[MOD] Lux Invicta

[richvh]

If you can manage to install the SVN version (directions in the Clairvoyance Corner) it's fairly bug free, at least crash-bug free. You're downloading individual files so it's a lengthier than normal download, and you have to move them into the right place, so it isn't very user friendly.

 

[MylesSCP]

Is there any obvious reason why my game would crash every time on the startup screen when loading the map? I got everything from the SVN and I can load other mods fine(like Elder Kings), changed the bcdedit value, and tried without DLCs, but no dice.

 

[richvh]

Are you sure you have no other mods checked?

 

[Enlil]

I always play LV with my mod and Lux Invicta checked. Every time its a surprise to see which overrides which.

 

[MylesSCP]

No other mods. It just crashes when it gets to the loading map(creating rivers) during start up.

 

[TheChronoMaster]

Matter of curiosity: will there be any Eastern or Indian bloodline traits added before the next release version?

 

[richvh]

Do you perchance have the 2.04 patch installed? Current SVN is for 2.1.6 and won't work with 2.04.

The only other thing I can think of is that the download aborted part way through, in which case you'll have to do a cleanup then update again.

I don't think we have any new bloodline traits. The current implementation is probably a not insignificant contributor to lag (the old agnatic inheritance is a much cheaper (computationaly speaking) implementation.)

 

[MylesSCP]

Nevermind, I fixed it. I reinstalled(which didnt fix it before), so I think it was an old Lux folder in Documents\Paradox Interactive\Crusader Kings II which was somehow getting loaded with the mod under Documents\Paradox Interactive\Crusader Kings II\mod. When I deleted that stuff I got new loading screens and no crashes.

 

[TheChronoMaster]

I don't think we have any new bloodline traits. The current implementation is probably a not insignificant contributor to lag (the old agnatic inheritance is a much cheaper (computationaly speaking) implementation.)

Isn't the reason for the current implementation to avoid, for instance, the player losing their bloodline trait unless they marry a distant relative when they have a female ruler? Also, to avoid early-game bloodline extinctions?

 

[richvh]

I can't comment on that as it was implemented during my absence, though it had been proposed already before I left. While bloodlines are nice, they're not really necessary for a successful game. (I played most of my View from Lands End AAR game with no bloodline trait.) Plus with the current implementation, you may end up with a different bloodline trait than you started with, depending on who you marry and how the game decides which of two possible bloodline traits the baby will receive.

 

[Phase]

If you can manage to install the SVN version (directions in the Clairvoyance Corner) it's fairly bug free, at least crash-bug free. You're downloading individual files so it's a lengthier than normal download, and you have to move them into the right place, so it isn't very user friendly.

Thanks.

I did this last night and it works brilliantly, but it was 4am before I knew it! The map is a bit disorientating, however.

 

[richvh]

Riknap, you might want to look at mercenary cost balancing again. In my Palmyra game, non-vassalized mercenary monthly costs were so low that I was able to keep them raised between wars as a standing army. In my current Isauria game, the cost of keeping the vassalized Isaurian Guard is so high that I had to dismiss them in the middle of a war, before I'd ever met the enemy's main force. And I'd gone into the war with what I'd thought was a decent bankroll.

 

[riknap]

Riknap, you might want to look at mercenary cost balancing again. In my Palmyra game, non-vassalized mercenary monthly costs were so low that I was able to keep them raised between wars as a standing army. In my current Isauria game, the cost of keeping the vassalized Isaurian Guard is so high that I had to dismiss them in the middle of a war, before I'd ever met the enemy's main force. And I'd gone into the war with what I'd thought was a decent bankroll.

that's pretty much the intent really:
non-vassalized mercenaries are expensive upfront but cheap to maintain, though they barely manpower while active - they are replenished quickly while inactive though (a sort of reorganization/recruitment phase that happens while not flying a lord's banner is how I view it really)
vassalized mercenaries are a third cheaper (relative to same-composition/number companies) upfront, but thrice more expensive to maintain. they also replenish at the same rate as non-vassalized mercenaries, ie. almost not at all.

I guess part of the issue that throws the figures askew is that vassalized mercenaries tend to be expensive-type units (HI and HC and/or HA mostly), while regular small-company mercenaries are a random mix.

Still, I'll try looking into closing the gap between the numbers again to make the difference not that drastic, while still keeping the distinction between the two noteable. I was trying to avoid making vassal mercenaries the instant-win trump card they used to be, as previously vassal mercs were both cheaper to hire and maintain, which made realms that happened to have them guaranteed blobbers (so long as the finances are too messed up).

 

[futuregary]

Matter of curiosity: will there be any Eastern or Indian bloodline traits added before the next release version?

Probably not, but that doesn't mean they aren't coming.

 

[richvh]

I was trying to avoid making vassal mercenaries the instant-win trump card they used to be, as previously vassal mercs were both cheaper to hire and maintain, which made realms that happened to have them guaranteed blobbers (so long as the finances are too messed up).

But hired mercenaries have become the easy-win trump card for players who see they can afford to keep them on the payroll between wars. (AI doesn't have the insight to realize this.) This shouldn't be the case.

And vassalized mercenaries shouldn't be so expensive to maintain as to become useless in wartime. Shaytana added them to be useful to the states having them, not to be white elephants.

 

[Attalus]

But hired mercenaries have become the easy-win trump card for players who see they can afford to keep them on the payroll between wars. (AI doesn't have the insight to realize this.) This shouldn't be the case.

And vassalized mercenaries shouldn't be so expensive to maintain as to become useless in wartime. Shaytana added them to be useful to the states having them, not to be white elephants.

IMHO the vassals mercs should cost nearly nothing ( you need to give an advance to the legions for them to fight for you ? ) but be really expensive

 

[TheChronoMaster]

But hired mercenaries have become the easy-win trump card for players who see they can afford to keep them on the payroll between wars. (AI doesn't have the insight to realize this.) This shouldn't be the case.

And vassalized mercenaries shouldn't be so expensive to maintain as to become useless in wartime. Shaytana added them to be useful to the states having them, not to be white elephants.

I kind of feel like vassalized mercs should have an authority cost attached to raising them, if it were possible.

 

[richvh]

We could give vassal mercenaries something like the estates minor title, only instead of incurring a one-time cost, a building is put in the liege's capital holding costing tax revenue, so there's an ongoing cost associated with having a vassal mercenary outfit, then reduce wartime maintenance to something commensurate with hired mercenaries. It should not cost more to keep a vassal mercenary in the field than a hired mercenary unit of similar size and composition. If anything, the hired mercenary should charge more, as they don't have a steady income stream to rely on.

A nice event could be written for the renewal of the contract with a new holder of the vassal mercenary title.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

IMHO the vassals mercs should cost nearly nothing ( you need to give an advance to the legions for them to fight for you ? ) but be really expensive

Well... kind of. Rome had a severe problem of "legions don't get paid > they support some nobody to the throne". Ask Aurelian.

By the way, don't you feel there should be an event in some Roman or other cultures similar to that in which the legions begin supporting a pretender if you can't pay them?

You should also be given an event in which you offer huge amounts of money to the revolted legions secretly, so that they might rid of the pretender and return to the fold, maybe raid a city or two on the way and then be done with it... and then you can let them go or have them killed. It feels very Shaytanic.

 

[DarkReborn]

That would be relatively easy to code... the problem could be the AI. I know the Holy Order AIs work fine, but I'm not so sure about the Merc AIs "raising themselves". I've often see the Vassal Mercs side against me in a faction and raise nothing.