MBX

Mount&Blade Expansion => The Last Days => Topic started by: Merlkir on November 02, 2011, 02:51:20 AM

Title: TLD 3.23 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 02, 2011, 02:51:20 AM
Take a look AT LEAST through the last two pages, if your suggestion isn't there. Please.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: GodHandApostle on November 02, 2011, 04:44:06 AM
Aside from congratulating once more and repeating how awesome the mod is, I wold like to address a small issue that can easily be read as a suggestion.

I noticed that, staying true to the feeling I got reading the books, the game makes it so that my party, with but a handful of knights, can easily keep at bay 50+ orcs. This still doesn't mean assaulting hundreds and surviving which helps giving a hint of realism. I appriciate the rather low statistics on the character because, after single-handedly besting 8 wild goblins and gaining a couple of levels, it really gives the feeling of raising from the simple soldier to a hero.

Now I reached rank7 with LothLorien (Trusted friend, I think?) And acquired .. How do I put spoilers, dammit!? ..anyway.. a certain item. I admit I was a  bit worried as I bought it and thought "Weren't they all lost?! All three of them (hint hint)?". Surprisingly, it was a book.

And that made me think. There are countless relics and artifacts mentioned in THAT book that perhaps could be, if not retrieved, heard of during quests and fightings. So my suggestion, to cut to the core of this post, would be to add explorations and hidden (as much as coding and such allows) coves, caves, cravices, woods, ruins.. whatever that can increase on one side the feel of having a small but powerful group (I am lvl18 and still roam Middle Earth with 20-something men) and on the other the idea of raising to great deals of power and making a difference.

We cannot siege settlements because it'd alter the balance the books enstablish and the game takes the leave from. Though maybe chasing certain items or legends would be interesting. I remember an adventure based on Tolkien's work that set the players off in search of one of the Palantirii of the north. Maybe that could be a quest for TLD or something similar. I'm not nearly as prepared over the lore as the team seems to be as it was a good while since I read the books, though that feels like a good option for later game, together with assisting heroes in taking the enemy settlements.
Different quests concerning ruins/village defence/village assault are in plans

Guess that's all. Thanks for such a wonderful mod and good luck with future updates :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: InstantB on November 02, 2011, 08:15:59 AM
Hi all.

I've been playing since yesterday as a Woodelf. Things I've noticed:

1 - Although I love the overall squishiness of orcs and friends (I think that should be so), I find them to be too weak and barely able to injure any foe with proper armor - I think this should be balanced. Although I do agree that they should be somewhat squishy, they should pack quite a punch. Otherwise it's just too easy.
Higher tier orcs/uruks should deliver quite a punch. Snagas on the other hand are deliberately made cannon fodder. We will tweak composition of parties, especially center garrisons, which currently employ too much of a low-tier troops

2 - I helped the King and its lord and lady to lay siege to the Gundabar forts (the Dale men were laying siege to the 5th fort). We did it in 2 days. We butchered with ease +1200 orcs...  How many elves died? Some 6, I think.

Since the forts have no walls, we just charged in, and the orcs were simply butchered. It wasn't even fun. The average death rate on those sieges was something like

orcs = 200
elves = 0, 1 or 2 dead/injured
Elves are OP, we'll nerf them later

3 - The way a faction loses power or gains (usually gains) is VERY quick. Mostly they increase numbers. The only ones losing power right now are Gundabar (I wonder why) and Gondor (that seems to be taking a beating). EDIT: What I am trying to say is that, so far, Moria and Isengard don't seem to be too much of a problem - except for Gondor. Otherwise, the Rohan are kicking ass and keeping balance with Isengard and the Dulendings...
Speed of events was deliberately set high for this release, cause we want people to go through the game fast enough to encounter bugs on different stages.

4 - Kings and lords seem to spend a lot of time waiting on the map (maybe this should go to suggestions... uhm...).

5 - The rate in which we gain resources should probably be toned down. After a couple of friendly actions towards my faction and allied factions, I'm earning loads of resources. If I raise my cha and leadership enough, I'll soon be running around with a huge army.
Speed of events (see above)

6 - Since I don't really need the resources I'm constantly getting with both dale and the dwarves, know what I do? I recruit their troops, find one of their armies, and dump those men and dwarves directly to them... this is a bit fishy (I stopped doing it, since it smells like cheese, the bad kind), AND I even get paid to do it, it's just great, but because of me, the Dale and Dwarves have now big big big patrols and scouts...
You recruit low-tier troops, so those are of little use in actual battle. They can be trained fast though currently, because of speed of events (see above)

7 - I would love for it to be possible to cut down on the number of trees and/or high bushes. My computer card isn't too bad, but with all the dozens and dozens of men+ trees everywhere, the graphics are somewhat slowed, enough for archery to lose a bit of its fun + It really gets to become hard to see enemies when I get trees and bushes everywhere, which makes me wonder how the heck do those elves see their enemies anyway?? (my char must have some human blood in her...) If this is not possible, at least allow for us to apply some patch like the "no more trees" (I would personally prefer the patch """reduce them trees""")
This is a pretty laborsome task, but well see what we can do. I hope somebody will help us by coming up with treeless patch. Like they did with better combat animation patch already

8 - This might have already been posted and be impossible to change... I never play the game in fps mode (?), since I prefer to see my char as I play... when playing a dwarf, I barely see him, which kind of sucks, although I guess I just need to get used to it, and it will be ok. :)
Yup, a hard task to do. There are custom camera solutions, but they bring certain troubles with them, so we decided to not include them for now

I'll write more as I play and discover more stuff.
As usually, thanks for all your hard work. I must say I was very skeptical since you were working on a ver very good thing (IMO the best mod ever for M&B), but you did a beautiful thing, for which I am very thankful.

Best regards,

IB
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: trueten on November 02, 2011, 08:21:36 AM
Bring back the rooster's scream/wolf's howl when night/day ends pls :)
Yes, certainly. It's a bug actually, meaning I forgot to code it in at the last moment :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Der_nibelung on November 02, 2011, 08:57:00 AM
Are there any future plans to expand the map to include all of the traditional northwest Middle Earth?
ERIADOR (Mithlond, Tharbad, the Barrow-Downs) HARAD (Umbar) etc etc.
I understand that it wouldn't follow the theme of this mod and it would create more work for the team
but it would be nice for explorers and to have a complete map.
no plans for complete ME map, since no action there. TLD is concentrated on theatre between Misty Mountains and mordor, that's it
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Stone on November 02, 2011, 08:58:53 AM
Truly epic! From the magnificent and unique cities and towns, to the immersive role playing dialogue and sounds, the beautifully detailed armor, and excellent gameplay with surprises, this long awaited mod is a real pleasure to play. Thank you so much for creating and sharing this mod!

For those who find the text messages during battle too large and dominating the screen, you can modify the font_data.xml file.

Location: Mount & Blade\Modules\TLD\Data
1a. Right click on the file
1b. Select Open With
1c. Select Notepad
2. Second line, font_size="70" - Change the number to "110"
2b. File Save

Screenshot of the steps is highlighted below. Increasing this number makes the font smaller, and vice versa.

(http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/3252/screenshotfvd.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/210/screenshotfvd.png/)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on November 02, 2011, 10:36:19 AM
Two things. Firstly, wargs. I think them being able to do a hell of a lot of charge damage is realistic, represents the fact that a large wolf has just rammed into you and bitten off half your face. Great. What seems silly to me is that fact that basically they can run right through 4/5 ranks of fully armoued men/dwarves and not be stopped. I'm guessing that since both come from the Charge attribute of a 'horse' than it's not possible to separate them? Cause for me they right now act as crazy heavy cavalry when in actual fact, I feel the role of a warg should be picking of isolated units with their charge power, not breaking entire formations of heavy infantry.

Secondly, and slightly related is the Dwarf troop tree, there's not currently alot of difference between the Spear-dwarf and Axe-dwarf lines, especially since the former don't actually get spears. Would be nice to see some more clearly defined differences between the two.
a bug, will be fixed in weekend patch
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 02, 2011, 02:30:43 PM
repasta from TW:

Quote
AWESOME SUGGESTION:

aswell/instead of the option "leave men behind and escape" option, there should be a "tell men to retreat and make a last stand". so you stay behind alone and if you kill enough of them your men retreat back to home barracks, where you can pick them up. obviously should have traits/rewards too for you know being so manly and stuff ;)

This sounds kinda dumb. But then... Something about this idea I like.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: InstantB on November 02, 2011, 05:26:22 PM
Stone, that font change thingy totally didn't work.
The font always stays the same size.

I followed all your steps, to no avail.

(the floating words are so distressing that I keep my screen free of the death toll. Those huge names and titles completely block my screen, making archery a bit harder :P).

EDIT: Worked, but only when I changed the font on the original M&B folder, not on the mod one...
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: InstantB on November 02, 2011, 06:22:11 PM
Some extra thinggies:

Elves are really overpowered. Right now nothing can beat my elven archers, other than a massive cavalary charge, and it must be a strong one, otherwise, they will become pincushions.

Even at melee range elves are incredible.
I think this should be as is, but on the other hand, we probably should only be able to recruit a handful of elves, not armies (I can get some 60 and will soon be able to get many more...) - elves should be a bit rare to find and recruit. At least more than they are now.
Elves are intentionally badasses yes. We will certainly nerf elves, most likely by restricting numbers you can get
Also, concerning archery and pincushions:

Perhaps give a couple more shields to the orcs goblins and uruks? As is, they merely die and die and die.
I've seen some orc and goblin shields, here and there, and I like it that they are crude and can't handle too much damage, but most of those orcish troops carry no shield, therefore they get overwhelmed by arrows.
no shields + no-block weapons for low level orc troops are intentional. To make slaughtering them fun for the player :) we'll think about buffing up higher tiers
I recentrly went over to the Rohan lands to help out with some 50 elfs (2/3 archers). I've butchered almost everything I've found and have no dificulty killing isengard troops with 2 to 3 times my size, and with 0 losses (so far I've lost 1 elf.... yup).

Also, the best bow I've found so far is a Rohan bow - the Strong Bow, with almost twice the damage output of the elven bows. Is this on purpose? Even in the far north, the best bows belong to the dale... (?)
pay attention to PD requirement and damage type too ;)
Thanks.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 02, 2011, 08:57:54 PM
I'm not sure whether what I'm about to say falls under the category of 'bug', or whether they're intentional game designs. I'm erring on the latter side, and dropping this in the suggestion forum. My apologies if this is ill-placed.

I finally got a brief crack at TLD today. Figured I'd go with a Dunedan Ranger and run around Middle Earth for a little while. Here's what stuck out for me:

1) Starting Stats.  All weapon skills at 15.  Is this intentional? It makes for a really squishy character who swings slow as Hell. Can't recruit any men, as there's no faction rep, and even basic quests like "find the outlaw" are crazy difficult. (Four hits, couldn't kill him... meanwhile he does one hit kills)   Also, Dunedan start with 1 Iron Flesh, 0 Power Strike, 3 Power Draw, and 0 Weapon Mastery. Can't remember what the Athletics score was.  For weapons... a poor short sword and poor armour. No shield, no bow, no arrows. No men to recruit. No resources to get the weapons their stats are geared toward (bows).

I realize that many mods like to turn up the difficulty level, but at some point game play descends into being more frustrating than fun. Plus in a mod with such a rich background in a detailed story, it'd be nice if the characters carried the feel of the fictional world they inhabit.  A Dunedan ranger with a sword, but no melee skills, nor weapon mastery, nor woodsy skills, etc... it's not a game-breaker or anything (far from), but it was somewhat disappointing. Skilled in woodcraft, and the art of spear, sword, and bow... not so much. They don't have to be amazing, but at least some nod in the direction of the source material would be lovely to see. The ranger leathers are awesome starting garb. A longsword would be lovely.
We though it would be not cool to not let the player develop his char from start. Would take away the enjoyable initial part of the game, when you are weak and ill-equipped

2) Equipment. Again, not sure how much of this was intended, and how much was accidental.
* Arnorian Armour can't be worn by Dunedain characters. The 'wrong race' warning comes up. :|
* The Lorien Longsword has a reach of 87... while the Arnorian shortsword has a reach of 86. One point of difference in reach seems odd for the different blade descriptions. Meanwhile hand-and-a-half swords swing with the incredibly slow speed of 93. They were actually very fast blades. The added leverage makes them more nimble than one-handed blades. Seeing them restored to stock M&B bastard sword stats would be lovely.
some of those are bugs, some just not balanced properly cause we had no manpower for proper balancing. Will be done eventually
There was a third point... but I'm tired and apparently blanking.

The mod is lovely overall. The models are stunning. The orcs are creepy as Hell. :) Beautiful work.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: captain proof on November 03, 2011, 12:21:01 AM
I feel like I am being picky when I make this suggestion but I will make it anyways...

-Dwarven Warhammers?
We discussed it. Tolkien never mentioned those, plus there is no heavy armor in ME, so warhammer efficiency would be dubious anyway.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ildanach on November 03, 2011, 12:21:29 AM
I have one suggestion which will likely receive a no but I will suggest it regardless.

One new town per faction which is only present when the player is part of that faction. Specifically a ruin which can serve as a defensive base for the player to drop off troops and store equipment.
you can drop troops and equipment at facion capital after you hit level 10
If that is acceptable, then perhaps it could be built upon at a later date to eventually create a small fort/keep. Nothing fancy, just a haven for the players assets which is not part of the player factions kingdom.
we thought of using "Brigand fort" concept from 808 as your personal town. Like you save some desolate settlement from orc onslaught and they ask you to be their visiting leader, or you make an orc onslaught on them and take the place. Did not have time to flesh it out in this release
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Anarchy on November 03, 2011, 02:20:12 AM
I'm playing as a Dunedain Ranger right now, and one thing I noticed while helping a Lothlorien Patrol (with Haldir's host in it) against a Moria War Party; The One Badass Lothlorien Elite Infantry (TOBLEI).

I kept the troops back in a line while Haldir and this one Lothlorien Elite Infantry charged out to meet the War party. Haldir had gotten plenty of kills (not surprised there), but a Troll (wounded with 2-3 arrows) along with a few goblins charged at TOBLEI. TOBLEI began spamming hits at the Troll, the Troll managed to hit TOBLEI three times with a Tree Trunk. I was simply laughing, wanting to see TOBLEI die by the troll, but suddenly the Troll falls dead. TOBLEI turns around, and this time I order my men to charge, wanting to fight alongside TOBLEI, and I see TOBLEI owning 5 goblins, and then killing a Warg charging at him. However, I screamed "NOOOO" as a goblin finally stabbed TOBLEI.

My suggestion comes as this: I feel that trolls and goblins are too weak, and should be buffed up a bit. The troll, if ganged, easily dies, and I am kinda disappointed to see them be weakened like this. Also, Elven Warriors might be a bit overpowered, and I think they should be nerfed just a bit, but I see you already planned to nerf them in the above posts. Anyways, thank you for such an enjoyable mod, as I laughed for 10 minutes after that episode, and keep the good work going.

RIP TOBLEI
http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/630730047410448087/AF5CFC2308D48E3931BF4F080B45B0ABBF04B2D9/
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: sapped on November 03, 2011, 02:31:42 AM
hey really great work!! my mind was totally blown when I first entered minas tirith.

although I only had a very brief look at the mod due to finals, this is already the best mod ever made in history. there is one suggestion I would like to give, that is to increase the amount of civilians in cities, because they all look really empty and deserted, other than that its all perfect, thx so much for this!!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Asterix on November 03, 2011, 03:52:32 AM
I agree with the suggestion for increased civillians and with the honourable colleagues point about the great work :)

(for all the warnings this is really not very bugged of a release)


Is there any way to implement ambushes? (where the ambushing party gets to set up around the victims) ... this is something I always felt missing from the game...
Currently you can be ambushed in certain regions, if you are a bad guy, in a global sense, meaning you wont see them coming on global map. Battlemap ambush mechanics is tricky, cause it's hard to script AI to not see enemies who are hiding. We'll see what we can add there, ambushes were discussed quite a bit on dev forum
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Asterix on November 03, 2011, 04:29:16 AM
I agree with the suggestion for increased civillians and with the honourable colleagues point about the great work :)

(for all the warnings this is really not very bugged of a release)


Is there any way to implement ambushes? (where the ambushing party gets to set up around the victims) ... this is something I always felt missing from the game...
Currently you can be ambushed in certain regions, if you are a bad guy, in a global sense, meaning you wont see them coming on global map. Battlemap ambush mechanics is tricky, cause it's hard to script AI to not see enemies who are hiding. We'll see what we can add there, ambushes were discussed quite a bit on dev forum

Excellent thanks for lightning quick reply!

After testing Mordor, Woodland Elves and Gondor here are my suggestions:

1) My elf is using a dwarven bow because Elven bows available were much weaker :)
They are not. Learn MB bow mechanics better and pay attention to PD and damage type
2) All elves should come with a high powerdraw and pathfinding ability and lower strength... currently my farming of strength for elves to get better powerdraw results in unrealistic character development.
would unbalance starting char. All starting chars are intentionally weaklings
3) In 2.4 there were other biggies besides the trolls... have they been taken out? no, there are some, but they are rare
4) I will post this in bugs... but after Gandalf visits me after I refused a call up from the elven high lord I go and see him and no dialogue is initated
G phrasing should change a bit. G only reminded you about your obligations for your faction, after you ignored them
5) The game balance is excellent but I would still increase the Isengard, Gundabad and Mordor numbers of patrols as it will add to the feel of the war of the ring :)
balance will be changed more than once in the future

Thanks!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: King_of_Dale on November 03, 2011, 05:45:23 AM
The mod is EPIC! All looks very good (even the evil orcs;) ); the settlements are fantastic.

But the worldmap-texture doesn't look very good (compared with the high quality of the models / textures).
World map texture is a balance between details and no visible tiling (which can become very visible if more complex textures are used)

Is there a way to be a regular soldier, serving in the army of the king / prince? Like in the mod Freelancer for Warband.
No way for now and no plans in near future. Would require a thorough rewrite of strategic AI, so that you not die of boredom camping in a city for X months
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Multiheaded on November 03, 2011, 06:00:02 AM
First of all, thank you for the truly amazing mod. 2.4 was already great and this time you've managed to top your previous efforts. The graphics in particular are undoubtedly the best view of Middle-Earth ever seen in a game, period. Games like LOTRO or Return of The King have nothing on your work!
However, like most people who have posted in your threads, I am extremely unhappy with the equipment balance. Can't wait for the RCM addon, to be honest. I understand you guys had to rush this open beta, but... what were you even THINKING? to release the mod I'm very curious if anyone on the team even LOOKED no, they were generated by 5-minute rnd at those stats while you were making them up. Just compare, e.g. the Mirkwood light scale (52 body/13 legs) with the heaviest armor of other factions. This is far from the only example (why the hell I can't buy a superior sword for 10000 resources in the Rivendell camp; if anyone would bring one to war, it's certainly the Rivendell elves or the Dunedain!). Not to come across as offensive, but it's just a MAJOR blow to the combat gameplay and atmosphere.
General answer: we had 2 options - do a lot of LotR related stuff and release it in 2 years more, or complete all the necessary stuff and release it earlier. We chose the second one.
What were you even THINKING(c) when we asked for help on TW some time ago? Or, you don't know how to mod, and can't understand how much time it takes. I see...
Okay, okay, but couldn't you have recruited a few volunteers for this particular job *before* a public release? Just post an advert on the forum, pick a guy whose response you like and send him the items file for editing...

Oh, and here's a pretty interesting suggestion on more non-combat activities. Ancient lore and secret knowledge are a key theme LoTR and Tolkien's other works. Therefore, please consider changing the unused 'Engineering' skill to 'Loremaster'. What benefits it gives is entirely up to you! Obvious ideas are:
1) gameplay-related hints given on specific situations (e.g. "Throughout many sieges, Hornburg's inner keep and the underground caverns were held by tenacious warriors even when the attackers overran the outer wall", or "While a horde of lesser orcs can easily be scattered by a mounted charge, Saruman bred and trained his Uruk-Hai with countering the Rohirrim riders in mind") talk to city walkers, you might be surprised
2) secret passages and areas opened, like the hidden doorway in the Lonely Mountain, a shortcut through Moria, a forgotten road through Mirkwood or the Paths of the Dead (for a Dunedain character with high charisma, as the Oathbreakers wouldn't let anyone else through) talk to city walkers, you might be surprised. And no, no paths of the dead in the forseeable future - you are no Aragorn, just yet another rank-and-file faction captain
Yeah, yeah, I'm just trying to suggest some effects for that new skill specifically.
3) a few "Ancient texts" to obtain/loot during gameplay, using the book mechanic; when studied with a high Loremaster skill, they could either give a permanent stat bonus like the vanilla books or point you to an area where you might find a long-lost unique item (e.g. a lesser Ring of Power in Osgiliath, weapons from an ancient battlefield in Dagorlad or an overlooked part of Smaug's hoard in Erebor)
good idea! Write us the texts please
They needn't have any readable texts; what I had in mind was just a few book-type items with appropriate names, e.g. "The Siege of Minas Ithil" (unlocks a secret passage in Minas Morgul, which can then be used in a mission to save allies from there or steal an artifact), or "The Last Leaf to Fall" (the story of a legendary Elven warrior, giving the PC +1 to weapon master, ironflesh and athletics on reading). Is it difficult to make stuff like this using the vanilla "book" items (sold randomly in taverns) as a base? I might make up a list of possible names and  effects if you give your approval.
4) learning either obscure parts of Elven languages, or the Black Speech; this would let you affect both allies and enemies with a script, like getting improved damage against the servants of the Enemy with a prayer to Elbereth, or driving your orcs onward with curses in Sauron's tongue. I'd say it would fit Tolkien's vision well; this isn't magic, just deeper understanding of the world, but it can influence people for good or evil. Of course, this might be difficult/impractical to code, but I'm interested in your opinion on whether this can be done in any form at all.
great idea. Now please go and code it, we would be grateful. We are busy with patching things so far
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ildanach on November 03, 2011, 07:13:42 AM
I know you are almost at your item limit, but Celeborn does deserve a more unique set of armour, all faction leaders seem to have it apart from him. Currently he looks like his other generals even though he co-rules Lorien, Glorfindel is more fancy than him. Not an important suggestion and does require more troublesome art to be made, but I think his character deserves it, perhaps give him a fancy Gondor style shoulder cloak?
might do. Don't hold your breath though, it's only one character after all

An option to stop in party arguing permanently, perhaps a persuasion based text option that puts characters racial prejudices aside for good. The one thing that irritated me with Vanilla Mount & Blade was the arguing.
NPCs might argue from time to time but they wont live you because of this. I think some argument now and then is a good thing for ME atmosphere
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 03, 2011, 07:26:28 AM
Suggestion to solve the problem with wargs already pointed out in this thread:

Riderless Wargs are obviously turned into Wargs with invisible riders shortly after they are killed. Can you give those invisible riders a very fast , short-reach weapon that would represent warg's bites and claw slashes? That way, you could tone down their charge and have them get stuck in infantry lines while still causing damage. It would also enable wargs to bite horses which would make them slightly more usable against horsemen.
They have short couching lance now, to make AI take them as couching lancers. We decided for the lance to not deal damage though, since we can't get rid of "Couching damage XXX" message, which would be kinda strange to see when warg runs you over. We have some other interesting ideas about wargs vs horsemen to cure their utter ineffectiveness
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Marmalade on November 03, 2011, 10:03:51 AM
1) Since Dwarves can't buy Riding, why can they buy Mounted Archery?
good point! fixed in next patch
2) I've noticed many quests given by Isengard and Rohan to travel to settlements deep in Gondor - geographically very close, but worlds apart on the actual map, owing to all the mountains and pointy bits.

This is not always a bad thing (indeed, it can create some very interesting challenges), but since this can frequently create missions (e.g. spawning a scout party) of a danger disproportionate to the reward being offered, I do wonder if this could do with tweaking.
good point!
3) For a longer-term suggestion - is there anything that *can* be done about the native campaign AI? It's frustrating in it's tendency to stop besieging a settlement with three hundred men to chase after six scouts who wandered past.

I know that this is Native M&B behaviour, and that the Warband campaign AI improves this somewhat, but in Native this gameplay problem can be mitigated by your time as marshal, whereas this is apparently not the case here, as far as I have seen.
Yeah, we will definitely try do more things with AI
This must be a low priority - getting to a workable release with no CTDs, properly balanced and textured is far more important, since the campaign AI will currently get the job done, even if it's irritatingly dense.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 03, 2011, 11:00:28 AM
I'v tried playing an Uruk and I'm suffering from what I call "morale starvation" which is also present in many other M&B modules. It's very easy to get a large party of orcs because of the troops size bonus granted by orcs, but the result is a very slow party that cannot catch anything on the map. On the other hand, if you were to keep a smaller party, it would stand very little chance of similarly sized parties of humans or elves. My suggestion for solving this is to also have orcs give a bonus to pathfinding so that their large parties would move faster.
Instead we will increase orc movement rate at night more. Orcs should be able to run at night, while men will be slower at the same time
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 03, 2011, 11:39:31 AM
I'v tried playing an Uruk and I'm suffering from what I call "morale starvation" which is also present in many other M&B modules. It's very easy to get a large party of orcs because of the troops size bonus granted by orcs, but the result is a very slow party that cannot catch anything on the map. On the other hand, if you were to keep a smaller party, it would stand very little chance of similarly sized parties of humans or elves. My suggestion for solving this is to also have orcs give a bonus to pathfinding so that their large parties would move faster.
Instead we will increase orc movement rate at night more. Orcs should be able to run at night, while men will be slower at the same time
In your party, you should compensate by getting high party Pathfinding (you or a companion) and having a large portion of your party on mounts (e.g. more warg-riders). Also, have less (or none at all) infantry recruits with low Athletics.
There is a reason why large parties move slower. The orc troops usually have a high Athletics to simulate their nimbleness.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Tostito on November 03, 2011, 12:12:51 PM
My idea is to make a siege list similar to the reward items list, where you can spend your influence with your leader for the right to attack a city of your choice (no capitols). Surely that wouldn't be unbalanced considering how slowly you accrue influence points. Balance issues would then become just a matter of "pricing".

Even if there are big hoops. Say your character must reach the highest rank within your faction. Or you have to be level 30 or over. Or both. And the faction whose city you want to attack has to be at fair or weaker status before their cities show up on the list.

Wouldn't this be way cooler than having to rely on the excruciating Lord AI, or even their spotty quest giving? This way you guys can design a control that stops the game being too easy or over too quickly, but still let the players initiate an assault instead of waiting for a month with our mental defective lords only to chase scouts or rabbits or whatever tickles their peanut brains.

Also a system like that seems way easier to implement than recoding Lord AI from native to be bearable.

That actually sounds like a pretty neat solution to me. (not saying it'll be done, but i like it.)


Suggestion 2: Add some jokes to the Troll Cave troll about installing this mod wrong.

right? Also windy flora.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on November 03, 2011, 02:14:48 PM
Only minor, but altering how long Beef takes to go off would be great. Given there's only 4 types of food you can easily get hold of up North it's a bit irritating that my 70 men can't even eat 1 lot of beef before it spoils. I need all the morale I can get.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: neuromant on November 03, 2011, 04:53:02 PM
Greetings every one !

First of all, I will start by saying how much impressed I am by your work. Not only you kept going to acheive your vision, despite all the drawbacks, and the time it took, but you also manage to realise it in a splendid way. It brings to the old Tolkien fan I am an incredible pleasure that no game - so far - had been able to. And I am sure that many people are, right now, slashing orcs with a big smile on their faces, thanking you with all their hearts. What strikes me even more is the time you spent answering suggestions and concern, removing bugs in the dev version, for bringing an even more polished game - a more than pro behaviour. Many congratulations to you !

I would like to make few suggestions, so maybe even you can improve your pleasure in playing this game, by adding something you did not think of - who knows (I definitely hope so) ?

1 - Would you consider adding by default this following mini-mod : cursor command ?
http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,63370.0.html
It is Open Source, and it helps a great deal in terms of immersion on the battle field. It is a very simple addition that let you point somewhere to tell your men their new holding position. If you are walking, you know how painful it is to get your archers positionned properly and your infantery, and then be sure that your cavalry is not in an awkward place, etc, etc... I think it not overpowered (you still need to see the place to give the order), and definitely saves your day during siege defense.
Moreover, all the indications are given to implement it in a mod. But since yours has many customs scenes, and I guess mission templates, you are definitely better placed than me to know where to put it.

2 - On the balance side of things. I will first start by congratulating you again on that. Considering the huge number of items (all beautiful and detailed) and troops, the fact that the whole thing is more or less already balanced is impressive.
Nevertheless, I would point out, along with Anarchy, that the trolls seem a bit underpowered at the moment. I remember having read on this forum that, at some point, they were so overpowered that you could not kill them any more... and I guess the balance is hard to find (I am playing with the Lotlorien elves, which are very strong, so this might as well cause that...).
Maybe only increasing their numbers ? I never met more than one at the time on the battle field, but I guess that only two, ever three (oh dear...) would cause a devastating wreck.

3 - The goblins so far are very weak, and I mainly think it is a good thing. However, they do not take advantage of their number. When I fight against them (still with the elves), I can, rather easily, destroy a army with 5 against 1 odds.
My suggestion is then the following: for factions that are weak at distance (goblins are the only one I met so far, but there might be more), why not change the default behaviour to charge anyway (like the dunlendings are doing, because they don't have any archery) ? Goblins are (at least for the elves) more deadly up close. When I fought a huge battle against them, it was close at some point because I was so much outnumbered that we had no more arrows to fight... and we took some losses at close combat.

Maybe this is due to M&B limitations, in this case a new AI script would be needed. In any case, that is something I might look upon at some time (I have no deep knowledge of the module system, but I am decent with Python).

Not much more to say, so far. Please, receive once again my deepest thanks.. you did a fantastic job !
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 03, 2011, 08:45:47 PM
1 - Elves should never get kill quests on other elves lore wise.  An elf killing an elf is a crime for the ages, and having the lady of the wood sending me off to kill another elf just doesn't feel right :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: WindusAndar on November 03, 2011, 09:19:39 PM
@Oyclo: I think the elf in question has already killed someone, before you killed him; thereby, he is an outcast/outlaw. Taking his life is just by nature's law. MURDER HIM!
----------

A suggestion I have is related to the screenshot of the tactical screen, during a siege I was engaged in. Specifically, I would like to point out the units' behaviour. All units are set to charge and they default to that order, even when their orders are changed. Archers ordered to stand ground/follow me will go back to charging after a few seconds. They do not use arrows, unless they have no room to charge forward.

(http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/427/tldbugreport3.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/526/tldbugreport3.jpg/)

This is not an issue with elves, as they are the right-hand of God in TLD, at the moment. However, I'm certain that other races, if composed of non-infantry units, will suffer losses, simply because their commander cannot keep them out of the fray or order them to do the right things, at the right time.

Are there plans to adjust this or shall we simply resort to using infantry only for sieges?

-------

A probably silly suggestion for the end game to be done much, much later:

If a player has finished wiping out the enemy factions in his area, at which point of time a relief force is sent to the other theatres of war, could we have an optional end-game for the player to set up a small fief/village of his own?

I don't mean that the player should desert the war and settle down to wife and kids. :P But, optionally, he could decide to found a small village, composed of 40 to 50 of his most experienced/about to retire troops. This would require resources and influence points and any developments made to the village would add bonuses to the faction's troops, aiding them in the far-off war effort.

To summarise, I am indicating something of a war-veterans' town/village. Something along the lines of Sparta, albeit tiny and expensive. Since the player's faction area has, relatively speaking, resolved its war problems, it could be considered rebuilding for the future and supplementing war convoys and supply efforts afar.

To make things easier to code/mod, there needn't be a separate village. It could also be implemented as an extension of your faction's capital. You would invest resources and influence in constructing a separate section in the capital city itself, where the troops would settle and develop it. The bonuses and development screens would be part of the capital city's menus itself, instead of being a separate town/village unit. Wouldn't this be easier to do?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Shazbot on November 03, 2011, 09:51:44 PM
I'm not sure how faction-strength calculations are made, but they shoudn't be simply linear.  I'd recommend having three formulae for each faction:  Here's how it might work in psuedocode.

case strength <= 2500 && strength > 0

addStrength = 75 + (0.02*Strength)
strength = strength + addStrength
end case

case strength > 2500 && strength <= 5000

addStrength = 125
strength = strength + addStrength
end case

case strength > 5000

addStrength = (375 - (0.05*strength))
if addStrength > 0
{ strength = strength + addStrength }
else
{ strength = 7500,
factionMighty(2, faction)
}  // Capping faction strength at 7500, and incrementing the faction mighty variable which leads to special faction-related events caused by the faction being quite strong.

end case

We also need more special events, but I'm assuming they're coming.  It would really add to the feeling of inevitability if you win quite a number of good fights against mordor, and then events trigger where Mordor gets lots of extra power and extra armies come forth.  Remember, The Free People's winning the war should be all but impossible.

Don't forget to spread the nerfs around a little bit, many of the better good troops are a bit too effective on the battlefield, not just elves being full of beans.  There is too much difference between them in auto-resolve and while fighting, but that's inevitable.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: SonKidd on November 03, 2011, 10:34:15 PM
There are too many troops that it is quite impossible to try them all - and, hopefully, no one releases a full troop tree with all the stats :P.

But I think it would be cool if the rumours gave you tips about different troops, say:
Gondor Citizen: I heard the Swan Knights of Dol ... (can't spell) are the best in Gondor (no idea if it's true).
Gondor Citizen: The archers from Ithilien are deadly from afar... but don't let anyone get near them.
Lossarnach, Pelargir Citizen: Our troops suck - don't even bother. (joking... but they do suck... kind of :P).


Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 03, 2011, 10:50:07 PM
I realized something funny while fighting some black numenorian elite troops. If I shoot them in the chest they die in 2 shots, if I shoot them in the feet they die in 1 shot.

I checked and realized this must be because their torso armor is 46 (armor + gauntlets), but leg armor only 33 (18 from body armor, and boots only 15) since they wear uruk boots. There are two uruk boots with the same armor (uruk greaves and uruk chain greaves), so you might boost one of those up to 20 or 25 or so and use it for the numenorian and other elite Mordor units.
lets say them have achilles heel :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Lithandrill on November 03, 2011, 10:55:11 PM
Hey, great mod so far. Just a few suggestions based on my experience so far. At the moment I am at Day ~100 of my campaign as a Dunedain and the war in the North is more or less decided in the favor of the good factions. There seems to be an inherent (probably intentional?) bias towards the good factions in the north while in the south (Gondor/Rohan) the evil factions have the upper hand. 

What seems to happen though is that if certain factions, that are surrounded by several enemy factions, (Such as Gondor or Gundabad) lose one or two major battles causing their heroes to stay inside their cities for several days, they get overwhelmed by the enemy spawn rate very quickly. This makes it almost impossible for certain factions to come back without heavy player interaction which sort of goes directly against the flavor of the game.

For example, between Gundabad and Erebor there are currently over 30 Dwarf/dale parties and everytime Gundabad spawns anything it gets swarmed on the spot. Even their main parties can't venture out anymore because they just get swarmed. Subsequently this has caused Rhun and Dol Guldur to become more or less ineffectual as well since everytime they get close to Dale and Erebor they too get swarmed. In about a week game time the evil forces lost about 4-5 towns there which quite frankly felt very cheap to me. Same happened in Gondor except for the other factions.

My suggestion is a serious tweak or perhaps a more intelligent approach to parties and spawns. Because right now many factions can just snowball out of control extremely easily and entirely trivialize a part of the war which feels very cheap.

Sort of tying in with this is that once factions have had a couple of towns destroyed (Or heroes killed I assume? I turned that off.) it's very hard for them to really come back. The towns never get rebuild no matter how much you help them recover. It would be nice to see factions recover from the brink of death more often since at the moment the war feels very linear. After all Middle Earth is full of examples of great nations falling and underdogs winning against all odds.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: trueten on November 04, 2011, 03:55:51 AM
Erm, will some traits be reworked? I found some of them non logical.
For example, I've reached 12th rank in Gondor and the trait I got is cheaper troops and some command features. Well, second feature is might be useful, but, honestly, cheaper troops is not a valid achievment when you reach 12th rank. By that time you don't even know where to spend your resources, not to mention that at this point there's a lot of enemy troops whom have a lot of prisoners and I can easily fullfill my partie by rescueing them.
I've noticed if you play for Rohan, you recieve the same trait.

Although I can't suggest something decent instead. The first thing that came in my mind is that trait could allow you to hire this fellas:
(http://s017.radikal.ru/i429/1111/5f/42bed5abc8a1.jpg)

Forgot their names, but I didn't notice any way I can hire them, so...

Another idea would be pretty argueable, but it could really increase the difficulty and motivation for a player to reach the top rank - the Player (playing for Gondor for example) cannot hire any cavalery troops (or those troops are pretty limited, say their top tier would be Veteran Squire), but after reaching the higher rank you unlock eccess to the elite cavalery troops (Gondor Knight and higher).

The bad thing is that it sounds good with Gondor, but I can't figure out options for other factions (mostly because I didn't play for them yet).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Jerus_alem on November 04, 2011, 05:02:59 AM
When make a camp, there is a option which says "walk around", currently it just make player to enjoy the environment around him/her.

I think spending time do stuff like this sholud have more advantage, lik:
`Walk around with some of your troops, the more time you spend walk around, the more resource point you will get. This is the basic idea, which can be improved like in the "walk around" map, there is sth you can really gather as resource point, the more time you spent gathering resource point, higher chance spawn some enemies.
`When you walk around, if you discover some of the enemy assassins following you, defeat them, then your next "make a camp" will sure to be secured.

Just some thoughts with the "walk around".
BTW I'm a fun of walk around even it doesn't do anything right now =)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Vrashk on November 04, 2011, 05:40:34 AM
Not really sure where to post this, whether in bugs or suggestion! (I play a snaga of Dol Guldur)


- Dol Guldur troops upgrade into Mordor troops, resource point issues arise.. from my limited experience of all the factions, it seems Dol Guldur is the only faction that have this issue?

- If possible, could "Orc" lords be stopped from requesting prisoners to be rescued? Its pretty annoying to get those quests when you have no one to rescue. (I hear elves have a similar issue about capturing prisoners)

- Possibly boost lower-tier Orc troops a little bit? 100 Orcs vs 40 Mirkwood elves, I expect the orcs to get butchered.. but at least more than 2-3 casualties on the other side would be expected. Orc bows feel completely pointless. (Orcs vs humans work out just fine though, at least Dale).
- At the moment I just massproduce Warg riders, because it feels like the only way to take on enemies (and it works great!).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 04, 2011, 07:44:42 AM
If Warg Riders are the only option for orc-players, then either lower tier orcs need boosting, Warg-riders need nerfing, everything other than orcs need nerfing, or warg riders need to be more expensive.

Of course, those are always your options when it comes to troops....
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ausgezeichnet on November 04, 2011, 08:00:33 AM
1. Rank reward items:
This is a bit spoilerish.

As a Mordor Uruk the 4th rank influence reward is an Orc Brew which grants +1 athletic - a nice little bonus. But - it acts as a consumable item (vanishes after a while) which to be honest renders the item completely useless. I see no reason why spend precious influence points on it; I thought maybe getting it before a bigger battle or even a siege could prove usefull but you can't control when it starts working and running to Mouth of Sauron just to get it before something big seems silly.
And what bothers me more is that the Erebor equivalent is permanent. So I suggest making the Orc Brew permanent too.

2. Item balance
From what I've read there's coming some balancing but I would like point how (at least) Mordor weapons crappy are. A polearmish, twohanded uruk axe has the same damage as a little onehanded dwarvish axe.
Not saying that there's a small weapon pool to begin with but that seems too big of a problem.

3. Unit balance
Again as an uruk I was afraid to attack an elvish patrol while having five times more troops. I won but my units got slaughtered. I get that this is probably lorewise but losing most of my troops after each battle means hiding around my factions place until I recover form the losses - this isn't that much fun.

The forces of good should be better unitwise but the gap is in my opinion too big. As a dwarf I would engage 4 times bigger Gundabad armies and won with little to zero losses - and I'm playing on highest difficulty setting.

4. Camera view
I guess this is not feasible or too difficulty to implement but playing as a dwarf or an orc the 3rd person camera is too high. Fighting in melee is eye tiring because I'm constantly looking on the bottom edge of my screen to see what's happening with me.
Of course one of the solutions could be playing in 1st view but that's not for everyone and honestly I can't see shit what's happening. As I remeber in Warband you can zoom in or zoom out in 3rd but I don't know if this information helps at all.

5. Quests
The quest rotation is too slow and too repeatable (you get the some quest over and over again). I swear - 80% of quest in Erebor, Dale and Esgaroth from the guild/quartermaster is to the escort a supply train to Woodelf Camp. And that was happening on the span of 40 days. Completing the quest itself didn't change too much.
Same with lords: the top quest in the dwarven lord community is to capture an enemy lord.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: benpenguin on November 04, 2011, 09:17:18 AM
Fantastic mod that exceeds my expectations - note, I am one of those that waited for 4 years with already high expectations...

Besides the occational after battle crash that happens with a lot of mods I have, my only complaint is that we are still having native music.  Sort of kills the mood for me.  Or maybe just me.

I played an elf lady - after being defeated by an orc band I was stripped naked.  And it costs SOOOO MUCH to replace my stuff.  Is it meant to be this way?  I am now walking around bare footed costs shoes are so expensive.  Cost of 1 pair of boots > cost to hire my entire warband + upgrades.  Woot.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 04, 2011, 09:30:30 AM
The team's stated that the equipment hasn't been balanced, and is one of the things that will be changed as things are tweaked with the mod. Equipment damage, durability, weights, sizes, and costs are all currently out of whack.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on November 04, 2011, 09:39:42 AM
Beorning hosts need to be balanced better in my opinion. There's pretty much 100% unshielded infantry and archers, which means they're total fodder for archers. More shielded infantry would be nice, at least so forming a Shield Wall actually had a purpose, the 2h troops hiding behind the shielded ones.

I'm thinking about the Beornings and woodmen. We'll see if I can get a 3D guy to help me out, there may be a major overhaul of how this faction looks and works in the future. Nothing very soon though, don't hold your breath.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on November 04, 2011, 09:53:34 AM
Hi all,

I`m a Mirkwood elf and the Great War has just started.

Contrary to many posters saying that elves/men are OP I found good faction scouting parties totally helpless vs warg/wolf riders even when outnumbering them.

Pathing is a great problem, I often get stuck in Mirkwood(can`t move shorter distances, but when choosing a distant settlement I can) and sometimes other places. Meaning I can`t run away from stronger enemies.

I see no point in "kill outlaw" missions at low player lvls as they are totally OP and for me at least they constituted a vast proportion of missions which I had to decline. I e no resources/influence.

And I can`t loot... Sometimes I see a message "you picked up" something but this something does not appear in my inventory. Even loot from men is inaccessible.

Rgds, Oldtimer
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: ghanburighan on November 04, 2011, 10:04:22 AM
In my game, playing as Rohan, Westfold and West Emnet were razed early in the game. However, now that Rohan is quite strong, and Isengard fair/average, hardly any confrontation takes place, because Rohan patrols/hosts are all patrolling around their own cities. Maybe parties can be made more aggressive, seeking out enemy territory, especially when having greater strength rating than the enemy.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Multiheaded on November 04, 2011, 10:49:35 AM
OK, about those Book items I mentioned... AFAIK, there's no way to make them require a skill value instead of just Intelligence, so here's the system I suggest.

At a certain rank with a faction, you can go to the Librarian (an NPC like the camp master) in its capital, and spend some influence for a chance to gather useful lore. You spend 24-48 hours, and, based on your Loremaster skill, dig up one or more Scrolls (using the vanilla "book" item category, but with an icon of a rolled-up scroll) that are placed in your inventory. More Loremaster skill means a better scroll, and more chance to get several at once. Then they function exactly like vanilla books; you choose the one to study from the Camp menu, and, once the PC is done reading one, it provides a permanent bonus to a skill/stat. I'm not sure if a script that opens up new areas can be made to fire upon completing such a book - I'm no modder at all - but if it's possible, I have some ideas.

A short list of proposed names and effects now. If you approve, I can make more. Someone else would have to do the actual "Librarian" script for receiving them, though.
"The Lay of Beregond": Free People only, +2 Ironflesh
"Melkor's Vindication": Shadow only, +1 power strike/throw/draw
"Serpent of the Sands": Shadow only, +1 riding and tactics
"Chains of Terror": Shadow only, +2 prisoner management
"The Arrow of Westernesse": Free People only, +1 power draw and weapon master
(in Sindarin, someone translate please) - "Banner of the Star and Moon" - +2 leadership
"Bastions of Khazad": +1 power strike and shield
(in Sindarin) "The Lady's Tears": Free People, +1 surgery and wound treatment
"Forbidden Reanimation": Shadow only, +3 first aid

Well, what about such a proposal?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 04, 2011, 11:07:16 AM
Well, what about such a proposal?
No.

:)

People tend to collect skill bonus items in their inventory. If you calculate how many items are there to collect already, it's already a significant number. Adding more would stress out the players too much, as they would have to decide often what to keep and what to throw.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Multiheaded on November 04, 2011, 11:37:18 AM
But most of the vanilla books DON'T need to be kept around in an inventory! After they're read, they give a permanent bonus and either disappear or can be sold, I forgot which. A few (only one, I think - the surgery manual) function like the current reward items (i.e. just sit there and give a +1 to something), but the ones that use the "Choose a book to read" function in the camp menu don't need to be carried after you've read them.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Dindi on November 04, 2011, 11:46:21 AM
Hey, just to say love the mod, you can tell you've put so much effort, quality is top notch!

Some suggestions about the dwarves:

There are only 3 commanders at the mo, seems a bit unbalanced, maybe a commander who stays in the Iron Hills quarry?

Also a possbile bug but all 3 dwarven commanders have the exact same equipment, masked helm, scale and mail armour and the strange 2 handed axe. On that point couldnt Dain have his red axe?

Also it seems a bit odd that theres 3 picks/mattocks to choose from but only one sword and one handed axe.

But yeah these are only very minor things, I'm awestruck by how you've made such a thorough and accurate depiction of middle earth  :)!

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 04, 2011, 11:53:29 AM
But most of the vanilla books DON'T need to be kept around in an inventory! After they're read, they give a permanent bonus and either disappear or can be sold, I forgot which. A few (only one, I think - the surgery manual) function like the current reward items (i.e. just sit there and give a +1 to something), but the ones that use the "Choose a book to read" function in the camp menu don't need to be carried after you've read them.
There is no book reading in TLD. And I don't think we miss it, given the plethora of reward items.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 04, 2011, 12:21:11 PM
When you kill men/elf/dwarfs in combat, manflesh should drop as loot like the metal scraps when you are playing evil. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Vert on November 04, 2011, 12:22:21 PM
I have noticed that the isengard and mordor are too weak especially uruk-hai which should be butchers on Short distance... Its the truth even 10 gondors skimrishers can defeat a 30 Uruk-hai of Isengard. Good kingdoms are really too strong. Give a chance people who want destroy Middle-Earth ;) Change a history
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Dindi on November 04, 2011, 12:48:20 PM
I have noticed that the isengard and mordor are too weak especially uruk-hai which should be butchers on Short distance... Its the truth even 10 gondors skimrishers can defeat a 30 Uruk-hai of Isengard. Good kingdoms are really too strong. Give a chance people who want destroy Middle-Earth ;) Change a history

I have to disagree, the key to winning with orc factions is to overwhelm with snaga first then use your larger orcs to close in for the kill. Falling that use trolls or wargs, wargs are really powerful. Also 10 gondor skirmishers vs 30 uruk hai??
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 04, 2011, 01:24:34 PM
I have noticed that the isengard and mordor are too weak especially uruk-hai which should be butchers on Short distance... Its the truth even 10 gondors skimrishers can defeat a 30 Uruk-hai of Isengard. Good kingdoms are really too strong. Give a chance people who want destroy Middle-Earth ;) Change a history

I have to disagree, the key to winning with orc factions is to overwhelm with snaga first then use your larger orcs to close in for the kill. Falling that use trolls or wargs, wargs are really powerful. Also 10 gondor skirmishers vs 30 uruk hai??

The problem is this is M&B not warband so you can't set up custom attack groups.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Vert on November 04, 2011, 01:26:23 PM
Quote
I have to disagree, the key to winning with orc factions is to overwhelm with snaga first then use your larger orcs to close in for the kill. Falling that use trolls or wargs, wargs are really powerful. Also 10 gondor skirmishers vs 30 uruk hai??

I hit 3 instead of 2 but yes they can drive fast a horse hit=death 10 make it 2 times (or make loops around you shooting from bows). You crew is dead


Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Arsakes on November 04, 2011, 01:55:17 PM
...
4) learning either obscure parts of Elven languages, or the Black Speech; this would let you affect both allies and enemies with a script, like getting improved damage against the servants of the Enemy with a prayer to Elbereth, or driving your orcs onward with curses in Sauron's tongue. I'd say it would fit Tolkien's vision well; this isn't magic, just deeper understanding of the world, but it can influence people for good or evil. Of course, this might be difficult/impractical to code, but I'm interested in your opinion on whether this can be done in any form at all.
great idea. Now please go and code it, we would be grateful. We are busy with patching things so far

It seems a very good idea to me also, similar thing was done in Brytenwalda mod, you could use warcry ability to scare your enemies and battlecry to boost health & morale of your troops.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Vert on November 04, 2011, 02:10:39 PM
Hey what about a crossbows for uruk-hai maybe its a good idea the uruks with crosssbows will be much better than with bows
Keep movie stuff out, this is a book mod
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 04, 2011, 02:12:32 PM
I have noticed that the isengard and mordor are too weak especially uruk-hai which should be butchers on Short distance... Its the truth even 10 gondors skimrishers can defeat a 30 Uruk-hai of Isengard. Good kingdoms are really too strong. Give a chance people who want destroy Middle-Earth ;) Change a history

Really? 'Cause I'm watching Isengard kick the Rohirrim around like a bunch of rusty tin cans. And those Uruk-hai do a fine job of clustering up and tearing apart the riders. I tend to station my Rivendell-based forces up on a hill and unleash arrows... but the wargs dodge back and forth so quickly that they rarely get hit, they don't slow down when they charge through melee troops, and they do massive damage.  When the Uruk have managed to close in on my Rivendell folk, they do some serious damage. The Uruk-hai take a beating before they go down.

At this point in my game, Gondor's getting it's butt whupped, Rohan's holding on by its fingernails, the Woodmen are getting kicked around something fierce, Lothlorien's taking considerable losses... and Elrond's having an unending tea party up in his corner of the world. Seriously, that jerk hasn't lifted a finger yet, except to send me around on quests. "Our men are losing hope and fearing capture. Go free some prisoners to show them it'll be alright." -- Here's a thought, Mr. High and Mighty... take your army of hundreds of scary-ass archers and knights, and go stab something in the face! (Huff!)


And since this is the suggestion thread: Smaller cursor. The big decorative one is lovely, but when hovering over an object for information, it tends to obscure things like the party's speed, troop totals, etc.  It's very frustrating at times.

Feel free to delete the cursor file in the TLD folder, you'll get the native MnB cursor back.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ettore53 on November 04, 2011, 04:54:04 PM
On patch strategy
As devs  said before  release the mod has many bugs as it is a beta...Player  are finding lots of new bugs,
Now devs can wait to find  many and many of them before to release a patch or can try  to repair some  in a patch and repair othesr in other patch ect.....
I am not sure what strategy is better, but thinking on my esperience  I suggest the second strategy as often repairing a bug you make another...Better to know this new bug  early then late.


Another thing: I hate  comment as  wonderful!! impressive !!!! and so spam  words.. But I played this game from first version and in last 4 years I wondered often why devs needed so long time After I saw the monster they made I know  why.  Is is truely a gigantic work with the true atmosphere  of Lord of Rings and I am sure that Ancient Walker would be pride  of it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Vert on November 04, 2011, 05:09:38 PM
I didn't know that the crossbows were in movie only. OK now I'm wining with rohans more often because i change tactic against them I use now uruk hai trackers to fight. Kill their horses before they reach my troops.
But with one thing you must agree. That the elves are too powerful.(Yes i know some people said this before)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 04, 2011, 07:41:34 PM
I think the problem with elves is their armour. I close in on elves while playing an Uruk or an orc, and I personally do 0 damage with each hit on lower levels to a Rivendell/Lothlorien/Mirkwood Scout, their lowest tier troops. Also, while playing an elf, I noticed that you can often get a cheaper leather/cloth armour which is much better then a more expensive metal armour (both elven). Their great armour is also the reason why "kill the outlaw" quest is too difficult for a low-level player.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: SonKidd on November 04, 2011, 08:03:18 PM
Give experience for killing wargs.

Shouldn't be hard, just a ti_on_agent_killed_or_wounded trigger?

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Pitar on November 04, 2011, 08:54:33 PM
As far as I know, Uruks are unable to ride any mounts. Understandable but also quite disappointing, seeing as I just invested four points in riding and spent all my influence on that mean-lookin' mordor horse.

Unless there is a mount I haven't encountered yet that they can ride, maybe their riding skill should be disabled like the dwarves?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 04, 2011, 09:41:10 PM
As far as I know, Uruks are unable to ride any mounts. Understandable but also quite disappointing, seeing as I just invested four points in riding and spent all my influence on that mean-lookin' mordor horse.

Unless there is a mount I haven't encountered yet that they can ride, maybe their riding skill should be disabled like the dwarves?
They can ride the special faction award warg.

It should probably say something in the dialog for the horse and warg though, like Human Only for the horse and Uruk Only for the warg.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 04, 2011, 09:41:31 PM
My uruk is able to ride a warg (mordor uruk).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 04, 2011, 09:44:49 PM
I'm enjoying the orc cannon fodder army approach while playing one, but perhaps the bonus to how many you can have could be tweeked up a tad more and manflesh give much bigger moral bonus. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: CppCoder on November 04, 2011, 09:55:56 PM
I love this mod! Excellent work guys!

A couple suggestions though:

1. Could you make special items not get looted? I wouldn't mind if you
could ask for them again. I hate loosing my Elven Amulet.  :(

2. I think some of the skills are a little low at the start. e.g., elves get
a nice power draw, but almost no other skills.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 04, 2011, 10:16:45 PM
It just occurred to me that one of the reasons for a not very interesting game with evil side is that they have towns which are too far apart, making you spend much time travelling in order to complete quests, which are usually 'take a message' quests. The additional outposts spawn only later, but I never reached that stage with the bad guys. You could solve this with some unique quests for the baddies. For example, the good old village looting from Native is very in-character for them, but since there are no villages in TLD, you could have a quest to loot a village which spawns only for the quest. The encounter itself would be a battle against a number of villagers, for example 50 of them. It should give loot, of course, and maybe even villagers as prisoners.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Tostito on November 05, 2011, 01:09:35 AM
I just realised something was missing from this version that was really great in 808: Innocents.

I don't remember if they were called farmers or villagers but there were a bunch of little parties running around Gondor, possibly Rohan too. They made you feel heroic if you were good, terrifically nasty if you were bad, and they could act as a bit of a speed bump for all the little grey parties (deserters etc).

Protect the innocent, eat the innocent, either way is fun. Bring back weak humans!

(refugees maybe? as a good faction weakens, or when a town has been destroyed they start spawning?)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 05, 2011, 01:22:17 AM
I just realised something was missing from this version that was really great in 808: Innocents.

I don't remember if they were called farmers or villagers but there were a bunch of little parties running around Gondor, possibly Rohan too. They made you feel heroic if you were good, terrifically nasty if you were bad, and they could act as a bit of a speed bump for all the little grey parties (deserters etc).

Protect the innocent, eat the innocent, either way is fun. Bring back weak humans!

(refugees maybe? as a good faction weakens, or when a town has been destroyed they start spawning?)

Me leik this. Weak humies fun. Elf scoutz no fun.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 05, 2011, 01:22:34 AM
It just occurred to me that one of the reasons for a not very interesting game with evil side is that they have towns which are too far apart, making you spend much time travelling in order to complete quests, which are usually 'take a message' quests. The additional outposts spawn only later, but I never reached that stage with the bad guys. You could solve this with some unique quests for the baddies. For example, the good old village looting from Native is very in-character for them, but since there are no villages in TLD, you could have a quest to loot a village which spawns only for the quest. The encounter itself would be a battle against a number of villagers, for example 50 of them. It should give loot, of course, and maybe even villagers as prisoners.
Hm, well, last time I played, I reached level 8 and started the war after 4-5 game days. Got the XP needed by training, doing quests and soloing tribal orcs and other weak bandits.
Once the war starts, it gets really busy real quick.
I understand the need of evil players to engage in more mindless slaughter of defenseless people, and maybe we should do something about it.
Raiding hapless villagers is certainly in plans! And always was
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 05, 2011, 03:20:44 AM
I think it would help orc players maintain large armies if there were elven flesh and dwarven flesh as separate types of food.
elven flesh might just be poisonous for orcs. And dwarven I suppose not so sweet and soft.
Instead we consider reworking morale mechanism, and increase bonus to human flesh
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 05, 2011, 03:31:47 AM
You guys might've already thought of this, and heard it a lot of times... but it doesn't seem to have been brought up in the last few pages, from what I skimmed, so here it goes:


How about a Time-Limit, till Frodo is going to Destroy the Ring?

Basically, after a certain amount of time, Frodo would be ready to destroy the ring. If it can be scripted that Aragorn becomes a lord of Gondor (that is, if Gondor survives long enough), he will decide to besiege the Black Gates as in the book (giving Frodo the chance to destroy the ring).
If the battle goes poorly, which it should if the player doesn't participate, then Frodo might fail, and die? Then, the only possibility of winning, would be to destroy the Mordor faction--which would be hard.

Similarly, Mordor has to either win the war before Frodo is ready to destroy the ring (unlikely), or do well enough in the siege on the black-gates that he dies.

There are a few questions as to the exact requirements for this Finale. Does Isengard need to be defeated before this can happen? What happens to the other factions under Mordor, if you defeat Mordor before finishing them off?
However, I think the TLD team is capable of thinking of good answers that make sense within the Tolkien lore, and would be astoundingly awesome to play.

I hope there is potential for this idea.

As with nearly everything related to the mod (ha ha, sorry for bragging), I've written about three pages of notes on this. And yeah, it'd be great, but someone would have to code it. I'd love to have it, we'll see if anyone's up to it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: trueten on November 05, 2011, 03:48:00 AM
How about a Time-Limit, till Frodo is going to Destroy the Ring?
I'm not sure if it is a good idea, but if it will be taken in to account I might add something to this.

Time-limit is fun, but it should depend on which side you're playing. If you play for bad guys, then, for example, you have 300 (200?) days to destroy enemy factions. If not - Frodo destroys the ring.

If you play for good guys, you have 300 (200) days to destroy your enemies, if you fail to do it in time - Frodo is captured and Sauron gets the ring.

The bad side of this idea is that you depend a lot from your ally lords, who are responsible for sieges and achieving victory overall. Thrie retardness usually will be the reason why you didn't make it all in time.
Yeah, any timelimiting would unleash a whole storm wrt any inconsistency in strategic AI, however small :D Ofc this can be mitigated to some extent by giving player more decisionmaking powers when he is on timelimit
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 05, 2011, 04:02:01 AM
Time-limits are controversial and should be somehow optional.
There are people who like the challenge and try to powerplay their game, and there are players who want to play the game slowly and deliberately. Both should be accomodated.

For example, a timer could be activated if the player chooses to accept a certain important (or "main") quest. He should be warned that he will be on the clock if he accepts. So, those that don't like the pressure, would avoid that quest.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 05, 2011, 04:12:56 AM
@Melkir: Glad to hear it :). Hope it gets added to the mod, one day. No need to rush, of course. You've already got a great game here, so it's wise to work on the polishing phase in the meantime.


Another suggestion: Is it possible to have it that after you defeat a Great Host, or Lesser Host, that faction goes into "recovery" stage for a while? What this would mean, is that they wouldn't spawn as many patrols and scouts, and wouldn't send out any more Hosts, for a while that is.
This way, you could effectively take a faction out of the war for a few days, while they reorganize--giving yourself a chance to besiege a third party unhindered or so-forth.

Example: You want to Besiege Mordor, which is Weakened and recovering. However, Mordor's allies have recovered some of their strength, and are a threat! If you manage to put them into Recovery mode, by giving them a shock--this'll give you time to besiege Mordor, before it recovers!

This is only an example of how it'd work. You'd probably want the ability to do this through quests. It might be that killing an important Lord of the enemy faction would put them into Recovery Mode, or a sabotage mission, or holding one of their Lords for ransom, etc..


@trueten: I disagree. Making it just a time-limit sounds... plain. It would be more interesting if Mordor was a super power that you don't have much chance of beating, like in the book--but you can defeat Mordor if you can hold out (and help Frodo).

Similarly, if you are playing for Mordor, and suddenly you lose the game because the only remaining faction, the Hobbits and Pacifists faction* is barely clinging to life.... that'd be REAAAALLY annoying.

By having it decided by an epic battle, at the end of the time-limit, you'd also free-up the option to actually let the player still have a say in how things go, DESPITE the idiot lord AI.

*: I know there won't be such a faction, and that there isn't one. 'Twas used for comedic effect.


@MadVader: Considering how TLD works, Vader, couldn't it be optional in the same way that NPC death is? You might also allow an option to adjust the amount of time you have till the ring is destroyed, to make things harder or easier?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Vert on November 05, 2011, 04:26:25 AM
Why  Black NUmenoreans camp doesn't exist. Other mens of Sauron have their own camps (e.g haradrims). it overlooks like im only numenorean in MIddle Earth

Black Númenoreans were very few in those days, certainly not enough to field a whole army, or to keep a camp.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: trueten on November 05, 2011, 05:02:40 AM
@Conners: Duh, I prolly misunderstood your post. I thought you mean the time-limit out - you lose. And that's the part I didn't like :)

I think TLD should have a lot of random events. The only random thing we have now is lord's death :)
Randomness adds much fun to the gameplay.



Anyway, I've been thinking about one neat feature:

There's a great mod for WB which is called Custom Commander. One of the features it adds - you can set the amount of reinforcement waves per one battle in the mod option menu. By defualt M&B has 3 reinforcment waves per one battle stage iirc. But this feature allows you to set 5, 6 or more waves per one battle.

 Advantages:
 1. Timesaving. Due to TLD being more unstable, people who had to switch their battlesizer down a bit suffer from the increased amount of battlestages they have to fight now. It is really annoing when you have to destroy a 100 enemy partie in two or even more stages.

 2. RAM saving (methink). Dealing with one big host in one stage saves you from loading another battle scene, thus preventing another hard time to your PC.

 3. CTD preventing. One of the biggest issues of M&B 1.011 is unit spawn. Each spawning unit adds a lot of pressure on your system and might end up crashing. Increased amount of waves decreases the numbers of spawning - if you don't lose enough troops, none reinf wave shall come from your side. But right now regardless the previous battle stage losses, you and your troops will spawn again in next battlestage, although you could've avoided it with this feature.
In addition. If you have battle advantage the more troop spawn near you, and that's a lot more worse for you PC then if more troops would spawn on the enemy side. The biggest problem I suffer now is when during a big battle last stage starts with, for example, 10 enemy units and 69 of my units. And because I couldn't deal with those 10 bastards in previous stage, I have to suffer from more spawning units in next stage. Poor PC, he could've avoid it.

 Disadvantages:
 1. If your surgery skill level is pretty high, another battle stage might help you to play with more HP and troops, that are healed after first battlestage. With this feature you will partly lose this advantage.

 2. It might be impossible to implement this feature in M&B 1.011 at all :)

But if you are interested in this feature, you can take a look at it here - http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,111808.0.html

CC mod contains its' source codes.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 05, 2011, 07:21:14 AM
I've noticed complaints about not receiving bonuses for killing enemies out in the field, and the reason for this being that no one else was around to see the deed. However... wouldn't your own troops be witnesses to the fact?

People mightn't trust your men, of course, since it's possible to teach them to say what you want them to. But then, it's hard to believe that you got men killed and wounded just to make things more believable (other details would make your story check through, also).

Not sure whether it is a military/LotR procedure to not reward men if you aren't certain they were fighting. It easily could be, so I'm not complaining.

Here is the suggestion for a compromise: How about making it that if no one else witnesses the the battle, you get half the usual points? That'd represent the fact that you and your mens' word is worth something.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 05, 2011, 09:25:49 AM
My uruk is able to ride a warg (mordor uruk).

OK now my Uruk can't ride wargs anymore at level 14 suddenly.  So either there was a bug to start or this is bugged or something :(

Might switch to a BN or regular orc, being a footman only with orcs is a difficult path :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 05, 2011, 09:28:53 AM
My uruk is able to ride a warg (mordor uruk).

OK now my Uruk can't ride wargs anymore at level 14 suddenly.  So either there was a bug to start or this is bugged or something :(

Might switch to a BN or regular orc, being a footman only with orcs is a difficult path :)
Did you switch wargs? Do you have the riding skill needed? What is the name of the warg you can't ride?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 05, 2011, 12:10:22 PM
My uruk is able to ride a warg (mordor uruk).

OK now my Uruk can't ride wargs anymore at level 14 suddenly.  So either there was a bug to start or this is bugged or something :(

Might switch to a BN or regular orc, being a footman only with orcs is a difficult path :)
Did you switch wargs? Do you have the riding skill needed? What is the name of the warg you can't ride?

I bought a lame warg to start (money reasons) and had no issues.  Then I later bought an armored warg and it was fine too.  After the war started I got a message in a town about 'wrong mount type' and after that both the lame warg and armored warg gave me the warning.  Riding skill was 4 it wasn't an issue there.  My first battle after I got the warning gave me the 'your mount bites you' spam.
hmhm.. no issues = a bug, bites spam = intended
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ildanach on November 05, 2011, 12:14:45 PM
It would be nice to have a slightly larger Mirkwood forest battle scene. It takes only a few seconds before being in close combat, which is no use for archers. If it is small for performance reason then it could be reworked to include a small clearing.
Archers are of little use in the dense forest, unless they are ambushing unsuspecting enemy. So i guess works as intended. Note that shorter distance is somewhat mitigated by the obstacles that attackers need to circumvent
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: mikev359 on November 05, 2011, 12:26:34 PM
Love the mod.

I have noticed how Very dark it is at night during a battle.  Would it be possible to give the races that are supposed to have decent night vision (elves, dwarves, and goblins/orcs i think) a brighter sceen to represent this. That's a pretty hard thing to do.
Also mabey you could give humans a penelty to WP to show thier difficulty in seeing in the dark.  That way the "bad" guys would truly have an advantage at night. men already have a penalty at night. While orcs at day
Mike
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: krelog on November 05, 2011, 01:02:57 PM
A tome of knowledge would be awesome - something like a elder who will tell you where your faction leaders are running around
and that offers some lore background in the special faction items
loving them but without reading the books some of that flair gets a bit lost
 
the mod has enough of that already but it would be a nice little addon =)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 05, 2011, 01:15:02 PM
A few simple suggestions after playing more:

1. Increase the amount of equipment stocked in armories and food in supply shops. You guys have so much awesome, varied equipment for each faction, but its often extremely difficult to find what you want - requiring you to run town to town every single day hoping for the item, which isn't very fun - the challenge should be in gathering the RPs imo, not finding that elusive helmet or armor for sale. It's more difficult for the factions where you have tons of equipment items, like Mordor with their tons of helms and armors and such for Orcs when I'm a man trying to find man armor.

The food part of the suggestion is from experience with a big army in the late game and having to visit like 4 towns just to get enough food before heading off to fight.

2. I was thinking maybe the deliver scrap quest should be converted from a quest to a thing you can hand in any time, with rewards based on how much you've brought in. It could have another faction slot for the amount of scrap you've delivered. The RP reward per unit would have to be reduced, but it would give bonuses for every so many points - mainly rank and influence. This would give players another logical way to gain rank and influence for fighting the enemy. Low quality scrap could be 1 point, useable 5 points, good 25 points. Every 50 points might give 1 rank point and every 500 points an influence point.

You could even build in fun things like the town smiths offering to craft you a masterwork weapon after large numbers of points, or have a trait that you can get for collecting lots of scrap that raises skills like inventory management, looting, or bargainer.

If you like it, I whipped up a mayor dialog that lets you tell him you have scrap, at which point he takes all your scrap and gives you the face value for it (could be adjusted based on trade skill if you wanted to) and counts up the rank and influence bonuses you should be getting, assuming your total goes over a multiple of 50 or 500. It doesn't actually add rank, influence, or resource points - since I don't know how you have that set up. I'm probably a bit rusty, but it should work - just need to assign a unused slot for slot_faction_scrap.

Code: [Select]
[anyone|plyr,"mayor_talk", [(store_item_kind_count, ":total_scrap", "itm_metal_scraps_bad"),
  (store_item_kind_count, ":scrap", "itm_metal_scraps_medium"),
  (val_add, ":total_scrap", ":scrap"),
  (store_item_kind_count, ":scrap", "itm_metal_scraps_good"),
  (val_add, ":total_scrap", ":scrap"),
  (ge, ":total_scrap", 1)], "I have some scrap metal for you.", "mayor_deliver_iron",[(faction_get_slot, ":total_scrap", "$g_talk_troop_faction", slot_faction_scrap),
  (assign, ":scrap", 0),
  (store_item_kind_count, ":scrap_count", "itm_metal_scraps_bad"),
  (try_begin),
    (ge, ":scrap_count", 1),
    (troop_remove_items, "trp_player", "itm_metal_scraps_bad", ":scrap_count"),
    (val_add, ":scrap", ":scrap_count"),
  (try_end),
  (store_item_kind_count, ":scrap_count", "itm_metal_scraps_medium"),
  (try_begin),
    (ge, ":scrap_count", 1),
    (troop_remove_items, "trp_player", "itm_metal_scraps_medium", ":scrap_count"),
    (val_mul, ":scrap_count", 5),
    (val_add, ":scrap", ":scrap_count"),
  (try_end),
  (store_item_kind_count, ":scrap_count", "itm_metal_scraps_good"),
  (try_begin),
    (ge, ":scrap_count", 1),
    (troop_remove_items, "trp_player", "itm_metal_scraps_good", ":scrap_count"),
    (val_mul, ":scrap_count", 25),
    (val_add, ":scrap", ":scrap_count"),
  (try_end),
  (store_mod, ":rank_bonus", ":total_scrap", 50),
  (val_add, ":rank_bonus", ":scrap"),
  (val_div, ":rank_bonus", 50),
  (store_mod, ":influence_bonus", ":total_scrap", 500),
  (val_add, ":influence_bonus", ":scrap"),
  (val_div, ":influence_bonus", 500),
  (store_mul, ":rp_reward", ":scrap", 10),
  (val_add, ":total_scrap", ":scrap"),
  (faction_set_slot, "$g_talk_troop_faction", slot_faction_scrap, ":total_scrap"),
  (insert adding rank, influence, and rp here)]],

My main reasoning for the suggestion is that currently the scrap quest is kind of random. If you happen to pick up a quest for 7 good scrap you can quickly rack up 3500 rps, but if you get a quest for 3 low quality and accept it all you get is crap and you have to wait a while to be able to do the quest again.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Hamel on November 05, 2011, 02:20:04 PM
Congratulations on the long awaited release, TLD dev team! You guys did an awesome job! :D

I especially love the new dwarves. They look like something you'd see in a commercial LotR game, but also like something that hopped out of The Hobbit book.

Anyway, speaking of those dwarves, it looks like none of the top tier dwarven units get shields? Maybe the Longbeard Axedwarves could get shields, since they're pretty much just slightly weaker clones of the Gror's Guards (which are especially awesome), at this point.
Well, top guys are meant to be shock infantry with twohanders and awesome armor against arrows, so no shields needed.
Edit-reply: Ehh, I don't think their armor is that good, archers can still hurt them pretty bad, especially over long distances. And when they're weakened up from the arrows the enemy infantry hits them even harder. Almost two thirds of my infantry force is composed of expert axedwarves/pike-dwarves that I refuse to upgrade just so they keep their shields. It's mostly the plus sign next to all those troops that bothers me. ;)

Also, whenever you guys get around to giving the spear dwarf line some spears, maybe the Pike Dwarves could get some of those big dale spears from their friends down the mountain?
so far they got spears too. Will think about pikes
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 05, 2011, 03:27:50 PM
1. Increase the amount of equipment stocked in armories and food in supply shops. You guys have so much awesome, varied equipment for each faction, but its often extremely difficult to find what you want - requiring you to run town to town every single day hoping for the item, which isn't very fun - the challenge should be in gathering the RPs imo, not finding that elusive helmet or armor for sale.

Ditto on this one. The equipment's beautiful, but getting it to come up in shops can be tiresome. Mordor has a lot of varied gear, whereas the Rivendell folk have just one shop -- either way, kitting out a character tends to get tricky. The designs are so well done, they deserve to be showcased. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: InstantB on November 05, 2011, 05:00:30 PM
Add more female fighters.

I know, I know... the books dont' mention the existance of them, but...
I just thought some factions could have a small number of them. I thought percentages:

Elves - up to 25% females
Rohan - up to 15% females
Others (like Gondor or the Dale) - up to 5%

The numbers wouldn't be too high, and there wouldn't be a swarm of females, but it would be good to see them fight as well. Maybe the war is so demanding that the army ranks started accepting women (I'm saying this because of the Gondor and the Dale, I would think that both Rohan and the elven factions would have female soldiers).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on November 05, 2011, 05:05:56 PM
As a potential solution to the problem of not getting much influence to command Lords around, and, as others have mentioned above, often finding yourself getting no influence out of battles (Or with a faction you don't want) you could add some new loot items from battles, similar to scraps, which you could trade in with influence. For evil factions this could be enemy heads or some such (A few of the enemy dialogues already suggest orcs taking the heads of slain enemies. For good factions maybe something else. (Say shields or armour pieces emblazened with Saruman's white hand or the eye of Mordor).

As it is the sources of influence can dry up as quests become increasingly more time consuming and you find yourself more able to defeat enemies without having to follow your faction leader around.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 05, 2011, 07:55:17 PM
There are 2 balance anomalies concerning Rohan.

1) Riders of Rohan have significantly lower survival rate than Skirmishers of Rohan even though they are same tier troops (upgraded from Squire of Rohan). This is because Rohan mostly fights Isengard, and Isengard has a lot of strong Uruk infantry that always forms ranks. Riders of Rohan on their fragile Rohirrim Coursers easily get stuck in the Uruk ranks when they charge them and become minced meat. I've watched 20 Riders charge 20 Uruks in a rank formation and get slaughtered with killing only a single Uruk in the process. Skirmishers, on the other hand, can safely ride around and shower the dense infantry formation with arrows to great effect. My elf character's party is now mostly Rohirrim and I've upgraded Squires to Riders and Skirmishers equally. The statistics is brutal: 11 Thengel Guards and 13 Elite Skirmishers from the skirmisher line, with only 2 Eorl Guards, 4 Brego Guards, 4 Elite Riders and 1 Elite Lancer from the rider line. Not only do the Riders have lower survival rate, but those who do survive and advance to higher tiers earn much less experience and advance much more slowly than their skirmisher-line counterparts. My suggestion is to equip Riders of Rohan with Rohirrim Hunters. This would increase their survival by giving them more chance to ride through Uruk ranks and possibly boost their XP earning rate by letting them trample more enemies with their horses.

2) Second problem is the fact that my elf character has mostly Rohirrim army without my specific intention. I'd say that who goes to Rohan once never goes away for a long time. Western Rohan is swarming with Isengard and Dunland parties which give ample opportunity to fight and suffer losses. As I lost my elven, Dalish and Beorning soldiers I replaced them with Rohirrim. Now, a great majority of my party is Rohirrim, and whenever I try to go out of Rohan I soon have to return in order to earn Rohan RP for upkeep. Sadly, I have no idea about how to solve this problem.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 05, 2011, 08:38:24 PM
Add more female fighters.

I know, I know... the books dont' mention the existance of them, but...


If they do not fit Tolkien lore (they don't), I don't see why the push for them.  Its simply generally unrealistic from both 'reality' and the lore. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: boyislaw on November 05, 2011, 11:41:10 PM
I don't have that much time in reading all the suggestion here, but I do have a couple. Please verify if already asked by fellow members of the board!

1. Custom Battle Mod - In quick battle you get the option to do some custom made skirmishes on your own, making 300 Rohirrim riders against Rhun riders or 500 Brutal orcs, or even 100 elven guardian archers again thousands of little gobbies. Hope you guys add this feature!

2. Uhh. Perhaps more weapons for each class? I can't say much since I've started the game with the Rivendallians, and they don't sell much. I go my Mirkwood and LOtherians bro's but they don't have much as well.

3. I just felt like sneaking this in, I got a quest from Lord in Rivendell that I have to defeat 3 Enemy War Parties from Moria, I have done so and did them mostly by myself without the help of other parties.

Although I walk back to the Lord and it does not give an option to tell him Im thru with the quest, am I doing anything wrong? Better instructions or detail for some quests perhaps. To give more persuasion to the quester before he accepts it.

4.More cinematicness, the cutscene before all the parties go crazy was amazingly well done! I'd like more of that.

5. Some different movements or attack animations would be nice, but no need really.

6. I really really wan't to extend my gratitude to the person who made this and really went through with it. I've encountered numerous different games where custom content was to be released that looked really interesting to me, but never pushed through. This would be the first.  Grats once again :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 06, 2011, 12:42:38 AM
It would be great if you guys could script a formation for archers that would make the short guys (orcs and dwarves) stand in the front row and the tall guys (humans, elves, uruks) in the back row so that tall guys would be able to shoot over the heads of the short guys. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 06, 2011, 01:01:51 AM
Heck, on that note, it'd be good if there was a script so that Snagas and weaker orcs tend to go up to the front of formations and take all the arrows. Though, since Sanagas have less armour, that's probably happening anyway.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Delyth on November 06, 2011, 04:16:50 AM
Hello,

I installed the mod yesterday, and... I'm just amazed! It really creates immersion for the player.

Just a little suggestion about the textures : I don't know if it's my computer or not, but at some places (inside of Isengard, in Mordor, the custom battle at Helm's Deep and almost all night battles...) it's really, I mean REALLY hard to see anything (except if the contrast is high enough, e.g. Saruman with his white robe or if other characters/enemies are close enough)... Is there anyway to change that?

Oh, and when you are in the trade screen, the text's colour for the price (just above the character's body) is yellow-white... on white (I was playing with Dunedain), which makes it really hard to see the real cost/income of your trading.

Thanks again for this great mod!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Vert on November 06, 2011, 07:28:14 AM
I think there is too little bandits i found only tribal orcs  some dunland outcasts and 2 parties of deserters .It should be more parties you can fight (except hostile factions parties).

And if you can add some villages for good factions ,something like lumber mills for bad factions (isengard, mordor) where you can hire (e.g Sauron's mans have only one camp and its only place i can hire their troops)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on November 06, 2011, 07:32:57 AM
Hi all,

in response to a poster above I suggest REMOVING the option to play as a female char as it goes against the lore. Except for maybe Rohan, I`m not sure if Tolkien himself mentioned Rohan shield-maidens or not.

Rgds, Oldtimer
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 06, 2011, 07:57:36 AM
Eh? Considering how much work it must've been rigging the armours to work on a female character, that SURELY can't be a reasonable request, Oldtimer.

Besides, there are plenty of cases of women rising up to fight. Just because it isn't common, doesn't mean it is physically impossible.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Dindi on November 06, 2011, 08:01:47 AM
Besides, there are plenty of cases of women rising up to fight. Just because it isn't common, doesn't mean it is physically impossible.

In middle earth? Urm other than Eowyn name me 5 other female characters who actually take part in combat? Theres certainly powerful female figures such as Galadriel and Melian but not many combatants.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 06, 2011, 08:09:48 AM
Tolkien didn't write down every happening in middle earth... That is, unless it's meant to not be an intelligent, well-fleshed-out, fictional world.

Eowyn is a perfect example that it can happen, because humans do human things. If Middle Earth has humans who are humans, you can expect them to do human stuff (like women going to war).


Just to clarify, I was not talking about middle earth specifically when I said there are lots of cases. I was talking about history. Tolkien's books remind me quite a bit of history, with a very realistic feel--which I like.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 06, 2011, 08:14:16 AM
It would be cool if a dozen shield maidens would appear and take part in a battle if it comes to the last stand for Rohan. It might happens as well for Elves, with Galadriel providing some special effects similar to the Nazgul.

It would also be cool if Ents would march against Isengard once it is down to only Isengard itself and weakened enough.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Dindi on November 06, 2011, 08:27:52 AM

Quote
Tolkien didn't write down every happening in middle earth... That is, unless it's meant to not be an intelligent, well-fleshed-out, fictional world.

I'm not sure what your trying to say here, also its pointless to infer things about the world that could have happened as this mod is based on the books and the war of the ring time period. Moreover if there was some culture of female fighters I'm sure Tolkien would of mentioned it in passing.

Quote
Just to clarify, I was not talking about middle earth specifically when I said there are lots of cases. I was talking about history. Tolkien's books remind me quite a bit of history, with a very realistic feel--which I like.


Even when referring to the real world there isn't really that many women fighters in the middle ages.


Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 06, 2011, 08:37:20 AM
I'm not sure what your trying to say here, also its pointless to infer things about the world that could have happened as this mod is based on the books and the war of the ring time period. Moreover if there was some culture of female fighters I'm sure Tolkien would of mentioned it in passing.

Even when referring to the real world there isn't really that many women fighters in the middle ages.
Who said, "a culture of female fighters"....?

Joan of Arc and Mulan are probably the most famous cases. Of course, there are a lot of women who were not famous after death. Japanese women defended their villages, with nigata (which can be translated into, "Halberd") and other weapons, when men were away at war. The Japanese also had Female Samurai--though at some point, they became unpopular and were all killed I think. There were female Gladiators in the Roman Arena, they discovered more recently--though they weren't very popular with the Romans. And of course there will be a lot of unknown cases of women going off to fight, dressed as men.

This isn't to say there are a lot of warrior women from history's standpoint. There are so many, many billions of male warriors throughout history, that female ones may account for less than 1%, for all I am aware. The point remains, however, that if you have humans, doing human things... some of the women are going to end up fighting in wars, throughout history.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Dindi on November 06, 2011, 08:44:36 AM
Thats a fair point, but translating that into mount and blade wouldn't be the easiest thing. Unless some garrisons simply had a very small number of low level female troops. Also there are already a number of female companions.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 06, 2011, 09:04:40 AM
The NamelessOne suggested a good way of doing it, by just having a few females jotted in for the last stands. When TLD gets to have the villages, where you can slaughter the townspeople, there might be some women who put up a fight there.
However, most women who end up fighting, will not be good at it... Because they have not, in most cases, received training.

A funny Easter-egg would be if you could recruit female peasants, if you are playing a female character. After recruiting enough of them, you get the trait, "Feminist" xP. OF course, that isn't very realistic, and I wouldn't say it works well for LotR.


For clarification: There are enough women in the game to be realistic, in the fact you can play as one and there are female companions. Also enough to fit with Lord of the Rings.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ron Losey on November 06, 2011, 09:26:54 AM
Tolkien only included one significant female fighter in the books, who was largely significant only due to being given the job as queen of Rohan and instead sneaking off to the battle with the men.  She was clearly portrayed as being the anomaly in this regard, so much so that her presence with the army had to be concealed.

I would say that the currently limited options for female characters and companions is more than fair, without completely undermining the integrity of the story.  Any more female characters, except as defenseless victims of orc raids, would start to go against the books.

Come on here, people - think knights and chivalry.  The men are supposed to rescue the women and children (and/or the orcs are supposed to try to prevent them from doing so, and enslave and/or eat the women and children).  That's what hero-types do.  While Tolkien didn't just come out and say this in so many words, that was clearly in the spirit of the fantasy he was trying to create.  This isn't generic fantasy - this is Tolkien's "Middle Earth".  Try not to make suggestions that undermine that point.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 06, 2011, 09:34:20 AM
Agreed.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Rhygar666 on November 06, 2011, 10:15:19 AM
Dol Guldur if its written correctly
Give them some extra orcs who use Dol Guldur Ressource Points. When you upgrade the Dol Guldur Orks they use Mordor Ressource Points and your Dol Guldur points are useless.
Its annyoing to go go to / work for Mordor as Dol Guldur just to be able keep your troops.
I unified their RPs in the patch. Dol Guldor was closest subsidiary of Mordor after all
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Thales on November 06, 2011, 11:06:14 AM
Two things (I did read the last two pages and haven't found them, so apologies if this has already been mentioned):

- a banner with your baggage to make it easier to find (apart from the possible bug that sometimes the baggage doesn't spawn which I have mentioned in the bug thread)

- is it just me or are enemies far harder to hit with a sword from horseback than in native? not just small orcs, but also normal sized enemies seem to be very hard to hit... Would be nice if this was a bit easier? Or at least a setting to make it easier if that's possible?

Are you by any chance used to the Warband combat? Orcs are short, yes, but other than that there isn't anything different.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: WerenCantRememberHisEmail on November 06, 2011, 01:04:23 PM
Hey, I was wondering if Moria is captureable like Cair Andros? not yet
If so, it could open a new troop tree for dwarves when captured. Moria dwarves with some unique equipment or shields for example.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Thales on November 06, 2011, 01:14:16 PM
Two things (I did read the last two pages and haven't found them, so apologies if this has already been mentioned):

- a banner with your baggage to make it easier to find (apart from the possible bug that sometimes the baggage doesn't spawn which I have mentioned in the bug thread)

- is it just me or are enemies far harder to hit with a sword from horseback than in native? not just small orcs, but also normal sized enemies seem to be very hard to hit... Would be nice if this was a bit easier? Or at least a setting to make it easier if that's possible?

Are you by any chance used to the Warband combat? Orcs are short, yes, but other than that there isn't anything different.

No, haven't played Warband in ages... recently was mostly playing 0.808 with the old TLD mod... :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Jcd on November 06, 2011, 02:43:27 PM
something that is a feature of native, but i think it bears "fixing"

when the enemy is the attacker on a siege, there is a cheesy tactic available: you can wait until they reach your walls, maybe a little more, and then retreat.
if you do this enough times on a row, you can win even against overwhelming odds..

also... it makes no sense that, being a defender, you can disengage whenever you want, inside and outside sieges...
it certainly unbalances the game...
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: InstantB on November 06, 2011, 03:48:31 PM
Come on here, people - think knights and chivalry.  The men are supposed to rescue the women and children (and/or the orcs are supposed to try to prevent them from doing so, and enslave and/or eat the women and children).  That's what hero-types do.  While Tolkien didn't just come out and say this in so many words, that was clearly in the spirit of the fantasy he was trying to create.  This isn't generic fantasy - this is Tolkien's "Middle Earth".  Try not to make suggestions that undermine that point.

If we start being serious concerning the books we will criticize everything. We don't do it, we know that this isn't a direct translation from the books, but a creation by a group of people that created a good game.

If you don't like the idea of female fighters, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But...

People aren't trying to ruin your game, they are trying to give suggestions that ~they~ (not you) think will add to the enjoyability, and really do not need to hear neither you or other people screaming troll or idiot or anything else every time a suggestion that you don't like comes on...

- inappropriate stuff, + yellow card.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 06, 2011, 05:51:41 PM
Rank point gain is a bit out of whack.

What do I mean by this? Well, it's either very easy or very hard to get them. Quests routinely give 1-5 rank points. Kill a stack of 100 men within a stone throw of Edoras? 1 rank point. Kill 20 wargs locked in battle with 4 foragers? Get 40 rank points and 4 influence. It's mighty strange that the Rohirhim cheer me on like a King when I save a handful of their soldiers but are indifferent when I annhilate huge armies on their way.

IMO, quests and battles should give more rank points, but helping your allies in battles should give less. Sometimes I get 100 rank points in a row if there's a few battles going on close to each other, but I've hardly been able to progress with my faction (Imraldis) since they hardly ever fight anyone.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 06, 2011, 06:26:46 PM
Rank point gain is a bit out of whack.

What do I mean by this? Well, it's either very easy or very hard to get them. Quests routinely give 1-5 rank points. Kill a stack of 100 men within a stone throw of Edoras? 1 rank point. Kill 20 wargs locked in battle with 4 foragers? Get 40 rank points and 4 influence. It's mighty strange that the Rohirhim cheer me on like a King when I save a handful of their soldiers but are indifferent when I annhilate huge armies on their way.

IMO, quests and battles should give more rank points, but helping your allies in battles should give less. Sometimes I get 100 rank points in a row if there's a few battles going on close to each other, but I've hardly been able to progress with my faction (Imraldis) since they hardly ever fight anyone.

Same here, I've reached level 15 rank with Rohan but only 6 with Ilmadris.

This brings me to another problem. I've got a part of 85 now and my morale is deteriorating quite rapidly. I fought a bunch of battles near East Emnet which got my moral to Excellent. Then I escorted a caravan from East Emnet to Hornburg and my morale plummeted to Terrible. This problem kicks in for the good guys only when you get powerful enough to get loads or rank points every day so your party grows very large. On the other hand, I think this morale deterioration might be one of the core problems with playability of orcs.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 06, 2011, 06:29:33 PM
With good, you can get lembas as a special reward, that'll give you +30 morale and it's not food so it doesen't deteriorate. Worth it IMO.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 06, 2011, 06:38:02 PM
With good, you can get lembas as a special reward, that'll give you +30 morale and it's not food so it doesen't deteriorate. Worth it IMO.

Doesn't it last only a single meal? Or is it only the problem with the starting lembas?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 06, 2011, 06:40:41 PM
Rank point gain is a bit out of whack.

What do I mean by this? Well, it's either very easy or very hard to get them. Quests routinely give 1-5 rank points. Kill a stack of 100 men within a stone throw of Edoras? 1 rank point. Kill 20 wargs locked in battle with 4 foragers? Get 40 rank points and 4 influence. It's mighty strange that the Rohirhim cheer me on like a King when I save a handful of their soldiers but are indifferent when I annhilate huge armies on their way.

IMO, quests and battles should give more rank points, but helping your allies in battles should give less. Sometimes I get 100 rank points in a row if there's a few battles going on close to each other, but I've hardly been able to progress with my faction (Imraldis) since they hardly ever fight anyone.

Same here, I've reached level 15 rank with Rohan but only 6 with Ilmadris.

This brings me to another problem. I've got a part of 85 now and my morale is deteriorating quite rapidly. I fought a bunch of battles near East Emnet which got my moral to Excellent. Then I escorted a caravan from East Emnet to Hornburg and my morale plummeted to Terrible. This problem kicks in for the good guys only when you get powerful enough to get loads or rank points every day so your party grows very large. On the other hand, I think this morale deterioration might be one of the core problems with playability of orcs.

I cheated on my evil guy and gave him 10 leadership in order to help and even things out a bit.  I also increased the path finding.  Otherwise thing are quite dull for your first several levels.  Any party you can catch you can't kill and if you can kill you can't catch. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 06, 2011, 06:49:59 PM
With good, you can get lembas as a special reward, that'll give you +30 morale and it's not food so it doesen't deteriorate. Worth it IMO.

Doesn't it last only a single meal? Or is it only the problem with the starting lembas?

It seemed like a permanent item to me.. but I didn't use it, I got the talisman instead (+1 to power draw, woot)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 06, 2011, 06:52:06 PM
I think Lembas is bugged atm, I never got a chance to try it since the first deliver food quest I took RIGHT after getting it gave it back lol... but you can get a cook pot from other factions that gives +20 morale and IS permanent.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 06, 2011, 07:13:20 PM
I have the cook pot and it doesn't help much. I think there might be a bug with "Recent events" component of morale. I repeated the drill (fought to get to Excellent then escorted a caravan to Hornburg) and my morale dropped only to High this time. Maybe the value somehow overflows and gets reset to 0 by the game engine?

Another suggestion: Since Persuasion skill is pretty much useless at the moment, why not use it in those "gather the food" quests to ask authorities of other allied cities to give free food or at least give it at discount?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 06, 2011, 09:18:13 PM
- is it just me or are enemies far harder to hit with a sword from horseback than in native? not just small orcs, but also normal sized enemies seem to be very hard to hit... Would be nice if this was a bit easier? Or at least a setting to make it easier if that's possible?

I'm embarrassed to admit that I've been whiffing even when not on horseback. :|  I was pretty good at headshotting NPCs in combat, but that's worked against me with some of the smaller orcs and gobbos.  Creepy little buggers.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 06, 2011, 09:25:16 PM
- is it just me or are enemies far harder to hit with a sword from horseback than in native? not just small orcs, but also normal sized enemies seem to be very hard to hit... Would be nice if this was a bit easier? Or at least a setting to make it easier if that's possible?

I'm embarrassed to admit that I've been whiffing even when not on horseback. :|  I was pretty good at headshotting NPCs in combat, but that's worked against me with some of the smaller orcs and gobbos.  Creepy little buggers.

I've found the goblins a bit hard to hit with a sword on horseback (I have no problems hitting humans).  I switched to a Rohan Lance as my primary melee weapon on horseback and they get skewered like a kebab.  This seems realistic too.

Edit: After more practice I'm back to the sword, its quicker for slashing goblin heads.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 06, 2011, 09:53:04 PM
An idea on a change to Lembas:

Currently its bugged, but I assume you're planning to make it act like the cauldron with a permanent morale bonus (which makes the cauldron less useful, since they don't stack).

How about the faction reward Lembas would give you one Lembas and unlock the ability to buy Lembas from Elven shops? It could be a food item for sale in the shops with like 200 charges and a big morale bonus, so it would be a very light and effective food for long campaigns and a nice extra food item for morale boosting. The bonus could be +10 or so.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ildanach on November 07, 2011, 12:30:25 AM
The Mirkwood weapons and shields are very well made, congrats to the teams artists. But their is a fair difference in quality between them and the Rohan shields. It is not really necessary, but it would be nice to have the quality of the Rohan shields bought up to Mirkwood standards.

Rohirrim aren't as skilled in smithing as the elves are.

I thought you would say that, and you know I mean quality of texture not equipment. ;)

The Rohan shields are also modular - they use the tablau system, which doesn't produce equally sharp textures. But it allows us to use a base texture and various painted motives randomly placed on that surface. We'll see if we can improve that a bit, but it's alright I think.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 07, 2011, 03:34:32 AM
An idea on a change to Lembas:

Currently its bugged, but I assume you're planning to make it act like the cauldron with a permanent morale bonus (which makes the cauldron less useful, since they don't stack).

How about the faction reward Lembas would give you one Lembas and unlock the ability to buy Lembas from Elven shops? It could be a food item for sale in the shops with like 200 charges and a big morale bonus, so it would be a very light and effective food for long campaigns and a nice extra food item for morale boosting. The bonus could be +10 or so.

Lembas originally was a food with 250 points in 808 version if I recall correctly. I don't think it should be changed.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: ikhi on November 07, 2011, 05:03:51 AM
AI parties could have some functions according to their type. This could both add a bit of flavour and create some differences between them apart from troop composition and size. For example:

-Scouts could be asked for information. Location of nearest enemy lord(s), closest battle, parties with prisoners, quest objective parties if near, etc.

-Patrols could report what they are currently doing- Patrolling around certain city, looking for enemies etc., and be directable by the player with an influence/resource cost, like friendly lords. They options could be vague enough to limit abuse- offence/defence/seeking reinforcements/reinforcing garrisons, etc.

The dialogue options should depend on players rank.
-----------

The player should feel a bit more part of his side's nobility. After certain rank they could be admitted to a war council that could determine the objectives of the current campaign or get possibility to influence the marshal. This could help solve the AI inactivity problem also.

You could even have a bit of court intrigue with trying to influence to opinions of other lords prior to a council vote. Other lords should have preference as to what kind of action they support- offensive, defensive, helping allies, gathering troops, mucking around "considering our next objective" ...

The gathering of the council should be announced around week beforehand with the lords heading to the capital, and gathering at the king's hall. Have some kind of minimum attendance (50% of the sides nobles?), with only those who are present being able to voice opinions, with rank influencing the weight of their words. Just for the heck of it have their allies send representatives also (this could be an escort mission for they player). The policy should then be in effect for some time, a month or two maybe, or until some significant change happens (destruction of an enemy faction, own faction's significant fall in strength, etc.).

Is it possible to set strategies for the AI like this?
Everything is possible in this department. Given enough time and manpower, both of which are kinda scarce
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 07, 2011, 05:15:30 AM
Nice ideas about the parties, in line with dev team thinking.

The politics part is not LoTR, but too much Mount and Blade (esp. Warband). Tolkien doesn't do intrigue much.
But player input on faction objectives is a valuable idea and possible to do.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: ikhi on November 07, 2011, 05:29:49 AM
Thanks, nice to hear that you like the ideas.

The politics part is not LoTR, but too much Mount and Blade (esp. Warband). Tolkien doesn't do intrigue much.
But player input on faction objectives is a valuable idea and possible to do.

I was thinking more on the lines of trying to win the support of other lords for your idea through argumentation (Persuasion -skill) than cloak&dagger intrigue.

When writing that suggestion I was thinking about the different parts in the book where council is held and opinions are voiced- and kings and stewards are swayed this way or that. Think council of Elrond with the different representatives deciding on what to do next with that piece of jewelry, Gandalf and the fellowship at Theoden's court, and the events in Minas Tirith. And although all of those are specific situations, decision by council gatherings does seem to be a procedure that was used.

And about intrigue and influence- what about Grima then and earlier Sauron in Numenor? I'm sure there are more examples (especially in Silmarillion), but it's been a while since I read the books.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ildanach on November 07, 2011, 05:49:13 AM
It would be nice to be able to talk to one of my troops and form a scout party instead of only ever being able to do it during a quest.

It would also be useful to be able to give resources to village leaders so they can create troops for defence and send out its own parties. I mention this because I currently have thousands upon thousands of resources for Rohan, as I constantly have to defend them. Giving factions resources in such a way would free me a little from having to defend them all the time so I can go do my own thing.
Resource inflow will be toned down in future. It's not your resources, technically, it's what your faction sets aside as your share in exchage for your services. So the total amount would logically be clamped from above, especially when faction is in trouble
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 07, 2011, 06:18:47 AM
Wasn't the Steward of Gondor messing things up? Having to defy self-destructive lords such as him could be interesting.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: ikhi on November 07, 2011, 07:08:16 AM
One more idea, as you guys clearly don't seem to have enough to do, with having time to answer forum posts and what not. ;)

It'd be nice if some of the ranks in factions had specific one-time quests tied to them- so that when you're elevated to hero ranks as a dwarf for example, you'd be asked to fetch some moldy pygmy bauble from Moria. Others could be:
-win a named enemy standard
-get an enemy reward item from a special quest / by beating enemy lord carrying it
-act as an emissary and take a gift item to an ally (remote one, so you'll have to travel almost the whole map)
-slaying some named specific beast, hero or enemy leader in single combat
-fetch some other ancient artifact (think Barrow mounds blades, etc)

And obviously I can't code any of this, but am quite willing to write dialogue and draw up more specific plans if you'd like that kind of help. And also- I'm aware that the creative process is a major part of the fun, and being told what to do by people who've contributed no actual work and who somehow seem to think that they know better can really be irritating. So, don't read this like that. ;)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 07, 2011, 09:32:49 AM
One more idea, as you guys clearly don't seem to have enough to do, with having time to answer forum posts and what not. ;)

It'd be nice if some of the ranks in factions had specific one-time quests tied to them- so that when you're elevated to hero ranks as a dwarf for example, you'd be asked to fetch some moldy pygmy bauble from Moria. Others could be:
-win a named enemy standard
-get an enemy reward item from a special quest / by beating enemy lord carrying it
-act as an emissary and take a gift item to an ally (remote one, so you'll have to travel almost the whole map)
-slaying some named specific beast, hero or enemy leader in single combat
-fetch some other ancient artifact (think Barrow mounds blades, etc)

And obviously I can't code any of this, but am quite willing to write dialogue and draw up more specific plans if you'd like that kind of help. And also- I'm aware that the creative process is a major part of the fun, and being told what to do by people who've contributed no actual work and who somehow seem to think that they know better can really be irritating. So, don't read this like that. ;)

- Bring some Sumpter Horses ;)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 07, 2011, 09:37:21 AM
I am assuming we should hold off with weapon balance/unit balance suggestions until those get their change.  Right now orc archers are completely useless vrs armored opponents.  With a warhorse and good armor you can kill dozens while taking between 1-0 damage to you and your mount.  Playing an elf the only time my horse is in danger when one of the stray elf arrows hits me because I'm running into the line of fire (20-75 damage to a 52 armor horse, that stings).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: nonrumpali on November 07, 2011, 09:42:41 AM
One more idea, as you guys clearly don't seem to have enough to do, with having time to answer forum posts and what not. ;)

It'd be nice if some of the ranks in factions had specific one-time quests tied to them- so that when you're elevated to hero ranks as a dwarf for example, you'd be asked to fetch some moldy pygmy bauble from Moria. Others could be:
-win a named enemy standard
-get an enemy reward item from a special quest / by beating enemy lord carrying it
-act as an emissary and take a gift item to an ally (remote one, so you'll have to travel almost the whole map)
-slaying some named specific beast, hero or enemy leader in single combat
-fetch some other ancient artifact (think Barrow mounds blades, etc)

And obviously I can't code any of this, but am quite willing to write dialogue and draw up more specific plans if you'd like that kind of help. And also- I'm aware that the creative process is a major part of the fun, and being told what to do by people who've contributed no actual work and who somehow seem to think that they know better can really be irritating. So, don't read this like that. ;)

I remember the good ol' Galadriel quest for killing the evil sorcerer in Mirkwood. If it already isn't in the mod or in the works, would be mighty nostalgic if I'd get to play it again in the new version.

Also there was some talk about the persuasion skill. Not sure if this has been suggested (or implemented), persuasion could obviously affect the cost of ordering other parties around. Maybe 3-5% reduction in cost per skill level? There's probably other uses for it also.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: whyareallthenamestaken on November 07, 2011, 09:46:08 AM
hey im new and i was wondering that since like all the settlements pretty much get destroyed and we are just like a small party do u think it would be possible for certain regions for certain factions to be able to setup new settlements and use like a population marker to allow them to grow depending on where it is for ex if rivendell sets up a camp like in the plain to the south of it then it would grow faster than if it set one up in mordor idk just a thought because the ai wont attack anywhere not close to its homeland even if its allies are getting destroyed also i dont mean to say like make a million settlements just like two or threee
ps i love the game its amazing and i love killing orks!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: alver on November 07, 2011, 12:13:28 PM
A very dorky suggestion:

You guys obviously know your Tolkien (e.g. Beruthiel: I had to look that one up!), but it seems a bit troubling that the game takes place in an impossible point on the timeline, with Isengard still standing but Pippin and Merry already at the courts.  Why not put Pippin and Merry in a Fangorn cutscene (I admit I have no idea what scene -- I haven't done any of the Fangorn stuff yet)?  That way they can have some nice dialogue about growing curlier hair, etc.

The consistence of the timeline and/or the authenticity of the ME universe in TLD is not yet clear. We've been thinking about this a lot will think some more. It should be resolved somehow, yes.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Set on November 07, 2011, 01:59:20 PM
Don't know if that have been suggested already, so if it was don throw rotten potatoes at me. Took Greenwood Relic Sword as reward for 9th rank at Mirkwood elves. It's enormously imbalanced as i think. Nerf it please.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 07, 2011, 06:41:16 PM
Have you guys considered usinng movie characters as companions? Lurtz and Sharku. You've probably considered it before--curious about what your thoughts on the matter are.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Meevar the Mighty on November 07, 2011, 07:46:11 PM

All great ideas I think.

The sphere of people you can talk to about lord locations needs to increase somehow, because when a small faction goes on campaign, all the people you can ask where they went are in one little bunch on a map that can take more than 4 days to traverse.

I'm playing as a corsair captain from Dunland and having rushed from Edhellond, I found my glorious Dunnish leader standing around in West Emnet, claiming to be taking a stand against Celeborn, who was nowhere to be seen. I ran to the other end of Rohan to scout some towns, came straight back and the Dunnish army was gone. When Dunland inevitably defeats Celeborn and Haldir (lol), my quest is cancelled. Turns out the battle was fought east of Dol Guldur.

Allowing scouts to divulge lord locations is probably the best solution. It might be more realistic if all parties could tell you, but only if they'd seen the lord recently, but I imagine that would require a database that doesn't exist and it wouldn't be as player-friendly anyway.

LoTR also has an awful lot of bitter internal squabbling and disloyalty. It would make a lot of sense to expand that in the mod (obviously not urgently). Instead of paying the king to assault an enemy city, bribe or blackmail his generals to vote for it. Lead naysayers into an ambush hours before the meeting, incapacitate their emmisaries or intercept their invitations. If a lord is being difficult, move to have him exiled or his lands confiscated.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 07, 2011, 09:12:31 PM
Elves are still the blond angles of death in patch,  I'm going to switch to Orcs just for a challenge.

300 elves vrs 300 Rhun, total elf dead 17, with 30 total casualties.  Rhun total wipe out.   This is on a small map too so they spawned very close, would have been worse if the archers had range.

Perhaps the RCM will change all that.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 07, 2011, 10:04:17 PM
Elves are still the blond angles of death in patch,  I'm going to switch to Orcs just for a challenge.

300 elves vrs 300 Rhun, total elf dead 17, with 30 total casualties.  Rhun total wipe out.   This is on a small map too so they spawned very close, would have been worse if the archers had range.

Perhaps the RCM will change all that.

I found elven scout parties quite manageable with an orcs party of 20-30.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 07, 2011, 10:26:33 PM
Elves are still the blond angles of death in patch,  I'm going to switch to Orcs just for a challenge.

300 elves vrs 300 Rhun, total elf dead 17, with 30 total casualties.  Rhun total wipe out.   This is on a small map too so they spawned very close, would have been worse if the archers had range.

Perhaps the RCM will change all that.

I found elven scout parties quite manageable with an orcs party of 20-30.

The problem is more when you are playing them.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Lathana on November 08, 2011, 12:20:39 AM
So...the troll you can get.

Mine was a troll of Moria, and good gracious it was awesome. At least twice it singlehandedly crushed Rohirrim war parties when the rest of my army and myself were on the ground dying or dead.

But the upkeep is incredible -- far too much for me to pay. Could the unit be made to not have upkeep, perhaps? I can see paying upkeep on other troops, for supplies, food, just influence to have them not jerked from your command, but the troll is a special case, unless I'm paying for sorcerous control over it....
you are feeding him - and this thing eats like no tomorrow, and its not regular food :)

My god, man,what am I feeding him? Noldor virgins by the dozen? :D
Title: Ambushes
Post by: Banok on November 08, 2011, 12:59:39 AM
I'd like to see ambushes, will post this knowing it will probably get shot down for too much coding or too ambitious but here we go...

so instead of 1 party chasing other party and having a chase then a battle, 1 party effectively "camps" but hidden on the map and can surprise the other going straight into battle. pherhaps with some sort of benefit, such as insta killed troops or cutting off sections of the main group.

by cutting off I mean battling vs a smaller portion of the party as you catch them off guard and have the advantage of facing less of them, number advantage. aka not get zerged.

how it would work is some groups/troop types would specialise in concealment, key example is ofc ilithien rangers instead of roaming around scouting and dieing they would camp concealed and ambush/pick off enemies which pass within their vicinity.

for the player character this would mean you choose the option to camp concealed, which may have requirements such as specific troop types (ie rangers) or a certain skill or certain terrain [and not currently spotted by any enemies].

then time passes by (hence the comparison to camping) and when a enemy group passes nearby the game will tell you their numbers and give you option to ambush them or leave them and continue waiting.

so it would/could be useful for fighting larger parties (aka gorilla warfare) as well as smaller parties which would outrun you such as scouts since you wouldn't need to chase them. depends on where you camped of course. would also change the gameplay abit, added challenge of being ambushed but also new way to tackle enemies with reduced tedium of chasing.

let me know the flaws and your thoughts.

snip

my other suggestion is simply to hire the donkey for the TLD team!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 08, 2011, 03:31:44 AM
Quote
you are feeding him - and this thing eats like no tomorrow, and its not regular food :)
Upkeep counts food too!? Then what are food items for O_o...?

Of course, it might be impossible for you to code it that trolls eat more than regular units.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 08, 2011, 03:35:56 AM
Quote
you are feeding him - and this thing eats like no tomorrow, and its not regular food :)
Upkeep counts food too!? Then what are food items for O_o...?

Of course, it might be impossible for you to code it that trolls eat more than regular units.
Methinks he's being a bit facetious - upkeep for trolls needs to be high, to balance them (as well as slow walking speed of course). It doesen't really matter what kind of ingame explanation you use for this.

Perhaps the upkeep is to pay for the Troll's handlers?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Taal on November 08, 2011, 03:43:17 AM
Could be lower, then once a week the troll eats the lowest level troop in your party..
Good idea! Once a week is too mild imo, how about once a day :) They are orc players after all, and snagas are a dime a dozen
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Meevar the Mighty on November 08, 2011, 05:08:14 AM
Elves are still the blond angles of death in patch,  I'm going to switch to Orcs just for a challenge.

300 elves vrs 300 Rhun, total elf dead 17, with 30 total casualties.  Rhun total wipe out.   This is on a small map too so they spawned very close, would have been worse if the archers had range.

Perhaps the RCM will change all that.

I don't support balance based on arbitrary K:Ds. I usually re-roll if I lose a single guy above recruit level, so clearly the game is perfectly balanced, because in my games, all factions get 0:100 or whatever. The fact is, everyone plays differently. Some people want to use troops as ammo and it would be frustrating for them to have an immortal army of orcish scum.

The books say elves are great and orcs are not, so I'm disappointed with the elf nerf. I feel that elves should be better than they are, but they should be slower to recruit and more expensive to maintain to inconvenience the player and elf lords should have low leadership, to inconvenience the factions. If they could be made to inhabit 5 slots each, that would probably be equivelant.

Swadia and Khergits are pretty good in this too though. Overall, it's Mordor and its orc subsidiaries that seem most distant from the pack in terms of balance, I think. Humans, Elves and Dwarves seem remarkably similar in strength considering (all of the weapon stats were randomly generated).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Llew on November 08, 2011, 05:28:29 AM
Could be lower, then once a week the troll eats the lowest level troop in your party..

I like that idea. :P
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 08, 2011, 05:42:21 AM
Quote
you are feeding him - and this thing eats like no tomorrow, and its not regular food :)
Upkeep counts food too!? Then what are food items for O_o...?

Of course, it might be impossible for you to code it that trolls eat more than regular units.

If the guys that made Rus XIII Century module could make the horses eat oats then surely it is possible to make one kind of troop eat more.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 08, 2011, 06:00:57 AM
Someone did that...? Amazing! Devs. Do you think it would be worth while making different races eat different amounts?



Here's a really impossible suggestion, which is more of a question: How hard would it be to have giant eagles, or the winged creatures the Nazgul rode on? Guessing it's impossible, but it'd be interesting to know.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 08, 2011, 06:57:26 AM
Here's a really impossible suggestion, which is more of a question: How hard would it be to have giant eagles, or the winged creatures the Nazgul rode on? Guessing it's impossible, but it'd be interesting to know.
What would you do with that information if you knew? :P
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 08, 2011, 07:01:42 AM
Stop wondering about the answer, I suppose. Then I'd wonder about something else instead... Better that I don't get behind on my wondering schedule :P.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Triglav on November 08, 2011, 08:18:37 AM
Stop wondering about the answer, I suppose. Then I'd wonder about something else instead... Better that I don't get behind on my wondering schedule :P.

Indeed.
My modest suggestion, play what is available more and wonder less.
Would you rather have another 20 half-baked and buggy additions, or have existing ones work well?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 08, 2011, 08:32:28 AM
Indeed.
My modest suggestion, play what is available more and wonder less.
Would you rather have another 20 half-baked and buggy additions, or have existing ones work well?
Erm, I probably phrased my post wrongly, as usual :-/. I wasn't meaning to ask in a, "hint-hint, nudge-nudge, wink-wink" sort of way. I was posting it because, "I'm a strange, curious creature".

Often, I think of some odd question, and it bothers me until I look it up on google (and if I can't find the answer, it irritates me like heck).

Sorry for not being clear in my post :-[.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 08, 2011, 09:33:30 AM
Elves are still the blond angles of death in patch,  I'm going to switch to Orcs just for a challenge.

300 elves vrs 300 Rhun, total elf dead 17, with 30 total casualties.  Rhun total wipe out.   This is on a small map too so they spawned very close, would have been worse if the archers had range.

Perhaps the RCM will change all that.

I don't support balance based on arbitrary K:Ds. I usually re-roll if I lose a single guy above recruit level, so clearly the game is perfectly balanced, because in my games, all factions get 0:100 or whatever. The fact is, everyone plays differently. Some people want to use troops as ammo and it would be frustrating for them to have an immortal army of orcish scum.

The books say elves are great and orcs are not, so I'm disappointed with the elf nerf. I feel that elves should be better than they are, but they should be slower to recruit and more expensive to maintain to inconvenience the player and elf lords should have low leadership, to inconvenience the factions. If they could be made to inhabit 5 slots each, that would probably be equivelant.

Swadia and Khergits are pretty good in this too though. Overall, it's Mordor and its orc subsidiaries that seem most distant from the pack in terms of balance, I think. Humans, Elves and Dwarves seem remarkably similar in strength considering (all of the weapon stats were randomly generated).

The fight in LoTR was one of desperation.  The West was GOING to lose if the ring wasn't destroyed.  The Elves were willing to banish themselves from middle earth by having the ring destroyed.  Thats how bad things were.  A one point Elrond says that even if they had a host elves with armor from the second age (to paraphrase) they still would lose.

I think everyones view of elf superiority has been colored by the movies, even if we don't want to admit it.  Elves fought very little in the books directly.  About the only real fight between elves and orcs was when the orcs from moria chased the fellowship, and even that was basically they were sniped from the trees, not hand to hand combat.

If the elves were as powerful as they are in the mod, Elrond should have just got all the elves together, and walked straight into Mordor. 

There needs to be balance in the mod, that while on the highest difficulty settings, you take some realistic casualties.  Otherwise its just a shooting gallery.  Maybe some people enjoy that, but its not really going to give you that desperate middle earth feeling. 

Even in the battle of the five armies with no trolls or men on the evil side, the Body guard of Blog (orc) was too strong for anyone to break through, it was only Beorn as a massive bear that was able to.

Its too early in the mods balancing to be overly concerned about it, but something should be done either with evil numbers and tactics skill, evil skills/equipment, elf recruitment, or the like, perhaps all of them. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 08, 2011, 09:43:52 AM
The fight in LoTR was one of desperation.  The West was GOING to lose if the ring wasn't destroyed.  The Elves were willing to banish themselves from middle earth by having the ring destroyed.  Thats how bad things were.  A one point Elrond says that even if they had a host elves with armor from the second age (to paraphrase) they still would lose.

I think everyones view of elf superiority has been colored by the movies, even if we don't want to admit it.  Elves fought very little in the books directly.  About the only real fight between elves and orcs was when the orcs from moria chased the fellowship, and even that was basically they were sniped from the trees, not hand to hand combat.

If the elves were as powerful as they are in the mod, Elrond should have just got all the elves together, and walked straight into Mordor. 

There needs to be balance in the mod, that while on the highest difficulty settings, you take some realistic casualties.  Otherwise its just a shooting gallery.  Maybe some people enjoy that, but its not really going to give you that desperate middle earth feeling. 

Even in the battle of the five armies with no trolls or men on the evil side, the Body guard of Blog (orc) was too strong for anyone to break through, it was only Beorn as a massive bear that was able to.

Its too early in the mods balancing to be overly concerned about it, but something should be done either with evil numbers and tactics skill, evil skills/equipment, elf recruitment, or the like, perhaps all of them.
By the time Ron is done with the RCM, it will be sorted out more reasonably.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 08, 2011, 10:21:09 AM
Elves are still the blond angles of death in patch,  I'm going to switch to Orcs just for a challenge.

300 elves vrs 300 Rhun, total elf dead 17, with 30 total casualties.  Rhun total wipe out.   This is on a small map too so they spawned very close, would have been worse if the archers had range.

Perhaps the RCM will change all that.

Given that most of the Rhun wear little to no armour? I'd say they'll be even more fodder-prone.  That faction's pretty much fubar if treated realistically, according to their model design. They look great, but running into combat unarmoured and with no shield is asking for a hurting.

As it stands, they're pretty beastly. Sure, the elves may have worked them over -- but I stepped into a battle of roughly equal numbers between King Bard's party and one of the Rhun warlords. Even with PC help, a dozen elite-level Rivendell troops bolstering their forces, and my game settings switched back to 'easy', Bard's party took a whuppin'. They won, but the 2nd phase of the battle was a complete slaughter with the Rhun dominating the map.

Mirkwood looked absolutely stunning, by the way. The addition of logs on the ground and the phenomenal work on the trees and lighting really paid off.  It made my system chug and really murdered the frame rate, but it was absolutely gorgeous. Though I did get "sucker-punched" a couple of times by Rhun troops coming right through big, thick trees at me.  Sneaky bastards.


Suggestions:
1) I love the Rohirrim maiden companion. She's well-designed and very useful. My inner geek twitches a bit, though. Part of what makes Eowyn's part of the story so compelling is the singularity of her effort: that rare maiden who rebels against the expected path and does something remarkable.  In the pursuit of retaining the feel of the books, it might make more sense to have the Rohir companion a male.

2) Expand the 'towns', or at least the territory, of the Rivendell faction. As it stands, they control so little territory and (in my test playing at least) do so little that earning rep with your own faction is slow. Doing so with allied factions, on the other hand, is far easier. If that was the intent, then just ignore this suggestion. In a way, it does maintain the feel of the books -- the trueblood Dunedain were rare, and Elrond's hosts not as numerous as they once were.

3) To that end, the Rangers are given significant power draw skill... but short-changed on power strike initially. As they start out with swords and no bows, that seems a little odd. Also, arming them with the longer blades of Arnor might be more in keeping with their general feel.

4) The Rangers of the North were described as going to war in mail.  The higher tier troops wear the exact same leather armour as the lower tier troops. As a result, they drop pretty quickly. For the top couple tiers of Rangers, it might be both more practical and more thematic to give them some mail, and have a chance of spawning with helmets.


I realize the suggestions are very faction-specific, but I played through with a single character to get a feel for how it would turn out. I didn't have time to experiment with other types yet.

Thanks for your time, and the excellent work on the mod. Absolutely stunning visuals.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 08, 2011, 10:25:25 AM
I think everyones view of elf superiority has been colored by the movies, even if we don't want to admit it.  Elves fought very little in the books directly.  About the only real fight between elves and orcs was when the orcs from moria chased the fellowship, and even that was basically they were sniped from the trees, not hand to hand combat.

I rather dislike the movies, though they were absolutely gorgeous eye-candy, and I don't think I've ever finished watching them. My impression of the danger elves presents came from the Silmarillion -- though I remember (perhaps incorrectly) that in the Silmarillion the orcs were scary and dangerous as Hell.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: thecalaquendi on November 08, 2011, 11:59:32 AM
Not really of the utmost importance or anything, but the "intro movie" is of very low (graphical) quality and looks terrible on larger screens (1920 x 1080 for instance).  The narrator's voice is pretty bad as well, to be honest.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barf on November 08, 2011, 12:22:56 PM
About the elves battle prowess being exaggerated, Finrod Felagund kills a werewolf with his bare hands somewhere in the Silmarillion. I think the elves weakness was that they didn't breed like rabbits and the only reason for what tiny population they had was because they were ageless, when one died there wasn't another there to step into it's place.

The Minas Tirith map icon has a nice alpha cutout but it's not being used correctly.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 08, 2011, 12:30:04 PM
Not really of the utmost importance or anything, but the "intro movie" is of very low (graphical) quality and looks terrible on larger screens (1920 x 1080 for instance).  The narrator's voice is pretty bad as well, to be honest.

Thank you very much for the heartfelt feedback. We'll be sure to fire our voiceover guy.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 08, 2011, 12:48:26 PM
Not really of the utmost importance or anything, but the "intro movie" is of very low (graphical) quality and looks terrible on larger screens (1920 x 1080 for instance).  The narrator's voice is pretty bad as well, to be honest.

Thank you very much for the heartfelt feedback. We'll be sure to fire our voiceover guy.
We don't even want to think of all that money we foolishly spent on voice acting... Please apply for a refund if you are unhappy about anything mod-related, or even if you have a bad hair day. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 08, 2011, 02:08:09 PM
I for one thought the intro was cool. I loved the artwork.

As far as the voiceover, it sounded fine to me. It conveyed the message and set the tone for the mod. I doubt I could do any better (actually, I could probably do much, much worse - lol).

It wasn't box office quality, but for what you guys paid for it I think it was quite a steal. ;)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on November 08, 2011, 02:52:03 PM
Hi all,

I have played some and would like to forward some thoughts on the early gameplay, i e before the outbreak of the war. And yes, I remember devs said that the events are speeded up to speed up feedback on later game stages. Anyway:

- resources should be side specific (NO, they should not). A common currency for goodies resp. baddies. Otherwise you may get stuck somewhere far from home because you have local troops which you won`t be able to pay for at home. That's your problem of not planning your army correctly
Meaning of course you`ll earn less resources/achievement for balances sake.

- the game world is so vast and beautiful that I myself want to explore it much more before the war interferes. Please make an option of slower leveling/later war or, let`s whisper it, no war at all... Decreasing xp earned would do wonders for immersion. Especially escort missions and defeating assassin attacks are ridiculously overpaid.

- I only play good factions and at least elves/dunedain lvl too fast now.

- the starting char is too weak. You actually enlist in an army so you should get basic lvl 1 equipment in  as new condition and better fighting skills. Not as good as an lvl 1 NPC though. With slower levelling and lots of wonderful medium/high lvl items you`ll have plenty of occasions to be deeply satisfied when you at last get one anyway.
MB has this rags-to-riches feeling, and we chose to preserve it, by having a weakling at start. Even if it slightly contradicts the logic of ME.

And yet another big thanks to the devs for this great effort.

Rgds, Oldtimer
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Surrealbeliefs on November 08, 2011, 04:01:21 PM
I think everyones view of elf superiority has been colored by the movies, even if we don't want to admit it.  Elves fought very little in the books directly.  About the only real fight between elves and orcs was when the orcs from moria chased the fellowship, and even that was basically they were sniped from the trees, not hand to hand combat.

I rather dislike the movies, though they were absolutely gorgeous eye-candy, and I don't think I've ever finished watching them. My impression of the danger elves presents came from the Silmarillion -- though I remember (perhaps incorrectly) that in the Silmarillion the orcs were scary and dangerous as Hell.

Then there's Fingolfin's battle with Morgoth, where he even managed to wound Morgoth. Of course we only have a couple of First Age elves still living in Middle Earth (Galadriel, Glorinfindel), but the Elves are still a potent force. Glorinfindel was able to kill a Balrog (at the cost of his life), but of course we can't compare Elf lords from a different age to the run of the mill Elf. I think it's fair to say that they were lethal fighters, I mean, they're immortal for one. You tend to pick up some skills over time.

They fought very little in the Third Age, but in the First and Second Age they were still pretty active. It just had already drastically been reduced by the end of the First Age. Of course that's if you count The Silmarillion.

I agree with just reducing their numbers, increasing their upkeep and keeping them as lethal fighters. Of course I'm not sure how that would interact with the AI's battles.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 08, 2011, 04:16:11 PM
- resources should be side specific (NO, they should not). A common currency for goodies resp. baddies. Otherwise you may get stuck somewhere far from home because you have local troops which you won`t be able to pay for at home. That's your problem of not planning your army correctly
Meaning of course you`ll earn less resources/achievement for balances sake.

I agree with the devs here, but I think the quests should try to keep the player in his own theatre of war. Factions from one theatre should not send the player on one-way quests like "deliver a message" and "escort a caravan" to another theatre because players tend to follow the quests and then there is a good chance of sticking to another theatre of war if it is much more active then yours.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: thecalaquendi on November 08, 2011, 04:21:44 PM
Not really of the utmost importance or anything, but the "intro movie" is of very low (graphical) quality and looks terrible on larger screens (1920 x 1080 for instance).  The narrator's voice is pretty bad as well, to be honest.

Thank you very much for the heartfelt feedback. We'll be sure to fire our voiceover guy.

We don't even want to think of all that money we foolishly spent on voice acting... Please apply for a refund if you are unhappy about anything mod-related, or even if you have a bad hair day. :)

My apologies, I was under the impression this thread was purposed for feedback and suggestions.  I will make sure to limit my next comments to the usual "OMG! THIS MOD IS ***ING AWESOME! PS THE TEXTURES ARE SOOOO COOOOL I CANT HELP BUT TO CUM ALL OVER MY KEYBOARD!!"

That is, if you so insist.

The intro is something we've done a while ago and we know the video quality isn't great. If you think it's a good idea to have a download file 50-150 MB larger, sure, we can throw in an HD version. Also, honesty is nice, but can also be hurtful. The "pretty bad narrator" frequents these forums and reads these comments. But hey, why should he feel bad, right? He's bad.

We want feedback yes, but there's no need to be rude.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 08, 2011, 05:18:56 PM
- resources should be side specific (NO, they should not). A common currency for goodies resp. baddies. Otherwise you may get stuck somewhere far from home because you have local troops which you won`t be able to pay for at home. That's your problem of not planning your army correctly
Meaning of course you`ll earn less resources/achievement for balances sake.

I agree with the devs here, but I think the quests should try to keep the player in his own theatre of war. Factions from one theatre should not send the player on one-way quests like "deliver a message" and "escort a caravan" to another theatre because players tend to follow the quests and then there is a good chance of sticking to another theatre of war if it is much more active then yours.
Note that all quests are limited by range, so you never go too far - the map is huge and we didn't want the apparently random and all over the map quest target choices as in Native. Keeping them in the same theater would have been too limiting for theaters with small number of friendly locations.

@thecalaquendi: criticism is ok, but your tone was obviously meant to hurt, and that's not nice. Sometimes some non-English speakers use a rougher, unfriendlier version of English and are not aware of it, but there are plenty of nice posters to learn from.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 08, 2011, 05:57:44 PM
- resources should be side specific (NO, they should not). A common currency for goodies resp. baddies. Otherwise you may get stuck somewhere far from home because you have local troops which you won`t be able to pay for at home. That's your problem of not planning your army correctly
Meaning of course you`ll earn less resources/achievement for balances sake.

I agree with the devs here, but I think the quests should try to keep the player in his own theatre of war. Factions from one theatre should not send the player on one-way quests like "deliver a message" and "escort a caravan" to another theatre because players tend to follow the quests and then there is a good chance of sticking to another theatre of war if it is much more active then yours.
Note that all quests are limited by range, so you never go too far - the map is huge and we didn't want the apparently random and all over the map quest target choices as in Native. Keeping them in the same theater would have been too limiting for theaters with small number of friendly locations.

I'm not talking about the range of the quests purely in the sense of units of measurement. My suggestion is to make a one-way quest between the theatres impossible. In my main game with version 3.0, I played a Rivendell Elf, and I got a one-way quest from Lothlorien to Rohan. Once I completed it, I started engaging Isengard parties and aiding Rohan in defence of their settlements. After some time, my elven troops were lost and mostly replaced by Rohan troops. Frequency of large battles also allowed me to raise my rank with Rohan to Great Hope and increased the number of troops I could lead. Finally, I had upkeep of around 6000 Rohan RP. As soon as I would try to go somewhere else, the paytime would come and I had to go back to Rohan to earn their RP so I could pay my Rohirrim.

I'm aware the player can make the hard choice and change his region of activity at the cost of some experienced troops, but it's no fun and many players who start in the north and go with the flow of quests have a good chance of ending up in Rohan or Gondor.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 08, 2011, 06:32:07 PM
If you give half of your troops away before leaving, they will give you lots and lots of RP.

Personally I mix troops from more than one nation so that I don't have a problem. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: nacrox on November 08, 2011, 06:46:30 PM
How about adding an option to the lords/marshalls to make them siege a city using some formula with influence+resources+persuasion+faction.target.strenght elements?

It would be an option added to the menu where you can assign tasks to the lords, and it could use a lot of influence and minimum rank to keep it balanced.

It could even add spice to the strategic level gameplay by adding the factor of collecting influence points for two or three sieges in a row, for a larger campaign :p
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on November 08, 2011, 07:19:12 PM
- resources should be side specific (NO, they should not). A common currency for goodies resp. baddies. Otherwise you may get stuck somewhere far from home because you have local troops which you won`t be able to pay for at home. That's your problem of not planning your army correctly
Meaning of course you`ll earn less resources/achievement for balances sake.

I agree with the devs here, but I think the quests should try to keep the player in his own theatre of war. Factions from one theatre should not send the player on one-way quests like "deliver a message" and "escort a caravan" to another theatre because players tend to follow the quests and then there is a good chance of sticking to another theatre of war if it is much more active then yours.
Note that all quests are limited by range, so you never go too far - the map is huge and we didn't want the apparently random and all over the map quest target choices as in Native. Keeping them in the same theater would have been too limiting for theaters with small number of friendly locations.

I'm not talking about the range of the quests purely in the sense of units of measurement. My suggestion is to make a one-way quest between the theatres impossible. In my main game with version 3.0, I played a Rivendell Elf, and I got a one-way quest from Lothlorien to Rohan. Once I completed it, I started engaging Isengard parties and aiding Rohan in defence of their settlements. After some time, my elven troops were lost and mostly replaced by Rohan troops. Frequency of large battles also allowed me to raise my rank with Rohan to Great Hope and increased the number of troops I could lead. Finally, I had upkeep of around 6000 Rohan RP. As soon as I would try to go somewhere else, the paytime would come and I had to go back to Rohan to earn their RP so I could pay my Rohirrim.

I'm aware the player can make the hard choice and change his region of activity at the cost of some experienced troops, but it's no fun and many players who start in the north and go with the flow of quests have a good chance of ending up in Rohan or Gondor.

Hi again,

the thing with one-way quests is that you can be sent from Rivendell to Rohan where you get a quest to Gondor AFAIU and so on, never to return home by quest as per above. So it`s not always bad army composition planning by player.
I`m a role-player so I try fulfilling tasks and make a difference but preferably close to home.
Of course I could give away "wrong" troops and with current levelling speed of NPC:s get a good unit at home pretty fast. But I grow attached to my men... Role-player, you know...

Rgds, Oldtimer
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 08, 2011, 08:40:20 PM
The voice-over is pretty good. Which means it isn't perfect... but it'd be hard to get perfect without millions of dollars.



With the side-specific resource thing... actually, you could do that somewhat, quite reasonably. If famous British commandos wandered into an American camp during WW2, you can bet the Americans would've helped them out.

Now, while the other factions of the evil side aren't as nice... the fact is, they are trying to win a war here. If they have a choice of giving their son a sword to go out and die, or giving the sword to some orc who can fight and die instead... the orc is the better option.
There's also the point that you don't want to offend your allies. And that means if a General of an ally comes and would like some assistance, you tend to give them assistance.


Thus it could be as simple as this: You can use your points from other factions, to buy things and so forth. However, items are twice as expensive. This way, you can be helped out by your allies... but it's only help. Not being supplied.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 08, 2011, 09:59:24 PM
I think Dol Guldur might need to be tweaked (assuming it wasn't already tweaked in 3.01, this happened in my 3.00 game that I was attempting to finish). Let me describe a scenario:

I was a dwarf, and after having destroyed both Rhun and Gundabad after extensive fighting decided to move on to Dol Guldur. All the local factions were very strong, but weren't really fighting Dol Guldur much. At this point Dol Guldur had 3000 strength and only the capital left standing (the camp had been wiped by Mirkwood way before). At one point it had been down to 2400, but I was busy with Gundabad and they had rallied. They had 3 lords and were spawning a few scout parties. I camped outside their place with a group of 140 elite Longbeard Axedwarves and just massacred group after group after group. Their leader just kept coming every few days with 240 troops, mixed with the other guys every so often.

After three months spent camping outside wiping out everything that would come outside, I had killed probably 8000 orcs. I had wiped out their main group probably 25 times (he kept coming out more than his underlings) and his two underlings 10 or so times each. All that and Dol Guldur was still at 1200 strength. The problem was, each time I killed their hosts they only lost 80 strength. Each day it regened them 20 strength. And it often took several days between them coming out. After another few weeks of it I finally got them to dip below 1000 and then Mirkwood came along and sieged them and finished them off (siege was unfinished I assume? it's currently a room stuffed with orcs with a door and no way for the orcs to shoot outside from inside, so basically a long drawn out battle between 5 elves and 5 orcs in the doorway slowly hacking at eachother with 300 on both sides right behind them just kinda hanging out yelling).

I think the main issue is their lack of outposts, so they just don't get many parties out there to be defeated and thus don't lose much. They always lose their north outpost early to Mirkwood, and then they just kinda stop fighting and regen. Might be good to add another Dol Guldur camp or two.

Might not just be Dol Guldur though. Moria is sitting at 2400 strength and is just kinda sitting back with nobody attacking it and none of the lords coming out to fight.


A suggestion: Perhaps factions could launch expeditions to reclaim razed towns/camps? It could reactivate the camp with 0 defenders (which I assume would trigger the enemy lords to come siege it again) and start spawning parties there and send the friendly lords there to patrol the area and defend it. If it isn't destroyed after a month or so it could repopulate and be functional again. This way you wouldn't have the current situation where once a faction loses all its outposts before it's beneath the 1000 strength cutoff it won't just sit back and recuperate, it will attempt to reclaim its land and both sides would still be actively fighting and going on campaign. This is in the plans, yes

It may already be, but if it isn't the faction strength regen could be based on the number of towns it currently has. That way razing the enemy camps is more meaningful, since it cuts their ability to rally. The capital might be cut back to 0 regen just so they will eventually wear down below 1000 where they can be finally sieged if they're so overwhelmed that they can't retake any of their camps.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Meevar the Mighty on November 09, 2011, 01:19:01 AM

I don't know if you read the Silmarillion, but the strengths and weaknesses Middle Earth's races are detailed in that book, as are most relevant things about Tolkien's world aside from LoTR's plot. I personally felt that Peter Jackson's films overstated the strengths of any single orc. Middle Earth seemed doomed because orcs were numerous and elves and dwarves were rapidly declining in population. This left men, of which most were bad and the rest were fickle. The average orc is not equivelant to the average elf, just as the average elf is not equivelant to the average troll or balrog. Elves have killed trolls and balrogs, but only in special cases or in armies.

On voice acting; it's more gruelling than some people think and I doubt the esteemed volunteer will be volunteering to re-do anything in a hurry. I cringe a little when my Noldor elite or knights of Dol Amroth shout something with a voice from Bree, but it's very hard to please everybody.

On the companion from Edoras; I think her backstory is perfectly consistent with LoTR and generally well thought out. I would have her eyes less close together so I didn't mistake her for an orc, but it's a companion well worth earning anyway. I don't think Tolkien intended for Eowyn to be a special case, as he fought in WWI and described Eowyn as a representative if the countless women who helped their country in war.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 09, 2011, 01:36:14 AM
On the companion from Edoras; I think her backstory is perfectly consistent with LoTR and generally well thought out. I would have her eyes less close together so I didn't mistake her for an orc, but it's a companion well worth earning anyway. I don't think Tolkien intended for Eowyn to be a special case, as he fought in WWI and described Eowyn as a representative if the countless women who helped their country in war.
My favorite NPC too, especially the little speech she gives when passing by an old Rohan battlefield.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ron Losey on November 09, 2011, 04:09:13 AM
Mentioned elsewhere, but I'll post it here too:

While working on the weapon stats, I found the bug with the Lembas bread.  Not tested yet, but it should be fixed now (as soon as the new stuff gets finished and distributed).  Since there were a number of questions, comments, and reports of the bug ... thought everyone would like to know.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 09, 2011, 05:08:38 AM
Mentioned elsewhere, but I'll post it here too:

While working on the weapon stats, I found the bug with the Lembas bread.  Not tested yet, but it should be fixed now (as soon as the new stuff gets finished and distributed).  Since there were a number of questions, comments, and reports of the bug ... thought everyone would like to know.

You mean itp_consumable? No need to be secretive about it, and we need to fix it regardless of RCM.
And by fixing, I mean probably moving it out of food range, so it doesn't get consumed at all. Although I recall a team decision to make it consumable for some reason.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 09, 2011, 05:30:03 AM
It makes sense to make food consumable, doesn't it O.o...? It does mean you will need to get some more every so often. Point will be to make it a worth while food item, that boosts morale and lasts some time.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 09, 2011, 05:44:24 AM
For 10 IP, Lembas should really be worth more than 30 units of food. I think it was something like 250 in the 0.808 version.

You should also make the food quest take the food in the order it finds it in the inventory so that we can choose which food to give away. Currently, it seems to take the cheapest food first, with Lembas being the second cheapest after cram rations.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Karunel on November 09, 2011, 07:44:05 AM
Well, after some heavy testing  :P, I've registered to drop some suggestions about what's being my biggest complaint so far: the course of war. Please note I've been playing 3.0 but as I've been unable to find what exactly changes in 3.1, I'll state what I find wrong by now.

First of all, absolutely mindblowing work on the mod. I've been enjoying it inmensely and the inmersion is total. Specially inside the woods. I don't know how you did it but you sure did it perfectly.

Now, about war. I'm currenly at day 400 with a Gondor character. Rohan is the only 'good guy' having a bad time, which is to be expected comparing army compositions, and Umbar and Rhun have been sent packing to their homelands.

What are the problems I'm noticing? Basically 3.

- In 400 days, only five leaders have died. That would not be such a problem if it wasn't for 2:
- Leaders are way too cautious when deciding when to siege or move agressively. Dol Guldur has been under 2000 for a long while and I have Dale, Erebor and Mirkwood sitting 'considering their options' instead of sieging the goddamned North outpost. Now this wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for 3:
-Leaders change their mind whenever a host respawns inside the sieged town. This means it's basically impossible to 'finish' someone as they change their mind when they see the new number of troops inside. As per #1 we know leaders just won't die so the game is one giant stalemate in which only factions with plenty of outposts suffer the destruction of some and then it just bogs down to a LENGHTY and boring state of things.

I understand you don't want the game to end in day 100 but from what I'm seeing (the good guys at least), the leaders of the factions just seem happy to spend forever in war. I'd say some proactivity is needed.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 09, 2011, 07:51:34 AM
Hmm.... Here's a suggestion: Momentum.

Let's say that factions put out five war parties a week, for this example. As the war goes on, they'd start to increase their war productivity. 30 days in, and they're sending out 10 War Parties a week.

This could work out to be quite interesting. On one hand, it could work to keep factions alive and kicking early on, allowing the game to last and build up.

On another hand... it could also be used to make the game get harder as it goes on, rather than easier. Mordor, for example, might start out with a productivity of 6 units a week, then upping to 15 units a week after 30 days, as an example. This way, it'd also be easier in some ways to decrease a faction's strength.


Does this sound like a possible element of gameplay, for TLD?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Estrathor on November 09, 2011, 07:57:38 AM
I wouldn't mind seeing some more normal Orc faces and skin tones and maybe height and weight differences. Would add a bit more variety and diversity to the Orcs even though you have done an excellent job on them already i just think im killing the same orc over and over. height and weight not possible. faces are different in 3.01. Skintones can be made different, but that would contrast with armors that have built-in skin, which can have only 1 tone.

Also i would like it if you could tell your companions to split from the party and follow you maybe give them some troops and be able to store them in the barracks instead of sending them home which makes it a bit of a mission to get back. Good idea with garrisoning, yes. And can be done

The quest where you are asked to go capture a leader needs changing because you cant capture leaders so maybe you add some sort of elite troop to war parties that are classed as leaders eg Gundabad Blackshield, 1st age elf, Uruk General and units like that  you can capture the leaders. But only when you have this quest active
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ron Losey on November 09, 2011, 08:05:51 AM
Mentioned elsewhere, but I'll post it here too:

While working on the weapon stats, I found the bug with the Lembas bread.  Not tested yet, but it should be fixed now (as soon as the new stuff gets finished and distributed).  Since there were a number of questions, comments, and reports of the bug ... thought everyone would like to know.

You mean itp_consumable? No need to be secretive about it, and we need to fix it regardless of RCM.
And by fixing, I mean probably moving it out of food range, so it doesn't get consumed at all. Although I recall a team decision to make it consumable for some reason.

Actually, it had  "itp_consumable" turned on, but not "itp_food" ... so it was consumable, but there was no code to tell the game when to consume it.  That's why the bug was missed the first time... the consumable flag was there, so it looked like the critical component was in place, but without both it will not work. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: pagan on November 09, 2011, 08:43:17 AM
Not really of the utmost importance or anything, but the "intro movie" is of very low (graphical) quality and looks terrible on larger screens (1920 x 1080 for instance).  The narrator's voice is pretty bad as well, to be honest.

Pretty bad? but not totally bad, right. Thats better then the "dire" i got else where. Then again i have also recieved quite a few,  'awesomes', 'loved the', and so on. i suspect the vast majority felt it was just 'meh' good enough, does the job. and hence never bothered commenting, which is fine too. least i got a response out of you. So well done champ. The fact is, however, they are all just opinions, and like assholes, everyone has one.

No i am not offended or feeling bad, i don't think you meant it as an insult, but even if you did, you are insagnificant, to be honest, so i wouldn't be hurt. But perhaps you forgot for a moment that we are amateurs working on a mod, for a long long time, which we then give out for FREE, and you were expecting Mark Of Choas intro or something. We tried, but the matrix team here in oz were busy. sucks i know. Quite a few things folk have complained about are a direct result of them forgetting we are not a professional company. The wait naturally built up the hype, so to speak. Yes the guys work is easily professional, but that doesn't change the fact that we are not pro's. And hence everyhting was done by amatuers, and I, like the others stepped up where needed.

Part of the intro makes me cringe, and i suspect it isn't just hearing my own voice. As a result of the drastic reduction in quality, the audio turned to crap also. In the HD version my voice is nowhere near so loud and all consuming, also the Sound fx in the background for each page turn all went to crap and can hardly be heard, thats 3 straight sleepless nights down the can. Not to mention the music turning to fuzz or Merl artwork becoming pixelatted to heresy. You think it's bad, try MAKING IT only to see it reduced to piss because you cant have an intro thats bigger in size then the bloody game, and you think your dissapointed. 

Mate, you don't know the half of it.

Thank you very much for the heartfelt feedback. We'll be sure to fire our voiceover guy.

 :o but..but
Don't even try to argue! Also, we suspend your lavish severance package and your stock options! :P
You ARE giving back the Bentley and the yacht. No discussion.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Marmalade on November 09, 2011, 10:07:42 AM

Pretty bad? ...

For what it's worth, I was surprised and pleased at the quality of the voice acting - for a mod this is far more than sufficient.

Are there any plans for further narration? Perhaps the "War has begun" cutscene or something similar?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 09, 2011, 10:22:31 AM
I also thought the voice-over in the intro was well done. The entire intro, in fact, added a lovely amount of flavour and had me grinning the first time I loaded up the game.

I don't know if you read the Silmarillion, but the strengths and weaknesses Middle Earth's races are detailed in that book, as are most relevant things about Tolkien's world aside from LoTR's plot.

I did indeed! Have a first print copy. :) My mother accidentally got it from a 'book of the month club' when i was a kid, but hates fantasy and so tucked it away. It's a lovely old edition with Tolkien's drawings of the personal crests of certain elf lords and ladies (Luthien, Fingolfin, Earendil, Celebrindal, Elwe, and Feanor)... which were crazy-ass complex. It was some two or three years after I'd read the Lord of the Rings before I finally realized what my mother had tucked away on her bookshelf. :D

Quote
On the companion from Edoras; I think her backstory is perfectly consistent with LoTR and generally well thought out. I would have her eyes less close together so I didn't mistake her for an orc, but it's a companion well worth earning anyway. I don't think Tolkien intended for Eowyn to be a special case, as he fought in WWI and described Eowyn as a representative if the countless women who helped their country in war.

Except he specifically mentioned that she was defying the traditions of her people in doing so, and painted her out as a singular example. She may have been representative of many women of courage who helped out in WWI... but women in WWI generally didn't strap on the ol' Tommy Gun and leap over the trenches to join in suicidal charges, either. Eowyn was representative of a number of women Tolkien respected, but she was herself a maiden of a royal household in a quasi-medieval/dark ages setting where the role of women was very different. She pulled an Eleanor of Aquitaine or Joan of Arc, and defied the expected gender role as part of her great act of heroism.

Which is part of the reason why I have a hate-on for Arwen one-upping her in the movies. Talk about stealing somebody's thunder.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 09, 2011, 10:35:10 AM
- the starting char is too weak. You actually enlist in an army so you should get basic lvl 1 equipment in  as new condition and better fighting skills. Not as good as an lvl 1 NPC though. With slower levelling and lots of wonderful medium/high lvl items you`ll have plenty of occasions to be deeply satisfied when you at last get one anyway.
MB has this rags-to-riches feeling, and we chose to preserve it, by having a weakling at start. Even if it slightly contradicts the logic of ME.

Not to harp on a point, or add a simple 'me too', but I agree with Oldtimer. The current chargen system in Last Days doesn't just spit out a rags-to-riches type character who does the whole 'heroic journey' -- turning from dirt-grubbing lowlie into ass-kicking armoured tank. The new characters in TLD actually start out weaker than their M&B counterparts. Equipment that's worse, fewer skill points, and weapon skills at 15 for what's supposed to be a trained warrior.

I don't think characters should come out of the gate as champions, but it would be nice if they at least preserved the feeling of their faction and background. The Dunedain, for example, start with 3 power draw... but no bow. Just a second-hand short sword.  If you're starting troops out with melee equipment, allowing some ability in that direction would be appropriate. And giving the PC any shield skill at all automatically gives that to every NPC on the field... so whether or not players wish to do a shield-oriented game should probably be left up to them. 

Sure, they're nitpicky details, but they're also very easy to tweak.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 09, 2011, 11:54:22 AM
- the starting char is too weak. You actually enlist in an army so you should get basic lvl 1 equipment in  as new condition and better fighting skills. Not as good as an lvl 1 NPC though. With slower levelling and lots of wonderful medium/high lvl items you`ll have plenty of occasions to be deeply satisfied when you at last get one anyway.
MB has this rags-to-riches feeling, and we chose to preserve it, by having a weakling at start. Even if it slightly contradicts the logic of ME.

Not to harp on a point, or add a simple 'me too', but I agree with Oldtimer. The current chargen system in Last Days doesn't just spit out a rags-to-riches type character who does the whole 'heroic journey' -- turning from dirt-grubbing lowlie into ass-kicking armoured tank. The new characters in TLD actually start out weaker than their M&B counterparts. Equipment that's worse, fewer skill points, and weapon skills at 15 for what's supposed to be a trained warrior.

I don't think characters should come out of the gate as champions, but it would be nice if they at least preserved the feeling of their faction and background. The Dunedain, for example, start with 3 power draw... but no bow. Just a second-hand short sword.  If you're starting troops out with melee equipment, allowing some ability in that direction would be appropriate. And giving the PC any shield skill at all automatically gives that to every NPC on the field... so whether or not players wish to do a shield-oriented game should probably be left up to them. 

Sure, they're nitpicky details,...
Both nitpicky and anti-gameplay. The player character needs to be handicapped, as it's the most powerful troop in the game. Imagine coming up into the game as a noble knight with a full set of equipment - the whole "upgrade equipment" subgame is ruined. The lower you start, the more fun you get slowly piecing your gear together.
Right about the shield skill though, that's just fluff, and we'll be better off starting with 0 there.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Khamukkamu on November 09, 2011, 12:09:36 PM
I for one enjoy the rags-to-riches feel of TLD. I also think it makes sense when looking at ranks. For example, though you are a "Commander," the Isengard Uruk starts out as a Snaga, which I think means slave. So as a slave, I feel you have just been working and not really part of the standing army. Of course you have been into lots of fights, hence some skills in certain areas. But you are not a Fighting Uruk Champion. So for me, it makes sense that a Snaga only has some boots and a stick, and then works his butt off at the training ground. I practice at the training ground till the weapon skill i want is up to 60 (mostly melee, as its close to impossible to raise Archery in training grounds).

I think a dwarf starts out with a rank of Miner as well, so as a miner it is expected for him to have a pick and some good boots.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Marmalade on November 09, 2011, 12:25:02 PM
I don't think there's a problem with the player progression in TLD - the slope is pretty short (in comparison to something like PoP, in any case), and you quickly get up to a decent level of ability pretty quickly... once your faction starts besieging cities there's really few money problems left at that point, for the most part.

If you're really bothered, then export the character, give yourself a ton of XP and import it again? You could give yourself a load of money whilst you're at it and have no problems.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 09, 2011, 12:42:21 PM
I'd also like to chime in and say that the intro was quite nice and of nice quality :)

Plus, remember that people will watch it the one time then skip it. It simply isn't all that important, and we should be glad they made one this good at all. ;)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 09, 2011, 12:59:24 PM
I just did a quick run through char creation, and it's a bit unbalanced. Also, there seems to be a random element adding skills. Starting twice with the same char gets a different number of total skills, with you sometimes getting extras and sometimes not. Warning: Long post.  :P

Heres a rundown of the different characters and their stat/skill points. I just took totals, since that was easy to keep track of. I didn't count the points to be allocated (4 stat, 4 skill, + any int bonus - left those out). This is probably spoilery, but I figured having it compiled would point out issues that need balanced. Some of the variation is probably the random element.

Just for comparison, a Native player has: 30 stat, 14 skill.

The good side:
Elves (all the same): 32 stat, 10 skill

Dwarves
of Erebor: 26 stat, 10 skill
of Iron Hills: 31 stat, 12 skill

Humans:
Gondor:
of Minas Tirith or Dol Amroth: 25 stat, 7 skill
of Lossarnach or Lamedon: 25 stat, 8 skill
of Pinnath Gelin: 30 stat, 16 skill
of Pelargir: 30 stat, 12 skill
of Blackroot Vale: 30 stat, 11 skill
Rohan: 25 stat, 8 skill
Dunedain: 32 stat, 10 skill
Beorning: 25 stat, 9 skill
Dale: 25 stat, 8 skill


The bad side:
Orcs:
All orcs seem to be 24 stat, with a random range between 4 and 7 skill (start once, you get 4 - start again and hey 7).

Uruks:
Uruk of Mordor: 25 stat, 8 skill
Uruk-Hai of Isengard: 25 stat, 7 skill (probably the same as Mordor uruk, just randomness striking)

Men:
Haradrim Desert Man: 25 stat, 10 skill
Far Harad Tribesman: 30 stat, 11 skill
Black Numenorian: 30 stat, 12 skill
Man of Umbar: 25 stat, 9 skill
Man of Rhun: 25 stat, 12 skill
Man of Khand: 25 stat, 7 skill
Man of Dunland: 25 stat, 8 skill


Summary:
Good side:
Elves and the Dunedain get the best stats and a decent number of skills, but less than some men.
Dwarves are either nearly equal to elves (Iron Hills) or barely above men (Erebor), their extra skills are in inv management.
The men are mostly balanced at 25 stats with a range of skills that seems to include a big random element. There are three men from Gondor who for some reason have 30 stats and a higher number of skills.

Bad side:
Orcs are all balanced at 24 stat points, 1 shy of what men get. Their skills seem really random, but is several points less than most men.
Uruks are balanced at 25 stat points, the same as men get. Their skills are better than orcs, and on the lower end of men.
The evil men are partly balanced to the good men standard, with two of them (black numenorians and far harad tribesmen) with 30 stats and more skills like some of the Gondor men.


My suggestion: Decide on a stat and skill total for each race and make them all balanced in terms of total stat/skill points, and change the random element to always give the same skill totals. Maybe have one Orc with a point in power throw and another with a point in mounted archery instead, but not one orc with a point in power throw and mounted archery and spotting and another just missing those 3 points.

For example, maybe something like this:
Orcs: 24 stat, 8 skills
Uruks: 25 stat, 10 skills
Men: 25 stat, 12 skills
Elite men (Dunedain and Black Numenorians): 30 stat, 12 skills.
Dwarves: 31 stat, 14 skills
Elves: 32 stat, 12 skills

Oh, and another little trick you can use for char creation that I've done in the past (back when I actually released mods, :P): If you want players to have more skill points to assign and thus more freedom, you can cut the starting intelligence of the player troop. That way when the char creation process raises it, it will give skill points to the assignment pool. By cutting starting int to 0 you can give the player 8 points to assign instead of 4, which would give 4 points across the board and let people customize their chars more.
Stats between factions or races need not be balanced, as gameplay differs depending on your choice (and will differ more in future patches, we have plans). Stats within one faction and race (like e.g. Gondor) need to be balanced yes, to not rule out completely inferior choices. Thanks for the reminder

Also, since I'm suggesting this, I'll also volunteer to do the work if you guys want it done. I'd just need the source for the menus file and some parameters on how you'd want things balanced and I could have it ready pretty quick.
it's only some troop stat change, even easier than menus. Starting char = tier1 troop wrt stats
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: sebas32ar on November 09, 2011, 01:11:44 PM
Hi amazing mod!
But... I want to be king of rohan, give castles to my companions and start sieges... Is in your plans to make something like that? It will be amazing, if some lord of rohan dies, we can take his place in his castle. The same with Theoden. I want to lead the rohan country!
Thanks

Not going to happen, sorry.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 09, 2011, 02:07:26 PM
Quote from: GetAssista
Stats between factions or races need not be balanced, as gameplay differs depending on your choice (and will differ more in future patches, we have plans). Stats within one faction and race (like e.g. Gondor) need to be balanced yes, to not rule out completely inferior choices. Thanks for the reminder

it's only some troop stat change, even easier than menus. Starting char = tier1 troop wrt stats

Yea, I get that. I just meant they needed balance between the ones of the same race - like the two vastly different dwarf starts, the differences in the men starts, etc. And the random element.

Do the tier 1 troop stats have a random element, or is that within the menus itself? I notice a lot of the faction choices are being given skills randomly, which imho isn't ideal.

Like I started as an orc of isengard and got 3 points in athletics and 1 in power strike, nothing else. Starting again with the same start gave me those skills plus spotting and horse archery.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 09, 2011, 04:30:27 PM
Quote from: GetAssista
Stats between factions or races need not be balanced, as gameplay differs depending on your choice (and will differ more in future patches, we have plans). Stats within one faction and race (like e.g. Gondor) need to be balanced yes, to not rule out completely inferior choices. Thanks for the reminder

it's only some troop stat change, even easier than menus. Starting char = tier1 troop wrt stats

Yea, I get that. I just meant they needed balance between the ones of the same race - like the two vastly different dwarf starts, the differences in the men starts, etc. And the random element.

Do the tier 1 troop stats have a random element, or is that within the menus itself? I notice a lot of the faction choices are being given skills randomly, which imho isn't ideal.

Like I started as an orc of isengard and got 3 points in athletics and 1 in power strike, nothing else. Starting again with the same start gave me those skills plus spotting and horse archery.

Char export, modify, char import.

I already cheat path finding on the evil side being the vast imbalance in troop strength, on good I don't touch anything.  You can customize the skills to what you think they should be starting.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 09, 2011, 08:14:48 PM
I'm wondering if the game would have more of a Tolkien feel if the Tolkien "racism" was there.

I can't imagine dwarves recruiting elves (that was a big part of the fellowship, an elf dwarf friendship).

Likewise I can't imagine orcs and men working in the same unit side by side.   

They would fight a common enemy but not intermingle.   
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Darth Trog on November 09, 2011, 08:28:09 PM
For those who have kids and know  how much of a pain "are we there yet" can be, I would like to point out just as kids can be cute the first time they say this, after the 50th time you want to shut them up.

This is how I feel about the mutiny option for the evil side, cute the first time,  a pain after this. An option to turn this "problem" off would be very nice.

Now for the real question.

Since the option to burn down or capture towns, outposts are not in this mod,  there is not a good way to help an ally when needed.

I have am playing as Gondor and trying to help my Rohan allies, I defeat armies, I recruit troops and supply them to their commanders/lords,  scouts, patrols, towns,  yet no matter what I do they still are weak.   500 + troops in towns,  100 man patrols,  And they are Still being seiged to death and loosing battles to Isengard.   

I would just like something clear, not random, that I do and can see the result.  Prior it would be capture a town,  and man it.   Here, the amounts of troops could be tied to the supply trains,  or metal remains brought in to be converted to troops.

Not sure how this works in the game engine but some sort of economy related to levels of enemy troops since we do not have a direct control over what/if sieges takes place.  The strength relationships between two powers is a great concept, what is not so great is how as a player to affect this, both to lower the other side and to raise your friends.  Since your time can't really do both,  you should be able to see clearly what the result of your actions really produces in terms of either troops that are active around a town,  or lords that do actions.

The other thing is lords who are resting in a town, the dialog to give troops should be added,  since they like to sit and sulk with their personal guard after they loose a battle.  there they sit for a month with 10 guys and no way to get them motivated to do anything. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 09, 2011, 08:46:00 PM
I'm wondering if the game would have more of a Tolkien feel if the Tolkien "racism" was there.

I can't imagine dwarves recruiting elves (that was a big part of the fellowship, an elf dwarf friendship).

Likewise I can't imagine orcs and men working in the same unit side by side.   

They would fight a common enemy but not intermingle.
I'd disagree. While there could be a morale penalty to simulate a dislike of intermingling, it should be doable. Soldiers can't always be so picky, after all.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 09, 2011, 09:45:08 PM
Both nitpicky and anti-gameplay. The player character needs to be handicapped, as it's the most powerful troop in the game. Imagine coming up into the game as a noble knight with a full set of equipment - the whole "upgrade equipment" subgame is ruined. The lower you start, the more fun you get slowly piecing your gear together.
Right about the shield skill though, that's just fluff, and we'll be better off starting with 0 there.

I have no idea how you drew that point out of what I said, but as three people in a row seemed to get the same impression, apparently I need to clarify. I did not say, or even intend to hint at the notion, that the PCs should be starting out with incredible equipment or massive skill. I'm reasonably sure I even came out and said as much directly, though apparently I mangled it.

I suggested thematic equipment for the characters, fitting their character type and the skill dump they're getting in the beginning.  How in the name of God is that "anti-gameplay"? If you're assigning a character stats as an archer, and then price arrows and bows at a total of 3,000 resource points, leaving the character with no melee skill, no power strike, and a rusty short sword as their only weapon... how is it anti-gameplay to suggest that a character with archer skills be kitted out as an archer? Or that if they're intended to be melee troops, that they have melee-oriented stats instead?

Can you use cheats or import/export to get past this stuff? Of course. But that's not the point of this thread. The mod's awesome, beautiful, and very detailed. The little details count, and help flesh things out. 15 skill in all weapons has the feeling of an abysmal noob, rather than a recruit with potential. It just requires patience to raise, granted, but if it's not a big deal at all then why not allow characters to at least be moderately competent (skills ranging from the 20's to 70's, like Native)?

Other little touches:
1) Dunedain start out with heavy foot armour, but light or no armour everywhere else. Leather boots probably fit the 'Ranger' vibe better.

2) A thought on the combat capability of elves: I've noticed in tinkering with companions that freakishly high dex and weapon skills can make them Hell on wheels. Elves don't need huge power strike, and only require a mid-level power draw to make their bows effective. But with crazy-high dex, light armour, and fast weapons & shields, they'd be Hell on wheels. A contrast to orcs with great physical power and heavier gear.  It would seem to compliment the RCM model that Ron's proposing.

3) Riders of Rohan: more Riding skill. They're supposed to be born to the saddle, but they come across as only passable riders, and tend to get out-paced on the map despite having chiefly mounted units. Their arms and armour aren't all that impressive, and that's fine... but they should at least have kickass skill on horseback.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 09, 2011, 10:16:46 PM
I'm wondering if the game would have more of a Tolkien feel if the Tolkien "racism" was there.

I can't imagine dwarves recruiting elves (that was a big part of the fellowship, an elf dwarf friendship).

Likewise I can't imagine orcs and men working in the same unit side by side.   

They would fight a common enemy but not intermingle.

I think the 'racism' is already there for AI parties. I tend to view player's party as a sort of experimental unit of mixed racial heritage.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 10, 2011, 12:03:07 AM
I've noticed that a wave of 50 Tribal Orcs or Mountain Goblins will always reach my line of elven archers in at least some number, while 50 orcs/goblins or Mordor/Isengard/Dol Guldur/Gundabad/Moria will get wiped out before getting even within throwing range. This is because tribals don't use formations so they charge the enemy with maximum speed at very loose formation, making it difficult to hit them. Orcs and goblins of evil factions move slowly in ranks formation making them an easy target for even the worst archers (if they miss one they will almost certainly hit another one). It might seem like their shields protect them but they are so weak they can stand 3 arrow hits at most. My suggestion is to make AI charge the enemy if the enemy has strong archers rather than using ranks formation by default in all cases.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 10, 2011, 02:23:21 AM
The option to trade ("rework") metal scraps of one grade into another grade would be handy.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Davos on November 10, 2011, 03:52:46 AM
I've just raised my first Swan Knight as to compare it with a Knight of the Citadel, and to my surprise they had the same stats !

I thought Swan Knights were the best Gondor could have... Maybe I'm mistaking, not being a "Master of the Tolkien Lore", but anyway even if those 2 knight orders are supposed to have overall the same strengh, maybe there should be "some" differences in stats, like one rides better, one strikes harder, etc... Don't you think ?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Banok on November 10, 2011, 03:57:59 AM
please remove the random char starting stats, and no character export dont work. 0 in all skills and 3 in attributes and let us choose would be better ;)

character export/import obviously works, i use it all the time.

how about a tribal goblin cave, location where tribal goblins can be found and fought, at least pre-war. so new players can fight some easy stuff and train troops. sometimes you never get any goblin quests.

imo turn off message quests to allied factions, or at least between gondor and rohan its way to far because of mountains.

maybe make trolls in troll quest like tribal orc quest where only you can engage them.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 10, 2011, 04:11:01 AM
I'm wondering if the game would have more of a Tolkien feel if the Tolkien "racism" was there.
I can't imagine dwarves recruiting elves (that was a big part of the fellowship, an elf dwarf friendship).
Likewise I can't imagine orcs and men working in the same unit side by side.   
They would fight a common enemy but not intermingle.

I think the 'racism' is already there for AI parties. I tend to view player's party as a sort of experimental unit of mixed racial heritage.
Yes, that's a no-starter, with nothing to gain except some nerd points with the lore extremist faction. And lose a whole lot more with everybody else. This is obvious, right?
You can always imagine that your party is a military version of the Fellowship, good or evil. It's unique and you are special. That explains away anything.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 10, 2011, 04:19:25 AM
Suggestion: For the evil faction, you should have it that once you win totally, you have the option of challenging your faction leader to a duel. If you win, then in the exposition (if there is any) at the end, it changes a little to mention how you became Sultan of the Haradrim or some-such.

A nice little touch, that would make it slightly more awesome.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 10, 2011, 04:52:54 AM
Suggestion: For the evil faction, you should have it that once you win totally, you have the option of challenging your faction leader to a duel. If you win, then in the exposition (if there is any) at the end, it changes a little to mention how you became Sultan of the Haradrim or some-such.

A nice little touch, that would make it slightly more awesome.
The lone wanderer ventured forth from Vault the Haradrim hinterlands, and helped in making the world a place safe for orcs.
It was not until the end of this long road that the Lone Wanderer was faced with that greatest of virtues - sacrifice, when he sacrificed his Chieftain to his desert Gods. Unfortunately, he was immediately smitten to dust by the now almighty Sauron, who now enforced conservative values among his subjects, to preserve order and stability in his new world, where orcs and humans can live together in harmony.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 10, 2011, 05:11:00 AM
The lone wanderer ventured forth from Vault the Haradrim hinterlands, and helped in making the world a place safe for orcs.
It was not until the end of this long road that the Lone Wanderer was faced with that greatest of virtues - sacrifice, when he sacrificed his Chieftain to his desert Gods. Unfortunately, he was immediately smitten to dust by the now almighty Sauron, who now enforced conservative values among his subjects, to preserve order and stability in his new world, where orcs and humans can live together in harmony.
Afraid I never saw the Fallout2 endings, so I can't understand the joke. Not sure if you mean this sardonically, or just out of humour.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 10, 2011, 05:49:57 AM
The lone wanderer ventured forth from Vault the Haradrim hinterlands, and helped in making the world a place safe for orcs.
It was not until the end of this long road that the Lone Wanderer was faced with that greatest of virtues - sacrifice, when he sacrificed his Chieftain to his desert Gods. Unfortunately, he was immediately smitten to dust by the now almighty Sauron, who now enforced conservative values among his subjects, to preserve order and stability in his new world, where orcs and humans can live together in harmony.
Afraid I never saw the Fallout2 endings, so I can't understand the joke. Not sure if you mean this sardonically, or just out of humour.
That's Fallout 3, and yes, it's an attempt at some humor. We are still not sure about the end game, but everybody on the team wants something done, mostly cutscenes. Whether the personal fate of the player will be explained in some kind of epilogue, or a final quest, is unclear at this time.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 10, 2011, 05:51:45 AM
First of all, good work to all the devs. This is a wonderful mod, and I want to thank you for all those hours you've been working on this.

I joined the forum because I've been playing Mordor for a while (level 20 now), and I found many comments here about elves, Gondor, Rohan, etc. but only a few about Mordor and his allies.

About war, I don't understand very well the war system and how factions become weaker or stronger, but I noticed the battles in the south are 99% against impossible odds for Gondor. This could be satisfying for a Gondor player, as he can save the day over and over. But for a Mordor player this is definitely not fun at all. Almost every battle I play is like 400 agaist 12 poor gondorians.

I think the problem is the swarming effect of small parties. We could probably find more levelled battles if there were fewer parties, but stronger. Right now I must travel to to western point of Gondor just to find a patrol, as everything that comes out of a Gondor city is automatically overrun by 20 or 30 small parties.

About battles, I think orcs need an improvement - or good guys to be downgraded. Elves look like Legolas in the film, and rohirrim barded horses are inmune to arrows, or at least to the arrows the orcs can use. My Mordor party has 70-100 (depending on the number of orcs) top-tier troops, and I think carefully before fighting any battle on 1-1 odds with a Gondor army (unless it is a caravan or something like that). Rohirrim are even more dangerous, and I don't want to think about what would happen if I find an elven army. I mean, my troops are not a bunch of snagas, they are top tier uruks, orcs, wargs, 5 black numenoreans and 5 companions.

I have no archers, as orcs archers are useless - about that, I think orc top-tier archers could use a more powerful bow, even if their ability is awful. The problem now is their bows just do nothing.

And even more important, orcs need shields. Don't know why, but half my orcs refuse to use shields in battles.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barf on November 10, 2011, 07:16:42 AM
How aboot smaugs bones visible in laketown?, I would totally model it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 10, 2011, 07:18:26 AM
The lone wanderer ventured forth from Vault the Haradrim hinterlands, and helped in making the world a place safe for orcs.
It was not until the end of this long road that the Lone Wanderer was faced with that greatest of virtues - sacrifice, when he sacrificed his Chieftain to his desert Gods. Unfortunately, he was immediately smitten to dust by the now almighty Sauron, who now enforced conservative values among his subjects, to preserve order and stability in his new world, where orcs and humans can live together in harmony.
Afraid I never saw the Fallout2 endings, so I can't understand the joke. Not sure if you mean this sardonically, or just out of humour.
That's Fallout 3, and yes, it's an attempt at some humor. We are still not sure about the end game, but everybody on the team wants something done, mostly cutscenes. Whether the personal fate of the player will be explained in some kind of epilogue, or a final quest, is unclear at this time.

Does this mean you will do a Fallout module once you are finished with TLD? ;)

edit: Feel free to consider this a suggestion :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 10, 2011, 07:22:05 AM
That's Fallout 3, and yes, it's an attempt at some humor. We are still not sure about the end game, but everybody on the team wants something done, mostly cutscenes. Whether the personal fate of the player will be explained in some kind of epilogue, or a final quest, is unclear at this time.
Alrighty. I would've found it funny normally--just that I was feeling a bit tense when I read it :P.


@Nameless One: I think there has been a couple of attempts at Fallout for M&B. Not sure if either of them is still going.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Triglav on November 10, 2011, 09:06:28 AM
How aboot smaugs bones visible in laketown?, I would totally model it.

Well, if you look carefully, some bones are already there.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 10, 2011, 09:30:54 AM
How aboot smaugs bones visible in laketown?, I would totally model it.

Well, if you look carefully, some bones are already there.

We would however not look down on a gifted skeleton, right? ;P Go for it, if ye feel like it.
But use an existing texture. Can't afford to add more needlessly.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 10, 2011, 01:17:07 PM
I'm wondering if the game would have more of a Tolkien feel if the Tolkien "racism" was there.
I can't imagine dwarves recruiting elves (that was a big part of the fellowship, an elf dwarf friendship).
Likewise I can't imagine orcs and men working in the same unit side by side.   
They would fight a common enemy but not intermingle.

I think the 'racism' is already there for AI parties. I tend to view player's party as a sort of experimental unit of mixed racial heritage.
Yes, that's a no-starter, with nothing to gain except some nerd points with the lore extremist faction. And lose a whole lot more with everybody else. This is obvious, right?
You can always imagine that your party is a military version of the Fellowship, good or evil. It's unique and you are special. That explains away anything.

I'm a Tolkien nerd and proud of it :)

I actually take to playing a Black Numenorean since when I was playing an Uruk it just didn't feel right having human lords treat me as an equal.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 10, 2011, 02:25:56 PM
One problem I have playing for Modor is in recruitment in the Dol Guldur area.  You take rather large losses fighting elves.  On the flip side playing elves you take very few losses fighting Dol Guldur.

While good has several settlements right in the area for recruiting, evil is very spread out.

I'd recommend maybe adding another outpost in southern mirkwood for Dol Guldur, or upping the recruit pool regeneration for Dol Guldur itself.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Surrealbeliefs on November 10, 2011, 04:03:27 PM
In my experience, evil just loses the outposts in the north to the Elven armies. Maybe if later on, more trolls were added and wargs too, that may help against the Elven forces. When I played my Elven character for around 56 in-game days, I only encountered a couple of trolls in the enemy armies. My elves were able to pepper them with arrows and kill them before any extensive losses.

Isengard and Duneland seems to destroy Rohan, since a lot of the Rohirrim appear to spawn near Alburg, on that path to Gondor. Which is kind of out of the way of combat, in addition to a caravan bug near there as well. I think Rohan may just need to have their path finding and spawn locations re-adjusted to balance out their fight.

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 10, 2011, 04:55:42 PM
Quote
About battles, I think orcs need an improvement - or good guys to be downgraded. Elves look like Legolas in the film, and rohirrim barded horses are inmune to arrows, or at least to the arrows the orcs can use. My Mordor party has 70-100 (depending on the number of orcs) top-tier troops, and I think carefully before fighting any battle on 1-1 odds with a Gondor army (unless it is a caravan or something like that). Rohirrim are even more dangerous, and I don't want to think about what would happen if I find an elven army. I mean, my troops are not a bunch of snagas, they are top tier uruks, orcs, wargs, 5 black numenoreans and 5 companions.

Yeah, elven armies are pretty ridiculous. Orcs are laughable. Thanks, Peter Jackson. Thanks a lot.  :(

Peter Jackson has nothing to do with this. Read the chapter where the Rohirrim completely destroy the combined urukhai and orc forces near Fangorn. People having been waving Silmarillion and The Hobbit in our faces for a while, talking of ancient orcs being super strong and well equipped. Well, we don't think that was the standard in the armies of Mordor.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 10, 2011, 05:41:58 PM

Quote
Peter Jackson has nothing to do with this. Read the chapter where the Rohirrim completely destroy the combined urukhai and orc forces near Fangorn. People having been waving Silmarillion and The Hobbit in our faces for a while, talking of ancient orcs being super strong and well equipped. Well, we don't think that was the standard in the armies of Mordor.

I was not talking about lore, I was talking about playability. Before I started my game with Mordor I played a dwarf for a while. It was just too easy to fight the evil armies. I had almost no casualties and killed hundreds of enemies. Well, not me, as I didn't have to fight much, my troops did. I played maybe two or three battles that were an actual challenge, and that was at the very beginning of the game.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 10, 2011, 05:48:33 PM
Quote from: Merlkir
Peter Jackson has nothing to do with this. Read the chapter where the Rohirrim completely destroy the combined urukhai and orc forces near Fangorn. People having been waving Silmarillion and The Hobbit in our faces for a while, talking of ancient orcs being super strong and well equipped. Well, we don't think that was the standard in the armies of Mordor.

Oh, I doubt Legolas was standard in the elven armies, either, or Gimli in the dwarves, etc.

Now, not to discount the cav-vs-inf battle you mention, but consider that epic sagas such as Tolkien wrote usually describe heroic feats on part of the good guys that were "not standard" to begin with and are practically defined by good guys defeating stronger enemies and odds that would be impossible under realistic circumstances.

Here's an analogy: Klingons always lost vs the Federation, therefore Klingons must be weak and bad at war.

On the other hand, Tolkien does state a few "standard" generalizations about orcs. He rarely talks about orcs, so you have to search around in his various other writings. I'm not trying to wave this in anyone's face, but if there is interest, I have a small compilation somewhere with quotes pertaining to the capabilities of orcs.

Anyway, I don't get the impression Tolkien's general comments on orcs (as opposed to the sentiment "the heroes won against terrible odds, therefore orcs must be inferior") are represented all too well in the mod, but it's understandable as he disliked talking about orcs and you really have to dig or read between the lines. On the other hand, for instance, I see some movie-inspired (and stat-wise lousy) armor, and Tolkien's comment that orcs were generally good smiths seems to have gone ignored, so I hope you can see where I get the notion the movie was more of an influence than some admittedly obscure direct descriptions of orc abilities.

I'm not convinced about the "orcs are good smiths" bit at all. Miners, yeah, I can get that, they dig tunnels quickly. But the quoted parts of The Hobbit (as I explained a couple of times, a book where Middle Earth wasn't at all fleshed out and where several concepts contradict LOTR directly) simply don't mean that orcs were capable of making excellent armour and weapons and that they were all clad in such equipment from head to toe. It tells me orcs particularly like to make weapons and other instruments to hurt other beings and that they're fairly good at that. There is no comparison with dwarves or elves.
If we're talking standards and averages, imagine a curve of "quality". For the orcs the gauss is fairly shallow and phase shifted towards "bad". For elves the curve is pretty steep and shifted towards "good". Orcs have a varying range of equipment, but mostly it'd not that great. But there are some very good pieces. Elves have mostly good equipment on all troops, but few have excellent and few average ones.
A similar curve was applied to skills. (not all of them though)


Our idea for orcs was them being cannon arrow fodder. We had them with more shields first, then removed them, cause they didn't die enough. On the other hand uruks/urukhai  (technically larger orcs) were meant to be more shock troops, with visibly heavier and better quality armour (ancient looking segmented for Mordor, industrial looking segmented for Isengard). Now with your kind testing, we will tune them further to make more sense. Maybe keep them easy to kill, but able to do more damage before they do. Kamikaze squad and all that... Elves are getting toned down a bit too...
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 10, 2011, 06:09:51 PM
How about a lancer line of warg riders?

The wargs seem wasted on the lousy dart throwing skirmishers. Give them orc spears and nothing else (no darts, no shields, no one handed melee weapons) and let em charge. Maybe slightly heavier orc armor, since the warg riding skirmishers are very lightly armored and the chargers will be running right into the fray, but all they need for a weapon is a pointy stick.

Sure, they'll die a lot - but no more than they do already - and they'll actually put those wargs to use, tearing through the lines of men.


Also, perhaps the Isengard spear should be made where you can use it mounted and with a shield? It looks pretty equivalent to the other spears that you can use with a shield or mounted, but for some reason is restricted. I can see the big Isengard pike being restricted, but the Isengard spear is smaller than the Gondoran tower spear and the Harad spear (both of which can be used mounted and with a shield). It'd be nice if an Isengard Orc player could get a decent spear to use on his warg without having to go suck up to the Haradrim.

No, we specifically didn't want couching orcs. Why we gave them ranged and sabres. Player can moderatly bypass that, but we frown on it :p
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 10, 2011, 06:15:05 PM
Not to knock it, but my concern is that wargs barely move fast enough to couch a polearm, especially the armored ones. Anyway, Ron is going to to a complete RCM rebalance on everything, so it might be worth seeing how things stand when he is done. :)

Off the top of my head, it seems like simply making orcs more shield-intensive might help, for one. I played as an elf for a while, but after a short time it got fairly one-sided and I decided to try another faction. Even the orcs that did have shields just took 2 or 3 extra shots, or so it seemed.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 10, 2011, 06:55:40 PM
I'm playing a uruk of isengard and I got the reward warg, first thing I did was run suck up to the Haradrim and get one of their spears. Wargs are epic for lancing, they are so maneuverable you can weave in and out of infantry lancing and trampling them as you go. And against enemy cavalry you can out-maneuver them, dodging their lances while you put yours right in their skull. You can't beat their horses for speed, which makes it hard to run down enemy horse archers, but you can dance around the enemy lancers and tear them apart.

Was there a lore reason you didn't want orcs using orc spears on wargs? They have spears and they have wargs, seems like they would logically try to combine the two. The orc spears are two handed with no ability to block, so they'd be a bit suicidal - but the change in the AI behavior between skirmisher and charger would make them oh so much more effective.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 10, 2011, 07:04:12 PM
Quote from: triglav
Our idea for orcs was them being cannon arrow fodder. We had them with more shields first, then removed them, cause they didn't die enough. On the other hand uruks/urukhai  (technically larger orcs) were meant to be more shock troops, with visibly heavier and better quality armour (ancient looking segmented for Mordor, industrial looking segmented for Isengard). Now with your kind testing, we will tune them further to make more sense. Maybe keep them easy to kill, but able to do more damage before they do. Kamikaze squad and all that... Elves are getting toned down a bit too...

Yeah, I get that completely. If, and I know it's a big if, TLD gets a morale system, what might you guys think of making one of the trade-offs for orc numbers be their higher chance of breaking and running in battle, maybe depending on being able to kill key soldiers in the unit?

That would still allow an "epic" feel of facing a large (and now far more dangerous) orc army, as well as introduce an extra challenge in battle in terms of trying to find and take out the captain, or standard bearers, or faction leaders, etc. Almost like a little sub-game, whack-a-captain first, then wipe out the remainder...  :P Plus, orcs would not have to be as puny in exchange for the numbers... just cowards when things started looking bad, which fits what is written about them perfectly imo.

I think one thing Tolkien wanted to bring out was that the real strength of men (and elves, dwarves and hobbits of course) was not so much their muscles, numbers or physical things, but their spirit. For instance, at another rare clarifying moment Tolkien writes of orcs (brace yourself) "many were by training as tough as Dwarves," and I find it hard to reconcile with the idea of weakling "fodder" orcs in a Tolkien setting, though I know I'm a bit in the minority with that view.

Anyhoo, the routing could apply for both sides, but the penalty for orcs would be much higher. You could even have progressing levels; say killing one of the standard bearers makes a few of his buddies close to him run off the field... killing the captain in battle might make a certain percent of the entire force run off of the field... and defeating a faction general makes all orc troops in that faction tend to rout faster for a week or so.

No promises (!), but yes, that's something I wanted to do with morale. When we implement it (and yes, when, MV ;) GA promised me, preciouss!), we'll certainly try to achieve a similar effect.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 10, 2011, 07:29:31 PM
I think the wargs were specially effective against cavalry. I saw this in the Unfinished Tales, if I'm not wrong, in a chapter about this battle of the rohirrim agaist warg riders (battle of the Fords of Isen?). I know it is impossible to include warg bites on horses in M&B, but maybe this can be achieved on some other way (spears on warg riders, or much better scimitars - or less protection for rohirrim horses).

I didn't test cavalry against trolls, but I read that you included panic for horses or something similar. That would be a good idea for wargs, too.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 10, 2011, 07:49:04 PM
Oh man, it might not be in the official mod but I think I might have to add it in for personal use.

I gave Isengard wolf riders orc spears in place of all their normal weapons, recruited 120 of them, and attacked a Mirkwood patrol of 31.

My guys got massacred - we lost 3 riders to archers on the way in and their spears were cutting them down pretty fast, but the riders swarmed them and kept knocking them down and poking them with the spears. Most of them didn't even couch their spears, they just rode around poking at them. All total we lost 28 riders to their 31 losses, even with the 4 to 1 odds. But watching that swarm of wolf riders charge in and trample the elven infantry was epic. If any of the elves focused on them they were screwed - no shields and no ability to block - but they were surrounding the elves and poking away at them until they died. One poor elf had 9 warg riders bunched up on him stabbing away until he finally died.

Hitting a Rohan patrol of 39 had similar results. 31 dead orcs vs 39 dead humans.

Oh, and hitting the same Rohan patrol of 39 with the default wolf riders (darts and 1h weapons) resulted in 120 dead or unconscious orcs and 9 unconscious men 2 dead men (most of them were being dehorsed and knocked out by riderless wargs). Sooo warg riders are a bit impotent vs cavalry in their current form, lol.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 10, 2011, 08:54:16 PM
Be neat if horses panicked when wargs were nearby. Like, becoming somewhat unresponsive, losing control temporarily. Wargs are scary to horses, I bet.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 10, 2011, 09:30:32 PM
I gave Isengard wolf riders orc spears in place of all their normal weapons, recruited 120 of them, and attacked a Mirkwood patrol of 31.

My guys got massacred - we lost 3 riders to archers on the way in and their spears were cutting them down pretty fast, but the riders swarmed them and kept knocking them down and poking them with the spears. Most of them didn't even couch their spears, they just rode around poking at them. All total we lost 28 riders to their 31 losses, even with the 4 to 1 odds. But watching that swarm of wolf riders charge in and trample the elven infantry was epic. If any of the elves focused on them they were screwed - no shields and no ability to block - but they were surrounding the elves and poking away at them until they died. One poor elf had 9 warg riders bunched up on him stabbing away until he finally died.

I think that ratio of losses is what is needed. Huge amounts of bad guys taking lots of losses against small parties of high level good guys, but that can finally win. If, of course, those good guys are high level. On the other hand, a top-tier Mordor/Isengard orc and uruk army should be a match for anything, not as good as noldor or fountain guards, of course, but really dangerous for an average army.

This is not just because of lore (we can be discussing about lore forever), but for making the battles more even and fun.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 10, 2011, 10:03:04 PM

Oh, and hitting the same Rohan patrol of 39 with the default wolf riders (darts and 1h weapons) resulted in 120 dead or unconscious orcs and 9 unconscious men 2 dead men (most of them were being dehorsed and knocked out by riderless wargs). Sooo warg riders are a bit impotent vs cavalry in their current form, lol.

No warg charge on cavalry so you just have a little incompetent lightly armored goblin doing the work :)

I don't think thats a bad thing really. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 10, 2011, 11:08:17 PM

Oh, and hitting the same Rohan patrol of 39 with the default wolf riders (darts and 1h weapons) resulted in 120 dead or unconscious orcs and 9 unconscious men 2 dead men (most of them were being dehorsed and knocked out by riderless wargs). Sooo warg riders are a bit impotent vs cavalry in their current form, lol.

No warg charge on cavalry so you just have a little incompetent lightly armored goblin doing the work :)

I don't think thats a bad thing really.

Well, the goblin is only so incompetent because all his weapons are more suited for infantry combat. Ranges of 50-70 are kinda hard to hit with from a mount. They can sometimes score a hit against an infantry target, but they try to approach an enemy cavalry and just get speared or hacked by weapons double the length of theirs.

With the longer orc spear they put up much more of a fight.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 10, 2011, 11:30:35 PM
There are several rather easy things that can be done to improve the balance which I've mentioned before but to sum them up:

1) Elves will be ruined if their weapon skills are decreased further. They need weaker armour for their lower-tier troops. Orcs and even Uruks have trouble hurting even the lowest level scouts.

2) AI needs to use more adaptable tactics. It makes no sense for orcs and Uruks to cluster together and move slowly just to be slaughtered by a rain of elven arrows. If they simply charged at their best speed, I'm sure the elves would suffer much more casualties then they do now.

3) Wargs need lower charge so they can get stuck in the infantry lines but should do some scripted bite and claw damage to both infantry and horses.

4) Riders of Rohan need better horses (Hunters) so they don't get slaughtered so easily by the Uruks.

5) Orcs need a bonus to pathfinding and spotting or the player's orc horde is not catching anyone.

6) Maybe make orcish bows more powerful but slower and/or give orcs less archery skill? Right now, an average elf can stand a dozen orcish arrows before being knocked down.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: grubald on November 10, 2011, 11:59:40 PM
Okay, I'm sure that some of this has been mentioned. I did read the last two pages and the first page.

Sieging and game pacing: In this playthrough/bugseeking run playing Isengard, I wanted to eliminate Rohan. This proved to be very hard to do, as Rohan's strength dropped only very slowly even with me and my allies absolutely hoovering all parties immediately and me trying to encourage all sieging actions to the best of my abilities (always supporting the field marshall, etc.). I had them hovering at "Spent and Wavering" for weeks, with three dead rohan lords and three razed cities, then I gave up. King Theoden was still popping up every 4 days or so with a new massive army of elite units.

Similarly, in my game all Gondor ever did was get their ass handed to them by Mordor (constant defeats on the news stream), their territory was swarming with enemy parties, and yet Mordor was sieging Cair Andros for the whole time I played (~200 game days) without taking it.

It seems to me that if you can gain an advantage over an enemy faction (sweep away their campaign armies) that their fall should start to accelerate instead of slowing to a crawl. That initial jockeying for position should be the crucial bit.
.
With that said, I'm sure that balancing the AI factions and power-shift dynamics must be a nightmare, since the AI rules need to produce "intelligent" results over a very broad range of conditions while leaving room for the player to make a difference.

Good luck! Still a blast to play, even if things got a bit grindy when I couldn't advance the "main plot".
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 12:48:20 AM
Quote
Well, the goblin is only so incompetent because all his weapons are more suited for infantry combat. Ranges of 50-70 are kinda hard to hit with from a mount.

A preference for shorter weapons is occasionally mentioned as one disadvantage of orcs in lore. Orcs are described as short but also as thickset, so long weapons are probably less wieldy for them, but I'd say they're likely strong enough for weapons nearly as long as usual... 50 is awfully short.

Quote
Maybe make orcish bows more powerful but slower and/or give orcs less archery skill? Right now, an average elf can stand a dozen orcish arrows before being knocked down.

But the average elf has hundreds of years of training in composing songs and making fine cheeses. What's an arrow or ten to an epic cheesecrafter? Heck, if you thought Bruce Lee was impressive when he was 20, just imagine how much better he could have performed by the time he was 80 with all that extra training...  :green:
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 11, 2011, 02:53:27 AM
Lorien and Mirkwood elves should have no armor, or just a leather one (or some equivalent). Maybe the king's guard could have some proper armor. Legolas didn't use any, after all, and he was the king's son, getting equipment should not be a problem to him. I can't remember anything in the books about armor used by Mirkwood or Lorien troops, and it would increase game balance if they are going to be Bruce Lee-tier archers.  :)

It's there. ;)

Ok. I don't know where to look for this. Any comments in the books about how those armors were? As I said before, a leather armor or equivalent (a light encumbrance/ medium protection elf armor) seems fine.

Quote
Maybe make orcish bows more powerful but slower and/or give orcs less archery skill? Right now, an average elf can stand a dozen orcish arrows before being knocked down.

I totally agree on this. I remember it was like this in the previous version, and I loved that.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on November 11, 2011, 03:21:51 AM
Oh man, it might not be in the official mod but I think I might have to add it in for personal use.

I gave Isengard wolf riders orc spears in place of all their normal weapons, recruited 120 of them, and attacked a Mirkwood patrol of 31.

My guys got massacred - we lost 3 riders to archers on the way in and their spears were cutting them down pretty fast, but the riders swarmed them and kept knocking them down and poking them with the spears. Most of them didn't even couch their spears, they just rode around poking at them. All total we lost 28 riders to their 31 losses, even with the 4 to 1 odds. But watching that swarm of wolf riders charge in and trample the elven infantry was epic. If any of the elves focused on them they were screwed - no shields and no ability to block - but they were surrounding the elves and poking away at them until they died. One poor elf had 9 warg riders bunched up on him stabbing away until he finally died.

Hitting a Rohan patrol of 39 had similar results. 31 dead orcs vs 39 dead humans.

Oh, and hitting the same Rohan patrol of 39 with the default wolf riders (darts and 1h weapons) resulted in 120 dead or unconscious orcs and 9 unconscious men 2 dead men (most of them were being dehorsed and knocked out by riderless wargs). Sooo warg riders are a bit impotent vs cavalry in their current form, lol.

Maybe it would be worth it to see (for fun) what would happen if you let a game run on its own for a few days.  You could see at that point who has the real advantage without player interference.  I'm surmising its the orcs, but who knows...

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 04:09:55 AM
I'm pretty sure Mirkwood elves in the third age were described as being lightly armored in battle. Can't recall about Lorien offhand, but probably the same. I'd expect mostly leather and maybe some mail shirts, Silvan elves tending towards light archers.

Quote from: Merlkir
I'm not convinced about the "orcs are good smiths" bit at all.

Well, a very prominent elf lord stated flat out he needed a blade of worth to get past orc armor and Tolkien himself wrote as narrator that orcs did well at smithing weapons, in the same paragraph in which he compared their mining skill with dwarves. I don't see how there could be a higher authority or more direct confirmation possible. I'm also curious why you think they couldn't be good smiths? Because they lost battles?

Quote
Maybe it would be worth it to see (for fun) what would happen if you let a game run on its own for a few days.  You could see at that point who has the real advantage without player interference.  I'm surmising its the orcs, but who knows...

Hey Fleshy. ;)

It might be orcs in the south, but so far it seems in the north that GundaBAD gets pwned each time, the worst was 200 days in and three of their outposts gone. Of course, maybe it was just flukes, all the other factions seem to deadlock quite a bit.

Then again, my games suggest that it's different for auto-resolves than it is for actual combat. The resolves for orcs seem much better than when you actually fight with them in many cases. I tend to resolve sometimes just because they're so laughable in combat.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 11, 2011, 04:25:47 AM

Well, a very prominent elf lord stated flat out he needed a blade of worth to get past orc armor and Tolkien himself wrote as narrator that orcs did well at smithing weapons, in the same paragraph in which he compared their mining skill with dwarves. I don't see how there could be a higher authority or more direct confirmation possible. I'm also curious why you think they couldn't be good smiths? Because they lost battles?

I think in LOTR there is some comment like that, about orc weapons being crude and ugly, yet very effective. Something along the line of the black drink the uruk-hai gives to Merry and Pippin: horrible but effective. :)


Yes, effective in the way that they can be used to kill effectively. Surely there is a difference between a crude orc sabre and a finely balanced elven sword. Yes, there are good orc weapons, but many crap ones too. It's just that the majority of elven weapons are good that makes the contrast.

As for the elven armour - guards in Lorien are described wearing grey mail. Sure, even the higher tiers of archers have mail in TLD, but I don't see why soldiers shouldn't wear armour.
The same for the Wood elves - they're not the Laiquendi who couldn't protect themselves - these are fierce Sindar with spears and swords. There's no reason for them not to have good armour.

(imo this is the result of a long long DnD/generic fantasy bias - "elves are fragile creatures living in the woods and they don't wear armour, but are awesome with the bow")
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 11, 2011, 04:51:03 AM
There are several rather easy things that can be done to improve the balance which I've mentioned before but to sum them up:

1) Elves will be ruined if their weapon skills are decreased further. They need weaker armour for their lower-tier troops. Orcs and even Uruks have trouble hurting even the lowest level scouts.

2) AI needs to use more adaptable tactics. It makes no sense for orcs and Uruks to cluster together and move slowly just to be slaughtered by a rain of elven arrows. If they simply charged at their best speed, I'm sure the elves would suffer much more casualties then they do now.

3) Wargs need lower charge so they can get stuck in the infantry lines but should do some scripted bite and claw damage to both infantry and horses.

4) Riders of Rohan need better horses (Hunters) so they don't get slaughtered so easily by the Uruks.

5) Orcs need a bonus to pathfinding and spotting or the player's orc horde is not catching anyone.

6) Maybe make orcish bows more powerful but slower and/or give orcs less archery skill? Right now, an average elf can stand a dozen orcish arrows before being knocked down.
1, 4 and 6 will probably be irrelevant when RCM is put in.

I agree with the rest of the points
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 11, 2011, 05:10:31 AM
1, 4 and 6 will probably be irrelevant when RCM is put in.

I agree with the rest of the points
Note that we don't want to depend on RCM becoming a sole version. As much as some people would love it, not all of them will, and it's best if we keep Native-inspired item stats as the default version.
Please don't discourage people from posting item stats problems, we do need that feedback.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 11, 2011, 05:42:11 AM
Note that we don't want to depend on RCM becoming a sole version. As much as some people would love it, not all of them will, and it's best if we keep Native-inspired item stats as the default version.

Please don't discourage people from posting item stats problems, we do need that feedback.
You're always going to have someone who doesn't like the way the numbers are, sadly :-/. Can only aim for the most popular option. No, there exists a more broad approach.

Wouldn't it be easier to tweak RCM stats into Native ones? Ron's going to have to balance the factions anway, so you should have a working base-line from there. Turning them into native stats would probably mean decreasing all damage and armour by 50%,  tweaking the couched-lance modifier and armour soak modifiers, then tweaking from there based on any occurring problems (which there will be less of).
Otherwise, it's a matter of looking at a hundred different reports, and trying to change everything while doing a balancing act so you don't unbalance stuff while trying to fix it (not a fun chore...).
There will be Native-based model (that we, developers, would balance), and there will be separate RCM model. Everyone can choose what he prefers. That's how things were in TLD, and that's how things will be in future millenia to come
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 11, 2011, 06:07:46 AM
Quote
(imo this is the result of a long long DnD/generic fantasy bias - "elves are fragile creatures living in the woods and they don't wear armour, but are awesome with the bow")

Ok, I agree with that, this are not some D&D elves. I love the elven armor models in the mod, btw.

But maybe the armor is too common in Lorien and Mirkwood troops right now. You are taking an example of a guard, after all, not the common elf warrior.

And I also think the barded horses of Rohan have too much armor. I read again the battle of the rohirrim against orcs near Fangorn. It was an elite force of rohirrim (Eomer companions), fighting against infantery with few bows and no cavalry support in a plain. And nowhere to hide. The perfect scenario for rohirrim tactics. They were harrasing the orcs for a long time (like two days shooting and tiring the orcs), and finally they massacred the orks and uruks. But 15 of the rohirrim died in combat from a total of about 100. In TLD, that fight would end with no casualties for the rohirrim.
Seriously? You sure? Did you try charge uruk-hai in the open with rohirrims?

No, I didn't, I just played Mordor so I'm judging in base to that (but I had top tier uruks and corsair pikemen). If you say the rohirrim would have a similar ratio of casualties I believe you, but I'm not sure this would happen. I mean, in the book the best rohirrim troops had 15% dead (and not counting wounded, that would mean 30% casualties? maybe more?).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 11, 2011, 06:21:54 AM
The balance seems very different from the two sides. There is an Isengard Let's Play on youtube, check it out and see how destroyed Rohan gets ;)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 11, 2011, 06:24:33 AM
No, there exists a more broad approach.

There will be Native-based model (that we, developers, would balance), and there will be separate RCM model. Everyone can choose what he prefers. That's how things were in TLD, and that's how things will be in future millenia to come
Better to talk with Ron on that point:
GetAssista:
Oh, please don't do the "optional" thing again.  It made the game impossible to balance.  If one version seems pretty realistic, and the other version has sticks doing more damage than swords and everybody has to carry an axe the size of a boat oar, then effectively there will have to be unique troops and economics for each... two complete mods, sharing graphics but little else.  Anything less, and one version or the other will be directly unplayable ... and somebody will be upset about that, too.  I would rather just forget it, and leave the stats generated by a sadistic random number generator, and just figure that I didn't need to ever play TLD, before dealing with all the nonsense that comes with an "optional" version.  That's just creating a nightmare of logistics.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 11, 2011, 06:48:07 AM
Look, RCM is a submod and we're ok with that. Don't push us.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 11, 2011, 07:55:34 AM
Look, RCM is a submod and we're ok with that. Don't push us.
I can't see how I could push any of you. I could annoy you, no doubt. But that isn't my intention... even if it sadly might occur :-\.

You guys aren't being bad, not at all. You've had to fight with a terrible loss of progress, fight to out-do what was already the best mod in M&B, fight against the depressing trolls who said the mod was dead, and fight against real life at the same time as the rest of it. Finally, you achieved what you set out to do... you released what might be the greatest computer game mod yet made. Now, while you're trying to get it out of beta, I come along and seem to be trying to start another fight...

I know you have the players' interest in mind. The way things are going (or were going, before I decided to stick my thumb in the pie), you would appease the RCM fans with an RCM sub-mod, and the rest of the fans who don't like RCM with Native stats. This was shown to work pretty well, last time, so it seems the logical thing to do. However... this ends up splitting the player base (this is an incorect assumption), and you can only cater to one group fully (just as this).

TLD is a top of the line game, better than most Triple A Releases! ...even if it is technically just a mod. You need to take measures to work out the most optimal solution possible. This should be discussed with Ron, the player-base, and between yourselves.
If you will continue your own logic a bit further you would inevitably arrive to an absurd conclusion that old man option in TLD808 was detrimental, that there should be no difficulty levels in games, and all should boil down to an agreed upon "optimal solution". Well, I have news for you - the world is very diverse and people are vastly different ;) Hence "+" for player enjoyment from being able to adjust the game closer to his own preferences vastly outweighs "-" from devs not being able to perfectly balance the game inside each subset of possible options

Sorry to cause you all this trouble :'(.
no trouble at all


You make fair points. Thank you for being so reasonable. I'm going to puzzle over this a while longer.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Surrealbeliefs on November 11, 2011, 09:41:15 AM
The balance seems very different from the two sides. There is an Isengard Let's Play on youtube, check it out and see how destroyed Rohan gets ;)

That sounds like my let's play of Isengard! Unless someone else is doing it too, but I doubt it right now.

It is that indeed. ;)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 11, 2011, 10:09:57 AM
Yeaaaaahhhh... in my play, playing one of the Rivendell host, no less (and so giving that significant advantage to the good guys) I've watched the Uruk of Isengard slaughter the Rohirrim, and even mixed forces of massed Rohirrim + Elrond's epic war party + my small but significant party of Dunedain and elves. 

The Uruk cluster up, and as soon as one of the Rohirrim get too close to that cluster (or, in a WTF moment, ride right into the middle of it), they're dead. It's like watching ants swarm and devour an animal. If they get far enough past the cavalry to get the foot troops, the foot troops get chopped up. The Uruk are badass.

Not to knock it, but my concern is that wargs barely move fast enough to couch a polearm, especially the armored ones. Anyway, Ron is going to to a complete RCM rebalance on everything, so it might be worth seeing how things stand when he is done. :)

They may not be as fast as horses, but they can smash right through a massed group of infantry, they do significant damage, and they don't flee the field when the rider is killed. For extra giggles, they continue to target your troops, zig-zag too fast for the archers to get a decent bead on, and so draw the attention of archers while the foot troops swarm up to them. The wargs are an effin' nightmare to deal with if there's more than a couple.


5) Orcs need a bonus to pathfinding and spotting or the player's orc horde is not catching anyone.

Athletics is what makes foot troops move faster on the map. Also makes them move faster in combat... and some of those buggers are already plenty fast.  Pathfinding only makes a real difference for player characters and companions, when we're talking about the player's orc horde.

Legolas didn't use any, after all, and he was the king's son, getting equipment should not be a problem to him.

Of the Fellowship, Tolkien wrote that they all travelled unarmoured -- save for Gimli, who wore a mail shirt because dwarves make light of burdens that would be considered heavy to the other races. Boromir and Aragorn also traveled unarmoured or lightly armoured... but there's no question that the Dunedain and Gondorians armoured up for war.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 11, 2011, 10:27:44 AM
Of the Fellowship, Tolkien wrote that they all travelled unarmoured -- save for Gimli, who wore a mail shirt because dwarves make light of burdens that would be considered heavy to the other races. Boromir and Aragorn also traveled unarmoured or lightly armoured... but there's no question that the Dunedain and Gondorians armoured up for war.

Sure, but Aragorn did use armor in battles and Legolas didn't. Even the hobbits used armor. Maybe Legolas thought he was too cool to use human armor? :)

I see your point about uruks, but the problem is when the player is leading the rohirrim. We are talking about this in a spanish forum, and people are starting to play the evil side as the good factions are autowin. At the beggining it is ok, and you can enjoy the slaughter. But as time passes by it becomes too easy, there is no challenge.

One of them said today he was quiting his Rohan game after destroying 300 orks and uruks with his 45 rohirrim and suffering 2 casualties.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 10:44:48 AM
Quote from: Merlkir
Yes, effective in the way that they can be used to kill effectively. Surely there is a difference between a crude orc sabre and a finely balanced elven sword. Yes, there are good orc weapons, but many crap ones too. It's just that the majority of elven weapons are good that makes the contrast.

I think the contrast is made more by the fact that even top tier orc troops have equipment that's awful, completely contrary to what Tolkien says they're capable of at their best. Did I mention the "lordly" Moria unique reward armor is half as good as some stuff humans can get at the shop? That's just silly.

Quote from: Merlkir
As for the elven armour - guards in Lorien are described wearing grey mail. Sure, even the higher tiers of archers have mail in TLD, but I don't see why soldiers shouldn't wear armour. The same for the Wood elves - they're not the Laiquendi who couldn't protect themselves - these are fierce Sindar with spears and swords. There's no reason for them not to have good armour.

Well, there is a huge difference between guards and archers, or even soldiers in field gear. The Silvan elves were not exactly known for heavy infantry. In their history, they had more success with light skirmishing tactics, and I recall they had some quite bad losses in stand-up infantry battles early on. Elrond's crew would have had more in the way of heavier infantry, comparatively speaking.

Quote from: Merlkir
imo this is the result of a long long DnD/generic fantasy bias

Or it could be because Tolkien actually described them as wearing lighter armor in battle, and a misperception that heavy armor means plate, so elves wearing chain is "not that much." In the days where maille was as heavy as it got, I'm going to assume Tolkien meant they mostly wore leather with some chain shirts or vests here and there. I might bother to see if I can dig up some more telling quotes later today.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 11, 2011, 10:52:15 AM
I would be interested (and quite surprised) to see ANY mention of the "sylvan" (this just means "wood", I don't know why people love it so much) elves' armour at all.
I don't recall anything describing them as "lightly" armoured.

And no, I don't think there would be a big difference between a "guard" and an "archer". Scouts, yes, they need to be stealthy and light. Which they are in TLD. But if you're going to war, you get mail.

From my evil playthrough I thought I had the access to quite good weapons, haven't had a look at most of the rewards. Maybe that needs some balancing, not disputing that.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 11, 2011, 10:55:40 AM
Those who focus in archery tend to be more lightly armoured than those who are fighting up front. -- a modern myth, imo. Nothing about armour hinders the ability to use a bow and other than RPGs and RPS games, there is nothing to suggest this to be a general fact.
Guards could be more or less armoured depending on the circumstances.  Don't follow.
If you have less guards then you would generally have soldiers, your guards could be betterly armoured at an affordable cost, during peace times. Cost is not an issue with elves.
If you need a lot of guards, or your guards don't see that much conflict where armour is necessary, you tend to give the, lighter armour--particularly in cases where heavier armour is too awkward. O_o so this is an argument for regular soldiers being more heavily armoured than the guards?

Sorry, I don't get where you're going with this.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 11:18:42 AM
Quote
And no, I don't think there would be a big difference between a "guard" and an "archer". Scouts, yes, they need to be stealthy and light. Which they are in TLD. But if you're going to war, you get mail.

Guards don't have to run around in the field, their purpose is stationary and they're more likely to engage in melee. They're not necessarily even soldiers, but they might also be in a bodyguard, meaning their level of gear would be far above the average grunt.

Quote
Those who focus in archery tend to be more lightly armoured than those who are fighting up front. -- a modern myth, imo

This... I... what? Seriously?

If you look at historical examples, and I understand Tolkien knew a little of history, archers go without armor all the time, even when full plate was available.

Quote
Cost is not an issue with elves.

Did they have a cheat for unlimited money? I'm beginning to think you are trolling us. :P
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 11, 2011, 11:24:53 AM
Quote
a modern myth, imo. Nothing about armour hinders the ability to use a bow and other than RPGs and RPS games, there is nothing to suggest this to be a general fact.

It is a general fact, Merlkir. Not because armor hinders ability, it is because the best armor available is used by close combat troops. You can see this in almost every ancient-medieval army. In fact, I can't think of an example of ranged troops armored as well as close-combat troops of the same quality in any army. Even the english bowmen, who were quite well armored for an archer of the time and were very important to the english forces, used lighter armour than the infantry.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 11, 2011, 01:18:32 PM
I don't know anything about armor hindering bows, but I do know that the differences in armor between archers and cavalry is also due to difference in status. Archers were all commoners, if you came from a family with land, money and landed titles, you became a man-at-arms instead. Remember, this was from a time before mass-issued munition-grade armors, so archers/man-at-arms had to supply their own gear.

I'll also say that this is true in Europe, perhaps not so much in the East. Heavy Horse Archers wearing the same armor as cataphracts was an actual thing, and presumably they were able to use their bows just fine.

Here's what wikipedia (I know, I know, but try copy/pasting from another source on the net) has to say about heavy horse archers.

Quote
Heavy horse archers, instead of skirmishing and hit-and-run tactics, formed in disciplined formations and units, sometimes intermixed with lancers as in Byzantine and Turkish armies, and shot as volleys instead of shooting as individuals. The usual tactic was to first shoot five or six volleys at the enemy to weaken him and to disorganise them, and then charge. Heavy horse archers often carried spears or lances for close combat, or formed mixed units with lancers.

Heavy horse archers could usually outshoot their light counterparts, and wearing armour, could stand their shooting. The Russian druzhina cavalry developed as a countermeasure for the Tatar light troops. Likewise, the Turkish timariots and qapikulu were often as heavily armoured as Western knights, and could stand the Hungarian, Albanian and Mongol horse archers.

An army could also consist of both heavy and light horse archers, such as the Mongol armies.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 01:54:42 PM
Quote
I'll also say that this is true in Europe, perhaps not so much in the East. Heavy Horse Archers wearing the same armor as cataphracts was an actual thing, and presumably they were able to use their bows just fine.

While this is true, consider that the factions Tolkien apparently modelled after the east would be Rhun, Khand, Harad, etc.

Quote
I don't know anything about armor hindering bows, but I do know that the differences in armor between archers and cavalry is also due to difference in status.

Not a bad point, though I'd say it was money more than status. Longbowmen in Britain, as stated, were well respected yet still went to battle in light or no armor.

Due to mobility and terrain being even more useful than armor for ranged troops, strategically speaking, foot archers in light armor might even be better than heavy armor... and if they do have some money or means, that just means they can invest even more heavily in bow and arrow.

Naturally, all this is moot when someone finds a quote from Tolkien defining what they wore to batte. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Michigan J. Frog on November 11, 2011, 02:05:57 PM
Did a quick search and couldn't find it, so pardon me if it's already been discussed.

Volley fire would be a wonderful addition to the game. Personally, I hate Helm's Deep volley, but when I'm lined up with my little dwarf archers firing at wargs riding down at us, it would really be cool if I could do a volley to knock those sonsuvbitches down. And the same idea for goblins firing from a hill across a valley and us firing back from the other side.
you can issue "hold fire" then "fire at will", will be as good as it can get. Doing a strict volley is impossible in MB1.011

**Damn, I can barely see, and MBX's verification image is impossible to read. Okay, 12th time now...
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 02:08:41 PM
Did a quick search and couldn't find it, so pardon me if it's already been discussed.

Volley fire would be a wonderful addition to the game.

Do you mean, like telling them to hold their fire, then having them all shoot at once?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 11, 2011, 02:19:41 PM
Just for fun I edited the invisible warg lance to deal 20 cut damage, have a speed of 300, and a reach of 120.

Not an elegant solution, but It's kinda fun seeing a pack of wargs chase down a horse and actually kill the horse, then go on to trample the rider.

Is it possible for a scripted attack to damage a horse specifically, without killing the rider? Would be fun if wargs could chase down and take out horses, and would make warg riders a lot more dangerous to Rohan.

We can always modify animation for the invis agent, so that his spear points to the horses legs area - will damage horses w/o killing riders imo. Main problem was always that we cannot get rid of "omg couched damage" message popping, it's hardcoded
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 02:31:35 PM
Quote
As for the elven armour - guards in Lorien are described wearing grey mail.

Quote from: TFotR
Beside it a broad white ladder stood, and at its foot three Elves were seated. They sprang up as the travellers approached, and Frodo saw that they were tall and clad in grey mail, and from their shoulders hung long white cloaks. 'Here dwell Celeborn and Galadriel,' said Haldir.

These were bodyguards of the king and queen.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Cologne on November 11, 2011, 02:38:29 PM
Hope this goes to the right place.

I was just wondering if there is any deeper quest involved with the book of Mazarbul that you get from the Mines of Moria? I personally tried IG to give it to Dain but he didnt seem really interested.

The matter of the fact is that lore-wise, the  Book of Mazarbul should be of huge importance and value to the dwarves in general.

This from: http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Book_of_Mazarbul   The victorious Orcs seem not to have understood the significance of the Book, so that rather than carrying it off or destroying it, they left it to rot in the Chamber. There it was found twenty-four years later by the Company of the Ring, burned, slashed and blood-stained, and missing a number of pages, but still readable in some parts. Gandalf passed it to Gimli to return to King Dáin, after which nothing more is heard about it. If Gimli was able to keep it through the battles that followed, and didn't discard it with his gear at Parth Galen, it is possible that he carried it throughout his travels in Middle-earth, returning it at last to Dáin's heir Thorin III in Erebor.

Since in TLD good side players can pick it up from the mines, I quess for a reason or another Gandalf didnt give it to Gimli and thus it was left there to be picked up.  ANYWAY! I was just wondering if it would be a nice side quest for players if they could return it to the dwarves OR have a companion dwarf in the text help you decode it and go after some loot or such... Just a thought!

PS: If something like this has already been established in the game and I have missed it, just ignore this post.
Yes, we had plans for the dwarven line of quests. Maybe including Moria liberation and resettlement. So far not finished yet, hence book is now orphan
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 11, 2011, 03:11:06 PM
Quote
As for the elven armour - guards in Lorien are described wearing grey mail.

Quote from: TFotR
Beside it a broad white ladder stood, and at its foot three Elves were seated. They sprang up as the travellers approached, and Frodo saw that they were tall and clad in grey mail, and from their shoulders hung long white cloaks. 'Here dwell Celeborn and Galadriel,' said Haldir.

These were bodyguards of the king and queen.

Yes, that is the part.

So, let me explain this one more time. You have elves - these super strong, super skilled beings. Who have unlimited time to train and exercise. Who are wealthy and most likely live in abundance. (superb craftsman skills, established trading and low birth rate)
We know that elves are capable of crafting armour from metal harder and lighter than steel. (a few bits from Silmarillion, this is not mithril actually)
We know that elves of Lothlorien have a guard wearing mail and also scouts who most likely don't wear any heavy armour (Haldir and co. Any quotes for them? I don't have the book here). We know that the woodelves field (among others no doubt) spearmen and archers.

This about sums up the knowledge we have of the elves during the War of the Ring.

If you have an army of übermensch and an abundance of light yet durable armour, why on earth would you ask your archers to go into battle (!) wearing leather?

Again, arguments about real history go kinda sideways in this case, you're dealing with elves. The financial aspect is out, the mobility aspect too. (btw, archers wearing mail are hardly unheard of even in our history)

I understand where you're coming from, but I hope I've shown clearly enough why it's wrong.  :P
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 11, 2011, 03:12:10 PM

These were bodyguards of the king and queen.

For the purpose of the mod, I can't imagine damn near immortal "magical" beings, being either poor or stupid enough to not wear armor in battle.  Lets not forget that we never saw elves ready for all out battle in LoTR.  My guess is they could afford a good mail shirt and helmets for everyone without much trouble.

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 11, 2011, 03:51:17 PM
According to this, the dwarf archers should be using the heaviest armor available, too.

I just saw an elven mirkwood spearman (the last one standing) fighting for 1 minute 4 Ruhn nobles on horse and one horse archer. He killed 2 of the nobles before they finally managed to put him down. He was moving so fast they could not hit him or even trample him with the horses, nor the horse archer was able to shoot him even once. I definitely don't see this according to lore, specially after seeing how he received two blows in the head from a supposed huge and mighty barbarian and kept fighting.

It is not that all elves are using armor, it is that their whole army use some of the best armor in the game, including archers, and they move so fast that it seems the armor is made of mithril.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 03:54:46 PM
Yeah, nobody said that. Way to strawman out of that hole.

Strawman? I don't see how being long-lived and magical means you had to be rich and wore armor in battle, that seemed to be exactly the implication of his statement. Maybe you can explain that better? Because other long-lived, magical things like ents come to mind with no money or equipment to speak of.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 11, 2011, 04:08:07 PM
Quote
For the purpose of the mod, I can't imagine damn near immortal "magical" beings, being either poor or stupid enough to not wear armor in battle.

I don't think the subtle sort of magic in Tolkien's world conjured up money or that living longer made armor grow on your skin.

 ::)

Right, there would be no armories kept for war....
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 11, 2011, 04:26:46 PM
Quote
Look, we agree the elves are way too strong at the moment. My argument is that it's not because "their armour is op and studid", but a combination of factors. We'll see how lowering some of them slightly changes things. Especially I'd like to see their parties be smaller/be less numerous. Elves are kinda rare.

Ok, even if I was arguing lore, I don't have so much trouble with this version of elves as with gameplay. I think you said something (Talewolrds forum, I think) about including ambushes. If that is possible it would be nice to see those terminator elves in action (in very small parties!  :P)

And about that, even if it is not possible to include real ambushes, it would be nice if some of the parties (rangers, explorers and such) could engage in battle and no one else (except other small units, maybe) can join the battle. That way small parties might assault caravans and prisioner trains behind enemy lines.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: TheMageLord on November 11, 2011, 05:17:18 PM
Is it possible for a scripted attack to damage a horse specifically, without killing the rider? Would be fun if wargs could chase down and take out horses, and would make warg riders a lot more dangerous to Rohan.

We can always modify animation for the invis agent, so that his spear points to the horses legs area - will damage horses w/o killing riders imo. Main problem was always that we cannot get rid of "omg couched damage" message popping, it's hardcoded

Sure you can. Just make the spear a two handed weapon, that way they can thrust it but not couch it. Thats what I did, but it still runs into the issue of hitting the rider with the horse.

Can you modify things so that the invisible rider can only thrust his weapon low? I've never worked with animations in M&B so im not sure whats possible, but if you could move the origin of the attacks down and forward you could have attacks seem to originate from the mouth area of the warg. If you can't control the direction of the thrusts you might use the slash left/right attacks to hit low. It all depends on whether or not you can move the origin of the attacks to the proper location.

If you can move it down but not forward, is there a way to alter the arcs of the slash left and slash right attacks? If you could make those two arc forward instead of left and right you could just put a long slashing weapon in the hands of the invisible rider and have him basically slash back and forth where the warg's mouth is, hitting anything in front of it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 06:02:21 PM
Quote
You have elves - these super strong, super skilled beings. Who have unlimited time to train and exercise.

There's a common assumption that unlimited training means you can just progress forever. Once you master a martial art, all the extra time in the world doesn't really help. A boxer of 30 years age might have 3 times the training compared to a boxer who's 20. That's a massive difference, but the fight could still go either way, because both are masters.

As far as every elf being a "super strong super skilled being," that seems like an extremely biased assumption to me.

Quote
We know that elves are capable of crafting armour from metal harder and lighter than steel. (a few bits from Silmarillion, this is not mithril actually)

Eol created galvorn. It was neither harder nor lighter than steel. It was described as being as hard as steel, but easier to craft thinner armor with. This was while he was learning smithing from the dwarves, incidentally. Eol crafted his own armor from galvorn, and as far as I know this was the last time we ever heard of the material.

I can understand how someone might arrive at certain assumptions, but starting at different premises one could reach the opposite conclusion. Like, "Tolkien described elves as loving to sing and dance, being artistic, clearly they were poor and spent their days reciting anti-war poetry in local coffeeshops." Or "elves did not live in ore-rich areas, so clearly they didn't make much metal armor." Etc.

Anyway, all this probably needs to go in a Tolkien lore-discussion thread at this point...
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 11, 2011, 07:30:40 PM
1) After having spent more time fighting alongside the Rohirrim, I'll re-voice my opinion from the 3.0 version -- they need a couple more points of riding skill. I popped open the troop files to look at them, and the riders of Rohan are no more skilled as horsemen than anybody else. As it's supposed to be their 'thing', it would be a nice little addition for them. 

It would have the additional benefit of not taking four riders to gang up on one riderless warg to kill the bloody thing. :D


2) Along the logic of "the elves wouldn't go marching off to war without proper armour" -- it'd be nice to see high-tier Rangers with some mail and Arnor bastard swords. Perhaps even horses. Sure, they couldn't use the bows from horseback, but if unhorsed they'd have ranged capability.

3) More items in the shops. Also, would the elves really be putting out rusted, chipped, or battered goods for their troops?

4) PLEEEEEEASE put the "will you follow me?" question back in the dialogue for allies.  It's so very frustrating to ride past Elladan getting mobbed by Isengard patrols, and be unable to say to Elrond "by the way, your boy? He's getting swarmed. You should really do something about that."


I think many of the play issues will shift depending on what's done with equipment. I know there's also a more native-esque weapons list planned. Has anybody been tasked to handle that, or is it still up in the air? If so, I'll take a look at how much time I've got in the coming weeks.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 11, 2011, 11:00:32 PM
snip

Being that item stats and unit stats are the easiest things to mod and don't require any skill (I can do it, so thats proof enough), you can really set the game to how you like it completely when it comes to arms and armor.

You want very well armored orcs?  Done.
You want lightly armored elf archers? Done.

I personally like the orc cannon fodder model, I'd just balance them with even greater numbers than they have currently.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 11, 2011, 11:09:25 PM
Being that item stats and unit stats are the easiest things to mod and don't require any skill (I can do it, so thats proof enough), you can really set the game to how you like it completely when it comes to arms and armor.

I do a bit of modding work elsewhere. I'm still waiting to see what happens after RCM is out, and I'm also hoping a morale system will go in and let orcs be beefed some in exchange for breaking and running more. :)

Anyway, maybe after that I'll see about tweaking a few things here and there to my liking.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 11, 2011, 11:40:21 PM
Can we get more info on the mechanics or orc mutiny? I had this happen while I was playing goblin of Moria. Will goblins cause a mutiny if lead by a non-orc?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 12, 2011, 12:24:53 AM
Can we get more info on the mechanics or orc mutiny? I had this happen while I was playing goblin of Moria. Will goblins cause a mutiny if lead by a non-orc?

I get the very vague impression it seems to trigger (or trigger more often) whenever you introduce new orc troops into your party. (Or upgrade orcs.)

It also seems as if when morale is above a certain point, the orc pretender will then back down. If morale is low, he ends up challenging you. Being inside a settlement and waiting does not seem to stop this from happening, if I recall correctly.

I assume this happens no matter what race the leader is, but I have no idea. It's a pretty awesome mechanic. "Feels" just right. But it makes it even harder to play a "commander" type general. You can't keep an orc army if you can't fight a duel.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 12, 2011, 12:43:02 AM
Can we get more info on the mechanics or orc mutiny? I had this happen while I was playing goblin of Moria. Will goblins cause a mutiny if lead by a non-orc?

I get the very vague impression it seems to trigger (or trigger more often) whenever you introduce new orc troops into your party. (Or upgrade orcs.)

It also seems as if when morale is above a certain point, the orc pretender will then back down. If morale is low, he ends up challenging you. Being inside a settlement and waiting does not seem to stop this from happening, if I recall correctly.

I assume this happens no matter what race the leader is, but I have no idea. It's a pretty awesome mechanic. "Feels" just right. But it makes it even harder to play a "commander" type general. You can't keep an orc army if you can't fight a duel.

The only problem is that starting characters are far to weak to defeat the pretender. I'm currently playing an Uruk and taking only Uruks, wolf/warg riders and humans. That together with using auto-resolve in most fights against elves and Rohirrim gives a playable game with bad guys. Now I'm thinking I might introduce some of those great goblin shooters if they won't mutiny :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 12, 2011, 12:53:47 AM
I think it should definitely happen to any race, if they have orcs in the party, but I don't know how that currently works. If you find out more, let us know. ;)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: GetAssista on November 12, 2011, 01:07:56 AM
Currently orc mutiny can happen each 8+ days (4+ days for the 1st dialog with pretender and 4+ additional days until challenge itself happens). It happens with some probability when 1) there are a lot of orcs in your party (>50%), when adjusted for you being an orc too (-10) and (-5) for each point in persuasion

Will add morale and player level check in future patch and adjust pretender skill and equipment to match player better. Some more nasty surprises planned further along the way for the orc lovers
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 12, 2011, 01:11:53 AM
Will add morale and player level check in future patch and adjust pretender skill and equipment to match player better. Some more nasty surprises planned further along the way for the orc lovers

Huzzah! Thank you.  :green:
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 12, 2011, 01:48:15 AM
Remember to keep tabs on this thread, guys: http://mbx.streetofeyes.com/index.php/topic,2543.0.html

We'll do our best to collect interesting quotes about different races for the mod.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 12, 2011, 02:26:47 AM
Currently orc mutiny can happen each 8+ days (4+ days for the 1st dialog with pretender and 4+ additional days until challenge itself happens). It happens with some probability when 1) there are a lot of orcs in your party (>50%), when adjusted for you being an orc too (-10) and (-5) for each point in persuasion

Will add morale and player level check in future patch and adjust pretender skill and equipment to match player better. Some more nasty surprises planned further along the way for the orc lovers

Do goblins count as orcs for this purpose?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 12, 2011, 02:37:08 AM
He's probaly lumping Orcs, Uruks, Goblins and Uruk-Hai into one group. I guess Olog-hai and the like are separate.

Orcs  = small guys
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 12, 2011, 02:55:13 AM
Personal preference, but I'd love it if spear and shield were a more common for low to mid tier units, and also spears more effective. To me they fit the "early medieval" feeling more. Wonder how hard it would be to get the alternate attack animation for spears from WFaS...  ???

Also, how about the ability for orc armies to recruit trolls, which only replenish slowly and under certain circumstances at barracks? They were typically part of the larger evil armies. Plus, the trolls are awesome.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 12, 2011, 03:01:13 AM
Problem is that spears in the Mount and Blade engine have problems. They're super-easy to block, and often they'll do zero damage due to the way damage speed is calculated.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 12, 2011, 03:06:24 AM
Problem is that spears in the Mount and Blade engine have problems. They're super-easy to block, and often they'll do zero damage due to the way damage speed is calculated.

Yep, we're aware of this and we're trying to make them more effective. It's a shame though.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 12, 2011, 03:18:37 AM
I know that I'm not meant to mention the RCM... but, it probably is a good example of spears. From what I remember, if you weren't blocking downwards, they could be pretty dangerous. If you look at how the spears are done, you could scale damage down to match the FLDM numbers.

A bit precarious to balance, either way... Too much damage, and a good hit is a "GOOOOD hit". Too little, and even a good hit will be "meh" while most hits will be "0 damage".
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: dRakot on November 12, 2011, 04:59:24 AM
A small suggestion that would be awesome for sandbox fans. Could you implement an option that would rebuild a town like village recovery in native?
No.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: WindusAndar on November 12, 2011, 05:16:28 AM
Umm, I am asking about this idea, because it just flashed in my head and weird as it might sound, I can't resist asking about it. This is NOT a suggestion, but just a hypothetical question.

You know how everyone wants customs stats for weapons, armour, horses, monkeys, donkeys, butterflies, and what not, right? In the previous incarnation of TLD, you guys had provided options via the old man, to make orcs weaker and stronger, along with some other nifty features. I was wondering:

Would it be possible to allow a player to input all the stats of every troop (main types, like infantry in general, archers in general, cavalry in general, etc.), weapon, and armour? No fancy interface. No funny characters or sliders to help players out. Just for those, who know what they are doing - an input dialogue, where they are asked to input numbers one after another for various values.

Would this be difficult to do? By difficult, would it be monotonous or just plain impossible?

Again, it isn't a suggestion, but a hypothetical scenario that popped into my head. Murder me later. :)

Everyone is free to use editor for troops/items txt files to his own liking. There are lots of tools for stat editing. There is no point whatsoever to include this functionality into the mod

GA, I am not asking you guys to include it into the mod. I am not. I am REALLY not. I am asking about it from a module maker's perspective. Would this be hard to code in-game or just monotonous? That's my question.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 12, 2011, 05:20:31 AM
Rebuilding towns? What does that refer to? Would be interesting if just after capturing a place, it is in Damaged-Mode for a while, so that it is easier for the enemy to take it back till it is prepared? Just an idea.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ron Losey on November 12, 2011, 05:38:43 AM
Rebuilding towns? What does that refer to? Would be interesting if just after capturing a place, it is in Damaged-Mode for a while, so that it is easier for the enemy to take it back till it is prepared? Just an idea.

If some serious system of capturing and holding territory were put into place, then the condition of local defenses might be an issue.  However, that sort of thing was discussed previously, and the general consensus was that such a thing was a potential plan for the distant future, but would require a major rework to the war system and strategic AI, and so could not be implemented any time soon.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 12, 2011, 05:47:22 AM
Okeydokey. You guys have thought of everything, haven't you :lol:? <- This should be general assumption before any suggestions :) We had a lot of time to think about everything

Note that when I suggest something, I don't necessarily mean it for the immediate releases. I've got a bad habit of looking too far into the future, including with my own projects.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Estrathor on November 12, 2011, 12:09:49 PM
Ive got a few suggestions to share with you guys that have came to my mind as i was playing the mod.

1. Ability to ask the guy in the Barracks to train your guys that you have stationed there but costs some resource points.

2. I seen some troops on my Mordor file that i wasn't able to get, Black Uruk of Barad dur. Make it cost influence to get 1 (5 influence = 1) and for all the other factions as well like Black Numenoreans for Corsairs. If there is a way to already get them already please let me no.

3. Oh ye this mite be hard to implement but im going to post it anyway. Make a use for metal scraps so that you can talk to orcs (yes orcs only since they are quite bad anyway) and have the new option "Upgrade" then the next screen comes up with his available path for you to choose with the type of metal scraps he requires to upgrade (Fire arrow mod has something similar). Just a suggestion...

4. On my Rivendel file i have Glorfindel (cant edit his equipment) on a horse then the rest of my party on foot, i wanted maybe a quick option to tell him to not ride a horse as its kind of annoying telling him to dismount at the start of every battle.

5. I keep getting ganked in Fangorn Forest... is there anyway to stop this because they should be, maybe a trait you can buy off your leader. Sometimes im nowhere near it but my maggot brain orcs keep getting taken lol.

6. Wouldnt mind some more Black Numenorean armours.

7. Orc factions should gain morale from running out of food (makes them more bloodthirsty for man flesh! :D)
and manflesh gives them 10 morale instead of 6. that would make people go after man flesh alot more

8. Orc factions ability to eat rotten meats and beef.

Think thats it. I hope i have given you some good ideas.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 12, 2011, 05:17:18 PM
It's been said but it can't be said enough - there's not enough sieges.

I'm sitting at around day 200 of my campaign. Gondor has been alone vs Mordor for ages, Gondor always dips to fair, then bounces back to average. Mordor has been unmatched (9995 strength) since day 30 or so. Cair Andros falls quickly, but nothing else does.

The problem is that the AI is too conservative in deciding how/when to siege. And when it is sieging, it often thinks it cannot make it, and never actually assaults, waiting for better conditions that never come. Many factions only have 3-4 generals to begin with, and often they don't feel comfortable sieging even when they have all 3 hosts in the siege. Faction strength does not correlate to stronger hosts, so even if the Beornings are unmatched, they still camp outside Rhûn for ages without actually doing anything.

In the north, it is a bit better - the outposts of the various factions do inevitably fall to the good game after game. Sometimes they manage to siege the capital of Rhun when they are spent and wavering (strength <1000) too.

My (second) problem is that the campaign feels a bit scripted - the good is bound to win in the north, and lose in the south, without player influence. It makes it hard to play for Mordor, since Gondor doesen't come out to play once they are at strength <2000 or so, yet the north is hard to handle. Perhaps you have done this already, but have you thought of making the side opposite to the player regain strength quicklier? It'd be nice if in one of my games as good, my help in the north was actually needed rather than all the good factions being at strong and the evil being at weak by day 100 or so.

Another issue - rank point gain. I've talked about it before but I can't stress it enough. There's too much gain from battles where you help out 4 scouts against 20 enemies, and not enough from quests. It's not so bad for the dwarves, I can exploit the fact that they repeatedly want to send caravans to Esgaroth for 5 rank points/1 influence (sometimes 2-3 in a day!), meaning that getting my ranks up with them is only tedious and not impossible. With the Beornings or Rivendell, who don't fight and have few/far appart settlements, it's exceedingly difficult to gain rank points.

Hence, I'm at rank 16 or something with Rohan, simply from my doing battles there to get Isengard down to weak, but the north where I've been spending most of my time since the beggining of the game, I have barely rank 2-3 per faction.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: benpenguin on November 12, 2011, 06:32:23 PM
Been trying to play as elves, and later, against elves.  Elves dominate Northern Orcs,  period.  No matter range or melee battles, 1 elf can kill 10 orcs (on ratio).  Something needs to be done.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 12, 2011, 06:33:48 PM
One thing I was meaning to ask: Is it possible to give NPC parties skills like Surgery? Always wondered about that, and I think it could work interestingly in TLD.

Anyone know if this is possible? I haven't really seen it done with other mods, so it doesn't seem likely... but I'm not sure why it's hard to arrange, if so.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: The Yogi on November 13, 2011, 03:55:06 AM
Been trying to play as elves, and later, against elves.  Elves dominate Northern Orcs,  period.  No matter range or melee battles, 1 elf can kill 10 orcs (on ratio).  Something needs to be done.

Not at all, this seems to be entirely accurate to the lore, or even downplaying elves a bit. If the balance is detrimental to the game, then vamp up orc numbers, nothing else. But I guess that would screw up the autocalced battles, so best leave well enough alone.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: WindusAndar on November 13, 2011, 08:03:42 AM
I have a few suggestions after taking my Meron Windus (Rivendell Elf) south, in order to 'uphold the law':

1. Please allow players to keep reserves in all friendly factions' capitals. Just as they can be kept in your faction's capital city, we may be able to keep it in other factions' capitals as well.

When I took my Elves south into the Wold, I decided to destroy Isengard's strength a bit; not to mention secure the Oathkeeper's trait at the expense of the Dunlendings. I lost a few infantry and the odd archer to Isengard, under overwhelming odds (I was fighting 300 to 90 sometimes, at night). To compensate, I have a few Rohirrim to assist me with their super horsies. When I go back to the north to replenish my Elven ranks, it would be nice to have a place to store the Rohirrim Eorl and Brego troops, instead of giving them to Theoden, who has died more times than a herd of bison in the annual Sahara migration, in Africa.

2. Would it be possible to split archers into two lines/files in the future?[/b] As of now, my Elven machine guns stand side by side, cutting across 1/4th of the map diagonally. The infantry, even in good numbers, can't seem to cover all of them, as they stand in two lines. May we have the same two line system for the archers, too?

telling them to stand closer doesn't help? You can have them form ranks, no?

Hey Merl, how are you? I haven't tried 'stand closer'. I'll try that today, but I do have 50 archers and the number is about to go up to 80-90. As for forming ranks, their idea of ranks is one straight line. They don't have a double line system and don't form squares, shield walls, or wedges.

3. Finwarsil shouldn't be obtainable from two factions.[/b] I admit. I only observed this, while playing the first version of TLD. If this has been taken care of in the latest patch, then please ignore this. My reason for asking this is that the agility bonuses don't stack from both rings. Basically, I get +1 instead of +2 Agi.

4. Could you get rid of the Tattered Leather Gloves and the Basic Wooden Club from the shop and insert two other low level weapons/armour in their place? It's just that no one would buy tattered gloves, since it has no armour value and it is tattered. :P As for the club, it is very basic. Something similar, but cooler looking could go in its place, for fluff value. :D

5. In the future, would you be implementing a companion or two from Rivendell? I ask, since there is no companion from Rivendell at the moment.

6. An Elven smith in Rivendell, who, at the expense of enormous amounts of resources (say, 50,000 or 100,000), would enchant the army to have +1 or +2 damage or +1 or +2 armour protection? It would be like an extra trait and anyone with the cash could go get it. This would be possible once only - something like a quest.

7. Is it possible to implement companion commands, separate from other troops? I would love to keep my companions by my side, following me and protecting me or fighting alongside me, while my troops rush ahead or hold a particular line.

8. A faction armourer per capital city to give rank armour and weapons. This is something along the lines of 'you hold this rank, you receive this armour' feature. If you go up a rank with a faction, they would gift you a suit of armour or weapons of that level (non-enchanted). Something for the sake of role-play immersion.

9. Use resources for food, if none is present in inventory. This is another possible use of excess resources. If the player has no food in the inventory, before losing party morale, he would use his resources to allow them to buy food from nearby inns, cities, hamlets, farms, etc. This would be costly; say, 100 resources per soldier; 50 soldiers would eat up 5,000 resources per day!

10. Non-enchanted, non-reward, low-grade to medium-grade armour degrades with use. I remember this feature in some other mod, with regard to horses. The armour of the character will degrade over time, with repeated blows, knock-outs, long travels, etc. He'd have to replace it, unless it is high-grade armour or enchanted armour.

11. Multiple parties. There was an interesting feature developed a couple of years back, I believe, which allowed you to appoint sub-commanders. Glorfindel would actually have an excellent purpose in this case, considering he's level 50 and has very high leadership (and other) skills. It would be nice to command two or three companies of troops, albeit at a very high resource cost. Players would require rank 10, minimum, with one faction to field a second party. The faction, from which resources would be deducted, would be decided by the companion, who leads the party. Glorfindel would deduct resources from Lorien's resource pool, while K. Goldfinger would take Dwarven resource points. It'd be a good use of faction resources, which remain un-utilised, when the player uses only troops from one specific faction.

These ideas just popped into my head after a long playing session. I thought I'd post them, before I forget.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Estrathor on November 13, 2011, 08:10:20 AM
I think they are all ready working something out for Orcs as alot of people have been saying the bad guys (especially orcs) are bad. I dont think they should make them better combat wise but maybe they should have some sort of party skill that only orcs have, maybe faster healing and better pathfinding.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on November 13, 2011, 06:29:56 PM
Hi!  I'm having a great time with this mod, and was truly blown away to see just how much has been done since the .8 version - good work, truly, takes time to prepare.  Thank you!

Knowing that this is an early version and more work still remains ahead, there's not too much I wanted to comment on, but I did want to add a small note to the "orcs are bad" comment.  Specifically, I feel that warg riders need some help.

No, not wargs.  They're great, and the discussion here about making them even better is really interesting.  I mean the poor sods who have to ride on them.  Their survivability is so low it's actually a little comical - even top-tier warg riders are minimally armored and unshielded, and armed with a hand weapon and some darts.  They aren't useless, as they can get in some kills with their swords, but their casualty rates are horrific and they'll die instantly if they're brought down to anything less than full gallop while in enemy ranks.

I'm aware that orcs should die pretty easily; I'm not saying they should be Lancers of Rohan or something.  Top-tier riders, however, cut a very poor figure compared to fell orcs and fell orc archers of any faction.  Currently, I wish that I could simply order the riders to dismount and stay behind while the wargs charge by themselves; I'd get most of their effectiveness without having to replace half of them after each battle.

Giving high and top-tier riders a small boost - a shield, for instance, and possibly some semi-decent footwear (most seem to wear none at all or wrappings at best, a poor choice for a mounted unit in M&B) - would help a great deal, and it wouldn't make them much more powerful.  What makes warg riders the bane of early characters is the wargs, not the riders.  Even if a boost in equipment isn't warranted for all factions, it seems odd that even the riders of Isengard and Moria, which are specifically described as well-equipped (by orcish standards, at least) still have not a single shield between the lot of them.  At the very least, a little shield would make them slightly less useless against elven factions, whom the goblins of the north face almost exclusively.

Thanks again!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 13, 2011, 07:04:52 PM
How about head removal? It has been managed by one mod that I know of, so I thought I'd bring up the idea.

You mean decapitation? Which MnB mod? (I know they did it in Warband, but that's different)
Impossible in MB1.011

Whoops, sorry about that... I remembered wrongly, and thought it was a 1.011 mod.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barf on November 14, 2011, 02:48:28 AM
How about replacing the compass with a more appropriate one?, Native's compass has always been an eyesore.

Maybe something like-
Atlus of middle-earth's paper compass http://www.theonering.com/images2-507/CompassSymbolfromtheAtlasofMiddleEarth

mixed with a viking sun compass?, http://www.ips-planetarium.org/planetarian/articles/viking.html
We had plans for Earendil star instead. The one in Atlas is not geniune Tolkien one
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 14, 2011, 02:52:49 AM
VOICES: With the voice files being too big, how about an optional patch which adds the bigger ones in? That way, people can get them if they want, but those who are stressed for MBs can still get the mod.
Do us a broad set of voiceovers, and we will include.
Will not do any voices on our own accord

EDIT: Err, a bit confused as to what you mean. I asked about the voices I did for the orcs, and someone explained that you didn't put them in yet because you're worried about the download size. so, I had the idea of, "why not put all the extra voices into an optional patch? That way, people who can spare the bytes can still get it". It wouldn't just have my voices, of course. All the voices which you can't fit into the mod but would like to.

Ah, voices. Those are not big at all, where did you get the idea huh? Surely will be included later, when bugfixing subsides

Good to hear. I must've misread.
Still waiting for that tutorial, BTW (not meaning to hurry you, but I figure you've got so much to do, it's easy to forget).


Idea you might've considered, for the far future: When Isengard and Mordor are fighting it out, there could be the option to convince Harad to join your side, or just mess up Harad's relationship with Mordor through spywork, and that sort of thing (this is from the perspective of the Isengard side).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 14, 2011, 11:23:37 AM
Currently, I wish that I could simply order the riders to dismount and stay behind while the wargs charge by themselves; I'd get most of their effectiveness without having to replace half of them after each battle.

You can, actually. :) The mounts perform better without the riders, especially against the elves.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on November 14, 2011, 05:07:56 PM
You can, actually. :) The mounts perform better without the riders, especially against the elves.

How do you manage it?  When I order cavalry to dismount at the beginning of the battle, the mounts just stand there, even when I tell everyone to charge.

Anyway, that seems like a further reason to make the riders a little more durable.  If you can just tell the mounts to charge, there's no real point in ever doing anything else - particularly against elves, who will otherwise snipe off half a dozen riders before they even make contact.  Since any mount that dies is just replaced after the battle, you can't really lose.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Nameless One on November 14, 2011, 05:11:06 PM
You can, actually. :) The mounts perform better without the riders, especially against the elves.

How do you manage it?  When I order cavalry to dismount at the beginning of the battle, the mounts just stand there, even when I tell everyone to charge.

Anyway, that seems like a further reason to make the riders a little more durable.  If you can just tell the mounts to charge, there's no real point in ever doing anything else - particularly against elves, who will otherwise snipe off half a dozen riders before they even make contact.  Since any mount that dies is just replaced after the battle, you can't really lose.

I think people were hoping they'd inspire you to search the forum for an answer, since it was already mentioned before :)

You have to order your warg riders to dismount, then to mount again after a couple of seconds.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 14, 2011, 06:09:25 PM
After a morale script that would hopefully turn combat vs orcs factions more into "kill flag-bearers and captains before the horde overwhelms us" the next thing I'd like to see to focus more on the 'spirit' aspect of Tolkien is one that brings the elven passing into actual game play. It should highlight the inevitability of that and the elven weakness naturally to regret the past and to become unwilling to face change.

I think it would definitely add some flavor to the mod and perhaps fit in with some balance issues experienced at the moment. I imagine it something like this.

1. After a certain period in the game, an elven faction is chosen at random, and an announcement is made "Travellers say the elves of [Faction] speak of nothing other than Valinor these days, and that their time upon Middle Earth rapidly wanes.

2. If the good player does absolutely nothing (or fails both at speech and battle) then the elven settlements of this faction will slowly and one by one begin leaving middle earth for Valinor, only elven ruins remaining behind.

3. Now, if the good player visits the faction leader in question, he has the option to appeal to the nobility of the elves. If his speechcraft plus some random number succeeds a check, he can convince them to stand by men a little longer. Human characters are much more likely to deliver a heartfelt plea for help and succeed at this, compared to dwarves and elves. In this case, the exodus stops and another one does not start for some time.

4. If the good player fails this, the elven faction leader will basically question "but would you also stand by us?" and reveal that there is an imminent attack by orcs. This is the second chance, and spawns a large battle of orcs vs a small army of elves nearby which the player must help in defeating. If the elven army in this fight prevails, the exodus is cancelled until a new one is announced.

5. If playing as the bad guys, there are once again speechcraft and combat options. The announcement goes something along the lines of "The elves of [Faction] are wavering in their resolve to stay in Middle Earth! Perhaps this could be exploited..." At this point, the orc's faction leader, if visited, offers a quest to demoralize the elves further. You are to dispatch one of your own orcs near the elves with a fake but disheartening message. If you can convince your orc scapegoat of the truth of the message, the plot succeeds and the elves continue their exodus.

6. If that fails, you have to demoralize the elves through force of arms, crushing their resistance. In this case an elven army spawns and you have to defeat it in order to ensure the elves remain demoralized and the exodus continues.

7. Of the three elven factions, only the first two at most will travel into the west during the course of the game. The last one always chooses to remain.

8. If the player is elven, his own faction will never be one of those travelling into the west. (But as said his plea for the others to stay will not be as convincing as from a human. Obviously a dwarf will also more likely be told "do it yourself, shorty." :P)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 14, 2011, 07:13:20 PM
Good idea, Grendel.


I'm a bit sad to see that lack of a "White Hand Tattoo" skin option for the Uruk-Hai :'(. Does it clash with the book? OR is it just something that gets left out because you have way too much to do already?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 14, 2011, 07:39:28 PM
Mr. Grendel: I like the idea of elves leaving Middle Earth and the quests you mentioned. But I'm not sure about a whole faction suddenly dissapearing from the game. Something like that could decide the whole war.

In LOTR the elves are traveling to Valinor in small groups, at least untill the war ended. So maybe the elven kindoms could be more vulnerable to war exhaustion that represents fear about the outcome of war and the resulting increase on migration. Besides, recovery could be harder than to other factions, as those elves would never return.

Your idea for quest that could reverse or at least slow down the process could be implemented in different steps, instead of just one big "all or nothing". That would add more things to be worried about for the elven player.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 14, 2011, 08:05:16 PM
I'm not sure about a whole faction suddenly dissapearing from the game. Something like that could decide the whole war.

I think Tolkien would have felt strongly in tune with the saying, "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." I'm sure the idea could be balanced to satisfaction by the dev team. The faction would not suddenly dissappear unless it was continously ignored by the player, and even then not at once.

Quote
Maybe the elven kindoms could be more vulnerable to war exhaustion that represents fear about the outcome of war and the resulting increase on migration.

I could see that in another arena, but the elves weren't generally leaving out of cowardice. I think it would be more of a general world-weariness, sadness and dislike of change, coupled with a longing for the undying lands. More of a "We are so very tired of all this and have had enough" feeling meeting the last straw.

Quote
Your idea for quest that could reverse or at least slow down the process could be implemented in different steps, instead of just one big "all or nothing". That would add more things to be worried about for the elven player.

I was thinking you could have more than one chance to stop the process, yeah, though I think it should be ongoing. It was clearly an inevitable process, elves were fated to pass out of middle earth from the very beginning. Beyond flavor and in terms of gameplay, elves are pretty strong as it stands. Adding something like this might mean they can be nerft a little less.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 14, 2011, 08:26:02 PM
I could see that in another arena, but the elves weren't generally leaving out of cowardice. I think it would be more of a general world-weariness, sadness and dislike of change, coupled with a longing for the undying lands. More of a "We are so very tired of all this and have had enough" feeling meeting the last straw.

I think you are right, here. Anyway, I think the idea of elves leaving Middle Earth is great. It would be a nice touch of "sadness" to the elven factions.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 15, 2011, 12:34:23 AM
Currently, I wish that I could simply order the riders to dismount and stay behind while the wargs charge by themselves; I'd get most of their effectiveness without having to replace half of them after each battle.

You can, actually. :) The mounts perform better without the riders, especially against the elves.

Just an observation.  If you order the wargs to hold fire, they stop trying to use their near useless throwing darts and act like normal cavalry.  They can be quite effective on infantry if you time the charge right.  In my game I also changed their weapon to something a bit more fitting for someone mounted length wise (92)  but even with the standard weapons you will find they are improved a good deal. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Boiled Ice on November 15, 2011, 01:35:24 AM
11. Multiple parties. There was an interesting feature developed a couple of years back, I believe, which allowed you to appoint sub-commanders. Glorfindel would actually have an excellent purpose in this case, considering he's level 50 and has very high leadership (and other) skills. It would be nice to command two or three companies of troops, albeit at a very high resource cost. Players would require rank 10, minimum, with one faction to field a second party. The faction, from which resources would be deducted, would be decided by the companion, who leads the party. Glorfindel would deduct resources from Lorien's resource pool, while K. Goldfinger would take Dwarven resource points. It'd be a good use of faction resources, which remain un-utilised, when the player uses only troops from one specific faction.

YES please!  I was coming on here to suggest the exact same thing.  I've currently got 200k resources for Rohan which I'll never use.  Would love raise a mounted army and give it to Galmyne to command.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 15, 2011, 01:46:06 AM
Here's an idea: Enemy Companions acting as Lords.

What I mean is, if you are on the evil side, than the Good Companions appear as lords and commanders. It might also be that they only become Lords if one of the original Lords die (so if King Theoden dies, then the Shield-Maiden in Rohan becomes a "Lord" to try and avenge his death).

Wouldn't it be epic to replay the game on the opposite side, then say, "Hey! It's that guy I fought with in my first playthrough!!" ?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: benpenguin on November 15, 2011, 02:14:18 AM
Quote from: The Yogi
Not at all, this seems to be entirely accurate to the lore, or even downplaying elves a bit. If the balance is detrimental to the game, then vamp up orc numbers, nothing else. But I guess that would screw up the autocalced battles, so best leave well enough alone.

How about adding a few more trolls or at least add a small composition of extra high armor elite orcs for the northern evils into big parties (Raiders / War parties etc) - who can actually deal some damage, while the low ranking orcs act as meat shield?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 15, 2011, 02:28:15 AM
Question is HOW to balance the evil guys... There are problems with having the good guys out-numbered exponentially, as the balancing agent:

1) In Auto-Battles, the Evil Guys win a lot more because of the way numbers work in auto battle, even if it's 100 rabble goblins against 50 elite elves...

2) In Player battles, the number of troops spawned doesn't really represent you being outnumbered so well... Even if they are twice your force, they might only have 30% more troops than you on the actual field... which means their cheap units are numerous enough to swarm your elites.


Hope this can be worked out with some tricky coding.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 15, 2011, 08:51:33 AM
1) Wargs & Riders
As it stands, the overwhelming sentiment seems to be that warg riders are  horrid troops, but the wargs are a) extremely dangerous for infantry, and b) irritating to clean up with cavalry at the end of a battle.

The latter is a detriment to fun for the good side, while the former an irritant for the bad side. It might help smooth things out to decrease how dangerous the wargs are by themselves, and increase the effectiveness of warg riders so that the mounted unit is more of a threat before the goblin drops, rather than after. Supplying them with short spears to compliment those throwing darts would be a great twist... giving them reach, and piercing damage to help get through that heavy elven and dwarven armour. It still won't be enough to allow them to slaughter elves and dwarves, but it will make the goblins themselves something more of a threat.

On that note, the wargs need to be downgraded for when the rider's lost. That they should still be a threat is a great idea. That they should be more dangerous without the rider "feels" wrong... to me, at least. Perhaps others feel the same way, and will speak up about it. I'm not sure what was done to make them so effective without the riders -- the wargs seem much more capable of skirmishing, dodging, and wreaking chaos among melee troops.

2) Trolls
They're awesome and scary -- when they get a chance to close in. Either they need to be present in greater numbers to be a bigger threat, move more quickly, or shrug off damage a little easier. As it is, they're almost always pincushions before they get to the enemy forces.  They are so awesome to behold. They deserve a little more face time.

3) Item balance.
I write this in full awareness that this is an issue you're thinking about for future releases. As such, I've been riding around looking at the equipment of the good faction, getting a feel for how they compare. There are some pretty obvious kinks in the system (again, realizing that they're intended to be ironed out eventually), such as weapon lengths extremely divergent from the models, and armour protection and weight ratings that don't really reflect the coverage or materials of the armour.

My suggestion is to use the men of Dale and Laketown as a standard. They've got access to smiths ranging from average to excellent (the dwarves having passed some of their lore onto them, according to The Hobbit, and trading with them as well), and are fairly representative of the "common man" of Middle Earth. Other factions can then look to those numbers as the median. Elven & Dunedain gear surpasses, dwarven gear (with the exception of bows) is heavier but better, Gondor is on par or slightly better (perhaps having access to 'balanced' versions, where as Dale might not), Rohan would be about the same, but with excellent horses, orc gear could generally be heavier with the armour less protective but the weapons more damaging, etc.

Given the general philosophy of the bad guys (seeing little to no value in individual life), and their lack of protective gear, as well as the phenomenal ranged capability of the good guys, a balancing factor would seem to be in the bad guys being good at causing damage when they close in. 

4) Stat balances
a) The Riders of Rohan, supposedly born to the saddle and the masters of horse, aren't any better at riding than any other faction. They could really do with a couple extra points of riding at each level so that they stand out.

b) I may be remembering incorrectly, but I recall Tolkien's dwarves being somewhat slower than the other races. I haven't had much of a chance to witness them in-game. Is a change of speed coded in? If not, then perhaps it could be achieved by either adding a point of athletics as a default to all other races, or simply making all dwarven gear that much heavier so that it slows them down. Tanks. Hard to hurt, but not terribly fast.

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 15, 2011, 09:16:36 AM
b) I may be remembering incorrectly, but I recall Tolkien's dwarves being somewhat slower than the other races. I haven't had much of a chance to witness them in-game. Is a change of speed coded in? If not, then perhaps it could be achieved by either adding a point of athletics as a default to all other races, or simply making all dwarven gear that much heavier so that it slows them down. Tanks. Hard to hurt, but not terribly fast.

As far as I remember the only mention about this is Gimli being slower that Legolas and Aragorn when they were chasing the orc party. But Legolas is an elf, and Aragorn is a numenorian and high above human average. Besides, this case was more about endurance than speed.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 15, 2011, 09:18:53 AM
I thought dwarves were very enduring, in LotR?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 15, 2011, 09:32:51 AM
He states they can carry heavier burdens before slowing down compared to other races. However, short and stocky builds aren't the fastest runners to begin with. :P And they can still be enduring, doesn't mean they can keep up in speed, sorta like the tortoise and the hare.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 15, 2011, 09:52:07 AM
I thought dwarves were very enduring, in LotR?

They were, but that doesn't mean all of them can beat an elf and the king of Gondor. If they were all three wearing full armor and carrying a 40 kg. backpack, that would be a different story.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 15, 2011, 11:35:33 AM
1) Wargs & Riders
As it stands, the overwhelming sentiment seems to be that warg riders are  horrid troops, but the wargs are a) extremely dangerous for infantry, and b) irritating to clean up with cavalry at the end of a battle.


I have to disagree mostly. 

Wargs are VERY good in combat IF you have them hold fire.  The darts are useless (even if you fix the powerthrow/powerdraw mistake), and they make HORRIBLE skirmishers.

If you have them hold fire and they draw their swords, they can really mess up infantry in a hurry.  Now in my game I did modify the orcs to carry harad sabres which look great and have a 92 reach, but even without that they do MUCH better with weapons out than as skirmishers.  Its a joy to see them follow me through an elvan archer line and then on the way back ordering them to charge and cut them down from all sides.

As for the hunting down wargs, sure the last couple are annoying but no more annoying than hunting down the last few mounted archers at the end of a battle.  Added I've had more than a couple big fights come down between a few wargs and a few infantry (on both sides of it) and being in those cases I"m usually just watching it can be quite a nice finish. 

By lore the wargs allowed the goblins to ride them, they were evil by their own right, and intelligent. I am VERY impressed with how wargs were done to be functional in this mod.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 15, 2011, 04:41:11 PM
I am VERY impressed with how wargs were done to be functional in this mod.

I have to agree on this. It feels just right.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on November 15, 2011, 05:28:06 PM
I have to disagree mostly. 

Wargs are VERY good in combat IF you have them hold fire.  The darts are useless (even if you fix the powerthrow/powerdraw mistake), and they make HORRIBLE skirmishers.

If you have them hold fire and they draw their swords, they can really mess up infantry in a hurry.

I agree that warg riders are a pretty good unit when used correctly, and were designed and implemented very well.

The problem isn't that the riders aren't effective in some measure, it's that their effectiveness isn't worth the loss.  The rider makes the warg better, but dead wargs come back after every battle while dead riders don't (and take their wargs with them).  A warg is better with a rider, particularly when told to hold fire, but I'd rather have 20 riderless wargs and still have 20 by the end of the battle than 20 wargs with riders but lose half of them by the end.  Because the riders are so vulnerable, what they add to the unit isn't worth the risk.

Without any shield or more than minimal armor, it just doesn't make sense to keep wargs mounted when you can simply dismount them and suffer many fewer casualties.  This applies particularly to battles against elves, where I often lose half a dozen riders to arrows before they even reach enemy lines.

I don't think riders necessarily need a better weapon, just more protection.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 15, 2011, 07:38:10 PM
Are there going to be more skins added in later? Would be nice to see the return of the black uruk skins, and the White-Hand Tattoo ones.
MB has a hardcoded limit of 16 skins. All are used. ANd if any freees up suddenly, we have better usages planned

Sad to hear :(.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 15, 2011, 08:18:43 PM
I have to disagree mostly. 

Wargs are VERY good in combat IF you have them hold fire.  The darts are useless (even if you fix the powerthrow/powerdraw mistake), and they make HORRIBLE skirmishers.

If you have them hold fire and they draw their swords, they can really mess up infantry in a hurry.

I agree that warg riders are a pretty good unit when used correctly, and were designed and implemented very well.

The problem isn't that the riders aren't effective in some measure, it's that their effectiveness isn't worth the loss.  The rider makes the warg better, but dead wargs come back after every battle while dead riders don't (and take their wargs with them).  A warg is better with a rider, particularly when told to hold fire, but I'd rather have 20 riderless wargs and still have 20 by the end of the battle than 20 wargs with riders but lose half of them by the end.  Because the riders are so vulnerable, what they add to the unit isn't worth the risk.

If you want to exploit the system, simply give yourself 10 powerstrike and a sword of 50p on slash with a reach of 300.  Sure in some cases its 'better' to just use the wargs being the wargs don't really die.  Its also an exploit.    Added if you are facing cavalry the wargs don't do anything but get in the way.

Quote
Without any shield or more than minimal armor, it just doesn't make sense to keep wargs mounted when you can simply dismount them and suffer many fewer casualties.  This applies particularly to battles against elves, where I often lose half a dozen riders to arrows before they even reach enemy lines.

I don't think riders necessarily need a better weapon, just more protection.

After testing with a better more sensible weapon (short reach weapons mounted don't make a lot of sense) I have to say the armor is fine as it is.  I did add helms to my top tier warg riders but just do differentiate them from the first tier and for looks.  They are suppose to die easily if they get hit, but now that I have my tactics down they only have issues on 'small' maps like Mirkwood. 

Elf archers should be only a minimal problem at range because you shouldn't run your wargs head on to the archers.  You use your infantry for that, and you flank with the wargs, which will disrupt the archers and also give the infantry the ability to reach them as well. 

If you like you can do what I did, but armor your riders instead, but I find them very good now as is. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 15, 2011, 08:53:04 PM
Oyclo, can you share some more tips? I'm sure I'm not the only one who has a hell of a time trying to play with orcs.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 16, 2011, 12:02:43 AM
Play suggestions I humbly make:

1 - Loot is messed up.  Killing Mordor orcs, which are some of the least equipped troops yields a TON of metal.  Killing other parties yields almost nothing.  This is a major issue for fighting elves as an evil side, because you get no prisoners from elves, and almost no loot for the largest 'risk' man for man in the game.  I would decrease loot on Mordor orcs and increase it on everyone else.  My elf character took level 4 inventory management jut to carry it off after 'farming' trips to Mordor.

2 - The quest asking for rescuing prisoners should be removed from orc factions being orcs can't be taken prisoner.

3 - Balance wise elves are not that far off, but I would decrease their party size (including lords and players) and increase upkeep.  The 'super impossible to break' shields should go though. 

4 - Orcs are not that far off balance wise either.  I'd increase the maximum party size a bit, and remove the darts from wargs as throwing darts makes them far weaker.  I'd also increase the number of Uruks, Uruk-Hai you can recruit a bit.  Shields should be a bit more frequent too.  I said 'bit' a lot there.  Orcs also need a speed boost (someone mentioned one at night for them).

5 - Increase the amount of goods carried by caravans.  These should be good for loot but they are not.  In my native games I increased the loot drop on caravans so looting them was worth the effort.  Sadly I can't recall how in the hell I did it.  It just seems odd that 60 elves should be carrying one bag a wheat across all of Mirkwood.

6 - Increase the spawn rate for enemy factions when you are playing the other side.  When I'm playing orcs, I see orcs all over the map and only a sparse number of 'good' race patrols.  When I play good, orcs are rare outside of the warparties.  Fighting is fun, fighting more is more fun. 

7 - Increase the spawn rate for enemy lord parties.  Fighting is fun, fighting massive battles is awesome.  Its a rare thing to see a full war party after the first few days of the war for the enemy side.  About the only place I can find a good fight is down in Mordor when I'm playing an elf or right next to Isengard.  Playing an orc, its often difficult to find mass Rohan or Gondor after the first week.  The only place I can find lord armies later is the Elves and thats going to be a bit much for the player unless they get lucky with an AI evil army nearby.

8 - Rohan.  The problem with Rohan is the MB AI is just not good with mass cavalry.  Unless its a skirmisher is doesn't understand the concept of hit and run, and with a skirmisher is more annoy and run.  I'm not sure this can be fixed really but it can be helped by giving them more warhorses. 

9 - I'd greatly increase the spawn for northern orc ai armies.  Their numbers are less than the good side and their troops are far less.  It just gets sort of 'meh' to play with them or against them, and they are never a threat. 

Just some ideas I have while I'm yawning here.  I had more but I think I'm falling asleep :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on November 16, 2011, 03:55:07 AM
If you want to exploit the system, simply give yourself 10 powerstrike and a sword of 50p on slash with a reach of 300.  Sure in some cases its 'better' to just use the wargs being the wargs don't really die.  Its also an exploit.    Added if you are facing cavalry the wargs don't do anything but get in the way.

Well, yes, it's an exploit, which is why I don't generally do it.  But it puts me in a position where either I'm losing wargs just because the riders die, or I'm keeping the riders off to keep the wargs immortal.  It seems just as silly to have intelligent wargs "go away" because the armor-less riders die like flies as to keep the riders off just to keep the wargs at the end.  Obviously, you can't make the game keep mounts when the riders die, so the best solution in my view is to increase the survivability of the riders to at least begin to keep up with the wargs themselves.

Flanking wargs doesn't seem to help me that much when I spawn within bowshot of the enemy, which is the case in most of the maps I've faced elves on as orcs.

Anyway, I think I've said my piece on this, and it's really not that huge an issue - personally, I'll probably just give the upper tier riders shields and maybe some better boots if they don't get them in a future version.  I just felt it was a balance issue that was worth looking at generally.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: WindusAndar on November 16, 2011, 04:06:09 AM
One possible way to workaround the bad cavalry handling in M&B is to modify the CHARGE ORDER.

I found that a good way to use Cavalry (especially lancers) is to order them to take a position far beyond the enemy host. Basically, while in ranks (not free charge), the cavalry ride hard through the enemy and take whom they can with them. Once they have gone beyond the enemy, they could repeat the same process and come to the opposite side.

Instead of allowing a free charge, the charge order should simply reposition the cavalry company flag many tiles beyond the enemy host. The player can keep track of his cavalry via the tactical menu or ride with them.

Is this possible?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 16, 2011, 06:54:48 AM
Why do you get forced to use a club, when starting fights on the evil side? Some of my enemies use deadlier weapons.

Also, I noticed that I was a uruk-hai starting a fight with an orc... yet in the brawl, I was allied with orcs and fighting uruk hai. Is it just random?


PS: You guys are totally awesome. When I saw that I could start random fights, I was like this: :!:
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 16, 2011, 07:39:38 AM
Oyclo made some excellent points and suggestions.  I don't know that I'd get rid of the Warg riders darts, however -- I had one smoke me for 50 points out of the blue, yesterday (Wearing elite Lorien armour and decorated Arnor helm). They may not hit often, but when they do... sweet Jeebus, they hurt.

The lack of massing forces seems to be more of a problem with some factions than others. The Rohirrim really suffer from this, as in the northern reaches of their land they can't stray more than a few inches of map from their town without either being ambushed and swarmed, or showing the AI's ADD tendency to chase everything they see... and get ambushed and swarmed.

As a result, I've yet to see Theoden riding out with his hosts. The most I've ever seen was the old King with one tag-along lord... and then they got ambushed and swarmed.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 16, 2011, 11:04:10 AM
Oyclo made some excellent points and suggestions.  I don't know that I'd get rid of the Warg riders darts, however -- I had one smoke me for 50 points out of the blue, yesterday (Wearing elite Lorien armour and decorated Arnor helm). They may not hit often, but when they do... sweet Jeebus, they hurt.


Early playing Mordor I got headshot for 127 by a ranger, I deserved a real death for that one :)

My reason for removing the darts is that it will make the AI wargs over all better. As a player I can just order them to hold fire.  In every orc battle vrs a good sized foe I always hit 2,k,f6,f6,3,2,4,2,5 with 5 being hold fire on the cavalry.  If the AI would only switch to ranged when it couldn't catch someone or they were at longer range it would be great but unfortunately it automatically tries to skirmish which makes the low armor low accuracy wargs riders pretty meh.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 16, 2011, 11:12:09 AM
As a purely flavour thing:

While the Men of Dale & Esgaroth have pretty basic equipment (which makes them a pretty awesome faction to join if you're looking to do the 'commoner rises to hero' type of story), they live awfully close to the dwarves, and are supposed to have a good trading relationship with them, it would be awesome if some of the Dale reward items reflected that. There's special mail that can be earned, and a fine sword. Having them be dwarf-crafted treasures of Esgaroth would be a nice touch.

As an aside: I love the way the Dale coat, mail, and cloak armour looks.  It's got a great archaic feel. Kudos to whomever designed the Dale equipment.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: GetAssista on November 16, 2011, 11:18:33 AM
Wargs will stay as is, cause they are meant to be skirmish troops first of all, not charging lancers (this is why not a single warg rider in game has any kind of spear).
Main point for us in TLD is and always will be to have a correct feeling from how troops are used on battlefield, not making this or that troop max effective from powerplayer's point of view.

We are thinking about additional penalties for losing warg mounts if you choose to dismount riders. Like - after battle half of your riderless wargs ran into the wild, and you are left with their riders on foot.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 16, 2011, 11:43:59 AM
Wargs will stay as is, cause they are meant to be skirmish troops first of all, not charging lancers (this is why not a single warg rider in game has any kind of spear).
Main point for us in TLD is and always will be to have a correct feeling from how troops are used on battlefield, not making this or that troop max effective from powerplayer's point of view.

We are thinking about additional penalties for losing warg mounts if you choose to dismount riders. Like - after battle half of your riderless wargs ran into the wild, and you are left with their riders on foot.

I'm thinking the AI's point of view, and limitations of the engine.  I'm not advocating warg lancers, but wargs wielding a bladed 1h weapon I dont' see as anyway out of lore.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Xatham on November 16, 2011, 12:26:41 PM
Perhaps you could make the wargs better at being skirmishers, if you don't want people to use them as light cavalry? More points in throwing/power throw for instance.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on November 16, 2011, 01:03:58 PM
I feel Rhun could do with a bit of tweaking/balancing. Firstly, I'm not seeing a particular lot of difference between the Swift and Light Horsemen trees, the latter also seem to have excessively high Power Draw and pathetic Ironflesh/Power Strike despite seemingly being melee only.

Secondly, there's a lack of lances on most mounted troops and swords tend to be fairly short. Would be nice to see a bit more variety in troop gear other than the 'Mostly naked with a 1h sword' that defines the faction right now. I like the idea of multiple starting troops for factions but when one offers Horse Archers AND melee cavalry then it can be frustrating when you don't have a lot of choice in recruiting.

The Rhun horses themselves could do with a little improvement. Pretty much all troops have them bar the top tier Nobles and I feel they could use a boost. As of right now the horses die in 1/2 hits from pretty much any troop and then the riders usually in 1. Perhaps a speed boost would be good and would set the Rhunian horses apart from other factions' (Quick but relatively light).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: azile0 on November 16, 2011, 01:14:11 PM
I'd like to see some consolidation on resources for factions that have a lot of neighbors nearby; For example, condensing all three Elf factions into one resource pool, condensing Dale/Erebor into one, etc. I came up with this idea after assaulting a Dol Guldur army of over 500 troops (It was a group fight) where I was assisting a Mirkwood patrol.

Well, I got a lot of points in Mirkwood, but none in Lothlorien, which is what I need to maintain my army. Payday came around and I lost some troops because I couldn't afford the 2000 RPs, despite having well over 3000 RPs in Mirkwood.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Szogunos on November 16, 2011, 01:15:13 PM
More Black Numenorean armour like those in previous version - it looked like hardened leather with some ornaments and small metal parts over dark chainmail. And helmets like that - iron, hardened lether, chain.
BTW: Why Black Numenoreans in 1.011 wear orc boots? I would never wear boots of orcish rabble if i was an excidingly proud man with very long lifespan. Not to mention possibility of catching some bad infection - i doubt orcs wash their feet  :P

Also - stats of black numenorean warriors are too low. I'd say they should be equal or almost equal to those of Dunedain - they are quite extraordinary guys, too

Please also restore some nice quests from previous version - especially freeing a captured lord by sneaking into enemy fortress avoiding guards and that one with Mordor sorcerer trying to desacrate elven forest. These were most amazing ones im my opinion

And again (as Conner above said) : Why do you get forced to use a club, when starting fights on the evil side? Can you give sth more elegant than wooden club like warhammer with damage both blunt and pierce (while stabbing with its sharp point)?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 17, 2011, 09:35:23 AM
Faster Trolls?

The trolls is TLD are quite slow. I was wondering why this was. Was under the impression that in the book, the troll was pretty agile.

Of course, if the trolls as they currently are were also faster... it'd destroy EVERYTHING....

The trolls in the books were fairly fast. We made them slow, because the animations look weird when they move fast.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: helkid2 on November 17, 2011, 04:49:48 PM
Aside from congratulating once more and repeating how awesome the mod is, I wold like to address a small issue that can easily be read as a suggestion.

I enjoyed, the game so much! but' when i saw the trolls/ents i whas kinda disepointed. they are powerfull Oponents but they look really' bad i would enjoy them, alot of more if they would look movie like dit you guys had any plans to improve them ?


I know this, is bookwhise and i really love that' *basic idea* but even there they look more powerfull and bloodlusty!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Yarrum on November 17, 2011, 05:40:46 PM
Can you guys implement a horse health bar like in Warband? It's really useful.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 17, 2011, 06:51:50 PM
Any way to make trolls fall under the cavalry type or something? If you have infantry and trolls attack, then your own infantry will end up taking more casualties than your enemies will....

trolls don't obey orders. If you keep infantry out of their way, they won't smash it.

That seems to be the case. Though, I'm not sure what the trolls are thinking exactly... which is cool :D. They seem to suck against Rohan, though. Hopefully they can take out some of those elves.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on November 18, 2011, 06:43:25 AM
I was wondering if it would be possible to throw in another evil human companion.  At present, there are only three, Lykyada (Harad), Fuldimir (Corsair), and Varfang (Rhun).  Of these, only Fuldimir is suitable for being a skilled companion - Varfang has a Int of 3 and Lykyada has requirements so high that he won't be available for a very long time unless you're actually Haradrim (and even then...).

Yes, I can use orcs for my healers and pathfinders and trainers and such, but it feels weird having a single orc as doctor to a horde of easterlings.  On the other hand, maybe I'm the only one who feels that way.

Anyway, my suggestion is just to throw in another evil man companion that's available fairly early, maybe a dunlending or variag since they don't have any companions right now.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on November 18, 2011, 08:27:13 AM
The first thing I thought of when I thought of an 'evil human companion' was one of Sauron's lackeys, like the Mouth -- someone pale and wasted, with evil having sapped their vitality and left them with a grim visage -- who 'heals' much in the same way that orcs 'socialize'. A sociopath. Someone removed from the human condition, who cares little about pain or scarring, is highly intelligent and utterly lacking in empathy. Living things are experiments. Brilliant, but someone that any sane person would be terrified to have as a doctor.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 18, 2011, 08:42:32 AM
Would like to ask, how hard it is to make faces for troops in mount and blade modding. Was under the impression that you set the sliders, then the game randomly adjusts the sliders between those two examples.

Sadly, I now figure this won't be the case... Would be nice to have more orc faces, but it might be too hard to arrange...
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: pagan on November 18, 2011, 08:53:52 AM
Would like to ask, how hard it is to make faces for troops in mount and blade modding. Was under the impression that you set the sliders, then the game randomly adjusts the sliders between those two examples.

Sadly, I now figure this won't be the case... Would be nice to have more orc faces, but it might be too hard to arrange...

Not all that you see, is all that is to be seen, gentlemen. There are bugs to be fixed, when this phase is complete, the Real TLD will begin to take shape.

*sigh* when the faithful lose faith... a note cracks and falls from my page.

This general screws up my melody, so cut it out!

 :P
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 18, 2011, 08:58:41 AM
That is a good point. Sorry for the cynical comment. Would be neat to have a huge variety of orc faces, with some of them being extremely different and very weird. LotR orcs can be like that, after all. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdXQJS3Yv0Y

As I already explained a couple of times, we can't change the skintone, so that all orc heads fit with all orc bodies. Orcs now DO have sliders for different facial features.

Wasn't meaning the skin-tone--just the shape of the heads.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 18, 2011, 10:29:04 AM
Quote
I think part of the problem is how vanilla M&B treats upgrades.

There comes a point in every game where your men are MUCH better equipped than you are.  At times you grab their weapons/shield when they die as its an upgrade.

So you start with everyone being scrubs, and for a few coins they are dressed like the best.  Really the level up should be automatic and skills only, the equipment should be what you pay for.

I've seen mods try to work around this but ideally you could upgrade equipment at any time for a cost.  Thats the problem I'm having with Gondor as a newbie is that all my men outside of a few horsemen have basically shirts, thin leather, and padded armor.

One interesting way around this which would not require a lot of code but troop tree modification, would be at recruitment having more options.  Instead of just 'Gondor levy' you would have three tiers of Gondor levy, each with the exact same skills but better equipment.  The level up tree skill wise would be the same, and the end troop would be the same.  This would make big economic decisions for the player too.  Do you hire a levy at 6 res or do you hire a levy with midlevel equipment for 100, or top level equipment for 300, knowing that they still have the 75 weapon skill (I'm guessing).

Right now I feel like a bad man marching horribly equipped troops into enemy territory to be slaughtered by orcs, if I could upgrade their equipment I'd spend the cash.

I posted that in the RCM thread, and its a bigger deal for RCM but I think it would work equally well non-RCM play too.  If anyone is interested in doing this, I'd be willing to work on the troop trees but the options would need to be added to the barracks. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: k0d1akattack on November 18, 2011, 01:11:55 PM
I love the look and feel of the Pelargir Marine with his javelins.  Unfortunately when upgraded to Veteran Pelargir Marine they get a bow and lose what makes them interesting.  I can't see any reason it would go against lore/reason to have them just keep the javelins instead of getting a bow.  It would also be helpful if they could be classified as infantry instead of archers since they only have three shots and only from very close range.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on November 18, 2011, 04:30:00 PM
The first thing I thought of when I thought of an 'evil human companion' was one of Sauron's lackeys, like the Mouth -- someone pale and wasted, with evil having sapped their vitality and left them with a grim visage -- who 'heals' much in the same way that orcs 'socialize'. A sociopath. Someone removed from the human condition, who cares little about pain or scarring, is highly intelligent and utterly lacking in empathy. Living things are experiments. Brilliant, but someone that any sane person would be terrified to have as a doctor.

That's interesting... and honestly, that would be fine too.  Just one more evil man companion (that's not a total meathead, like Varfang) would make things easier for mannish parties in the service of Sauron/Saruman who prefer not to use orcs.  Fuldimir is OK but he can't do everything.

Actually, the more I think about it, the better your idea sounds - a bit creepy BN surgeon who offers to offers his services for the chance to "work" on your soldiers - and maybe your prisoners, too.  Nice idea. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oyclo on November 18, 2011, 08:19:07 PM
If I can restress the carvan loot issue.  I attacked 4 of them at the 'stuck' point.  Total look 1 tools 1 metal.

I attacked 2 rivendell caravans at the same time in Lothlorien, took 100 casualties to do so, total loot 2 maggoty bread 2 metal.

That ain't right  :o
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: pagan on November 18, 2011, 10:17:35 PM
this will be fixed in next patch. From what i gather you will find the same amount of loot in scrap as if you had crossdressing on.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on November 19, 2011, 04:39:48 AM
Is it possible to add an armored alternative to the last tier of Isengard Uruk-hai pikemen upgrade line? Where an armored pikeman gets upgraded to an unarmored berserker? Under native it just weakens the guy, under RCM it makes him almost useless. Adding a possibility to upgrade to an armored halberdier or something would get rid of this, while leaving the flavor of having berserkers to those who want it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on November 19, 2011, 06:48:28 AM
I would like to suggest some texture improvement.....
The bows.
The vanilla bows remains unchange, and they are quite bad.

The 'grip' have a low quality texture, being a brown/black thing with some stripes on them- suppose that should be some leather or cloth.
Especially pitted against the all-new elven bows, they look even worse, only due to the texture.

Also, I found that the Gondor horse have a rather bad 'head plate'-
If any movie inspiration is taken, I think this may help?
(http://i42.tinypic.com/k1t9hz.png)
This is the one on the Gondorian herald.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Kendogreg on November 19, 2011, 09:48:04 PM
I love the mod!  I think the Dark Lord is under powered.  Once I grew strong I was kicking his butt far to easily.  Here's my suggestions to modify this:
Str/Agi Change
   Fighting Uruk Hai Berserker (Level 30 STR: 20 AGI: 20 1H: 200 2H: 200 POLE: 200)
Level change
   Black Numenorean Assassin (Level 35 STR: 18 AGI: 20 1H: 200 2H: 200 POLE: 200)
   Fighting Uruk Hai Champion (Level 35 STR: 18 AGI: 18 1H: 200 2H: 200 POLE: 200)
   Variag Axe Master (Level 35 STR: 18 AGI: 18 1H: 200 2H: 200 POLE: 200)
   Variag Berserker (Level 35 STR: 18 AGI: 18 BOW: 200 XBOW: 0 THR: 200)
   Corsair Night Raider (Level 35 STR: 18 AGI: 18 1H: 200 2H: 200 POLE: 200)
   Corsair Assassin (Level 35 STR: 18 AGI: 18 BOW: 200 XBOW: 0 THR: 200)
   Fang Heavy Cavalry (Level 35
   Dunnish Wolf Guard (Level 35 STR: 18 AGI: 18 1H: 200 2H: 200 POLE: 200)
Additional Tier
   Black Numenorean Warlord (Level 40 STR: 18 AGI: 18 1H: 200 2H: 200 POLE: 200)
   Orc Nemesis of Mordor (Level 30 STR: 13 AGI: 15 1H: 200 2H: 200 POLE: 200)
   Uruk Nemesis of Mordor (Level 35 STR: 18 AGI: 18 1H: 200 2H: 200 POLE: 200)
Added tier in front and back
o   Dunnish Rider   (Level 10 STR: 10 AGI: 7 1H: 100 2H: 100 POLE: 100)
   Dunnish Raven Rider (Level 15 STR: 13 AGI: 11 1H: 135 2H: 135 POLE: 135
   Dunnish Warlord (Level 20 STR: 15 AGI: 15 1H: 170 2H: 170 POLE: 170)
Title: lord's guards talk
Post by: cynan on November 20, 2011, 12:29:38 AM
Ok,

One suggestion it's small and totally opinion: I find if you talk to orcs on guard duty in a lord's chamber saying "we're not allowed to talk on guard duty" wrong somehow I know i shouldn't talk to them anyway but sometimes I can't restrain myself :-)

Personally I feel  the line is a little too friendly for an orc. I would prefer silence, or a threatening growl

I personally think silence would also be more fitting for elves and Gondorians (and possibly Harad - i'm not sure) who may take ceremony and ritual and tradition very seriously.... This comes from thinking of modern ceremonial guards who are not to speak or respond in any way to the public.

Maybe for less formal human factions (with maybe less militaristic discipline) like Dunlendings, Beornlings, Rhun, forget the no talking on duty and have them greet the character..... these guys don't look to me like the kind of warriors who will stand on ceremony.

Maybe for some of the other human factions like Dale and Rohan and Corsairs leave it as is.

Just some thoughts.
Title: balence
Post by: cynan on November 20, 2011, 12:45:04 AM
The actions that the player makes can have a huge impact on how the war plays out.

A skilled player can kill many foes, and a strategic player can raise a band of hardened veteran troops into battle and kill even more foes. Moreover by jumping into battles the player can often tip the tides in the favor of his own faction and make a huge impact.

My first longer game was in 3.0 and I played a Dunedain for Rivendale. It may be that the war in the north is balanced too much for the light but I found early in the game I was able to tip the tides of major conflicts which ultimately eliminated several enemy parties including hosts and put the momentum in favor of the good guys. Of course rohan was being ripped apart as fast as we took Gundabad and Dol Guldor down.... if you tip the balance too much then it could become too easy if the player is a bad guy.... since as a game designer you don't know which faction the player fights for it can be hard to account for this on as far as balancing the factions.

I had an idea to address this problem.... could the factions in direct conflict with the player's faction get extra enemy parties.... maybe the strength of these extra parties could be effected by the player's level? like before the real war starts it could be extra patrols and after the war starts it could be extra hosts?

One thing that I think bears mentioning is that the player should be encouraged to play with normal damage to allies. i made the mistake of playing on the default 1/2 damage to allies in battle and whenever I showed up on the battlefield suddenly Elrond's host could cream whatever he was up against, as long as I kept hacking the foes down at his side. I realized it later in the game that i was on 1/2 damage to allies but by then it was too late for our foes they were seriously weakened and on the defensive.....

also a general observation of war balance. Without the player's presence in the south the war in the south seems to be in favor of the bad guys. I have a feeling it is the opposite in the north, favoring the good guys, but I have not played my southern campaign very long at all, so it's too early to say.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 20, 2011, 01:44:51 AM
Was thinking of some suggestions for the Morale system you folks hope to implement. However, I'm not sure what your plans are, so it's hard to suggest anything.

One thing to consider, is that Warband already has a bit of Morale in the Native game--so it mightn't be worth while coding a morale system from scratch for 1.011?

There's also the question of what kind of gameplay you want it to have, and what levels of complexity are possible. For example, you could have a morale score for each army, so that certain troops will all retreat like a hive-mind at certain times.
Or, you could make it based on what is nearby. Are there lots of allies getting killed around them? Are there banner units or officer unites nearby to bolster them? Did they just see the enemy General go down? That kind of thing.
------
With the latter option, if it was for Warband, you might want to increase the size of the battlefields. That way, you could actually d some fairly intricate tactics, such as pincer formations, fake routing, and trying to manage two battles on the same field.


Those are my thoughts from what I know currently--which is similar to nothing.
Title: Re: balence
Post by: GondorKnight on November 20, 2011, 01:45:43 AM
The southern part, of Gondor, is always on the bad guys side.
I wan't a good Gondor soldier- I often wander off to the North... 8)
But there are many host of Mordor, and various Southerners and things, Gondor army can get swarmed easily.
In my game, (actually two, 3.0 and 3.0) the only lords that fight are Imrahil and Faramir.
Other just do nothing and derp.
Once they ride out, soon they will be outnumbered at least 3:1- once I saw Faramir with 150 men against 1200 enemy.

You'll need to babysit them, to prevent them from losing and then went back to do nothing.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Mage246 on November 20, 2011, 02:40:10 AM
I think it's supposed to be easier for the good peoples in the North. The focus of Sauron's forces is on Rohan and Gondor - the other theatres of war are more of a distraction and delaying effort, to keep the elves of Mirkwood and Lorien (both still very powerful, even though their best years are past them) from linking up and moving South in time to save the day. The situation for Rohan and Gondor is desperate, but the men, dwarves, and elves of the North have not only a chance but a very good chance of beating their foes on their own. But it's all for nothing if by the time they do the hordes of Mordor and its allies have already won....
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 20, 2011, 02:42:09 AM
Gah.... these sieges are driving me nuts! My faction asks me to join their warband and they start sieging... but they've been sieging  for days and days. Do I need to wipe out every enemy unit within a mile radius, so that they don't get interrupted whatsoever?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on November 20, 2011, 03:50:45 AM
Gah.... these sieges are driving me nuts! My faction asks me to join their warband and they start sieging... but they've been sieging  for days and days. Do I need to wipe out every enemy unit within a mile radius, so that they don't get interrupted whatsoever?
Which faction you belongs to?
I have quite some luck with the northern Elves- Celeborn and Haldir pair rocks.

Lords usually wants to assist each other- so help them out.
Clear the area until nobody dares to challenge and the siege assault will begin.
Number of units under their command also counts- they won't really do some epic charge.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 20, 2011, 05:54:14 AM
Isengard. Scouts keep popping up, so they decide to amble the whole infantry force after them.

Trying the approach of just attacking everything green in the state.



GAH!! They have about 400 men, 500 if you count my party. Yet, they still won't get to attacking West-Emment, which has 175 men... Also, I've stopped them from being distrubed the whole time of a day and a half.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on November 20, 2011, 07:21:25 AM
They just don't like to and they don't. lol
It's rather random, I always press space or even camp and wait until the assault.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Cuthos on November 20, 2011, 10:21:07 AM
Fabulous mod.

I think couch and cavalry is a little overpowered so here; the solution I'd propose.

First the problem description. Running a purl cavalry force is the rationally best strategy as a Rohan or Gondor character because:
1. Cavalry makes you much quicker on the campaign map allowing you to have much more impact on the war
2. The slowness of Orcs staying in formation mean that cavalry allow you to close much faster on the tactical map.
3. The high % of orc archers in orc armies make cavalry devastating against them
4. Cavalry is immune to those damm wargs that knock over heavy infantry like ninepins
5. couching is devastating for the player character versus any enemy

It needs to be rational to bring in infantry and archers into you army and it needs to be more rewarding to fight on foot as the player.

Two simple changes would achieve this:
1. Reduce AI combat speed on the world map - thus making fast travel time less important to have an impact on the war
2. Reduce horses HP. This would reduce the effectiveness of cavalry versus infantry and make couching less appealing to the player (more chance of getting mobbed when you try and couch through a formation of orcs). I also think its more realistic. You only need to damage a leg and a horse is out of combat. Whereas the game in implicitly assuming you have to kill them to get them out of combat. When you read medieval combat accounts - cavalry is devastating but vulnerable in melee. That's how it should be. In fact couching against a troll is one of the best bits of the game - you can do massive damage but the fear aura also means your horse probably dies and you risk ending up in a 1:1 duel with a troll. So its a great decision to have to make as a player.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on November 20, 2011, 10:42:51 AM
Personally i found cavalry less useful than I expected..... and am finding infantry more useful in large pitched battles.

When i was playing a good guy and helping Rohan (I was supposed to be in the north helping Elrond but we were already winning and Rohan was getting swamped) the cavalry seemed ineffective against the uruk hai. I'm not sure why but the infantry formations seemed to be pretty cohesive and not break up easily like in the old version on 0.808.... whenever I told cavalry to charge they would get caught up in hand to hand with the infantry and get slaughtered. I tried leading them around through the back field with more success to hit the archers but i found that many still got caught up on the archers or nearby infantry  and got cut down. Until their formations break up I found the cavalry not very useful and ended up using mostly missile cavalry which seemed to keep it's distance better with a large force of infantry. Maybe it was because i was leading weak cavalry against superior infantry... but I'm seeing it again playing bad guys in the southern conflict... going to help harad scouts against Gordor scout normally results in the cavalry heavy harad being cut down early incurring almost no damage to the enemy which seems to be mostly archers. This was a huge surprise to me....

I also found (playing a good guy) using a couched lance was very effective against infantry but against uruk hai archers they were able to hit be with arrows quite frequently... I thought it was silly because normally we think cavalry trumps archers... and you'd think a guy couching a lance at his side could still have his shield forward to ward against arrows.... but that is purely a M&B issue.... you can't block while you are couched which makes you vulnerable for the crucial moment before impact when if the archer hits you the couched lance will not kill him....

One thing you are right about.... it's awesome how the horses are afraid of the trolls. First time I went up against a troll on a sway backed saddle horse, hopelessly outnumbered as well (I got jumped by scouts and a full war band joined them while i had like 4 guys).... and my horse spooked and stopped a few meters away from the Troll.... i was terrified "GO GO GO!!!" that was fun!

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on November 20, 2011, 10:52:22 AM
One comment, and again this was from my old game in 3.0, you may have fixed it:

the elves had several bows that required power draw 3 and could not be used on horseback.

The Rohirrim had nomad bows and war bows which had no power draw limits and could be used from horse back AND did higher damage (at least the war bows did) and at a lower price I believe. Anyway i didn't think it was really fair...  but since i wanted bows that could be used from horseback ended up exploiting it.

It just seemed like a small oversight that some bows were hands down better in every way: cheaper, easier to use, more versatile, AND more damage.... anyway aren't elven bows supposed to be superior? At least for foot based bowmen?

There is a thread named "Elven bows ARE better than others", it explains why.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Cuthos on November 20, 2011, 11:19:43 AM
Interesting reply Cynan.

I'm fascinated because I have been getting irritated that I no longer need to participate in battles up to a 2x ration (my 50 against their 100). I just turn up and press F3 and go and make coffee. 3 minutes later (10 minutes if their are wargs) I come back to win with 1-2 casualties.

Maybe its just top tier that are overpowered. I have only been using elite and eorl guard of rohan and the knights of the citadel. They just seem to slaughter any Urak hai.

I agree in urak hai archers being effective if you are on your own couching against them. If you have cavalry with you then they split their fire too much to be effective.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 20, 2011, 12:09:34 PM
Maybe its just top tier that are overpowered. I have only been using elite and eorl guard of rohan and the knights of the citadel. They just seem to slaughter any Urak hai.

I think barded horses is what make the difference. Don't know about Uruk-hai, but orc, harad and corsair archers need tons of arrows just to kill one... and they usually have no time to do that before they are slaughtered.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on November 20, 2011, 01:06:59 PM
I'm fascinated because I have been getting irritated that I no longer need to participate in battles up to a 2x ration (my 50 against their 100). I just turn up and press F3 and go and make coffee. 3 minutes later (10 minutes if their are wargs) I come back to win with 1-2 casualties.

Maybe its just top tier that are overpowered. I have only been using elite and eorl guard of rohan and the knights of the citadel. They just seem to slaughter any Urak hai.

Under the current RCM your cavalry would get slaughtered even with 1x1 ratio. Perhaps that's what cynan is playing.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on November 20, 2011, 02:04:10 PM
The problem I have with sieges is that the difference in time between preparing a siege and hosts respawning is so minimal. The scenario I end up with is generally this:

1. The 4 Rhunian Lords sally out, against Boernings or Dwarves generally.
2. We find the enemy hosts and defeat them, usually sustaining mid-heavy losses (Against Dain and his men it's horrendous).
3. Huzzah! Onwards to the siege!
4. Wait 2 days preparing to siege.
5. The  enemy hosts return at full strength and the Rhun lords either retreat or die.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on November 20, 2011, 04:07:19 PM
what does RCM stand for? I have been playing with normal damage as opposed to reduced damage.... game seems too easy if all the troops on your side are magically stronger just because you are there....

also it's the only way to observe the game balance between NPCs fighting it out.

To Cuthos: Yah I think I was commanding mostly the horses that ally companies had plus a bunch of new squires of my own and only a handful of stronger cavalry that I had brought with me from the Rivendale camp.... Well that was until I switched tactics :-)

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on November 20, 2011, 04:34:49 PM
RCM stands for Realistic Combat Mod, see this thread - http://mbx.streetofeyes.com/index.php/topic,2492.0.html (http://mbx.streetofeyes.com/index.php/topic,2492.0.html)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Taohn on November 20, 2011, 10:53:21 PM
Hi,

Just wanted to suggest a couple new traits and some changes to the way rescuing prisoners is handled.

Traits:

As you go through the game you acquire reputation with the factions on your side, but this is all done at the expense of the enemy...killing hundreds upon hundreds of their troops. Presumably you'd acquire a pretty fearsome reputation with the enemy factions and so be hated and cursed for it. I thought it might be interesting if there were some  traits to reflect this. The traits could have multiple levels that you'd advance through as you defeat more and more enemies. Say something like "Nuisance to Mordor" ;p->"Annoyance to M"->"Hated foe of M"->"Implacable enemy of M"->"Bane of M"-> "Undoing of M", etc. (For flavour, the dark factions could have more evil sounding traits: pest to Lothlorien, plague on L, torment of L, scourge of L, downfall of L, ruin of L). These traits could give any kind of bonus, but I thought they might work best with the planned battle morale system. They could also be a double-edged sword depending on how many enemy troops the player is facing: the enemy receives a moral penalty if it doesn't outnumber the player by at least, say, 2 to 1 (of course this cut-off point could change depending of the level of the trait). When the player is more outnumbered than this, however, the enemy could receive morale (and maybe even stat) bonuses to reflect their degree of hatred for the player (at the higher levels they'd be in a frenzy for your head and get some pretty significant bonuses). I think it would be an interesting challenge for the player at higher levels and add another strategic consideration. In big battles against a faction that loathes you their first waves would be supercharged, but if you managed to survive the trait would start to work against the enemy as you whittle them down.

Another way this could work on the battlefield (though it might be too complicated to code) is to have the morale and stat bonuses applied only (or more intensely) to enemies within a certain radius of the player. This could vary with the level of each particular troop relative to the player. Troops of a significantly higher level than the player might be unaffected by even an upper level trait, but snagas or raw recruits around a player with a fearsome rep would be petrified.

Prisoners:

Whenever I do the prisoner quest it always seems a shame to leave behind the troops that I can't fit in my party. I assume the leftovers are taken into any allied parties that may be present, but what happens when you're fighting alone? Do the leftovers simply disappear? In any case, it seems a little strange for rescued prisoners (many of whom would be traumatized and malnourished) to magically get all their (looted) gear back and be ready to fight. We already have refugees now, so why not have rescued prisoners behave similarly after a battle? Instead of the player or allies being able to recruit them instantly, they could spawn in a separate group and ask the player (as a quest) to be taken to the nearest town of their faction. These troops would be neither fully equipped soldiers nor generic refugees. They could be a separate troop type with the prefix "rescued" (e.g. "Rescued Knight of Dol Amroth," Rescued Rider of Rohan," etc.) Changing their stats in the troop file would be time-consuming, so maybe they could just have really poor gear (rags, no weapons, or maybe a few clubs). These troops would sit in town for a while and eventually be reequipped as normal troops according to their type. Prisoners rescued by the ai could be handled like the prisoner trains we have now (light escort, easy prey) and spawn after battles (commanders in the field wouldn't have the gear to simply reequip prisoners on the spot). Ai lords might be able to recruit a certain percentage of prisoners right away to reflect the presence of prisoners were captured only recently and haven't suffered too badly (depending on the size of the party: prisoners rescued by patrol=0, those rescued by a general=maybe 20%). The guild masters could give a version of this quest in addition or instead of the refugee quest (which doesn't make a lot of sense...why can't they remain in the town they're staying in when the quest is given?)

Anyway, that's it. Loving the mod!

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on November 21, 2011, 06:43:04 PM
This talk of integrating morale is very interesting. i really enjoyed the morale mod that someone created for M&B that caused my troops to hesitate before following me into battle, or route if things went poorly, and when i killed foes their morale was bolstered! It would be fun to have it in this game, but it will make winning battles easier and losing battle harder! It's awesome seeing your foes backing away from your forces!!!

One comment my brother made which I thought was good (if it would be possible) is the idea that different soldiers could be effected by morale in different ways. Higher tier solders, (or certain soldiers designated as higher morals soldiers) might be less effected/penalized for a bad situation than recruits or irregulars. While a Knight of Arnor might realize that a situation looked bad he would not likely abandon his lord on the field of battle. if his lord fell he'd probably fight twice as heard to recover his lord's body. The same might also be said of the knights of the tower guard.... the same would almost certainly be said of any seasoned dwarven warrior. I'm not sure if the same could be said for a veteran corsair raider....Maybe some orcs could be especially steadfast??? slaves to their master's will???..... but it might be easier just to relate it to the level of the AI warrior.

I think if the veterans are less effected than the recruits it could make the veterans more vulnerable since they'd be charging in while the rookies held back....  but at least it would give the player SOMEONE to back him up if he chose to stand his ground!!!

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Erhen on November 21, 2011, 07:17:13 PM
It`s a pity that is no way to convince the dwarf king to recapture Moria and Gundabad =( At least in my game it didn`t hapened, usually all dirty job goes to elves.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Karunel on November 22, 2011, 06:17:23 PM
Dwarves defeated Gundabad in my game, it just takes a silly amount of effort and tears.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on November 22, 2011, 07:54:27 PM
I wasn't sure weather to post this under bugs or suggestions:

it's not a "bug" perse but the tents in the harad camp act liek solid ground, which means that because they are sloped gradually enough you can run up on top of them and even ride a horse up one!

I did a bit of training in the Harad camp and noticed one of my opponents on horseback managed to evade me by riding up onto the tent. I then realized that I could go up on a tent to gain a "high ground advantage :-)

silly.

maybe if the tents were steeper no one could get up on them?

maybe it doesn't matter because not many battles will play out in that camp....

I thought I'd mention it though.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on November 23, 2011, 07:04:18 AM
Hi all,

having played a lot more(with RCM), mostly on the initial stage before the war starts as I think a lore conforming start does lots for immersion in the whole campaign I have some comments/suggestions:

- resource/rank/influence system does now make sense actually. Still it limits the player geographically somewhat, not illogical for a faction member. But... as dialogues go, the player comes to volunteer for service and gets, IMO, drafted. "It is your duty" blahablaha...  That`s why I`d like the possibility to fight as an irregular.
It is the only plausible argument for PC staying with crappy start equipment. As an irregular you`re not limited by geography, but you get no pay and less influence. And no ranks... But you`re free!!! IF you`re a draftee you should by b-d-y right get new lvl 1 equipment, for some factions even a horsie!

- weapon distribution among vendors needs attention. Firstly, dwarven gear should be fairly common, but becoming more expensive in general and also with increasing distance from dwarf settlements. Dwarfs lived off arms trade to great extent. Also dwarf armor in man-sizes(export ware) should be available. And dwarven maces, javelins, jarids, made for export even if not used by the dwarfs themselves.
I`ve not yet seen javelins for sale among Rohirrim, Dale, Dwarfs, Elves.

- armour should be more expensive at medium and higher level. And pricing more conformant with quality and weight.

And I think many are a bit mistaken in thinking that ME is an early medieval world. Techwise it is, but socially Gondor is more like an ancient centralized state(Egypt, Assyria?), Rohan an early medieval ducal law state. Meaning there are no fiefs but there are standing armies. This should also apply to the elves(state armoury in Mirkwood).
So equipment and training level should be good. One more argument for beefing up players starting stats.
Baddie humans like Rhun, Khand are more tribal kingdoms/federations.

Rgds, Oldtimer
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: mrideos on November 23, 2011, 07:36:58 AM
Please make Lothorien elves armor kit from battle of helms deep!!!  :green: :green: :green:

No.


Why its a best armor from lothlorien
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 23, 2011, 08:45:56 AM
And I think many are a bit mistaken in thinking that ME is an early medieval world. Techwise it is, but socially Gondor is more like an ancient centralized state(Egypt, Assyria?), Rohan an early medieval ducal law state. Meaning there are no fiefs but there are standing armies. This should also apply to the elves(state armoury in Mirkwood).
So equipment and training level should be good. One more argument for beefing up players starting stats.
Baddie humans like Rhun, Khand are more tribal kingdoms/federations.

Gondor is not centralized at all, it is more like a medieval feudal state. The reinforcements that arrived to Minas Tirith came as vassals, not as part of a standing national army. Rohan organization is based on dark ages germanic societies, like anglo-saxons (but with more cavalry). They seem like a mixture of anglo-saxons and sarmatians.

About elves, afaik Tolkien never wrote very much about wood elves organization. We know they had a king/queen, and something similar to a capital (the place were the king lived), but that doesn't mean very much. Lorien and Mirkwood could be some kind of centralized kindoms as much as different semi-independent settlements under the authority of the same king. As I see it, Galadriel and Celeborn's goverment, for example, was more based on other elves recognizing their authority and wisdom than a "modern" state with a centralized administration, but that's just my opinion.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on November 23, 2011, 12:49:18 PM
And I think many are a bit mistaken in thinking that ME is an early medieval world. Techwise it is, but socially Gondor is more like an ancient centralized state(Egypt, Assyria?), Rohan an early medieval ducal law state. Meaning there are no fiefs but there are standing armies. This should also apply to the elves(state armoury in Mirkwood).
So equipment and training level should be good. One more argument for beefing up players starting stats.
Baddie humans like Rhun, Khand are more tribal kingdoms/federations.

Gondor is not centralized at all, it is more like a medieval feudal state. The reinforcements that arrived to Minas Tirith came as vassals, not as part of a standing national army. Rohan organization is based on dark ages germanic societies, like anglo-saxons (but with more cavalry). They seem like a mixture of anglo-saxons and sarmatians.

About elves, afaik Tolkien never wrote very much about wood elves organization. We know they had a king/queen, and something similar to a capital (the place were the king lived), but that doesn't mean very much. Lorien and Mirkwood could be some kind of centralized kindoms as much as different semi-independent settlements under the authority of the same king. As I see it, Galadriel and Celeborn's goverment, for example, was more based on other elves recognizing their authority and wisdom than a "modern" state with a centralized administration, but that's just my opinion.

Hi,

after a heavy defeat both Gondolin and Mirkwood set up state armouries according to Silmarillion. Not much reason to issue weapons from there to total noobs methinks. Skirmishing, recon and ambush need the best troops you have, not florists. By deduction this could be the situation in Lorien.

Abt. Rohan maybe I was not clear, not being native speaker. "Ducal law" is next stage of development after the "dark  ages"(your perception of Rohan). The state is considered personal property of the ruler in most respects. There are no fiefs, no feudal service but a "druzhina" raised and paid by the ruler, a standing army actually.
There are separate administrative areas with local levies tasked exclusively with local defence but any qualified missions are the domain of professionals in permanent state service.

Re Gondor, they are descendants of Numenor. Their taste for monumentalism remains and needs lots of coordination to be sated(Echtelions tower anyone...). Sure there were many monumental buildings constructed in fully developed feudal states but raising the resources needed control at some level, be it royal court or an archbishops court.
Gondorian "fiefs" are IMO more like todays counties. They can raise local forces, the territorials. Our "communes" in Sweden raised their own police until recently but it had to be according to one governmental std.
Argonath and the like is akin to pyramids, projects outside a feudal states scope. There was local administration in Egypt and nobility too but they had to execute orders from above.
This looks more like Gondor to me. At the lvl of threat they lived under relying on no matter how good an feudal army which could not be mobilized in time, traditional medieval feudalism was not a choice I think.

Rgds, Oldtimer

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 23, 2011, 04:20:44 PM
Abt. Rohan maybe I was not clear, not being native speaker. "Ducal law" is next stage of development after the "dark  ages"(your perception of Rohan). The state is considered personal property of the ruler in most respects. There are no fiefs, no feudal service but a "druzhina" raised and paid by the ruler, a standing army actually.
There are separate administrative areas with local levies tasked exclusively with local defence but any qualified missions are the domain of professionals in permanent state service.

Re Gondor, they are descendants of Numenor. Their taste for monumentalism remains and needs lots of coordination to be sated(Echtelions tower anyone...). Sure there were many monumental buildings constructed in fully developed feudal states but raising the resources needed control at some level, be it royal court or an archbishops court.
Gondorian "fiefs" are IMO more like todays counties. They can raise local forces, the territorials. Our "communes" in Sweden raised their own police until recently but it had to be according to one governmental std.
Argonath and the like is akin to pyramids, projects outside a feudal states scope. There was local administration in Egypt and nobility too but they had to execute orders from above.
This looks more like Gondor to me. At the lvl of threat they lived under relying on no matter how good an feudal army which could not be mobilized in time, traditional medieval feudalism was not a choice I think.

I agree with you on Rohan, but what you say about Gondor is more about it's "glorious past" than the Gondor of LOTR, I think.

after a heavy defeat both Gondolin and Mirkwood set up state armouries according to Silmarillion.

Are you referring to Mirkwood or Doriath?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on November 23, 2011, 04:31:52 PM
Hi Barbudo,

I refer to Thranduils realm, he was the one to found one of those armouries.

Re Gondor on decline, I still think that a part-time feudal army could not solve their problems and that their leaders fully understood that. They might have to economise in some areas but the lack of mp made same precious and not to be wasted as poorly equipped local militia.

Rgds, Oldtimer
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 23, 2011, 05:48:40 PM
I asked because I think Gondolin was not contemporary with the realm of Mirkwood. Maybe you are talking about the defeat of  Nírnaeth Arnoediad, and how Gondolin and Doriath (the wood-elves' kingdom of Beleriand) prepared to resist.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on November 24, 2011, 02:40:14 AM
I asked because I think Gondolin was not contemporary with the realm of Mirkwood. Maybe you are talking about the defeat of  Nírnaeth Arnoediad, and how Gondolin and Doriath (the wood-elves' kingdom of Beleriand) prepared to resist.

Hi,

you`re right in this. I think the state armouries were set up after this battle(have mislaid my Silmarillion copy). AFAIR correctly Thranduil was one of the commanders there and lost something like 2/3 of his soldiers due to poor equipment which made him think.

Rgds, Oldtimer
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on November 24, 2011, 05:23:36 AM
Hi all,

just chiming in to support a previous poster suggesting:

- that char gen table should be blank. Everything to be distributed by the player.

Rgds, Oldtimer
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Stone on November 24, 2011, 11:28:03 AM
Might I suggest adding the following hints.csv file with the referenced text, so that it replaces the standard M&B hints to increase the sense of immersion.

X:\Mount & Blade\Modules\TLD\languages\en
hint_1|From the ash, a fire will be woken. A light from the darkness shall spring.
hint_2|There are some things that time can not mend. Some hurts that go too deep... that have taken hold.
hint_3|The world is changed. I feel it in the water, in the earth. I smell it in the air. Much that once was is lost.
hint_4|Mist and shadow, cloud and shade. All shall fade, all shall... fade.
hint_5|I am naked in the dark...there is no veil between me and the wheel of fire. I begin to see it even with my waking eyes.
hint_6|The way is shut...it was made by those who are dead...and the dead keep it. The dead do not suffer the living to pass.
hint_7|One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
hint_8|A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends, but it is not this day.
hint_9|There are many paths to tread. Through shadow. Til the edge of night. Until the stars are all alight.
hint_10|Spears shall be shaken, shields shall be splintered. It is a sword-day; a red day, ere the sun rises!
hint_11|The stars are veiled. Something stirs in the East...A sleepless malice. The Eye of the enemy is moving.
hint_12|Understand this: things are now in motion that cannot be undone.

we already have our tips which are somewhat helpful.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Cuthos on November 24, 2011, 01:59:32 PM
So I got to day 270; defeated Dunland and Mordor. Here are some ideas:

First - this is the most amazing mod. It may be the best mod of all time for any game. Talk about a labor of love.

Great things:
- The look of the cities
- The look of the factions
- The item rewards (Especially the Mear Stallon - wow does it feel like a good top tier reward; the Sword of Westerness is great too)
- The quests are great
- The burning of outposts (rather than capture) is such a good touch
- But I love the way you capture East Osigiliath (not burn it)
- The faction specific reputation/money is brilliant.

Suggestions - strategy:
- The battle at Morannon is disappointing. You end up in the inner sanctum fighting three orc archers and two human prisoners. How about a Nazgul? the Mouth of Sauron? Something else? (I'm not a lore expert but something epic would be great)
- The death rate of nobles should be increased - defeating the same guy 20 times gets old.
- I actually worked out how to get sieging working - I got Gondor to 9995 strengths; reduced targets to weak; and fed troops to Prince Imrahil. But it was waaaay to much work.


Suggestions - economy:
- There is no use for rep points after day 30 from your man faction. You can support 100 top tier troops by rank 10. And there is not much interesting to buy.
-  was excited to get to level 9 for each faction. After that yawn. Increasing strategic control with rank would be very powerful i.e., can force siege initiation at rank 15 or for 50 influence points etc.

Suggestions - tactics:
- I'll ignore troop balance - others seems to be all over that
- companions (apart from Glorfindel) seem less powerful than top tier troops. Glorfindel, Fanuil and whoever you use for pathfinding were the only ones that felt useful.
- It would be good to have some form of single combat encounters (like the vanilla in town ambushes). I felt like too much of a general by the end. Part of the beauty is the balance between combat and strategy.
- those riderless wargs (others have covered this)

2 years of checking this form waiting was worth it. Thanks.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Erhen on November 24, 2011, 03:37:05 PM
How did you fed troops?I always have a bug in giving my troops to any ally lord =(
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Conners on November 24, 2011, 08:12:06 PM
Idea for the lord problem:

After defeating a Lord's host, sometimes you'll get the message, "Lord X is escaping!". And you can choose, "Ignore him" or, "Pursue him!!".

If you pursue him, you end up in a fight with a few of your elite units (such as companions) against the Lord and his elite bodyguard units. The player might be at a disadvantage in numbers, however, since they had to maximize speed to catch up (whereas the Lord had a head-start).


Another good way to deal with the Lord problem, would be to have it that when a Lord escapes from a defeated army, rather than teleporting to the capital, a small, fast party appears on the map, near the defeated army. "Lord X's Personal Retinue". It would be the Lord, plus some elite bodyguards. It'd also be very fast... so you'll need to take only a swift, small portion of your army if you want to catch him.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on November 25, 2011, 02:28:57 AM
I have a couple of suggestions concerning the sieges.

First, it seems that the lords only start assaults when their force is large enough in comparison to the besieged force and the player's force, if he tries to support the siege, is not included in the calculation. I propose to give the player possibility to sign up for the siege, after which the calculations for the start of an assault would include his force in conjunction with the lord's one. This can be done through the voluntary process of signing up or by the lord issuing a command to the player to come to his side.

Second, the lords' armies can often spend quite much time besieging a single fortress. It would be logical for them to slowly resupply their force with new troops. If they need those troops to assault the fortress, such resupplying becomes even more logical. Perhaps some special caravans can be implemented, that would give small amounts of troops (or make them appear) to the lord, if the caravan manages to reach him? This would give the player an opportunity to protect the supply line, which can even be made a quest.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Davos on November 25, 2011, 04:49:40 AM
After playing for quite a "long" time (since the release in fact), and enjoying it so far, the major flaw I would try to resolve is the fact that many generals are passive most of the time, staying in cities or running around fighting occasional battles. The player is often stuck waiting for anything to happen to be able to participate to a siege battle.

You could rework the AI, but I wouldn't for that matter ; I would more suggest to make better use of the player's reputation and credit with generals and kings.

It would be a greater motivation than just "rewards" to be able to influence more the generals with options that would make persuasion skill useful, like "try to convince to attack ***** city" with the choice to try to convince, bribe, or use influence points.

I've read lots of player complaints (like here for instance : http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=492927 ) that would be resolved with such tweak, and I think it would be a great asset to this beautiful mod.

What do you think ?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MrGrendel on November 25, 2011, 06:14:52 PM
It would be nice if the southern orc armies differed a little more strongly from the northern orc armies in flavor. Mordor could probably stand to lose the warg riders, I'm under the impression the wargs were most common around the northern lands, especially the Misty Mountains. Perhaps more Mordor infantry could be recruitable instead.

This talk of integrating morale is very interesting. [...] Maybe some orcs could be especially steadfast??? slaves to their master's will???

Orcs weren't really known for being braver than others, but it certainly seems the case that when their leaders go down, they break fast. Many battles against apparently overpowering orc forces are won this way.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on November 25, 2011, 08:25:06 PM
It would be nice if the southern orc armies differed a little more strongly from the northern orc armies in flavor. Mordor could probably stand to lose the warg riders, I'm under the impression the wargs were most common around the northern lands, especially the Misty Mountains.

I agree.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MakkeCrash on November 26, 2011, 06:39:14 AM
The mod is the best i've ever played and i love LOTR. But i was dissapointed when i couldn't find Lurtz as a captain/general of Isengard. It would be epic if you added Lurtz to the game, and it would be really cool if his army only had Uruk-hai trackers
Thx for a great mod!

Lurtz is a movie invention we don't see as necessary in TLD.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on November 26, 2011, 08:05:54 AM
I'm still loving the mod. Having a blast trying out an evil human. I can't bring myself to recruit orcs though :-) This brings up an issue, There seem to be very few human companions on the bad guy side. I found one in the corsair camp where I started. There was also another in the Harad camp you can get with influence (I'm working on it) I haven't seen any others. I looked in the Variag camp and the Dunlending camp.... didn't go all the way up to the Rhun camp though.... I suppose I ought to expect a lack of companions since I'm ignoring the orc ones, but still... it seems to me that orc and human troops would not be too keen on mixing too closely. I don't think they would respect each other. Humans would view orcs as miserable loathsome dirty savage monsters. Orcs would view humans as mentally soft, and.... maybe as food??? Might it be possible to make it such that if you are an orc you can't get human companions and vice versa? You might have to make a few more of each though....

One idea I had for an evil human (any evil human faction) is the reluctant warrior. It seems to me that Sauron controls his armies based on fear and oppression more than majesty and inspiration. It stands to reason that many of those present would prefer to be home rather than making war on those human too foolish to obey the eye. In fact many "evil" humans may not be evil at all and in some ways admire their stalwart adversaries.
 
I don't know how many people remember in the old old version of mount and blade how they introduce Borchka (or something). He was a prisoner that you can do a "quest" to either free him, and have him be your tracker and pathfinder.... or escort him to his hard fate. I was thinking of something similar where you can gain custody of a deserter and either bring him to "justice" or convince him to join with you because it's better than the alternative, and you become friends... and he ends up being one of your most loyal companions.... just an idea :-)





 

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on November 27, 2011, 03:39:57 PM
Vaegir Wombat's post:

Hey :)

Me again with suggestions, this time with expanded list of them. I also rated them what I think would be low/medium/high priority to  mod them in my opinion after playing TLD for quite some time. Some are really obvious and never-ending like more of this and that (I find some of such important too), but mainly I focused on those that would add more depth and variety to playing by basically enchancing what already is in game. Ofcourse, main reason of this list is, that I just like to help the way I can and if any of those are to use of you, even better  :wink:

Here they are :

Appereance :

-More faces beards and hairstyles (1 of each for every faction would already make significant difference) (low priority)   Very low priority, if at all. It increases texture load and adds very little, as you don't usually notice face difference in battle. (which is where you spent most of the time looking at agents)
 
-No size difference beetwen large orc and orc of mordor (same size in party menu, i presume they look same while in battle?).I know messing with skeletons is hard so not putting much into it. (low priority) - impossible with the current skin file system. IF (and it's a big if) we reconsolidate the skin file, it may be possible and not too difficult, just a lot of work.

Landscape :

-Moving through woods on the map slow you down : Just now, you can move like anywhere else without movespeed penalty. Also going up the hill would slow you down, while rushing down the hill would speeds you. This change along with others ill mention would add increase chances of you getting caught by suprise or catching some smaller party you prey on. (medium priority) - iirc forests do slow you down.

-Most trees dont intercept arrows or stop you when going through them if I remeber correctly (medium priority) - native MnB issue with collision meshes. Might be possible to fix, but it's a lot of work.

I miss more larger  and smaller rocks on some battlefield scenes you can operate from behind or use as terrain advantage (medium priority) - the set dressing of battle scenes is a WIP, there will (very likely) be more variety of objects such as trees and rocks depending on the area/region you're in.

-Smaller ponds and lakes? I know your dedicated team spend alot time to make everything  as much to tolkiens as possible and I really respect that but some small pond or lake on some dull places (around the place beornings, dwarves especially) would make world map look more lively and full... This is more guessing than anything so (low priority) - see answer above. Though water in MnB is tricky, might cause unexpected problems.

Items

-Not enough blunt weapons. I can see, that not many were mentioned in lore but few versions of hammers, two handed maces couldnt hurt since they are quite common in normal life (smithy hammer for example) (medium priority) - unlikely as large hammers or maces are not good weapons of war.

-Change bow dmg : Strong bow have 43 dmg with no power draw req and some another gondorian bow with 42 dmg  I think and Fine Galadhrrim bow has around 25 dmg if I remember correctly with 4 power draw req? I might be wrong here by not understanding how the dmg calculates with power draw, but I think bows without power draw are too  powerfull? So i set this to (high priority)  Please explain me if im wrong. - read the thread about bows.

-Less arrows in one stack : 30 arrows gives your army no actual reason to wait with fire beacuse before enemies get to you, archers in most cases wouldnt even use whole stack and enemies already die before doing any harm to you which makes archers too strong in my opinion. By having reduced stack of arrows to 15 you would not only use them more carefully and order your archers to hold fire more, but also bringing closer to adequate versitality beetwen other ranged options such as javelins and throw axes. (medium priority) - don't see the point really.

-Few more armors and boots in general : I dont find most enjoyable if all lords of one faction have same armors as some top tier troops and the lords dont differ in equip beetwen themselves. (low priority) - impossible, item slot limit.

-Shattered items of fallen heroes (when you kill enemy hero, you get certain item, they distinguish from others on the battlefield (unique look). Then you can take it to dwarven smits if from good side or gates of Moranon if on bad side, where they repair it for you for some resources and metal scraps. They dont need to have certain skill boosts as items from armory which you get by influence, unique look is enough. (medium priority) - see answer above.

-Add quality metal scraps (which would be droppable from top tier units, and would be used to repair shattered hero items) and usable, low grade leather (out of leather armors boots and gloves) and wooden scraps (out from bows and shields) which would be used for making a camp which ill describe later . (medium priority)
- *sigh* see answer above.

Units :

Differences in stats and weapons proficiencies and wages : When upgrading troops, they seem to be to similar ... One example is comparing Illithien ranger to Gondorian Bowman. Except that Gondorian bowman is a bit more heavily equipped and Illithien ranger has one athletic skill more, they dont differ in anythnig else I think. I compared some other units as well even on the bad side ,  but after a while I stopped careing about it cuz everything turned out to be too similar. adding more depth to stats would give you more variety for a player to think how to setup his army for maximum pwnage:twisted:  and giving more options in tactical approach... While with some i would charge when possible due to their high athletic skills, id stay waiting with others etc,...   (high priority)
- this is of course still a WIP, but having troops with huge differences in stats and skills makes little sense. Archer units will be similar, as will be knights and so on.


-Tracking parties : One goal for them. Find a party they seek and destroy. They would be bigger in troops and better equipped than scouting parties and smaller than war bands, but highly mobile so it would be hard to escape. At this moment , its too easy to evade what you dont like to fight and catch what you like to trample, keeping your party on low risk and by so preventing sudden bursts of raging and making game harder and increasing excitement. This is one of many changes you wont move so freely around the map in such harsh times ( medium priority)

- number of parties is already an issue, not sure we want to add many more.

-More different people to meet in towns : Some suggestions... Every main town (minas thirith ,edoras etc,... would have a healer which would help you heal injuries faster for some resources while resting in that town (though some injuries needs to have longer recovery time for healer role to actually be more effective and in general). Innkeeper (not in every time ofc) would be selling wine or some faction related drink) for good side to raise morale). Hooded figure selling you rumors which some would be based on true facts and could get you to some quests or location you otherwise couldnt (you can change hooded figure for Illithien ranger or Strider :wink:). Merchant with common non faction based items (blunt weapons, non faction related few armors etc,.. ). In Rohan towns, you could walk around the town and try persuade womans to join you, if you find out they are skilled in fighting. . Townsman crying the orcs took her daughter few days ago (quest).
(medium priority)

- some of these might happen, we used to have healers like that.

-Units with ladders : I know this would be hard to code, but extra ladders in sieges would be great. Based on engineer skill (at least rank 2), you could make ladders (cost of usable wooden scraps and time, orcs can also make out of low grade wooden scraps). In one custom battle, I think its the Two towers scene, few additional ladders gets places on their own. If that can be coded to all the sieges or at least some and would be optional for you to make them or not , it would be really great and harder to defend sieges! (medium priority) - it's most likely possible, not sure if it's worth the effort. It's certainly something we've thought of.

Other features :

-Make a camp : When resting in camp it increases your party healing and wages are reduced by 50%.You can also leave troops here. Camp can hold up to 50 units). Based on your rank, you can have up to three camps (nonstackings with ranking with other factions.Only highest counts). Elves can have infinite camps but their camp needs to be adjacent to woods and the building of it is longer since they dont wish to hurt trees. Making camp costs resources, wooden and leather scraps) and requires engineer skill (higher it is, faster is built and lower are the resources). In camp, you can build 3 things : Palisades (less chance for enemy ambushing randomly), watchtower increases seeing radius and alarms when enemy is nearby your camp when you are not inside and training grounds where your troops would be training and getting small exp boosts everyday they rest there. Camps are siegeable (you already have scene for it , so no needed scenes for it, except for maybe elven camp and for orcish camps (maybe you already have it?). If you dont have camp built, you can only wait on map to turn time faster (but you wont heal any faster) or rest in towns (forces you to pay and its alot more cruel and challenging for player). This feature would remove camping the way it is now. I know it was mentioned, that in tld its no time for building and slowplaying and  such, but this is actually war option and very strategic feature (high priority)

- no promises, in fact don't get your hopes up. But yes, we've thought about it.


-You can persuade Barrack commanders to let you give troops you cant get normally (top tier units which are reserved for Heroes and town defend), but the cost for them varies from 10 times - to 6 times the weekly wage for troop is. For example troop x wage is 70. if you succed in persuading, you must pay resource cost in beetwen of 420 resources and 700 for each such unit. (high priority)
- not a bad idea, we could probably find some more uses of Persuasion since it's there.

-Evil troop commanders (or you if you play on bad side) can force their party to march faster for short time (5 secs) but getting morale decrease after. Based on their Charisma, their morale lowers less/more. Another option of making things unpredictable. (medium priority)

- this is interesting. As always, no promises.

-Eye of Sauron (Moves aroudn the map) if it catches good faction party it lowers their morale and if its already low, it can scatter some of your troops . You get one last option to talk to your party and try to  encourage your troops and prevent scattering (Charisma skill). If morale is high enough when caught it only lowers your morale.On other side, bad troops getting marked by Sauron eye get morale increase. (medium priority)
- yeah, no. No floaty fiery eye beacon light. There might be something like that, but again, no promises.

-Option for Bad faction to let your party have what they like to do with the prisoner you choose on their own. It increases morale more than changing prisoner into food, but you loose one food stack or option to sell that prisoner. (medium priority)

- not sure, might work.

-Warcry (Charisma) : your Hero lets out a roar with few words, which would increase your party skill and athletics for short duration based on your charisma (15-20 seconds) athletics would go up from 0-3 and weapons skills up from 5-30 and powestrike from 0-3. It can be used once per battle. It would be cool if every faction would have its own roar sound. For example : From the movies, The rohans roared Deeaattthhhhhh!!! Another would be ''For Rohan!'', ''Eorlingeeeers''', ''To Heeeeellll '' etc,... And when you roar, troops would join in roar along one second after yours .And top tier troop could have a horn sound along. This feature would surely pump you into adrenaline state  :P (high priority)

- no power ups or boosts. This is not WoW.

-Crouch : You can already crouch in game (when kneeling to king). I would make this as another option for you to choose what to do in fights to add variety (medium priority)

- not sure if this can be done in MnB without bugging the hell out.


-Ballistae : Im asking for a bit too much here  :mrgreen:, but I saw some on Minas Thirth and wondered if they can be done to be operational and another option to be made out of wooden scraps and usage of engineering skill. You would need time to build them, same as ladders, and and Engineer skill 3 to be able to use them. (I dont dare to enter priority here) !!!  :)
- not going to happen, most likely.


Quests : few ideas

-Dwarves demanding troll prisoner to cover the work in the iron quarry while miners go to war, and demands for iron increases in such times.
- not Tolkienish at all, sorry.

-Important person x is posioned by some arrow or sword, you need to find Illithien ranger party and order them to find rare herb and defend them from any harm while they scout for it on the map and then take it to a healer in town which would make you an antidote for posion and deliver to the questgiver

- complex quests are difficult to do without bugging, but not a bad idea.


-Trolls are marching towards host x.Intercept them and kill them before they join the host as they are vurneable on their own.

- eh, ok. Not bad.

-Persuade Ents to march on the Isengard or Isengard wood camp at fangorn forrest and help you destroy the camp. Ents need to have a champ Ent to add more epicness to them  :) . Before they would march on any fotress you need to do something for them or clear fangor forrest which is infested with orcs burning trees...
- yeah, probably not.

-Becoming Illithien ranger : Faramir giving you certain quests and by completing them you would get Illithien armors and options to buy illithien covered hood and all other rangers gear, including arrows which needs to be removed from all shops and make them more special and replaced with some more common arrows. And as Illithien ranger you would have option to join other ranger parties to yours or sent out your own scout party on the map.

- doesn't make any sense in the big picture of the War. The rangers are not the Dark Brotherhood, it's just a military unit.

Short description and predicted outcome of suggested ideas :

-More options to get caught and approach enemies
-Adding meaning to Persuasion skill and Engineer skill
-Building strategic camps and gathering army to put pressure on certain factions
-Make you feel more as commander




P.s. Some quests are written very defined and thus alot harder to code and time consuming... Even more basic version of those (such as warcry, make a camp etc,...) would add alot to mod.



Hope you TLD team like them and find any of use! 

Others writte comments and post your own ideas as well. You never know when you might contribute  :P
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Davos on November 27, 2011, 04:02:56 PM
After playing for quite a "long" time (since the release in fact), and enjoying it so far, the major flaw I would try to resolve is the fact that many generals are passive most of the time, staying in cities or running around fighting occasional battles. The player is often stuck waiting for anything to happen to be able to participate to a siege battle.

You could rework the AI, but I wouldn't for that matter ; I would more suggest to make better use of the player's reputation and credit with generals and kings.

It would be a greater motivation than just "rewards" to be able to influence more the generals with options that would make persuasion skill useful, like "try to convince to attack ***** city" with the choice to try to convince, bribe, or use influence points.

I've read lots of player complaints (like here for instance : http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=492927 ) that would be resolved with such tweak, and I think it would be a great asset to this beautiful mod.

What do you think ?

So...?

Am I really the only one here who thinks that would be a great idea ?

I think we've commented a couple of times that we're planning something like that.

Oh. Sorry, I missed these suggestions (there are so many !)  :lol:
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: neuromant on November 28, 2011, 11:46:41 AM
I don't want to over-insist, but my earlier suggestion (page 2...) was not at all replied to. I was just wondering if it got completely forgotten in the swarm of following suggestions.

--- I was proposing the addition of the cursor command minimod  to TLD. It is an open-source script available at http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=63370.0 (http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=63370.0) that eases a lot troop management, allowing you to design points for your troops to go to visually.

This might ease some siege defense (East Emnet pops to my mind) where the AI get stuck and do not find a path, and improve mainly the experience.

I, for one, tested it in all the mods that used it (1.011), and it worked like a charm, no issues. Considering it would be fairly simply added, would you consider doing it ?

Also, good luck with the balancing of the war campaign, it is so far the only slight inconvenient I can see to your wonderful work ! Keep doing great things !

I'll leave the answer to the coders, but I don't think it could be used in sieges without breaking the siege AI.

edit: ok, if not in siege, at least on the battlefield it would already be a very appreciated option. And for the sieges, it might be possible to implement after some time passed, to solve potential problems, not at the very beginning. To come back to the defense of East Emnet, many bad guys were stuck some way before the ladder, and my fellow elves and rohirrims unable to climb the stairs to fight them.. I, alone, had a bit of trouble mowing the bad guys (no one would answer my follow me command)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: CppCoder on November 28, 2011, 01:41:34 PM
How about a quick battle at Minas Tirith? Since I started playing this mod, I wanted to have a huge battle there. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Vaegir Wombat on November 28, 2011, 04:31:26 PM
Thank you Merlkir for all the answers... Its just the right info I was looking for.

I agree on most of your replies, except warcry... Maybe just leave it as a sound candy without any boosts if not agreeing on increases... Just additional roaring on the battlefield from both sides would be epic in my opinion  :)

And with this i dont agree as well :

>this is of course still a WIP, but having troops with huge differences in stats and skills makes little sense. Archer units will be similar, as will be knights and so on.

For example Illithien and gondorian bowman : while gond bowmans could be heavier equipped and have better ranged skills, Illithien is more lightly equipped so faster, has higher athletics and better melee proficiencies...

I dont see point why units would have to be similar.... It looses preferences of one unit over another and discussing which unit is strongest :)

Though its your teams decision and ill respect it!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on November 28, 2011, 07:11:07 PM
I assumed that Rangers were a more hybrid unit (given their 2h weapons) with the Gondor Archers being the more ranged orientated unit, although I've not actually seen the stats. The old troop trees from way back when always made that distinction between them and several other units. (Like the Blackroot Vale archers who didn't even get swords).

Also, I think being able to shout in battle/blow horns would be fun. Fairly useless and probably not worth the effort, but fun.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: marin on November 29, 2011, 12:55:04 AM
How about allowing the player to do the sieges once he reaches some high rank within his own (or any) faction?

I'm a retard as far as programing, but that can't be too hard to do. And it will allow you to finish the enemy by yourself and conclude the campaign, once you've  spent a great deal of time playing to reach that level. Also, you would probably have that much infuence to call other lords for help.

May not be a perfect solution but it is much better than this. In my game, we've reduced thee Rohans and  the Gondorians below 2000 and, after a long time,  Mog the Sevenfingered and the rest of Isengard has besiged Alburg, but he is just not attacking, for weeks. It's frustrating and it kills the will for continuing..

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on November 29, 2011, 04:41:11 AM
I meant to add this a while back and seemingly forgot, but the warning system could do with changing. As it stands right now, with regards the Far-North theatre, is that when any Evil lords approach a Good town (presumably triggering the 'Enemies Spotted Near X') then it seems that all 4 of the Good factions up there (i.e. Mirkwood, Dale, Erebor and Beornings) are all notified.

The situation is thus that if you hang around say Erebor for long enough, not only will you get the Dalian and Dwarven hosts on your ass (Which is fine in terms of both gameplay and context) but you'll also soon get the Mirkwood and Beornings lords heading straight for you. Now with current respawn times it's excruciatingly difficult to defeat these.

Not only this it also seems wrong to me. Dale and Erebor helping each other out like this is fine, they are very close allies in mutual support, and the geographic distance is small. Yet the Mirkwood elves both don't generally trust dwarves and have their own problems to face at this point (i.e Gundabad). I'd much rather see them trying to focus on their own problems rather than suddenly dashing across Mirkwood to lift a siege, it just feels so wrong.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Abelard on November 29, 2011, 05:11:45 AM
It would be great to see a use for persuasion and engineer in the mod, one idea I had for persuasion would be to link it in some way to influence.  Perhaps for each point in persuasion, you gain 1 influence with your starting faction per week.  This could tie in well if you wanted to add an influence option to encourage faction leaders to siege.  Alternatively, each point in persuasion could lower the cost of persuading generals to follow you, go to x, etc.

Engineer is a little more tricky, but someone else mentioned the idea of a forward camp where it could come into play..
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Mitch on November 29, 2011, 06:11:16 AM
First of all I want to say that this mod is absolutely amazing. It has excelled all of my expectations... and it's not even in a final state. :-D

Nonetheless I have a few suggestions that I would like to see in the mod. A few of those might have already been mentioned by someone else,  but I write them down here to give a full picture of my future vision of the mod.

1. I would like to see small settlements (villages)) on the map, not only camps and cities. The environment would seem to be less static and deserted. Villages could be raided or razed like in vanilla M&B. This is of course a step back to M&B native so I guess you decided against villages or
there was an issue? Also this might be a bad idea for the elves and dwarves but a good idea for Gondor and Rohan.

2. It would be really nice if the faction leader gave the player fiefdoms (city or village) when he has advanced to a certain rank in that faction (maybe "hope of faction".
Again I dont' know if that makes sense for dwarves and elves but it certainly does for Gondor and Rohan. Also this would encourage the player to defend that village/city.
Perhaps a questline to get a fiefdom would be a good idea too. Or it's only triggered when a lord of that faction dies.
Another advantage is that faction choice would be more important. You won't leave your settlement alone for too long only to help out the dwarves against Mount Gundabad, would you. :-)

If you've read the Manual, you would've learnt that we don't have villages and fief giving for a reason. And we won't ever have them.

I have read the manual, but I didn't learn the manual by heart. Sorry for that. ;-) But thanks for telling me where to find the information.

3. It was mentioned a few times before. The player should be able to initiate sieges. Or siege preparation time should be really really short so that the faction lords could finish what they have begun.

It was mentioned a few times before by us that we're planning something like that.

Yes, and as I wrote, I just wanted to give a full overview of what I would like to see, no matter if anyone has mentioned it before. And no matter if you will actually implement it. If you are not interested - ok no problem.
Honestly: Very often you sound like asking a question that has been asked in a similar way before or talking about things that you've already heared really pisses you off. Please don't be so harsh, I was thinking a lot about what to write in a way that it doesn't bug (especially) you anyway...lol. Jeses at least I didn't ask for the release date...  :idea:

4. A really minor issues... the sword you can get from Galadriel (not sure) is really crap compared to the Sword of Eorl or the Blade of Westernesse. This should be fixed imho. But I guess that counts to rebalancing which you are surely doing constantly.

Ok this is it. It didn't see all parts of the game so I concentrated on what's the most important thing in role playing games for me: A consistenst authentic living and breathing world.

I think you really did some awesome things with the M&B engine... I'm constantly thinking how
hard modding for M&B must be. You easily can see how static everything in the original game is.

I really wished there was some other game like M&B that has a better world map and a better
system for kingdom management and army movement (both on the world map and on the battle map).


 
 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Darkard on November 29, 2011, 01:04:22 PM
Been playing as  Mordor Uruk so far and Im loving it.
At the moment though I'm having issues getting together some cash to pay upkeep.

With the Mob tactics I've been employing (Which I personally feel are a very Orcish way to play as Mordor :) ) I'm employing large numbers of troops to overwhelm my tougher Gondor Infantry Opponents. This means I'm recruiting and upgrading mid tier troops all the time rather than having some long standing elite troops.

These large mobs are costing me a fortune in Upkeep that I'm struggling to manage. I really cant be doing anything that is not directly generating income. Following a leaders hosts around the map is really crippling to my RP as Im often stood outside a Town eating food and spending upkeep.
So as a suggestion can there be some way of mitigating the upkeep costs of orcs? Maybe just the low tiers like Snagas and lvl 2 orcs.
Could have it against the number of Uruks on the party with each one contributing to reduce the upkeep of Orcs, in a similar fashion to orcs boosting party size.
This has a knock on effect of making Uruks a more important sergeant-ish troop rather than the "Heavy Mob Troop" I use them as now.

This should encourage more Orc Horde style play rather than Warg Swarms which seems to be the pro-tip for Mordor.

Trig: A little tip. Take lots of human prisoners. Sell some, eat others. Should give you enough revenue & food.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on November 29, 2011, 06:36:15 PM
As someone whose played a few games but never really played THAT far my opinion may be biased towards my experiences in the early game.

I find it costs too much influence points to get allied armies to do things. For example, you see an allied party being attacked but you don't have enough men to turn the tide of the battle because you lost troops or are just starting or just like using a small fast party. Rather than fall in a hopeless battle you withdraw. Then quite nearby and find a friendly patrol, and you realize with them involved you could save that other party. Problem is if you spend influence you won't be able to get that special item you'd really like to have.... some of the items are awesome and will have an impact for much longer on the game.

on a grander scheme another situation is this:

you see an allied town under siege 400 besiegers, 200 defenders. You don't have the might to turn the battle, so you decide to pull back. Not far away you see the friendly faction leader and another accompanying commander.

You figure 'My character would ask to see the king and tell him that such and such is under siege and he'll go fight, and I'll join in with the king there.... it'll be a hell of a fight but i think we can win!'

Wrong, you don't have enough influence to have any impact on the king's behavior.

I understand it wouldn't make sense to be able to drag the king halfway across the world on whim of a regular field commander.... but I wonder if there might be some way you could get a party to follow you a small distance based off of persuasion or with less influence?

As it stands I have not yet used influence to impact other units on the field at all. I have only saved my influence for rewards. I understand that in later stages of the game you'll have extra influence and you'll already possess all the special stuff you'll want, and maybe it makes sense that a celebrated hero would have more influence over other field commandeers but... it would be nice to be able to have a small impact in the mid game as well.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Mitch on November 30, 2011, 02:22:16 AM
I find it costs too much influence points to get allied armies to do things. For example[...]

That's a good point. Perhaps depending on your rank with that specific faction you could be able to make "proposals" which the faction lord will accept or not:

- follow me for a number of days (and help in attacks)
- siege enemy city/camp

Only 2 examples. Most probably kings should never accept such proposals or only when your rank is really high (like Great Hope of Faction).
Don't know if this is hard to script in a sensible way. But I remember it was possible to be "Commander" (or so) of your factions armies in the original M&B or one of it's many mods.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on November 30, 2011, 03:06:30 AM
One of the TLD premises is that you are only a commander of one of the Middle Earth factions, a cog in the great wheel of the War. Some players would like to have the option to become a marshall or even a king, but that goes against this basic premise. Tolkien never wrote about YOU. :)
However, I agree that there are ways to increase player's ability to influence what kingdoms do at war, as some people suggested, if you are of high rank and have plenty of influence (and I mean siege proposals there). If the rest of the team agrees, there will be such an option in the next update.

Note that you can already use influence to command individual lords to follow you, go defend a town and patrol around towns.

As for lacking influence in the early game, that's an intentional trade-off. You can either go for the reward items or command lords, and that's up to the player to decide. You are able to do both later in the game, but we are not going to make it too easy for you early on.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on November 30, 2011, 04:52:54 AM
I think the player should be able to 'command' the lordless patrols and things.
They follow your command in battle, then why not in the field?
This could be some sort of 'bonus' for having a high rank- and it sounds right to be a Captain and take one or two units to help.

Not everyone of them, and not in early game, though.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on November 30, 2011, 06:47:53 AM
Would it be possible for the lesser parties to do some form of mini-campaigns whereby a few of them gather together and then march to somewhere more useful. One of the problems I see in most games is that some areas of the map are just swarming with parties that are of basically no use to anyone for the most part. (The Southern Rhun camp if Rhun are winning, the Black Gate/Variag Camp area and the Pinnath/Gelin/West of Gondor area are all examples). The situation then ends up where a faction is strong but has no way to utilise this strength, since it's all tied up in 30 patrols and scouts that act incredibly defensively.

This might be resolved somewhat with more active campaign AI, since Lords would be moving into these areas, but I currently find that if I lead an enemy near one of these areas (The Rhun camp in my case) we can easily swarm and defeat them. I just think it'd be great if some of this force could be mobilised aggresively as well as defensively. I don't know if it's possible in terms of code but having a war party, supported by a few smaller parties, head off to do battle at a more active front of the war would really alleviate some of the 'static' feeling of the war right now.

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on November 30, 2011, 05:31:10 PM
One of the TLD premises is that you are only a commander of one of the Middle Earth factions, a cog in the great wheel of the War. Some players would like to have the option to become a marshall or even a king, but that goes against this basic premise. Tolkien never wrote about YOU. :)
However, I agree that there are ways to increase player's ability to influence what kingdoms do at war, as some people suggested, if you are of high rank and have plenty of influence (and I mean siege proposals there). If the rest of the team agrees, there will be such an option in the next update.

Note that you can already use influence to command individual lords to follow you, go defend a town and patrol around towns.

As for lacking influence in the early game, that's an intentional trade-off. You can either go for the reward items or command lords, and that's up to the player to decide. You are able to do both later in the game, but we are not going to make it too easy for you early on.

Granted... maybe some of the rewards should cost MORE influence then...

How much influence does it cost to be given Eorl's sword? 30 or 35 if i remember right. Eorl of course being the first king of Rohan and who helped save Gondor in a moment of crisis. His sword being an artifact about 500 years old.... a sword which is totally awesome by the way!

How much influence does it cost to get Theoden to follow your suggestion from near Edoras to near Westfold and help save a city in his own kingdom? Priceless he doesn't.

Just saying....

Actually I've realized that there is a cheaper way to get lords to save town (just tell them, go to X, they may get distracted and chase a raider party that is too fast for them to catch... but it only costs a few influence) So you can cancel the suggestion of make it easier to influence lords to save cities.... 

But I do feel that the moment Theodan gave me Eorl's sword was the moment Rohan accepted me as a hero / figure head, mayeb a peer of one of their own lords.... I guess they'll be asking for the sword back at the end of the war eh?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on November 30, 2011, 07:44:20 PM
It's sometimes difficult to find your faction lords.  This is especially true for small factions with 3-4 lords; while you can ask lords where other lords are, I often find that they've all left together on a campaign somewhere while I was on some errand, I have no idea where they've gone to, and there's no lord left to tell me where they've gone.  Despite the fact that there's a whole network of our scouts, foragers, and patrols all over the region, I can't get any information about where they've gone unless I can find another lord.

I propose having an NPC in the capital, maybe a guard or official in the "throne room" for each faction (or just use an existing throne room guard), who will tell you where other lords are in a similar manner to asking lords about the location of other lords.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on December 02, 2011, 12:49:19 PM
Been mentioned somewhat by others before but some of the Mirkwood maps could do with being made bigger. They're in a pain in the ass to fight in using cavalry anyway but it's even more difficult when most of your horsemen just get stuck on the edge of the map within a few minutes. It's not even like it's particularly easy to avoid the forests up north. I love the scenes for Mirkwood, but damn they make life difficult.

Have horsemen dismount? They're way more effective that way.

It's an option but I have a feeling that it'd result in a lot of dead Rhunians. I might have to carry out this experiment.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 02, 2011, 04:45:13 PM
Bouncing off the last post something is brought to mind:

One thing that surprised me is that Mirkwood is pretty much the East boundary of the map... I would have expected  a bit more space to put  Rhun camps a little further south east and the ensuing struggle to happen as often as not in the plains est of mirkwood. The Rhun seem a little crazy to go deep into the woods after the elves who are cavalry light and perhaps more well suited to forest combat. I have to admit though the trees can limit visibility for long ranged shots on elven bows....
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: The Yogi on December 03, 2011, 02:20:10 PM
Regarding the debate on initiating sieges, would it not make sense if the faction leader gave you the command to capture or raze this or that town or camp?

The idea would be that once you were of sufficient rank, your faction had a sufficent strength and the target faction was lowered to a certain strength, the the faction leader would give you a mission to capture/destroy a settlement. Until the mission is completed, you do have the ability to intiate a siege, but only on the target settlement. Additionally, you could be given the temporary power to order one or two lords (for a lesser reward) to help you.

Wouldn't this be a rather elegant solution to this conundrum, and help get things going, bypassing the AI somewhat?

I think the player should be able to 'command' the lordless patrols and things.
They follow your command in battle, then why not in the field?
This could be some sort of 'bonus' for having a high rank- and it sounds right to be a Captain and take one or two units to help.

Not everyone of them, and not in early game, though.
Agree completely. You might not be the High Poobah, but at rank 20 or so, you should count for something!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Beriadan on December 04, 2011, 03:15:53 AM
My suggestion is about MUSIC.I'm not trying to convince the dev team to add more movie stuff or compose more ones,.the mod is indeed brilliant respecting the feeling of "immersion" that the dev team has created so far,and the music is really good;I just find that music aren't popping up at the right place.

I noticed that these soundtracks have their names representing certain factions or scenes.Yet,their appearance during the game is so irregular that you have no idea what they're about.For example,when i am in Mirkwood, i still hear Gondor Map music,Rohan LordHall, vanilla ones,...I see that there's no music intended for elves,but at least there should be something that comes to my ears to remind me that i'm in an elven forest,not in Gondor or even Harad.(don't know if it's a bug,and hopefully it is)

Here are my ideas about how to make them(including vanilla ones) play at more proper place to make the game just more epic.I've come up with two sets of possible solution:

1.Geo-specific
I've seen other mods that have done this.Music changes as you move from one country to another,or enter a country's town,or in a special scene(e.g.Argonath,Fangorn,Moria) to make the scene feel more gorgeous or frightening.Like,when you're in Rohan,you only hear music intended for Rohan.When you step on Isengard territory,Isengard music comes to your ears,and you can FEEL you are about to face Uruk-Hais.The same with Gondor,Harad,Rhun and Corsair camp.And,when you're in Gondor and you enter Minas Tirith,the Gondorian music changes as well to town music(in my mind,the Rohan LordHall fits Minas Tirith better even than Meduseld;anyway just my personal feeling).

The vanilla music should go to the northern factions like Beornings and Men of Dale.Maybe giving Khergit music to Dwarves can distinguish them from Men of the West.

NightMusic and maybe other ones not representing factions in TLD music folder can be given to the Elves.Anyway,maybe no need to allocate music to Elven cities coz they have birds singing,which is more pleasant than any music in my mind.

2.Faction-specific
It simply means after you have chosen your faction,you hear the same set of music,whose style represents the faction,wherever you go(may differ when you enter a town,and of course when you enter a battle scene).This is the way Third Age Total War manages music.

3.Combine the two in some way
I think the second idea applies to the evil factions better(since they're born to destroy good things no matter where they are),while the first one may be better for the good guys.

I know you're very busy and music is a small issue.Anyway your attention is already well appreciated and maybe this can be better in the next release and maybe in ways not in our minds yet.And of course,thank you for your excellent work!

Music is already completely different in our dev version.

That's so COOL!!!Looking forward to new soundtracks.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on December 04, 2011, 03:32:15 AM
Pagan, the TLD composer, has already done a new set of town tracks, and works on a new set of map travel tracks, so we'll have a better musical illustration of various parts of Middle Earth.

We could adapt some logic for different music to play depending on the player being good or evil, but we need to balance it with the need to have a maximum variety of tracks, so not too many of the tracks get excluded in any single campaign. Thanks for the suggestions and the observations!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: BunnyPoopCereal on December 04, 2011, 10:32:22 AM
Hello I have been playing the game for 50+ hours and Ive noticed some minor bugs that dont even need mention and some bigger ones that seem to have no fix whatsoever, despite these drawbacks the number one fallback on the game for me at least is the limited number of armor and weapons AND it bugs me how the current roster of armor and weapons are not properly balanced, its actually very badly balanced, so much so that I would like to learn where I can go to change the stats for these items.


I would like to help the team balance the item prices and the stats, but I can only do that when school is over in two weeks time. Let me know If I can help or if you already have someone who is willing to do this?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Beriadan on December 04, 2011, 11:47:18 AM
Pagan, the TLD composer, has already done a new set of town tracks, and works on a new set of map travel tracks, so we'll have a better musical illustration of various parts of Middle Earth.

We could adapt some logic for different music to play depending on the player being good or evil, but we need to balance it with the need to have a maximum variety of tracks, so not too many of the tracks get excluded in any single campaign. Thanks for the suggestions and the observations!

Thank YOU guys for the amazing work!!!And yeah,i think the balance is the hard part.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Mitch on December 04, 2011, 12:59:09 PM
Regarding the debate on initiating sieges, would it not make sense if the faction leader gave you the command to capture or raze this or that town or camp?

The idea would be that once you were of sufficient rank, your faction had a sufficent strength and the target faction was lowered to a certain strength, the the faction leader would give you a mission to capture/destroy a settlement. Until the mission is completed, you do have the ability to intiate a siege, but only on the target settlement. Additionally, you could be given the temporary power to order one or two lords (for a lesser reward) to help you.

Wouldn't this be a rather elegant solution to this conundrum, and help get things going, bypassing the AI somewhat?

That idea is really elegant! Let's see what the devs ' opinion is. :-)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Mitch on December 04, 2011, 01:02:00 PM
One thing would be nice: Initially the map shows Gondor (South) on the top of the map and Erebor (North) at the bottom. So I always have to rotate it once. :-D It would be cool, if that was changed. :-)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: LusitanianWolf on December 04, 2011, 02:53:01 PM
Pagan, the TLD composer, has already done a new set of town tracks, and works on a new set of map travel tracks, so we'll have a better musical illustration of various parts of Middle Earth.

We could adapt some logic for different music to play depending on the player being good or evil, but we need to balance it with the need to have a maximum variety of tracks, so not too many of the tracks get excluded in any single campaign. Thanks for the suggestions and the observations!
Thats great news! I realy like the TLD style of music! The composer being called Pagan may explain it since I'm quite Pagan regarding musical tastes :P
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: The Yogi on December 04, 2011, 06:31:48 PM
Another suggestion, the Sword of Westernesse, while badass, has little Numenorite vibes for me. Wouldn't a longsword be more appropiate, seeing as how the men of Numenor were taller and stronger than the current men of Gondor?

Would also make a nice difference to the 1H Sword of Eorl.

There is a SoW longsword, not sure what you mean.


With "Longsword" I mean a 1/2H bastard sword. Not a 1H arming sword, which is what the Sword of Westernesse is right now.

Screenshot? There IS a SoW longsword, I know what a longsword is. There are 2 SoWs in fact, you can check them out in the reward swords BRF file. Now I'm not sure if the 1/2h one is used ingame, but I thought it was.
Either way, Númenoreans also used the eket, which the other one is supposed to be.


Here's the screenshot(s). The stats are from the RCM version.

(http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/1614/sowr.th.jpg) (http://img696.imageshack.us/i/sowr.jpg/)

I always thought of the Eket as a shortsword, which this SoW is not really. Not like the Linhir Eket (IIRC) or Pelargir sword. Anyway, I haven't seen the longsword version of the SoW offered, (I'm Hero of Gondor (21) and and have 95 influence) but it would both be cool and make sense to have a matched pair of iconic Numenorite weapons, an Eket and a longsword. I hope the long version is also included in the game in a future version.

Actually, this SoW is a lot like the barrow blades of the Hobbits, which are described as "leaf-shaped". But of course, those swords were made as daggers (Ekets?) by the ancients Dunedain so maybe if shrunk to perhaps 2/3 size, this model would make a wonderfully Tolkien-faithful Eket.

Yes, it seems it was made bigger ingame than it was intended in concept. God, these are kinda old. They could both use a proper facelift. :/
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: slyspy on December 05, 2011, 06:46:19 AM
I think in the previous version of TLD the SoW was 1handed/2handed.

I like the current version, although the model seems a little short.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on December 05, 2011, 04:35:46 PM
Speaking of 1H/2H weapons, I'd like to suggest that the Isengard Sword be made 1H instead of 1H/2H.  It's really quite short to be wielded 2H (reach of 70-something), and the designation means that you get penalized for using it with a shield like all 1H/2H weapons.  That makes the only really viable 1H weapons for Isengard the axe and the hammer, both of which seem to be rare in shops.  I'd like to see Uruk-hai using a sword and shield, or at least have the option to do it myself without taking a penalty.

Uruk-hai troop equipment in general might warrant a second look.  You have the berserker, who has no shield, get 1H weapons on occasion, while the Fighting Uruk-Hai Warrior gets a shield but can't use it because his only weapon choices are 2H.  The only time I actually see Isen Uruk Shields in use is on Champions, and even then only occasionally.  I'd personally like to see them used a bit more by the Uruk-hai warrior line of troops.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: slyspy on December 06, 2011, 07:26:57 AM
Another suggestion, the Sword of Westernesse, while badass, has little Numenorite vibes for me. Wouldn't a longsword be more appropiate, seeing as how the men of Numenor were taller and stronger than the current men of Gondor?

Would also make a nice difference to the 1H Sword of Eorl.

There is a SoW longsword, not sure what you mean.


With "Longsword" I mean a 1/2H bastard sword. Not a 1H arming sword, which is what the Sword of Westernesse is right now.

Screenshot? There IS a SoW longsword, I know what a longsword is. There are 2 SoWs in fact, you can check them out in the reward swords BRF file. Now I'm not sure if the 1/2h one is used ingame, but I thought it was.
Either way, Númenoreans also used the eket, which the other one is supposed to be.


Here's the screenshot(s). The stats are from the RCM version.

(http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/1614/sowr.th.jpg) (http://img696.imageshack.us/i/sowr.jpg/)

I always thought of the Eket as a shortsword, which this SoW is not really. Not like the Linhir Eket (IIRC) or Pelargir sword. Anyway, I haven't seen the longsword version of the SoW offered, (I'm Hero of Gondor (21) and and have 95 influence) but it would both be cool and make sense to have a matched pair of iconic Numenorite weapons, an Eket and a longsword. I hope the long version is also included in the game in a future version.

Actually, this SoW is a lot like the barrow blades of the Hobbits, which are described as "leaf-shaped". But of course, those swords were made as daggers (Ekets?) by the ancients Dunedain so maybe if shrunk to perhaps 2/3 size, this model would make a wonderfully Tolkien-faithful Eket.

Yes, it seems it was made bigger ingame than it was intended in concept. God, these are kinda old. They could both use a proper facelift. :/


In the version of RCM that I'm using the reach of the SoW is 100, which is why I thought the model was a little short.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: The Yogi on December 06, 2011, 07:41:08 AM
In the version of RCM that I'm using the reach of the SoW is 100, which is why I thought the model was a little short.

That's an older version of RCM then, I believe.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: slyspy on December 06, 2011, 11:55:54 AM
Probably, but I'm not too sure where to find the latest version.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: azile0 on December 06, 2011, 01:33:43 PM
It would be nice to be able to establish forts and outposts on the front line. A place where you can get basic supplies like food. It would take considerable RPs, but it would be worth it so that you wouldn't have to run back to the nearest allied town after each battle.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Darkard on December 06, 2011, 07:14:51 PM
Quest ideas

Remove Wild Wargs (Good/Evil Quest)
A Pack of Wargs (Wild or escaped, not sure on the lore behind them?) have infested the area. Kill them.

Similar to "Remove Troublesome Goblins" except you fight a party of Riderless Wargs.

Locate Hidden Camp (Good/Evil Quest)
The enemy has set-up a hidden camp near one of your settlements and are using it to report on troop movements. Locate it to complete the quest. Destroy it for extra kudos.

Think the bandit camps from Warband. The camp will appear on your map depending on how close you are to it and how good your spotting skill is.
Camps will always be near a current settlement to avoid it being too muck of a needle in a haystack hunt.
Attacking the camp will cause a mini Siege of the camp , or just a battle in a set scene for the region.

Steal food supply (Good/Evil Quest)
Sneak into the enemy settlement and steal their food supply. Remain unseen for extra kudos.

Same sort of set up as the stealth quests (Are they still in from the last version?). Reach a chest to complete quest/receive food.

Intercept Orders (Good/Evil Quest)
A Messenger party has been spotted moving between X and Y. Intercept them and replace the messenger with our own impostor.

You receive a "<Faction> Messenger Impostor" unit at the start of this quest, dressed in appropriate (Or generic) attire.
The Messengers party will be quite light so a fact party of your own will be needed.
Once you kill the messenger party the Impostor will leave to the destination to deliver the false orders.
Doesn't have to be a visible effect beyond this, and the quest could still work without the Impostor character if its cuts down on work.

Setup Ghastly scene (Evil Quest)
Travel to the area near Settlement X and setup a demoralising scene of corpses impaled on spikes etc in full view of the local populace.

Move close enough to a settlement and then use the camp menu or speak with a specific unit to start setting the scene. This takes 2 hours ( or more, whatever works best) and your party remains stationary while it is setup
The trick is to set it up where you wont get interrupted.
Could put some heads on pikes on the world map when completed to add a bit of flavour as well maybe?

Recruit Wild Goblins (Evil Quest)
We need fresh recruits, convince X unaligned Troops to join us.

You get a new dialogue option when speaking with Wild Goblin/Orc Straggler Party's to try and get them to join your faction.
You can either:
* Intimidate their leader (Factoring in your characters Strength)
* Persuade  their leader (Factoring in your characters Persuade)
* Bribe (Cost gold depending on party size)
Party's will be removed from the map if successful, will attack or flee you if you fail.

Convince troops to rejoin army (Good Quest)
Same as the Recruit Goblins quest above. Except you must convince Deserters to rejoin the army.

Kill Cowards (Evil Quest)
Cowardly troops are fleeing their justice. Kill them before they escape

Same as the "Recover fleeing Slaves" quest except you kill them when you catch them.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Razack on December 07, 2011, 02:08:01 AM
Siege attacking is half the fun in M&B.  Destroying everything with a Rohan cavalry is only fun for so long.  The game needs a bit more variety in attacks and missions.  I know I can join a siege but I never know when my faction is going to siege.

-Perhaps use the same system but instead have a way to instigate a siege by maybe asking the leader of that people? 

-I haven't tried using my influence to ask for siege yet.  Is that possible?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Oldtimer on December 07, 2011, 05:18:56 AM
Hi all,

just supporting another poster saying that killing wargs/wolves should give XP.
They are intelligent combatants so this is natural.

Rgds, Oldtimer
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Senta on December 08, 2011, 03:09:53 PM
hey guys, not sure it's a persistent problem for many but i can't see many of the darker items in my inventory, due to the black background. if not on you rend, is there something i could do with it? my gamma is and brightness is not even fully offsetting that.

I don't know where the black box actually is in texture files. It could probably be made lighter, if I knew where it was.


thanks Merl, that would be amazingly helpful, as buying anything as a baddie is a bit of a pain hehe.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Ettore53 on December 09, 2011, 06:58:10 AM
Suggestion  for scout or 250 turn bug
Just a idea: I think that bug is connected on faster  game mod of beta.  I noted  lot of patrols in every zone where war  is not fighted. I suspect that faster spwn is a cause of  this bug. I suggest to test game in normal
 game speed. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Mitch on December 09, 2011, 07:25:08 AM
Perhaps scouts should return to a city after a certain number of days, e.g. 30 days. And the soldiers of that group should then be available as volunteers. Just an idea that came to my mind. I guess there might be some gameplay complications resulting from that idea...
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Radx on December 09, 2011, 01:44:27 PM
Posted from another thread, since it probably belongs here:

To solve the stability problem (in order of importance):
1) Cap the number of parties. This should be quick to do and easy. 
2) Tell us exactly where in the text files the cap number is so that everybody can adapt to their hardware specs
3) If possible, kill parties smaller than, say, 2-5 (if that doesn't conflict with the player). You can have a script running every, say, 7 days doing that. This is nice to have (not necessary), to be done only if easy.

To solve the gameplay issues:
1) Increase probability that Lords/companions die when knocked out to, say, 10%
2) Increase the likelihood that you will be given the mission to capture an enemy captain and give a 50% prob to capture when you have the quest. Make sure that after you hand the enemy captain over, he is as good as dead.
3) Tell us where we need to change those 2 probabilities in the text files to tweak our game to our taste
4) Decrease regeneration of all factions (but evil should regenerate faster, if that is easy to do)

The above changes should be very quick and it should be possible to include them in a patch very quickly. Developers, please correct me if I am wrong.

The above changes would be enough to move this mod from "One of the greatest ever coded" to "The absolute best mod ever"
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Lord Nalfein on December 10, 2011, 12:04:08 AM
I think it would be a good idea to triple or quadruple the amount of goblins in the armies of Gundabad and Moria. Playing as an elf, with an army fifty strong, I can defeat any army they send out with very few losses. Unless i'm mistaken, the size of elven, dwarven, and goblin armies are similar, which puts the goblins at a huge disadvantage. I just feel that the real strength of goblins is overwhelming numbers.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 10, 2011, 07:33:43 AM
I think it would be a good idea to triple or quadruple the amount of goblins in the armies of Gundabad and Moria. Playing as an elf, with an army fifty strong, I can defeat any army they send out with very few losses. Unless i'm mistaken, the size of elven, dwarven, and goblin armies are similar, which puts the goblins at a huge disadvantage. I just feel that the real strength of goblins is overwhelming numbers.

I think the goblin armies being smaller than you might like MAY be because you have them on the ropes so to speak. If me memory serves from when I was playing in the north in version 3.0 the goblin armies WERE larger, but not by 3 or 4 times, maybe 50% larger or double?

One thing is that once you start winning you gain momentum and the odds turn more and more towards your favor. While it seems realistic, it does seems rather anti-climactic, but at this time that is the way the game works. I don't have any suggestion of how to change that. I take it as a given.

As to you stomping your foes I think you are right a large part of your advantage comes  from the fact that your party has elves. However there is more, because you have been winning,  part of the advantage is also that your party probably has higher tier warriors than most other parties. Also you can exacerbate the problem by playing with reduced damage to allies.

Mount and blade is set by default that your troops take 1/2 damage from enemies which makes a big difference in the short term and a huge difference in the long term. In the short term (say a battle) your troops fall less, and you gain the upper hand as the enemy takes losses faster. In the long term (battle after battle) since you lose less troops  it ends up being easier to get most of them to the upper tiers because you don't have to replace experienced troops with raw recruits at the same rate. if you are on half damage to allies you might want to think about changing that.

It may be that you aren't playing on reduced damage, but sooner or later you will still start to win the war never the less and when you do your armies are going to be awesome and your foes are going to be relatively weak.  I'm currently approaching that place. Or course I lose several elite guys every battle still and take significant losses against hosts but yes it's not as hard as it was before, i haven't lost a  battle in some time, I have an elite war band, and it seems like my allies need my help less and less. It's the way things go.

One idea is if you are in the north and things are getting too easy and routine up there, change venues. Of course your lord will call upon you for campaigns, ignore him.... go save Gondor! Go save Rohan! You'll find fresh orc armies at full strength and they are itching to kill you! And when you do go down if you want a change make sure you don't have your troops set to receive half damage!
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 10, 2011, 07:39:33 AM
Hi all,

just supporting another poster saying that killing wargs/wolves should give XP.
They are intelligent combatants so this is natural.

Rgds, Oldtimer

Interesting idea... as it stands wargs seem to function a lot like horses that just keep charging after their riders are killed. Which is a nice easy solution.

I figure that's why you don't get XP for killing them, one other reason is that Wargs can't attack riders or mounts. If you are on a horse you are safe from wargs.... I know it's probably never gonna happen but it would be cool if wargs could attack horses and riders!

As it stands they are very good at hurting footmen, they can smash through a tight formation of elite dudes and live, knocking several over.... but against cavalry they are just a mild nuisance and no real danger.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: ikhi on December 10, 2011, 07:40:12 AM
What about capping both the number of parties and the number of troops and tying those to faction strength levels? Say-

1) Have a hard limit on the total number of parties to ensure that no game mechanics are broken, saves won't corrupt, etc. Distribute this limit among the different factions based on their strength relations. So, the more powerful the faction is, the greater number of individual groups it could claim from the common pool. (eg. if faction A is 9000, B is 4500 and C is 4500, and max number of groups on the map is 100, A is allowed 50, B&C both 25)

2) Break down the faction strength into different troop types, for example: The faction has a strength of 6000, which would mean 6000 troops in total. This might be broken into different groups somewhat like this:
25% - town garrisons (1500 men in total)
25% - lords' armies (1500)
15% - patrols / defensive groups (900)
15% - raiders / offensive fast groups (900)
10% - caravan escort (600)
10% - scouts (600)

3) Have troops generated on a daily basis into town garrisons, up to the faction strength limit.

4) Have towns generate different groups when the total number of troopers in that group is under the limit they should be based on #2. Don't generate the groups out of thin air, but rather have them reduced from the garrison when the group is sent out. Towns should first satisfy their garrison minimum and then send excess troops out as different groups.

5) Have seriously understrength groups return back to join town garrisons (or other understrength groups of the same faction- but just town garrisons might be a neater solution).

Edit: Or some other way of tying the faction strength and number of troops on the map closer together. So, the faction strength might be the total number of troops (modified by level maybe) on map, and each town would generate a set amount more every day (less or none if under siege maybe). Also the total maximum should be capped somewhere (1000 / town, or what ever), so that a faction of just a few settlements could never become crazy strong, and a faction that has had many of it's settlements razed could never again fully recover.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Arkerless on December 10, 2011, 04:20:19 PM
5) Have seriously understrength groups return back to join town garrisons (or other understrength groups of the same faction- but just town garrisons might be a neater solution).

Edit: Or some other way of tying the faction strength and number of troops on the map closer together. So, the faction strength might be the total number of troops (modified by level maybe) on map, and each town would generate a set amount more every day (less or none if under siege maybe). Also the total maximum should be capped somewhere (1000 / town, or what ever), so that a faction of just a few settlements could never become crazy strong, and a faction that has had many of it's settlements razed could never again fully recover.

The definition of understrength needs to scale too, either over time or by character level, because it is important to have tiny parties around in the early game to give the player something to fight.

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Daergar on December 11, 2011, 03:32:37 AM
The definition of understrength needs to scale too, either over time or by character level, because it is important to have tiny parties around in the early game to give the player something to fight.

Not necessarily, since the key to advancement in the beginning is to help a faction in their battles. If you aid them in a 5v5 or 50v50 battle makes little difference, neh? And they will be outnumbered when it is 50v100 just as well as when it was 5v10.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Arkerless on December 11, 2011, 03:21:20 PM
The definition of understrength needs to scale too, either over time or by character level, because it is important to have tiny parties around in the early game to give the player something to fight.

Not necessarily, since the key to advancement in the beginning is to help a faction in their battles. If you aid them in a 5v5 or 50v50 battle makes little difference, neh? And they will be outnumbered when it is 50v100 just as well as when it was 5v10.

Not saying the game would become impossible without them, but they are fun at the beginning, when your party is small enough to catch them. I usually level myself a few times by wiping out small enemy parties solo and running letters around before I start recruiting troops. It's only later, when there is no way you can possibly catch the little buggers, that they start causing problems.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: ikhi on December 12, 2011, 03:09:45 AM
The definition of understrength needs to scale too, either over time or by character level, because it is important to have tiny parties around in the early game to give the player something to fight.

Not necessarily, since the key to advancement in the beginning is to help a faction in their battles. If you aid them in a 5v5 or 50v50 battle makes little difference, neh? And they will be outnumbered when it is 50v100 just as well as when it was 5v10.

Not saying the game would become impossible without them, but they are fun at the beginning, when your party is small enough to catch them. I usually level myself a few times by wiping out small enemy parties solo and running letters around before I start recruiting troops. It's only later, when there is no way you can possibly catch the little buggers, that they start causing problems.

What I meant by understrength was of course relative to the original size of the party- a scout party of 10 originally might be understrength when reduced to 5 men, a patrol of 50 when at 25, etc., say about 50% of original numbers. It would remove those 1-man parties waltzing around with a dozen prisoners, which just seems silly, and also lessen the clutter on map that's causing slowdowns and corrupt saves.

The prisoners could act as a kind of resource too- baddies executing them could cause good side's morale to drop (whatever that means- maybe just faction strength), forcing them to slavery might give more resources, releasing them might raise your own sides morale and either raise (bu giving their troops back) or lower (making them see the error of their ways) the enemy's. It'd be great to hear a rumour on actual game evens, on these lines: "Did you hear? King Theoden pardoned and released two score Dunlending captives on condition that they would not take up arms against Rohan again. I hear that many of their kin felt a great shame and decided to give up the fight against us after hearing of this noble deed."

Other game events generating new rumours would add to the atmosphere too- fall of settlement, great battles, death of a lord, player's exploits. Is it possible to dynamically generate these?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Duha on December 12, 2011, 04:13:22 AM
Hi all,

just supporting another poster saying that killing wargs/wolves should give XP.
They are intelligent combatants so this is natural.

Rgds, Oldtimer

or Auto kill all wargs if no other enemy troops on battlefield.
It spends a lot of time to my cavalry to hunt down this poor animals.

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Arkerless on December 12, 2011, 12:47:07 PM
Hi all,

just supporting another poster saying that killing wargs/wolves should give XP.
They are intelligent combatants so this is natural.

Rgds, Oldtimer

or Auto kill all wargs if no other enemy troops on battlefield.
It spends a lot of time to my cavalry to hunt down this poor animals.

I'd say that sounds like a reasonable solution. If I understand correctly, making them give XP is just too difficult because of the way the game is made, but it would make sense that if you kill all the goblins the wargs would run away.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Darkard on December 12, 2011, 01:55:39 PM
but it would make sense that if you kill all the goblins the wargs would run away.

Wargs are evil vicious killing beasts filled with rage and blood lust. Trained to be even more evil and murderous by their handers
They never flee and you don't scare them. They only want to kill you.

If anything, riderless wargs should be pouncing on your troops and tearing them limb from limb rather than pushing them over.

It would be amazing if the rearing up onto hind legs animation could be combined with the victims falling over animation to have them actually pounce and maul their target.
This would also mean they would be charging about less and easier to pin down and kill.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Northcott on December 12, 2011, 10:50:19 PM
Wargs are evil vicious killing beasts filled with rage and blood lust. Trained to be even more evil and murderous by their handers
They never flee and you don't scare them. They only want to kill you.

I was never left with the impression that they were suicidal, or mindless.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Duha on December 13, 2011, 02:56:20 AM
but it would make sense that if you kill all the goblins the wargs would run away.

Wargs are evil vicious killing beasts filled with rage and blood lust. Trained to be even more evil and murderous by their handers
They never flee and you don't scare them. They only want to kill you.

If anything, riderless wargs should be pouncing on your troops and tearing them limb from limb rather than pushing them over.

It would be amazing if the rearing up onto hind legs animation could be combined with the victims falling over animation to have them actually pounce and maul their target.
This would also mean they would be charging about less and easier to pin down and kill.

Then 'realism' and gameplay clashes I prefer gameplay.   PS. I read this book about 20 years ago and my realism not strong as yours.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Lord Nalfein on December 13, 2011, 03:49:32 PM
Toward cynan,

You make a few good points. Gundabad is under 2000 in strength, and it makes sense that their armies are weak. My army is all archers of at least master level, which make things easier. I have turned the difficulty up to full for everything though. I think saving Rohan and Gondor will liven things up as well, but i'm just waiting until a lord finally decides to come and finish off Gundabad first.

I still think the armies should be larger for the evil factions in the area though. A 40 soldier strong elven patrol should not willingly go after an enemy general at full strength.

Another suggestion I have is to either give some of Gundabad's camps to Moria, or make a few new ones for Moria. Unless I'm mistaken, Moria starts with Moria and the Troll Cave, and gains nothing new when the war starts. Gundabad on the other hand just starts with the capital and gains five or so camps when the war starts.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Arkerless on December 14, 2011, 12:38:12 AM
Then 'realism' and gameplay clashes I prefer gameplay.   PS. I read this book about 20 years ago and my realism not strong as yours.

I would actually prefer his solution, were it possible. But wishing for the impossible doesnt improve either gameplay or realism.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Arkerless on December 14, 2011, 10:47:48 PM
I have noticed several very strange areas of the map. I know that there are several notorious spots the devs are aware of already, but I dont remember whether the eastern edge between Rhûn and Dol Goldur, and hence down to Dagorblad and the Easterlings, has really been brought up. I havent figured out the map editor yet but in game there are clearly large areas that are impassible though they look open, some very strange pathing as a result. One area of disruption runs from the eastern edge of the map at Old Forest Road and makes the area to the south of the point impassible down nearly to Dol Goldur. The other juts out in a similar way south of Dol Goldur. These may in fact be bugs but because I dont see ai parties getting hung up on them I was kind of thinking there might be a reason they were put in on purpose?

Having played each part of the early war there now it seems certain that evil needs a lot of help in the north. Rhûn is cut off from allies and practically impossible to save. As a light-sider they are barely roadbumps and too weak to be a challenge. I was thinking about why this is and why it wasnt like that in the books and one thing that I think is a big deal is the geography - in the book they inhabit (albeit thinly) this rather large area of steppe land in the northeast, a territory bordering the Variags far east of the usual range of mirkwood and allied scouts, but in TLD they have one city right at the very edge, with a few warcamps when war starts, and even the pathing forces them against mirkwood the dwarves the lakeside humans and the woodsmen/beornings all at once - they no strategic depth at all.

Opening up the blockage on the east side of the map, and dotting the eastern edge of the map with minor Easterling outposts, so they can at least run an occasional caravan might be a gentle tip towards viability for them without having to do any real changes to the map, and for the light-side player those same caravans would make excellent prey.



Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Kiah911 on December 16, 2011, 02:19:54 AM
Hello :)

I would just like to firstly say....THIS IS THE MOST AMAZING MOD..... E V E R!!!!


But my humble suggestions are:

the elven armor, to make it look more "elven", it does now, but it doesn't look like a lord of the rings elf.

Do tell, good chap, what does an elf look like?

(if this one is possible) but make the game seem more real by adding a house you can buy, family, land, economy, and "home" stuff.

No. We've said it many times, this is not what the mod is about. You don't have time to buy houses and raise a family, trade. it's the War of the Ring.


Also, if you have other hosts following you, that you yourself can lay siege to a camp or capital (to fix the whole sitting hosts problem)

Clearly you guys (if you like the ideas...I have many more ;D) can go more in depth and stuff but I just wanted to through it out there :)

I suggest reading the manual.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Kiah911 on December 18, 2011, 01:24:48 AM
Hello :)

I would just like to firstly say....THIS IS THE MOST AMAZING MOD..... E V E R!!!!


But my humble suggestions are:

the elven armor, to make it look more "elven", it does now, but it doesn't look like a lord of the rings elf.

Do tell, good chap, what does an elf look like?

(if this one is possible) but make the game seem more real by adding a house you can buy, family, land, economy, and "home" stuff.

No. We've said it many times, this is not what the mod is about. You don't have time to buy houses and raise a family, trade. it's the War of the Ring.


Also, if you have other hosts following you, that you yourself can lay siege to a camp or capital (to fix the whole sitting hosts problem)

Clearly you guys (if you like the ideas...I have many more ;D) can go more in depth and stuff but I just wanted to through it out there :)

I suggest reading the manual.


Well, in terms of the elven armor, I was thinking more along the lines of the elves at helms deep, with the long swords, golden looking sharp armor and with the tripped out bows :) its just a suggestion!

There were no elves at Helms Deep in the books. You suggest movie stuff to a book based mod??? And hope to be liked for it?  >:(

In terms of the houses and family, your totally right. So I'll throw that out the window. BUT! Maybe later on long down the road when you've finished this mod, you could make a Middle Earth mod, with all those pretty features :)

And I didn't even know there was a manual! haha
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Feanor on December 18, 2011, 02:01:54 AM
    If this is at all possible, prevent towns that are under siege from spawning units. I believe that this is the true cause of sieges taking too long. The siege gets interupted every time a unit spawns from the besieged city.

    Great work by the way. Love everything so far, especially the "goodies". During my third time through the game (well .. till you're so strong it feels like you've cheated) I was barely even surprised to be able to explore under Isengard. I just seemed like .. cool here's Isengard, I wonder how I can explore under it. I explored Moria (three hours later I made it out, I love mazes), and a few of the other places (Hornburg, Minas Tirith, Mt. Gundabad) as well. I'm sure there are loads more just waiting for me.

    By the way, games that use the same engine but are different games aren't usually referred to as "mods", they are just described as a new game. I think that you have definitely reached this. Though no insult intended to M&B.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Elmar Bijlsma on December 22, 2011, 06:30:24 AM
Great mod guys. I never thought to see The One Mod back and looking so great.

Some tiny suggestions:
A way to convert the reputation points (money) in to influence. That way I can help things along with those factions where the gaining of influence is near impossible and have a desitination for any rep I don't have much use for.

Loot. I miss it. I loved keeping an eye out for useful or expensive items amidst the stuff that wasn't worth carrying back to the nearest town. The current setup works but is rather dull.

Elvish horse archer bows.
Glorfindel is correctly portrayed as a kick-ass horse-archer but no dedicated elf bow is to be found for the player for that purpose. The memory of the Gondolin refugee rearguard demands an Elven horse-archer bow! ;)

And the silliest request yet:
That the Woodelf arrows and Elf arrow quivers are hung from different locations.
Currently both quivers occupy the same space on the back unlike the Ithilien arrows which hang from the hip. A Elf+ Ithilien quiver combo looks really well and it would be nice to replicate this effect with the top two Elven arrow sets in the game.

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on December 22, 2011, 10:15:53 AM
Loot. I miss it. I loved keeping an eye out for useful or expensive items amidst the stuff that wasn't worth carrying back to the nearest town. The current setup works but is rather dull.
You can turn on the normal loot in the Camp options menu, so you can dress up in enemy gear.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Elmar Bijlsma on December 22, 2011, 10:33:41 AM
You can turn on the normal loot in the Camp options menu, so you can dress up in enemy gear.
Ahhh. So that is the "Item Restrictions" option, I assume? I had not figured that is what it meant.
Guess I should RTFM, huh?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 22, 2011, 10:46:02 AM
Toward cynan,

You make a few good points. Gundabad is under 2000 in strength, and it makes sense that their armies are weak. My army is all archers of at least master level, which make things easier. I have turned the difficulty up to full for everything though. I think saving Rohan and Gondor will liven things up as well, but i'm just waiting until a lord finally decides to come and finish off Gundabad first.

I still think the armies should be larger for the evil factions in the area though. A 40 soldier strong elven patrol should not willingly go after an enemy general at full strength.

Another suggestion I have is to either give some of Gundabad's camps to Moria, or make a few new ones for Moria. Unless I'm mistaken, Moria starts with Moria and the Troll Cave, and gains nothing new when the war starts. Gundabad on the other hand just starts with the capital and gains five or so camps when the war starts.

Actually I think you're right that the orc factions in the north are underpowered, after playing Rivendale, Umbar, and Rohan, it seems to me that it was much easier to crush the bad buys in the north, even playing Umbar in the south held challenges because while the bad guys were winning, at least The Gondorian troops were relatively strong compared to my own, while in the north when you're playing with elf troops and such the goblins and orcs seem trivial.... However I think the devs already know that the balance in the north is not quite right.

One thing I think we should all keep in mind however is that balancing these factions is a delicate act. If they make one faction too strong you get two possible side effect. 1 If you are playing against them it could become too hard to get going in the early game. 2 if you are playing with that faction you will steam roll the other factions right away and never feel like you overcame any challenge, which is the point, and incidentally I think the problem you were feeling.

Really one thing That I think would be very cool, and make the game funner (though maybe not have the feel of a long prolonged war of attrition that it has now) is this: As a faction gains or loses strength it fields always the same number of units... the number here is not based on faction strength but based on the size of the faction, like Mordor should always have the most units, Gondor quite a lot, Rhun should be a big faction with lots and lots of troops too.... Rohan in the middle,  with the elven factions fielding fewer soldiers and fewer units, maybe Moria has only a few units but they are big units.... etc... When a faction falls it falls hard and suddenly, and with a bang. Like once you get an enemy faction into desperate straights it gets one more great host, but it's an extra big host, enough to get the player excited and maybe even a little scarred! Maybe this host pours out of their capitol the first time you besiege it.....
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 22, 2011, 11:04:58 AM
I'll start by saying that I really do love this mod, and that it's already hand and fist better than teh older 0.808 version. i have it running effectively on maximum battle size actually, and have experinced only a few isolated problems. The look is awesome, i love the new small and hunched orcs, and the Trolls, and the dwarves! I haven't seen the ents, but i think it's awesome they exist, and i love that the Wargs act a little less like horses than they did before and more aggressive and dangerous even without a rider! All that said I have to say tehre is one thing in the old version that i LOVED that i have not seen in the newer versions as of yet.

I remember in the older versions of this mod for version 0.808 there were a bunch of exciting infiltration missions. Whenever a companion was captured you would get the chance to sneak into the enemy capitol. Sometimes you could get a mission form a faction leader to assassinate an important enemy or rescue an NPC. You'd go there at night and fight or sneak your way through specially designed scenes with a hand picked team. I loved it, it gave a real sense of adventure, and doing something very different from the norm established with the typical battlefield scenarios. It added more variety, and it was great!

I have not yet seen anything like that in this version if you've already done it, and if it just hasn't happened for me yet, awesome! If not, I really think you should bring these back! I don't know if you can reuse the scenes you already have.... I know it would be a lot of more work to make new ones.... but it was one of my favorite parts of the older version.... so I'm throwing this out there.  If they are in, and I just have not encounter one yet... well really look forward to doing one soon! Maybe if that were the case my suggestion would be that they could come up more since i have had my party wiped out several times and none of my companions has been captured yet....

Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 22, 2011, 11:39:07 AM
Oh another thing based on the older version, the Nazgul!

I liked how the in the older version you might have attacked an enemy party and then there is a horrible cry and a message that a Nazgul has been spotted is displayed and your men start retreating in all directions.

It didn't happen often but when it did I thought it was scary.

Now I'm sure that animating a flying Nazgul is probably completely out of the question.... however.... there are a couple of options. It could be handled the way it was before... or you could throw in a nazgul on a black horse.

If it was handled as it was before with the implication of a Nazgul mounted on a fell beast, I would suggest that it never happen when the character is low level and happen more often when the character is higher level. I would also suggest that it not happen tight at the beginning but after both sides have had a chance to engage so when the good guys flee in terror, they take some losses doing so.... I'd say this sort of event could happen anywhere since the flying nazgul wouldn't all nessicarily be following the armies of Mordor, not would they always stay in Mordor.... they could be sent anywhere as emissaries of Sauron, and help the bad guys in any battle they came upon, though maybe evil men would fear them too? I might also suggest that it happen more often when the player's faction is already strong so as not to hamper a player who is already struggling. Of course Nazgul would help only the bad guys, but the eagles could do the same thing on the other side.....

Now to discuss my idea of a mounted nazgul. I know it might not seem right, since we all know that the Nazgul lost the horses and got those fell mounts before the real fighting started.  In defense of this idea, this mod does not simulate an exact time or replicate the battles fought.... I'm pretty sure that tolkien never wrote of nazgul using horses after they lost the horses at the river near Rivendale... however I don't think he ever wrote that they didn't.... In this version the Nazgul rides swiftly around the map joining in the occasional battle but not following enemies onit's own nor following freindly hosts.... they travel far and wide and swiftly and only help in battles they find. In any battle the Nazgul can not be killed and he will have considerable strength as well.... so you can't win such a battle.... player present or not.... it might convince you to run away leavign troops behind, or you could stay and kill orcs avoiding the nazgul which might be a chalenge and fun... but costly as your troops would be getting killed by the Nazgul.... if it happens to a party without the player just either make the good guys flee (leaving troops behind) or they can kill orcs but will take heavier losses... and if they win the nazgul leaves... or else if there are no orcs left to kill the good guys leave... gains this is not a dirty trick that should be used against a faction that is losing but against a faction that is winning the war.....  Yuo might make a similar "white rider" that helps the good guys if the bad guys are kicking butt.... And you already have the outfits :-)




Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Kiah911 on December 22, 2011, 03:21:38 PM
I'll start by saying that I really do love this mod, and that it's already hand and fist better than teh older 0.808 version. i have it running effectively on maximum battle size actually, and have experinced only a few isolated problems. The look is awesome, i love the new small and hunched orcs, and the Trolls, and the dwarves! I haven't seen the ents, but i think it's awesome they exist, and i love that the Wargs act a little less like horses than they did before and more aggressive and dangerous even without a rider! All that said I have to say tehre is one thing in the old version that i LOVED that i have not seen in the newer versions as of yet.

I remember in the older versions of this mod for version 0.808 there were a bunch of exciting infiltration missions. Whenever a companion was captured you would get the chance to sneak into the enemy capitol. Sometimes you could get a mission form a faction leader to assassinate an important enemy or rescue an NPC. You'd go there at night and fight or sneak your way through specially designed scenes with a hand picked team. I loved it, it gave a real sense of adventure, and doing something very different from the norm established with the typical battlefield scenarios. It added more variety, and it was great!

I have not yet seen anything like that in this version if you've already done it, and if it just hasn't happened for me yet, awesome! If not, I really think you should bring these back! I don't know if you can reuse the scenes you already have.... I know it would be a lot of more work to make new ones.... but it was one of my favorite parts of the older version.... so I'm throwing this out there.  If they are in, and I just have not encounter one yet... well really look forward to doing one soon! Maybe if that were the case my suggestion would be that they could come up more since i have had my party wiped out several times and none of my companions has been captured yet....

I would like to comment/suggest on that last part highlighted.
I have noticed that in the game so far, you hardly ever are able to catch any other Lords, and vis versa. I think the probability of this should be increased a little bit :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 22, 2011, 05:32:02 PM
I'm on a roll for suggestions today! I'm sick and not at work and staying indoors = playing lots of the last days recently :-)

I was playing Rohan and it occurred to be not for the first time that the Dunlendings are EXTREMELY uniform in appearance. I hadn't said anything till now because I know you guys are out of new costumes / items. My first thought was that some of the furs should be slightly different colors or something.... but I realize that you guys can't do that....

SO i came up with a solution (though you might not like it, i think it's pretty realistic) Dunlendings are mostly fighting the Rohirrim, and they themselves seem to have pretty primitive armor. Would it not make sense for mid to upper tier Dunlendings to possess a little looted armor? A helmet here, a chain mail shirt there, a pair of leather grieves on the next fellow? Not enough that you would mistake them for Rohirrim since they are going to be engaged in a battle but enough to break up the visual monotony of seeing the Dunlending horde? Personally i think it might be an interesting mesh, fur coat with a steel helmet....






Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 22, 2011, 05:34:18 PM
I would like to comment/suggest on that last part highlighted.
I have noticed that in the game so far, you hardly ever are able to catch any other Lords, and vis versa. I think the probability of this should be increased a little bit :)


In relation to this post regarding lords getting captured: it seems to happen more when you have the quest to capture an enemy leader than when you don't. I think they keep the probability low because it takes a long time for the war to play out and if all the commanders were captured or slain there wouldn't be much of a struggle at the end, but I do agree that it would be nice if it happened a bit more especailly if you take him down yourself :-) Also (if captured) they could be freed by enemy infiltration parties from time to time... though the faction would sacrifice strength (resources put into a rescue party and casualties from failed or even successful attempts).
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 22, 2011, 05:46:59 PM
One more idea. I wonder if it would be possible to have some quests have an effect of your faction strength or enemies' faction strength.

For example following the spy and bringing back the spy and the spy's master... that should have  tangible effect on the war (maybe it does and i just don't know it) even delivering a message in a timely manner (I hope those weren't just personal letters they were asking me to deliver!) Guarding the messengers... bringing a lord several new soldiers.... maybe even the quests you get from the local authorities (village Thain, quarter master, lore master, camp chief, whatever) like transporting cargoes etc.... some quests would have a very small impact while others should have a larger impact...
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Arkerless on December 22, 2011, 09:10:22 PM
I remember in the older versions of this mod for version 0.808 there were a bunch of exciting infiltration missions. Whenever a companion was captured you would get the chance to sneak into the enemy capitol. Sometimes you could get a mission form a faction leader to assassinate an important enemy or rescue an NPC. You'd go there at night and fight or sneak your way through specially designed scenes with a hand picked team. I loved it, it gave a real sense of adventure, and doing something very different from the norm established with the typical battlefield scenarios. It added more variety, and it was great!

That does sound great. I never played the .808 version because I didnt have enough hardware at the time for it. I have hit one sneaky type mission in 1.01 that I have not yet been able to complete, however. Something along the same lines to look out for. Only ever seen it as a dwarf but it is probably available for good players in the north generally I would imagine. Something to look forward to at least. More stuff like this could be very cool.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 22, 2011, 10:57:30 PM
Playing Rohan, using high tier infantry I have some comments on the higher tier troops: sorry if I misspell some of the unit names.

I was gearing my guys towards elite footmen over heavy footmen because I like the sword or axe with a shield combo... blocks lots of arrows, and fits my idea of what the Rohirrim should use too.... (Rohirrim seem to be based on Saxons with horses as far as I understand.... and Saxons didn't have 2 handed swords) Saxons are a  bit irrelevant. It's a common myth parroted by almost every Tolkien "scholar" that the Rohirrim are AngloSaxons on horses. They aren't. (for way too many reasons I'm too lazy to list now. There are essays about it if you google it.))
The Heavy swordsmen are a bit of a nod to the heroic past of the Rohirrim. Hey, it never says in the book what type of swords they used.


Anyway I found the advancement options from the elite footman troublesome and I'm not sure if it was intended....

I'm not sure if it was intentional but it seems to me that the Frealaf Raiders don't get a helmet, which I find unfortunate. They are a top tier infantry, I would think a helmet was important gear especially since all the lower tiers up the tree had helms.... I understand they are supposed to be fast but without helmets they are fast to die, not a really a viable option for the battlefield....

Failing upgrading to Frealaf Raiders we have another option! Folcwine Guards.... which was another thing that took me a while to figure out, while fully equipped, complete with heavier armor, (bonus) and some  throwing weapons (cool) these guys switch from being considered infantry to archers.... and follow archer commands instead of infantry... which is unfortunate because they are really not that good archers and probably better infantry....anyway I'm surprised that they should be considered archers since they are the end of an infantry line... I didn't find them terribly useful as I'd sometimes forget about them when I only had a few and not give them orders.... or set them up with archers from other factions who have more arrows and they'd just sit there with the real archers  looking fierce.... not shooting either because they were out of range or out of axes I'm not sure....

Which leaves 2 options:

1 leave the elite footmen as elite footmen and not upgrade them (Which was a viable option really, they are decent after all and this was something I was doing for some time)

2 get over my hang ups with the 2 handed sword and go with heavy footmen...

Big surprise was when I finally caved and started using them a lot and upgrading to their final tier.... the heavy footmen upgrade back into a sword and shield thing for their last promotion.... while I was pleased another player who likes 2 handed weapons might not be.

I think it's cool that there are so many options but.... it seems a little scattered no?

My suggestions:

First the biggest thing I can suggest is give Frealaf raiders helmets (even light helmets) i think they are a little gimped without. Why have them around if people don't find them useful?

Second don't alternate one line from having shields then 2 handed swords and gong back to shields
3 options I suggest  :

A go 2 handed and stay... not going back to weapon and shield (maybe make it a great axe instead of a 2 handed sword? I'm not sure about my lore... this is more based on my ideas of what the lore is based off of so feel free to ignore)

B take the two handed heavies and give them all shields.

C And this is my favorite option because it gives the player the most choices: make heavy swordsmen have shields but then have 2 upgrade options one as it is and another with a 2 handed weapon.... how would heavies be different from elite? Give them lower athletics and heavier armor, which makes them tougher (heavier armor that protects more) but slower.

Third suggestion and maybe my weakest case: I'm not sure Folcwine guards should be considered archers.... I like the idea of them staying with the infantry and throwing axes at their foes and when the fighting breaks out they go to their melee weapon which is what they've been fighting with from day 1.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: joshfish on December 25, 2011, 03:28:04 AM
I play as a Dwarf a lot, have two suggestions for Dwarves:

1. Make some top tier dwarves carry shield
    I used to lead a army almost 100% dwarves, but found it's annoying that there's no one carry a shield once they reach beyond expert axedwarf. The best solution is to hire some ironhill miners and upgrade them to ironhill infantries. However, ironhill infantries are not very tough, and hard to recruit once dwarven army is marching south. So it will be great if there's another upgrade route for dwarves to reach high tier shielded soldiers.

2. Ponies!!!
    I know the dwarves will be op if they have cavalry, but please let the player ride ponies on the battlefield. It's hard to command troops , especially cavalry units, effectively on the battle, when you can only walk on foot. The ponies don't have to be fast or tough, they are just transportation on the battlefield.

These are the suggestions for improving the game experience as a dwarf. I really really love your mod, and looking forward to the future patches of this mod.

Wish you guys Merry Christmas and Happy New year~ :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on December 25, 2011, 05:41:42 AM
Saxons are a  bit irrelevant. It's a common myth parroted by almost every Tolkien "scholar" that the Rohirrim are AngloSaxons on horses. They aren't. (for way too many reasons I'm too lazy to list now. There are essays about it if you google it.))
The Heavy swordsmen are a bit of a nod to the heroic past of the Rohirrim. Hey, it never says in the book what type of swords they used.


From Tolkien's letters:

- About language:

"Since the Rohirrim are represented as recent comers out of the North, and users of an archaic Mannish language relatively untouched by the influence of Eldarin, I have turned their names into forms like (but not identical with) Old English. The reason for using 'Anglo-Saxon' in the nomenclature and occasional glimpses of the language of the Eorlingas – as a device of 'translation' – is given in Appendix F. From which it follows that 'Anglo-Saxon' is not only a 'fertile field', but the sole field in which to look for the origin and meaning of words or names belonging to the speech of the Mark; and also that Anglo-Saxon will not be the source of words and names in any other language [in my tales] – except for a few (all of which are explained) survivals in Hobbit-dialect derived from the region (The Vale of Anduin to the immediate north of Lórien) where that dialect of the Northmen developed its particular character. To which may be added Déagol and Sméagol, and the local names Gladden River, and the Gladden Fields, which contains glædene 'iris', in my book supposed to refer to the 'yellow flag' growing in streams and marshes. Outside this restricted field reference to Anglo-Saxon is entirely delusory."

Using the Bayeux Tapestry (anglo-saxons) to explain Rohan's armor and houses:

"The Rohirrim were not 'mediaeval', in our sense. The styles of the Bayeux Tapestry (made in England) fit them well enough, if one remembers that the kind of tennis-nets [the] soldiers seem to have on are only a clumsy conventional sign for chain-mail of small rings. In such a time private 'chambers' played no part. Théoden probably had none, unless he had a sleeping 'bower' in a separate small 'outhouse'. He received guests or emissaries seated on the dais in his royal hall. "

How rohirrim spoke:

"The Rohirrim no doubt (as our ancient English ancestors in a similar state of culture and society) spoke, at least their own tongue, with a slower tempo and more sonorous articulation, than modern 'urbans'. "


Yes, you answer yourself. The quotes show that he used the Anglo Saxon language as a way to explain how the Rohirrim language was related to the common language. (ie similarly to Old English is to English, same way the people of Dale's language was "translated" by Tolkien as Old Norse and how the various Northmen and Woodsmen spoke "Gothic")
Also, the reference to the Byeux tapestry refers to the "civilization level", not directly to Anglo Saxons. He speaks of armour being mail, not plate.

Tolkien "scholars" still spread this silly idea that the Rohirrim are Anglo Saxons on horses. But they're not. They're the Rohirrim. All Tolkien did was give us clues that would make us imagine them, he told us what they were in relation to other cultures of Middle Earth and gave us a parallel in our world.

I heartily recommend reading a bit of Martinez on this topic:

http://www.michael-martinez.com/mmbooks/anglo-saxon-myth.html (http://www.michael-martinez.com/mmbooks/anglo-saxon-myth.html)


Thanks, I'll read this as soon as I can, it seems interesting.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: pagan on December 25, 2011, 06:19:39 AM
You Bolded the wrong parts from what i see.

Outside this restricted field reference to Anglo-Saxon is entirely delusory."

That was all the quote you needed to post. Delusory essentially means a dillusion. Tolkein is telling you straight out, other then these references i used, their link to anglo saxon is an illusion.

But Merl gave a more discrptive answer while i was typing...he is quicker on the trigger
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Barbudo Siniestro on December 25, 2011, 06:35:33 AM
No, Pagan, that is not true.
Tolkien is talking about the Middle Earth languages. What he says is that rohirrim language is the only one with anglo-saxon roots, and there is no other language with the same characteristics. What you imply is that Tolkien is saying that language is the only thing related to anglo-saxons in rohirrim culture, but what he is really saying in this quote is that rohirrim are the only ones with anglo-saxon similarities.

I'm reading Parma Endorion now, so I can understand better what Merlkir is saying.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on December 25, 2011, 06:49:30 AM
Martinez gets a lot of flak for not being a "serious scholar" and for trying to be contrarian at all costs. Which, with all due respect, is partially true. But so what? He's right about so many things the Tolkien mainstreamists take for granted.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 25, 2011, 09:29:40 AM
I did not expect to stir up so much controversy with my off-handed comment!

I did not mean to imply that you should get rid of guys wielding two handed swords in Rohan because they did not exist at the times of the various anglo-saxon kingdoms. Only that they appealed to me less because of what i imagine the Rohirrim fighting with.

Of course the Rohirrim have to be viewed first and foremost as a product of their lives in middle earth. Whatever the roots of their conception in Tolkien's mind, there is really no reason to say they could not have possessed technology that their close allies in Gondor would have held for long years.

In middle earth, long swords that are best wielded in 2 hands could go back very far.... elven metallurgy, dwarven metallurgy, and that of the Numenorians as well I'm sure are supposed to far outstretch that of our own middle ages. The elves for example could make wondrous armors light and yet strong. Long weapons, strong enough to survive the impact implied with the length and leverage associated with 2 handed use while maintaining a reasonable weight would not have been a problem for the master smiths of middle earth. I imagine that though many skills had been diminished over time in Gondor the art of forging high grade steel would not have been lost amid all the times of war. I can only imagine that at least some of those skills, at least to a lesser extent would have migrated towards the Rohirrim. Failing that the weapons could be traded to neighboring kingdoms in long friendship and alliance.


Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Parsifal on December 29, 2011, 08:04:31 PM
First off, thanks a lot for making a great mod! Unfortunately, I haven't had the chance to play it very much, but in a few weeks...

Although I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone already thought of this, I've had an idea for a possible workaround to prevent corrupted savegames after 250+ days.

As I understand it (feel free to correct me), there are two likely causes: (1) too many parties on the map; (2) too many parties in total (both on the map and already killed off).

One thing that struck me while playing the mod (especially in comparison to the previous TLD version) was the number of tribal orc parties on the map at the same time. They were pretty much everywhere. Moreover, quite a few of these ended up being killed off by patrols of the major factions. One way to limit the number of these parties (both alive and dead) would be to spawn a maximum of five or six of these simultaneously in a fairly remote place, away from the main action and other hostile elements. The player could then be given a quest (in exchange for RP's and experience) to kill these parties in their specific location in much the same way as the river pirate quest worked in M&B 0.903 and earlier. For instance, good guys could be ordered to remove a threat to innocent travelers, while evil characters could be ordered to punish "unaffiliated scum."

The advantage of this setup would be a much smaller number of parties, both alive on the map and dead off it. Also, it might be possible (and not too detrimental to gameplay) to stop spawning tribal orcs after the war starts.

Similarly, I noticed quite a few renegade corsair parties on the map at the same time. Although it would obviously be a shame, I think it wouldn't be too bad if you would get rid of them altogether. Leveling up until the war starts can easily be done on tribal orcs and patrols. After that, there's plenty of tougher opposition and no real need for neutral bandits and/or deserters.

Anyway, it might be something completely different that causes corrupted savegames, but if not, this just might help to buy enough time for the war to properly finish.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Harding Grim on December 30, 2011, 06:06:24 AM
I just wanted to say that I'm having an absolute blast playing this mod, and after I recovered from the shock of The Last Days of the Third Age I wanted to pitch in with some ideas that occurred to me. I read through the entire thread.

My first suggestion is for quest content for the good-aligned forces, or specifically Gondor and Rohan. The game is progressing against the backdrop of Frodo's journey, and it would be amazing to allude to to the Ring's movement closer to Mordor somehow.

The Diversion

The Mirror of Galadriel shows that the Fellowship (or just Frodo and Sam, after the Fellowship has fractured) is unknowingly headed into the jaws of a great host of Mordor. The player is requested to join a swiftly-prepared assault on one of the enemy's capitols, against overwhelming odds, to act as a diversion from the Ringbearer and draw the host away from the Fellowship's path.

If the player is playing a race of men, Galadriel's message is passed through one of the realm's Lords, who is very doubtful of why they need to do this and suspicious of what's being kept in the dark. But they ultimately decide to hold faith in the Lady Galadriel and commit themselves to a higher purpose they don't know.

 The "Diversion" quest would be initiated with a in-game notice popping up to convene with other lord at x city, perhaps at the 500-day mark.

When the player arrives at the castle, he sees the gathered lords. Three of the realm's minor leaders with their parties, and maybe an elven commander who is bearing Galadriel's message, all of them chosen at random? They have a conversation with the elf pleading for the men to buy them "Three days' time" going through the hesitation, doubt, suspicion, and hostility between the humans and the elves, before they decide to throw in the gauntlet. They need to attack Minas Morgul (if Gondor) and keep the host engaged. If they hit and run the city, the host will just go back and run into the Fellowship.

Faramir: If we are to buy three days' time for this secret you're keeping and have any chance of surviving ourselves, we must not be trapped in the open, caught between the sorties from the city and the enemy host.

Orophin (or another of Galadriel's commanders): That much is clear. How do you intend to accomplish this?

Faramir: We storm the city and take it. Then we face the host and keep it there from the walls. They cannot turn away then. 

Gondor commander: But that leaves us trapped against a very strong foe at the gates. You had a mind of us surviving this mad ordeal, did you not?

Faramir: Do not forget that once this city belonged to us. When it was taken, a secret causeway remained sealed, invisible and known only to the king's circle and to the city's architects long dead. On the third day - if we indeed live through the first two - we abandon our defenses and steal away into the heat of Ithilien.

Angbor (to Orophin): Your archers will surely be most helpful for this phase of the plan.

Orophin: Aye, the Galadrim will play the part required of us.

Angbor: So shall the men of Gondor.

Faramir: Then it is time to see what they have done to fair Minas Ithil.

The gathered force heads out to besiege the capitol across the overworld map. Maybe you can have the quest be split into two objectives, the first being "Seize Minas Morgul before the enemy host returns." So it just plays out like a siege you have to win by taking the walls.

Then it leads into the secondary part of the quest: "Hold the walls against the enemy host for three days."

Then the player plays the role of the besieged. They repel attacks by the host, and finally when the three days are up, they steal away through the secret causeway (maybe a modest scene with the player going through Minas Morgul until they stumble upon the passageway and entering it, or just a text message with exposition) and the survivors appear in the middle of Ithilien.

I think this quest fits and would contribute to the mod's 'amazingness' factor on so many levels:

1) It abides by the main ideological point that the developers are standing by: the player controls a rank-and-file faction captain who doesn't know of the Fellowship's existence.

2) It adds more storyline into the otherwise nebulous plot, and relates our struggles a little more to the Fellowship's, without explicitly revealing it to the in-universe player.

3) It creates tension, lending more gravitas to the game because it's storyline-based. It's a different kind of tension from the gameplay-derived tension, when your realm is getting put to the sword with its lords falling left and right because enemy armies are spawning nonstop.

4) It captures and expresses the Tolkien moral that military strength is ultimately a diversion in the face of Sauron's might.

5) Opens up a lot of tiny, but potentially amazing detail, like Pippin and Merry (if you're Gondor or Rohan) having new dialogue expressing worry as they have a good idea why this assault is happening. Faramir maybe joins the campaign if you're playing Gondor, and he quietly says how he defied his father Denethor's wishes in joining this seemingly suicidal endeavor because he understands the importance of this higher purpose. The city could be swarming with hysterical citizens with confused and tearful dialogue, and a lot more soldiers shown making preparations.

These sort of scripted events are almost perfect opportunities to make the characters seem like more real characters, aside from being a list of quests and information of how the war's going. You can have the hobbits wish the player luck and show worry, you have realistic touches like the city given where the quest going into an uproar as news spreads, touch upon Faramir's strained but loving relationship with his dad, have a lot of specialized dialogue for the otherwise wooden lords.

6) It's also interchangeable between Gondor and Rohan. If the player is Gondor, then have the scenario  take place after Frodo passes through Henneth Annun, have the participants be Gondor commanders meeting in Minas Tirith or West Osgiliath and the city they attack be Minas Morgul. If the player is Rohan, the scenario can be molded around the Fellowship's movement in the Two Towers timeframe. But including this for Gondor would be heartbreakingly epic.

7) I don't know anything about the coding difficulty, but some elements would already be in place. From reading bits and pieces, armies can be spawned at will on time-triggers (not sure if their paths can be predetermined :s). Sieges are already implemented. Two step quests are already part of the main Mount and Blade proper.

I know that there's literally no limit to the number of ideas that are probably impossible, but either way one kind of super-event would propel this mod to even greater heights.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Arkerless on December 30, 2011, 04:08:03 PM
"6) It's also interchangeable between Gondor and Rohan. If the player is Gondor, then have the scenario  take place after Frodo passes through Henneth Annun, have the participants be Gondor commanders meeting in Minas Tirith or West Osgiliath and the city they attack be Minas Morgul. If the player is Rohan, the scenario can be molded around the Fellowship's movement in the Two Towers timeframe. But including this for Gondor would be heartbreakingly epic. "

While this is actually a good idea, putting in all the time and effort to implement this and then allowing only PCs of two factions to see it would not be. That wouldnt even allow all good humans. Better to allow the PC to get sucked up in it when he is in the appropriate area from any faction.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Harding Grim on December 30, 2011, 06:54:36 PM
I agree. Maybe make it a mission based in Gondor, with the Minas Morgul scenario with the participant commanders predetermined, and that way it doesn't matter which good-aligned faction is playing. Whenever they are in the area, they get the summons. Make the summons non-specific, just have a notice saying that a gathering is taking place and the player's presence is sorely needed.

Is it easy to program a handful of lords to be at a desired location, with a reasonable number of troops?

My main point is that this kind of scripted event, bringing narrative into the experience, is something that I think the player fundamentally wants. This is just my proposal for such an event. It's elegant I think - the Fellowship's movement, the actual procedure of the siege and defense, the drama of Gondor retaking Minas Ithil. The concept of soldiers being called upon to create a distraction for the Ringbearer is a good one that meshes well with Tolkien's themes, and in fact it actually happened in the books, with Aragorn leading his army to Mordor.

The siege then defense is, in the first place, an original idea for a quest structure in the first place, and it interlocks naturally with the ME lore. The secret passageway idea for Minas Morgul is justified by the fact that it belonged to Arnor in the past. The dialogue can be very Tolkien-esque and dramatic in a non-ridiculous way, like Faramir saying "It is time to see what they have done to our fair Minas Ithil" and has a bit of strategizing and planning, that military  and conflict flavor, that Lord of the Rings fans tend to love.

I have other ideas for such events, but these kinds of story-driven events would just be stunning, and universally appreciated. Through this device, you can make the world and its characters really come to life. The thing about this mod is that it recreates the world, and does so spectacularly, but it is ultimately aesthetic, isn't it? The armors, weapons, settings, troops, character models are masterfully done, and NPCs reference the lore, but the key characters just have the native dialogue set. And I've noticed that this is true in all mods for Mount and Blade. The major thing missing from the native version is this lack of narrative except for the endgame (Calradia has been conquered, Middle-Earth has been conquered or saved), and it's a fundamental flaw that's exposed in mods, and something like this would fill that hole.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on December 31, 2011, 09:00:02 AM
I have other ideas for such events, but these kinds of story-driven events would just be stunning, and universally appreciated. Through this device, you can make the world and its characters really come to life. The thing about this mod is that it recreates the world, and does so spectacularly, but it is ultimately aesthetic, isn't it? The armors, weapons, settings, troops, character models are masterfully done, and NPCs reference the lore, but the key characters just have the native dialogue set. And I've noticed that this is true in all mods for Mount and Blade. The major thing missing from the native version is this lack of narrative except for the endgame (Calradia has been conquered, Middle-Earth has been conquered or saved), and it's a fundamental flaw that's exposed in mods, and something like this would fill that hole.

I am of a like mind with you, Narrative is awesome. I'm not a modder but I would  encourage you to share all of your ideas with with the makers of this mod.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Dwarf on January 11, 2012, 10:50:01 AM
Suggest giving the same amount of rank & influence points for rescuing allies and defeating enemy. In 3.01, it is better to ignore enemy and lure them to friendlies then rescue them for the points. Attacking right away only gives 1 or 2 points. Maybe 1 point for every 8 enemy killed or some system like that?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: avien on January 14, 2012, 03:33:17 PM
I remember in the older versions of this mod for version 0.808 there were a bunch of exciting infiltration missions. Whenever a companion was captured you would get the chance to sneak into the enemy capitol. Sometimes you could get a mission form a faction leader to assassinate an important enemy or rescue an NPC. You'd go there at night and fight or sneak your way through specially designed scenes with a hand picked team. I loved it, it gave a real sense of adventure, and doing something very different from the norm established with the typical battlefield scenarios. It added more variety, and it was great!

I have not yet seen anything like that in this version if you've already done it, and if it just hasn't happened for me yet, awesome! If not, I really think you should bring these back! I don't know if you can reuse the scenes you already have.... I know it would be a lot of more work to make new ones.... but it was one of my favorite parts of the older version.... so I'm throwing this out there.  If they are in, and I just have not encounter one yet... well really look forward to doing one soon! Maybe if that were the case my suggestion would be that they could come up more since i have had my party wiped out several times and none of my companions has been captured yet....

Yeah, these were fun. Any comment from the devs?
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Darkslayer on January 16, 2012, 01:05:30 AM
I have been playing as a dwarf my first time through.  I think the mod is excellent.  My save game just got corrupted so back to the drawing board I guess.  I do have some suggestions.

1.)  I have not got received any "rescue X lord" quests.  I am not sure if these were not included in this version or there are just no lords being captured.  I used to really enjoy those quests on the old mod.  I have noticed it is VERY difficult to capture a lord and darn near impossible to kill them.  I think there is one dead lord on my side and I was pretty far into the mod.  I suggest making lords much easier to capture and kill and to have most hosts like you did in the original version being lead by a generic leader.

2.)  Shorten the time it takes to siege an enemy camp.  King Theoden has some serious ADHD and almost invariably breaks his efforts within a single day to rescue a tiny party of kin or chase an impossibly fast target across the map.  There are certain places on the map that are so high traffic that he literally never gets anywhere.  It is so annoying.

3.)  Lengthen the regen time of the leader lead hordes.  They are ridiculously high at times.

4.)  The engineering skill does not appear to do anything.  It would be nice if you could siege minor towns at some level of reputation or build something to give the skill of some value.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on January 16, 2012, 03:50:33 AM
I remember in the older versions of this mod for version 0.808 there were a bunch of exciting infiltration missions. Whenever a companion was captured you would get the chance to sneak into the enemy capitol. Sometimes you could get a mission form a faction leader to assassinate an important enemy or rescue an NPC. You'd go there at night and fight or sneak your way through specially designed scenes with a hand picked team. I loved it, it gave a real sense of adventure, and doing something very different from the norm established with the typical battlefield scenarios. It added more variety, and it was great!

I have not yet seen anything like that in this version if you've already done it, and if it just hasn't happened for me yet, awesome! If not, I really think you should bring these back! I don't know if you can reuse the scenes you already have.... I know it would be a lot of more work to make new ones.... but it was one of my favorite parts of the older version.... so I'm throwing this out there.  If they are in, and I just have not encounter one yet... well really look forward to doing one soon! Maybe if that were the case my suggestion would be that they could come up more since i have had my party wiped out several times and none of my companions has been captured yet....

Yeah, these were fun. Any comment from the devs?
I'm vaguely aware that these were developed by GetAssista, but not finished and enabled. Might take a look and see if they can be easily finished for the next release. GA is unavailable for the time being, so no promises.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on January 16, 2012, 08:48:22 AM
Yes, what MV says is accurate.
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: Trendar on January 17, 2012, 12:22:04 PM
If you still need help can you please provide us with information about what is done and what needs to be done for future patches? I really appreciate your great work, I waited for this for a long time and it was a great surprise for me to see that new version is actually done and I truly am grateful for this great mod.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: thecalaquendi on January 30, 2012, 01:36:28 PM
I would suggest that Isengard parties capture elves instead of killing them.  Surely Saruman would approve of this as he would find many uses for them :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.0 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on January 30, 2012, 03:02:58 PM
If you still need help can you please provide us with information about what is done and what needs to be done for future patches? I really appreciate your great work, I waited for this for a long time and it was a great surprise for me to see that new version is actually done and I truly am grateful for this great mod.

The TLD team needs new blood urgently, in particular:
- someone to go through the item and troop stats and balance them
- an experienced coder who considers himself among the top 30 or so Mount and Blade coders

Join the elite arrogant douche crew! (must be serious and experienced - no novice training programs)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Dwarf on February 01, 2012, 06:18:41 AM
Ver 3.1
Day 158 as Elf
(http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn142/MightyMoose888/31a.jpg)
1) Faction strength is too high, opposing factions are actually gaining strength, look at Gondor/Mordor & Rohan/Isengard, this will turn into a never ending game. Will everybody be 9000+ if I leave the AI alone? Current strength gain is 50 per day, maybe lower to 20? Or give bigger penalties to defeating armies. I've killed 1500 orcs personally. Seriously too much grinding to lower faction strength, I strongly suggest lowering the strength or the game will never end.
2) Influence is too hard to get now, I get 1 point for aiding allies now, I didn't manage to get a companion due to the high cost of influence. I prefer not using influence for companions, they are actually not that strong.
3) Shops should have more money for convenience.
4) Too much scrap now, I have 60,000+ in one faction alone and no companions to spend on.
5) I manage to defeat Moria on day 158. Took many battles due to high strength regen.
6) Recommend giving rank and influence points just for defeating armies.

PS: The Grinding, make it stop. Is it possible for the player to config the faction strength so they can choose the length of a campaign?

This is useful. I'll make sure to put this in our "useful feedback" thread for the coders to take a look, when they're around. Thanks!
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Dwarf on February 02, 2012, 02:31:52 AM
3.1 as an Elf.
Continue from my above post...
After the defeat of Moria, the hosts of Lothlórien and Rivendell just partrol their cities and never bothered to raid the lands of Dol Guldur. So I single-handledly camped and grind Dol Guldur down to 1100 strength. But I was unable to bring it down below 1000.
(http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn142/MightyMoose888/one/31b.jpg)
Their parties could not replenish to full strength and their faction strength went up and down as I kill the occasional party that pop out.. Even if the hosts of the Elves were patrolling around the area, the Dol Guldur hosts will hide in their fortress and the game will not end.
They cannot come out, I cannot attack.
So I gave up and use the seige edit in the menu.txt in this forum and defeated them. Finally the forces of Lothlórien and Rivendell attacked Isengard.
I reloaded and rest until day 604 when I got tired of it. I save and reloaded every week and no save game corruption. But I was doing nothing.
Anyway most of the faction strength is mostly over 9000!!! on day 604.
(http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn142/MightyMoose888/one/31c.jpg)
Take note that Imladris has only 5000. They didn't fight a single battle so I assume that the high numbers are for winning battles.
So I suggest:
1) Some way for the player to bring down factions holed up. Maybe give host less reliance on faction strength so they will always have full troops so they will be willing to leave their fort. Maybe spawn war parties or something.
2) More aggressive actions, the Elves ignore Dol Guldur, and Dol Guldur ignore Elves, all they do is patrol.
3) I was unable to tell hosts what to do due to the influence costs. Suggest removing influence cost like in native. This may sound overpowered but the AI is too passive.
4) I didn't see any special host when Moria was weakened.
5) The faction strength bonus for winning battles is probably too high and the defeat too low.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Elgalas on February 02, 2012, 10:29:45 AM
Perhaps number of troops in garrisons should be reduced, especially for the places where there is a lord who never goes out.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: vota dc on February 02, 2012, 11:14:26 AM
str_mordor_rank_0 Worm
str_mordor_rank_1 Snaga
str_mordor_rank_2 Backstabber_of_Gorgoroth
str_mordor_rank_3 Sentry_of_Cirith_Ungol
str_mordor_rank_4 Slavedriver_of_Udûn
str_mordor_rank_5 Despoiler_of_Durthang
str_mordor_rank_6 Watchman_of_Morannon
str_mordor_rank_7 Captain_of_Minas_Morgul
str_mordor_rank_8 Commander_of_Barad-dûr
str_mordor_rank_9 Scourge_of_Mankind

str_guldur_rank_0 Worm
str_guldur_rank_1 Snaga
str_guldur_rank_2 Backstabber_of_Gorgoroth
str_guldur_rank_3 Sentry_of_Cirith_Ungol
str_guldur_rank_4 Slavedriver_of_Udûn
str_guldur_rank_5 Despoiler_of_Durthang
str_guldur_rank_6 Watchman_of_Morannon
str_guldur_rank_7 Captain_of_Minas_Morgul
str_guldur_rank_8 Commander_of_Barad-dûr
str_guldur_rank_9 Scourge_of_Mankind

Guldur and Mordor already share troops, shouldn't have at least different rank names?
Something like this

str_guldur_rank_2 Backstabber_of_the_Elves
str_guldur_rank_3 Treeburner
str_guldur_rank_4 Slavedriver_of_the_Woods
str_guldur_rank_5 Despoiler_of_the_Forest
str_guldur_rank_6 Elfbane
str_guldur_rank_7 Tamer_of_Wargs
str_guldur_rank_8 Commander_of_the_North
str_guldur_rank_9 Scourge_of_Mirkwood
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Kohlrabi on February 03, 2012, 03:43:52 AM
I would like to see the influence costs of the companions lowered a bit,
I do like to grind a little to get things in the game, but the recent influence
cost addition was a bit too exaggerated.
My suggestion would be to divide the current companion costs by 4.
(the items are very well priced though - keep those costs)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on February 03, 2012, 06:29:03 AM
Just a suggestion as per character creation. It seems that the starting stats for Orcs (definitely true with Moria) are somewhat randomised. 3 Athletics is standard but otherwise I've seen points randomly put in bargainer, power draw, wound treatment and others. I'd much rather prefer these points were either unassigned (I really like TLD's 'starting with little' type of play) or if that's not possible then put in something like Leadership or Ironflesh that everyone will use.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Elgalas on February 03, 2012, 01:14:54 PM
Do you plan to change the food system? Actually I changed the item_kinds1.txt file and multiplied by x10 the number of food per units, because the MnB food system is really annoying (but there is still beef which becomes spoiled within a few days)

At the beginning food is not a problem because it is not consumed quickly, but when you have a great army, this become really annoying. It's like everything is done to prevent you from having great armie, this plus the speed and moral systems; and the worst is that food is not part of any gameplay mechanic, its only purpose seems to be to make the player run everywhere all three days to buy all food they can. For exemple if I want to stay near my Lord when he besiege a city, for when he'll assault it, I can't because my food won't last it. Even if I fulfill my inventory with food, beef will become unuseful like 3 days after..

Perhaps you could increase the number of food per units (and durability for beef), and make them more numerous in shops, so that we don't have to go to each cities of our faction to get all types of food needed.

For good side armies, food is a problem, but for the bad side this is a great concern because of the orcs party limit bonus (also in the same subject I think orcs should have moral advantages with their party limit modifier, or better special items for bad sides like cooking cauldron, to have less disadvantage for having uge armies of orcs)

Thanks for reading.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: vota dc on February 04, 2012, 05:30:20 AM
It would be interesting that the higher your level is, the more food you find in shops. But the cooking cauldron isn't already for the bad guys?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Gaxleep on February 04, 2012, 06:57:06 AM
I would suggest a modification about the troubling orcs missions (and others like that).
I happen that orcs group at start is really near the sorrounding (like the quartermaster of a town usually says) but after some battle at least a group disappear.
I guess that this is not properly a bug, but the groupo move very far from the sorroundings of the town wich is supposed to have a problem.
I've accepted a mission like that in Esgaroth, and the last group of troublesome orcs was near Beorn House, wich is hard to say "sorrounding of Esgaroth".
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Elgalas on February 04, 2012, 07:09:43 AM
It would be interesting that the higher your level is, the more food you find in shops. But the cooking cauldron isn't already for the bad guys?

Yes they have the cooking cauldron, but with the orcs party bonus (3 orcs where you could have only 1 human or Uruk) you need more and more moral points.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Hidole555 on February 04, 2012, 09:14:37 PM
Holy goddamn. In the next update can you change either how deserters work or nerf wargs?

I just ran into around 30 Great Warg Riders of Udun deserters and they trashed my entire army of over 80+ upgraded troops.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Ettore53 on February 05, 2012, 02:55:24 AM
Citadel is totally empty a couple of guards near White Tree should be good
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Dwarf on February 05, 2012, 06:26:18 AM
3.1 hotfix 2 as Gondor.
Finally defeated Mordor but there is a problem, even with the reduce strength growth of +10.
Morannon has 900 troops +140(Mouth of Sauron) + 6 commanders with 12 soldiers. This means the manpower is so high it cannot generate large parties and I was unable to bring Mordor strength down below 1000. So I had to edit the menu.txt again and seige it manually. I could not bring strength below 1100.
I manage to defeat the 3 evil human factions attacking Gondor so the problem is with the high number of troops of Morannon. Also with 1000+ troops, the ones who can assault it are Gondor & Rohan with its large number of commanders. What if Gondor/Rohan is too weak to marshal troops and the player is taking a faction with only 3 or 4 commanders, will they refuse to assault Morannon even with full stacks? 4 commanders have only 550 troops.
The game still takes too long , even with +10 growth.
I did it before day 200, though I ran off to aid Rohan for a while.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Dwarf on February 05, 2012, 10:33:09 AM
^ Update, the same problem exist for Isengard, can't bring strength below 1100, Isengard has only 500 men excluding commanders. Dunlendings with its smaller garrison can be brought below 1000.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Narnian on February 05, 2012, 07:15:57 PM
Faction captain's shield.  Me wants it. It's me precious.   :o

I saw a Pelargir Captain's shield and drooled like a baby.  In fact, should not the lord of that faction also bear that shield design? And I noticed with Orthalion, his troops were Gondorian regulars instead of Pelargir troops.  Haven't made a study of other Gondorian factions, though I did meet a Pinnath Gelin captain with a lovely shield design.

Incidentally, I just read in RotK when Aragorn arrives at Pelennor in the corsair ships, and all the folks with him.  His banner when unfurled, bore the seven stars and the crown above the White Tree, and the book indicates that no one bore that device since Isildur.  Have I not seen a crown on some Gondorian heraldry somewhere?

Yes, iirc some ancient shields have it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Mage246 on February 07, 2012, 12:26:15 AM
I would like to see the influence costs of the companions lowered a bit,
I do like to grind a little to get things in the game, but the recent influence
cost addition was a bit too exaggerated.
My suggestion would be to divide the current companion costs by 4.
(the items are very well priced though - keep those costs)

I have to second this. I started as Elf of Mirkwood, and it's going to cost me 50 (or was it 60?) influence to recruit Ulfas, and a whopping 150 (!) influence to recruit Galwyne. That's insane. 200 influence to save up before I can even start earning for faction items and similar.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: KidStein on February 07, 2012, 01:35:19 AM
I'd like to see more companions! If it's possible, I think it would be nice to have at least one companion per faction/race. It was a little disappointing that there's only one Dwarf companion (And he looks kind of lame to me. I don't like his orange hair! >_>) and only one Elf, aside from the spoiler companion that I won't name!

Maybe you could start a thread asking for idea's on new companions. Have people come up with a character, a look, and a small bio that would fit in Middle Earth. The best one's could be implemented into the game and such.

Just a suggestion! And you can completely dismiss this if you've already said nay to new companion's or if this would be too complicated to do. (:
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: HamsterSensei on February 07, 2012, 06:48:34 AM
Just got back to TLD, and found the patch. Lovely! It showed me once again what an incredible, immersive and addictive mod it is :)

Couple of suggestions:
1) Its been said already, but I'll third influence costs. Much, much too high, both in comparison with the faction reward items (The Rohan will give me a Meahra cheaper than they'll let Galwyne ride with me...), and particularly in comparison with earnings.
2) Influence earnings could be increased substantially too. Someone suggested automatically gaining influence for the relevant factions every time you defeat enemies, which sounds reasonable to me. And the influence gains from rescuing beleaguered allies should be much higher. Fighting off 300+ Uruk Hai to save Theoden's life earns you a whooping 1 influence...By comparison, killing a lone troll to finish the quest earned me 7. If at all possible code-wise, the amount of influence you earn for winning a battle while helping allies would ideally be based on a formula comparing your contribution to the battle (in kills, or in ratio of your soldiers to allies soldiers) to the difficulty and scale of the battle (ratio between enemies and friendlies plus number of total soldiers participating). And a range of 1-50 influence sounds about right - for the truly epic battle where you single-handedly save the day against hordes of enemies, surely you could go from stranger to trusted ally just based on that (Aragorn appearing at Pelennor Fields)? Coding that might be a handful, but maybe something simpler could approximate it?
3) An influence cheat would also be nice. Since the patches are not save-game compatible its a bit much of a grind to start over earning it every time.
4) Maybe I'm just missing it, but is there a way to see your rank (in points) with the different factions? I get the individual updates ("You have earned 4 rank points..."), but only my rank-level with the various factions. If not, could we have it?
5) I'll fifth (or however many we're up to) the concerns with Wargs. I'd love to see them be much, much deadlier, but less tedious to hunt down. Is there any way to increase their charge to where they do real damage when they hit you, while simultaneously decreasing their penetration power? Ideally they ought to run into someone, hurt them bad, but stop as a result and have to start running again. The weaker horses work like this (they slow to something like a complete stop from hitting just 1 or 2 enemies), but I have a feeling the charge value and this may be related..? At any rate, their penetration power seems too high - they're just not massive enough to look realistic plowing through massed ranks of infantry seemingly without effort. I'm also getting 0 damage hits about 1/3 of the time. Maybe that's from the way I happen to be fighting them (swinging the sword on my right side, from horseback), but it makes killing them off more time-consuming than it could be. That's the invisible rider, I gather, and I understand changing it may be impossible. But nerf, if possible. And is it just me, or do they regenerate when they respawn with the invisible rider? I've done 70-80 points damage to a Warg while killing the rider, and then had to do another ca.100 damage to kill it off. If it does regenerate like that, maybe the hit points of riderless Wargs should be half of the original, to take into account the odds that it will have suffered damage in the process of killing the rider?
6) Someone once suggested riderless Wargs as a troop-type, and this sounded like a good idea to me? Warg-riders would then be an upgrade. Free-roaming packs of unaligned riderless Wargs could definitely be a real threat near the Misty Mountains.
7) Some of the small maps (e.g. The White Hand one) make an enormous difference to the battle. That's not necessarily a bad thing - Isengard has a much, much better chance fighting elves on the small map, because they only have time to get of 4 or 5 shots before the infantry closes for melee - but its a nasty surprise as a player when you've guesstimated your odds based on the expectation of fighting on one size map and then find yourself fighting on another. Can we increase the size of the small maps (Mirkwood, the White Hand, and probably others) to somewhat harmonize the sizes? Or as an alternative have information about map-size in the battle-menu where you're offered the choice between committing and withdrawing?
8) Similarly - some of the small maps might benefit from a clearer sense of where the borders of the map are. On horseback its rather to easy to run headfirst into the border and thus come to a complete stop (with 20 pike-armed Uruk-Hai in hot pursuit if you're unlucky), simply because you didn't know it was there. I might be willing to accept something like a thin red line, small enough to only be visible when you get close, as an aesthetic concession to gameplay.
9) Is there any way we can be allowed to command troops during sieges? Watching your handpicked and lovingly trained soldies charge headfirst into a deathtrap without being able to intervene is...painful. And it would make more interesting siege-tactics possible (e.g. lead your troops to one end, order them to charge, and sneak back to and over a different crossing).
10) The capture spy mission is terribly difficult because archers ignore the "don't fire" command if they're told to use blunt weapons. I seem to recall that in 3.01 they used their fists?
11) Its been mentioned, but at least some AI is still very passive. Elrond and company have yet to leave the immediate surroundings of their camp (day 80 something), although they're the second-strongest faction (next to Mordor) and their hostile neighbours are at fairly low strength. On the other hand Mirkwood have been fighting well with Gundabad, Isengard is pushing Rohan hard, and Gondor is taking a beating from all sides.
12) I don't know if this counts as a bug, but it seems that once a companion passes a certain level, the only quest I get offered by lords is to lend that companion. If you're strongly dependent on th companion, say for spotting and pathfinding skills, this may be a poor option. Is it possible to reduce the frequency with which this quest is offered, or perhaps even better, to give it a temporary flag as being unofferable, if it has been recently refused?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Triglav on February 07, 2012, 07:26:26 AM
It was a little disappointing that there's only one Dwarf companion (And he looks kind of lame to me. I don't like his orange hair! >_>)

Anyone who doesn't like Kili Goldfinger, is an enemy of TLD, Tolkien, dwarves in general and Ian Fleming!
You've been warned!
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: vota dc on February 07, 2012, 10:59:05 AM
It was a little disappointing that there's only one Dwarf companion

Even if they will add new companions, I doubt they will add a Dwarf one. Some factions are without companion. Mordor, Gondor and Rohan have many settlements on the map, Isengard too after the war start: this is the reason why they get two.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: KidStein on February 07, 2012, 03:20:44 PM
It was a little disappointing that there's only one Dwarf companion

Even if they will add new companions, I doubt they will add a Dwarf one. Some factions are without companion. Mordor, Gondor and Rohan have many settlements on the map, Isengard too after the war start: this is the reason why they get two.

That makes sense, but the companions are only useful for the player. :P NPC commanders don't recruit them. So having a bunch in the south and few in the north seems kind of silly, especially considering how the south factions get tore up! Also, I wanted to create my own little fellowship. >_> <_< Dwarf, Elf, Dunedain. That kind of thing!
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: KidStein on February 07, 2012, 03:23:54 PM
It was a little disappointing that there's only one Dwarf companion (And he looks kind of lame to me. I don't like his orange hair! >_>)

Anyone who doesn't like Kili Goldfinger, is an enemy of TLD, Tolkien, dwarves in general and Ian Fleming!
You've been warned!

*Gasp!* I will take my punishment then! :P I really don't mind him, just that orange hair bothers me. (: If I could, I'd totally shave his head and beard and give him a wig. And a... Fake beard. Or something. <_<
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on February 08, 2012, 09:32:50 AM
Would it be possible to have slightly more information on the Faction Strength screen? I like to know what's generally going on with the war as a whole and something like the value increase/decrease of a factions strength in the past week of game time would be great.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on February 08, 2012, 02:04:58 PM
Would it be possible to have slightly more information on the Faction Strength screen? I like to know what's generally going on with the war as a whole and something like the value increase/decrease of a factions strength in the past week of game time would be great.
Good idea, although you have occasional "strength decreased/increased" messages. Additional info in the report screen on weekly change would be about right.
It would be best to have running info presented like a stock market ticker tape on the main screen.
(Hint: Mordor is a strong buy) :D
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on February 10, 2012, 10:09:24 PM
Is the 'party spwan rate' in 3.1 changed, I wonder?
It seems it's even harder to finish those destroy parties quest.
There used to have a tons of Mordor War Party around- now there are only a few at a time.

Can it be made that the quest only require the player to destory some enemy faction's party, and specific types?
I'm thinking of changing this quest to "kill X strength points worth of enemy faction parties, regardless of party type"
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Castratikron on February 11, 2012, 03:53:37 PM
Suggestion: Include Arnor and parts of Eriador. I know these regions aren't necessarily included in the Great War, but it'd make the mod so much more interesting. Also, this would add Rivendell, Bree, the Shire, maybe even the Grey Havens, and other locations mentioned in the novels, perhaps Tom Bombadil's house as well :green:.

I know this would make a large portion of the game map seemingly void of evil factions, but, if the mod is based on the book, then you could make an evil subfaction of maybe stuff from the Barrow Downs or the evil men who take over the Shire and such. This would give the player many more options when it comes to how and where they want to play the game.

I know this would mean creating a whole region and multiple factions, but it'd really give the mod an entire new feel.

Yeah, not gonna happen.  +1
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Wowwars on February 11, 2012, 07:29:38 PM
^ Maybe for Mount & blade 2? Also would u ever remove the damn vertification really annoying me
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on February 12, 2012, 12:51:28 AM
Is the 'party spwan rate' in 3.1 changed, I wonder?
It seems it's even harder to finish those destroy parties quest.
There used to have a tons of Mordor War Party around- now there are only a few at a time.

Can it be made that the quest only require the player to destory some enemy faction's party, and specific types?
I'm thinking of changing this quest to "kill X strength points worth of enemy faction parties, regardless of party type"
Ah nice.
Looking forward to that.

BTW the verification is the whole forum's setting AFAIK.
Just be more active and post some more and you can get a 'pass' in that- and no more fuss.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Talinn on February 12, 2012, 06:51:09 AM
........................I'm thinking of changing this quest to "kill X strength points worth of enemy faction parties, regardless of party type"

That is a great idea!
It would really allow the player to 'tailor' the quest to their own style of play and current character/party abillity.
Many times this quest is unattainable due to reduced faction strength.

Would it still only apply to engagements begun by the player, or would it include battles that the player's party joined?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on February 12, 2012, 07:19:07 AM
(http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/6396/mountblade2012021213003.th.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/714/mountblade2012021213003.png/)

I still feel a bit like the war in the North is pretty unbalanced. 2v1 is fine, Rhun vs. Dale/Erebor is a challenge but this is just crazy. 4 factions Lord's just sticking together and alternatively steamrolling the Rhun/Gundabad hosts. I'm not quite sure how we managed to raze Iron Hills Quarry but within about 30 seconds of doing so these lot rolled up. It'd be great if this kind of behaviour could be reduced somewhat - all I can do is run away and leave my friendly hosts to die since there's pretty much no possibility I could ever win this large an engagement. It just takes away part of the fun when the odds are stacked this much against the player and even trying to fight is a guaranteed way to lose all your men.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on February 12, 2012, 07:44:28 AM
Both Rhun and Gundabad should probably have a lot more lords - that's the best way to increase their military presence on the map. Their parties and garrisons were buffed in 3.01, then 3.1, but that's still not enough.
The North Rhovanion theatre is unbalanced, as you said, it's 4 versus 2. And the 2 are supposed to be doing the invading.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: thecalaquendi on February 13, 2012, 02:28:30 AM
I would suggest:

1. Bringing rank points and influence gain back up to its previous level.

2. Gaining rank points with the closest friendly faction when you defeat enemy parties single-handed.  At the moment you only gain rank points if you help an ally in a battle.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: thecalaquendi on February 13, 2012, 02:44:07 AM
I'd like to see more companions! If it's possible, I think it would be nice to have at least one companion per faction/race. It was a little disappointing that there's only one Dwarf companion (And he looks kind of lame to me. I don't like his orange hair! >_>) and only one Elf, aside from the spoiler companion that I won't name!

Maybe you could start a thread asking for idea's on new companions. Have people come up with a character, a look, and a small bio that would fit in Middle Earth. The best one's could be implemented into the game and such.

Just a suggestion! And you can completely dismiss this if you've already said nay to new companion's or if this would be too complicated to do. (:


Are you talking about Glorfindel or some other *hidden* companion? If so can you tell who this spoiler companion is?

Edit: sorry double post...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on February 13, 2012, 04:38:25 AM
I'd like to see more companions! If it's possible, I think it would be nice to have at least one companion per faction/race. It was a little disappointing that there's only one Dwarf companion (And he looks kind of lame to me. I don't like his orange hair! >_>) and only one Elf, aside from the spoiler companion that I won't name!

Maybe you could start a thread asking for idea's on new companions. Have people come up with a character, a look, and a small bio that would fit in Middle Earth. The best one's could be implemented into the game and such.

Just a suggestion! And you can completely dismiss this if you've already said nay to new companion's or if this would be too complicated to do. (:


Are you talking about Glorfindel or some other *hidden* companion? If so can you tell who this spoiler companion is?

Edit: sorry double post...
Glorfindel indeed.
And maybe the hidden companion hidden.... which everyone knows. :green:
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: GetAssista on February 13, 2012, 06:29:05 AM
No new companions for now.
Unless somebody goes and writes a set of good enough dialogs for those. Instructions on what strings to fill were long available on forum.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on February 13, 2012, 07:36:37 AM
Suggestion: Include Arnor and parts of Eriador. I know these regions aren't necessarily included in the Great War, but it'd make the mod so much more interesting. Also, this would add Rivendell, Bree, the Shire, maybe even the Grey Havens, and other locations mentioned in the novels, perhaps Tom Bombadil's house as well :green:.

I know this would make a large portion of the game map seemingly void of evil factions, but, if the mod is based on the book, then you could make an evil subfaction of maybe stuff from the Barrow Downs or the evil men who take over the Shire and such. This would give the player many more options when it comes to how and where they want to play the game.

I know this would mean creating a whole region and multiple factions, but it'd really give the mod an entire new feel.

Yeah, not gonna happen.  +1

Probably this is asking for too much. 

Maybe, however, an alternative could be to build a city called Hobbiton and have hobbits roam around there.  Maybe certain "special" missions could start there and if you complete them then you would get double the influence points from Rivendell. 

Just some ideas...

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on February 13, 2012, 07:45:00 AM
As we said many times before - it would be a huge amount of work and it's completely unnecessary for the war of the ring, which this mod is about.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Sp00nlord on February 13, 2012, 07:48:02 AM
Both Rhun and Gundabad should probably have a lot more lords - that's the best way to increase their military presence on the map. Their parties and garrisons were buffed in 3.01, then 3.1, but that's still not enough.
The North Rhovanion theatre is unbalanced, as you said, it's 4 versus 2. And the 2 are supposed to be doing the invading.

I think it's a tough situation. I mean given that Dale/Erebor did defeat the Easterlings in the lore (just) then their forces should generally be in a position to eventually defeat Rhun with no intervention from the player. But then again I believe Erebor was besieged so some reflection of that has to be given. I think I've posited this before so apologies for repeating myself but I think the best solution, where possible, would be to somewhat separate the far North theatre into two. In the same way that the Rivendell/Lothlorien hosts don't ride any further North than against Dol Guldor perhaps Mirkwood and the Boernings could be focused more on Gundabad.

Maybe to this end the evil camps could be moved a bit - the Dol Guldor mirkwood camp means that Lothlorien hosts campaign that far north, whilst the Rhun hosts get distracted trying to siege the Woodsmen camps and end up overwhelmed. I always got the feel of the War of the Ring that the strategy of Sauron was all about isolating his enemies and stopping them from helping each other and for me right now this just isn't quite right in the northern theatres. The evil factions could definitely do with a few more lords though and/or greater numbers. Gunda have 3 lords who generally sit on around 220/90/90 and even just facing Mirkwood who have 210/100/100 ish it's pretty desperate. The great thing with the war/faction strength system you guys have is that, I noticed as Rohan, as you start to win the war more and more of your lords come into play - it was a great sight seeing Thoeden with the entire Rohan army behind him when they went over 9000.

Anyway I'm most likely contributing little at this point - I'm sure you'll do well to fix it when the chance emerges. It's still plenty playable and certainly gives the player an option for a really tough game. My last Rhun game on 3.01 was great fun though, challenging but enjoyable. It obviously did stagnate as most games did though on 3.01. I shall battle onwards in 3.1 and try my best to win. That Iron Hills Quarry has gone down is already a positive (Just under 50 days too) so at least the war is showing itself to be far more active than before.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Smile on February 13, 2012, 11:54:45 AM
Seems to be i missed this topic :). Suggestions -
a) Button "Start siege" :). Or working conversation with kings about sieges. Or both. Without lowest faction strength, or, maybe, on levels "fair" or "weakened". Or treaty about siege with kings on that levels and "Start siege" on lowest.
b) Lowered influence prices for NPC's (or resource based hiring).
c) Forced charge for AI if in my army >70% archers or some randomness between charge or usual tactic in this.
d) More points of influence/rank points if i win big armies.

And about balance - i think, evil factions must be overpowered if player choose good side (they should defeat good factions with time without player activity), and vice versa.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: vota dc on February 13, 2012, 01:34:54 PM
I think it's a tough situation. I mean given that Dale/Erebor did defeat the Easterlings in the lore (just) then their forces should generally be in a position to eventually defeat Rhun with no intervention from the player.

Wasn't because "they lost their heart"?

Haradrim 3:1 against Rohirrim, after their leader is slained by Theoden scatter.
Dunlendings surrender because Gandalf scare them and because they realize Saruman deceived them. Eventually they would lose as well, but they didn't try a last stand.
Dunlendings failed at Wulf time because Wulf was slained by a small host at the hand of Helm's nephew: simply the coalition (Dunlending and some river folk) collapsed. Never undestood why Helm never tought about that: he just hoped to babysitter Gondor intervention and hide in the fortress while his son tried to fight to preserve at least Edoras.

With the last stage of the war the lost heart argument is still more valid. I doubt that without the destruction of the ring and with both their king dead and Dale under enemy control, it would be possible to pass from a siege to kick home easterlings.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: thecalaquendi on February 13, 2012, 02:12:08 PM
I'd like to see more companions! If it's possible, I think it would be nice to have at least one companion per faction/race. It was a little disappointing that there's only one Dwarf companion (And he looks kind of lame to me. I don't like his orange hair! >_>) and only one Elf, aside from the spoiler companion that I won't name!

Maybe you could start a thread asking for idea's on new companions. Have people come up with a character, a look, and a small bio that would fit in Middle Earth. The best one's could be implemented into the game and such.

Just a suggestion! And you can completely dismiss this if you've already said nay to new companion's or if this would be too complicated to do. (:


Are you talking about Glorfindel or some other *hidden* companion? If so can you tell who this spoiler companion is?

Edit: sorry double post...
Glorfindel indeed.
And maybe the hidden companion hidden.... which everyone knows. :green:

Ok... so is there really a "hidden" companion, or are you just taunting me?  :P
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Dwarf on February 13, 2012, 08:06:04 PM
I mean given that Dale/Erebor did defeat the Easterlings in the lore (just) then their forces should generally be in a position to eventually defeat Rhun with no intervention from the player. But then again I believe Erebor was besieged so some reflection of that has to be given.
They only won after the ring was destroyed, same goes for Dol Guldur.
When a lord loses a battle he respawns with full troops making him likely to win the next battle. But when a lord rests he takes days to regain his troops. Maybe let the regain rate when resting increase higher? This may hasten the war as they sometimes takes a long time to rest.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on February 13, 2012, 11:56:32 PM
And about balance - i think, evil factions must be overpowered if player choose good side (they should defeat good factions with time without player activity), and vice versa.

I agree wholeheartedly. The first half of Isengard-Rohan war (before it comes to a standstill) is a good example of how things should develop, at least on the Mordor-Gondor front.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: thecalaquendi on February 14, 2012, 01:14:29 AM
And about balance - i think, evil factions must be overpowered if player choose good side (they should defeat good factions with time without player activity), and vice versa.

I agree wholeheartedly. The first half of Isengard-Rohan war (before it comes to a standstill) is a good example of how things should develop, at least on the Mordor-Gondor front.

In my games (playing as good), Rohan usually gets butchered.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on February 14, 2012, 02:40:24 AM
Yeah, that's exactly what should be happening.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Dwarf on February 14, 2012, 09:02:11 AM
Yeah, that's exactly what should be happening.
Like you said, but due to the AI, after the initial butchering, nothing much happens. Armies don't venture beyond their camps and with Westfold/Emnet gone, the armies of Rohan and Isengard seldom meet each other as their patrols don't overlap. Same with Gondor and Mordor.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on February 14, 2012, 09:48:17 AM
Yeah, that's exactly what should be happening.
Like you said, but due to the AI, after the initial butchering, nothing much happens. Armies don't venture beyond their camps and with Westfold/Emnet gone, the armies of Rohan and Isengard seldom meet each other as their patrols don't overlap. Same with Gondor and Mordor.
I get the feeling you guys will be happy only if we forgot about faction strength, strategic ebb and flow, and totally scripted what happens at strategic level. Like in a movie, only you get to click on the screen. :)
The problem is, there's got to be balance. You don't want to overwhelm a good player with disasters and wipe out Rohan and Gondor in a few months. But you don't want an endless stalemate too. So, there we are, somewhere in the middle.
We also had to lower the number of spawned parties on the map, so we delay/prevent the 200+ day save corruption. The downside is there are fewer parties that roam the map and fewer battles to join than before. So, there are less things to do, but you don't suddenly lose your campaign.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Dwarf on February 14, 2012, 10:03:38 AM
I get the feeling you guys will be happy only if we forgot about faction strength, strategic ebb and flow, and totally scripted what happens at strategic level. Like in a movie, only you get to click on the screen. :)
The problem is, there's got to be balance. You don't want to overwhelm a good player with disasters and wipe out Rohan and Gondor in a few months. But you don't want an endless stalemate too. So, there we are, somewhere in the middle.
Seems like an endless stalemate now. Is it possible for Gondor and Rohan to fall below 2000 without player intervention? After the initial bloodletting, Gondor and Rohan actually grow stronger with king Theoden occasionally venturing out, sometimes only with his 12 bodyguards.  They went from 2000+ to 4000+ while Mordor/Isengard ignore them and only patrol their own land.
And with Gondor/Rohan gone, the game isn't over.  :D
If I wait 2 years, will Gondor/Rohan still be around waiting for me to save them?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on February 14, 2012, 11:18:17 AM
The balance is different if you are a good or an evil player. If you are evil, evil parties have 50% strength in AI battles, and faction regeneration penalties, while Gondor and Rohan regenerate slightly more quickly, so they are not likely to get defeated by themselves.
Try playing as a good player (no evil side handicaps), and you'll likely see Gondor and Rohan going down.
There are a lot of random factors, but that's what would happen most of the time.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on February 14, 2012, 12:40:10 PM
I get the feeling you guys will be happy only if we forgot about faction strength, strategic ebb and flow, and totally scripted what happens at strategic level. Like in a movie, only you get to click on the screen. :)
The problem is, there's got to be balance. You don't want to overwhelm a good player with disasters and wipe out Rohan and Gondor in a few months. But you don't want an endless stalemate too. So, there we are, somewhere in the middle.

Oh, I think we're pretty happy with the mod, just discussing how to make it better. I actually do believe that it's OK to overwhelm a good player with disasters and wipe out Rohan and Gondor in a few months (around 200 (erroneously wrote 300 here) days sounds like a better number, BTW). That would make for a very dynamic and challenging game. Perhaps, some kind of strategic difficulty levels can be introduced in some future patch? So that those who actually want to face the evil blitz would have a chance to do so.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Wowwars on February 14, 2012, 07:27:36 PM
I get the feeling you guys will be happy only if we forgot about faction strength, strategic ebb and flow, and totally scripted what happens at strategic level. Like in a movie, only you get to click on the screen. :)
The problem is, there's got to be balance. You don't want to overwhelm a good player with disasters and wipe out Rohan and Gondor in a few months. But you don't want an endless stalemate too. So, there we are, somewhere in the middle.

Oh, I think we're pretty happy with the mod, just discussing how to make it better. I actually do believe that it's OK to overwhelm a good player with disasters and wipe out Rohan and Gondor in a few months (around 300 days sounds like a better number, BTW). That would make for a very dynamic and challenging game. Perhaps, some kind of strategic difficulty levels can be introduced in some future patch? So that those who actually want to face the evil blitz would have a chance to do so.

That really should be added.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Dwarf on February 14, 2012, 10:00:45 PM
The balance is different if you are a good or an evil player. If you are evil, evil parties have 50% strength in AI battles, and faction regeneration penalties, while Gondor and Rohan regenerate slightly more quickly, so they are not likely to get defeated by themselves.
Try playing as a good player (no evil side handicaps), and you'll likely see Gondor and Rohan going down.
There are a lot of random factors, but that's what would happen most of the time.
As a good guy:
At above 4000 strength the lords of Rohan and Isen/Dun goes around sieging each other, this results in a lot of combat with Rohan eventually falling below 4000.
Then Rohan goes on defensive since AI defends its camps, this result in battles between lords until all 3 camps of Rohan are taken. Rohan strength is around 2000+ now. The 4 remaining Rohan camps will not be sieged until Rohan reaches below 2000, Edoras and Hornburg needs to be below 1000.
At this point, Isen/Dun could not siege so they patrol their camps, Rohan likewise do the same and slowly regain their strength. As their lords seldom meet each other it is a stalemate.
Gondor at the start loses their one city, eventually this results in them reaching 2000+ strength. With no other cities to siege, Mordor patrols their own camps. Gondor lords hide in the southwest, occasionally fights around their hidden ranger camp and near the river. Gondor slowly regains their strength.

(http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn142/MightyMoose888/one/31g.jpg)
Day 172 as Erebor where I ignore Gondor and Rohan, occasionally I rode down south to capture and rescue prisoners. Gondor and Rohan strength has risen from 2000+.
The AI cycle:
Lords rarely fight unless there is a siege going on. When a friendly camp that is in its theater is attacked, lords will ride out in defense of the camp. When an enemy camp is available for siege, lords ride out to attack it, but only one faction will siege it. So when Gondor falls below 2000, I see 4 simultaneous sieges by its 4 attacking factions. As only 1 faction will siege an outpost, and many factions will defend its allies, this favors the defenders. But the attackers will tend to go for the nearest enemy camp and will only stop if another faction sieges first, so sometimes you get multiple attacker factions attacking defenders when they are on route to their destination.
Seldom, lords will ride to aid its allies when they are in battle.
So there will be lots of fighting until:
Factions drop below 4000 where they stop sieging. This is not the issue but rather:
Factions ran out of places to siege, in which case, they patrol their own homes forever and ever. This is the scenario in the above screenshot, though Gondor and Rohan should be able to siege now as they are above 4000, I'm guessing they could not gather enough troops to win against the 9000+ opponents.
Until the player comes in and by himself, camp and grind the Gondor/Rohan until 2000 or 1000 and their allies suddenly rush it to siege the available camps.
An evil solution: restrict lords from hiding in their castles for sometime. Even if all the enemy lords camp outside their enemy camp, if the AI pops out, then runs back it in, it is a stalemate.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on February 14, 2012, 10:51:01 PM
So we basically need either the lords to hunt and fight each other like they did in TLD for 0.808, or the siege rating requirements dropped drastically, so as to get rid of stalemate situations. I don't know if the first solution is at all possible, as it requires modifications to the AI, but the second one would require making fortresses better protected and more durable (which would be nice, BTW).

Alternatively, the rating system needs to be tweaked in such a way as to stop the half-defeated factions from regenerating - perhaps, this can be tied somehow to the territorial control, i.e. if Isengard dominates (has more strength in terms of soldier-levels in parties in the region) half of Rohirrim regions, Rohan's rating falls gradually, rather then rises.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Brandis of Gondor on February 15, 2012, 06:02:23 AM
something weird: isn't Saruman wanting to take the ring for himself not just "allies with Mordor"
I think he should be at war with everybody except Dunnish men.

No, he's officially a servant of Sauron even in the books. Yes, he wants the ring, but the war of the two towers starts only after the good factions are defeated.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on February 16, 2012, 12:26:16 PM
AFAIK, the current level of faction strength reduction per battle is effectively doubled for the battles where the player helps his allies, probably because of double counting. I suggest leaving this level of strength reduction (removing the double counting, of course) and extending it to battles where the player isn't helping anyone. The war gets much more dynamic that way and there is almost no need for a dull and repetitive grinding (camp under the capital, wait for lord, kill lord, rinse, repeat - that sort of stuff), the war actually plays out more or less like the war should play out.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on February 16, 2012, 02:04:27 PM
AFAIK, the current level of faction strength reduction per battle is effectively doubled for the battles where the player helps his allies, probably because of double counting. I suggest leaving this level of strength reduction (removing the double counting, of course) and extending it to battles where the player isn't helping anyone. The war gets much more dynamic that way and there is almost no need for a dull and repetitive grinding (camp under the capital, wait for lord, kill lord, rinse, repeat - that sort of stuff), the war actually plays out more or less like the war should play out.
It already works that way. In AI battles, the losing faction loses faction strength (the number depends on party type that was destroyed) and the winner gets half that value.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on February 16, 2012, 10:55:54 PM
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear enough. What I am suggesting is to leave the double rating losses both for battles in which the player is helping his allies and to institute them for battles in which no allies are participating and the player only has his party.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MountainBlade on February 17, 2012, 07:02:59 PM
 I have come to the "grinding" phase that people have mentioned and have been wondering if this would be possible to reduce it.
yes, will definitly look into reducing grind issue in next patch. This seems like the biggest letdown so far

If a faction has no scouting/raider/war parties, if you defeat a general, or the factions leader could it reduce their strength 5x more than it normally would?

I found that Dol Gunder has reached a point where they have no random parties, just their generals, so there is not much to defeat to lower their strength quickly. The generals however only patrol around their bases, and my allies are far enough away in their advance camps they very rarely ever engage each other. So it is up to me to take Dol Gunder from 4500 to under 2000, when defeating a general seems to lower strength by about 100-160.

I don't know if my solution is even possible to code in, but it was the only thing I could come up with that hopefully wouldn't disrupt the normal run of play too much, but would allow a player to take down a faction quicker once they reached a point where they were not a threat to anyone.


Also I feel a need to suck up to the devs because I absolutely love this mod, and it kills me that it seems the majority of posts that you guys see come off as negative. You guys should look into adding a compliments thread to go along with the bugs and suggestions so the players have an outlet for all their HAPPY AWESOME POSITIVE emotions about the game to come out.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on February 19, 2012, 10:42:09 AM
How about deleting Beornings from the list of Rhun initial enemies? They have low faction strength, so Rhun lords, instead of fighting the already very tough war against the Dale and Erebor, start crossing half the map to besiege Beorning fortresses and get defeated by all the 4 northern good factions swarming up on them. Rhun vs. Dale and Erebor war is already very hard, Beornings are way too much and they're nowhere near the place anyway.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: The Yogi on February 21, 2012, 04:47:36 AM
Very small suggestion regarding the get scrap metal quest -

I seem to get low quality metal scraps only at the very beginning of the game, don't know why (because of poor looting skill, perhaps?) so it is very annoying if a get the quest for low quality scrap and cannot fulfill it with the tons of good or serviceable quality scraps I get all the time.

So my suggestion is simply to have the quest accept the desired quality or better, instead of just the desired quality.
yup, that's my plan too
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: vota dc on February 21, 2012, 10:55:57 AM
How about deleting Beornings from the list of Rhun initial enemies? They have low faction strength, so Rhun lords, instead of fighting the already very tough war against the Dale and Erebor, start crossing half the map to besiege Beorning fortresses and get defeated by all the 4 northern good factions swarming up on them. Rhun vs. Dale and Erebor war is already very hard, Beornings are way too much and they're nowhere near the place anyway.

But Beorning should send troops in Rhun land. I am agree that Mirkwood shouldn't be involved much in this war and should focus more on northern orcs.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on February 21, 2012, 01:04:17 PM
But Beorning should send troops in Rhun land. I am agree that Mirkwood shouldn't be involved much in this war and should focus more on northern orcs.

I disagree completely. Beornings are half the map away, while Mirkwood elves are close by - if anyone of them did have to attack Rhun, it would be Mirkwood. Anyway, neither send their troops to Rhun camps and that's good, as 7 hosts of Dale and Erebor against 4 Rhun hosts already creates a strategic imbalance. But Rhun lords' marching to Beorning lands overcomplicates the already very tough war. And for the good player it weakens Rhun too much. They are by no means a strong faction, they shouldn't overstretch themselves this way.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: thecalaquendi on February 21, 2012, 11:43:24 PM
When you capture an enemy general, you should also be given the option of executing him.

Well, you are a faction's soldier, you not on your own. And your superiors want this important prisoner alive :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Mage246 on February 26, 2012, 06:42:53 AM
Top rank for each faction should give a small amount of influence per week (or day if week is impossible).

At that level you're basically a living legend and an inspiration for the faction - and your legend and fame grows with each passing day even if you're off on the other side of the map saving some other faction. It would also make it less necessary to grind for influence at the top levels to get all of the reward items/give orders (at this point I almost never give orders because I'm so starved for influence that it seems like a bad investment). At that point, you're strong enough that the only obstacle is time and the availability of enemy parties to farm - so I don't think it's really taking anything out of the game to reduce the amount of farming required.
+1. Thinking on it
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on February 26, 2012, 10:02:42 AM
There are already other weekly bonus in place IIRC.

And yes, make make the higher levels more than insignifican RPs- at that point you get the the 'Hero' place, RP is very easy to come by.
100k+ of Gondor RP in my Gondor char, and increasing. And I don't even know what to do with them.
The 10+ levels would grant more influence other than RP will make a difference, and worth the grind much more.

So maybe Lv9 still RP, and Lv10 start awarding IP?

Future plan is to limit RP growth and amount. Since this is an allowance from your faction, not real money purse, your king will find it unreasonable to keep giving you more when you did not use what's there.
IP with higher level is a very nice idea yes, high level guys need to be spared of grind somewhat and given means to see the fullness of the game.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Mage246 on February 26, 2012, 03:58:05 PM
Another suggestion I have is to change the way training X troops works. Currently they have you train up to the highest tier of troops - the problem is that this is usually way too difficult to be worth it (especially for elvish factions). The 4th tier of troops is usually level 30, as is the 5th. So unless you have high trainer skill and higher than level 30, you wont be training tier 5 troops except through combat, and even then it will happen very very slowly (I'm carrying around some tier 4 troops that haven't leveled in like 100 days). Doesn't help that the troop requested often doesn't mesh well with your army composition (I'm looking at you Erebor), so you don't really want to use them in combat and they die in droves if you do.

IMHO, training quests shouldn't require you to go higher than tier 4. High enough that it's not super easy, but not so high that it's unrealistic. Right now I always refuse to take these kinds of quests, but they never stop offering them. My companions all have lots of training (my main doesn't), but they're all under level 30 so it doesn't make a difference. I suppose once I have Glorfindel it could get a bit easier, but that seems a bit excessive for a quest they've been offering since the beginning.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on February 27, 2012, 09:26:54 AM
A sudden thought: is it possible to make a script to 'reforge' or 'upgrade' some equipments?
It would be great if the player can spend RPs to get the 'special' Smiths (at the Capital if that matters),
To 'upgrade' the equipment (like from normal to Masterwork).
(And 'reforge' the starting equipment for the lol)

Just to throw away RPs, and make the 'Steward's Smith', 'King's Smith' live up to it's name.

Good idea.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Herumarath on March 04, 2012, 10:35:47 AM
I agree with what others have said with regards to Influence rewards once you break the top tier of ranks.  Especially in the new build IP are so hard to come by that the grind to get gear can be painful, and going after companions is just unrealistic.  150 IP for Galmyne, when troll kill quests only award you a paltry 7 points?  By the time I reach the rank needed to unlock her I have a whopping 20.  The prospect of climbing to the top ranks with more than one faction, giving you the option of leading a hybrid army with the kind of gear that befits a hero with the support of nations, has gone from daunting challenge to soul crushing impossibility.  If I still wanted to spend that kind of time grinding for the top gear in a game, I would go back to WoW raids.  I'd actually prefer to go back to getting companions with RP, so that they aren't in conflict with the high level gear.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: GondorKnight on March 05, 2012, 04:24:40 AM
It's getting a overhaul- at least the value are going to be reviewed.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: the_scotsman on March 09, 2012, 11:39:28 PM
I'm really happy with this mod in general, it's incredibly true to the books and the level of detail put into it is simply astounding.

Gameplay-wise, it's similarly fantastic except for an issue that's brought up time and time again, the fact that there's no way for the player to initiate a siege battle.

It's true that this poses an issue game balance wise, since the war would be over in a matter of days if the player could initiate sieges all over the place, and the game would lose a whole lot of its strategic ebb and flow.

In its current incarnation, the AI will initiate sieges when a faction drops below a certain strength, as I understand, the cities will become "vulnerable to attack" if, for instance, the strength falls below 2000. Right now the player has no way to know which cities will become possible to attack when and has no control over which faction initiates a siege. (It's always frustrating when a major city becomes vulnerable and the mighty might of the Dunlendings steps up to the plate before Saruman's hordes can take advantage, and they spend forever camping outside the gates while the White Hand does nothing)

One possible fix to this issue might be to add a new command available with Influence. Some of the best moments in Lord of the Rings come about when a general rides out to take a city, calling forth the combined might of whichever empire he represents- Saruman's hosts marching on Helm's deep, the combined might of Mordor sweeping through East Osgiliath and on towards Minas Tirith.

Why not let the pinnacle of achievement in The Last Days be putting that power in the hands of the player? Once they've attained sufficient rank, amassed huge wells of influence and curried favor and trust with their chosen lord, let them lead the march against one of the enemy's vulnerable strongholds.

There would have to be some kind of notification when a faction's strength has waned enough to make certain outposts or settlements ripe for conquer, and obviously the price of the Lord's blessing would be high, requiring maybe 50,000 resource points and 50 influence, as well as a minimum rank for the player-lower if he only wants to lead the charge against a minor outpost, but much, much higher if the player wants to lay siege to an enemy capital.

Once the player has the go-ahead, any of the major armies of the nation would be issued a "follow" order when they come within sight of the player, and he would be unable to initiate combat or follow other minor quests until the siege is completed.

This might also be a good way to implement a more permanent punishment for failure for the player. Rather than just losing their own host, failing in a siege with the king's blessing would cost the player in Rank points as well as cause a large hit to faction strength.

I hope this doesn't seem like just another poorly thought out plea for wanton player lead sieges, I understand the mod's goal of having a more gradual strategic flow of the war, rather than Native M&B's unstructured, unrealistic chaos. The system as implemented so far is an interesting concept but it does tend to put the player somewhat in the back seat of things as well as robbing the mod of a little bit of LOTR's characteristic epic scope. The concept could even be modified to let the player lead an army to lift the siege of a city, or to call in a nation's allies if the player is a high enough rank with another faction besides his native one for even more strength.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Grothag on March 10, 2012, 12:10:43 AM
+1 The idea is good, although it can be "polished" a little and some things I believe are not possible, but indeed - the player in the late game, being 1 of the best(if not the best) commanders the faction have, should be able to initiate and lead at least some of the sieges, at the expense of a big amount of influence and considerable hit, if he fails to do it in some time period(ex 10 days).

Also I want to propose s'thing - isn't it possible to permit the player, who plays as human at least, to enter enemies cities/camps(or at least the human ones) as a spy, probably for a quest? There were spies in the books - the Southerners in Bree, Grima in Edoras, the Hobbits :P
I really miss this function, as I want to look through all those beautiful scenes you've made, but I really dislike playing with the good factions(it feels good to be bad :P), especially the human ones, so the only option is, to make a good guy just for sightseeing(or modding  ::)). Also this can spice up the things a little bit.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: repzaj1234 on March 10, 2012, 12:58:07 AM
Make the siege gates more passable, I was waving to Uruks just standing there in front of a broken gate. Also make the siege reinforcements spawn a bit farther from the walls. Siege warfare is like wall war, people just crowd to the wall for like 80% of the battle.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Wowwars on March 12, 2012, 03:54:18 PM
Yeah what the top dude said, but a more popular issue of maybe making sieges happen for good more often like if you play good and lets say have a feature/or/Submod(idk which would be better) to turn on the evil hordes and make good be quicker to fall in the west? like i really want to actually see a Edoras Minas & Helms deep siege as defender point of view.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: bearlyfunctional on March 12, 2012, 07:44:57 PM
Yeah what the top dude said, but a more popular issue of maybe making sieges happen for good more often like if you play good and lets say have a feature/or/Submod(idk which would be better) to turn on the evil hordes and make good be quicker to fall in the west? like i really want to actually see a Edoras Minas & Helms deep siege as defender point of view.

Totally agree. I was kind of waiting for it to happen on its own as a Lothlorien elf, but we elves don't get threatened too much by evil forces up by the misty mountains and I wanted to hunt some orcs. I was curious to see if Rohan would fall, but East Emnet and West Emnet and Westfold fell and then nothing else happened. It's almost like the evil forces take Cair Andros, Rohan towns, etc. and good forces knock out some Rhun, Gundabad, and Dol Guldur towns regardless of player and then the player has to make up the difference. Not a complaint, just an observation.

I think it would be very interesting to make both sides more aggressive, like Native more, but give the side opposite the player a heavy numerical or otherwise advantage, putting the player's side on the defensive at the beginning, but making it easier for him to conquer after he restores military balance. I feel like there's support lore-wise too since in the books Minas Tirith, Helm's Deep, Lothlorien, Dale, Erebor etc. were all at one point or another under attack in the books. And if the player were evil, well it's no fun if it's no challenge, but massacring innocents repeatedly can lose its charm with no results.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Phoenixlee on March 13, 2012, 12:35:55 AM
Thanks for that, it's much appreciated!
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: TheVigilante on March 13, 2012, 09:14:32 PM
Freakin' fantastic mod! I absolutely love the atmosphere and the detail. Bravo.

I looked and couldn't find any reference to this, so please excuse me if this has been mentioned before... was hoping there might be plans to implement a persistent minimap during battles so you don't need to bring up the command interface; similar to other mods like Fire Arrow have used.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Grothag on March 13, 2012, 11:44:33 PM
Quote
I looked and couldn't find any reference to this, so please excuse me if this has been mentioned before... was hoping there might be plans to implement a persistent minimap during battles so you don't need to bring up the command interface; similar to other mods like Fire Arrow have used.

Great idea and very useful one. Also I might add there were s'where a mod, that adds topography to the mini map, which makes the things a lot better.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on March 15, 2012, 10:23:47 AM
Would something like a game length option be possible?  As in option that would reduce the starting and maximum strength of all factions say to 1/2 and maybe 1/4.  Also scale the ratings i.e. Strong would be 4000+/2000+/1000+ depending on the game length you choose. 

I'm just not a big fan of 'grinding'.  For me once you hit the point you've built your killer army and refined your tactics the challenge is gone.  Then it's just matter of killing the same hosts over and over and over.

Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Wowwars on March 15, 2012, 05:10:00 PM
or just add a sauron host of 2000 elite mordor units :) + trolls
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: EasyEight on March 18, 2012, 07:18:31 AM
I've seen these request before, just hoping for an update. I'm playing in the Dwarves faction now, love 'em, and was hoping that:

1. The camera height will be adjusted to dwarf height so you can see your character and get a Dwarf's eye view

2. The war mattock/pick has a thrusting attribute listed, but it will not thrust

3. More leaders and special characters for the Dwarves

Oh, and how many battles must I play where I'm spending countless minutes chasing down some riderless Wargs after shooting their riders out of the saddle?? That's a real drag on the game. I suggest that Wargs have some sort of aggro timer on them, that after a certain time period of being (a) riderless and (b) not within aggro range or in combat, that they stop counting as an active enemy (like a horse does) so a battle can end more efficiently.

Thanks again for a fantastic mod!!
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on March 18, 2012, 11:54:54 AM
Influence, I think it would be nice to get 1 point each time you take out a host singlehanded.  When I was playing Rohan I hit the point where all the lords wouldn't leave their towns and the scouts and patrols would, and rightly so, run away from enemy hosts.  It's a little disheartening to take out multiple hosts for the grand reward of 1 rank point each.

Companions, what's their purpose?  The cheapest one I've seen so far costs 15 Influence points.  By the time I've got even that much Influence I don't need a companion as I've already spent points on Surgery, Pathfinding, etc...  It'd be nice to be able get one fairly cheap low level companion to help take some of the skill load off the player.

edit>Found Lueven(sp?) in Mirkwood, that's a little more like it.  Personally I'd prefer see one or two companions, at most three, for each faction that would only join a player in their faction.

Weapons and armor, lot of inconsistencies.  For example Elven spears can't be used on horseback while the longer, higher damage Gondor and Rohan spears can.  Some spears can only thrust while others at about the same size have multiple attacks.  Mirkwood Royal Spearman and Archer helms have the same stats but the Archer helm costs ~190 more.  Etc., etc...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on March 20, 2012, 06:45:28 AM
I would like to see, if possible, the option to have one of your soldiers form a party that follows you.  This would in turn allow for the player to have more control in terms of battles and eventually winning the war.

Detractors may disagree with this idea.  First, in lore it doesn't necessarily speak about a hero having multiple armies following them around and secondly it would give too much power to the player.

To the first I would respond in that there are stories of armies following another in the Tolkien's lore (as opposed to them working together as one large army).  Secondly, if there was a certain price given to the soldiers in the party (e.g. they cost 4x the normal amount) then this would limit the additional parties, size of the parties and type of troops held within them.
Finally, I would liken this concept to that of a "grand marshal" idea to where you are the highest of all ranks of that given kingdom (e.g. Rohan).  Then you should be able to do more damage and have more troops, including those that want to follow you but cannot enter your party.  Additionally, you could keep an area patrolled while you're off fighting elsewhere.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on March 22, 2012, 09:44:07 AM
If possible could the strategic AI be tweaked so the AI lords won't leave their city when they only have 10 men?  I've seen this a lot especially on the 'good' side.  The lords will go on patrol or leave their city to chase some scouts only to get swamped by multiple enemies and defeated.  I suspect this is why the good lords usually die at a higher rate.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Carthean on March 25, 2012, 07:43:57 PM
Hi guys. I just wanted to say firstly that you've done a magnificent job turning mount and blade into the world of middle earth during the War of the Ring.

I can't remember where I saw this (I know I did somewhere on this forum), but someone suggested that the fellowship be included as well as the timeline of the books. I wanted to expand on this.

There should be two versions - the first being the regular sandbox like we have now in 3.1. Maybe in the menu when you start a game, call it, 'The War of the Ring'?

The second version would be the one on the timeline of the books. Maybe call it, "The Lord of the Rings'? Anyway, you start out in your respective area in May, and things happen whether you affect the strengths of the faction or not. So, Mordor takes East Osgiliath in June, Theodred is killed at the Battle of the Ford in February, the Fellowship appears in Lothlorien in February and breaks up in Parth Galen, and so forth.

The way the player has an effect in this version is different. Instead of grinding down enemy parties to lower faction strengths, the goal is to level up, get good equipment, and raise a party so that one can survive and win the key battles in the war.

So, for example, if one wins the battle of Helm's Deep, Isengard's strength is dropped down to spent and wavering, and the capital is under siege/attacked by a unique Ent/Huorn party (maybe the player can join that too and watch the wonderful ent NPCs squash orc snagas?   :lol: ) If the player fails the battle of Helm's Deep, then bad things happen, and it wouldn't be impossible to save Rohan, but very difficult and unlikely.

If all goes well, and the good side survives until March 19, then Aragorn will become a Lord (Heir to the Throne, Denethor dies/disappears and Prince Imrahil takes over temporarily), and attack a low garrison/empty Minas Morgul before marching on the Black Gate. (I realize I've only been talking about the South, in the North, one would have to defend Erebor from the Easterlings at this time).

This is the final battle. Maybe the player has to survive until a time limit is up and Frodo destroys the Ring? If the player survives, then the War is won and the game is over with a cool cinematic. If the player fails, Sauron gets the Ring and the War is lost. It's up to you guys if you want to either end it then and there or make an agonizingly long losing of the War.  :P

That's for the good side.

For the bad side, the principle is similar, but you don't have to survive the onslaught of Good. There are two ways of going about the bad side (since it canonically loses).

The first is that the player has to race to help the baddies crush the good side factions in its theater before the Fellowship has any effect on the course of events. (A time limit)

The other way is that all the events from the timeline happen, but at the Black Gate the player has to win, and then Evil begins its inevitable conquest of Middle Earth.

The end to either scenario is still the same - Mordor and Isengard have to fight.

Also, on a completely separate note, I'd like to suggest putting in certain Nazgul like Khamul and the Witch-King as lords like Gothmog, Grishnakh, etc. I miss their presence, and they should show up after October 3018 and do their thing. Maybe change their dialogue a bit since they're wraiths. And to the argument that the Nazgul could be theoretically killed, I say two things - other people who didn't canonically die like Faramir or Prince Imrahil could be killed, and the Nazgul could respawn anyway. And make the Witch-King the Lord of Mordor if you don't intend to make Sauron the Lord of Mordor in-game.

I don't know a thing about coding, but I know this is probably a lot of work. I don't want it NAO, but it's just something to consider for the future. The Last Days of the Third Age 4.0?  8)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on March 26, 2012, 04:16:27 AM
How about making the max faction rating required to siege a city be not uniform for Gondor cities, but falling east-to-west? I.e. making West Osgiliath immediately siegeable, like Cair Andros, making Pelargir and Lossarnach siegeable below, for example, 3500 rating, making Dol Amroth and Lamedon siegeable at 3000 and so forth. That way there'll actually be a gradual campaign of the evil side in Gondor, instead of static grinding that either goes on forever, or ends in all Gondor towns being besieged simultaneously.

On  a separate note, I'd like to suggest making West and East Osgiliath capturable, like Cair Andros. This would add to the immersion, better re-create the atmosphere of war at Gondor and be more interesting from strategic point of view.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on March 29, 2012, 06:50:06 PM
How about once a faction drops to certain level say 'spent and wavering' instead of gaining strength points they start losing strength points?  Let the dying factions die.  Think of it as desertion, lack of volunteers, disease, coups or whatever.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on March 31, 2012, 12:27:13 PM
Hi Guys,

I've been playing this wonderful Mod once again continuing a good guy campaign as a Barding.

One thing I've noticed is that there is a real temptation to dress my guy up as an elf... since all the armour offered by the elven smiths  is better (lighter and offering more protection). Also I've been really tempted to rely on other faction for troops since some of the other nearby good factions have better archers and better infantry. In fact even though it's important to me to have mostly barding troops, I actually can't due to the low number of settlements and the rather  gradual replenishment of volunteers in those towns.

As the Mod is you are really encouraged to mix and match quite a lot, take a few bardings on especially for northern cavalry, maybe take on dwarves  for infantry, and elves for archers since they have the best bows... You might also play a human decked out in elven armor from various factions. That's all pretty cool, however looking at the mod from the standpoint of someone who will play multiple games as different factions I wonder if it might be better if the player was more encouraged to use troops from his own faction? I must say that this idea sits well with me from a realism point of view. Warriors will be more eager to follow a leader loyal to his own homeland, and who they can identify with. Middle earth Lore wise also gives me the impression that elves tended to follow elves most often, men follow men and orcs fighting shoulder to shoulder with orcs, I can't think of many examples of racially integrated units. Even in the first age when the lords of men paid homage to the elven kings, the men tended to fight under the banner of a mannish lord as a separate unit. Of course there are many battles were elves and men fight on the same side helping each other it seems to almost always be as distinct units.

So what if you could only recruit members of your own race (except companions)? If you were a human, you'd therefore not be able to recruit a bunch of elven archers. That might make the game harder for humans but life IS harder for humans :-) Or you could increase the number of troops available to humans and decrease it for elves.... which would fit with the idea of elves being harder to replace.... make orcs the easiest to replace of course.... I think dwarves might need human mercenaries since there is only one dwarf faction with two towns and no cavalry....  or else make them replace very often.... 

Also what if the rate of replenishment of troops willing to follow you was higher in settlements of your own faction than it was from other factions? What if factions that had few settlements also had a higher rate of replenishment for recruits and or a high limit to those they could hold?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on March 31, 2012, 02:32:29 PM
I really like that idea, being restricted to only own faction recruitment, at least until you acquire some sort of special faction trust and then it should still be limited. however I think it would be good to leave recruit replenishment alone as that encourages you to pick your fights carefully and actually care about your mens lives as valuable. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on March 31, 2012, 03:21:24 PM
Thanks Annuinir,

To clarify my statements on differential numbers of troops in different factions is that I've noticed is that it's a lot easier to fill up your party with Rohirim or Gondorians than it is to fill up your party with Bardings . It seems to me that Gondor has a lot of settlements and each one offers you the same number of troops as the 2  lonely barding settlements.  If you could get 5 troops from each settlement you'd have a lot more if you were pulling from a pool of 10 settlements than if you were pulling from a  pool of 2.

The other reason I bring up differential rates of troop replenishment is that elves tend to have stronger troops than humans and humans tend to be a lot stronger than orcs. Therefore if you are commanding orcs you are going to need more troops than if you are commanding elves....

Anyway I know it's kinda a radical suggestion but.... I thought I'd throw it out there anyway! I will say that for me personally, Playing a barding I really don't want my elite band to be a bunch of elves....  And I think that it will add to re playability if each time I play the game my war band is composed of completely different troops. You might be able to keep the prisoners you rescue (or not, I'm really not sure on that one) but you'd really end up mostly with troops of your own race.... or faction.... either or...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 01, 2012, 10:38:14 AM
I'd like to humbly suggest taking a look at Motomataru's Formations and AI.  The current code has some odd behaviors like the lone soldier not joining formation or the AI cavalry just stopping and standing still even when under attack.

Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on April 01, 2012, 10:53:10 AM
I agree Orcs should have much higher recruit replenishment but Bardings are supposed to be a kinda weak faction so I feel like lore wise it makes sense for them to have a harder time fielding large armies. And I don't know of that mod but if it stops that moron in my army from blindly charging while I'm screaming to hold I'll support it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Pingpong on April 01, 2012, 11:27:01 AM
Yeah there's nothing like watching my best unit run to solo attack the other army :p
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 01, 2012, 01:24:06 PM
Yeah there's nothing like watching my best unit run to solo attack the other army :p

If you're talking about archers that's an M&B bug.  All you can do is order Hold Fire and not let them shoot until you've got them in position.

What I'm talking about is with AI formations will have one soldier way off by themselves not doing anything.  I've seen it mostly with infantry but occasionally with cavalry too.

Worse though is this.
(http://thumbnails7.imagebam.com/18272/9345c8182710093.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/9345c8182710093)
AI controlled cavalry just stops and stands in place.  In this instance they just sat there while their outnumbered infantry engaged and was destroyed.  And still remained stationary when the Dunlenders started killing them and their horses.

Suppose I should make a case for Motomataru's code. 
Controls and general layout are the same as the current code.  Formations are the same jkl; and deployment is the same as in archers forward, infantry left, cavalry right. 
Commanders stay with their infantry(if any) even if mounted rather than charging straight in. 
Skirmishers try to keep an optimum range moving back from threats. 
Cavalry is less likely to charge straight into polearm armed infantry formations.
It's compatible with Sphere's Modmerger.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 01, 2012, 01:51:41 PM
This cavalry bug can be overcome by charging the AI, then moving your units back into formation (unless you actually want to charge). The AI cavalry always reacts to that and breaks its stationary formation. Often just giving a charge command is enough, though sometimes you or your units have to get closer to them.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 01, 2012, 03:00:07 PM
This cavalry bug can be overcome by charging the AI, then moving your units back into formation (unless you actually want to charge). The AI cavalry always reacts to that and breaks its stationary formation. Often just giving a charge command is enough, though sometimes you or your units have to get closer to them.

Crappy screenshot so you probably can't see the name tags but those are allied troops.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 01, 2012, 03:23:08 PM
The allies sometimes react to you charging too. And you can try drawing the enemy out, so that he charges your guys.

BTW, this tactic isn't always so stupid. Dale actually uses it to its advantage against Rhun - its cavalry helps protect the archers. Rohirrim, obviously, look stupid when their cavalry doesn't charge.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 01, 2012, 04:10:23 PM
Guess I'm not being clear.  The allied cavalry is charging but then on occasion mid-battle they all just stop and stand in place.  It's like something in the formations and AI code is giving a hold order and usually at the worst possible time in the worst possible place.

edit>  Just happened again.  Battle was almost over and some allied cavalry blitzed through some Isengard archers and then just stopped allowing to orcs to start cutting them down.
(http://thumbnails77.imagebam.com/18274/8f4652182730803.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/8f4652182730803)

edit2>  Another bad behavior I've noticed with this formation code is that the AI will frequently deploy it's archers behind it's infantry on fairly flat ground blocking their fire.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 01, 2012, 04:46:12 PM
Strange, I've played the mod quite extensively and never saw the AI stop its cavalry once it charges. Are you sure they're not  just advancing forward, then stopping dead, like they do sometimes? That can be alleviated the way I described. If they really charge, then gather their cavalry back in wedge and stop - well, that's a pretty strange bug, I've never seen it happen.

As for the archers - the infantry is usually packed much more tightly, so most archers still get to shoot. And your own archers fire at the better-armored infantry, rather than at the vulnerable enemy archers, so this isn't such a bad tactic for the AI. And it's not that often that it's used, mostly the AI archers skirmish in front of their infantry formation.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Noob4boob on April 05, 2012, 01:42:24 PM
Please add crossbow back to the game, i can't play as a archer, put the crossbow to the uruks to make it more fun to play. I know all you said it must link to the book. Then can you explain why you have so many things similar to the movie?

We explained it in the manual. Read it.


OK DUDE, ok another suggestion: Its so annoying that i have to keep typing those stupid letters and answering same question over and over again in order to do reply

It's temporary, it'll go away after a few posts.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on April 07, 2012, 09:30:30 PM
In reference to the AI cavalry charging and then stopping in front of infantry:

I've noticed it too.... I was actually just logging on to post about it.... It's happened very often. In fact it's happened to me for a few battles in a row helping Rohan.... the Rohirim cavalry under king Theoden charge out .... I follow them (telling my guys to follow me).... hoping to coordinate attacks. When the AI Rohirim cavalry get right in front of the Uruk hai infantry they stop right there and get mauled.... formed up in a pretty wedge formation.... it's rather annoying since there seems to be little you can do to change the king's behavior.

I've also noticed the Rhun doing similar silliness to my own barding forces... it doesn't make for a challenge.... 

I've tried it on both high and low combat AI... same things happen each time.

Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on April 07, 2012, 09:47:27 PM
In relation to differential recruitment:

I agree Orcs should have much higher recruit replenishment but Bardings are supposed to be a kinda weak faction so I feel like lore wise it makes sense for them to have a harder time fielding large armies.

Bardings may be a weak faction but their AI patrols and hosts are able to field all barding contingents so why not a player barding commander? Furthermore Bardings may have fewer cities and fewer hosts but their hosts are not especially small.

I would say the same thing For Harad and for Corsairs, and for Variags as I have tried games with each of these factions and realized after i started that I might have a few troops from my own faction but most would have to come from allies.... It's actually one of the reasons i lost interest in those factions. As a corsair leader I didn't want a party partly comprised of men partly of orcs.

I think allowing small factions to have more troops per city gives the player a chance to put together a full party OF that faction. I don't think giving the player the chance to do this is a bad idea.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 11, 2012, 02:37:13 AM
Can you make nights a bit brighter in the next patch? I swear it's impossible to play at night. I don't see anything, and wargs just run me over, and increasing monitor gamma does almost nothing.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on April 13, 2012, 05:25:39 PM
Can you make nights a bit brighter in the next patch? I swear it's impossible to play at night. I don't see anything, and wargs just run me over, and increasing monitor gamma does almost nothing.

What kind of background light to you have when you play? Any chance you could turn the lights off when the game goes to night, or close the binds or curtains? Personally I haven't had a huge problem but maybe my eyes are better in low light? ... maybe eat more beta karotine? :-)

Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 14, 2012, 12:34:21 AM
It's not my eyes, and I need to buy new curtains :D, but I still feel the night was brighter in vanilla MnB.

Oh I also want to add that dwarves need a troop revamp, it's probably been noted but just incase. Their armies are mainly made up of archers, which is kind of ridiculous I think.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 15, 2012, 10:49:53 AM
What brand videocard are you using?  With Nvidia cards you can go into the Nvidia Control Panel > 'Adjust desktop color settings' and adjust brightness, gamma, etc... and at least on my computer the changes carry over to M&B.

Troll quest suggestion, can you slow the buggers down?  If it's just one or two trolls they have a world map speed of ~6.9.  Makes them very difficult to catch with infantry.



Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 15, 2012, 10:55:31 AM
I'm using Radeon, but the problem is in me, not in the game. When it gets dark outside it's much easier to see ingame. Oh btw, why doesn't the TLD team release patches on bugs that are easy to fix, like spearmen not using spears, especially Thranduil's top tier spearmen use daggers.., or bugged stats like top tier infantry having lower power attack than lower tier, etc..
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 15, 2012, 01:44:30 PM
They're re-working the troops and the weapons for the next patch. Right now, the troop and equipment bugs are only fixed in RCM.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Warexpert on April 15, 2012, 02:22:45 PM
How about mumakils? Is it real in TLD?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Bas0172 on April 15, 2012, 03:52:14 PM
ok first of all this mod is awesome! Sure there are some things that can be improved but this mod is extremely good looking (places, armor, soldiers, mod overall). I really need to give respect to the people who made this mod possible. There are some really fresh ideas in this mod like the siege thing and the influence system. It could be tweaked a little though. 

Now for the suggestion: When i was playing as Mordor I noticed u can also recruit Trolls! Now as I really like trolls I was thinking how they could be made even more awesome as they are. And then it striked me, give the evil side a troll companion! As he/ is really powerfull the cost can be pretty steep ofc. You can even collect his armor/weapons with some quest or something or make it craftable by a smith. By giving a troll companion I think the mod can really demonstrate how cool the troll has been made in this mod. Lower the upkeep cost though, as a sort of reward for the time spend at unlocking him.  I also think he should be kept uncontrolable as he is to awesome to be given orders. Free will and all, isnt that what sandbox games are about?   
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on April 16, 2012, 06:46:02 AM
Thanks Annuinir,

To clarify my statements on differential numbers of troops in different factions is that I've noticed is that it's a lot easier to fill up your party with Rohirim or Gondorians than it is to fill up your party with Bardings . It seems to me that Gondor has a lot of settlements and each one offers you the same number of troops as the 2  lonely barding settlements.  If you could get 5 troops from each settlement you'd have a lot more if you were pulling from a pool of 10 settlements than if you were pulling from a  pool of 2.

The other reason I bring up differential rates of troop replenishment is that elves tend to have stronger troops than humans and humans tend to be a lot stronger than orcs. Therefore if you are commanding orcs you are going to need more troops than if you are commanding elves....

Anyway I know it's kinda a radical suggestion but.... I thought I'd throw it out there anyway! I will say that for me personally, Playing a barding I really don't want my elite band to be a bunch of elves....  And I think that it will add to re playability if each time I play the game my war band is composed of completely different troops. You might be able to keep the prisoners you rescue (or not, I'm really not sure on that one) but you'd really end up mostly with troops of your own race.... or faction.... either or...

Cynan,

I see your point, but I think that something would be lost with your suggestion.  First, it would change the gameplay in that you would not have the chance to actually try out each faction (and thereby enjoy their positive and negative aspects).  Secondly, it would also change the war as you would be much more limited to your area.  So, for example, if you were playing as Rohan you could go and help Gondor, but only those areas close to your bases.  Yet, each time you would have to return back to your cities to replenish all of your troop and food levels.  This detracts from gameplay.  Also, figure that this also limits the amount of interaction you get with other races and makes it more difficult to upgrade your character in terms of leadership qualities (e.g. each faction rank allows you to carry more troops and as a fully seasoned commander you should be able to host many troops...without cheating).

I do see your point that this would make gameplay more natural in terms of being supportive of one single faction, such as the Bards.  On the other hand, it would place a major limit on gameplay that I personally would not enjoy. 

Just my opinion...

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on April 16, 2012, 06:52:13 AM
Guess I'm not being clear.  The allied cavalry is charging but then on occasion mid-battle they all just stop and stand in place.  It's like something in the formations and AI code is giving a hold order and usually at the worst possible time in the worst possible place.

edit>  Just happened again.  Battle was almost over and some allied cavalry blitzed through some Isengard archers and then just stopped allowing to orcs to start cutting them down.
(http://thumbnails77.imagebam.com/18274/8f4652182730803.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/8f4652182730803)

edit2>  Another bad behavior I've noticed with this formation code is that the AI will frequently deploy it's archers behind it's infantry on fairly flat ground blocking their fire.

LCJr,

So, I haven't seen this bug yet and I'm playing as Rohan.  On the other hand, I've been fighting alongside the Rohannites for quite some time.  I've discovered that if I use the buttons instead of the strategic map for my cavalry, then I have no problems with this bug.  If I use the strategic map to order my cavalry, then ALL (including the AI) have the possibility to screw up.  Note, however, that controlling my infantry and archers via the map is without a prob.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 16, 2012, 08:41:47 AM
@FleshyStarfish  I've never had any problems with my troops or troops under my control(patrols, foragers and scouts).  Problem is with allied troops controlled by the AI lords. 



Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on April 17, 2012, 04:26:07 AM
@FleshyStarfish  I've never had any problems with my troops or troops under my control(patrols, foragers and scouts).  Problem is with allied troops controlled by the AI lords.

Hmmm, I did see some interesting behaviors the other day.  When I was sieging with Theoden, my archers and infantry kept charging, even if I told my archers to hold their ground so they could fire.  What I found was that even after they would listen that after about 30 secs they were charging again making my orders useless.  I would suppose, however, that this is a M&B issue and not codable for the TLD team.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: mlkjhgfds on April 18, 2012, 06:10:24 PM
Thanks for this mod ! Had a lot of fun playing it - till I found out the influence bonus trait didn't work and lost all hope of getting any.
This has probably been mentioned, but influence is crazy hard to get EVEN when you're in the mood for a grind - because of the way lords deal their quests, it seems at some point the only quest available from any lord is one of the crappy quests you just can't do (train X of a faction's highest tier troop, bring more prisoners than your holding capacity, defeat raid parties from factions that likely won't ever send any more...)
The training quest is especially painful - it didn't bother me quite that much back in vanilla. I typically bounce between 6 lords and they'll ALL ask for the same thing. If it can't be fixed to require more reasonable troop ranks the mod would be better off without that quest entirely imo.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cynan on April 21, 2012, 05:12:03 AM
Thanks for this mod ! Had a lot of fun playing it - till I found out the influence bonus trait didn't work and lost all hope of getting any.
This has probably been mentioned, but influence is crazy hard to get EVEN when you're in the mood for a grind - because of the way lords deal their quests, it seems at some point the only quest available from any lord is one of the crappy quests you just can't do (train X of a faction's highest tier troop, bring more prisoners than your holding capacity, defeat raid parties from factions that likely won't ever send any more...)
The training quest is especially painful - it didn't bother me quite that much back in vanilla. I typically bounce between 6 lords and they'll ALL ask for the same thing. If it can't be fixed to require more reasonable troop ranks the mod would be better off without that quest entirely imo.

I do believe it has been observed that if you refuse a quest and go to other lords there is a tendency for the quest to get brought up again and again. One nice way to deal with the training quest is accept it and then ignore it, you get a crazy lg amount of time to do it so it will take the training quest off of the list for all the other lords for like 90 days....and you can decide if you want to try to do the quest when there are 30 days left for it.... if you choose to completely ignore a quest there are penalties but they are not terribly severe in my opinion.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on April 21, 2012, 03:00:02 PM
So, I haven't seen this bug yet and I'm playing as Rohan.  On the other hand, I've been fighting alongside the Rohannites for quite some time.  I've discovered that if I use the buttons instead of the strategic map for my cavalry, then I have no problems with this bug.  If I use the strategic map to order my cavalry, then ALL (including the AI) have the possibility to screw up.  Note, however, that controlling my infantry and archers via the map is without a prob.

I've definitely noticed it when fighting Rohan.  In my current Uruk-Hai game, there are occasions where the Rohan cavalrymen will stop charging, bunch up, and sort of stand there passively.  They will fight back, of course, but a horseman who's not moving is toast in M&B.  I can't really speculate as to why this occurs, but I've never seen it happen with small or all-mounted parties, only with large hosts containing infantry as well.  Scouts and patrols are usually much smarter, peppering you with arrows and then charging if you manage to kill one by shooting back.

Could be Saruman's magic. Or a native bug. We certainly didn't script them to stop...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: vota dc on April 22, 2012, 06:45:35 AM
You mean when they reach the invisible border?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 22, 2012, 07:52:58 AM
You mean when they reach the invisible border?

No, the cavalry just stops with all kinds of room to maneuver.  I've seen Gondor do it once but they usually don't have much cavalry.  And like I said Rohan doesn't do it every single time but they do it quite often.

I finally turned the formations off which I didn't really want to do.  With the formations off I haven't seen this behavior and the Rohan cavalry and infantry advance together most of the time which is a big improvement.  With formations on the cavalry just charges ahead and leaves the infantry behind. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Ardashir on April 23, 2012, 10:11:15 AM
My own suggestion would be to add skin types specific to elves, or more distinct low tier armor. I know that this mod took a more "low fantasy" approach to armor and clothing than many other middle earth related media (Angus McBride's illustrations, Jackson film etc) and I respect that decision.
However, the elves are not visually distinct from humans. When I played my 1st larger Mordor game and fought the elves, then at first I didn't even realize that they were elves. Higher tier elven troops are more distinct through the pointed helmets. Lothlorien are distinct because most of their troops have ornate clothes. However early tier Rivendell and Mirkwood troops look entirely human.
So maybe add some elvish touches to them? More onraments on the leather jackets? Circlets and/or hairbands? Patterned gloves and shoes?

I do see your point that this would make gameplay more natural in terms of being supportive of one single faction, such as the Bards.  On the other hand, it would place a major limit on gameplay that I personally would not enjoy. 

Just my opinion...

I'd agree with you here,
Title: recruiting modders
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on April 23, 2012, 11:26:39 AM
I'm fairly new here so I don't know what all has been tried but have you tried to recruit modders from other sites such as twcenter perhaps the people from fatw? I realize it's a different game but twcenter has tons of active modders some of which might have the skills or the ability to learn how to help with this mod. I'm sure there are tons of other sites but yeah I just wanted to suggest that you guys (or I will for that matter) go on a recruitment drive so that this mod doesn't go into permanent hibernation.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 23, 2012, 01:59:28 PM
My own suggestion would be to add skin types specific to elves, or more distinct low tier armor. I know that this mod took a more "low fantasy" approach to armor and clothing than many other middle earth related media (Angus McBride's illustrations, Jackson film etc) and I respect that decision.
However, the elves are not visually distinct from humans. When I played my 1st larger Mordor game and fought the elves, then at first I didn't even realize that they were elves. Higher tier elven troops are more distinct through the pointed helmets. Lothlorien are distinct because most of their troops have ornate clothes. However early tier Rivendell and Mirkwood troops look entirely human.
So maybe add some elvish touches to them? More onraments on the leather jackets? Circlets and/or hairbands? Patterned gloves and shoes?

I do see your point that this would make gameplay more natural in terms of being supportive of one single faction, such as the Bards.  On the other hand, it would place a major limit on gameplay that I personally would not enjoy. 

Just my opinion...

I'd agree with you here,

I don't think the early elven units look human, at all. Their faces are more attractive ( yeah attractive faces in MnB lol) they don't have beards, their clothes look pretty elvish to me, elvish swords and bows. Take a look at early rohan and gondor troops, or even dale. You can clearly see that early tier elves are ELVES. That's what I think anyways..
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Auvar on April 23, 2012, 05:18:43 PM
I recently fought a battle near Erebor, and I absolutely love the battle scene there in front of the gates - I'm not sure if it's new to this version, maybe I've just never encountered it before.

The problem is that it's tiny.  The sides start within easy bowshot of each other and right against the battlefield edges.  It's so small, in fact, that at a battle size of 80 I routinely saw troops spawning outside the battlefield.  Please make this scene bigger - while it's great for small skirmishes, it turns battles of any significant size into an insane invisible-edge meatgrinder.  If the intent was to penalize cavalry or make maneuvering impossible, then it would be much better to do this with actual barriers rather than the map edge, which has no clear marker in this scene.
Title: player faction+ player siege mod?
Post by: gozzar on April 23, 2012, 08:21:54 PM
can some one do a sub-mod that allows some more sandboxing into the mod player faction+ player sieges ?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: SonOfNiall on April 24, 2012, 02:42:33 PM
Hi,
I'm now swimming in RPs as a 12th rank gondorian. Gondor is now quite unthreatened and the auxilias of blackroot and pinnath gelin are enjoying a nice and peaceful war. So the suggestion would be to make the player able to move spawnpoints for a nice stack of RPs, thus a. eliminating the day 200+ bug b. it would make sence to start sending forces further up the campaign once rear positions are secured. Also maybe make it possible to "buy" influence would be nice. RPs are abundant in the later game, influence isn't.
Cheers
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions: FIGHT OR DIE!
Post by: Khergit Kabob on April 24, 2012, 04:21:35 PM
FIGHT OR DIE!

The biggest problem with the game as it stands is that the more damage a faction takes the harder it becomes to damage it further.

That, as many have mentioned, defies common sense and obviously isn't canon either.

So there Isengard sits, invincible because of a loophole in the game mechanics: they're not weak enough to actually be sieged and eliminated, but they're not strong enough to send out the armies whose defeat is required to weaken them enough to make them siege-able. But they don't really need armies, outposts, or caravans anyway -- their faction strength regenerates if all they do is sit on their white hands and do nothing.

The solution is as simple as it is canonical: Isengard is looting Fangorn for a reason, isn't it? If all of its external supplies are choked off, how can they maintain and equip a huge army?

Instead of instituting complicated blockade logic why not use the existing regeneration mechanic to implement negative regeneration?

First create a "supply inventory", an abstract value representing stored supplies. Faction regeneration subtracts from this. When inventory runs low regeneration slows; when empty faction strength decays. (It may be unbalancing to have an overflowing inventory trigger increased regeneration, and I'm not trying to introduce a new game mechanic, just trying to fix a tiny little part that's broken.)

To add to inventory a faction requires some useful work be completed:
Caravans unloading.
Foragers foraging.
Battle victories (the commanders presumably loot the scrap).
Player donating scrap metal (up to the maximum -- dropping 10 years' worth of supplies on your capital shouldn't be allowed.)

Regeneration is capped at its current levels so that balancing issues are not introduced. The only change is that now regeneration doesn't come for free -- it has to be earned.

The only balance issue to really consider is how fast do the various factions consume supply and how much supply is given from various sources. I would expect some factions, like Beorings, to be more self-sufficient than others, like Isengard.

As a minimum standard, though, no faction should be able to survive indefinitely with no outposts, no armies in the field, and no trade.

Now parking your army on Isengard's door actually pays off: Isengard is going to have to do something about its economy or else.
When the AI's clock runs out it's up to you game designers what the AI should do about it, but "sit in the tower gathering strength" shouldn't be an option.

Come out and fight me or starve.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 24, 2012, 05:15:51 PM
Actually, there exists a more straightforward solution - http://mbx.streetofeyes.com/index.php/topic,2740.0.html

Though I'm still waiting for the devs' reply on that one.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 24, 2012, 11:49:06 PM
Both those solutions are okay, and there's plenty of other that are similar, and a solution to faction strenght is seriously needed because it renders the game kind of unbeatable without a lot of uneeded hard work. But there's the part about the mod not being developed anymore, so you'll have to do with the patch that they are wrapping up currently, hopefuly it will have something implemented for this problem, but we can only hope, until we get a confirmation from the devs.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 25, 2012, 02:08:32 AM
a solution to faction strenght is seriously needed because it renders the game kind of unbeatable without a lot of uneeded hard work

There's also the problem of it being impossible to lose. The only region that the AI is capable of wrapping up by itself, without the player's guiding intervention, is the far North and even there things develop with painful slowness. Everywhere else it's a standby on both sides, even if there are some initial gains or losses.

It'd be nice if the players themselves could experiment with this, the way they can experiment with equipment and troop stats - arguably, changing the strategic stats is even more important and fun in this regard. But the module files are necessary for that.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 25, 2012, 02:52:16 AM
Yeah I know, I tried using the troop editor and played a bit with the party templates to supposedly change the war party/scout party etc's personality to soldier which gives them more courage and aggressiveness. I did that in hopes of them engaging other lord's parties, or looking for them as it happens lol.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions: FIGHT OR DIE!
Post by: FleshyStarfish on April 25, 2012, 04:59:51 AM
FIGHT OR DIE!

The biggest problem with the game as it stands is that the more damage a faction takes the harder it becomes to damage it further.

That, as many have mentioned, defies common sense and obviously isn't canon either.

So there Isengard sits, invincible because of a loophole in the game mechanics: they're not weak enough to actually be sieged and eliminated, but they're not strong enough to send out the armies whose defeat is required to weaken them enough to make them siege-able. But they don't really need armies, outposts, or caravans anyway -- their faction strength regenerates if all they do is sit on their white hands and do nothing.

The solution is as simple as it is canonical: Isengard is looting Fangorn for a reason, isn't it? If all of its external supplies are choked off, how can they maintain and equip a huge army?

Instead of instituting complicated blockade logic why not use the existing regeneration mechanic to implement negative regeneration?

First create a "supply inventory", an abstract value representing stored supplies. Faction regeneration subtracts from this. When inventory runs low regeneration slows; when empty faction strength decays. (It may be unbalancing to have an overflowing inventory trigger increased regeneration, and I'm not trying to introduce a new game mechanic, just trying to fix a tiny little part that's broken.)

To add to inventory a faction requires some useful work be completed:
Caravans unloading.
Foragers foraging.
Battle victories (the commanders presumably loot the scrap).
Player donating scrap metal (up to the maximum -- dropping 10 years' worth of supplies on your capital shouldn't be allowed.)

Regeneration is capped at its current levels so that balancing issues are not introduced. The only change is that now regeneration doesn't come for free -- it has to be earned.

The only balance issue to really consider is how fast do the various factions consume supply and how much supply is given from various sources. I would expect some factions, like Beorings, to be more self-sufficient than others, like Isengard.

As a minimum standard, though, no faction should be able to survive indefinitely with no outposts, no armies in the field, and no trade.

Now parking your army on Isengard's door actually pays off: Isengard is going to have to do something about its economy or else.
When the AI's clock runs out it's up to you game designers what the AI should do about it, but "sit in the tower gathering strength" shouldn't be an option.

Come out and fight me or starve.

Easiest solution is to just use the siege option.  Its not pretty, but it gets the game mechanics in order and gives you tons of fun.

On a side note, the North in my game was totally torn apart, which is why I rode north immediately after defeating Dunland, Isengard and the Umbards.  In my game, only Rohan is set around 10000 and the rest are all 6000 or below.  I suspect that after cleaning the north that Mordor will be a synch.  In my game, however, I do have to deal with the fact that one of the dwarf cities was totally destroyed.

TLD is really a lot of fun, I would simply suggest to include with 3.13 also the siege + influence changes.  Both have made my game really great (not to mention the easter eggs!).

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 25, 2012, 05:54:44 AM
Yeah I know, I tried using the troop editor and played a bit with the party templates to supposedly change the war party/scout party etc's personality to soldier which gives them more courage and aggressiveness. I did that in hopes of them engaging other lord's parties, or looking for them as it happens lol.

How did that work out?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 25, 2012, 09:07:35 AM
Oh well I don't know I had to start a new game for all the changes I made to have any effect, so I made a gondor cheat character, currently at day 4, I can't see any effect, since there's always fighting at the start, but once I play a bit more I'll repost my success or failure  :),


Well it does work I think, I just saw a bunch of gondor foragers that are 14 chasing a mordor war party of 40, which does not happen in my other vanilla elf game.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 25, 2012, 12:45:28 PM
Now that I've played a long game, save game corruption finally got me at day 512.  I'm of the opinion about the only thing needed is some tweaking of the influence.  Either make it easier to get and/or make the war strategy action cost less.  The AI lords have been very aggressive in my games(usually to the point of suicidal).  They just need the player to be able to give them a nudge in the right direction.

As for the suggestion of smaller factions getting more troops I have ask are you using the free storage in the capitol?  Troops stored in capital cost nothing in upkeep.  And the war starts based on your level so nothing to stop you from screwing around for month just recruiting and putting them storage.  Personally I recruit troops even when I don't really need them and put them in storage plus a lot of rescued prisoners.  That way I always good reserve to replace my party if something catastrophic happens or to reinforce garrisons, lords, etc...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 25, 2012, 01:39:43 PM
Now that I've played a long game, save game corruption finally got me at day 512.  I'm of the opinion about the only thing needed is some tweaking of the influence.  Either make it easier to get and/or make the war strategy action cost less.  The AI lords have been very aggressive in my games(usually to the point of suicidal).  They just need the player to be able to give them a nudge in the right direction.

What about Gondor, were there any sieges (without you actively fighting on that front, lowering ratings etc.) apart from Cair Andros? And was any faction defeated without your active participation, apart from Rhun or Gundabad?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 25, 2012, 03:08:32 PM
No faction can die without the player budging in, at least not in my games. My lords are aggressive aswell but only when the other lords are near their cities or camps. Or when they set up advance camps. But after that they camp all day in the cities and wait for the mighty frontline warhero (you) to rape everything so they can take a stroll trough the green plains and storm the enemy city.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 25, 2012, 03:27:01 PM
I was fighting for Gondor and I literally intervened everywhere.  Rohan lost Westfold and East Emnet and was in the process of losing West Emnet when I intervened.  Got called up by Imrahil and we(Forlong, Hirulin and Faramir) took out the Orc Sentry camp after fighting off Harad, Mordor, Khand and a second round with Harad.  While I was bouncing around Imrahil went after the Khand camp and they actually had the situation under control when I got there.  I pitched in anyway and Khand was eliminated.  I bounced around some more and was called up again by Imrahil and we went for the Orc Patrol camp but ran into Mordor on the way there.  Beat the Mordor hosts and Imrahil went for East Osgillith instead.  Recaptured it and reinforced by the rescued prisoners Imrahil went straight for Minas Morgul which we razed.  I went up North and Imrahil and company took out the Orc Sentry camp finally.  I come back and trashed a few Umbar hosts and here comes Imrahil to lay seige to their camp.  I pitched in and Umbar was eliminated.  I went back up North as the situation was actually bad up there.  Rhun was Very Strong.  They'd lost one lord but still had all their camps.  Dol Guldar was Unmatched and down one lord.  Moria average and Gungabad was Strong and had only lost the North and South camps.  Mirkwood lost Gladevothor and was bouncing between Average and Strong and had come under siege at least once.  Dale was barely holding average and had been sieged a few times by Rhun.  Beornings were sucking and frequently under siege as usual.  Dwarves were up and down but improving and I believe had been sieged once.  That answer your question?

edit>Oops, forgot.  Rohan took out all the Isengard camps.  I pitched in on one assault but they had the numbers to get it done without me.  And for another siege I intercepted the enemy hosts so they could do their thing.  Third one they did all by themselves.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 25, 2012, 04:02:13 PM
Oh well, seems like you have a sweet game. I started as a rivendell elf and after much grinding destroyed moria, followed by gundabad. Then a lot more grinding on the Rhun lords followed and we destroyed them aswell, moving on to Dol Guldur. By that time all the good factions were Unmatched bosses solely because of me (Beornings still sucky strong though.) So after we razed Dol Guldur every army of the north set up advance camps near isengard and destroyed all the outposts in one day, Isengard and Dunland counterattacked by staying in the camps and not moving, ever. So I went to Gondor to aid my human buds there who were being swarmed by a fuckload of enemy parties. Seriously there's like over 100 mordor, khand, umbar and harad parties over there. After helping a few lords, I swore vengeance on Faramir's grave and started murdering Umbar parties where ever I could see them. Oh did I mention Gondor now had lost Faramir, Beranor or Baranor whatever his name was, The Fat Lord guy, Orthalion, and at least 2 more lords I think. Sadly no matter how many Umbar parties I killed I still got Oathbreaker so I reloaded and am now putting in the ''Siege fix'' so I can siege the Umbar camp to see if that will help with the trait quest..
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 25, 2012, 04:50:00 PM
@ LCJr

You've had a good campaign, at least, for the current version. There are two problems though:

- the game doesn't seem to progress much by itself

- it it literally impossible to lose, even for the good side.

It's basically a sandbox currently, a world in war decorations for the player to conquer. It's fun to play, but it tends to lose re-playability rather quickly, unfortunately. I'd like to actually have a challenge and for the war to be more real.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 25, 2012, 05:04:00 PM
I sieged the umbar camp killing like 200 yeach time... then disengaging, but I guess that doesn't work for the quest and I still get the trait, so now I'm stuck with an influence penalty bonus? GREAT it was sooo easy to come by anyways.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 25, 2012, 05:25:33 PM
The Oathkeeper/breaker quest is bugged so in the future don't even mess with it.  I don't think you'll get any effect from it either way.

I can't say if it's impossible for a faction to lose or not.  Playing soley as a good guy Rohan always has the look of sinking ship.  If it's an illusion it's a pretty good one:)  Gondor never looks to good either and they always seem to lose several lords.  Next game I think I'll try one of the northern factions and see what happens with Rohan and Gondor.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 25, 2012, 05:34:42 PM
Next game I think I'll try one of the northern factions and see what happens with Rohan and Gondor.

I've played several northern campaigns + rolled through (by using Ctrl + Space) a couple of 200-300 day campaigns. All the time it was the same - Rohan lost Westfold, East and West Emnet, then it was all quiet on that front. The Gondor front never moved beyond Cair Andros being overrun.

In the North, Lothorien/Rivendell vs. Moria and Dol Guldur is always stuck. Further North is the only active part of the game, as sometimes the good side there can win by itself. I've yet to see evil side win there. As I've said, the action doesn't unfold beyond some territorial losses.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions: FIGHT OR DIE!
Post by: Khergit Kabob on April 25, 2012, 08:49:05 PM
Easiest solution is to just use the siege option.
How?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: j.finley92 on April 25, 2012, 08:50:05 PM
So I'm a Lothlorien character and whenever I get the quest to go report to Celeborn it always fails no matter what I do. I click to accept the mission and then I go find him. As soon as I come within range of him it fails automatically. Does this happen to anybody else? Celeborn and Co. don't seem to do much either. All they do is patrol the forest and never leave.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 25, 2012, 10:52:13 PM
Welcome to the Lorien patrol corps my friend! Your job is to walk around the forest all decade :). No but seriously, they don't do anything besides that, not if order Haldir or Orophin to follow you, with influence and the Elf Friend perk. Or lure an enemy lord close to them so they can attack him. Same with the Imladris Lords, Mirkwood are far more active. And both Lorien and Imladris lords are so inactive because Moria and Dol Guldur, their two main enemies just stay at their bases and never attempt to attack, anything.

The quest also fails because he decided he doesn't want to patrol the particular spot, because that's what he does when he calls for a grand host, so he goes back to patroling somewhere or in the city. It is not a bug.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions: FIGHT OR DIE!
Post by: FleshyStarfish on April 26, 2012, 04:25:15 AM
Easiest solution is to just use the siege option.
How?

Just check it in the threads (I believe the thread's title is something with the word "siege").  A player posted a siege fix where several people commented (including me) to make the fix most userfriendly as possible.  Read all comments before you download anything so you can see all the information before you make changes.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on April 26, 2012, 04:29:51 AM
So I'm a Lothlorien character and whenever I get the quest to go report to Celeborn it always fails no matter what I do. I click to accept the mission and then I go find him. As soon as I come within range of him it fails automatically. Does this happen to anybody else? Celeborn and Co. don't seem to do much either. All they do is patrol the forest and never leave.

After destroying Isengard, Dunland and the Umbars I decided to help out these jokers.  Lothlorien was getting kicked from one end to the next.  Anyway, after I rode to their help, things settled down...a bit too much.  Both Imladris and Lothlorien do absolutely nothing.  So, I simply got the hosts of Moria to follow me towards the hosts of these elves, which always created epic battles.  Anyway, at a certain point I got called to help Rohan for a while at which point I went back to them.  When I came back, I found Celeborn and Orophin to my GREAT SURPRISE sieging Moria.  Why would you ask?  Because when I left Moria they were at about 800 to 900 strength.  Anyway, it took Lothlorien about 2 weeks to siege.  So, I happened to get there in time and together we flattened Moria (great scene there by the way!).

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: j.finley92 on April 26, 2012, 01:29:26 PM
Nice! I always try and goad the Moria armys close to Lothloriens but they never fall for it. They just stay in there base all day.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on April 26, 2012, 03:03:05 PM
Nice! I always try and goad the Moria armys close to Lothloriens but they never fall for it. They just stay in there base all day.

I always zoom in very close and then move back and forth.  Eventually they follow.  It does take some time at can be a bit precarious.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions: The Running of the Wargs
Post by: Khergit Kabob on April 27, 2012, 02:12:32 AM
An arena option, maybe a "tournament event" like the Native arena tournaments.

The Running of the Wargs!

All contestants start on a fenced-in or walled track. Your goal is to make it to the other end of the track.

About 10 seconds after the start of the race, the MC yells, "RELEASE THE WARGS!"

You can figure out what happens next ...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions: The Running of the Wargs
Post by: FleshyStarfish on April 27, 2012, 07:59:48 AM
An arena option, maybe a "tournament event" like the Native arena tournaments.

The Running of the Wargs!

All contestants start on a fenced-in or walled track. Your goal is to make it to the other end of the track.

About 10 seconds after the start of the race, the MC yells, "RELEASE THE WARGS!"

You can figure out what happens next ...

Funny idea, but it looks like TLD is dead.  The devs are looking at bringing out the final patch and then its done.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions: The Running of the Wargs
Post by: Khergit Kabob on April 27, 2012, 02:57:26 PM
Funny idea, but it looks like TLD is ... done.
If this is it, it's been one heck of a ride.

Even Bethesda should be impressed by what the devs have done here. Maybe if Bethesda bought out TaleWorlds (keeping Armagan Yavus in charge, of course) and hired the TLD developers ...

*sniffle* I think I got something caught in my eye ... please excuse me ...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 28, 2012, 12:13:18 AM
Wait, why bethesda, out of all companies lol? And yes I'm a huge fan of the elder scrolls but that's not relevant. I thought about asking on the Moviebattles II forum, (an awesome modification for Jedi Academy) if there's an interested coder but I doubt they'd have the time since they are working on Moviebattles III too.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on April 28, 2012, 09:45:14 AM
There are tons of modding sites and specifically lotr projects for different games (and go figure they are all some of the most popular for that game) that we could get.in contact with to attempt to find.coders. I'm sure tons of talented python coders exist that might be interested in contributing to this mod we just need to find them. If the devs feel burnt out on trying to find new people or have too much on their plates to go begging around the internet then I suggest we start a community initiative to go around to as many relevant sites as possible and try to find interested and competent modders to come join tld. We would need to keep it classy, not literally beg, and definitely not spam. Most major.modding sites have recruitment threads and even game specific forums usually have threads to discuss other games in. these should be our target areas and we should probably discuss beforehand some vague structure of approach so as to avoid the 3 listed no-nos and any others that I didn't think of that would hinder rather than help our cause. If the devs hvave no objection to this initiative then I say let's go for it. I'll wait for a reply from merlkir and triglav before I start a topic for this project
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on April 28, 2012, 09:50:35 AM
It's most likely to fail.

We don't need just any coders, not even good coders used to other games. It's not Pyhton coding, it's MnB module system coding. And we need people who are really really good at coding for Mount and Blade.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 28, 2012, 12:10:08 PM
I don't mean to be offensive, but I really think you overestimate the complexities involved in video game programming. There are tons of people out there who've gotten the hang of way more complex things and there are enough of them among those interested in modding. They might need some time to adjust, but I'm pretty sure they can do the job.

Maybe M&B is uniquely complex, of course, to the point of requiring some kind of exceptionally ingenious coders to work with it, but that's doubtful.

I wouldn't be writing this, but I've seen you reject vota_dc as a balancer on talewords forum (before you took him into the team), even though the job he wanted to do doesn't require any kind of M&B modding experience at all. You might be making the same mistake here.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on April 28, 2012, 01:25:58 PM
You underestimate the hit to motivation adjusting to a new programming language deals to a person, as well as the time needed to adjust. We need someone to help us now, not someone who'll maybe (!) adjust in the unspecified near future.

Not that we couldn't wait, but it's way way more likely that most people who'd be skilled enough can't be arsed to learn some indie game's module system.

Again, I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it's not very likely.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 28, 2012, 02:11:13 PM
I see your point. I'm tempted to try to get a grip on M&B module system myself, but that kind of project is currently way beyond my means time-wise. I can do some sub-modding, help out with balancing things like troops, prices, strategic part etc., but not go all the way to proper coding.

Still, that doesn't mean that someone else wouldn't try. Maybe it won't hurt if Annuinir asked? At the very least, you'd get additional publicity.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on April 28, 2012, 03:04:46 PM
Yeah i'm not trying to say you will definitely find someone I just want to see all options explored. I love this mod more than any other whole game I think I've ever played (except maybe kotor) and I just don't wanna see it die prematurely before all options have been exhausted. It doesn't hurt to try is my only point.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Danthepianist on April 28, 2012, 11:25:27 PM
I would love to be able to throw some money at this project, but I suppose that starts falling into the realm of making money off of copyrighted material.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on April 29, 2012, 08:15:07 PM
I've only ever done low-level programming (C, assembler, etc.) but if you can't find anyone else to take this on why not let me have a look?

What's the worst that could happen? If I don't want to devote the time to bring myself up to speed you haven't lost anything, but if I do happen to catch on quickly the project needn't die.

A chance at life is better than none, right? But try everyone else you can think of first. I don't like to work if I don't have to. ;)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on April 30, 2012, 10:25:19 AM
O man, after several weeks not looking at this forum, this. Doom and gloom, lazy lords not doing anything, some corrupted saves, talk of extinct coders.

Why exactly do you need coders anyway and why not spam the TW board with ads - there are about 50 competent (or so) people out there who could step in, although most of them may be busy at the moment.
Just ask nicely and don't insist it's a privilege to work on TLD. :)

@Players: what is really missing from TLD to enjoy it fully? No crap or lulz, please.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on April 30, 2012, 11:10:04 AM
Quote
@Players: what is really missing from TLD to enjoy it fully? No crap or lulz, please.

Well, I'd like more options, to change how to game acts, for example to be able to lower starting faction strenght, to lower the speed at which faction strenght is gained, like you said, less lazy lords. Basically customizability.

Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 30, 2012, 01:27:11 PM
@Players: what is really missing from TLD to enjoy it fully? No crap or lulz, please.

The strategic part is not dynamic enough. This is the only critical thing, upgrades in other areas would, obviously, be nice, but they're not critical. I've proposed to partially solve this through submodding - http://mbx.streetofeyes.com/index.php/topic,2740.0.html - but haven't received any answers from the devs, not yet, at least.

I know we've already had this conversation a couple of months ago, but it's been raised many times by many different people since then. Apart from the strategic gameplay, the game's brilliant.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on April 30, 2012, 01:32:57 PM
The more quality replies (like the above), the more likely you'll get it. ;)

(Btw, I'm an ex-dev, if you haven't noticed, still interested in TLD getting better)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 30, 2012, 03:52:35 PM
(Btw, I'm an ex-dev, if you haven't noticed, still interested in TLD getting better)

Maybe you could help me with that strategic submod then? All I need are the necessary module files. Getting directions on where to change the faction ratings and maximum ratings required for the fortresses to be siegable would be awesome, but I can look it up myself, if that's impossible.

Or maybe you know how to change them in the text files, without the modules?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on April 30, 2012, 04:20:06 PM
(Btw, I'm an ex-dev, if you haven't noticed, still interested in TLD getting better)

Maybe you could help me with that strategic submod then? All I need are the necessary module files. Getting directions on where to change the faction ratings and maximum ratings required for the fortresses to be siegable would be awesome, but I can look it up myself, if that's impossible.

Or maybe you know how to change them in the text files, without the modules?
Maybe I'll implement it as an option, if there is a good case for that. Or change AI behavior so it solves your problem, something that's preferable.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on April 30, 2012, 04:33:02 PM
Lord ai needs to be more aggressive, the whole grind thing needs fixed, supply trains need to serve a more direct purpose (as well as certain missions and perhaps the selling of materials as well). Personally I feel like faction strength shouldn't naturally rise. It should start at an appropriate lore based level and go up or down directly with the ride of events. Supply trains, supply missions, and materials given to factions should make this rating go up whereas losing men should make it go down (and camps of course). If possible troop level should also play a part as higher level troops represent more "strength" of a faction than low level. I don't know if more dynamic quests are possible where the outcome actually effects the game but if so things like scouting missions should actually add to the desire of an ai lord to besiege a camp and things along that line. Things that overall effect the grand strategy of the war are the most needed improvements, the game needs more chance to be strategic in the overall campaign sense.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on April 30, 2012, 04:35:03 PM
Maybe I'll implement it as an option, if there is a good case for that. Or change AI behavior so it solves your problem, something that's preferable.

That'd be truly awesome!
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on April 30, 2012, 08:11:58 PM
@Mad Vader

Like the rest I'd like to see the strategic AI tweaked.  IMHO the AI lords are aggressive enough they're just held back by the low 'faction strength must be less than X' requirement.  The rating required before they attack is so low it puts the player in a catch-22 situation.  The player needs to grind a faction down but once that factions ratings drop they stop leaving their camps and you get a stalemate. 

Also part of this is the low rate of influence gain and the high cost of the war strategy option.  I've only used the war strategy option once as the cost is just so high.  But it did get the Gondor AI to take out the Umbar camp at a higher faction strength rating than what the AI requires to attack.

I'm probably in the minority here but I really, really don't care for the current formation code.  I've noted several odd behaviors with it, such as cavalry just stopping and forming a wedge, and I also get some lag/stuttering.  Using the follow me command and high, steady fps it's 'one thousand one -stutter- one thousand two -stutter- etc...'  Also noticeable lag when cavalry knocks troops out of formation and they reform.  I've already suggested Motomataru's formation code before and I'll suggest it again:) 

Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 01, 2012, 12:09:39 AM
Quote
Maybe I'll implement it as an option, if there is a good case for that. Or change AI behavior so it solves your problem, something that's preferable.

Maybe we'll build you a shrine after that :p.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 01, 2012, 01:47:38 AM
@Mad Vader

Like the rest I'd like to see the strategic AI tweaked.  IMHO the AI lords are aggressive enough they're just held back by the low 'faction strength must be less than X' requirement.  The rating required before they attack is so low it puts the player in a catch-22 situation.  The player needs to grind a faction down but once that factions ratings drop they stop leaving their camps and you get a stalemate. 

Also part of this is the low rate of influence gain and the high cost of the war strategy option.  I've only used the war strategy option once as the cost is just so high.  But it did get the Gondor AI to take out the Umbar camp at a higher faction strength rating than what the AI requires to attack.

I'm probably in the minority here but I really, really don't care for the current formation code.  I've noted several odd behaviors with it, such as cavalry just stopping and forming a wedge, and I also get some lag/stuttering.  Using the follow me command and high, steady fps it's 'one thousand one -stutter- one thousand two -stutter- etc...'  Also noticeable lag when cavalry knocks troops out of formation and they reform.  I've already suggested Motomataru's formation code before and I'll suggest it again:)

Use the siege option.  It makes the game quite fun, although its not pretty.  I can say, however, that last night for example that nations will still siege another (day 300), you just have to get the opponent to wavering before that happens.  My proof was last night when I brought Gundabad down to 1000 and the Thranduil immediately began sieging them.  He went from one base to the next until the faction was completely destroyed.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on May 01, 2012, 02:03:03 AM
Some time ago, when we still were working on this, I suggested an option for sieges that was between grinding to get lords to siege and being able to siege freely.

Once achieving a certain rank, the player could "buy" a one time consumable item for one siege (unlimited? a limited number of them for the whole game?). It'd cost some influence and a LOT of resources. Could be a special banner, a horn, something like that.

It could make him a leader of a host of lords for that one siege.

Or we could allow for switching sieges in options.

Anyway, I thought this would feel like the player can do stuff himself, but not without earning it first. Grinding shouldn't feel like grinding, but there needs to be some progression, something to do continuously.

But all that's just talk for now.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on May 01, 2012, 02:27:59 AM
@Mad Vader

Like the rest I'd like to see the strategic AI tweaked.  IMHO the AI lords are aggressive enough they're just held back by the low 'faction strength must be less than X' requirement.  The rating required before they attack is so low it puts the player in a catch-22 situation.  The player needs to grind a faction down but once that factions ratings drop they stop leaving their camps and you get a stalemate. 

Also part of this is the low rate of influence gain and the high cost of the war strategy option.  I've only used the war strategy option once as the cost is just so high.  But it did get the Gondor AI to take out the Umbar camp at a higher faction strength rating than what the AI requires to attack.

I'm probably in the minority here but I really, really don't care for the current formation code.  I've noted several odd behaviors with it, such as cavalry just stopping and forming a wedge, and I also get some lag/stuttering.  Using the follow me command and high, steady fps it's 'one thousand one -stutter- one thousand two -stutter- etc...'  Also noticeable lag when cavalry knocks troops out of formation and they reform.  I've already suggested Motomataru's formation code before and I'll suggest it again:)
But this is Motomataru's formation code (heavily modified). Not sure what happens with the horsies though, it's kind of complicated to look into it if you don't have a savegame that will get you the same problem every time, and you know that devs don't play their games :). Stops and stutters you say.

I'll definitely look into making marshalls do more stuff (even if it is patrolling around borders), so cancelled campaigns never happen (Rivendell is probably the worst at this).
What I'm seeing here in the replies is that we need more options for the player to influence sieges - not quite initiate them himself, but the ability to adjust the game tempo to his progress, without resorting to too much grinding.
I was toying with the idea for the various faction strength requirements (like 2000 for sieging) to decrease over time, so Middle Earth would increasingly become free-for-all over time and factions would be able to do anything they want, but that may still not be good enough, as the player has no input into the rate of easing restrictions. Have to think about this more.
But if you have a brilliant idea, I'll just do what you say. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 01, 2012, 03:15:43 AM
I was toying with the idea for the various faction strength requirements (like 2000 for sieging) to decrease over time, so Middle Earth would increasingly become free-for-all over time and factions would be able to do anything they want, but that may still not be good enough, as the player has no input into the rate of easing restrictions. Have to think about this more.
This is actually a very good idea.

I've been thinking on those issues for a while and I have several ideas:

1. Some balance needs to be found between the player having his say and War of the Ring playing out properly, like a true onslaught of evil it was. My idea is to have a separate "hardcore" set of campaign options, which I originally thought to release as a submod - http://mbx.streetofeyes.com/index.php/topic,2740.0.html . The other campaign would be with the milder options and would progress more gradually, but still faster then the current one - MW's idea of siege requirements slowly coming down sounds very promising in this regard.

As I envision it, the "hardcore" campaign shouldn't have siege requirements on good side fortresses, so that the evil factions attack constantly, while the good ones defend. If the defenders are successful, they'll bring the evil factions' ratings down enough and be able to counterattack. Ideally, without the player's intervention, the good side should lose on a good campaign, but win (thanks to the 50% autocalc evil strength in evil campaigns) on an evil campaign. So the player's strategic task would be to turn the tide, rather then to progress the campaign.

The regular campaign, as I envision it, would be the same, but more gradual. An important thing is for it to be smooth and, ideally, still developing by itself too, without unsolvable stalemates that can only be broken by the player. Centering the campaign fully on the player breaks the immersion and takes the challenge away IMO. The player should adapt to the war, not the other way around.

2. To resolve this issue once and for all, it needs to be properly playtested while being developed. The devs probably wouldn't have enough time for this, but there are several people here who would, including me. Just teleporting the PC somewhere safe, leveling him up to level 8 and fast-scrolling time with Ctrl+Space (and repeating all this a couple of times) would already yield enough information on how the campaign progresses with certain options.

I deem this to be the most important thing currently, so I'd like to volunteer to help on this. Ideally, I'd like to participate in developing the parameters for both campaigns (or for one, if my twin campaigns idea gets discarded), but if, for some reason, the devs want to do it themselves exclusively, I'd like to at least help with testing, scrolling the campaigns through time to see how they develop independently of the player.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 01, 2012, 03:39:31 AM
@Mad Vader

Like the rest I'd like to see the strategic AI tweaked.  IMHO the AI lords are aggressive enough they're just held back by the low 'faction strength must be less than X' requirement.  The rating required before they attack is so low it puts the player in a catch-22 situation.  The player needs to grind a faction down but once that factions ratings drop they stop leaving their camps and you get a stalemate. 

Also part of this is the low rate of influence gain and the high cost of the war strategy option.  I've only used the war strategy option once as the cost is just so high.  But it did get the Gondor AI to take out the Umbar camp at a higher faction strength rating than what the AI requires to attack.

I'm probably in the minority here but I really, really don't care for the current formation code.  I've noted several odd behaviors with it, such as cavalry just stopping and forming a wedge, and I also get some lag/stuttering.  Using the follow me command and high, steady fps it's 'one thousand one -stutter- one thousand two -stutter- etc...'  Also noticeable lag when cavalry knocks troops out of formation and they reform.  I've already suggested Motomataru's formation code before and I'll suggest it again:)
But this is Motomataru's formation code (heavily modified). Not sure what happens with the horsies though, it's kind of complicated to look into it if you don't have a savegame that will get you the same problem every time, and you know that devs don't play their games :). Stops and stutters you say.

I'll definitely look into making marshalls do more stuff (even if it is patrolling around borders), so cancelled campaigns never happen (Rivendell is probably the worst at this).
What I'm seeing here in the replies is that we need more options for the player to influence sieges - not quite initiate them himself, but the ability to adjust the game tempo to his progress, without resorting to too much grinding.
I was toying with the idea for the various faction strength requirements (like 2000 for sieging) to decrease over time, so Middle Earth would increasingly become free-for-all over time and factions would be able to do anything they want, but that may still not be good enough, as the player has no input into the rate of easing restrictions. Have to think about this more.
But if you have a brilliant idea, I'll just do what you say. :)

Maybe instead of rank, the idea should be centered on army?  The would be that a player would first be able to host a large enough army for possible sieges (let's say 140).  The reason for this is because sometimes you will not continue to stay with one faction, but help other factions thereby losing the further gain of influence with your previous faction (and thus the influence bonus).

Also, influence for gaining rank should be easier to obtain.  Some areas that are missing is that you gain influence for destroying parties without you having to have another faction join the battle (or in quests as some require you to destroy 6 war parties of a faction, etc.).  The idea woud be that you gain favor with the locals for keeping their lands safe.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 01, 2012, 04:12:30 AM
Indeed, the rank point gain needs to be reworked, for example a quest like Dispatch Raging trolls, in which you must kill 1 or 2 measly trolls, gives you a whooping 70 rank points. While destroying a faction ruler or just a lord's large host may give you about 5 rank points or so, it makes no sense. Giving a lot of rank points for destroying parties might make it too easy to gain ranks, but it would still make more sense than what we have currently.

So maybe give 20 rank points for the troll quest, while making the party of trolls larger, so they are an actual threat, and give about 50 for a large leader's host. And about 35 for Lord's hosts. The troll party should be consisting of at least 10 trolls, they are too rare in the game anyways. Only parties I've seen using trolls are Moria war parties, which are super rare themselves lol.

Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on May 01, 2012, 08:46:55 AM
But this is Motomataru's formation code (heavily modified). Not sure what happens with the horsies though, it's kind of complicated to look into it if you don't have a savegame that will get you the same problem every time, and you know that devs don't play their games :). Stops and stutters you say.

Credits list Foxyman for the formation code, same person different name?  I've always used Motomataru's 12/28/10 release for my personal mods and never seen any of the issues I've experienced in this mod.  What I've seen playing TLD:
1.  Cavalry heavy forces will sometimes just stop and reform wedge mid battle leaving them very vulnerable.
2.  There's usually one soldier way off by themselves and not part of their formation.  Usually see it with infantry but occasionally cavalry.
3.  The stuttering/lag, most noticeable with the follow me command or heavy cav scattering archer formations.
4.  Mounted leaders are prone to charging.  The version I've used mounted or not they stay next to the infantry.
5.  Archers frequently deployed behind infantry on level ground.
6.  Not seeing the AI portion.  AI usually just charges ahead. 
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on May 01, 2012, 09:20:35 AM
But this is Motomataru's formation code (heavily modified). Not sure what happens with the horsies though, it's kind of complicated to look into it if you don't have a savegame that will get you the same problem every time, and you know that devs don't play their games :). Stops and stutters you say.

Credits list Foxyman for the formation code, same person different name?  I've always used Motomataru's 12/28/10 release for my personal mods and never seen any of the issues I've experienced in this mod.  What I've seen playing TLD:
1.  Cavalry heavy forces will sometimes just stop and reform wedge mid battle leaving them very vulnerable.
2.  There's usually one soldier way off by themselves and not part of their formation.  Usually see it with infantry but occasionally cavalry.
3.  The stuttering/lag, most noticeable with the follow me command or heavy cav scattering archer formations.
4.  Mounted leaders are prone to charging.  The version I've used mounted or not they stay next to the infantry.
5.  Archers frequently deployed behind infantry on level ground.
6.  Not seeing the AI portion.  AI usually just charges ahead.
Not sure why foxy is listed for that - the credit goes to Motomataru and Treebeard (it's PoP's formation code). I merged it in and modified it slightly for TLD (trolls charging etc.)

Some issues were likely fixed for PoP by this time, so I'll get to merge in the latest fixes at least.
I don't think you meant to be mean by point 6., a few less organized factions are set to charge blindly.
Thanks for the other observations! If I find the time, I'll look into some of them.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Carthean on May 01, 2012, 09:23:17 AM
I think some of the Nazgul should be lords of Mordor like Gothmog, Pharakad, etc.  >:D

Gothmog wasn't a Nazgul and iirc he's in the mod. And no, we don't want the Nazgul as army leaders.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on May 01, 2012, 10:27:11 AM
I don't think you meant to be mean by point 6., a few less organized factions are set to charge blindly.
Thanks for the other observations! If I find the time, I'll look into some of them.

Not trying to be mean:)  What I've seen in TLD is a lot different than what I've seen in my playing around where the player's troop are a small part of the force in large battles.  What I'm used to seeing is the opposing AI forces meet in the middle.  The skirmishers shoot it out, cav tries for the archers and after the preliminaries the infantry clashes in the center.  The main thing is the forces appear to be under control and in TLD there's just a lot of charging.

Off topic, PoP?  Forgive me but I've been out of the M&B loop for awhile.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Triglav on May 01, 2012, 02:28:43 PM

I was toying with the idea for the various faction strength requirements (like 2000 for sieging) to decrease over time, so Middle Earth would increasingly become free-for-all over time and factions would be able to do anything they want, but that may still not be good enough, as the player has no input into the rate of easing restrictions. Have to think about this more.

This sounds sensible enough and how about just tying it in with player level, like the war start? You trigger the war when you're what, lvl 8, you trigger all out slaughter by the time you're 20 or something? Maybe a message like "The war expands, commanders are getting bolder! (siege requirement strength reduced by 100)" for each level gained after war start?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 01, 2012, 02:40:53 PM
You trigger the war when you're what, lvl 8, you trigger all out slaughter by the time you're 20 or something?

This is a really good idea. Trust me, I've played TLD quite extensively, triggering an all-out war by +/- level 20 would simply rock. This is about the time when the dull grinding starts - and you'll be escalating things instead of it!

BTW, if the siege requirements will be dropped to 0 this way, maybe it'd be wise to have the faction die only when all its fortresses have been destroyed/taken? The death at 0 rating and the last-stand armies don't make much sense in the environment where the lords siege everything, it'd be better to let factions fight until their last stronghold is destroyed.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Pingpong on May 01, 2012, 07:49:41 PM
That would be awesome :D
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 02, 2012, 02:14:31 AM
Currency:
Yeah, okay, throw the rotten fruit at me, but hear me out. From the original story we know the civilian economy used gold as a reliable store of value.
Why not make Erebor coins a convertible currency, on the premise that they contain gold?
Trading on favor isn't a bad idea, but as the game wears on building up a "war chest" in a faction's territory is an unbelievably inconvenient grind. None of the vendors can take more than 2-4 metal at a time and there are only 1-2 vendors per city, so you have to shop your scrap metal around 3-4 towns just to build up enough "resource units" to ship your army to a new theater.
If you could trade scrap for civilian money -- Erebor coins -- and pay your troops with it in a pinch it would fix everything.
But there's a catch: unless you're actually in Erebor (or IH Mine) the exchange rate is terrible. The gold coins come from the civilian marketplace, and while your logistics officers don't expect a profit when you trade them scrap metal for RU's the civilian merchants do and so only pay half-price for scrap. (To Dwarf society gold is favor -- they are one and the same.)
Making dwarf coin the universal currency prevents having to add another currency type to the game. To simplify further the "vendors" who run on favor don't take gold (they're part of the government.) Outside of Dwarf cities gold coins are only good for paying troops (they will surely accept civilian gold coins in lieu of government-issue RU's). If you run out of Rohan Bucks your cost comes out of your Dwarf Bucks. Simple.
To make this work with minimal effort you don't even need to add new buildings or vendors, just make the mayor or goods merchant auto-sell all your scrap when the player selects the conversation option. Simple.
The only exceptions are Elves, who would only trade on favor (RU's), and of course Dwarves, who only trade in gold (for them gold is favor).

Sieges:
I kind of like the idea of buying "siege tokens", but why not call them real names like catapults and rams and make carrying them slow you to a crawl?
If you wanted to really make it shiny you'd change the map icon to a big wooden catapult, but that's not really necessary. The point is you've paid big bucks to put your army into a "siege configuration" whose temporary nature is reinforced by the inconveniently slow map speed. Players will naturally expect their siege gear to be consumed if the effects of carrying it make doing so grossly inconvenient.

Pacing of the War and Its Effect on Northerners:
If you're a Rohan or Gondor player the situation starts out pretty desperate, as it should. When you hit level 8 you'll have to really hustle to save Westfold and Cair Andros, but it's doable. I'm anticipating the "siege momentum" problem will be fixed, so let's assume if Rohan gets rolled the whole nation will inevitably burn, with Gondor almost as sure a thing if nothing is done to help.
But if you're a Northerner your only option is to abandon your people and go save Rohan once the war starts or help your own people while Rohan burns. "But ... what about 'The Northern Experience'?" you may ask yourself. I have a solution!
If you pick a Northern nationality for your character the war in the north starts first! Now you'll get a chance to spend your lower levels tooling around with your own people, fighting your own tribe's battles, and gaining your own nation's favor -- but you can do this without sacrificing Rohan and to a lesser extent Gondor.
Eh? Good idea? Bad? Impossible to implement?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on May 02, 2012, 05:46:04 AM
I like the siege and northern experience ideas. I don't per se like.the current currency system but I don't really like your suggestion any better. At the very least I think Rohan should start the war later since they really did join the war after everyone else. Lore is the primary concern in basing such a decision however so i'm fine with whatever the devs think fits that best.

One suggestion of my own however would be a reworking of the initial "main threats" of each faction. It drives me crazy that Mirkwood is more.concerned with rhun than dol guldor. My thoughts are that dale should start most concerned with rhun and possibly dol guldor but honestly I think they should really just be focused on rhun at start. Erebor should be rhun and gundabad and if it's possible to pick the next target after the initial two fall then it should be moria. Mirkwood should be gundabad and dol guldor. Beornings should be same. Lorien should moria and dol guldor. Rivendell should be Moria and gundabad. I don't have memorized what everyones already is so i'm sure there are some already as stated but yeah I am just mainly concerned by mirkwood not being mainly concerned with dol guldor since they should have a.very strong desire to drive sauron out of their own ancestral lands.

Edit: oh and madvader if there is a fix for the lords not regaining full troops bug then that would go a long way to making the game more enjoyable.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 02, 2012, 06:48:20 AM
I second the idea with changing the initial diplomatic stances. Specifically, Rhun should only have Dale and Erebor as their main enemies. Currently, they overstretch themselves all the time by going for the Beornings (the weakest Northern faction with lowest ratings). Other re-orientations might be good too, but it'd be best to test them a little bit before implementing, especially if MV is going to implement that awesome idea about siege requirements dropping with player level. The balance will change significantly, it's best to test it beforehand.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 02, 2012, 12:14:14 PM
Assuming you're a government employee / foreign attache / etc, assuming, that is, that you trade on favor for the most part, that doesn't conflict with the lore. Your government pays your troops so long as you keep your government happy.

It doesn't even conflict with lore to say that your sponsor government(s) won't allow you to pay their troops directly when the favor runs out. But it doesn't conflict to allow it, either, and it would be darned convenient.

And gold is, of course, featured very prominently in the source texts. It seems like an obvious way to help a player out once they start raking in enough loot to not mind selling at a loss. At that point your time is more valuable than money -- and it gives us something to spend our spoils on once we've bought everything else.

If you don't want to do that at least give the capital cities more industrial capacity. Minas Tirith, industrial heart of Gondor, can only take 4 bits of scrap metal per day? Is it really necessary to force us to ride around selling junk to half a dozen cities just to keep our army fed?
It breaks immersion, turning the War of the Rings into Sanford and Son (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WqazleR3FE).
(Yes, that's the music I hear in my head when I'm tooling around looking for buyers for my scrap metal ...)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 02, 2012, 12:30:02 PM
Just give all the cities's smiths and suppliers more resources, problem solved. I also do not agree on your idea about the war starting earlier in the north and using the north as a MMORPG's newbie zone. That's how I see it, shit was serious in the North anyways  :P.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on May 02, 2012, 12:35:21 PM
I agree that having 18 different quasi-currencies is silly. It was a misguided attempt to pretend there's no economy and limit the player's options. Simple universal gold coins would have been better, just as in Native.
Also, the scrap metal recycling bit is silly too. Just turn "Item Restrictions" to Off in the options menu to receive regular loot. Won't solve the traders running out of money though, but there are plenty of towns if you are in the Gondor and Rohan areas.

Disclaimer: these are my personal opinions on all things silly, not ones belonging to the magical entity known as the "TLD Team"
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Triglav on May 02, 2012, 01:00:36 PM
Ya, there were many arguments on the financial system and loot availability before, MV found it silly, mtarini and a few others found it smart, some just didn't have an opinion, but pleasepleaseplease let's not go there all over again, k? Overall the decision was made to make it like it is now, with some bits modifyable in cheat options.

The whole concept behind it was that this is not a trading/economy game. So feeding your army should be taken care of by the faction you're fighting for. Aragorn didn't have to pay for stuf wherever he went, did he? Nor did the Nazguls or the orcs. The system is supposed to show an epic battle between light and dark, not feudal squabbles, mercenary armies and mercantilism.

If the system has flaws, then these flaws should be fixed to make it closer to the general idea that the player shouldn't have to worry about finances and making "Money", but only about defeating the enemy (so food should be cheap enough and fation rank should yield enough pay so the hardcoded sytem of having to pay troops weekly doesn't get broken). But it doesn't mean the system should be abolished and the native system implemented and players reduced from epic heroes or villains to looters and mercenaries.

So yes, I agree. It's not smooth now, but it can be fixed by giving more smiths more resources, maybe even increase the value of scraps. You kill 20 orcs, get 4 scraps, well, defeating 20 orcs should surely earn your warriors some food and some swords too... And while I love economic games, mercenaries, traders, pirates, etc, and would love to play a detailed renaissance mod with all those, I really don't like this in TLD environment. (also just my personal opinion here)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 02, 2012, 01:09:58 PM
(also just my personal opinion here)

Which is very valid, I find it silly that you have to pay for weapons and armor too, the simple ones at least but then the game would be too easy, so it is understandable. Anyways your main focus should be the faction strenght/lord thingy, overall the flow of the war, if you don't mind me saying guys :), so we shouldn't shower them with ideas about different matters.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 02, 2012, 09:50:08 PM
That you are authorized to command troops from day 1 doesn't make your status as paymaster / quartermaster / logistics officer a far-fetched proposition.
Once we've crushed a few orc armies the government paying our way seems right, too. Aragorn the Anonymous has to loot scrap metal to pay for his troops, but Aragorn the Renowned has a logistics guy with government connections who handles all that.
The big problem with paying our way with a flat wage is we could disband the army and pocket the money. Aragorn wouldn't do that, nor would the government let him.
So part of our government perk package is [measly] pay and most is [quite generous] army upkeep, but we don't get to pocket the unused upkeep funds.

On to the [lack of] romance of looting scrap metal ... by the time we meet him Aragorn has more important things to worry about than prying scraps of metal off dead orcs. Yet we know that orc equipment has at least some metal and metal is of at least some intrinsic value.
We even know that not only is wartime looting done IRL, but that commanders with a nose for "liberating" supplies are celebrated by their men (ever heard of "King Rat"?)
What if you're the kind of pragmatic hero who wants to loot the bodies for valuables? There's no reason you shouldn't be able to ... if you have the desire and skill to do it.
You should see where this is going: "Looting" skill gets you scrap metal. Since you start at 0 the scrap metal game mechanic becomes optional in a natural, believable way.

Other stuff in the loot table still shows up. Even Aragorn wouldn't walk away from perfectly healthy and ready-to-ride horses, would he? (The relative value of food problem, i.e. "Human flesh" and "Maggoty Bread" having value to humans, has been discussed elsewhere.)

On the "Sanford and Son Effect" just let us dump ALL of our scrap anywhere there's a smithy. Whether that's easiest to do by giving the smiths 99,999 RU's or by adding a dialog option, "I have some metal scraps for you," just get me off the pawnshop circuit and back on the battlefield, please and thank you!
And the number of cities is deceiving: the old TLD had TWO smiths per city; the new one only has one. Some cities are even lacking a supply shop. How people buy food in these places is anybody's guess, but if we're forbidden access to whatever that food source is at least let us unload our loot without the hassle and get us back to the war.

The final idea is just give us RU's as loot. The camp followers do the scrap-metal-prying and Sanford and Sonning behind the scenes; we just get the RU's and go on fighting.

Paying foreign troops would still be an inconvenience. But I also don't disagree with the reasoning behind it -- at first. So when we get to a certain rank a government's support becomes fungible. "You've killed a lot of orcs doing what you're doing. We trust you. Here's the money for your Woodelf Archers. Now go kick some more ass," seems a proper attitude at a certain rank. It also gives the player another character development milestone.

Long post, sorry for that. None of these ideas are as important as getting me out of Lamont's red truck and back on the battlefield. However you do it just do it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on May 02, 2012, 10:47:11 PM
Agreed to let it rest in peace.
Btw, there are TWO merchants per town, one with equipment, and one with horsies and food. Both accept everything you sell them. You might have missed this.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 03, 2012, 01:08:06 AM
Agreed to let it rest in peace.
Btw, there are TWO merchants per town, one with equipment, and one with horsies and food. Both accept everything you sell them. You might have missed this.
Didn't miss it at all. The old version, in addition to having 1 supply merchant (horsies and food) had TWO smithies, one for weapons and one for armor.
The new towns only have 1 smith.

In addition some are missing a supply merchant while others are missing a smith.

Lastly they do not accept everything you sell them, if by "accept" you mean "pay for". In fact once you soak up their starting funds, ~1k, you can only sell 2 bits of scrap to them per day. At 2 shops per city in most cities that's 4 cities for 16 units of scrap. Just one medium-sized battle will routinely produce 16 or more units of scrap.

If that's the way the game is intended to work then fine. But I'm not sure if you understand just how inconvenient it is or if you intended for players to have to visit town after town after town selling 4 bits of scrap at each one just to clear the inventory from a single significant battle.
If you're in the market for items you don't notice the problem right away, as the stuff you buy soaks up the value of the scrap metal.
If you're in the market for RU's themselves, which is a very valid thing to want if you've gone to the trouble of training up elite soldiers and want to keep using them, that's when you realize you can't get the money to pay for them except in little dribs and drabs.
That there is only one smithy per town only makes the problem worse, but really you don't need to add smiths to solve the problem, just give us a way to unload our loot.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on May 03, 2012, 01:10:52 AM
Just how many scraps do you get? The part of the loot code giving you scraps may be unbalanced (i.e. you get too many scraps).

It most likely is, I think GA might've overdone it in 3.13.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 03, 2012, 03:13:45 AM
Well after defeating say 90 gundabad orcs, I'd get a full inventory of good quality scraps hehe, but anyways that's fine. The elite soldiers cost a lot anyways, especially elves and you can barely maintain them currently. So just give smiths more resource points.

Or tweak unit salaries a bit so that the government funding would cover most of them at appropriate ranks...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 03, 2012, 05:35:04 AM

Or tweak unit salaries a bit so that the government funding would cover most of them at appropriate ranks...

Good point.

I have also had problems in paying the salaries for my troops on purely government funding.  I'm currently the Hero of Rohan, Friend of Gondor, Hope of Lothlorien and Mirkwood and a few other ranks.  It takes a LOT of scrap to pay for an army of about 143 troops (most high tier) and so I would prefer a better system of payment from other sources than purely scrap.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 03, 2012, 06:31:41 AM
I'd say that dropping the salaries would be a bad decision, as resource constraints currently impose an effective ceiling on the quantity of player's troops. Without those constraints, the player'd be fielding an army vastly outnumbering the armies of enemy lords. IMO, that'd be very bad for balance.

With 143 top-tier troops, like in the example above, you're supposed to have hard time supporting your army, otherwise you'll just continue growing it until it's bigger then anything the enemy can muster. The player is already OP by the fact that he is human and by the fact that his tactical combats take place instantly, so he exerts much control over the strategic playground. Giving him huge armies on top of that would make the game too easy.

Maybe some non-monetary form of cap can take place - like capping the leadership skill at +/- 6 - but uncontrollable growth of player's army would be a bad thing, IMO.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 03, 2012, 08:11:42 AM
I'd say that dropping the salaries would be a bad decision, as resource constraints currently impose an effective ceiling on the quantity of player's troops. Without those constraints, the player'd be fielding an army vastly outnumbering the armies of enemy lords. IMO, that'd be very bad for balance.

With 143 top-tier troops, like in the example above, you're supposed to have hard time supporting your army, otherwise you'll just continue growing it until it's bigger then anything the enemy can muster. The player is already OP by the fact that he is human and by the fact that his tactical combats take place instantly, so he exerts much control over the strategic playground. Giving him huge armies on top of that would make the game too easy.

Maybe some non-monetary form of cap can take place - like capping the leadership skill at +/- 6 - but uncontrollable growth of player's army would be a bad thing, IMO.

I don't think anyone is suggesting to drop the salaries, in fact, most of us (as you are) would like to see more financing to come from income generated through trust with the locals as opposed to depending solely on scraps.

In terms of my army, I'm over 350 days in the game, so I don't see the problem with 143 troops and I might need to parse the concept of 143 a bit as I said "most" and you said "all" (by the way, top-tier does also not mean the highest rank, many are still climbing).  There is no way I could get or afford 143 top-tier troops.  I don't know anyone who could...without cheating.  So, as a result I spent tons of time selling goods to keep my army and to keep them fed.

Also, you don't really keep growing because at my level (I think its something like 40) I almost rarely get a notch above in level (thus being able to increase my troop count).  I only get that by gaining rank, which of itself is already hard to do (I think its +1 troop count per rank).  So, I consider this "cap" enough.

Also, since we're using me as an example, I would suggest that by the time you've been over 350 days in the game that you should be able to have at the very least a small host, which according to my game is anywhere from 120 to 160 (the big ones are reserved for kings and are over 220).

Anyway, I think we need to consider game play as well.  If I'm 350 days in the game, 40+ level, Hero of Rohan + high ranking with several other groups then you as player should have a right to have more control of the war.  I don't intend to play to day 600 to finish the war.  I would like to try other races as my primaries, other setups of armor/fighting, etc.

Just my opinion.

So, getting back to my point, it would be great to get more funding from the locals as the beginning of the game serves as a perfect time to get cash from whatever you get (e.g. rank, scrap, etc.), but as you level and gain rank you should be paid accordingly and not have to spent countless time selling items.  Good to see most people agree with this idea.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on May 03, 2012, 08:30:17 AM
FS, can you give me an example from your game for these:
- Your leadership skill and charisma
- Actual and max party size, rank bonus for party size
- Ranks levels (the numbers) for the factions you use troops from
- Party upkeep breakdown (X RP for Rohan dudes, Y RP for Gondorians etc.)

And point out what seems unbalanced.

I don't have the time to play the game for 300 days, and can't gauge how much there is a cheat/exploit bias in player comments (and there always is :)).
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on May 03, 2012, 09:44:36 AM
Mad Vader from my last long game that corrupted, found the last backup save at day 487.

Level 37.
Charisma 15, Leadership 7(Horn of Gondor and Simarillion)

Max party size 109.  10(Base) + 35(Leadership) + 15(Charisma) + 49(Ranks).
Didn't notice exactly at what point Rank only gives +1 instead of +2 to party size.

Rank 16 Gondor, Rank 11 Rohan and Rank 2 Mirkwood.
Party upkeep if I went all out.  2 companions(Cirdil and Luevan), 87 Citadel Knights, 12 Eorl Guards and 8 Swan Knights.
10303 Gondor, 1308 Rohan and 7 Mirkwood.

Thing is I wasn't going, or felt the need, to go all out.  At this point my force was 20 Citadel Knights, 10 Eorl Guards and 30-40 Dol Amroth trainees.  I was mostly helping up north as the south had stalemated.  I was using the free space for rescuing prisoners which I sold back to their faction.  The Dol Amroth trainees would go to a Gondor lord once the majority were veteran knight or better.  Normal upkeep cost was ~6400 RP for Gondor and ~1100 RP for Rohan.  Had over a half million in Gondor and about quarter million in Rohan.







Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on May 03, 2012, 10:16:46 AM
Thanks LC. So you are actually saying you had no party upkeep problems and people complaining are just being babies who want to run around with 100+ top troops and not pay for it. :)
How did you make your upkeep when you had your 100+ knight party?
Maybe all people need is a good advice. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 03, 2012, 11:02:51 AM
I don't know about changes between versions, but I can tell that I could support an army of 130+ high-tier elves (all three factions) in 3.01 exclusively on government allowances. I clearly remember re-balancing the army for that purpose, so as to fit those allowances.

As for 3.13 - by day 100 I usually have 85-100 mostly high-tier troops of my faction. In all cases they can be supported fully by government allowance. Only rarely would their pay exceed it, if I have high training skill and don't fight major battles for some time (which is a rare occasion).
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 03, 2012, 11:16:00 AM
FS, can you give me an example from your game for these:
- Your leadership skill and charisma
- Actual and max party size, rank bonus for party size
- Ranks levels (the numbers) for the factions you use troops from
- Party upkeep breakdown (X RP for Rohan dudes, Y RP for Gondorians etc.)

And point out what seems unbalanced.

I don't have the time to play the game for 300 days, and can't gauge how much there is a cheat/exploit bias in player comments (and there always is :)).

Ok, so my character is level 42, leadership 10, charisma is 30 and my rank is Hero of Rohan, Hope of Lothlorien, Hope of Mirkwood and known/friend of most other factions.  I also have some special items, although I don't remember them all here.  I did complete the Ent quest (which was REALLY cool by the way).

Max party size was 143, currently holding it around 128 due to costs.

The difference that this baby  :lol: had was that I was playing up north and hoped to use non-Rohan units as I would like to enjoy all the races.  So, had I remained with purely Rohan's units then I would be absolutely fine as LCJr mentioned (i.e. he got paid by Gondor and had mainly Gondor units even if he was up north).  I decided to leave all of my Rohan units at Edoras so I could enjoy the other groups.

Anyway, I'm not complaining per se.  I'm only saying that it would be better to have some way to pay for my large group of troops other than consistently hunting for scrap, especially after I've reached that level with Rohan.  Yet, had I still been much lower tier (level + low rank) than absolutely I would have agreed with paying through scrap.  That's just what life is about while climbing the ladder.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on May 03, 2012, 11:32:58 AM
I didn't call anyone a baby:)  I also don't think I ever had more than 80-some high tier troops.  At that point I did like Rene Korda and had a mix of Gondor and Rohan troops so my faction income covered the majority if not all of my troop costs.  If my costs got too high I would put some of the top tier troops in storage and take on new recruits.

That's my best advice, use and abuse the troop storage in your capital.  Thin out your top tier troops to keep your costs down and build a reserve in case something goes seriously wrong.  Same advice for the people that think the small factions don't get enough recruits.  Recruit troops when you don't need them and store them for when you do.

The only faction I've seen a problem with is Imaraldis/Rivendell if you want to go purely with your faction.  I haven't tried Khand or Harad yet so can't say about them.  Corsairs weren't a problem.  There's just not much action with Moria and their area of control seems small.  Most of the fighting I did was earning me rank points with Lothlorien or the Beornings so it was quest, quest, quest for rank points.  Only having the two shops to sell to limits your income too.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 03, 2012, 01:26:36 PM
I have a Rohan army that costs me 4k/pay period in net upkeep (Rohan salary - upkeep = -4k).

The first time I went north I ran out of money after like 2 pay periods. I was obliged to return to Rohan to build up my "war chest".
I wanted 40k in Rohan bucks before venturing North again. That's when I discovered how hard it is to turn scrap metal into RU's.
I don't want more money given to me, I just want a more convenient way to convert what I've rightfully earned into the right kind of money. If all you did was give the smiths more resources to trade (especially faster regeneration of RU's) I'd be happy. If you reduced the drop rate of scrap metal that's probably also a good idea, as right now a medium-sized-army can fill your packs. Only a large-sized army should do that.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 03, 2012, 02:38:18 PM
Anybody tried playing a Rivendell elf and stacking up Elvish knights and Arnorian ones? Didn't think so  :P. I had like 40 knights in total and I could barely keep up selling all the scraps I could to the rivendell camp, along with the daily income I had at Hero of Imladris or whatever the name was of the last rank. But that was an old character and I soon gave up on using elven knights since they were too expensive, stacking sentinels and infantry instead.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 05, 2012, 12:53:14 AM
I'll venture a guess that the only way to maintain a Rivendell army is by taking great multitudes of evil humans prisoner and paying your army's upkeep with the ransom money.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Samuellucas1993 on May 05, 2012, 06:11:52 AM
i would reguarly run around with 100+ troops, 50 high tier of gondor and rohan(swan, earl, thengal,brego) and have 60-70 lower tier ones, never ran into money troubles, always take prisoners if possible and free others, that gives easier income than scraps...
whenever i would see a lord with the option of needing reinforcements i would dump half the high tier dudes
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: fuman144 on May 06, 2012, 05:38:48 AM
Hi,ive been playing last days in middle earth and i got some question and suggestions firstly in next patch can you add a new unit for rohan called rohirrim royal guard wearing the armor like in the film add some more scale mails to look awsome ,i know you game i based of the books if you dont want that but please add the armor for the commanders to . can you please add epic plate armor for gondor and more armor for dwarf like the armors in drawf in your epic drawings in the victorious scene.Thats  all my suggestions now for the

Question: why does rohans heraldic armor have wierd purpule strips?, Will the minas tirith siege be like in the books or will it be normal?, how can i kill my self and the commanders?,if i destroy a race what will happen to there commanders?   
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 06, 2012, 05:55:06 AM
First, all of your suggestions will be instantly shot down when they are seen.

Second, I have no idea why there are purple stripes, I don't know what you mean by your second question, your character can die if you turn on that option in actions, enemy commanders cannot be killed by you, only by other lords, if you destroy a faction* the lords will be gone from the game.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 06, 2012, 10:57:27 AM
@fuman:
Rohan already has "King's Guard" units. You probably haven't seen them because they only hang around the King.

I managed to rescue a few in a previous game. They seem to be horse archers along the lines of Thengel Guards only they wear green and ride Rohan Warhorses instead of wearing brown and riding Thengel Warhorses. (In the old TLD the horses were only dressed differently, but in the new version they're slightly different, the Rohan horse having more armor and the Thengel horse having more of ... umm ... something else I can't remember, speed or hitpoints or something ...)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Triglav on May 06, 2012, 12:15:52 PM
can you please add epic plate armor for gondor

*shoots fuman144 down*
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on May 06, 2012, 02:18:50 PM
How about awesome Gondor plate armor then?  Oh and dwarves should be able ride bears for their cavalry.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Triglav on May 06, 2012, 02:33:55 PM
How about just awesome Gondor armour, eh?
I synthesized that design from book sources combined with an overall film colour theme, so people wouldn't feel too disasociated seeing our Gondorians. But everytime someone asks for Gondor plate armour my mind clouds and I push a granny down some stairs. So, please, think of the poor grannies...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 06, 2012, 02:38:22 PM
Does asking for awesum elvun armuuuur from da muviees have a similar effect?  :D
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 06, 2012, 02:44:31 PM
And how about Liv Tyler in armored bikini as a recruitable NPC?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 06, 2012, 03:01:50 PM
Oh oh wait I got it! Give rideable eagles xDDDDDDDDDDDD'.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on May 06, 2012, 08:22:58 PM
Or a butterfly that I can whisper to to save my ass when I'm about to get decimated? (Sorry Gandalf :P)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 07, 2012, 05:58:49 AM
How about just awesome Gondor armour, eh?
I synthesized that design from book sources combined with an overall film colour theme, so people wouldn't feel too disasociated seeing our Gondorians. But everytime someone asks for Gondor plate armour my mind clouds and I push a granny down some stairs. So, please, think of the poor grannies...

I wouldn't mind if their name was Mrs. Doubtfire...

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MadVader on May 11, 2012, 11:35:28 PM
That's why every mod needs a friendly PR person to shield the public from the rightful wrath of the devs. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 12, 2012, 12:12:35 AM
That's why every mod needs a friendly PR person to shield the public from the rightful wrath of the devs. :)
Unless on the "Sliding Scale of Product Quality vs. Customer Tolerance for Abuse" you're certain TLD is quality enough for anything you dish out.
(That's also known as the "Soup Nazi Theory".)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Carthean on May 12, 2012, 02:44:52 AM
D'aww, I liked WETA's Gondor plate armor.  :-[ Although if it were ever implemented I think only the Tower Guard or the lords should have it, and not every Tom, Dick, and Harry in Gondor's armies. Be that as it may, I like the design for most of the armor in the mod. It's very well done.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 14, 2012, 06:34:55 AM
Quick question to the devs:  Have you thought about incorporating the "more metal sound" mod to TLD?  I haven't kept up with it in a while, but when I used to use this mod, it created a much more realistic sound effect environment than traditional native.

FS

TLD doesn't use native sounds, we have a custom sound pack by DaBlade.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Xomy on May 14, 2012, 03:27:03 PM
Hello.  :green:

I've played your mod a bit, liked it a lot, but there's one thing I don't really like : the darkness of evil factions. In terms of colour I mean.
Sky is black, land is black, buildings are black, bodies are black, armor and weapons are black, even the human armis like khand or rhun are always black (grey sometimes).
I don't really play those factions because I'm tired of this darkness...
I know your mod is based on the books and I don't want my orcs to wear pink armors, but... Is there a way to give a better feeling when playing those factions ?

Thanks !
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Triglav on May 14, 2012, 04:07:45 PM
Hello.  :green:
I've played your mod a bit, liked it a lot, but there's one thing I don't really like : the darkness of evil factions. In terms of colour I mean.
Sky is black, land is black, buildings are black, bodies are black, armor and weapons are black, even the human armis like khand or rhun are always black (grey sometimes).
I don't really play those factions because I'm tired of this darkness...
I know your mod is based on the books and I don't want my orcs to wear pink armors, but... Is there a way to give a better feeling when playing those factions ?
Thanks !

Valid question.

But no. See darkness is the absence of light. And light is the one that creates rainbows. And the bad guys just wanna kill all the rainbows. And light. And just have the darkness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darkness

So there you have it.

But hey! It's not all that dark. Haradrim and Corsairs of Umbar are a bunch of jolly fellows with much colour, only fighting for the dark side for shits and giggles. Play them.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Carthean on May 14, 2012, 11:15:42 PM
Actually most of the Variags are slightly pale and they wear white armor a lot. And I would imagine orcs and uruks would be pretty grimy and stinky and dirty. And yes, the Haradrim are very colorful. My favorite evil faction to fight for besides Mordor.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cowsaresomething on May 15, 2012, 11:18:32 AM
I got this idea while mowing the lawn - could everytime a major event happens in the game (i.e. Your Faction/Immediate Enemy's Faction gain/lose (I don't know what it is called - you know - untouchable, very strong, strong), or gain/lose a city) your king summons you  and requests your advice in the war, and you could suggest things like patrolling your cities, hunting other lords, hunting down enemy patrols, withdrawing your forces, or sieging a town?

I'm not suggesting that if you are Mordor, and you are summoned and say "Siege Minas Tirith" that it would happen as a matter of course.  It should be related to your rank, persuasion level, the logic of the suggested action (?), and if your suggestions in the past have been good (like - "Player Name, you have always given me wise counsel, and I have no qualms about following it now.").

P.S. I love the Gondor Armor - especially when my Black Numenorians slice through it like butter.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 15, 2012, 11:58:42 AM
I got this idea while mowing the lawn - could everytime a major event happens in the game (i.e. Your Faction/Immediate Enemy's Faction gain/lose (I don't know what it is called - you know - untouchable, very strong, strong), or gain/lose a city) your king summons you  and requests your advice in the war, and you could suggest things like patrolling your cities, hunting other lords, hunting down enemy patrols, withdrawing your forces, or sieging a town?

I'm not suggesting that if you are Mordor, and you are summoned and say "Siege Minas Tirith" that it would happen as a matter of course.  It should be related to your rank, persuasion level, the logic of the suggested action (?), and if your suggestions in the past have been good (like - "Player Name, you have always given me wise counsel, and I have no qualms about following it now.").

P.S. I love the Gondor Armor - especially when my Black Numenorians slice through it like butter.

This is a great suggestion.  Maybe what could be done is that the player gets called in every time an ally city is destroyed?  Then the player can choose between several different quests such as: "destroy the war parties" or "destroy the raiding parties" or even hosts. 

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Sir_Alleyne on May 15, 2012, 05:09:38 PM
I got this idea from 1866 Mod for M&B.

In 1866 there are several parties running around (Vigilantes, Trappers, Outlaws etc.) and by completing certain tasks and fighting certain factions your relation with these factions goes up allowing you to recruit units from the parties that are running around.

Vigilante's like you enough you can recruit Deupty Sheriffs and Vigilantes

Outlaws like you enough you can recruit THieves and horse robbers.


So the though I had is that as your renown goes up, and your legend spreads, when you go to certain parties you can ask if some of the members of that party will want to follow you. And maybe your specific race and charisma  would play into that?

A company of rangers would surely be eager to follow such a Valorous and heroic Dunedain kinsman :D

Just a thought :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cowsaresomething on May 16, 2012, 10:47:27 AM
@FS  When you say an ally city, do you mean your own faction, one who fights the same enemies you do (like Mordor and Harad), or one that is on the same side as you?  If you mean the last one, I don't think it would work - e.g.  I don't think that the Haradrim would care if a Gungabad outpost was razed.

Also, from my understanding, not many cities are taken without the player helping.  I know that there are a few in Gondor and Rohan that go at the start of the war, but that is it, right?

I'm not sure about the quests - they just sound typical.  I mean, "Oh, Evil Bob, Gungabad Mirkwood Outpost has been razed.  Please go and destroy 3 Mirkwood Elves Patrols."  If the city being taken idea were kept, the quests should be special.  For example, "Oh, Gondorian Bob, vast amounts of Khand have been pouring in from the east.  I need you to hold them off for x days until our forces have been gathered to face this new threat."  Just more thoughts.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 16, 2012, 11:43:26 AM
The player already has the unique ability to recruit any mix of troops allied to his faction. Turning the player's army into a press gang seems way over-the-top.

You can always rescue prisoners.

The real challenge is upkeep, anyway, especially if you're Imladris or Erebor.

Running out of faction-specific favor actually does seem like something that might happen in The Book: you rescue a party of Dorfs, they travel with you for awhile, then they say something like, "It's been an honor serving with you, but we must return now to Erebor. Our people need us."
(That actually happens if you talk to the guys after the first "recall warning". I thought it was an awesome easy-to-miss little bit of added detail.)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 18, 2012, 04:05:39 AM
I have a suggestion on balancing the war in the North. One of the reasons for the good side's dominance there is their numerical superiority in terms of lords - they just field more armies. To correct thus, I suggest the following:

1. Adding two more lords to Dol Guldur. Hopefully, this will put an end to the counter-to-lore state of things when Lorien and Rivendell are attacking Dol Guldur whenever siege requirements drop and not vice versa.

2. Adding one more lord to Rhun. Rhun is faced with seven dwarven and Dale lords, supported by 3 Mirkwood and 3 Beorning lords. They desperately need to field at least one more army.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 18, 2012, 06:41:04 AM
I have a suggestion on balancing the war in the North. One of the reasons for the good side's dominance there is their numerical superiority in terms of lords - they just field more armies. To correct thus, I suggest the following:

1. Adding two more lords to Dol Guldur. Hopefully, this will put an end to the counter-to-lore state of things when Lorien and Rivendell are attacking Dol Guldur whenever siege requirements drop and not vice versa.

2. Adding one more lord to Rhun. Rhun is faced with seven dwarven and Dale lords, supported by 3 Mirkwood and 3 Beorning lords. They desperately need to field at least one more army.

Remember that each additional lord also means that if those lords are defeated in battle that the faction strength reduces quicker.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 18, 2012, 07:24:12 AM
Yeah, but their absence just means that the faction gets defeated much more often and loses even more strength that way.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: vota dc on May 18, 2012, 08:29:05 AM
2. Adding one more lord to Rhun. Rhun is faced with seven dwarven and Dale lords, supported by 3 Mirkwood and 3 Beorning lords. They desperately need to field at least one more army.

Beorning should go against Dol Guldur and Gundabad. Problem is Rhun consider Beorning as enemy and cross the map instead focusing on Dale and Erebor.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 18, 2012, 10:41:16 AM
I agree. Been pointing that out for a long time now. But Rhun would still need that additional lord. And Dol Guldur too, especially if Beornings go against them.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on May 18, 2012, 11:07:21 AM
Yeah I've mentioned that the northern factions need their starting enemies reworked. Rhun needs only dale and erebor, beornings need gundabad and dol guldor, mirkwood same, lorien - Moria and dol guldor, imladris - gundabad and moria. The last two could be flopped or all 3 for both of them maybe even better. But the whole everyone ganging up on rhun and mirkwood not starting with dol guldor needs changed badly. And if someone would tell me how to change those I would love to do some experimenting with it.

Also is there any way to give dwarfs priority in sieging gundabad and Moria? As with the mirkwood dol guldor thing I feel this is a lore issue that needs addressed
That would make sense indeed.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on May 19, 2012, 08:35:52 AM
Yeah, but their absence just means that the faction gets defeated much more often and loses even more strength that way.

Very true.  The player can't be everywhere and the auto-calculated battles go to whichever side has the most troops.

So along that line which battle speed are people using?  Anyone using Fast and do you notice any difference?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 19, 2012, 08:37:24 AM
Wait... battle speed is for the map? I always thought it was for ingame XD... the shame.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 19, 2012, 09:43:00 AM
Wait... battle speed is for the map? I always thought it was for ingame XD... the shame.

I second the question. Is menu-set battle speed for the map?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on May 19, 2012, 10:24:16 AM
Wait... battle speed is for the map? I always thought it was for ingame XD... the shame.

I second the question. Is menu-set battle speed for the map?

I think I'm entirely wrong about that, sorry:(
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Annuinir Thanguridhren on May 19, 2012, 10:28:15 AM
Yeah I think it's a speed modifier for running and swinging weapons and such. But I only ever play on normal so I've never even checked for a difference in combat I just usually can tell when I forget to take it off slow because everyone runs crazy slow.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 19, 2012, 10:57:42 AM
Well I play on fast, as it ups the difficulty rating, and I like faster and more dynamic combat anyways.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 19, 2012, 11:51:50 PM
The Gandalf visit as your "victory lap" was quite satisfying, have to say.

How tough would it be to put a King on the throne at MT? Gandalf said there'd be one but Elvis has left the castle. (Elvis = The King, har har.)

It would also be kind of cool if all the lords gathered at MT and just partied down. It's weird having all those Lords running around with absolutely nothing to do. They've already got their tents set up and everything; with all the booze confiscated from Captain Morbir they should be living it up.

So putting a King on the throne is hard. It's a new NPC, new code to write, new art, all that jazz. But Lords already appear in castles when they go there, so that part ought to be pretty easy.
You could just rename Denethor to ... whatever the right name is for the King ... and move him to the throne. He never stands up, moves around, or leaves the castle anyway ...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 22, 2012, 04:35:41 PM
Is it possible to make Osgiliath passable only if both parts of it are held by one side and only to the units of that side? Seeing good armies passing without concern through evil-occupied Osgiliath is kind of disconcerting.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cowsaresomething on May 23, 2012, 10:54:10 AM
Just a thought - when you get your daily salary from your faction, you could get a bonus if you are in an enemy's territory - as if you are raiding their land.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 23, 2012, 02:07:45 PM
Can more people be added to Minas Tirith? I mean like 20 times more. It's very well done, but it looks a bit like a beautiful, but empty, decoration now, instead of a bustling city.

Not if you want to crash everytime you visit it. It WAS quite empty in the books too, Pippin noticed it.


Yeah, I remember that. I envisioned it less empty myself, still. Probably a matter of interpretation, heavily affected by need for optimization.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 23, 2012, 05:39:47 PM
Re: Minas Tirith evacuated: nice catch. You guys are really well-read on your source material.

Y'know before I played TLD I couldn't stand how everybody made such a big deal over Tolkien. When I was a kid I knew this old hippie who was really into it. Had the sh*t on his walls and everything. When he told me his dog's name was "Frodo" I thought I was going to vomit, but the marijuana smoke must've been thick enough to suppress the gag reflex.

But that was then ... now I'm just going to have to read the books. Having actually lived in Tolkien's world for a while I can't hate it anymore.

How could you do this to me? Nice job, guys. ;)

At least Harry Potter still sucks. Nobody's going to make an M&B mod out of that, are they?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on May 24, 2012, 01:46:02 AM
Re: Minas Tirith evacuated: nice catch. You guys are really well-read on your source material.

Y'know before I played TLD I couldn't stand how everybody made such a big deal over Tolkien. When I was a kid I knew this old hippie who was really into it. Had the sh*t on his walls and everything. When he told me his dog's name was "Frodo" I thought I was going to vomit, but the marijuana smoke must've been thick enough to suppress the gag reflex.

But that was then ... now I'm just going to have to read the books. Having actually lived in Tolkien's world for a while I can't hate it anymore.

How could you do this to me? Nice job, guys. ;)

At least Harry Potter still sucks. Nobody's going to make an M&B mod out of that, are they?

I've always wondered if I would prefer to be Harry or Professor Dumbledork.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 24, 2012, 07:55:49 PM
The real question is "Coyote or Roadrunner?"
Harry's the Roadrunner. He's an airhead who gets lucky.
Voldemort is Wiley Coyote. He's a super-genius whose plans always fail due to some detail overlooked.
Hermione is, I suspect, an avatar of the author, whose girlhood crush on a Harry-like guy who was as popular and vacuous as she was unpopular and intelligent was re-imagined into Hermione's platonic near-worship of Harry.
Every character in the books that isn't trying to kill him fawns over him. Real people don't act that way unless you're a Beatle or Justin Bieber or something, and even then the magic wears off around age 19 or so. People act that way around "Harry" because the author felt that way about his real-world counterpart deep in her past and she's forcing anyone who reads her books to relive it with her.

Back on the much more agreeable subject of Tolkien, LOTR made it into the discussion of the Greek banking crisis! This is so nerdy it hurts:
http://www.brendanloy.com/lrt/2012/05/one-eurobond-to-rule-them-all/

My favorite quote:
“The Greeks delved too greedily and too deep. You know what they awoke in the darkness of the Bundesbank.”
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on May 24, 2012, 10:46:06 PM
==============================================================================================
This thread is for suggestions. The fact we're not working on the mod any longer doesn't make it an open chat. Thank you.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Samuellucas1993 on May 25, 2012, 10:40:20 PM
Capture enemy lord quest, How about you cannot capture the enemy's main lord, i just captured theoden and that completely decimates rohans ability to field any decent army's
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 26, 2012, 02:24:14 AM
The lord in question doesn't seem to be kept as prisoner, he appears in the field again quite soon.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: usn1996 on May 27, 2012, 05:40:55 PM
==============================================================================================
This thread is for suggestions. The fact we're not working on the mod any longer doesn't make it an open chat. Thank you.


you guys aren't working on the mod anymore?

Anyway, I understand the whole "balance" thing, but If your character is a "Becon of hope" to Gondor or something, don't you think that by then, you would be treated as a Lord, and Commander of that Nation, and could take/raze enemy settlements? Its the War of the Ring for christs sake, Dol Guldur was destroyed, And if you have 40 guys, and can take on 225 orcs, there are some balance issues. Im sure that there are some others that would love to claim "I took Minas Morgul" or "I took Minas Tirith" and took it all by themselves, or didnt have to wait hundreds of turns for a lord to do it.

Awesome mod though, sorry if I sound pissed
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 27, 2012, 06:14:14 PM
Officially the mod is either done or dead depending on how complete you view the existing work.

Unofficially there are still a couple of people cobbling away on the margins. You'll know them from all the rose petals placed at their feet by all the rest of us.

In its current state the game tells a coherent narrative, doesn't have too many major bugs that aren't the fault of the Mount and Blade engine (which seems to be getting pushed to its limit -- the "Native" world that shipped with M&B was much more modest in scope), and is "balanced" from the default PoV of the "Dawn of Man" side of the war: the good guys will get stomped without player intervention, but neither side will definitively "win".

In a Third Age game that's more about the War than the Fellowship all the bases are pretty much covered to justify calling it "done".

There are a couple of broken quests, at least I think the "Vengeance" quest is still broken, and a few rough edges, some weird terrain bugs and so forth, but commercial games have shipped with more problems that never got fixed and which people loved.
On the "MoO 3" / "Fallout 2" spectrum of bugs interfering with gameplay TLD in its current state is a solid "Fallout 2". (That's good, in case you've never heard of MoO 3 or Fallout 2.)

Those RCM guys on the other hand are completely insane and will be tweaking RCM from now until the Fifth Age. Just leave them to their work; when Sisyphus is rolling his boulder up yet another mountain it isn't polite to stare. ;)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 28, 2012, 04:50:32 AM
Those RCM guys on the other hand are completely insane and will be tweaking RCM from now until the Fifth Age. Just leave them to their work; when Sisyphus is rolling his boulder up yet another mountain it isn't polite to stare. ;)

RCM item and troop stats are finished and only minor tweaks are being done, which don't change gameplay significantly. The same can be said about native - vota_dc seems to continue fine-tuning its balance.

That said, please refrain from commenting critically on someone else's work if you're clueless about it. Thank you.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 28, 2012, 12:26:04 PM
I'm terribly sorry! I didn't mean my comment to be negative. Your team cares very much about the quality of your work and attention to detail is one of the indicators of that. Caring about your work is a quality I admire and not something I would ever disparage.
I also plan to enjoy your work for myself when I can clear enough time to play another game.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 28, 2012, 01:59:47 PM
I don't think he has a team, it's just him editing all by him self as far as I know :).
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Samuellucas1993 on May 28, 2012, 06:59:09 PM
Rene Korda overreaction much? he playfully talked about how you put in a lot of work and change it to perfection and you have a go at him, calm your farm mate.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on May 29, 2012, 12:57:13 AM
yeah yeah, English may not be the native tongue of all the people discussing here, text doesn't perfectly convey emotions and what we mean etc etc.

Happens.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 29, 2012, 01:56:05 PM
Don't jump on RK; this misunderstanding was totally my fault. I was overly familiar with someone who doesn't know me all that well. I am appropriately embarrassed by my faux paus and hope not to make a similar mistake in the future.

Now if making all the weapon lengths in RCM exactly match their 3D models I had compared to the First Labor of Hercules and the 3D modeler got mad that would be an overreaction, although I would have to impressed by our hypothetical artist's willingness to drill a metaphor right down to the very bottom to dig up an insult. ;)

I hope the second attempt at humor can put this line of conversation to rest on a lighthearted note. I meant no insult, but it was I who was in the wrong for giving it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on May 29, 2012, 02:26:59 PM
Let's just bury it. It was a miscommunication and I did overreact, should've been more relaxed about it. No grudges are borne anyway.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: fuman144 on May 31, 2012, 11:22:40 AM
How about adding the fellowship, they dont fight they just walk around like gandalf the lone rider. and in sieges good or bad force can join the sieges so that Minas Tirihs battle can be more realistic. And can we have our own banner plz the guard all ways say commander but whats a commander without a banner 
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Foshizzle on May 31, 2012, 02:18:44 PM
I think the number of Warg Riders Isengard, Dol Guldur, and Mordor get per army should be reduced. Not the White Hand or Wolf Riders, but the ones using Armored Wargs, mainly because it's incredibly repetitive having to fight upwards of 20 Armored Wargs. They are extremely fast, plow through infantry with ease, and take well over 100 damage to kill (mind you the most common hit you'll strike on them with a one-hander is around 20). They're effectively powerful as Wargs should be, but for the sake of repetitivity, I think their numbers should be reduced just a little, or at least their HP or speed, as currently they can easily outrun any horse, leading to chases of upwards of several minutes across the map trying to kill one Warg. The Wargs in the movies only take an arrow or two to bring down, not a huge line of infantry playing whack-a-mole.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Triglav on May 31, 2012, 03:28:56 PM
<something irrelevant> ... The Wargs in the movies ... <something else irrelevant>

Dude! Never, ever, even in your dreams, suggest anything to TLD devs with a "movie" argument. Ever!
It is guaranteed to provoke troll rage and have us stomp all over your post regardless of how well intentioned it may have been.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Minas_Ithil on May 31, 2012, 03:40:00 PM
I think the number of Warg Riders Isengard, Dol Guldur, and Mordor get per army should be reduced. Not the White Hand or Wolf Riders, but the ones using Armored Wargs, mainly because it's incredibly repetitive having to fight upwards of 20 Armored Wargs. They are extremely fast, plow through infantry with ease, and take well over 100 damage to kill (mind you the most common hit you'll strike on them with a one-hander is around 20). They're effectively powerful as Wargs should be, but for the sake of repetitivity, I think their numbers should be reduced just a little, or at least their HP or speed, as currently they can easily outrun any horse, leading to chases of upwards of several minutes across the map trying to kill one Warg. The Wargs in the movies only take an arrow or two to bring down, not a huge line of infantry playing whack-a-mole.
The game is not based on the movie. Warg riders usually relies on their respective wargs to slay their enemies and leaving almost all the job to these pets. There is no mistake here and I think warg riders are really useless. Archers are so powerfull in M&B compared to WB version of the game and reasons are obvious. Cavalry units supposed to counter the archers but last day I had a fight that I lost 5 White Hand Riders and many Warg Riders (11 as I remember) to 7 seven shitty elven scouts. They even killed some of my infantry units which is sucks hard. Then the wargs beat those elves without their riders ^^. I think there is a balance issiue that needs to be fixed.

My suggestion : Why Uruk-Hai of the Isengard are humpbacked? As far as I remember the Mordor's Uruks were humpbacked(Mordor's bad climate were effecting their mutation) whereas the Uruk-hai were flawless in their physics. They were diffrent then their brethren in Mordor. Ok brown Uruk-Hai makes some sense because Saruman couldn't find a time to fully breed his Uruks. So most of the Uruk-Hai were not smart and not that black skinned. Still It would be cool to see some fully breed Black Uruks with white hand above their heads. Btw the limited time may result in stupid Uruks but they were still stronger and better equipped then the Mordor's ones. Maybe because of the Saruman's diffrent methods of breeding them.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on May 31, 2012, 05:12:26 PM
Warg Riders have some pretty powerful darts as thrown weapons. There's like 8 to a pack, they do quite a bit of damage, and they're pierce weapons, so they penetrate armor.

They don't hit very often, but when they do they're deadly. Think of them as the orc equivalent of lawn darts ...
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: MrPixel on May 31, 2012, 09:19:52 PM
Warg Riders have some pretty powerful darts as thrown weapons. There's like 8 to a pack, they do quite a bit of damage, and they're pierce weapons, so they penetrate armor.

They don't hit very often, but when they do they're deadly. Think of them as the orc equivalent of lawn darts ...

More than once while playing my mounted elf archer, I was instantly knocked out from full health due to getting a spear in the head from those warg riders... quickly learned to target them first.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on May 31, 2012, 11:59:38 PM
You don't want to see a few moria or gundabad hosts together, there's like 40 wargs... all throwing their spears at you, and afterwards roflstomp all your soldiers :).
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Minas_Ithil on June 01, 2012, 03:24:03 PM
You don't want to see a few moria or gundabad hosts together, there's like 40 wargs... all throwing their spears at you, and afterwards roflstomp all your soldiers :).
Never seen this. In my games they are dying as soon as they spawn. Isangard is very close to Rohan and Elves. So I'm always busy with them. And those warg riders can't do anything. They usually get an elven arrow to the head or got killed by spear of rohirrims before they can kill someone with so called "powerfull darts". Pikes are really usefull against Rohirrims but their horse archers are countering them. Isengard is ok against other factions but Elves and Rohan just slaughtering them. Come on man I have many elite warriors but can't even get into a battle with some elven scouts. It requires some big balls to lose your high tier soldiers for some shitty first tiers. 5 Elven Scouts > 13 Large Uruk-hai
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on June 01, 2012, 04:03:40 PM
Yeah, sure kill the rider. Now enjoy a oversized raging mutt running around the map charging in to everything that meets it path for 20/30 damage. Now take 40 of those and see how long you'll last. And I'm not exaggerating even one bit, I've seen at least 30 riders just on gundabad's ruler.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Minas_Ithil on June 01, 2012, 07:33:40 PM
You are totally right. Wargs are better without their noobish poorly equipped riders. But still it doesn't change the fact you lose your men. You win the battle with riderless wargs but how about another fight? You can't use them again ^^. Nerf the wargs without riders and give some light armor and a spear to these poor orcs please..
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on June 02, 2012, 02:25:54 AM
Actually, the effectiveness of large amounts of wargs is a bit exaggerated. They would just bump into an infantry formation, stop and half of them would get slaughtered there. On their next charge, the other half'd get slaughtered the same way. Plus, if they initially charge in large quantities, many'd get killed by archers at the beginning.

Giving spears to riders would nerf them. The AI is notoriously bad at couched lancing and in regular melee spears are inferior, especially on horseback.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on June 02, 2012, 02:30:58 AM
Wargs were nerfed to hell. The only thing saving them is that collision issue, where they're sometimes difficult to hit properly. Otherwise if you hack at them while riding, or if you aim your attack well so that they run into it, they'll often die in one hit.

And of course, the easiest thing is to kill them under their riders, that's when you can hit them fine.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on June 02, 2012, 02:41:04 AM
Actually, the effectiveness of large amounts of wargs is a bit exaggerated. They would just bump into an infantry formation, stop and half of them would get slaughtered there. On their next charge, the other half'd get slaughtered the same way. Plus, if they initially charge in large quantities, many'd get killed by archers at the beginning.

Giving spears to riders would nerf them. The AI is notoriously bad at couched lancing and in regular melee spears are inferior, especially on horseback.

Nah it isn't when said wargs are backed up by orc archers firing at all your troops along with the large amount of infantry with their halberds and axes slowly (or quickly) cutting away at your troops.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on June 02, 2012, 03:04:12 AM
If the numbers are comparable, you should have enough troops of your own to deal with the wargs. Besides, combined arms tactics is the whole point of having those different units. If the AI is capable of synergising them it's very good.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: vota dc on June 02, 2012, 07:05:06 AM
Giving spears to riders would nerf them. The AI is notoriously bad at couched lancing and in regular melee spears are inferior, especially on horseback.

But they don't have regular swords, but very short swords that give 20 cutting damage. So a spear would be an improvement.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on June 02, 2012, 07:19:11 AM
Why don't you give them better swords then? There's no problem like that in RCM since the wargriders' swords do adequately high damage. But spear is nerfed in comparison to swords by the very physics of M&B, this aspect works the same in both vanilla and RCM.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on June 02, 2012, 10:02:22 AM
But they don't have regular swords, but very short swords that give 20 cutting damage. So a spear would be an improvement.

My complaint is with the riderless wargs.  They're zero threat to cavalry but mow down infantry.  AI infantry and cavalry both aim for the invisible rider more than the actual warg so can't deal with them properly.  Even worse with the buggy 'regenerating' wargs in 3.15 and higher charge values.

If at all possible I'd like to humbly request giving the invisible rider the same armor and hitpoints as the warg and killing either kills both.  Or make the warg hitbox as high as the rider maybe?

As for giving them spears since the orc spear is 2H, no shield and no block they will lance with them.  I've only played with Isengard a tiny bit but I had Durgash the Lancer and the little bugger actually took out a few Thengal armored horses.  Don't think they sit high enough to hit rider unless they catch them in the foot.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: usn1996 on June 02, 2012, 10:43:14 AM
Could you make the Dunadain respawn more in the Rivendell encampment, I know that's not quite lore friendly, but when there's twenty volunteers, and one of them is a Dunadain, its kinda sad.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on June 02, 2012, 11:50:52 AM
^What? You must have a bugged game because in all of my playtroughs the rivendell camp has, say 20 volunteers and 15 of them will be all dunedain.. ALWAYS.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on June 02, 2012, 12:11:41 PM
Looks like there's a limit to how many recruits a barracks holds.  If you only recruit one troop type and let the others fill up they'll prevent the type you want from showing up.  So if you want Dunedain you have thin out the Rivendell recruits every once in awhile.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on June 02, 2012, 12:20:45 PM
If at all possible I'd like to humbly request giving the invisible rider the same armor and hitpoints as the warg and killing either kills both.  Or make the warg hitbox as high as the rider maybe?

Gee, why didn't we think of that. Oh wait. We did. And it's impossible. Seriously, the wargs have not changed much since the initial release, the still work the same way, only are now easier to kill.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on June 02, 2012, 12:51:54 PM
If at all possible I'd like to humbly request giving the invisible rider the same armor and hitpoints as the warg and killing either kills both.  Or make the warg hitbox as high as the rider maybe?

Gee, why didn't we think of that. Oh wait. We did. And it's impossible. Seriously, the wargs have not changed much since the initial release, the still work the same way, only are now easier to kill.


I don't know what you did and didn't try until you say so.

Something has changed in 3.15.  Damaged riderless wargs will stop, if they're the last one everyone cheers, and then you get the growl sound effect and they go back in action.  All blood decals + arrows disappear and they appear to go back to full health.  Test it for yourself.

Yes, exactly the same way it was in 3.0 and every other version.


And was has this always happened?  I never noticed it in 3.13 myself.  Hard to see in this screenshot but outside the battle area will be a pile of dead wargs and the growl sound effect will repeatedly play and each it does you see a warg appear to come out of the ground and do a death animation.
(http://thumbnails6.imagebam.com/19368/ffe9b5193674772.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/ffe9b5193674772)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on June 02, 2012, 03:07:51 PM
I want to be absolutely clear on this since I only noticed in 3.15.  I'm not talking about the pause after the 'real' rider is killed and the warg respawns with the invisible rider.  I fully understand that part.  What I'm seeing is after the warg has respawned with the invisible rider and goes back into action it will take damage then will run out of reach, stop and then respawn yet again with full health.   Now are you saying that has always happened?

yes, that happens when you somehow kill the invisible rider. The only thing I can think of is that Vota changed the stats of the invisible rider and it's somehow easier to kill them accidentally now. He'll have to say, I don't know.
The mechanism and the warg coding is still the same. And no, it's not possible to make them die when the invis rider dies, it just works the same as when the regular rider dies.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on June 03, 2012, 07:08:21 AM
That's what I originally thought too and I have killed a few of the riders but you know when that happens because you get XP.  Checked the stats and equipment with the unofficial editors and everything looks good.  I tested trying to kill just the rider and you need a high damage piercing weapon and a good speed bonus to even wound them.  I got plenty of damage messages showing only the mount is taking damage and after ~40-50+ damage if I couldn't finish them off in a few seconds the warg would stop and respawn.     

BTW were the warg corpse piles and the constantly spawning and dying wargs always there and I'm just now noticing?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Khergit Kabob on June 03, 2012, 02:56:11 PM
Is it possible to make the invisible rider have same armor as warg and give it 65535 hp, then transfer damage to the warg from the rider down to 1 hp?

If the last hp has to be inflicted on the warg body but other hits do normal damage wherever they hit that would be a 99.9% solution, wouldn't it?

Oh, right and "Warghenge", that mysterious circle of warg corpses in the corner of the battle zone, seems to be a "warg body falling through the world geometry" thing, like the Lossarnach siege sends people flying to the corner of the map. If you watch Warghenge long enough you'll see Warg bodies fall out of the sky.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on June 04, 2012, 08:47:43 AM
Since it only takes a few minutes to test something like this I made a Rohan cheat character and went warg hunting.  Killed off some Isengard warg riders and all the wargs but one.  Had a Rohan Sword(28c) and Power Strike 5.  Went the same as what I've already observed.  M&B reports 0 damage to rider but if the warg is damaged it will respawn if not finished off quickly.  Just to be sure I tried aiming specifically for the warg.  With M&B reporting damage only to the mount it would still respawn if left alone.  According to M&B's damage reporting I did in excess of 450 pts total damage to the test warg and 0 to the rider.
(http://thumbnails74.imagebam.com/19403/ba1a9c194026748.jpg) (http://www.imagebam.com/image/ba1a9c194026748)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Merlkir on June 04, 2012, 08:56:19 AM
It may trigger if you hit the rider, no matter for what damage. I'm quite sure this hasn't changed at all in any of the versions since 3.0 though. Anyway, this is something for a coder to look into, not me.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: LCJr on June 04, 2012, 09:07:42 AM
I just wanted you to be aware there was an issue.  Won't mention it again, well unless it's in the next version:)  Thank you for your time and patience.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on June 06, 2012, 02:53:55 AM
Ok, so I know that you are not planning on making additional content.  I'm not sure, however, if my suggestion would be that hard to code or not.

I was playing last night and noticed a feature that would be nice. 

Before I mention this, a great TY to MV for adding the possibility of getting the opposing side's equipment.  Playing TLD without riding my trusty Warg as a goodie just wasn't the same.  I also noticed, by the way, that when accepting the opposing side's equipment, you actually make a LOT less cash which makes the game much more challenging.  So, all in all great. 

Feature request:

Anyway, the feature I was hoping to have would be the ability to dispatch a NPC with a small army to patrol an area.  I know that this is possible as many other mods have that feature.

Some people will say this simply overpowers the player too much.  I don't think so as those patrols you could code to cost double the normal cost and be only possible if you have a very high rank (lvl 11?) with a certain faction, effectively making this only possible later in the game.

I would like this feature as I often have excess troops later in the game and would like a bit more control of the war's progress, in the ending stages of the war.

Request:

Is there a way that it could be coded that no sieges could be done from a certain allied faction until a player arrives there (maybe completes a certain type of quest)?  The reason I ask is because I really enjoy the whole war immersion of TLD.  I also really enjoy the different armies and battle tactics necessary (e.g. in Mirkwood you should mainly fight with infantry, in the plains of Rohan cavalry dominates).  Anyway, in some of my games, the North is almost won before I can even reach it.  I would love to be a part of those battles/sieges in order to be immersed into the game AND enjoy all scenes, etc. that have been created by the team.  Naturally this would create a longer war, but be lots of fun.

Of course some people will respond by saying that I should start in the North.  This is a good point, but if I did that then I would lose the opportunity of protecting either Rohan or Gondor and enjoying their scenes/soldiers as my northern allies put up their encampments and assault Isengard/Mordor after defeating the northern groups (by the way, this feature is really cool).

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on June 06, 2012, 04:13:53 AM
Is there a way that it could be coded that no sieges could be done from a certain allied faction until a player arrives there (maybe completes a certain type of quest)?  The reason I ask is because I really enjoy the whole war immersion of TLD.  I also really enjoy the different armies and battle tactics necessary (e.g. in Mirkwood you should mainly fight with infantry, in the plains of Rohan cavalry dominates).  Anyway, in some of my games, the North is almost won before I can even reach it.  I would love to be a part of those battles/sieges in order to be immersed into the game AND enjoy all scenes, etc. that have been created by the team.  Naturally this would create a longer war, but be lots of fun.

The strategy tweaks should be enough to achieve that. Besides, the fact that some part of the war is artificially frozen would break the immersion rather then enchance it.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on June 06, 2012, 05:03:54 AM
Is there a way that it could be coded that no sieges could be done from a certain allied faction until a player arrives there (maybe completes a certain type of quest)?  The reason I ask is because I really enjoy the whole war immersion of TLD.  I also really enjoy the different armies and battle tactics necessary (e.g. in Mirkwood you should mainly fight with infantry, in the plains of Rohan cavalry dominates).  Anyway, in some of my games, the North is almost won before I can even reach it.  I would love to be a part of those battles/sieges in order to be immersed into the game AND enjoy all scenes, etc. that have been created by the team.  Naturally this would create a longer war, but be lots of fun.

The strategy tweaks should be enough to achieve that. Besides, the fact that some part of the war is artificially frozen would break the immersion rather then enchance it.

The problem with the strategy tweaks is that they are universal, which effectively would also change the siege requirements for my faction (thereby making it impossible to win the game).

I think the immersion would be increased if the siege effort were frozen (note that the war would continue as usual, e.g. hosts would still fight another).  The frozen sieging would subsequently allow me to join those factions and see all factions to their win (thereby allowing me to enjoy more of TLD).

The take away would be that I would have time to gain ranks in the different factions, thereby I could enjoy what they have to offer in terms of strategy, weapons, troops, etc.

You are right that the general war would be affected.  Yet, to be honest, the general war isn't important to me.  What's important is that I get to enjoy all aspects of TLD to their fullest.  I know that's a different opinion than others, which is why I'm wondering if this could be added as an option.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on June 06, 2012, 06:20:46 AM
You are right that the general war would be affected.  Yet, to be honest, the general war isn't important to me.  What's important is that I get to enjoy all aspects of TLD to their fullest.  I know that's a different opinion than others, which is why I'm wondering if this could be added as an option.

Yeah, at least to me the idea sounds unpleasant. I prefer the war to be, well, war, rather then decoration. Tastes differ, I suppose.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: FleshyStarfish on June 06, 2012, 06:35:23 AM
You are right that the general war would be affected.  Yet, to be honest, the general war isn't important to me.  What's important is that I get to enjoy all aspects of TLD to their fullest.  I know that's a different opinion than others, which is why I'm wondering if this could be added as an option.

Yeah, at least to me the idea sounds unpleasant. I prefer the war to be, well, war, rather then decoration. Tastes differ, I suppose.

I understand your point.  I would point out that I also like the war as opposed to decoration.  I'm only talking about one aspect of the war, which is sieging.  Of course sieging can make or break a group, which is a major part of the war, but so do lost battles of hosts as well (by lowering the faction strength) which would still happen in my suggestion.

Anyway, just an idea.

FS
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Ji Indur on June 06, 2012, 07:07:05 AM
Yes, tastes differ.

Me, I don't like sieging (since M&B). The battles are less funny than openfields battles. I enjoy the work of the team with the towns but not the gameplay.

I'm happy some sieges be done by the AI. :)
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on June 06, 2012, 07:10:30 AM
In the absence of sieges the intensity of warfare falls drastically and ratings regeneration starts to rule, which leads to stalemates everywhere except the Dale-Erebor vs. Rhun front (where they're very close to each other, hence do battles faster then their ratings regenerate). So the war on non-player fronts does become a decoration - we've been through this in the previous version.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cowsaresomething on June 14, 2012, 11:02:15 AM
I love this mod, but the one thing that I dislike is that I can't pay upkeep for my troops with scraps as the money regeneration in camps isn't high enough for the amount of scrap I bring in.  So, would it be possible to add a "Supply Camp"?  What I mean is that you go there, and all you see is a chat window with a camp master.  You can then give supplies to him like in the Scrap Metal Quest, and receive the R.P.  This way, there is an infinite supply of R.P. for the scraps that you bring in. 

To me, it seems lore breaking that you are a general or whatnot of a faction, the king/lord trusts you to lead his troops into battle, but, oh, if you keep those troops alive and they reach high tier status, expect to not be able to pay for them.  This is really apparent in Saruman's troll quest - "Here, have these trolls as a gift.  Just expect to pay thousands of upkeep for them."

Sorry if I'm slightly ranting, it is just annoying to me.  Anyways thanks for the mod.  It is absolutely beautiful.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Rene Korda on June 14, 2012, 11:09:02 AM
Throw away a quantity of scraps that would give you ~1000 RPs at the supply master. Then Ctrl+X yourself that 1000 RPs. Rince, repeat.

I know it's not as fun a your idea, but it is a workaround.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cowsaresomething on June 14, 2012, 11:13:39 AM
That is what I do.  I just feel guilty.  What is the point of working hard to raise a full contingent of Galadhrim Royal Wardens if you can't afford them?  It is just lore breaking.  You are a general for a kingdom at war, but the expenses of the troops that follow you come out of your pocket, not the kingdom's treasury.  And don't got me started on how much armor costs when your troops get it with just a couple of levels... I feel a troll moment coming.

This is a misunderstanding of the resource system and thinking it to be money. The resources you pay ARE from the kingdom's treasury. If you can't afford your troops, they don't just disappear. No, they keep fighting for your faction and are paid from the same pool of resources, just not for you specifically.

Giving the player any troops and gear he wants would just kill any sense of challenge and progress. That's why we did it this way.

This system is a result of days and days of arguments and iterations, it changed a lot and it's not easy to understand for people used to MnB and gold coins. It won't change. Even if the mod wasn't dead (or hibernating), this was agreed upon and this aspect of the game was done as a compormise we were mostly ok with.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: vota dc on June 14, 2012, 12:54:42 PM
With high cheating I love to behaving like Nobody, the Terence Hill's character: I teleport, recruit give max experience and give troops to allied lords, sometimes I soften enemy parties a little before they engage my allies...in few words I make my best to give the glory to my allies but I never win personally.
I suggest to make possible to give Dol Guldur more troops: last time I tried I could give only snaga and orc of Guldur but not higher tier...maybe because high tier of Guldur is labeled as Mordor.
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: Anterias on June 14, 2012, 02:22:25 PM
Wait, so vota you're not ''officially'' working on the mod with the troop/item stuff :o?
Title: Re: TLD 3.1 Suggestions
Post by: cowsaresomething on June 14, 2012, 02:46:26 PM
All right, I think I somewhat understand.  It is just not the way I think.  In vanilla M&B the payment system makes more sense to me.  But hey, I love the mod, and I will apply cheat codes to best suit the way I feel it should be.  One misunderst