Search results for query: *

Suspicious Pilgrim said:

I want to get permissions to Rise of Nations music in my mod, but the company that made it is now defunct. I also want to use the old Warrider music. Where can I contact Taleworlds?

Click to expand...

I would contact Microsoft Game Studios to find out if you can use it for your mod. As long as it's noncommercial, they can be lenient. After all, they allowed a dedicated fanbase permission to run their own game http://www.microsoft.com/games/allegiance/features.htm --> http://www.freeallegiance.org/ after the main community went defunct. Ask for the credits for the music creators so that you can directly contact them.

The only thing I found was http://www.taleworlds.com/tw_contact_us.html for taleworlds, but the devs used to frequent these boards. Until M&B2, I think they are quite busy.

From this thread http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?472160-How-do-I-contact-the-TaleWorlds-forum-to-resolve-a-registration-issue, it seems that is the only page as well.

Having trouble adding a chest to a multiplayer scene. Researched and found some people say it's supposed to be hard.

From module_scenes:
("multi_scene_14",sf_generate,"none", "none", (0,0),(100,100),-100,"0x0000000040000c910003e8fa0000538900003e9e00005301",
    [],["bonus_chest_3"],"outer_terrain_snow"),

"bonus_chest_3" is one of the in-game chests.

I put this in module_troops, which shows I have no idea what I'm doing.
["bonus_chest_3","{!}Bonus Chest","{!}Bonus Chest",tf_hero|tf_inactive, 0,reserved,  fac_neutral,[itm_strange_helmet,itm_strange_great_sword],def_attrib|level(1,wp(60),knows_common, 0],
 
["multiplayer_end","{!}multiplayer_end","{!}multiplayer_end", 0, 0, 0, fac_kingdom_5, [], 0, 0, 0, 0, 0],

The reason I'm trying to do this has to do with baggage on horses. Thinking it logically, the two are separate, so would it be impossible for me to add a chest to a horse in multiplayer? I'm creating some historical cavalry units and several elite units for Mongols and Middle East require both different arrow types, mace, knife, shield, and lance. I want to attach a chest to a horse that can be ridden in combat and to circumvent the 4 slot limit, have the player be able to swap out with the chest when needed or when the lance is broken on impact.

I think I already know the answer, but if I change the animations, does it change the hitboxes as well or do I have to do double the work?

Wow, thanks again for all the info. Aaaah, Hurstwic. I remember this website when I happened upon viking shield combat when learning sword and shield. http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_sword_technique.htm I thought it was the pinnacle website for viking combat when it came to learning from photos. Definitely eye-opening to the use of shield to hide attacks.

There's probably a really good reason for why one-handed axes were bearded.  This is starting to get interesting and fun.  This was a lot more than what I expected in a great way. Much appreciated.

Kissaki said:

NovaTitan said:

From what I've seen, the bearded Viking and Nordic axes are the best for trapping and prying off shields in the offensive. But, I don't know how they'd fare for parrying in the defense in sparring.

Click to expand...

Just have to interject a bit here. While the Norse did have bearded axes (we still do today, by the way), these were tool axes. The war axes that did have beards had very modest beards at that. And why would you want long beards for your axes? You don't need much of a beard to hook effectively, and too much beard means an increased risk that your axe will be hooked rather than the other way around.

As for axes and thrusting, of course you can thrust. Which is why viking axes had a longer edge pointing up away from the shaft rather than down along it. It won't thrust as well as a dedicated thruster like a spear, of course, but you certainly do not want to be on the receiving end of an axe thrust. They are very pointy and nasty.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the information. We only have hatchets (woodaxes) in the states for woodcutting. I'm a noob at axes and thought I needed a long beard.

I look mainly at medieval weaponry and handaxes used during those times didn't have a point at the end, at least not to the extent of the vikings. Thanks again for your input. I wouldn't want to get a heavily bearded axe and regret it later.

Night Ninja said:

In my experience, wielding the spear on its own is the best option of the lot in a duel. It's ridiculously fast, hits very hard, and you just need to spam thrusts like a loon while watching your measure.

Click to expand...

I agree. And you'll win almost all your spar fights this way. You got range, you got speed (fast feints, multiple thrusts), and it has a lower learning curve, but a high skill ceiling. In the 21st century, you'll rarely, if ever, find anyone who trained with the longsword from childhood and I'm sure that the spear and polearm will outwin the sword as it has in the past. After all, the sword was mostly a sidearm come the High Middle Ages, while the polearm reigned supreme.

However, I'm choosing based on fun and my strengths. This is why I prefer the arming sword instead of the halberd, which will almost always defeat me unless I markedly outskill my opponent.

SacredStoneHead said:

How do you achieved such conclusion? I'm curious

I can't help much on that in pratical terms because I never handled a battleaxe, just hatchets to chop wood.

But I dunno if it would be a good combination for three reasons:


1- First and foremost: It doesn't thrust. The advantage of the dagger is that it can be used into quick thrust attacks, without exposing the attacker to a counter - whilst while using an axe, the weapon need to gain momentum to hit effectively, or else: he/she need to do an arch with his weapon for the attack, something not much intelligent to do with an offhand weapon;

2- Even the battleaxe being comparably lighter and more balanced than a hatchet, I doubt it has the balance to be really effective in the offhand - say, superior to a dagger or even the bare hand in speed and ease of handling;

3- Its slowish and no thrusting traits would be compensated somehow if it had any other advantage, such adding range to the attacks or if it was good for parrying, but that's absolutely not the case.

**

My conclusion: doesn't thrust, doesn't add range, it's not good for parrying, it's unbalanced, leaving your guard open.

Yeah, it can somehow hook shields. But that alone doesn't make it a good offhand weapon.

You have to try it sometime and research more to be sure of it, but I doubt dual wielding with an axe is an intelligent thing to do.

Click to expand...

I took note of this and hopefully, I'll practice and spar enough to see if it is more of a hindrance than if I had a dagger (which would also lose to a shield).

1) This is completely true. It's not even close to the speed of a dagger and it's heavier weight and unbalanced lends itself to slower recovery and higher learning curve. However, I think it can serve well as a trapping tool against staves and sword blades.

From what I've seen, the bearded Viking and Nordic axes are the best for trapping and prying off shields in the offensive. But, I don't know how they'd fare for parrying in the defense in sparring.

2) Lighter than an arming sword at less than 2 lb. Problem is the unbalanced nature of it, making for a completely different weapon from a balanced sword. There is a transference of martial knowledge from longsword -> staves, but it's quite different for axes.

You can parry on the defensive with it and weight allows momentum so that it can ward off attacks from arming swords, while pushing further for a counterattack, which wouldn't be as easy with a dagger. I think the effectiveness of an axe on the offhand vs. dagger comes down to the skill of the axeman. The best sword + axe would beat the best sword + dagger. At least, that's my impression so far.

3) It could add range by using a longer handaxe, like a short sword on the offhand. But to me, that's less effective. It's my personal preference, but it completely loses track of what you had the axe for in the first place-- to be used as a secondary weapon. I use the arming sword 36 inches overall with the axe, so I want it a lot shorter than that.

No range advantage, thrusting is only a heavy punch, and slower parrying. Yeah, it does have a lot against it, but it does have three main advantages: 1) trapping (most important and what separates from the dagger), 2) armor-piercing, shield-crushing, shield-prying (historically), and 3) momentum allowing you to push back one handed weapons on the primary hand.

I think you can trap light blades with the dagger, but it's not as effective from what I've seen. I will try it out more and see what I can find out.

Ahhhhhhh, the summer is here! How is everyone? This thread continues to live, though annoying at times, I have come once more to ask a question. I've been practicing with longsword and sword and shield for about a month. I've practiced sword and buckler for 2 weeks. Recently, my father and I created an 8ft pole as a practice spear. Drawing inspiration from the Stainless Steel bannermen that uses the banner as a longass spear and the sword as a sort of shield and Hilde from the Soul Calibur series... Fine, it was mostly Hilde, but the SS bannermen gave it a sort of historical legitimacy.

Anyways, I found out that although the spear (primary) and sword (secondary) looks cool and elegant, the axe is actually a far better weapon for trapping the enemy's weapon or hooking and removing their shields. A shield works great in a true medieval battle, but I'm focusing on duels when it comes to martial arts, so I came to the conclusion that an axe is preferable to a shield when going with the arming sword. A free hand would work just as well in most duels, but against a sword and shield an axe would penetrate or cause blunt trauma on the shield arm in historical situations.

Now there are scant sources on the sword (primary) and axe (secondary) combo, but I do think it would've been used by a few practitioners. Does anybody have any experience or historical knowledge on this? Thanks for your time. 

Edit: Also, thanks to Blackthorn. He was right. A free hand is preferable to sword + dagger. The free hand is theoretically the better in most encounters.

Somebody said:

Code:

multi_data_troop_button_indices_end = multi_data_troop_button_indices_begin + 16 #maximum 16 troops per faction
multi_data_item_button_indices_begin = multi_data_troop_button_indices_end

Click to expand...

Thank you so much. I didn't know I had to use header files. Well, at least this is one more roadblock passed.  I'll go check them out again if I have some more problems.

There seems to be a multiplayer troop limit. I looked up the earlier question on this same thread and I don't know why he was limited to a smaller number of troop types, however, I've tested it and it seems to be 16 for faction 1 at least. I edited out some troops temporarily to see if the newer troops were causing the error, but no. It has to do with the number of troop types.

Is there a way to bypass this? When I go over this limit, I can click on the text of the unit (it shows up) and changes color when cursor is over it, but it doesn't allow me to go to the inventory screen.

Wow, we've waited so long for this. Thanks Sebastian. I'll try it out when I get the chance.

BapKing said:

Ok, so they now show up thanks to that, but unfortunately all sub classes are showing up despite what class you choose, same goes for rank and sub class. (The module_presentations is the same as previously posted)

module_scripts.py troop_set_slot section

Spoiler

Code:

	  #Troop settings
	  (troop_set_slot, "trp_usa_ranged_multiplayer", 1, "trp_usa_sub_classes_ranged"),
	  (troop_set_slot, "trp_usa_melee_multiplayer", 1, "trp_usa_sub_classes_melee"),
	  (troop_set_slot, "trp_usa_melee_multiplayer", 1, "trp_usa_sub_classes_melee_2"),
	  
          (troop_set_slot, "trp_usa_sub_classes_melee", 1, "trp_usa_swordsman_multiplayer"),     
          (troop_set_slot, "trp_usa_sub_classes_ranged", 1, "trp_usa_crossbowman_multiplayer"),

module_troops.py section (don't mind the stupid class names, simply for testing )

Spoiler

Code:

# Classes Start
   ["multiplayer_classes_start","MPCLASSSTART","MPCLASSSTART2",tf_hero, 0,0, fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],
   ["usa_ranged_multiplayer","Ranged","Ranged",tf_guarantee_all,0,0,fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],
   ["usa_melee_multiplayer","Melee","Melee",tf_guarantee_all,0,0,fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],
   ["multiplayer_classes_end","MPCLASSSEND","MPCLASSEND",tf_hero, 0,0, fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],
# Classes End

# Sub Classes Start
   ["multiplayer_sub_classes_start","MPSUBCLASSSTART","MPSUBCLASSSTART2",tf_hero, 0,0, fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],
   ["usa_sub_classes_ranged","Crossbowman","Crossbowmen",tf_hero, 0,0, fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],   
   ["usa_sub_classes_melee","Swordsman","Swordsman",tf_hero, 0,0, fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0], 
   ["usa_sub_classes_melee_2","Grenadier","Grenadier",tf_hero, 0,0, fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],      
   ["multiplayer_sub_classes_end","MPSUBCLASSEND","MPSUBCLASSEND",tf_hero, 0,0, fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],

   
# Ranks start
   ["multiplayer_ranks_start","MPRANKSTART","MPRANKSTART2",tf_hero, 0,0, fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],
   ["usa_crossbowman_multiplayer","American Crossbowman","America Crossbowmen",tf_guarantee_all,0,0,fac_kingdom_7,
   [itm_bolts,itm_crossbow,itm_sword_medieval_b_small,itm_tab_shield_heater_a,itm_wfi_leeslegion_sgt,itm_ankle_boots],
   def_attrib_multiplayer|level(19),wpe(90,60,180,90),knows_common|knows_ironflesh_2|knows_athletics_5|knows_shield_5|knows_power_strike_2|knows_riding_1,swadian_face_young_1, swadian_face_old_2],	
   ["usa_swordsman_multiplayer","American Swordsman","America Swordsmen",tf_guarantee_all,0,0,fac_kingdom_7,
   [itm_bolts,itm_crossbow,itm_sword_medieval_b_small,itm_tab_shield_heater_a,itm_wfi_leeslegion_sgt,itm_ankle_boots],
   def_attrib_multiplayer|level(19),wpe(90,60,180,90),knows_common|knows_ironflesh_2|knows_athletics_5|knows_shield_5|knows_power_strike_2|knows_riding_1,swadian_face_young_1, swadian_face_old_2],	
   ["multiplayer_ranks_end","MPRANKSEND","MPRANKSEND",tf_hero, 0,0, fac_kingdom_7,[],def_attrib|level(2),wp(20),knows_inventory_management_10,0],
# Ranks end

Spoiler

Code:

# WFI
multiplayer_classes_start = "trp_usa_ranged_multiplayer" 
multiplayer_classes_end = "trp_multiplayer_classes_end"
multiplayer_sub_classes_start = "trp_usa_sub_classes_ranged"
multiplayer_sub_classes_end = "trp_multiplayer_sub_classes_end"
multiplayer_ranks_start = "trp_usa_crossbowman_multiplayer"
multiplayer_ranks_end = "trp_multiplayer_ranks_end"

Click to expand...

Did you solve this or what?

Is it possible to use scrolling troop selection menu in multiplayer as opposed to the MM type of selection as seen from these threads? http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,222956.0.html http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,228367.msg5464806.html#msg5464806

So much useful information and then I find this is from 2009. Hahaha. Sticky this.

You should check out this list: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,187434.0.html for hardcoded stuff. Should explain the limits of modding. For everything else, there is a way to find an alternative roundabout way to the solution, at least from my understanding.

Check out the official module system documentation or the fixed one from mbrepository. It has information. You need to edit module_troops.py to disable auto-using the items. However, I don't know how you'd be able to prevent them from equipping 100% of the time.

Suspicious Pilgrim said:

I'm upper class. D: Stop hurting my feelings!

Click to expand...

It's alright. You're one of the cool ones. 

Bayard-X said:

SacredStoneHead said:

Ambalon said:

Which would point out it was harder then. Sure, there's more competition now, but just since there are (proportionately, specially) more people with 3rd degree education, having this much instruction isn't that much of an achievement.

Click to expand...

Past:

-Harder to get to the university;
-More jobs for low degree graduates;
-Low degree graduates gained proportionally more money than today;
-Life costs = ridiculously low compared with today's.

Now:

-Any halfwit can pass the vestibular for some courses, but being admitted in Medicine, Mechanical Engineering or Automation is very hard (you'll not earn good salaries if you're a graduate in Social Sciences, anyway);
-Low degree graduates need to continue study for more 4/5 years to earn some high end jobs (or be innovative, by the way, but it holds for past generations too);
-Low degree graduates earn **** as payment today;
-Life costs = way higher than ever.

See, I still think a poor dude nowadays is more ****ed than before.

But everything depends hardly on the situation, so then let me reinforce that I don't disagree with you either.

Ambalon said:

Precisely because everyone and their dog can become a medic now.

Click to expand...

That's because less people are bare-foot poor today.

P.S.: You're ninja'd-ing me all the time with your edits, dammit 

Click to expand...

It has always been an expensive pastime to be poor.


The difference is that it became more likely to degrade socially as a middle class person during the last twenty years. This is causing unrest and can lead into severe states of disorder in developped countries. Mind Hellas.

Click to expand...

Unrest, yes. Full-on uprising using guns? Unlikely.

Haha, the problem is at the moment unsolved, but irrelevant. It was to test out mod files to find if the method was bugged or not. It was bugged, so I used the newer method using the module system to create a multiplayer troop.

So, it's technically unsolved, but the issue is resolved. Also, dedicated should work as opposed to nondedicated in most cases for Warband and other games like TF2.

Well, we couldn't set a time, but I finished testing by using my ****ty laptop as a dedicated server. It worked out and I found out it was bugged. So, I went back to some other instructions from Somebody and Beaver (thanks to both) and was able to get it working. Just finished my first troop! Conquered Eastern Tribesman. A great description for cannon fodder.

Well, I found a way to change single player items into multiplayer from this tutorial: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=105740.0

It's outdated, but it works only for the host as stated from the replies. I tested it as host and as non-host and only the host gets all the weapons. It's a bugged method. I don't know how to make this work since the only recommendation from there is to use Mogh's tool and that doesn't work for multiplayer.

EDIT: Well, I went back to Somebody's advice and tried it one more time. It works now. I messed up last time because I put my unit in the wrong section/faction and also editing parameters in module_scripts, which ended up making things even more messed up. Haha, I thought he was only talking about parameters in the sense of description and then after I messed up, I thought he wanted me to edit "parameters" in module_scripts.

I put my infantry unit as B for khergit. Does that indicate default constants for infantry or is that just coding lettering to make categorization of units easier in vanilla? From what I've seen, it seems (for most part, aside Nords) that they go by:

c horseman
b infantry
a archer.

SacredStoneHead said:

AWdeV said:

You're brazilian?! Man, and here I thought you were cool. 

Click to expand...

Don't got it.

We're the coolest people on the planet. 

(some irony on it, be aware)

Click to expand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEhGlCMMqyk&feature=related BABABA