BattleOfValmy
There's really no point in making mods for WF&S. The only worthwhile thing to do, if you felt like it, would be to rip the new code (once/if the module system comes out) and models/textures and use them in Warband.
when will there be any mods for M&B WF&S???
- Thread starter Senior Jarl Raven
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Senior Jarl Raven
Recruit
I dont agree, there could be tons of good mods like:BattleOfValmy said:
-warband features and weapons
-new weapons and armor
-new horses
-new storyline
and so on...
Senior Jarl Raven
Recruit
Ceriy said:
didnt know theese were compatible
thanks
Senior Jarl Raven
Recruit
cbjorsten said:
I would like if after an execution a new lord would come up, and that ideas are actualy realy grat
Senior Jarl Raven said:notenome said:
lol dude, if you could do all that, the game would be too easy...
anyway, I said before that first i would love to see moding tools for warband and vanilla compatible with WF&S
too easy?
Maybe we're not playing the same game.
Let me tell you about easy.
Make 2k gold.
Go to any city that sells velvet
buy velvet for 120
go to narva
sell velvet for 1900
go to city that sells velvet
start caravan for 8k to narva
at narva make 220k (due to bug that pays twice)
repeat 20 times
go to merc vendors
hire max # of cav mercs
equip to max
capture first fortress
that's the game you have right now. You tell me what's easy.
Senior Jarl Raven
Recruit
nox said:Senior Jarl Raven said:notenome said:
lol dude, if you could do all that, the game would be too easy...
anyway, I said before that first i would love to see moding tools for warband and vanilla compatible with WF&S
too easy?
Maybe we're not playing the same game.
Let me tell you about easy.
Make 2k gold.
Go to any city that sells velvet
buy velvet for 120
go to narva
sell velvet for 1900
go to city that sells velvet
start caravan for 8k to narva
at narva make 220k (due to bug that pays twice)
repeat 20 times
go to merc vendors
hire max # of cav mercs
equip to max
capture first fortress
that's the game you have right now. You tell me what's easy.
yes, that would be too easy, beacuse than you would be able to kill most of the rival's lords, after you would have more than 100 soldiers. and yeah, i've tried that way before, but it gets a little complicated after capturing the first forrest, doesnt it? and just mercs wont do nothin', you need to buy better armor 'nd weapons (wich you can due to your money
) and the most important UPGRADE your troops but yes, I guess its kinda easy 
Can't do that, for the same reasons that porting over non-MP mods is currently impractical; that would involve transferring a lot of Taleworlds' art from one engine to the other. It might result in a C&D, basically, as it's technically possible to make free WFaS clones for Warband if that was allowed.
xenoargh said:
This isn't correct.
Also, there are plenty modes that use no artwork at all. BK used no artwork.
Noone's suggesting moving artwork from one product to another to create compromised versions of the product.
The base code for F&S is from mount and blade. Porting mods, especially gameplay mods won't be that hard. Fixing some of their bugs will be trivial, as well.
BattleOfValmy
Senior Jarl Raven said:I dont agree, there could be tons of good mods like:BattleOfValmy said:
-warband features and weapons
-new weapons and armor
-new horses
-new storyline
and so on...
WF&S is a 15 dollar mod. Everything it adds could be or already has been added to Warband, so there's no reason to waste the effort.
Enh. I like the bones of the castle upgrade stuff.
We'll see how it goes once the module system is released. If they release it soon, I'm going to be stuck in iowa city for 2 weeks with no gaming computer. That's a lot of time to code.
We'll see how it goes once the module system is released. If they release it soon, I'm going to be stuck in iowa city for 2 weeks with no gaming computer. That's a lot of time to code.
notenome
Recruit
Continuing from my early post,
Before I write anything, I'll add a disclaimer that to me the main draw of wF&S is the time frame, which is why I wouldn't be interested in ahistorical mods, as guns have already been moded into Warband. In my opinion, to throw out the historical context of wF&S is to throw away the baby with the bathwater, persay.
I'll subdivide things into sections:
Equipment:
I have no clue if its possible to mod, but misfires were a huge problem in this time period, so much so that the home made firearms that are so abundant in the game seem to be wildly out of place. To begin with, russian serfs were considered property and most of the time not given even a basic education. The odds of them being able to craft a functional musket are slim, and the odds of the aforementioned musket not exploding are even worse, to fire a homemade musket would basically be playing russian rullet (no pun intended) with the odds being greater that you would get hurt than the target.
The advantage of guns, from the earliest arquebuses all the way to rifles etc, is that they bypassed armor (if they hit) and they scared the living crap out of troops. Early firearms were as much a morale weapon as anything else. Because they negated armor, they could kill a noble or knight, who maybe had 10 000 hours of combat training, as well as they could kill a levied peasant. As such they marked the beginning of the democratization of the battlefield, persay. What the ingame application of this should be (ideally, again I'm no modder) is this: Armor doesn't affect damage, but we can't assume that every hit is fatal either, so there should be a wide variety of damage (from grazing to head shot) that should be unafected by armor.
Lastly we have handguns, which were basically one shot weapons. Pirates in particular were infamous for having multiple, sometimes 7 or 8, loaded handguns. A combatant would shoot each weapon and then proceed to engage in hand to hand combat. I think a better modeling of handguns would be for them to not have ammunition, just fire and forget. So a character could, for example, have 3 handguns in his inventory and one melee weapon, firing three shots and then closing in.
Formations:
As we're still dealing with pre-Napoleonic warfare (and post-Mongol warfare, who themselves had a flag system and a decimal chain of command), there is basically no command and control after battle is joined. No volley fire, no bayonets, no nothing. Tactics involved basically maneuvering, morale, and hoping to god your troops didn't rout at the sight of cavalry and musket fire.
Sieges:
Honestly, without cannon fire sieges are kind of broken in game. Cannons were in the process of turning fortresses obsolete (a process not concluded until centuries latter). That said modeling cannons is hellaciously tough, as they really weren't battlefield weapons, plus I dont even know if you can get cannonballs to work in game. So IMHO the best way to model cannons is in the siege screen. Basically a player would buy cannons (very slow) and ammunition, and could use those to reduce the amount of time a fortress holds out before surrendering. One cannon bombarding consumes one unit of ammunition and capitulation time by one day, for example. Only a minority of forts were ever stormed in this time period. Most attempted to just hold out until help arrived.
Serfs:
As aforementioned, in Tzarist Russia serfs were property, and it was allowed for entire villages to be bought and sold. As such Russian noble characters should, IMHO, have a dialogue option to allow them to buy villages from nobles.
Banditry:
As I've mentioned before, this was the golden age of banditry. One thing that would be awesome to model were the many different types of bandits. Some bandits were your looter types, poor uneducated frontiersmen type, some were deserteres, stick up crews, unemployed soldiers, highwaymen, land-privateers and social bandits. Social bandits in particular would be interesting to model, robin-hood types that would rob caravans and distribute some of the wealth to the local population. Some bandits had hide outs, but most actually lived within communities, who supported them either because of fear, loyalty, social ties or patronage.
Thankfully a lot of the framework that makes this possible is already in game, such as different faction relations and relations with different lords and communities, man-hunters etc. Its more of a question to build atop this. For example, allow an outlaw character to build a safehouse in a village, or nobles to give land-privateer contracts against other factions, etc. The penalty for getting caught was death, plain and simple. That said, the line between law enforcement and illegality was tenuous at best, so many bandits were themselves marshalls and vice versa, depending on the situation. Generally bandits would operate with relative impunity until they screwed up, ie robbed the wrong merchant, killed the wrong person, took the wrong noble hostage. Then the hammer would come down and it was either get out of dodge or hang.
Troops:
As aformentioned in this and other posts, the combination of the growing complexity of the battlefield with the horrid level education meant that peasant levies were cannon fodder, sometimes literally. Peasants would generally rout at the first sight of trouble, be that cavalry, casualties or bullets. In game terms this means that morale for non elite troops needs to be brought waaaaaaaaaaaay down and that whatever progression there is for peasants needs to have a pretty solid hard cap, for one thing no one bothered to really train peasants to fight (they weren't considered much better than animals and had a low life expectancy). Peasants were line filler, and no match for professional troops.
As for standard troops, generally they were either mercenaries (hired as companies, in other words, you pay for a package, not a man) or professional soldiers (every country had their own system for this, generally there was a commander responsible for raising a certain number of men). Most soldiers signed a contract, giving their services in return for a wage and share of plunder, and a lot were imprinted, aka forced to serve against their will, many being themselves prisoners. This lead to hodge-podge armies (Sweden being something of an exception) with vastly different levels of experience, training and morale. Particularly in eastern europe, soldiers were responsible for their equipment, not equipped by their contractor.
As for the game, the tavern system works, but needs to be expanded. For one thing there shouldn't only be mercenaries in taverns (and there should be a lot more of those) but people (nobles, merchants, company commanders) looking to hire the player as a mercenary for a specific, targeted and short term job, this was how most 'professional' troops were recruited in this region and time period. Secondly probably the best way to raise troops would actually be through the companion system, add a dialogue option: 'I want you to raise some men', followed by some options 'do it quick/I don't care how' (poor quality/morale/equipped troops), 'here's some money' (mid level troops) 'take your time' (better quality troops). Then the companion runs off and raises troops for a variable amount of time, the quality being a combination of the training/persuasion skill plus how much time plus how much money the player gives them.
Before I write anything, I'll add a disclaimer that to me the main draw of wF&S is the time frame, which is why I wouldn't be interested in ahistorical mods, as guns have already been moded into Warband. In my opinion, to throw out the historical context of wF&S is to throw away the baby with the bathwater, persay.
I'll subdivide things into sections:
Equipment:
I have no clue if its possible to mod, but misfires were a huge problem in this time period, so much so that the home made firearms that are so abundant in the game seem to be wildly out of place. To begin with, russian serfs were considered property and most of the time not given even a basic education. The odds of them being able to craft a functional musket are slim, and the odds of the aforementioned musket not exploding are even worse, to fire a homemade musket would basically be playing russian rullet (no pun intended) with the odds being greater that you would get hurt than the target.
The advantage of guns, from the earliest arquebuses all the way to rifles etc, is that they bypassed armor (if they hit) and they scared the living crap out of troops. Early firearms were as much a morale weapon as anything else. Because they negated armor, they could kill a noble or knight, who maybe had 10 000 hours of combat training, as well as they could kill a levied peasant. As such they marked the beginning of the democratization of the battlefield, persay. What the ingame application of this should be (ideally, again I'm no modder) is this: Armor doesn't affect damage, but we can't assume that every hit is fatal either, so there should be a wide variety of damage (from grazing to head shot) that should be unafected by armor.
Lastly we have handguns, which were basically one shot weapons. Pirates in particular were infamous for having multiple, sometimes 7 or 8, loaded handguns. A combatant would shoot each weapon and then proceed to engage in hand to hand combat. I think a better modeling of handguns would be for them to not have ammunition, just fire and forget. So a character could, for example, have 3 handguns in his inventory and one melee weapon, firing three shots and then closing in.
Formations:
As we're still dealing with pre-Napoleonic warfare (and post-Mongol warfare, who themselves had a flag system and a decimal chain of command), there is basically no command and control after battle is joined. No volley fire, no bayonets, no nothing. Tactics involved basically maneuvering, morale, and hoping to god your troops didn't rout at the sight of cavalry and musket fire.
Sieges:
Honestly, without cannon fire sieges are kind of broken in game. Cannons were in the process of turning fortresses obsolete (a process not concluded until centuries latter). That said modeling cannons is hellaciously tough, as they really weren't battlefield weapons, plus I dont even know if you can get cannonballs to work in game. So IMHO the best way to model cannons is in the siege screen. Basically a player would buy cannons (very slow) and ammunition, and could use those to reduce the amount of time a fortress holds out before surrendering. One cannon bombarding consumes one unit of ammunition and capitulation time by one day, for example. Only a minority of forts were ever stormed in this time period. Most attempted to just hold out until help arrived.
Serfs:
As aforementioned, in Tzarist Russia serfs were property, and it was allowed for entire villages to be bought and sold. As such Russian noble characters should, IMHO, have a dialogue option to allow them to buy villages from nobles.
Banditry:
As I've mentioned before, this was the golden age of banditry. One thing that would be awesome to model were the many different types of bandits. Some bandits were your looter types, poor uneducated frontiersmen type, some were deserteres, stick up crews, unemployed soldiers, highwaymen, land-privateers and social bandits. Social bandits in particular would be interesting to model, robin-hood types that would rob caravans and distribute some of the wealth to the local population. Some bandits had hide outs, but most actually lived within communities, who supported them either because of fear, loyalty, social ties or patronage.
Thankfully a lot of the framework that makes this possible is already in game, such as different faction relations and relations with different lords and communities, man-hunters etc. Its more of a question to build atop this. For example, allow an outlaw character to build a safehouse in a village, or nobles to give land-privateer contracts against other factions, etc. The penalty for getting caught was death, plain and simple. That said, the line between law enforcement and illegality was tenuous at best, so many bandits were themselves marshalls and vice versa, depending on the situation. Generally bandits would operate with relative impunity until they screwed up, ie robbed the wrong merchant, killed the wrong person, took the wrong noble hostage. Then the hammer would come down and it was either get out of dodge or hang.
Troops:
As aformentioned in this and other posts, the combination of the growing complexity of the battlefield with the horrid level education meant that peasant levies were cannon fodder, sometimes literally. Peasants would generally rout at the first sight of trouble, be that cavalry, casualties or bullets. In game terms this means that morale for non elite troops needs to be brought waaaaaaaaaaaay down and that whatever progression there is for peasants needs to have a pretty solid hard cap, for one thing no one bothered to really train peasants to fight (they weren't considered much better than animals and had a low life expectancy). Peasants were line filler, and no match for professional troops.
As for standard troops, generally they were either mercenaries (hired as companies, in other words, you pay for a package, not a man) or professional soldiers (every country had their own system for this, generally there was a commander responsible for raising a certain number of men). Most soldiers signed a contract, giving their services in return for a wage and share of plunder, and a lot were imprinted, aka forced to serve against their will, many being themselves prisoners. This lead to hodge-podge armies (Sweden being something of an exception) with vastly different levels of experience, training and morale. Particularly in eastern europe, soldiers were responsible for their equipment, not equipped by their contractor.
As for the game, the tavern system works, but needs to be expanded. For one thing there shouldn't only be mercenaries in taverns (and there should be a lot more of those) but people (nobles, merchants, company commanders) looking to hire the player as a mercenary for a specific, targeted and short term job, this was how most 'professional' troops were recruited in this region and time period. Secondly probably the best way to raise troops would actually be through the companion system, add a dialogue option: 'I want you to raise some men', followed by some options 'do it quick/I don't care how' (poor quality/morale/equipped troops), 'here's some money' (mid level troops) 'take your time' (better quality troops). Then the companion runs off and raises troops for a variable amount of time, the quality being a combination of the training/persuasion skill plus how much time plus how much money the player gives them.