[Official Testing] Updated EDU with all the "unofficial" fixes and many others

[QuintusSertorius]

Greetings one and all! I've been promising this for a while and I'm glad that I can finally offer something concrete. The mod is still progressing in the background, even if things seem a bit quiet, hopefully this will demonstrate the team is still at work. Furthermore, here's something you can all do to help which doesn't require much more effort than installing this change and trying it out (and reporting back).

Partly as a result of the previous thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?148305-Unofficial-Hotfix-Functional-inf-cav-javelineers-improved-spearmen-faster-cavalry), I'm now Ibrahim's EDU-sidekick, implementing stuff for testing before they make the next release. Thanks to some assistance from Voice of Treason, I haven't wasted four weeks of work and now have a functional, updated export_descr_unit.txt and new descr_projectiles.txt to trial. The former is an update of my own work with a lot of changes that feature in the current build's EDU, including many balancing fixes, consistency checks, a complete reworking of fatigue and some new ideas on how to model things like levy spearmen.

Cavalry formations have been tightened generally, all but horse archers now have close formations. There should be a very noticeable different in fatigue - both from increases in stat_heat across the board and the removal of hardy/downgrading of very_hardy to hardy for many units.

The descr_projectiles.txt is the new one from the current build, which should fix the unimpressive default javelins from 2.01. I've also carried over slightly longer ranges for javelineers, though infantry now default to 60m and cavalry 55m (it was 70m and 60m in my unofficial fix). Let me know how that works out - are javelineers still throwing them at those ranges?


This is fairly close to the final version, so it's relatively safe to use for a campaign, but beware any future edits won't be savegame compatible. Generally EDU changes should be, but since 2.01 I've never found them to be, so to save yourself a lot of restarted campaigns, either don't start one or use any subsequent updates for custom battles only. I'll try to keep re-issuing an updated EDU for major edits/fixes, rather than tweaking stats or correcting omissions.

On to the goods.

Here are the two files you need (install both in [Your M2TW directory]\mods\EBII\data, overwriting what's there - backup your originals first):

EDIT12 (3/5/15): 15297 - a host of little tweaks all over the place:

Numerous sword/knife discrepancies resolved
Carthaginian Sacred Band, KH Bodyguard and Epilektoi Hoplitai now equal in attack stats to Hypaspistai
A few more morale tweaks
The two Kretan units now have the correct secondary weapon stats
Some stat_ground changes for Celtic and Germanic units


EDIT3 (22/4/15): 15116 - complete overhaul with new projectiles, all with regular names - "medium_arrow" instead of "arrow160".

Make sure you install them both; if you forget the second you'll get an error or CTD given the first refers to it.

One more associated file everyone should be using that is linked to the EDU and D_P changes is the battle_config.xml. Kill rates for missiles has been increased (from 0.35 to 0.75), and for melee slightly decreased (from 0.35 to 0.3): EDIT: 15286 (unzip into the same location as the other files - this should be savegame compatible).

I'd highly recommend everyone use z3n's updated pathfinding, BAI and CAI (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?686614-Updated-Pathfinding-amp-BAI-(internal-testing-for-CAI-overhaul-in-progress)). The pathfinding in particular will be important with the next update.

Enjoy! Please make sure you report back what you find with it. What's good, what's not so good, what looks funny and so on. All feedback welcome.


OPTIONAL: Campaign updates including Bosporan recruitment fix

I'm now in a position to start thinking about campaigns. This is not officially endorsed, though it's a change the team is experimenting with in the next release. That being the removal of the scripted boosts to troop replenishment the AI Hellenistic factions get in 2.01 (which may be reponsible in part for the "Pergamon has one province, but four full stacks" issue.

In addition, the Bosporans were forgotten about in an update of the Hellenistic Poleis building, meaning they lose out on a load of recruitment options in settlements featuring them (including their capital). I've fixed that so they should have a lot more troops to choose from, both as player and AI.

If you want to try a campaign with both of these updates, download this: EDIT: 15156.

Lastly, I've been tinkering around with the options in the Hellenistic Poleis, making them give all the levy Greek troops, but no phalanxes. If you want to try all of the above, but with my completely unofficial tweak, download this instead: EDIT: 15157.

In both instances, NOT savegame compatible, and you need to delete your map.rwm before starting a new campaign.

[QuintusSertorius]

I've noted more people have viewed the EDU than descr_projectiles. Just a gentle reminder, you absolutely need both of them in order to use the new EDU, without the D_P you'll get a CTD, since there are references to weapons that don't exist in the old D_P.

[Shadowwalker]

Very interesting. Will try it out and report if (when) I experience any differences.

Two comments:

(1) Oversight or intentional?


Uisusparos Kingetoi
-soldier: models increased from 64 to 80; collision mass decreased from 1.11 to 0.9
-added mount_effect horse +2
-attributes: hardy removed
-stat_pri: base attack reduced from 9 to 5; charge value from 2 to 0; weapon changed to javelin50; range reduced from 70m to 60m
-stat_pri_attr: added ap
-stat_heat: increased from 1 to 2


Mercenary Uisusparos Kingetoi
-soldier: models increased from 64 to 80; collision mass decreased from 1.11 to 1
-attributes: hardy removed
-stat_pri: base attack reduced from 9 to 5; charge value from 2 to 0; weapon changed to javelin50; range reduced from 70m to 60m
-stat_pri_attr: added ap
-stat_pri_attr: added spear_bonus_4
-stat_heat: increased from 1 to 2

(2) I can't seem to find the answer anywhere - what does "soldier: models decreased from 25 to 20;" or similar mean? Is that the # of different armours/shields/clothings etc? Does it mean completely different battlefield appearance of the unit? Or perhaps "just" a measure about how "detailed" a unit is? I'm pretty much clueless. . .

Third comment of two :laugh4:: Reading that spoiler in your first post makes me wonder how long you worked on these changes. (And this is but one "small" part of the mod and two files only . . . ~:eek: )

[QuintusSertorius]

Very interesting. Will try it out and report if (when) I experience any differences.

Two comments:

(1) Oversight or intentional?



(2) I can't seem to find the answer anywhere - what does "soldier: models decreased from 25 to 20;" or similar mean? Is that the # of different armours/shields/clothings etc? Does it mean completely different battlefield appearance of the unit? Or perhaps "just" a measure about how "detailed" a unit is? I'm pretty much clueless. . .

Third comment of two :laugh4:: Reading that spoiler in your first post makes me wonder how long you worked on these changes. (And this is but one "small" part of the mod and two files only . . . ~:eek: )

1) Intentional - the mercenary variety is better than the non-mercenary variant. The first are levies called up at short notice, the second men who choose war as their livelihood. It's not universal across levy/mercenary versions of the same unit, I think it's something being tried out.
2) It means the unit has been made smaller - the number of models is the base number your choice on unit scale is multiplied by.

I didn't work continuously for four weeks, but there's a good 16-20 hours worth in editing and documenting. The documenting took up at least half of that time (and you can see the results in that spoiler).

[Shadowwalker]

Thanks for the quick reply. :2thumbsup:

(1) Makes perfect sense to me. I just wondered why the numbers were different for this unit but not for all. I'll try them an see if that slight change makes for any significant difference in battle performance.

(2) Silly me. :laugh4: Should have known this.

And I expected that the documentation process would have taken a lot of time, since it's far from just "copy and paste" but rather looks like some tedious "write one line - compare to the old version - write updated line - add updated line to list for the changelog post - write next line"...

[Saigrin]

Wow that looks sincerely like a lot of work done. I've tried the unnoficial mods "fixing" some issues, and most of them were very interesting.

This very night I'm going to start a new campaign with this updated tools, I promise feedback if I find any problems ;)

And, of course THANK YOU VERY MUCH for your work, team!

[Saigrin]

Sadly, I have to say I suffered a CTD when I installed the modifications. I rescued the old archives and the game ran correctly, sorry to say that.

It's as much as I could do, if you guide me, i'll try to do something.

Note: I installed it over the last version available

[QuintusSertorius]

Sadly, I have to say I suffered a CTD when I installed the modifications. I rescued the old archives and the game ran correctly, sorry to say that.

It's as much as I could do, if you guide me, i'll try to do something.

Note: I installed it over the last version available

Do you have your error logs (see [Your M2TW directory]\logs)? When did the CTD occur - startup, faction selection, in battle?

[Shadowwalker]

That's odd.
I started another Carthage campaign after installing the two files and had no problems at all.
You did delete your map.rwm, right?
And you didn't try to load a previous save, either? (This would result in a definite CTD, since the EDU is changed.)

[Saigrin]

Strange... I did as you said, deleting that map.rwm file, and tried again with the new EDU and its pal, but I couldn't create a new game, nor loading a previous saved game.

Well, I'll wait to the next release to enjoy these changes, its not a big deal.
~:handball:
Thanks!

[QuintusSertorius]

Strange... I did as you said, deleting that map.rwm file, and tried again with the new EDU and its pal, but I couldn't create a new game, nor loading a previous saved game.

Well, I'll wait to the next release to enjoy these changes, its not a big deal.
~:handball:
Thanks!

When you delete the map.rwm, you can't load an existing save - you have to start a new game in order to generate a new map.rwm (even if you then go back to your old save). However, I am pretty certain this will not work with existing saves, and you have to play either a new campaign, or custom battles in order to test it.

[Saigrin]

Do you have your error logs (see [Your M2TW directory]\logs)? When did the CTD occur - startup, faction selection, in battle?

I'll look for it when I'm off work, thanks ;)

[QuintusSertorius]

There's a whole host of consistency checks I've found now I'm not stuck in the middle of it, plus the unexplored phalangite issues, so I'd highly recommend people don't use this version to start new campaigns with. As in stick to custom battles until the immediate issues have been found and fixed.

[Thoras]

So in phalanx fights they don't all switch to swords?
In guard mode most stay and use the pikes ,but it also depneds on the enmey unit.It is not optimal since they don't really do aything for most of the time,They don't even move the pikes or attack.If one gets through not all but those the men close to that enemy switch,which is better than vanilla Med2 behavior,but still not as good as Rome 1.And would normally result in more men comming through which doesn't happen(weird).Without guard mode they do use the pikes in the begininng to kill quite a few enemies, but the fact that they are marching forward means that they will switch relativly soon.

[Shadowwalker]

There's a whole host of consistency checks I've found now I'm not stuck in the middle of it, plus the unexplored phalangite issues, so I'd highly recommend people don't use this version to start new campaigns with. As in stick to custom battles until the immediate issues have been found and fixed.

I deliberately started a new campaign (as Qart'Hadasht, hehe, must be my 10th EB 2 campaign with them already, I simply love their government system and units).

I played very defensively, allied with the Massylians, Luso, Arverni and Makedons, didn't even try to defend/save Alalia when the Romans came for it (oddly enough they never seem to come for Nora after that) and in general just sat there building up my little trade empire and hit "toggle_fow" ever so often.

The changes made to the EDU seem not to alter the campaign balance (which was what I wanted to see and what made me start a campaign at all ~;) ). I spent the whole thursday on this campaign and am at turn 253 now. I saw nothing that I never saw before (except perhaps the Ptolemaioi grabbing Sardis from the AS early on).

So the (still rudimentary, I know) campaign balance is not affected.

Of course I played a battle or two with the Carthaginian units, too. :laugh4:
I stood away from the (macedonian) phalanx units.

The skirmishers behave as they always do since your "unofficial" fix - almost perfectly. The only problem they have is that they aren't retreating fast enough (they never did since the release of EB 2.0). I'm not sure if this is intentional, it's not a big problem for me, though, as I tend to use at least half of my skirmisher units as bait for the enemy cavalry anyway. :laugh4:

The higher cavalry speed doesn't help avoiding the horses, too. You were absolutely right about the Numidians, by the way. ~:eek:
This higher speed makes it very much essential to have your own light cavalry wings, since the heavier cavalry can't even nearly move quickly enough to prevent them from (for example) get around your flanks, obliterate your archers and retreat again. Frightening! (And fascinating at the same time.)

Oh: still no crashes for me, despite the consistency issues you mentioned. :2thumbsup:

[Thoras]

The only problem they have is that they aren't retreating fast enough (they never did since the release of EB 2.0)
They do in my game(against hoplites),they throw and retreat and then run away and throw again if the distance is long enough.Did you test them against fast enemy infantry?

[QuintusSertorius]

In guard mode most stay and use the pikes ,but it also depneds on the enmey unit.It is not optimal since they don't really do aything for most of the time,They don't even move the pikes or attack.If one gets through not all but those the men close to that enemy switch,which is better than vanilla Med2 behavior,but still not as good as Rome 1.And would normally result in more men comming through which doesn't happen(weird).Without guard mode they do use the pikes in the begininng to kill quite a few enemies, but the fact that they are marching forward means that they will switch relativly soon.

Interesting, so Guard Mode actually does something. I wonder if there's an attribute which switches it on by default (so that AI phalanxes don't turn into swordsmen)?


I deliberately started a new campaign (as Qart'Hadasht, hehe, must be my 10th EB 2 campaign with them already, I simply love their government system and units).

I played very defensively, allied with the Massylians, Luso, Arverni and Makedons, didn't even try to defend/save Alalia when the Romans came for it (oddly enough they never seem to come for Nora after that) and in general just sat there building up my little trade empire and hit "toggle_fow" ever so often.

The changes made to the EDU seem not to alter the campaign balance (which was what I wanted to see and what made me start a campaign at all ~;) ). I spent the whole thursday on this campaign and am at turn 253 now. I saw nothing that I never saw before (except perhaps the Ptolemaioi grabbing Sardis from the AS early on).

So the (still rudimentary, I know) campaign balance is not affected.

Of course I played a battle or two with the Carthaginian units, too. :laugh4:
I stood away from the (macedonian) phalanx units.

The skirmishers behave as they always do since your "unofficial" fix - almost perfectly. The only problem they have is that they aren't retreating fast enough (they never did since the release of EB 2.0). I'm not sure if this is intentional, it's not a big problem for me, though, as I tend to use at least half of my skirmisher units as bait for the enemy cavalry anyway. :laugh4:

The higher cavalry speed doesn't help avoiding the horses, too. You were absolutely right about the Numidians, by the way. ~:eek:
This higher speed makes it very much essential to have your own light cavalry wings, since the heavier cavalry can't even nearly move quickly enough to prevent them from (for example) get around your flanks, obliterate your archers and retreat again. Frightening! (And fascinating at the same time.)

Oh: still no crashes for me, despite the consistency issues you mentioned. :2thumbsup:

Thanks for that. Not sure why some people are getting CTDs with the secondary weapon issue and others aren't.

I wouldn't expect campaign balance to change much, a lot of the alterations are more significant in played-out battles than auto-calc ones.

Light cavalry are going to get slower in the next update; how are people finding heavier cavalry?


They do in my game(against hoplites),they throw and retreat and then run away and throw again if the distance is long enough.Did you test them against fast enemy infantry?

It's always a tricky balancing act between the skirmish range and throwing range (that distance is smaller now I've shortened ranges slightly), but I'm relieved to hear it's working.

[GRANTO]

some feedback...clean new install eb2..maps deleted and stuff
...added your files ...
ctd when starting a new campaign...
maps deleted and stuff...replaced your files with originals ...
no ctd ..campaign starts...

although ...custom battles work....no log,

might try a new install of everything from scratch.

[Saigrin]

Hi everyone warriors.

At last, I was able to invest some time investigating what was going wrong, and that was my last try:

I copy-pasted the EDU and projectiles data files over the ones in the Data folder. After that, I deleted the maps.wrm file and started the game. No CTD until I pushed the "Start" button when choosing faction, some seconds with my computer frozen and I was thrown to desktop with violence. I had the log at the fist try, but at the second one it magically dissapeared... Well that is as much as I can do with my knowledge, I accept suggestions.

EDIT: I achieved to save a log from a new try, I paste some of the last lines below:

22:58:12.619 [system.io] [trace] file open,,mods/EBII/data/world/maps/campaign/imperial_campaign/descr_faction_movies.xml,6341
22:58:12.619 [system.io] [info] open: found mods/EBII/data/world/maps/campaign/imperial_campaign/descr_faction_movies.xml (from: C:\juegos\Medieval II Total War)
22:58:12.683 [system.io] [trace] file open,,0D6C6540,269344
22:58:12.683 [system.io] [info] open: found mods/EBII/data/text/historic_events.txt.strings.bin (from: C:\juegos\Medieval II Total War)
22:58:12.687 [system.io] [info] exists: missing mods/EBII/data/world/maps/campaign/imperial_campaign/descr_disasters.txt
22:58:12.688 [system.io] [info] exists: found mods/EBII/data/world/maps/base/descr_disasters.txt (from: C:\juegos\Medieval II Total War)
22:58:12.688 [system.io] [trace] file open,,0D6C65B8,1704
22:58:12.688 [system.io] [info] open: found mods/EBII/data/world/maps/base/descr_disasters.txt (from: C:\juegos\Medieval II Total War)
22:58:12.760 [system.io] [info] exists: found mods/EBII/data/descr_area_effects.xml (from: C:\juegos\Medieval II Total War)
22:58:12.760 [system.io] [trace] file open,,mods/EBII/data/descr_area_effects.xml,6954
22:58:12.760 [system.io] [info] open: found mods/EBII/data/descr_area_effects.xml (from: C:\juegos\Medieval II Total War)
22:58:12.857 [system.rpt] [error] Medieval 2: Total War encountered an unspecified error and will now exit.

Thanks, team.

[QuintusSertorius]

I think it overwrites the previous log with the current. Those errors you've posted above have nothing to do with the new EDU, but your first one might have.

[Saigrin]

I think it overwrites the previous log with the current. Those errors you've posted above have nothing to do with the new EDU, but your first one might have.

I have no problem waiting for your next release, I only hoped to be of some help ;).

Best regards, thanks

[QuintusSertorius]

Quick update, as in the OP I'd said I'll only release material updates, rather than deluging you with a new file every time I tweak some small thing. Fixing the broken phalangite animation issue isn't "some small thing", and I've removed the secondary weapon from the Pantodapoi and Illyrioi phalangites for the time being, along with sorted the funny spacing for the Machimoi phalanx. There's also a host of minor amendments (mostly consistency; so that lancers have the same attack stats with their lances, and all javelineer-skirmishers being equally useful against elephants), but what I haven't finished yet is the reworking of cavalry speeds. That should be in the next day or two, and once done I'll be putting an update here and removing the old one.

[QuintusSertorius]

Updated EDU in the first post, I've fixed the phalangites with no secondary weapon skeletons/animations and the spacing on the Machimoi phalangites. Numerous little tweaks, but a revision of cavalry speeds, which mostly impacts the lighter ones, who will be slower. Even those Numidians!

[GRANTO]

still cant start a campaign with clean instals...

[QuintusSertorius]

still cant start a campaign with clean instals...

Have you got an error log entry?

[GRANTO]

there is a log...but i can see nothing that would cause it..i will post it for you in a bit...custom battles still works

[QuintusSertorius]

there is a log...but i can see nothing that would cause it..i will post it for you in a bit...custom battles still works

Interesting; I get the same when I try to start a campaign, but custom battles work fine.

[MIKE GOLF]

When I get home I will start adding your update one unit at time non-projectile units first, and try and track down the issue.

[MIKE GOLF]

One error found on the 'indian elephant bodyguard' the initial number was 4, I changed it to read the following and it worked;
soldier Elephant_Archer_Crew, 12, 6, 1 will continue looking for other issues. Cheers.

This was done without changing any of the projectile entries, just working on the edu only. I believe that was the only issue. Checked with the projectiles info added everything is hopefully good now, just the one entry. Now I can start fighting some battles.... Looking forward to your hard work.

[QuintusSertorius]

One error found on the 'indian elephant bodyguard' the initial number was 4, I changed it to read the following and it worked;
soldier Elephant_Archer_Crew, 12, 6, 1 will continue looking for other issues. Cheers.

This was done without changing any of the projectile entries, just working on the edu only.

Ah, that's it! Though you've caught my incomplete edit. That should actually be 4, 2, 1 - the unit has been made smaller. That's why it was crashing where it was, thank you.

Updated EDU in the first post.

[GRANTO]

works now....good work QS. splendid!

[QuintusSertorius]

What do people think of the newer, lower cavalry speed boosts (particularly for lights)?

[GRANTO]

What do people think of the newer, lower cavalry speed boosts (particularly for lights)?its very good ...the battles are much better and i can now concentrate on the BAI now ...great job so far .

[Saigrin]

At least I was able to play the mod, with your new EDU. It was fantastic! I've just started a new campaign with Makedonia, and the cavalry charges looked awesome, great work!

[QuintusSertorius]

At least I was able to play the mod, with your new EDU. It was fantastic! I've just started a new campaign with Makedonia, and the cavalry charges looked awesome, great work!

Great stuff! Bear in mind that phalangites are by no means complete, you'll find the different variants of wildly different capability.

[GRANTO]

Great stuff! Bear in mind that phalangites are by no means complete, you'll find the different variants of wildly different capability.youv done wonders though QS .

[QuintusSertorius]

Now people have had some time to play with these changes, what's the view of light cavalry speeds?

They were definitely much too fast in the first couple of versions, but I think they're about right now. They should be notably faster than heavies, but not so fast they're like lightning around the battlefield. They should be able to outpace heavier cavalry, but not look like it's easy.

[Saigrin]

I've been playing with the AS, Carthage and Makedonia, none of them very rich in cavalry, but for the cases I've experienced, it seems ok for me.
I have one question about the phalanxes: I've noted they have been reworked, but the mercenaries have very different stats, as if untouched. Is it intended to have weak mercenary phalanxes, or is it a little mistake?

[QuintusSertorius]

I've been playing with the AS, Carthage and Makedonia, none of them very rich in cavalry, but for the cases I've experienced, it seems ok for me.
I have one question about the phalanxes: I've noted they have been reworked, but the mercenaries have very different stats, as if untouched. Is it intended to have weak mercenary phalanxes, or is it a little mistake?

All the phalangites are a work in progress - they've all got different stats trying out different things. So yes, it's not functional, but that's intentional.

[Saigrin]

Well, I don't know if this has been told yet, I'm talking again about my experience with the AS:

The Ioudaioi recruits are using the model from the Thureoporoi, and the pantodapoi phalanx are way more efficient than their pehzetaroi comrades, for the only reason they do not switch weapons. In most battles, when facing an homogeneous army, as for example the Nabateans, when resisting a frontal charge against the same troops, the pantodapoi phalanx suffers notably less casualties than their greek friends. It's great to see the troop switch weapons, but I feel they do it too soon, and the entire unit suffers from having the formation broken.

I only want to give some help, it's not a criticism.

I hope to see more news from you soon, team, keep on fighting! :D

[QuintusSertorius]

Well, I don't know if this has been told yet, I'm talking again about my experience with the AS:

The Ioudaioi recruits are using the model from the Thureoporoi, and the pantodapoi phalanx are way more efficient than their pehzetaroi comrades, for the only reason they do not switch weapons. In most battles, when facing an homogeneous army, as for example the Nabateans, when resisting a frontal charge against the same troops, the pantodapoi phalanx suffers notably less casualties than their greek friends. It's great to see the troop switch weapons, but I feel they do it too soon, and the entire unit suffers from having the formation broken.

I only want to give some help, it's not a criticism.

I hope to see more news from you soon, team, keep on fighting! :D

Observations, and even criticism are welcome - as I said it's all a work in progress. The Ioudaioi using Thureophoroi models is intended as a temporary measure, they'll have their own proper ones later.

Stats for the Pantodapoi Phalangitai are different to the Pezhetairoi (indeed only the mercenary Pezhetairoi still have the same stats), so they will had different performance. We haven't yet found a workable solution to the secondary weapons issue with pikemen, but all this feedback is useful, so keep it coming.

[Lizardo]

hi when I download its coming up as a .php file? what do I open with?
EDIT: problem rectified had to download with firefox instead IE downloads the files as attachment.php

[QuintusSertorius]

Could people post their specific observations with phalangitai (identifying which units you are talking about) in this thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?148736-Phalanx-testing-please-respond), please? e're after details on their behaviour - do they use their pikes (or switch to swords too quickly), do they hold their formation, can they hold their ground and so on. Again, it needs to be with reference to specific units, they all have different stats.

[QuintusSertorius]

Not in a position to make another release of the EDU yet, but I've given the Numidian Bodyguard cavalry their javelins back and slowed down phalangitai a little (though not as slow as they were originally). Still trying to find solutions to the sword-switching issue.

Does anyone have any details of phalanxes/pikemen in other mods? There doesn't seem to be a middle ground between either too weak from the front or too strong on the flanks/rear.

[QuintusSertorius]

I think we've had a breakthrough on phalanx behaviour (courtesy of some work from another mod), I'm hoping to have another release soon with an improvement to them. We'll also be looking at infantry speeds generally, but that will be a subsequent release of this mod. I think the potential phalanx fix is significant enough in its own right to merit a release.

[QuintusSertorius]

I've uploaded a new EDU into the original post - phalanxes have been reverted to no secondary weapon and tweaked in some important ways and so should now (hopefully) perform the way they are supposed to. The differences between the types are mostly in their armour and morale, but the two "professional" types (Phalangitai and Misthophoroi Phalangitai) also have a slightly higher mass. Pantodapoi Phalangitai also have a slightly lower attack value. They're all slightly slower, at 0.65 compared to the 0.8 they had in the last edit.

As always, I'd appreciate feedback on how well (or not!) these changes work and specific observations on the behaviour of specific units.

As an incidental fix, I've also given Numidian bodyguard cavalry their javelins back, no idea why they'd been removed in the first place, but they're back again.

[MIKE GOLF]

Will test it out when I get back home.

[QuintusSertorius]

Infantry speeds more generally are the next issue I'm dealing with now phalanxes are in a stable and workable state. After that I'll look at elephants and finally chariots.

If anyone is interested in an update on what's in the official build, the cavalry speeds we were trialling earlier are now official. Cavalry shields are due to be revised soon (to be less effective against missiles).

[King Of Europe]

hi, will this amazing updated EDU be in the next "official" download for eb 2.01? I haven't tried it out but ive been following the thread and will defo instal the finished EDU, sounds amazing,

[QuintusSertorius]

hi, will this amazing updated EDU be in the next "official" download for eb 2.01? I haven't tried it out but ive been following the thread and will defo instal the finished EDU, sounds amazing,

Yes; cavalry speeds from this mod are now in the "trunk" build that will be in the next release. Essentially, things we're testing here that work are going to be adopted. We're currently looking at phalanxes and shortly infantry speeds.

You may be waiting a little while for the finished product - I'd recommend trying out the current one in custom battles to see what you think, if you don't want to hazard a campaign.

[QuintusSertorius]

New updated EDU - I've done a big clean-up of mount_effect bonuses. Javelin and archer cavalry had a bonus against other cavalry - upshot was they were performing far better than they should in melee (since the bonus works with all attacks). Same goes foot archers with cavalry and javelineers with elephants (reduced from +6 to +2). That should alter the balance in play quite a bit. It also explains why Illyrioi Hippeis were so awesome against even much better cavalry.

EDIT: MIKE GOLF (or anyone else) Help! I've done something wrong again, I should have tested before issuing (rather than after), I get this error:


23:22:18.305 [script.err] [error] Script Error in mods/EBII/data/export_descr_unit.txt, at line 2497, column 1
Missing attributes field for unit type 'getic cavalry hippotoxotai'.

That's the "officer" line, not sure what's happened with things being moved around.

[Ibrahim]

New updated EDU - I've done a big clean-up of mount_effect bonuses. Javelin and archer cavalry had a bonus against other cavalry - upshot was they were performing far better than they should in melee (since the bonus works with all attacks). Same goes foot archers with cavalry and javelineers with elephants (reduced from +6 to +2). That should alter the balance in play quite a bit. It also explains why Illyrioi Hippeis were so awesome against even much better cavalry.

EDIT: MIKE GOLF (or anyone else) Help! I've done something wrong again, I should have tested before issuing (rather than after), I get this error:



That's the "officer" line, not sure what's happened with things being moved around.

maybe the game is reading separate lines as a single one for some weird reason. :shrug:

[QuintusSertorius]

Updated the EDU in the first post (thanks Ibrahim), that should now be working for everyone to try. Anyone who downloaded EDIT4 from a couple of days ago should probably re-download, I don't think that one worked.

[Ozonius Tomicus]

I had tried the version a couple of days ago and at start-up logged the same error you did.

I downloaded and installed today's update and am happy to report that EBII is loading fine and am going to start a new game to try out the changes. Thanks!

[Ibrahim]

I had tried the version a couple of days ago and at start-up logged the same error you did.

I downloaded and installed today's update and am happy to report that EBII is loading fine and am going to start a new game to try out the changes. Thanks!

you bet!

yeah, it was as I suspected: a common bug with using notepad++; luckily it is easy to fix.

[QuintusSertorius]

Does anyone have feedback on the latest EDU? Phalanxes should be stable now, archers and javelineers (foot and cavalry) should no longer be unbalanced.

[Vermin]

My common or garden Epirot phalanxes seem to work well and my hippakontistai now get beaten by hellenic light lancers so I think it is much better balanced. I still have problems with foot skirmishers being caught by heavy foot - this seems to be caused by a few laggards not running quickly enough and the formation becoming stretched out as they evade. That is a relatively minor issue however.
Regards
Vermin

[QuintusSertorius]

My common or garden Epirot phalanxes seem to work well and my hippakontistai now get beaten by hellenic light lancers so I think it is much better balanced. I still have problems with foot skirmishers being caught by heavy foot - this seems to be caused by a few laggards not running quickly enough and the formation becoming stretched out as they evade. That is a relatively minor issue however.
Regards
Vermin

Infantry speeds are being revised, so hopefully this will be resolved. Not sure about the cohesion aspect, though.

[Ibrahim]

My common or garden Epirot phalanxes seem to work well and my hippakontistai now get beaten by hellenic light lancers so I think it is much better balanced. I still have problems with foot skirmishers being caught by heavy foot - this seems to be caused by a few laggards not running quickly enough and the formation becoming stretched out as they evade. That is a relatively minor issue however.
Regards
Vermin



all it took was changing cavalry speeds and formations only--the attack, defense, and armor were left as before. This is excellent news!

Anyways, as Quintus said, we're now working on infantry skirmisher speed: we have a base speed for all non-skirmishers, but need one for skirmishers. As to cohesion proper: there's relatively little we can do using the EDU itself, beyond the obvious balancing of speeds.

if all goes to plan, only other skirmishers and light (or at least fast) cavalry will be a serious problem to skirmishers

[QuintusSertorius]

all it took was changing cavalry speeds and formations only--the attack, defense, and armor were left as before. This is excellent news!


Also removing the mount_effect bonus that cavalry skirmishers (javelineers and archers) had against other cavalry. That was why Illyrioi Hippeis were so disproportionately good before I amended that.

[QuintusSertorius]

An update with new infantry speeds should be coming soon. We've got an agreed approach on everything bar the lights, which we're testing now to find some appropriate values. The intent is faster than cataphracts, and thus potentially difficult to catch with anything other than light cavalry or other skirmishers.

[Vermin]

Which battle difficulty setting are the EB2 settings balanced for? I usually play with H battle but my results will not be very meaningful if you are using M or VH.
Regards
Vermin

[QuintusSertorius]

Which battle difficulty setting are the EB2 settings balanced for? I usually play with H battle but my results will not be very meaningful if you are using M or VH.
Regards
Vermin

I always assume M, and that's what I always play on. The AI getting hardcoded bonuses isn't necessarily very helpful, testing-wise.

[QuintusSertorius]

EDIT6 is up - wholesale changes to infantry speeds; phalanxes are untouched; non-phalanx non-skirmish infantry have a uniform speed, skirmishers are faster. Additionally, new values for testing for Akontistai, Sphendonetai and Thanvare Parsig (Persian Archers) - I'd appreciate particular observations on how those three do. Also a new descr_projectiles.txt, make sure you get that too.

Given the testing nature of those three units as stand-ins for their type, I'd recommend not using this one for a campaign.

[Ibrahim]

I would also add to please test them from all angles, and to note the direction of the shot, if the frontage of your missile-men is wider than the enemy formation, etc.

[QuintusSertorius]

As a concession to those who do want to play a campaign with the updated EDU, I've done a version with unmodded test units - ie Akontistai, Sphendonetai and Persian Archers are back to their usual values in this one.

EDIT 7A:

This gives an equally balanced play experience for all units, but won't let you test our new thinking on how to do skirmishers, which isn't consistently applied across all units.

[Chap]

I'm using MOROS FASTER BATTLES

Speed of skirmishers feels nice. Now i can put them in front of my battle line and not feel like they will just get charged. Skirmish mode is a bit more reliable now. At first it feels strange to see that kind of speed for infantry, now i enjoy the faster skirmisher tactics.

The 3 new idea units have more reliable casualties per volley and more total casualties inflicted.
The old idea units have varying casualties per volley and less total casualties inflicted.

'Casualties inflicted' test results - first type is from behind a battle line. Second type is a typical chaotic battle.

15077

[QuintusSertorius]

I'm using MOROS FASTER BATTLES

Speed of skirmishers feels nice. Now i can put them in front of my battle line and not feel like they will just get charged. Skirmish mode is a bit more reliable now. At first it feels strange to see that kind of speed for infantry, now i enjoy the faster skirmisher tactics.

The 3 new idea units have more reliable casualties per volley and more total casualties inflicted.
The old idea units have varying casualties per volley and less total casualties inflicted.

'Casualties inflicted' test results - first type is from behind a battle line. Second type is a typical chaotic battle.

15077

Very interesting, particularly that the effect of the changes on archers and javelineers is pretty big, but on slingers is quite small (I suspect the removal of ap has something to do with that - though javelineers lost ap too).

[Chap]

javelineers are 240 per unit

slingers are 120 per unit

that might have something to do with it

[QuintusSertorius]

javelineers are 240 per unit

slingers are 120 per unit

that might have something to do with it

Sizes are relatively consistent within a unit type; I don't think that explains why archers and javelineers roughly doubled their casualties compared to other similar units, but slingers only added about 10%.

[Ibrahim]

Sizes are relatively consistent within a unit type; I don't think that explains why archers and javelineers roughly doubled their casualties compared to other similar units, but slingers only added about 10%.

well remember that the battle_config has already increased the accuracy of the missiles from 0.33 to 0.85 or so, and attack is about doubled for both, and missile mass for both is lower than before. balancing that out is that missile radii are much smaller, and in the case of the Akontistai, accuracy is decreased (in descr_projectile). It ends up doubling casualties for both.

with slingers, the attack is much higher, but ap is removed, and mass is increased (so that it works more like a bullet than an arrow). With that in mind, according to Chap's data, slingers armed with glandes are so far the most efficient long-distance killers. the most efficient overall however are the javelins, but of course you have to get up close for them to be effective.

[QuintusSertorius]

Javelins being deadliest, but you have to get really close, is a very good trade-off. That's exactly as it should be, risk v reward.

[Chap]

i just did Balearic slingers vs scutari spears

2-4 per volley

82 total


and i realized would Drapani and Gaisatoi move as fast as skirmishers now?

[QuintusSertorius]

and i realized would Drapani and Gaisatoi move as fast as skirmishers now?

No, they're regular infantry and so have a speed of 0.83.

[QuintusSertorius]

Big update coming soon, which should be used in concert with z3n's pathfinding/BAI changes. To give some more details of what to expect:

Some tidying up of stats; there were about ten units who hadn't been updated to the new morale setup (ie it was far too high).
Better unit cohesion, especially infantry, when used with z3n's pathfinding updates.
A complete overhaul of missiles; all skirmisher, missile and precusor-javelin using units had both their unit stats and their projectiles amended. No more ap for missile weapons. Archer and slinger ranges are more realistic. Users of the ankyle/amentum get an attack bonus on javelin throws, which needs feedback.
A revised approach to elephants.



Of the things we've been looking to address, that leaves only chariots. In the upcoming formal release, you should see all these changes (possibly tweaked again if we get lots of detailed feedback), plus some new units.

[Saigrin]

I'm eager to see what you have achieved, come on, team! You are great!

[QuintusSertorius]

New EDU and D_P in the original post, a host of pretty significant changes, building on the feedback from the last iteration:

Some errors fixed; Ethiopian archers now have a loose formation; some units with the wrong morale values adjusted
Infantry speeds all adjusted; phalanxes are slow (but not as slow as they were); regular infantry share the same speed; skirmishers/missile infantry are faster
A wholesale update to charging distances, which combined with z3n's pathfinding should improve infantry cohesion
A complete overhaul of missiles; all skirmisher, missile and precusor-javelin using units had both their unit stats and their projectiles amended. No more ap for missile weapons. Archer and slinger ranges are more realistic. Users of the ankyle/amentum get an attack bonus on javelin throws, which needs feedback.
Increase in the number of soldiers for the Petere Fleet from 15 to 18 - which should skew auto-calc in their favour.
Elephant updates didn't make it in time, I'm afraid, I was keen to get this out rather than wait for them.

[QuintusSertorius]

Sorry to anyone who just started a campaign with EDIT8 - I've now sorted all the queries out and EDIT9 is fairly close to final in most respects. EDIT10 with elephant stats may be early tomorrow, it's being worked on now and I'm off to bed.

[QuintusSertorius]

One area in particular I'd like feedback (and will be testing myself) is javelin cavalry, but also javelineers more generally (skirmishers and precursors). A few times I've looked in on them, they've not been as effective (or consistent in throwing their missiles) as they were a while back.

Could people take a look and report their observations (referencing which unit in particular you tried)?

[QuintusSertorius]

EDIT10 with the much-anticipated revision to elephant stats. Most of the rest is unchanged from EDIT9.

[Saigrin]

Hi people:

I've just started a new campaign as the AS to test as many units as possible in a single game. This made me question this: are unit upkeep costs intended? I felt a bit surprised when comparing hellenistic units with their eastern counterparts, for example:

Gund - i - palta: around 320 shinies

(the most similar unit i can think at this time)- Euzonoi: 129 shinies

It can be that eastern units, for some reason, where truly more expensive to maintain, but if this is not the case (I've always thougt that eastern infantry levies were treated as fodder) will this be changed in the future?

Thanks, and sorry if this has been explained elsewhere, this is not my native language and I find some difficulties exploring around the ORG.

And again thanks for the tremendous amount of work you are doing, team, remember: "Finis coronat opus"

[QuintusSertorius]

Hi people:

I've just started a new campaign as the AS to test as many units as possible in a single game. This made me question this: are unit upkeep costs intended? I felt a bit surprised when comparing hellenistic units with their eastern counterparts, for example:

Gund - i - palta: around 320 shinies

(the most similar unit i can think at this time)- Euzonoi: 129 shinies

It can be that eastern units, for some reason, where truly more expensive to maintain, but if this is not the case (I've always thougt that eastern infantry levies were treated as fodder) will this be changed in the future?

Thanks, and sorry if this has been explained elsewhere, this is not my native language and I find some difficulties exploring around the ORG.

And again thanks for the tremendous amount of work you are doing, team, remember: "Finis coronat opus"

Indeed, costs need reworking. It's outside my remit; Ibrahim and I do battle mechanics, but they are being revised as we speak.

[QuintusSertorius]

Update to the first post with an optional EDB update.

EDIT: Apologies to anyone who downloaded a couple of hours ago, I'd missed some commas, so they wouldn't work. The two in there now should be fine.

[QuintusSertorius]

One more associated file added so that you are using the same values as the current build: the battle_config.xml. It's in a zip in the first post, just unzip it into the same place as the other files. Kill rates for missiles has been increased (from 0.35 to 0.75), and for melee slightly decreased (from 0.35 to 0.3).

[QuintusSertorius]

EDIT11 now available, a host of small changes, this is very similar now to the current build:
Caetratii now have the correct weapon; small change to Kombaragoues defensive stats
Myriad morale changes, a collection of about ten units with old values that were much too high

[QuintusSertorius]

New kill rates in the first post (0.45 for missiles, 0.325 for melee), which should do for now. There's a big mod-pack being prepared at the moment which will supercede all these changes (including some more EDU tweaks), but I'll leave you all with this version for now rather than badgering you with constant little updates.

[QuintusSertorius]

EDIT12 - I know I promised no more, but some material changes in quite a few places:

Numerous sword/knife discrepancies resolved
Carthaginian Sacred Band, KH Bodyguard and Epilektoi Hoplitai now equal in attack stats to Hypaspistai
A few more morale tweaks
The two Kretan units now have the correct secondary weapon stats
Some stat_ground changes for Celtic and Germanic units


This should be the last one of these I issue before the big update bundle, which may be a week away.