More info- Provinces and Regions, Armies and Generals

[Hooahguy]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?548136-Exclusive-Content-and-Dev-chat-for-Total-War-Center&p=12887735&viewfull=1#post12887735

Here is a brief overview, provided by Spoonska:

Regions
Regions makeup provinces. 2-4 regions per province
You can construct buildings, raise armies, recruit agents and manage happiness and taxes for each one.
Regions in a province can be owned by individual factions, and can be taken as normal
When the settlement of a region is attack it proceeds as a normal battle.

Provinces
Provinces are groupings of between 2 and 4 regions
If you own the whole province then you can pass edicts which provide various bonuses for the province
All the construction options for a province can be managed from a single screen
Happiness is also on a province level for a faction
1 region per province is the Capital
More on the Capital : Has more building slots than the other regions
More on the Capital : Has a "Siege" map to go with it. Can only be taken by a siege attack.
Both province capitals and minor settlements have garrisons that will defend them if they are attacked.

Army & Generals
You cannot have an army without a general
Max of 20 units in an army. A navy also requires a general
If an army loses its General a new one can be appointed straight away
There is a limit to the number of armies you can have at any one time. That number is tied to your factions power. (Works similar to the fame system in Shogun 2)
You raise an army from a settlement, and then you have to appoint a general to lead it
Settlements no longer have a recruitment slot
You recruit by selecting the army not the settlement.
When recruiting your army will enter muster mode and it cannot move in this stance
Your army can be named and you can change its emblem
Generals still have skills and traits
Armies now have a raid stance. This reduces their upkeep
More on raid stance : If they are in enemy territory it also gives some money as income, if it is done in friendly territory it additionally causes unhappiness
Forced march stance is a great way to move around the campaign map quickly. It gives a large bonus to movement distance, but the army cannot attack that turn and if it is attacked the units in it will suffer a morale penalty

Im not sure I like the whole army restriction thing. I mean, I guess it makes sense that a 1 province country should have 8 armies, but still, not a huge fan of the restriction.

Also, the whole "no more recruiting in settlements" doesnt sit with me too well. I wonder how garrisons will be managed then.

EDIT: But I really like the emphasis on non-siege battles, it will remove the monotony of taking settlements, very much like the no-forts mod in ETW.

[Lemur]

More info shows up (http://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/comments/1f9gmf/new_rome_2_info_provinces_and_regions_armies_and/):

--------------------

Originally Posted by Daniel_mo: Hey Jack, How big is a Army Stack? Will Navies work the same way as Armies are tied to a General

Max of 20 units in an army. A navy also requires a general

Originally Posted by SughdianWarrior: i.e. Admiral traits/skills and Fleet traditions?

Yup.

Originally Posted by SamueleD: Thank you for the info Jack Lusted, it made many things clear! I would like to now if navies will be built in a similar way as armies, if they will also have a limit and if admirals will be appointed in a similar way. The number limit on fleets might avoid having a single half sunk low tier warship (like those bow kobayas) blockade an entire port.

Yes fleets will work in the same way.

Originally Posted by torongill: Jack, I have a question: In the other forum, the official one, you have said that the maximum number of units in an army is 20. However, in another interview Dom, the campaign lead, said the maximum number of units you can control will be 40(I'll look for the RP episode in question). How does that work out? If both statements are true, would that mean that you, the player, can control two different army stacks? in the same battle? Thanks.

Yes just like in FOTS and was later patched into Shogun 2

Originally Posted by kamikazee786: hey jack, quick question here...how will garrisoning work ? we know that each province will have a capital with smaller settlements around it. Will the garrisons of smaller settlements be pre set or can we recruit them ourselves ?

The automatic garrisons work the same as in Shogun 2, units in them are base don the buildings you have. You can also have an army protect a settlement as well.

Originally Posted by torzsoktamas: Jack,I have some easy questions regarding the recruitment of armies: 1)As I understand it,..we will recruit whole armies not units!So this means that for example in a turn or two,with a general I will have a full stack?Also how will I choose the unit composition of the army? 2)Will I be able to garrison full stack armies in settlements to protect them?

No you still recruit individual units when recruiting for your armies, so you have full control over what units are in them.

Originally Posted by MrOuija: Thanks Jack! One question. If there are 57 siegeable provinces, how many of these are unique or custom locations? Should we expect many in-depth cities like in the siege of carthage video, or just a few with many generic ones?

There are a few unique settlements, but Rome II also has the highest number of city maps of any Total War game to date so you will see a large variety on the battlefield.
Originally Posted by Modestus: Just to clarify this is not the terrain in the distance that surrounds a tactical map, if I am on a hill on the campaign map I will be on a hill in the tactical and any other features detailed enough to see on the campaign map will also be on the tactical map.

It's the whole terrain in a battlefield. Same was true for non-siege battles in Shogun 2.

Originally Posted by PROMETHEUS ts: I mean if the strategical map is it dynamically linked with the battlefields maps like in Rome ...Like where I place my army and meet the enemy will be represented by the actual terrain I see on the map, like if I place my army on a hill , with sea on left , mountain on right , a wood behind , the road ahead , will this be represented also. On the battlefield? So dynamic battlefields for every point the army is placed in the strategical map.Or instead...Like in Shogun II does not matter where I have my army , if it is in region x the map for field will always be the same , no matter if my army is near the coast, on the hill , in the woods or else... So static battlefields for each strategical map region.

Shogun 2 worked on a template system for battlemaps on the campaign, where there would be a number of templates tied to a region and whichever one you were nearest would be used for the battlefield. There were arond 800 of these and they were all done to mirror the geography of the campaign. For Rome II there is basically a giant template map for the entire campaign so the terrain will be picked based on where you fight. Siege maps are also no longer presets, the cities themselves have been made as tiles so the outfield and surrounding terrain will match the campaign map.

[Barkhorn1x]

I like what I'm hearing so far as unlimited armies are not very realitic in any case.

Love the fact that you can name them and they'll have character and love the limited sieges as now they'll be "special".

[andrewt]

Loving the decrease in siege battles. I don't like siege battles and ended up auto-resolving many of them in my latest campaign.

I wonder how the army recruitment works with the tech tree, though. A big problem in the recent games is that my most high-tech provinces are located deep within my territory. In the late game, it could take 10+ turns to move my shiny high tech units from where they can be recruited to where they can actually fight. It is a logistics nightmare.

[Spoonska]

This thread right here answers a lot of the questions raised from the recent dev diaryhttp://forums.totalwar.com/showthread.php/68061-Jack-Lusted-s-clarification-of-army-cap)

Personally I don't know how I should feel about this.

[Hooahguy]

This thread right here answers a lot of the questions raised from the recent dev diaryhttp://forums.totalwar.com/showthread.php/68061-Jack-Lusted-s-clarification-of-army-cap)

Personally I don't know how I should feel about this.
I like the limited army numbers. If you have only one or two provinces you shouldnt be able to recruit a bunch of big armies. Remember, there werent all that many people in the world back then. If I recall correctly, population numbers in the antiquity was about 30-50 million. Thats not that much at all, and recruitment numbers should reflect that.

EDIT: this will also prevent a large number of those small armies of 1-3 units that are a pure nuisance by running around. I think it really will increase the number of large battles as if the AI can only make a number of armies, plus recruiting directly into the army, the chances of having a large army rather than a bunch of small ones that the AI cant seem to be able to converge into a larger force.

Also, as one redditor put it, "we're not going to have a 3/4 stack of quality troops in every town anymore, if we let an enemy army get past the front lines, we're gonna pay for it."

[Barkhorn1x]

I like the limited army numbers.

Also, as one redditor put it, "we're not going to have a 3/4 stack of quality troops in every town anymore, if we let an enemy army get past the front lines, we're gonna pay for it."

Yea I think I like this too and you should pay for enemy armies marauding on your lands.

Not to change the subject but how come nobody asks about whether they fixed the phalanx or not? That is burning question for me.

[The Stranger]

what was wrong with the phalanx?

[B-Wing]

I feel like many of the changes and new features of Rome II are specifically geared towards the Romans, which causes me some unease (I am apparently amongst a minority of players who have no intention of playing as Rome in this game). But it does seem CA is trying to drastically cut down on army micromanagement, which I feel is probably for the best.

I haven't read the long response from Jack Lasted yet, but I hope he addresses whether there are any restrictions on army compositions, like recruitment caps on elite units, for instance. In Medieval 2, you could recruit militia units in much larger numbers than knights. This was due to the way the unit pools of individual settlements worked, but not due to any faction-wide limitations. Shogun 2's recruitment system was significantly less satisfying to me, but then again the scale of the game was extremely small compared to Medieval 2, so perhaps I'm comparing apples to oranges.

I may have missed this info, but have they confirmed if generals/family members also function as governors? If so, will their governing bonuses only be applicable when stationed in a province capital, or in any region's settlement?

[Barkhorn1x]

what was wrong with the phalanx?

The AI in RTW couldn't handle their phalanx units properly making them easy to flank/cut up piecemeal and the player barely could - all due to due to poor pathing.

[Hooahguy]

I haven't read the long response from Jack Lasted yet, but I hope he addresses whether there are any restrictions on army compositions, like recruitment caps on elite units, for instance. In Medieval 2, you could recruit militia units in much larger numbers than knights. This was due to the way the unit pools of individual settlements worked, but not due to any faction-wide limitations. Shogun 2's recruitment system was significantly less satisfying to me, but then again the scale of the game was extremely small compared to Medieval 2, so perhaps I'm comparing apples to oranges.


I think there may be some sort of limit. He says that you have to choose between a lot of low-trained armies or a few elite armies. Personally, I see why they want that, as German clans will have a lot of armies but not many elite units, while the Romans and Greeks might want more elite, but fewer armies.

[lars573]

The AI in RTW couldn't handle their phalanx units properly making them easy to flank/cut up piecemeal and the player barely could - all due to due to poor pathing.
You realize that was 5 whole games ago right? And that much progress was made in unit AI.

[Barkhorn1x]

You realize that was 5 whole games ago right? And that much progress was made in unit AI.


Umm...phalanxes haven't been in a TW game since RTW and CAs track record has been far from stellar when it comes to TAC AI - or AI in general for that matter.

[lars573]

Wrong. They were for sure in ETW, as it had pike units. And the AI has improved much in 5 games. I haven't played Shogun 2 (my PC lacks with ETW), but ETW's AI was a VAST improvement over RTW.

[Hooahguy]

Wrong. They were for sure in ETW, as it had pike units. And the AI has improved much in 5 games. I haven't played Shogun 2 (my PC lacks with ETW), but ETW's AI was a VAST improvement over RTW.

Eh, Im not so sure about that. The infamous melee bug in ETW took months for them to "fix" and even then, only modders were able to keep it from occurring. But considering how willing the AI was to charge into melee range, maybe thats a good sign?

On the other hand, shogun 2 AI seemed to be much better, although I havent had that much time on it. I was attacking a large city and when the first line defenders began to show signs of breaking they fell back to the second line (and last line) of defense and made a last stand there, so I was pretty impressed with that.

But we will have to wait and see about the AI, we will only know when the game comes out, as CA's promises about the AI should not be taken too seriously.

[Barkhorn1x]

Wrong. They were for sure in ETW, as it had pike units. And the AI has improved much in 5 games. I haven't played Shogun 2 (my PC lacks with ETW), but ETW's AI was a VAST improvement over RTW.

I don't know what stock version of ETW you played but that AI sucked as Hooahguy pointed out. Pathing was also a mess - try running down a routing inf. unit with some hussars and tell me how that goes.

Oh and here's a tip; Pike units - all 2 of them in a battle - ain't an 8 unit phalanx by any stretch.

[lars573]

Eh, Im not so sure about that. The infamous melee bug in ETW took months for them to "fix" and even then, only modders were able to keep it from occurring. But considering how willing the AI was to charge into melee range, maybe thats a good sign?
I didn't get the game until very late 2010. And the AI behavior was on target for the time period. That's not charging into melee range, that's an attempt at forcing you to withdraw.

[Myth]

I must admit i'm liking what I'm seeing so far for the most part. I just want to exclude that on the fly replenishing system like in Shogun 2. Limited armies, named armies and such really bring a new depth to the game. Back in Rome and Medieval 2, the army was the general basically, and perhaps some chevroned units you managed to save and retrain. But when your 10 star, Night Fighter, +12 morale general died, a lot of that army's spirit went with him.

Having true veteran armies gaining experience as a cohesive unit is much better IMO. A general alone does not make or break an army - much of the tactical part of the fighting relied on the officers and troop experience, discipline, morale and skill. A mediocre general leading an excellent veteran army with great officers will do better than a genius general with raw recruits and incompetent officers. Another matter entirely is that veteran armies don't like being lead by fools and that they are very likely to mutiny versus incompetent high command. Mars's spear but I hope that is implemented in the game...

Limting the classical "you dun got blocadeded by my one trireme hur-durr" and the dreaded 6 units of peltasts "army' is great IMO. Seems like they definitely took not only what made RTW great, but also what made it annoying in some instances. Moving peasants around at turn 120 to keep PO, or mustering cav from the other half of the map was annoying and tedious, I'm glad that will be removed.

Overall, I'm pretty excited about the new game and will probably buy a new graphics card exclusively for it if my GeForce 570 doesn't cut it any more.

[katsoro]

"More on the Capital : Has more building slots than the other regions" Witch limited building slots, WTF is this? I guess I was an idiot to hope Rome 2 would be more like Rome and less like the latter games (That I did not play, because they where never finished and all the horror stores about them). Limited armies could work out but over all it seems like everything is just being limited. I really hope the limits are mod able.

[Hooahguy]

"More on the Capital : Has more building slots than the other regions" Witch limited building slots, WTF is this? I guess I was an idiot to hope Rome 2 would be more like Rome and less like the latter games (That I did not play, because they where never finished and all the horror stores about them). Limited armies could work out but over all it seems like everything is just being limited. I really hope the limits are mod able.

Limited building slots makes perfect sense. If its a small town you should be limited in the number and types of buildings you can make. This way you got to plan out each town/settlement carefully.

[B-Wing]

I don't mind building options being reasonably limited, but I don't want them to define a region's function to the degree seen in Shogun 2. Don't get me wrong, I love Shogun 2, but I think Rome's scale is too big for it to feel right in. I guess it also depends on how R2's unit recruitment works.

[Myth]

I don't mind building options being reasonably limited, but I don't want them to define a region's function to the degree seen in Shogun 2. Don't get me wrong, I love Shogun 2, but I think Rome's scale is too big for it to feel right in. I guess it also depends on how R2's unit recruitment works.

What? In Shogun 2 you had three options:

1. Keep it as a backwater craphole with only a single first-level market and whatever fields you can afford.
2. If it has a special bonus, develop a dojo/building for that bonus or make the last tier upgrade for the market (only the first and last tiers make sense economically).
3. If it's big and filled with useless buildings by the AI, tear down what you don't need and keep a first level market.

Cities don't grow, trade without the gimmicky trade node mechanic is worthless, the armies replenish on their own, ashigaru kill everything in AR, the Wacky pirates are an absolute menace yet land-locked rebels are pathetic, there is no population as a resource like in RTW, you get skill trees for your generals, the text is too small, the portraits are not to my liking... Plenty of reasons I didn't fall in love with Shogun 2.

[B-Wing]

I'm not sure if you're making an argument, a point, or a rant. But I get the impression you would like more building slots for Rome 2.

[aimlesswanderer]

I guess that as long as there aren't all these crappy little armies which are difficult to chase down running loose burning everything I will be much happier. That put me off ETW big time.

Given that the provinces are much larger in area (and likely more populated too?) than areas in Shogun, they should have, on average, more slots for buildings.

I guess that the army limit is ok as long as it is reasonable. I am guessing that there isn't a provincial population, like Rome I? If not, then it makes sense that a 1 province empire can't field 10 armies. However, if it's possible to have a very rich province (trade?), then that should be able to field more than the minimum number of armies. Or they could field mercenaries, if there are any?

[Myth]

I guess it started as a point and devolved into a rant. Anyway, I don't want more building slots. I actually don't really care for the building slot system per say (I think it was introduced in Knights of Honor? I may be mistaken) but it's not a terrible system. Still I'd much rather have the buildngs/upgrade level of the city to be tied to population size and the surrounding countryside and its villages, as well as any special conditions in that region (having iron, gold, forests, a natural harbour etc.) I also want every upgrade level of a building to be worth it, not making it worse as is the case with Shogun 2's marketplace.