[Dev-Report] Chivalry I : Previews & Progress

[beatoangelico]

well the AI cannot handle properly almost everything, but I don't consider it a good reason to not include them since even the vanilla system isn't an AI friendly one.

[DaVinci]

... we aim to increase the players challenge and to help the ai where possible.

- I don't like it, if an ai unit creates shiltrom only because it "sees" cavalry, stays in this formation, and the player can **** them up with range units or can simply ignore this fix unit until all other ai units are considered, and then going back to the shiltrom unit to slaughter them.

- Shieldwall is very inflexible, the ai is far more vulnerable if attacked and ie. encirlced. And i believe it is also earlier exhausted.

Besides this, shieldwall is a (imo. anyway superflouos) performance resource-eater.

Plus, for the medieval battlefields in our mod not very historical accurate.

Those are indeed reasons for me to not include these formations.

[Hashashim]

Is Kazharia going to be in the mod? No mod I have every seen included them, but they were a powerful Jewish Empire stradling the caucasus and part of Khazakstan.

[Pompeius Magnus]

you see a confused Pompeius magnus!
First of all: all faction slots are used. So, we can't install a new faction.

Anyway...
Please give me sources for your comment.
Which Empire is it? Which time-frame? Make more concrete examples please.

[DaVinci]

Is Kazharia going to be in the mod? No mod I have every seen included them, but they were a powerful Jewish Empire stradling the caucasus and part of Khazakstan.

Here is a RTW mod in development that has planned the Khazars as faction
Viking: Total War

[beatoangelico]

... we aim to increase the players challenge and to help the ai where possible.

- I don't like it, if an ai unit creates shiltrom only because it "sees" cavalry, stays in this formation, and the player can **** them up with range units or can simply ignore this fix unit until all other ai units are considered, and then going back to the shiltrom unit to slaughter them.

- Shieldwall is very inflexible, the ai is far more vulnerable if attacked and ie. encirlced. And i believe it is also earlier exhausted.

Besides this, shieldwall is a (imo. anyway superflouos) performance resource-eater.

Plus, for the medieval battlefields in our mod not very historical accurate.

Those are indeed reasons for me to not include these formations.

these are good points, but if we expand them you would have to change almost everything, because almost everything is "exploitable" by the player. High charge - low attack cavalry, frighten and command attributes, long range missile weapons, javelinmen, ap weapons...hell, maybe also the spearmen/swordsmen distinction. Every thing I've listed can be used much, much better by the player than the AI.

[DaVinci]

these are good points, but if we expand them you would have to change almost everything, because almost everything is "exploitable" by the player. High charge - low attack cavalry, frighten and command attributes, long range missile weapons, javelinmen, ap weapons...hell, maybe also the spearmen/swordsmen distinction. Every thing I've listed can be used much, much better by the player than the AI.

Whom do you tell this? Therefor we reduce a few options which are very significant, got it?

Originally Posted by Hashashim
Is Kazharia going to be in the mod? No mod I have every seen included them, but they were a powerful Jewish Empire stradling the caucasus and part of Khazakstan.

Btw., i forgot, we have them as independent factions at least ( Khazars and Abkhazians )

[MasterOfNone]

Khazars were indeed powerful - but seldom mentioned. It was nice to see as little bit on them last time I went to the British Museum though

I first heard about them through Arthur Koestler's fascinating "The Thirteenth Tribe" book which draws on Muslim sources among others.

[DaVinci]

Khazars were indeed powerful - but seldom mentioned. It was nice to see as little bit on them last time I went to the British Museum though

I first heard about them through Arthur Koestler's fascinating "The Thirteenth Tribe" book which draws on Muslim sources among others.

Thanks MoN for showing your face here, it's an honor

[MasterOfNone]

Thx

I like to pop in to the top-notch mod forums every now and again

[pez dispenser]

I have noticed a lot of critiscism for the strat map in Chivalry, but I just want to say one of the best things about Chivalry, one of the things that makes it so good, and one of the things is the realistic strat map - I'm sick of bright greens and yellows, not only that the map adds to the atmosphere of the mod better then anything else I can think of

[DaVinci]

Nice to hear that, thanks

[Cathar1209]

It's great to see that one of my favorite mods is alive and kicking!
Do you have any new previews?
Cheers,

CK

[DaVinci]

Pomp Mag will provide soon a new one, atm. we have still a lot to do, before the next internal beta version stays, respectively before it is is ready for a new preview
(ie. many units are added and/or changed, the starting maps are changed, one faction switch, a lot new ancs ... but all needs still a quasi-final status).

[clone]

hi. i liked very much this mod .but the flag of byzantine empire in the game is historically accurate but it was also the two headed bird(eagle) who looks with his one head in the west and one in the east. you know that Byzantium came vary close with the orthodox church and Greece and as a Greek i would like this photo as the the flag of the Byzantium .i have the old version could you tell me how to change the flag and the units

[Basileios]

Yes, cool flag as well! At the Byzantium TW team we wanted to use it as a flag, too. Like many other well know Byzantine flags, it is rather a flag of the HIGH and LATE period, I'm afraid.

Pompeius Magnus posted a number of other flags at his 'Basileis ton Rhomaion' thread: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=157469


P.S.: The picture of your favorite flag below seems to be of better quality than the pic you posted, so it might though be of some interest for you.

[Pompeius Magnus]

you know that Byzantium came vary close with the orthodox church and Greece and as a Greek i would like this photo as the the flag of the Byzantium .i have the old version could you tell me how to change the flag and the units

Well actually we have no intention to change the flag but we will think about this as Basileios said.
And by the way:
The doubleheaded eagle was sureley a byzantine sign in earlier times, however, it was widely used after the reconquering of Constantinople in the era of the Palaiologoi. That means the professional introduction was somewhere between +/-1204-1261.
But it was for sure not the main sign of the Roman state in 1072AD.
As Basileios said: High or Late era. It was known before, but it was more a sign of a dynasty.

The sign means: the eagle looks into the old west and the new east. The sign means also a proclamation of the emperors over the old Roman Empire. And it really has nothing to do with any greek terms or greek forms. The Roman Empire was a multi-ethnic state!!! (with Thrace, Illyria, Pontus, Armenia, Isauria, partially Latium and Africa and Iberia and dozens of other people.)

Even in the 10th century the official sign was still the chi-rho sign of constantine the great.

[Col.Blitz]

Hi ,your mod is great But I think that the Poland need Retainer's and adding Vois from Kiev or Novogrod??Sorry for my english i'm from Poland

[clone]

Well actually we have no intention to change the flag but we will think about this as Basileios said.
And by the way:
The doubleheaded eagle was sureley a byzantine sign in earlier times, however, it was widely used after the reconquering of Constantinople in the era of the Palaiologoi. That means the professional introduction was somewhere between +/-1204-1261.
But it was for sure not the main sign of the Roman state in 1072AD.
As Basileios said: High or Late era. It was known before, but it was more a sign of a dynasty.

The sign means: the eagle looks into the old west and the new east. The sign means also a proclamation of the emperors over the old Roman Empire. And it really has nothing to do with any greek terms or greek forms. The Roman Empire was a multi-ethnic state!!! (with Thrace, Illyria, Pontus, Armenia, Isauria, partially Latium and Africa and Iberia and dozens of other people.)

Even in the 10th century the official sign was still the chi-rho sign of constantine the great.

yes but Byzantium came very close with greek orthodox church and i don't say there wasn't any other nation

[clone]

Well actually we have no intention to change the flag but we will think about this as Basileios said.
And by the way:
The doubleheaded eagle was sureley a byzantine sign in earlier times, however, it was widely used after the reconquering of Constantinople in the era of the Palaiologoi. That means the professional introduction was somewhere between +/-1204-1261.
But it was for sure not the main sign of the Roman state in 1072AD.
As Basileios said: High or Late era. It was known before, but it was more a sign of a dynasty.

The sign means: the eagle looks into the old west and the new east. The sign means also a proclamation of the emperors over the old Roman Empire. And it really has nothing to do with any greek terms or greek forms. The Roman Empire was a multi-ethnic state!!! (with Thrace, Illyria, Pontus, Armenia, Isauria, partially Latium and Africa and Iberia and dozens of other people.)

Even in the 10th century the official sign was still the chi-rho sign of constantine the great.

yes but Byzantium came very close with greek orthodox church and i don't say there wasn't any other nation