extra features?

Imo, a game should be as historically accurate as possible at the start of the game. But I also feel that after the game starts, you the player, should have ultimate control over you factions destiny.

Which means, I would love to have extra features so that your faction could branch off in different ways, outside of what "really" happened.

For example. If you want the roman faction to have better archers, then you should be able to do this. Perhaps by investing much time and money into building a "building" at the capital, which would then trigger an "archer" reform. Or something like this. Or if you want a senate for a faction that doesn't have one, you should be able to have some way to trigger this.

I just think having many features like this, for each faction, would make the game even better and would allow even more roleplaying. Is anything like this (extra feature control) going to be in EB2? Would it be hard to script in?

-Apple

Quote:

---

For example. If you want the roman faction to have better archers, then you should be able to do this. Perhaps by investing much time and money into building a "building" at the capital, which would then trigger an "archer" reform. Or something like this. Or if you want a senate for a faction that doesn't have one, you should be able to have some way to trigger this.

---

Unit limits. Hard codes.

Impossible. The engine is not that flexible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market

Impossible. The engine is not that flexible.

---

In a perfect world with unlimited time and no unit limits it wouldn't be 'impossible'. But, EB isn't really that kind of game anyway. While it would be fun to do stuff like that it is highly unrealistic. If Rome could just magically invest time and money into something and have better archers that would have actually made a significant contribution to their military they would have.

War is an arms race in a way and militaries that were unable to adapt of unwilling seldom stayed strong for long. Truth is, rome was not in the position to have strong archers. They were argrarian by nature so had no underlying 'class' of people that would have hunted and used the bow enough to have experience with it. It takes many many years to become proficient with a bow. Furthermore the climate is unsuited for the adoption of the composite bow, so even if they had put much time and effort into it they were unlikely to have a successful design. The longbow is an idea, but not one they took up. In fact outside wales I don't think any other country has ever designed such a bow (do not quote me on that, it is merely an after-point). The welsh may have just stumbled on an effective design.

HOWEVER, if you want to do this yourself then it is easy enough to mod in. Simply change one of the temple buildings. Make the first level take say...10 turns to build and put any weak archer unit recruitable there. Make the next level 20 turns and put a mid range archer unit there (or whatever). And for the next make it 50 turns and put a top end recruitable unit like a far eastern unit there. And when you need to build this chain in each settlement, each costing tens of thousands of mnai and years of time for the simple use of an archer, maybe you can appreciate the difficulty in promoting the development of a particular warrior mentality that is different from the current, native one and realise why nations used local troops if possible. You can't simply just 'be like the romans but roleplay that you would do it better'.... there are actually other factors at play in real life.

EDIT: I sound a bit patronising there. Didn't mean it that way, sounded much nicer in my head when writing it. And actually, my idea was meant to be a solution to your problem. Just modify a temple building to take time and money to build to represent your archers reforms. Then once you have built it once, you can cheat build it in any town you think would be able to field archers due to reforms OR simply leave it and ship the units around to represent my idea of promoting the archer warrior ethos in that once location and then rebuild it in places that you would like to also promote and build those units from.

While I'm sure there will be some "What if" or "It could happen" type units and perhaps even some buildings of the like, it won't likely be to the extent you'd likely prefer. The problem is that the EB team prefers (to my understanding at least) to give as fair and equal amount of attention to each individual faction as possible. That would mean EVERY faction would need to get a lot of these buildings and units, which would in turn leave far less room for what would otherwise be actual historical buildings and units.

turning ths thread the other way what kind of extra features over EB 1.2 we can expect?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blxz

EDIT: I sound a bit patronising there. Didn't mean it that way, sounded much nicer in my head when writing it. And actually, my idea was meant to be a solution to your problem.

---

A bit, yes. And I do disagree with much of what you said. The subject/argument of "change" is very complicated, not one I'll start here.

I would just like more features and not be so tied to "history"... Or at least have current features not so tied to history. For example, reforms. Perhaps certain reforms could have another trigger, one you could get faster by spending much money or something like that. A "research" type option. I guess I'm trying to add more of a civ-like option to the game.


As for hijacking this thread for other "features", I'm all for it and curious.

Phew, glad you agreed! I was almost going to let the capslock fury unleashed!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darius

While I'm sure there will be some "What if" or "It could happen" type units and perhaps even some buildings of the like, it won't likely be to the extent you'd likely prefer. The problem is that the EB team prefers (to my understanding at least) to give as fair and equal amount of attention to each individual faction as possible. That would mean EVERY faction would need to get a lot of these buildings and units, which would in turn leave far less room for what would otherwise be actual historical buildings and units.

---

I'm pretty sure the team has explicitly stated that they wouldn't never make any "what if" units.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

I'm pretty sure the team has explicitly stated that they wouldn't never make any "what if" units.

---

History is a fluid, complicated mechanism. It is folly to assume that we could artificially induce reforms that would have stretched the limits of feasibility, with the construction of one building. As Blxz stated, the Romans never developed a great archer culture, because of their social situation, geographic situation, and their successes in other fields.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by applebreath

A bit, yes. And I do disagree with much of what you said. The subject/argument of "change" is very complicated, not one I'll start here.

I would just like more features and not be so tied to "history"... Or at least have current features not so tied to history. For example, reforms. Perhaps certain reforms could have another trigger, one you could get faster by spending much money or something like that. A "research" type option. I guess I'm trying to add more of a civ-like option to the game.


As for hijacking this thread for other "features", I'm all for it and curious.

---

We aren't replicating civ, and so we certainly wouldn't do that.

Foot

In EB you have all the unrealistic freedom you need.
For example you can make an army full of mercenary phalangitai, tindanotae and horsearchers and send them to the hindus as a roman or even as Casse. :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market

History is a fluid, complicated mechanism. It is folly to assume that we could artificially induce reforms that would have stretched the limits of feasibility, with the construction of one building. As Blxz stated, the Romans never developed a great archer culture, because of their social situation, geographic situation, and their successes in other fields.

---

Think you quoted the wrong person there, also i noticed a small mistake in my last post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

I'm pretty sure the team has explicitly stated that they wouldn't never make any "what if" units.

---