public order

Hi. I just wonder if you are going to do anything about the public order in eb? Becouse when capturing cities the only option if you want to keep the city is sacking it.

I have occupied only a few cities without sacking them, and even though the governors influence is high, and the garrison is about 3000 soliders they are very angry. Cisites not long from the capital and cities I have kept for many, many years building everything I can and with populations low.

I think now, about 50% of the game is about keeping public order low in every city, and when the governor dies, they turn red. Most of my cities are blue, but I keep building, and having great garrions and governors with high influence.

You may say "its historical accurate". But I think a population of 20k, should be kept quiet by my largest army and my best family member after I have had the city from the beginning. Is it possible to reduce "distance from capital" counting? Its hard, and stressing.

Yes, we will do stuff with the public order. You may not have an easier time keeping order in a huge empire though, I think that will be harder than in EB1.

The population in cities is not something you can take at face value. It's an arbitrary number that doesn't reflect anything about the actual population of the region, realistic population levels or anything like the number of people needed to maintain the armies.

yeah ok, on historical accurate, what I meant to say was that the population is not realistic in rtr anyway. A little confusing post, sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ludwag

Is it possible to reduce "distance from capital" counting? Its hard, and stressing.

---

I totally agree with this right here. I mean, I'm almost 1,000 miles away from Washington, DC and I don't feel like inciting a riot!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Majd il-Romani

I totally agree with this right here. I mean, I'm almost 1,000 miles away from Washington, DC and I don't feel like inciting a riot!

---

That´s just becasue all the bars are keeping the PO up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by General Appo

That´s just becasue all the bars are keeping the PO up.

---

nonalchoholic...

Video game entertainment. TV. Propaganda. No starvation, even a luxurious surplus for many of the people. You don't riot because you have a good life.

In antiquity, you were living with the constant risk of a bad harvest. The only contact you have with your rulers is them coming occasionally to take away the small surplus that you have, and then some. Sometimes they would even come for you yourself, dragging you off to some war in a faraway land that you have no interest in, or even knew that existed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Majd il-Romani

nonalchoholic...

---

Doesn´t matter if the whole region is, a bar still gives +15 PO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bovi

Video game entertainment. TV. Propaganda. No starvation, even a luxurious surplus for many of the people. You don't riot because you have a good life.

In antiquity, you were living with the constant risk of a bad harvest. The only contact you have with your rulers is them coming occasionally to take away the small surplus that you have, and then some. Sometimes they would even come for you yourself, dragging you off to some war in a faraway land that you have no interest in, or even knew that existed.

---

ok, I get it. :idea2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bovi

Video game entertainment. TV. Propaganda. No starvation, even a luxurious surplus for many of the people. You don't riot because you have a good life.

In antiquity, you were living with the constant risk of a bad harvest. The only contact you have with your rulers is them coming occasionally to take away the small surplus that you have, and then some. Sometimes they would even come for you yourself, dragging you off to some war in a faraway land that you have no interest in, or even knew that existed.

---

:medievalcheers: That is absolutely RIGHT. ~:cheers:

In EB, I always just slaughter the regions I take that can't build a type 1 or 2 government. It keeps my frontier places docile while I build up the interior of my empire. Then after I have my people nice and content, I can start building up those frontier regions. I find public order extremely easy to care of and could care less if they added more or less of it, because either way a good extermination will keep the city under control for a good 10-20 years.

I havent captured new land in maybe 100 turns. Becouse it is impossible to control the public order while fighting the enemy at the same time :(

But i have sacked all egypt, greece, italy, southern arabia, some of india and hayasdan and now I am sacking asia minor. But I cant keep any of it becouse of public order. So sometimes I miss vanilla rtr. public order is the only thing I dont like about EB, and I dont think it is historical accurate.

In reallity, if someone did someting bad, like destroying some buildings or something, the people that own the city could do something to the people like mass exicutions. But in total war game, that is not possible. So I think that to stabilize, the public order could be lower.

i've NEVER that had that much of a problem with public order. if you take over a settlement that has a different culture, upgrade the governors building as soon as you can

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcantu

i've NEVER that had that much of a problem with public order.

---

Me neither. What I do have a problem with is the corruption, which is simply gargantuan, considering that I own 120 provinces by now. I wish there would be something more in EB II that could help deal with corruption. I thought I was going to conquer the wolrd, but after seeing how much my outer settlements are losing due to corruption and how negative their income is, I was quickly tempered. My capital is still Roma and I the easternmost settlements I own are Seleukeia and Babylon. Ekbatana-Susa-Charax is probably going to be the line of the furthest eastern extent of my empire. Such as Client Rulers for instance. After all, a Type IV government and the Client Ruler wasn't so much dependent on the capital of his overlords, thus theoretically reducing corruption. A settlement with Type IV government is like its own capital (almost). Now reducing corruption is not so historically accurate, but EB is a computer game. Game mechanics are not accurate like, say units for instance. A general's view camera is historically accurate, but almost no one uses it in the TW games.

atm I am training like 3896547226300 celtic archers now, for garrioson after I have conquered italy. And one merchenary general for each city I capture. Then I will have to use all my income for building buildings that increeces happyness. And I have to do that for maybe 604320 turns. Now the governor witch have got alot of influence from building all this, he dies. And the city rebels.

btw, Aemilius, how to control the camera when using generals cam? arrows/wasd or making the general and press on the ground?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ludwag

btw, Aemilius, how to control the camera when using generals cam? arrows/wasd or making the general and press on the ground?

---

Not sure what you're asking. Please clarify if possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

Me neither. What I do have a problem with is the corruption, which is simply gargantuan, considering that I own 120 provinces by now. I wish there would be something more in EB II that could help deal with corruption. I thought I was going to conquer the wolrd, but after seeing how much my outer settlements are losing due to corruption and how negative their income is, I was quickly tempered. My capital is still Roma and I the easternmost settlements I own are Seleukeia and Babylon. Ekbatana-Susa-Charax is probably going to be the line of the furthest eastern extent of my empire. Such as Client Rulers for instance. After all, a Type IV government and the Client Ruler wasn't so much dependent on the capital of his overlords, thus theoretically reducing corruption. A settlement with Type IV government is like its own capital (almost). Now reducing corruption is not so historically accurate, but EB is a computer game. Game mechanics are not accurate like, say units for instance. A general's view camera is historically accurate, but almost no one uses it in the TW games.

---

Well, in theory, it is harder to maintain an empire rather than build one. know what I mean? so you never have public order problems? I always get those in alot of my settlements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ludwag

btw, Aemilius, how to control the camera when using generals cam? arrows/wasd or making the general and press on the ground?

---

use the RTS camera, it is better.

Does I have to select the general and click where he has to go on the ground? just like other units? How to control the generals cam? :s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ludwag

Does I have to select the general and click where he has to go on the ground? just like other units? How to control the generals cam? :s

---

The general cam just means that the camera is restricted to where the general's unit is. Everything else stays the same.

Foot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ludwag

How to control the generals cam? :s

---

Just go to Options on the main menu before loading a game, and find the Generals Cam option, and check it.

Quote:

---

In EB, I always just slaughter the regions I take that can't build a type 1 or 2 government. It keeps my frontier places docile while I build up the interior of my empire. Then after I have my people nice and content, I can start building up those frontier regions. I find public order extremely easy to care of and could care less if they added more or less of it, because either way a good extermination will keep the city under control for a good 10-20 years.

---

Yeah, that's what I do. Extermination. Besides, I don't blitz and try to conquer the whole map. I keep my empire at a realistic size, so less unrest due to distance from capital. It gets boring when you just conquer everything.

With the map scale larger in EB2, I am predicting AS and Sauro will be the hardest factions to play in EB2.

Presumably, movement rates will be adjusted proportionally?
Units in EB move too slowly as it is, and not adjusting movement rates in EB II will just exacerbate the problem.

I think they made movement points low for a reason.

Hmm. I, also, wonder whether they will increase movement rates slightly. For my part, I wouldn't care much for either decision. It's just a curiosity.

It would be kind of pointless to increase the map scale and then increase the movement points. I think Foot said he wanted the roads to have a large bonus to movement and for regular movement points to be reduced so roads have a major importance like they did in RL.

I suppose you're right. Increasing movement would also partially destroy the likelier possibilities of field battles.

What I would really like to see change is the whole "exterminate city" and suddenly everyone is happy. What I think should happen is that once you exterminate a city, it becomes compliant but all your other cities become a little less loyal out of disgust for your actions. I don't know how that could be implemented other then script and even with that I have no idea on how to make a script for such an action.

Why would the citizens of Rome get mad if a triumphator slaughters some filthy Gauls? To make a system like that realistic, a lot of coding would have to be done. It might even be outright impossible.

Plus, the "exterminate" option could just be changed to enslave.