Suggestions for v0.74/0.8

I seem to recall someone in another thread mentioning that when cities rebel they have to rebel to -someones- control. Is it impossible to have all cities rebel to Eleutheroi control? This would mean that recently conquered cities would not revert to the original owners - but I think this can be rationalised as the locals reasserting their independence.

An expansion on this: if it is possible it might be good to allow homelands (type i governed provinces) to revert to the original owner, but to force all other provinces to revert to independent (Eleutheroi) control?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou

Yeah, I think you answered your questions already brad. We just can't do a lot of the things with the game engine the way it is now, and we have to stay in bounds here. Interesting ideas though.

BTW Caesar did the same thing as Genghis Khan there too. When moving through Greece he certainly made examples of some cities and others capitulated quickly (they had been on Pompey's side). I suspect this has happened countless times with countless other armies as well.

---

is it possible for besieged cities according to their (or the general´s) loyalty to surrender randomly before the max siegetime has expired ?

a scroll could pop up offering their capitulation and if you accept it could be handled like a successful bribe ?
...or offer a randsom to lift the seige

maybe it could still be possibel to plunder the town but being negative to your reputation

I don't think there's any way to do that Teutobod. We would like to have surrenders of towns (affected by the town's loyalty or the general's traits or whatever), but it's just not something the system gives us a way to alter. If anyone found such a way, we'd love to hear it though. We have not found a way to insert a single scroll with options to choose - it's something RTW didn't feel the need to include (you'll have to remember that scripts weren't even designed for the campaign - they just were put in to help take the player through the prologue).

Is it possible to have a descrption of each province or city in the game somewhere? Just a little brief thing, whether it's rich or poor quality land, an interesting fact or detail, information about any particular nationalist sentiment, just a little something to make you feel more connected to the game world.

I don't know how to implement this in game, but it feels like despite all the information about the units, buildings etc, there's not a lot of info about the land itself.

For example, you might have 'Nisa: Nisa is at the very heart of the Parthian homeland. It is a land of deep, fertile valleys and high, arid mountains. It's vast wilderness areas experience frequent bouts of extreme weather, and the locals complain that they must sleep on the roofs of their houses for much of the year due to the extreme heat, often touching 40 or even 50 degrees celcius.

As this region is deep within parthia, and the people here consider their nomadic parthian culture and independence to be at the very heart of their identity, foreign rulers cannot expect these to be the most loyal of subjects.'

Or something like that. I dont know if this could be implemented through a script that make province descriptions pop up in the General's traits box or if they could be made to appear in the province description thing that pops up when you mouse over the province. If it was possible in any way though, I'd love to see it done.

If someone would write them, we could give the province/settlement descriptions to the governor of the province. This would be great and is something we've been wanting, to have certain provinces influence the generals who inhabit them, but it would take a lot of research.

Maybe it could include a short history of what historical events happened here during our timeline, what battles, etc.

Quote:

---

It'd be really neat if governments could be even more complicated - I have a bunch of kooky ideas but I don't really understand the capabilities of the scripting language so I am loathe to start babbling away building castles (empires!) in the sky as it were.

---

Yeah me too. The problem is the game has a limit of 64 building blocks and EB is already at 64. However, there might be ways to compact some of the existing blocks to free up some slots or squeeze extra buildings into the existing slots. Time will tell. I think you should babble though as even if only 10% of the ideas here are possible it would still be cool.

Quote:

---

This is an error I think, cause in this way the main aspect of the roman history(so real realism) is excluded from the game; I'm talking about the "CIVIL WAR", between senate and great families of the roman history

---

I think the old roman factions becoming new factions is better but it would be great if the old mtw style civil wars could be added back somehow with scripting.

Quote:

---

Is there ANY way to reduce the number of brigands spawning

---

You can mod the frequency in rtw 1.5.

(Completely irrelevant but i've been testing EB building stuff in 1.5 and deleted all the recruitment lines for everyone but me so i wouldn't be hassled by the ai. lol, you should see the huge swarms of pirate fleets you get when the ai isn't fighting them because they can't build ships. I couldn't move anywhere by sea at all without getting attacked 3 or 4 times a turn.)

Quote:

---

Finding some way to do cooler things with the rebel spawns would be nice. Is it possible to alter spawn army size and frequency from province to province? Can you decrease the frequency based on the amount of time a province is controlled or by the presence of certain buildings?

And related to this subject, any chance of decreasing random spawns in favor of major rebellions, which could be triggered by certain things (eg, Carthage hires no mercs, so all the mercs who travelled there looking for employment revolt up and down the seacoast--not quite realistic, but better than citizen militia armies). Or, even better, if you could detect the recruitment of machimoi in the Egyptian armies, you could trigger large machimoi rebellions. That could also help curb Ptolemaic expansion

---

The brigand type rebels all work off the same frequency i think but the brigand ones are really boring imo and in my ideal game they'd be removed and replaced with script-based major rebellions from time to time. It would be even better if these rebellions were influenced by the sort of things you mention. I really like the idea of faction-specific problems an the machimoi thing would be a perfect candidate for the ptolemaic faction problem.

Hey

I was thinking about how war declarations work. Here is the deal:

- Sneak attack. You march you army into a neutral army or besiege their cities with no warning.

- You declare war, then march your armies, etc..

If you do not declare war first, the faction leader gets some sort "not trusted" trait that will take -5 to influence +1 management or something.

You "declare" war by having a diplomat in your enemy's territory when you attack one of their armies. If you do no, it is a sneaky attack.

Cheers

Quote:

---

Or, even better, if you could detect the recruitment of machimoi in the Egyptian armies, you could trigger large machimoi rebellions. That could also help curb Ptolemaic expansion

---

Mhh this sounds interesting. Could you elaborate? Unfortunately i know nothing about machimoi rebellions.

Well, the Ptolemies didn't recruit many native troops for their armies until the run-up to Raphia in 217. The native phalanx troops performed so well against the Seleukid phalanx that they got a bit more ambitious for their own share of power, and even began to contemplate throwing the Makedonians out entirely. Starting in the last years of the third century, and continuing off and on afterwards, Egyptian rebellions would be kicking off, with veteran machimoi soldiers providing the military core to the armies.

Ok but what would cause this rebellions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LorDBulA

Ok but what would cause this rebellions?

---

Military reforms? Triggered by army size/territorial extent or a certain number of high level MICs being constructed in Ptolemian homelands?

I don't spose it's possible to test for what type of unit is being built other than infantry, cavalry etc.

If you broke down ptolemaic recruitment somehow so you had "greek" barracks for the greek units and "egyptian" barracks for the native machamoi troops and then make it really difficult for the ptolemaic player to survive without building at least some of these barracks. Something like that maybe.

The cities on the Greek peninsula always seem to get depopulated quickly; maybe add some more to their starting population.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teutobod II

is it possible for besieged cities according to their (or the general´s) loyalty to surrender randomly before the max siegetime has expired ?

a scroll could pop up offering their capitulation and if you accept it could be handled like a successful bribe ?
...or offer a randsom to lift the seige

maybe it could still be possibel to plunder the town but being negative to your reputation

---

We can change a cities ownership, maybe we could do something with this..

i got a new idea wel meby not new but
you now you can make 1 bulding at a city but why 1 when you can make 2 or 3 etc

This is a limitation of the game system; we cannot change it to allow the construction of multiple buildings at the same time. At least, I think that is what you were suggesting. :dizzy2:

You can adjust the order of multiple buildings in the queue by clicking and dragging, however. So if you have a 20-turn building being constructed, you can start construction on a shrine and then drag it in front of the government building to get it built in a few turns. Then the 20-turn building will resume construction when the quick building is finished.

I don't know if this is the right thread to post suggestions about traits but here goes. I've always thought barbarian generals should get more traits that make the general and his retiue stronger in battle while Roman (and many other factions) generals should get fewer. A barbarian general would generally be in his position because of his physical prowess and ability in battle whearas there is no reason why a Roman General should be more capable or last longer in battle than other soldiers (other than being well equiped). Celtic sources clearly show that the job of a leader was demonstrate personal valour in the field. In addition, Roman generalls should get more traits that make them better generals given that barbarian factions often had more limited ideas about soldiering (their martial culture usually being based on raids). Clearly the only way to make barbarian generals better in combat is to increase their experience and the HP of the general so I think barbarian generals should get more traits that increase these. In Celtic and Germanic 'hero culture' a war leader was expected to fight whearas the job of a Roman general was to command.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by khelvan

This is a limitation of the game system; we cannot change it to allow the construction of multiple buildings at the same time. At least, I think that is what you were suggesting. :dizzy2:

---

You could do it with 0 build times though, couldn't you?. Some buildings are actual infrastructure that take time to build- city walls, roads or sewers, fr'instance, but some kinda more represent civic organisations and systems for which you could make a case for simultaneous builds- education, religion, grain supplies. Actually I think that the build tree is fast enough, but maybe you could consider making the first level of religion, education, law enforcement have a zero build time, with longer build times for subsequent levels of development. What I mean is it takes years to build a Pantheon or a Cathedral, but I could get a prayer-meeting together tomorrow. The same applies to Universities and discussion groups.
Roads, however,are too fast- two turns I think for the first level of road? That's quick. I also think that roads should cost upkeep every turn, if that's possible. If they're not surveyed and regraded etc on a regular basis then you get massive chariot-swallowing potholes.
Actually most buildings should cost some upkeep- and that'd be another way to keep incomes in line. PLaying as KH I have a massive income if I choose not to spend it every turn. Is it possible to attach a per-turn cost to buildings the same as for units?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oudysseos

You could do it with 0 build times though, couldn't you?. Some buildings are actual infrastructure that take time to build- city walls, roads or sewers, fr'instance, but some kinda more represent civic organisations and systems for which you could make a case for simultaneous builds- education, religion, grain supplies. Actually I think that the build tree is fast enough, but maybe you could consider making the first level of religion, education, law enforcement have a zero build time, with longer build times for subsequent levels of development. What I mean is it takes years to build a Pantheon or a Cathedral, but I could get a prayer-meeting together tomorrow. The same applies to Universities and discussion groups.

---

Yeah, all the Stoics needed was a porch, and Plato just had a grove of trees! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oudysseos

You could do it with 0 build times though, couldn't you?. Some buildings are actual infrastructure that take time to build- city walls, roads or sewers, fr'instance, but some kinda more represent civic organisations and systems for which you could make a case for simultaneous builds- education, religion, grain supplies. Actually I think that the build tree is fast enough, but maybe you could consider making the first level of religion, education, law enforcement have a zero build time, with longer build times for subsequent levels of development. What I mean is it takes years to build a Pantheon or a Cathedral, but I could get a prayer-meeting together tomorrow. The same applies to Universities and discussion groups.

---

The thing is that though you could set up a shrine in a few days, for it to have any beneficial effect would take time, and thats what the time for construction is taking into effect (or at least thats how I see it). Though I do think that one of the greatest restrictions of the RTW engine (and all TW engines) is that you cannot build more than one building (or recruit more than unit) at any one time. Damn you, CA! What are your reasonings! Ah well, EB offers enough enjoyment for me to get past that stuff.

Foot

Only in a few cases does a "building" in EB represent an actual building. In most cases these are abstractions forced upon us by the game system. Anything you might think would be applicable to a 0-turn build time likely falls under the "abstraction" category.

I sincerely doubt we will ever see 0-turn build times for anything at all within EB.

As I said I think that the developement of cities is fast enough in gameplay terms- I was just wondering if the 0 build time trick would work for buildings too.

But what about my idea for upkeep costs on buildings? Is that even possible?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oudysseos

As I said I think that the developement of cities is fast enough in gameplay terms- I was just wondering if the 0 build time trick would work for buildings too.

---

0 turn build time doesn't work. I tried that some time ago in vanilla, I made a couple of buildings have a 0 turn build time ... the buildings were never constructed.

The queue was full, and constructed buildings fine, except the 0-turn ones, they would simply remain in the queue forever.

Oh, and, I love this mod.:2thumbsup:

How bout creating a script (if possible) so that when a player blockades a port, that player recieves the trade money from that port would generally get? This would make navies profitable, since their only purpose seems to be transporting troops, now navies could be used to collect cash.

I'd quite like to have some what of abandoning a settlement to the Eleutheroi - thereby establishing a "buffer state" or just letting local political factions take over.

This is something I wish I could have done during my "bashing" campaigns in Gaul when I was not ready to actually colonise the place yet.

I think you've already had a debate about diplomacy but it wouldn't hurt. How about you'd put a rule into the script for ai starting to sue for peace after you've taken over a few of their cities? I really don't enjoy it when i have to walk all over the seleucid empire or chartage just for them to leave me alone...

Well I think it is best to release the 1.5 port as soon as possible. If there's any lesson to be had from the open beta it's that it's MUCH easier to fix and improve when the community gets its dirty little hands and heads on it.

And also, since 1.5 is so different from 1.2, most suggestions made now would not be valid given the 1.5 situation. The new battlefield and strat map AI changes a lot of things.

Really the only thing that I like to remind the team given the 1.5 environment, are the new bug fixes, namely the charge bonus, amphibious invasion (no land bridges please) and "sword on non-phalanx spearmen" (feel free to use the regular swordsmen skeleton for the sword secondary). And oh yeah, if you take advantage of the now quantified anti-cav bonus, you can get your Triarii to fight infantry with swords and cavalry with spears in that nice smart way that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

We have been, and remain, hard at work on trying to port this mod to 1.5. We continue to be dedicated to solving current problems in the meantime.