Tavern Talk - History, Modding or Discussions

[Hidden Sage]

That is WAY beyond my skills. I dont even understand the instructions for it. I have searched all over the M2 forums for someone who knows how to and is willing to do it for SS. Havent found anyone yet, so unless there is someone willing to learn, probably not going to happen.

As much as I'd love to actually see the Golden Horn properly displayed, it's probably beyond the scope of this mod. TATW's Minas Tirith is the only custom battle map I've ever seen in an M2 mod, and while awesome, it was also time-consuming as hell to create. Admittedly, Jerusalem and Rome would be far simpler than that. But the point stands.

[ggggtotalwarrior]

As much as I'd love to actually see the Golden Horn properly displayed, it's probably beyond the scope of this mod. TATW's Minas Tirith is the only custom battle map I've ever seen in an M2 mod, and while awesome, it was also time-consuming as hell to create. Admittedly, Jerusalem and Rome would be far simpler than that. But the point stands.

You realize that you just used TATW as an example of the only custom battle map, when there are about 10 of them in Third Age?

[Andytheplatypus]

As much as I'd love to actually see the Golden Horn properly displayed, it's probably beyond the scope of this mod. TATW's Minas Tirith is the only custom battle map I've ever seen in an M2 mod, and while awesome, it was also time-consuming as hell to create. Admittedly, Jerusalem and Rome would be far simpler than that. But the point stands.

It is possible. The problem is finding someone who 1. Wants to create historical settlements and 2. work with this mod. It doesnt really take all that much time to create. Look how many leo did in a relatively short amount of time http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...official-patch

Its really just a difficult to first learn how to do it.

[poisoned goat]

I remember reading that only a handful of people in TWC know how to make custom settlements, and not all of them are active..

If you want custom settlements, SS has 2 I think. 1 of them is the village built on a hill, which also happens to be incredibly buggy......

[Duck of Death]

If you have the British Isles as the heart of your Kingdom, then using your Merchants there is pretty poor management. In many cases they earn lots of -1 finance traits, and for me usually end up earning 0 gold. I believe its proximity to Capital that determines this.

I'd set aside a couple cogs (trained at an Explorers guild) to ferry merchants out to Scandinavia and North Africa. Not much competition out there, but still good resources that are reasonably accessible for a sea-faring faction.

True, early in the game merchants to N.Africa could be very profitable, but I like to load up all possible merchants in the British Isles first because its peace-of-mind. I can make the merchant, send him off to his station somewhere in country and forget about him for the next 80 or so turns. If my merchant is anywhere else, I have to watch for foreign merchants. Thats attention I could be devoting to conquests, court intrigue, and contemplating the reason for the existence of the Belgians... of course, they share a border with the Dutch

[Vissewalde rex de Gerzika]

I remember reading that only a handful of people in TWC know how to make custom settlements, and not all of them are active..

If you want custom settlements, SS has 2 I think. 1 of them is the village built on a hill, which also happens to be incredibly buggy......

That was probably me

[RollingWave]

Yeah, custom settlement (big once) is essentially the holy grail of M2TW model making, so few people have both the artistic skill, the modding skill, and the commitment to pull it off.

It would be kinda fun to make rivers navigable , that's rather doable with just Geomod, but the commitment and research into which rivers to do them for is tough.

[Losthief]

Yeah, custom settlement (big once) is essentially the holy grail of M2TW model making, so few people have both the artistic skill, the modding skill, and the commitment to pull it off.

It would be kinda fun to make rivers navigable , that's rather doable with just Geomod, but the commitment and research into which rivers to do them for is tough.

that, and they navigable ones changed over time due to build up of castles, chokepoints during the games time period, so finding a way to model that in this engine would be extremely difficult.

[Duck of Death]

Each faction will have a few resources that are highly valuable to them, so putting your merchants on those resources will yield a very large income. I'm not sure how to find out what these resources are, though, although I do remember Byzantium loves gold.

To be fair... I think most civilizations loved/love/will love gold

[Andytheplatypus]

Hypothetical question. What do you guys think of an invisible land bridge between England and France? AI has notoriously terrible ability to mount naval invasions on a regular basis, which makes the campaigns as England way too easy. Adding an invisible land bridge would solve the problem of the AI not knowing how to use ships correctly.

[Lord of Shadows]

Hypothetical question. What do you guys think of an invisible land bridge between England and France? AI has notoriously terrible ability to mount naval invasions on a regular basis, which makes the campaigns as England way too easy. Adding an invisible land bridge would solve the problem of the AI not knowing how to use ships correctly.

I like that idea.

[Kataphractos]

Rarely use merchants myself. They require a lot of micromanagement in order to make a decent income and for many it's just not worth it.

If you're a faction like France or Poland, go capture Alexandria and Cairo and park some merchants on the resources around those cities, and if you can, get a merchant to the gold deposit directly east of Cairo. Enjoy pulling in 2k+ a turn just from them.

Hypothetical question. What do you guys think of an invisible land bridge between England and France? AI has notoriously terrible ability to mount naval invasions on a regular basis, which makes the campaigns as England way too easy. Adding an invisible land bridge would solve the problem of the AI not knowing how to use ships correctly.

I dunno, AI seems to be able to do naval invasions fine in my campaigns. But I will admit that I have never seen AI France invade England, even though Norway doesn't seem to have a problem doing it.

also, does anyone know how to improve longbowman? cause, all of the english archers suck compared to the original game.

AI longbowmen, as far as I can tell, are the only stake-laying archers in the game that can throw down a wall of stakes in the middle of a battle. They don't need anymore help.

[Ishan]

Thread moved from SS sub-mod to Titanium section.

[Skomorox]

Honestly, merchants are a good idea but not like it's implemented in the game, why do I have to micro them? I would much rather prefer an automatic merchant who would do things for me, moving them around and training them really gets annoying especially when I have 10 of them. In my opinion it shouldn't make a unit "merchant", but it should be like a bonus thing every now and then asking me where to put the merchant and giving me options with risks. And then if something significant happens to him it should simply notify me. On the map generally I the less non-military units the better in my opinion, I forget to control them and it gets clumsy and after a while boring to move each guy because he can't move by himself to the objective, there must be alternative to just moving these guys around with mouse, it would be better to have a control system like in real life, the kings state directions and the units move by themselves...anyway that's my opinion

[CoeurDeLion]

Hypothetical question. What do you guys think of an invisible land bridge between England and France? AI has notoriously terrible ability to mount naval invasions on a regular basis, which makes the campaigns as England way too easy. Adding an invisible land bridge would solve the problem of the AI not knowing how to use ships correctly.

To be fair, I would argue that armies IRL had notoriously terrible abilities to mount naval invasions during this period in general, and of England specifically. This is (at least partially) why William I of England is more commonly known as "the Conqueror" as opposed to just another numerated monarch. Sure there are a couple historical examples but naval warfare and amphibious capabilities were not primary considerations for most states during the middle ages. Even nearly a millenia later, the logistics involved in the Allied invasion across the English Channel at Normandy stretched the combined logistical capabilities of the Americans, English, and Canadians nearly to the breaking point and was a bloody miracle that it succeeded at all.

All that being said, yes, I would like to see the AI be more capable of mounting naval invasions but, I think a land bridge makes it too easy. Remember, it may be nearly impossible to lose playing as England once you have consolidated the British Isles however, it's not possible to win either unless you venture onto the continent where the advantage is forfeit.

[Deteriorate]

All that being said, yes, I would like to see the AI be more capable of mounting naval invasions but, I think a land bridge makes it too easy. Remember, it may be nearly impossible to lose playing as England once you have consolidated the British Isles however, it's not possible to win either unless you venture onto the continent where the advantage is forfeit.

I think that an invisible land-bridge would only help even the playing field for the AI. The AI doesn't defend coastal settlements in a meaningful way, making first strikes against multiple settlements on the French coast a near fatal blow to France, who rarely recovers enough to slow a player steamrolling them. The player on the other hand needs to place only a decent garrison in Edinburgh and Nottingham to ward off invasions. With AI vs AI situations, the corner of the map is more often stagnant and dull.

If the mod team is against the idea of an invisible land-bridge in the end, I am currently trying to learn how to make them myself anyways and will make a file available to anyone who wants it in the game.


As for merchants I am in favour of adjusting their abilities or leaving them as they are. I use them as a way to counteract the expense of military expeditions to far off lands. Distance from capital = less income from cities, but if you send merchants you can easily justify losing many soldiers for a mini empire on the other side of map.

Example: Player as Venice allies CS, conquer Egypt, send merchants to the most profitable areas around, then use this base of operations recruit soldiers, attack holy land cities for CS and sell to them for huge cash. Then open a multi-front war with ERE who usually conquers anatolia by now. Very fun but economically unsustainable without merchants. They make unique campaigns possible

[Andytheplatypus]

I think that an invisible land-bridge would only help even the playing field for the AI. The AI doesn't defend coastal settlements in a meaningful way, making first strikes against multiple settlements on the French coast a near fatal blow to France, who rarely recovers enough to slow a player steamrolling them. The player on the other hand needs to place only a decent garrison in Edinburgh and Nottingham to ward off invasions. With AI vs AI situations, the corner of the map is more often stagnant and dull.

If the mod team is against the idea of an invisible land-bridge in the end, I am currently trying to learn how to make them myself anyways and will make a file available to anyone who wants it in the game.


As for merchants I am in favour of adjusting their abilities or leaving them as they are. I use them as a way to counteract the expense of military expeditions to far off lands. Distance from capital = less income from cities, but if you send merchants you can easily justify losing many soldiers for a mini empire on the other side of map.

Example: Player as Venice allies CS, conquer Egypt, send merchants to the most profitable areas around, then use this base of operations recruit soldiers, attack holy land cities for CS and sell to them for huge cash. Then open a multi-front war with ERE who usually conquers anatolia by now. Very fun but economically unsustainable without merchants. They make unique campaigns possible

As of right now I am set on using invisible land bridges between most islands on the map. The AI is notoriously terrible at using ships. Everyone knows that England is probably one of the easiest campaigns. It is only easy because of the restrictions on the AI, which I dont like. I want the chances of being attached to be the same regardless of your starting faction.

I have been playing a test campaign as England for about 150 turns now. I have relied on merchants to keep my economy going in the red ever since I attacked Cairo. I think more tests need to be done as far as the money management goes and also how much lag having dozens of merchants marching around on the campaign map causes. I realize not everyone has a top of the line computer ( Mine is pretty terrible). We would like to provide a fun and exciting experience for everyone that choose to play Titanium.

[Deathchant]

land bridges sound like a great idea.

I have been using BGR recently to increase difficulty, the mod does not use any merchants, i do miss them but BYG has left them out for a reason that i can accept.

[Melooo182]

We would like to provide a fun and exciting experience for everyone that choose to play Titanium.

so toggle able ON OFF merchants? im pretty sure it can be done with the SMM

[Deteriorate]

Or change their requirement level from grain exchange to market