Post by Collie on Jun 25, 2005 3:25:20 GMT
....Whereby I ramble on to a disinterested public about my thoughts and discoveries I have made whilst trying to mod RTW into something that resembles a playable and enjoyable game.
Sit back, get yourself a refreshing drink, and amuse me by sticking around and reading on.....
Of Modding Battles:
Ah, modding battles can only mean one thing: extending the length and quality of them! Well ok, there are more things that can be changed, but increasing length is the foremost goal of most modders. To increase the length, the typical changes involve reducing the kill rate and the morale/mental attitude of the units, as defined in the export_descr_units.txt file. Basic attack, defence skill and armour ratings can all be changed also. Further changes include to unit speed: by editing the terrain movement modifiers (descr_battle_map_movement_modifiers.txt), and by editing the unit animations themselves. The latter of which is something I've yet to attempt, and probably won't. Sounds like hard graft. Anyway, unfortunately it's a double-edged sword improving battle length. Firstly the benefits of longer battles..
Benefits of Longer Battles: (Assuming slowed down movement, lower kill-rates and increased morale used).
Drawbacks to longer/slower battles:
Those infernal Chariots:
Chariots: love them, or hate them, they're a part of RTW by default. Used correctly (and with a touch of luck) they can destroy enemy formations and pave the way for glorious victories where defeat seemed certain before. Now if you apply the changes to battle length as mentioned in the above comments, Chariots become less effective.
Chariots rely on causing fear to enemy infantry to be truly effective. They aren't strong by default, and it's their noisy and chaotic charge that often does the most damage: routing infantry and running over those foolish enough to flee. Now if you have increased the morale of all units, when the chariot charges into the enemy ranks, they are far less likely to rout. If the infantry fails to rout, they are highly likely to slaughter the unwieldly chariots. It's hard to put a quantity to how much the effectiveness of chariots is therefore reduced, but it's substantial.
However, if a unit's effectiveness is reduced, the answer is surely simple: increase the stats for the chariots to make up for shortfalls. How? Modify the descr_mount.txt file - increase mass, do some other changes. Tricky to get this right. But, then how about increasing the actual stats of the chariots? Back to export_descr_units.txt (herein refered to as edu.txt). More defense to protect it? Sure, add some armour. More hitpoints... might be drastic, but ok. More attack - fine. More morale? Probably not a factor to be honest, if it is taking heavy casualties, it's not done its job and should flee. Now test out the chariots in a battle. If it's more effective, then job's a good 'un. Wrong! Increasing the stats of chariots will improve their skills in auto-resolved battles in the campaign. Since the 1.2 patch, chariots are incredibly powerful in auto-resolved battles, especially if you have a hard campaign setting. I've had a single general's chariot wipe out over 1,000 of my men in one attack! Increasing their stats makes them more deadly, so any AI faction using chariots will have a considerablely greater advantage in the campaign. So do you increase their costs to make up for this? Well if you do, you make them less cost effective on the battlefield - which is what you tried to adjust them for in the first place.
Modding is such fun!
More pointless drivel about modding when I next get the urge to substitute sleep for typing needlessly long messages on the web.
Cheerio for now.
Sit back, get yourself a refreshing drink, and amuse me by sticking around and reading on.....
Of Modding Battles:
Ah, modding battles can only mean one thing: extending the length and quality of them! Well ok, there are more things that can be changed, but increasing length is the foremost goal of most modders. To increase the length, the typical changes involve reducing the kill rate and the morale/mental attitude of the units, as defined in the export_descr_units.txt file. Basic attack, defence skill and armour ratings can all be changed also. Further changes include to unit speed: by editing the terrain movement modifiers (descr_battle_map_movement_modifiers.txt), and by editing the unit animations themselves. The latter of which is something I've yet to attempt, and probably won't. Sounds like hard graft. Anyway, unfortunately it's a double-edged sword improving battle length. Firstly the benefits of longer battles..
Benefits of Longer Battles: (Assuming slowed down movement, lower kill-rates and increased morale used).
- Battles aren't over in the blink of an eye (hurrah!)
- More time to employ and use battlefield artillery, like the otherwise useless scorpions.
- More opportunities to re-evalute battle situation and apply new tactics.
- Adds a touch of realism, with units swinging their weapons and missing, and parrying blows more often, instead of killing in the first swing.
- AI in theory has the ability to also use more tactics: it can withdraw units engaged in battles and charge them back in, as well as flank.
- Routing is reduced initially, so elite units don't drop dead in 5 seconds if a cavalry unit charges into their rear.
- Battles are more fun in theory, because of all the above, and that no-one wants to see a 2,000 strong army wiped out in less than 2 minutes.
Drawbacks to longer/slower battles:
- Arguably, the player benefits more than the AI, which can only be a bad thing as AI is hopeless at the best (and worse) of times.
- One of the AI's few bonuses against the player is that it can control all units separately and isn't restricted to concentrating on one area of the battlefield at once. If the battles are longer and the kill rate reduced, the player has increased time and opportunity to scout the entire battlefield and change tactics and counter an already poor AI army.
- Slower kill rates means units tire faster and can be exhausted after a couple of clashes. Sounds acceptable, only the AI has a very poor grasp of fatigue, and is all too keen to run around the battlefield when it should be preserving energy. The result: your armies are fresher for longer, and as fatigue plays a major part in the ability and speed of the troops, so you often have another advantage against the AI, especially as you're more prone to resting worn out troops. In addition, exhausted troops are far more likely to rout, so exhausted AI troops often break before re-engaging your soldiers.
- If movement speed is reduced, many of the AI's attempts to flank are pure folly, as they slowly move at snail's pace, whilst your men have time to counter. The flanking was really introduced in the 1.2 patch, but it was poorly implemented as AI flanking units often slowly walk into position with the most deliberate and unsurprising manner, and once in a good position, often just sit there and do nothing. The time they charge, you've usually wiped out half their main army already.
- Slower movement and kill rate increases archer and missile lethality and value: If units move slower, missile units have a longer period of time to rain down their missiles before the units close to attack. Not good if the AI is oblivious to this fact. If attack/defence/armour/lethality and cost is unaltered, missile units are therefore improved by default with no penalty.
- Chariot and some other units' effectiveness is reduced by increased morale stats for units and other kill-rate reductions. (See below for more on Chariots)
Those infernal Chariots:
Chariots: love them, or hate them, they're a part of RTW by default. Used correctly (and with a touch of luck) they can destroy enemy formations and pave the way for glorious victories where defeat seemed certain before. Now if you apply the changes to battle length as mentioned in the above comments, Chariots become less effective.
Chariots rely on causing fear to enemy infantry to be truly effective. They aren't strong by default, and it's their noisy and chaotic charge that often does the most damage: routing infantry and running over those foolish enough to flee. Now if you have increased the morale of all units, when the chariot charges into the enemy ranks, they are far less likely to rout. If the infantry fails to rout, they are highly likely to slaughter the unwieldly chariots. It's hard to put a quantity to how much the effectiveness of chariots is therefore reduced, but it's substantial.
However, if a unit's effectiveness is reduced, the answer is surely simple: increase the stats for the chariots to make up for shortfalls. How? Modify the descr_mount.txt file - increase mass, do some other changes. Tricky to get this right. But, then how about increasing the actual stats of the chariots? Back to export_descr_units.txt (herein refered to as edu.txt). More defense to protect it? Sure, add some armour. More hitpoints... might be drastic, but ok. More attack - fine. More morale? Probably not a factor to be honest, if it is taking heavy casualties, it's not done its job and should flee. Now test out the chariots in a battle. If it's more effective, then job's a good 'un. Wrong! Increasing the stats of chariots will improve their skills in auto-resolved battles in the campaign. Since the 1.2 patch, chariots are incredibly powerful in auto-resolved battles, especially if you have a hard campaign setting. I've had a single general's chariot wipe out over 1,000 of my men in one attack! Increasing their stats makes them more deadly, so any AI faction using chariots will have a considerablely greater advantage in the campaign. So do you increase their costs to make up for this? Well if you do, you make them less cost effective on the battlefield - which is what you tried to adjust them for in the first place.
Modding is such fun!
More pointless drivel about modding when I next get the urge to substitute sleep for typing needlessly long messages on the web.
Cheerio for now.