-
Bugs and Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I'm going to start this thread as a placeholder for when the patch arrives sometime in the next 48 hours. (If Mods object, etc. then delete or lock as appropriate.)
The Readme is nice but it is general, and as it states it probably omits a number of small or subtle changes...or perhaps uses classic British understatement. So what I hope to do in this thread is to compile a list of changes and fixes that have been implemented compared to RTW 1.3. I will try to edit to maintain a list of what we find (although I could be out of pocket for a considerable time in the coming weeks--so a moderator might want to take over if I don't appear for an extended time after the patch is released.) Some general guidelines:
1. Contribute what you observe that is different/changed.
2. For obvious things like changed stats, just provide before/after number.
3. If you are uncertain about something that requires some testing, it might be best to have a separate thread to discuss it and flesh it out before adding it to the list.
4. CA comments would of course be very helpful toward compiling a complete supplemental list.
A similar thread for BI 1.6 might be useful. I'm not a good candidate for managing the BI list, as I don't have BI at the moment and won't have any "history" to compare. (Hopefully this RTW patch will prompt me to remedy that, and change my sig.) :san_grin:
And as always...a separate bug/workaround type list would be handy to keep in a different thread. Bugs of course could be in this thread, assuming they are *changes* from the previous release, not pre-existing bugs.
EDIT to begin lists for RTW 1.5, looks like my original format is going to require changing:
Undocumented fixed/changed items.
1. Officers seem to all have their weapons now. Before they had a tendency to show up for battle at times with no sword. Lots of punching... (Several...need more time to confirm.)
2. British Generals have been upgraded to 5 def. skill from 1. (Red Harvest.)
3. Generals_unit_upgrade added for Pontus "East Pontic Generals"
4. The AI has resumed using its warcry more consistently. In 1.3 it would often not warcry when attacking. In 1.5 it seems more prone to do so...including in custom tests. Glad to see this back! (Red Harvest)
Confirmed officially documented fixed items.
1. Naval invasion seems to be working according to initial reports. (Many.)
2. The AI uses its pila now. (Many.)
3. Barb Archer Rebel/Slave officer removed.
4. Spear warbands now have secondary swords and slightly lower cost/upkeep.
5. Berserker hit points have been cut to 2, and armour increased to 2. Recruiting and armour/weapon upgrade cost have been increased.
6. Memory leak has been partially fixed. It takes much longer to get the same level of leak. However, symptoms are exactly the same as before. CA gets partial credit.
7. Javelin skirmish AI appears to be improved. It is more likely to use them as skirmishers now. Archers/slingers still have some serious issues (not firing at times, marching through enemy fire, etc.) but they do seem to behave more like skirmishers on average.
Unfixed issues.
1. The two highest level horse temples are still buildable for Gaul, etc. and should not be according to the messages provided onscreen. (Red Harvest, many others) EDIT: Confirmed by Intrepid Sidekick/Capt. Fishpants, the two highest level horse temples should be buildable by Roman factions only.
2. SPQR still has Greek family members. (Seasoned Alcoholic)
3. Some reports of not having control of reinforcements in battle. (Various.)
4. "Short_pike" does not work properly. Phalanx units with it won't shoulder arms when phalanx is toggled off, and when attacked in phalanx, the pikes don't seem to hold the enemy off at all, the whole first row switches to swords. (Red Harvest.)
New 1.5 Bugs
1. AI seems to be able to very successfully use pila after it engages in melee...even after it did the initial hurl and charge. (Red Harvest.)
2. Academy class buildings might not be providing intended law bonus. (Barbarossa82.)
3. Disasters don't seem to work properly. The triggers are unreliable now (and appeared to be in 1.3 as well.) I've not seen a storm at sea in 1.3 or 1.5. I can get Etna to smoke, but not erupt (except for the historical event.) I have seen two floods, but no deaths from them. Have so far been unable to trigger a quake, or drought, or storm at sea in 1.5.. I know the disaster file is getting referenced, since I can make Etna smoke (by plugging in a coordinate as well as a frequency.)
4. Slave resources don't seem to be adding to population anywhere, even when the growth icon shows they should. There is growth in year zero, but none of the projected slave population growths are actually received. (Pode, Germanvs, and others. Confirmed.)
5. There have been quite a few reports of problems with siege towers, particularly the larger ones. Typically, men will mill about running in and out and can't be commanded. Eventually, they move up the tower. Sometimes they bypass the tower and end up on the wall before the ramp opens, this can cause a CTD. (MAt, and others.)
6. There is no option to turn off the battle timer in provincial campaigns. (Red Harvest)
7. During a Civil War test (as provincial campaign using straightforward descr_strat diplomacy mod) found that agreeing to a ceasefire with an AI Roman faction allows them to siege and blockade without being at war...and if the player's popularity is low, he can't counterattack in any way, leaving him helpless. It looks like the AI cannot attack ships or armies, but it can siege and blockade. War continues against other Roman factions. (Red Harvest)
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
With regards to a new RTW v1.5 bugs thread, it may be useful to everyone if the first page documents the entire list of encountered (and confirmed) bugs. I'm taking this idea straight from Kraxis' Sticky BI bugs thread. Before anyone posts a potentially new bug they should double-check the entire list to date to avoid duplications. It would need to be updated on a frequent (perhaps daily) basis, depending on how many members are posting in there.
Perhaps once the patch is released, someone could post the final readme version in here, and this could prevent duplications on this topic. It may contain a few more documented changes / fixes than what CA have already provided.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I have plans for a RTW Bugs/BI Bugs/Undocumented Features thread to sticky so there will be only one sticky instead of three. All I need is someone dedicated enough to maintain it
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
The different flavours of RTW/Bi probably need different threads for bug I think. This one's stickied for now, to merge with BI bugs at a later date
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I think Golden band are much better now. I don't remember their original stats but they seem a bit higher.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
RTW v1.5
SPQR start with 2 Greek-named family members. It appears that their names are generated at random at the start of a new imperial campaign.
Of course, it depends how you interpret this as to what you believe it to be.
[EDIT:]Double-checked descr_strat and there aren't any entries in the family section under Romans_Senate for these 2 named charachters. Looks to be bugged.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
The Imperial German Bodyguard and the Hunnic warlord look fine to me, but the Chosen Archer thing is just frightful. They kind of look like Bobba Fett. How the @#&% did that slip past QA? I mean it's not something you'd miss with even a cursory glance at them, and since they CHANGED them, you'd really think they'd bother to look at them.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
1. AI is using its pila, but the implementation is whacked. In hastati vs. hastati match up I just did they both throw, then charge...then the AI halts in melee switches back to pila...AND throws again...successfully. How the hell do they get away with this??? The implementation of pila has always been wierd about the charge (often blunting it.) I'm going to break out a separate topic on this...
2. AI archers are still dolts so no apparent improvement there. It will still march its longer range archers up to my line, get shot to pieces, then try to run away. It did this with enemy hastati captain and enemy archer auxilia vs. my triarii captain and roman archer. My hopes for improved missile unit AI have been dashed.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
From the patch readme:
"Academy-class buildings now give a law bonus, as they do in the BI expansion pack. These buildings now have uses in cities without governors or generals in residence"
There is nothing on the info scrolls for the academy-class buildings to indicate that they have that effect. Has it been implented or not?
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Professorspatula:
Are you saying that 1.5/6 makes it HARDER or EASIER to get command stars? 1.3 and BI made it much harder to get them, so if 1.5/6 made it even harder than that, I will be pretty annoyed; if they made it easier, then good for them.
Thanks
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbarossa82
The Imperial German Bodyguard and the Hunnic warlord look fine to me, but the Chosen Archer thing is just frightful. They kind of look like Bobba Fett. How the @#&% did that slip past QA? I mean it's not something you'd miss with even a cursory glance at them, and since they CHANGED them, you'd really think they'd bother to look at them.
Well this is what I experience:
------------------------------
Imperial German Bodyguard:
https://img327.imageshack.us/img327/...31153ud.th.jpg
Hunnic General:
https://img416.imageshack.us/img416/...24544lk.th.jpg
It's amazing how many units still have messed up textures (often basic alpha channel issues) and also messed up models. The quality assurance people are my heroes.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
My mistake about the bodyguards, Professor. On closer inspection I do have those odd floating artifacts at the corners of the shields.
About the Hun guy though, this is weird. I tried both custom battles and campaign battles with Hun generals and captains, and saw nothing amiss. Then I decide to take a screenshot to prove it - and the stupid red rectangle shows up in the screenshot! I swear it isn't there on my monitor during the battles though. This isn't the first time I've seen differences between what I saw in a battle and what came out on the screenshot. Might be some graphics card weirdness I guess.
My screenshot of the Hun general:
https://img363.imageshack.us/img363/1738/hun8bk.th.jpg
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules
Professorspatula:
Are you saying that 1.5/6 makes it HARDER or EASIER to get command stars? 1.3 and BI made it much harder to get them, so if 1.5/6 made it even harder than that, I will be pretty annoyed; if they made it easier, then good for them.
Thanks
Well I just took a quick look, and it appears easier to get points towards the good commander traits, but at the same time, you need a few more points to get each level of the trait. So overall it's probably a little easier to get a good commander which is welcome. It also appears it's more difficult to lose command stars too. Hurrah.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I just knoticed that Public order seems harder to maintain for barbarian factions i think, i loaded up my Saxons Game and before i patched all my cities were green, then i loaded up after i patched and Most of them were Red Faced or at least blue, i had to up garisons by like 50 percent
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
So far all my officers/captains have actually had weapons, rather than punching at opponents as in 1.3. This appears to have been fixed.
I've seen some initial reports that reinforcements are still prone to be under AI control. No confirmation yet.
The temple of horse upgrade problem is still there. Very puzzling that this simple edit wasn't made.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Ok, this new pila issue is definitely a bug. I just had a scutarii ram my phalanx FOUR times and each time it start "reloading" it's pila AFTER melee began. It inflicted quite a few casualties this way, even though it took plenty as well. This is a very poor implementation of getting the units to use their pila in a charge, because in many cases they are instead switching to them after they run in. It is better than not having the AI use its pila at all...but it has introduced a new problem that actually seems to favor the AI.
Also, in the "not fixed" category is "short_pike." It behaves just the same as it did in 1.3. Units with "short_pike" never leave the phalanx style animation, whether or not phalanx is turned off (they don't shoulder pikes.) The phalanx itself still does not work like one when short_pike is used. All the enemy troops penetrate past the pikes so the phalanx switches to swords in the first row.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I'll have to check that one Red.
Interestingly, it's actually a tactic I've used regularly against the AI, particularly when fighting on walls! I'd press the standard attack button which would geet my troops to throw pila then charge. Then once engaged, I'd press it a second time to get them to throw another round of pila whilst engaged. Seemed to work for me, so until I try fighting against AI pila troops I'll reserve my judgement on this one.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
for 1.5, What did they do to Germania!?!?!
this is early in my scipii campaign.
https://img203.imageshack.us/img203/1876/923le.jpg
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
I personally reckon CA have upped the ante when it comes to AI aggression. Like the previous poster's minimap screenshot shows, the AI doesn't hold back on its conquest anymore.
In my Scipii campaign the Seleucids and Macedonians have been destroyed by 250 BC. The Julii aren't sitting passively with the Gauls which they too often did in previous versions and the Brutii are having a tough time of it against the Greeks. A constant stream of Carthaginian ships has prevented my Scipii navy doing too much to help expansion early doors and they've been landing army upon army onto Sicily.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rilder
It seems much more random, in my 1.5 camp (brutii) the britons has northern france and germany, the germans have been pushed east. the seluids seem strongern in that camp. too.
This would need to be confirmed ofcourse.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rilder
That was fairly normal before. Gaul gets carved up amongst the Julii, Germania, and the Britons. In the next phase Briton and the Julii begin to carve up Germania.
A more accurate question would be "What is happening to Gaul?" Gaul simply doesn't have much of a chance because it has four flanks to protect: Spain, Britannia, Germania, and the Julii. Factions in a corner do better as long as they have land mass to expand out onto--and enough of a base economy/poplulation to power the expansion: Briton and Egypt do well for this reason. Scythia suffers from having such a huge landmass, with little economic power or population. Numidia suffers from a weak economy (and weak units for autocalc.) Meanwhile, the Julii, Brutii, and Scipii are all effectively in a corner, since their backs are to one another and they can expand outward.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo
I personally reckon CA have upped the ante when it comes to AI aggression. Like the previous poster's minimap screenshot shows, the AI doesn't hold back on its conquest anymore.
Well, if you check out the default diplomacy for all factions in descr_strat, you'll see that many factions have been made to act more aggressively toward one another, as below:
Code:
; >>>> start of diplomacy section <<<<
;DS_ALLIED = 0
;DS_SUSPICIOUS = 100
;DS_NEUTRAL = 200
;DS_HOSTILE = 400
;DS_AT_WAR = 600
core_attitudes romans_julii, -10 romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_julii, 400 carthage
core_attitudes romans_julii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_brutii, -10 romans_julii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_scipii, -10 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_senate, -10 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes romans_senate, 600 slave
core_attitudes macedon, 90 romans_brutii
core_attitudes macedon, 600 slave
core_attitudes egypt, 410 numidia
core_attitudes egypt, 600 slave
core_attitudes seleucid, 410 parthia
core_attitudes seleucid, 600 slave
core_attitudes carthage, 310 romans_julii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes carthage, 90 numidia
core_attitudes carthage, 90 spain
core_attitudes carthage, 600 slave
core_attitudes parthia, 90 armenia
core_attitudes parthia, 600 slave
core_attitudes pontus, 410 armenia
core_attitudes pontus, 600 slave
core_attitudes gauls, 410 romans_julii, spain
core_attitudes gauls, 600 slave
core_attitudes gauls, 90 germans, britons
core_attitudes germans, 90 gauls
core_attitudes germans, 310 britons
core_attitudes germans, 600 slave
core_attitudes britons, 310 germans
core_attitudes britons, 600 slave
core_attitudes armenia, 90 parthia
core_attitudes armenia, 600 slave
core_attitudes dacia, 90 romans_julii
core_attitudes dacia, 410 germans
core_attitudes dacia, 600 slave
core_attitudes greek_cities, 410 romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes greek_cities, 600 slave
core_attitudes numidia, 90 carthage
core_attitudes numidia, 600 slave
core_attitudes scythia, 600 slave
core_attitudes spain, 410 carthage
core_attitudes spain, 600 slave
core_attitudes thrace, 310 romans_brutii
core_attitudes thrace, 300 dacia
core_attitudes thrace, 600 slave
core_attitudes slave, 600 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate, macedon, egypt, seleucid, carthage, parthia, pontus, gauls, germans, britons, armenia, dacia, greek_cities, numidia, scythia, spain, thrace
This is what I've changed the diplomacy section to:
Code:
; >>>> start of diplomacy section <<<<
;DS_ALLIED = 0
;DS_SUSPICIOUS = 100
;DS_NEUTRAL = 200
;DS_HOSTILE = 400
;DS_AT_WAR = 600
core_attitudes romans_julii, 100 romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_julii, 200 gauls
core_attitudes romans_julii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 100 romans_julii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 200 greek_cities
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 200 macedon
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 100 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 200 greek_cities
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 200 carthage
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_senate, 100 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes romans_senate, 200 macedon, egypt, seleucid, carthage, parthia, pontus, gauls, germans, britons, armenia, dacia, greek_cities, numidia, scythia, spain, thrace
core_attitudes romans_senate, 600 slave
core_attitudes macedon, 300 romans_brutii
core_attitudes macedon, 100 dacia
core_attitudes macedon, 200 thrace
core_attitudes macedon, 300 greek_cities
core_attitudes macedon, 600 slave
core_attitudes egypt, 200 numidia
core_attitudes egypt, 300 seleucid
core_attitudes egypt, 600 slave
core_attitudes seleucid, 300 parthia
core_attitudes seleucid, 200 pontus
core_attitudes seleucid, 100 greek_cities
core_attitudes seleucid, 300 egypt
core_attitudes seleucid, 200 armenia
core_attitudes seleucid, 600 slave
core_attitudes carthage, 300 romans_julii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes carthage, 100 numidia
core_attitudes carthage, 100 spain
core_attitudes carthage, 600 slave
core_attitudes parthia, 100 armenia
core_attitudes parthia, 200 seleucid
core_attitudes parthia, 600 slave
core_attitudes pontus, 200 armenia
core_attitudes pontus, 200 greek_cities
core_attitudes pontus, 200 seleucid
core_attitudes pontus, 600 slave
core_attitudes gauls, 300 romans_julii
core_attitudes gauls, 300 spain
core_attitudes gauls, 200 germans
core_attitudes gauls, 100 britons
core_attitudes gauls, 600 slave
core_attitudes germans, 200 gauls
core_attitudes germans, 300 britons
core_attitudes germans, 300 dacia
core_attitudes germans, 600 slave
core_attitudes britons, 300 germans
core_attitudes britons, 100 gauls
core_attitudes britons, 600 slave
core_attitudes armenia, 100 parthia
core_attitudes armenia, 200 seleucid
core_attitudes armenia, 200 scythia
core_attitudes armenia, 600 slave
core_attitudes dacia, 200 romans_julii
core_attitudes dacia, 300 germans
core_attitudes dacia, 100 macedon
core_attitudes dacia, 300 thrace
core_attitudes dacia, 200 scythia
core_attitudes dacia, 600 slave
core_attitudes greek_cities, 300 romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes greek_cities, 200 carthage
core_attitudes greek_cities, 100 seleucid
core_attitudes greek_cities, 200 pontus
core_attitudes greek_cities, 300 macedon
core_attitudes greek_cities, 600 slave
core_attitudes numidia, 100 carthage
core_attitudes numidia, 300 egypt
core_attitudes numidia, 600 slave
core_attitudes scythia, 200 armenia
core_attitudes scythia, 200 dacia
core_attitudes scythia, 200 thrace
core_attitudes scythia, 600 slave
core_attitudes spain, 200 carthage
core_attitudes spain, 300 gauls
core_attitudes spain, 600 slave
core_attitudes thrace, 300 romans_brutii
core_attitudes thrace, 200 scythia
core_attitudes thrace, 200 macedon
core_attitudes thrace, 300 dacia
core_attitudes thrace, 600 slave
core_attitudes slave, 600 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate, macedon, egypt, seleucid, carthage, parthia, pontus, gauls, germans, britons, armenia, dacia, greek_cities, numidia, scythia, spain, thrace
I've inserted a lot more rows in my modified version to try and improve the chances of survival for most factions. Each faction still remains at war with the rebels (slave), but overall hostilities have been reduced. Why for example have the Julii been given default 410 (just over a hostile diplomatic mentality) towards Carthage? Must be to do with the Senate mission involving Caralis, but other than that, these two factions rarely engage in warfare through the entirity of an imperial campaign.
Also, each faction now at least has a core attitude to their immediate neighbours - before there were scarcely any core attitudes in place. I'm not sure if the AI follows these values by the book, but IMO they required tweaking to avoid campaign maps as displayed above, IE steamrollering factions.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
But any human player will steamroller given the opportunity! In fact in most campaigns I will be looking for my first war in the first few turns.
I think ideally you want a more aggressive AI. Otherwise what you end up with is one human superpower taking advantage of many equally sized AI factions who are all doing very little with outdated troops. This is particularly frustrating when playing with a Roman faction and the other Roman factions are doing very little to further their empire. I remember getting frustrated with the Julii in previous versions as so often they'd simply refuse to attack the Gauls.
Also, remember in RTW one can only replace outdated units when they're killed as this is the only time when unit upkeep is freed. This is where some form of unit upgrading feature would be extremely beneficial to the peaceful factions. Without it though, the AI doesn't disband archaic units and therefore a stagnant AI faction is likely to be one with town militia throughout their armies.
In my mind what makes a good campaign is one where the prevailing factions are different each time. What you don't want is repetition of which AI factions always win.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
For instance, one nice thing to do with this diplomacy is gang up Parthia and Seleucids on Egypt and encourage Pontus to tackle Armenia rather than Seleucids!
That might balance out the eastern factions and make it a little more interesting.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo
For instance, one nice thing to do with this diplomacy is gang up Parthia and Seleucids on Egypt and encourage Pontus to tackle Armenia rather than Seleucids!
That might balance out the eastern factions and make it a little more interesting.
Yes, I've been considering reworking diplomacy to ally various factions against Egypt to try to keep the Seleucids from breaking down immediately. Considering the same for Carthage-Numidia-Spain-Gaul-Britain, it should help Gaul and slow Britain. Numidia might be able to focus its resources into holding Siwa. While these factions will eventually end up fighting amongst one another, at least this would give them a chance to retard the stronger Roman/Egyptian factions.
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Egypt are definitely the problem faction in the middle east. I'd stripped 3 of their provinces (given them to the rebels) back in RTW v1.2, reduced their population growth rates, starting armies, various unit sizes, stats etc to bring them in line with their neighbours. AFAIK, Egypt were earning around 7000 denarii per turn in an unmodded vanilla copy of RTW. After modification, this is roughly 1000 denari from 3 starting provinces.
Yeah, I suppose you could set the default stances to allies (as with the Romans) so that they have a combined power to fight off Egyptian raids. Tbh, I just like to keep changng things to keep the game interesting, rather than 'same old' each new imperial campaign.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo
For instance, one nice thing to do with this diplomacy is gang up Parthia and Seleucids on Egypt and encourage Pontus to tackle Armenia rather than Seleucids!
That might balance out the eastern factions and make it a little more interesting.
Sounds good, but if two or three AI factions don't dominate then the human player isn't going to have strong opposition later in the game. Of course, in RTW playing as the Romans you have to eventually beat the other roman families, so there is that challenge.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
Sounds good, but if two or three AI factions don't dominate then the human player isn't going to have strong opposition later in the game. Of course, in RTW playing as the Romans you have to eventually beat the other roman families, so there is that challenge.
Yes, but the problem is often *which* factions dominate and how rapidly.
I'm not even sure that I've even had the civil war. By the time that comes around I'm already unstoppable and bored. Starting with the civil war ongoing might be interesting...then it might be a single uber Roman faction that emerges for the late game.
A big problem with the game is that it is structured so that rapid conquest is a necessity, because each turn you sit stagnant you lose more income. So while I might prefer a liesurely pace, I'm forced to fight like a demon to conquer everything, rather than try to hold an empire. As with the tactical map, the strategic play is accelerate. 10 RTW years is about 50 actual years.
-
Re: Default diplomacy between the AI
Umm is it just me or is it alot harder to maintain public order? in 1.2-1.3 a small garison of like 2-3 town watch plus a governer allowed very high taxes, now you need a near half to ful stack garison just to pull off normal taxese
-
Re: Undocumented Patch Changes RTW 1.5
Oops? I had always use for much more garrison. Big metropolis are not easy to handle, so I use to use lots of peasants. Now akademy helps to maintain order as well.:san_kiss:
