Information about developments at snowballing problem

Users who are viewing this thread

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
in 1.8 S Empire still gets trampled and Batannaia most of the time also, ran a 50 year run
So after 50 years your test had a snowball score of 43, which is pretty good. It does give me a bit of a pause though as my test are ending up much higher (most recent tests are looking at 70+). I'm curious what speed multiplier did you use to run the test? I've been using 20 as that's the max Mex felt comfortable using without it starting to impact gameplay.
 

Flesson19

Not a Cookie
Knight
So after 50 years your test had a snowball score of 43, which is pretty good. It does give me a bit of a pause though as my test are ending up much higher (most recent tests are looking at 70+). I'm curious what speed multiplier did you use to run the test? I've been using 20 as that's the max Mex felt comfortable using without it starting to impact gameplay.
yeah from earlier tests it is much better, but it just seems most games I play the south Battania get their butt kicked
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
yeah from earlier tests it is much better, but it just seems most games I play the south Battania get their butt kicked
Did you use the campaign speed multiplier cheat for the timelapse or is it the normal game speed and speed up with video editing? If you did use the campaign speed multiplier cheat, what did you set it at?
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
250 X in game, then it was 6 X in editing
ah unfortunately I think 250x is too high for us to trust the results, mex was worried that 20x was too high and didnt feel comfortable going higher than that. If you plan to do anymore (which would be appreciated) could you run it at 20x and increase the timelapse through editing? Might have to cut your timeframe down to 20 years though as it take 2 hours at 20x.
 

Flesson19

Not a Cookie
Knight
ah unfortunately I think 250x is too high for us to trust the results, mex was worried that 20x was too high and didnt feel comfortable going higher than that. If you plan to do anymore (which would be appreciated) could you run it at 20x and increase the timelapse through editing? Might have to cut your timeframe down to 20 years though as it take 2 hours at 20x.
gotcha ill speed it up more in editing
 

Blood Gryphon

Master Knight
WBVC
Ok here are 3 more tests. First two tests don't seem to be anomalies, these new tests snowball scores are 92, 86, and 72, giving us an average snowball score of 80 between my 5 tests. Surprisingly the last test had Battania and South Empire as part of the winning kingdoms. The most consistent thing throughout these tests is Sturgia getting stomped by 20 years. I'll add some more observations later. Let me know if you would like any of these saves @SadShogun

Test 3

6xa8l.jpg
6oMMa.jpg
cjzem.jpg
gS5ry.jpg
SKUYz.png
q5l0C.png
wUI2_.png



Test 4
xaG0z.jpg
4VBNd.jpg
htFnF.jpg
w_Ggq.jpg
m8cl_.png
UO74Z.png
5WFzG.png

Test 5

JWBgc.jpg
dYB50.jpg
UisLV.jpg
e4rBg.jpg
q_ABN.png
k7WiK.png
Dc785.png
 
What does Sturgia need changed in order to not suck? Is it its geography that's the fundamental problem or something else?
From the beginning it was clear (at least I thought) that both geography and army composition(less horses) where mayor factors for the less than stellar performance of Sturgia.

I still think the early attempts of stopping the khuzait snowball, by giving every faction more horses, was wrong. Makes all the battles more or less similar. It addressed the problems with speed benefits on the campaign map(ai only having to fight winnable battles) and cavalry bonuses to autocalc by levelling the playing field.


A way of making sturgia more resilient could be by increasing the snow penalty for other factions, movement speed and food consumption.
In addition Sturgia could get a fighting in snow bonus in autocalc.

A more different approach could be: reducing Sturgian party sizes but also give them more parties. This would give them the opportunity to avoid bad matchups on snow, because of the movement speed on snow and smaller size. While also retaining the ability to unite in big enough armies to take settlements.

This all would keep the Sturgian core lands safer, while preventing them to expand easily below the snow line.

Another nice feature would be for more aggressive raiding during winter times.

This all would adress some of the problems while keeping the factions unique (I hope)
 
What does Sturgia need changed in order to not suck? Is it its geography that's the fundamental problem or something else?
I'm not particularly familiar with all the factors and systems in place, but I wonder if the autocalc system needs to be more fleshed out and robust? In theory, a spear-heavy army should generally beat a horse-heavy army, an archer-heavy army should generally beat a shieldless infantry-heavy army, and certain infantry-heavy configurations should beat other infantry-heavy configurations.
 
Top Bottom