Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

[Point Blank]

Timurids need some sort of scripted help. I've seen them stagnate for 40+ years occasionally besieging cities until they turn rebel but never claiming a capitol or actually making a decent push west. They tend to just roam around the Khwarezm area traversing their own paths over and over.

Also, Ghulams become unavailable after 1370. This hurts the Fatimids as they no longer have a decent heavy infantry unit recruitable from castles after this point; they rely solely on Al-Haqa. Not a terrible thing, but just wanted to make sure this is intentional.

Its tough for the Timurids, they get dumped in a pretty sparse area. Maybe some scripting would help.

Ghulams are intentional. Egypt after 1370 has good availability of ME Heavy Spearmen, and Tabardariyya for AP (though they will be less available, but will likely be available from castles also in low numbers also).

can we give ports the "hinterland" prefix so they don't get destroyed?

Yep.

[Gorrrrrn]

farms is a special case I believe - check mod workshop for more comment on the issue.

[RollingWave]

IIRC farm / road 's problem is that even if they get destroyed the map still shows them, this is less of a problem for farm than roads though obviously

[RomanGuy]

I was just looking at Frenchy's new units and they are freaking sweet! They actually look like real soldiers and I especially like the Norman knights, they gotta be included!

Edit: And did you see my previous suggestion about not letting the AI blockade ports, so many stupid wars are prevented?

[Point Blank]

Frenchy's units are all included (subject to his final permission), and will also include his new feudal knights when they are done

Not sure how to prevent the AI blockading ports?

[BarSteward]

Is there a way you could change the animation sets when a unit is put on defensive stance? I ask this because with some of the more elaborate animations i see individual units killing and enemy but then once they have finished the attack they are about 3 units deep behind the enemy line, meaning instant death.

They also take up a long time, and when you just want to hold the line a quick but fast attack, like a constant spear jab is perfect.

[RomanGuy]

Well I know there are ways to prevent allies from attacking each other if they still have an alliance and they first have to break the alliance, it was a mod for TATW. However, I guess I didn't think that it would affect the human player too, if it is possible to prevent the action of blockading a port.

It might not be possible to code or change in a file anyway, I don't know the files well enough, but if a way was found I would not mind giving up my ability to blockade ports if the AI couldn't do it also, as I feel it is a sort of pointless action anyway.

[ShadowKiller2000]

Hi PB,

For Aragon should they be able to recruit Chivalric Knights, and Dismounted Chivalric Knights?

They used to have Aramats, but those were removed in 6.3 I think. And they were simply given MAA.

So for balance giving Aragon those units back would be great......Aramats had identical stats to Chivalric Knights anyway IIRC.

Cheers,

[Point Blank]

Yes, I don't know what I was thinking, Aragon definitely have a Chivalric/Armat unit. Will fix.

[ShadowKiller2000]

Cool I am glad they will be added in as I like playing as aragon against the endless hordes of the Moors, or is that the Moops?

[Gorrrrrn]

just spotted this:
http://leeds.academia.edu/RobertJone..._Irish_Hobelar
is extremely interesting / relevant re discussion of british light cavalry - lots of new books in the bibliography too!
excellent piece of work

[smitty]

just spotted this:
http://leeds.academia.edu/RobertJone..._Irish_Hobelar
is extremely interesting / relevant re discussion of british light cavalry - lots of new books in the bibliography too!
excellent piece of work

Mounted Longbowmen?! Can we get this in the works for the next update? Would be so much fun...

[Gorrrrrn]

Mounted longbowmen didn't use their longbows whilst mounted, they dismounted to use them.
And Dismounted longbowmen are already in the game.

[ihranator]

I suggest including the Son of X and Heir Ancillary mods from Meneth's compilation.

[Ichon]

just spotted this:
http://leeds.academia.edu/RobertJone..._Irish_Hobelar
is extremely interesting / relevant re discussion of british light cavalry - lots of new books in the bibliography too!
excellent piece of work

That was interesting... also the references to how much armor might affect movement rates and the fact that many knights would fight dismounted. I don't believe it was always a preference but if the terrain or advantage to morale dictated it most knights seemed to have been willing to fight dismounted. I think the capture of fleeing enemy to gain a ransom played a role in fighting mounted as did the prestige later when armies grew larger and the importance of noble lords began to diminish as more sergeants and men at arms took over more with the rise of more professional armies.

Speaking to the light cavalry- it sounds as if they could have heavy equipment but choose to leave it behind for faster movement.

[RollingWave]

A possible suggest to consider... the effects of horses against each other.

We know that on a general level horses were not the same, some cavalires used horse that was fast / agile / easy to control while others used horses that was big / strong / more reckless . this should play into how cavalires do against each other .. from my observation the mass effect of cavalries don't really seem to do much when they charge each other , and when they melee it makes no difference at all.

My general suggestion is..

pony / small pony : -1 against horse
medium / eastern horse : normal
heavy and above : +1 against horse

This is fairly strait foward and simple to do...

[zlikovac]

Regarding the issue of AI leaving settlements undefended:
1. Will lowering loyalty for AI controlled settlements somehow force AI to keep more troops inside the settlement?
2. Can we have few generic unit types for the AI that have no movement points and thus cannot leave the settlement? These units should be attractive for the AI to recruit them but to prevent AI from stockpiling them a counter should be added for each settlement on how much of those units can be recruited

[RollingWave]

Regarding the issue of AI leaving settlements undefended:
1. Will lowering loyalty for AI controlled settlements somehow force AI to keep more troops inside the settlement?
2. Can we have few generic unit types for the AI that have no movement points and thus cannot leave the settlement? These units should be attractive for the AI to recruit them but to prevent AI from stockpiling them a counter should be added for each settlement on how much of those units can be recruited

I personally think we should just reduce the spawn script and increase garrison script...

(although setting up a garrison script is a royal pain in the arse... it requires one entry for every settlement)

[Gorrrrrn]

Regarding the issue of AI leaving settlements undefended:
1. Will lowering loyalty for AI controlled settlements somehow force AI to keep more troops inside the settlement?
2. Can we have few generic unit types for the AI that have no movement points and thus cannot leave the settlement? These units should be attractive for the AI to recruit them but to prevent AI from stockpiling them a counter should be added for each settlement on how much of those units can be recruited

1)As far as I understand the basic game mechanics, the AI is programmed to use the least number of units to defend a settlement, unless it is programmed to increase the garrison if under threat. And the least number is usually a governor. So we tend to work on the assumption that loyalty / order have to be organised around that - with some leeway so the settlement doesn't revolt if the governor dies, as the AI may not have a spare close enough to it. The AI might add more garrison (depending on how much garrison counts in the settlement_mechanics file towards order) to boost order - but not normally enough to make for a proper garrison.

2) We could create garrison_units (indeed I've suggested this myself) which spawn if a settlement is besieged and using a unique attribute we can destroy_units garrison_units every turn if a faction has no settlements under siege. Do-able but requires giving up a dozen or more EDU slots, to cover different cultures and time periods.

[Silver Legionary]

A possible suggest to consider... the effects of horses against each other.

We know that on a general level horses were not the same, some cavalires used horse that was fast / agile / easy to control while others used horses that was big / strong / more reckless . this should play into how cavalires do against each other .. from my observation the mass effect of cavalries don't really seem to do much when they charge each other , and when they melee it makes no difference at all.

My general suggestion is..

pony / small pony : -1 against horse
medium / eastern horse : normal
heavy and above : +1 against horse

This is fairly strait foward and simple to do...

That makes a good amount of sense, are you going to do that for HURB?