Ahh, don't we all love to burn those settlements to the ground. I've always wanted to destroy a settlement down to the size of a village.
Printable View
Ahh, don't we all love to burn those settlements to the ground. I've always wanted to destroy a settlement down to the size of a village.
You can't destroy some of those things because their visibility on the map is hardcoded (once they are created).
Try it for yourself - give another destructible building level the roads capability or wall level. Then build it. Then destroy it. Surprise - the roads and walls are still there on the strat map! Well, not a surprise for us anyway - that's why we have to leave them as indestructible.
Case Solved: Hardcoded!
Great Music!
But we can still destroy farms and "governers house", since they don't show up on the map.
The informative texts in loading screens are usually too long to read properly, at least for me. Perhaps the historical battles screen could be used for such texts, in the description; for instance, a battle would be named "Facts: Lorica Hamata" or whatever, with the text providing detailed information and a clear indication that it is not an actual battle. This way, a whole wealth of information not directly relevant to gameplay could be included.
What about including the walls from Athens to Peiraios, just like the Akropolis and Delphinion?
This is partly a responsibility tucked under my wing, as the chief of siege warfare.. But I fear that this may only be possible with the new settlement system for M2TW.. Until we see such capabilities it's not the highest priority..
But this is certainly a dream of our's. Same for other famous cities like Syrakosion, Roma etc..
Farms and governors' houses do show up on the map. Farms upgrades change the way the whole texture of the province looks (from plain grass to lines and fields) and governors houses change the way the city looks (goes from small village to huge city).
I think the amount of money the AI factions get are a little out of control and should be scaled down a little.
By 250 B.C., playing as Rome, I had takes the Italian peninsula, and was engaged in a fight for sicily, pretty historically accurate at this point, but the Aedui had defeated the Arverni, controlled most of modern day France, and had about 10 fully stacked armies it attacked me with.
I agree that if the AI does not get monetary boosts it's easy to conquer them, but to give them so much money that every rebel faction city is fully stacked, and all other AI factions get enough money to support more than a fully stacked army per city they control, is a little much. It makes every single battle in the game en epic battle and this just destroys any realism you hope to create with the mod...
I would really love to see a more realistic economy system that balances these issues.
-Dampiel-
I think that could be fixed by fine-tuning the money added to AIs, in the short term. Perhaps 20,000 mnai instead of 30,000?
Any idea where that is located?
*Edit*
Ahhh....I found it....
Data/World/Maps/Campiagn/Imperial_Campiagn/Campaign_Script.txt (At the very bottom)
I changed all values to 10000, I might raise it if it is too little, I will test a few games and see how it goes...
hope that helps anyone who was having the same frustrations I was having :)
-Dampiel-
Ahh, Never knew that they affected the map. Well just for curiosity, why can you destroy ports, since they do show up on the map.
Oh yeah, I second that money thing.
This is campagne script. Its only run once at the very start of campagne. So you only changed amount of many factions get at the beginning of campagne.Quote:
Campaign_Script.txt
To modify economy assistance durning the game go to Data/scripts/ebbs.txt file.
Oh wow thanks :)
I had a hard time finding that hehe...
-Dampiel-
Kart-Hadast (should be Qart Hadasht) should have a unique building or something to represent its unique system of walls, 3 walls for most of the perimeter, and those had stables, barrackses and supply depos in them, plus an extending sea wall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shigawire
And I agree that the AI's cash increments should be a little altered though it seems so far to be fairly balanced in the new version, experimention with the unit creating upon general appearance would be interesting.
I doubt we will split them by 0.8, but the unique in carthage will get split up into two for sure. The walls/port and the temple complex there (unlike other temples in our game so it's something of an exception).
YEAH! Qodesh Baal Hammon!!! And the Cothon!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
Ok, here's something. I'll naturally play as the Getae, but am always bothered that the economy of the starting city sucks (because of the cost to maintain the army) and now I'm wondering if you could either lower the maintenance cost of the units you get initially or if you could make the first city (Buridava) a more advanced city to stop or at least make the turn by turn debt you will acquire a lot less.
It ain't supposed to be easy for them. :grin: If they take control of Kallatis with their starting forces, things will get easier for them soon.
It's the same with Baktria, the Yuezhi, Pontos, and Hayasdan too. Simply a matter of figthing two brutal battles against surrounding rebel scum... and bide you time until your finances are stable once again. :grin:
Perhaps that's the way it's supposed to be.
Makedon too.:no:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
I'm finding more often than not when starting an EB campaign with the factions i've played so far, it's generally easier to just disband these large starting armies or throw them at the enemy to purposely take huge losses just to fix my economy, and then rebuilding an army of units tailored to my immediate needs.
From what i've read, a lot of other players generally do this as well.
This is quite silly to be honest, as I feel forced to take several steps back before I can take one step forward, while every other faction is being gifted money every turn just for being the enemy (AI).
I can't really see the realism here either.
I can speak for Hayasdan, its starting postion shall be much harder and will require paitence. Attacking the provinces of Kartli or Egrisi will invoke the anger of Arche Seleukeia (AS had a treaty with the Caucasus Iberia during this period that lasted till 260BCE). Also I'm hoping that expanding too much (ie building gov1, gov2 and perhaps gov3) will force a situation with Arche Seleukeia for this period as well. But remember that AS will be concerned with the East for much of this time so you might be able expand under their nose. Scripting is bloody powerful.
For factions who were mobilized in our starting year, they will have large armies (notice that Casse had just signed a treaty with surrounding tribes, and so their forces are far smaller). Hayasdan will start with a much smaller starting army, to represent AS keeping a close eye on this dangerously independent kingdom.
Foot
Yeah, and the seleukids seem to be more powerful than they were in 0.74.
As for disbanding some troops at the start, yeah, I usually do it too, or use them to attack immediately. This is the reason though: We have to have good armies for these factions to start with or the human player will just stomp other AI factions into the ground in the first few years. It's an argument of "it's too easy to conquer other territories at the start" vs. "my army is too advanced for my economy at the start", and since it's not too difficult to just disband soldiers, we err on leaning towards the latter.
Okay, this may seem a little random, but it is integral for an idea I am looking at proposing. Just how many potential unit slots does the game support?
500, and 255 models.
Foot
Well, I usually go for attacking and takin as many towns as posible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
troops die out + new towns = my economy comes up. :2thumbsup:
I say don't change anything here.
Any takers at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
I don't think we have any additional unit load screens in 0.8. But there are a lot of other ones. Only one has much text.
You do remind me though - I need to go through and change the font on those to make them a little more legible. I don't think we will be dropping them, but we will try to make them easier to read at least.
We really wish we could specify when loading screens appeared, that would be so awesome...
Those of us with crappy computers have no problem reading the loading screens.....
I won a "prize" as a result of being able to read even the longest of loading screens at least twice through...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lignator
Too few, perhaps in EB2 my grand scheme will come true, different game engine too, so no point yet debating whether my idea is possible. You will just have to wait to discover my genious!:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
I am wondering if it is possible to be able to lose men or even your general when spending long times in the enemy territory? Like is it possible that when your general gets the "Tightening there belts" or whatever trait, could it be scripted that the general recieves the "plague" with that trait? This way you will keep losing men til you get resupplied.
Unfortunately there's no way we know of that this could be achieved. We've thought about it but it seems to be something that is thoroughly hardcoded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus_Aurelius
I doubt the EB members want to answer this again, they are probably tearing their hair out as they read your post. Its not your fault, they've just been asked this, and answered it, so many times. The answer is no, it is hardcoded.
*Edit*
OK, so TA did answer you, my fault.
ok well I guess I should have tried a search
I would like to see Macedon overhauled a bit,
They should be able to build a Satrapeia Makedonike anywhere they go. Thats what the macedonians did under Alexander.
They also trained persian units to fight in the Macedonian tradition, so once a Satrapeia is built, Macedonian units should be possible as well, at least Taxies Hoplites and Phalangites...
Currently, you stray not very far north of traditional homelands, and you are forced to build type 3-4 governments and only recruit barbarian units, which I really do not see the Macedonians using...
The persian units of Darius were just as foreign as the barbarian units to the north and the towns there should be able to be converted to Macedonian standards...
One of those towns, I think Tyris? (should have written it down...)can have a type 1 government, but cannot recruit ANY units at all, not even barbarian...
These little types of changes I think could really round out v8.0
-Dampiel-
There`s something I`m curious:
As koinon hellenon, my FM`s ethnycities are for example athenian, rhodian, thessalioi, cretan, pontic greek, etc... but the thing is, if my armies conquer say makedon, why not having generals that are originary from makedonia, say makedon mesogaios, etc?
When I`m playing as epeiros, why not having generals which ethnicities are tarantinoi, samnite, or why not, roman if I conquer those regions?
I presume you see where I`m going. As Koinon Hellenon, I have generals that come from the pontic area, even though I haven`t set a foot in that area... but even though I have conquered makedonia, epeiros or Illyria, I haven`t got any generals from that area.
The thing is, can my FM have the ethnicities from the regions I conquer?
The same should be applied to the seleukids, celts, etc...
Bye.
PS: Probably is hardcoded, and the trait pool for the factions cannot be changed once the campaign starts...
Eventually all factions will be able to draw from ethnicities of conquered regions, but only if they did so historically! The thing is, when you first conquer a province, unless you share a very similar culture as that region (or a group within that region) it is very unlikely that you would go around hiring the locals for fighting (the hellenes will probably have the largest number of ethnicities as they grow larger). Basically this is planned but designing and implementing ethnicities takes time and 0.8 will focus on different areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by k_raso
Foot
The thing is that I was thinking about achemenid`s policys (and also alexander`s in some ways), when the persians conquered a region, for example Lycia, they hired Croesus and made him counselor... the same happened in other cases... Hippies (Hipías in spanish...) took active part in Darius`s expedition in the 1st persian war...
But I think you are right, those are exceptions, no conquered nation`s general would work for their vanquisher...
On the other hand that's how the Romans ruled their 'homeland': as long as the local elite remained loyal to Rome, they'd remain 'in the saddle'. According to EB, this is how the Epeirote kingdom was governed too.
That doesn't mean they would become a Family Member (whatever the family member means for different factions).Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
Foot
Those FM's are a substitute for the whole lot of generals, politicians, governors etc. In this way those people I mentioned prior to this post are pretty much that what is represented by the game's FM's. After all, lots of them would decide on making carreer in Rome for example and then become, say, a senator.
I think there must be a Hyasdan voice mode. I mean there must be a voice mod in the armenian language. If it's possible that would be very cool.:2thumbsup:
Already planned.Quote:
Originally Posted by KtotheC
Foot
if you need some one who can talk Armenian (Hayeren) for the voices I would like to help :yes:
I may have to call that offer in once 0.8 gets out. How good are you at translating as well?Quote:
Originally Posted by KtotheC
Foot
Not so bad if you need something translated from the english to the armenian language I could do that. If I can help with hayasdan ask and I will do what I can.
What about altering the greek unit descriptions a little, to make them appear with greek symbols rather than latin ones?
Like this:
https://img249.imageshack.us/img249/747/0015nu0.th.jpg
I would say Greek first and then Latin transliteration second.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
It's not final by any means.
You'll have noticed that for example all the accents are missing, and the spiritus isn't properly taken care of yet. It was just to show what I meant, anyway, because since I'm not into the spelling of ancient Greek, (I don't have a clue as to the correct placement of accents), I won't be able to do this properly unless I have examples in ancient Greek (which I haven't).
I'm still curious, though, about the opinion of the team on the possibility of altering the descriptions in the way I have proposed.
That idea of mine could be extended to buildings, and perhaps characters too.
Ok, I've started several campaigns as the Dacians to see what could be done to fix the economy early on. You said you wouldn't make the city more advanced, and that's fine, but my problem is that there is a large army of horse archers to the north east of the faction heir's starting position. This army always attacks, and you would have to get your troops together to fight them off. Is it possible to remove this army?
Yeah by destroying them. :laugh4:
Had a short campaign with the Dacians, got most my guys marched East, on the way I met an enemy force and those horse archers attacked from behind. Got squished in the middle. I won but it was a mess. Although I got a reinforcement CTD afterwards and couldn't be bothered to replay despite a patch came out to fix it days later. Moral of the story is, if I can beat them when they have an extra force you can be beat them no problem.
The unit selection in costom battles definitley needs clearing up. It's just one big mess of mercs and faction units.
Yes it does need cleaning up. There are so many peasant unit cards for some factions that you cannot tell the difference between each unit. I do think, however, that this sort of thing will be fixed in 0.8 or 1.0.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumbass
Dumbass: I like your name, it's kind of funny. I think that you may end up in the HoF 2006 for such a humorous user name. :thumbsup:
Heh, thanks. But what's HoF?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumbass
I'm sorry, that won't change, it has to do with the eb recruitment system.
Hall of FameQuote:
Originally Posted by Dumbass
I doubt we will switch to letters out of the english alphabet for those names. We did have this discussion a long time ago internally. People who don't know greek (or these other languages) can't really read or pronounce the names if we do that. The only exception to this is the 'v' for 'u' in the Latin, and we had a big discussion on that, but we felt that virtually everyone could still read the names even without knowing Latin.
Yeah, it`s kinda weird the first times you read those names, but one gets accustomed after a few days of faithful EB play...Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
PS: About the subject, I just noticed that Avlvs Brittanicus`s nick, in the "Brittanicus" part it has an "u" and not a "v"... why is that?
PS2: Ok, that was a weird observation from my part, just couldn`t help asking it... :sweatdrop:
I'm not a big fan of 'v's as 'u's, for one thing it doesn't seem to go well with the RTW font. But I have gotten used to it.
PS. I have noticed the 'u' in Avlvs Brittanicus's name as well and wanted to ask... :sweatdrop:
(no offense or anything)
How about including an additional stategic element as field costs for player armies outside of settlements as a simulation for food, transport, camp... costs?
1000 in homeland; even more expansive in enemy territory: 2000 ?
Only for the player because the AI can't handle it.
Example julii, same for other factions (including in your 4tpy script)
;################################################Field costs################
monitor_event CharacterTurnEnd FactionType romans_julii
and FactionIsLocal
and not EndedInSettlement
and not AgentType = admiral
and not AgentType = spy
and not AgentType = diplomat
and not AgentType = assassin
and InEnemyLands
console_command add_money romans_julii, -2000
end_monitor
monitor_event CharacterTurnEnd FactionType romans_julii
and FactionIsLocal
and not EndedInSettlement
and not AgentType = admiral
and not AgentType = spy
and not AgentType = diplomat
and not AgentType = assassin
and not InEnemyLands
console_command add_money romans_julii, -1000
end_monitor
Please don't do that. I'm sure some people don't want to spend all their money on building armies and paying unit support just to have to pay even more money for armies (oh, and wouldn't that make you have to pay money for every little army outside a city).Quote:
Originally Posted by repman
This may be a lot of work, but I read that Imperium total war (now dead) were going to script civil wars and famous invasions, like the second Punic war, or the teutonic invasions. I don't really know how it would work, but maybe this idea could be worked on and included in any future versions, as it adds more spice to the game.
But if you conquer germania with the aeduii, then there would be no historical teutonic invasion... the fact is that if your game develops in a different way to what happened historically (which happens 100% of times), then there would be no point of scripting the Cimbrian Wars, Cesar`s Civil War, or the Yuezhi/Tocharian Invasion of Baktria...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dumbass
Don`t get me wrong, I would love to fight against a punic mercenary army that crosses the alps commanded by someone named Hannibal (even though the smartness of the AI would spoil the historical feeling to be fighting against such general)... but wouldn`t you feel strange if, after you conquered and assimilated germania and scandinavia with the arvernii, and the romans are vanquished, some scroll pops up and say "A number of germanic tribes that dwelled on the scandinavian area, of which the most numerous and warlike are the cimbrian and the teutons, depart from their homeland to find a better place to live. So beware! if they cross through your lands and you are in their way... rumours are that they are heading towards the po valley, towards roman lands!!!"...
:speechless:
To be a properly historical event, that would requiere the condition of the subsistance of the Romans as a faction, and the scandinavian zone to be controlled either by the Sweboz, or to be rebel.
What I do agree, is that there could be mass migrations of peoples, originated by script, and composed of zonal units. For example, a vast migration of nomads (represented by some 2 or 3 full stacks) originated from the pontic steppe, towards the danubian area... or why not, a migration of celtic tribes, originated in the narbonensis area, towards the po valley in cisalpine gaul.
That wouldn`t requiere the condition of the existance of the helvetii, sarmatians, teutons/sweboz as a faction, since the race/culture/people groupings would subsist in most cases troughout the game, even after foreign conquest (unless the conquering nation aplies a massive genocide in such magnitude, that even the ZOR units dissapear).
It would rock if there could be scripted invasions and migrations, represented by the popping of some rebel full stacks in a certain region, and the scripted migration of those full stacks towards a certain settlement, killing every one that gets in their way. :grin:
:2cents:
Cheers!
On the other hand: (a while ago) you started a thread about displaying both a building's name and a 'translation' into English. That translation would be some way of adressing the problem you mentioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
And, maybe it's just me, but somehow it would feel better if the team added (that is, just adding, not removing their Latin counterparts per se) the original names. (:idea2: Seeing that the EB installer gives anyone the option to include and exclude certain features, such as the Latin Voice Mod, I wondered: would it be possible to include some separate descr.txt files that overwrite the original ones if someone wanted to? These files could contain all descriptions with the appropiate languages instead of 'Latin' version of the original ones.)
Note: I've noticed that while replacing any 'u' in the names of units, buildings and characters, EB has kept every 'u' in the starting provinces of the Romani. Why?
Well the conditions for Hannibal invading Italy would really only require Carthage to own a particular amount of provinces in Spain, and a hatred for the Romans, which happens a lot.
Civil wars don't have to be the one's that actually happened, just if your empire gets divided by unloyal and loyal generals (Idea for EB2 as I doubt it would work for RTW).
I'm still a big fan of the "battle field booty" idea raised about 16 pages back.
If the EB Team are tossing this around and thinking of implementing such an idea in future builds, could this be done by using a similar screen to that at the end of sieges. The one which gives the occupy, enslave and exterminate options with there various cash bonuses. Except with only the one option saying "Well done son" here's x amount of cash and x amount of slaves to be distributed to settlements or similar.
Like: using a script that counts the number of soldiers that don't leave the battle alive...
Some questions though:
is there a way of counting the various numbers of the various units that are sent into the fray? So destroying a lot of thorakitai could be worth more than destroy a bunch of akontistai, to reflect the fact that the latter don't have such expensive equipment as the first?
Will your own soldiers be counted in as well, giving that it would have been quite unlikely to strip your own (dead) men from all that could be worth a few minai?
Quote:
Originally Posted by repman
I really, really like this idea. An army outside a settlement costs more than the same army inside a settelement, and an army in enemy territory costs even. It bring in a realistic element called: LOGISTICS (currently it only happens when a General leads the army)
BUT IF this is to be implemented, then the player shouldn't have such a crappy economy, OR the AI shouldn't get so much cash bonus.
Quick question.Will I be able to play BI and Alexander with .08 downloaded?
I was thinking about the "Epic Stone Wall" and how everyone hates it... My suggestion is this: Rather than removing epic walls, the normal stone wall should be changed. If the 'stone wall' was changed to be a smaller, weaker, uglier wall, then the 'large stone wall' was made to be like the current 'stone wall' and 'epic' was made to 'large' ("downgrading" all the walls and putting a new one in). My thinking behind this is that alot of cities had walls made of stone around them, but not all of them had quality stone wall around them. Mud brick wall for example.
The problem is, this would require new battle map and strat map models and building modelers seem to be the one thing every mod is missing.
Probably not, as BI is RTW 1.6, and not 1.5 - the RTW version EB 0.8 will be using.Quote:
Originally Posted by scourgeofrome
There might be a way around this though (IF it is possible to have both a working version of RTW 1.0 and RTW BI):
first install Vanilla RTW, then make a backup of 1.0;
then install BI over the original RTW 1.0;
make another backup of your 1.0 folder;
patch it that backup to 1.5;
install EB 0.8;
play.
The second backup is just for safety: if something should go all wrong, you still have 1.0. You could therefore skip the second backup, and patch your first to 1.5 on which you then could install EB 0.8 and play it.
As I don't have either BI, or Alexander, I'm not sure though: still you could find out for yourself, by trying to do these steps for EB 0.7.4.
You could even try the same with Alexander, resulting in at least 3 versions of RTW on your computer...
Ah no, BI does not overwrite vanilla files (and neither does EB), it sort of acts as an add-on, whereby a seperate .exe tells the game to access different files (BI files) instead of vanilla files. BI files are 1.6, but vanilla files are still 1.5. This is roughly similar to how EB works at the moment. All its files are installed in a seperate folder in the RTW folder, and we use a shortcut with the command line -mod:eb to tell the RomeTW.exe to look in the EB folder for files rather than the vanilla folder. The great thing about this is that you don't need a seperate install of RTW to play EB and vanilla (though other mods that don't use the -mod: command will need a seperate install as usual).
Foot
Okay I really don't understand all of what you just said (I'm not really computer literate).So what your saying is I can access vanilla stil with EB installed.1.How and 2. Does that mean I can still add on BI and Alexander after .8 comes out. And for backing up files,how do I do that.I tried it once but nothing worked when I tried to install it to the new copy.
What about giving carth some mercs to hire in there "homeland"? I'm playing a carth game right now, but I cant find any.
From what I've understand carth used mostly mercs and alomst no native carth soldiers.
As it is right now its hard to play historical, because I cant find any mercs and it takes years to transport iberians back and forth. (plus iberia doesnt have that many mercs eighter)
The aim should be to make the historical way the easy way, since I pretty sure carth didnt use, gauls, iberians, numbs and whatever only to make it more of a challange. :P
0.8 works in the same way BI works. You'll notice, with BI installed, that there is a seperate folder for BI within the RTW folder, it is in essence a completey different set of files from vanilla. BI is accessed through a seperate .exe file, not the RomeTW.exe for normal RTW. Because they use different .exe files, they are essentially different games and thus have different version numbers. When BI is 1.6, RTW is 1.5. In just the same way that you can choose to play either RTW or BI from the same install, we have modded EB so that you can choose to play RTW and EB from the same install. We are able to do this because we can add a command line to the RomeTW.exe that tells the game to look in a seperate "EB" folder for the modified game files that we use.Quote:
Originally Posted by scourgeofrome
This means that on the same install, ie in the same RTW directory, you can have vanilla RTW, BI, Alexander and EB all working seperately and correctly.
the data files for vanilla RTW are found here:
Rome - Total War/data
the BI data files are found here:
Rome - Total War/BI/data
The EB data files are found here:
Rome - Total War/EB/data
Because they are all in seperate data folders the files don't affect each other and thus the all the different games can be played without fear of messing the others up.
Foot
Does that mean right now I can install Bi with the .74 version of EB?Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
No, for two reasons. EB 0.74 does not use the - mod: build and so overwrites the vanilla data files. Only if the mod uses the -mod: build can you use BI and vanilla RTW with it. The second reason is that EB 0.74 must have RTW 1.2, but BI must have RTW 1.3 to work (and automatically upgrades RTW when installed).
Foot