Remark goes triple for archers and crossbowmen, who ONLY work well when not facing shields

6) I happened to be able to command several groups of troops at one time, with the same orders (like, "INFANTRY" and "SPEARMEN" and "CAVALRY"). How did I manage that ? Would that be CTRL number, or SHIFT number, or something like this ?

7) I begun with the story mode, so, obviously, Friese hates me, and has now declared war on me. The sad thing is that their country is small and isolated, and never attacked, leading them to have large garrisons (300+) and armies (King's army 500/600+, others 300+). And, of course, they come if I siege a fort... so, should I let them rot there, and only come back after I have many lords in my employ ?  Or may I hope to defeat them ?  Because, even though they do not seem to have a lot of heavy troops, even a 150-strong frisian lord was able to soundly defeat me, when I had 250+ troops there, with about 40% heavies... I guess their "turtling" up, an my not doing so (because I never seem to have enough troops to do it, in the right divisions) might have something to do with it, but confirmation would be nice.

I killed companions in story mode. Now, I receive notices that some of the dead ones are out there, adventuring (getting at a symbel, or whatever). Is that a bug ?  Because the travellers can't seem to be able to indicate where to find my dead or departed companions (like Egil, who didn't like the party, and which Ieft before I could fix it - sad, as I intend to play a pagan ruler)... So, are they all gone for good ?  (version 2.028, I guess - from memory, I'm at work, now, no internet at home)


I'll probably find other questions to ask later, but those should be a nice start. Thanks in anticipation

Thanks, I tried it yesterday, and now have my pretty own kingdom. I now can pass laws forcing people to dye their ponies to stupid hues, or whatever I wish !

I guess this thread can be closed, now

Ok, so, I guess it's only because of "story mode" that I couldn't keep the fort I had captured ?

If I capture a fort, and wish to keep it, then I will automatically create a new faction ?