
- 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: |
| Viking Invasion 2 - Pre-release Thread; Current Vsn: Public Beta 1.0 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 1 2008, 04:05 PM (3,213 Views) | |
| DaVinci | Sep 4 2008, 08:18 PM Post #91 |
|
Helot
|
Well, it must be map tga file concerning the trade routes. I guess only Uranos is able to fix this. However, the AI knows* which settlement/port is making money, besides the usual cash-flow impact, it will influence the global AI behaviour. *although the AI is justz dumb, it always counts everything of the respective map, and fails though ... mainly to do the right thing Burt of course, half of the ports have no sea lines (no trade income), and this is a significant gap in the build for the balancing efforts. -- As for the high xp points of bg's (valid especially in autoresolve ... in other words also AI vs. AI battles): Now as you have given 2hp to bg's, i would actually track down the high given start xp boni to max 2 xp. Also it helps to track down the command/attack/defence boni that are contained in the vanilla traits, not sure what you have included in VI 2. And removed should be the bodyguard valour trait/trigger. |
![]() |
|
| palantir | Sep 4 2008, 09:11 PM Post #92 |
|
Perioikoi
|
I've ran an -ai run and no CTDs. No un-religioned Vikings either - and a few Roman Christian too. I counted 12 ports across the map not trading; that's about quarter of the total ports. Mind you, some of the active ones seem to be doing the work of several ports! These generally are the Scandinavia landmass, Ireland (except on the east coast), Cornwall, London, Lindisfarne and Luel and Din Eidyn. I have not yet looked into trade resources to see if this remedies it - will try at some point! Here's the list of non-working ones as of AD 1036: Northumbria - Luel, Lindisfarne Alba - Din Eidyn Wessex - Lundenwic Wales - Tintagel Ireland - Dun ceannaigh, Ceannora, Tuam, Grianan Aileach Scandinavia - Jutland, Rogaland and Hordaland Port positions may also be open to adjustment. They are largely a product of ATW and the removal of regions to which they may have originally been attached. I am thinking Lundenwic, for example, probably had its main port up the Thames and not its present location.... |
![]() |
|
| DaVinci | Sep 4 2008, 10:45 PM Post #93 |
|
Helot
|
I'll finally add the last patch, i believe at least i didn't so as yet, and will do a new test based on this without my own tweaked files
It's just already weekend for me ...lol. |
![]() |
|
| palantir | Sep 4 2008, 10:47 PM Post #94 |
|
Perioikoi
|
Hang on there DaVinci - wel'll get patch 2 up in the next 24 hours and probably less!
|
![]() |
|
| DaVinci | Sep 4 2008, 10:50 PM Post #95 |
|
Helot
|
Wait ... the last patch is patch 1, right? This i have already! I thought there were map tweaks done by Uranos, and other things by Aradan and you, in the meantime ... where is this? Edit: Found Uranos' tweaks on page 4 ... does it make no sense to add this now? Hmm, will wait on the official patch 2 then. |
![]() |
|
| palantir | Sep 4 2008, 11:13 PM Post #96 |
|
Perioikoi
|
Yup, just wait otherwise it gets confusing and people start reporting things that have been corrected or are not valid because they have different files. |
![]() |
|
| uranos | Sep 5 2008, 07:13 AM Post #97 |
|
Helot
|
3 main things to have a sea trade - different resources in the provinces, not tooo big distance and the provinces can't share land border, 2 other minor things that come to my mind are the available road connection between port and city and water type on map_ground_types - there is no trade on ocean, can't remember what's with deep sea. Scandinavia - Rogaland and Hordaland - share border so there can't be a sea trade between them, because of distances there isn't trade between them and Scotland, but i moved Rogaland's port a bit more south and the Jutland port a bit more north and there is a trade now Lindisfarne and Wigranceastre don't trade because of no road connection between cities and ports - was easy to fix. Ireland - the distances - i moved ports more west so it shouldn't be a problem now, but it seems there is still problem with "different resources". Haven't checked the casue of rest no trade thingy. Pal, you can check where i put the ports: http://rapidshare.com/files/142757006/1.rar.html |
![]() |
|
| palantir | Sep 5 2008, 07:49 AM Post #98 |
|
Perioikoi
|
Thx Uranos. I'll adjust it for this patch and then we can observe what still needs to be done. |
![]() |
|
| DaVinci | Sep 5 2008, 11:28 AM Post #99 |
|
Helot
|
Great Uranos! I knew you are the one for this item
Btw, please look short into the ChivTW dev forum MoN, i wanna finally test the patched version ( to moan anew about the balance ), hurry up .... lol. ... but don't rush :rolleyes:
|
![]() |
|
| palantir | Sep 5 2008, 12:25 PM Post #100 |
|
Perioikoi
|
Patch 2 is now up (see opening post) Main features, other than rebalancing, include new formations, culture-specific recruitment buildings, limited recruitable merc regions... We still have some base balancing to do, and to fix sea-port trade. Initial traits (beyond the necessary) may also need coding into DS as well as any extra agents. I have not tested Uranos's ideas much but I had to ignore the change to Scandinavia as, alas, the Rogaland - Jutland trade lane fast became an invasion lane and the Norwegians took Jutland. As base balancing reaches its optimum, we must review campaign-script items regarding such things as: * starting armies * prebuilt barracks * adjusted treasuries etc. This should be kept in mind as base balancing continues. Some other minor elements also need to be added in but I would like patch 3 to be considered the final patch, although it's conceivable that patch 4 might be... |
![]() |
|
| DaVinci | Sep 5 2008, 12:33 PM Post #101 |
|
Helot
|
Great, will dl now. I assume this is cumulative ... (All) Ports: Should get then 1+ trade bonus as quasi replacement to the sea trade issue, or if you have still hr's available, make one hr for the non-sea-trade ports, and give these exclusively +1 trade. |
![]() |
|
| palantir | Sep 5 2008, 12:42 PM Post #102 |
|
Perioikoi
|
We'll have to think of something like that if no solution can be found (or even having less ports). Edit button is back Opening post now carries correct link.Yes, as the instructions say, it is cumulative EDIT: Oh and let me know if anything looks weird or goes wrong; I have not tested it on a clean build. It should be fine unless I've misnamed a folder or something
|
![]() |
|
| Aradan | Sep 5 2008, 04:52 PM Post #103 |
|
Helot
|
I tweaked a bit and I'm happy. Tweaked map-regions and descr-strat a bit and I got Wessex to survive the Dane onslaught, Danes to send reinforcements from Denmark, Welsh to stay alive etc. Albans are still troubling me, they get massacred by the Norse after a while, they just seem unable to expand aggressively or defend for long. Also decreased peasants to 10 men per unit, because now with these factional barracks they get used for a longer amount of time. Main things to do: weaken mercia a bit, strengthen alba a bit. Then the script. And a bug report: Ports need to block danish peasants. |
![]() |
|
| palantir | Sep 5 2008, 06:42 PM Post #104 |
|
Perioikoi
|
Great, Aradan. Invasions are definitely associated with sea trade routes. Patch 3 change log begun
|
![]() |
|
| DaVinci | Sep 6 2008, 05:31 AM Post #105 |
|
Helot
|
Aradan, good to hear what you've reported above. MoN, i also thought in the meantime it would be better to remove the non-trading ports. What i really miss is that you would have included a bit more of the region-oriented unit specilists, you know, in different regions different good mercs or different good cavalrymen andthelike, this would add a lot of the original VI content. Sometimes i'm afraid the mod is still a bit too plein (despite the very good graphic work) as yet to keep people amazed for a real long time, and to make this mod a cult. Don't misunderstand it, the mod is very well done, but i mean, it must compete in principle with VI 1, what isn't easy in this regard, and the VI 2 user will be already RTW/BI users who know the progress of the RTW (graphic-)engine compared to the MTW/VI engine. What will i say? When the eye candy and first impression of "a new mod in town" is over, the mod can only live on via in-depth-content, at least i think this is valid for the advanced player, the most noobs will love anyway everything what is new But, nonetheless, as a version 1.0 it is a great achievement with the current design ... i know it exactly how long it needs to make a mod better and better ... it just needs years.Else: I thought you've put 2hp for bg's in the meantime ... . Still i find the combat system not tensed and not immersive enough for my personal taste, further the unit behaviour is not the best, for example too much single units attack if they are in defence in settlements, but i know this is hard to fix. I noticed pathfinding/correlation problems in battle mode, especially in relation to settlements. The building/tech-tree is still too vanilla'ish for my taste with the costs/turns/recruitment/boni. However, the mod lives mainly (for me) via the quite VI atmosphere that it is indeed able to transport (music and graphic), for a RTW/BI mod this goal is pretty good reached in my view. --- MoN, please don't mention me in credits with "balancing" unless it means that you use this word as synonym for betatesting. I think you should make a category for the non-coders/non-artists in this mod like ie. "active supporters, consultants and testers" (in which group i see myself). All other contributors who did files or file tweaks that are used, should get their concrete credits with naming the file departments, imo.. It looks now a bit like a one-man show, in regard of who did all the work ... i'm sure at least Aradan deserves more mentioning for all his work he did and does all the time, how about "created by MoN and coded by MoN and Aradan" ... in this sense.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · VI-2 · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Zeta Original | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
8:33 AM Jul 11
|
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy



), hurry up .... lol. ... but don't rush :rolleyes:

8:33 AM Jul 11