What are the main things you want to see fixed from EB1 in EB2???

Epic timeframe, epic immersion, epic realism, etc. Yes, and epic imagination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

... gold chevroned peasants stand as gods on the battlefield. ...

---

Yes there is a "resolution" problem with the improvement in a unit over 10 levels of experience, especially at the bottom end. A slinger witrh "1" attack, plus 9 for experience winds up being ten times as deadly, whereas a unit with 10 attack merely doubles its deadliness.

The proposed autodisbanding militia feature will go a long way to fixing this I'm sure.

I do like the idea of some experience being available. Military doctrine does recognise the value of veteran troops over greenhorns.

I see this as a factor when translating historically described units into game terms. Alexander's men kicked some, big time. The Romans managed to beat the later Macedonians who used a similar unit set-so do we rate Romans higher than the victors of Gaugemela?

I see part of this equation being Alexander's army included a huge proportion of veterans of Philllips many campaigns, whereas the Diadochi troops the Romans fought were probably less well lead but also less "professional", that is not having been in the field as a cohesive force for sustained periods.

IIRC there's an episode in the Gallic wars where Caesar hires a mercenary German cav unit which procedess to trounce all the Gallic cav it meets. Is this because the German cav is intrinsically better, or was it an experienced unit vs green ones?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The Gallophile in me wants it to be the second option. As if germanic cavalry could defeat its gallic equivalent straight up! [scoffs ignorantly]

I'm confident there will be a sensible position reached in the way the game is presented. Pretty much every decision has been subject to examination.

On the question of Epic-ness (epic-osity? epic-centricity?), I think its there.

I think we're seeing at least the same attention to detail, respect for the sources, and love of the subject than in EB1. Certainly the excellent work already done meets the highest standard we could set. Its a luxury having dedicated people doing such a thorough job for free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

...The proposed autodisbanding militia feature ...

---

Something just occured to me. Could different groups of units be autodisbanded over different timescales?

EG all units with the militia tag get demobbed annually (someone suggested each Autumn).

And maybe there could be units tagged mercenary which get disbanded after 5 or 10 years? Elites could get 20 or even 40 years (like the white haired silver shields who fought with Phillip and Alexander and even afterwards). OMG OMG.

I haven't though it through but a sliding scale of unit lifespans might allow for some unit "maturity" but without them becoming elite zombie legions ("you see these chevrons I got? My Pappy earned them back in the First Punic War, but somehow it makes me a better soldier. Why? Hardcoded, sonny!").

edit-I forgot, the gobal disband would be at a fixed time, not a countdown for each unit. Damn.

What I want most is the "minor factions" introduced in ETW, they're not complete factions hence not playable, but they're independent AI factions.
So every Eleutheroi city would belong to their respective minor faction which fails to qualify as a major faction, rather than all belong to a bizarre huge faction called Eleutheroi.
However I know this feature is not in M2TW...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Julianus

What I want most is the "minor factions" introduced in ETW, they're not complete factions hence not playable, but they're independent AI factions.
So every Eleutheroi city would belong to their respective minor faction which fails to qualify as a major faction, rather than all belong to a bizarre huge faction called Eleutheroi.
However I know this feature is not in M2TW...

---

That's what I like most in EB, and will be improved in EB II. It is also the reason I can't play any other mod out there.

In EB every province is unique and has its own character, whether you control it, an AI faction control it, or the Eleutheroi control it.
Many small independent factions would be nice indeed, but the EB team are doing a magnificent job within the limits of the engine to represent each independent region.

On the subject of veterancy, keep in mind that veterancy in M2TW is toned down quite a bit from RTW veterancy. In RTW and EB, it was +1 attack +1 defense skill with every single chevron, plus, I believe, a morale bonus that I am not sure about because it doesn't show on unit cards (I still cannot understand why morale is not shown on unit cards in both RTW and M2TW btw...).

In M2TW, the first chevron in each "level," aka the first bronze chevron, the first silver, and the first gold, all give +1 attack. However, there is no defense skill addition, and they only get +1 attack for these three chevrons, not for the rest. Again, I'm unsure about morale bonuses. But this definitely is not nearly as much of an overall bonus as in RTW. With all 9 chevrons, a unit only gets +3 attack, as opposed to +9 attack and +9 defense skill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Julianus

What I want most is the "minor factions" introduced in ETW, they're not complete factions hence not playable, but they're independent AI factions.
So every Eleutheroi city would belong to their respective minor faction which fails to qualify as a major faction, rather than all belong to a bizarre huge faction called Eleutheroi.
However I know this feature is not in M2TW...

---

the Eleutheroi were minor factions, jsut a colelction of minor factions. In EB I they all had different flags, colours, units and names

Yeps, and I can confirm that each province will be unige in EB II as well, though not whether more or less so then in EB I. That I shall leave to your guesstimate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Julianus

What I want most is the "minor factions" introduced in ETW, they're not complete factions hence not playable, but they're independent AI factions.
So every Eleutheroi city would belong to their respective minor faction which fails to qualify as a major faction, rather than all belong to a bizarre huge faction called Eleutheroi.
However I know this feature is not in M2TW...

---

Oh,wow, that would be awesome. Imagine all the Hellenic city-states, celtic tribes etc. being separate factions. :O But as we know, EB II will be closer to that than EB I, since the faction slot number for M2TW is much bigger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vartan

Here's a question for y'all: What are the main things you want to see kept from EB1 in EB2? (note: only one question mark necessary, not three)

---

I don't think it's moddable, but I would like to see units being able to fall off the walls. When I played MTW: 2 I always had the feeling as if there were invisible walls on top of the walls. I also found it quite funny when peasants commited suicide by jumping off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drunk Clown

I don't think it's moddable, but I would like to see units being able to fall off the walls. When I played MTW: 2 I always had the feeling as if there were invisible walls on top of the walls. I also found it quite funny when peasants commited suicide by jumping off.

---

Makes for some funny YouTube videos.

The main thing, the only thing even, that I would like to see "fixed" is the in game stability. I dont know how many times Ive given up an EB campaign after yet another CTD. The mod is brilliant and I recognise that it takes advantage of all the features available to it - but cant do anything about the AI. However, the CTDs are just too much in the mid to late game when you can often fight 5+ battles a turn, then have to log on again and replay them all - again.

CTD is the largest of all the EB1 problems, I just can't think of any others.

yeah sometimes you're going great in a campaign and then it CTDs, and every time you re-load the game, it CTDs again, so that whole campaign is wasted.

I've never got past 200 BC because of CTDs destroying my campaign.

I've come up with some other things I'd like to add to the discussion:

1) Seige Works Animation on Campaign Map blocks individual map towns next to the beseiged city and should be fixed.

2) True, 10 exp. peasants should not be able to beat silver chevroned cohorts. But, keep in mind, that, historically, the Rhaetian peaks were not subdued by the Romans until the Imperial Era because they were so vicious, warlike, and occupied a strong defensive position. They weren't particularly better warriors than the Romans, but the fact they were located geographically where they were (between Gaul, Germany, and the Alps) caused them to be conquered well after Gaul and Germany were subdued. Once surrounded, their demise was assured. In the game, you could easily defeat such armies straight up, because there is nothing that prevents u from moving across the alps with such ease (and loss of life and soldiers). Thus, there must be something to balance that out and such an issue actually might help. I'm not saying its perfect, just saying its an issue that can be put to good use.

3) About the "minor" factions, I agree that they should be their own, unplayable factions. Because there is nothing that makes me wonder more than: "If 3 Lusotanni Towns are at war with Rome, and Rome surrounds them, why would they not ally against Rome if they themselves are not at war?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

If you can be more specific and post your evidence that we got it wrong, that would be great. Note that translating a world that is not flat onto a map that is never going to be correct. But if you don't tell us how we've got it wrong (and back that up with some good evidence) then how are we going to know we got it wrong. Its all well and good for you to say "fix it", but we need to know what to fix and also the reasons why you think it needs to be fixed.

Foot

---

Well, in some cases it wasn't that you guys got it wrong, they're simply errors that it appears were never corrected from the original RTW map when EB modded it. Mazaka, the capital of Kappadokia, for instance, remains unchanged from it's location in RTW, where it is depicted as being north of the Halys River, however, this is clearly inaccurate, as the city of Mazaka still exists to this day, albeit under a different name. Mazaka's name was changed to Eusebia during the reign of Ariathes V, and later to Caesarea Cappadociae. which became corrupted in Turkish to Kayseri. Now, if one looks at a modern map of Turkey, one can see that Kayseri is clearly south of the Halys River.

http://www.majhost.com/gallery/bizar.../picture-2.jpg

Compared to the EB/RTW location, it would be the red dot on the EB map:

http://www.majhost.com/gallery/bizar.../picture-1.jpg

The other obvious error that sticks out, is the location of the city of Susa. This one appears to be a case where the EB team got it wrong. On the EB map, Susa is depicted as being located in the Zagros Mountains, which is inaccurate. Susa, like Mazaka, is a city that remains inhabited to this day, as the city of Shush in Iran, and it's location is easy enough to pinpoint on a modern map as being in the plains south of the Zagros.

http://www.majhost.com/gallery/bizar.../picture-5.jpg

Compared to the EB location, it would be the red dot on the EB map:

http://www.majhost.com/gallery/bizar.../picture-3.jpg

These are my main quibbles with the EB1 map. If necessary, I can provide more evidence for these changes. There are also a few seemingly anachronistic city names, such as Asaak, or Arsakia as the Greeks called it, in Astabene, which, as far as I can tell, wasn't known as such until it was conquered by Arsakes I, roughly thirty years after the beginning of EB. The portrayal of the province of Atropatene, or Adurbadegan as it is called in EB, is also highly dubious to me, but I'd have to do a lot more digging in order to properly address that issue.

some new faction like Numidian, Bosporan, etc... and unit voice. hearing Hindus Pattiyodha speak greek accent is just weird. and Nomad Unit vioces. saka have their own language, many HA don't have voices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by plutoboyz

some new faction like Numidian, Bosporan, etc... and unit voice. hearing Hindus Pattiyodha speak greek accent is just weird. and Nomad Unit vioces. saka have their own language, many HA don't have voices.

---

Two words: Germanic Voicemod!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Something just occured to me. Could different groups of units be autodisbanded over different timescales?

EG all units with the militia tag get demobbed annually (someone suggested each Autumn).

And maybe there could be units tagged mercenary which get disbanded after 5 or 10 years? Elites could get 20 or even 40 years (like the white haired silver shields who fought with Phillip and Alexander and even afterwards). OMG OMG.

I haven't though it through but a sliding scale of unit lifespans might allow for some unit "maturity" but without them becoming elite zombie legions ("you see these chevrons I got? My Pappy earned them back in the First Punic War, but somehow it makes me a better soldier. Why? Hardcoded, sonny!").

edit-I forgot, the gobal disband would be at a fixed time, not a countdown for each unit. Damn.

---

I beg to disagree on elites (in part); while its true that no unit lasts forever, it is however common for regiments to last longer; roman legions were known to last for centuries after being raised in the late republic. IIRC, LEG. XX lasted 3 centuries or so, and I recall one legion lasting 5 and a half centuries. and I am aware of Argyraspides being maintained by the selecids for extended periods of time.

the trick is to make experience effect less. luckily, M2TW is just that in regards to experience.

In EBI there were Germanic units which possesed swords but didn't use any spears. Personally think that owning a sword didn't equal using it at a primary weapon. Like the Cherusci being known as sword owners doesn't mean they don't fight primerely with spears.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phalanx300

In EBI there were Germanic units which possesed swords but didn't use any spears. Personally think that owning a sword didn't equal using it at a primary weapon. Like the Cherusci being known as sword owners doesn't mean they don't fight primerely with spears.

---

That's correct. But there is one problem. In RTW and in M2TW, as far as I know, units can only have two weapons: primary and secondary. The Cherusci swordsmen in EBI were given two thrown javelins (spears) as primary, and a sword as secondary. Certainly the Cherusci could (did* more likely) have a SPEAR that they carried with them, but in the aforementioned games (RTW/M2TW) the unit cannot have 1) javelins, 2) spear, and 3) sword, but rather only a combination of two of these. That is unfortunately why the Cherusci swordsman does not carry a fighting spear in-game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vartan

That's correct. But there is one problem. In RTW and in M2TW, as far as I know, units can only have two weapons: primary and secondary. The Cherusci swordsmen in EBI were given two thrown javelins (spears) as primary, and a sword as secondary. Certainly the Cherusci could (did* more likely) have a SPEAR that they carried with them, but in the aforementioned games (RTW/M2TW) the unit cannot have 1) javelins, 2) spear, and 3) sword, but rather only a combination of two of these. That is unfortunately why the Cherusci swordsman does not carry a fighting spear in-game.

---

If only there was EB Mount and Blade.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hannibal Khan the Great

If only there was EB Mount and Blade.....

---

Heck it'd be the best game ever

Too bad you need to carry projectiles as a weapon too

~Jirisys (Khergit Khanate:clown:)

Ever heard of the M&B mod "Hegemonia" or "Hegemony"?
PS: Where is it stated that the EB team will stop working after EBII?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ziegenpeter

Ever heard of the M&B mod "Hegemonia" or "Hegemony"?
PS: Where is it stated that the EB team will stop working after EBII?

---

I already dowloaded it:grin:

~Jirisys (SIGNA FERTE!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vartan

That's correct. But there is one problem. In RTW and in M2TW, as far as I know, units can only have two weapons: primary and secondary. The Cherusci swordsmen in EBI were given two thrown javelins (spears) as primary, and a sword as secondary. Certainly the Cherusci could (did* more likely) have a SPEAR that they carried with them, but in the aforementioned games (RTW/M2TW) the unit cannot have 1) javelins, 2) spear, and 3) sword, but rather only a combination of two of these. That is unfortunately why the Cherusci swordsman does not carry a fighting spear in-game.

---

I see, well this certainly answers my question. Thanks.


And yes Hegemon mod is nice and clearly EB inspired. Yet they put their own view in it which I don't always like. Like having Germanic pikemen without shields. Whiel its said some Germanics had overly long shields that doesn't equal no shields. Seeing the symbolic importance of shields in Germanic society as well...

I would like to see two key things fixed:

1. I would like to see a more robust Seleucid Empire. I don't like how Baktria tends to sweep across Asia at the expense of the AS, very innacurate in my opinion. Obviously don't make the Seleucids an unstoppable force but just less prone to collapsing within a ten year gap. I know this can be prevented with the add_money cheat but i would rather see the Seleucids have a fighting chance.

2. Most importantly! I would like to see Rome and Carthage actually fight. As a fan of Celtic factions I am sick of watching Sicily remain in peace whilst the Roman legions march towards the English channel. Yes I know I should use the force diplomacy mod but I would rather , as above, watch history unfold.

A few more factions to slow the Sweboz down would be nice but I will settle for the above happily.

I hope in EB2 the chevron flags on the battlefields won't be removed, so you can see which are the seasoned troops of your enemy. That was a quite useful feature in MTW2.

I remember that in some MTW2 mods the general's bodyguards units were different for those family members who where adopted or married to princess, it will be nice to see this in EB II with special units for family members with a particular ethnic trait...

I'd like to see a fairer distribution of boni amung Temples and the like. In EB1 you've always got those not working morale/layality boni and the pitifull tax bonus limiting your choice of temples. Or (as I think the EB team planned it) rewrite the building tree to some extent. I know that M2TW has other boni but I'd just like a bit more focus on this(the balancing not temples as such) than in EB1.

question: will there be as much "health" buildings in EB2 as in EB1 or more like in M2TW?

apart from that I don'T know much to improve :)