EaglePrince

This sounds like really interesting challenge, I'd love to give it a try. Now I feel sorry I didn't bring a laptop with me with Stronghold Crusader installed on it. Still, I'm coming back from Greece on Friday, and on Saturday I should be home, and have some time to give it a try. It would be better if I could stay here some time longer, but what the heck, I should be able to answer on this challenge, so I've got that going for me. :-)

I agree, it should be putting the "/" together with the rest of the link within url tag. I just meant to let you know - in case you could implement some kind of forwarding. (I don't imply you should do it, but we could expect that issue like this appears somewhere else too.) I have similar issue with Outlook mail client for Windows 10. Regarding Outlook, I will write a feedback to Microsoft about that, this app it's still being developed, so it might be fixed.

For example, if you simply copy and paste a link for a map submitted to Stronghold Nation at Stronghold Heaven forum (that is without using the url bbcode tags), and if you later click on the posted link there, the visitor would get error 404 - the same one as you could see if you click on the link above without "/" symbol. Obviously it's not just me, It happened to PCdania at Stronghold Heaven as well in a tread for off topic stuff. Only I fixed the link yesterday. It was in this tread. http://stronghold.heavengames.com/cgi-bin/forum/display.cgi?action=ct&f=5,3944,,10 Btw, it happens in different browsers like Edge, Firefox, Chrome...

Hi, I have seen before that I have some issues with Stronghold Nation links, but I wasn't sure was it about SHN or about the browser or email client. Now I figured out what was the issue. When you give us a link like this: www.stronghold-nation.com/downloads/file/367-a-kings-game/ sometimes it loads the link without "/" at the end (like this: www.stronghold-nation.com/downloads/file/367-a-kings-game ). When the page loads without the "/" symbol, error 404 shows up. I still don't know if this is something that needs to be solved at Stronghold Nation, but I'm just letting you know. :)

Thanks. :)

Unfortunately, I have been too busy this week, I haven't managed to make anything, and I still have t finish something, so I won't be able to submit any entry. :( On the good side, I passed my ninth exam this week (of twelve).

It is going to be an interesting kingmaker map. I'm not sure though how would it work in multiplayer, as there are four castle estates, and several of them are bordering. Still, we could make it if we all agree not to build castle structures too close an enemy borders. Then it would be interesting in multiplayer as well. :)

Thanks, Chris! :) And, yes, Nigel, it would have been more interesting if you were taking part as well, but yes, hopefully there will be many other interesting missions such as this one. Chris, I hope you could give us a mission to defeat William (or Williams) using only archers, swordsmen, and laddermen. :) William should be with fixed castle made by myself and by Doomsword, and it could be another combination, such as pikemen instead of swordsmen, etc...

It looks really nice. Can we see the minimap before it's approved? We could play it during next week if others are going to be able to. :)

I almost forgot to submit my victory. :P I won it few days ago. I hope there will be others who also tried to win this one, it was pretty interesting indeed! I hope to see some other changes like this - you could do similar in Stronghold 2 as well! Only I would suggest for this to be done a little bit differently - you could provide us a save file, and we would just load it, restart it, and we would all go through same issues. I mean, in general, it does matter which strongholds AI lords build. :) Only in this particular case it was almost the same, and of course - even if you make an invasion scenario, it's not the same after each restart - for example, invading armies could once attack from north at some moment, and after a restart it may attack in that same particular moment from south. This doesn't make anything harder, only less predictable. EaglePrince 1.sav

Well, yeah, I forgot about that - you can see number of trained troops, number of troops killed by your enemy, and number of players troops in the moment when the last enemy is dead, so you would be able to notice if there was a group of units which was used and disbanded at some point.

This is bad, because AI lords wouldn't build the same castles after each restart, so not all of us would fight under same conditions. Also, you didn't say what settings should we choose - give them 8,000 gold, or..? Maybe it would be better to pick a Crusader Trail mission, but even then you don't know if the player wasn't using any other types of troops. Still, regarding my last statement, I do not expect from anyone from here to do something dishonorable like that.

Thanks Charles for that info, I just tried it, and it works great! All hail Gaben! :D By the way, I spoke to Charles a minute ago, he also told me that Steam overlay doesn't work in multiplayer unless the player has Steam version of the game. Still, this is very useful for multiplayer games. I am thinking about installing Steam version on my PC now, though the only thing which could stop me from that is if I may not be able to use AI manager with the Steam version.

This has become even more interested, I'm subscribing to this topic, and I shall wait for the answer. :D

You and your ally did a good job there. By the way, he (or she) picked interesting name in the game, and something tells me it's not Little Finger, but some other Finger, since you blurred it. :P

That's interesting, I thought knowing Latin could help you in learning Russian (or any other Slavic language). I mean, the languages are far from similar, but what is really interesting to me - grammars of the two languages have a lot of that in common.

Well, yeah, we also have similar rules, and it would be really a mess for someone who tries to learn it. We have seven cases of nous, and it works similar as in Latin language. I suppose in many cases it is easy to learn, but we have rules about changing voices while changing a noun through cases. Sometimes we skip some letters, and sometimes we change some voices, such as when D switches to T. Even I make a mistake now and then, and my girlfriend corrects me. :D But if you want to learn such a language, you can easily learn it enough so we could understand you, and so you could understand us as well, while by the time you would learn it better. I'd say that compared to our languages, English is a paradise - like it was invented to be learned easily. :)

I hope that it won't come to that, as whatever people thought, not allowing kids to learn in their native language would be against their civil right (or however you call it). Here where I live there are many schools in which minorities learn in their native languages.

Well, yeah, I agree it would be bad to split any country, and so it applies in this case with Wales and UK. Regarding Welsh language, maybe Welsh being independent could change that. Actually, that could be changed anyway - with education. I think you should be proud of your language, you are one of the original Britons, and this is the language which was spoken before Saxons landed on Britain. One could say "it's history, it means nothing", but it is a lot - you are "the true descendants of King Arthur", not those who speak English as their native language. You are what is left of Celts! I could keep numbering reasons why people in your country should proudly speak their language, but I guess I could stop here. I'm sad that it's the current state in your country. I hope it will get better. For some reason people nowadays appreciate what is modern and "what is cool", but in my opinion it is mostly a matter of educations.

I hope not, but I could just say that I believe that once people have their occupation (their work), and when they can live well, they will not care about religion. If you go around destroying countries, you can only expect from them to fight you back the only way they can, and that would not be the way you would prefer. Look at all those countries in Near East - they were better with their dictators then it is now. Those were countries of educated and well living people, just look at Libya. Now there is chaos, and what is more - this is effecting Europe as well.

That would be great, I will make a gaming event as soon as I find some time for that, and that could be in less than a week, or during the next week.

I don't think that is a problem. In fact, you could make it like this to make it more interesting: the two players have two cities next to each other. City of player 1 declares war to a city of player 2. Then both of players can lose their cities, and in case of stalemate none of them loses their cities. This would make it somewhat more realistic as well. Indeed, if you attack, and the opponent cripples your troops in the battlefield, there's nothing to stop the attacked player to march into counter attack and take what over some of the attacker cities. Only in our case that could be only one city from which the attack was launched. In our interpretations we could say that the attacked one cannot easily go further, because other cities are garrisoned.

There is also another point of view from poorer countries - that only advantages from EU have those rich countries. EU makes rules which have to be obeyed by produces (of whatever), and producers from richer countries have more resources to satisfy those rules. Villagers from poorer countries don't have money to buy some equipment which is expensive from them, plus they don't get any help from the state which hardly manages to help itself and its bureaucrats ("poor bureaucrats"). Of course, I don't say that it is true. Those who talk about this somehow avoid to tell how it comes that out villagers cannot compete with those from richer countries when we have cheaper workforce, while products of both of them are sold by almost the same price... I just pointed this example how there are so many of them convincing people how EU is "bad for you" in your country and in mine, but by opposite arguments. So we certainly have some demagoguery here, but people can bite it because they don't know all of the facts, they know what they were served... And still, I cannot say for sure whether EU is bad for us or not. One you surely noticed - I would really love to see European peoples united and acting together! I am sure you feel the same, the only question which remains is whether EU as it is today is exactly what we want or something else. From what it is supposed to be, we should only have benefits from it - working together, exchanging our goods without customs, ensuring that what is sold to us is of better quality, etc... Of course, there is a "danger" that one of the members could become poor at certain moment, and people from there could start leaving that country to other European countries. But even in that case - the reason why this country became poor may be because of EU, would that be fair to leave that people behind, like "we bough your resources, we sucked all your blood, now get lost"... So, there is that other purpose of EU - to unite countries together. Is that worth sacrificing... Keep in mind that if you don't offer them something, they may just turn to other great powers, such as China or Russia... What do Ukrainians fight for... Would that be what you want... Though I do not question UK's point when it comes protecting their borders.

I have another suggestion. Why would one of the players have to win? :) Maybe we could make a rule like "if one doesn't manage to defeat his opponent in two hours, that is a stalemate". I am not too much familiar with Crusader 2 tactics, but isn't it possible for players to try to rush their opponents, or anything - just to stop him from turtleing? You could also fix this by putting some of the resources out of players territories, so no one could wall himself with his farms and quarries in a corner of a map. This way, the attacker could raid the farms from around the besieged player, and by the time the one who doesn't want to fight on the field would suffer a defeat. Don't you agree?

Why do you mean sharia law?