I don't know much about modding, but in Stainless Steel (M2TW mod), rebel settlements will increase in units and buildings over time. That could just be the result of scripting, but I think they have an actual AI that allows them to improve.
I don't know much about modding, but in Stainless Steel (M2TW mod), rebel settlements will increase in units and buildings over time. That could just be the result of scripting, but I think they have an actual AI that allows them to improve.
One of the reasons for the Eleutheroi's inability to train new units is the fact that as the single largest faction in the game, their huge amount of units quickly causes them to go bankrupt. You can experiment in EB1 by setting the money script to give them copious amounts of money each turn, and they will sometimes start to recruit units. This is not recemmended, though, as it will severly unbalance the game.
In many my last games, I regularly gave the Eleutheroi 100,000 or more mnai a turn via the console (and often picked certain settlements to add extra units to their garrisons), and it didn't "severely unbalance the game". It slowed down the advance of the other AI factions, but still not enough for my tastes. There certainly wasn't an advance of the rebel settlements, since they only seem to defend what they have, not try to expand.
It began on seven hills - an EB 1.1 Romani AAR with historical house-rules (now ceased)
Heirs to Lysimachos - an EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR with semi-historical houserules (now ceased)
Philetairos' Gift - a second EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
Let's wildly assume that the average settlement is defended by 8 units, and that the average upkeep per unit is 500. Which is probably on the conservative side, especially since cavalry units are quite expensive in upkeep. No Eleutheroi city in EB comes even close in terms of making 4000 Mnai / turn. The only way they could do that is second tier mines, in a minerally rich province. As far as I know, no settlement starts with those mines.
Add in all the rebel stacks, scripted defenders, pirates, etc., and it is obvious that the Eleutheroi are crippled in debt from the get-go. In order for them to develop, you would need to give them copious amounts of money, to the tune of 100 000 Mnai for every 20 settlements they own. At the start of the game that would be more than 600 000 Mnai / turn. I think someone actually experimented with giving them about 3000 Mnai / turn for every settlement they owned. That massively reduced expansion in Eleutheroi lands. Doing so would only require some minor changes to the script.
Back on topic:
I am not too worried about this particular issue in EB2. I am sure the first version won't have it solved - it is a matter of testing and tweaking. A blunt method such as "add_money" may work in general, but that may conflict with historical reality, and AI practice.
For EB, there were the AI faction progress threads, which also helped in identifying issues that lead / have led to unwanted AI behavior, such as the formation of Grey Death / Yellow Fever, factions expanding to unwanted areas (Hayasdan to the steppes, Pahlava up north, rather than to the south; Sweboz saying hello to the Romans in 250 BC). It is all in finding the right balance, and that requires serious testing.
Another child on the way, too!
Hmmm, my modding in the EB1 days was rather limited to cosmetic changes (names of things, colours on the minimap, etc) and the odd bit of tinkering with descr_strat.txt, but I'll have a look at what's involved and assess whether it's something I could learn how to do.
Standing is a new concept in M2:TW isn't it? Might that offer some means of having more sensible diplomacy?
Doesn't sound much changed from RTW; there if you shared a border peace was basically impossible. Frankly it's the ones who share a border where being able to have meaningful diplomacy matters.
Hmmm, does this mean that like with BI's executable, anyone bordering on the same body of water treats you as a constant invasion target?
I got it a lot in EB1, I'd send my single not-full-stack army into enemy territory, and sometimes have to spend some time chasing down their armies. Worse still, sometimes I'd bring them to battle, only for them to run away the moment the battle started.
There might be something there.
If EB1 is anything to go by, the danger isn't that the Eleutheroi might be too strong, but that they are fundamentally far too weak. In a normal game, all the independents are normally gone within 50 turns. That's far too fast, IMO.
I'll have to do some digging. I hope so.
I'd completely forgotten about the money script, thanks for reminding me. It seems there was a more elegant solution than the one I was using, and I wasn't adding nearly enough money. Is there an equivalent in EB2?
As to historicity, I find the disappearance of everything independent, and emergence of 8-10 superpowers within 50 game years a lot less credible than a strong, vibrant Eleutheroi remaining until late into the game.
I did an awful lot of FD-augmentation in some of my game to prevent ahistorical expansion, it would be nice if the EB2 team had found some way of preventing that.
Last edited by QuintusSertorius; 04-15-2013 at 01:07.
It began on seven hills - an EB 1.1 Romani AAR with historical house-rules (now ceased)
Heirs to Lysimachos - an EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR with semi-historical houserules (now ceased)
Philetairos' Gift - a second EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR
Yes, there are 10 levels (iirc). It does help a lot...
In M2TW they still accept peace, even if they border you. Ofc you would've to act pretty fast, to further your relations. Because depending on how bad the standings deteriorated, during the conflict, the AI would try to regain its status soon as it feels confident...Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius
Absolutely not, only if the AI faction has low diplomatic standing...Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius
In the diplomacy menu, it's also stated what a given faction wants from its relation with you (be that trading, peace, alliance or conquer)...
In regard to rebels, I think that it's possible to check their treasury in a script, right? Then you can ensure that they will have a surplus once every year or so. Most likely, you can even base this on in-game year or progress of other factions. Shouldn't be too hard, as long as there are proper triggers in place.
What will religion represent within the game? Except for a few coy references, the issue was never directly broached.
What's the hardcoded limit for the number of religions, for that matter?
It will represent the socio-political culture of the region, I guess. Some region are typically more tribal while others might be used to imperial administration, but eastern tribalism is of course still rather different from North European one. It represent whether the dominating faction's administration/governement/... is compatible with that of the local population. However obviously a faction's way of administration can change or evolve as well. The parthians might start out as tribal pastoralist but would historically end up as a true empire. Obviously we will allow a player to do this as well.
I believe the number was 7, but I might be mistaken.
Care to divulge all the cultures?
I experimented with religions and only managed up to five before some of the scrolls started behaving erratically. The game still registers the existence of a religion but doesn't always display it.I believe the number was 7, but I might be mistaken.
I've just added an entry in the FAQ about the usage of religions as Cultural affinities in EB2. They will be central in the development and evolution of the factions, from one socio-cultural group to another.
"Death Smiles at Us All,all a Man Can Do Is Smile Back."
Maximvs Decimvs Meridivs, Commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, Iberian Gladiator.
I think the FAQ needs some general updating too ;-)
I think the culture concept will be very, very interesting.
What's the difference between European Tribal and Forest Tribal? Does European Tribal represent the more urbanised socio-political structure of the Celts while Forest Tribal represents the thinly populated, semi-nomadic lifestyle of some Germanic tribes?
That would be my guess. Suebi and Lugii are probably the only forest tribal factions.
"Death Smiles at Us All,all a Man Can Do Is Smile Back."
Maximvs Decimvs Meridivs, Commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, Iberian Gladiator.
BTW, the FAQ is reformed to be more organized.
"Death Smiles at Us All,all a Man Can Do Is Smile Back."
Maximvs Decimvs Meridivs, Commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, Iberian Gladiator.
So, will Rome and Carthage be represented as Western Mediterranean Polities, being easier to assimilate each other than helenistic states?Q: Will you represent cultures? How and which ones?
A: We will use the religion mechanism to represent socio-political affinities, which are in competition in varying degrees in any given settlement. This competition may end up in civil unrest, if a culture gets closer in importance to the dominant one. Certain factions will need to evolve to another culture, which will certainly trigger unrest throughout the territory, and that transition will be harder if the player wants to do it too fast. The cultures are:
- Arid Nomadism
- Steppe Nomadism
- Eastern Imperial
- Eastern Tribal
- European Tribal
- Forest Tribal
- Western Mediterranean Polities
- Hellenistic Polities
- Indian Tribal
Thank you!
Another question, this time more complex (maybe worth of a new thread instead):
One of the (few) things that annoyed me in EB1 was the imperative need to either start aggressive (conquering regions and going in huge debt for that) or disbanding a large part of the army when starting a campaign with many factions. I'm not exactly an hardcore roleplayer and I know the game is called TOTAL WAR for a reason, but lets take for example the Lusotannan, it would make sense to me to not expand at the start, to be able to keep a half decent army for defense and some raiding (instead of conquering) and still be able to improve infrastructures at starting province. I suppose that this would be possible with M2TW free upkeeps in cities, but the other mods I've played don't use this feature. How will EB2 stand in this matter?
Thank You.
We will use free upkeep under certain circumstances and political/governmental situations. In EB1 the availability of units was controlled through availability of money and that's why the Lusotannan had to disband some units early on, to get finantially stable. In EB2 we can control the unit availability directly, so it will be easier to have a more balanced start without the need to disband. We are trying to provide these slow-moving factions the means to get money, namely through raiding. We can achieve this through the use of PSFs, since they represent minor settlements that can be conquered (without siege battles) and return money while they're controlled, and through traits that give money while the general is in enemy territory.
"Death Smiles at Us All,all a Man Can Do Is Smile Back."
Maximvs Decimvs Meridivs, Commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, Iberian Gladiator.
Will raiding deprive the enemy of income, aside from blocked trade-routes and devastated farm tiles? Otherwise it just seems like a rehashed version of the forager trait.
Will we see a return of the recruitment viewer? Perhaps in a later release? I found it very useful in EBI. I also browsed through the files, and it seems closed source so the community can't update it independently.
Last edited by Rex Somnorum; 07-21-2013 at 01:46.
Guys, has sth happened to your regular site? europabarbarorum.com is closed?
Bookmarks