[EB MP]3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

--- EBO EDU v3.0 Testing and Update Thread ---

NOTES FOR CURRENT VERSION

HERE ARE THE UNITS CURRENTLY UPDATED TO 3.0

-ALL FACTIONS EXCEPT THE SAKA RAUKA


Information on the new battle system can be found in the documentation.

The download for the most recent version can be found here: http://www.mediafire.com/?jnkb1l9a7kvyhbv
Latest Update: 11/4/11 @11:12 PM Eastern Time

INSTRUCTIONS:

Download the rar and extract the four files into EB\Data (wherever that is located on your computer). In addition, copy the new export_descr_unit file into the EB\mp game edu backup folder.

I encourage you to post any and all questions that you have, I will be glad to answer them. Please do have a look at the EDU before firing questions off.

I can test Today (Saturday 8/13).

hi all,

Testing the vers.3.0 with B.Sir Robin we noticed that cavalry is very slow to moving.

I also don't agree with cohors lower morale: I explain this point.
I played against B.Sir R. gauls and I've deployed my imperial cohortes in front of him, and in guard mode.
I also deployed some cohors behind my first line.
The gauls attaked my first line from the front.
Incredibly, after one minut, one cohors routed and all my cohors (engaged only from the front) leave the field.

I think the cohors should not be a super-killer unit in attak, but it should be quite good (or at least decent) in defence.
The lower morale feels very much, this thing maybe needs to be fixed.

Cohorts need higher morale. Archers need Poor morale. A cav charge should insta rout archers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

hi all,

Testing the vers.3.0 with B.Sir Robin we noticed that cavalry is very slow to moving.

I also don't agree with cohors lower morale: I explain this point.
I played against B.Sir R. gauls and I've deployed my imperial cohortes in front of him, and in guard mode.
I also deployed some cohors behind my first line.
The gauls attaked my first line from the front.
Incredibly, after one minut, one cohors routed and all my cohors (engaged only from the front) leave the field.

I think the cohors should not be a super-killer unit in attak, but it should be quite good (or at least decent) in defence.
The lower morale feels very much, this thing maybe needs to be fixed.

---

To be fair, the cohort unit I routed was engaged from front by neitos and on the flanks by gaesatae with carnutes chanting away behind them so this is what started the rout. However, cavalry moves FAR too slow, tired cavalry moving about the same speed as winded infantry and this was heavy infantry too. In fact, the horses look like they are moving in slow motion. Also, not liking the extra men in missile units. Clogs up the battlefield with men in loose formation.

This is not making sense ACS is totaly right i just played with WordlyBoar few moments ago and this battle proved that something should be fixed, cohorts routed and altrough they lost only 15-20 men its not so real i save battle as well to see this unrealistic battle I think Ceasar had bigger IQ than Ainstein when he counquered whole gallic tribes lol... http://www.mediafire.com/?s6vlvy18imyjlzo I played with Gauls just to tell that its not about my frustration, its about Roman Faction

Yeah I was the Romans and I left that side of the battle field to Flank right, I was in a good position and was sure they would hold for 30 seconds, when I turned the camera I see the whole of my middle line routing. I think the only thing holding in the left side of my line was the general....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vega

This is not making sense ACS is totaly right i just played with WordlyBoar few moments ago and this battle proved that something should be fixed, cohorts routed and altrough they lost only 15-20 men its not so real i save battle as well to see this unrealistic battle I think Ceasar had bigger IQ than Ainstein when he counquered whole gallic tribes lol... http://www.mediafire.com/?s6vlvy18imyjlzo I played with Gauls just to tell that its not about my frustration, its about Roman Faction

---

This thread is for testing 3.0, that battle was played on 2.1.1.

Anyway, the battle doesn't show the weakness of Roman morale, but the strength of the double-scare, i.e. chariots + gaesatae/uirodusios/pictones/any-scare-infantry, especially against someone who for whatever reason hasn't brought any eagle units. It doesn't serve as an argument that legionnaires should have a morale bump at all.

The reason it's a bad argument for legions getting morale bump is because what about nations that don't have any eagles or units as professional on the ground as Rome, such as Hayasdan? Surely you would not use such invalid reasoning. In fact, I might have to end up bringing two generals, one for each flank, because of this problem.

Currently planning to shrink some western missile units, while you can expect Persian archers to have 120 men (large).

Also, tired cavalry are supposed to be damn near useless. I don't like these ahistorical charge-and-charge again - cavalry charges were a big committment, not something easy to call off if you messed up. Meanwhile, a good cavalry charge would be devastating, hence increased horse mass.

Thank u. Though I still dont care even if you give them 0 stamina. You cannot change the engine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking

This thread is for testing 3.0, that battle was played on 2.1.1.

Anyway, the battle doesn't show the weakness of Roman morale, but the strength of the double-scare, i.e. chariots + gaesatae/uirodusios/pictones/any-scare-infantry, especially against someone who for whatever reason hasn't brought any eagle units. It doesn't serve as an argument that legionnaires should have a morale bump at all.

---

Any scare infantry should not rout a cohors engaging from the front... this is the point.
The cohors morale of vers. 3.0 is the same of 2.1.1, I think (13)

Quote:

---

Also, tired cavalry are supposed to be damn near useless. I don't like these ahistorical charge-and-charge again - cavalry charges were a big committment, not something easy to call off if you messed up. Meanwhile, a good cavalry charge would be devastating, hence increased horse mass.

---

Look that increasing mass you could create some bugs with infantry.
I've already tried to do it, and I see which, if you engage a phalanx with your super mass cavalry, the phalangites lost cohesion in strange way.
You could see some phalangites bringing the sarissa 50 meters out of phalanx formation ;-D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ACS

Any scare infantry should not rout a cohors engaging from the front... this is the point.
The cohors morale of vers. 3.0 is the same of 2.1.1, I think (13)

---

They have 14 morale in 3.0. Why "any scare infantry" shouldn't be able to rout cohors from the front I've no idea as the majority of scare infantry are elites while cohors are not, but according to Robin they didn't even do that. They engaged your unit from the side, and it resulted in a chain-rout. Nothing special about that.

You still missed my point anyway, which Vartan tried to explain. The battle Vega uploaded doesn't serve as an argument to increase legionaire's morale, because the Aedui army was using the double-scare tactic and the Roman army had no eagles. You can use double-scare against [insert whatever army you like] to show that [insert same army] should get a morale increase that way, because the problem is not the morale of the legionnaire, but the effectiveness of double-scare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking

They have 14 morale in 3.0.

---

This is actually the 3.0 EDU:

Attachment 1932

Then what are you talking about?

@ACS,Vega; Guys, stop whining. stop blaming your losses on the EDU. Fact is you people get beaten by more mobile and versatile opponents, instead of ranting about your units, get better. Its getting pathetic now. We are not the campaign AI so dont expect us to sit there , soak up pila and then attack 100 man cohorts in guard mode with whatever in the face.

/rant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

This is actually the 3.0 EDU:

Attachment 1932

Then what are you talking about?

---

1) You said Imperial Cohortes. Cohortes Reformata are Marians.

2) Way to completely ignore my argument! :applause:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

This is actually the 3.0 EDU:

Attachment 1932

Then what are you talking about?

---

You're going to have to stick a chevron on them to make them scary proof it seems or be extremely careful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lazy O

@ACS,Vega; Guys, stop whining. stop blaming your losses on the EDU. Fact is you people get beaten by more mobile and versatile opponents, instead of ranting about your units, get better. Its getting pathetic now. We are not the campaign AI so dont expect us to sit there , soak up pila and then attack 100 man cohorts in guard mode with whatever in the face.

/rant

---

I could say something but i promised vartan that i will not, this is insulting me and ACS, and you dont have to be genius to win vs spqr like i wasnt when i played with gauls vs boar i atacked cohorts they trows pila and they was in guard mode that was useles cohorts routed after losing 15 men, the fact is that they are bad and slow killers and that symbol of SPQR rout after 10% lost army :stare: :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lazy O

@ACS,Vega; Guys, stop whining. stop blaming your losses on the EDU. Fact is you people get beaten by more mobile and versatile opponents, instead of ranting about your units, get better. Its getting pathetic now. We are not the campaign AI so dont expect us to sit there , soak up pila and then attack 100 man cohorts in guard mode with whatever in the face.

/rant

---

LazyO,TCV; Guys, please, respect the opinions of others, without saying "pathetic" and clapping ironically.
Otherwise you two will do a new edu and only you two will play it.

We want to improve the edu to make it realistic and have fun, every suggestions are precious.

The thing that I'm saying is that some romani units were weakened compared to the original edu.
So I think this is not the right way for having a good balance between factions in game.
This is my suggestion, nothing else.

What I see, is constant complaining of supposed underpowerement (new word, yay) of Roman Units which does not even exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lazy O

@ACS,Vega; Guys, stop whining [...]

---

Was this really necessary...? I am disappoint. :no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vega

I could say something but i promised vartan that i will not, this is insulting me and ACS, and you dont have to be genius to win vs spqr like i wasnt when i played with gauls vs boar i atacked cohorts they trows pila and they was in guard mode that was useles cohorts routed after losing 15 men, the fact is that they are bad and slow killers and that symbol of SPQR rout after 10% lost army :stare: :inquisitive:

---

I actually explained my analysis of that battle in detail in the Hamachi chat. Firstly, let me correct you in that WorldlyBoar's legions were mostly, if not all, out of guard mode. That's the first thing I looked for when I was reviewing the battle. It was my conclusion that due to a lack of first cohorts and a general, the Roman army was simply asking to have its morale lowered to the point where entire units would rout. It was simply a matter of time until the first routed. After that point, not only do you have a double-scare, but now you lose morale because your brothers-in-arm beside you are running for their lives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

LazyO,TCV; Guys, please, respect the opinions of others, without saying "pathetic" and clapping ironically.
Otherwise you two will do a new edu and only you two will play it.

We want to improve the edu to make it realistic and have fun, every suggestions are precious.

The thing that I'm saying is that some romani units were weakened compared to the original edu.
So I think this is not the right way for having a good balance between factions in game.
This is my suggestion, nothing else.

---

Romans were strengthened compared to the original EDU. The most important thing is their sword, and that was improved to kill more often (its lethality for instance is improved).

Also, if suggestions are so precious, please reconsider what you think about increasing heavy cavalry mass. Remember, we wish to simulate history better by making the exploitation of heavy cavalry less possible (cannot completely exterminate it). By this we mean to allow a cavalry commander a decisive charge (or two) that really matter, after which point you should not be able to keep hitting and running as if you're running on 500 horsepower. It's a horse carrying kilo after kilo of armour, not a Lamborghini (not that I like Lambos).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lazy O

What I see, is constant complaining of supposed underpowerement (new word, yay) of Roman Units which does not even exist.

---

Do you mean to say people may be unintentionally contributing with deception? :laugh4: You need to give the benefit of the doubt and consider that the player is not informed (or has not reviewed) the changes in question. And I think it's underpowerment* :laugh4:

Because I love you guys so much. :2thumbsup:

https://i.imgur.com/yI79p.jpg

Yea it was necessary. Like vega complains something is wrong every single match.

The suggested money amount for testing is 40000 mnai. For the new big Tier 2 units, you need it. Also expect an update later today.

First cohorts may seem expensive at first glance; but have a closer look. They not only carry a command eagle, they are veteran versions of regular cohorts; meaning they have superior javelin accuracy and fighting ability. With 16 morale, they are very difficult to rout, and inspire the rest of your army.

Notice also the option of bringing an expensive, but extremely powerful Praetorian unit. With 100 men, they will be the largest elite infantry unit in the game. They cost 3400 mnai but have devstatingly good accuracy with the javelin and excellent skills up close (they have 14 attack/0.15 leth and 29 defense!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

LazyO,TCV; Guys, please, respect the opinions of others, without saying "pathetic" and clapping ironically.
Otherwise you two will do a new edu and only you two will play it.

---

Sarcastically.

Anyway, if you don't want your opinion to be criticized, then keep it to yourself. If you go public with it and suggest that we make changes that will affect others, then you should expect that other people might have their own opinions as well. It just won't do to give your opinion and then cry foul when someone disagrees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

We want to improve the edu to make it realistic and have fun, every suggestions are precious.

The thing that I'm saying is that some romani units were weakened compared to the original edu.
So I think this is not the right way for having a good balance between factions in game.
This is my suggestion, nothing else.

---

I have given you my criticism of your suggestion, which you have completely ignored twice now. See, that's what annoys me: your attempts to shift the focus anywhere but to my arguments. It seems to be an attempt to obfuscate the fact that you can't answer my points, because that would mean that I could actually be right. Which would mean that the arguments you've made would be invalid.

And that's just not possible.

I move to Give ALL archers Poor morale. This will cause them to insta rout at cav charges which is historical. An archer in the feild of battle would *** in his pants when he sees cav running towards him. The current system makes it so u need 2 cav charges to rout even the persian archers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking

Anyway, if you don't want your opinion to be criticized, then keep it to yourself.

---

This is absolutely true, but you can still criticise someone without getting disrespectful. If you can't say it politely, don't say it at all. That applies even when the other guy is talking nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Stormrage-

I move to Give ALL archers Poor morale. This will cause them to insta rout at cav charges which is historical. An archer in the feild of battle would *** in his pants when he sees cav running towards him. The current system makes it so u need 2 cav charges to rout even the persian archers.

---

The problem with this is that missiles on skirmish mode would not receive any charges at all. Units could only pursue them. Hence, you still have to rely on using a relatively high attack, lethal unit (such as overhand spear light cavalry) in order to take out missile units.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ludens

This is absolutely true, but you can still criticise someone without getting disrespectful. If you can't say it politely, don't say it at all. That applies even when the other guy is talking nonsense.

---

Yes. Thankfully, we have not had any disrespect in this thread (you know what I mean, dearest Ludens). As for nonsense, a friend once said that nonsense can only be fought against with nonsense. Perhaps. But no worries, you won't see that in this thread.

I still insist Archers be given poor morale. Not all players use skirmish mode and if an archer is pursued by a cav it will rout almost immediately after a few seconds of engagment which is how it should be.

Poor morale to Archers.

and could more units have Bonus fighting cav in 3.0 ?

Would it be possible to make the veteran unit a smaller but veteran version of the 1st cohort? Afterall, they are the super experienced battled hardened guys and they don't seem to play that way in the old EDU.

Praetorians while somewhat historically fanciful are a really devastating assault infantry. As of right now, Rome plays a lot like a faster version of KH.

@TCV. There's a difference between criticizing someone's idea like you and saying your opinion doesn't matter because you write it off as whining. More directed at LazyO than you because you have a point about ACS ignoring you and no one likes that.