Search Members FAQ Portal
  • Navigation
  • In the shade
  • →
  • Hosted Mods.
  • →
  • Viking Invasion 2
  • →
  • VI-2
  • →
  • Viking Invasion 2 - Pre-release Thread
Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to In the shade. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 12
Viking Invasion 2 - Pre-release Thread; Current Vsn: Public Beta 1.0
Tweet Topic Started: Jun 1 2008, 04:05 PM (3,218 Views)
palantir Aug 29 2008, 01:13 PM Post #16
Perioikoi
Posts:
338
Group:
Members
Member
#7
Joined:
May 31, 2008
that's something we need to do too - we have only basic starting traits in ds at present, not sure about comingofage etc. ones - should be fairly barb vanilla-ish
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
palantir Aug 29 2008, 01:14 PM Post #17
Perioikoi
Posts:
338
Group:
Members
Member
#7
Joined:
May 31, 2008
But you cannot stop xp increase which is why it is wise to have units NOT start with 0 xp so as to make the difference less severe.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
DaVinci Aug 29 2008, 01:21 PM Post #18
Helot
Posts:
104
Group:
Members
Member
#13
Joined:
June 1, 2008
Btw., of course all comments are initial thoughts on playtesting Saxons, and haven't looked for any other factions as yet. My view for global balancing will change if i played more, deeper, and have observed, as described, the global AI development.

Edit: I'm not for 0 exp points from the start, not for any units higher than peasant-like units. There should be steps as per the unit class, and per advancing buildings from where they are recruited, imo.
But anyway, everybody has its own view on combat balancing, that's okay :)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Antagonist Aug 29 2008, 01:54 PM Post #19
Helot
Posts:
73
Group:
Members
Member
#9
Joined:
May 31, 2008
I've played about 50 turns with Northumbria and have a couple of observations:

First I would agree with much of DaVinci's campaign points (population growth from farms excessive, some buildings build too quickly etc.) Some other points:

- I haven't played too many battles, but one thing which does strike me (although it may be coincidence) is the nature of starting AI formations - for the most part they seem to deploy pretty much in a single line, and a player with any cavalry can quickly punch holes through ranged/skirmish segments, which causes the formation to disintegrate and generally makes battles very easy. I realise that only so much can be done here, but any formation coding that could be implemented would be great.

- Movement on the campaign map for generals seems very limited/slow. It should not be rapid, particularly without roads, but I still think it's on the weak side. This might just be the relatively wild Northumbrian area though.

- This may be a case of gameplay over realism, but realistically Armoured Spearmen shouldn't be recruitable so early in the tech-tree. It's not simply a matter of mail being expensive, but crucially noble units generally provide their own mail. Common spearmen can't do that, so this unit basically entails the state producing it for its soldiers, on a relatively large scale. Ain't gonna happen in a Mead Hall.

- Again this may be a result of limited play-time (two campaigns and maybe only 70 turns combined) but AI expansion seems uneven - most expand very slowly (which isn't necessarily bad) but there are exceptions, notably the Norse sweeping over Ireland very rapidly with the Irish faction relatively very slow to expand. Not sure what can be done about this (from my experience with ATW anyway, balancing factions fully on a map like this is very difficult and requires a lot of tweaking money, populations, farming, starting troops etc. and still remains elusive) but it certainly could be better.

I also had a couple of disappointing AI glitches etc. dent the experience (for example, a fleet of Norwegian longships with a full stack and generals in tow appeared of the Northumbrian coast fairly early, but never landed, simply sailed up and down turn after turn) but hopefully they are largely once-offs.

Overall though I'm very impressed, particularly with how the graphics/UI have developed and the extent to which the atmosphere of VI1 is evoked. I'll see what happens after another 50 turns or so...

Antagonist

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Aradan Aug 29 2008, 02:08 PM Post #20
Helot
Posts:
111
Group:
Members
Member
#12
Joined:
June 1, 2008
Shield-wall/sclithron: The AI cannot use either correctly, I know that and so does Pal. It's his call what to do here, weighting gameplay vs diversity/flavour. The game has so many exploits anyway, that's it's impossible to not beat the AI.

I will tweak formations (spacing and no of rows) according to unit class

Bodyguards are intentionally small units (though very strong) so that a) the AI doesn't use them to attack entire armies on their own and B) so that the player uses them more as commanders, morale-boosters and a last-resort option, rather than killing machines. Note that in that version all BGs were lacking 4 exp points.

Partially agreed about the spy/assassin deal. Move assassins 1 tier upwards (with 0 exp of course). The rest seems fine to me.

Better use the weapon tech trick to block peasants where barracks are available, instead of giving them higher training time. Makes more sense.

Emissaries are fine where they are, even small villages often sent "ambassadors" to the Vikings to plea for peace or offer tribute.

Starting treasuries are a matter of later stages campaign balance, I think.

Even a stockade can protect from hit-and-run-in-the-same-turn Viking tactics, so I say we keep its happiness bonus as it is.

Yes, lose missile bonuses, add trade to smiths. Perhaps restrict the upgrades only of heavy weapon type, in regions with iron.

Do take down farm levels in descr_regions.

Construction times: We were trying to find a balance between RTW and MTW, the AI likes to mess up with long building times. Some buildings can take a boost though, true.

Construction/Recruit/Upkeep costs: Construction costs can take a boost, I'm fine with it. Recruitment/Upkeep costs, well, that depends on the faction you're playing with, but it's very easy to multiple all of them by a given value, say 1,50. I have no problem with them though.

You are missing the point with the starting exp points. We don't just give exp to units; we give them exp and then reduce their EDU stats accordingly, so essentially they have the same final stats. The only difference is that this way they have a limit to how much better they can become. Imho that makes sense, a Jomsviking cannot become much better than he currently is, while a peasant can improve a lot. After all, what is a Jomsviking (technically) other than a very experienced peasant with better armour? he wasn't born a killing machine, what makes him so good is his already-acquired experience. And that is mirrored in the starting exp.

Regarding attack/defence ratios, it's all based on a balance system, but it's a subject of personal taste and choice.

Agreed about Armoured Spearmen.

I'll make some formations then, any historical one you want, in particular?

Agreed on movement points, maybe a boost to 100?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
DaVinci Aug 29 2008, 03:50 PM Post #21
Helot
Posts:
104
Group:
Members
Member
#13
Joined:
June 1, 2008
Quote:
 
This may be a case of gameplay over realism, but realistically Armoured Spearmen shouldn't be recruitable so early in the tech-tree. It's not simply a matter of mail being expensive, but crucially noble units generally provide their own mail. Common spearmen can't do that, so this unit basically entails the state producing it for its soldiers, on a relatively large scale. Ain't gonna happen in a Mead Hall.


Good point. Here "entails the state producing it for its soldiers" it would be the local noble who pays it to the local smith, whereas i believe this is a seldom exception in this era, so the armoured spearmen is rather a gameplay addition, imo. Eventually they should be rather called the Theigns, whio were indeed partially rich enough to buy their own well equipment and so also their armour.


If MoN follows this hint and my suggestion with the smith string*, then i would add all those armoured troops to the smith string, last tier, and perhaps those units should get 2 turns train time to not have them spawned unrealistically.
After all, the british isles hadn't professional Men-At-Arms and also no Sergeants, except who could be viewed as such, Theigns and Hirdmenn, and a few wealthier Fyrdsmen, perhaps. All other are historically unarmoured, imo.

*btw., it would add to the global (and combat) balance and vs. AI exploit, to remove the complete weapon upgrades, maybe an exception for the blade bonus with iron resource as little "hidden" goodie, and just add trade bonus ;) this is what i'll do later, when i start to make my personal custom VI 2 ;)

@Aradan
Unit numbers: Very well done, did you look into ChivTW for that ;)
Despite the little unit number for general/bodyguard units, they should have 2hp for gameplay purposes ... as said the army breaks if the general is killed*, this is known since i mod combat stats (since 2005). And i have another view on the generals, here also the AI cannot handle your assumption properly (the of not charging them), that it keeps it behind the line, this is only possible with clever AI formation coding. And by all that, a lot fun is lost, if the generals are weak as they are now (the good stats and exp cannot compensate enough). This is no offence, no way, just the known different view of combat modding in respect of the AI and campaign global balancing (that i a few times mentioned), and just last but not least, the fun to have a heroic character in-game ;) and i just don't want to loose Alfred or the other famous kings in this mod easily, it destroys my fun to play, also i don't want to kill Alfred as Vikings (the vice versa case) easily! Such things must be a real tragedy, this adds to the immersion very much.

*the only way to avoid this is to give immense morale points via edu to every unit, what renders the mod unhistorical and unrealistic, so the break of armies is okay to a certain moment, but not htat easily via an early killed general, imo., so we need just the 2hp. And btw., any code-influence that exploits the AI is bad if it can be avoided with little tweaks, this is what i try to do since years, and it works quite proper.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Aradan Aug 29 2008, 05:01 PM Post #22
Helot
Posts:
111
Group:
Members
Member
#12
Joined:
June 1, 2008
Quote:
 
If MoN follows this hint and my suggestion with the smith string*, then i would add all those armoured troops to the smith string, last tier.


3rd tier barracks already use the 2nd tier smith as preq to build.

Quote:
 
Unit numbers: Very well done, did you look into ChivTW for that  ;)

Nope. FATW has its own balance system (which I am using here as well), made from scratch, and I try to improve it constantly.

Tests on fatw and gafm showed that when the general is smaller and with 1 hp, the AI doesn't use him by himself to attack - not always, but the difference is noticeable. I can understand wanting to have stronger general units though, currently they are menat to be a part of a battle-line, unable to do much on their own. Plus, I'm not sure the number of personal followers was very big at the time. Anyway, since opinions on BG numbers are torn, let's wait to see what others think and then I will adjust them accordingly.

I was going to use skirmish-style generals (mounted) to prevent suicidal behaviour, but that needed new formations and MoN has said to keep thing minimal.


Note: we are not trying to make a historical mod (for now), rather a port from MTW to RTW engines, so bare this in mind. There are a myriad of things to be improved, the point is we want to keep the original VI feeling, while fine-tuning stuff.

Quote:
 
nd btw., any code-influence that exploits the AI is bad if it can be avoided with little tweaks, this is what i try to do since years, and it works quite proper

Yes, but the AI is so stupid that almost all code in an exploit. The thing is to keep a balance between AI-exploiting and giving the player some options.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
DaVinci Aug 29 2008, 08:49 PM Post #23
Helot
Posts:
104
Group:
Members
Member
#13
Joined:
June 1, 2008
Well, but the player is the one who plays the game, know what i mean? In the end, He has all options in his hand ;)
I stay with my attempt to limit the exploit where it is possible, and it is possible.

I know the VI 2 concept, yes, but i wouldn't go too anal along the "mistakes" that VI 1 did in a RTw mod. The flavor and atmosphere lives mainly from graphics, just the imagery, the music, the factions and its names andthelike, and the mirror of the main VI 1 gameplay concept ... as said, there are easily a few things that can be improved, imo., which won't destroy the "new" VI feeling on RTW.

And, as you say, the transport from the MTW engine to the RTW engine is the main change (and challenge) in the gameplay, you know of course VI 1, and no RTW engine can provide what the MTW 1 engine can, it is, and will remain another feeling in RTW or vice versa in MTW1. The trick is to bring over a bit of the MTW 1 feeling, and this happens with this mod anyway :) It will be one of my absolute favourites, btw., no question.

Another thought to this theme: MTW1/VI has a certain kind of graphics qualtiy, plein 2d, it lives from that, and that you don't expect too much realism, so you forgive the engine as for this fact, and you (or at least me) liked especially this minimalism.
In the result, we can't compare the M1 and RTW engine. The RTW engine though, lets us expect more realism in the gameplay as for its existing graphics engine (mainly).
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
DaVinci Aug 29 2008, 09:57 PM Post #24
Helot
Posts:
104
Group:
Members
Member
#13
Joined:
June 1, 2008
I did quick a few of the little tweaks that we discussed for the edb in the posts of the last 2 (?) days, perhaps check it out.

I'll playtest this, plus bodyguards with 2hp, now with the Irish H/H, trying to hold it against any raids, and will observe the ongoing massakers on the main isle ;)

http://www.file-upload.net/download-107721...gest02.zip.html

What is not solved really is the high growth rate, this rather needs tweaks in descr_regions, i guess (farming levels, but i didn't look after it as yet).
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
DaVinci Aug 30 2008, 04:10 AM Post #25
Helot
Posts:
104
Group:
Members
Member
#13
Joined:
June 1, 2008
Superb Irish campaign ... i couldn't stop for many hours, and even have forgotten to toggle_fow to check the map, respectively the AI gaming :D but have just viewed the statistics, and all seems okay so far, good balanced i believe (but found still a few little things that can be improved, of course, ie. i didn't realise prior to my little changes, that tax income is called now "tax due to plunder" or the similar text ... lol).

MoN, Aradan, Halie, Uranos, Ahiga and everybody who seriously worked on the mod ... this mod is an absolute beginner .... errh i mean winner ;)
It even gives me more fun than the original, i believe (although as said, not really comparable, perhaps an |absolute| comparision is possible , and then i would prefer VI 2 B) Great work!


One question, why the Irish have no sea trade? Intentional i assume ...
I looked into port-edb-section and hr's and other files and don't understand the "and port", what's the trick here?

Oh, btw., at least the Irish have not a too high growth rate anymore (don't know how it was before i did the little changes, but it seems the Saxons (?) had have special high growth values ?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
palantir Aug 30 2008, 09:19 AM Post #26
Perioikoi
Posts:
338
Group:
Members
Member
#7
Joined:
May 31, 2008
Antagonist will be pleased that the Irish campaign is good ;)

I am glad you are enjoying it, DaVinci!

tax due to plunder uses the unused capability of taxable_income_bonus to simulate extra income from tax gained from viking booty passing through ports: it is only available to vikings.

Trade fleets have no pre-requisites so everyone should have sea trade, unless the Irish have some problem with trade resources?

"port" returns true if a region has a white pixel (a port) assigned to in map_regions.tga - generally all coastal areas. It is used in vi2 to block th eport line appearing in non-coastal areas and also to limit the viking elites from the deep inland areas (of which there are very few btw) as a small ZoR of sorts.

You will see that I have added villages & farms (the hut resource model - such as in some of the southern england regions). These are GRAIN resources that increase pop. growth, reflecting that area to be not only fertile but populous. Although to be found elsewhere, Wessex has an extra one or two becuase the region was known to be very rich in this regard and i hope it also makes it more of a target.

I have yet to tweak the DR values, but that will probably sort most things. I should also say that all of the evented plagues and bad famines affect Wessex too - so they get some hardship.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Halie Satanus Aug 30 2008, 11:07 AM Post #27
First of the '300'
Admin
Posts:
175
Group:
Admin
Member
#1
Joined:
May 29, 2008
I've also had a quick turn with the O'irish, first off I'm not a very good beta tester because I don't look at text files so don't expect to much advice in that regard..:P

Things that pop out at me (probably mentioned already)

Battle interface; I can't tell which units are selected and unselected (also one of Mak's bug bears) so maybe make the difference more noticeable..I actually dislike white interfaces tbh, they look bare, maybe try something in oatmeal..(obviously just a personal issue)

Obviously my eyes are accustomed to sky mods, maybe you could consider adding one, everything looks sooo bright..

The unit scroll which I've seen in the 2d thread, the texture could be toned down a bit and maybe then could be applied to the ui cards which might solve the 256 colour blotch problem..If I get time I'll test that out myself..

Game play.

First I hate peasants in mods. :P Saying that the Irish peasants can be quite effective while Viking peasants are just annoying, the Vikings recruit piles of them and while they rout pretty quickly they do seem to have quite decent auto resolve results..

Ok so I'm bobbing along and doing quite well, I've expanded out and hold the entire south, Dublin is in my sights. That's when it all goes Pete Tong, the Viking peasant armies start to show up around my capital and because my main army is laying siege to Dublin I can't get back (not a hope) .. It takes a few goes but eventually my capital falls. I was actually winning the battle the Viking peasant horde had routed and only their warlord and a couple of Vikingr units remained (armies below, best I can recall) so my forces who had fallen back to the town centre had to face a Viking warlord, despite a fearsome resistance he decimated my force and all was lost..

To add insult to injury My siege of Dublin failed, (the little un threw a tantrum and I had to auto resolve :( ))

Now I have a full stack Viking army in the south heading toward poorly defended towns and no chance of reinforcing them.

I think it might be a lost cause..

Oh and do the Generals have to missile cavalry, I hate it when they are since they don't have that direct charge until the ammo runs out..

Any way, much fun, though think I messed due playing tactics same as '300' where you have time to build..

Trade seems low..

Population growth seems reasonable, not to fast not to slow, I know my family tree is more of forest so assume they were just as prolific in those days.. :D

My army;

Five bonnact (sp) merc units.
Five peasants.
One monks.

Vikings;
General.
One Huscarl (which I routed)
Three Vikinr.
and the rest of full stack of peasants.


Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
palantir Aug 30 2008, 11:31 AM Post #28
Perioikoi
Posts:
338
Group:
Members
Member
#7
Joined:
May 31, 2008
Hehe. You need to come out of the Dark and into the Light! ;)

Much of what you have said - except the Dark/Light bit (which I have no intention of changing - much at least) - has been addressed in tweaks and edits already.

Feel free to tweak the large unit cards and scroll texture. Aradan had blurred the scroll texture which makes the writing easier to read - but I am not sure I wil get time to ever tweak all the info cards, especially as I do not seem to have a batch process on my PSP or gimp :(
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Halie Satanus Aug 30 2008, 02:16 PM Post #29
First of the '300'
Admin
Posts:
175
Group:
Admin
Member
#1
Joined:
May 29, 2008
Quote:
 
Hehe. You need to come out of the Dark and into the Light! wink.gif

Much of what you have said - except the Dark/Light bit (which I have no intention of changing - much at least) - has been addressed in tweaks and edits already.


Nah, maybe I can play VI;II with shades on.. :P

I thought most of my points would have been picked up already (I said I'm not a very good beta tester ) :lol:

Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
DaVinci Aug 30 2008, 07:19 PM Post #30
Helot
Posts:
104
Group:
Members
Member
#13
Joined:
June 1, 2008
MoN, i mean i enjoyed the campaign especially with my edb changes included ;)
I'm sure without them my fun would be smaller, as for the few quite annoying things we discussed above, hope you'll consider lots of my edb tweaks, and very important, give generals 2hp, as my fun would be really smaller if played with 1hp.

In the meantime, i toggled fow and observed the AI play and ongoing actions, and one thing is, that Mercians are a too strong, same seems to be the case with Northumbrians. I feel they need to be restricted with income, as they can field too much armies. Mercians rule on the isle.

And yes, also i noticed now the village-structures (resource), nice thing, i know this from the old RTR metro submod. Far more impressive is the Hadrianswall, this is a huge feature, congrats!!! As well i noticed that somebody has textured the stone walls to wooden ones ... very very very well done.

This mod has so much extra features (graphics area in main), it is exceptional, and even more appealing in this regard than FATW, in my view for now.
The only gap is now that a unit maker should create some special models/skins per faction to enrich this area ... for the longterm tasks.

Ports: I didn't know this what you use "port" (as relation to regions.tga) ... thanks a lot for this info, as i use indeed a HR for this purpose. This will save me one more HR in ChivTW mods.
But, the irish have no seatrade, although they have a few resources in some regions, in fact, no seatrade at all ... seems to be a bug in place in this area, as i also saw this for other factions/regions, that lines aren't active. I haven't found a reason for this glitch in the code, strange thing, but this needs to be fixed.

Growth rate once more (also via village resource): This is critical in my view. Why? I'm sure in this timeframe there were only a very very few settlements that were able to grow really, and a growth rate of maximum ca. 1 % would reflect this. Also, this would help to decrease the huge appearence of (peasant) armies, which is ineed not realistic ... note i play this mod also only on Medium unit size to reflect the small armies, and it should be the recommendation for this mod, imo. The unit numbers per edu adress this already, well done. Here, perhaps the decrease of the peseant unit number could also help to reflect the hard times for the peasantry (lower unit number for peasantry), and also, that the AI would not train them so much. Further the train time of 2 turns (or even 3 turns) for them is needed, also in this regard! I guess, i would disable the Viking peasant, or restrict them to certain circumstances via edb, i think Vikings wouldn't have trained so much english peasants ;)

I second what Halie says to the unit selection in battle mode, this is really annoying, and i don't see the reason why this has to be that way, please fix this.

Also, what Halie meant with dark feeling: We are indeed in the dark age in this mod, and a bit more dark atmoshere would add to the mod ... not in a fantasy/mythology way, but just a bit more depressive feeling would help to transport the permanent threat for the people and the Danelaw timeframe, just the struggle and violence that was in place. The mod doesn't transport this atm., it is a clear gap imo., still much too Roman timeframe mod-like atmosphere, although you've such content already in place with the imagery (loadscreens, ui's).
Ie. the new wall-texture is one example of the needed dark and rough atmosphere, it adresses this, as it expresses exactly the rough and dark timeframe.

Now, i'll probable playtest the Danes ...



Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · VI-2 · Next Topic »
Locked Topic
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 12

Theme: Zeta Original Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 8:33 AM Jul 11
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy