Tsardoms Total War - Campaign Feedback, Bugs and Reports

[jurcek1987]

Zagreb gives you Ban of Slavonia title but you also need to have Knez of Bihac and Zhupan of Pozega. And also the King of Croatia (faction leader only) which requires Ban of Slavonia, Grand Voivode of Donji Kraji (Jajce) and Ban of Croatia and Dalmatia (Knin with large feudal estates, also requires Knez of Knin, Knez of Zadar and Knez of Split). The requirements for the King of Croatia title are not so easy.

In regards to the crashes, wait a couple more days, version 2.2 is coming

[Biffleur7w7]

I've been playing this mod for a while, now I don't want to uninstall it, but I want to play "Chivalry II: The Sicilian vespers mod", I install it correctly but when I launch it from its executable C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Medieval II Total War\mods\SicilianVespes, it launches as Tsadorms mod, is there a way to play them both without having to uninstall one of them?

[Antiokhos Euergetes]

Is there a faction specific arquebusier and or musketeer unit for Wallachia/Moldova? While waiting I've been playing an old save and I'm in 1506. I know it's a little too early for Mihai Bravu, but he would have muskets. Just thinking outloud as I'm playing

[Artannis Wolfrunner]

The event with the earthquake at Gallipoli & the Ottomon attack that happens there a turn later is very poorly implemented. It should be changed or removed. At the moment, it spawns a magic stack of Ottoman elites to attack the city. It also puts the owner of that city at war with the Ottomans, regardless of any previous diplomatic standing or treaties. Here I am sailing along as the Aydinids, allied and trading with the Ottomans, satisfied with them watching my back while I take out the Romans - and this event hits and puts me at war with them. It's a real punch to the face as it removes player agency and invalidates dozens of turns of farming reputation and standing with them. I will not hold back, I think the event that spawns the army is bad in its current state.

[Antiokhos Euergetes]

I on the otherhand think it's great thanks guys

[Anubis88]

The event with the earthquake at Gallipoli & the Ottomon attack that happens there a turn later is very poorly implemented. It should be changed or removed. At the moment, it spawns a magic stack of Ottoman elites to attack the city. It also puts the owner of that city at war with the Ottomans, regardless of any previous diplomatic standing or treaties. Here I am sailing along as the Aydinids, allied and trading with the Ottomans, satisfied with them watching my back while I take out the Romans - and this event hits and puts me at war with them. It's a real punch to the face as it removes player agency and invalidates dozens of turns of farming reputation and standing with them. I will not hold back, I think the event that spawns the army is bad in its current state.

Yeah agreed with Antiokhos, the event has to stay. The campaign is too easy otherwise, even with help events the Ottoman AI never becomes the juggernaut they were historically, so we are doing our best to help them. You have described one of the few events where this event perhaps doesn't make that much sense, but you are talking about playing out a completely ahistorical, and more importantly, highly unlikely and unrealistic scenario where the event doesn't work as well.

[Runner]

this mod is very very good, really thank you all for creating this Great Mod!


i have tried 2 games. (one is Austria, one is Ottoman)


however, both 2 games have the same problem at about turn 58 / turn 59.


when in the AI campaign turn, the AI will stop at the "Slave Faction" and just said "uh oh. This isn't good. No idea why, but exiting now. Sorry pal".


this mod is very good, just until turn 58 / turn 59. . .


does anyone have the same problem and know how to solve it?


thank you

[Anubis88]

Wait for a few days, new version is coming soon which won't have that crash.

[Runner]

thanks for the reply , i am looking forward for the new version.
i love this mod very much, thank you for making this Masterpiece!!


p.s.
i have tuned the Battle AI a bit so that it can now perform better when it is attacking in the siege.


the Battle AI is now better in attacking the 2nd layer and the 3rd layer of the citidal.


it will try to collect more ladders to attack the 2nd layer.
sometimes, it will collect both ram and ladders to attack the 3rd layer.
sometimes, it will collect 2 rams to attack the 3rd layer.


let's try if it is suitible for you or suitible for the new version 2.2


just copy and paste this in the "config_ai_battle.xml" file to replace the code about <attack-settlement>


==================================


<attack-settlement>
<detachment>
<engine-collection>
<!-- when stealing an engine, prioritise being out of combat over distance -->
<prioritise-out-of-combat>0</prioritise-out-of-combat>
<min-units>5</min-units>
</engine-collection>
<commit>
<!-- commit sufficient forces to outnumber the enemy by this ratio -->
<strength-ratio>3.0</strength-ratio>
</commit>
<perimeter-attack>
<termination-criteria>
<enemy-in-perimeter>0.2</enemy-in-perimeter>
</termination-criteria>
</perimeter-attack>
<min-plaza-assault-groups>2</min-plaza-assault-groups>
<max-plaza-assault-groups>6</max-plaza-assault-groups>
<units-per-plaza-assault-group>3</units-per-plaza-assault-group>
<artillery-times>
<!-- successful assaults performed for at least 1 minute -->
<minimum>3.0</minimum>
<!-- don't prolong the bombardment longer than 6 minutes if we have no targets left -->
<maximum>6.0</maximum>
<!-- stall test is a moving average that checks if any artillery is active (moving/firing/reloading) each tick -->
<stall-test>
<!-- minimum number of ticks to collect before detecting a stall -->
<minimum-samples>900</minimum-samples>
<!-- track at most this number of samples -->
<maximum-samples>1200</maximum-samples>
<!-- if the artillery has be inactive for at least 75% of its time -->
<limit>0.5</limit>
</stall-test>
</artillery-times>
</detachment>
<tactics>
<assault-gate>
<inside-position-dist>40</inside-position-dist>
<formation>ai_settlement_assault_gate</formation>
<resourcing>
<!--minimum number of units that can be assigned -->
<min-units>1</min-units>
<!--maximum number of units that can be assigned -->
<max-units>6</max-units>
<!--amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>15</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
</assault-gate>
<capture-plaza>
<reform-dist>10</reform-dist>
<resourcing>
<!--maximum number of units that can be assigned -->
<max-units>20</max-units>
<!-- amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>5</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
<order-repeat-rate>1000</order-repeat-rate>
</capture-plaza>
<assault-walls>
<assignment>
<!-- attack the top x surfaces. sorted by descending assault threat -->
<surfaces>4</surfaces>
<points>4</points>
<resourcing>
<min-units>1</min-units>
<!-- maximum number of units that can be assigned -->
<max-units>8</max-units>
<!-- amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>25</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
</assignment>
<street-position>
<!-- base threat level possessed by street positions - used to enforce an initial spread of units -->
<base-threat>40.0</base-threat>
</street-position>
<gate>
<!-- base threat level possessed by breaches - enforces an initial unit spread -->
<base-threat>60.0</base-threat>
</gate>
<ladder>
<resourcing>
<min-units>1</min-units>
<!-- maximum number of units that can be assigned -->
<max-units>8</max-units>
<!-- amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>25</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
<phases>
<!-- phase 1 - running with the ladder to the walls -->
<phase1>
<!-- configuring the conditions for entering this phase -->
<entry-conditions>
<!-- ratio of current to initial melee strength -->
<melee-remaining>1.0</melee-remaining>
<!-- outshoot ratio between enemy and us. Test: [enemy strength] > [ally strength] * [ratio] -->
<outshoot-ratio>1.3</outshoot-ratio>
</entry-conditions>
<!-- run if closer than this distance (in metres squared) -->
<run-threshold>400000</run-threshold>
</phase1>
<!-- phase 2 - in case of artillery or heavy fire -->
<phase2>
<!-- configuring the conditions for entering this phase -->
<entry-conditions>
<!-- ratio of current to initial melee strength -->
<melee-remaining>0.9</melee-remaining>
<!-- outshoot ratio between enemy and us. Test: [enemy strength] > [ally strength] * [ratio] -->
<outshoot-ratio>1.1</outshoot-ratio>
</entry-conditions>
<!-- run if closer than this distance (in metres squared) -->
<run-threshold>400000</run-threshold>
</phase2>
</phases>
</ladder>
<tower>
<resourcing>
<!-- maximum number of units that can be assigned -->
<max-units>10</max-units>
<!-- amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>25</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
</tower>
</assault-walls>
<reform>
<resourcing>
<min-units>1</min-units>
<max-units>6</max-units>
</resourcing>
<offset>10</offset>
<formation>ai_settlement_attack_reform</formation>
<percentage-formed>0.1</percentage-formed>
<advance-timer>1.0</advance-timer>
<siege-equipment-advance-timer>2.0</siege-equipment-advance-timer>
<order-repeat-rate>1000</order-repeat-rate>
</reform>
<!-- plaza attack -->
<attack-plaza>
<!-- only issue move orders if we are more than this distance away from the destination -->
<destination-proximity>5.0</destination-proximity>
<resourcing>
<!--maximum number of units that can be assigned -->
<max-units>20</max-units>
<!-- amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>5</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
<order-repeat-rate>1000</order-repeat-rate>
</attack-plaza>
<attack-street>
<!-- configure resourcing strategy for this tactic -->
<resourcing>
<!-- priority to encourage attacks from another street -->
<prioritise-outflanking>1</prioritise-outflanking>
<!-- amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>20</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
</attack-street>
</tactics>
</attack-settlement>

[Runner]

btw, sometimes, the code about <defend-settlement> will also affect the AI performance in attacking.


because it will set the threat values of the gate, breach, units and many things.


here is my code about <defend-settlement> in the "config_ai_battle.xml" file


it may also help to improve the Battle AI to choose where to attack in the siege


=================================


<defend-settlement>
<threat-assessment>
<!-- how far behind the siege equipment does the threat extend -->
<lag-distance>-200.0</lag-distance>
<!-- how far in front of the siege equipment does the threat extend -->
<lead-distance>200.0</lead-distance>
<!-- what angle (either side of target vector) is considered at risk -->
<risk-angle>0.95</risk-angle>
<!-- what distance away (normal distance) is considered irrelevant -->
<approach-threshold>500</approach-threshold>


<breach>
<!-- threat contribution when the breachable area is damaged -->
<contribution-damaged>70</contribution-damaged>
<!-- amount of breach threat that gets applied as an assault threat -->
<bleed-over>0.1</bleed-over>
<base-threat>70.0</base-threat>
</breach>


<gate>
<!-- base threat level possessed by breaches - enforces an initial unit spread -->
<base-threat>5.0</base-threat>
</gate>


<street-position>
<!-- base threat level possessed by street positions - used to enforce an initial spread of units -->
<base-threat>5.0</base-threat>
</street-position>


<weak-point>
<!-- threat contribution from unit proximity -->
<contribution-units>40</contribution-units>
<!-- distance (in metres squared) above which a unit does not contribute -->
<unit-threshold>10000</unit-threshold>
</weak-point>


<tower>
<!-- default threat contribution -->
<contribution-general>40</contribution-general>
<!-- threat contribution when siege equipment is moving this way -->
<contribution-targetted>30</contribution-targetted>
<!-- threat contribution when the siege equipment is docked -->
<contribution-docked>30</contribution-docked>
<!-- rate at which the threat fades per metre (for weakpoints and breaches) -->
<horizontal-fade>0.0575</horizontal-fade>
<!-- rate at which the threat fades per metre (for weakpoints and breaches) -->
<vertical-fade>0.035</vertical-fade>
</tower>


<ladder>
<!-- default threat contribution -->
<contribution-general>40</contribution-general>
<!-- threat contribution when siege equipment is moving this way -->
<contribution-targetted>30</contribution-targetted>
<!-- threat contribution when the siege equipment is docked -->
<contribution-docked>30</contribution-docked>
<!-- rate at which the threat fades per metre (for weakpoints and breaches) -->
<horizontal-fade>0.0575</horizontal-fade>
<!-- rate at which the threat fades per metre (for weakpoints and breaches) -->
<vertical-fade>0.035</vertical-fade>
</ladder>


<ram>
<!-- default threat contribution -->
<contribution-general>40</contribution-general>
<!-- threat contribution when siege equipment is moving this way -->
<contribution-targetted>40</contribution-targetted>
<!-- threat contribution when the siege equipment is docked -->
<contribution-docked>80</contribution-docked>
<!-- rate at which the threat fades per metre (for weakpoints and breaches) -->
<horizontal-fade>0.0575</horizontal-fade>
<!-- rate at which the threat fades per metre (for weakpoints and breaches) -->
<vertical-fade>0.035</vertical-fade>
</ram>


<unit>
<!-- default threat contribution -->
<contribution-general>5</contribution-general>
<!-- threat contribution when siege equipment is moving this way -->
<contribution-targetted>10</contribution-targetted>
<!-- rate at which the threat fades per metre (for weakpoints and breaches) -->
<horizontal-fade>0.0575</horizontal-fade>
<!-- rate at which the threat fades per metre (for weakpoints and breaches) -->
<vertical-fade>0.035</vertical-fade>
<!-- rate at which threat fades per metre (for street defenses) -->
<general-fade>0.01</general-fade>
<!-- scale factor applied to the plaza threat -->
<plaza-scale>1.5</plaza-scale>
</unit>


<!-- if our force strength is this value times the attacker's strength then sally out -->
<sally-out-ratio>1.6</sally-out-ratio>
</threat-assessment>


<!-- settlement defense stage control -->
<stage-configuration>


<!-- in this stage the walls are defended and towers are manned. the objective is to repel the attackers as strongly as possible -->
<repel-attackers>
<!-- criteria for moving to the next stage -->
<progression-criteria>
<!-- percentage of the enemy force that has made it inside (on ground or walls) -->
<enemy-penetration>0.0</enemy-penetration>
<!-- percentage of breaches we can tolerate - set to 0 to tolerate no breaches -->
<breach-threshold>0.0</breach-threshold>
<!-- is the plaza threat over this level -->
<plaza-threat>0</plaza-threat>


<!-- defines how many troops are required to defend against different incursion types -->
<manning-requirements>
<!-- destroyed wall, gate or spy unlocked gate -->
<ground-incursion>
<siege-engine>0</siege-engine>
<cavalry>0</cavalry>
<melee-infantry>2</melee-infantry>
<missile-infantry>0</missile-infantry>
<general_unit>0</general_unit>
</ground-incursion>
<!-- docked ladder/tower -->
<wall-incursion>
<siege-engine>0</siege-engine>
<cavalry>0</cavalry>
<melee-infantry>2</melee-infantry>
<missile-infantry>0</missile-infantry>
<general_unit>0</general_unit>
</wall-incursion>
</manning-requirements>
</progression-criteria>


<!-- configuration for how units are assigned in this stage -->
<assignment>
<!-- defend the top x surfaces. sorted by descending assault threat -->
<surfaces>10</surfaces>
<!-- defend the top x breach points. sorted by descending breach threat -->
<breaches>4</breaches>
<!--defend the top gates. sorted by descending breach threat -->
<gates>1</gates>


<!-- don't assign units to a surface if its health is below this limit -->
<surface-health>0.70</surface-health>
<!-- threat values below this limit will be ignored -->
<minimum-threat>5.0</minimum-threat>
<!-- if the assault threat goes over this threshold then melee units will be assigned -->
<melee-threshold>10.0</melee-threshold>
<!-- allow stealing if (new tactic threat / old tactic threat) is this greater than this ratio -->
<tactic-switch-limit>1.2</tactic-switch-limit>
<!-- if a unit is assigned to a defend a breach within this distance (in metres squared) then don't assign a unit -->
<breach-lockout-distance>6400</breach-lockout-distance>
</assignment>
</repel-attackers>


<!-- in this stage we are still manning walls and towers but we now also defend breaches -->
<defend-perimeter>
<!-- criteria for moving to the next stage -->
<progression-criteria>
<!-- enemy got 40% of their force into the settlement -->
<enemy-penetration>0.4</enemy-penetration>
<!-- is the plaza threat over this level -->
<plaza-threat>100.0</plaza-threat>


<!-- defines how many troops are required to defend against different incursion types -->
<manning-requirements>
<!-- destroyed wall, gate or spy unlocked gate -->
<ground-incursion>
<siege-engine>0</siege-engine>
<cavalry>0</cavalry>
<melee-infantry>3</melee-infantry>
<missile-infantry>0</missile-infantry>
<general_unit>0</general_unit>
</ground-incursion>
<!-- docked ladder/tower -->
<wall-incursion>
<siege-engine>0</siege-engine>
<cavalry>0</cavalry>
<melee-infantry>4</melee-infantry>
<missile-infantry>0</missile-infantry>
<general_unit>0</general_unit>
</wall-incursion>
</manning-requirements>
</progression-criteria>


<!-- configuration for how units are assigned in this stage -->
<assignment>
<!-- defend the top x surfaces. sorted by descending assault threat -->
<surfaces>4</surfaces>
<!-- defend the top x breach points. sorted by descending breach threat -->
<breaches>2</breaches>
<!--defend the top gates. sorted by descending breach threat -->
<gates>1</gates>
<!-- don't assign units to a surface if its health is below this limit -->
<surface-health>0.70</surface-health>
<!-- threat values below this limit will be ignored -->
<minimum-threat>5</minimum-threat>
<!-- if the assault threat goes over this threshold then melee units will be assigned -->
<melee-threshold>10</melee-threshold>
<!-- allow stealing if (new tactic threat / old tactic threat) is this greater than this ratio -->
<tactic-switch-limit>1.2</tactic-switch-limit>
<!-- if a unit is assigned to a defend a breach within this distance (in metres squared) then don't assign a unit -->
<breach-lockout-distance>6400</breach-lockout-distance>
</assignment>
</defend-perimeter>




<!-- in this stage we are fighting on the ground and trying to hold the enemy back -->
<defend-streets>
<!-- criteria for moving to the next stage -->
<progression-criteria>
<!-- if the enemy outnumbers us by this proportion (in the perimeter) then fall back -->
<force-ratio>0</force-ratio>
<!-- have our forces depleted too much in this stage? -->
<loss-ratio>0.7</loss-ratio>
<!-- is the plaza threat over this level -->
<plaza-threat>2000</plaza-threat>
</progression-criteria>


<!-- which settlements is this state permitted for -->
<permitted-settlements>
<!-- forts -->
<fort>1</fort>
<!-- castles -->
<motte_and_bailey>1</motte_and_bailey>
<wooden_castle>1</wooden_castle>
<castle>1</castle>
<fortress>0</fortress>
<citadel>0</citadel>
<!-- cities -->
<village>1</village>
<town>1</town>
<large_town>1</large_town>
<city>1</city>
<large_city>1</large_city>
<huge_city>1</huge_city>
</permitted-settlements>


<!-- configuration for how units are assigned in this stage -->
<assignment>
<!-- defend the top x defense points. sorted by descending threat -->
<maximum-points>8</maximum-points>
<!-- threat values below this limit will be ignored -->
<minimum-threat>5.0</minimum-threat>
<!-- allow stealing if (new tactic threat / old tactic threat) is this greater than this ratio -->
<tactic-switch-limit>1.2</tactic-switch-limit>
</assignment>
</defend-streets>




<pull-back>
<!-- offset from the gate in metres -->
<gate-offset>45</gate-offset>
<!-- criteria for moving to the next stage -->
<progression-criteria>
<!-- if the enemy outnumbers us by this proportion (in the perimeter) then fall back -->
<maximum-proportion>0</maximum-proportion>
<!-- is the plaza threat over this level -->
<plaza-threat>2000</plaza-threat>
<!-- are all units pulling back within this distance of their destination? (in metres squared) -->
<destination-proximity>400.0</destination-proximity>
</progression-criteria>
</pull-back>
</stage-configuration>


<!-- per tactic configuration -->
<tactics>
<!-- surplus tactic -->
<surplus>
<gate-offset>80</gate-offset>
</surplus>


<!-- wall defense tactic -->
<defend-walls>
<!-- configure resourcing strategy for this tactic -->
<resourcing>
<!-- maximum number of units that can be assigned -->
<max-units>12</max-units>
<!-- amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>15</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
</defend-walls>


<!-- defense manning tactic -->
<man-defense></man-defense>


<!-- plaza defense -->
<defend-plaza>
<!-- only issue move orders if we are more than this distance away from the destination -->
<destination-proximity>1000.0</destination-proximity>
</defend-plaza>


<!-- street defense -->
<defend-street>
<!-- configure resourcing strategy for this tactic -->
<resourcing>
<!-- maximum number of units that can be assigned -->
<max-units>4.0</max-units>
<!-- amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>15</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
<!-- only issue move orders if we are more than this distance away from the destination -->
<destination-proximity>400.0</destination-proximity>
</defend-street>


<!-- breach defense -->
<defend-breaches>
<!-- if the gate health drops below this percentage then the breach should be defended -->
<gate-health-perc>0.7</gate-health-perc>
<!-- if the wall health drops below this percentage then the breach should be defended -->
<wall-health-perc>0.70</wall-health-perc>
<!-- unit offset in metres from the breach -->
<breach-offset-pos>15.0</breach-offset-pos>
<!-- lateral offset -->
<lateral-offset>15.0</lateral-offset>
<!-- configure resourcing strategy for this tactic -->
<resourcing>
<!-- maximum number of units that can be assigned -->
<max-units>12</max-units>
<!-- amount of threat a single unit can counter (controls how many units will get assigned) -->
<threat-per-unit>15</threat-per-unit>
</resourcing>
<!-- only issue move orders if we are more than this distance away from the destination -->
<destination-proximity>200.0</destination-proximity>
</defend-breaches>


<!-- pull back -->
<pull-back>
<!-- offset from the gate in metres -->
<gate-offset>45</gate-offset>
<!-- per state configuration -->
<state-criteria>
<!-- stand ground state - will hold position and fight the enemy -->
<stand-ground>
<!-- stand ground if the percentage of soldiers in the unit in combat is above this -->
<combat-percentage>0.2</combat-percentage>
<!-- stand ground if the enemy is within this distance - in metres squared -->
<nearest-enemy>200.0</nearest-enemy>
</stand-ground>
</state-criteria>
</pull-back>


<!-- defense of settlement by artillery -->
<artillery>
<!-- minimum offset in metres squared -->
<minimum-offset>10000.0</minimum-offset>
<!-- maximum offset in metres squared -->
<maximum-offset>40000.0</maximum-offset>
<!-- placement band begin range -->
<minimum-range-scale>0.45</minimum-range-scale>
<!-- placement band end range -->
<maximum-range-scale>0.75</maximum-range-scale>
<!-- only issue move orders if we are more than this distance away from the destination -->
<destination-proximity>900.0</destination-proximity>
<!-- flag which artillery units are viable for defending a breach -->
<defend-breaches>
<catapult>0</catapult>
<trebuchet>0</trebuchet>
<ballista>1</ballista>
<bombard>0</bombard>
<grand_bombard>0</grand_bombard>
<huge_bombard>0</huge_bombard>
<culverin>0</culverin>
<basilisk>0</basilisk>
<cannon>0</cannon>
<mangonel>0</mangonel>
<mortar>0</mortar>
<scorpion>1</scorpion>
<serpentine>1</serpentine>
<rocket_launcher>1</rocket_launcher>
<ribault>1</ribault>
<monster_ribault>1</monster_ribault>
</defend-breaches>
</artillery>
</tactics>
</defend-settlement>

[Artannis Wolfrunner]

Yeah agreed with Antiokhos, the event has to stay. The campaign is too easy otherwise, even with help events the Ottoman AI never becomes the juggernaut they were historically, so we are doing our best to help them. You have described one of the few events where this event perhaps doesn't make that much sense, but you are talking about playing out a completely ahistorical, and more importantly, highly unlikely and unrealistic scenario where the event doesn't work as well.

This event is not good in its current form because it ignores the current conditions in the campaign. It spawns an elite stack regardless of the condition of the Ottoman AI or Gallipoli itself. It could be improved by adding some conditions under which the army would not trigger - say, if Gallipoli is held by a faction that is Islamic and not at war with Ottomans OR allied to the Ottomans = no army spawns. Or, if Ottomans do not have control over Bursa/Prousa = army does not spawn - it would be difficult to organize an intercontinental invasion when you've lose your capital. This would add a diplomatic and military option for stopping the army before it reaches you. It's also odd that an earthquake is what provided an opportunity for the invasion historically, but no damage is actually done to the city on the campaign map, and in battle there's just 1 wall break. Which the spawned army, having no siege weapons, immediately tries to force all 20 units through and dies. There seems little point in giving the Ottoman AI an elite doomstack if they are then forced to throw it away charging into 1 wall breach. The event is flawed all around.

The way the event would work better, is if instead of spawning an army that is forced to attack the city, it just spawns an army near Gallipoli. The Ottoman AI are then free to do what they want with it. If Gallipoli is allied, then they will go elsewhere.

[Anubis88]

Yes i agree the event could be refined, but it's not just a priority for the unlikely scenario you are describing. The only issue is that you were a player that conquered Galipoli from the Romans before the event, which comes fairly early in the campaign. Plus you were an Islamic faction and were allied to the Ottomans. So it's such a rare occasion that i don't see this a priority.

The AI of MTWII is just retarded unfortunately, so these kind of scripts are necessary.

We are really trying to make the Ottomans an actual threat in the campaign like they were historically, and sometimes it might feel a bit crude but it's necessary. If the Ottomans don't get this boost then your Aydin campaign would be really easy if you just allied yourself with the only nation that could pose any threat to you, while the nation is neutered because the AI doesn't know how to expand on it's own.

[Artannis Wolfrunner]

We are really trying to make the Ottomans an actual threat in the campaign like they were historically, and sometimes it might feel a bit crude but it's necessary. If the Ottomans don't get this boost then your Aydin campaign would be really easy if you just allied yourself with the only nation that could pose any threat to you, while the nation is neutered because the AI doesn't know how to expand on it's own.

I do see the intent, some scripts are required for challenge. For example capital garrison scripts, the AI loves to leave 1 unit to guard its capital and those scripts are required to make sneaking up on a capital more costly. I do understand the intent behind it. But the way the Gallipoli script works now invalidates choices the player has made up until that point. In my first campaign as Romans, when this event triggered I had Ottomans down to 1 city that could only produce Piyades and Azaps, and I was releasing prisoners to recover reputation. Then out of no where, this devastated faction that can only raise levies conjures a horde of elite supermen to attack a city deep in my territory, 400 miles from the nearest town flying an Ottoman flag, a city which has not been threatened by the Ottomans for 20 turns. It feels nonsensical as it ignores everything I've done on the campaign map so far. Soon I'd like to go for a Roman speedrun - ignore Kantakouzenos and see what happens when this event triggers after the Ottomans are already destroyed.

Also, I do understand that historically, the Ottomans are supposed to be the big threat. However the reasons they are not as great a threat as they should be, in my experience, are related more to unit roster, production, and starting position rather than the AI itself. The Ottomans units are quite weak in autoresolve due to low armor, particularly their levies like Azap and Piyade units which the AI tends to mass in large numbers and are easily autoresolved off the field by the heavy knights and elite archers or crossbows of the christian factions. Even the early game Roman AI with its easily massed Kontaratoi and 4 missile damage Toxotai have great deal of autoresolve power against the Ottoman Piyades and 2 missile damage Azap archers. Every faction in Tsardoms has this starting situation where most of their units are trained out of just 1 city for the first ~50 turns before other cities catch up. This seems to hurt Ottomans especially hard because they waste most of their recruitment slots in Bursa on Azaps and Piyades and recruit hardly any Siphahis. Maybe a script that replaces the Ottoman barracks in certain cities with an AI-only version that only has elite units available to train, so that they aren't wasting their recruitment slots in key cities on levies that break as soon as someone tosses a naphtha jar in their general direction.

And I think in many ways, most important reason the Ottoman AI suffers: every single rebel city in Anatolia has a garrison script that is triggered even by the AI and further slows their expansion and depletes their forces. This greatly slows down the Karamanid AI while it fights the continental wall of rebel settlements between it and the rest of the world, and prevents the Karamanid AI from ever really accomplishing anything. It also slows down the Ottoman AI's westward expansion when a large portion of their forces are wasted fighting magic garrisons in the east.

[Anubis88]

You have a lot of good points; however it's all a matter of balance. We are trying to make the Ottomans stronger any way we can; but they suck in auto-resolve like you said, but what can be done about it? We can't really give them imaginary troops can we? We are going to make the Sipahi's heavier in the next version, and we are going to add a medium infantry that will represent the dismounted Sipahis which should make them more competitive in auto_battles.

The problem with your campaign as the Romans is probably that the Romans are too strong as well; there is no realistic way that the Romans could launch an assault on the Ottomans before the date of the Galipolli script given how weakened they were at this time.

The truth is that as players we have an insane edge against the AI, so if you don't use any roleplay and don't give the AI any chances to actually become stronger all campaigns will be a walk in the park, unless the odds are just super stacked against you to just lose no matter what.

[Artannis Wolfrunner]

You can give them imaginary troops - that's really what the garrison and gallipoli scripts are. The Ottomans close their eyes, imagine they are strong enough to attack a city deep in my territory, and voila an army appears.

A medium infantry would be welcome, but the Ottomans are mainly held back by their weak levies and the many nearby garrison-scripted rebel settlements. The Romans are strong because 1) they have no rebel settlements nearby, and will focus all of their attention directly on their enemies or their own defense and 2) the Roman levies are exceptionally deadly, widely available, and very cheap - armies of Kontaratoi, Toxotai, and Viglai Hippeis are dirt cheap and properly positioned can hold off anything the Ottomans have early on, while also being able to garrison newly captured cities due to being free upkeep in settlements which makes for minimal downtime before moving on to conquer more cities.

Piyades and Azaps are a trap for the AI. Their deep recruitment pools and fast replenishment means they are recruited in large numbers, but are weaker than the levies of other factions nearby. And the garrison scripted rebel settlements are scripted to spawn many high-quality units like Foot Askari and Sipahi archers & lancers, which easily beat Ottoman levies. I've watched the Ottoman AI siege the same 2 rebel settlements half a dozen times each and break off each time due to being unable to field an army capable of fighting the script-conjured professionals and elites. The Ottomans should be a great threat, but their rather weak units are easy to deal with compared to the unholy blood legions of 18-armor heavy knights, horse archers, and 12 missile damage crossbows that the christian factions can bring to bear. As the Golden Horde, a faction with a much more powerful start and units than the Romans, I had a much harder time dealing with Moldova, a small 4-city faction of super heavy knights and crossbows and horse archers, than I ever had fighting the Ottomans as the Romans.

What I disagree with is the idea that part of the solution to all that is a script spawning an elite Ottoman army as part of a historical event, an event which only occurred because specific military and economic conditions were in place at that time in history to make it possible, should activate even if none of the conditions that historically made that event possible are active in-game. It's not a very satisfying solution, is it? The Ottomans don't recruit enough good units, so on turn X the Ottomans will get an army that only has good units and it will attack 1 city regardless of the diplomatic status of its owner. The Ottoman AI needs to spend more time recruiting better units and less time smashing its face into rebel settlements full of elites. However, I do not know how much power scripting has over making this happen. Is it possible to script the Ottoman elite units to replenish their recruitment pool instantly?

Playing as an Islamic faction that's allied to the Ottomans and has control of Gallipoli by turn 20 is a fairly specific set of circumstances, I'll admit - but even if only 4% of people who play the mod run into this situation, it sure is deflating when you're one of those 4% and a wrench is thrown into everything you are doing by a script. It's also worth noting that anyone who plays the Romans is going to run into this situation as well. With the Palaiologoi, you'll have your Ottoman enemy on the run, their capital captured, most of their territory taken, their production devastated - then from behind, a doomstack you couldn't prevent. I haven't played the Kantakouzenoi yet, but if it works the same way it would be much worse - they start allied with the Ottomans, being allied with the Ottomans is a major part of their campaign, and Kallipolis is one of the first cities a Kantakouzenos player would capture, if not the very first due to its position. But if I take it too early, a script is going to fire with little warning and put me at war with my main ally. It all feels very deflating and messy. The Romans are just 2 factions out of 26 (28?) but I believe that being Romans and the long history associated with them across many nations, they are going to be among the most played factions in the mod. Which means many players are going to be running into odd situations with this event.

Well I've made my case and I understand yours. I think that spawning a full stack near the city for the AI to do with as it pleases is a better way to approach this event. The AI gets the help it needs, a player at war with the Ottomans has some time to see the threat and gather a response, and it doesn't invalidate player choice by forcing war with an ally. If you've played Europa Barbarorum 2, I think the way that mod approaches the scripted events regarding the breakaway satrapies of the Seleukid Empire is a good model. Stop paying tribute, get a warning. Continue to not pay tribute, an army spawns a few turns away and attacks. Beat it, another spawns and attacks. Eventually they stop and you are independent. There are some strong differences between this example and the Gallipoli script: 1) the EB2 approach does not invalidate player choice up to that point and in fact is brought on by player choice, leaving me responsible for what happens and 2) it feels organic in that I caused this to happen and the scripted attacks are consequences for my own actions, and I have time to muster a response to said attacks.

edit: wow that's way too long, I didn't mean for it to come out that long but things kept on coming to me. Sorry about that

[Wallachian]

@Artannis. Thank you for the very detailed feedback. There is definitely some takeaways from here which we can apply to improve the Ottomans.

Fully agree about the problematic garrison scripts. We will address those. We might also improve the Piyade and Azaps, i believe it is possible to give the AI autoresolve bonuses to help them.

In regards to the Kantkaouzenos campaign, this is exactly what happened historically. The Ottomans were allied with them but still took the city. When the Kantakouzenos leader asked to leave the city the Ottomans refused saying that God granted them the city. Also, if we just give them a stack near the city instead of besieging it, the AI will just move the army back to Anatolia. The idea of the script is to encourage Ottomans to go into Europe. But indeed, there could be some more work done in this script.

[jurcek1987]

Spawning just an army near Gallipoli is no good, the ai will just withdraw to Anatolia immidiately. The only reason why the script was added cos the AI never attempted to invade Europe on its own. I think it's a very nice and historic event, I'm surprised at the negative comments here to be honest. It happens very early, on turn 18, and if you played any other campaign beforehand, you get notifications that it happens. If it's your first ever campaign, you still get a warning one turn before it happens. Not sure why it would be deflating and messy if Kantakouzenos owns Gallipoli and the Ottomans still attack it. Actually that's what happened in history, Ioannes Kantakouzenos was Roman Emperor in 1354. Ottomans were only his allies during the civil war because it suited their purpose at that time.

Not point comparing this mod to EB2, that one had like 100 people working on it at its height, while we are a very small team. It's very easy to remove the script from the game, I can show you how. Will take you like 20 seconds

[Artannis Wolfrunner]

I did not know this about Kantakouzenos, in reality did the capture of the city cause war between the two? This event would fit well in a roleplay campaign. However I do not think that most people are roleplaying, and designing an event specifically for those who are roleplaying makes it feel out of place for those who are not. For those who are not playing their first campaign, they will know to have an army waiting in the city and nothing impactful will happen. For those who are new, this event can be a mean surprise from a faction that not one turn ago was near-death.

The reason I make a comparison to EB2 is the events are similar. In the EB2 script, an army would spawn a few turns away and be scripted to march forward and attack a certain city. It felt more organic since even though the army was script-spawned, it spawned as a result of my own action and I was able to intercept and attack it before it could threaten a city. As opposed to the army teleporting on top of the city with no opportunity to counter it once it has appeared.

That's sort of the problem, on the first playthrough this event is a nasty surprise from a faction that shouldn't be able to raise that kind of force anymore or attack that city, or was once a strong ally. On subsequent campaigns, it is a non-issue. You will know to have an army in Kallipolis on turn 18. If you are allied, do not take Gallipoli and wait for the Romans to retake it after the event. It becomes a sort of item on a metagame checklist. I don't like to meta, which is a large part of why I dislike this event. It feels like a meta-event that happens regardless of my actions. And I won't be able to stop myself from meta-ing an army into Kallipolis on turn 18 or 38 on 4TPY from now on. 1 turn isn't much of a warning, and if all my armies are off fighting the Aydinids and Ottomans deeper into Asia Minor, there is no way to return in time unless I know of the event in advance. It punishes you for pursuing the objectives the campaign lays out for you at the start - if you pursue them, by turn 18 your armies will be deep into Aydinid and Ottoman teittory and greatly out of position to deal with the event.

I don't think there is much more for me to say about this that hasn't been said. The event as-is leads to some very odd and off-putting situations: partial resurrection of a near-dead faction that couldn't possibly raise that kind of force, scripted breaking of alliances even with fellow Islamic factions, metagaming an army into the city to easily suppress the event army, a feeling of being punished for doing well, lowered reputation which may encourage more war declarations, and more. Know that I like this mod very much and all words I say here are in the spirit of possibly improving the experience in some small way.

[Antiokhos Euergetes]

They have made the "sandbox' version without the heavy script. But each to their own. I personally find the scripts and historic buildings in characters add depth and immersion.

[Runner]

in the start of each campign, this mod allows player to choose whether there is an extra cost for the troop in enemy land.
Also, this mod allows player to choose whether to allow the Black Death to affect the game.


it is very good that this mod allows different player to choose their own different playgame style.
Even the same player can choose to try a different approcah when he/she starts another new campign.


so, is it possible to provide a similer way for the player to choose from these 2 options at the start of each campign:


----------------


(1) a more History-orientated Approcah (just like the way suggested by Anubis88)
- allow AI elite army to spawn and attack, no matter the ingame situation and diplomatic standing or treaties of the player.


however, this will be better to have a pop-up statement to warn the player at least 4 turns before the event,
it will be much better to allow the player have some time to prepare for this coming spawn elite army.
actually, it will be much more enjoyable if people have some chance to defend against the spawn elite army.


this History-orientated Approcah is for the players who like more roleplay element.


----------------


(2) a more Ingame-interaction Approcah (just like the way suggested by Artannis Wolfrunner)
- set some condition triggers in the spawning script to interact with the ingame situation and diplomatic standing or treaties of the player.


this Ingame-interaction Approcah is for the players who like more ingame-logic and less care about history accuracy.
i think that many players are actually want to change history when they play this game.
they may like this Ingame-interaction Approcah more.


-----------------


In my humble opinion, it will be great to provide an option for player to choose at the start of each campign.