IOT Developmental Thread

[Cull]

Medium for battles: Civ as is only right. Maybe not player-player but at least using debug mode and AI-AI.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Renaissance isn't that bad. Suck it up.

Better than anything but modern, but it still sucks.

Joecoolyo Posted: Anything other than modern can suck it.

This.

Yes, it is.



Trust me, you don't WANT it to work. There are so many problems with that game, it's not even funny.

Examples of its atrocities:

• Fences make the entire unit unable to do anything but fence hop
• Star forts give the AI the worst pathfinding I have ever seen in a game. Instead of trying to actually siege the fort, the run around back to where you have no units, grapple up the side of the wall, and make a beeline for your square without stopping to fight.
• Naval battles were awesome, but with one of the updates, sloops have longer range than 1st Rate Ship of the Lines because the AI wouldn't make anything other than sloops and brigs, the worst ships in the game.
• Melee combat was slowed down to a crawl
• Garrisoning houses is HORRIBLE, because the only way to oust them is with artillery, which takes too long in the beginning (and you'll never want to get past the beginning due to the bugs), or melee combat.
• Despite the graphics being "better," you have to suffer worse graphics than Medieval 1 if your computer isn't good enough to run Crisis
• One skin for each unit again
• The unit list is sickeningly small. Not just for one faction, but everyone has the same list. The unique units are almost nonexistant, and those that do could have fooled me.
• The minor factions are as aggressive and even worse with alliances than Milan or the Romans
• You can't play as the minor factions in the first place. FOR NO REASON. They're perfectly workable, other than thinking they are the British Empire at its height.
• The Indians will STEAMROLL the European colonists with bows that not only shoot faster than guns, but farther and more accurately. They are like goddamn sniper rifles, and the Indians have EVEN MORE PEOPLE THAN THE EUROPEANS ON TOP OF THAT.
• Instead of surrendering a settlement whose only defenders are the crappy free militia units, the civilians would rather fight to the death than hand their town over peacefully

That's all I can remember at the moment, besides the dozens of CTD's and pseudo Blue Screen of Deaths you'll get. There's at least 20 more big ones.

I suggest either War by Story, War By like Risk style, or War by Civ 4 (I wish we had Civ 5 For this.)

How would we do player/player though?

If we do Civ 4 War, the GM could just set it up AI vs AI on a map similar to the terrain you are fighting on (Use World Builder.) Then, you'd get to pick from Renaissance units (Standard ones) one unit per battalion you have on the map. For instance 9 Battalions= 9 Units.

I prefer war by Story, Risk, or probably some methods I haven't thought of better, but if we were gonna do Civ 4, above is how I'd do it.

Also, I think we should change the name of this to Imperium Civfanaticum or something else, it can't be called IOT V if it isn't modern.

 

[Double A]

We could use Rise of Nations. That's like every era ever. One all-encompassing game with rock-paper-bigger rock-antiaircraft-scissors gameplay.

 

[ilduce349]

I say we have no Sieges. We leave the battle mechanics as simple as they currently to avoid loosing potential new members.

 

[GhostWriter16]

We could use Rise of Nations. That's like every era ever. One all-encompassing game with rock-paper-bigger rock-antiaircraft-scissors gameplay.

Agreed.

Except, how would it be done.

I suggest:

The GM creates a scenario map with similar terrain to the terrain you are fighting on. With every troop batallion you have, you pick one STANDARD (Not unique) Renaissance unit. Then duke it out between two tough AIs.

Good idea?

EDIT: I just remembered its the Gunpowder/Enlightenment Eras encompass the Renaissance. I'd suggest going with the Gunpowder Era early on and then switch to Enlightenment later (I think Native American nations played by the players should be the same Era as everyone else, or get more troops to compensate. The native American NPCs should start Medeval.)

DOUBLE EDIT: I agree with Ilduce349.

 

[ilduce349]

I HATED RoN, use to play. I would much rather we use Medieval 2 total war.

 

[Double A]

I'd prefer M2, too. RoN was just a suggestion.

M2 kicks ass.

Dibs on England!

 

[Cull]

Civ>RoN>Risk/Story/Everything but Total War>Total War

 

[GhostWriter16]

I HATED RoN, use to play. I would much rather we use Medieval 2 total war.

I'd prefer M2, too. RoN was just a suggestion.

M2 kicks ass.

Dibs on England!

I prefer RON, but does Medeval Total War 2 have Gunpowder? If not, you can't really use it, we need gunpowder.

 

[MathNerd]

We should get to pick which method to use to attack. I prefer coin flip (yeah, I know, so boring) because its so much easier to calculate the probabilities and such.

 

[GhostWriter16]

We should get to pick which method to use to attack. I prefer coin flip (yeah, I know, so boring) because its so much easier to calculate the probabilities and such.

How would we tie in army size then?

I suggest we include RON, Total War, and CIV, and let the attacker pick.

 

[ilduce349]

I prefer RON, but does Medeval Total War 2 have Gunpowder? If not, you can't really use it, we need gunpowder.

You have gunpowder in the late game. It is the most realistic rts I have ever played and is my 4th favorite computer game (behind Tropico 3, HOI 2 and Civ 4). I am considering getting Empire. is it any good?

 

[GhostWriter16]

You have gunpowder in the late game. It is the most realistic rts I have ever played and is my 4th favorite computer game (behind Tropico 3, HOI 2 and Civ 4). I am considering getting Empire. is it any good?

Haven't played it. Haven't Played Medeval Total war to.

Maybe Cull is right, maybe Civ 4 is the only thing we'll all agree on.

 

[ilduce349]

I am against Civ 4 as it is a war based game not a battle based game

 

[MathNerd]

Maybe, every turn, players could distribute points between different parts of their empire, like expansion, army, economy, etc. Then these points could be used in a RNG to determine who wins a battle:

E.g.:

Say China devotes 10 points to military, and India devotes 7 points to military. If China attacked India, China would get a 3 point advantage in the RNG.

The reason I don't like games so much is that they're so objective. How can army size directly correlate into game terms? It would be easy to powergame and claim you have 100,000,000,000,000 people in your army, and then you'd win basically every battle.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Maybe, every turn, players could distribute points between different parts of their empire, like expansion, army, economy, etc. Then these points could be used in a RNG to determine who wins a battle:

E.g.:

Say China devotes 10 points to military, and India devotes 7 points to military. If China attacked India, China would get a 3 point advantage in the RNG.

The reason I don't like games so much is that they're so objective. How can army size directly correlate into game terms? It would be easy to powergame and claim you have 100,000,000,000,000 people in your army, and then you'd win basically every battle.

It wouldn't work that way though, there would be a formula determining how many troops you have.

Not sure what, but it'd base on population somehow or something.

@Ilduce- Its not even a war game, its a game about history, I'm against it too, but it may be the only way.

 

[Cull]

Maybe Cull is right

If we do do this should we do AI-AI GM battle, or, assuming the players want to/have civ play themselves?

 

[ilduce349]

Nah, some of us are better civ players then others. The ai would have to play any battle

 

[GhostWriter16]

Nah, some of us are better civ players then others. The ai would have to play any battle

Correct, and if people can't log on there should be an automatic way to assign their forces.

 

[Double A]

Civ>RoN>Risk/Story/Everything but Total War>Total War

Die in a fire.

AoM≥TW>AoE>Civ>RoN>Everything else>ETW/NTW>Console RTS>Halo Wars

I prefer RON, but does Medeval Total War 2 have Gunpowder? If not, you can't really use it, we need gunpowder.

Yeah, but cannons are inaccurate as other artillery (only use them against big armies or walls if you want to hit anything) and unless you have a mod (or have modded it yourself), any gunner who isn't a hand gunner ("primitive" kind) or mounted (*drools*) will only fire in a straight line and only the first row will fire. No one on walls will fire.

I think the mod Stainless Steel gets rid of this annoying attribute, and somewhere in the unit files after unpacking, you can change "fire by rank" to no, which makes them much more effective.