Knights and Merchants.net Forum

Hi, just discovered KaM remake about month ago and played though the TSK campaign... It's a really nice project almost perfect copy of the original with some great features, BUT
I really don't like the idea of dropping siege workshop and town hall. I understand that these building are not perfectly balanced for multiplayer games, but they were part of the original TPR campaign and without them it really does not feel natural to play the TPR campaign.

Here's a proposed solution - add it to the game with the original stats, both buildings, but make them disabled in TSK campaign and enabled in TPR, to keep the original gameplay, and optional, off by default in multiplier games. And regarding the "no-one is pushing the siege weapons", this never occurred to me as a problem when I played TPR back then, so I don't think it's a big issue.

So do you think this is a feasible proposal? Or there are other reasons for not including these building that I might have missed?
Thanks for considering it

Probably most of the members on this forum know my opinion about siege already so I won´t tell you again. Just to make it short: Much cooler maps/missions can be done (TNL campaign can´t be converted up to here, because the last missions aren´t fun with bomwen/xbows replacing the strong sieges). For sure these 2 things are too strong, but there is no problem to reduce the attack etc. I would even like to see both building in TSK AND TPR, because for me these buildings were additionaly made like the fishermen(even if it was the first building, that was drawed by someone). Still everyone can decide to make sieges in TSK or not

So the biggest problem is the Multiplayer. As far as I know Krom and Lewin don´t like to have 2 different games (SP with siege and TH and MP without) for example. However there were still no tests in multiplayer at all. There were many ideas about increasing the amount of iron and wood for these sieges and that catapults can ONLY attack buildings. This way maps like Cursed Ravine or other "campy" maps could turn even more interesting for everyone, because it would be easy to "camp" but it would be also easy to destroy these 40 buildings/towers

I have the same opinion like you about the "pushing" person. I liked to play AOE also or The Settlers III / IV and in every single game of these 3 you had "magical" sieges. (Ok in S4 the ships and some sieges had a donkey or a person, who pushes/pulls it. I don´t think anyone said in these times "ehh so unrealistic". I mean we can discuss also if it is reaslistic that a fire stops to burn, if you take 20 labours in KaM and these strong men will hit your building with a hammer but I guess some (specialy the developers) have a different opinion to this point and they don´t like this "magic" movements.

You can choose to turn of buildings in the editor right?
then the map makers can choose for themselves to enable or disable the siege shop and town hall?
and in the campaign they are turned on in TPR maps?

Or am I thinking to simplistic?

Well that was an argument for me also. If multiplayer can´t handle these sieges AT ALL (that isn´t possible, because you can always reduce any stats like defence/attaack/health...) mapmakers could decide themselves if they wanna block the siegeshop and/or townhall or not but that´s not an argument enough I guess.

Don´t understand your 3. question, if you bought TPR, you could build siege and townhall in tpr aswell as in tsk.

This is required here:

Can you please explain the diagram and why the Siege workshop and City hall is not in the middle part? I've not checked the source code of the game, but it looks to me that these buildings are not really different to Fisherman's hut and Fisherman, right?

I think my diagram looks better. But maybe this is only me?

Despite the arrows not being very straight, I agree with you 100%.

Our reasons for not including them are covered in our FAQ:
http://www.kamremake.com/faq/

@Necroman: see the link that Lewin has posted

@Kamykos: Nice try, but you forgot TPR altogether

My diagram is the best. But I am too lazy to draw it, it basically includes Jedi Knights, alien spacecraft and nuclear strikes.

I agree with sado (at least I think I know what he is trying to say). Why do these diagrams mean anything? They're totally abstract, and have nothing to do with KaM. I could make a diagram that doesn't include gamespeed changes for multiplayer. Does that mean that they shouldn't be in the game?

I didn't see a reason to add this because all TPR features are on diagram already . I can't see why this is such a problem . By dynamic script you can make buildings which are built by themselves(Randziu did a map called Furious warriors where this is possible). So we can have such feature in dynamic scripts but we can't have self moving siege machines? Somebody can tell that dynamic scripts and whole remake are not the same thing. Ok, so why not allow adding machines by dynamic script then? In dynamic scripts we have such "magical" things so why not?

Good point Kamykos, never thought about that True, if you have dynamic scripted maps where Troops spawn randomly, buildings get built automaticly, stones get refilled in towers every 2 seonds and you can "magically" conquer buildings on "The Conquest" by standing in front of them, why you cannot have Icatapults or Ibalistas that can movethemselves because of their great IOS

Wow...I never thought of that. That's a very good point, Kamykos. I say "Amen" to that