Additional Scripted armies - Suggestion

[AngryAngelDD]

Hi all

1. i´ve noticed that Lusotann is an real killer when played by AI.
in my two 1.0 campaigns (sweboz H/M and romani VH/H) the Lusotann expands very sucessfull towards gaul.....they always manage to hold Kart-Hadast off their lands and have the armies (because of their high quality cheap levy infantry) to take lands beyond the pyrenees. on the other hand the Aedui and Averni have nearly no chance to expand....(war vs the other and large rebel armies in neighbouring lands)


2. when sweboz is AI-controlled (on VH) they crush everything, too.

so the Celts need really help from the human player, or will be killed around 220BC.

my suggestion:
to held the Lusotann out of Gaul, a scripted army with general in Cantabria (city of Vellika) could help.

to held sweboz off Gaul put a scripted army in Nervaea Belgica (city of Bagacos).
=> this might otoh lead to an southwards expansions of Sweboz so i might be reasonable to put another scripted general in Raetia (city of Veldideno).


3. this was already mentioned in other threads:
the script of the celtic reforms might need adjustion, because even if Aedui/Averni are poor performers the Casse fulfill the combined need of large markests etc. pretty easily.....so in both my campaigns the Celts have time of Soldiers around 240BC.


4. didn´t CA/Sega announced an editor to make own artillery devices sometime this summer? :inquisitive:
or do i remember just one of my dreams??? :dizzy2:

don´t feel offended, these are only suggestions,
the rest of the game is fine as far as i´ve seen it.....for now....

[Thaatu]

I'd buy those. At least the reforms need to be tweaked.

[Tellos Athenaios]

The Time of Bondsmen was unconditionally set to trigger around 240 BC since we felt that most players would be stuck with Freemen units for far too long otherwise.
The Time of Soldiers is the 3rd (and final) Celtic Era and I kinda doubt the idea that it occurs around 240 BC in general. Indeed: I myself play as the AS and now in 230-ish BC the Celts are still Bondsmen.

[Sakkura]

I don't know, I had Lusotannan running amok across Gaul and into Germania in my 0.81 games, and now in my 1.0 games they seem to get stuck indefinitely at 2 settlements.

[iwwtf_az]

just because a faction is overpowered in your game, doesn't mean it is for eveybody. carthage has taken all of modern spain and portugal in most of my campaigns.

[The General]

In every game but one that I've played the Lusitanians have grabbed 0-2 provinces and then done nothing.

In one game, though, they did manage to get four provinces before stopping advance...

Also, in my games, I've yet to see the Qarthadastim expand in Iberia (I think they once took one province, Edetania[/Arsé]... But I'm not sure, though).

[AngryAngelDD]

ok i need to say, that i run EB on the BI.exe....
probably this causes the more active StratAI....

and i don´t say some faction is overpowered or underpowered.
the units are well balanced as well as the starting positions.

i only ask for the placement of additional scripted armies in rebel provinces...
they serve well their task of preventing early expansions (in 1.0 in some provinces in the alps as well in areas north of danube)

the main problem is, if one AI faction has enough luck, they might get a huge empire by lets say 225-200BC.....e.g. KH or one of the large successor states.
if they encounter a scripted army they are blocked by it for some years or even decades...
but if they can freely expand, the game becomes unplayable by 200BC (only 72 years are gone, another 214 years need to be played).


(in my current romani campaign it is quite annoying that the sweboz are on the atlantic, the Lusotann connect to them in the next turns from the south.
Aedui, Averni fight for survival since 240BC with 1 province each left - they would be gone if i hadn´t helped them with money or other means)
KH annihilated Maks 100% and Getai 95%....they currently fight Sweboz on the danube.
thank god that Ptolies attack KH from Byzantion, supported from troops in Asia Minor)


that Kart-Hadast can´t (yes i say CAN´T) expand in Iberia is the poor StratAI of RTW.exe.... you will see naval transports very very very rarely.
on BI.exe they are able to reinforce their stacks in Iberia with troops from the Balearic Islands or Africa.

in general the AI of all factions is more aggressiv on BI.exe (it is a big difference from RTW.exe)
i know it is unsupported, but i can only advise all players to switch to BI.exe, it will bring you 20-30% more fun.

and again: i don´t try to offend anyone here, especially not the EB-team, which does an awesome work!
it is only a suggestion based on my observations.

my two cents...

[konny]

to held sweboz off Gaul put a scripted army in Nervaea Belgica (city of Bagacos).
=> this might otoh lead to an southwards expansions of Sweboz so i might be reasonable to put another scripted general in Raetia (city of Veldideno).

May I ask the question where do you like to see the Sweboz to expand? They allready have scripted rebells in the East and the South East and South-South East. When you place more of them in the very South and in the West too, they have nowhere to go.

[Pharnakes]

True, but it would still be be quite a big nowhere.

TBH, though I agree with all his other points, I don't with this one. It would be counter productive IMHO, since at least in 0.8, bagacos was a favourite target of the Aedui, so of they break themselves against it, making it stronger would only weaken the gauls, not strengthen them.

The other points are valid, though.

[burn_again]

In my campaigns its mostly the same thing, the Gauls are not doing very well and get eaten up by Romans, Sweboz and Lusotanni.

Perhaps stronger Eleutheroi garnisons in northern Iberia and in Germany would slow down the Sweboz and the Lusotanni. Garnisons in Gaul could be a bit weaker for the AI-player.

I don't think a scripted army in Bagacos would be a good idea either, I'd rather like to see scripted armys in Bononia and Segesta, to slow down the Roman expansion in that direction.

Putting the Sweboz in a cage can't be a solution, they are already much weaker in 1.0 than they used to be.

Perhaps the Gauls just need more money?

One thing that slowed the Lusotanni down in 0.8 was this scripted army in Numantia. It appeared every time they attacked Numantia, so that there were sometimes three of these armies wandering through Iberia. That doesn't seem to happen anymore, it seems only to appear on the first attack and then no more.

[AngryAngelDD]

May I ask the question where do you like to see the Sweboz to expand? They allready have scripted rebells in the East and the South East and South-South East. When you place more of them in the very South and in the West too, they have nowhere to go.




I don't think a scripted army in Bagacos would be a good idea either...



you all are right...don´t thought of this. :oops:

but the scripted armies in the east, especially in the City of Lugos (?where the two-hand Lugian Swordsmen can be recruited) and the province north of it are not necessary.
additionally the army in Lugoz blocks sweboz AI expansion to bastarnolandam.
(i know that the armies don´t appear in the first years).

in a perfect world i would move each of them one province to the east. (yes bastarnolandam itself and the others up to the north) :yes:

[Thaatu]

The Time of Bondsmen was unconditionally set to trigger around 240 BC since we felt that most players would be stuck with Freemen units for far too long otherwise.
The problem with that is that if you expand with caution/realism you can't get chariots. They require MIC 4 in three non-starting provinces, and since Celts reportedly had chariots at Telamon in 225 BCE, it's a bit of an anachronism.


The Time of Soldiers is the 3rd (and final) Celtic Era and I kinda doubt the idea that it occurs around 240 BC in general.
I haven't got it yet, because I have on purpose avoided the trigger, but in my brother's Casse campaign it triggered around 210 BCE. Still a huge shift from the previous 120 BCE.

[burn_again]

in a perfect world i would move each of them one province to the east.

You're right in terms of gameplay, but from a historical point of view this script is meant the represent the Boii-Lugii-Alliance (Eburonum + Carrodunum). The Boii were powerful enough to keep the Germans out of their territory for a while, but I doubt that a similar strong power existed one province east...
Also the Sweboz get Bastornolandum sometimes in my campaigns, if its not conquered by the Getai but by a greek or eastern faction it will rebel to them.

In my Sweboz campaign I just sneaked an army through from Ascaucalis to Bastarnolandum without being discovered by the scripted armys.


I'd rather like to see scripted armys in Bononia and Segesta, to slow down the Roman expansion in that direction.

Another advantage of this would be that the Romans might become more interested in Taras and Sicily. Many people in the forums would like to see the Romans expand south first and complain about their AI-behaviour.

[burn_again]

The problem with that is that if you expand with caution/realism you can't get chariots.

That's right. In my first Aedui campaign on 1.0 I even could train only two units of axemen before the reforms...

Perhaps the AI focuses too much on upgrading their temples? The gauls don't seem to build very much, many cities don't even get roads, but they still manage to get their temples upgraded.
In my current Aedui campaign I have several large cities and markets, but I haven't enough large temples, so I still don't have the reform in 240 BC.

[AngryAngelDD]

You're right in terms of gameplay, but from a historical point of view this script is meant the represent the Boii-Lugii-Alliance (Eburonum + Carrodunum). The Boii were powerful enough to keep the Germans out of their territory for a while, but I doubt that a similar strong power existed one province east...



perhaps this creates historical correctness at the start in 272BC but it is highly unhistorical that the sweboz and lusotann can expand so far, but the celts in france are so weak that they can´t defend themselves.


perhaps a total different suggestion can help:
don´t add any scripted armies, but set the relationship of averni and aedui to peace. this might lead to an expansion towards the rebel provinces in gaul instead of fighting each other from the first turn.
so they have a stronger base after some years.

[burn_again]

Well, I think having the Aedui and Arverni fight each other is the big point in having two gaulic factions. There must be another way of making them stronger.
Perhaps their AI-personality can be made more aggressive somehow.

[AngryAngelDD]

i think they will fight each other pretty often.
but the point is, that they will presumably attack the rebels first.
(this is what i´ve seen in countless campaigns)

when most rebel settlements are gone, they attack each other for sure.

[Pharnakes]

I'm pretty sure thats not going to happen, the team will never bend history like this. Otherwise why not have the Romans and the Qarthadastim at war? Sure, it would be inacurate but at lest we might see some Punic wars.

[Thaatu]

Otherwise why not have the Romans and the Qarthadastim at war?
Btw, why do they share military access?

[Sakkura]

I'm pretty sure thats not going to happen, the team will never bend history like this. Otherwise why not have the Romans and the Qarthadastim at war? Sure, it would be inacurate but at lest we might see some Punic wars.
Well, those two do usually end up at war a few decades into the campaign, fairly historically correct. That they don't understand how to reenact the historical progression of the Punic wars is another matter :sweatdrop:

[Pharnakes]

Btw, why do they share military access?


I think all allies at the start have to have it, but I'm not sure. Can't think of any other reason why it should be done this way, so I suppose that must be the reason?


Very annoying, isn't it, when all those Carthie stacks of 2-3 units wander around southern italy, mopping up the Roman's rebels.

[Thaatu]

I haven't got it yet, because I have on purpose avoided the trigger, but in my brother's Casse campaign it triggered around 210 BCE. Still a huge shift from the previous 120 BCE.
Update on the situation, I got it in 218 BCE. Now I'm sad.


Edit: ...and tired.