My own opinion about 'Stainless Steel' + 'Byg's Grim Reality' + 'Real Recruitment' for people who want to check Stainless Steel 6.4 out.

[Paladin-Weabb]

I was playing 'Medieval 2' as a kid, now I'm 23 and decided to pick this game up again. I played vanilla as Poland on VH/VH and it was very fun. Until recently someone told me about Stainless Steel mod.


So I was playing Stainless Steel on VH/VH + 'Byg's Grim Reality IV' + 'Real Recruitment' + 'Limited Activities' + 'Longer Assimilation' and here's what I want to say to everyone who's like me and wants to check Stainless Steel mod out:
---------------------------------------

1. Is 'Stainless Steel 6.4' worth installing?

In my opinion yes, very much so. The bigger map is amazing in actual gameplay and new units add much more depth and fun to the game. Vanilla units tend to feel like they are all the same across different factions. Stainless Steel units feel awesome and every faction brings a lot of different units.
---------------------------------------

2. Should I play with 'Gracul AI', 'Lusted AI' or 'Savage AI'?

I suggest 'Savage AI'. From my experience it's only a little less aggressive or as aggressive as 'Gracul AI'. But it's probably more reasonable than 'Gracul AI' because 'Gracul AI' is just senseless everlasting hatred towards the player. Especially from your own troops as they tend to rebel all the time on 'Gracul AI' to a ridiculous degree. 'Lusted AI' is probably too easy.
---------------------------------------

3. Should I install 'Byg's Grim Reality II' or 'Byg's Grim Reality IV'?

Don't install any of them. Uncheck both of them. In my opinion BGR is simply a bad mod.
The reason why BGR is IMO a bad mod is because while Stainless Steel makes the game harder (in a right way) an also very fun too. Meanwhile BGR will make the game a chore.
I play as Poland - this faction has weaker infantry and foot archers, and is constantly under Siege from all directions (Holy Roman Empire to the west, Denmark from the beyond the Baltic see, Lithuania and Kiev and Novgorod from the east and someone may join the fight from the south too). To defend yourself you will have to constantly recruit new units as fast as possible and move them around the map all the time.
So in practice what BGR mod will do is simply punish you heavily for everything. You have to pay heavy money to supply troops when they travel across borders, you will have to send your 3 best generals to sit like ducks in a few towns and recruits units (because only they those 3 best generals can recruit best units and if they leave that town, new units won't be waiting for them ready to be recruited - their "turns to next available unit" will reset).
So the beginning of a campaign is OK but as soon as you get your first/second war declaration you will constantly lack troops, lack money (you will also get into a heavy debt due to paying tons of money for supplies) and you won't appreciate that "deeper economics" anyways... Plus BGR will also make waiting for your next turn longer...
This mod should actually be renamed to "Byg's Pointless, Masochistic Reallity" - it would reflect that mod more accurately.
---------------------------------------

3. Should I install 'Real Recruitment'?

I would suggest not to use it. From what I saw it's probably a chore similar to BGR mod. You won't be able to use good and fun units until the campaign is very late or it's too late for your faction to survive as you are already overwhelmed by enemy armies that have access to better units (at least better than Polish militia) and they can make a lot of them. Or at least much more and better of anything than you can do.
Someone even wrote on some forum that he wanted to play the Holy Roman Empire for the Gothic Knights... And in 500 turns campaign he got access to them somewhere on turn 450... and only in a few areas of HRE.
So it's simply not worth it. In 'Stainless Steel' the better units are already much more expensive and take a lot of time to recruit. No need to make them non-existing with 'Real Recruitment' enabled.
---------------------------------------

4. Should I install 'Limited Access'?

This one can actually be fun. I played the game with it and it was pretty fun. You will have to move your generals from town to town so it forces you to plan your town development for future turns. Nonetheless, it gives a bit more difficulty for that reason so I suggest to check it out but can as well uncheck it if you want.
---------------------------------------

5. Should I install 'Longer Assimilation'?

IMO yes. What it does is forcing you to stay with your army in a conquered town for a one turn longer in order to do establish your control over it. It's pretty fun in gameplay.
---------------------------------------

6. Should I install 'Permanent Arrows'?

Depends on your computer. If you have a good PC, then you can go for it. I myself never really payed attention to tiny arrows in the ground.
---------------------------------------

7. Should I install 'Permanent Watchtowers'?

IMO no because it's quite fun to chose strategic locations for the watchtowers yourself.
---------------------------------------

8. What campaign and battle difficulty should I play on?

When it comes to Battle Difficulty - play on Very Hard. This is really fun and quite fair experience. Most battle will resolve around killing enemy General to win. Otherwise there is no chance for enemy army to route. It may seem hard to do but it's actually nicely done in practice (but keep in mind that enemy's General's Bodyguard are very hard to kill in Stainless Steel).
When it comes to Campaign Difficulty - it depends on what faction you play as. An isolated faction will be easier to play. The higher the difficulty the more armies the enemy gets out of thin air to attack you. Check it out yourself but I suggest starting at Very Hard, and then eventually lowering the difficulty if need be.
---------------------------------------
So this would be my opinion after trying playing Stainless Steel as Poland (which is a difficult faction to play) with all possible difficulty. But the highest possible difficulty is simply not worth your time. Just do as I said above and the game should both very fun and satisfying.

[Hellvard]

Nice review, I never tested Byg's Grim Reality long enough by myself, I wonder if more people have similar opinion about it as you have

[Losthief]

Glad to hear your opinion, and thanks for the detailed review. That why i like the submod manager (and submod section) cause you can play around with different setups and play all sorts of different campaigns. I have like 7 diff setups on my computer personally. Some stuff goes will together, some stuff doesn't too i've noticed. Also don't use bgr II and IV together, just one or the other or none. (non saying you did, but your write-up made that unclear).

One recommendation: there is other ai's available in the submod section you might like as well to try. Take a look around and see. And if you find battles too easy add in g5's battle ai (in the submod section) as it will help the ai with formations and pathfinding.

Some of your bgr stuff (complaints) are addressed via the manual that is available in its submod thread in the forum. It is recommended to read that so you understand what the mod does. This makes the economy easier to handle and understand. And will remove that 3 best general issues via moving the 'training staff' anciallaries as described. But to be fair, its a mod aimed at making the build up and act off war in stainless steel harder/more tedious to keep the player from snowballing and steamrolling the ai's. So its definitely not for everyone.

[Larsel]

without BGR stainless steel becomes boring for any player with experience who wants an actual challenge. Your critique of BGR really only reflects your own lackluster knowledge of the mod (and yes, it does requires time to learn) and shows a huge bias. I would heavily recommend BGR to anyone who wants a true challenge of m2tw and I say this with several hundred turns played with BGR5 on several factions late era (ERE, Denmark, Egypt, Sicily and Aragon) - I will happily provide screenshots that disproves your points on the economical and logistical aspects of the mod. BGR4 is easier than BGR5 and a good way to learn the overall mod. In Byg's description of the mod it says that it is made to make your lose in most cases (like the grim reality of actual life) so it is senseless to say that the mod is bad because of that. It is like saying apples tastes bad because they are apples.. My own critique of BGR is simple and short, and that is controlling religion at times feels unbalanced.
Essentially, if you want to steamroll the map play without BGR and if you want to fight for your survival play with the mod.

[Steward Denethor II]

I usually play with BGR V because without it the game is too easy. I prefer version 5 to version 4, because in 5 the correct lord can recruit in the settlement and in 4 the requirements along with recruitment pools are too much for me. But I also bring back the battle traits like command because it's absolutely not fun to have your generals never improve.

Sometimes I seem to get random revolts in BGR V but maybe I don't get the game well enough.

At least use BGR II if you can't handle IV or V, that one just has supplies.

[Losthief]

Sometimes I seem to get random revolts in BGR V but maybe I don't get the game well enough.

most likely is a defied orders thing. Either too many went broke somehow, or the one i get a lot is my king will get the damn always release prisoners, or always execute/raze city trait (can't remember the name) and i forget or didn't notice and poof! my wc has caused a damn civil war.

[revar]

I agree with OP and can confirm, every single point. I'd love to have something making SS more difficult and challenging but BGR and RR are clearly not that kind of things. But some people will for sure like it, so always try things and make your own opinion.

[Steward Denethor II]

I meant settlements, my generals are fine.

[Larsel]

could be due to religion or low resources in the region due to rebel/foreign armies. check for devastation on your F-keys. Could also be enemy spies in the region so bring your own spies to the settlements.
Btw what do you mean you "bring back battle traits" and how do you do it?Because, like you mention, i have also been missing to develop my generals as they feel kinda static. I can raise chivalry by putting generals in cities with good population boom, and dread by slaying prisoners, but thats basically it as far as the control i have over my generals. This has caused me to do some pretty cool work arounds to get citadels and huge cities, as my generals have never been able to get the required population by themselves. So what i do is set high levy each year and recruit alot of peasents and then bringing them to a settlement close to next upgrade and disband them all. This just cycles the yearly levy number but also it works as a way to transfer population from one settlement to another, though it will cost in recruitment and upkeep.

[Losthief]

haha larsel, i do the same with peasants. I also bribe ai forces alot (cause money is pretty easy once you get established at 12 turns per year) to get the manpower from disbanding. Super expensive, but lets me build reserves without using resources and my coffers go crazy high as a result of doing 0 levy.

He adds back in the battle traits from base ss that bgr took out I assume. Shouldn't be too hard, just compare the base ss 6.4 file with what bgr made, and add back in the traits and triggers you want. I can't recall if he actually deleted them, or just changed the triggers, but you should be able to do it all with some time and notepad.

@steward
I've never really had problems with settlements, unless i have my capital in the wrong spot. Check your Faction Leader's authority, especially after succession, this can be bad too. Also, cities/castles with a general who defied orders, or is 'in open rebellion' against the king will rebel with that general acting as governor even if he has the deeds i believe. Not saying that is what is going on, but im just trying to guess now.

[andresimoes]

I want to suggest to use germanicu5 "really bad ai"

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/downl...o=file&id=3350

And also use Zuma's stone forts mod.

https://www.mediafire.com/file/atb03...Forts_SS6.4.7z

Have fun

[k/t]

Settlement population is not used for recruiting units in M2, so you cannot transfer population from one settlement to another with that exploit. Unless BGR has a script for that.

[Used2BRoz]

Interesting observations on SS6.4

I leave and come back to it every couple of years, mainly because I love the time period and because I like customising the mod.

Perm arrows off, helps the graphics speed, perm watchtowers on.

I install my perm stone forts sub-mod as that has castles as forts as well.
Makes for more variety.

BYG - the complicated stuff I find tedious. I want a game i can see on-screen and that doesn't need a manual to play it.
The supply stuff is OK but even when i have it installed I tend to ignore it anyway.

RR - I like the time period aspect of this, so that weapons only arrive at the right time, irrespective of buildings.
But the regional units is annoying. I'm currently elimiating a lot of that so that, for example england, scotland, norway and denmark can recruit their own light horse units anywhere, and nobody else can.
(They're practically the same unit, so no point in allowing the recruitment on regional basis.)

I play 2TPY, and so make adjustments to some recruitment times and building completion times - but nothing too drastic.

I also use my destroy_units scripts and boost the AI and slave factions kings purses.
Makes rebel faction more of a challenge.

Generally I boost the descr_strat so that settlements start with more buildings, farms etc.
makes it more realistic than the barren landscape of SS6.4

There's still issues with balance, Moors can get swamped too quickly, Crusader states don't last very long either.
Moorish settlements are very under-developed in the mod, and the CS start with just towns which limits their recruitment possibilities.

Whatever, main thing is to enjoy playing it.

(The bug fix 1.27 is very useful, and I'll be assembling some more fixes to add to that in due course.)

[xRossTheBossx]

Permanent Arrows are usually not a problem for higher end PCs. But be warned that if you face someone like the mongols with massive archer spam, it will kill the frame rate of your computer, happened to my new PC that is barely a year old - presumably because the engine wasn't designed for permanent arrows to that effect.

Dont forget that you can always change the event files so you dont have to wait 450 turns for gothic knights for example.

I also want to note that for anyone that isnt aware of the submod "2 turns per year"[/B] if you are using it, you might want to change the event files so you dont have to wait like 900 turns for gothic knights or musketeers for example. Because it essentially doubles the turn time for everything so you would have to change it.

[Kataphractos]

Never had an interest in BGR. I play EUIV for that kind of gameplay.

Otherwise, I build my own watchtowers, no permanent arrows, use RR, and use Savage AI. I play with VH map and M or H battles; peasants not routing 99% of the time after getting flattened by a knight charge is just stupid, and the AI gets plenty of combat advantages already, such as not being affected by dense fog or snow, and pechengs being able to effectively melee down the player's general's bodyguard (yes, I'm still salty about the time that that happened).

[Dekhatres]

pechengs being able to effectively melee down the player's general's bodyguard (yes, I'm still salty about the time that that happened).

difficulty does not affect attack/defense stats of the units

[Jurand of Cracow]

I play as Poland - this faction has weaker infantry and foot archers, and is constantly under Siege from all directions (Holy Roman Empire to the west, Denmark from the beyond the Baltic see, Lithuania and Kiev and Novgorod from the east and someone may join the fight from the south too). To defend yourself you will have to constantly recruit new units as fast as possible and move them around the map all the time.

The question is how one finds himself in such a situation. As Poland you should never be at war with all your neighbours. I you take Prague - then yes, the HRE will attack you. If you not only crush foreign incursion but retaliate (eg Hungary may just check if you're ready to defend yourself) - there'll be long war. If you attack armies walking through your territories (eg on crusades) - long war. You need to defend and make deals. And attack pick your enemies with utmost care, assessing chances to win quickly, and potential benefits from the settlements. You are actually able to keep peace with HRE, Hungary, Denmark, Kypchaks very long. Also with Kiev or Lithuania, unless you pick them as the target.
Any faction that has multiple neighbours must use a bit of diplomacy. It actually works in the M2TW engine, even if it's not so visible as in the Warscape.

My report on Poland in the SSHIP is here.

[Dauntless07]

Interesting idea, to review the whole package in one go. Suppose I'll give my thoughts as well. (Note: I'm referencing the bugfix variant, so some plugins may not appear in vanilla, but I consider this the definitive form of Stainless Steel.)

1) which AI?
I think Savage is the best option. I feel that while a player should be prepared to deal with backstabbing, (and I dislike Lusted since alliances are hardly ever broken, the game is too easy, and it's too hard to help stupid AIs in battle anyway,) the point of strategy games in general is to control situations around you, with diplomacy being one of those tools. To this end, Gracul makes diplomacy near useless, since every faction has a "hate the player" mentality. (Share a border? HOW DARE YOU!?)

2) BGR?
Never played II, but I think IV and V are pretty good, but I wouldn't recommend V if you dislike especially slow campaigns, because it has fully 12 turn years! In any event, IV should be played before V because it's easier, and because it comes with the base package. Now, I wouldn't recommend using this with the 2 Turns Per Year submod, because that one lowers settlement income by 25%. The trouble is, IV seems to have been balanced with 1 TPY in mind, and you will simply be utterly broke if you do so. I think there's a lot to appreciate about IV, but my biggest criticism of it is that it makes moving nobles to cities or castles depending on their traits necessary, but kept the annoying vanilla mechanic where nobles hate you when you try to swap around deeds. Byg did realize this, however, and corrected it in V.

3) Disable RR?
Never tried it. I think it's a personal preference thing. I can understand why some would prefer not to wait until the end of the game to see the coolest units, but that's kind-of how it was historically, and this is a historical game, so I have no recommendation on that.

4) Weak Heretics?
I think this is a must to be honest. Too many heretics, (often the least pious of your priests that go rogue,) magically become literal prophets for no reason. Yes, you can kill them via assassination EVENTUALLY, but by then, your assassins will have failed so many times, your faction leader will have lost any shred of Chivalry he had. So, especially for non-Dread players, it's needed IMO.

5) Limited Activities?
It's a reasonable limitation on the player given the nature of historical feudalism, so yes.

6) Longer Assimilation?
see 5

7) Permanent Arrows?
Yes, if your PC can handle it, and especially on large+ unit scale. It makes the carnage after the battle even more satisfying. I love it.

8) Permanent Watchtowers?
This is another personal preference thing. I can understand why some players would prefer to explore the map and place watchtowers themselves, but I find it to be tedious, especially if you need them sitting in settlements to build and recruit, and the AI almost never builds them. I find it reasonable to assume that a lord would be aware of massive armies ravaging his own land. I just don't think it would be possible to sneak right up to the city gates.

9) 2 Turns Per Year?
It is what it is. I think the problem is that it doesn't sufficiently enhance the vanilla experience. You get more time with your characters, which is nice, but it will take you longer to do anything because of the lesser money to "balance" the game for 2 TPY. There was also no representation of the 4 seasons, when this mod easily could have done that to let players plan campaigns around the non-winter turns. Instead, we got the same boring summer/winter alternating every turn. The vanilla experience was fun as it was, so I think the better option is to mod SS yourself with an open resource TPY script, as the BGRV submod does for instance.

[Losthief]

2) BGR?
my biggest criticism of it is that it makes moving nobles to cities or castles depending on their traits necessary, but kept the annoying vanilla mechanic where nobles hate you when you try to swap around deeds. Byg did realize this, however, and corrected it in V.

an easy way around this limitation is to give one extra title first (usually from your king cause he doesnt' get pissed if you remove a title/deed) so the general has two. Then moving one does not trigger the lost of title/stripped of title trait. It can take some planning to start with, but definitely feasible. What i do personally is send my king to wherever a new title/unclaimed title is, then give that his current title to someone to hold in the meantime. Then I go collect it back and my king has two titles. Then he can go around giving the extra out to whoever needs to lose a title.

p.s. two titles they will not rebel (unless you give them two of the -loyalty ones like Jerusalem and others), but more than two and they get big headed and will. (this is from ss base too though iirc).

[Used2BRoz]

As for CAI - Iusually use Savage AI.
It seems the most reasonable.
Although that may depend on which faction you play and how you play it.
I managed to get 51 regions as France with only having fought the English among the catholic factions.
Europe was at peace because all the remaining catholic factions had alliances with all the others.
The key is do what the Pope says, have diplomats next to your attacking armies and ask for peace once you've conquered a region.
They had plenty to keep themselves busy with eliminating the non-Catholic factions.
(It was only when I checked the victory conditions that I discovered I supposed to also eliminate Genoa,
but I left it there as I'm slowly customising the game and wanted to check other factions.