Campaign Tweaks and Changes
Hey guys, I have been experimenting with some modifications these past few weeks (and losing saved games because of it), and I've noticed that several M2TW conventions might not transition as well over to the the TA mod. Among other things, I take issue with corruption. Distances between towns and castles are significantly larger in TA than in M2 vanilla, and the penalties for distance from capitol hurt both ecnomically and when on the offense against a distant foe (unrest due to capitol distance). The way I see it, the system favors those factions who start off with territory in a relatively homogenous glob and can expand their borders into a neighboring hostile territory which also acts as their elimination target. Examples are Eriador to Ootms, Dale to Rhun, Gondor to Harad/Mordor, Silvan Elves, and Rohan to Isenguard (this typically works both ways, but not always).
More problematic scenarios are given by the Dwarven and High Elven campaigns, both of which start off with narrow strips of land and isolated segments of territory far from your primary powerbase (unless your playing FROME with dwarves split). Both campaigns must navigate around friendly territory (compete against it for land) and in a relatively linear fashion away from prior territory in order to reach the enemy (Ootms) and gain access to hostile territory for the end objective. The typical result midway through the game (midway being a casual week of play) is a U shaped progression hugging the neighboring ally, with HE going under Eriador and up the misty mountains, and Dwarves going over Silvan/Eriador and down the mistly mountains. In both cases, the inherently best place to have your capitol in order to maximize profits is smack in the middle of allied territory (often their own capitol). That leaves the central portion of your curve as the ideal 'center', but its still not vey appealing since your split between your older production centers and the newly conquered Minor cities and Castles of the enemy. And thats not even bringing up the HE objective of destroying mordor.
I am not at all implying that this makes those campaigns unplayable or even not fun, far from it. These challenging aspects are even what could make them more unique. But I am saying that the current system could have been better optimized (if it hasnt already) with those campaign objectives in mind. To that end I would like to atleast ask to community how to change the following factors (data folder, txt document to look in)
1-Corruption factor based on distance to capitol
By changing this to roughly half its current value, I feel that corruption could be far more manageable, and make necesary territory conquests far more meangful.
2-Number of Maximum Turns
It is simply obnoxious that the game tell me I have an arbitrary limit on the amount of time I have to complete my objectives. While the current limit is generous, I dont want to have to keep calculating how fast I need to make a conquest every number of turns once I get to midgame. I would probably increase the limit substantially (1000+)
3- Territory Conquest Objectives (number of territories needed for victory)
At the risk of making the game simply easier, I would like to look into the territory requirement for completing the victory condition. It is simply frustrating to realize that, after defeating your faction elimination target, you still need twice as much (or more) territory as your currently have in order to complete the campaign. Again, an arbitrary limit not strictly connected to a lore based or gameply based objective.
Any help or insight would be greatly appreciated, and thank you for stopping by
Reply With Quote
