Page 164 of 170 FirstFirst ... 64 114 139 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 LastLast
Results 3,261 to 3,280 of 3387

Thread: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

  1. #3261

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Why did you choose to add Belgium as a faction? I thought you were focusing on the 7 Years War and Belgium emerged in the 1800s.

  2. #3262
    MRENGLISHRULES's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    249

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Some of the militia units are still using vanilla skins. Is this a bug or are you going to add these skins?

  3. #3263
    Eldgrimr's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Regnum Sweorum et Gothorum
    Posts
    516

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    I'm new to this mod, so far I've only played Darthmod and Imperial Splendour. I have two questions.
    Does this mod concentrate on historical accuracy like Imperial Splendour?
    Also, what is the most realistic difficulty to play on?
    Last edited by Eldgrimr; April 08, 2017 at 06:49 AM.

  4. #3264

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Eldgrimr View Post
    I'm new to this mod, so far I've only played Darthmod and Imperial Splendour. I have two questions.
    Does this mod concentrate on historical accuracy like Imperial Splendour?
    Also, what is the most realistic difficulty to play on?
    Yes

    Hard/Very hard

  5. #3265

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Hi,

    Started a campaign in v5.0 and must say that it is a extremely solid and well built version, with the quality LordSith has already habituated us. But....

    A couple of minor unit bugs/mistakes:

    1) Bavaria;

    On previous versions, the starting level of the army barracks in Munich had only available for recruitment 4 specific regiments of line infantry each one limited to 1 regiment recruitment cap. The immediate following level of the army barracks building, allowed the recruitment of the 'standard/uncapped' line infantry ( that usually is available in the previous army building level for other nations).

    In version 5.0, the 'standard/uncapped' regiment is available right from the start ( the line infantry unit card with blue jacket), and the previous 4 'capped' line regiments are reduced to 3. The glitch here, is that when recruiting the 'standard/uncapped' regiment, the unit that is actually recruited is the previous 'capped' regiment that was dropped from the initial 4 'capped' available regiments, but now it doesn't have a recruitment cap. Conclusion the 'standard' regiment overlapped the 'capped' regiment.

    To be more helpful:
    1.1) the 'standard/uncapped' regiment is defined in: [Lord_Core.pack -> db_units -> units_tables -> gs_units -> "euro_line_infantry_bava"] (to make it available in an early army barracks, it only needs to be added the appropriate building in [Building_units_allowed])
    1.2) the 'uncapped' regiment is defined in: [Lord_dbunits.pack -> db_units -> units_tables -> CB_German_units -> "ger_euro_line_infantry_bava"]

    2) Mameluks ( to be a little picky);

    2.1) There is a glitch in the unit 'Azaps', a melee unit.
    This unit is equipped with a 2 handed axe and a shield. When ever I play a battle with this unit in the army, the axe vanishes during melee fights. this unit is really helpful vs cavalary, so if this is possible to be fixed please don't remove the unit.

    2.2) The 'Azaps musketeers'.
    This unit has a very low recruitment cost and maintenance cost, but 'accuracy = 15' is simply terrible even for a irregular musketeer regiment.

    Now some campaign considerations:

    1) The Sioux are part of the Plains Nations ( along with the Black Foot and others), this makes a little redundant to have the 2 factions. On the other hand, the Apache aren't Pueblo tribes. So allow me to suggest some reorganization of these tribes. Give the Wilderness_Great_Plains to the Plain Nations, turn the Sioux into Pueblo Nations and move them to the Texas region. Or, Rename the Apache into Pueblo and move them to Texas and Rename The Sioux to Apache or Navajo and move them to the Wilderness_Tejas.

    2) The region Wilderness_Mexico should be given to Spain. The Apache 19th century raids in Sonora, Chihuahua, and Coahuila, are well documented as the New Spain, and latter Mexican, activities and expeditions to stop these raids. So it isn't accurate to have any other faction but Spain owning Wilderness_Mexico region.

    3) The prestige value for recruiting ships should be reviewed (and probably the upkeep and recruitment costs to, they are a little low). Reducing the prestige value by 1/3, on average, should work well. As it is, one 1st rate ship adds the prestige value of 11 cannons [45/4], and the upkeep costs are roughly the same. in game it makes naval recruitment much more desirable and extremely hard to compete if we are playing with a land lock faction. Also it makes the prestige victory condition virtually only obtainable via naval spam.

    4) The technology 'dialectics' gives '+20 diplomatic relations', this value makes Carlos II of Spain a very smart, and intellectual stimulant person to engage in a conversation. There is an obvious difference between technology and faith produced miracles, So the 'dialetics' max value shouldn't exceed +5.

    5) The North_Western Territories should go back to the Cree.

    6) Why are Sunny-Shia Dip. Relations a exact copy of the Sunny-Sunny relations? Shouldn't be some attrition between these 2 religions?

    And to finish,

    Thank you very much for the unspeakable value that you add to our leisure times with this herculean work, from a sincerely grateful player that will continue to post minor glitches and suggestions.

    Thanks,

  6. #3266

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    can anybody tell me how to handle ottoman freeze bug??it's ruining my exp.I m using the latest version.

  7. #3267

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    how do i play as banjar?

  8. #3268
    Gen.jamesWolfe's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    in my house.
    Posts
    2,595

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Done some playing on here. Some things have been disturbing, in an otherwise excellent mod:

    1-is there no way to introduce a more realistic morale system? I'm literally shelling Frenchmen to piece, and they still hold their ground. I'm forced to kill 60-70% of them even when they are flanked. Historically, a regiment was lucky to remain intact when it had lost ~30% of its men, and the combat is pretty slow in this mod compared to vanilla, so I feel this is workable. Doesn't have to be a mandatory thing--just a special patch.
    2-why do the ships run so often? If I shoot them to pieces and have them surrounded by up to 5 ships, they should surrender--like normal people do. Them running away (or trying to) is a pain in the rear, since they "rally", and come back--which is insane for a naval battle...especially if you're sinking...
    3-why is it that when I board a ship whose crew I outnumber 2 or 3 to 1, I'm eager and they're wavering (or even broken), I lose? that makes no sense. They should lay down their arms outright.
    4-and really? Why on earth would it have taken half the year to cross Britain? "Bonnie Prince Charlie" Stuart was halfway through England in less than a month from the border--and he had to besiege Carlisle and capture Manchester and Derby; An army at most needed a month and a half to cross England if there were no obstacles, and perhaps another month or two to cross Scotland--form North to south. It took even less time to cross from east to west. As a result of this highly questionable feature, I literally had a Barbary fleet take over Cardiff's port, and I couldn't do a thing about it, since my navy was fighting the French, and I couldn't get my army there from The area just west of London--because it apparently takes three or four turns...

    As you can tell, my main issue is the AI's frankly suicidal behavior in terms of morale. A secondary issue concerns the movement points. Tactics are good for an AI, and the armies are reasonably well-balanced.
    I haz a culler!! (really, who gives a darn? its totally meaningless, and it doesn't really accurately reflect who I am)


  9. #3269

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    i downloaded the mod but when i start the campaign and click "End turn" it just doesnt work

  10. #3270

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION


  11. #3271
    Herr Doctor's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Lukomorye
    Posts
    620

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Gen.jamesWolfe View Post
    Done some playing on here. Some things have been disturbing, in an otherwise excellent mod:

    1-is there no way to introduce a more realistic morale system? I'm literally shelling Frenchmen to piece, and they still hold their ground. I'm forced to kill 60-70% of them even when they are flanked. Historically, a regiment was lucky to remain intact when it had lost ~30% of its men, and the combat is pretty slow in this mod compared to vanilla, so I feel this is workable. Doesn't have to be a mandatory thing--just a special patch.
    2-why do the ships run so often? If I shoot them to pieces and have them surrounded by up to 5 ships, they should surrender--like normal people do. Them running away (or trying to) is a pain in the rear, since they "rally", and come back--which is insane for a naval battle...especially if you're sinking...
    3-why is it that when I board a ship whose crew I outnumber 2 or 3 to 1, I'm eager and they're wavering (or even broken), I lose? that makes no sense. They should lay down their arms outright.
    4-and really? Why on earth would it have taken half the year to cross Britain? "Bonnie Prince Charlie" Stuart was halfway through England in less than a month from the border--and he had to besiege Carlisle and capture Manchester and Derby; An army at most needed a month and a half to cross England if there were no obstacles, and perhaps another month or two to cross Scotland--form North to south. It took even less time to cross from east to west. As a result of this highly questionable feature, I literally had a Barbary fleet take over Cardiff's port, and I couldn't do a thing about it, since my navy was fighting the French, and I couldn't get my army there from The area just west of London--because it apparently takes three or four turns...

    As you can tell, my main issue is the AI's frankly suicidal behavior in terms of morale. A secondary issue concerns the movement points. Tactics are good for an AI, and the armies are reasonably well-balanced.
    The battle difficulty should be set normal as the mod is specially made for it, this will make things way more balanced.

    On the 4th "issue" - you may choose the option that would allow you to play with normal speed for the armies on the strategic map.

  12. #3272
    Gen.jamesWolfe's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    in my house.
    Posts
    2,595

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    I usually set the difficulty to normal. Will double check, make sure.

    I'll definitely consider the option.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I haz a culler!! (really, who gives a darn? its totally meaningless, and it doesn't really accurately reflect who I am)


  13. #3273

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Does this mod nerf AI Campaign spending?

    I cannot remember if it was this mod or another that I played and was enjoying the very tough economy until I invaded French Guinna and the French had SEVEN full stack armies there! Kind of killed the immersion that every cent spent was keeping me in the chase with the rest of the world.

    I am currently playing Minor Factions Revenge (love it!), but even there, in Europe, the Armies get spammed. I am looking for a mod that gives the player AN the AI a tough economy and the AI spends it much like I do on economy moreso than military.

  14. #3274

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Try with the VDM mod and some of the other sub mods that LordSith has in store. Sometimes the VDM becomes very tough to handle your economy and the political ambitions of your ministers.

  15. #3275
    Civis
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    115

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    I cant vote, because something of the permisions

  16. #3276
    Civis
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    115

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    I had a video for you guys, is to uninstall eny mod ( 1600 Colonialism mod in this case ) and install Imperial Destroyer for the Hispano ( So is in Spanish ) community of this mod:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFK8fSCmbbs

  17. #3277

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Is it possible to do something about diplomacy? I have noticed nations I am very friendly with, who are my allies and we have long established trades routes will start a war with me for no good reason. It doesn't really make sense that your allies you start attacking you like that.

  18. #3278
    Sir_Aggelos_GR's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Halkida,Greece
    Posts
    751

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    set BATTLE difficulty to normal? want it be too easy>?
    what about campaign difficulty?

  19. #3279

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by joebob1337 View Post
    how do i play as banjar?
    I, too, cannot find them in either Era in newest version. Did they get taken off 5.0? Loving the mod otherwise, best variety I've seen in an Empire mod! Took me forever to decide who to play as

  20. #3280
    Civis
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    115

    Default Re: IMPERIAL DESTROYER SUGGESTIONS, COMMMENTS, QUESTIONS & DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •