Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread

alkexr

@cernel The letters saying that you need xyz version are apparently not big enough, or there aren't enough exclamation marks after them. Maybe I should add something that breaks compatibility completely with the stable

Cernel

@alkexr For @epinikion, I gave him the latest prerelease to download, but he is having problems to install it, as his system refuses it as not secure (since very new and very few users).

Also, I strongly suggest you have the download link for the latest in the first post of this thread. The last one you gave is already getting quite a bit buried in the pages.

alkexr

@cernel said in Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread:

he is having problems to install it, as his system refuses it as not secure

Yes, mine does too. In cases like that you usually have to look for some option like "more info" or "advanced options". The option to run is there, it's just hidden from the average user.

Also, I strongly suggest you have the download link for the latest in the first post of this thread.

I can't really make a link always point at the latest pre-release, an they are called "unstable" for a reason. E.g. there were versions which threw errors constantly. So you would want to select one you know to be relatively stable.

prastle

@alkexr bumped the map link
https://forums.triplea-game.org/post/15442

alkexr

@prastle You mean this link? https://github.com/triplea-maps/the_battle_for_arda/archive/master.zip This always points to the latest version.

prastle

@alkexr ty

zlefin

notes so far:

What does Unseen do? I couldn't find in the game notes what it does. At least not that I remember seeing, it could use its own entry.

In the unit info, some units say stuff like "prefers wilderness" or "prefers open skies", whereas other units it specifies the exact keyword and just say "unyielding". It should really always use the keyword imo, as when you're using the table in the notes to lookup what's going to happen to a unit it's way easier when the keywords matchup.

In Hard AI games, evil seems to always win.

The AI can play the map reasonably, but there's a number of specific parts which cause it to make mistakes, because they're not sufficiently supported by the ai engine yet (and won't be for some time). So AI cannot be used to estimate the map well.

vs the AI I had a game hwerein evil obtained the win condition, but I kept playing and good ultimately won (I was playing the high elves, with all other nations ai, long term eagle spam is brutal).

Air battles are weird: there are times when you'd far rather your units DIDNT fight in the air battle, and just waited for the main battle. but righ tnow it's mandatory they partake in the air battle.

alkexr

@zlefin said in Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread:

What does Unseen do? I couldn't find in the game notes what it does. At least not that I remember seeing, it could use its own entry.

The entry for terror mentions that Unseen units are unaffected (units which exist in the Unseen world or "wraith-world"). But you're right, it deserves an entry.

In the unit info, some units say stuff like "prefers wilderness" or "prefers open skies", whereas other units it specifies the exact keyword and just say "unyielding". It should really always use the keyword imo, as when you're using the table in the notes to lookup what's going to happen to a unit it's way easier when the keywords matchup.

Noted.

In Hard AI games, evil seems to always win.
The AI can play the map reasonably, but there's a number of specific parts which cause it to make mistakes, because they're not sufficiently supported by the ai engine yet (and won't be for some time). So AI cannot be used to estimate the map well.

The lack of support for specific parts is the smaller problem. The core issue is the AI's strategy, or rather, the lack of strategy. Like Gondor not even trying to slow down the advance of Mordor + Harad, which would be crucial IMO.

vs the AI I had a game hwerein evil obtained the win condition, but I kept playing and good ultimately won (I was playing the high elves, with all other nations ai, long term eagle spam is brutal).

I don't think you really have the time for eagle spam. A game against a competent opponent will be over in one way or the other long before eagle spam does anything significant. In particular, I don't think you can hold Rivendell with eagles.

But yes, of course, a game vs AI (especially when you only play one faction) is something entirely different. I used to play a lot of games like that too, but they become boring after a while (especially after you start to feel the shortcomings of the AI). You can't really make a map interesting to play with most factions played by AI, except maybe FFA.

Air battles are weird: there are times when you'd far rather your units DIDNT fight in the air battle, and just waited for the main battle. but righ tnow it's mandatory they partake in the air battle.

That is sort of the point. The Nazgul above the battlefield at the Black Gate didn't want to fight the eagles, either.

zlefin

I don't recall your nazgul/black gate point. I go by book canon. I don't recall them fighting in the book.

so that's what unseen does; doesn't seem like a good keyword, in that it's not intuitively obvious what it means ("grokkable") even if it fits the lore.

On ai; both are problems; but core strategy is something that might be one day fixed with some decent lookahead protocols; alot of the other stuff just won't be fixed cuz it's too map specific and hard for the ai to assess. not that it really matters which one is the bigger problem for the ai. I'm pretty sure it is possible in principle to make a map enjoyable with mostly ai nations; iirc one of the newer ones is pretty decent at that, as are some of the classic maps.

You might not have time to spam pure eagles, but they're probably still a good investment, given how the math works out in similar cases on other maps. Mostly though my point was about eagles but about ways in which the victory detection rule might fail. Probably wouldn't apply in human games though, as the ai doesn't know to use siege properly.

it'll be interesting once you have more human play to get proper map results.

edit add:

what does the terrain type "pass" do? it doesn't have its own entry in the table. nor do I see any obvious note nearby that explains what it does.

snaga skirmishers are marked as being ambushers, but their bonuses appear to be the ones for wilderness.

Hepps

You should really put the link for the down load in the fist post of the thread. Trying to track down how and where to get the newest version is a bit of a challenge.

alkexr

@hepps You can download it from the game. But having the link in the first post certainly won't hurt anyone.

Hepps

@alkexr Ah yes the name change. Now I got it.

Good to see it back on my screen.

TheDog

@alkexr
Thanks for your method of PU calculation I have modified my own, so consider the following;

Increase the PUs of the following;
uruk_pikeman
olog_hai
wainrider_chieftain
noldorin_warrior

Increase the following by 4+ PU
swan_knight
kings_company

Rhun should not have a trebuchet, too advanced. Maybe they should not even have a catapult?

Consider giving Siege attacks to Wizards, so they can attack Battlements so Woodland Realm and High Elves can take Settlements easier?

Consider giving Siege attacks to Trolls (Angmar, Orcs) and Olog-hai(Mordor) and Bears(Northmen)
Could then remove Catapult from Orc list, too advanced for them,
Perhaps the Balrog could have siege attacks?

Lorien, could have Wizards, as in Galadriel and other Noldor?

Free Folk could have Catapults?

Im liking all the coding and graphical changes, keep up the good work guys!!!

alkexr

@thedog said in Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread:

Rhun should not have a trebuchet, too advanced. Maybe they should not even have a catapult?

The Easterlings are not barbarians. It's a common misconception that steppe nomads are brainless savages. (The Mongols for example did have trebuchets, and were quite advanced compared to Feudal Europe.) We know almost nothing about Rhûn, but we know that it consisted of many different kingdoms, tribes and hordes of varying levels of development.

Consider giving Siege attacks to Wizards, so they can attack Battlements so Woodland Realm and High Elves can take Settlements easier?
Consider giving Siege attacks to Trolls (Angmar, Orcs) and Olog-hai(Mordor) and Bears(Northmen)
Perhaps the Balrog could have siege attacks?

A unit can't have multiple targeted attacks. That's a feature the map-maker community suggested multiple times, but it's a lot of work I guess.

Could then remove Catapult from Orc list, too advanced for them,

The Goblins of Goblin Town are explicitly mentioned to be very creative when creating advanced machinery and tools for war and torture and other evil purposes.

Lorien, could have Wizards, as in Galadriel and other Noldor?

Tolkien used the word "Wizard" only to mean the Istari: Gandalf, Saruman, Radagast and the two Blue Wizards. They are Maiar (gods, basically). But the idea is great, Elven magic-users could be added. I'm not sure though, should they give leadership? Or what abilities should they have?

Free Folk could have Catapults?

I guess they could... I just couldn't really visualize how the hobbits decide to start buidling catapults

TheDog

@alkexr
The Free Folk also include humans, men from Bree, so they could man the Catapults, the Edain, Men of the West, or the Rangers of the North could have taught them to build them.

For me most factions should have units that can help take settlements.

The Noldor
Noldor ‘royalty’like Galadriel and Fëanor who made the Silmaril, could be Magicians to differentiate them from Wizards. That way they could have lesser powers than the Istari.

The Noldor elves would have their 1st and 2nd age weaponry that the Orcs would fear and so the noldor_warrior could cause terror.

Galadriel would have many Noldor followers with her in Lorien so I think Lorien could also have noldor_warrior.

A case can be made for giving terror causing or leadership to noldor_warrior as they would be revered for living thousands of years by humans and elves alike.

Hepps

@alkexr I like the way you re-engineered the unit classes and terrain effects. It is a much cleaner system than the previous version.

Cernel

@alkexr said in Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread:

The Mongols for example did have trebuchets, and were quite advanced compared to Feudal Europe.

Well, they had trebuchets because the more advanced civilizations they subjected provided them.

epinikion

hey alkexr,

my first evaluation of balance is: evil is way to strong

no problem to take early rihan and arnor city
no problem to take early osgiliath.

so the momentum is clearly on evils side. easy to balance tuv early with better momentum and growing income. i guess you should do something for the good side:
a) give some more units around osgiliath to gondor and some more units to rohan
b) make few good units stronger.

a or b or even c. di somethng for the good

epi

Dr. Stein

Hi, is dale going to be a nation??? or is it going to be under northmen? i understand that it adds some strategic aspect, but its still pretty wierd.
Also, has anybody found a way to stop rhun if its invaiding mirkwood? no way you can defend elevenkings halls + dains halls + erebor + esgaroth + dale...and rhun is perfectly capable creating a strong offensive army that will tame them out one by one...or at least the smaller ones without erebor and maybe one other, but i feel that like this (with a smaller army guarding teritories east of erebor) rhun can efectively cripple mirkwood dwarwes and northmen

unless i just played the good poorly...

alkexr

@dr-stein said in Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread:

Hi, is dale going to be a nation??? or is it going to be under northmen? i understand that it adds some strategic aspect, but its still pretty wierd.

The inhabitants of Dale are Northmen. Dale was a sovereign realm, but then so were Lindon, the Shire, Dunland, Fangorn, the Dwarves of Ered Luin, the Goblins of Goblin Town, the Orcs of Gundabad, the Dwarves of Ered Mithrin, the Dragons of Ered Mithrin, the Lands of the Eotheod, the Lands of the Beornings, Lake Town, the Realm of Vidugavia, the Kingdom of Rhovanion, the Balcoth, Dorwinion, the Dwarves of the Iron Hills, Nurn, Khand and Umbar (that I can list off the top of my head). None of them is given a separate player.

Also, has anybody found a way to stop rhun if its invaiding mirkwood? no way you can defend elevenkings halls + dains halls + erebor + esgaroth + dale...and rhun is perfectly capable creating a strong offensive army that will tame them out one by one...or at least the smaller ones without erebor and maybe one other, but i feel that like this (with a smaller army guarding teritories east of erebor) rhun can efectively cripple mirkwood dwarwes and northmen
unless i just played the good poorly...

Depends. If Angmar focuses on the Dwarves (like the AI tends to), then the North is going to have a hard time. In any case, Rhun is very strong on the offense, and on plains - try to fight them in the forest as much as possible, coordinate the 3 players, and don't leave your stacks on the frontline where Rhun can attack them - keep them behind for counterattacks, to force Rhun into defense.

But then I don't know if it's possible to hold out against a well-played Rhun. Balance testing has just begun.