Combat System and Civilopedia Race History

[heroic_spur]

Hello all!

Firstly I have to say (in typical first post on a topic fashion!) that this is a truly remarkable mod, oozing with with potential, and despite the incompleteness, it is quite awe inspiring.

My main suggestion is perhaps the implementation of the tabletop Warhammer combat system, for example using movement, weapon skill, ballistic skills, strength, toughness, wounds etc etc I feel that such a system is not only true to the game, but is also inherently balanced, because GW have done that already, then it just becomes a case of copying unit stats. Although admittedly, with my non-existent knowledge of modding, I am probably being naive and such a project would require substantial effort, indeed, if it was even possible.

My second comment is with regard to some of the unit names. I notice that some of the races have units like 'Archer Warband', 'Warrior Warband' etc, alongside the unique units like slayers. Will these be changed to 'High Elf Arches' or 'Dwarf Clansmen', 'Skeleton Warriors' and so on, or will it remain as warbands?

Finally I noticed that many civilopedia entries are non-existent at the moment, which is undoubtedly because they are low priority. However the race histories need a bit of revision in terms of English. Again I assume this is largely because they are low priority at the moment. I would be willing to re-write some (using the same content) after my Uni exams, which are fairly soon if you guys would be interested.

Keep up the superb work guys

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

First of all, welcome to CFC and the Warhammer mod!

and im glad you think the mods going well

now onto your suggestions:

My main suggestion is perhaps the implementation of the tabletop Warhammer combat system, for example using movement, weapon skill, ballistic skills, strength, toughness, wounds etc etc I feel that such a system is not only true to the game, but is also inherently balanced, because GW have done that already, then it just becomes a case of copying unit stats. Although admittedly, with my non-existent knowledge of modding, I am probably being naive and such a project would require substantial effort, indeed, if it was even possible.

This was actually my wish also a couple of years ago, but all our attempts at coding it and getting it to work in a balanced way failed epically. i now am lead to think that its more effort than its worth

My second comment is with regard to some of the unit names. I notice that some of the races have units like 'Archer Warband', 'Warrior Warband' etc, alongside the unique units like slayers. Will these be changed to 'High Elf Arches' or 'Dwarf Clansmen', 'Skeleton Warriors' and so on, or will it remain as warbands?

Initially we had a totally sepparate unit for everything (ie Highelf Archers, etc) but this created hundreds and hundreds of units and really slowed the load time and actual playing of the game down, so we reverted to more general things for the non UUs. I do believe however that there is a way to give unique names to units for a particular civilization so that they are different between civs, but im not 100% on that.

Finally I noticed that many civilopedia entries are non-existent at the moment, which is undoubtedly because they are low priority.

Yep got it in one

I would be willing to re-write some (using the same content) after my Uni exams, which are fairly soon if you guys would be interested.

ANY help would be greatly appreciated! it sounds like your quite familiar with warhammer in general so i think it would be a huge help check out the WRITING NEEDS thread, theres a list of technologies and text that will be put into the game eventually. if you come up with anything, post it there

We really appreciate any feedback we get so keep it up! thanks!

 

[Ahriman]

a) Trying to shoe-horn tabletop rules into an engine that isn't designed for them is the quickest way to failure. The single largest reason why most Warhammer adaptations to computer games have failed is because they tried to strictly implement tabletop rules. The successes have been things like the Dawn of War games, that drop the tabletop rules in favor of capturing a flavor that works in their engine.
Given that we are limited to the civ engine and how it works, and how its AI works, we are limited to combat strength and various modifiers through intrinsic traits for each unit and promotions.
b) There will be more variation as we tweak some of the factions more, but certain core units will probably remain the same. I see no reason to create separate "Wood Elf Archer Warband", "High Elf Archer Warband", "Dark Elf Archer Warband" units that are all the same. The units are different from the leader traits (WE are protective) and their racial promotions, there is no need to create excess clutter by creating separate units for most of the core units. They'll already have separate graphics and unit barriers and belong to different empires, there's no need to differentiate them into actually separate units.

Separate units will exist when the core units vary for that civ (eg chaos civs have maurauders rather than militia swordsmen or spearmen, Empire will get variants on many of the core units that have the Senior Captain promotion built in).
There are tradeoffs, but I am against creating more units and clutter than we really need. There will already be a ton of UUs for each civ, and probably more than in any other mod, but not every unit in the game needs to be a UU.

c) Yeah, the civilopedia is fairly empty.
d) The Writing needs thread is somewhat out of date; it doesn't match the updated tech tree intentions. There are several new techs in that design that don't feature here, and a few of the ones here that will disappear or be renamed.

 

[heroic_spur]

Hi, thanks for the replies.

Firstly in response to Psychic Llama, I'm only roughly familiar with Warhammer as a game, I played it years and years ago, so I have a basic grasp of the rules etc. I am more familiar with the lore however as I tend to read the fiction a fair bit, just the other day I read 'The Life of Sigmar' by Matt Ralphs.

Secondly in response to Ahriman, your comments are perfectly reasonable. If you update the 'Writing Needs' thread, I will see if there is anything I can do.

On a final note, is there any indication of when the next iteration of the mod will be ready?

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

I am more familiar with the lore however

thats perfect for us if you feel youd like to help out with some writing

If you update the 'Writing Needs' thread, I will see if there is anything I can do.

i will do this as soon as i have some time, (later on this afternoon most likely)

On a final note, is there any indication of when the next iteration of the mod will be ready?

Probably in a month or so. thats when my Exams are over so hopefully ill actually have some free time to mod. no way youll see one before then though.

 

[civ_king]

Hi, I'm just browsing for now, but here is a tip from FfH2, gameplay>lore, but that isn't to say that you should ignore lore...

 

[Ahriman]

Believe me, as long as I am involved in this mod, game play > fluff

 

[heroic_spur]

Well, seeing as gameplay isn't something I can really contribute to (except by testing!) If everyone chips in what they can it means the whole mod will progress faster. Also by contributing lore and 'fluff' I expect it means the people who do the important gameplay stuff, can focus on that, and not on writing histories etc (which is what I'm more suited to being an undergraduate historian! albeit a bit of rubbish one )

 

[Ahriman]

I'm not an expert on Warhammer lore or fluff by any means, but I'm pretty good at designing simple tractable models and systems - I'm an economist, thats what I do.
So people are very welcome to make suggestions that could enhance the Warhammer flavor of the mod, or submit ideas for events, or whatever. Just don't be upset if 90%+ of them never make it into the mod. Feature creep kills mods (Fall Further is starting to spin out of control now from the changelogs, there are too many features and they no longer combine to make the game actually play well).

At the moment though the limiting factor isn't design work, its coder-time. There are a bunch of changes that have to be made that can only be done by a couple of the key coders (not me), and so things have to wait until Life actually allows some time.
We have a ton of features, units etc. already designed just waiting to get implemented.

One of these is a change to combat system that encourages a bit more of a RPS feel to encourge combined arms; swordsmen are good vs melee units (including spearmen), spearmen are good vs shock cavalry and ok vs chariots, shock cavalry are good vs archers, archers are good hill and city defenders (though crossbows get less of this and are better at melee), chariots are good vs swordsmen, missile cavalry are good vs melee units, recon units are split into skirmishers (with withdraw chance) and ranger-types (good vs monsters), monsters are expensive but good vs everything except rangers.
Another are some tech tree changes, another are some tweaks to buildings, another is functioning elemental magic, another is religious UUs and priests, another is a bunch of UUs, UBs and unique mechanics for a ton of the civs that are pretty vanilla atm.

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

Fall Further is starting to spin out of control now from the changelogs, there are too many features and they no longer combine to make the game actually play well

im actually begining to notice this too :/

At the moment though the limiting factor isn't design work, its coder-time.

amen to that (also its amazing how well you summarised all that O_O if i tried itd be 10 pages long lol. and this is why i need you )

 

[Ajidica]

Just a question, I realize that I haven't done anything (I've forgotted about it and been working on my own project) but whats the Warhammer reasoning on why chariots are stronger than cavalry in general? Chariots were dropped from the battlefield because the Assyrians showed the power of simple mounted cavalry which were cheaper and more maneuverable.
I do agree that FF has turned into a MOAR bloat mod, no where as lean as FfH.

 

[Ahriman]

As far as I can tell, its because people think chariots look cool and they liked painting the model. In the real world, chariots have been obsolete for a couple of thousand years - they only work on flat ground, they're slow and rickety and have poor manueverability, compared to mounted cavalry. And stirrups really make chariots look bad.

The Warhammer combat system isn't really based on historic military realism.

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

warhammer chariots are a key unit in most army lists (especially Tomb kings of Khemri) and itd suck without them

 

[Ajidica]

So basiclay its because the designers thought it would look cool?

OT, but do you know any python? I've read the tutorials but they haven't helped much. Any tips or useful things to know?

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

So basiclay its because the designers thought it would look cool?

no, because its true to traditional Warhammer fluff and because it will work with the new combat system

OT, but do you know any python? I've read the tutorials but they haven't helped much. Any tips or useful things to know?

very very VERY basic stuff. what do u need to know?

 

[Ahriman]

I think we're all in agreement that chariots should be in the mod, given that they are key in the tabletop game. His point is, its pretty silly for chariots to be powerful weapons in a medieval/renaissance-era tabletop wargame, because in real earth history chariots had been obsolete for many many centuries by that point. He's questioning why they're in the fluff, not why they're in the mod.

 

[mathurian]

The thing is that the primary people who use chariots fluff-wise are A) Tomb Kings who live in a flat desert where they might actually be effective, and B) People who have things like Grizzly Bear-sized Boars or huge White Lions to pull them. I think that chariots could at least possibly be much more useful in those cases than they were when pulled by horses in the European middle ages.

 

[Greeneyedzombie]

C) chariots tend to be driven by champions/heroes/lords. Giving them some extra punch when they manage to hit home.
Will you also include snotling pumpwagons? Those guys can bring real havoc to any army, including the one wielding them

 

[deadliver]

Rise from your grave...

I like the idea of ranged attack strength being separate. I also enjoyed using chariots to ferry important units around (whether that would work better as a promotion or a transport I don't know, though the AI across all mods can't handle land transports).

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

well there are a few methods we are considering with merging WH with 3.19, one of which involves rebuilding from scratch using the latest FF code. this means that ranged attacks will be separate.

regarding the chariots, we could do something similar with the goblin wolf riders. ie have them 'cast a spell' which lets them mount the chariot, and also unmount. being mounted cound give characters cerstain chariot benefits over being on foot, but also the obvious penalties.