[DOWNLOAD] SSHIP ver. 0.97 (outdated, use v. 098)

[P.Konrad]

Thankyou for the Feeback. It's much appreciated. Damn what a pity.

[Jurand of Cracow]

If you're interested, there's been a discussion on the siege engines in the EBII thread (the things haven't actually changed much for much of the Middle Ages).

[VineFynn]

If you're interested, there's been a discussion on the siege engines in the EBII thread (the things haven't actually changed much for much of the Middle Ages).

Trebuchets should probably have lower damage against buildings *or* lower range. If the latter, we could then allow the use (if we gave them higher accuracy) of ballistae in their intended role against defenders on a wall (that would probably be contingent on the AI not being stupid though). As it stands, they are basically medieval cannons, a single unit guaranteeing multiple breaches in any strength of wall, in doing so having none of the weaknesses that they did historically (like being immobile and constructed in the same manner as "siege equipment" like rams). The adjustments in practice might need to be more complex, but the principle behind them would remain that the usefulness of trebuchets in game is exaggerated from their usefulness historically.

[Lifthrasir]

I need to read the stuff linked by JoC. However, note that it concerns another period.
Regarding your idea VF, they also should have 0 pt of movement to reflect that they were immobile. Basically, once deployed, they stay on their position.
About ballistas, I've only found records of their use as defensive weapon, not offensive and not by all factions.

[Jurand of Cracow]

Trebuchets should probably have lower damage against buildings *or* lower range. If the latter, we could then allow the use (if we gave them higher accuracy) of ballistae in their intended role against defenders on a wall (that would probably be contingent on the AI not being stupid though). As it stands, they are basically medieval cannons, a single unit guaranteeing multiple breaches in any strength of wall, in doing so having none of the weaknesses that they did historically (like being immobile and constructed in the same manner as "siege equipment" like rams). The adjustments in practice might need to be more complex, but the principle behind them would remain that the usefulness of trebuchets in game is exaggerated from their usefulness historically.

I fully agree on the exaggeration of their usefulness.
Furthermore, they're surprisingly effective in the open battles.
I'd go even deeper in this criticism as I don't think "their intended role against defenders on a wall" is true. The role of trebuchets was to sow terror among population and destroy the city prompting it into surrender. They were too inaccurate to be used against small targets on the walls.

I need to read the stuff linked by JoC. However, note that it concerns another period.

AFAIK, untill arrival of gunpowder in 14th century little has changed besides trebuchets replacing "catapults" - and this was for economic reasons, they're cheaper and hurled bigger projectictiles even though they're probably less accurate.
The 6 S of sieging remained the same:
SUBORNING or subverting key defenders
SCARING the garrisons with ”propaganda"
STARVING the population
SAPPING the walls
SHELLING the besieged
STORMING the defenses

[Lifthrasir]

If made immobile with a lesser accuracy, that would make them less useful in open battle

[VineFynn]

I'd go even deeper in this criticism as I don't think "their intended role against defenders on a wall" is true. The role of trebuchets was to sow terror among population and destroy the city prompting it into surrender. They were too inaccurate to be used against small targets on the walls

I was referring to ballistae, not trebuchets, with that remark.

[Lifthrasir]

But ballistas and catapults aren't in game anymore
Anyway, what about the 0 movement point idea for siege engines prior to the gunpowder era?

[VineFynn]

I need to read the stuff linked by JoC. However, note that it concerns another period.
Regarding your idea VF, they also should have 0 pt of movement to reflect that they were immobile. Basically, once deployed, they stay on their position.
About ballistas, I've only found records of their use as defensive weapon, not offensive and not by all factions.

In the case of ballistas being purely defensive, I'd just remove them altogether.

Making trebuchets immobile is a no-go for a few reasons:

- It is not always possible to deploy them within range of the walls

- The AI never deploys them within range of the walls anyway

- If there is a secondary layer of walls the game will not recognise that the immobile trebuchets cannot be used to destroy them, achieving the same effect as deploying them out of range

Re: being too effective in battle, I would just make them less accurate and remove flaming shot

The intended effect of any changes would be to make it so that only sustained bombardment at a closer range and for longer than currently would produce breaches in stone walls.

[Lifthrasir]

Ballistas and catapults aren't in game anymore already Mate

[VineFynn]

Ballistas and catapults aren't in game anymore already Mate

They're still in the unit roster.

[Lifthrasir]

Damn! I need to check that. Thanks.

[VineFynn]

Damn! I need to check that. Thanks.

There's a bunch of units we should cut when the time comes, no rush on those two specifically (actually not sure if ballista is still there but the mango definitely is).

[Jurand of Cracow]

As you may read in the discussion on the EBII page I've sent the link to, even the very historical EBII team decided to keep ahistorical catapults in the game to simulate for something different - the (available in the RTW engine) sapping.
I'm not sure know how to deal with the issue though. In the Titanium there're catapults - and they're pretty useless. Maybe it's the way to go...

[Daerandir]

As you may read in the discussion on the EBII page I've sent the link to, even the very historical EBII team decided to keep ahistorical catapults in the game to simulate for something different - the (available in the RTW engine) sapping.
I'm not sure know how to deal with the issue though. In the Titanium there're catapults - and they're pretty useless. Maybe it's the way to go...

Would it be possible to rename the unit "sappers" and adjust with the range to accomplish the desired effect?

[Rasher]

Hi all After installing 0.92 do i just extract 0.95 to the mods folder ? thanks in advance

[VineFynn]

Hi all After installing 0.92 do i just extract 0.95 to the mods folder ? thanks in advance

Yeah

[Rasher]

SSHIP v1.0.0. preview...

Just some cosmetic changes, for warming up


Splash Screen


_m2_border Screen


Menu Screen

Hi. Thanks for all your great work , I was just interested to find out if you had an approx release date in mind please ? Thanks

[Lifthrasir]

I hate to give a date, even not precise but I hope to have the next release ready sometimes next month

[sullivanclan1]

So there was no more faction slot to put in Armenia, Sweden, or County of Flanders? What new features will there be for the new release?