Something for you guys to try take II

**Lusted** · April 29, 2007, 08:52 AM

Okay guys here is the latest version of the files me and Palamedes have been working on, im very interesting in hearing your feedback on them. These files with possibly a few minor changes will likely be the ones included in 2.3.

Like before simply but them into Medieval II Total War\landstoconquer\data.

**Sonny WiFiHr** · April 29, 2007, 08:32 PM

Sherwood Archers need more arrows (45)

**Matte979** · April 30, 2007, 08:51 AM

Are these for the leaked 1.2 patch?

**Eraser** · April 30, 2007, 09:14 AM

Hey Lusted, I like the way archers work in this more than the last update, seem not to be so overpowered. Not that this is a really big issue, more personal taste, but is it possible to increase morale a bit slightly for all units to make the battles last a bit longer? Thanks

**DrJambo** · April 30, 2007, 09:51 AM

Hey Lusted,

I noticed you increased the shield value of all shield troops by 2. What was the reasoning behind this? Won't this imbalance the elite late-game cavalry units that don't use a shield like Lancers, Gendarmes and Gothics for example? Like what you did for two-handed infantry units, maybe you'd consider increasing the defence values of knights that aren't bearing shields? After all, a mounted knight with one hand free would be more adept at defending himself. If you don't, they will simply not stand a chance against even the most basic of shield bearing knights.

Other than that, this looks a lot better than the previous version.

**Lusted** · April 30, 2007, 10:56 AM

I noticed you increased the shield value of all shield troops by 2. What was the reasoning behind this? Won't this imbalance the elite late-game cavalry units that don't use a shield like Lancers, Gendarmes and Gothics for example? Like what you did for two-handed infantry units, maybe you'd consider increasing the defence values of knights that aren't bearing shields? After all, a mounted knight with one hand free would be more adept at defending himself. If you don't, they will simply not stand a chance against even the most basic of shield bearing knights.

Well this is infact NOT the last version of the changes, the +2 boost to shields was originally done in combination with a -2 reduction in armour, all this done by Pala. This version doesn't have the -2 reduction in armour, the next version will. Whilst it may seem to unbalance things, it enhances the differences between the different unit types, and the main use of high end shield less cav will remain kicking the **** out of most infantry units from a frontal charge, or spearmen from a rear charge.

**repman** · April 30, 2007, 11:01 AM

Some observations with the new files:
- error message in log file:
17:48:22.265 [script.err] [error] Script Error in DLV_ext/data/descr_mount.txt, at line 117, column 1
Could not find battle model for mount 'Mount_Adv_English_Armoured_Horse'.
17:48:22.265 [script.err] [error] Script Error in DLV_ext/data/descr_mount.txt, at line 147, column 1
Could not find battle model for mount 'Mount_Adv_English_Barded_Horse'.
17:48:22.265 [script.err] [error] Script Error in DLV_ext/data/descr_mount.txt, at line 162, column 1
Could not find battle model for mount 'Mount_Adv_French_Barded_Horse'.
17:48:22.281 [script.err] [error] Script Error in DLV_ext/data/descr_mount.txt, at line 242, column 1
Could not find battle model for mount 'Mount_AdV_French_Heavy_Horse'.

I can see they are included in the mount file, but I checked the edu and the db file from leaked patch 1.2, they are not in there either.

- AI cavalry is attacking heads on on my pikemen and then gets sticked to it. Slaughterhouse for them, maybe the same was happening already in vanilla...?

repman

**Lusted** · April 30, 2007, 11:03 AM

I can see they are included in the mount file, but I checked the edu and the db file from leaked patch 1.2, they are not in there either.

That's what happens when a CA dev working on the expansion sends you their mount file, im guessing those mounts will be used in some of the expansion campaigns or something.

- AI cavalry is attacking heads on on my pikemen and then gets sticked to it. Slaughterhouse for them, maybe the same was happening already in vanilla...?

Pikemen have a mass of 4, all cav will be stopped dead if they charge pikemen frontally.

**repman** · April 30, 2007, 11:06 AM

Pikemen have a mass of 4, all cav will be stopped dead if they charge pikemen frontally.

That's clear but why do the AI cavalry run full stop into the pikeman death trap and does not try any flanking ?

repman

**Lusted** · April 30, 2007, 11:08 AM

That's clear but why do the AI cavalry run full stop into the pikeman death trap and does not try any flanking ?

Dunno, might have to try tweaking some of the config_battle_ai.xml values.

**DrJambo** · April 30, 2007, 11:23 AM

There's an outflank analyser value in config_ai_battle:

Code:

        <outflank-analyser>
        	<unit-priority>
        		<cavalry-vs-phalanx>16</cavalry-vs-phalanx>
        		<vs-routers>0.25</vs-routers>
        		<behind-stakes>20.0</behind-stakes>
        	</unit-priority>
        </outflank-analyser>

Maybe increasing these values here would help?

Also there's an outflanking ratio:

Code:

        <outflanking>
            <strength-ratio>0.66</strength-ratio>
            <double-envelopment>
            	<!-- minimum number of cavalry units required for double envelopment -->
                <min-units>2</min-units>
            </double-envelopment>
        </outflanking>

Maybe tweaking this value will help make the AI perform more outflanking manoeuvres with its units? Trouble is, I'm not sure whether this value should be increased or decreased since there's no accompanying explanation of what this strength ratio is comparing... is it AI to human or human to AI?

Regarding the proposed -2 decrease to armour, how would that then figure with armour upgrades? Do armour upgrades set to a stated armour value or do they increase it? E.g. does padded give +4 or set it to 4.

**Lusted** · April 30, 2007, 11:39 AM

Regarding the proposed -2 decrease to armour, how would that then figure with armour upgrades? Do armour upgrades set to a stated armour value or do they increase it? E.g. does padded give +4 or set it to 4.

It appears from my chats with Pala that armour upgrades give a fixed value all the time, and so do not give the increasedvalue they should.

**DrJambo** · April 30, 2007, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by Lusted

It appears from my chats with Pala that armour upgrades give a fixed value all the time, and so do not give the increasedvalue they should.

So if they give a fixed value (e.g. padded gives armour 4) then wouldn't reducing a unit's armour by 2 be negated as soon as the unit's armour is upgraded?

**Lusted** · April 30, 2007, 04:57 PM

So if they give a fixed value (e.g. padded gives armour 4) then wouldn't reducing a unit's armour by 2 be negated as soon as the unit's armour is upgraded?

No as in each time the armour is upgraded it gives a +2 bonus or something is what i meant.