Search results for query: *

lol - That Devil & his Faustian bargains!

I removed them because I didn't like them.  Plain and simple.

One person's love is another's loathing 

Twan said:

In EU3 victory conditions vary a lot. With my friends we are mostly playing short (hum 3-4 sessions of 3+ hours is short... only for EU3) team games with 4-6 players (usually religious wars around 1600-1700, as they are team games there is no individual victory) ; I've also played in bigger games organized on paradox forums (grand campaign with 10+ players and any nation playable) in these, victory conditions are nation dependant (usually a score calculated comparing starting situation of the nation in the beginning and situation when the game ends, or with specific objectives for each nation ; ... or no objective at all with the "winner" just decided by player consensus when they decide to end the game).

Click to expand...

I should pick that up.    I played a few games of EU1 and really loved that game.  The barrier to entry and play is so freaking steep that I have had a hard time playing any more of those series other than HoI1.  I didn't like the simplification that was done in HoI2 - as to my mind, they simplified all the wrong parts, and left complex all the parts I didn't care for.  And HoI3 has been painful.  I've yet to like a game where, due to complexity or game designer's intentions, you have to delegate command of your empire to an AI.  The AI is invariably dumb as nails, and the interfaces make it really hard to tell them to do what you really want them to do... so I end up fighting the AI (maybe realistic, but not a lot of fun).

I recently discovered "Making History Gold" - on Impulse - and that's got a lot of the HoI feel without the crushing weight of too much complexity.  Its a bit on the light side (too simple), but their next version should be about the right balance (for me, at least).

And yes - its one of the major pit-fall of coding - trying to do too much all at once leads to insane problems that are sometimes impossible to root out - and force you to start over again.  A disciplined, methodical approach to programming yields faster gains that can be built upon to attain ever grater heights without the whole thing imploding upon itself. 

This version is extremely stable.  As good as any high-quality commercial release.

4.5 gold is in alpha/beta, and that has lots of rough edges.

So if you're looking for the most recent stable version, then this is it.  Just look at the first post in this thread - all the instructions / links are there. 

One Disclaimer: DON'T do the rebellion/pretender to the throne quest lines.  Those are all incompatible with SoD (all versions).  Read around a bit for advice / insight.

I am quite certain that M&B has some video memory management bug(s).

I am able to run it on quite high settings on my older nVidia 8800GTS 320MB, but I get constant crashes out of my newer ATI 4870 1GB.  I have tried messing with their display config file, and forcing them to allocate much more ram for the vertex buffer (and every other video buffer), but I invariably crash out.  I can even crash out on some very, very conservative video settings - ones that the 8800 would handle without issue.

I have 4 gaming machines - on all of the other 3 I have no issues with M&B - and those three all have weaker video systems and CPUs.  But on my highest-end system (i7 920 with the dual 4870s) things crash with the vertex message often.

Sorry, there's no way that this is really anything but a bug in M&B.  I can only hope that Warband is fixed, and that SoD and other mods can be made compatible easily.

We badly need a much improved autoresolve.  The IEF should be tough - but it gets tedious with so many big battles.  It would be nice to auto some of the less important ones and have some confidence that the outcomes would be reasonable.

YES, You can play without the invasion. Just talk to the oracle.  She will help you.

xainssj3 said:

just one problem,IM NOT A MODDER

Click to expand...

So learn.
Or go look elsewhere for a mod that has what you want.

but don't expect the world to jump at your command... its 

Those are in there for two reasons:

1. Testing game balance
2. I got sick of starting from level 1 every time and having to play out the first boring levels.  Sometimes I'd make a change to the game that required a restart to see it in the game, and I didn't want to really start over.  So access to these things allows me to import my character, and then get up to speed rapidly.

Its like a nose ring: if you don't want one, don't get one.

Doing a whole dynasty thing is really another mod in itself.  Its possible that one day some sort of dynasty management could be added to SoD.  But I wouldn't hold my breath - and it certainly isn't in the foreseeable future.

SoD has a lot of creative contributors.  If you really, really want to see a set of features added - then roll up your sleeves, and ask VM for a copy of the source to go off and prove you can make it work sensibly by making your own mini-mod of SoD.  If its well liked, I imagine it would be happily integrated in to the main SoD code base.

I'm glad it works smoothly for everyone.  Most of the salient ideas and basic implementations came from Vonmistont and others.  I just cleaned it up and debugged it, and added a few niceties of my own.  It was a lot of work to make it as bug free as it is - and there's always more to do!  One more thing to make this or that better...

Meh - he didn't flame, or swear, or denigrate anyone.  Just stated a few facts.  Personally, I wouldn't be offended by that at all.

Wow!  VM - thanks for doing a history of this project.  Its really great to see how it unfolded.  I'm psyched to see that SoD continues to build up steam.  I have been out of the picture for some time, and I cannot reasonably contribute currently (too much going on RL).  But I can't be happier to see that you guys are making it work (even though it saddens me that I cannot be a part of that at this time).

I wish everyone at SoD a wonderful Christmas / Hanukkah / season.

I vaguely recall there being the ability to configure min/max skill values in the module files.  Perhaps we can just max out Surgery at say 8, instead of 10?

Surgery is the most unbalancing skill of them all, and it is hard-coded in terms of its effect.  So, since we cannot mess with its effect, lets just limit how much of it a player can get.

I like the idea of your provinces happiness with you being related to your persuasion level.  The more charismatic you are, the more they feel good.  Could be a fun dynamic (though, play testing for the win).

There's always a lot to be said for KISS.  Still, could be a fun dynamic.

Yes - I agree that the NPC interactions do add character to the game - and I like that.  What I don't like is that by the time you get them leveled to about 20th?  You become an army creating no-losses machine.  I can go grab 80 green recruits, and level them to top tier in like 5 days (if that long), and when I battle, my losses are absurdly low compared to the computer's.

I would like to see surgery nerfed for the player, and buffed for the computer (based on your level).  So that their losses aren't so different than yours - still I want to win as a player - just not have battles where I do 10:1 kill ratios.  That's just wrong (though the invaders may need to be reduced in number if we were to go this route).

Interesting - remove the NPCs entirely.... or at least remove their skills entirely, so no more having a surgeon, etc.  Sounds good on some level - but then completely removing the ability to heal your troops?  or have others help you train them?

I would love to nerf surgery- big time.  And training doesn't need to be as effective as it is.  But removing surgery and training entirely sounds like to too much of a nerf.

I'd love to have back all of those troop slots.  Maybe make it so that only 4 NPCs are really worth having around?  That would stil open up a fair number of slots.

Solok said:

I agree with you and I don't want them to just becomes a free army neither. One thing I'm a bit affraid though is that they become too dependant on the player. With a few lords, it's not a big deal but with 20 lords or so i can see this becoming a nightmare. Giving money to some, troops to others, etc.. They should be autonomous as much as possible, the player could have the option of boosting it (for example giving the lord the 5k denar once when he joins to jump start his army) but the lord should be able to develop their army in a reasonnable amount of time and be able to recuperate after losing a major battle by their own. There's already so much micro management (like lords not improving villages/castle/town, all lords running off in all direction when they meet a small party instead of following you, etc..), we should try to avoid to add more.

Click to expand...

Kuba has already added code to allow Lords to upgrade their own fiefs - and 4.5 makes buildings cost far less, so the micro should diminish.

Ultimately, I think we all want the same thing.  The game to feel like you're really promoting someone to Lord status, and they then take care of the micro for you for some part of your empire, while providing you troops / logistical support when you require.

I agree that I over-nerf'd starting lords cash.  OTOH, I don't want to go back to "instant army - just press button"  --- that's completely lame too.

So we need to find some way that empowers you, the player, to get your lords up to speed rapidly (by bestowing provinces, troops, and money) - but isn't a magical add lord = add army for free.

**** YEAH! 

You should not need any special settings.

The main things are:
CPU speed (Say 2GHz+)
RAM 2GB+
GPU (Hard to say what's needed - the faster the better)

Laptops = much slower than a desktop in most cases
Netbooks = unplayable

XP 32 bit, Vista 32 or 64, and Windows 7 32 or 64 all should run with no special settings.

G/L

I have never found a key combo that allowed me to upgrade an entire stack at once...  IF there is such a beast, PLEASE let us know what it is!