artaxerxes
02-19-2009, 15:32
Hi. One of the major flaws, I think, with EB (and as absolutely ALL flaws with EB, it's of course the fault of the RTW engine and NOT the EB team:laugh4:), is that because the AI's either non-existent or, at the best, drunkenly eccentric, handling of naval invasions, the Punic War - or actually more or less any Spain-Italy-North Africa-conflict, NEVER plays out in any way that can at all be compared to the real world. Here I'm not talking about historical accuracy - it's a game obviously - but more that in the real world, a Roman or Greek conquest of Sicily would be followed by either of the following:
1) Carthage wants to take Sicily back, so their main capitol isn't so critically exposed
2) Roman or Greeks wanna jump from Sicily onto Carthage itself, to prevent 1) and also just because it would be an easy step towards supreme victory.
But because the AI - if it uses naval invasion AT ALL - doesn't consider such geography, the idea that Lilibeo (that's the name right?) and Carthage are Step 1 and Step 2 goes right out the window. For the AI, any other destination in the Mediterranean is just as likely as a jump between those 2 cities, and therefor it is impossible to emulate THE VERY REASON why Carthage AND the opponent of Carthage HAS ANY REASON for being in Sicily.
This has a number of problems, if one really wishes to use EB to experience the conflicts of the ancient world - they don't have to be accurate of course, but just possible - which are
1) if you play as Carthage, you're never seriously threatened by Rome, and since the threat from Rome was a driving force for Carthage in this period of time, that means the empire YOU RULE is much farther away from a realistic Carthage, than say the EB Baktria is away from the real life Baktria - even tho the geography is correct, you are building an empire under completely different premises than the actual Carthagians and have no chance of experiencing their challenges
2) if you play as Rome, taking Sicily from the Carthagians will, mostly, end the Punic Wars, and again, like 1), you'll be playing a campaign, where even though your lands are historically correct, their challenges are not. Like playing Napoleon but having England scratched off the map - it simply alters the experience immensely.
3) if you don't play as Rome OR Carthage, which is often my situation. Usually I play as a faction of the Eastern Mediterranean, and I always try to create a quite powerful state with secure borders and good economy etc. And everyone around me behave realistically - not historically accurate of course, but quite realistic anyway - so I really get the feeling that "ooh, I AM the KH" or whoever I'm playing. But then, after a few decades, I want to experience the threat from the west - that is, whatever empire has emerged triumphantly from the Punic Wars and now musters an immense strenght. But that almost never happens, unless Carthage has been immensely lucky and subdued Rome. Otherwise, there are just two non-super powers on each their continent.
I don't expect a big threat from the west in every game - of course there'll be the games where the Punic Wars never occur, and the stray ones where Lusotannan or some Celtic faction manage to contain their neighbours. But it bothers me, that I NEVER experience a Rome that has conquered Carthage.
4) very often the Carthagian AI gets stuck in North Africa, and unless you play as Ptolemaioi, they become COMPLETELY redundant. Even if you play as Lusotannan or Rome, factions who should, if EB should in any way be realistic, fear the progress of their southern neighbours, Carthage might as well be wiped off the face of the earth, and unless you play an invasion of Africa, it wouldn't matter to you at all
Now following this novel-size essay (sorry), I'm gonna propose somthing that sounds insane. A small mini-mod , not by the EB team of course, since it won't be directly historically accurate, but hopefully by some fans adapt at this thing. A mini-mod that adds the kind of Crossing, or whatever you call it, between Lilibeo and Carthage. I mean, so ordinary armies could WALK from the one place to the other.
Obviously, I'm aware of 2 problems here:
1) armies stopping in the middle of the water???:wall:
2) it being unrealistic that armies don't need a fleet here.
BUT I think 2) is easily overshadowed by HOW more realistic Italy-vs.-North Africa conflicts will be. Just think of it:
1) the Carthage AI will suddenly see Lilibeo not as a "why-did-the-gamemaker-give-us-that-let's-just-leave-it-and-let-whoever-take-it", but rather - like the real Carthagians - as a GATEWAY to their capitol itself. They'll therefor try to take it back if they lose it.
2) Carthage will be able to walk their armies to Sicily. In the games I've played, Carthage has always only used troops trained in Lilibeo for conquering Sicily, and then used the ones from Africa IN Africa. It will be much more historical, that the Carthage AI has been possibility of using the lion's share of their troops in the battle for the Mediterranean, rather than for subduing Sahara. Thus the rather unrelated problem of Carthage often getting stuck in Africa with nothing to do, will also be solved
3) the Rome AI will now have no reason whatsoever for STOPPING it's progress in Sicily, but rather, like in history, attempt to continue.
4) in the case of Rome/Carthage/Epeiros being overwhelmed by others in late game: the EB map will no longer have a dead end in Africa - the place where an AI faction expands, but just gets stuck, cos there's nowhere to go. The map would be much more alive. Perhaps a crossing between Spain/North Africa should also be considered, since that's just as realistic as the Sicily/Africa one, and because that would add to factions in Spin and North Africa taking decisions based on each other, and not pretending North Africa is as far away as Mars ;)
EDIT: just realized I can't even remember IF there is a crossing between Spain/North Africa. There isn't, right? ;)
EVEN in the case of future AI engines being more friendly towards the idea of naval invasion, my suggestion still solves one thing that wouldn't even solve: it makes it probable for the AI to go Lilibeo-Carthage or Carthage-Lilibeo, and not Lilibeo-Sparte or Carthage-Alexandria or whatever they might find funny. In real life, crossing directly from Lilibeo to Carthage, or the other way round, made sense, so if we want Rome and Carthage to behave IN ANY WAY comparable to realistic factions, we need to get the AI's to think such a progress makes sense. Then they'll behave much more like what could be expected from Romans or Carthagians, and not make their decisions on the basis of facts completely detached to the lay of the ancient world.
Hope you like it. As I said in the title, it's an idea for a mini-mod, I wouldn't consider the EB Team doing it, rather like Force Diplomacy, it could be such a little tweak that we could try, to see if we could get a more realistic behaviour out of the AI:yes:
1) Carthage wants to take Sicily back, so their main capitol isn't so critically exposed
2) Roman or Greeks wanna jump from Sicily onto Carthage itself, to prevent 1) and also just because it would be an easy step towards supreme victory.
But because the AI - if it uses naval invasion AT ALL - doesn't consider such geography, the idea that Lilibeo (that's the name right?) and Carthage are Step 1 and Step 2 goes right out the window. For the AI, any other destination in the Mediterranean is just as likely as a jump between those 2 cities, and therefor it is impossible to emulate THE VERY REASON why Carthage AND the opponent of Carthage HAS ANY REASON for being in Sicily.
This has a number of problems, if one really wishes to use EB to experience the conflicts of the ancient world - they don't have to be accurate of course, but just possible - which are
1) if you play as Carthage, you're never seriously threatened by Rome, and since the threat from Rome was a driving force for Carthage in this period of time, that means the empire YOU RULE is much farther away from a realistic Carthage, than say the EB Baktria is away from the real life Baktria - even tho the geography is correct, you are building an empire under completely different premises than the actual Carthagians and have no chance of experiencing their challenges
2) if you play as Rome, taking Sicily from the Carthagians will, mostly, end the Punic Wars, and again, like 1), you'll be playing a campaign, where even though your lands are historically correct, their challenges are not. Like playing Napoleon but having England scratched off the map - it simply alters the experience immensely.
3) if you don't play as Rome OR Carthage, which is often my situation. Usually I play as a faction of the Eastern Mediterranean, and I always try to create a quite powerful state with secure borders and good economy etc. And everyone around me behave realistically - not historically accurate of course, but quite realistic anyway - so I really get the feeling that "ooh, I AM the KH" or whoever I'm playing. But then, after a few decades, I want to experience the threat from the west - that is, whatever empire has emerged triumphantly from the Punic Wars and now musters an immense strenght. But that almost never happens, unless Carthage has been immensely lucky and subdued Rome. Otherwise, there are just two non-super powers on each their continent.
I don't expect a big threat from the west in every game - of course there'll be the games where the Punic Wars never occur, and the stray ones where Lusotannan or some Celtic faction manage to contain their neighbours. But it bothers me, that I NEVER experience a Rome that has conquered Carthage.
4) very often the Carthagian AI gets stuck in North Africa, and unless you play as Ptolemaioi, they become COMPLETELY redundant. Even if you play as Lusotannan or Rome, factions who should, if EB should in any way be realistic, fear the progress of their southern neighbours, Carthage might as well be wiped off the face of the earth, and unless you play an invasion of Africa, it wouldn't matter to you at all
Now following this novel-size essay (sorry), I'm gonna propose somthing that sounds insane. A small mini-mod , not by the EB team of course, since it won't be directly historically accurate, but hopefully by some fans adapt at this thing. A mini-mod that adds the kind of Crossing, or whatever you call it, between Lilibeo and Carthage. I mean, so ordinary armies could WALK from the one place to the other.
Obviously, I'm aware of 2 problems here:
1) armies stopping in the middle of the water???:wall:
2) it being unrealistic that armies don't need a fleet here.
BUT I think 2) is easily overshadowed by HOW more realistic Italy-vs.-North Africa conflicts will be. Just think of it:
1) the Carthage AI will suddenly see Lilibeo not as a "why-did-the-gamemaker-give-us-that-let's-just-leave-it-and-let-whoever-take-it", but rather - like the real Carthagians - as a GATEWAY to their capitol itself. They'll therefor try to take it back if they lose it.
2) Carthage will be able to walk their armies to Sicily. In the games I've played, Carthage has always only used troops trained in Lilibeo for conquering Sicily, and then used the ones from Africa IN Africa. It will be much more historical, that the Carthage AI has been possibility of using the lion's share of their troops in the battle for the Mediterranean, rather than for subduing Sahara. Thus the rather unrelated problem of Carthage often getting stuck in Africa with nothing to do, will also be solved
3) the Rome AI will now have no reason whatsoever for STOPPING it's progress in Sicily, but rather, like in history, attempt to continue.
4) in the case of Rome/Carthage/Epeiros being overwhelmed by others in late game: the EB map will no longer have a dead end in Africa - the place where an AI faction expands, but just gets stuck, cos there's nowhere to go. The map would be much more alive. Perhaps a crossing between Spain/North Africa should also be considered, since that's just as realistic as the Sicily/Africa one, and because that would add to factions in Spin and North Africa taking decisions based on each other, and not pretending North Africa is as far away as Mars ;)
EDIT: just realized I can't even remember IF there is a crossing between Spain/North Africa. There isn't, right? ;)
EVEN in the case of future AI engines being more friendly towards the idea of naval invasion, my suggestion still solves one thing that wouldn't even solve: it makes it probable for the AI to go Lilibeo-Carthage or Carthage-Lilibeo, and not Lilibeo-Sparte or Carthage-Alexandria or whatever they might find funny. In real life, crossing directly from Lilibeo to Carthage, or the other way round, made sense, so if we want Rome and Carthage to behave IN ANY WAY comparable to realistic factions, we need to get the AI's to think such a progress makes sense. Then they'll behave much more like what could be expected from Romans or Carthagians, and not make their decisions on the basis of facts completely detached to the lay of the ancient world.
Hope you like it. As I said in the title, it's an idea for a mini-mod, I wouldn't consider the EB Team doing it, rather like Force Diplomacy, it could be such a little tweak that we could try, to see if we could get a more realistic behaviour out of the AI:yes: