SSHIP - General Discussion

[Overlord.ru]

I think Velikiy is a right transliteration.

Btw, how did you change strat map settlements' models, what programm did you use? I wanna try it. I uploaded my own modifications of the old Agart's models here in sub-mods forum, used 3dsMax, but now I see that the files in the mod folder are completely different, is each model split in several files...?

[Lifthrasir]

You need to ask MWY. He did the new settlement strat models.

[MWY]

I used Milkshape 3D. And each city model is still one file. And some textures for that file.

[Overlord.ru]

Hey guys, I'm finally ready to share my game experience and impressions with you. Hope this helps you to improve this already briliant mod.
Now, I've done 200 turns into the Norway campaign and had some success with it. This is what I found during the period.

AI.

"+" The Ai seems to act logical. Seems to me like it tries to save money, not spending a last coin on troops, so it doesn't make hundreds of stacks and get an empty treasury. Smaller kingdoms tend to keep to the budget, having 1-2 well trained armies for protection, while economizing money for developing (at least it seems like that).
"+"Estimates the chances correctly and tries to attack the most vulnerable targets.
"+" AI uses fleet for invasions and agents.

"-" AI doesn't tend to arrange alliances at all. OR when it does, it doesn't keep them. Max allies factions have 1 or 2. Constantly keeps breaking alliances, trading one ally for another in time.
"-" Reputation pool is extremely low for the player, so when trying to arrange an alliance and it's really profitable for the AI (i.e. it estimates the proposal as very generous) it'll still decline with "firmly rejected" formulation. Same for the marriages. Another problem is that it's really hard to raise that reputation except only for throwing enormous money at it. Even if a faction was my ally long ago and I fought it's enemies, or simply didn't act harmful towards it, the reputation still kept falling down.

Population.

It's a mystery to me how to keep positive growth rates. Some settlements wouldn't grow even if they had chivalrous rulers, low taxes and all buildings built. Any recipes on how to defeat the squalor?

Corruption.

Sometimes reaches hellish amounts. Any clues about fighting it?

Rebellions and Civil War.

The mechanic is quite confusing rather then improving the gameplay. Too many traits, mostly useless or coinsiding each other, such like "Usurper" and "Usurping", "Unhappy with leadership", "Plotting" and many other.
First of all - why do people with these traits have reduced movement points?
What's the point of "Plotting" and "Unhappy with Leadership" giving authority to family members?
"Usurping" trait gives +1 to Loyalty? Regardless it's description ?
But the most hilarious is that none of this gives +to unrest or cut the public order? No severe cut in loyalty? Not increased bribe chance?


The other weird thing was when a general got "Gone Rebel" but the only effect was him having no movement points, while public order and growth in the settlement were still positive, so I could do just nothing to him.

Suggestion: Cut the amount of "disloyal" traits, make the remaining ones more transparent. For example, there is a "Feels Unappreciated" trait. If a character stays unwatched and just sits in a settlement without moving anywhere he can later get "Unhappy with Leadership" or something like that, which can increase unrest, decrease income or his own loyalty etc. If nothing is done than he will become "Rebel" or "Plotting", which would in the end make the settlement rebel. The Same mechanic could be applied to the family members who feel more suitable to rule the kingdom (example - former king's son becomes next ruler instead of the king's brother and he's not satisfied with that).

Also, I wasn't pretty sure about the conditions of igniting a Civil War. Sometimes my king just got "Inspires Civil War" trait without a clue why.
Suggestion: make more transparent conditions. For example:
A king isn't crowned for a long time. To get a crown ancillary he should visit the faction's capital(now you just need to wait some turns until he gets a crown).
The royal treasury is empty and keeps decreasing.
The faction is waging too many wars OR many battles were lost and lots of people died etc.
A King gets his Faction excommunicated and his piety is not high
A new King ascends to the throne, particularly if he has low Authority
Then the king should get "Offends the Nobility" trait which could later ignite a Civil War...

Re-emerging factions

The feature is really cool, adds some MTWI flavour, But still is not perfect. What's frustrating is that it's 100% predictable. Example: Conquered Novgorod, exterminated the populace. The population keeps on growing fast and when it reaches a certain level the unrest is that high that you won't be able to hold it by any chance -> Novgorod re-emerges. Looks like a vicious circle. Just need to keep a full-stacked army there and exterminate it the next time, but everything would repeat after the population grows high enough. Same's with London.


Another strange thing I experienced when London was rebel, AND England faction was alive, not present on the isles but somewhere on the mainland, the next turn the "A rebellion In England" poped-up and 2 English armies spawned near London and Bristol...I besieged and conquered London before them and the aI just transported them to the mainland via ships to fight the French.

Missions.

Not sure if this is a vanilla bug, but often I got missions to assassinate heretics who were on the other side of the map. It would take longer to get to them then turns available to succeed. Could you fix that?

Etc.Etc.Etc.

Can guilds be acquired only in stone-walled towns?

Why ballistas and catapults no longer available for recruitment? Why can't a siege workshop be built in a castle?


I built a hospitalier chapter, but couldn't train any knights. Why?


Later though, after I could finally hire 1 knight unit, the next turn it disappeared from the recruitment tab...

Lastly, got lots of CTDs when fighting Novgorod, had to load the battle several times to be able to fight it till the end. Also have a log after I got CTD in a battle versus Rebels.
Rebel Battlesystem.log.rar

The overall impression of the mod is great, really enjoy playing it. It's now quite harder and challenging. The balance seems to be, most of the factions still exist and keep to their territory, which is fun.
Also uploading the save, hope this helps somehow.
Norway 200.rar

[Larkin]

Gonna offer my thoughts on your points:

AI - yes, very good. They do things that make sense. I'd like to see them more aggressive at taking rebel settlements. The Fatimids and Moors, instance, have lost Cairo and Alexandria + Fes, Casablanca and Algeirs to rebellions, but have made no effort to take them back - this leads to them stagnating a bit.

Population - not all settlements should be able to grow to huge levels, as that wouldn't be historical. It is frustrating when you only need a few hundred more to grow and can't quite get there, but realistic. "All buildings" - I recommend demolishing the public gallows, as that will give you a small + to population growth temporarily.

Corruption - buildings with law will help this, as will good governors, but sometimes it is hard to avoid. Again, realistic.

Rebellion and civil war - I've made my feelings on this matter quite clear before; it needs reworking. It needs to be apparent why a general would revolt and what makes him revolt. It needs to be easier to determine who is your next heir rather than having everyone a usurper. And really there needs to be some way to end civil wars easily by killing the revolters (DLV style was discussed, which is a good idea). Base loyalty should be higher to avoid the danger of turncoats.

Re-emergent factions - completely agree. It's a cool thing that sometimes works really well. But capitals are SO hard to hold you get stuck in this vicious cycle. There needs to be a way to really lock down a province that's rebellious. My solution would be a single, quick to build but EXPENSIVE building that gives big + to law and happiness. A colonial law enforcement building or something. You wouldn't be able to build them everywhere due to cost, but it would help secure things. I process_cqd everything in Constantinople with a full garrison and a good governor after 2x extermination cycles and still couldn't get over 50% PO. Apart from anything else, repeatedly having to exterminate a settlement for public order reasons ruins your reputation, which only magnifies the issue with reputation. The AI also struggles with this and it leads to factions very rarely being wiped out for good.

In addition, it seems that there isn't even a simple unrest for some settlements - Palermo, for example, just turns straight Sicillian without even one riot, so I have to pay close attention to check if it is in the red or not. There's no grace period, it just straight up revolts immediately.

Missions - not much can be done there, been a problem since vanilla and is pretty much out of anyone's hands.

Order knights - your reputation must be at a certain level to recruit them.

[lequintal69]

Great review Overlord. Sums up some of my questions pretty well.

150 turns with the fatimids, first campaign in my case. So far, a really cool and interesting game with a decent challenge, loving AI behaviour. Loving units roster evolution.

Some misc questions:

1-When i attacked Jerusalem, i was quite surprised to see what looked like an european city with firs which i assume shouldnt be a thing in there :p

2-Speaking of maps, i have played Third age total war mod for quite a long time and i have been SO much impressed by the custom settlements. But i have yet to find a single other mod with custom settlements. Wouldnt that add a lot to immersion to have at least some "kind of" historical cities or key castles ? Or is it really too much work and not worth it?

3-Just wondering, teutonic knights wont appear as a fresh new faction like mongols do right? But will be recruitable by some existing factions?

4- Could you take a look at the traits "pathetic commander" , "incompetent commander", or "unproven commander". It really is annoying when your general gets it even tho he has always won batlles, and most of the times heroic ones. Some of my generals have the traits "great victor", "born to command", "talent for command", or "famous victor" and still have that god damn "unproven commander" or pathetic commander trait.
Maybe the triggers of those traits are bugged?
If anyone knows what triggers them, i would be very gratful

5-I was asked to marry 2 ppl of my family, a bug i assume?

6-Just wondering, are u guys having trouble to get skilled muslim imams? Mine never go higher than 4 or 5, tho i have many universities and cultural or religious building. Should i park them INSIDE the town instead?

[lequintal69]

forgot two things.

7- I love the Vanilla SS deeds but other than adding to immersion and giving small bonus or penalties, they are not really useful? Also, why are generals limited to one Deed ? Dont you guys think you should add more purpose to them? (I'm thinking of Byg's grim reality mod if you ask me)

8-I noticed some traits related to the general's weath, but those i saw never gave any bonus/penalty. Some do ? or is it just superficial?

[Larkin]

Great review Overlord. Sums up some of my questions pretty well.

150 turns with the fatimids, first campaign in my case. So far, a really cool and interesting game with a decent challenge, loving AI behaviour. Loving units roster evolution.

Some misc questions:

1-When i attacked Jerusalem, i was quite surprised to see what looked like an european city with firs which i assume shouldnt be a thing in there :p

2-Speaking of maps, i have played Third age total war mod for quite a long time and i have been SO much impressed by the custom settlements. But i have yet to find a single other mod with custom settlements. Wouldnt that add a lot to immersion to have at least some "kind of" historical cities or key castles ? Or is it really too much work and not worth it?

3-Just wondering, teutonic knights wont appear as a fresh new faction like mongols do right? But will be recruitable by some existing factions?

5-I was asked to marry 2 ppl of my family, a bug i assume?

6-Just wondering, are u guys having trouble to get skilled muslim imams? Mine never go higher than 4 or 5, tho i have many universities and cultural or religious building. Should i park them INSIDE the town instead?

1 - It's the Crusader States capital, so it's Westernised.

2 - Custom settlements take time. There are other mods with them (I know Tsardoms uses them) but not SSHIP. If you want to design some yourself, I'm sure the team could use them

3 - Nope, the Teutonic Order as an emergent faction has been removed. If you have a high enough reputation and Teutonic Chapter Houses etc, you can recruit Teutonic Knight units.

5 - Don't think that's a bug. Incest wasn't exactly uncommon in those days, marrying into your own bloodline was also pretty common.

6 - I recommend sending your imams to non-Muslim regions to convert the populace, as this will give good traits.

[lequintal69]

Alright, ty for the answers

About 5/ Ye, i first thought that, but there is no way your princess can marry someone of your faction. I mean technically

[lequintal69]

One more thing, sometimes for some reason, i cant ask peace via diplomacy to some factions. Is that due to the fact that they have a crusade ongoing against ? (the option doesnt appear in the diplomacy tab at all)

[MWY]

Wow that's A LOT of feedback! Thank you so much. It would also be cool to upload pictures of your campaign (or the savegame like overlord did) so I can see how you're progressing in the game.

@Overlord:

AI: Alliances are a very difficult thing AI wise. The big problem is that they cannot count them first of all, second of all there are some bugged values in the code. With other AI's, you often had the problem of huge blocks of alliances. Most common, it was a big faction against all it's neighbours. Now that might be logical to do as a player, but it's not realistic. AT ALL. Another problem was that the AI hardly ever cancelled an alliance. So the alliances didn't really shift much. Which is also historically speaking pretty much.. bad I think. So I tried to find a way around it. Keeping alliances to a minimum, and making it more difficult (but still very much possible) to keep an ally.
The diplomacy screen concerning alliances is bugged. The preview doesn't work how it should. I can't change that sadly, I think. So alliances are some sort of a gamble. But with high reputation, globally and towards the faction, it's highly probable that you succeed.

Reputation:
If you are not too agressive, your reputation should be okay with allies. It depends on the faction obviously. F.E. as england, you will not be able to sustain an alliance with scotland without paying them. It wouldn't really make sense for scots right?
I need to think if I implemented a boost to reputation by fighting an allies enemies highly enough. But to lower your reputation you don't need to fight the ally directly, obviously. I mean, imagine a situation where your ally is expanding agressively in every direction, killing people left and right and increasing it's power compared to you constantly. You would be sceptical if you're not the next target atleast right? Or atleast you would not directly trust this guy...

Population: As larkin said, settlement growth had to be turned down. You can still do a lot with it (destryoing gallows, play around with the food administration building, not build mines, even destroying military buildings), but I see the point. In the future, I will see if I can do something about that without deviating from history too much.

Traits, Revolts, etc: I agree. I wasn't really into the whole traits and ancillaries stuff before I "fixed" the usurper thing. At least now it's somewhat working. But there's just so many traits in SS that I can't get a good picture of the whole yet. The stuff you guys posted might help there, so thank you for that.

Reemergent factions:
Taking another factions capital, you should be forced to invest in it a lot. You should need to stack troops in there to maintain order, and you should be forced to create some buildings (like gallows) which usually you wouldn't. But obviously it shouldn't be impossible. It's really hard to find a balance there, so sending me savegames of your campaigns might help there, then I can see how things are working out (I can't test every scenario on my own).
A factions doesn't really need to be dead to reemerge at it's capital or core cities. That's intended.

Missions: No clue, I haven't changed anything about that..

ETC: Ballistas and catapults where historically not used on the battlefield (according to Ichon I think). That's why they are removed.
The ability to recruit religious order units is attached to your reputation, as larkin said.

@Larkin:
Concerning reemerging factions, there should be 1 riot first, if you can't get it under control the next turn, it should force a reemergement.

AI more agressive towards rebels: Well... that's difficult. For now, I have programmed them to not attack rebels while at war with another neighbouring faction. Which makes sense I think. Otherwise, they are always programmed to attack rebel settlements. It's just that for some reason, the AI doesn't really follow this command sometimes. I can't change that.

@Lequintal:
Custom settlements would obviously be awesome. But I don't have the time to create them. If anyone would do this (and it wouldn't look horrible ) I'm sure we would use them.

You can only get the Bad Commander trait (which includes all of those) only by losing battles or by prebattle withdrawal. The second one is probably the cause for you.

Not able to ask for peace: no clue. I haven't changed anything about that.

I hope I answered everything.

[Overlord.ru]

Population: As larkin said, settlement growth had to be turned down. You can still do a lot with it (destryoing gallows, play around with the food administration building, not build mines, even destroying military buildings), but I see the point. In the future, I will see if I can do something about that without deviating from history too much.

How about adding the same ERA mechanics as for the unit reqruitment? You know, now you can only train certain units during certain time periods. Why not make the same with settlements? For example, a settlement can't grow larger than it is until a certain date, but after this date it'll be able to grow further? Will help to avoid huge cities\citadels in early games. For that you could consult Point Blank, if I recall correctly he's the one who developed that unit era system.

I agree that we just can't let all settlements expand to the highest level after several turns into campaign, but just think - the game uses only 199 settlements - how historical is that? As far as the game is concerned, only the MOST important settlements are present, each one selected to be represented because it was of the greatest importance at the timeframe or was a regional capital. Now imagine a governor or a king willing to expand his settlement or people coming to town and a guy is standing at the town's gate not letting any1 in saying like: "Erm, sorry guys, this settlement shouldn't be growing further, that is unhistorical..." The game is about alternative history lines, isn't it?

Another solution could be adding greater amount of population required for growth for certain settlements. For example, Bergen or Oslo would have the same growth rate as London (say 0.5%) BUT London would need 20000 ppl to get to next level while Oslo only 10000.

There could be even a third solution - giving heigher penalties for growth conditions - the larger the town - the more skillfull and chivalrous governor should be, certain buildings should be built etc. I noticed that you added lots of new buildings to the high tier towns - you try to alter them to give a player a real choice between the growth and income for instance...

The feature that's the easiest to implement could be used. Having different settlement levels on the map is historical indeed, but settlement not being able to grow having the greatest governor, low taxes and 100% your faction's religion is illogical.

And one more - how the hell can I be able to recruit top tier Norway units if they are AOR and my settlements don't grow?

About the re-emergent factions.
What really upsets that it's 100% predictable. Why not try to make it more surprising and unprepeared for? Like England reemerging not only near London, but in Wales, Ireland or even somewhere on the mainland in France? Who knows where a heir of the bloodline could find a refuge? What was cool about it in MTW1 that you couldn't even closely predict where and when would a faction reemerge(except for the papacy). But right now it seems to bring more annoyance rather than fun, cuz you'll have to exterminate the population on and on and run your reputation to the ground in the very same settlement cuz you know that otherwise you'll get a re-emerged faction. Imagine this - what if the population was unsatisfied with it's former rulers? And here you come, the shiny and mighty liberator, cancelling the taxes, building "happinees buildings", or just being a ruler of a greatest and cultured faction which everyone wants to join?

[Larkin]

MWY - thanks for your responses. I'll screenshot and upload a save of my game soon (it is 0.8.2 though).

Didn't know about the AI not attacking rebels if at war with a neighbouring faction. I think this is why it has been so negative for the Fatimids and Moors, who are usually at war with some Catholic faction due to Crusades.

About the re-emergent factions - Sicily certainly has revolted without a single riot multiple times. Mostly because I don't realise Palermo has dropped to red and end turn it has caused much frustration...

[Lifthrasir]

In addition to MWY comments:
Settlements depends on the faction's culture. As Jerusalem has the Northern European culture, Jerusalem appears as an European settlement. With the game limitations, I'm not sure that you can make custom settlements without involving the other factions with the same culture while being still able to upgrade the settlement (hope I'm clear).

Regarding incest and for Catholic factions, the Church forbidded unions up to the 4th degree of family. For example, you couldn't marry your cousin. A lot of Kings used that rule as an excuse to divorce. The other thing to consider is that during Middle Ages, homosexuality was more condamned than incest or abuse on children.

To reduce or to make the re-emergent faction feature better, I'm still convinced that it bcan be done by adjusting the conversion rate, not only on religions but may be also on cultures. For example, if Novgorod conquiers Kiev, it should be easier to get an unrest low (both are Rus) than having Novgorod conquiering London where the religion and culture are different. In that case, unrest and risk of rebellion should be hight. That's why Kings granted some settlements with specific rights or advantages, like the King of France when he got the Toulouse county joining the royal domain. For example, Carcassone was exempted to pay some taxes.
So, to go back to Novgorod conquiering London, to avoid rebellion and the risk of having the English coming back, it would requiered a strong garrison, some priests to convert local people to Orthodoxy and may be we can add some feature to represent some kind of advantages the settlement can get.

[lequintal69]

You can only get the Bad Commander trait (which includes all of those) only by losing battles or by prebattle withdrawal. The second one is probably the cause for you.



I hope I answered everything.

They sure didnt lose a single battle. Are you aware of the % chance of getting those traits when doing prebattle withdrawal? Seems like its almost 100% to me.
And when you think about it, why would a general that does not want to fight 5000 men at once and wait for better odds be considered as a "pathetic general'?

Shouldnt those traits disappear under certain conditions ? (big victories, etc)

[Jimmeh36]

Just to add to Overlord's points about development based on my experiences with this great mod - I don't think it should be easy to reach high populations in every region, but I do think that it should be technically possible to do so if various conditions are fulfilled (i.e. built all the right buildings, done everything possible to reduce squalor, high chivalry governor, or if possible, there could even be some event scripts that trigger with choices (such as the one that allows you to fund the kingdom of Jerusalem), and depending on the choice there are certain positive outcomes (such as pop growth) and negative ones (unrest, higher chance of plague etc.). I think it could be argued that with the right governance and luck towns could have expanded more (or less) than they have done historically.

One thing I did notice in the export_descr_buildings file is the somewhat randomness of the population growth bonuses for different city and castle sizes. For instance:

level 1 castle provides:
a) +1% pop growth for regions with a river
b) +1% pop growth for capital
c) +2% pop growth for river and capital
d) +0% pop growth for neither

level 2 castle provides:
a) +1% pop growth for capital
b) +0% pop growth for river
c) +1% pop growth for capital and river
d) +0% for neither

level 3 castle provides:
a) +1% pop growth for capital
b) +0% pop growth for river
c) +1% pop growth for capital and river
d) +0% for neither

level 4 castle provides:
a) +3% pop growth for river
b) +5% pop growth for capital
c) +5% pop growth for river and capital
d) +3% pop growth for neither

level 5 castle provides:
a) +5% pop growth for river
b) +6% pop growth for capital
c) +6% pop growth for river and capital
d) +5% pop growth for neither

And it is similarly unpredictable for cities.

In my opinion the pop growths for the level 1 castle make sense - bonus for capital, bonus for river, bigger bonus for having both and it would be nice if this pattern was maintained for each subsequent castle upgrade but just with an increased bonus, for example, level 2 castle might be...
a) +1.5% pop growth for regions with a river
b) +1.5% pop growth for capital
c) +2.5% pop growth for river and capital
d) +0.5% pop growth for neither

Just my thoughts, correct me if I've read these wrong.

[Overlord.ru]

To reduce or to make the re-emergent faction feature better, I'm still convinced that it bcan be done by adjusting the conversion rate, not only on religions but may be also on cultures. For example, if Novgorod conquiers Kiev, it should be easier to get an unrest low (both are Rus) than having Novgorod conquiering London where the religion and culture are different. In that case, unrest and risk of rebellion should be hight. That's why Kings granted some settlements with specific rights or advantages, like the King of France when he got the Toulouse county joining the royal domain. For example, Carcassone was exempted to pay some taxes.
So, to go back to Novgorod conquiering London, to avoid rebellion and the risk of having the English coming back, it would requiered a strong garrison, some priests to convert local people to Orthodoxy and may be we can add some feature to represent some kind of advantages the settlement can get.

That is so true BUT to my opinion only regarding simple unrest or rebellions, but not reemerging faction. I disagree that every rebellion on a conquered territory should lead to faction coming alive again.
Best is to make the event coming like a thunder in the middle of a hot sunny day. I.E. when you feel certain that this particular nation is gone for good - it would come back out of the abyss and kick your ass.

Another idea about settlements - you can restrict settlements from growing BUT just relax recruitment requirements then. For example, if Oslo can't grow to a castle, make higher tier units recruitable there, but only in less quantities or add longer cooldowns on unit replenishment rates.
Just imagine - if a castle isn't that large and has less defensive walls, should it mean that you can't recruit same, say, knights as in the other one?

[MWY]

Right now I'm sorting out all the trait stuff, and try to make it simpler and more interactive.


@Overlord: Era growth would easily be possible and I thought about that as well. Perhaps a +0.5% growth bonus every 50 turns? The scale and intervall of the growth is really difficult to choose in my opinion. Perhaps we could link it to some historic events?
The second idea doesn't work mechanically, the third one.. Well there are already penalty for growth buildings in the game (f.e. higher tier markets) but perhaps one could do more with it.

The reemerging of factions actually can mostly happen in more than one city. That just never happens because it's usually the capital which revolts.

@Larkin: I check palermo again.

@lifth: That would be pretty difficult to code, atleast how it is right now..

@Lequintal: If you attack into them and then withdraw, the odds are 85%. That's a bit high I guess. Although the player should be punished somewhat, otherwise he can easily check out the strength-ratio and units before fighting every single time, which would be a bit op. But I agree that it shouldn't directly make the character a "bad commander". Although now that you know about it, you can easily play around it.

@Jimmeh: Those are not really random numbers, they are there to make all the settlements currently in the game start with mostly 0% or .5% growth rate.
There could be some events to boost the growth rate I guess.. But then we have to simulate those for the AI as well. And we have to find a reasonable historical background for the events.
Feel free to make suggestions.

[Overlord.ru]

Some minor issues I encountered.

Silver surfers.


Some UFO above arbalest militia

Latest Medieval fashion squeak - square bows

Fyrd spearmen texture mess

An enchanted mine which no1 can use

And some cavalry fighting with spears instead of 1-h weapon in melee combat.

[Overlord.ru]

Perhaps we could link it to some historic events?

That is what I wanted to say. Won't let them grow until a certain date.

The reemerging of factions actually can mostly happen in more than one city. That just never happens because it's usually the capital which revolts.

That is what we're trying to tell ya! This is the point, please change that, untie the event to a rebellion in settlement, just make it completely random!

P.S. Check my posts #517 and #519