Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Tried modifying the.ini file, didn't work.
For the armies we made during strat 4 we had to go with certain numbers of gears in each vategory based on aproximately how many different classes that usually applies for battles - and not based on what or who we actually was going to attack with the army we were building.
All the major clans, as fas as I know, makes their armies more or less exactly the same - a grey army allways has the same amount of each weapon (give or take) for their open field battles. One battle is the same as the next one - you never get surprised by Hetman suddenly fielding an all cavalry army for instance, if he would see it strategically wise to do so in a certain situation - since he cant because of lacking cavalry applicants.
For sieges everybody would be either high power draw archer, high accuracy crossbows or strength crutch ing maulers. In field battles or village attacks it would be all cav, agi polearms and agi shielders.
Can be done. Do I have to join a clan to see this c-rpg banner page, or can someone post a screenshot? Maybe I should just show a full color picker, when someone click on the input field.
The in-game shared wpf character menu display feature hasn't been coded yet, so it won't show up. The actual effective wpf change from shared melee proficiencies has been tested and is working as if you had the amount of wpf that you see on the website.
Is there any chance to load banners on that armors in future?
In theory, everything is possible. The only limits are my motivation, which is unfortunately VERY limited. The heraldics would require you to upload a banner and then it could blend it over the normal texture. The biggest problem would be to define how to align it, so that it is displayed in the proper position. This information is already available in the tableau definitions in the BRFs, but adapting it for the viewer might not be straightforward. Or it might be. We'll see.
Seriously? You're arguing that classes can't be called "ranged" or "melee" only 2h/1h etc..
If you're going to argue rationally, you may want to note that even though throwing has its own wpf separate from bow so does 1h, 2h , polarm wpf. And they're still "melee" not "their own classes."
Um, so it was kind of like a bunch of deflection from the real issue.. why there's suddenly superfluous realism which targets all range except throwing. Nice argumentative weight.