Vatrix's Campaign Fixes

[Ben]

Difficulty should be consistent with original TSK. I think it's okay that mission 8 and 14 were tough as balls. It should be the same in the Remake

[Vatrix]

Difficulty should be consistent with original TSK. I think it's okay that mission 8 and 14 were tough as balls. It should be the same in the Remake

Yes, that's true

[Everstill]

I don't at all disapprove with your changes, but please make sure that Lewin and Krom approve of such changes before you take this further. I know we should value AI performance over the exact match up of villages and quantity of troops, but they still might not like these changes.

Since they're not very active now, I just did what I thought would be good. If I rely on them now, my fixes will take forever to be finished. They can say what they don't want when they come back.

More troops in TSK 8? LOL, did you add them because of my 31 minute win in r5503? Maybe I should try to beat it in 30 minutes to change your mind.

It was because I was thinking that it would be good for enemies to have every kind of troop defending their town (+ lances & horses).

Please don't do that, I can't make changes which will stop you from winning. It's not my campaign .

*Edit:
Hey you two guys (cmowla, Everstill), you both made a good points and explained your point of view. Thank you for time spent here on writing these things.

BUT please stop filling my topic with this now, it's "Vatrix's Campaign Fixes" after all, not "cmowla's and Evertstill's battle tactics"

I need help with fixing here ... anyone listening ... hello?

*Edit2:
BTW I'm just playing my fixes and saving replays for all of you to see how I'm playing my missions

I'm really sorry for misrepresenting your topic, let's go back to your fixes! (but i'm sure you're not mad that people are having discussion about KnM ). And give us the replays to see how you play

This is your interpretation of the storyline. The thing is, it is not up to you to decide that the player shouldn't be able to destroy the first village with his initial army. If it was possible in the original campaign, it should be possible in the Remake's version too. Since building in the Remake is faster than in the original game, I agree with adding a few extra troops/wares/whatever to maintain the difficulty. But to double the army count...?

I don't agree with this. As I said, I really doubt anyone design a mission where you sneak a Scout in the city and by the AI incompetence you just destroy the main buildings and everyone die by starvation. In missions where there is a Leather enemy and you start with a good amount of Iron troops, cavalary and archers, of course we can see that it's designed for you to be able to take their city down with this initial army. But missions always have a 'main enemy' and some allies, if you're destroying the main enemy camp with the initial army, I don't think it's intended. We are suposed to improve things in Remake right? Otherwise we can just play the original game, because the Remake itself already change too many things in the core Mechanics.

Todo for next patch (TSK):
Needed:
General:
- block fish in all missions (Bens idea, I really like it)
- remove all fish from storehouses

You ask for feedback, let's give them.

First, why you want to remove Fish and fisherman? I don't get it, The Peasant Rebelion added them so I don't see why you want to remove. I don't see too what this will improve and pros for it, it will be just a arbitrary decision for whatever reason that change nothing in the Campaign.

- market balancing

I did not see problems in the Market, in fact, I did not used it in my TSK run. There is something you can abuse that I don't know? Other than Block things (like Iron) in missions you are not supposed to have, I don't see balancing problems here.

- recruit timer balancing

Recruit timer balancing??

- AI wares balancing (mostly gold and timber)

AI always have infinite resources for main things anyway, what need to be 'balanced' here?

- balance missions difficulty
- this is not he right difficulty order:
cmowla wrote:
TSK 11
TSK 8
TSK 14
TSK 7, TSK 15
TSK 12
TSK 20
TSK 9
TSK 4
TSK 5
TSK 16
TSK 18
TSK 1
TSK 2

I agree in the missions difficulty balance, with the mission 8 and 14 on top =P There are too easy missions that can receive a bump. (and change the rank in difficult) and I agree to make the difficult consistent with the original TSK.

TSK 4
- make both cities have wares in all houses from start (like the city is working already)
- improve top yellows attacks
- improve top yellows defence positions
- change radius of bottom yellows defence positions (still not same as in original + not well balanced)
- switch of defend allies (useless, just annoying)

TSK 5
- make both cities have wares in all houses from start (like the city is working already)
- improve defence positions
- first blue enemy attack should happen sooner (-15 minutes I assume)
- maroon horses defence positions are redone in patch 1.0, but needs more work

And you want all pre built city to have all the workers and buildings and stuff already running from the start? Well, I always saw this just as a delay for the enemy to start producing weapons, but as they always have infinite resources anyway, I can accept this, but you will not see the enemy city before it is running....

And try to improve the AI attacks to follow the same wave size as the Original. For example, if in the original the enemy takes very long to attack but when they attack they send a abusive amount of troops, try to keep this. You can even put aditional waves for this (like, a first big wave like the original and then some improved waves made by you).

An example is the TSK 7, I remember they just stalling the game and after a high amount of time, Walhein just send a very high amount of troops to destroy your allied village and then you. When I played your version, I think Walhein had more frequent and small attacks. But I have to play your 1.0 mission to see if you changed

TSK 8
- redo defence positions of both enemies

TSK 9
- bottom-right enemy should make soldiers after at least 60 minutes (also need more feedback on this) - he should be building his city instead of making army

We need to discuss TSK 8 very much =P

And I think we should wait for the AI functions so you can make them build their city before we give feedback about them.

TSK 12
- moorbach should not attack you (dont know if I should let him, in patch 1.0 I set him to attack human player, but its not according to original) - what do you think?
- bottom green guy is not working the same way as in original - need more work

I don't think there should be a AI village that don't attack you, the only time that I think this is fine is when this given village is in front of other village, for example in Mission 16, the Black enemy that build his own city, you can make him to not attack you, because the Black enemy he protects will do this for him. Other than that, why the enemy would not attack you? If they don't attack, you cant lose. For enemies that originally don't attacked like this Moorbach village, you can add a big Delay for them to start to attack, so it will somewhat fit the original, but will not make the mission impossible to lose if you let this enemy alone.

And what's wrong with green?

TSK 20
- need complete enemy attacks rebalancing
- fix problems with iron supply balance for top enemy

Optional (+ not according to original):
TSK 8
1)
- make both enemies make only leather units
- results in rebuilding both cities to be more leather-like
2)
- after depleting iron, instead of axemen they should build barbarians (dynamic script)

As I said, I think we should maintain consistency with the initial troops of the Babarians. I'm playing in the Foreign Lands Campaign and there was a Village training Barbarians, this is what we need in TSK 8. Instead of Iron, they should train Leather and Barbarians as his Melee foot soldiers instead of Axeman, increase the training speed if needed to keep the Hard difficult (I doubt it needs, because Barbarians are strong as Iron troops). You could keep the Iron Mines in the Barbarians village, just replace the Iron Smith with a Market to make as if the Barbarians sell the Iron Ore to foreigners. (it's possible to make the AI use the Market? They could literally trade the Iron Ore).

With your feedback Ill extend this list, so I ask you again to write here every little thing (related to my campaign )

Also any opinion on my Todo list?

I think you should add "Fix The Peasant Rebelion" in your to do list

Jokes aside, tells us what mission you need test, finish something, upload and ask 'test mission 8 please', so we can test and give you feedback.

[Ben]

The reason to block fish and market in TSK is because that campaign was not designed with those features in mind. How would you like it if you made a campaign, balanced it the way you like then BAM! - Lewin and Krom add ninjas to the remake that completely destroy the balance of you campaign. Not so cool in my opinion

Speaking of which, this is actually why I think it would be good to keep the old build order in TSK. However, that contradicts the mechanics of the Remake. We need to decide where the line is between what should be a core mechanic and what was designed for the campaign in the first place.

[Everstill]

The reason to block fish and market in TSK is because that campaign was not designed with those features in mind. How would you like it if you made a campaign, balanced it the way you like then BAM! - Lewin and Krom add ninjas to the remake that completely destroy the balance of you campaign. Not so cool in my opinion

Speaking of which, this is actually why I think it would be good to keep the old build order in TSK. However, that contradicts the mechanics of the Remake. We need to decide where the line is between what should be a core mechanic and what was designed for the campaign in the first place.

Wait wait, we cannot follow this when fixing the Campaigns, because the Peasant Rebelion Campaign are designed with the Siege Weapons in mind, we will bring them just for the sake of this Campaign?? In fact, the TSK campaign is balanced based on the original game, the Remake have too much changes and the balance is already destroyed, the Campaign is not designed with the Shield Defense bonus for example.

Instead of removing the new features because it 'completely destroy the balance', let's just rebalance the Campaign to fit the new things. Fish is not a thing that 'omg, now I can easily win TSK 8', it's just a new thing that I, myself, rarely use. Market on the other hand must be tested if it bring imbalance.

The old build order really contradicts the new mechanics of Remake, while I can accept and understand why Vatrix made the old build order, we can't balance the missions based on the new Build order? Let's just test how much time it takes to build things with the original build order and the new build order, then, we subtract this extra time in the delay for the AI to start to train troops.

For example, to build things with the new build order, it takes 40 minutes, with the old, it takes 55 minutes, just subtract 15 minutes in the delay for Recruits that the AI have to start training troops and the balance will stay the same.

I get and understand your arguments and we really need to decide where the line is between what should be a core mechanic and what was designed for the campaign, but instead of removing features to fit the campaign, we can't choose the other way and fit the features in the campaign?

[zombie01]

I like how passionate everyone is about making the Campaign as original and good as possible.

[Ben]

The reason to block fish and market in TSK is because that campaign was not designed with those features in mind. How would you like it if you made a campaign, balanced it the way you like then BAM! - Lewin and Krom add ninjas to the remake that completely destroy the balance of you campaign. Not so cool in my opinion

Speaking of which, this is actually why I think it would be good to keep the old build order in TSK. However, that contradicts the mechanics of the Remake. We need to decide where the line is between what should be a core mechanic and what was designed for the campaign in the first place.

Wait wait, we cannot follow this when fixing the Campaigns, because the Peasant Rebelion Campaign are designed with the Siege Weapons in mind, we will bring them just for the sake of this Campaign?? In fact, the TSK campaign is balanced based on the original game, the Remake have too much changes and the balance is already destroyed, the Campaign is not designed with the Shield Defense bonus for example.

Instead of removing the new features because it 'completely destroy the balance', let's just rebalance the Campaign to fit the new things. Fish is not a thing that 'omg, now I can easily win TSK 8', it's just a new thing that I, myself, rarely use. Market on the other hand must be tested if it bring imbalance.

The old build order really contradicts the new mechanics of Remake, while I can accept and understand why Vatrix made the old build order, we can't balance the missions based on the new Build order? Let's just test how much time it takes to build things with the original build order and the new build order, then, we subtract this extra time in the delay for the AI to start to train troops.

For example, to build things with the new build order, it takes 40 minutes, with the old, it takes 55 minutes, just subtract 15 minutes in the delay for Recruits that the AI have to start training troops and the balance will stay the same.

I get and understand your arguments and we really need to decide where the line is between what should be a core mechanic and what was designed for the campaign, but instead of removing features to fit the campaign, we can't choose the other way and fit the features in the campaign?

Doesn't matter if the mission can be balanced in different ways. We could add elephants to the game and balance them in too. The point is that the missions were not intended to have these features so they shouldn't be there.

[zombie01]

The reason to block fish and market in TSK is because that campaign was not designed with those features in mind. How would you like it if you made a campaign, balanced it the way you like then BAM! - Lewin and Krom add ninjas to the remake that completely destroy the balance of you campaign. Not so cool in my opinion

Speaking of which, this is actually why I think it would be good to keep the old build order in TSK. However, that contradicts the mechanics of the Remake. We need to decide where the line is between what should be a core mechanic and what was designed for the campaign in the first place.

Wait wait, we cannot follow this when fixing the Campaigns, because the Peasant Rebelion Campaign are designed with the Siege Weapons in mind, we will bring them just for the sake of this Campaign?? In fact, the TSK campaign is balanced based on the original game, the Remake have too much changes and the balance is already destroyed, the Campaign is not designed with the Shield Defense bonus for example.

Instead of removing the new features because it 'completely destroy the balance', let's just rebalance the Campaign to fit the new things. Fish is not a thing that 'omg, now I can easily win TSK 8', it's just a new thing that I, myself, rarely use. Market on the other hand must be tested if it bring imbalance.

The old build order really contradicts the new mechanics of Remake, while I can accept and understand why Vatrix made the old build order, we can't balance the missions based on the new Build order? Let's just test how much time it takes to build things with the original build order and the new build order, then, we subtract this extra time in the delay for the AI to start to train troops.

For example, to build things with the new build order, it takes 40 minutes, with the old, it takes 55 minutes, just subtract 15 minutes in the delay for Recruits that the AI have to start training troops and the balance will stay the same.

I get and understand your arguments and we really need to decide where the line is between what should be a core mechanic and what was designed for the campaign, but instead of removing features to fit the campaign, we can't choose the other way and fit the features in the campaign?

Doesn't matter if the mission can be balanced in different ways. We could add elephants to the game and balance them in too. The point is that the missions were not intended to have these features so they shouldn't be there.

Agreed, TSK was designed without the fish.
So there should be no fish.

(Elephants, could they be pink ? Sounds like a great addition)

[Swiss Nisi]

Tpr was designed with Townhall and Siegesmith (or whatever it was called) but neither is usable in the campaign... So why take out fish in Tsk? Just because it wasn't there in the first Game?
You guys are contradicting things. Get something out that wasn't there and also get something out that was there.... decide for one option and not a mix from both... so i agree with everstill

[The Dark Lord]

Tpr was designed with Townhall and Siegesmith (or whatever it was called) but neither is usable in the campaign... So why take out fish in Tsk? Just because it wasn't there in the first Game?
You guys are contradicting things. Get something out that wasn't there and also get something out that was there.... decide for one option and not a mix from both... so i agree with everstill

This is irrelevant; siege weapons and the town hall are not available in the Remake at all, so they can't be added even if we wanted to.

[Vatrix]

Agree with TDL, Ben and zombie01. TSK was not designed for fishing, even if it is not a hard work to balance it in Remake. And as both sides said, fishing is also very rarely used in TSK, so it's not a harm if I remove it.

AND I'm supporter of democracy, so 4 votes (Ben, TDL, zombie01, Vatrix) for not adding it and 2 votes (Everstill, Swiss) for leaving it as it is.

Hopefully this decision won't stop you from helping me fix this campaign.

[Swiss Nisi]

Why take two things out of the game who were usable in the original that makes absolutely no sense....

And no Vatrix it's just as a matter of principle
in the end i don't care if there's fish or not in the campaign, i always builed them though^^ but like i said principle^^

[Krom]

Just to note: KaM Remake is a remake of KaM TSK. We have added some features from TPR and some from scratch. Balance changed during the years, so even basic TSK campaign can not be played exactly like it was intended to (which is grey area, because it changed with SR patches too)

[Vatrix]

Guys, I need you to test TSK 6 for me, please. Can you play like 10 times, post replays and write your win/lose statistics here? I would be glad if you do it .

[Everstill]

Doesn't matter if the mission can be balanced in different ways. We could add elephants to the game and balance them in too. The point is that the missions were not intended to have these features so they shouldn't be there.

I don't know why you people are contradicting things here. I don't know anymore the criteria for this things here.

The game already have a "elephant", it's called Market and it's on the Campaign, if you will remove fish, you will remove the Market and ALL the other Remake features?

The Peasant Rebelion campaign is already broken, in fact:

so even basic TSK campaign can not be played exactly like it was intended to

The original campaign is already broken too. And the second time I played, it was with the Peasant Rebelion Expansion, so I had fish in the TSK in the second run.

I have a line of thought that if I want the original campaign and the original game, I can just play the original game, i'm glad Remake exist because it make things better.

So, let's define here, we just want things exactly like the original with no improvements or new features in any reasonable way?