Poland was never really known for great infantry. In earlier times the people from that area copied the Russian system (except a little more westernised in appearance) having nobles and strong warriors on horse back while crappy spears and axemen were used as infantry. Most of the infantry couldn't purchase chainmail or swords which was the best quality armament at the time. Even in the late era the best we had were spear men/crossbow men that served as a front line soldier.
So Ltd has got every unit spot on. I have never seen such a good representation medieval Poland so stellar job Ltd hats off to you. If you are having trouble adding mercenaries to the factions then add some horse archers.
Also have to ask, will I be able to create Poland by asking the other duchies to join? Is it possible to create Poland or will I stay as my duchy? And will I have access to all the other duchies' units (bar the ones that repeat) just in a Poland looking version instead of the duchy version?
I am really glad somebody has realised why I have chosen to make the polish duchies (well, lesser Poland and Silesia , more than the others) rather cavalry-heavy but lacking some units in the infantry department. I specifically went for this route rather than giving a lot of heavy infantry to Poland as well. So , thanks Han-Yolo
As to your last question: you will be able to confederate and make Poland come to life (the specifics of whether you need all polish duchies to join or just some , will be decided later) but I'm affraid they will use the "duchy-version" of their units as otherwise I'd need to create another set of units for all eras, after all you might confederate either in the early or high or late era so...
That's the plan for now, at least
My Granfather Frederick Avery.Battalion Boxing champion. Regiment.The Kings Own Yorkshire Light Infantry. dorcorated D.C.M. M.M.
campaigns
(India.1930) (Norway 1940) (Fontenay le Pesnil) (North-West Europe1944-45) (Argoub Se!lah)
(Sicily, 1943 Salerno) (Minturno) (Anzio Gemmano Ridge)
"Burma, 1942"
My grandfather was a hero, modest, quiet and wounded twice, in hand to hand combat at Casino Italy.
These are really good. Got a side note about playable factions tough. Wouldn't Greater Poland make more sense then Lesser? I mean it was Przemysł II the Duke of Greater Poland that was crowned the King of Poland and reuinted the Kingdom.
These are really good. Got a side note about playable factions tough. Wouldn't Greater Poland make more sense then Lesser? I mean it was Przemysł II the Duke of Greater Poland that was crowned the King of Poland and reuinted the Kingdom.
Krakow is in Lesser Poland. Makes much more sense to have the faction with Krakow as playable.
I see what you were going for Ltd but the problem is the cav units Poland have aren't better nor more varied than France for example. Poland has knights and mounted serjeants, same as France but less infantry, and they don't even have the tier 1 axemen unit Han Yolo mentioned, Pomerania does, but not Poland itself. You got to give them something even if that's not their forte. Even if it's like a couple of melee infantry units, it would still give people more to work with. I'm noticed from people firsthand or from players and Youtubers telling me this faction or that faction isn't enjoyable because it's not good enough. People aren't playing as these some of these factions because their weakness is too crippling. And as a result the intended gameplay style is completely lost on someone playing the mod. They shouldn't have to see that post above to know that. I don't mean to sound like an ass or anything but I wanted to state why so many people are arguing for this.
Even if it's like a couple of melee infantry units, it would still give people more to work with. I'm noticed from people firsthand or from players and Youtubers telling me this faction or that faction isn't enjoyable because it's not good enough. People aren't playing as these some of these factions because their weakness is too crippling. And as a result the intended gameplay style is completely lost on someone playing the mod. They shouldn't have to see that post above to know that. I don't mean to sound like an ass or anything but I wanted to state why so many people are arguing for this.
I have made the same suggestion about adding at least a couple of infantry units to the Cumans, but it seems people want to paint them as the "savage horse archer nomads". Their roster is so pathetic it is not even funny, for example the light horse archers have a melee damage of only 3, which is lower than any other unit in the entire mod. Cumans should be one of the strongest if not the strongest faction in Eastern Europe. They reckt Russia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Serbia, and even the Byzantines!
Marvelous units, great skins, fantastically well done.
Originally Posted by warman222
I see what you were going for Ltd but the problem is the cav units Poland have aren't better nor more varied than France for example. Poland has knights and mounted serjeants, same as France but less infantry, and they don't even have the tier 1 axemen unit Han Yolo mentioned, Pomerania does, but not Poland itself. You got to give them something even if that's not their forte. Even if it's like a couple of melee infantry units, it would still give people more to work with. I'm noticed from people firsthand or from players and Youtubers telling me this faction or that faction isn't enjoyable because it's not good enough. People aren't playing as these some of these factions because their weakness is too crippling. And as a result the intended gameplay style is completely lost on someone playing the mod. They shouldn't have to see that post above to know that. I don't mean to sound like an ass or anything but I wanted to state why so many people are arguing for this.
If a player wants heavy infantry they can play as HRE or something along those lines. The Polish were known for their great cavalry, and I believe the Cumans had only cavalry. . It is far more interesting to play with a faction that has some limitations in one department or another. Personally I think the unit mix is fine, maybe one more melee unit maybe of swordsmen of some kind that one can use for custom battles, for youtubers who can't be bothered to fight as Poland. Of course when online custom battles have rules such as no more than 4 cav units, that means you cannot play as the Mongols, as the Polish or Hungarians. If players were allowed free cavalry, then swordsmen would be rarely seen in online pitched battles. Why are Conquistadores allowed in online battles, who are out of the timeframe of the rest of the units, not to mention wrong geography? The problem with youtubers is with the silly rules not with the faction rosters.
I expect in the actual Middle Ages few would have fought with a sword unless their lance or spear broke or they had fired all their arrows or if their unit broke ranks or some other dire situation like that. Swords should mostly be secondary weapons.
Hi all!
After several hours of fun with this modification. I feel that the Polish Duchies need some rework. Especially my favorite faction in the whole modification, the Duchy of Silesia.
In this post I will give some basic information about the Duchy of Silesia
After death of Bolesław Krzywousty in 1138 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolesław_III_Wrymouth ) Polish Kingdom was divided between his five sons, this time period in polish history is called Feudal fragmentation. In this post I'll post some valuable informations and pictures about Silesia history, Which I hope will help with work on the mod. Map of Silesia around 1212 AD
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Orange and purple-land of Henry the Bearded
Yellow-land of Kazimierz Opolski
green-Kalisz land
Leader of the faction (early period)-Henry the Bearded ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_the_Bearded )
One of the most powerful and influential person in 13th century middle Europe. Ambitious, wise and modest Duke of Silesia. He tried to unite the Polish kingdom, But he died too early and did not finish his work. His son (Henry II the Pious) tried to finish his father work but Mongolian horde destroyed the entire henry's output. In general historians agree that if the disaster at the Battle of Legnica had never happened, Poland would have been united in the middle of the 13th century, and avoided the territorial losses that occurred. At that time a lot of teutonic knights were settled in Silesia by local rulers.
Henry I the Bearded with his family. In the center sit: Henry and his wife Hedwig, from left stand: Gertrude, Agnes, Henry II the Pious and Bolesław; at the bottom sit: Sophie and Konrad the Curly.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Henry's funeral
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Coat of arms of Lower Silesian Piasts XV century
Leader of the faction (high period) - Przemysław I Noszak ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Przemy...uke_of_Cieszyn )
One of the most trusted person of Emperor Charles IV. Leader of the Silesian Union and one of the most talented diplomat on Charles IV court. The Holy Roman Emperor sent him on a diplomatic mission to France to maintain the alliance between Kingdom of Bohemia and Kingdom of France. He also tried to negotiate the peace between Engladn and France, who were engaged in the Hundred Years War Przemysław also negotiated the marriage of Princess Anne of Bohemia, Charles IV's daughter, to Richard II, King of England. He was a skilled negotiator, experienced in many diplomatic efforts in several European countries.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Tombstone of Przemysław I Noszak
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
The coat of arms of the Upper Silesian Piasts XV century
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Cieszyn Piasts coat of arms
Leader of the faction (Late period) - Jan II Żagański ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_II_the_Mad )
An ambitious and cruel prince who even killed his own brother to receive the duchy.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
coat of arms
In next post I will try to add some photos with Silesian coats of arms
I know what you mean and I also definitely understand the concerns polish players have when playing CBs. The main thing I wanted to avoid with every single faction I created or contributed in creating is to have uniformity. By that I mean that some factions were simply stronger militarily (and / or economically) than their neighbors and that obviously reflects in their army composition as well.
If we are to balance every faction to be able to match any other faction, even the strongest / most balanced ones (let´s say stereotipically : HRE, France, England) , then the whole point of creating diversified rosters loses its forte. If every faction has swordsmen / 1h axemen / macemen, if every faction has super-heavy cavalry, mounted crossbowmen, pikemen, good skirmishers, good and heavy archers, good light infantry and and and , once we get to the campaign, every faction will feel exactly the same on the battlefield only with different names and color variations / COAs.
I also understand people who complain that some factions are not enjoyable or less enjoyable than others, due to the lack of certain units for example. However, faction x having only a somewhat bare-bones roster and only around let´s say 10 units is, IMHO, still a lot better than faction x not having any units at all in order for faction y or z to have a few more units or a more balanced roster in the next CB release; after all time, our time, is a very important factor, too, when creating units and rosters.
Regarding Poland in this case: nothing is set in stone, and I have obviously no intention of "sabotaging" the creation or addition of any further units, regardless of their class. On the contrary, several factions are somewhat incomplete atm and will need additional units for the grand campaign. In our case Poland may receive further cavalry units, and why not, medium-heavy 1h infantry units as well.
I know what you mean and I also definitely understand the concerns polish players have when playing CBs. The main thing I wanted to avoid with every single faction I created or contributed in creating is to have uniformity. By that I mean that some factions were simply stronger militarily (and / or economically) than their neighbors and that obviously reflects in their army composition as well.
If we are to balance every faction to be able to match any other faction, even the strongest / most balanced ones (let´s say stereotipically : HRE, France, England) , then the whole point of creating diversified rosters loses its forte. If every faction has swordsmen / 1h axemen / macemen, if every faction has super-heavy cavalry, mounted crossbowmen, pikemen, good skirmishers, good and heavy archers, good light infantry and and and , once we get to the campaign, every faction will feel exactly the same on the battlefield only with different names and color variations / COAs.
I also understand people who complain that some factions are not enjoyable or less enjoyable than others, due to the lack of certain units for example. However, faction x having only a somewhat bare-bones roster and only around let´s say 10 units is, IMHO, still a lot better than faction x not having any units at all in order for faction y or z to have a few more units or a more balanced roster in the next CB release; after all time, our time, is a very important factor, too, when creating units and rosters.
Regarding Poland in this case: nothing is set in stone, and I have obviously no intention of "sabotaging" the creation or addition of any further units, regardless of their class. On the contrary, several factions are somewhat incomplete atm and will need additional units for the grand campaign. In our case Poland may receive further cavalry units, and why not, medium-heavy 1h infantry units as well.
The thing is that we should also take "fun" into context. A roster with just a 2-handed axemen for infantry doesnt look very interesting, and isn't fun playing with either. One can go so much into uniqueness that at one point they would sacrifice the fun aspect of the mod; people like seeing battles between swordsmen, and not just light/medium swordsmen, but between heavily armored knights who carry different kinds of weapons; something that M2TW kinda lacks. If I may say so, the Polish or Middle Eastern rosters lack this feature, and make them look pretty inferior to, for example, the roster of France or the Latin Empire. I find it kinda sad though because your models look so great, it would be a waste to not use your talent for making those infantry units .
Last edited by Filips Augustus; August 23, 2016 at 03:40 AM.
some factions were simply stronger militarily (and / or economically) than their neighbors and that obviously reflects in their army composition as well. If we are to balance every faction to be able to match any other faction, even the strongest / most balanced ones (let´s say stereotipically : HRE, France, England) , then the whole point of creating diversified rosters loses its forte.
I think reflecting whether or not a faction is weaker or stronger would be better represented through its economy, research, and starting situation rather than the unit roster itself. If you limit a faction's unit roster then that faction, sooner or later, reaches a plateau that it simply can't pass because it doesn't have the means to do so. If you limit that faction economically and through its starting situation on the campaign map it has a chance to overcome those obstacles and eventually be counted among the stronger nations (it just has to work harder from the start to do so). Additionally, historical unit rosters only work in a historical setting and the whole basis of Total War is taking history into your own hands and changing it if you want to. A nation's army composition and tactics are based on the types of enemies they're fighting and therefore change based on their circumstances.
Personally I think every faction should have equal access to every unit-type and tier (NOT the same exact units though) from a roster perspective but shouldn't be able to recruit every unit-type easily (this is where different faction advantages would come in). In the case of the Polish duchy for instance, give them access to all types and tiers of units but make it harder for them to recruit them by not giving them the foundation to do so. Instead, give them the foundation to easily recruit lots of cavalry (by making them cheaper to recruit, starting them off with higher-tier stables, and a larger variety of cavalry). The HRE historically had a better economy than the duchies and fought a lot of European powers with heavily armored infantry and therefore focused a lot on expensive heavy infantry whereas Poland spent a lot of time fighting its Eastern neighbors and found cavalry to be more effective. However, if the duchy decides to start attacking the HRE and manages to take some major settlements early on it should gain access to the armorers and blacksmiths in those settlements (that the HRE would start with and Poland wouldn't by default) while at the same time gaining the extra revenue of those settlements to start recruiting and supporting more expensive and heavily-armed infantry. Also make those infantry units slightly more expensive for Poland to recruit and increase their upkeep while making them slightly weaker (in terms of training, not equipment). But this works under the assumption that units will be relatively balanced with one another so that you don't have one armored tier-3 soldier slaughtering 50 individual peasants one after another (doesn't matter how much armor you had if you were outnumbered and getting stabbed from all angles) and that their costs would be adjusted so that full chain-mail armored units would cost 3-4 times as much as say leather-armored units (further limiting factions with weak economies from having access to those types of units).
One way to implement something like this could be through the faction traits, research, or some combination of both. Give factions that historically had heavy infantry (England, France, HRE, etc) a discount when recruiting those units while also starting the recruits off with 2 chevrons and giving Poland experience for cavalry recruits and lowering their recruitment costs.
If you'd want this to carry over to MP or skirmish battles you could adjust costs appropriately. Give Poland tier-3 heavily armored swordsmen BUT make them cost more than an equivalent unit from the HRE while at the same time giving them less expensive cavalry than the HRE. This would make players play to the strengths of the factions without restricting them.
Now keep in mind these are just some suggestions and I'm no modder or anything so I have no idea how these changes would actually work out in Attila's engine given how limited it is (I BET RECRUITMENT POOLS MAKING A COMEBACK WOULD CERTAINLY HELP THOUGH, RIGHT CA?). Anyway thank you guys for your hard work on this mod, its the only reason I bought Attila (on sale ofc).
Why bother with melee damage for an archer unit? While 3 might be a tad excessive, I like that a light horse archer don't have melee capability, just like how Peasant Archers were nerfed. The unit still have the hidden Impact Damage, so as long as you can charge, I wouldn't worry to much. If all else fails, you're like a wasp that can't be ignored. Here I used my Trebizond HA to occupy my Aragonese opponents units. My opponent wasn't able to micro, and I was able to engage him with superior numbers. Had it not been for Slytacular stumbling face down on my flank, we might have won that day. lol
I don't know, it's understandably not easy to balance factions to everyone's satisfaction. I think some of the conclusions about faction strengths might be based on players, unknowingly, mixing uneven tiers up against each other. For example Tier 1 with tier 2/3. I don't like to criticize people's gameplay, but here is an example.
1. Take this example. The YouTuber Pixelated Apollo played a HA faction and did 0 skirmishing at all. His Horse Archers got no kills. Instead, he played as if he had knights and went head to head. He got punished for it.
2. He also played poorly and lost a trade on both flanks early on by allowing his units to get charged. Still, he had the higher ground and fought head to head on an even keel.
3. While he acknowledge those two aspects at the end of the video, he didn't mention that he played a Tier 1 faction. These are units from the 1200s wearing padding, or at best, mail. Their weapon was also design to fight opponents of equal equipment. His Crusader opponent, used tier 2 units. We're talking about coat of plates and a 100 years in the future for almost equal cost.
The armies were not balanced around equal technology, but that didn't cross Apollo's mind and it's common among the video's I've seen.
I don't know if this is true for everyone, but if people don't play within equal tiers, then I feel that that gameplay aspect has been poorly communicated to the player base. I'd even argue it's game changing. Units within each tier are in my opinion balanced, but if you mix, for example, a German knight from Tier 1 (Early, 950) with Tier 2 (High, 1000), then you're loosing out on 10 melee damage, 10 melee defense and 28 armour with a cost differentiation of a Peasant unit. That's significant, but I can't point to any YouTuber that has emphasized this. Maybe I'm wrong..Ż\_(ツ)_/Ż
~Wille
Thorolf was thus armed. Then Thorolf became so furious that he cast his shield on his back, and, grasping his halberd with both hands, bounded forward dealing cut and thrust on either side. Men sprang away from him both ways, but he slew many. Thus he cleared the way forward to earl Hring's standard, and then nothing could stop him. He slew the man who bore the earl's standard, and cut down the standard-pole. After that he lunged with his halberd at the earl's breast, driving it right through mail and body, so that it came out at the shoulders; and he lifted him up on the halberd over his head, and planted the butt-end in the ground. There on the weapon the earl breathed out his life in sight of all, both friends and foes. [...] 53, Egil's Saga
I must tell you here of some amusing tricks the Comte d'Eu played on us. I had made a sort of house for myself in which my knights and I used to eat, sitting so as to get the light from the door, which, as it happened, faced the Comte d'Eu's quarters. The count, who was a very ingenious fellow, had rigged up a miniature ballistic machine with which he could throw stones into my tent. He would watch us as we were having our meal, adjust his machine to suit the length of our table, and then let fly at us, breaking our pots and glasses.
- The pranks played on the knight Jean de Joinville, 1249, 7th crusade.
This is the only forum I visit with any sort of frequency and I'm glad it has provided a home for RTR since its own forum went down in 2007. Hopefully my donation along with others from TWC users will help get the site back to its speedy heyday, which will certainly aid us in our endeavor to produce a full conversion mod Rome2.
Why bother with melee damage for an archer unit? While 3 might be a tad excessive, I like that a light horse archer don't have melee capability, just like how Peasant Archers were nerfed.
~Wille
I never said they should become like tanks in melee......all I suggested was to set their melee damage to "standard".
In a scenario with a similar class of units, tier 3 unit should win against a tier 2 unit. If two tier 2 units fight a tier 3, there should be some losses on the tier 2 units, but the tier 3 unit destroyed. A tier 3 should be able to have an even fight with two tier 1 units.
@kjertesvein, I'll probably talk about the differences in the August update.
Allright, so I decided to add a couple more units to the polish as well as the cumans, so 2 polish infantry ( high and late ) and 2 cuman infantry ( early-high-ish and high-late-ish) units have been done, and once I am able to send them to finix to create cards and to warman to add them to the build, then hopefully you guys should be able to play with them in the upcoming hotfix. I also fixed and tweaked some other clipping issues as well other incosistencies. Some more are still to be done.
Edit: just to be on the safe side: these are all 1h + shield units for all you out there loving battles between units bashing shields and chopping off extremities
Best and historically accurate way to give Poland good high tier infantry would be to add unit simply called Foreign Infantry or Foreign Men at Arms. Normaly mercs are for that role, but they were used extensively enough to make them standalone units. They would have been made from Germans and Czech, using maces, flails, axes etc. In next centuries even regular Polish soldiers will be fighting in foreign regiments yet still in Polish Army. Also like we chatted about Polish units and army long time ago Ltd., I gave you some examples of late Polish heavy cavalry with plate barding from around 1450-1480, they could be added in order to give Poland that final punch, but with high cost.
Last edited by KAM 2150; August 24, 2016 at 03:59 PM.
Re: Medieval Kingdoms Total War: Polish Duchies
Originally Posted by Han_Yolo
Reply With Quote
manuscript from XIV century 
Henry with his wife 
Henry's funeral 
Coat of arms of Lower Silesian Piasts XV century 
Tombstone of Przemysław I Noszak 
The coat of arms of the Upper Silesian Piasts XV century 
Cieszyn Piasts coat of arms 
coat of arms 
lol
