TATW Realism+ /Final/ [TATW 3.2]

[Pleiades]

DaVinci, this time in new game I lost Gandalf very easily also against peasant archers. No spearmen or other enemy archers in battle, no stakes, no friendly archers fire. I charged directly from the back into engaged heavily wounded peasant archer unit and again I was winning the battle. Of all 50 Gandalf horsemen, just one died and that one was Gandalf. I even reduced battle difficult level from VH to H.

I don't think you can fix this. It is probably something hard-coded - maybe that is the way how game eliminates too many generals/governors on the campaign map. Or else I am extremely unlucky guy in two campaigns in the row.

[DaVinci]

I'm allied with Gondor (and pumping money into them). Eriador starts off allied to Gondor in this mod.

As to the tech tree, where is it?? I've built pretty much everything I can in Annuminas.

What I have now would have been enough to become Arnor in vanilla and previous versions of this mod unless DaVinci changed the requirements.

Thanks for the replies though.

Pleiades is right. If you don't have the according "temple" tier (Heroes Shrines), then House of Kings can't occur (that is indeed changed in one of my last updates). Aringtoit, please report back about that (not that there is something else now for which i have pay attention).
As for regions, settlement tier, etc., you have much more than required. Iirc., the usual requirements are listed with vanilla (except the pre-requisite for H.o.K building along building-tree), if not, i might have to improve that.
Btw., you have not to wipe-out any faction to become Arnor.

DaVinci, this time in new game I lost Gandalf very easily also against peasant archers. No spearmen or other enemy archers in battle, no stakes, no friendly archers fire. I charged directly from the back into engaged heavily wounded peasant archer unit and again I was winning the battle. Of all 50 Gandalf horsemen, just one died and that one was Gandalf. I even reduced battle difficult level from VH to H.

I don't think you can fix this. It is probably something hard-coded - maybe that is the way how game eliminates too many generals/governors on the campaign map. Or else I am extremely unlucky guy in two campaigns in the row.

Oh, that's really weird. As you can imagine, i almost always playtest Eriador in campaign, as already expressed some posts above, i never lost Aragorn or Gandalf (or other main characters ie. Halbarad) in battles which i play on M, and i engage them always, and a lot also vs. much heavier enemies than rebels ... but, of course if you engage with important characters, you should micromanage the situation, every hitpoint reservoir finds its end. However, my cavalry engagements are usually the decisive winner-factor in my battles, even if ie. rebels are sometimes stubborn enough to not give up easily a fight.

In result, i must assume, your VH/H setting for battle is responsible for such comicable effects here for such charge-results. Just try M battle and compare (it is known, that higher than M setting add artificially to the attack/defense value of AI). Edit: You mentioned you apply now (again) G5 5.7 update (?), i don't know if there could be a source for that comicable effect as well (as expressed i stay with G5 5.6 plus manual reinforcement-bugfix for TATW Realism+, maybe try the same manual fix which is described by G5 - the recommendation is at least once more: Do not apply G5 5.7 as released for TATW Realism+ ).

Edit2: For the ones who can't wait and can install single files, i attach here the currently according campaign script file from TATW Realism+ 2.46.x (dev version), which includes the G5 5.7 reinforcement bugfix. And, i guess the script file takes only effect properly, if a new campaign is started with this file on board.
Hint for everybody who reads here: This script file actually works only properly with TATW Realism+, not that somebody thinks he can apply that for anything else.

[Pleiades]

Pleiades is right. If you don't have the according "temple" tier, then House of Kings can't occur (that is indeed changed in one of my last updates).
As for regions, settlement tier, etc., you have much more than required. The usual requirements are listed (except the pre-requisite for H.o.K building along building-tree), iirc., if not, i might have to improve that.




Oh, that's really weird. As you can imagine, i almost always playtest Eriador in campaign, as already expressed some posts above, i never lost Aragorn or Gandalf (or other main characters ie. Halbarad) in battles which i play on M, and i engage them always, and a lot also vs. much heavier enemies than rebels ... but, of course if you engage with important characters, you should micromanage the situation, every hitpoint reservoir finds its end. However, my cavalry engagements are usually the decisive winner-factor in my battles, even if ie. rebels are sometimes stubborn enough to not give up easily a fight.

In result, i must assume, your VH/H setting for battle is responsible for such comicable effects here for such charge-results. Just try M battle and compare (it is known, that higher than M setting add artificially to the attack/defense value of AI). Edit: You mentioned you apply now G5 5.7 update, i don't know if there could be a source for that comicable effect as well (as expressed i stay with G5 5.6 plus manual reinforcement-bugfix for TATW Realism+, maybe try the same manual fix which is described by G5).

You did put prerequisites for HoK.

Another thing - I think there is possible bug with Eriador "Sheep farming" building. It seems it does not give pop growth at all.

There are also some double "entries" on farms type of buildings, like "pop growth is 0.5" but written twice.

Now, off topic:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Thank you for your encouragement.

I did play over 10,000 battles since MTW1, through Rome, MTW2, modes etc in last 10 years. I can even play with double speed without pause whole battle and easily win each battle. So, you may trust me that I do not make stupidity with my generals (or princesses) That's the reason why I choose higher battle difficulty. Because on M battle difficulty it is almost endless morale and fatigue for player. And in all games with your mod I used M campaign difficulty, because I don't know how much scripted stacks you added to evil factions. Aragorn died with G5 5.6, Gandalf died with G5 5.7 (which is actually 5.6 with manual reinforcement-bugfix, I myself gave you hint when arrived manual reinforcement- bugfix and you said "Thanks" )

In Rome TW on hard battle difficulty +4 attack +4 morale for AI, on very hard +7 attack +7 morale for AI - official CA statement. In MTW2 I just sent request for G5 to check these things thoroughly because no one from CA officially released what is going on with battle diff levels and there are too much contradictory forum reports and subjective opinions and playtests. H battle in Rome is harder than VH in MTW2. You can see that easily if you have installed both games at the same time. There are no att/def bonuses to units on H and VH battle diff levels in MTW2. See my ramblings in G5 thread for more details if you like.

Now, if I increased camp difficulty in TATW (which I didn't), then units have more experience and battles are more challenging and that is another thing. It has nothing to do with battle diff.

Aragorn could quite easily die cause of exhaustion, because fatigue greatly reduce combat effectiveness.

Gandalf death is cosmic joke. Literally! Ah, wait! Maybe he charged so strong when he put in sandwich those heavily wounded peasant archer, that his head finished at the end of spear of my own spearman on the other side of sandwich.

[k/t]

(it is known, that higher than M setting add artificially to the attack/defense value of AI).

In RTW, not in M2.

[Aringtoit]

So I need a hero's shrine! Kind of like that. Only thing is that if you build too many "religious" buildings, your general in that city gets "silly beliefs"/"religious fanatic" traits. Not a big deal though.

Also didn't know that I didn't have to take out the OoG to become Arnor. Personally I liked having to take them out first. It made it more challenging. That's just me though.

Started a new 2.46 campaign (I was actually playing 2.45 before). The OoG actually made an early move (about turn 10) against Fornost and Annuminas! That's a first. I'll keep you posted.

[Zimmy]

I am really loving this submod, it's turn 40 in my Rohan campaign and six times I have fought battles at the Fords of Isen, Eored(a general whom was raised from captain in the first battle) has 10 command and four dread, refusing to yield the ford to the masses of Isengard. Each battle was a Heroic Victory, I was outnumbered 3 to 1 each battle.

Some thoughts:
-Eorling Militia seems ridiculously powerful in battle, it has 2 more attack then Eorling Axemen, but 2 less defence I think it should be the other way around.
- Gondor is pushing back Mordor to Henneth Annun, and Mordor is ignoring them and sending trolls my way over the Nindalf, but I've been able to hold them at the Woldberg.
- Isengard is able to afford like four Guards of the Orthanc in one battle.

EDIT: Turn 50, invasion on East Osgiliath, I've sent Eored and Eomer over the Nindalf to help. Theodred wins a close victory against a stack over Mordor at Woldberg. Only him and 4 of his guard lived. Rohan has a ceasefire with Isengard, borders at Foldeburg and Gineard guarded nonetheless.

[DaVinci]

I am really loving this submod, it's turn 40 in my Rohan campaign and six times I have fought battles at the Fords of Isen, Eored(a general whom was raised from captain in the first battle) has 10 command and four dread, refusing to yield the ford to the masses of Isengard. Each battle was a Heroic Victory, I was outnumbered 3 to 1 each battle.

Some thoughts:
-Eorling Militia seems ridiculously powerful in battle, it has 2 more attack then Eorling Axemen, but 2 less defence I think it should be the other way around.
- Gondor is pushing back Mordor to Henneth Annun, and Mordor is ignoring them and sending trolls my way over the Nindalf, but I've been able to hold them at the Woldberg.
- Isengard is able to afford like four Guards of the Orthanc in one battle.

EDIT: Turn 50, invasion on East Osgiliath, I've sent Eored and Eomer over the Nindalf to help. Theodred wins a close victory against a stack over Mordor at Woldberg. Only him and 4 of his guard lived. Rohan has a ceasefire with Isengard, borders at Foldeburg and Gineard guarded nonetheless.

Thanks for the campaign-feedback, sounds cool.
Keep it coming. I'm especially interested how Gondor/Mordor proceeds when Rohan is player and Gondor gets your help (it is just so, that if AI has you as player as enemy-neighbor, that there is an AI focus on you, that's AI engine).
Also, how is Eriador AI etc. and Dale AI etc. going?

-Eorling Militia seems ridiculously powerful in battle, it has 2 more attack then Eorling Axemen, but 2 less defence I think it should be the other way around.

No, that's wrong - you irgnored here the axe-armour-piercing effect, that counts even more than double-attack-value in effect, means if the axe has 3 or 4 attack, then it is at least 6 or 8 in attack-effect.
Btw., your Rohan spear militia (who has 5 or 6 attack base, iirc.) have usually not more attack value than most other spear forces in the game, while experience-points increase all attack values.

- Isengard is able to afford like four Guards of the Orthanc in one battle.

But recruitable only in Isengard. A good sign that Isengard AI focuses on its best units.

[Zimmy]

When I get back to the game, I'll turn off fow and update this post on the progress of the other factions. Also, in East Osgiliath, Mordor took it but it said the invasion was cancelled? And despite that, Invasion Armies still came when Gondor took it back.

I'll be back to update this post later.

EDIT: Chicken Farming building description says it increases trade, was this done on purpose?
Turn 77
-Gondor has crossed the Anduin and is expanding into Harondor.
-High Elves and Silvan Elves have not expanded at all
-Misty Mountains doing good, which is why the Elves can't expand
-Eriador almost has all the Arnor borders, but stacks of Gundabad are crushing their armies. Isengard is also attacking Eriador
-Dale has only Dale and Esgaroth left.
- I took Isengard and sacked it.
-Mordor owns all of Mirkwood except Thranduil's Halls.
-Despite loosing it's main source of income, Isengard is top for financial
Turn 88
-Dale has only Dale left, five full stacks of Rhun converging on it
- Eored and Eomer retreat to Rohan after a large defeat against the Nazgul.
-Harad keeps loosing it's capital to rebels.
Turn 94
-Arnor has been reunited under one banner
-I march to destroy the last four Isengard settlements and burn them to the ground.
Map update

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

As you can see, Gondor lost Lossarnach to rebellion. Harad's 10 dead chieftains? They all died in rebellion at Harad's capital.

Oh god, massive battle at Pellenor Fields. One Rhun Army, One Mordor army, against me and two Gondorian armies.

[Pleiades]

@Ecthellion - Nice report, thanks. I +rep you

@DaVinci - There are some (or many) TATW vanilla bug reports, which possibly you didn't pay attention much, like ancillaries squalor don't work, +1 farming does not work. There are also some buildings which does not work, like +farming. I also believe that this is the main reason why people complain so much about vanilla TATW unusually slow growth of cities even with 10 Chivalry. Have a look here:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...8#post12167418

Why I am telling you this? Because I know you invested lot of effort in details for balance purposes, but maybe it slipped your attention that many things in vanilla are simply broken.

Now, feedback for my current Eriador game. This is total opposite of my previous games. Isengard attacked me at turn 27 with one small stack. Then very soon OoG attacked me. So I was suddenly at war with OoMM, Isengard, OoG before turn 30. I cannot understand this extreme passive, then reasonably active behavior of AI when players usually do pretty much the same things with same faction from next game to another. Again, this I observed in vanilla MTW2 and vanilla TATW, so I am not accusing specifically your mod.

I have house rule to not make peace with Isengard (or any other evil faction) once they started war with me, so I have challenge on three fronts, though OoMM didn't have counteroffensive or threat west of Moria in these 25 turns (from turn 30 to turn 55). Because Eriador borders are so vast, I have constant OoG raids on the north and always threat in the south, so I cannot expand so easily, yet I do expand slowly.

My other house rule is that I can trade maps and only maps with enemies while still in peace with them. So, instead of moving fog of war, I used diplomat. Mordor "accidentally" cut off Harad from Gondor, taking Harad-supposed-to-be territory. That seems no problem for now, considering that Mordor alone stands there and threatens Gondor without help of Harad. I took half of Isengard's territories, but Rohan maps seems status quo for a very long time. This I think is good for "good" factions actually, because with my slow expansion into north, I need that Rohan buffer time and I do not know situation on the east.

So, this is nice game indeed. Three wars, looong borders, never being able to sleep peacefully because of that, with very scary Mordor and who knows what's happening with Dale and Dwaves on the east. And all of this on M campaign difficulty. Amazing!

Also, your goal as for Eriador is successful. No blitz either from player or from AI.

EDIT: I had about 45 to 50 battles for now and it is not even turn 60.

[DaVinci]

Thank you both a lot, that's exactly the kind of campaign-feedback which i need for the balance-finetuning.

The only thing that is missing would be the camp-difficulty setting from Ecthelion, but however, his observation speaks for itself, even if it is H or VH, just not M dev diff.

Obviously, i have to look for Harad, loosing chieftains a lot, while the source for it is diffuse (is it actually only the rebellion-cause?), however i'll look that i strenghen bg stats of Harad generals a bit by default (and perhaps i shall add another law AI bonus for Harad characters or all AI's?), related to Harad rebellion of cities in late game ... okay, gets attention.

But here is info for the whole balance thing: Recruitment parameters will change again for all good side factions due to the then new added/implemented units, ie. core/home units will be then indeed only available in core/home aka natural areas available, else special ZoR/AoR units. This is contrary to evil side factions who remain with the possibility to recruit everywhere, but most frequence as well in "natural areas". That means, next update is pretty much beta in this regard again, subject for observation-reports once more. In the whole it'll make the campaign not easier for good side factions but more attractive/tensing in direction of "lore-realism"-balance.

Pleiades, thanks for the link/issues growth etc.. Actually as for me i didn't find the same issues in TATW Realism+, please observe it for TATW Realism+, if it is the case here as well, i don't have the time to do that as well. If you can iron out such points that i'm able to encircle such things and can eventually solve them (if it is overall possible), such efforts go into the credits part, of course.

I cannot understand this extreme passive, then reasonably active behavior of AI when players usually do pretty much the same things with same faction from next game to another. Again, this I observed in vanilla MTW2 and vanilla TATW, so I am not accusing specifically your mod.

In the last instance i take that as feature ( even on M camp diff), not as M2TW bug, why? It is much more worse to foresee campaign outcomes as player ... i guess M2TW has somehow a random-program hardcoded, for good reasons.

[Aringtoit]

I'm on turn 77 as Eriador (2.46). The OoG are down to Carn Dum and Gundabad, but it's taking me a lot longer to wipe them out this time which is good imo. Their units seem better. They actually attacked a pretty decent sized stack led by Aragorn with a good stack of their own (Fellers, Halbierds, Orc Bands and Wargs) which is a 1st!

I've also got North/South Tharbad and Duneard. The good factions are all hanging tough. Rohan still has Gineard at this point which is also a 1st. Gondor's doing well but Sauron just called for an invasion of Minas Tirith. Let's see how that goes.

I have a spy outside of Isengard, and Saruman is hanging on his border with a huge stack wanting to invade either me or Rohan, but can't. That's the immobile character trait I guess. He won't delegate and let another general invade. Same goes for the OoG's High Chieftan. He just stays in Carn Dum with a full stack. Makes taking OoG territory easier for me, but this makes Carn Dum a tough siege. Sieging Isengard will be even tougher. I don't know if this is what you planned or not.

Mordor is definately the force to be reckoned with in this mod as it should be, which makes Eriador the force to be reckoned with for the good guys because Mordor isn't at their throats from the start. The OoMM mainly go after the High Elves/Silvan Elves after they make an attempt for Hoarwell (if Isengard doesn't beat them to it). Isengard seems easier (for the good guys) in this version, probably because of Saruman and his immobile stack. Rohan's major problem so far is with Mordor, and Isengard's territories bordering Eriador are more lightly defended. From an Eriador player's perspective, maybe Isengard should be toughened up a bit if Saruman's just going to hang out outside Isengard.

It's a really good mod and each new version makes it better. I'm playing on M/H btw. Maybe I'll try H/H with the next version.

[Pleiades]

It's a really good mod and each new version makes it better. I'm playing on M/H btw. Maybe I'll try H/H with the next version.

I would like very much if you would choose Sylvan Elves or Dale and play on M/H and report back. There are far too many players of Eriador, Gondor, Rohan and H Elves and this submod gives nice opportunity that we see nice story and development about east side of the map.

Also +rep for report of your game

[Zimmy]

I just looked at the buildings in Talsir, which was previously owned by Isengard. The Dungeon building gives them the ability to recruit.....Sentinels of the Woodland Realm? Also, this may be a vanilla problem but during a battle at the Pellenor Fields, in which some Gondorian troops and I battled two stacks of Mordor, I froze halfway through, and could still hear the sounds of batte going on. It may have been how many units were on the battlefield.

[DaVinci]

... . That's the immobile character trait I guess. ...

But Aringtoit, you know that item long time from the many months of playing this submod, i remember we discussed this already - anyways, item won't be changed (suddenly), also if it has not only advantages (in majority it helps the AI), and in case of Saruman it even reflects directly the lore-realism.

I just looked at the buildings in Talsir, which was previously owned by Isengard. The Dungeon building gives them the ability to recruit.....Sentinels of the Woodland Realm? Also, this may be a vanilla problem but during a battle at the Pellenor Fields, in which some Gondorian troops and I battled two stacks of Mordor, I froze halfway through, and could still hear the sounds of batte going on. It may have been how many units were on the battlefield.

No, that would be your recruitment-ability there (not the one of Isengard), if you free these Elves which are imprisoned by the Evil aka if you conquer that settlement - the requirement though is that a certain percentage elven culture stays in the region.

[Zimmy]

Rohirrim Skirmishers(Missile Cav.) cost more than Eored Horsearchers, but Eored Horsearchers have 5 missile attack, and the Rohirrim Skirmishers have 4. The Skirmishers do not have any better stat.

EDIT: I just quit my Rohan campaign, I was sick and tired of Mordor sending armies that were full of ten units of trolls each. Also, the AI is incapable of holding invasion targets. Minas Tirith rebelled against Mordor the turn after they took it.

[DaVinci]

Ecthelion, your points have been adressed (for the update), except

Minas Tirith rebelled against Mordor the turn after they took it.

as i like that ... quasi a designed effect, good to see it works.

[Aringtoit]

I'm not complaining about Saruman staying at and around Isengard with a stack DaVinci. It's just the 1st time I've had a spy there and seen it. When I think about it, if Isengard was able to go all out against Rohan, Rohan wouldn't last 20 turns the way they're pressed by Mordor. If the OoG and Isengard went full out, Eriador would have big problems early on too. I have no complaints as Eriador with this mod.

Thanks Pleiades. I want to get further into my Eriador campaign (like turn 120/130) and then I'll try Dale or the SE. When the 1st versions of this mod came out I was playing the SE to see how the archery and HP changes worked. They work fine, but the SE had it tough being wedged between the OoMM and Mordor. Haven't tried Dale yet. I've always been pretty much an Eriador player. I'll change that soon.

[DaVinci]

When I think about it, if Isengard was able to go all out against Rohan, Rohan wouldn't last 20 turns the way they're pressed by Mordor. If the OoG and Isengard went full out, Eriador would have big problems early on too.

Exactly, you say it, Aringtoit. That's one reason for that kind of design.

[Pleiades]

@Aringtoit - HoK is expensive as hell and very long number of turns to finish it. I really hope Arnor is worth it

Also, take your time, no pressure that you report back Dale game.

@DaVinci - Erm... Venting here. Nothing personal Still in that Eriador game. I am not happy with more Orcs with less tows, especially if that conquered town is most important for enemy which lost it. Am talking about OoG here. If I take 3 OoG towns and one of those towns is most important OoG major financial and recruiting Orc castle center which was difficult as hell to conquer, I do not expect after all that - trouble all over my territories (even very deep) stacks of Orcs in only 3 turns and some of those stacks were quickly regrouped into half to full stacks. Not to mention that with half territory less, OoG seems more powerful than with full volume of territory. What is the point of existence of settlements, I mean strategy, tactics and all that, if enemy will clearly artificially and without any logic get free stacks? I can understand let's say one half stack near just conquered town to help enemy to reconquer back or to recover somewhat, but mini stacks regrouped in 3 large stacks and threatening in 3 turns 4 of my towns?

That was also my major complaint for vanilla TATW. It does not provide more challenging game, it is providing boring game by killing role play and strategy. I am turn 73 and already had 76 battles! Of these 73 battles around 30 to 40 battles I had with OoG and with them I took only 2 natural OoG towns and one neutral captured from them. Why I have feelings I will need 30 to 40 battles for the next 3 OoG towns? If I want so many similar battles for the sake of only battles I would play custom battles, not campaign.

End of venting.

[DaVinci]

@Aringtoit - HoK is expensive as hell and very long number of turns to finish it. I really hope Arnor is worth it

Also, take your time, no pressure that you report back Dale game.

@DaVinci - Erm... Venting here. Nothing personal Still in that Eriador game. I am not happy with more Orcs with less tows, especially if that conquered town is most important for enemy which lost it. Am talking about OoG here. If I take 3 OoG towns and one of those towns is most important OoG major financial and recruiting Orc castle center which was difficult as hell to conquer, I do not expect after all that - trouble all over my territories (even very deep) stacks of Orcs in only 3 turns and some of those stacks were quickly regrouped into half to full stacks. Not to mention that with half territory less, OoG seems more powerful than with full volume of territory. What is the point of existence of settlements, I mean strategy, tactics and all that, if enemy will clearly artificially and without any logic get free stacks? I can understand let's say one half stack near just conquered town to help enemy to reconquer back or to recover somewhat, but mini stacks regrouped in 3 large stacks and threatening in 3 turns 4 of my towns?

That was also my major complaint for vanilla TATW. It does not provide more challenging game, it is providing boring game by killing role play and strategy. I am turn 73 and already had 76 battles! Of these 73 battles around 30 to 40 battles I had with OoG and with them I took only 2 natural OoG towns and one neutral captured from them. Why I have feelings I will need 30 to 40 battles for the next 3 OoG towns? If I want so many similar battles for the sake of only battles I would play custom battles, not campaign.

End of venting.

Well, those are the spawned units when a faction is going down aka remains with a certain amount of their settlements, default TATW vanilla content which is reduced/changed though in TATW Realism+ (but i can't remember what i did there for which faction, long time ago...2nd or 3rd version, irrc.).

Ask Aringtoit how you can defeat OoG properly/effectively, he exercised it multiple times as Eriador, sucessfully along his reports.
Maybe try E campaign and M or also E battle difficulty as Eriador, if it is too hard now for you ( couldn't resist ).

However, i'll think about these spawn-scripts once more when i have time ... perhaps i reduce the amount of units or whatever, at best you remind me later once more, before i'm gonna go to release an update (which will take time though, no idea now when).