Printable View
I am playing the Aedui, and managed to not be losing money after only capturing one province. Of course, I disbanded much of my army too, but I am still making much more than before. Now it is 264 BC and I am well on my way to conquering all of Gaul.
Hmm I hope we didn't make it too easy for you guys, or we'll have to rehaul everything again ;)
Although personally I'm glad we got rid of the "click "end turn" for first 20 turns just to start making profit" for some factions, perhaps we've gone too far? What do you think?
Quote:
Originally Posted by eadingas
I like how it is, but some areas of the map are now extremly valuable. For example the Nile is incredibly crazy, so Ptolemaioi will never lose ground to the Seleucids. The Romans also become very rich due to that.
Casse is a lot easier and have avoided the problem you mention (Not an altogether bad thing).
Well, Ptolemies have all the right to be extremely rich - they are the "granary of the World" after all. I don't think, historically, they ever had money problems... We are countering that with rebellions and giving them Seleucids as immediate, and powerful, mortal enemies on one side, and strong Carthage on the other... I haven't yet seen Ptolemies become an unstoppable juggernaut, like other factions tend to do..
Rome has become a bit too powerful, IMO, not only because of resources... we'll see about that.
Well, I am only playing on hard, and it wasn't too much easier to destroy the Arverni (I still didn't have enough money to recruit anything). Mainly it just took away the time I spent getting out of debt after destroying the Arverni.
Actually, I noticed that, too as the Aedui. It took no time at all to get out of debt after those Averni dogs had been put down. I must admit, I didn't pay too much attention to how much trade changed things (the incone summary scroll for each settlement), but the economic recovery was noticably quicker.
Note that I did keep the remnants of my starting army. The Aedui/Averni can recover in no time if they disband all the cavalry units, archers (too expensive for their size), Mala Gaeroas hordes, etc. I find disbanding is usually an invitation to the Romani dogs to take your lands, though..
Well, I disbanded some before destroying the Arverni, so I never went into debt. I didn't disband what I had after destroying the Arvarni though. I'm still poor, just not as much as before.
Ah, the eternal problem of RTW: a too powerfull Rome. The reason is, and I think the same for EB, is that they have all too soon acces to units that are way to powerfull for their immediate neighbours. (Why else would Epeiros nearly always have been pushed out of Italy in no time, if not for my diplomacy a.k.a. allying to both?) With EB it's not like in Vanilla, the neighbours simply not having any true elites that can prove a match to those of Rome, it's simply that Rome has acces to them right from the start, whereas their neighbours don't. And so the overall result still is a way to strong Rome.Quote:
Originally Posted by eadingas
Also I have noticed the Romani to be extremly rich in comparison to other factions of a similair size: Rome doesn't seem to have much of upkeep costs to pay for. Maybe it's worth limitting the financial support this faction receives from script a bit further?
That sentence may also apply to other factions like the Casse that invariably end up being filthy rich.
Cheaper units for Rome (in Italy) make sense, due to the fact the region was noticeably more densely populated than other areas at the time, giving an advantage in manpower especially clear in the second Punic War. Much like Greece was in its expansionist days.
Well, not having a lot of expensive cavalry to maintain might help as well?
I know that when I play the Romans (which is normally what I play) I rarely have more than two units of cavalry in my stacks (I try to operate two or three of these) and two or so "police detachments" of two cavalry units and a trainee general family member. If I compare this to my Baktrian, Makedonian, or Pahlava (!) armies then the difference is striking.
I must be a Cheapskate 3 then because I hardly ever use any cavalry formations apart from family members maybe its a Seleukid thing it is quite hard to have enough armies being so spread out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trithemius
I'd say Romani stats may be too high, and if the Greeks can't recruit pezhetairoi from the start, the Romans probably shouldn't get triarii.
Really? Seleukids get some okay cavalry too, don't they? (I have yet to try them...)Quote:
Originally Posted by Andronikos Kypriakos
They certainly do they get Hetairoi best cavalry in the game as far as I'm concerned Mad Asabara Persian medium cavalry I'm trying to use them more there not bad but let them get pinned down and they are toast and last but not least Kataphraktoi I have only used them in a custom battle and I wasnt to impressed but I think if I had some time to get used to them they would be a great unit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trithemius
My main problem is an economic one playing as Seleukeia I need an army to attack Ptolemaios and army to stop Pontos getting delusions of grandeur an army to put down the rebellions in the east both population uprisings and the straps of Parthia and Baktria and at some point Hayasdan will make a play for Media. I have tons of cash coming in but it is all needed elsewhere and 6 months ago :wall:
I LOVE IT ! :2thumbsup:
Well, no AI faction seems to use really expensive cavalry except for what they've got at the start of the campaign. I think that is because of the AI loving large but rather worthless (like fully composed of pantodapoi and akontistai) instead of high quality armies: both due to the fact that it takes time and lots of money to build the prerequisited buildings and in the meantime they have spend all of it on infantry units. The only elite units I have so far seen were heavy infantry ones...Quote:
Originally Posted by Trithemius
So I don't think it's because of the cavalry: it is because of the fact that the non Roman factions have to start everything from (nearly) scratch whereas the Romans don't.
You better get ready for parthia in 0.8 too, they seem to get a lot more interested in giving the seleukids trouble. :grin:
Finally: it makes some sense trying to ally yourself to Parthia playing as KH or any other faction not at war with the Seleukids from the start...
(In my latest campaign they seem to be a little inactive, so far they've got only 3 regions after more than 20 years, and since they have said bye bye to the alliance with Sleukia they haven't done a thing of significance whatsoever.)
While it may be a bit off-topic, I have a question regarding this very issue. While it is historically correct for the Romans to have access to all three basic army units, (Hastati, Principes, Triarii) should not all of the Successor states as well as the Greeks and Epirotes have access to their high end standard troops (Pezhetairoi, Hypaspists, etc.) as well?Quote:
Originally Posted by paullus
Indeed, should not cities like Sparta, Athens, Cornith, & Pella, not only be cities to large_cities but have a nearly fully developed recruitment and training system? (Though this can unbalance things)
Some of them might be, but the EB team has had trouble with building placement at the start of the game. It was detailed in a thread somewhere.
If you look at it though, the stats for the Roman infantry early in the game are pretty weak compared to what Carthage can field. The Heavy Liby-Phoenician infantry, Elite African Pikeman, and Elite African Infantry are just examples.
Your three examples are elites, and should also be compared against their elite counterparts. (Triarii, Samnites)Quote:
Originally Posted by abou
Part of this problem is rome is able to build triarii in so many provinces at the start. IIRC almost all of the roman starting cities have Type I government. Samnites they are able to build only in one city (Capua, IIRC), so they shouldn't be too much of a problem.
I also read somewhere in the forums that early triarii would be toned down a little in 0.8, which should affect this.
Add to the places, where you can recruit Samnites from the start, Canusium too.
I read that for recources to appear in the right places i have to start a new campaign. but i'm wondering if the gameplay changes also take affect after starting a new campaign. Can i continue my savegame, taking the weird recource locations for granted? or gameplay effects be messed up too?
you might have noticed, graphics matter little to me.
Well you simply won't have anything changed.
Heeeeelllllllpppppppppppppppppppppp!!!!
:help: :help: :help: :help:
Please o please o please!
For those of us who stare at the screen when confronted with the simple directions "Unpack it to your RTW directory"
errrr....:dizzy2:
What does that mean? -exactly.
I'm dying to give this resource patch a go. Thinking of trying Iberia (we love silver!!), but... :shame: I don't know how to "Unpack it to your RTW directory"
Please, some kind soul enlighten me!
thanks
RTW directory is "C:/Program Files/Activision/Rome - Total War"
uless you have eras, in which it is "C:/Program Files/The Creative Assembly/Rome - Total War"
Thanks,
giving it a try. Will let you know how it goes. Once again - thanks.
Well, that was embarassingly easy. Thanks for the help.Off to poke around Iberia!
:2thumbsup: