Win Conditions [Archive]

JMRC

06-01-2007, 16:07

Hi.

Here it goes the descr_win_conditions.txt file with the regions indicated by the EB objectives. The majority is not historically accurate, since those factions never managed to achieve those regions, but I want to keep the file in line with the EB objectives. I did not include the regions highlighted in black, because they are just raiding objectives.

;Romani
seleucid
hold_regions Latium2 Etruria Umbria Apulia Campania Kalabria Brettia Aemilia Liguria Venetia Insubramrog Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Sardin Korsim Greseoallra Arvenotorg Volcallra Aquitae Lacetania Cantabria Edetania Celtiberia Carpetania Bastetania Turdetania Asturia Turdulia Galaecia Lusitania Baleares Lugonesis Mrogaedu Batromorgan Lemorisae Sequallra Mrogaule Armoriae
Helvetis Rhaetia Noricae Pannonia Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Habukolandam Pannonia_Illyrica Dalmatia Scorcouw Illyria_Hellenike Dardanoia Thraikia_Hypertera Mikra_Skythia Epeiros Makedonia Thessalia Aitolia Attike Euboia Peloponnesos Lakonike Krete Rhodos Lesbos Mysia Lydia Karia Pamphylia Phrygia Galatia Bithynia Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Kilikia Syria Syria_Koile Kypros Phoenicia Ioudaia Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Thebais Oasis_Megale Triakontaschoinos Marmarike Libye Kyrenaia Syrthim Byzacena Zeugitana Numidia Mashiliem Mauretania_Massaesili

;Saka
pontus
hold_regions Sai_Yavuga Saka_Yabgu Kangha Dayuan Dahyu_Haomavarga Sogdiane Margiane Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Yugra Dahyu_Mazsakata Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Daha Khwarazm Astauene Parthava Gabiene Aria Baktria Paropamisadai Karmania Drangiane Arachosia Gedrosia Gandhara Sind Sattagydia Xiyu

;Arverni
scythia
hold_regions Sequallra Lugonesis Arvenotorg Batromorgan Mrogaedu Lemorisae Armoriae Mrogaule Aquitae Volcallra Lacetania Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Noricae Pannonia Thraikia_Hypertera Eravacouw Coutinoe Insubramrog Venetia Liguria

;Saba
saba
hold_regions Saba Qataban Hadramaut Zufar Maketa Arabia Main Gerrhaia_Arabia Diamat Kush Erythraia Triakontaschoinos Thebais Heptanomis Delta_Neilou Sinai Nabataia Rhodos Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Syria Syria_Koile Kypros Phoenicia Ioudaia Assyrie Babylonia Charax_Spasinou Persis Karmania Arachosia Gedrosia Sind Sattagydia

;Makedon
macedon
hold_regions Makedonia Thessalia Peloponnesos Euboia Lesbos Attike Lakonike Aitolia Epeiros Chersonesos_Thraikia Odrysai Dardanoia Illyria_Hellenike dalmatia Mikra_Skythia krete Rhodos Mysia Lydia Karia Pamphylia Phrygia Galatia Bithynia Kappadokia_Pontika Kappadokia Kilikia Syria Syria_Koile Kypros Phoenicia Ioudaia Delta_Neilou Assyrie Babylonia Kalabria
Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Campania Apulia Latium2

;Ptolemaioi
numidia
hold_regions Erythraia Triakontaschoinos Thebais Heptanomis Delta_Neilou Oasis_megale Marmarike Ioudaia Phoenicia Kypros Kilikia Pamphylia Kyrenaia Libye Diamat Kush Sinai Nabataia Main Saba Qataban Hadramaut Zufar Syria Syria_Koile Tadmor Assyrie Babylonia Chersonesos_Thraikia Makedonia Thessalia Aitolia Attike Euboia Peloponnesos Lakonike Krete Rhodos Lesbos Mysia Lydia Karia Phrygia Galatia Bithynia Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Kappadokia

;Arche Seleukeia
romans_julii
hold_regions Phrygia Kappadokia Sophene Syria Syria_Koile Assyrie Adiabene Babylonia Media Charax_Spasinou Elymais Hyrkania Khoarene Gabiene Parthava Astauene Margiane Aria Drangiane Karmania Persis Chersonesos_Thraikia Makedonia Thessalia Aitolia Attike Euboia Peloponnesos Lakonike Krete Rhodos Lesbos Mysia Lydia Karia Galatia Bithynia Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk Hayasdan Adurbagadan Pamphylia Kilikia Kypros Phoenicia Ioudaia Tadmor Nabataia Sinai Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Thebais Triakontaschoinos Oasis_Megale Libye Marmarike Kyrenaia Gerrhaia_Arabia Maketa Gedrosia Arachosia Paropamisadai Baktria Sogdiane Khwarazm Dahyu_Daha Kangha Dayuan Dahyu_Haomavarga Gandhara Sattagydia Sind Xiyu

;Carthage
egypt
hold_regions Zeugitana Mashiliem Byzacena Syrthim Turdetania Bastetania Baleares Sardin Korsim Elimya Carpetania Turdulia Edetania Lacetania Celtiberia Cantabria Asturia Galaecia Lusitania Sicilia Trinakrie Brettia Kalabria Campania Apulia Latium2 Umbria Etruria Aemilia Liguria Venetia

;Parthia
parthia
hold_regions Khwarazm Dahyu_Daha Saka_Yabgu Kangha Dayuan Dahyu_Haomavarga Sogdiane Margiane Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Yugra
Dahyu_Mazsakata Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Roxsalanna Dahyu_Siraca Aghvan Astauene Parthava Gabiene Aria Baktria Paropamisadai Karmania Drangiane Arachosia Gedrosia Hyrkania Adurbagadan Hayasdan Media Elymais Khoarene Persis Charax_Spasinou Babylonia Adiabene Sophene Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Kilikia Pamphylia Phrygia Galatia Kappadokia_Pontika Assyrie Syria Syria_Koile Tadmor Phoenicia Ioudaia

;Pontus
carthage
hold_regions Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Kilikia Pamphylia Phrygia Galatia Bithynia Mysia Lesbos Lydia Karia Sophene Assyrie Syria Syria_Koile Tadmor Phoenicia Ioudaia Babylonia Adiabene Hayasdan Adurbagan Aghvan Kartli Egrisi Maeotis Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Skythia Bastarnolandam Eravacouw Getia Getia_Koile Mikra_Skythia Pannonia Pannonia_Illyrica Dalmatia Scorcouw Illyria_Hellenike Dardanoia Thraikia_Hypertera Odrysai
Chersonesos_Thraikia Epeiros Makedonia Thessalia Aitolia Attike Euboia Peloponnesos Lakonike

;Aedui
gauls
hold_regions Mrogaule Mrogaedu Insubramrog Venetia Rhaetia Noricae Pannonia Mrogbonna Vindelicos Sequallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belga Armoriae Lemorisae Batromorgan Lugonesis Volcallra Arvenotorg Batromorgan Aquitae Celtiberia Asturia Galaecia Cornovae Cassemorg

;Sweboz
germans
hold_regions Swebolandam Kimbriolandam Skandza Auwjogotanoz Rugolandam Silengolandam Mrogbonna Hattolandam Heruskolandam Habukolandam Vindelicos Bastarnolandam Sequallra Mrogaedu Bellovacaea_Belgae Naervaea_Belgae Lugonesis

;Casse
britons
hold_regions Cassemorg Corieltauvae Cornovae Cymriae Brigantiae Caledryn Cruddain Erain Armoriae Mrogaule Lemorisae Batromorgan Mrogaedu Sequallra Lugonesis Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Aquitae Arvenotorg Volcallra Cantabria Asturia Galaecia

;Hayasdan
romans_scipii
hold_regions Hayasdan Egrisi Kartli Aghvan Adurbagadan Media Elymais Persis Charax_Spasinou Babylonia Adiabene Sophene Assyrie Tadmor Syria Syria_Koile Phoenicia Ioudaia Sinai Nabataia Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Thebais Marmarike Pontos_Paralios Paphlagonia Kappadokia_Pontika Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Kilikia Galatia Phrygia Pamphylia Karia Lydia Mysia Lesbos Bithynia Scorcouw Thraikia_Hypertera Dardanoia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Makedonia Epeiros Thessalia Aitolia Attike Peloponnesos Lakonike

;Getai
dacia
hold_regions Getia Getia_Koile Mikra_Skythia Bastarnolandam Thraikia_Hypertera Coutinoe Eravacouw Mrogbonna Noricae Pannonia Pannonia_Illyrica Dalmatia Scorcouw Illyria_Hellenike Dardanoia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia

;Koinon Hellenon
greek_cities
hold_regions Attike Lakonike Rhodos Peloponnesos Euboia Aitolia Krete Thessalia Makedonia Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Dalmatia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Mikra_Skythia Skythia Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Egrisi Pontos_Paralios Paphlagonia Kappadokia_Pontika Bithynia Mysia Lesbos Lydia Phrygia Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Kypros Delta_Neilou Marmarike Kyrenaia Kalabria Brettia Campania Apulia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Sardin Korsim Liguria Greseoallra Lacetania Edetania Baleares

;Baktria
romans_brutii
hold_regions Baktria Dayuan Sogdiane Khwarazm Dahyu_Daha Astauene Margiane Parthava Gabiene Aria Karmania Drangiane Arachosia Gedrosia Sind Sattagydia Paropamisadai Gandhara Dahyu_Haomavarga Kangha Sai_Yavuga Xiyu

;Sauromatae
armenia
hold_regions Dahyu_Aursa Dayhu_Roxsalanna Dayhu_Yaziga Dayhu_Siraca Dahyu_Yugra Dayhu_Thissakata Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Mazsakata Dahyu_Daha Khwarazm Astauene Sai_Yavuga Saka_Yabgu Kangha Dayuan Dahyu_Haomavarga Sogdiane Margiane Baktria Gandhara Parthava Hyrkania Media Adurbagadan Hayasdan Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Galatia Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Skythia Budinije Neurije Bastarnolandam Coutinoe Mikra_Skythia Thraikia_Hypertera Eravacouw Scorcouw Pannonia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Xiyu

;Lusotannan
spain
hold_regions Lusitania Celtiberia Galaecia Asturia Cantabria Turdulia Carpetania Turdetania Bastetania Edetania Lacetania Volcallra Aquitae Baleares Cruddain Erain

;Epeiros
thrace
hold_regions Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Kalabria Dardanoia Makedonia Odrysai Mikra_Skythia Chersonesos_Thraikia Thessalia Aitolia Euboia Attike Peloponnesos Lakonike Krete Dalmatia Scorcouw Pannonia Pannonia_Illyrica Venetia Aemilia Etruria Umbria Latium2 Apulia Campania Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Sardin Korsim Greseoallra Rhodos Karia Lydia Lesbos Mysia Bithynia Phrygia Pamphylia Kilikia Kappadokia Pontos_Paralios Paphlagonia Kappadokia_Pontika Galatia Sophene Assyrie Syria Adiabene Babylonia Media Elymais Persis

If you find some wrong or missing name, please tell me. I will start making tests with this file and I'll let you know the results.

LorDBulA

06-01-2007, 18:18

Great initiative JMRC. :2thumbsup:
Let us know how the tests go.

Spoofa

06-01-2007, 20:02

save game compatible?

MarcusAureliusAntoninus

06-01-2007, 22:23

My suggestion for this would be, fill in only the first areas you want a faction to expand to. For example, have Rome's be only Italy, Sicily, the islands, eastern Iberia, Greece, and maybe Africa. That way, they will set expanding south to be their priority, then expand how they want after that.

Also, if you get all territories listed, does it set off the victory screen?

Foot

06-02-2007, 00:00

Also, if you get all territories listed, does it set off the victory screen?

No. In BI this file was used for the new type of victory conditions, tailored for each faction, where a certain number of provinces AND one or two specific provinces were required for victory. This such makes sure that the AI would go for the specific provinces and thus be able to win. Basically its the modifiable version of the code that made all the factions in RTW go for the Rome province.

Foot

JMRC

06-02-2007, 05:46

save game compatible?

No, sorry. You have to start a new game for the changes in DWC to be loaded into the new savegame.

JMRC

06-02-2007, 05:55

Hi.

I took the suggestion of reducing the number of target regions. Now, the regions that show below the image don't represent the colored areas. It's a shame, but in fact now the factions behave more according to what I want.

However, I'm still unable to force some factions to activity: Getai and Baktria rarely go into activity... I think I'll have to make some adjustments in the descr_strat.txt to force Baktria to attack Seleukeia.

I also made several corrections to the region names in DWC, because they were producing errors when leaving the game and the DWC instructions only work if there are no errors in the script.

So, here goes a smaller but more efficient version of the DWC without any errors:

;Romani
seleucid
hold_regions Latium2 Etruria Umbria Apulia Campania Kalabria Brettia Aemilia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Liguria Venetia Insubramrog Sardin Korsim Syrthim Byzacena Zeugitana Greseoallra Lacetania Edetania Celtiberia Carpetania Bastetania Turdetania Baleares Pannonia_Illyrica Dalmatia Illyria_Hellenike Epeiros Makedonia Attike Delta_Neilou Ioudaia Syria
take_regions 60

;Saka
pontus
hold_regions Sai_Yavuga Xiyu Saka_Yabgu Kangha Dayuan Dahyu_Haomavarga Sogdiane Margiana Dahyu_Alanna Aria Baktria Paropamisadai Drangiane Arachosia Gandhara Sind Sattagydia
take_regions 20

;Arverni
scythia
hold_regions Sequallra Lugonesis Arvernotorg Batromorgan Mrogaedu Lemorisae Armoriae Mrogaule Aquitae Volcallra Greseoallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Insubramrog Venetia Latium2
take_regions 20

;Saba
saba
hold_regions Saba Qataban Hadramaut Zufar Maketa Arabia Main Gerrhaia_Arabia Sinai Nabataia Syria Syria_Koile Phoenicia Ioudaia Assyrie Tadmor Babylonia Charax_Spasinou
take_regions 20

;Makedon
macedon
hold_regions Makedonia Thessalia Peloponnesos Euboia Lesbos Attike Lakonike Aitolia Epeiros Chersonesos_Thraikia Odrysai Dardanoia Illyria_Hellenike Mikra_Skythia Mysia Lydia Karia Bithynia Thraikia_Hypertera
take_regions 30

;Ptolemaioi
numidia
hold_regions Erythraia Triakontaschoinos Thebais Heptanomis Delta_Neilou Oasis_Megale Marmarike Ioudaia Phoenicia Kypros Kilikia Pamphylia Kyrenaia Libye Diamat Kush Sinai Nabataia Syria Syria_Koile Tadmor Assyrie Babylonia
take_regions 30

;Arche Seleukeia
romans_julii
hold_regions Phrygia Lydia Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Kypros Sophene Syria Syria_Koile Assyrie Adiabene Babylonia Media Charax_Spasinou Elymais Hyrkania Khoarene Gabiene Parthava Astauene Margiana Aria Drangiane Karmania Persis Phoenicia Ioudaia Tadmor Nabataia Sinai Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Thebais Marmarike
take_regions 40

;Carthage
egypt
hold_regions Zeugitana Mashiliem Byzacena Syrthim Turdetania Bastetania Baleares Sardin Korsim Elimya Carpetania Turdulia Edetania Lacetania Volcallra Greseoallra Liguria Etruria Latium2 Sicilia Trinakrie Mauretania_Massaesili Mauretania_Tingitana
take_regions 30

;Parthia
parthia
hold_regions Khwarazm Dahyu_Daha Aghvan Astauene Parthava Gabiene Karmania Gedrosia Hyrkania Adurbadagan Media Elymais Khoarene Babylonia Adiabene Sophene Assyrie
take_regions 20

;Pontus
carthage
hold_regions Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Galatia Bithynia
take_regions 10

;Aedui
gauls
hold_regions Sequallra Lugonesis Arvernotorg Batromorgan Mrogaedu Lemorisae Armoriae Mrogaule Aquitae Volcallra Greseoallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Insubramrog Venetia Latium2
take_regions 20

;Sweboz
germans
hold_regions Swebolandam Kimbrolandam Skandza Rugolandam Silengolandam Mrogbonna Hattolandam Heruskolandam Habukolandam Vindelicos Bastarnolandam Sequallra Helvetis Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Rhaetia Noricae
take_regions 20

;Casse
britons
hold_regions Cassemorg Corieltauvae Cornovae Cambriae Brigantiae Caledryn Cruddain Erain
take_regions 10

;Hayasdan
romans_scipii
hold_regions Hayasdan Egrisi Kartli Aghvan Adurbadagan Adiabene Sophene Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk
take_regions 10

;Getai
dacia
hold_regions Getia Getia_Koile Mikra_Skythia Bastarnolandam Thraikia_Hypertera Coutinoe Eravacouw Scorcouw Dardanoia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia
take_regions 15

;Koinon Hellenon
greek_cities
hold_regions Attike Lakonike Rhodos Peloponnesos Euboia Aitolia Krete Thessalia Makedonia Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Dalmatia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Mikra_Skythia Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Bithynia Mysia Lesbos Lydia Karia Kypros Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Greseoallra
take_regions 30

;Baktria
romans_brutii
hold_regions Baktria Dayuan Sogdiane Sai_Yavuga Xiyu Saka_Yabgu Kangha Dahyu_Haomavarga Margiana Dahyu_Alanna Aria Paropamisadai Drangiane Arachosia Gandhara Sind Sattagydia
take_regions 20

;Sauromatae
armenia
hold_regions Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Roxsalanna Dahyu_Yazyga Dahyu_Siraca Dahyu_Yugra Dahyu_Thissakata Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Mazsakata Maeotis Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Skythia Budinije Neurije
take_regions 20

;Lusotannan
spain
hold_regions Lusitania Celtiberia Galaecia Asturia Cantabria Turdulia Carpetania Turdetania Bastetania Edetania Lacetania Baleares
take_regions 15

;Epeiros
thrace
hold_regions Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Kalabria Dardanoia Makedonia Odrysai Mikra_Skythia Chersonesos_Thraikia Thessalia Aitolia Euboia Attike Peloponnesos Lakonike Dalmatia Scorcouw Pannonia Pannonia_Illyrica Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Thraikia_Hypertera
take_regions 25

Dumbass

06-02-2007, 12:09

Cool, I'm gonna try it!

Basileus Seleukeia

06-02-2007, 12:28

This should go into the Barbarian_invasion directory in the BI folder, right?

Redmeth

06-02-2007, 16:00

Please post some pics of your tests for all to see the effects (hopefully there are effects) and some detailed instructions on how to use this. What file goes where etc..

JMRC

06-02-2007, 22:48

(...) Also, if you get all territories listed, does it set off the victory screen?

Yes, it sets off the victory screen. I even deleted the victory conditions section in the EBBS file, since from now on it's irrelevant for me (and maybe even gained some script processing time). I only feel sorry for the pics that show the objectives when you enter the faction screen, since they show the EB standard and not the ones I set. Maybe one day I'll try to change the pics and complete the work.

JMRC

06-02-2007, 22:53

This should go into the Barbarian_invasion directory in the BI folder, right?

The file is named descr_win_conditions.txt and must be put in the following directory:
(directory where you installed RTW)\EB\Data\world\maps\campaign\barbarian_invasion

I did not experiment with RTW 1.5, but feel free to copy the file into the standard EB directory:
(directory where you installed RTW)\EB\Data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign

mlp071

06-03-2007, 00:42

Great job! :2thumbsup:

Can you show us test results by any chance ?

JMRC

06-03-2007, 01:55

Hi. I will post some screenshots as I go through the current test run (which includes all changes that I've been making on EB, thus some results might only be achieved through certain conditions, like money assistance, changes in descr_strat.txt file, etc).

So, I ran the first 40 turns (up to 262BC) and I got the results indicated below. As a summary, let me say that in 30 conquered regions, 24 belonged to the objective regions. And in the case of Parthia, I believe the AI prefered to conquer regions outside the objectives instead of going into war against Seleukeia.

Note: starting regions are in Italic; Conquered objective regions are in Bold; Lost starting regions are Underlined/Italic; Conquered non-objective regions are in Bold/Italic

Romani
hold_regions: Latium2 Etruria Umbria Apulia Campania Aemilia Venetia Korsim Pannonia_Illyrica Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Liguria Insubramrog Sardin Syrthim Byzacena Zeugitana Greseoallra Lacetania Edetania Celtiberia Carpetania Bastetania Turdetania Baleares Dalmatia Illyria_Hellenike Epeiros Makedonia Attike Delta_Neilou Ioudaia Syria

Saka
hold_regions: Sai_Yavuga Saka_Yabgu Xiyu Kangha Dayuan Dahyu_Haomavarga Sogdiane Margiana Dahyu_Alanna Aria Baktria Paropamisadai Drangiane Arachosia Gandhara Sind Sattagydia

Arverni
hold_regions: Arvernotorg Sequallra Lugonesis Batromorgan Mrogaedu Lemorisae Armoriae Mrogaule Aquitae Volcallra Greseoallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Insubramrog Venetia Latium2

Saba
hold_regions: Saba Qataban Main Hadramaut Zufar Maketa Arabia Gerrhaia_Arabia Sinai Nabataia Syria Syria_Koile Phoenicia Ioudaia Assyrie Tadmor Babylonia Charax_Spasinou

Makedon
hold_regions: Makedonia Thessalia Euboia Lesbos Peloponnesos Dardanoia Attike Lakonike Aitolia Epeiros Chersonesos_Thraikia Odrysai Illyria_Hellenike Mikra_Skythia Mysia Lydia Karia Bithynia Thraikia_Hypertera

Ptolemaioi
hold_regions: Erythraia Triakontaschoinos Thebais Heptanomis Delta_Neilou Oasis_Megale Marmarike Ioudaia Phoenicia Kypros Kilikia Pamphylia Libye Sinai Nabataia Kyrenaia Diamat Kush Syria Syria_Koile Tadmor Assyrie Babylonia
non-target regions: Arabia

Arche Seleukeia
hold_regions: Syria Syria_Koile Assyrie Babylonia Lydia Elymais Media Kappadokia Hyrkania Persis Gabiene Karmania Drangiane Aria Margiana Charax_Spasinou Parthava Khoarene Phrygia Sophene Adiabene Astauene Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Kypros Phoenicia Ioudaia Tadmor Nabataia Sinai Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Thebais Marmarike
non-target regions: Gerrhaia_Arabia

Carthage
hold_regions: Zeugitana Mashiliem Byzacena Syrthim Turdetania
Bastetania Baleares Sardin Elimya Korsim Carpetania Turdulia Edetania Lacetania Volcallra Greseoallra Liguria Etruria Latium2 Sicilia Trinakrie Mauretania_Massaesili Mauretania_Tingitana
non-target regions: Numidia Phasania

Parthia
hold_regions: Khwarazm Dahyu_Daha Aghvan Astauene Parthava Gabiene Karmania Gedrosia Hyrkania Adurbadagan Media Elymais Khoarene Babylonia Adiabene Sophene Assyrie
non-target regions: Dahyu_Mazsakata Dahyu_Alanna

Pontus
hold_regions: Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Galatia Bithynia

Aedui
hold_regions: Mrogaedu Insubramrog Mrogaule Lugonesis Sequallra Arvernotorg Batromorgan Lemorisae Armoriae Aquitae Volcallra Greseoallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Venetia Latium2

Sweboz
hold_regions: Swebolandam Kimbrolandam Hattolandam Skandza Rugolandam Silengolandam Mrogbonna Heruskolandam Habukolandam Vindelicos Bastarnolandam Sequallra Helvetis Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Rhaetia Noricae

Casse
hold_regions: Cassemorg Corieltauvae Cornovae Cambriae Brigantiae Caledryn Cruddain Erain

Hayasdan
hold_regions: Hayasdan Adurbadagan Egrisi Kartli Aghvan Adiabene Sophene Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk

Getai
hold_regions: Getia Getia_Koile Mikra_Skythia Bastarnolandam Thraikia_Hypertera Coutinoe Eravacouw Scorcouw Dardanoia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia

Koinon Hellenon
hold_regions: Lakonike Rhodos Attike Peloponnesos Euboia Krete Aitolia Thessalia Makedonia Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Dalmatia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Mikra_Skythia Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Bithynia Mysia Lesbos Lydia Karia Kypros Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Greseoallra

Baktria
hold_regions: Baktria Dayuan Sogdiane Sai_Yavuga Xiyu Saka_Yabgu Kangha Dahyu_Haomavarga Margiana Dahyu_Alanna Aria Paropamisadai Drangiane Arachosia Gandhara Sind Sattagydia

Sauromatae
hold_regions: Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Roxsalanna Dahyu_Yazyga Dahyu_Siraca Maeotis Dahyu_Yugra Dahyu_Thissakata Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Mazsakata Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Skythia Budinije Neurije

Lusotannan
hold_regions: Lusitania Turdulia Celtiberia Galaecia Asturia Cantabria Carpetania Turdetania Bastetania Edetania Lacetania Baleares

Epeiros
hold_regions Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Kalabria Dalmatia Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Dardanoia Makedonia Odrysai Mikra_Skythia Chersonesos_Thraikia Thessalia Aitolia Euboia Attike Peloponnesos Lakonike Scorcouw Pannonia Pannonia_Illyrica Elimya Thraikia_Hypertera

In this first image Test Run 262BC pic1 (http://picasaweb.google.com/jorgemrcarvalho/EBTestRun262BC) (taken with perfect_spy on), notice the following actions:
1. The Romani have conquered Korsim and now move against Sardin (both are objective regions of this faction).
2. The Epirots have just conquered much of southern Italy and 2/3 of Sicily and now they are reinforcing the garrisons there.
3. The Epirots are building an army to go against Pella. This is the third attempt in 10 years.
4. The Makedonians built a fort to defend Serdike (Dardanoia) and Pella (Makedonia) and, at the same time, to threaten Epidamnos (Illyria_Hellenike) which is in Epeiros hands.
5. Though it's not evident in the picture, but the Romans have tried for several times to conquer Taras (Kalabria) and Rhegion (Brettia), without success.
6. The Carthaginians are moving against the Epirots in Sicilia (one of their target regions), though there is an Epirot army south of Rhegion.

In this second image Test Run 262BC pic2 (http://picasaweb.google.com/jorgemrcarvalho/EBTestRun262BCPic2) notice the following actions:
1. There's a tough fight between Greeks and Makedonians for the control of Chalkis (Euboia) and Athens (Attike). These regions are in the target list of both factions.
2. A Makedonian army is besieging Byzantion (Chersonesos_Thraikia) which is one of the objective regions of this faction.
3. An army from Pontus is besieging Nikaia (Bithynia), which is one of their few target regions. They don't want to face the Seleucids yet, so they didn't attack Mazaka (Kappadokia) or Ipsos (Phrygia).
4. Although it's not visible in this image, the Greeks have been trying to conquer Demetrias (Thessalia) which is one of their target regions.
5. The Greeks are timidly moving against Thermon (Aitolia), which is another of their target regions.

JMRC

06-03-2007, 03:14

No. In BI this file was used for the new type of victory conditions, tailored for each faction, where a certain number of provinces AND one or two specific provinces were required for victory. This such makes sure that the AI would go for the specific provinces and thus be able to win. Basically its the modifiable version of the code that made all the factions in RTW go for the Rome province.

Foot

Foot, I'm sorry to contradict you, but I checked the victory conditions by putting the Casse with the objective regions Cassemorg and Corieltauvae. After conquering Ratae (Corieltauvae), the game presented the victory screen and asked if I wanted to keep on playing.

LordCurlyton

06-03-2007, 04:16

What he means is that you can delay the VC screen from popping up by saying the faction also needs to take X number territories.
Frex, from BI's descr_win_conditions.txt:
saxons
hold_regions Tribus_Saxones Britannia_Superior Belgica
take_regions 18

Therefore, the Saxons in BI have to have Tribus_Saxones, Britannia_Superior, and Belgica, as well as controlling 15 other territories (for a total of 18). So you could, say, for the Casse, have whatever territories you feel they MUST have, and then add a "take_regions X" for the rest. That way you don't have the VC screen popping up too early.

Spoofa

06-03-2007, 04:18

from what i can see in his post of the code he has added the "take_regions" command to all the factions

LordCurlyton

06-03-2007, 04:42

Oops, my bad. Didn't look too closely. :oops:
As I recall from BI though, I never saw a victory screen until I had both the # of territories and the specific ones, so I don't know why they should be popping up sooner than that.

MarcusAureliusAntoninus

06-03-2007, 06:11

If you set that to 199, though, you wouldn't have to worry about setting off the victory conditions and wouldn't have to cast off the complex EB victory conditions.

Redmeth

06-03-2007, 08:30

So does this work ONLY for BI 1.6 or RTW 1.5, because if it works for both the team should include it in the build if not then a mini-mod that's endorsed by team.
Because if this works as intended ,it really could help direct the AI. The complex EB conditions should stay as they are for the human players, but if these direct the AI then it's a great addition.

JMRC

06-03-2007, 10:42

Now it's my turn to make a question: in the Test Run - 258BC Test Run - 258BC pic1 (http://picasaweb.google.com/jorgemrcarvalho/EBTestRun258BCPic1) and Test Run - 258BC pic2 (http://picasaweb.google.com/jorgemrcarvalho/EBTestRun258BCPic2) I noticed that Epeiros is a protectorate of the Romans and Seleukeia a protectorate of Ptolemaioi...

I never understood what means the concept of a protectorate in RTW and these 2 cases are strange, since the 4 factions envolved are very powerful.

Can someone help me understand this?

EDITED: In 254BC, the Aedui became a protectorate of Rome: Test Run - 254BC (http://picasaweb.google.com/jorgemrcarvalho/EBTestRun254BC)

Darth Stalin

06-03-2007, 10:56

Well, one thing:
In order to play EB with BI, I should, IIRC, to copy the folder:
[EB install folder]\Eb\data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign

and rename it to be barbarian_invasion

and then put back to [...]\campaign folder

to have there two folders: imperial_campaign and barbarian_invasion

and then in the desktop shortcut add "-BI to "RTW" in target line, right?

Redmeth

06-03-2007, 10:58

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1433613&postcount=85
This should be stickied.
EDIT:
@Basileus
Read the above post by Oleo (the link) I believe it's pretty clear.

Basileus Seleukeia

06-03-2007, 11:30

JMRC

06-03-2007, 11:47

I don't have a barbarian_invasion folder in my standard EB-campaign folder.
Do I have to copy the one in the BI folder or just copy the imperial_campaign one in the EB-campaign folder?
Edit: I do have BI.

If you check the desc_win_conditions.txt that you have in the directory
(RTW install directory)\EB\Data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign you'll notice that it's empty. Just copy the code that I made above into that file. If you use BI, I think it will work.

JMRC

06-03-2007, 12:19

Hi. This is an update to my Test Run, taken in 252BC (80 turns into the game). Some factions were very active, others didn't move an inch... :-(
Still, those who move, are going towards their objectives.

In this latest count, from 46 regions conquered, 38 were objective regions.

Note: starting regions are in Italic; Conquered objective regions are in Bold; Lost starting regions are Underlined/Italic; Conquered non-objective regions are in Bold/Italic. The factions that didn't have changes since 262BC are marked in red, otherwise are marked in blue. I'm playing with Casse, so it doesn't count.

Romani
hold_regions: Latium2 Etruria Umbria Apulia Campania Aemilia Venetia Korsim Pannonia_Illyrica Elimya Liguria Sardin Greseoallra Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Insubramrog Syrthim Byzacena Zeugitana Lacetania Edetania Celtiberia Carpetania Bastetania Turdetania Baleares Dalmatia Illyria_Hellenike Epeiros Makedonia Attike Delta_Neilou Ioudaia Syria
non-target regions: Volcallra

Saka
hold_regions: Sai_Yavuga Saka_Yabgu Xiyu Kangha Dayuan Dahyu_Haomavarga Sogdiane Margiana Dahyu_Alanna Aria Baktria Paropamisadai Drangiane Arachosia Gandhara Sind Sattagydia

Arverni
hold_regions: Arvernotorg Sequallra Lugonesis Batromorgan Mrogaedu Lemorisae Armoriae Mrogaule Aquitae Volcallra Greseoallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Insubramrog Venetia Latium2

Saba
hold_regions: Saba Qataban Main Hadramaut Zufar Maketa Arabia Gerrhaia_Arabia Sinai Nabataia Syria Syria_Koile Phoenicia Ioudaia Assyrie Tadmor Babylonia Charax_Spasinou

Makedon
hold_regions: Makedonia Thessalia Euboia Lesbos Peloponnesos Dardanoia Aitolia Attike Lakonike Epeiros Chersonesos_Thraikia Odrysai Illyria_Hellenike Mikra_Skythia Mysia Lydia Karia Bithynia Thraikia_Hypertera

Ptolemaioi
hold_regions: Erythraia Triakontaschoinos Thebais Heptanomis Delta_Neilou Oasis_Megale Marmarike Ioudaia Phoenicia Kypros Kilikia Pamphylia Libye Sinai Nabataia Kyrenaia Diamat Kush Syria Syria_Koile Tadmor Assyrie Babylonia
non-target regions: Arabia

Arche Seleukeia
hold_regions: Syria Syria_Koile Assyrie Babylonia Lydia Elymais Media Kappadokia Hyrkania Persis Gabiene Karmania Drangiane Aria Margiana Charax_Spasinou Parthava Khoarene Phrygia Sophene Adiabene Astauene Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Kypros Phoenicia Ioudaia Tadmor Nabataia Sinai Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Thebais Marmarike
non-target regions: Gerrhaia_Arabia

Carthage
hold_regions: Zeugitana Mashiliem Byzacena Syrthim Turdetania
Bastetania Baleares Korsim Sardin Elimya Carpetania Turdulia Edetania Lacetania Volcallra Greseoallra Liguria Etruria Latium2 Sicilia Trinakrie Mauretania_Massaesili Mauretania_Tingitana
non-target regions: Numidia Phasania

Parthia
hold_regions: Khwarazm Dahyu_Daha Astauene Aghvan Parthava Gabiene Karmania Gedrosia Hyrkania Adurbadagan Media Elymais Khoarene Babylonia Adiabene Sophene Assyrie
non-target regions: Dahyu_Mazsakata Dahyu_Alanna

Pontus
hold_regions: Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Bithynia Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Galatia
non-target regions: Chersonesos_Thraikia

Aedui
hold_regions: Mrogaedu Insubramrog Mrogaule Lugonesis Sequallra Arvernotorg Batromorgan Lemorisae Armoriae Aquitae Volcallra Greseoallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Venetia Latium2

Sweboz
hold_regions: Swebolandam Kimbrolandam Hattolandam Heruskolandam Habukolandam Mrogbonna Skandza Rugolandam Silengolandam Vindelicos Bastarnolandam Sequallra Helvetis Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Rhaetia Noricae

Casse
hold_regions: Cassemorg Corieltauvae Cornovae Cambriae Brigantiae Caledryn Cruddain Erain

Hayasdan
hold_regions: Hayasdan Adurbadagan Kartli Egrisi Aghvan Adiabene Sophene Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk

Getai
hold_regions: Getia Thraikia_Hypertera Getia_Koile Mikra_Skythia Bastarnolandam Coutinoe Eravacouw Scorcouw Dardanoia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia

Koinon Hellenon
hold_regions: Lakonike Rhodos Attike Peloponnesos Euboia Krete Aitolia Thessalia Makedonia Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Dalmatia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Mikra_Skythia Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Bithynia Mysia Lesbos Lydia Karia Kypros Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Greseoallra

Baktria
hold_regions: Baktria Dayuan Sogdiane Sai_Yavuga Xiyu Saka_Yabgu Kangha Dahyu_Haomavarga Margiana Dahyu_Alanna Aria Paropamisadai Drangiane Arachosia Gandhara Sind Sattagydia

Sauromatae
hold_regions: Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Roxsalanna Dahyu_Yazyga Dahyu_Siraca Maeotis Dahyu_Yugra Budinije Neurije Dahyu_Thissakata Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Mazsakata Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Skythia

Lusotannan
hold_regions: Lusitania Turdulia Celtiberia Galaecia Asturia Cantabria Carpetania Turdetania Bastetania Edetania Lacetania Baleares

Epeiros
hold_regions Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Kalabria Dalmatia Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Dardanoia Makedonia Odrysai Mikra_Skythia Chersonesos_Thraikia Thessalia Aitolia Euboia Attike Peloponnesos Lakonike Scorcouw Pannonia Pannonia_Illyrica Elimya Thraikia_Hypertera

The Romans achieved a very interesting situation, by having Epeiros and Aedui as protectorates. Since they are allies of the Arverni, they practically only fight the Carthaginians. If all goes well, they'll meet in eastern Iberia (as really happened in History).
Also, the Germanic tribes are pushing south towards the Roman Empire. Soon they'll meet in Noricae or Helvetis.
The Sauromatae are moving towards eastern Europe and they might have to face the germanic tribes or (hopefully) the Romans.
The greeks are strong, but can't move past the Macedonians, despite several attempts to conquer Thessalia and Euboia.
At last the Getai stirred from their stronghold in Getia. They now have 4 full stacks idle in their 2 territories. It will be tough to Epeiros and Makedon to try to take Thraikia Hypertera from them.

Check the Test Run pic here (http://picasaweb.google.com/jorgemrcarvalho/EBTestRun252BC).

Redmeth

06-05-2007, 15:40

Foot

06-05-2007, 16:48

I found this interesting and decided to post it here.
I inserted your win conditions in my ongoing Sauromatae campaign and some years later I see Carhage doing something I have not seen them do before crossing the Gibraltar straits to retake Iberia (which they lost 30 years ago or so in the game)
https://img201.imageshack.us/img201/9665/carthiecrossiv9.th.jpg (https://img201.imageshack.us/my.php?image=carthiecrossiv9.jpg)
And they're also aggressively taking on the Romans in Sicily.
https://img201.imageshack.us/img201/6854/carthiesicilymq8.th.jpg (https://img201.imageshack.us/my.php?image=carthiesicilymq8.jpg)
I'm playing with BI and I know naval invasions are more common but I've never seen the Gibraltar stuff before. I guess it could be a coincidence but this started recently after introducing the code.

It is a coincidence:

No, sorry. You have to start a new game for the changes in DWC to be loaded into the new savegame.

It is not savegame compatible, so the actions of carthage are not being influenced by the DWC.

Also if in my campaign I hold all the settlements needed for the win conditions in descr_win_conditions and choose to keep playing could I still get the more complex victory conditions in EB?

As I said before:

In BI this file was used for the new type of victory conditions, tailored for each faction, where a certain number of provinces AND one or two specific provinces were required for victory. This such makes sure that the AI would go for the specific provinces and thus be able to win. Basically its the modifiable version of the code that made all the factions in RTW go for the Rome province.

Foot

Spoofa

06-05-2007, 20:20

Ive heard that when Carthage expands all the way to the strait of Gibraltar then they would shift their focus to Iberia.

JMRC

06-05-2007, 22:47

I found this interesting and decided to post it here.
I inserted your win conditions in my ongoing Sauromatae campaign and some years later I see Carhage doing something I have not seen them do before crossing the Gibraltar straits to retake Iberia (which they lost 30 years ago or so in the game)
(...)
I guess it could be a coincidence but this started recently after introducing the code.
Also if in my campaign I hold all the settlements needed for the win conditions in descr_win_conditions and choose to keep playing could I still get the more complex victory conditions in EB?

This must be a coincidence, because DWC is a campaign file, so it is loaded when the campaign starts.

As for your 2nd question, when you have all the required number of settlements (which must include the specific settlements) declared in DWC, the Victory screen allows you to keep playing. This means that the conditions in the EBBS file may still be met (because they are scripted) and thus you will receive a second victory screen.

As an academic thought, I think you may get unlimited victory screens if you accomplish the objectives and keep playing, then lose one of the objectives and get it again afterwards, re-accomplishing the objectives, and thus getting another VS. I don't think the AI will be smart enough to understand that the conditions have already been met before. NOTE: I haven't tested this, so I can't say it for sure.

Redmeth

06-05-2007, 22:51

To stop that you could follow MAA's suggestion from the previous page:

If you set that to 199, though, you wouldn't have to worry about setting off the victory conditions and wouldn't have to cast off the complex EB victory conditions.
About setting the specific settlements to take by name and then using take_regions 199 to make sure you don't trigger them abruptly.

JMRC

06-05-2007, 22:53

Ive heard that when Carthage expands all the way to the strait of Gibraltar then they would shift their focus to Iberia.

This is highly unlikely, unless it's hardcoded in the game (which I also don't believe). Unless you're using DWC to make the AI go for certain objectives, the AI will move on a "turn by turn" evaluation of targets using heuristics (which can go a few turns into the future, though).
This means that if they go as far as the strait of Gibraltar, their next target will be going through the strait or moving south to the desert. The heuristics (if correctly implemented) should point to Iberia because it surely is a richer land than the desert, so the AI moves there. But if for some reason, the heuristics point to the desert, then that's where the AI will go.

JMRC

06-06-2007, 00:39

To stop that you could follow MAA's suggestion from the previous page:

About setting the specific settlements to take by name and then using take_regions 199 to make sure you don't trigger them abruptly.

I just made some tests and noticed that the victory conditions set in EBBS only apply to the faction controlled by the human player due to the condition:

and CharacterIsLocal

I don't know why this was made, but if you remove this line, the conditions also apply to the AI controlled factions.

As for the DWC, it doesn't trigger victory screens for the AI controlled factions. The VS only appear to the human player.

When I removed the line above from the EBBS, the VS appeared for the AI controlled faction, but it still gave me the option to keep playing.

So, I don't think you need to put the
take_regions 199 since even if the VS appears, the player always has the chance to keep playing.

JMRC

06-06-2007, 01:30

Hi. This is an update to my Test Run, taken in 242BC (120 turns into the game).

In this latest count, from 69 regions conquered, 58 were objective regions.

Note: starting regions are in Italic; Conquered objective regions are in Bold; Lost starting regions are Underlined/Italic; Conquered non-objective regions are in Bold/Italic. The factions that didn't have changes since 262BC are marked in red, otherwise are marked in blue. I'm playing with Casse, so it doesn't count.

Romani
hold_regions: Latium2 Etruria Umbria Apulia Campania Aemilia Venetia Korsim Elimya Liguria Sardin Greseoallra Insubramrog Lacetania Baleares Pannonia_Illyrica Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Syrthim Byzacena Zeugitana Edetania Celtiberia Carpetania Bastetania Turdetania Dalmatia Illyria_Hellenike Epeiros Makedonia Attike Delta_Neilou Ioudaia Syria
non-target regions: Volcallra Aquitae Pannonia

Saka
hold_regions: Sai_Yavuga Kangha Saka_Yabgu Xiyu Dayuan Dahyu_Haomavarga Sogdiane Margiana Dahyu_Alanna Aria Baktria Paropamisadai Drangiane Arachosia Gandhara Sind Sattagydia

Arverni
hold_regions: Arvernotorg Sequallra Lugonesis Batromorgan Mrogaedu Lemorisae Armoriae Mrogaule Aquitae Volcallra Greseoallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Insubramrog Venetia Latium2

Saba
hold_regions: Saba Qataban Main Tadmor Zufar Hadramaut Maketa Arabia Gerrhaia_Arabia Sinai Nabataia Syria Syria_Koile Phoenicia Ioudaia Assyrie Babylonia Charax_Spasinou

Makedon
hold_regions: Makedonia Euboia Lesbos Thessalia Peloponnesos Dardanoia Aitolia Odrysai Attike Lakonike Epeiros Chersonesos_Thraikia Illyria_Hellenike Mikra_Skythia Mysia Lydia Karia Bithynia Thraikia_Hypertera

Ptolemaioi
hold_regions: Erythraia Triakontaschoinos Thebais Heptanomis Delta_Neilou Oasis_Megale Marmarike Ioudaia Phoenicia Kypros Kilikia Pamphylia Libye Sinai Nabataia Kush Syria Kyrenaia Diamat Syria_Koile Tadmor Assyrie Babylonia
non-target regions: Arabia Augila

Arche Seleukeia
hold_regions: Syria_Koile Assyrie Babylonia Lydia Elymais Media Kappadokia Persis Gabiene Karmania Drangiane Aria Margiana Charax_Spasinou Parthava Khoarene Phrygia Sophene Adiabene Hyrkania Syria Astauene Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Kypros Phoenicia Ioudaia Tadmor Nabataia Sinai Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Thebais Marmarike
non-target regions: Gerrhaia_Arabia

Carthage
hold_regions: Zeugitana Mashiliem Byzacena Syrthim Turdetania
Bastetania Baleares Edetania Korsim Sardin Elimya Carpetania Turdulia Lacetania Volcallra Greseoallra Liguria Etruria Latium2 Sicilia Trinakrie Mauretania_Massaesili Mauretania_Tingitana
non-target regions: Numidia Phasania

Parthia
hold_regions: Khwarazm Hyrkania Astauene Dahyu_Daha Aghvan Parthava Gabiene Karmania Gedrosia Adurbadagan Media Elymais Khoarene Babylonia Adiabene Sophene Assyrie
non-target regions: Dahyu_Mazsakata Dahyu_Alanna Saka_Yagbu

Pontus
hold_regions: Kappadokia_Pontika Galatia Paphlagonia Bithynia Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia
non-target regions: Chersonesos_Thraikia

Aedui
hold_regions: Mrogaedu Mrogaule Lugonesis [U]Insubramrog8/U] Sequallra Arvernotorg Batromorgan Lemorisae Armoriae Aquitae Volcallra Greseoallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Venetia Latium2
non-target regions: Pannonia_Illyrica

Sweboz
hold_regions: Swebolandam Kimbrolandam Hattolandam Heruskolandam Habukolandam Mrogbonna Skandza Rugolandam Silengolandam Vindelicos Bastarnolandam Sequallra Helvetis Bellovacaea_Belgae Nervaea_Belgae Rhaetia Noricae
non-target regions: Eravacouw

Casse
hold_regions: Cassemorg Corieltauvae Cornovae Cambriae Brigantiae Caledryn Cruddain Erain

Hayasdan
hold_regions: Hayasdan Adurbadagan Kartli Pokr_Hayk Egrisi Aghvan Adiabene Sophene Pontos_Paralios

Getai
hold_regions: Getia Thraikia_Hypertera Scorcouw Getia_Koile Mikra_Skythia Bastarnolandam Coutinoe Eravacouw Dardanoia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia

Koinon Hellenon
hold_regions: Lakonike Rhodos Attike Peloponnesos Thessalia Euboia Krete Aitolia Makedonia Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Dalmatia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Mikra_Skythia Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Bithynia Mysia Lesbos Lydia Karia Kypros Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Greseoallra

Baktria
hold_regions: Baktria Dayuan Sogdiane Dayhu_Daha Margiana Dahyu_Haomavarga Xiyu Sai_Yavuga Saka_Yabgu Kangha Dahyu_Alanna Aria Paropamisadai Drangiane Arachosia Gandhara Sind Sattagydia

Sauromatae
hold_regions: Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Roxsalanna Dahyu_Yazyga Dahyu_Siraca Maeotis Dahyu_Yugra Budinije Neurije Dahyu_Thissakata Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Mazsakata Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Skythia

Lusotannan
hold_regions: Lusitania Turdulia Celtiberia Galaecia Asturia Cantabria Carpetania Turdetania Bastetania Edetania Lacetania Baleares

Epeiros
hold_regions Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Kalabria Dalmatia Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Dardanoia Makedonia Odrysai Mikra_Skythia Chersonesos_Thraikia Thessalia Aitolia Euboia Attike Peloponnesos Lakonike Scorcouw Pannonia Pannonia_Illyrica Elimya Thraikia_Hypertera

Check the Test Run pic here (http://picasaweb.google.com/jorgemrcarvalho/EBTestRun242BC).

Imperator

08-27-2007, 23:00

Wow- great find! This could mean a whole WORLD of improved campaign map AI behavior! Well done!

Ludens

08-29-2007, 21:10

Has there been any progress on this? It certainly sounds like a potential remedy for unrealistic A.I. expansion.

Imperator

08-31-2007, 23:30

I think a moderator should probably move this to the EB forums, where it belongs so it could get the attention it deserves. If it works the way it seems it does, then the EB team should definitely look into it.

MarcusAureliusAntoninus

09-01-2007, 03:02

Does it work in v1.5?

Anarzius

09-02-2007, 16:36

...

Puupertti Ruma

09-03-2007, 12:53

I'm going to try if this indeed works with version 1.5 later today. First I will do some test runs playing Casse and doing nothing but pressing end turn and taking screenshots. After couple of those, I will insert the DMC exactly as made by JMRC and see if the AI expansion differs.

I'dd do it right now, but alas I have some other things to do so this has to wait for the evening.

Puupertti Ruma

09-05-2007, 14:27

Ok, it took a while but after one game of only pressing end turn and with slightly modded JMRC's DWC it seems that the DMC doesn't do anything. I pressed the end turn until about 212 BC IIRC and during this Makedonia first seemed to win the Greek wars but then it took of and went to the steppes, leaving both Epeiros and Koinon alive. So in other words, Makedonia did not try to conquer it's victory conditions before going to some weird places.

Fortunately this isn't conclusive yet! I mentioned I slightly modded JMRC's DWC. The only thing I modded was that every faction would have to own 234 provinces. That might put the AI off of the region owning requirements as it also has to conquer huge amount of provinces, and of course it could nullify the whole DWC file as the region count is more than the hard coded limit (which is 199 right?).

To remedy those things I started another campaign earlier today with quite extraordinary DWC. The point is to make the victory conditions so weird that if the AI actually follows them this should show quite clearly on the map. Here is the DWC so others can see it, correct it and perhaps even use it to figure out if the DWC 1.5.

;Romani
seleucid
hold_regions Latium2 Etruria Umbria Apulia Campania Lakonike Attike Aitolia Peloponnesos
take_regions 10

;Saka
pontus
hold_regions Sind Sattagydia Gandhara
take_regions 10

;Arverni
scythia
hold_regions Turdetania Carpetania Turdulia
take_regions 10

;Saba
saba
hold_regions Karmania Gablene Karmania
take_regions 10

;Makedon
macedon
hold_regions Neurije Budinije Skythia
take_regions 10

;Ptolemaioi
numidia
hold_regions Kyrenaia Syrthim Byzacena Zeugitania
take_regions 10

;Arche Seleukeia
romans_julii
hold_regions Phrygia Lydia Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Kypros Sophene Syria Syria_Koile Assyrie
take_regions 199

;Carthage
egypt
hold_regions Liguria Etruria Latium2 Sicilia Helvetis
take_regions 10

;Parthia
parthia
hold_regions Saba Hadramaut Arabia Tadmor Babylonia Elymais Gablene
take_regions 10

;Pontus
carthage
hold_regions Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Galatia Bithynia
take_regions 10
;Aedui
gauls
hold_regions Rhaetia Noricae Pannonia Scorcouw Dardanoia Odrysai Bithynia Galatia
take_regions 10

;Sweboz
germans
hold_regions Liguria Aemilia Etruria Umbria Latium Apulia Venetia Campania
take_regions 10

;Casse
britons
hold_regions Cassemorg Corieltauvae Cornovae Cambriae Brigantiae Caledryn Cruddain Erain
take_regions 10

;Hayasdan
romans_scipii
hold_regions Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Roxsalanna Dahyu_Yazyga Dahyu_Siraca Dahyu_Yugra Dahyu_Thissakata Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Mazsakata Maeotis Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Skythia Budinije Neurije
take_regions 10

;Getai
dacia
hold_regions Krete Rhodos Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Galatia
take_regions 10

;Koinon Hellenon
greek_cities
hold_regions Egrisi Kartli Aghvan Hayasdan Maeotis Kypros Syria Phoenicia
take_regions 10

;Baktria
romans_brutii
hold_regions Sogdiane Dayuan Kangha Saka_Yabgu Sai_Yavuga Dahya_Alanna Dahya_Aursa Dahya_Yugra
take_regions 10

;Sauromatae
armenia
hold_regions Neurije Lugouw Venedu_Tauta Mrogbonna Vindelicos Coutinoe Eravacouw Pannonia Scorcouw
take_regions 10

;Lusotannan
spain
hold_regions Lusitania Galaecia Asturia Cantabria Turdulia Carpetania Edetania Lacetania Baleares Erain Cruddain
take_regions 10

;Epeiros
thrace
hold_regions Epeiros Makedonia Aitolia Euboia Attike Peloponnesos Lakonike Krete Rhodos Marmarike Heptanomis
take_regions 10

Notice how my modded DWC is full of errors? If you do, please point them out so we can count out the possibility of DWC not working because of syntax errors.

Also I'd like to point out some things about JMRC's research in to the DWC. First and foremost, his test games weren't in my opinion long enough. Those posted here lasted to 252 BC at their longest. In my first campaign everything looked fine until little after 240 BC the Makedonia made it's plunge for the steppes. Second problem is the DWC itself. It doesn't differ enough from the normal unmodified AI expansion patterns. Epeiros kicked out of Italy by Rome? In my first unmodded reference game, Rome did it by the end of 270 BC! Third problem is the lack of repeats. Two games don't tell enough about the norm, to see the norm there must be more repeats.

All this in mind, I'd like to have some help with trying this thing out, not only with 1.5, also with BI. I my self don't have BI, so if you could test my DWC with it we could see if the DWC actually has any influence on anything, even in BI.

PS. My second test game is now in 237 and it seems my edited DWC has no effect at all. I will also post raw research data of my first game to the AI expansion thread when I have edited them to publishable form. This might take a day or week, depending on RL stuff.

:edit: Some wordings and some such:

Puupertti Ruma

09-06-2007, 21:40

Hmm.... I just realised I hadn't deleted the map.rwm. I guess that should nullify my test result pretty much completely. Nice. About 6 hours of just pressing end turn down the drain.

madmatg

09-12-2007, 10:45

im really interested in this hope it works!

JMRC

09-12-2007, 13:00

Hi!

Nice to know that someone went back to look at this thread. I always used BI in my tests, so DWC might not work with 1.5 (which is what you are confirming).

However, I would like to add a few issues, that I found since the time that I made my last post here:

- It seems that the I slightest syntax error in the DWC file turns it into unreadable, which means it won't be taken into account. So, please, start with few (and correctly introduced syntax and regions) before adding the rest.

- It also seems that, despite using BI, the DWC file which is read is the one found in the
imperial_campaign.txt file. I haven't confirmed this one.

- The way the AI has to achieve its objectives might not be direct. It probably has to do with enemy strength on surrounding settlements, etc. Which means that they don't rush into the objectives, and if the objective settlement is very far, the AI might get "lost" in pathfinding and never go for that objective.

- The simplest way to test this is to give objectives which are 2 regions deep away from the "border" and without massive defenses. The AI should not get lost in pathfinding and might consider it a good target. After that, you can start making more difficult situations.

Puupertti Ruma

09-23-2007, 21:48

I've edited my DWC to have a good syntax but due to RL stuff haven't had a chance to play EB in almost a month and haven't had the time to test it. I've constructed it in a way that quite a lot of factions have a "trail" of victory conditions. That means there is one near or even next to their starting territories and from that there is a trail to follow to some very odd place where the AI faction should never wander without guidance. For example, Aedui have a trail from Helvetia to Galatia, with a neighboring victory condition provinces next to each other.

Also, what do you mean by

- It also seems that, despite using BI, the DWC file which is read is the one found in the

imperial_campaign.txt

file. I haven't confirmed this one.

I couldn't find file called "imperial_campaign.txt" from my EB folder, or even RTW folder. Did you mean EB\Data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign folder maybe, or is that a BI only thing?

And last, my latest DWC.txt for interested people to test, mock or enjoy:
;Romani, goes for greece
seleucid
hold_regions Aemilia Venetia Pannonia_Illyrica Dalmatia Illyria_Hellenike Epeiros Makedonia Thessalia Aitolia Attike Peloponnesos Lakonike
take_regions 8

;Saka, goes for India
pontus
hold_regions Sind Sattagydia Gandhara Gedrosia
take_regions 4

;Arverni, goes for Iberia
scythia
hold_regions Turdetania Carpetania Edetania Lacetania Volcallra
take_regions 6

;Saba, goes for Persia
saba
hold_regions Arabia Charax_Spasinou Elymais Gabiene Persis
take_regions 4

;Makedon, goes for the amber route
macedon
hold_regions Chersonesos_Thraikia Odrysai Mikra_Skythia Getia Thraikia_Hypertera Scorcouw Eravacouw Mrogbonna Silengolandam Rugolandam Venedu_Tauta
take_regions 7

;Ptolemaioi, goes for Carthage
numidia
hold_regions Kyrenaia Phasania Syrthim Byzacena Zeugitana Mashiliem
take_regions 10

;Arche Seleukeia, goes for Steppes
romans_julii
hold_regions Adiabene Hayasdan Egrisi Dahyu_Yugra Dahyu_Mazsakata Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Daha Dahyu_Yazyga Dahyu_Roxsalanna Dahyu_Siraca Dahyu_Thissakata Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Haomavarga
take_regions 18

;Carthage, goes for Italy
egypt
hold_regions Sicilia Elimya Trinakrie Brettia Kalabria Campania Apulia Latium2 Umbria Etruria
take_regions 10

;Parthia, goes for Persia and Babylonia
parthia
hold_regions Hyrkania Khoarene Charax_Spasinou Elymais Gabiene Persis Babylonia Assyrie
take_regions 7

;Pontus, goes for Syria
carthage
hold_regions Sinai Ioudaia Phoenicia Syria Syria_Koile Kilikia Kappadokia
take_regions 5

;Aedui, goes for Galatia
gauls
hold_regions Sequallra Helvetis Rhaetia Noricae Pannonia Scorcouw Thraikia_Hypertera Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Bithynia Galatia
take_regions 6

;Sweboz, goes for Italy
germans
hold_regions Kalabria Campania Apulia Latium2 Umbria Etruria Aemilia Venetia Noricae Mrogbonna Hattolandam
take_regions 6

;Casse, goes for Iberia
britons
hold_regions Carpetania
take_regions 6

;Hayasdan, goes for persia
romans_scipii
hold_regions Charax_Spasinou Elymais Gabiene Persis Babylonia Assyrie Sophene
take_regions 6

;Getai, goes for modern Turkey
dacia
hold_regions Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Lydia Phrygia Mysia Bithynia Chersonesos_Thraikia
take_regions 4

;Koinon Hellenon, goes for Kaukasus
greek_cities
hold_regions Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Lydia Phrygia Mysia Bithynia Chersonesos_Thraikia Kappadokia Pokr_Hayk Hayasdan
take_regions 8

;Baktria, goes for the steppes
romans_brutii
hold_regions Dahyu_Yugra Dahyu_Mazsakata Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Daha Dahyu_Yazyga Dahyu_Roxsalanna Dahyu_Siraca Dahyu_Thissakata Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Haomavarga
take_regions 8

;Sauromatae, goes for Pusta
armenia
hold_regions Skythia Bastarnolandam Eravacouw Scorcouw
take_regions 5

;Lusotannan, goes for Ireland and Normandy
spain
hold_regions Armoriae Mrogaule Cruddain Erain
take_regions 6

;Epeiros, goes for modern Turkey
thrace
hold_regions Karia Pamphylia Kilikia Lydia Phrygia Mysia Bithynia Chersonesos_Thraikia
take_regions 7

:edit: Made the DWC a "spoiler".

Tarkus

11-14-2007, 19:55

BUMP...this is a really interesting and very promising thread that deserves some more attention...JMRC / Puupertti, anything new?!

C.LVCIANVS

11-15-2007, 01:23

~D
JMRC this is woonderful!!!!:smash:
The order of listed provinces to be conquered could influence AI expansion? For ex: if I put korsim before massilia in the list the AI will try to take korsim first then moves to massilia? :stupido2:
Everything is possible. I'm using imagination! :laugh4:

EDIT: And what about the "outlive_faction" command, used for vanilla RTW imperial_campaign?

Anarzius

11-16-2007, 16:42

...

JMRC

11-17-2007, 11:35

Hi! Sorry, I didn't see that there was still some action in this thread.

First, you're right, I meant imperial_campaign directory.

Second, many people say that DWC doesn't work, but I'm still not convinced of that, because I think I saw a pattern of movement during my testing. I do recognize that sometimes the AI didn't went straight to the targets assigned for it, but I reckon it might be related to easier targets around, which draw the AI.

I'll try to make a few more tests.

Anarzius

11-17-2007, 16:39

...

Callicles

11-18-2007, 07:24

To really test to see if it works like we hope, you should give factions strange win conditions. For example, see if you can get the Seleukids to focus on conquering the Pahlava, Baktrians, and Saka. Meanwhile have the Ptolemaioi focus on Carthage and have Pontos and Armenia focus on conquering Syria and Babylon.

If the Win Conditions file works like we hope it does, then after 20 turns you should begin to a big difference as the Koele-Syria region is vacated by the traditional Ptolemaioi v. Seleukid war and replaced with Pontos v. Hayasdan.

Edit: I see I missed the post where this was already suggested. My apologies.

konny

11-22-2007, 00:37

It seems to work with RTW as well: I had seen on the modding forum that at least one mod uses the BI win conditions with RTW. I had made a simple test myself: using the code for BI in an RTW.exe run game. I had changed the conditions for >>Selucids<< (the EB Romans) to conquer Kalabria (Taras) and have 6 towns. The other VCs remained unchanged.

- In 6 attempts the Romans had send their army north to Segesta once

- In the other 5 tests they had massed their forces in the south without doing anything north of the Rubicon.

- Of these 5 they had attacked Taras at first in two tests

- Attacked Rhegion first in two tests

- Attacked Rhegion and Taras in the same turn in one test.

I had run this last test for a longer time and in this one they succeded in Rhegion in the second attempt but not in Taras. After that they attacked Taras every turn without doing anything else.

This is not a prove that it 100% works, because for that they should have attacked Taras first in 6 out of 6 times. On the other hand the AI might also take other things into account than just its VCs. But experinced EB might find it notable that the AI Romans did not atttack Bononia in 6 out of 6 tests and that they went south in 5 out of 6 times.

I had tested other things too: I had given Epeiros Makedonia as a target, Makedonia Attika and KH Krete; always with the respective "outlive" command. All three factions have an army next to the respective town from the start but in no occasions ever the AI uses this army to siege the towns (Pella, Athen and Kydonia). What should I say, they didn't do so this time too:

- The KH army didn't do anything at all
- Pyrrhos marched to the mountains and became pinned there
- Antigonos followed him, defeated his army and became pinned on the same position (pathfinding problems in the hills west of Pella?).

Later the Maks trained a new army in Chalkis and attacked Athens (but what else should an army from Chalkis do?), while the Epeirote sent another army across the mountains that did not dare to attack Pella because there was a (second) Makedonian stack guarding the town.

But that must not mean anything: It might be logical for a human player to do use these armies to attack the nearby towns when beeing ordered so; but the AI works different and might as well march a stack from Attike to defeat an enemy army in Makedonia and move in the same time the army from Pella to attack Athens. It might be better for the AI to place all units in towns at the beginning of the game that it can compose its own stacks and asign them targets according the hardcoded preferences?

I definitly think that further tests with the win conditions on RTW will be usefull and, after the results of the Roman tests, I am convinced that the BI codes can be used for RTW as well and that they might change the AI behaviour up to about 80%.

larsbecks

11-22-2007, 01:27

Is there a command to not take a region or avoid taking it?

konny

11-23-2007, 17:22

Is there a command to not take a region or avoid taking it?

No, there isn't.

Further tests:

I had made the three Northen Italian towns targets for the Aedui. I had made one test and it didn't work. On the other hand, I was sure that it will not work in advance because in all my EB campaigns the Aedui only attacked Bononia once and the other two never, even though they are rebell. May be, before the next tests I will reduce the garrison there, or there is another reason why the AI does not recognize them as legal targets for the Aedui.

descr_strat

Not the same but related: I have noted that for all factions, save for Armenia(!?!), the slave faction has the highest priority. Can it be that this is the reason for "the hardcoded preference of the AI towards the Eleutheroi"? I have made one test with slightly altered preferences: Epeiros and KH got Makedonia as highest priority and Makedonia got KH as highest and Epeiros as second highest. The test was run without using victory conditions. After 5 years neither the Makedonians did attack Serdike nor Epeiros Dalmatia. Both factions had large forces in the mountains between Makedonia and Ill. Helenike, what were fighting each other.

Other changes that seem to be important for the AI:
- The Epeirote army at Pella should start in or around Epidamnos because the AI is always trying to move it there, but usually the stack becomes pinned after the first turn.

- Antigonos army must be moved to either Demetrias or Pella, while the forces next to Korinth must become part of the garrison. In every test Antigonos merges that army with his own force and moves the entire stack north, leaving Greece open for KH.

- The Greek army from Krete must be moved to the mainland because the
AI has absolutly no idea what to do with it (and the player will most likely move it back in the first turn anyway).

larsbecks

11-24-2007, 04:07

I've noticed the Greek Army will take Krete but only after a very long time (in one of my games, 35 years). Or it will try and fail and just sit there. I've modded my game so that the Maks will always have a good chance against the greeks. I made the unit spawning for human only players to be permanent for human and AI and I changed their metality to "bureucrat". Also, once they beat the greeks and expanded all the way to Byzantion they took Epidamnos by sea attack, except once they landed they stood around for a couple of years standing between two Epeiros armies before anything happened.
And the lack of Hayasdan expansion seems to be a combination of the 300 rating for aggression towards elutheroi and their "fortified" AI.

Callicles

11-24-2007, 05:16

As always, Konny's testing is superb. I've been away from my EB computer for a while, but I'll report back on my own testing tomorrow.

I plan to make Carthage have first priority against Rome and second against Iberia. Likewise, Rome will have first priority against Rome and second against Iberia. If Konny's testing rings true, this should lead to a Punic war in Sicily and after some time, a proxy war in Spain.

I'll give Epeiros a priority against the city of Kyrene to see if they make the attempt to cross the sea.

I'll give Pontos a priority towards Trapezeus and then Cheronesos to, again, see if they cross the sea.

Finally, I'll give Parthia, Baktria, and Armenia, priority against the Seleukids, and give Parthians a target priority of Babylon to see if they cut through the middle of Persia.

Report to follow tomorrow night with screen shots.

konny

11-24-2007, 10:35

I plan to make Carthage have first priority against Rome and second against Iberia. Likewise, Rome will have first priority against Rome and second against Iberia. If Konny's testing rings true, this should lead to a Punic war in Sicily and after some time, a proxy war in Spain.

You should give Rome the highest priority against >>thrace<< (=Epeiros) and you should either use very extreme values, like thrace = 600 and slave = 100, or make Taras a target for the Romans. I have seen that with "thrace=500" and "slave=400" and without asigned targets they went for Bononia as usual.

There is some (hardcoded) reason why the Roman AI regards the North as essential for its faction. Any moddable means to convince them from the opposite should be used.

I would also suggest to cancel the alliance between Rome and Carthage and set Carthage and Epeiros to "neutral". I belive that their state of war is responsible for some of the odd Carthagian movements in Southern Italy. On the other hand, the player as well as the AI will always have no problems to arrange a peace between both factions very early in the game.

The state of war between Carthage and Rome is scripted as soon as the Romans attack Messana. On the other hand, the Carthagian AI has severe problems in sending reinforcements from the mainland to Sicily (the same's with Epeiros and Kalabria). I would therefore raise the initial Carthagian army on Sicily and delete the Xanthippos script in return, or leave the Carthagians as they are and delete the date trigger from the Xanthippos script.

I would also make Messena and Syracusae targets for both factions. I think with these settings you'll have a real first Punic war in the 250s in most of the games, when both factions are run by the AI.

I'll give Epeiros a priority against the city of Kyrene to see if they make the attempt to cross the sea.

Running the RTW.exe, I doubt that you'll get good testing results because of the bugged naval invasion feature. And even with BI.exe you will have to run your test very long because it is unlikely that the Epeirote AI will build new ships and start this operation early in the game.

I'll give Pontos a priority towards Trapezeus and then Cheronesos to, again, see if they cross the sea.

The same is for this one. I would give Pontos a target that they can reach on land route but usually don't attack, like Pella or Kalatis. In these cases you should give them a high priority against the Makedonians and Getai too.

Callicles

11-24-2007, 16:13

There is some (hardcoded) reason why the Roman AI regards the North as essential for its faction. Any moddable means to convince them from the opposite should be used.

You're right, especially using RTW.exe. But I have been using the bi.exe for the past few months, and I have been pleasantly surprised with the results. It seems that the Romans take Corsica, Sardinia, and the Balearic Islands by naval invasion. My test, therefore, will be to see if, through win-conditions and diplomacy priorities, it is possible to get the Romans to cross the sea and navally invade Iberia.

If we can get the Romans to focus on the South West, then we'll start seeing a whole different kind of AI game.

Speaking of executables, which do you use: bi.exe or rtw.exe?

There is a secondary question that we need to answer: if we give the Seleukids only one target priority (Alexandreia) and the Ptolemy's only one target priority (Babylon) will the AI behavior of the two factions be any different. I could forsee two alternative:

(1) Both factions launch thrusts into enemy land, bypassing certain settlements to the rear, in an effort to quickly reach the enemy captial

or

(2) Both factions behave as they do now, only acting on their priority when the target settlement is within one region away from faction territory (i.e., the Ptolemy's have already reached Mesopotamia by taking over all of Syria and Asia Minor).

In my view, the first alternative is ideal.

konny

11-25-2007, 00:57

I use both exes. The test were all done with the RTW.exe because it is somehow the official exe for EB. I play useing the BI.exe

The AI will not go immediatly for VC towns if those are not in reach, I think. It might even ignore a VC (for some time?), may be because of other states of war and priorities. I had seen the Romans going once for Segesta and twice for Rhegion instead of Taras.

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

Further Testing

I had now made a complete set of victory conditions for all factions. That are basicly the starting provinces plus the homeland/expansion zones, with minor adjustements to influence AI behaviour (for example no Roman targets north of Arretium).

First: The provinces are recognized as legal victory conditions by RTW and are listed on the faction overview screen below the map. Any required number of provinces to controll is not displayed there, so I doubt that RTW will recognize that as a VC (BI might do so, it was a feature there).

On the modding forum there was stated that only 11 provinces can be listed as targets. That is not correct. Even lists with 40 or more towns are displayed, what BTW screws the display of that page a little.

Second: I had started a new test with settings (and altered priorities) with "follow AI movements", so it will take some time to get notable results. The first impression is that the AI is leaving more garrisons in the starting towns (what are all VCs).

- The Romans are again massing troops in the South but didn't attack anything so far, their first 10 turns are different than those of the previous test.

- Aedui and Arverni have so far not attacked any Eleutheroi settlements, what they usually do in the first three turns, but are attacking each other's armies.

- The same is for Makedonia and Epeiros who have not marched to the Balkans so far but are fighting each other in the Thessalian highlands. I had observed the same when only changing the priorities, so that might make an important difference.

- Still these very odd first turns by Epeiros and Makedonia. That need to be fixed by descr_strat. May be placing Antigonos next to Pella will give us a nice epic battle at the start of each Mak or Epeiros campaign?

- Armenia isn't still doing anything even with priority for the rebell set to 600 and all towns around asigned as targets. May be there are pathfinding problems and some of their armies need to moved too?

- No movements by AS and Ptolemaians. But on the other hand, they have no real armies at hand that could something in the first turns.

Third: The option "short campaign" is missing. If we can have it back we can create a whole new set of EB campaigns. For example, short campaign for Epeiros: Outlive the Romans and Makedonia. Does someone know how we can get it in again?

Callicles

11-25-2007, 18:18

My testing thus far hasn't produced any results to write home about. I'm starting again, but I've changed Taras into a Rebel settlement. I know this departs quite a bit from the EB vision, but I want to see how the Romans behave (as well as the Epirots).

konny

11-26-2007, 02:07

What about this: Make all factions that are at war with another faction at the start of the game (or that are not expected to go for the rebells in the early game) at peace or even allied with the rebells. That is the same what is now with the Casse - one of the few faction where it doesn't make any sense, IMHO.

That would be Rome, Epeiros, Makedonia, Greece, Aedui, Arverni, Seleucia and Ptolemeia. They will go for the rebells in any case at some point in the game, the Casse do so too, but might prevent it in the start.

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

In my test the Aedui are doing what I want of them, ignore the rebell towns and go for the Arverni. They have allready conquered one of their towns. The Arverni are not doing anything at all.

The stupid Romans have attacked Taras three or four times and failed. When I reloaded the game they withdrew one of their two stacks in the south and marched it to Segesta.... The other stack had remained in the South but so far did not do anything against the Epeirote.

The Epeirote show no interesset in Arpi, once the Roman attacks have stopped, but are moving an army into Brettia. The Carthagians are marching in the same direction with a smaller army (4 or 5 units).

In Greece, neither Epeiros nor Makedonia did make any moves north. There was a major battle between Pyrrhos and Antigonos that Pyrrhos had won. Since then he is standing in the Thessalian mountains and not doing any moves against Demetrias or Pella.

The Greeks are much more aggressive and have launched several attacks on Demetrias so far. On a sidenote, I had the last two test-years run the BI.exe and the Greeks have brought their army from Krete to the mainland and are constantly shipping troops from Rhodos to Athens.

The others behave as usual.

The tendency is that the AI is acting much more defensive and keeps much more forces in reserve.

Callicles

11-26-2007, 05:09

Well I've had a very unproductive (in the rest of my life) day of playing EB and doing nothing more than clicking "end turn."

Here are my observations.

The win conditions file definitely has an impact, but it is not the sole determinant of where and when a faction attacks a settlement. Case in point: Taras.

I did some testing with Taras, removed the wall, took away the garrison, and gave it to the Rebels. Still, the Romans wouldn't get around to taking the city 4th or 5th year of the game... that's 16-20 turns! Then, they would stop and go North. Most of the time, before taking Rhegion, they would take Bononia. This observation makes me think that not only the win conditions, but also the "faction capital" determines AI behavior, at least for the Romans. It appears like the Romans are reluctant to advance too far away from Rome in any one direction.

But that's Rome. Some of the most intriguing results were in Baktria. I for one have been frustrated with the Baktrian powerhouse. But with a properly defined win-conditions file, the Baktrian machine is much slower and spends less time against the Rebels, Saka, and Parthians, and more time preparing to invade the eastern edge of the Arche Seleukeia (which is what I programmed it to do). But by going slower, Baktria doesn't steamroll and became too big for the Seleukids to deal with. Somewhat coincidentally, by trying to get the Baktrians to focus on the Seleukids, I have given the eastern Seleukids a chance at repelling them.

The Getai are behaving very interestingly. Instead of sitting around like they often do, they spread out in a circle, first taking the Carpathians, then the coast of the Black Sea, then the inner Dacian regions around the Danube, and then to the North and into south-western Skythia. In my view, this is ideal. It creates a buffer against the Epirots, but also keeps the Sweboz from taking too much of Central Europe.

The Ptolemaioi are also behaving rather well and, as you noted, not being too aggressive. It seems that they maintain garrisons more, thus limiting their ability to expand. Morever, this means that when the take the southern Ethiopian regions, there is less likely a chance of revolt, which in turn prevents an odd looking Sabyn empire.

Your observations about the Arverni and Aedui are the same as my own. They spend all their time on each other and neglect the rebels.

Apart from the Romans, the only other disappointment has been the Carthaginians (which is ironic, because my whole motivation has been to get the AI controlled Romans to fight a punic war with the AI controlled Carthaginians). Even with the BI.exe, it seems like those two factions just do not care about Messena or Syracuse. Romans will invade Corsica, and the Carthaginians besiege Capua, but it seems like each turn ends with a ceasefire and renewed hostilities in the next turn. Thus, property never changes hands.

For now, I've decided to stop testing and to instead just play through a campaign (perhaps late game behavior is different?).

But, a couple final observations. As you suggested, I moved Areus and his army from Krete and into Laconia. It functions much better there. I also moved Pyrrhos to the Peloponnesos right about where Argos would be on the map (because historically, that's where he was in 272). This means that usually Antigonos does not return north to Pella with his army, but instead crosses the Corinthian Isthmus and engages in a pitched battle. Antigonos tends to win more often than not, but this keeps the Garrison of Korinth in Korinth... in the past, as you remarked, the Garrison under Krateros is merged with Antigonos before going North. The result is that it takes much longer for the Greeks to liberate Korinth, sometimes they even lose Athens. Moving Pyrrhos into the Peloponnesos makes the AI game in Hellas much more interesting as the KH, Epeiros, and Makedonia all slug it out and trade cities back and forth.

I think the next thing I will try is to give Rome Rhegion and Taras at the start of the game (ahistoric, I know), but maybe that will force them into a southern war with Carthage.

konny

11-26-2007, 11:59

Good to hear that your tests came up with the same results as mine. I think, we can now consider the impact of the victory conditions on the AI behaviour as proofed.

I did some testing with Taras, removed the wall, took away the garrison, and gave it to the Rebels. Still, the Romans wouldn't get around to taking the city 4th or 5th year of the game... that's 16-20 turns! Then, they would stop and go North. Most of the time, before taking Rhegion, they would take Bononia. This observation makes me think that not only the win conditions, but also the "faction capital" determines AI behavior, at least for the Romans. It appears like the Romans are reluctant to advance too far away from Rome in any one direction.

Speaking of the factional capital, I have noticed that Bononia is the capital of the Eleutheroi when the game starts. They move it to Illyria later.

I have thought it over with the Romans, and it might be that they are regarding the three heavily guarded rebell towns as a threat, not as a prey, and therefore attack them. I will make a new test with making the Romans allied to the rebells. May be that might change their behaviour.

The Getai are behaving very interestingly. Instead of sitting around like they often do, they spread out in a circle, first taking the Carpathians, then the coast of the Black Sea, then the inner Dacian regions around the Danube, and then to the North and into south-western Skythia.

That is something we have without VCs too. Have you noticed that the army you start as Getai next to your capital with, is "beamed" next to the northern Eleutheroi settlement on game start when Getai is controlled by the AI?

Apart from the Romans, the only other disappointment has been the Carthaginians

Karthage has always a poor conduct in the first 20 or so years. I don't what their problem is. May be they need a larger army in Sicily or Spain when the game starts.

Romans will invade Corsica, and the Carthaginians besiege Capua, but it seems like each turn ends with a ceasefire and renewed hostilities in the next turn. Thus, property never changes hands.

That is bugged. We have the same issue with Rhodos: factions (most of the time Ptolemaia) landing there, sieging the town but make peace the very next turn; only to start the siege anew the following turn. I have the same in my KH campaign - bad idea by the Ptolees BTW, because I am planing to burn down Alexandria in return.

I also moved Pyrrhos to the Peloponnesos right about where Argos would be on the map (because historically, that's where he was in 272).

Yes, that's fantastic! All three faction with their major armies around Attike and Peleponnes will ensure a lot of action in the early game. These Hoplitai Haploi levy armies should be replaced with better mercenary units. That would make some fine battle in the early game.

I think the next thing I will try is to give Rome Rhegion and Taras at the start of the game (ahistoric, I know), but maybe that will force them into a southern war with Carthage.

That would be not more ahistoric than a Baktria faction with three provinces in 272. You can also combine the Roman forces and place them next to Taras. But that is not a guarantee for the AI attacking it, like we have seen with Athens and Pella.

Callicles

11-27-2007, 01:57

I just realized that I've been doing all my testing with your money script. I'm switching to the original money script from EB 1.0.

I've noticed that in 1.0 (and maybe you've seen this too) your script functions differently than it did the previous version of EB. The rebels don't seem to be as productive.

konny

11-27-2007, 12:57

Yes, I am using my script too. The poorer factions with large armies, like Epeiros, get more money running my script. The rebells never train any units because they don't have the required MICs.

I had moved Pyrrhos to Agros, the Greek army from Krete to Elis and replaced the levies of all three armies with better mercenaries (doesn't make any difference for the auto resolved battles of the AI, but when I am playing one of these factions).

The movements were not as expected, the outcome was: Pyrrhos was trying to reach his homelands by land, caused a war with KH when approaching Thermon and was crushed by the KH main army. Other Epeirote armies have so far made two (failed) assaults on Pella.

Antigonos didn't do anything but repulsing an attack of Athens' garrison. After the battle of Thermon he went after the KH survivors of that engagement and crushed them. So, there was a "last man standing" between the three armies, but no battle between Pyrrhos and Antigonos in the first turn.

Callicles

11-28-2007, 05:56

I'm surprised by your results regarding Pyrrhos. Maybe move him closer to Korinth so that he can't escape from the Peloponnese on the first turn? Also, what coordinates do you use? I put him at 140,105.

----------

I think you are right that we've proven the general impact of the win_conditions.txt on the game AI. Of course, more testing is necessary, but here the slowness of the game works against us -- it takes several hours to get to 252, and it is only around 232 that we can see the real impact of the changed files (in my view).

There are still two more things I would like to test regarding the file: (1) whether the order of the regions listed in the file factors into the selection of the targets - that is, if Brettia is listed before Kalabria, will the Romans attack Brettia first? And (2) whether not listing regions held by a faction at the beginning of the game has an impact on their garrisoning of those regions (e.g., if the Parthians have as their first and second priorities Parthaiya and Hyrkania but their starting regions are not listed, will they migrate into Seleukid territory like they did historically?).

Any input or thoughts you have on these is appreciated.

---------

Once we figure out how to get the Romans and Carthaginians to behave like we want them to (if possible, and I hope it is), I suggest we work on the Armenians, Sarmatians, Parthians, Saka, and Bactrians. The northeast corner of the map is a mess that frustrates me in every game.

I think what is the most frustrating about current ai progression in that reagion is that the ai doesn't seem to care about economics. Instead of targeting the wealthy settlements, it targets the hapless ones. Example: Armenia should focus on driving for Mesopotamia, not conquering the barren steppes. I can accept all sorts of ahistoric "what-ifs," and not tie my happiness to turning EB into a historical reenactment game. But still, I wish we could make the ai into a rational actor.

konny

11-28-2007, 12:02

I'm surprised by your results regarding Pyrrhos. Maybe move him closer to Korinth so that he can't escape from the Peloponnese on the first turn? Also, what coordinates do you use? I put him at 140,105.

I think it was 141 106 (or that was the new position for the fleet?). In any case about the same position you have him. It took him several years to get around Korinth and Sparta, always moving one tile per turn next to enemy armies.

----------

Of course, more testing is necessary, but here the slowness of the game works against us -- it takes several hours to get to 252, and it is only around 232 that we can see the real impact of the changed files (in my view).

For me even slower, because I am watching the AI moves too. I want to know, what the AI is trying to conquer and how it is moving its armies. It seems to be important to reduce the rebell spawning to about 0%.

Before creating VCs, I had the impression that the AI was igonring these pathetic little rebells armies on its lands. Now, it is very concerned on them and I have seen that an "army" of some Velites and one unit of Equites was able to keep the Romans occupied for years, because the AI always tried to defeat them with even weaker forces.

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

Our main problem, the Romans: In my test they had tried to take Taras several times, but when all failed they moved to other targets: Rhegion (failed), Bononia (success), Venetia (ongoing). At least, when the Epeirote made an attack on Arpi, the Romans withdraw their forces from the North and repulsed them - something that I haven't seen always in previous games.

I think we should not only encourage them to attack Taras but also help them to take it. For example, by moving all Roman forces South, enlargen their army or reducing the garrison.

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

I am also disappointed by the Selucids and Ptolemaians. They are not doing anything in particular. AS has by far the largest army, but these are all Pantodapoi and the like that are used as garrisons (on a good note: no rebellions so far in AS provinces), while Egypt is spending all her troops with spawning rebells (the same is for Karthago, BTW).

I think both should start with a strong mercenary army in Syria to "keep the fire burning".

There are still two more things I would like to test regarding the file: (1) whether the order of the regions listed in the file factors into the selection of the targets - that is, if Brettia is listed before Kalabria, will the Romans attack Brettia first?

I don't think so, but that must be tested.

And (2) whether not listing regions held by a faction at the beginning of the game has an impact on their garrisoning of those regions

I am very sure that will do, because that's the situation we had before: towns more or less unguarded while the army is on safari elsewhere.

Once we figure out how to get the Romans and Carthaginians to behave like we want them to (if possible, and I hope it is), I suggest we work on the Armenians, Sarmatians, Parthians, Saka, and Bactrians. The northeast corner of the map is a mess that frustrates me in every game.

I have given Saka the same VCs as Sauromate. Saka is doing very well, the Sauromate not anything at all. Parthia is fighting Saka, while Baktria had made several attempts on the rebell towns around. Armenia is in fact a major problem.

I think what is the most frustrating about current ai progression in that reagion is that the ai doesn't seem to care about economics. Instead of targeting the wealthy settlements, it targets the hapless ones. Example: Armenia should focus on driving for Mesopotamia, not conquering the barren steppes.

Oh, I would be happy if they were going at least for the Steppe. In my test they have 2 1/2 full stacks doing absolutly nothing.

MiniMe

11-29-2007, 16:33

2Konny&Callicles:
Guys, your victory conditions and money script treads are very intresting. Me thinks that both of you are digging in the right direction and will one fine day hit the gold.
If you need additional testers, count me on, I have powerful computer, plenty of free time in next month and am willing to help you on this one.
(Besides, I'm really bored of my current KH campaign where I have to defend from 4 Grey and Yellow uberstacks every freakin turn in Eastern Turkey).
Best regards
MiniMe.

konny

11-29-2007, 17:20

Yes, everyone is invited to take part. Sometimes you are just imaging effects of things you have made yourself, so it is important that other players run tests as well. I am going to make a workaround of descr_strat.txt next (re-positioning of several armies, changes in priorities etc) and will upload the hole bunch on the weekend for testing purpose. May be Callicles will upload his files too?

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

I think the money script has to be reviewed under these conditions, that goes for both mine and the EB script. Without VCs we have the situation that the AI is useing all its forces to move around and conquer not careing what is going on in its provinces.

With victory conditions, we have the situation that the AI is keeping larger forces as garrisons in the towns, what might lead to situations in which we have a hughe empire with only a small army and the AI is not leaving the towns to prevent them roiting, regardless what happens around. That is it what I have seen with AS in my longer test: 11 years and not a single AS army outside a settlement. But also not a single rebellion in any of their settlements.

To prevent this, we should either raise the garrisons in the towns (may be scripted, only when controlled by the AI) or raise the money help at the start of the game (the exact opposite to the current EB script) or link the money help to specific VC-towns not owned by that faction (what I had suggested earlyer).

MiniMe

11-29-2007, 17:54

I am going to make a workaround of descr_strat.txt next (re-positioning of several armies, changes in priorities etc) and will upload the hole bunch on the weekend for testing purpose.

great, I will test it as one of the successor factions

With victory conditions, we have the situation that the AI is keeping larger forces as garrisons in the towns, what might lead to situations in which we have a hughe empire with only a small army and the AI is not leaving the towns to prevent them roiting, regardless what happens around.

Is this happening only to the big old greys with their overstretched empire? Or small and hungry for expansion factions also behave in the same way?

konny

11-30-2007, 00:52

I give it up with the Romans @Taras. The problem is, they always wait so long with their first attack that the Epeirote have build their barracks and are able to repulse the Roman attacks. After some years the Romans give up the operation in general and search for new targets (úsually according to the old scheme in the North).

I have tried about everything:

Combine the two Roman armies and move them to Kalabria short behind the border - they move them away in turn #1.

Combine the two Roman armies and place them in Arpi - they move them away in turn #1.

Combine the two Roman armies and place them next to Taras - they move them away in turn #1.

Enlargen the garrisons in the other towns that there is no reason to move away the armies from the front - they move them away in turn #1.

I think the only chance to have an AI Rome expanding south is either make Taras rebell or give it to the Romans....

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

Pyrrhos in Argos didn't do for me either. The AI (Makedonia) does not attack him with the major army next to Athens, but sometimes with a little army from Demetrias. While the other AI (Epeiros) always tries to reach Ambrakia on the landroute, even though I have placed the ships next to his starting position.

I have now moved Pyrrhos on his old position and placed Antigonos next to him. That did much better: Because Makedonia makes its turn first, there is no way for the Epeirote to run away and we (should) always have a major battle. In my tests Antigonos always won (may be not,if we move the Taras garrison to the main army?), what gave him some breathing space against the Greeks. That makes the Makedonian starting position a bit stronger when controlled by the AI.

Is this happening only to the big old greys with their overstretched empire? Or small and hungry for expansion factions also behave in the same way?

The factions in general behave more defensive. That is no problem with the Aedui or Arverni who have more full stacks than towns. Or with the Greek theatre where every province of each faction is bordering one or two enemy provinces. But it is a problem with AS and the Ptolemaians who have both hughe empires with only a few provinces bordering enemy provinces and nearly no army.

I would assume (I haven't really played with VCs, just tested) that later in a campaign it turns out that attacking a faction's homelands is much more difficult than it is now, but beeing under attack is not as dangerous, especially when the enemy is also threatened eleswhere.

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

I will next make the last changes that I have planned for now: Make Taras rebell, place two strong armies for both AS and Ptol. facing each other somewhere in Syria and review the Victory Conditions and then upload what I have so far.

Mouzafphaerre

11-30-2007, 03:01

.
I believe there's a quantitative value determining the relation between factions at the beginning right? If so, can't you just make them loving rebels and hating each other to death? Also neutral w. rebels (like Casse) but at war with each other?

Anyway, it boils down to RTW being made to share the spoils of Gladiator and HBO Rome and not for historical reenactment. ~:(
.

Callicles

11-30-2007, 05:00

I give it up with the Romans @Taras.

I did too. I gave Taras to the rebels, but still it took Rome a long time to get them. I've come to terms with the fact that in my game, both Taras and Rhegion are beginning in Roman hands (unless I play them).

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

Pyrrhos in Argos didn't do for me either.

I haven't been able to conduct more testing over the past few days, but I'll try moving Antigonos and Pyrrhos outside of Pella like you've done to compare.

If this can prevent the Makedonians being turned into the Mytlenians by 250BC, then I accept it.

I would assume (I haven't really played with VCs, just tested) that later in a campaign it turns out that attacking a faction's homelands is much more difficult than it is now, but beeing under attack is not as dangerous, especially when the enemy is also threatened eleswhere.

This comports with the one game I played through with the VC's and other changes. I played as Pontos and got well into the 230's before being attacked by the Seleukids. In fact, they never attacked me. Instead, my first battle was when the Greeks invaded by sea with an army of Spartans under Agis II. It was quite the pleasant surprise (especially since I hadn't even taken Sinope or Trapezous yet).

I will next make the last changes that I have planned for now: Make Taras rebell, place two strong armies for both AS and Ptol. facing each other somewhere in Syria and review the Victory Conditions and then upload what I have so far.

I'm interested on how your testing in Syria goes. I'm going to keep working on the Baktria, Parthia, Saka mess... there has got to be a way to allow for the Pahlavans to survive until their reforms where they actually become the Parthians.

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

Anyway, it boils down to RTW being made to share the spoils of Gladiator and HBO Rome and not for historical reenactment.

I think you are right concerning the Gladiator (just look at all the lorica segmentata and lines like "Unleash Hell!") But BBC's Rome came out after RTW was already out and popular. But your sentiment is right. And as I see you are a member, former or otherwise, of the L.I.B. you know well the plight of games losing out when the producers sell out to the movies. Still, that Xebec you made was nice.

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

On Saturday or Sunday I'll upload my version of the WC along with my version of the Descr_strat. I've also got some other goodies buried in my descr_strat. I'll include explanation and disclosure of them all, of course.

Mouzafphaerre

11-30-2007, 05:54

.

I think you are right concerning the Gladiator (just look at all the lorica segmentata and lines like "Unleash Hell!") But BBC's Rome came out after RTW was already out and popular.

I can't resist the temptation of making a fool of myself now and then. :wall:

But your sentiment is right. And as I see you are a member, former or otherwise, of the L.I.B. you know well the plight of games losing out when the producers sell out to the movies. Still, that Xebec you made was nice.

Hey, great to see an old timer! :pirate: (Do I know you sir? :inquisitive:) It was Duke Surak'nar (also an infrequent ORGah) who made the Xebec, IIRC. I just made the Armed Tartana for Sea Dogs. (I lost the skins I had modified with a gunport so it's remained a function-only mod.) We both are active LIB members, in the sense of visiting our forum regularly. :yes:

PotC was such a great disappointment indeed. I never played it can you believe? Don't know about AOP but haven't heard good things about it either.
.

konny

11-30-2007, 10:52

.
I believe there's a quantitative value determining the relation between factions at the beginning right? If so, can't you just make them loving rebels and hating each other to death? Also neutral w. rebels (like Casse) but at war with each other?

Yes. I have made it so for the Romans, Epeiros, KH, Makedonia, Ptolees and AS. It has its impact on the AI too. Of course, when removing Epeiros from Italy I have to change priorities for the Romans again, because I don't want them to cross the Adriatic in turn #2.

konny

12-01-2007, 19:41

OK, here we go:

http://www.2shared.com/file/2558597/a883f423/descr_win_conditions.html

This contains the "Victory Conditions", a changed descr_strat and a changed "campaign script". The last one is not to be confused with the EB-Script. All files go in the ...\imperial_campaign folder. Please back up your orignial files before.

- The Victory Conditions are a set of (conceptual) VCs for every faction. Their main purpose is to influence the AI behaviour, therefore for example do the Romans don't have any VCs North of the Alps.

- The descr_start has several changes that should make the start for some AI-factions easyer. For example: Taras had been made rebell, the Makedonian army is moved North, field armies had been placed for AS and the Ptolemaioi, priorities changed for several factions, the rebell spawn value has been drasticly raised to a level where random rebell armies should no longer appear etc.

- The "Campaign Script" is needed because it places additional Epeirote forces in Taras when the human player is Romani. That wouldn't really work with Taras beeing rebell (the forces are of the correct faction, but not all Epeirote units can be rebell). Depending on testing, it can also be used to place additional units for factions that now the humand player starts against with a decisive battle (Epeiros, Makedonia, Arche Seleuka and Ptolemaia)

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

I have played with these files now until 265 BC.

- The Romans attacked Taras in Winter 272 and took it Summer 271 (there is no rebell leader who prevents moving of the garrison).

- Makedonia is reduced to Pella, Mytilene and Chalkis. At least there are better in defending their homelands now.

- There is a little more movement in Syria than in previour tests. The Ptolemaioi survivors of the opening battle were able to take Antiochia.

- Revolutions are very rare in AI lands. I had so far seen one against Pontos in Sinope.

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

This is still beta so, please test it excessivly and report your impressions back, that these files can be further improved.

MiniMe

12-01-2007, 21:13

What about your money script alterations?
And what were your reasons of removing KH stack from Crete?

And: WOW! I've started a Ptolemaic campaign and discovered my sirian stack. cool

And: when quiting the game, a message pops up:
Generic Error
Regons_DB:: Region name(Abdurbadegan) does not exist in this region db

later: solved that for myself. You need to correct "Abdurbadegan" to "Adurbadegan" in descr_win_conditions.txt

Callicles

12-01-2007, 23:29

The reason for moving the KH army from Krete is that the AI just left it there and never attacked Krete. This way, with the navy, a player can move it back if the player wants, but the AI can make use of it as intended.

konny

12-02-2007, 11:17

The money script will be changed later. I will play this campaign a little more now (I am at 258) and see who is in need of further help. I am much concerned about the Romans and the two Successors. BTW, the Romans managed to lose Taras in 259 by rebellion to the Epeirote, the second rebellion on AI territory at all, and all work there was in vain :wall:

The Makedons are barely holding on Pella, but Epeiros and KH (now allied) throw full stack after full stack at them. The first invasion was done by 1 1/2 full KH stacks. Later the Epeirote joined in, sometimes both were around Pella the same time. The Makedons were so far able to repulse all these attacks, but now they have about 1/2 stack left in Pella and are sieged by a full Epeirote stack (including artillery!).

And: WOW! I've started a Ptolemaic campaign and discovered my sirian stack. cool

I have played this battle with AS; a quite exciting and short run thing. Even if it does not change the AI behaviour in a significant way, it adds some fun to start a campaign with one of these two factions. I always found it strange to have the two strongest empires on the map fighting with Pantodapoi and Hippakontistai for the first decades.

And: when quiting the game, a message pops up:
Generic Error
Regons_DB:: Region name(Abdurbadegan) does not exist in this region db

later: solved that for myself. You need to correct "Abdurbadegan" to "Adurbadegan" in descr_win_conditions.txt

Ah, thank you. There is a typos in the recruitement viewer where I had copied the province names from.

mrtwisties

12-02-2007, 11:44

I'm totally lurking on this thread, but am following your adventures very keenly. If I ever get my year jump mod working, I'll do some testing of the victory conditions file too.

MiniMe

12-03-2007, 11:33

Feedback
260BC
https://img524.imageshack.us/img524/6397/260bs8.png
Ptolemaic campaign, based on rome_BI.exe, settings H/M.

Intresting issues:
1. Casse gone crazy. Every turn they are landing in Normandy and then retreat to the ships;
https://img86.imageshack.us/img86/6837/britinvasionch7.png

2. Makedons are good. First thing they did they annihilated mr.Pyrhhos. They are not invading Epeiros lands, prefer to concentrate on KH instead;

3. Epeiros is broken. After Pyrhhos death most of the time they do nothing. They do not invade Taras lands. Once they took Pella, but it did not last for long;

4. KH in a series of bloody battles switched Athenai for Korinth. But in the same time they continue to launch naval invasions against Roman Taras!

5. Taras was the first town Romans were after. Now they succsessfully defend it from KH. Their second objective was Corsica. Now they are after two things - the Nothern Italy barbarian belt and Sardinia;
https://img86.imageshack.us/img86/8214/romeinvasionos1.png
6. Every turn Carthage somehow manages to sigh peace treaty with Romans.

7. AS is broken. They are not attacking Ptolemai.

Konny, I'm afraid your modified files slow down game performance. Don't know what's happening but my previous 1.0. campaign wasn't so laggy. Vanilla sea pack does no help.
And I think something has to be done with wicked Casse behavior and romantic Roman/Carthage relations, cause these every turn landings and peace treaties are very strange.

Best regards
MiniMe.

konny

12-03-2007, 12:42

Feedback
260BC
https://img524.imageshack.us/img524/6397/260bs8.png
Ptolemaic campaign, based on rome_BI.exe, settings H/M.

First thing I thought when seeing this map: "WTF did Ptolemaioi attack Kyrene!" I didn't make it a target for them and Karthage to keep them away from each other. But that's you, ok, excused ;-)

1. Casse gone crazy. Every turn they are landing in Normandy and then retreat to the ships;

Strange thing, haven't seen before. They have targets in Gaul, so may be they are trying to reach them but the AI is looped by something.

2. Makedons are good. First thing they did they annihilated mr.Pyrhhos. They are not invading Epeiros lands, prefer to concentrate on KH instead

Excellent! They are pushing south instead of going for Serdike or Tylis.

4. KH in a series of bloody battles switched Athenai for Korinth. But in the same time they continue to launch naval invasions against Roman Taras!

Southern Italy is a target for them, but I have seen that too in games without VCs. In fact sailing elsewhere while beeing under attack in its homeland is something I wanted to avoid.

6. Every turn Carthage somehow manages to sigh peace treaty with Romans.

This siege-peace-siege sequence after naval invasions is a BI bug. I have it in about every game with the BI.exe on Sardine and/or Rhodos.

7. AS is broken. They are not attacking Ptolemai.

I have the same problem in all tests. It seems that controlling to many VC-towns at the start of the game does the AI no good. They don't care on loosing Antiochia or Seleucia as long as they still hold Alexandria-the-most-remote.

The number has to be cut down to, may be, three or four vital towns while the rest of the VCs must be towns that they have to conquer.

Konny, I'm afraid your modified files slow down game performance. Don't know what's happening but my previous 1.0. campaign wasn't so laggy. Vanilla sea pack does no help.

The sea pack is placebo and doesn't help preformance. descr_start and campaign script are only read once when starting the game. So, the only lag can be by reading the VC file. What is laggy? Only the AI turn or the entire game?

MiniMe

12-03-2007, 15:48

First thing I thought when seeing this map: "WTF did Ptolemaioi attack Kyrene!" I didn't make it a target for them and Karthage to keep them away from each other. But that's you, ok, excused ;-)
well, for this test purposes I'm trying to act like AI myself (thus I resolve all melees through autobatlle and play on Hard difficulty in hope that AI factions would pay me less attention) but staying away from Kyrene and Charax was to much for me, I'm afraid =)

Excellent! They are pushing south instead of going for Serdike or Tylis.
indeed. Only sometimes they send a small taskforce to the north, but not too often compared to their southern borders

This siege-peace-siege sequence after naval invasions is a BI bug. I have it in about every game with the BI.exe on Sardine and/or Rhodos.
So it's a BI bug. Must admit I've seen it before in my last BI campaign. What a shame. The only reason I was using BI.exe was because of naval invasions. And as it seems, it makes no sense after all.

I have the same problem in all tests. It seems that controlling to many VC-towns at the start of the game does the AI no good. They don't care on loosing Antiochia or Seleucia as long as they still hold Alexandria-the-most-remote.
Good news: actually AS began trying (not that they are very successful) to regain their settlements from me. Seleukia, Antiocheia and Tarsos are under siege. Good lads.

What is laggy? two things:
1. Sometimes there is a lag on AI turn while he is doing nothing, but it is very small and not annoying;
2. Scrolling slows significantly when I order somebody to move far away. Now that's very annoying, but me thinks it has nothing to do with your files. I blame EB strategic map textures, me thinks they in some kind of conflict with vanilla highlighted movement path

konny

12-03-2007, 16:19

So it's a BI bug. Must admit I've seen it before in my last BI campaign. What a shame. The only reason I was using BI.exe was because of naval invasions. And as it seems, it makes no sense after all.

I can't recommend the BI.exe after all because of these stupid naval operations. The one thing is the siege-peace loop, the other are those random landings:

- Rome on Korsika
- KH in Kalabria
- Karthago near Capua
- Ptolemaioi on Rhodos

They happen in about every campaign and usually don't make any sense at all. So I regard that as buggy. I am now playing the ALX.exe what doesn't have this "feature".

1. Sometimes there is a lag on AI turn while he is doing nothing, but it is very small and not annoying;

You mean when you are watching the AI turn and everything seems to be frozen for about a minute in a middle of a AI faction's turn? That's not a lag, that's a spy: The engine (usually) doesn't show you the movements of a spy, even with "toggle_fow" and "perfect spy" activated. Because spies have a hughe reach and a very slow animation, it takes nearly forever for the spy to finish its move.

2. Scrolling slows significantly when I order somebody to move far away. Now that's very annoying, but me thinks it has nothing to do with your files. I blame EB strategic map textures, me thinks they in some kind of conflict with vanilla highlighted movement path

I don't know. But that has definitly nothing to do with the changed VC files.

burn_again

12-03-2007, 17:53

Perhaps this doesn't really fit in here, but I suggest that if you want Rome go south first, you should make the garnisons in Bononia and Segesta stronger.

In my recent Aedui and Sweboz campaigns, I didn't want to face Rome too early, so I filled these cities with some additional Gaesatae. I know it's a bit unfair, but the Romans were still able to conquer the towns, though much later than normal. They also would usually take Rhegion and Taras first, sometimes even Sicily. Still if they lose Taras due to rebellion, they often don't take it back.

Perhaps some scripted armies in Bononia and Segesta would work even better, they are not impossible to beat, but it takes the AI quite a long time now to conquer Iuvavoaeta or Eburonum for example.

konny

12-03-2007, 18:01

Bononia and Segesta allready have the strongest garrisons of all rebell towns. That's not the problem. The problem is that once the Roman AI starts to attack them it becomes obsessed by the idea. I had campaigns in which the Karthagians and Epeirote were peacefully dividing Italy amongst them while the Romans were throwing army after army North.

I would rather go the other way and weaken the garrisons, that once the Romans catch that virus they might be able to come over it again by taking the towns.

But I think, the results with making the southern towns Victory Conditions for the Romans show that we are on a good way to prevent from that madness.

burn_again

12-03-2007, 18:07

I would rather go the other way and weaken the garrisons, that once the Romans catch that virus they might be able to come over it again by taking the towns.

I doubt that they will stop their northern trip after these 2 towns, I've often seen them losing Rome while conquering Gaul or Germany.

I had the impression that they lose interest in attacking cities that are too strong, at least for quite a while.

But great to hear that you're making progress on this, AI-behaviour is the only thing that sometimes really annoys me in this game.

MiniMe

12-05-2007, 19:20

Konny, I have to report another minor error
Please, change "Parthava" to "Parthyaia" in descr_win_conditions.

Best regards
MiniMe.

Callicles

12-05-2007, 19:36

I haven't had much time to dedicate to this for about a week, but I have learned that the best expansion from the Romans occurs if you give them Taras and Rhegion at the beginning of the game.

I've been playing through for much longer though. I'm currently in 224 and Rome has Italy, Messana, Corsica, and all of Cisalpline Gaul, but they can't break through into the Arverni, Aedui, and Sweboz controlled regions on the far side of the alps.

Also interesting is that I changed the core diplomatic attitudes of the factions so that Romans hated Carthage and were neutral toward the rebels. This has seen the Romans not expand into Pannonia and Illyria. They do, however, march through Pannonia to attack the Epirotes. Interesting!

What has been fun to watch is that the Greeks took Syracuse, the Carthaginians hold on to Lilybaeom, and the Romans try to get their act together in Messana. There is usually a big battle there every few turns.

I've also turned off "prefers naval invasions" for the Carthaginains in the sm_factions file. They still use ships to shuttle reinforcements to Sicily, Corsica, and Sardenia, but they aren't sending the weird invasion force into Capua every so often.

konny

12-05-2007, 22:55

I haven't had much time to dedicate to this for about a week, but I have learned that the best expansion from the Romans occurs if you give them Taras and Rhegion at the beginning of the game.

I've been playing through for much longer though. I'm currently in 224 and Rome has Italy, Messana, Corsica, and all of Cisalpline Gaul, but they can't break through into the Arverni, Aedui, and Sweboz controlled regions on the far side of the alps.

hmm.. That's not so much, taking into acount that they start with all of Italy south of the Rubicon. How strong are the Roman armies? I had encountered very strong armies when I played the Sweboz and came across the Romans in the Alps, but in the current game they are very very weak.

I've also turned off "prefers naval invasions" for the Carthaginains in the sm_factions file. They still use ships to shuttle reinforcements to Sicily, Corsica, and Sardenia, but they aren't sending the weird invasion force into Capua every so often.

That is good. Those Capua Raids had made me avioding the BI.exe meanwhile.

------------------------------
How are the Seleucids doing in your build? My VCs seems to have made them lazy.

@ MiniMe

Thank you. The next VCs will be done by using the regions file. There seems to be a number of typoi in the recruitement viewer.

MiniMe

12-05-2007, 23:36

That is good. Those Capua Raids had made me avioding the BI.exe meanwhile.

I'm going to abandon BI after my current campaign too.

My VCs seems to have made them lazy. .
confirmed =(

LOL
Konny, I think you gonna like this:
https://img140.imageshack.us/img140/6382/freak2229ua6.png
Karhies went berserk and took Segesta from Aedui and Galicia from Lusotannan
Seeing this Karthage rush, KH went jelous, launched two-stack mayhem and took Taras, Arpi and Capua from Romanz.
Methinx, right now Roman and Lusotannan embassadors have a chat sort of "WTF went wrong with these people?" :laugh4:

konny

12-08-2007, 00:25

https://img140.imageshack.us/img140/6382/freak2229ua6.png
Karhies went berserk and took Segesta from Aedui and Galicia from Lusotannan
Seeing this Karthage rush, KH went jelous, launched two-stack mayhem and took Taras, Arpi and Capua from Romanz.
Methinx, right now Roman and Lusotannan embassadors have a chat sort of "WTF went wrong with these people?" :laugh4:

Oh, that's very fine. Only Makedonia and Epeiros "misbehaved" a little and went into Balkans instead of going for Greece. But it is good to see that the Maks are still alive.

I think Capua and Arpi are VCs for KH. All of Italy and Spain is for Karthe. But how did they make it to Galicia without taking Lusotannia?

Next VC-file will come tomorrow: I think I have now a better preformance of AS. Some further minor changes, including the "take_regions" command which allows for a little more random games.

konny

12-08-2007, 21:12

OK, here is version 0.2:

http://www.2shared.com/file/2583444/aa77f253/CAMPAIGN_SCRIPT.html

Even though the file is called "Campaign Script" this one was not altered. The descr_start has some minor changes. Most important is that the Successor Armies have been moved from Jerusalem to Sidon: the AS army always became pinned after the battle somewhere within the Syrian Hights starting on the former position. The survivors are now used by the AI in the first turns; they are very fast depleted nevertheless.

Some major rework was done with the victory_conditions:

- Karthago has now no additional targets in Africa, what might - or might not - result in an more active Karthago in Europe.
- AS is now holding only six of its VC towns, with more than 20 to conquer. That together with the changed starting position for their army had at least in 2 of 3 test made a more active Seleucia.
- Parthia's starting towns are now no longer VCs for that faction. The AI should not spend to much ressources on defending or retaking them and rather head south.
- Some of Baktria's and Armenia's VCs were deleted that might have guided them into the steppe.

Most important is that now all factions have the take_regions command assigned to their VCs. But that doesn't seem to do them much good, because I have seen a lot of misbehaviour in my three tests (attacking of non-VC rebell towns, losing VC towns to rebellion).

These are the screens from the three test, always Winter 262 BC:

https://img514.imageshack.us/img514/354/versuch1pf7.png
https://img514.imageshack.us/img514/2245/versuch2cn2.jpg
https://img410.imageshack.us/img410/4492/versuch3ft4.jpg

It seems that wildcard victory conditions are not good for every faction because that brings up the old patterns. I think, that that was it what we have seen in EB: the old RTW:Vanilla victory conditions of taking 50 towns of your choice (and Rome) that are hardcoded somewhere in the engine and can only be outruled by the textfile.

I will go on with the last game because it had some interessting Roman movements, but I think that I will change the file again; save for the Nomads who can go whereever they want and should not be bound by VC towns.

Callicles

12-08-2007, 21:56

That looks good, Konny. I'll try yours out when I both have more time and get through my current campaign.

I know these are long overdue. But here are the VC's I've been using in my current campaign.

;Romani
seleucid
hold_regions Latium2 Etruria Umbria Campania Apulia Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Etruria Trinakrie Umbria Zeugitana Lacetania Celtiberia Makedonia Attike Delta_Neilou Ioudaia Syria Kypros
take_regions 60

;Saka
pontus
hold_regions Sai_Yavuga Xiyu Saka_Yabgu Kangha Dayuan Sogdiane Margiana Dahyu_Alanna Baktria Gandhara Sind Sattagydia
take_regions 20

;Arverni
scythia
hold_regions Sequallra Lugonesis Arvernotorg Lemorisae Helvetis Rhaetia Volcallra Aquitae Greseoallra Bellovacaea_Belgae Mrogaedu Nervaea_Belgae Vindelicos Insubramrog Batromorgan Armoriae Mrogaule Venetia Latium2 Galatia
take_regions 20

;Saba
saba
hold_regions Saba Qataban Hadramaut Zufar Maketa Arabia Main Gerrhaia_Arabia Sinai Nabataia Syria Syria_Koile Phoenicia Ioudaia Assyrie Tadmor Babylonia Charax_Spasinou
take_regions 20

;Makedon
macedon
hold_regions Makedonia Thessalia Peloponnesos Euboia Lesbos Attike Aitolia Epeiros Chersonesos_Thraikia Odrysai Dardanoia Illyria_Hellenike Mikra_Skythia Mysia Lydia Karia Bithynia Thraikia_Hypertera Kypros
take_regions 30

;Ptolemaioi
numidia
hold_regions Delta_Neilou Oasis_Megale Libye Syria Syria_Koile Phoenicia Ioudaia Kypros Tadmor Rhodos Assyrie Babylonia Pamphylia Kilikia Marmarike Kyrenaia
take_regions 30

;Arche Seleukeia
romans_julii
hold_regions Syria Syria_Koile Assyrie Babylonia Mesopotamia Elymais Phoenicia Media Ioudaia Lydia Phrygia Adiabene Sinai Delta_Neilou Kypros Tadmor Rhodos
take_regions 40

;Carthage
egypt
hold_regions Zeugitana Sicilia Trinakrie Turdulia Mauretania_Massaesili Edetania Lacetania Kypros Kalabria Brettia
take_regions 30

;Parthia
parthia
hold_regions Hyrkania Astauene Parthyaia Media Babylonia Elymais Dahyu_Daha Khwarazm
take_regions 20

;Pontus
carthage
hold_regions Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos
take_regions 10

;Aedui
gauls
hold_regions Bellovacaea_Belgae Sequallra Nervaea_Belgae Lugonesis Mrogaedu Mrogaule Batromorgan Arvernotorg Lemorisae Armoriae Aquitae Volcallra Greseoallra Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Insubramrog Venetia Galatia
take_regions 20

;Sweboz
germans
hold_regions Swebolandam Kimbrolandam Skandza Rugolandam Silengolandam Mrogbonna Hattolandam Heruskolandam Habukolandam Vindelicos Bastarnolandam Sequallra Helvetis Rhaetia Noricae Venedu_Tauta Sembu_Gentys Sapmi Auwjogotanoz Seliun_Gentis
take_regions 20

;Casse
britons
hold_regions Corieltauvae Cornovae Cambriae
take_regions 10

;Hayasdan
romans_scipii
hold_regions Hayasdan Egrisi Kartli Aghvan Adurbadagan Adiabene Media Babylonia Elymais Charax_Spasinou Persis
take_regions 10

;Getai
dacia
hold_regions Getia Getia_Koile Mikra_Skythia Thraikia_Hypertera BastarnolandamEravacouw Scorcouw Coutinoe Dardanoia Pannonia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia
take_regions 15

;Koinon Hellenon
greek_cities
hold_regions Attike Lakonike Rhodos Peloponnesos Krete Kyrenaia Aitolia Thessalia Makedonia Epeiros Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Bithynia Mysia Lesbos Kypros Trinakrie
take_regions 30

;Baktria
romans_brutii
hold_regions Baktria Paropamisadai Aria Arachosia Drangiane
take_regions 20

;Sauromatae
armenia
hold_regions Dahyu_Roxsalanna Dahyu_Yazyga Dahyu_Siraca Dahyu_Aursa Dahyu_Alanna Dahyu_Mazsakata Dahyu_Thissakata Maeotis Skythia Budinije Dahyu_Siraca Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos
take_regions 20

;Lusotannan
spain
hold_regions Lusitania Celtiberia Galaecia Asturia Cantabria Turdulia Carpetania Turdetania Bastetania Edetania Lacetania Baleares
take_regions 15

;Epeiros
thrace
hold_regions Makedonia Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Dalmatia Pannonia_Illyrica Dardanoia Thessalia Aitolia Kypros Kyrenaia
take_regions 25

Also, here is what the world looked like in the summer of 244. I'm playing as Pontos.

https://img444.imageshack.us/img444/512/244bworldmapxi1.jpg

And lest there be any confusion, don't worry. The Seleukids make a powerful come back. They get along pretty well for the next 20 years until Baktria, Armenia, and Parthia start eat up the north east.

MiniMe

12-09-2007, 01:00

Konny, if you don't mind, I'll stick to my current Ptolemaioi campaign with your previous WC for a while.
right now me too drunk to post a complete report on 220 BC, but the one thing I'd like to say is that AS are not that passive as you've might think they are. In fact, they keep attacking my eastern iron belt with very nice stacks every turn, sometimes I don't have time to reinforce. Like it.
(but, of course, the best would be to see Romans sieging Carthage capital, however, I doubt we can achieve it on current engine)

Maksimus

12-09-2007, 01:11

right now me too drunk to post a complete report on 220 BC

My Russian friend:laugh4: You have great time playing the game I am sure:san_grin:

just have fun:san_wink:

konny

12-09-2007, 01:56

@ Callicles

Interessting: you are sending everyone to Kypros. The Seleucids in fact took it, that's rare.

But you have also some stepping out of the line. Especially the Romans in the North and As in Arabia. May be you should try it without the take_regions command.

Konny, if you don't mind, I'll stick to my current Ptolemaioi campaign with your previous WC for a while.

Yes, please do so. I consider the last tests a failure. I had much better results without the take_regions commands (that is the one you are useing now). So, for further tests I will only use that for factions that can't do anything wrong like the Nomads, Casse or Lusotanns.

-----------------------------------
I have seen that RTW:Alexander uses the "outilve" command as a basic VC. I will include that too in the next version, even though it is a little difficult to test. I think, before the year is over we have found a way to convice the AI how to play EB the correct way.

BTW, I finally came behind the mystery of Getai: Sometimes we have a very active Getai, even invading Makedonia. In other games they might as well be Eleutheroi. It seems to be the first town (that one North of their capital). In all games in which they had been able to take in the first attempt they overrun the Balkans afterwards. In all games they failed they didn't do anything impressive afterwards. That one is another "to do": change descr_strat that they have a 100% chance of taking it in the first attempt.

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

For now, because I have done nothing else than hit "End Turn" and watching stupid AI moves the last two days, I am going to play a little and give Armenia a first try for EB 1.0.

right now me too drunk to post a complete report on 220 BC

*lol*

Ok, have a good time.

Callicles

12-09-2007, 05:52

@ Callicles

Interessting: you are sending everyone to Kypros. The Seleucids in fact took it, that's rare.

I don't necessarily remember my thinking on that, other than that it is in a strategic position and has the potential to be a pretty good fortress. If I were the Seleukids and everything was falling apart, it might serve as a pretty good Alamo.

BTW, I finally came behind the mystery of Getai: Sometimes we have a very active Getai, even invading Makedonia. In other games they might as well be Eleutheroi. It seems to be the first town (that one North of their capital). In all games in which they had been able to take in the first attempt they overrun the Balkans afterwards. In all games they failed they didn't do anything impressive afterwards. That one is another "to do": change descr_strat that they have a 100% chance of taking it in the first attempt.

Good to know. I'll weaken its garrison in my descr_strat.

For now, because I have done nothing else than hit "End Turn" and watching stupid AI moves the last two days, I am going to play a little and give Armenia a first try for EB 1.0.

Sounds good. I'm in the middle of a pretty exciting Pontic campaign right now, but I'm sorta getting the hankering for something new myself. Since I've only ever played as KH and Pontos, the whole field is open.

Enjoy Armenia and be sure to keep us updated as you go.

MiniMe

12-12-2007, 02:19

recent news from the battlefield: The most annoying issue are epeiros. after grabbing eastern adriatic coast they just sit on their arse and do nothing.
everyone else in doing great BTW.

konny

12-12-2007, 11:43

recent news from the battlefield: The most annoying issue are epeiros. after grabbing eastern adriatic coast they just sit on their arse and do nothing.

Yes, that depends very much on Pella. When they can take it they are very good in expanding in all directions - if not, they don't do anything in particular for large parts of the game. I didn't give them any targets on the Balkans; that seems to work up to some degree: they always take Dalmion, but that's ok I think, but hardly make any serious attempts on Serdike or other midland towns.

everyone else in doing great BTW.

That's good to hear.

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

After a fruiteless campaign with the Armenians (beeing attacked by AS in the phase of consolidation; pretty much the same as in 0.8 but now with this Pan-Caucasian Reform and hardly any homelands/expantion lands around the position of Armenia is even weaker than before), and two days of trying to get something positive out of M2TW (extreme laggy battles, units and AI even worse than RTW:vanilla - have to wait for mods), I am now back on testing.

The outlive command doesn't seem to work, so much for that. The first thing I do now is testing the 0.2 VCs without the take_regions command to proof if that really has a negative impact on the AI behaviour.

Callicles

12-13-2007, 03:45

A couple observations from my current campaign.

I'm not sure how effective the "core diplomatic attitudes" are. To see if I could get Carthage and Rome to fight it out in Iberia, I gave both core diplomatic attitude of 480 with the Iberians. It certainly hasn't come into play here. After the Carthaginians got kicked out of Iberia, they started that whole declaring war /ceasefire each turn. And once the Ibarians took the whole peninsula, they started running amok.The Aedui lost Gaul because of the massive Iberian invasion.

But what is so frustrating is that the Sweboz and Romans are allied with the Iberians. Hopefully that will change soon, and I'll start getting interesting expansion from the Romans and Germans.

I recognize that the Iberians might be the "interesting expansion," but I didn't tell them to do it, that's all.

Considering that the Romans shouldn't be allied with the Iberians considering their core diplomatic attitude of 480, I'm perplexed.

konny

12-13-2007, 10:21

Considering that the Romans shouldn't be allied with the Iberians considering their core diplomatic attitude of 480, I'm perplexed.

May be you should try it with something above 500, or even with the 600? I have seen changes in the AI behaviour by just changing the core attitude without any VCs assigned. That was for example the Maks go hunting Epeirote armies instead of rushing up the Balkans.

Another observation on Sicily: Not only the Romans seem to ignore it in the early game (they make some feeble attacks on Rhegion), the Carthagians do so as well. It take them very long (a minmum of 5 years) to launch the first attack on one of the two free towns, and these attacks are so weak that it takes even more longer to conquer one of these towns. So, there must be other reasons why the AI in general regards that region as not worth conquering.

burn_again

12-13-2007, 12:46

So, there must be other reasons why the AI in general regards that region as not worth conquering.

Could it be that allies avoid having common borders? I always had that impression with Sicily, but it also seems to happen with other regions, between Baktria and AS, Makedonia and AS or (if they become allies/protectorates) between KH and Epirus or Rome and gauls. Often if they have a common border, the will end up in war, perhaps the AI wants to avoid that...

konny

12-13-2007, 13:38

That can be, but I doubt it: The Armenians are often attacking Phraaspa very early in the game, what would give them a common border more with AS. On the other hand we also have these very odd movements of very small Karthagian armies in Southern Italy. They are sometimes standing very close to Rhegion, blocking off any Roman advance South (I think that is accidently and not intended).

There must be something seriously wrong with this region of the map for the AI. They are attacking these towns from time to time but with very small armies compared to the armies they send elsewhere. That is in particular evident for the Romans who might march their full stacks either North or South. The stronger the army they gather, the more likely it becomes that this one is not of the South.

Another problematic spot seems to be Chalkis: The Maks have no problems moving troops from the mainland to Chalkis to reinforce the garrison. They also have no problems to use this army to attack Athens. KH on the other hand seems to have serious problems to identify Chalkis as a target or to find a way there (or a safe route of retreat?), because I often see full stacks of KH standing next to Athens for turns and turns and turns that could easyly overrun the few Makedonian defenders but do not move.

Because both places include very small land-bridges it might be easy to suspect them to be the reason. On the other hand, I think it is just a land-tile that looks like a sea-tile? So, that should not cause any problems with AI pathfindings.

burn_again

12-13-2007, 15:44

Yeah, the common border thing was just an idea. In my campaigns however the Armenians will almost always expand north, and rarely attack Phraaspa.

The Carthies are always trying to march from Sicily to Spain or vice versa, sometimes they are even trying to get to Afrika. There are sometimes carthagian FM standing around in Greece or Asia Minor with no movement points left.

The KH seems to prefer Demetrias over Chalkis, but they take Chalkis later most of the time. I thought that perhaps the AI is less interested in smaller settlements, as Chalkis is only a town. That was the same thing with the Sweboz in 0.8, they always headed for Eburonum instead of the easier Gawjam-Silengoz.

konny

12-13-2007, 17:20

Yeah, the common border thing was just an idea. In my campaigns however the Armenians will almost always expand north, and rarely attack Phraaspa.

That is something I am trying to change by assigning Vcs for the factions. In particular with Armenia the results are good (save for the last test with the wildcard VCs) and they are more often staying in the Caucasus region and later attack AS than going for the Steppe.

The Carthies are always trying to march from Sicily to Spain or vice versa, sometimes they are even trying to get to Afrika. There are sometimes carthagian FM standing around in Greece or Asia Minor with no movement points left.

I have seen these too. But I think they are bribed generals, because in some occasions I even see small Karthagian armies of horse-archers and the like Eastern folk around the Caspians.

The KH seems to prefer Demetrias over Chalkis, but they take Chalkis later most of the time. I thought that perhaps the AI is less interested in smaller settlements, as Chalkis is only a town. That was the same thing with the Sweboz in 0.8, they always headed for Eburonum instead of the easier Gawjam-Silengoz.

From my testing I don't have the impression that the AI is much concerned on economics when going on conquest. Most notable in this aspect are again the Whites who go for remote desert villages first and ignore rich towns like Syracusae for most of the game.

burn_again

12-14-2007, 16:02

But I think they are bribed generals, because in some occasions I even see small Karthagian armies of horse-archers and the like Eastern folk around the Caspians.

Could be bribed generals, but in a KH campaign I witnessed a FM with a carthagian name marching from Spain through Gaul and the Alps and then through Greece to Asia Minor. He got stuck somwhere in Syria.

MiniMe

12-15-2007, 18:43

201 BC Ptolemaioi campaign
https://img47.imageshack.us/img47/6918/201bcre9.png
Everything looks fine besides previously mentioned issue:
Epeiros as passive as it is. Four very good stacks guard his capital and don't move.
But AS is not passive. They are losing it, yes. But they are not passive, they are desperate in their attempts to retrieve Selevkia and the rest of Iraq.

What annoys me is that:
Baktrian stacks are composed of Pantodapoi 50%
KH armies are composed of Hoplitai Haploi 50%
Carthage armies are composed of Numidian Skirmishers 50%
Surprisingly the rest of their armies is very good.
Which alltogether means that after 1.0 unit rebalance AI (who's not a fool and never was) is disposed towards these units due to their soldiers quantity and moderate quality of their spears.
Do you on any occasion still have 0.81 EDU somewhere, I'd like to take look on it

konny

12-15-2007, 21:37

201 BC Ptolemaioi campaign
https://img47.imageshack.us/img47/6918/201bcre9.png
Everything looks fine besides previously mentioned issue:
Epeiros as passive as it is. Four very good stacks guard his capital and don't move.

So far I couldn't figure out what causes the static stacks on the Adriatic coast. I have them too after some time: Epeiros always starts active but becomes pinned after taking Dalmion.

The other factions:

Armenia and Baktria made it into the Steppe. That can't be prevented all the time because they might conquer these towns during a war. I like how Baktria advandced into India.

I think you have the version in which the Sauromates are told to go West, that's what they did.

The Sweboz are also fine, staying more or less within their homelands.

I am worrying again on the Romans. I think they moved by war to the Channel? At leat they are not Poland.

Very fine: The Maks are still in Pella and Demetrias in 201 BC. I think the new starting position for their main army works wonders. In my tests I had them only once loosing Pella in the first 10 years.

konny

12-15-2007, 21:45

On the Edit:

Baktrian stacks are composed of Pantodapoi 50%
KH armies are composed of Hoplitai Haploi 50%
Carthage armies are composed of Numidian Skirmishers 50%
Surprisingly the rest of their armies is very good.
Which alltogether means that after 1.0 unit rebalance AI (who's not a fool and never was) is disposed towards these units due to their soldiers quantity and moderate quality of their spears.
Do you on any occasion still have 0.81 EDU somewhere, I'd like to take look on it

I don't think so, but may be on the PC in my office. Aren't the old unit cards still around?

I remember from EB 0.8 that the AI loved the Hoplitai Haploi. It raised dozends and hundreds of them with every faction as soon as possible (even with the Romani and the Arverni). That is always a good sign of a unit beeing terribly overpowered/to cheap compared with others.

I have also seen that the AI prefers the light hoplites (Ekodromoi?) over the classical one. Do you have any cavalry in Carthagian armies in Africa? I usually don't see the AI raise any cavalry for the Whitees.

MiniMe

12-15-2007, 21:47

Romans were acting fine. What you see in Antwerpen is their recent move. If not the insane Carthage Genoese landing I'd expect them to be in control of Sicily by now. Well... things happen =)
They have very good Polibian stacks and I still expect them to show themselves in Italy.

Armenia was expanding very slow, and this'd be Ok IMO. My grim thought is that it is not them who's the problem, it's the EB weekest faction -Sauromates that lets them in.

MiniMe

12-15-2007, 21:53

Do you have any cavalry in Carthagian armies in Africa? I usually don't see the AI raise any cavalry for the Whitees.
Oh, Carthage 1.0 cavalry recruitment is very good. They send Bastard Cavalry to Italy and Sacred Band to me. Afrikan pikemen and Sacred Band Infantry jointly with siege machinery can be spotted everywhere. These guys we don't need to worry about, they have it all plus zillions of cash.

and: I've installed RomeTW-ALX and ran my campaign with it (your descr_win_conditions, script and descr-strategy applyed). Good, performance increased.

konny

12-16-2007, 01:55

Armenia was expanding very slow, and this'd be Ok IMO. My grim thought is that it is not them who's the problem, it's the EB weekest faction -Sauromates that lets them in.

I have no idea what can be done for Sauromates. They get the same money help as the Saka, they have about the same units and the same VCs, but most of time they don't do anything impressive. They are even worse than the Getai or Armenia.

When I watch the AI moves I see them running up and down their lands but hardly crossing any border. May be there lands are simply to large and they don't find the exit?

Callicles

12-16-2007, 02:45

I have no idea what can be done for Sauromates. They get the same money help as the Saka, they have about the same units and the same VCs, but most of time they don't do anything impressive. They are even worse than the Getai or Armenia.

Someone pointed out that Horse Archers aren't computed properly by the AI for autocalc and that the fix was to change teh EDU so that horse archers have stathealth of 1,2 rather than 1,0. I'm seeing more aggresive Sauromatae with that change.

konny

12-16-2007, 09:59

May be archers in general are getting a defensive bonus and offensive malus on autocalc? Everytime I see one of these horsearcher factions attack a rebells' stack composed of the same units they lose if not seriously outnumbering the defenders.

MiniMe

12-18-2007, 00:22

https://img402.imageshack.us/img402/4948/victorydk5.png
As you can see here, your victory conditions are at least not crashing game to desctop when achieved =)
I shall continue this campaign and try to massacre Maks and Greys, cause I'm curious what will happen when I'll achieve scripted victory conditions. Besides, island of Sicily is somewhat tempting =)
Have to admit that after relocating on RomeTW-ALX.exe I see significant performanse in AI logistiks. No more strange "walk that way, now go back".
Please, see section 2 of my recent post in Maximus tread, I would like to know yours pros and contras on it.
Best regards
MiniMe

konny

12-18-2007, 00:56

As you can see here, your victory conditions are at least not crashing game to desctop when achieved =)

I had one CTD out of three occasions when clicking "Continue".

Have to admit that after relocating on RomeTW-ALX.exe I see significant performanse in AI logistiks. No more strange "walk that way, now go back".

Just wait until it starts to retain experinced elites. I think than the campaing becomes really fun....

Please, see section 2 of my recent post in Maximus tread, I would like to know yours pros and contras on it.

on the way.

Mouzafphaerre

12-21-2007, 12:48

.
Could you guys please post the files or codes of the final status? I'm eager to try it. :jumping:
.

konny

12-21-2007, 14:25

Due to the Christmas madness I hadn't so much time to mod, or to be precise I simply had not the energy to fiddle around with txt-files after work. But the results with version 0.21 that I am now using look good, I will upload this one tonight or tomorrow.

There is still some work left before I can come around with a "1.0" version.

That is in particular some testings and changes done to descr_strat for balance reasons: The stronger armies that I had placed for the four Hellenics are well balanced for the AI, but a human player might find these battles to easy and will use this army to blitz all his neighbour. So may be adding some units to the AI when the opponent is human is at hand.

The other thing is a new money script. I am not satisfied with the AI expansion with my script because the AI is akting more passive/defensive when holding VC towns. I had changed to the EB-money script, the results are better, but I still think it is unbalancing the game because it gives more money to the richer and less to the poorer. So I will try something new.

Mouzafphaerre

12-22-2007, 05:00

.
Good luck, waiting impatiently. :yes:

I hope it cures some of the AU (Artificial Unintelligence), such as SPQR sending half stacks to Gallia and Illyria while Epeirotai are besieging Roma herself!

:end:
.

Labrat

12-22-2007, 12:51

What'll be the difference between 0.21 and 1.0? Are there bugs in the current version?

Great job, BTW :2thumbsup: .

I hope it cures some of the AU (Artificial Unintelligence)
I prefer Artificial Idiocy. :wall:

Mouzafphaerre

12-22-2007, 15:32

.

I prefer Artificial Idiocy. :wall:

Much better! :yes:
.

konny

12-23-2007, 10:36

I am sorry, I am a little late:

http://www.2shared.com/file/2633488/fe30b2cb/descr_win_conditions.html

What'll be the difference between 0.21 and 1.0?

Depends on testing. What I want to try in the VCs is to give the Romans targets North of the Alps and in Spain, but not the Alpine Region or the Danube. I want to test if that makes them move along the coast to Spain or attack the Gauls without heading for Poland.

I am also still somewhat concered on Baktria because they tend to expand very fast into steppe territory when at war with Saka. But I don't think that this can be changed because these wars break out mid game and are, as far as I can see, provoked by Saka.

In the decr_strat there might be some minor changes too. May be fiddling around with the core attitude a little.

I will also make a special version for the ALX.exe, because with that engine I can use the "not_attack" command that prevents the AI from attacking other factions until at war with them.

Are there bugs in the current version?

None that I know of. I had one CTD out of three times when hitting "Continue" after meating the VCs, but that was three times the same game, so that might have other reasons.

Labrat

12-23-2007, 11:24

Thanks for the answers!

MiniMe

12-23-2007, 13:08

I am sorry, I am a little late:
http://www.2shared.com/file/2633488/fe30b2cb/descr_win_conditions.html

before 1.1. is out?

I will also make a special version for the ALX.exe, because with that engine I can use the "not_attack" command that prevents the AI from attacking other factions until at war with them.

:2thumbsup:
BTW, how about giving casse "prefer naval invasions" feature?

Mouzafphaerre

12-23-2007, 13:52

.
:2thumbsup:
.

konny

12-23-2007, 14:43

before 1.1. is out?

I am certain I have to redo descr_strat and campaign_script after that. So, no, I'll wait for 1.1 to make the first final version.

BTW, how about giving casse "prefer naval invasions" feature?

Yes, that should be tested (I am usually testing with Casse, so I can't really say how they are doing).

MiniMe

12-23-2007, 14:49

One more thing about them.
In my campaign it's already 185 BC and they don't have military port in the province they can build this damn building.
Either they are spending all their money on something else either AI prefer different building order than we would...
Perhaps, adding this building to this province from the start would help...

Hax

12-23-2007, 18:17

Alrighty.

Thanks so much for clearing this up for us, this really improves my game. Finally, after ten years, the Getai have woken up from their asleep (Zlad reference, anyone?) and are besieging Kallatis.

Romani have taken Bononia, Patavia, Segestica and Dalminion, and the Epeirotes have taken Rhegion (after I kicked them out of Greece)

Nothing interesting further, I'll wait until 200 BC before I toggle_fow, and see what craziness has been unleashed upon yon World.

konny

12-23-2007, 19:28

One more thing about them.
In my campaign it's already 185 BC and they don't have military port in the province they can build this damn building.

They can build ships in several provinces (at least one Ireland too). But yes, it seems the AI needs to have that building, otherwise we won't see a Casse Royal Navy ruling the waves.

Mouzafphaerre

12-23-2007, 20:27

.
I've installed and started a Sabā campaign. Things look promising. :yes:

https://img512.imageshack.us/img512/254/saba265bceuropero2.jpg

https://img412.imageshack.us/img412/1334/saba265bcom3.jpg

Have you seen this post of mine? What do you think?
.

konny

12-23-2007, 21:17

What year are you in?

Have you seen this post of mine? What do you think?

No, I haven't followed that thread. Will have a look ASAP.

Mouzafphaerre

12-24-2007, 00:18

.
Sorry, my bad. It's 265. Not too long but definitely better than the -about- same years in my Make campaign.

Still, I'm uneasy with the quick expansion of the coloured fevers (white, yellow, grey) into rebel lands. Maybe rebel garrisons need a bump? Like by 2x?
.

konny

12-24-2007, 01:37

[/COLOR]
Sorry, my bad. It's 265. Not too long but definitely better than the -about- same years in my Make campaign.

Thank you. Close to what I had guessed. But Epeiros is quite strange. Do they make any moves against the Maks? They should not go for Illyria this expansive.

Still, I'm uneasy with the quick expansion of the coloured fevers (white, yellow, grey) into rebel lands. Maybe rebel garrisons need a bump? Like by 2x?

White has a serious problem with the army deployment. I am playing Karthago myself now and all her forces are in Africa, save for some troops in Lilibeo - but not enough to do anything on Sicily. Recruitement of better troops is also only possible in Africa. Taking into account that the AI is not so firm in shipping around forces (on either exe), I can understand that it takes it decades to do anything in Europe.

There are also some wandering rebell stacks down in Africa. These are always a problem for the AI in terms of expansion because they lure the AI in a random direction where it usually continues to advance and takes the next rebell town.

Grey isn't doing anything, it seems. That is a problem with the size of that Empire because the AI needs decades to have an army ready. But I think that should not be changed because I am afraid that it will use stronger forces first of all against Pontos and Armenia.

They start with a strong army down in Syria by this modified descr_strat, but the Ptolemaioi have an army of the same strength there that usually wins the battle. At least this keeps the war between them going on.

Yellow is always eager to get the two Nabatian/Palmyrian towns. At least I consider it a progress that they now do not go for the African towns first. They are basicly keeping the wanted direction (East and North) in all games. I think they are even more concered on that Southeastern flank because you are playing Saba. Beeing close to the human player always changes the behaviour of the AI factions.

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

I don't think that any rebell towns should be strengthened. According to a theory of mine, a strong garrison will in fact provoke an attack of the AI, not prevent from that. I haven't tested it so far, but I recall to have heard something like that about RTW and AI attacks on the human player.

Mouzafphaerre

12-24-2007, 03:32

.
Classical TW AI I suppose; you would reinforce a border province in MTW and the AI would respond by adding at least the same size of forces there. It would go on forever, until you hit a neglected/underpowered hinterland province through naval invasion and the AI faction would likely collapse into civil war.

I propose that strong rebel garrisons will prevent the AI from taking the provinces, rather than attacking them. I've seen it happen with and without the VC. Good old ever-returning Satres in the north notwithstanding, I've observed Roma broken down and giving up on Segestica, Getai on that Thraikian province right N. of Makedonia, AS on Gerrha etc. Once they experience a decisive defeat, they usually give up trying over an over, but you are the one with more trial and experience. :bow:

In my game Epeiros gave up on Makedonia after they repelled the homeland invasion. Presently the hot feud is between KH and the Makes. KH just got broken on Thermon but raped Korinthos and Makes seem not to be doing anything effective about it. Will observe further. ~:)
.

Mouzafphaerre

12-24-2007, 04:10

.
Have you tried making the factions that we want to fight each other (SPQR - Epeiros, Seleukeia - Ptolemaioi, Aedui - Arverni) at peace with rebels (core attitudes about, say, 200) and at war with each other (core attitudes 600)?
.

MiniMe

12-24-2007, 12:36

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=1787830#post1787830 this tread reminded me of one simple thing: with your victory conditions we don't need part of the script anymore. Not that their volume is comparable with the volume of puppet rulers script but even insignificant improvement in game performance is good.

konny

12-24-2007, 14:00

Have you tried making the factions that we want to fight each other (SPQR - Epeiros, Seleukeia - Ptolemaioi, Aedui - Arverni) at peace with rebels (core attitudes about, say, 200) and at war with each other (core attitudes 600)?

They are! That's part of the modified descr_start. It also has a mistake, I have just found out: the Romans are still at peace with the rebells even though I had removed the Epeirote from Taras. Unfortuantly, beeing not at war with someone doesn't prevent the AI from attacking, as we all know.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...30#post1787830 this tread reminded me of one simple thing: with your victory conditions we don't need part of the script anymore. Not that their volume is comparable with the volume of puppet rulers script but even insignificant improvement in game performance is good.

Yes, if everything works as it should, we won't need the respawning rebells in Central Europe for example. These are quite a lot of code lines because every units needs its own entry.

May be we can also delete some of the allied scripts, like for example KH and Sinope or Trapzont. These wars are usually triggered when Pontos and KH are far away from each other and don't have any meaning (the AI will instantly make peace again). When those towns rebell to KH they are at war anyways and won't make peace so fast.

Janus2

01-06-2008, 22:33

On Alex I experiment with the ai_do_not_attack_faction option for a few factions :

-for AS not to go at war with Baktria, Pahlava, Hayasdan, Pontus, Saka & Sauromatae so it should attack Ptolemaioi (or go west maybe)

-for Baktria & Pahlava not to go at Saka & Sauromatae

- for Carthage not to go at Spain : I hope they will attack Rome after they have North Africa

I would like to use the VC file to try to control the AI expansion better, but is the use of the VC file compatible with the ai_do_not_attack_faction option ?

ps : - can I just use implement the descr_win_conditions from Konny's download without using the other 2 files ?
- is the order of the regions in the VC file important ? Does the AI give more priority to regions that are first mentionned ?

konny

01-07-2008, 02:17

I would like to use the VC file to try to control the AI expansion better, but is the use of the VC file compatible with the ai_do_not_attack_faction option ?

Yes of course. Both files are not related.

ps : - can I just use implement the descr_win_conditions from Konny's download without using the other 2 files ?

Yes. Only when you use the changed descr_strat you need the campaign_script too.

- is the order of the regions in the VC file important ? Does the AI give more priority to regions that are first mentionned ?

No. Not that I could notice.

The AI might ignore the VCs all together for some time. That is in particular when failed more often when trying to take a VC town, or when at war with another faction outside its VC-zone.

The most important result on useing VCs is that the AI is more concerned on defending its lands than to go on conquest elsewhere. That slows its expansion down a bit, but also helps faction that are often overrun, like Makedonia, to survive.

NEver

01-18-2008, 14:45

I'm gonna start a Hayasdan campaign using this setup.

Alex.exe lite
Konny's 23rd Dec win conditions and strat found here just a few posts up
Fanatic's mod

I'm also using Sinuhet's battle formations mod and changed the lighting files for the battle map but obviously that will have no effect on the campaign map game

I will report on this campaign as it goes along.

konny

01-19-2008, 13:18

That's pretty much the same set up that I use in my Romani campaign, of TWFanatic's changes I only use the altered Hoplites formation. I had to start anew because I had changed the trait file, but intending to play this one until Imperial Periode to see what these changes do in the late and mid game.

NEver

01-19-2008, 15:23

Forgot to put in night battles and it was bugging me so much so I decided to start again. Here's a pic from 261 BC which is as far as I got today (Following ai movements :S)

https://img101.imageshack.us/img101/5841/mapyw6.png

Comments:

That orange province to my western border is actually a Koinon Hellenon province. They didn't go crazy as you'd think. It happened like this: After I took Trapezous, Konion Hellenon declared war and Pontos, now sharing a border, did the same. Pontos had a vastly vastly superior force and were marching it towards Trapezous. I failed in my attempt to sue for peace. So, after milking the province for money for a few turns, I decided to destroy every building in it, take the money that gave me, and leave it with approximately three turns till Pontos could reach it so it would rebel prior to them conquering it. It rebelled to KH, who having no interests in the region, signed a peace deal with me!

Rome refuses to advance into Sicily. Following the thread It seems its really troublesome to get Rome to advance south first but it would be very very nice if they could. Playing as Carthage in vanilla RTW you'd wish the brutii and the scipii would just leave you alone for a moment so you could deal with your problems in Spain but here we are with the opposite problem. I wonder if Rome filled the same "slot" as the house of scipii, if there is some kind of "hardcode" that would make them advance south. Probably wishful thinking.

The Getai also seem to be having a tough time doing anything but then again even Rome was stalling for a while before they launched their haywire attack on the alps, which had limited success.

Also I'd like to laud the ALX team, because switching to Alex really has made the AI far far far superior to the buggy AI in vanilla and BI.

konny

01-20-2008, 00:05

That orange province to my western border is actually a Koinon Hellenon province. They didn't go crazy as you'd think

Yes, there can be a quite a couple of towns rebelling to KH: most around the Black Sea, Syracusae (not sure), Massilia, Emporion, Kyrene and surely more.

I wonder if Rome filled the same "slot" as the house of scipii, if there is some kind of "hardcode" that would make them advance south. Probably wishful thinking.

Rome is in the Seleucide slot, so no. I had also noticed that Karthago isn't doing much on Sicily, or Epeiros when they happen to get Taras back by rebellion and take Rhegion afterwards. We don't know what makes the AI attack one region and leave another alone. One reason why many factions prefer to move north can be (wild speculation!) that Gotland is the old Latium region what was the target for all factions in the vanilla victory conditions, and these seems to be still hardcoded in the engine.

Mouzafphaerre

01-20-2008, 09:20

.
Have you guys tested enough with the BI exe, which lacks those harcodes (Latium, Marian Reforms, Civil War, Senate)?
.

konny

01-20-2008, 11:32

.
Have you guys tested enough with the BI exe, which lacks those harcodes (Latium, Marian Reforms, Civil War, Senate)?
.

I had been playing BI.exe before changing to ALX. The hardcodes are in all exes; for sure the Marian Reforms which in EB trigger a several refroms for other factions. So I think, the other are still in too.

Mouzafphaerre

01-20-2008, 12:44

.
:ballchain:
.

konny

01-20-2008, 12:58

In addition: I have also learned that in the M2TW engine the RTW phalanx formation is still implemented. I think CA does not delete any older functions from their engine in general, even when these are no longer used.

MiniMe

01-21-2008, 07:00

I think CA does not delete any older functions from their engine in general, even when these are no longer used.
Did anybody mentioned that Papacy is RTW Senate and Venice, Green Bankers and Mafiozo are the Three Roman Factions :thumbsdown:
CA indeed thinks their customers are idiots

NEver

01-22-2008, 03:42

Ok here's 260BC take two with hayasdan. I'm doing alot better :D

https://img99.imageshack.us/img99/718/hayasdankt6.png

I've noticed three things.

1)Qarthardatism are doing nothing, nothing at all. For now atleast, they just seem to be shuttling troops back and forth for no purpose after taking kirta and another eleuthori settlement in deep africa.

2)Getai took their first target this time around and have been pretty active ever since, The getai stack should be increased so this ALWAYS happens, when human is not getai of course.

3)Epeiros are moving north after building up three full stacks for 6 years. Its not too bad but it'd be better to have them more active south and in Magna Graeca. Maybe a paper scissors rock system is required where Epeiros hates macedon but likes KH, macedon likes epeiros but hates KH and the KH hates epeiros but likes macedon. That should keep the pelleponese interesting for a while at least. As for magna graeca well they need means to build a fleet, and perhaps a prefers naval invasions.

I also think that when human is not playing rome that the stacks in segesta bononova and patavium should be shrunk a little. Maybe this way rome won't see them as a threat and move into rhegion instead, or in the least take them quickly so they can move on and do something significant. There must be someway to get them to attack rhegion and become active in sicily. Same goes for karthadatism. Prefers naval for both mayhaps? (I don't really know how much of an impact that feature has)

Everyone else seems to be doing very well. Wouldn't hurt making parthia more agressive to the south though. I really like the conflict between yellow and silver. It's given me a few advantages. Macedon also seems to be reinforcing the north after taking athenae and the emerging threat of the getae which I like.

konny

01-22-2008, 16:04

1)Qarthardatism are doing nothing, nothing at all. For now atleast, they just seem to be shuttling troops back and forth for no purpose after taking kirta and another eleuthori settlement in deep africa.

It's hard to get Carthage acitve in either Spain or Sicily. It is more likely that they will start the conquest of Spain some 50 years after game starts than doing anything in Sicily. But in any case they prefer to conquer Africa at first.

I have it in my Roman campaign too: the conquest of Sicily was very easy. I had then conquered Arse (Saguntum) and established an allied kingdom there to cause the next war when Carthago starts moving in Spain. But so far nothing has happened. They have one full stack standing outside Karthagena, sent a diplomat who threatened me with war if I don't pay him 140 mne (no, not 140,000), and I said to him, 'if you like come out and play'. But no, they are not moving in Europe, but have conquered all of Northern Africa save for Tingis.

Let's consider it that the Anti-Barcids are leading the state. I think I will ship over to Africa, take the towns on the coast and make them Numdians. When they don't know how to behave as Karthagians, may be they are doing better as Numdians?

2)Getai took their first target this time around and have been pretty active ever since, The getai stack should be increased so this ALWAYS happens, when human is not getai of course.

Yes, that would be an idea. On the other hand, the current settings add an element of random to the game.

3)Epeiros are moving north after building up three full stacks for 6 years. Its not too bad but it'd be better to have them more active south and in Magna Graeca.

Epeiros is often very active at the start, attacking the Maks like crazy, but becomes very static afterwards. I could not figure out what causes these. May be it is some kind of hardcoded behavior that should prevent the AI from blitzing the map?

As for magna graeca well they need means to build a fleet, and perhaps a prefers naval invasions.

That's often not necessary because the stupid AI Rome loves to lose Taras by rebellion - and it always rebells to the Epeirote.

I also think that when human is not playing rome that the stacks in segesta bononova and patavium should be shrunk a little. Maybe this way rome won't see them as a threat and move into rhegion instead, or in the least take them quickly so they can move on and do something significant.

That was my idea too. I think the extremly strong stacks in these three towns do the AI no good in finding targets. At least they do not have the desired effect of keeping Rome away from the North.

Making them weaker might it also make more likely that the Aedui take one or the other of them: I had this in my current campaign, when the governer of Patavium died and the stack moved out it was defeated by an Aedui army from Mediolanum and they took Patavium. That would have blocked an AI Rome more from the Alps than all rebell stacks on the map. (of course, it didn't stop)

-sKy-

01-27-2008, 10:51

Year: 235 / Difficulty: VH/M / Faction: Rome

First Pic from the World:
http://www.party-xxl.com/user/5108/files/rome2.jpg

And here of Greece and Minor Asia:
http://www.party-xxl.com/user/5108/files/rome1.jpg

Very strange game with the new Victory Conditions (i love them!).
The big Ptoly Army in Syria won, but had heavy losses. They tried to capture Antiocheia, but were beaten, then Sidon revolted, the Seleukids took it, and then they made peace.
Up to 265 the Seleukids killed Pontus, same year Makedonia, Epiros and Greece made Peace and an Alliance (strange ^^)

The Epirotes went northwards into the Balkan, the Makedonians into Thrace.
Greece did nothing.

I in the meanwhile captures Sizily, Carthago did nothing.
250 Baktria invaded the Seleuks, who where conquering Minor Asia, but the Baktrians where beaten, but in Minor Asia most of the Towns revolted.
After Baktria was beaten, the Hayasdan, the Ptolies AND the Makedonians started attacking, and then the Parthians started invading.
Now Front seems stabilized in the East, the Parthians and the Seleucids are fighting around the same 3 cities every turn with no winner, and the Seleuks have built a defense line around Babylon.
Ptolies, Hayasdan, Makedonia are an Alliance.

Rome (me) is at war with Carthage, i have beaten the Lusotann, and i am now capturing the revolted Parts of Epirote homelands.

Swebozs, the Gauls and Casse aren´t doing much, same so Getai.

konny

01-27-2008, 13:46

Interesseting campaign! What exe are you playing?

-sKy-

01-27-2008, 15:24

standard RTW.exe

LotW89

02-04-2008, 17:14

so if i make a descr_win_conditions.txt file where the factions have the homelands inside the file they will try to take them first:
1. won't i lose the game if they get the homelands, because it is in the descr_win_conditions.txt?
2. and it will deactivate the original EB win conditions?
3. will they conquer anything else than their homelands?
4. if yes, will they focus on the homelands first?

konny

02-05-2008, 01:55

so if i make a descr_win_conditions.txt file where the factions have the homelands inside the file they will try to take them first:
1. won't i lose the game if they get the homelands, because it is in the descr_win_conditions.txt?

Correct. Once the VC are meat the game is over (giving you the chance of playing on of course). You should therefore include more towns than just the homelands.

2. and it will deactivate the original EB win conditions?

The EB VCs are stored in the script and won't be affected. Nevertheless they can be achieved as well.

3. will they conquer anything else than their homelands?

Yes, certainly.

4. if yes, will they focus on the homelands first?

Depends very much on the faction. I usually have the Sweboz expanding very fine through their homelands, instead of rushing East for instance. The same is for the Arverni and Aedui who concentrate on Gaul instead of going for Germania or Hispania. Armenia and Baktria are not so focused on the steppe when directed by VCs. The others are either sitting on their homelands right from the start, while the Romans constantly refuse the VC file.

PershsNhpios

02-07-2008, 12:09

I have read the first post of course, and some others to convince my interest more.

I congratulate the author for his persistence and experimentation.

I run EB with BI.exe, what I want to know I will detail;

you seem to have discovered a mod that needs no development - am I right in believing that - with instruction, a player can give preliminary directives to each faction in the game - and then play the campaign at his leisure?

Or is this not so flexible?

How successful are you so far?

When you detail the objective settlements, do you simply give goals, or routes?
Routes would be an option anyway, but I mean that if you wished the Sweboz to conquer Rome regardless of tactic - would you simply have to add, "Roma", as a target?

I like this very much, and I don't really mod EB greatly.

I like the idea of deleting map.rwm, telling my factions where their hearts are, and starting a new campaign to see who wins and who will interrupt my own ambitions.
A player can even set the entire world eventually against him, without having it ridiculously so on Very Hard difficulty!

konny

02-07-2008, 13:47

you seem to have discovered a mod that needs no development - am I right in believing that - with instruction, a player can give preliminary directives to each faction in the game - and then play the campaign at his leisure?

Or is this not so flexible?

The victory conditions seem to work in two directions:

1. Given two valid targets, one being a VC the other not, the AI tends to attack the VC town first. Example would be the Romans, who tend to go for Segesta or Bononia first without VCs, but usually attack Taras first when that is assigned a VC-town.

The problem is of course, that there is no way to make the AI regard a town as a valid target. For example, both Karthago and Rome usually aviod Rhegion, Messana and Syracusae, even when these are assigned as victory conditions.

Another example would be Baktria. Baktria's targets are all recent Seleucide lands and none of the Saka. Nevertheless she starts allied with AS but as war with Saka. The result is a Baktria expanding North and leave the South alone. But that is only until AS and Baktria become hostile. In this case Baktria seems to pay much lesser attentions to the steppe - often losing much ground there - but pushes very hard into Seleucia.

So, when you give the Sweboz Roma as a target you won't see them packing and trecking South in turn#1, but given the situation at one point in the game that they might either attack Roma or another town they will most likely go for Roma first. You might make a path of VCs towns between their starting position and Roma, and provided all these towns are regarded as valid targets and at none they will definitly fail to take it, you'll have them standing at the gates of Rome one day.

2. The AI seems to pay much more attention to defend VC towns than attacking non-VC towns. That's the reason behind Makdonia surviving in most of the games since using this file: Pella is a victory condition for them, any towns on the Balkans are not. So they usually do not waste their armies on Serdike while Pella is under attack from KH and Epeiros but keep larger forces in reserve.

That makes the AI a bit more defenisve, up to the extreme in my first tests when AS had been asigned all starting towns as VCs with the result that she did not field any armies but used everything as garrison. That works a bit regulative in the way that the closer an AI faction will come to achiving it's VCs the more passive it will become.

How successful are you so far?

Testing it is a bit problematic because you have to run tests really long to see any effects of changes - the opening moves of the AI are always more or less the same. I will try to give Rome VCs North of the Alps to create a path into Spain and Greece. Giving targets that require to cross a watershed seems not to work to well. Karthago and Epeiros are another problem; all other factions seem to do pretty well what I want them to do in most of the games

PershsNhpios

02-08-2008, 07:42

This is good, so all I simply have to do is study the settlements of EB, draw a perimeter with my finger, and give all the cities within as objectives.
As long as the AI starts on the border of one of these towns, they will do what I ask.

Thank you for a detailed response.

Does this mean you have found a way to create proper naval assaults?
A way to bring the Casse over onto the continent?

Let's say I give the Iberians the objective of taking all of Iberia, and once they've done this, make Ippone a target, will they set sail?

konny

02-08-2008, 10:16

This is good, so all I simply have to do is study the settlements of EB, draw a perimeter with my finger, and give all the cities within as objectives.
As long as the AI starts on the border of one of these towns, they will do what I ask.

From my experiments with the Romans and Taras, I would say it is a 80% chance that the AI will do what you want; provided they are not a war with someone else that draws its full attention. There is always a matter of random. For example, I had observed that brigands seem to be able to lure AI armies in different directions to that the AI seems to have targeted originally.

Does this mean you have found a way to create proper naval assaults?
A way to bring the Casse over onto the continent?

No, not at all. Naval operations are a serious problem, save for the random raids with the BI.exe. That allready starts with having ships. So simple but true: the AI seems not to build ships for specific purpose, for example an invasion or fighting pirates, but by random. The next problem seems to be coordination between army and navy. On the one turn the ships are on the coast but the army is far away; on the next turn the ships have set sails before the army arrives. The result are always full stacks standing along the coats staring across the water (very often with Epeiros, Karthago and Makedonia in Mytilene).

PershsNhpios

02-09-2008, 06:20

Ok Konny, I am very pleased with what you've given me, and convinced that I should try this.

If it doesn't require too much effort that is called for elsewhere, and if I can, could you instruct me on how to apply this to my game?
Is there a map or list of settlements somewhere I can choose from?

Thank you very much.

konny

02-09-2008, 17:49

I had used the recruitement viewer to find the names of the provinces (not the settlements' names even though these are displayed on the overiew screen ingame!) and checked spelling - what is not always correct in case of the viewer - with the file descr_strat.txt (it's in the main subfolder of the map folder). For the correct syntax you should download my version some posts above.

Note, it is not savegame compatible.

PershsNhpios

02-10-2008, 04:04

Righto, thanks Konny.

I have overwritten with the given files in both EB/Imperial_Campaign and EB/Barbarian_Invasion.

I hope that is all.

Now I shall start a campaign probably as the Lusotanann.
If all goes well, I should be conquered!

One last question,
seeing as I have not given my own custom objectives, I want to know the details of yours.
Do all factions have new objectives?
Realistic objectives?

I noticed the Sauromatae do very well in the campaigns shown.

PershsNhpios

02-10-2008, 09:24

Noticing differences already.

I am playing as the Sweboz, M/M.

By the Autumn of 272, Rome had Taras, Lusotanann had Sucum-Murgi, Aedui had Avaricum, Epeiros had Dalminion, Getai had Sarmiszgethusa.

Very aggressive. Most of these factions besieged a second town by autumn 271.

konny

02-10-2008, 15:19

Righto, thanks Konny.

I have overwritten with the given files in both EB/Imperial_Campaign and EB/Barbarian_Invasion.

I hope that is all.

When everything has worked correct you should see a list of the settlements to conquer on faction overview screen.

One last question,
seeing as I have not given my own custom objectives, I want to know the details of yours.
Do all factions have new objectives?
Realistic objectives?

Yes, I consider them to be realistic with the limitation that I did not asign VCs where I don't want the AI to expand to. Some factions, like the Nomads have "wildcard" VCs. That is conquering a number of any settlements instead of expanding in a specific direction. The Romans are ordered East, but that is something that I am going to change after my own Roman campaign is completed.

Seyduna

02-10-2008, 16:40

Hi, konny. I overwrote the files in barbarian_invasion and imperial_campaign folder; started a new campaign, however I cannot see the list of provinces on faction overview screen. Does the list supposed to be under 'Domination' title?

Edit: Nevermind. I started another campaign with Casse and got the list on faction overview screen. Then I started Saka campaign and could not see the list.

konny

02-11-2008, 00:12

Edit: Nevermind. I started another campaign with Casse and got the list on faction overview screen. Then I started Saka campaign and could not see the list.

That's correct. Saka has wildcrad VCs without named settlements.

Dumbass

05-28-2008, 22:28

Where can I get the latest version of the victory conditions mod?

||Lz3||

05-29-2008, 04:15

is there an update? is it worth it?

and as said before what's the newest code to use?

konny

05-29-2008, 09:50

You can use the last one of the files in this thread. It can be used with any built of EB. I haven't tested the result with EB 1.1, but the results with EB 1.0 were very good.

Dumbass

05-29-2008, 10:20

The file is missing though. The link is dead.

Dumbass

05-31-2008, 15:17

Could someone re-upload the file? Or just copy and paste the data from the file into their post?

konny

06-06-2008, 09:24

Here is the new download link:

http://www.2shared.com/file/3396274/ff47ec09/descr_win_conditions.html

And the code, just in case it disappears again:

romans_julii
hold_regions Mesopotamia Babylonia Syria Syria_Koile Lydia Margiana Aria Kypros Phoinike Ioudaia Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Thebais Triakontaschoinos Oasis_Megale Libye Marmarike Kyrenaia Augila Kilikia Pamphylia Karia Rhodos Lesbos Mysia Galatia Bithynia Chersonesos_Thraikia Makedonia Illyria_Hellenike Epeiros Thessalia Aitolia Attike Euboia Peloponnesos Lakonike Krete

romans_brutii
hold_regions Baktria Sogdiane Dayuan Margiana Aria Paropamisadai Gandhara Sattagydia Sind Dahyu_Haomavarga Arachosia Astauene Parthyaia Drangiane Gabiene Karmania Gedrosia

romans_scipii
hold_regions Hayasdan Adiabene Aghvan Kartli Egrisi Pontos_Paralios Paphlagonia Galatia Kappadokia_Pontika Kappadokia Kilikia Pokr_Hayk Sophene Media Elymais Persis Adurbadegan Hyrkania Charax_Spasinou Babylonia Mesopotamia Assyrie Syria Phrygia

macedon
hold_regions Makedonia Thessalia Euboia Peloponnesos Lesbos Illyria_Hellenike Epeiros Attike Lakonike Krete Rhodos Chersonesos_Thraikia Kappadokia_Pontika Kappadokia Galatia Bithynia Mysia Lydia Karia Pamphylia Phrygia Kypros Kilikia Syria Assyrie Babylonia Mesopotamia Phoinike Syria_Koile Ioudaia Delta_Neilou

egypt
hold_regions Atiqa Zeugitana Byzacena Syrthim Mashiliem Turdulia Turdetania Carpetania Bastetania Edetania Lusitania Celtiberia Lacetania Cantabria Asturia Galaecia Greseoallra Liguria Aemilia Venetia Etruria Umbria Latium2 Apulia Campania Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Baleares Sardin Korsim

seleucid
hold_regions Etruria Umbria Latium2 Apulia Campania Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Sardin Korsim Atiqa Zeugitana Byzacena Syrthim Mashiliem Mauretania_Massaesili Numidia Phasania Kyrenaia Augila Libye Marmarike Oasis_Megale Thebais Heptanomis Delta_Neilou Ioudaia Phoinike Syria Syria_Koile Kilikia Kappadokia Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pokr_Hayk Pontos_Paralios Phrygia Pamphylia Bithynia Galatia Karia Lydia Mysia Lesbos Krete Kypros Rhodos Chersonesos_Thraikia Makedonia Thessalia Aitolia Attike Euboia Lakonike Peloponnesos Illyria_Hellenike Epeiros

carthage
hold_regions Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Bithynia Adiabene Assyrie Syria Hayasdan Sophene Kilikia Pamphylia Karia Aghvan Kartli Pokr_Hayk Kappadokia Galatia Phrygia Lydia Mysia Lesbos Egrisi Maeotis Bosporion_Tyrranesis Taurike_Chersonesos Skythia Mikra_Skythia Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Adurbadegan Mesopotamia Babylonia

parthia
hold_regions Margiana Astauene Aria Parthyaia Hyrkania Khoarene Gabiene Karmania Persis Elymais Media Adiabene Mesopotamia Charax_Spasinou Babylonia Assyrie Syria Adurbadegan Syria_Koile Tadmor

pontus
hold_regions
take_regions 50

gauls
hold_regions Armoriae Mrogaule Lemorisae Aquitae Batromorgan Arvernotorg Volcallra Greseoallra Lugonesis Sequallra Nervaea_Belgae Bellovacaea_Belgae Habukolandam Heruskolandam Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Noricae Insubramrog Liguria Aemilia Umbria Venetia Mrogbonna Lugouw Coutinoe Eravacouw Pannonia Scorcouw

germans
hold_regions Swebolandam Rugolandam Silengolandam Mrog_Arctagone Heruskolandam Habukolandam Kimbrolandam Skandza Latium Venedu_Tauta Sembu_Gentys Lugouw Bastarnolandam Coutinoe Eravacouw Mrogbonna Pannonia Noricae Vindelicos Rhaetia Helvetis Lugonesis Sequallra Nervaea_Belgae Bellovacaea_Belgae Mrogaedu

britons
hold_regions Cassemorg Cornovae Corieltauvae Cambriae Brigantiae Caledryn Cruddain Erain Kimbrolandam Habukolandam Nervaea_Belgae Bellovacaea_Belgae Mrogaule Armoriae Lemorisae Aquitae

armenia
hold_regions
take_regions 50

dacia
hold_regions Getia_Koile Getia Mikra_Skythia Skythia Bastarnolandam Thraikia_Hypertera Odrysai Chersonesos_Thraikia Bithynia Makedonia Dardanoia Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Dalmatia Pannonia_Illyrica Pannonia Scorcouw Eravacouw Coutinoe

greek_cities
hold_regions Lakonike Peloponnesos Attike Euboia Aitolia Epeiros Illyria_Hellenike Makedonia Chersonesos_Thraikia Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Krete Rhodos Lesbos Kypros Pamphylia Karia Lydia Mysia Bithynia Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios Taurike_Chersonesos Bosporion_Tyrranesis

numidia
hold_regions Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Marmarike Sinai Ioudaia Phoinike Syria_Koile Syria Sophene Assyrie Mesopotamia Babylonia Charax_Spasinou Kilikia Pamphylia Karia Lydia Phrygia Mysia Bithynia Kypros Rhodos Lesbos Krete Euboia Chersonesos_Thraikia Makedonia Thessalia

scythia
hold_regions Armoriae Mrogaule Lemorisae Aquitae Batromorgan Arvernotorg Volcallra Greseoallra Lugonesis Sequallra Nervaea_Belgae Bellovacaea_Belgae Habukolandam Heruskolandam Vindelicos Helvetis Rhaetia Noricae Insubramrog Liguria Aemilia Umbria Venetia Mrogbonna Lugouw Coutinoe Eravacouw Pannonia Scorcouw

spain
hold_regions Turdulia Turdetania Bastetania Carpetania Lusitania Galaecia Asturia Cantabria Celtiberia Lacetania Edetania Volcallra Aquitae Baleares Cruddain Erain

thrace
hold_regions Illyria_Hellenike Epeiros Makedonia Thessalia Aitolia Attike Euboia Peloponnesos Lakonike Chersonesos_Thraikia Kalabria Brettia Sicilia Trinakrie Elimya Sardin Korsim Atiqa Zeugitana Apulia Campania Latium2 Umbria Etruria Liguria Greseoallra Bithynia Mysia Lesbos Lydia Phrygia Karia Rhodos Pamphylia Kilikia Syria Kypros Kappadokia_Pontika Paphlagonia Pontos_Paralios

saba
hold_regions Saba Qataban Hadramaut Zufar Maketa Gerrhaia_Arabia Charax_Spasinou Babylonia Mesopotamia Assyrie Syria Tadmor Syria_Koile Phoinike Ioudaia Main Nabataia Sinai Delta_Neilou Heptanomis Thebais Triakontaschoinos Erythraia Kush Diamat Oasis_Megale Libye Marmarike Augila Kyrenaia

Dumbass

06-06-2008, 09:29

Thanks a lot! I'll test these for my next campaign. I like how my victory conditions are working though. One good thing is that I made Seleucid victory conditions only for the provinces are syria and the coast. Both ptolemaioi and seleucids have conditions to go for jerusalem and damaskos. This ensures there's a continual war along that front but means that it is stuck in a stalemate. Stopp both grey death and yellow fever becoming out of control. It's also meant that pahlav and baktria have been able to expand in from the east. Same with hayasdan.

konny

06-06-2008, 09:47

Yes, it turned out that giving them to many VCs that they already posses makes the AI factions "lazy". I haven't tested it with EB 1.1 so far, but I think it might work better with BI.exe or ALX.exe because both were designed to use it, while RTW.exe only had this as a patch on modders demand.

||Lz3||

06-07-2008, 05:11

excuse me if Im ignorant :sweatdrop:

but aren't those RTW vanilla VC??:gah:

well at least faction names...
:inquisitive:

konny

06-07-2008, 10:40

These are the internal names the programm uses to identify factions. These cannot be changed, for example "seleucid" is our "SPQR".

||Lz3||

06-07-2008, 17:36

wow that's something I didn't know:sweatdrop:

I'm almost ready to start my historical romani campaign

cheers :medievalcheers:

||Lz3||

06-27-2008, 17:54

bump...

this is a really good mod we cant afford to loose it just like that :laugh4:

konny

06-27-2008, 18:39

I have now used win conditions in two 1.1 campaigns, and in both occasions there was no "Yellow Death"; meaning the front in Syria was stable with both sides fielding hughe armies around. The Seleucids even managed to conquer Tarsos in my Mak campaign.

Skandinav

06-28-2008, 00:52

No matter how much I wish for these to have a positive effect I best add that I, in my first 1.1 campaign, had a balanced middle-east aswell without the Win Conditions and even, so unlike my usual approach, any console aid for the AI; this is a known fact ( I even think it was mentioned earlier in this thread ) but the manner in which the factions play just seem to differ from one campaign to another; granted some factions have a very typical pattern of conquest which they often follow, for example the passive getai, but one cannot count on them not suddenly striving for world-domination in a new campaign; a curse for us who wish for historical reenactment; a blessing to others I am sure. Pahlava were overly aggressive and spanned across half of the world in two of my campaigns, but the same Pahlava are equally passive in my current game, regardless of how many armies, regions or mnai I bestow upon them.

Even so, I believe that I have had more balanced campaigns, in matters of more historical accurate strategy maps, when applying the Win Conditions. At least it seems as if.

konny

06-28-2008, 14:22

Yes, modding AI behaviour is no way an exact science, because it would require to have played exact the same campaign without the modification - what is of course impossible because every campaign is different.

You only have observations of tendencies. Here, it seems that by using win conditions the AI seems to be more defensive when holding some target towns. I regard this as proofed due to the first version of the file that made all AS settlements part of their win conditions - with the result that they didn't do anything at all, not even proper defending threatened towns ("Defending all is defending nothing" - Frederic the Great).

QuintusSertorius

07-23-2008, 23:47

Could this be something I really need for my historical Roman game? Might it save me doing all that mucking around with the console to stop Baktria and Hayasdan heading north? To make Makedonia actually try to defend itself in Greece?

Just a shame it's not savegame compatible, I could really do with this to rein in AI Romani in my Pergamon game, and make Pahlava do something.

||Lz3||

07-24-2008, 04:07

could... help

In my roman game (222 bc) there are several ahistorical things for example the sweboz crossing the rhine and eating like half gaul ,and such :sweatdrop:

it's not perfect, but at least I have the feeling that it's better and I think that's enough for me :smash:

QuintusSertorius

07-24-2008, 10:26

It's got to be better than nothing at all.

konny

07-24-2008, 14:18

Could this be something I really need for my historical Roman game? Might it save me doing all that mucking around with the console to stop Baktria and Hayasdan heading north? To make Makedonia actually try to defend itself in Greece?

Again, this is not exact 1:1. You might give the Romans Taras only as a target and still see them attacking Bononia and whatsoever instead. The AI takes the VCs into account when selecting the next target, but only as one out of many variables. At least it gives you tendancies towards specific regions, both offensive and defensive. It also seems to make the AI either more offensive or defensive, depending on how many of its target towns it controlls.

Che Roriniho

07-24-2008, 16:50

Does this work with RTW.exe? If so, where is DWC?

Edit: Never mind, I've found it. If anyone else is looking for it, it's in [...]\EB\data\world\maps\imperial_campaign. Haven't tested it yet though.

QuintusSertorius

07-24-2008, 17:10

Again, this is not exact 1:1. You might give the Romans Taras only as a target and still see them attacking Bononia and whatsoever instead. The AI takes the VCs into account when selecting the next target, but only as one out of many variables. At least it gives you tendancies towards specific regions, both offensive and defensive. It also seems to make the AI either more offensive or defensive, depending on how many of its target towns it controlls.

Seriously, konny, if it even works just a little it'll be a marked improvement. :laugh4:

mcantu

07-24-2008, 17:22

i've been using this while beta testing EB 1.xx. I've noticed real differences in AI expansion...for the better. Rome doesnt shoot off to the north for example...

QuintusSertorius

07-24-2008, 17:45

Rome, Makedonia, Hayasdan and Baktria are the worst culprits for haring off north.

Pahlava have real problems heading south, or indeed doing much of anything on their own. Be nice to keep the Gallic factions and Germans to their respective sides of the Rhine. And perhaps encourage the Casse to invade Gaul.

Senshi

07-28-2008, 15:02

Romans tended to expand west- and eastwards more than to the North when I enabled the VC in 1.1. They conquered all of Italy and then went past Massilia and start conquering along the Mediterranean coast until they hit the QartHadast in the South of Iberia. Amazing...at the same time they did some slow expansion eastwards, conquering Segestica and moving on the Dalminion...all on H/M-difficulty and me playing as Saba.

Makedonia was nearly crushed and left Greece for Asia Minor, where they established a new empire based on Mytilene (conquering all western Asia Minor provinces).

The Hay instead went north like a rocket, storming through the steppe and expelling all Sauromatae on their way, ignoring everything south of the Caucasus...

Baktria went south and east, then turned west towards the AS, not a single step north...

QuintusSertorius

07-28-2008, 18:10

The Hai are the most annoying for going where they shouldn't be; is there nothing that will make them go south, besides forcing them into war with the Seleukids?

konny

07-29-2008, 10:35

Difficult, because they have tempting rebell towns in the North. But I have the impression that they often cannot hold their steppe conquests. May be making them at peace with the Sauromates will help?

mcantu

08-01-2008, 11:43

here's my faction progression as Carthage in 241 BC w/EB 1.x...

https://i33.tinypic.com/faxz0j.jpg

||Lz3||

08-01-2008, 18:54

baktrian expansion is weird... I've never seen that on my campaigns :sweatdrop:

they usually get stuck with 2 provinces and then move to the south

bigmilt16

08-06-2008, 20:51

How does campaign difficulty affect win conditions? I know VH makes factions hyper aggressive, so is higher difficulty counter-intuitive for this mod?

mcantu

08-06-2008, 21:29

shouldnt affect it at all...

QuintusSertorius

08-11-2008, 14:28

Roughly speaking, what are the goals for each faction under this mod?

konny

08-11-2008, 14:45

Basically, it should keep most of the factions (Greeks, Romans, Carthagians) concentrated around the Mediterranian Basin and point the AI to where the core lands of its factions are - also in respect of recruitement zones.

QuintusSertorius

08-11-2008, 18:08

konny

08-11-2008, 19:07

I think so.

Maion Maroneios

08-13-2008, 19:01

This looks quite promising... I'm currently using BI.exe, so I would like to ask you how I can add those changes to my EB folder. Do I have to do it manually, or is there some kind of link somewhere I should look for?

Thank you in advance,
Maion

konny

08-13-2008, 19:13

It's file that can be downloaded some pages prior in this thread. Just download and place it in your maps>campaign>imperialcampaign folder. Note that it is not save-game compatible.

Maion Maroneios

08-14-2008, 14:29

Thank you for your quik reply, konny! I search some pages before and foun a post of yours containing a link of what I assumed to be what I am looking for. When I clicked though, I got a message somewhere saying: ''The file link that you requested is not valid. Please contact link publisher or try to make a search.''
Could you or someone else please help me?

Thank you again,
Maion

johnhughthom

08-14-2008, 16:07

Create a new text document in the folder konny specified above, call it descr_win_conditions and copy/paste from the fourth post from the bottom on the previous page. Worked for me.

Edit: First thing to do is actually check if the file is already there, it may well be blank. If so just copy/paste from the post on the previous page.

Maion Maroneios

08-14-2008, 16:24

Ah, thanks a bunch! I'm gonna start a new campaign soon with the VC, will post maps here on a regular basis.

Maion

AymericNikator

08-18-2008, 15:34

This mod looks very cool. As I'm far for being a great modder, I'd like to ask a few questions before doing anything: :help:
first where can I find the "good" tex for this.

In my rtw folder, I got EB\Data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign in wich there is a empty file (1 k) called "descr_win_conditions". I have BI installed but I use Rome Exe to play EB. Will I have to put the here in there or will I have to create a new file?

Any help would be very helpfull. This looks actualy like chinese to me. Thanks

konny

08-18-2008, 18:25

In my rtw folder, I got EB\Data\world\maps\campaign\imperial_campaign in wich there is a empty file (1 k) called "descr_win_conditions". I have BI installed but I use Rome Exe to play EB. Will I have to put the here?

yes.

Maion Maroneios

08-23-2008, 19:47

Hey guys, I finaly found some time to post my AI progression here. So the year is 262BC, I'm Makedonia playing with EB 1.1 and BI.exe.
http://img33.picoodle.com/data/img33/3/8/23/f_262BCm_9ed4d52.jpg (http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img=/3/8/23/f_262BCm_9ed4d52.jpg&srv=img33)
Lusotana: Guys where doing quite well, they where looming close to Arsé at that time (easternmost Iberian city of the Karthadastim, which they sieged sometime later).
Aedui: It seems they managed to gain the upper hand (again, for me) and have made some attempts to take the easternmost and center city of the Arverni. They even later took the former stated city (easternmost one).
Aedui: Slowly losing to the Aedui. They have made some fruitless attempts to take Lemonum and another city which I don't remember the name of. I'm thinking of interfering with the Gallic civil war by gifting them Ankyra at some time (it had tipped the balance in my previous campaign).
Casse: Usual stuff here. Slowly unifying the Isles of Tin. Tey even later raised 2 good armies with which they blitzed 2 cities eary on.
Sweboz: They have been growing to a quite dangerous threat for the Gauls. Later they even went close to the Rhine with their armies, without inciting any war or something. I wonder how long this will be postponed...
Romani: Some very good expansion here, they went for the northern cities first, ignoring Taras (though maintaining a small army in the vicinity) then, after I took Taras from the Epeirotai and left a small garisson there, they attacked me. I retook the city and now they have set their eyes upon the north mostly. Some attempts to take Rhegion has to be noted here.
Kart-Hadast: The Poeni have been focusing more in Iberia, it seems, somehting I've never witnesed before in any of my campaigns. They even went for Emporion and the Celtiberian city after some time, though they where unsuccessful. They lost Korsim to the Romani at some time, but made no attempt to take it back. Sikelia has also remained unattained by them, for the moment that is.
Getai: Usual expansion, for my standard that is. They tried to take Kallatis a couple of times, without any success. They currently keep near 2 fullstacks outside their westernmost city at stalemate.
Epeiros: My main enemy, I left them largely alone apart from driving away the occasional invading force upon Pella or Demetrias. Killed Pyrrhos early on and attacked Taras after they send their big force (1 fullstack) to Illyria. At the moment I took the pic, I had Alkyoneus with his winning force of Taras along with some Italian troops near Ambrakia. I later kicked them out of Hellas and into Illyria, renamed them into Illyrioi and forced a ceasefire upon them.
Pontos: Pontics took Ankyra as their first city and shortly after that they took Sinope. They later even went for Amaseia (AS controlled region), Trapezous, Ipsos and Nikaia, though all atempts have proved to be fruitless so far. It is worth noting that they are wielding very good quality units, like Chalkaspidai, Thureophoroi, Pontikoi Thorakitai, Archers and Cappadokian Medium Cavalry.
Sauromatae: Usual expnsion, in comparison to my previous campaigns. The only notibly thing I believe, is that they took Kotais (city in the Caucasus) and maintain a small army outside of it.
Ptolemaioi: Slowly losing to the AS juggernaut, who prove to be more than capable of maintaining a strong empire even when atacked on all fronts. They lost Tarsos in Mikra Asia and 2 cities in Ioudaia, inevitably losing the Syrian War after that. The only notably thing they did was to send a well-experienced army led by an Ioudaios FM (round 15-16 units) with a Pentekonterai unit from Kypros to the waters surrounding Krete (at that time, my property), only to be sunk by a navy of mine. I thus sank every attempt of them to claim Krete.
Armenia: Stalemate here, sadly. Though the poor guys have tried desperately to claim Kotais, Trapezous and Phraaspa. I hope I can see a Pan-Caucasus Kingdom soon kicking AS and Sauromatae butt.
Arche Seleukeia: Best faction, ATM, most advanced, biggest and the greatest military power. I even saw some Thorakitai Agematos Basilikou at some point in Anatolia, I believe that says enough. Winning against the Ptolemaioi, losing steadily from the Pahlava. They later even got as far as Alexandreis (besieging it in the process), but got driven out of the Aigyptian heartlands.
Saba: Usual expansion here, not any great stuff.
Koinon Hellenon: Kicked them out of mainland Hellas and Krete, they had control of just Rhodos at the time. I later gifted them 20,000 mnai and Halikarnassos, after which they build a fleet and transported some FM's at the city. Now I can focus on taking Rhodos from them and unifying Hellas.
Pahlava: Steadily winning from the AS, later conquered as far as Phraaspa, with a steady trickle of armies coming from the steppes. I just hope they don't become the next Achemaenid rulers of Asia anytime soon, though that will keep the AS in check.
Saka Rauka: Nothing to mention here really, jus a bit of struggling with the Baktrians over Xiyu.
Baktria: See above, nothing serious yet.

As for me (Makedonia), I am in the process of unifying Hellas. More reports to be followed in 252BC.

Maion