View Full Version : which .exe is best for EB?
sorry if this has been posted already. which of the 3 .exe files is best for playing EB 1.2?
original rtw.exe
bi.exe
alexander's exe?
Define 'best'.
EB was built for Vanilla. It does not officially support the BI or Alexander .exe's. There are, however, supported mini mods that deal with both with dedicated players for each.
BI opens up the world of AI naval movement, though it tends to be wild and random. Alex is meant to build on that, but is still not particulary effective. BI and Alexander also give you acces to night battles and some more unit formations (shield wall etc). To be honest I miss none of these playing on the RTW.exe. My AI still has reasonable naval activity (though they tend to neglect naval recruitment from time to time) and the formations like shield wall are not really needed in my opinion with the EB team's work on the phalanx.
Hope this helps.
Aemilius Paulus
03-10-2009, 21:56
The smartest AI is arguably alex.exe Perhaps the only argument for rome.exe is familiarity. We humans always stick with familiar, and prefer it to new, as a general trend.
I have yet to see any coherent AI naval activity in RTW. Rare as a black diamond it is. Alex.exe is different, and it features quite a bit of it. The battlefield AI is a mark above as well, in both of the expansions. Alex.exe seems to have the best and most refined AI. Flanking movements are a good example.
But generally, if you want better battlefield AI, just get the Darth, Camillius (sp?), etc mod. They improve the AI much more.
Define 'best'.
EB was built for Vanilla. It does not officially support the BI or Alexander .exe's. There are, however, supported mini mods that deal with both with dedicated players for each.
BI opens up the world of AI naval movement, though it tends to be wild and random. Alex is meant to build on that, but is still not particulary effective. BI and Alexander also give you acces to night battles and some more unit formations (shield wall etc). To be honest I miss none of these playing on the RTW.exe. My AI still has reasonable naval activity (though they tend to neglect naval recruitment from time to time) and the formations like shield wall are not really needed in my opinion with the EB team's work on the phalanx.
Hope this helps.
I guess, my main concern was the AI. I wonder the AI plays any better (especially on the battlefield) if alexander or bi's exe is used.
The smartest AI is arguably alex.exe Perhaps the only argument for rome.exe is familiarity. We humans always stick with familiar, and prefer it to new, as a general trend.
I have yet to see any coherent AI naval activity in RTW. Rare as a black diamond it is. Alex.exe is different, and it features quite a bit of it. The battlefield AI is a mark above as well, in both of the expansions. Alex.exe seems to have the best and most refined AI. Flanking movements are a good example.
But generally, if you want better battlefield AI, just get the Darth, Camillius (sp?), etc mod. They improve the AI much more.
well, but my understandin is that darth mod is a standalone and cannot be used with EB. my interest is specific to the EB mod.
antisocialmunky
03-10-2009, 22:46
Alex AI is the best because it allows the AI to do naval operations intellegently. Otherwise not too much of a difference.
alex.exe has the smartest AI. Albiet, it is not much better, it mainly does a better job at flanking. It also, improves naval invasions.
Atraphoenix
03-11-2009, 11:43
for AI yes best exe is Alex.exe . but believe me you will not like being outflanked by AI in battle map.
and if you play as a neighbour of A.S. you will be get tired of endless battles. but if you like challenge you can stick with VH/N difficulty setting. if not use H/N.
Ravenfeeder
03-11-2009, 11:51
I was under the impression that alex had the best AI overall, but that BI had more and better naval invasions. Is this not so?
I have yet to see any coherent AI naval activity in RTW. Rare as a black diamond it is. Alex.exe is different, and it features quite a bit of it. The battlefield AI is a mark above as well, in both of the expansions. Alex.exe seems to have the best and most refined AI. Flanking movements are a good example.
I still haven't tried alex.exe, but I am positive that the battlefield AI in BI is identical to standard R:TW. I have yet to see any evidence to the contrary.
well, but my understandin is that darth mod is a standalone and cannot be used with EB. my interest is specific to the EB mod.
Aemilius is talking of Darth Formations, not Darth Mod. The former can be adapted to EB. Search the unofficial EB mod forum for "AI formation mods", and you shall find an adapted version.
I was under the impression that alex had the best AI overall, but that BI had more and better naval invasions. Is this not so?
"Better" is not a word you can use to describe BI's naval invasion. They are often pointless and seem to be carried out mostly because the AI can, not because it makes sense.
Ravenfeeder
03-11-2009, 13:32
"Better" is not a word you can use to describe BI's naval invasion. They are often pointless and seem to be carried out mostly because the AI can, not because it makes sense.
I can see this statement applying to KartHadast actions early in the game, after that, not so much.
Invasions of Rhodos and Kyprus always make sense. Romani invasions of Korsim and Sardin and the KartHadast counter-invasions tend to make sense. The landing of an elite full-stack by KartHadast in Italy makes much more sense than trying to walk from Iberia.....
A Very Super Market
03-11-2009, 23:48
Eh, sometimes they send Hasdrubal and his two militia units over on the 20th turn or so.
By then, there is usually a full-stack of Allied elites and Samnite heavies.
Tollheit
03-11-2009, 23:56
In my BI games, naval invasions in the Mediterranean are frequent and frequently successful. Rhodos for example went from KH to Ptoly to KH to Ptoly to Pontos, and the next Ptoly fleet is already approaching.
george585
03-12-2009, 00:09
For me alex.exe was much, much more stable than rome.exe. I believe with alex I had only 1 CTD, but even that was after playing like 100 years!
Silence Hunter
03-12-2009, 01:12
One more thing in favour of alex.exe is that it has no phalanx bug which was present in 1.5 (and BI if I'm not mistaken). So playing a hellenic faction is more pleasant now as you don't have to micromanage phalanx as much now.
Aemilius Paulus
03-12-2009, 01:13
For me alex.exe was much, much more stable than rome.exe. I believe with alex I had only 1 CTD, but even that was after playing like 100 years!
Well, the first 100 years are always relatively easy. The CTDs multiply exponentially as the turns progress. That is one of the reasons why I am blitzing in my Romani campaign.
Ferromancer
03-12-2009, 03:52
Time for my totally biased opinion. Advantages over alex:
Pick and choose which items to install. From just the BI exe to unlocking all features of the BI exe.
Unit formations
Compatible with existing mods for vanilla EB
AI retrains units (correct me if Alex can do this as well)
Better naval invasions than alex
Very small installer
Continue saved games from vanilla EB
All right here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=95664
a completely inoffensive name
03-12-2009, 07:07
I use BI because I am too lazy to buy/download ALEX. If I could have ALEX at my fingertips I would switch to it from BI in a second.
Bucefalo
03-12-2009, 11:05
Well Imho Alex.exe is very good, specially on battles. The thing is that with Bi.exe i have seen a lot more naval invasions than with alex, and a better rounded campaign on the strategic map. On the battlemap it is really just capable, and i think alex get the upper hand here, but not by too much.
BI has decent naval invasions but I've never noticed any difference with the battle AI.
Also don't forget that with BI you have the option of modding in hordes!
seienchin
03-12-2009, 13:00
I played several campains with 1.1 rome.exe and then moved to Alex and played 3 campains there and I noticed some differences. Some of them are also explained in the official threat;
1 The ai shifts troops and family members with ships around, but it is not their priority!!!(When KH was reduced to one city they led their faction leader with 2000men alone on chalkis(Which belonged to me) for 30 years.
2 naval invasions occurs if the enemy has no chance to atack you via land.
3 The battle AI tries to outflank you with their light skirmisher cavallery(quite succesfull), but still atacks you head on with their heavy cavallery.
4The ai places all their infantry in front of their phalangites, which makes it incredibly hard to atack.
5. The ai does every thing to be not outflanked by you which is good on one hand, but incredibly anoying on the other, because the Ai sometimes breaks it formation and just to prevent 20 akonkistai to outflank them.
6. The Ai still doesnt atack with all its infantry at the same time.
7. Single AI units tend to act more stupid than in rome.exe. They tend to just stand around if surrounded. Maybe because the AI tries to not be outflanked...
8. Most Factions tend to expand slow and peacefully, but they try everything to conquer certain cities.
Time for my totally biased opinion. Advantages over alex:
Pick and choose which items to install. From just the BI exe to unlocking all features of the BI exe.
Unit formations
Compatible with existing mods for vanilla EB
AI retrains units (correct me if Alex can do this as well)
Better naval invasions than alex
Very small installer
Continue saved games from vanilla EB
All right here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=95664
supposedly alex retrains units too. the evidence is somewhere in here:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=94861.
to me, another big advantage of alex is that it does not need the RTW/BI CD to run. mine had turned almost unreadable by now...
heldelance
03-13-2009, 14:58
I think that the head on charge with heavy cavalry is pretty realistic. It's not realistic with spearmen but if I remember correctly, the usual tactic for heavy cavalry was to hit an enemy head on to cause heavy casualties and also to disrupt their formation thus allowing infantry to come in an have an easier time of smacking the enemy around. It's one of the things I'm a little disappointed about with the game, almost all heavy cavalry need to hit from the back or they'll take unacceptable casualties and won't do as much damage as they should. From what I've noticed, it's only really the Kataphraktoi and the other ones that are just a little lighter armored that disrupt formations enough that your infantry actually does have an easier time of it.
Am I right in thinking that the original doctrine for heavy cavalry was to hit head on (not against spears and pikes) and cause disruptions in the enemy's formation which could be exploited by infantry?
From all I've read and from a tactical point of view I kinda arrived at that conclusion.
I think that the head on charge with heavy cavalry is pretty realistic. It's not realistic with spearmen but if I remember correctly, the usual tactic for heavy cavalry was to hit an enemy head on to cause heavy casualties and also to disrupt their formation thus allowing infantry to come in an have an easier time of smacking the enemy around. It's one of the things I'm a little disappointed about with the game, almost all heavy cavalry need to hit from the back or they'll take unacceptable casualties and won't do as much damage as they should. From what I've noticed, it's only really the Kataphraktoi and the other ones that are just a little lighter armored that disrupt formations enough that your infantry actually does have an easier time of it.
Am I right in thinking that the original doctrine for heavy cavalry was to hit head on (not against spears and pikes) and cause disruptions in the enemy's formation which could be exploited by infantry?
From all I've read and from a tactical point of view I kinda arrived at that conclusion.
It's a bit off topic, but my main issue with RTW (and other TW) cavalry charges is that infantry starting to walk/run with their backs to the cavalry disrupts the charge effect... In real life, the opposite would be true for the charge would be so much more effective with the cavalry charging into the fleers' undefended backs.
At least in MTW2, if a unit runs TOWARDS the charging cavalry, the charge effect is so much more devastating. However, if a unit runs AWAY from the cavalry or sideways, the charge still breaks down in MTW2. In EB 1.2 this effect is even more pronounced for some reason.
Aemilius is talking of Darth Formations, not Darth Mod. The former can be adapted to EB. Search the unofficial EB mod forum for "AI formation mods", and you shall find an adapted version.
From your own experience, would you recommend Darth's formations for EB 1.2?
Aemilius Paulus
03-13-2009, 17:12
7. Single AI units tend to act more stupid than in rome.exe. They tend to just stand around if surrounded. Maybe because the AI tries to not be outflanked...
Not true. My current Romani campaign is in rome.exe and the single AI units are just as stupid. Unless they are ranged (or possibly if they are mounted - I do not remember my battles with single mounted units), they never do anything. I always surround them and start firing in their backs, until they rout, which is usually pretty quickly. This is absolutely the same in both alex and rome .exe.
Tellos Athenaios
03-13-2009, 17:47
Just a few notes here:
(a) There are NO supported minimods. By definition. Everything EB supports is released via the EB server (click on a 3rd party mirror and you will make a slight detour on our server regardless).
(b) CTD's do not and could not multiply exponentially. Do the math. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_equation)
(c) The difference in AI is a rather subjective experience: some people here for instance improved much better naval activity using BI others claim that the naval activity now resembles the AI for land operations. With ALX the main feature appears to be [note I use plain RTW, but have read others reporting it] the fact that the AI actually retrains/merges troops.
I can see this statement applying to KartHadast actions early in the game, after that, not so much.
I was perhaps a bit too emphatic, but I have seen more pointless than appropriate naval invasions when playing western Greek factions.
From your own experience, would you recommend Darth's formations for EB 1.2?
To be honest, I have played very little EB since the release of 1.2. I simply don't have enough time available. However, I have no reason to believe that A.I. performance has significantly changed since 1.1, so yes, the EB-adapted version of Darth's formations improves EB. I personally use Sinuhet's adapted formations, but I believe Darth's are about as good.
Zorachus
03-14-2009, 20:02
Thank you all for this discussion, I was about to start a post on this subject.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.