Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 58

Thread: BC 2.3.2 my experince

  1. #1
    Qarluq o'g'lan's Avatar Ikko-Ikki
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    20

    Default BC 2.3.2 my experince

    I was looking for smth close to CAE v1.4 when it crashed and i came across yr mod. I had only 15 or 16 turns and dropped, as i lost interest to continue. Ofc it is a matter of opinion, but i disliked yr mod for the following reasons: 1. siege equipment is useless against walls. 2. archers do not cause any casualties. 3. roads, farms and so on are expensive and take lotta turns to finish. 4. Rebel army too strong and seems like i have to spend half of my campaign time fighting rebels. 5. Neighbor factions seem too relaxed to go and take rebel settlements (seems like no competition). 6. why Khwarezmian have tajik militia, they were supposed to be Oguz turks. 7. It is easy to go bankrupt and looks like i will never make a normal army to conquer other factions. Well i understand you guys claiming to make it historically accurate, but IMHO it is just a game, and i believe game should be interesting and addictive (like my M2TW France campaign, with lotta competition and intigues)

    BC is a brilliant idea. I see you guys planning next release and (if my opinion matters) i've some suggestions: 1. make more factions, instead of rebels with huge armies. It will make the game more interesting as you can expect retaliation. 2. add intrigues and better diplomacy. 3. please make factions active and greedy (Transoxiana and persia were always war zone). 4. please make it cheaper to grow infrastructure (it is a game anyway). pls make siege eqp and archers stronger. I believe many players love challenge which lacks in yr mod imo.

  2. #2
    Emperor Hantscher's Avatar Centurio
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    404

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Quote Originally Posted by Qarluq o'g'lan View Post
    1. make more factions, instead of rebels with huge armies. It will make the game more interesting as you can expect retaliation.
    They plan on releasing 5 new factions in the next release.

    I believe many players love challenge which lacks in yr mod imo.
    What difficulty do you play on?

    You say the mod is not challenging enough but want them to make development cheaper and thus easier? Also making the rebels weaker to make expansion faster and easier is going to make the mod more challenging??? I think you need to play more than 15 or 16 turns before you turn your back on this amazing mod. I think any campaign in any mod I've played takes at least 50 turns before it really starts getting fun.

    And about the archers, use horse archers. They carry more arrows than foot archers and can move to volley arrows into the enemy's flank and rear, that's really effective. There is most likely a submod that increases the amount of arrows and damage foot archers do. For the amount of people I've read complaining about archers I'd be surprised if no one made a submod yet.
    Last edited by Emperor Hantscher; January 06, 2013 at 02:03 PM.

  3. #3
    gamegeek2's Avatar Sōkō yumi
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    828

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Archers don't do enough in vanilla BC?

  4. #4
    Emperor Hantscher's Avatar Centurio
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    404

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Quote Originally Posted by gamegeek2 View Post
    Archers don't do enough in vanilla BC?
    Apparently so.

    In other mods you can almost break a mid-size army before they even reach your lines if you have 5 or six archer units. At least in BC if you have 5 units of archers your not guaranteed victory, which I like about it. And a lot of them are hybrid units so once they are done with their arrows, which they will in every battle, they can join the melee and not be completely useless.

  5. #5
    Sukauto
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    58

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    As far as i know Kwarazems were Iranic people not Turkic.

  6. #6
    Qarluq o'g'lan's Avatar Ikko-Ikki
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    20

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    "You say the mod is not challenging enough but want them to make development cheaper and thus easier? Also making the rebels weaker to make expansion faster and easier is going to make the mod more challenging???"

    Sir, you apparently misunderstood. Rebel towns do not retaliate. they do not come to invade yr settlement. other factions seemed inactive whole time. no matter how expensive is the development and stronger the rebels are, i dont see a challenge in expansion just conquering rebel settlements which are not claimed by other factions.

    If you ever played M2TW vanilla and excommunicated by pope and neighbor factions attack you from different sides, you will get pretty nice challenge.

  7. #7
    Qarluq o'g'lan's Avatar Ikko-Ikki
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    20

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainIglo View Post
    As far as i know Kwarazems were Iranic people not Turkic.
    Transoxiana had Sakas, Massagetaes and Sogdians. They spoke dialect close to persian. However, Sakas migrated when hephtalites atatcked. Then came Gokturk and turkic migration started. as turks were nomadic they adopted persian culture to some extent and became bilingual. Early khwarezmians were alans who later migrated to caucasian area of russia and Khwarezm oasis was occupied by Oguz turkic confederation. even sogds had turkic leaders and army in transoxiana was consisted of mainly turkic tribes. Transoxiana was a corridor for turkic migration. Most of the early turks urbanized for a better administration of conquered transoxianian lands. as the game illustrates XII century inhabitants of Khwarezm was purely turkic.

  8. #8
    Qarluq o'g'lan's Avatar Ikko-Ikki
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    20

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    "And about the archers, use horse archers. They carry more arrows than foot archers and can move to volley arrows into the enemy's flank and rear, that's really effective. There is most likely a submod that increases the amount of arrows and damage foot archers do. For the amount of people I've read complaining about archers I'd be surprised if no one made a submod yet."

    I love mongol tactics and indeed sent 4 units to attack with missiles and retreated when they got closer, while moving main army backwards. and i was hoping to reduce opponents numbers and to misdirect his flangs with HA that are out of missiles. but to my surprise any of my archers didnt cause any casualties

  9. #9
    wudang_clown's Avatar Fire Is Inspirational
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    7,186

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Population of Khwarezm certainly wasn't homogeneous in the period. Khwarezmian language stopped being used in XIII c., which was after Mongol invasion, which in turn brought more significant than ever wave of Turkic peoples into Central Asia and further west. We can't just say "Khwarezmians were Turks". Anushtiginids were Turks, that's for sure. People of Khwarezm were most likely of different races, that's why Tajik Militia is not necessarily a fantasy unit.

    Under the patronage of m_1512

  10. #10
    Qarluq o'g'lan's Avatar Ikko-Ikki
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    20

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Quote Originally Posted by wudang_clown View Post
    Population of Khwarezm certainly wasn't homogeneous in the period. Khwarezmian language stopped being used in XIII c., which was after Mongol invasion, which in turn brought more significant than ever wave of Turkic peoples into Central Asia and further west. We can't just say "Khwarezmians were Turks". Anushtiginids were Turks, that's for sure. People of Khwarezm were most likely of different races, that's why Tajik Militia is not necessarily a fantasy unit.
    Sir, Culture and writing came to early Transoxiana from persia, as transoxianian population was mainly nomadic (like barbarian). "Khwarezmian language" is a myth as Transoxiana was bilingual (persian and trukic). All mighty turkic rulers used persian language as science, scholarly writings were in persian not in turkic (i mean in Transoxianian cities).

    XII century Khwarezm was indeed turkic, with other nations being minorities. Early turks divided into confederations like Khazars, Pechengs, Kipchak, Cuman, Oguz, Karluk, Tatars. All being naturally strong people thanks to nomadic lifestyle, Oguz turks expanded to modern day Turkey. Even modern day Turkmenistan, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Khwarezm area of Uzbekistan speak Oguz dialect. Khwarezm being part of modern day Uzbekistan still speaks Oguz dialect while rest of Uzbekistan speaking Karluk dialect. Persian dialect only exists in cities like Smarqand and Bukhara, while none of the current Khwarezmians speak persian dialect or look persian.

    and you are absolutely right about mongol invasion.

  11. #11
    kaesonius's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Busan, South Korea
    Posts
    60

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Adding "Sir" to the beginning of a post does not make you less of a troll. Simply a more polite one than normal. If that is your intention of course.... Please re-read your original post mate, you can see why people are confused as to your arguments. Also take a look at BC 3 which is the summit of this teams plans. It is going to be jaw-droppingly epic and I hope the team puts enough rebel cities and armies in, just to balance it out!

  12. #12
    Princeps
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,154

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    kaes version 3 is a long way away... although I do agree with your point about it lacking rebels. It seems a reversal to traditional BC with a focus on faction warfare as opposed to endless rebel gobbling.

    Qar your first faction is a poor choice, khwarezm is frustrating to play as even if you are experienced with BC. They are poor, surrounded by tough rebels, unhappy regions, have no cheap units to garrison conquered regions, the ghurids lurk nearby eager to spread out and devour the iranian rebels, and then the mongols pay a little visit Try another easier faction to break yourself in, maybe the abbasids or ayyubids. Makuria is good too, the AI is passive so feel free to steamroll southern egypt. I agree with your point about difficulty, factions do seem apathetic to one another and the player. After playing third age, where the action kicks off fast, BC does feel a tad pedestrian. It's a mod where you have to wait until the late game for aggressive factions that will try to wipe you out.

    Your point about archers has merit as well, they lack strong killing power and many have tiny quivers which sucks. BC uses a system based around armor and mounts, light HA get alot of arrows, medium HA recieve a solid amount, elites vary between a tiny and semi decent amount.
    Foot archers get screwed basically, recieving only 12-18 volleys... compare this to the 48 for light HA and 36 for medium HA. I edited the unit values so that foot archers have more arrows as it does seem unfair to light FA...
    Light horse archers can destroy entire armies after alot of kiting. The only thing that can mess this up is lots of enemy cavalry, especially elites. So I would not describe all archers as weak, the problem lies mainly with foot archers.

    also what is CAE


  13. #13
    Ansar Warrior's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    252

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Khwarezm's ruling class was Turkic but as others have said the area they ruled over included parts of Iran and those subjugated peoples fought for their lords for favour etc so Tajik, Sughdian, Persians etc would have all fought under that one banner.
    In fact the Khwarezm took over the Seljuk Eastern half of their kingdom which in effect was Persia, they ruled Persia hence a good sized make up of their military was Persian as well as Turkic and the other tribes who resided in those areas.

  14. #14
    Ansar Warrior's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    252

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Quote Originally Posted by nein View Post

    Your point about archers has merit as well, they lack strong killing power and many have tiny quivers which sucks. BC uses a system based around armor and mounts, light HA get alot of arrows, medium HA recieve a solid amount, elites vary between a tiny and semi decent amount.
    Foot archers get screwed basically, recieving only 12-18 volleys... compare this to the 48 for light HA and 36 for medium HA. I edited the unit values so that foot archers have more arrows as it does seem unfair to light FA...
    Light horse archers can destroy entire armies after alot of kiting. The only thing that can mess this up is lots of enemy cavalry, especially elites. So I would not describe all archers as weak, the problem lies mainly with foot archers.

    also what is CAE
    You can solve that issue relatively easily, I was told how to amend it now my foot archers (only elite divisions like Jannisary) have the same amount of arrows as Horse Archers.

    I reconcile this because elite foot archer units would have had baggage trains assigned to their units, the Sultans/Kings woul dhave had them well stocked so I don't have a problem enlarging the amount of arrows they would have.

    Oh and your tactic for defeating Horse Archers is not the only option or even the best one, I use the same tactics the Persians and Ottomans used and it works an absolute treat.

    It took me years before it dawned on me why the Persian military was as exotic as it was but while I was questioning why the original Jannisary recruits were all archers (Why would you make your elite soldiers archers?) it dawned on me and the Immortals/ Cataphract purpose fell into place also.

  15. #15
    Princeps
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,154

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    >You can solve that issue relatively easily

    I mentioned already that I did

    >Oh and your tactic for defeating Horse Archers is not the only option or even the best one

    I was talking about the only thing that could threaten a player spamming light horse archers in a field battle... an enemy with lots of cavalry. As for defeating large HA armies... I usually pin them on a bridge or in a city. It pays to impede their movement and even more so to funnel them into concentrated fire and waiting infantry.

    And another thing to qarluq, yes buildings are very expensive... it usually pays to carve out a large empire before building much of anything. And then focusing around your wealthiest cities. Sacking rebel regions is a good way to generate alot of money... but sometimes buildings get destroyed. I think if you sack with your king structures are never damaged, unsure about this though.


  16. #16
    Ansar Warrior's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    252

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    I'm referring to beating a full HA stack on a normal battle map without resorting to tricks like making them siege etc.

    Obviously numbers will have to be similar but I've tried it many times on custom battles and it's never come close to failing.

  17. #17
    Mamertine's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    272

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Quote Originally Posted by Ansar Warrior View Post
    I'm referring to beating a full HA stack on a normal battle map without resorting to tricks like making them siege etc.

    Obviously numbers will have to be similar but I've tried it many times on custom battles and it's never come close to failing.

    I'd like to hear your tactics Ansar, the more the merrier. Mine is simple. A few foot archers to out distance and shoot the HAs coupled with a few spearmen if they get close, and some light lancers to catch the HAs. I lose about 1/4 of my army on average. Adjust accordingly if the enemy has other units or heavy HAs.

    OP,
    It is a big change of pace from vanilla and most other mods. I feel that the economy is a little too unforgiving and the foot archers do not have enough ammo. Fortunately this is an easy fix, and that is coming from a guy that knows nothing about modding.

    BC: Once you get over these two easily fixable things, you realize something else. This is the most balanced mod ever! The factions are beyond unique, the fighting feels more intense, etc., etc., etc. Also no boring Northern Europe, clone factions, or Pope.

    About archery in general. It takes some getting used to at first. I suggest a faction that isn't archer dependent. But you need to realize that this is how it was back then. The Mongols and Turks used feigned retreat and harassing in real life, that is what you have to do in the game to win with HA armies. You attack an enemy, shoot off all of your arrows, retreat and repeat (most new players do not like this style initially). Once you learn how to use archery you will appreciate it more (support, defense, and harassment). I always tell new users to never start with an archery heavy faction their first playthrough.

    Try starting with the Ayyubids and ease into the BC style. I played a half campaign with Rome, the Abbasids, Ayyubids, Crusaders, and a half campaign with Oman before I had the patience and tactics to go full HA.

    The Crusaders is a great transition. You can create HA armies to harass the enemies while still not being dependent on them for your core army. I always had a half stack of HAs deep in enemy territory harassing their armies. It did wonders.

  18. #18
    Mamertine's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    272

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Quote Originally Posted by Qarluq o'g'lan View Post
    If you ever played M2TW vanilla and excommunicated by pope and neighbor factions attack you from different sides, you will get pretty nice challenge.

    Be the Crusaders or Rome and wait for a Jihad. Or be the Ayyubids, start taking the Levant and wait for the crusades and endless stacks of Romans.

    Or if you really have a deathwish, the Khwarezm and wait for the Mongols.
    Last edited by Mamertine; January 09, 2013 at 07:16 PM.

  19. #19
    Ansar Warrior's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    252

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    Sure Mamertime, admittedly the way the game is it's not always appropriate as you don't always know what your facing hence it's hard to prepare for but the Ottomans trying to control a mutiny from the Begs under their rule and the Persians having constant threats from Turkic HA raids, Parthians and Scythians prepared as such so I just copied the tactic.

    Front row of Spear men is fine but if you have the money I would definitely go for Heavy Infantry preferably with either spear, pole arm or axe as they can hold off enemy infantry, take a charge and hack down horses easily.

    Second & Third row - Archers (enough to match the HA's)

    I always double line formation with the archers so they fit behind my front line protected and I usually station an infantry unit on either side just behind the front line sticking out of the square formation so if cavalry try to sweep in behind to get the archers you have a mobile flank unit that can deal with it without having to use a front line unit breaking the formation.

    ------------ (Spear or Heavy Infantry)
    - (Flank unit) -
    ------------ (Archers)
    ------------ (Archers)

    This basically answered my questions as to why the Persians and the first trained Jannisaries were archery focussed, the Immortals for example with their standard equipment being Bow & arrow, Shield and spear were perfectly equipped to form the sort of formation I mentioned above.

    One tip would be to increase the quiver size to 30 in the EDU.

    If you go onto Custom battle and give the enemy as many Horse archers as you want and try that formation it's not failed me yet even against a full stack.
    Last edited by Ansar Warrior; January 09, 2013 at 07:33 PM.

  20. #20
    Qarluq o'g'lan's Avatar Ikko-Ikki
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    20

    Default Re: BC 2.3.2 my experince

    nein,

    Thanks for explaining. I will have another try. mod seems unique. Only reason i chose Khwarezm is: i thought it will give me a lot of HA, so i could use Subutai's tactics (that he used against much bigger russian army, poles and hungarians) to use it against mongols themselves. To my surprise khwarezm had only persian archers. So i had to hire mercenary kypchak HAs. and they being week, subutais tactic didn't work. one more thing do kypchak khanate create HA or they have only mercenary HA too?

    mamertin: Fortunately this is an easy fix, and that is coming from a guy that knows nothing about modding.

    well, congrats.

    and thanks. i will try as you suggested. . but what should i do for jihad? attack muslim faction or just wait for it (and how many turns)? and in case of ayyubids, do they create HAs?

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

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