(Historic) Development and suggestions

[Lorodim]

Is there any change with the banners?
I was thinking the banner could have an effect on the player(or party) like special items in TLD(oh and the banners hitpionts should be reduced to prevent using it as a shield)

[Ron Losey]

The shield-hand flagpoles were dropped in the first .808 dev version, on the grounds that they were not particularly useful, and that we could not really create the proper effect.  (The function of banners is to improve coordination ... and the AI is equally coordinated or not, regardless.)

Banners were attached to a number of spears instead.  It created a similar visual effect, while not interfering with any other game-play element.

With the exception of high-stat weapons or armor, there is no real way to determine a benefit given from an equipped object.  If the object is inventory, it works.  It would be highly illogical that a bunch of flags would improve a trait like leadership - not to mention a disaster to the game should these banners be removed from inventory (it would create a party size larger than allowed - not allow players to exit the party screen without discarding large numbers of troops).  There is no other trait in the game, except leadership, that would be logical at all to attach to how many streamers you drag behind you.

So for technical reasons, no, there's really not much that can be done with the flags.  Too bad, really.  We tried.

[Lorodim]

I think when you diseqiup in TLD the benefits are gone until the item is equiped again.Maybe it could just improve charisma and it could be as a reward or expensive

[Ron Losey]

I think when you diseqiup in TLD the benefits are gone until the item is equiped again.Maybe it could just improve charisma and it could be as a reward or expensive

Improving Charisma would serve no purpose in combat ... and even if it did, unequipping the item - such as picking up an object from the field which caused the previous to be dropped - would likely crash the game.

Even if it worked perfectly, there is no logical reason or historical prescident to suggest that carrying a banner would greatly improve one's abilities to lead men.  (If it would, every modern politician would have five or six flags strapped to his body at all times.)

This is a historical mod.  Raz is very specific about historical accuracy - and he is a fine historian... certainly a much better historian than I was at his age.  There will be no magic reward items.  Either the object works for some purpose, or it does not.  Actual titles or ranks could change one's ability to lead, but this would not necessarily depend on a particular object (i.e. if you are king, it really does not matter if you carry the banner or if someone else carries it - you would still be recognized as king).

Flags, outside of their decorative properties, provide only a minimum of improved morale in combat (at least as long as your flags are advancing) and slightly enhanced potential for command and control (because you can find your own troops) - both of these points being nothing that can be effectively simulated in M&B.  (Commands are 100% efficient in M&B, all troops on the field fight, and there is no effective way to change the odds of friendly fire incidents.)  People in the time of the Crusades were a superstitious lot, to be sure - but they were not so petty as to be that seriously influenced by a flagpole.

So no, that is not a plan.  Not for HW.  Wrong mod.

[Odin Doomhammer]

Just wondering - what is the planned date for the mod?

I know Raz wanted to set it around the time of the third crusade, but before the arrival of the crusaders (i.e. somewhere around 1180-1187).  But for much of this period there was an uneasy peace, broken only by Reynald de Chatillon's attacks and the occasional skirmish.  It was only in 1187 that Saladin launched a major offensive, recapturing most of the Holy Land in one year (which would make for a rather one-sided game I think).

 It's difficult to really pick a date that allows plenty of fighting, with all sides comparatively balanced, but doesn't include the crusaders such as Richard I, Phillip II and Leopold V.

[Ron Losey]

Just wondering - what is the planned date for the mod?

I know Raz wanted to set it around the time of the third crusade, but before the arrival of the crusaders (i.e. somewhere around 1180-1187).  But for much of this period there was an uneasy peace, broken only by Reynald de Chatillon's attacks and the occasional skirmish.  It was only in 1187 that Saladin launched a major offensive, recapturing most of the Holy Land in one year (which would make for a rather one-sided game I think).

 It's difficult to really pick a date that allows plenty of fighting, with all sides comparatively balanced, but doesn't include the crusaders such as Richard I, Phillip II and Leopold V.

It starts 1187.  That was in the introduction.

http://mbx.streetofeyes.com/index.php/topic,28.0.html

However, beyond when it starts, it will be very much a "what-if" model from then on ... there will be no real way to guess who might start or end a war for whatever reason, or even ally themselves with someone unexpected, if the conditions are right.  That is both to allow the player some freedom if and when he advances to some titles of nobility, and to keep the mod unique (i.e. no two games will come out exactly the same).

Allowing plenty of fighting is not really the objective.  Actually, player actions reducing the volume of fighting could make you a bigger hero.

And Saladin's effectiveness was based more on obvious mistakes by his opponents than on issues of balance ... the same armies stood for years before that, both afraid to start something.  However, when your enemies are just stupid ...

[Agent Griff]

And will the muslims have a numerical advantage against the Crusaders? Hollywood would have us think that Crusaders were outnumbered every time they fought against the Arabs, but I have learned to take everything I see in a movie with a hefty dose of salt.

[Ron Losey]

And will the muslims have a numerical advantage against the Crusaders? Hollywood would have us think that Crusaders were outnumbered every time they fought against the Arabs, but I have learned to take everything I see in a movie with a hefty dose of salt.

Well, they were in the Middle East ... and the Saracen use of slave-soldiers did give them somewhat of an advantage in recruiting, albeit lower-quality troops.

But the difference wasn't like, say, something out of Tolkien, where 300 defenders had to hold off 10,000 orcs.  It was more along the lines of the Crusaders having a slight numeric advantage in upper-tier units, but a more than minor disadvantage in total numbers.  That and, to be honest, the Saracens had a little on them in technology as well.

[Texous]

And will the muslims have a numerical advantage against the Crusaders? Hollywood would have us think that Crusaders were outnumbered every time they fought against the Arabs, but I have learned to take everything I see in a movie with a hefty dose of salt.

Well, they were in the Middle East ... and the Saracen use of slave-soldiers did give them somewhat of an advantage in recruiting, albeit lower-quality troops.

But the difference wasn't like, say, something out of Tolkien, where 300 defenders had to hold off 10,000 orcs.  It was more along the lines of the Crusaders having a slight numeric advantage in upper-tier units, but a more than minor disadvantage in total numbers.  That and, to be honest, the Saracens had a little on them in technology as well.

u can always trust  Hollywood to make the west look valiant no matter how stupid and greedy they actually were.

i think strategy and planing had the biggest influence in Saladin's army's victory's at this time,the fact he used the terrains lack of water resources for his armies benefit and and also as a weapon againsts his enemy, it was simple but affective. I wonder if it is possible to add the neccecity for water just as food is needed into the game.
and also beeing able to control vital water resourses areas to slow map movement or weaken enemy morale? Just a thought!

[Ron Losey]

Often as not, the difference between "brave" and "stupid" is not very much.

Saladin came out ahead because he was not concerned about being brave - he waited for his enemies to make stupid mistakes.  (And of course, his enemies DID make stupid mistakes...)  He was just as greedy, ambitious, and brutal as anybody else (probably more so than many, actually), but he was patient, and just a peg or two less stupid than the majority.  Although he did have a slight force advantage, he most certainly capitalized on it in a big way.

As for being greedy and stupid, there was really no shortage of that on either side.  Although oddly enough, right around that time, there were some traces of competence floating around.  The most notable being the Templar and Hospitaller orders, who (quite in contrast of how they are sometimes portrayed by Hollywood) seemed to be trying very hard to prevent open war ... a quest that ultimately failed, but not for lack of effort on their part.  While their reasons were probably more tactical than humanitarian (i.e. they were pretty sure it would be a close fight), it still goes to their credit that not everybody in the world at the time was a mindless axe-murderer.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again ... "Courage is for people who are bad at math."

"Those the ancients commended for excelling at war attacked targets that were easy to take.  Thus their victories were not marked by great courage or tactical skill - their victories were free from errors."  - Sun Tsu, "Art of War"

[grailknighthero]

i think strategy and planing had the biggest influence in Saladin's army's victory's at this time,the fact he used the terrains lack of water resources for his armies benefit and and also as a weapon againsts his enemy, it was simple but affective. I wonder if it is possible to add the neccecity for water just as food is needed into the game.
and also beeing able to control vital water resourses areas to slow map movement or weaken enemy morale? Just a thought!

I think this could easily be implemented as the requirement for food is found in a simple trigger and if you make it conditional like I have it in my mod, certain factions, or in the case of my mod the Peasant's Rebellion on Taleworlds, races.  Implementing water would be easy and you could even make it have disastrous effects (men start dying) if you do not have so much water in a certain amount of time.  It would not affect the ai though, as the consumption of food is only for the player's party.  If made to affect the ai, the ai tactics would have to be rewritten so that they would either buy water or get it somehow.  I believe it could even be made so that if you are around a place with water that water is not consumed and you get it for free.

[Lupu]

Is it possible to make more equipment slots? it might not fit for knights, but a ghulam or mamluk was a universal warrior trained to use many different kinds of weapons, 1 mamluk could carry up to 2 different mellee weapons,(Normally a sword, and mace/axe/warhammer) a bow and arrows, a lance or spear and shield, that takes up 6 weapon slots and there are originally only 4 wepon slots.
Turkish ghulams didnt use much lances, mostly bow, mace and hield, but some times other things too.
The ayyubid tawashi eqipment was bow, mace(or sword?) and lance, and shield plus armour.
There are not enough wepon slots for that.

Also, i'm new here, my first post, how are the armies of the different factions?
The crusaders mostly foot sargeantants with spears, crossbows and cainmail-padded armour, with lance/sword knight support?
The ayyubids with many medium armoured ok troops, both on foot, and mounted(horses were not as specially only for the rich as in europe) with some(low number) elite versatile mamluks and ghulams.
The seljuks with many light, but very effective light turkomans, some ghulams, and more armoured troops(mostly cavalry)
Is this right? if not can anyone explain, I'm very much lookinf forward to main release 

[Ron Losey]

The equipment slots can't be changed.  This subject has been raised on a number of mods.

The troops of various factions were not that easily analyzed.  Muslim caliphates use a mixture of slave troops and free recruits, all ranging in equipment from elite units (nobility and elite warrior-slaves like the Mamluk) to virtually unarmed slaves and peasants, and most everything in-between.  Crusader armies tended to be two-level, knights who had good equipment and training, and commoner troops (who might or might not have much in the line of equipment, but likely better than nothing).  Muslim troops loved their elite horse archers, Crusader armies tended to draw the bulk of their ranged weapon support from commoner infantry.  But none of them really fit into a clear-cut pattern, like modern people tend to think of military roles.  There was a lot more variation there, a lot of space for individual preference.

[newromans]

Raz I beleive you should base your time period of the crusades around the  time Frederick 2 got Jerusaleam, YOU SHOULD MAKE IT A REAL CHALLENGE FOR THE PLAYER, JERUSALEM SHOULD BE WAY UNDERPOWERED OF MEN SINCE THE TREATY BETWEEN FREDERICK AND SULTAN KILIJI REALLY PREVEMTED HIM FROM DOING SO. oh  when you make this mod you must add the Byzantine Empire because it wouldent be that historically accurate without them since they played a major role in the crusades.  (another era you could do is the fourth crusade, that would be really exciting, Raz once youre done with all this would you like to join me in making the baltic crusades mod?)

[Dryvus]

Yeah, you keep on yelling at people and tell them how to make their mods. It's sure to win back your... *chortle*... previous good standing.