1.0?

[Gaul]

You can't push for 1.0?


I remember... when you guys... had your own forum and everything... strat command center.com

What happened.. really.??

Ohh... to remember .34 and its palethera of bugs...

[ReignTerror]

I love this mod... because I can't play M2TW on my low end comp... I wish I could see a 1.0... but I can't really complain... it's just a number... I enjoy the mod enuff already... this and EoD... and SPQR... since EB destroys my computer

[drak10687]

Oh, SSC is still there... but for the past 6 months or so, it has become less and less reliable. One time it went down for at least 2 weeks. At that time we already did not have many people posting there, devs or "fans", since we were slowing the pace down... but that down time basically killed it. Now I'm the only one pretty much who checks the forums there, but for the past month or so, theres only been one poster, and I recommended for him to come here, so that he can have more people answer his questions.

As far as 1.0... well, I can't say we're "pushing" for it; however, Garnier recently volunteer to help with several things... and as soon as I get some free time, I'll make sure to work on it a bit as well. So its not out of the question that we'll see an update eventually.

[DaVinci]

You can't push for 1.0?


I remember... when you guys... had your own forum and everything... strat command center.com

What happened.. really.??

Ohh... to remember .34 and its palethera of bugs...

Bold: That was in may 2006 ... why mentioning it now at October 2007? ... makes that sense?

What happened.. really.??

I worked hard on this mod for 1 year (june 2006 - may 2007) ... team members and me just retired. ... now i work hard on a M2 Chiv-like mod

Let's hope Drak and Garnier will polish the mod still a bit for a 1.0 release, but the gameplay won't change anyway, only cosmetic, it will be.

[drak10687]

Bold: That was in may 2006 ... why mentioning it now at October 2007? ... makes that sense?

I think he's just pointing out how much work has been done since that version.

[Pompeius Magnus]

Hey friends,
I made a little brain-storming for myself accoring the next build (1.0?)

And I don't want open for such minors a new thread, so I post here.

Dear Modders, dear gamers,
is it posible to rename the byzantine-empire in "east-roman-empire" or "roman-empire" or something like that?
The people who lived in the (today) so called byzantine empire called themself always: Basileía tōn Rhōmaíōn/Vasilía ton Romäon „Empire of the Romans" or Romaikí Aftokratoría "Roman Empire".
The name "byzantine empire" came with the modern time (post-medieval).

And another question: Is it a bug is it normal? Always when I move my diplomats or my armies the character (figure) dissapears after all movement-points are gone. Only the banner is visible. In the next turn the character is visible again.
The problem is with the diplomats for example. I think it is a better idea if the diplomats-cart is always visible.

So, and now some comments from me: As I told before, the game is great. It is much better than Medieval I and "much much" better than medieval II (vanilla). The music is great, and the atmosphere on the strat-map is hypnotic. Well done, gents, well done!

Thanx and best regards

[drak10687]

Well, I'll let DaVinci or someone else answer your suggestion about changing the name of the Byzantine-empire, as I'm no historian myself, though I don't doubt that what you say is true... but history is complex, and there are always other factors involved.

For your second question, it is a "bug", sort of. The reason this happens, is because all these strat-map models use the animations of the vanilla ones. Since they must be attached to the central bone of the skeleton, which is the area of the pelvis, they follow the movement of it. Normally, when the vanilla characters run out of moves, they sit-down, thus the central bone is lowered. This also happens with our characters, only they are smaller, and are static, so when they run out of moves, the effect is that of them "sinking" or disappearing into the ground.

This has been so since the very first release, and has not really been worked on in order to be solved. I guess the best way would be to make/find a better fitting animation.

Hopefully this will, eventually, be done.

Thanks once again for all your comments and suggestions!

[DaVinci]

is it posible to rename the byzantine-empire in "east-roman-empire" or "roman-empire" or something like that?
The people who lived in the (today) so called byzantine empire called themself always: Basileía tōn Rhōmaíōn/Vasilía ton Romäon „Empire of the Romans" or Romaikí Aftokratoría "Roman Empire".
The name "byzantine empire" came with the modern time (post-medieval).

... this is doubtfree correct.

In the M2 mod successor of Chivalry, "The Sicilian Vespers", all those things are proper reflected, Byz is calling there 'Basileía tōn Rhōmaíōn'.

For Chivalry I TW, as we have all faction names in english, it would be the best to call them 'East Roman Empire'.

[Pompeius Magnus]

Thanx for the answers.

Also good to hear that the Byzantene name will be changed with the next build (hopefully).

here are some other questions:
1) I checked out some days ago a lot of older posts. I saw an official screenshot with the hagia sophia. An amazing work of one of your chivalry modders. Why isn't the building included?? Is it possible to do that with the next version?

2) What was the reason to put only so few buildings to Constantinople? I mean when I check the city I see 5 or 6 minor buildings. I think it would be more realsitic to include more bukldings to Constantinople. Or do you had "game-tactical"-reasons due to balancing?

3) Is it possible to remove the character figures from the stat-map and exchange them with real-person-symbols like in other mods?
I mean the diplomate horse-cart is OK so far. Beautiful.
But the little army symbols are moving and jumping and so on. That really don't looks very good. If at least the army symbol will revised with an early medieval soldier I would be more happy
But this is only my opinion!
If other users and gamers want the army symbols it is also Okay for me.

4) I have problems to identify ports on the strat-map. Is it possible to create a medieval (chivalry-like) symbol for a port. I also say that the original RTW ports doesn't match the mod. But something very small for better identification should be created.

5) can you make the main menue a little bit better. If you want start a game there are some dots in the middle of the screen (Custom battle/campaign etc...) It looks like that some menues or options are missing.

I am playing nealry every day your mod (yesterdays my wife was a little bit angry)
Also the AI reacts extremly good. What have you done??? Also the independent nations are acting like real players or factions. Very agressive.
I got a lot of intelligent diplomatic offers form other states. I have to say that again. The mod is really well done.

[drak10687]

Hey, thanks again for all your feed back.

I will be sure to check all these things out, but I can't promise that they will be done as these are quite minor graphical details, while there are still some more important things to be finished and progress is at a halt at the moment... which is mostly my fault since I'm the one who is supposed to be working on them.

In the meantime, I'm glad you enjoy the rest of the mod, and please don't hesitate to post more suggestions.

[DaVinci]

Also the AI reacts extremly good. What have you done??? Also the independent nations are acting like real players or factions. Very agressive.
I got a lot of intelligent diplomatic offers form other states. I have to say that again. The mod is really well done.

Bold: Lol ... this is the Dark Side secret of the 'global' modding/coding design

Thanks for the compliments

[Nikitn]

Oh, I really like this mod, BUT its alot of Cosmetic errors, like the 3 dots, on the single player menu! They shuld be fixed, adn removed. But also, those historical battle tat cant be plaeyd shuld be removed, and those units on the campaign map wuld be much better if the small armies wuld be replaced by early medieaval captains and generals! But i like the name Byzantium, its much cooler with short, and known names! I think its unnecacary too change it too Eastern roman empire. But this Mod is great! Hope u could get done, lol!

[Pompeius Magnus]

Thanxs Nikitn for repeating my suggestions. ;-)
Good to hear that you support my ideas.

But the name changing from Byzantine Emp. to Roman Emp. is not a question of coolness. It is important because it is historical. The East romans never saw themself as Byzantine-nation or something like that. A byzantine empire never existed. This name is a creation made by some european historians.

Your arguments according a "short" name are obsolete because roman empire is, by the way, more short!

[Nikitn]

No, No! its not just that! Do you know that "The east Roman empire" Has always been called the Byzantium by all of euorpe after 1500? ! Well, maybe they, themself called it that, but the rest called them Byzantium, as a nick name. I think it wuld be stupid calling them Roman empire for the first time. And yes, its more inportant calling em Byzantium empire cause of gameplay and coolness. lol
And no, one wuldnt call em roman emp. But East Roman empire. Just because they called themself tat, means tat wat all the rest of europe shuld call them?
Again, its a matter of better gameplay, and its just as historically right to call them Byzantium empire. That is Because they are a much more known name, lol.

[Pompeius Magnus]

No No. It is not very cool.
Because in the time frame of 1072 everybody in the world called them Romans. Even the Turks called them Romans.
And it is not very cool to give them a name which was given by foreigners in the 1500s or 1600s.
The cool name of Basileía tōn Rhōmaíōn never stopped to exist in the medieval or middle age.
The name "Byzantine" was given in an a-historical way in Vanilla Medieval 2 to east rome as well as the a-historical name "Aegyptians" was given to the Ptolemaer in Vanilla RTW.
Indeed, the uncool name of Byzantine empire existed before. But this happened after the empire died! And the so called Byzantine Empire is nothing else than a continuation of the roman empire (with one difference: the language became more and more greek).
If the name "Byzantine Emp." is the only name you know according the east romans, I would say it is your own problem. Then inform yourself with cool books or other sources.

More cool is a real historical game.
Because Chivalry is a very balanced and cool historical game. So it makes sense to give them the real name they had in reality before.

[Atterdag]

Well the term Byzantine is iirc a name given to the Eastern Roman Empire after the decline of the 6th century.

[Pompeius Magnus]

The 6th century means the time-frame of Justinian and Belisar.
If you want you can read a little bit abuot the late antique in my late roman army thread. Just click on my signature.

No, no. You are not right. I don't know which sources you have, but it is not right.
Until the last roman emperor Constantinos defended the walls of Constaninoupolis the empire was called Basileía tōn Rhōmaíōn. Even after the empire was destroyed the greeks and some people in Asia minor continued to call themself Rhomäer.
Some historians, perhaps in germany (even that is not 100% known) started to call the old empire "Byzantine Empire".

[Coni]

The ignorance of some Users according historical facts is terrible.

I know Pompeius from several late romans army mods. He is the historical advisor for several mods and I think he knows what he is talking about.

But I made also some researches by myself. I have to agree Pompeius 100%!!! The east (byzantian) romans never stopped to call themself Romans. Even here I must say: Pompeius researches are again great.

To change the name is not a question of coolness or gameplay. It is only a historical fact and should changed quickly. If somebody want play a game with wrong names I suggest to play Vanilla MTW1 or MTW2.

And the latin language at the royal court was still used in the 6th and mid 7th century.

[Nikitn]

Pompeuis magnus, oh, perhaps u didnt read so well, because it stood clearly in my post, tat the Byzantiums did call themself Romans, and rest of Europe. So did they call the Holy Roman empire. I SAID: they were called byzantuims for a fact after 1500. Yes, a german called them byzantium, but anyway. THE POINT IS: tat after that, they were called Byzantium Empire. Everyone called them tat. Adn now, we live in 2007. Man, the name Byzantium is a matter of gameplay, cause A: its more known, and B: Therfor the gameplay wuld be better wit tat name! And do u know how historrically innacurate vanilla rome is? Do u hate it for tat? Man, they did all the names, the units and factions for gameplay. Do u know tat? So, Rome wuld be much more fun tat way, than it wuld be accurate. CAUSE then everyone knew these empires, egypt, rome etc. So rome was unnacurate, yes, But it is better to hav an innacurate history, then hav a very good gameplay! Hope u get tat, cause its cool, yes cool!

[Nikitn]

And Coni, YES, in a game gameplay and coolnes far out goes historical accuarcy, i know much history, and i know how innacuarate Rome is, but tat dont bother me, at all! Cause its a game u enjoy, not some historical text book, on a screen! And chilry is a good historical game? No, the gameplay macse it cool. Its not particully historical either, but it is a very good mod!
The best to rome, i wuld say, and tat is cool!