DLV Fan Contributions and Suggestions thread

[Lord Finga]

dlv 3.0??? is the diffrence to 2.2 such as big, that you will give the next release the version number 3.0??? thats very good news! when will it be released?

[Sosobra]

ETA ?

[Tokus*Maximus]

Last bits of Tokus*art for DlV3.0 all in. Awaiting Repman's keen and canny signal now...

[verity_blues]

Last I knew DLV was gonna be 2.3. This IS good news indeed!
Also, last I knew DLV was waiting for the CA official second patch... by the way, anyone have ANY IDEA when that things gonna hit the streets (the patch, not DLV 3.0)? GEEZ, you think they'd of had it down by now...

[Tokus*Maximus]

Dunno when they'll let the 1.2 beastie out of the gates Verity. Could be any day/week now. Thanks for help and research on some of the new DlV 3.0 faction symbols btw.

[Hunter Makoy]

here's a suggestion that would prolly require alot of text modding, but i think it should be in. this sounds radical, cuz its goes against this mod and alot of other mods, but i think the region titles should not be ancilaries. for one thing, someone shouldn't be the duke of wessex if they have nothing to do with wessex. i think the city mods should only apply to the current governors, and work like the seat of power trait, if ur in the city, u get the city trait, and if ur not, ur not. ive rutinely ended up wiht kings that cant be crowned cuz while they were young they conquered a bunch of cities and have too many nontransferable ancilaries to inherit the crown.

[hellbard]

i don't like that.. it is not historical and it is not fun.. i like to award my generals with titles.. it adds much to role play..

[missu]

oh yeah, the hunter is right!
i really like having ancillaries, but i hate to have too many. even though i modified descr_ancillaries in that aspect(=made almost all ancs transferable, apart from the crowns), it is always a timeconsuming and general/familymember-upsetting set of actions required to get the king and heir the right retinues:
the king needs 1: the crown, 2: the royal banner, 3: most of the time has a knights/knight commanders banner, 4: some fighting retinue like swordbearer/veteran warrior or even both, 5: a great sword that hopefully boosts authority, 6: regions that grant authority boosts
these are the ancillaries my kings and heirs ALWAYS have, and normally they have more than one 4 and 6. the result is, they can't be crowned or gain another crown. which makes me crazy, because i actually like the royal regalia stuff.
the way i deal with this is the following: when my king grows old, i gather all family members around, adopt or agree to marry someone (and i don't care about him, the less loyal the better) and give him the crap titles nobody wants: swordbearer no. 709, veteran warrior no. 568, knights banner number 5000, and so on. then my new family member is allowed to go meet with that nice guy with one eye and a wooden leg who is advertising with free shaves: "if you don't like it i'll cut yer head off!"

so my suggestion is the following: couldn't the knights... banners, crowns and royal banners (which are beautiful and i would be sad to see them go) be transferred to the traits section? they would still have the nice texts, and they could be producing asterisks-

or am i just pissed off right now because i had to spend half an hour rearranging my families retinues, having effectively lowered the loyalty of two of them simply because these were the two with only seven ancillaries...

[Tokus*Maximus]

oh yeah, the hunter is right!
couldn't the knights... banners, crowns and royal banners be transferred to the traits section? they would still have the nice texts, and they could be producing asterisks-

With respect Missu, why not the other way 'round? Move knight banneret bonuses from the traits section over to the ancillaries? A banner then would be more meaningful than mere pretty pixels.

-- Tokus

[verity_blues]

As we can all see, there is something a-miss on the retinues, for sure. Bottom line, 8 is the max, no more. Can we change this 8 to a higher number? No. Being that DLV is sooo retinue heavy, and hey, I love all the DLV retinue stuff, how bouts we make ALL retinues transferible; except crowns and royal banners. I know, I know, Pagan Magi is worthless, and no right minded noble is going to request that his brother give it on over to him. But, we can only have 8, we've gotta do something. Like missu said, the king and heir need at least 6 of my choosing, but if hes already got a foriegn fruitcake and a pagan magician... then it gets a little frustrating.
IF all the retinues were tradable what would happen? Well, for one all your bad retinues would be passed to some old man, or given to a crappy recruited general, to take them to the grave with them. While all your preferable family would have only the retinues you wanted them to. This IS an advantage over the AI; because it isn't smart enough to mix and match like you or I could.

That being said, I'm not sure what to think about it.

[hellbard]

i agree with vblues.. all should be transferable, all but crowns and banners.. one way or the other most of us that like dlv play by house rules.. so if we don't want a pagan magician we can say that he found another soothing general.. one that is more in to old gods.. or more gullible.. a foreign fruitcake.. maybe she found a better sponsor or a better lover.. ect..

[Tokus*Maximus]

Checks 'n' Balances in Ancillaries...

Hail Deus lo Vulters!

I'd like you to imagine - for a moment - a custom delux Deus lo Vult ancillary set. Fewer in number (making them rare) but greater in primary effect (+3), while ensuring each carried weaker secondary contra trait/s (-1) that affect the general in other ways than the main one. There's also the negative ancillaries, suffering your man a -3 primary penalty and a few +1 postives. So my idea is simply; rare, strong primary, weaker contra effects which enhance role-playing. Might make you feel your general really earned them too.

@Hunter, it'd be good to give a general who hold's the regional shield ancillary for a settlement and territory some bonus-or-other ruling the settlement or fighting within that land, with penalties when he leaves (but still holds the title) as his absent landlordness makes alot of things go to pot?

@Verity , Missu and Helbard, I agree it'd be good to move every ancillary between generals - I know the AI can't match the human's desire to lump the best together but there's always that % chance that one of your generals will feel robbed of their title/ancillary and become more disloyal. Also, having a main trait and lesser contra ones in each ancillary might help bzlance the 'power-loading' of fav' characters - ensuring built in drawbacks.

...just a thought.

-- Tokus

[Hunter Makoy]

keep in mind that none of this is a knock at the game at all. and i do love all the ancilaries and titles, it adds alot to the game. but it does get to be too much sometimes.

@Tokus. its not that im against the bonouses from the titles of provinces, is that they tend to stack up too much. for one, if they become traits, certain conquring generals wouldn't be bogged down with city titles forever, and can aquire more battle specific ancilaries, which suit them more anyway. also, the governor of the city should get a bonus rather or not that person conqured the town/was first governor, or not. basically, the governors get bonuses for staying in the city, the same way that the king gets the autority bonus for staying in the capitol, but only holds it on endturninsettlement.

i like to see the act of managing a settlement become a more hands on and direct method of improving, as it is improving comand ability. as it stands with TW games, its very direct and too the point, for the most part, of how u improve ur generals on the field. however, when it comes to governing a city, its not as hands on, or direct, and somethings just seem to happen by chance or luck.

too all the modders working on this game, i have been putting together a system of traits for governors. It works off of the similar principle of the advancement as field generals. it is used so that if there is a family member that is used solely as a governor, there r methods to reward them the same way as someone who is a life long general in the field. u guys would have to do most of the actual coding of it, but if ur interested i can send over the layout for the system and wat i have worked up so far.

[Sosobra]

With the addition of the Kiev Rus in DLV a unifier of the Rus trait is warranted
I think.

Set the conditions to the owning of Novgorod and Kiev , if these are met then Give the faction leaders a King of the RUS crown and maybe a title, just a thought.

[DarkSword]

Greetings !

Here's a suggestion that I've been pondering over since I started playing DLV. How about the addition of Ireland as a playable faction? I've been currently playing as the Scots and it would be interesting to have them as allies in my ongoing struggle against my arch - nemesis... The Kingdom of England.

[verity_blues]

@Darksword

Excellent post! My thoughts as well, though that would create alot of factions on that side of the world. Maybe if they would enter the game later, uprising style.

Thats one of the three things that I miss the most about MTW1.

1. A Factions wouldn't be out forever after they get wiped away. They would respawn a few times in their original territiries with decent stacks- lead by some long forgotten cousin of the thought-dead monarchy line of succession!

1. B Some factions would enter the game latter than early era, same respawn-style as mentioned above. For example, the Swiss emerged this way, for sure.

2. Assassins could be ordered to strike ANYONE on the map, including your own factions'!

3. Rebellions! Though Repman has worked hard to reinstate this through "offends the nobility" traits and such, nothing compares to the original. It would divide your kingdom into two seperate factions vying for the crown. Then it would ask you to choose one while the other one would become a rebel faction. ie, French Rebels.

Also, welcome to the twcenter community! Heres your first rep point!

[MaxPower]

I agree that the irish need to be added, i believe there is a mod already out that adds the irish as a playable faction. Maybe you can incorporate it into the next version of DLV like you incorporated the Flanders mod into 3.0. This would make the war over the British isles much funner. In my recent campaign with England, i had one of the funnest wars ive had an any total war game (the only other one that may have been funner was my italian wars as venice against milan, france, and HRE in my first campaign in the vanilla) against the scots in scotland. My great general, Philip the Saint, fought from 20-30 battles in scotland and eventually got the scottish to submit, but it was a hard and long war. after conquering scotland i shifted my troops to other theatres of war for awhile and let what was left of the scottish in ireland establish themselves there. Then later came back and conquered ireland with ease. But i think it would be much better if ireland wasnt just 4 provinces there for the english and scottish to race to control, i think they should add the irish to balance out this area since its such a concentration of rebel provinces. Plus all the other hottly contested areas, like iberia and italy have 3 factions occupying them and fewer rebels. Plus i would like to see the irish units available to actually maintain as the bulk of an army instead of just the occasional mercenary unit of galloglaich (one of my favorite units in the game and i have recruited as many as i can every time they have popped up in my english campaign which has lasted until the late 13th century and i have only been able to maintain 4 units of them, 2 of which have 3 gold chevrons cause i have used them to take every city square in scotland and ireland)


i also agree that managing skills definitely need to become more active like hunter said.

and i also think it would be sweet to do what sosobra said about having like a king of a united russia, or even change the name from grand duke so and so to Tzar/Csar so and so

[verity_blues]

I think that when you either defeat a faction and control their original capital, or, force them to become your vassal your King should become King of that faction too. Instead of just King of "whoever" even though you might practicaly control an entire continent! I know that this is represented through the crowns already, but maybe if it went into the traits, "King of France by virtue of conquest." Or "King of France by submission of the French Monarch."

[Tokus*Maximus]

@Maxpower - Here, here! An Irish faction on the emerald isle would be interesting as they expand to counter Angerland and Scroatland. Spice up the region. Add Iceland and the Orkney Isles as regions? - dropping off points for invasion to or from Scandanavia, British Isles and the New World?

There's many other places in deeper Europe and the Holy Land that could do with a new faction here and there.

DEUS LO VOX :german:
In a recient thread, many players had interesting suggestions. Deus lo Vulter Shadrach suggested Ukrania, adding some action to the east. Lord Finga suggested Bulgaria. Krasen too, pointing out that Bulgaria's been a major power in the Balkans since the 7th century until 14th, when the Ottomans conquered the region. A candidate for factionalisation? Chgo suggests Lithuania. Xtiaan72 suggested Ireland, Norway and Wales. Norway as a counter to Denmark. Ireland, same thing, so England has to watch it's back. Wales; the English had a hard time conquering Wales and this was prime time for castle building in that part of the world.

All the best you crazy Deus lo Vulters --

[verity_blues]

Don't forget that the Ottomans could emerge late game themselves. How about Jerusalem starting off as Crusade occupied an independent kingdom unto itself, with every factions first mission to be to reinforce this King of Jerusalem.