Test 5.8 Openbeta_3 (12\29\2008 )

[Gaius Philopator]

Hello guys.
I have Medieval II : total war Gold Edition.
do I need the patch 1.5 to install the game or I can download it right away?
help is needed and anyone who helps me would get something in return
thanks in advance.

[Taiji]

Installation: not save compatible to DLV 5.6, or 5.74, 5.8_openbeta2
- install kingdoms patch 1.5 !!!!!
- clean Install DLV 5.0 + 5.6 (no addons or...)
- If you have 5.74 or 5.8_openbeta2 already you can put 5.80_3 just over it
- Execute file Deus_lo_Vult_58_openbeta_3_Install.exe and enter the correct path for the installation
Example: C:\Program Files\SEGA\Medieval II Total War
(For Germans change it to: C:\Programme\SEGA\Medieval II Total War !!!!)
Ignore the warnings of write protected files !
Don't close the pop-up windows even if takes minutes to perform, wait until they close by themselves.

No need to thank me, it's on the first post

[repman]

@Taiji
maybe you could have a look into the files regarding openbeta3 texture problems ?
thanks

Outlook on openbeta4
Changelog openbeta4: (includes openbeta3)
- player can decide at playstart to activate the point system or not
- pointsystem: deleted gov_p gains dependent on your treasury surplus, deleted permanent mil\gov_p losses dependent on your 2 highest settlement levels
- added more normal maps for all units: thanks to Blueoran
- metropolis settlements are shown on the map in uppercase format
- negative destruction economic events for roads, markets, mines, markets, harbours cost now 1000 Fl. to rebuild, negativ times longer than the positive ones
- doubled settlement costs for all higher stone settlements
- enhanced some event text descriptions
- added interactive event gambler: If you have a tavern, a gambler will ask sometimes for a quek game. If you accept (loose 2 gov_points and earn gambling traits, loyal for generals, disloyal for governors) then you have to bet 5000 Fl. and the win probability is 50%. Decline give disloyal generals.
- player inflation modi: enhanced settlement costs depending on your treasury surplus

suggestions ?

repman

[Infinity at End]

@Taiji
maybe you could have a look into the files regarding openbeta3 texture problems ?
thanks

Outlook on openbeta4
Changelog openbeta4: (includes openbeta3)
- player can decide at playstart to activate the point system or not
- pointsystem: deleted gov_p gains dependent on your treasury surplus, deleted permanent mil\gov_p losses dependent on your 2 highest settlement levels
- added more normal maps for all units: thanks to Blueoran
- metropolis settlements are shown on the map in uppercase format
- negative destruction economic events for roads, markets, mines, markets, harbours cost now 1000 Fl. to rebuild, negativ times longer than the positive ones
- doubled settlement costs for all higher stone settlements
- enhanced some event text descriptions
- added interactive event gambler: If you have a tavern, a gambler will ask sometimes for a quek game. If you accept (loose 2 gov_points and earn gambling traits, loyal for generals, disloyal for governors) then you have to bet 5000 Fl. and the win probability is 50%. Decline give disloyal generals.
- player inflation modi: enhanced settlement costs depending on your treasury surplus

suggestions ?

repman

repman ? can you tell me where I can find openbeta4 ? and if it isn't availabe can you tell be when it will be ?

tks...

Regards , Infinity !!!

[Dauntless Commandant]

repman ? can you tell me where I can find openbeta4 ? and if it isn't availabe can you tell be when it will be ?

tks...

Regards , Infinity !!!

You'll know when it's released because this thread will be closed and there'll be a new one entitled Open Beta 4

Hopefully though the next version is not an Open Beta, I'd like a Real Version now

[Xtiaan72]

I think it is a big mistake to eliminate the Gov Points linked to treasury... This works really well and rewards players for spending time developing economy at beginning of the game...

At some point you really have to think about whether you are just throwing up barriers that make the game "frustrating" or if it is really is adding to the immersion and game-play experience.

Why eliminate the only concrete way to build Gov Points? It's still difficult to get them and to keep your treasury at that level.

There has to be something to do at the beginning of the game. At the moment that is building the economy without which you can't afford the expensive military buildings. This is currently difficult but possible.

Take out the treasury tie ins and depending on the faction you start out with most players are going to have to sit around waiting for a governor with a "key' or something to do anything.

Please don't make this change, Government Points are working great as is and the economic model in the current version is one of the big plus' in the mod.

Also the costs of fortress' and stone walls are high enough imo. These new "barriers' are in danger of ruining DLV's fun factor.

The permanent point loss for big settlements are fine as long as the treasury tie- ins stay in. Basically, I think the economic system in beta 3 is superior to the one proposed in beta 4.

[Taiji]

@Taiji
maybe you could have a look into the files regarding openbeta3 texture problems ?
thanks

OK, the only one I know of is with eastern spear militia for georgia.

In fact these issues with textures being misaligned (faces, etc.) that I hear about make very little sense. For the textures to become misaligned they'd have to have changed their layout. Either that or the models themselves would have to have been changed. In both cases I find no evidence of any change.

With the spear militia I suspect they've always had this problem I see, they have a sword pasted across the texture for their shields.

Looking at the files of the 5.83 beta I can't see that you've done anything which should cause problems with the huscarls textures.

Frankly, I don't see any problem caused by 5.83. Perhaps reinstall will fix the issues people are having.

Maybe Blueoran has some insight into the issue but I don't see how what he's been doing can cause this issue that people report.

@All, Please post any issues you find with unit's appearance on the battlefield here and please remember to include your installation process in detail including any minimods or personal modifications. Thankyou!

[Wartower]

Agree with Xtiann72 on all points. Sounds like you're already going to include an option to have those points on/off anyway repman.

[repman]

I thought about higher settlement costs for stone settlements because people reported that they have too much money later in the game.
I was thinking to eliminate the money gov_point build up together with the stone settlement gov_point subtraction.

What are other people thinking about the point system ? Is openbeta3 perfect ? Maybe adding
- knight banner, banneret benefits to mil_points ?
....

repman

[Xtiaan72]

The Gov point set up for Beta 3 is awesome. Or at least as good as it's going to get when you consider that the economic system needs to work no matter what faction a player is using. ( I'm assuming we want some factions to be more difficult but still playable)

As far as permanent military points for Heraldry..YES! YES! YES! If fact, info on this is so vague that many of us already thought this was a feature that was broken. This is the change that will play balance the point costs for military structures. ( Similar to keys for Gov points ect.) Then you can leave those point costs in. This ups roleplaying as building those high level heraldic generals will take on added importance ( As well as making sure you have another one in the pipe line)

The higher costs for stone walls. It's a tough call Repman. I think it will push some of the more difficult factions to being impossible. Money really is always an issue even late game if people haven't built up merchants to counter-act Dark Ages events. If some players are still getting rich with difficult factions,They are the exception not the rule. The true elite DLV players that have mastered the game mechanics.

In short, make the Military Points for Heraldry permanent and the ecomonic system will be one step closer to perfection. IMHO of course.

[Harris2000]

I thought about higher settlement costs for stone settlements because people reported that they have too much money later in the game.
I was thinking to eliminate the money gov_point build up together with the stone settlement gov_point subtraction.

What are other people thinking about the point system ? Is openbeta3 perfect ? Maybe adding
- knight banner, banneret benefits to mil_points ?
....

repman

I think is not need of increasing settlements cost but decreasin building time so we will have what to spend money for. Or at least lets pay for some retraining in order to remove the bad governor traits.

[Nicholas H.C]

Well I am currently downloading this openbeta, but from what I heard, people say it's really stable. Maybe for next version just include graphical improvements, bugfixes and small new features?

[PrivateJoh]

@ Repman

Possibly I should not be the one taking part here as I am still at 5.74, but from my experience the key word would be "balance".

1.- If high fortress/citadel decrease mil. points, then high ranked generals (either command stars or traits/ancs.) should increase mil. points.

2.- Large cities allow for good governors, who get good traits, which in turn increase trade/tax/etc, so improving the cities should be expensive accordingly.

Hope it was not too cryptic.

[Slon80]

@ Repman

Possibly I should not be the one taking part here as I am still at 5.74, but from my experience the key word would be "balance".

1.- If high fortress/citadel decrease mil. points, then high ranked generals (either command stars or traits/ancs.) should increase mil. points.

2.- Large cities allow for good governors, who get good traits, which in turn increase trade/tax/etc, so improving the cities should be expensive accordingly.

Hope it was not too cryptic.

I'm fully agreed with both. But I have a suggestion:

1. Increasing mil. points by generals need higher penalties (higher than they are right now) for having fortress/citadels because you can have many generals but only few fortresses/citadels.

[repman]

I do not play or have ever played any TW game (imaginary simulation and just short testing). I'm just interested in developing new creative features, not in graphical schnickschnack. Graphical stuff depends on people who develop submods of DLV.

We have 400 downloads of openbeta3 so i need feedback if the point system is balanced and the recruitment limitation system is balanced too.

[Dauntless Commandant]

I do not play or have ever played any TW game (imaginary simulation and just short testing). I'm just interested in developing new creative features, not in graphical schnickschnack. Graphical stuff depends on people who develop submods of DLV.

We have 400 downloads of openbeta3 so i need feedback if the point system is balanced and the recruitment limitation system is balanced too.

Recruitment limitation seems fine to me, although - it's getting money in the first place too recruit which is the hard thing -

Lol @ "graphical schnickschnack!"

[Nicholas H.C]

Delete

[CharlesMarkley]

I've been playing Openbeta_3 as the Eastern Romans and I find it much easier to obtain government points than military points. I really like the gov points in Beta 3, but I've had to lower the military points threshold for me (in the campaign script) to even build a fortress. I vote for more mil_points for my Drougarios and Turmarchs ranked generals (never achieved a Strategos yet).

I should also note that I do a lot of auto-calc battles as my computer is slow when battling. That, and I limit myself to one defense/attack a turn as my glorious ruling presence can't be everywhere at once!

Mark

[Brips]

With Flanders in 1300 I have 0 gov point! I think that's too hard to get them......

[Xtiaan72]

Not too hard... Just get your treasury to 30,000 and you should get at least one a turn.