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

[XSamatan]

@Kleitos:
I wrote a guide about this topic some time ago, maybe it can help you.

XSamatan

[vollorix]

You want a character move somewhere on the map for whatever reasons ( realism, for instance: a unit of rider bodyguards won´t need a year to get from Rome to Numantia; not even a legion would^^ ). It works instantly, like magic - faster then beaming, i´d say... Just search on the forums for all the details ( what not to do to prevent CTD, etc. )
There are also the increased movement points for the factions done in couple of mods, but that is something different ( apperently one can increase the moving points of characters significantly, moding specific files ).

without family members - is no problem. but one would need them too. ...specific character traits of FM´s are in that case i find just disturbing ...i mean when they only sit in the fleet - why should they affect the duration of the journey.

Maybe taking command of the fleet and giving wired orders ( in case they are somehow mad, ill or whatever ). Or perhaps because their harem wasn´t on board in time? Or probably because the ships had to drop anchor way too often because those VIP´s became sea sick? Who knows? ;)

[FinnishedBarbarian]

@Ca Putt - well yea that is definitely a point - winter is no season for sailing ..but i remember a sea travel (just because of the winter campaigning restriction of that one fella ..maybe there was also some "tired" character trait or something like that involved) like from Athenai to Syracousai..it took more then a year ...not to speak from a journey to massalia.

without family members - is no problem. but one would need them too. ...specific character traits of FM´s are in that case i find just disturbing ...i mean when they only sit in the fleet - why should they affect the duration of the journey.

yes only the admirals influence for the speed would be nice.

@vollorix - hm, i never used "move_character" ..how does this work? ..like beaming one character from one moment to the other to any place? ..or can you do this then for a "normal" travel duration?
i meant that as some thing (if resolvable) that would be nice to think over it to change.
actually dont wanna use cheats (except for avoiding CTD´s like decrease population in rebellious settlements)

Offtopic

It works as sort of a beaming/teleportation and I think that in some cases it shouldn't be considered cheating, for example in moving agents to a island (rhodes/britain) there was civilian transportation during antique so it shouldn't be necessary to build a fleet to transport single diplomat to a island. other ways I use it are unselfish like transporting koinons troops from rhodes to help them hold some distant province that has rebelled to them.

You have to first (using console) toggle fog of war of (toggle_fow) then look for a spot where want to move the character holding mouse over the spot (it has to be empty of other characters, also transporting directly to a city doesn't work) enter "show_cursorstat" which gives you the coordinates. After that you just need to enter "move_character "characters_name" and coordinates for example 93,115.

Back to the topic

Family members bodyguards should be toned down a bit, now they form completely unrealistic heavy cavalry reserve (this conserns mostly hellenes and carthigians because both like to use their family members as extra heavy cavalry), kings and heirs should of course have large cavalry retinue but that every FM in for example seleucid empire has 50-70 somathophylakes (if we compare the games unit strength to real size of armies of time that would give us about 500-700 somathophylakes) is complete unrealistic. Sweboz and pritanoi generals (both are going to have infantry bodyguards) unit numbers are more realistic because in germanic and celtic (atleast in early era) warfare first and foremost purpose of a general was to lead other warriors by his own example in thick of a fighting.

This change depents mostly on battle AI, if team can't make AI generals less suicidal then they will stay likely same as in eb1.

[Kleitos]

thank you guys :-) ..i put that guide to my EB favorites - good to know if needed - and try it out sometime.
(already have a lot of them - since this game is so complex - until now it never got boring)

..but actually i didnt mean that for this version ..rather if this maybe can be changed in EB II without using the cheats.

do you know if with M2TW as engine this giant trees would be a thing of the past?

[Ichon]

I've thought about the AI generals being so suicidal alot and it seems difficult to resolve since even with best Germanicus BAI the generals still often do this.

The current way generals are portrayed is usually as some special heavy cavalry unit. Which isn't always so far off but in the game mechanics gives them quite disproportionate power.

It seems to me that increasing BG defense quite high while also lowering charge value while giving decent melee but not crazy high- base 3 or 4 so reach 6-7 with xp would be the best way.

Since then the generals wouldn't be continual and endless chargers who rarely win a battle by fighting melee but win by charging 500 to death and then renew their numbers for the next battle. While the AI trying to use the powerful charge kills its commander off giving the entire army penalties.

So then you could use BG to anchor a wavering point in the line as the very high defense wouldn't immediately imperil the general and the BG could still have some charge effect but more limited. As the BG protect the commander they wouldn't necessarily always be focused on killing as many enemy as possible.

Also while BG would be deadly in melee combat due to their high defense and decent attack they wouldn't be completely overwhelming like they can be now with a single charge killing 50% of a unit in a few seconds. (referring to MTW2).

Most important is that the AI would have much higher chances of preserving its generals and keeping the army morale up and the generals command bonuses intact. So many heroic victories I've won and seen in others screenshots are due to the suicidal generals of the AI and the massive repeating charges of players own general.

So battles get much tougher for players without having any other artificial bonuses to AI just by keeping their generals alive much longer and not having players use a single general to repeatedly charge and get 200 kills in battle after battle just due to charge. BG might have 200 kills at the end of a battle still but 100 from charge and 100 from melee which happens at a much slower rate would mean BG's affect on battle overall is becoming more about morale and less about being the most powerful unit on the battlefield in its own right. AI might still send its general ahead foolishly but with high defense can pull him out before death and if player wastes alot of time pursuing there is alot lower guarantee of a quick kill.

do you know if with M2TW as engine this giant trees would be a thing of the past?

Giant trees that block view as in RTW you mean? I haven't seen that in MTW2 though maybe it exists on some part of the map but I would say it seems lower though there are some thick forest tops you have to lower beneath to see properly the huge tree trunks as in RTW aren't around to block view even right next to the ground.

[bobbin]

There are no giant trees in M2TW from what I've seen.

[Moros]

There are no giant trees in M2TW from what I've seen.

Not yet!

[NikosMaximilian]

I haven't played M2TW, and I probably won't buy it until EB2 is released, so I apologise for any (uninformed) mistake. Also I understand that there are many things that are harcoded by CA and can't be changed, so this is probably a sketch about some things.

- The first and most important: reduce the number of CTD. Even after following some of the advices posted in the forum, and reducing their number, they're annoying.

- Strategic: A smarter AI that selects its targets better (Makedon going into the Baltic? Hay into the steppes?). I don't know if this can be done, but somehow force it to follow a smarter, more realistic expansion, choosing richer cities.

- Naval Invasions: EB on BI seemed a little better on this. Otherwise, Baleares, Sardinia, Corsica, Krete and Rhodos belong to the same faction in whether it's 272BC or 14BC (unless the player attacks them).

- I know this won't be a popular opinion since most players seem to choose the "barbarian" or Hellenic factions, but I would like to see the Nomadic factions empowered, specially in their homelands. If possible a larger battlemap, with more stamina for horse archers so they can apply their tactics. Or maybe the ability to attack, and withdraw at any moment without losing the battle (as long as you have movement points left in the strategic map).

- Make more mercenaries available to Saka, Sauro and maybe Pahlava, and make secondary the need of a growing city to recruit, only elites maybe. Most of the steppe cities grow very slowly compared to other regions and that's historically accurate, but the nomads didn't recruit in the way other civilizations did. Their recruitment pool wasn't centered in a settlement, it was spread among those vast lands. It would be a better way to represent the nomadic confederations and their goals, which in many cases the motivation was looting, pillaging and plunder. You've got the money, you recruit them, now go and sack some rich city to pay for their loyalty upkeep. Military success means gold and more raids, failure means disbanding, pretty much like the Huns.

- This is an animation thing and more of a suggestion. Could javelin throwing units have more range when running? Obviously you can throw a javelin further if you gain momentum in a run-up. Likewise, units in a defensive, stationary position should have their range reduced (unless on higher ground than the intended target).

- Hopefully minor things like the uber-pirate stacks in the Baltic won't happen.

Oh, and thank you guys for such a terrific effort and nice game! Congratulations from the land of silver, keep up the great work!

[Kleitos]

There are no giant trees in M2TW from what I've seen.

well thats good to hear

@NikosMaximilian: more stamina for horse archers? ..i´d love the Pahlava campaign (and now using with the early HAY campaign the same tactics) but those horse archers have the best stamina anyway - battle need micromanaging yes - but these horse archer troops are nearly invincible. ..doing much damage, suffering almost no casualities. ..last blow (if not meant as hitattack) can be done with FM´s or those great Yancai Uazdaettae (very good stamina and good spear/charge attack) ..available for almost every faction in two provinces northeast of the Hyrcanium Mare.

[bobbin]

- The first and most important: reduce the number of CTD. Even after following some of the advices posted in the forum, and reducing their number, they're annoying.

This was an issue with RTW so we couldn't do anything about it. Thankfully M2TW is a lot more stable, so it doesn't happen anymore.

- Strategic: A smarter AI that selects its targets better (Makedon going into the Baltic? Hay into the steppes?). I don't know if this can be done, but somehow force it to follow a smarter, more realistic expansion, choosing richer cities.

I believe things can be done to encourage faction expansion along certain routes although we haven't really looked into it yet.

- Naval Invasions: EB on BI seemed a little better on this. Otherwise, Baleares, Sardinia, Corsica, Krete and Rhodos belong to the same faction in whether it's 272BC or 14BC (unless the player attacks them).

Yep, the AI in M2TW is a lot better at naval invasions than in RTW.

- I know this won't be a popular opinion since most players seem to choose the "barbarian" or Hellenic factions, but I would like to see the Nomadic factions empowered, specially in their homelands. If possible a larger battlemap, with more stamina for horse archers so they can apply their tactics. Or maybe the ability to attack, and withdraw at any moment without losing the battle (as long as you have movement points left in the strategic map).

These aren't things we can mod and horse archers already get the best stamina possible.

- Make more mercenaries available to Saka, Sauro and maybe Pahlava, and make secondary the need of a growing city to recruit, only elites maybe. Most of the steppe cities grow very slowly compared to other regions and that's historically accurate, but the nomads didn't recruit in the way other civilizations did. Their recruitment pool wasn't centered in a settlement, it was spread among those vast lands. It would be a better way to represent the nomadic confederations and their goals, which in many cases the motivation was looting, pillaging and plunder. You've got the money, you recruit them, now go and sack some rich city to pay for their loyalty upkeep. Military success means gold and more raids, failure means disbanding, pretty much like the Huns.

You will have to wait and see about recruitment but I can say it is a lot different from EB. Also I'm pretty sure the population in a settlement in the game is supposed to represent that of the whole province, not just the main city. M2TW doesn't subtract population when recruiting BTW, which should help as well.

- This is an animation thing and more of a suggestion. Could javelin throwing units have more range when running? Obviously you can throw a javelin further if you gain momentum in a run-up. Likewise, units in a defensive, stationary position should have their range reduced (unless on higher ground than the intended target).

Not possible.

- Hopefully minor things like the uber-pirate stacks in the Baltic won't happen.

We will try and prevent things like that happening in EBII.

Oh, and thank you guys for such a terrific effort and nice game! Congratulations from the land of silver, keep up the great work!

Thank you!

well thats good to hear

What is even better to hear is that makanyane and wilddog over on the TWC have cracked the vege_model files, so now we can have our own custom trees and shrubs in the game.

[vollorix]

What is even better to hear is that makanyane and wilddog over on the TWC have cracked the vege_model files, so now we can have our own custom trees and shrubs in the game

WOW! I knew it, i will buy my new pc only after EB2 comes out

[stratigos vasilios]

Not sure if this has been thrown up in this thread... Regarding the trade resources on the campaign map (i.e. furs, silk, grain, olive oil and amber), I'm hoping buildings are available to increase their trade value. Very similar to the trade buildings in the mod DLV, examples could be a silk mill or an olive oil grove. I can't remember if there were similar buildings in EBI, exam study does that to my memory...

[Foot]

Not sure if this has been thrown up in this thread... Regarding the trade resources on the campaign map (i.e. furs, silk, grain, olive oil and amber), I'm hoping buildings are available to increase their trade value. Very similar to the trade buildings in the mod DLV, examples could be a silk mill or an olive oil grove. I can't remember if there were similar buildings in EBI, exam study does that to my memory...

Individual trade resources cannot have their individual resource value increased. Building capabilities that affect trade value (there are two of them) affect all trade resources in a province. For example, if the Olive Grove increased trade value in a province by 10% if there is an Olive Oil resource, this 10% will increase the trade value of any other resources in the province. It is misleading to have a building concept that, by its description, gives the impression that only one resource will be improved, but in actual fact improves all trade resources in a province. In EBII buildings will be designed to reflect this.

Foot

[stratigos vasilios]

Individual trade resources cannot have their individual resource value increased. Building capabilities that affect trade value (there are two of them) affect all trade resources in a province. For example, if the Olive Grove increased trade value in a province by 10% if there is an Olive Oil resource, this 10% will increase the trade value of any other resources in the province. It is misleading to have a building concept that, by its description, gives the impression that only one resource will be improved, but in actual fact improves all trade resources in a province. In EBII buildings will be designed to reflect this.

Foot

Ahhh ok. For conversation purposes, let's use the silk mill as an example. It doesn't increase the trade 'power' of the silk resource, but the 'power' of the entire region. So the bonus isn't on silk itself but trade as a whole? (I know I've probably paraphrased what you've just said, but it'll sink in if I do this).

[Foot]

Ahhh ok. For conversation purposes, let's use the silk mill as an example. It doesn't increase the trade 'power' of the silk resource, but the 'power' of the entire region. So the bonus isn't on silk itself but trade as a whole? (I know I've probably paraphrased what you've just said, but it'll sink in if I do this).

That's the one. It makes the whole concept of buildings affecting specific resources difficult to handle. It also rather ruins the perspective of the player. A player, playing as the government of their faction, wouldn't be concerned with the construction of a silk mill - private ownership of production is really out of their hands and perspective - and so in EBII this player's perspective is going to be consistent and will define the buildings that are available. You won't construct buildings that produce things (that's not entirely true, but I'll keep the specifics secret for now), but will instead invest in buildings that secure trade through your region; protecting caravans from bandits, and merchant ships from pirates.

Foot

[B-Wing]

I very much like what you have said here, Foot! Keeping things consistent in terms of what exactly the player controls is a nice thought. Thank you for the info!