Some random thoughts about the Sabaeans

I downloaded the .81 patch onto an almost clean version.

[RTW 1.5 from the Gold Edition plus EB 0.8, rather than a fresh install of 0.81 over RTW 1.5 Gold -- which is what I would have done if I were really being serious about this . So it was clean but not virginal.]

The install was a bit slow, and had to be repeated because it started looping at one point. It also seemed a bit surprised that I was installing the patch over EB 0.8 and not RTW 1.5. I'm sure that if I weren't very patient and had gone off to read a good book I would have ended up with a corrupted install. In the end, however, I managed to get the patch installed (and a few chapters read).

[Translation: the install process seems pretty good, but might benefit from an inspection and maybe a tiny bit of tweaking].

I may have had a saved campaign but immediately deleted it because it makes no sense to me to try to play a campaign from one version of EB under another. I'm assuming this is a good way to generate CTD's that would just cloud the issue of how debugged 0.81 is or isn't.

In general I was very pleased and even surprised by what I saw.

Not a peasant in sight. The units were pretty convincing, especially on the battlefield. My only criticism of the tiles would be that the scale difference between some of the infantry and the mounted troops can be a bit jarring (i.e. should be tweaked a little).

I played Saba down to about 252 BC without a single CTD. And that included several saves and reloads.

I noticed a few minor oddities that will get cleaned up eventually. References to Baal and the Carthaginians cropped up once or twice. I think when I researched Caravan routes the description of the finished product ended up with wrap-around and misplace text overlay (and part was on the wrong line). And I think the dam in South Arabia and one of the local temples are still awaiting descriptions -- ISTR there are people in California involved in South Arabian archeology who could provide descriptions of this with their eyes closed. And one of the missing descriptions is probably on an exhibit plaque in one of the back rooms on the second floor of the British Museum. The only thing that really puzzled me was the building that allowed me to build native hellenic infantry -- I didn't try to build it because I assumed it was a yet-to-be-purged artefact of an older version.

That's pretty impressive, guys. You've taken the Sabaeans from not ready to be played to something that looks a lot like almost ready to be played.

Now for the bad part, and I've saved the game in case anyone needs to see it.

After about twenty years the Sabaeans had subdued three neighboring towns and started building them up. And had established trade relations with the Ptolemies and the Seleucids.

Then things started getting weird.

Meroe suddenly appeared as a Sabaean province and started rioting. I'm not disturbed by the South Arabia-Nubian connection, but I'm a little puzzled as to the game mechanic that got them into the picture.

Then, to my horror, one of my spies reported that there was a really big Hellenistic army under the command of a Seleucid captain headed my way. All development and expansion plans were cancelled while the Sabaeans started raising and drilling troops. Then my spy reports that there's a second, smaller army under the command of a Seleucid with Ptolemy in his name. Ok, keep drilling. Each army shows up in front of one of my cities. This is really bad...I'm outnumbered and outgunned. So after a turn of siege I do the only logical thing I can think of -- send in a diplomat.

I eventually lost track of how many turns were involved, but what happened next was that each turn the Seleucids would start a war and lay siege to two of my cities, and each turn my diplomat would offer a ceasefire and trade rights in exchange for 600 mina. The Seleucids would mumble something about necessity forcing them to do something that would dishonor a helot (didn't know the Seleucids were Lacedaimonians), they would accept my offer, the sieges would be lifted and the war was over. They never paid the 600 mina, of course, because at the begining of the next turn the war and the sieges would start all over again.

The net result was that the Seleucids were perpetually commencing a siege but always calling it off the same turn. As a result no damage was being done to the cities they were camped outside of, apart from the fact that the Sabaeans were sliding deeper and deeper into the red (because they had mobilized to a war footing). Eventually what probably would have happened is that someone, somewhere would start a real war with the Seleucids, who would have realized that they needed that army to stop the Ptplemies.

Having said that, the repetition of the sequence was so persistant (five or six times before I gave up, saved, and quit) that I'm pretty sure I was witnessing some kind of game flaw. Not sure if it's an EB problem or an RTW problem, but it's a bit too repetitious to be convincingly realistic. (Yes, I know the Seleucids never conquered South Arabia, but I really doubt that this is supposed to be the mechanic that prevented them from doing so).

And the whole time this was going on, all I could think of was Hey, there's this huge army sitting month after month in the middle of the Arabian desert --and there's no attrition!

Let me know if you need me to send the save game file to anyone.

First of all, all cities have a founding faction. If you have a city rebel and it was founded by you, it will go to the rebels. If the founding faction is dead, it will go to the rebels. But if the founding faction is still around and a city rebels, it will go to that faction. And cause a war between the two factions :furious3: even if they are long time friends and allies.

Second, the diplomacy in RTW is retarded. It never works, the AI doesn't use logic when making decisions, and no agreements are trusted. If there is a territory next to an AI territory, and the AI can take the settlement, they will try to. Allies, neutral, trade partners; it doesn't matter, if they can take it they will. Also, if the AI borders you (the human player) they will attack you, period. They will ignore their long time enemy, they will ignore an easily taken rebel settlement, they will even ignore the loss of two thirds of their empire from the other side. If they border you, and don't have long time loving relationships with you (or all your border settlements have a whole stack or two guarding it), they will attack you.

Remember that before we had Saba as a faction the Arabian desert and south arabia rebelled to Parthia. The culture in the upper Nile regions is more similar to the Sabaeans than the Ptolemies. We'd rather have eastern buildings and portraits and names than Greek ones. So it's a no brainer to us to make those upper Nile provinces Sabaean rebel sub factions instead of carthaginian or ptolemaic. THe other stuff MAA hit on the head - it's RTW AI. We tried making the desert areas harder to cross, but the Seleucids and Ptolemies like all factions go for rebel lands first, and so that's why they love coming into Arabia for no good other reason. That puts them at conflict with you of course more quickly than we might like.