Printable View
The problem with the client rulers season trait being off is known and to fix it would require adding a few thousand lines of code if not more so it was chosen to leave it that way as it would be a hit to performance in no way proportional with the yield.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
I think the Babylonian New Year trait was changed so that it no longer causes problems.
so... did anyone tried the instructions yet?:juggle2:
Gonna do it later tonight and let you know.
Thank.. you.. Then post so we can all see that someone made it.. and then if there are any probs I'll just fix it during the day :chucks:
I tried downloading your group of files (most recent batch). You forgot the one called chat_filter.san (unless you left that out for a reason), but other than that it all seems to work perfectly. I haven't seen any night battles yet, but don't have any high-star generals. The campaign AI seems to amalgamate armies better as you said in your notes. Looking forward to occasional big battles and not pissy little sieges the AI normally hassles you with every turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maksimus
I see you've used this command in descr_strat
Can someone report if they got the faction eliminated pics to show up correctly when they eliminate a faction of course :beam:Code:options bi, night_battles_enabled
I installed as directed...now I have a CTD after faction selection screen on new campaign...reinstalling everything and will report back.
It's better to use download link.. Really the manual might be hard to implement because there are some Trrigers and traits that are in EB script's already - but just need to be 'unlocked'.. And because Some traits and descriptions in *txt files that you need to 'hunt down' and because some need to be added.. well.. there is nothing to help hereQuote:
Originally Posted by Blazing141
It's more likely that for EB 1.1 all will be more stable and clear! :shame:
Got it working but as the poster above mentions, the "faction eliminated" screen picture doesnt appear, instead you just get a box wit text...
Also, while I have the box "try a night battle" appearing, the game wont let me click on it to actually do a night battle--do I need to have a particular trait before that I can check the box and night batter becomes selectable?
Oh... yes.. I have ..:laugh4: I forgot to add it.. .. anyways.. You should have an option to use and try a 'night-fight' with any (I think) general.. Or if not - then he should gain some victories before he start's a battle. Pyrros can make night battles from the start for example (and he has no night_fighter trait)...so:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by CutLunch
I think you just need one better general, Like I said.. Pyrros can do it right away and so can Gonatas.. I think that some trait like 'good commander' or .. you know, win a couple of battles and the try again:yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Blazing141
Saw it? The info form Blazing141? The faction eliminated pics are not the prob any more - I think that if they can't be shown - the ALX.exe engine just pop's up the text... Realy.. Alexander is god for EB:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
Well they were not causing CTDs or anything just preventing the pics from showing up,
I'm not too big on night battles anyway they were very rare in those times, mostly skirmishes or raids were carried at night. Think about it for a Hellenistic faction to mantain the order needed for the line of phalanxes at night would've been close to impossible I believe, and for horse-archers to shoot in the night....
Most important thing is that the immortal FMs are gone.
Yes, I don't like night-battles much either.. That is just one + to EB 1 on Alex.exe, But what I am waithing for is Lgt to see if he can make some features from BI into Alex.. like swimming, or hordes.. or shiellwall (whic is ment anyways for some units in EB but due to RTW.exe engine limits it could not be implemented..).. And I am sure night battles were often in the Far East and nomad lands.. That is all the way from East Europe to China.. And even Germania and Gaul.. so.. For greeks I agree.. And if you are to play one night-fight with phalanx you will see that IT IS realy hard to command.. so, that is 'value' for me..Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
Anyway, If you are just to 'check' ALX.exe on EB for just 10 turns... you will be happy.. I can't give you data for campaign speed because I don't know how to measure it.. but!
My CPU is in very 'lighter' ambient and more friendly environment after I use Alex engine for my EB game :slomo:
I know its impolitic but has anyone have any idea about 1.1 and when it might be coming out? The AI is definitely better using Alex, BTW. Maks is right about that.
Oh... I hope it will be New Year's present from EB team to the fans!~D
In that case.. I will make EB tattoo on my PC! :birthday2:
And can anyone confirm that he had night battles ok...with any general .)
No, not night battles, but have you seen that the AI is able to retrain units with the ALX.exe?
I had watched some AI moves and the Epeirote had about 1/2 stack in Taras. Of this they moved out all save one (suposingly) unit to fight some Roman invasion armies. After these battles the 1/2 stack was drasticly reduced and the few suvivors moved back to Taras. I thought they were done for because they had not build any new units in the town meanwhile.
But no! The very next turn they had 7 units with exact full strength and a lot of chevrons in Taras. Either the AI had retrained them (what it is not able to do with the RTW or BI.ex) or it is cheating against itself and had beamed them form the mainland (they don't have any ships). But even then they should have been some units understrength in Taras.
I have checked some towns of the AI and all units were full strength there, save for the lowest class units like Pantodapoi, archers and the like. Now I understand how the Maks have been able to hold Pella for the last 25 years against KH, Epeiros and Getai: they have some full strength double gold chevron elite in there that they are retraining constantly between two attacks.
Konny, you sure about that? AI is not retraining units in Medieval II, that's for sure...Quote:
Originally Posted by konny
I have no other explanation for the magical 1-turn recovery of AI armies in one city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by konny
W...What?! Are you sure :inquisitive: I always thought that it was just my imagination .. now I am sure it is your's too :wall:
My god! That is the reason I ended my campaign with Epeiros.. I never had enough army to run down those AS in Sardis... They had large wall, royal barracks and they were apparently retraining the troops! I mean.. I know that after killing two of their armies at Pergamum they just could not get another one.. Then when they 'it seems now' retrained some units - they had another army in the next turn! I really thought I did not see one army coming form the East - but NO! Now I am sure it was retraining :furious3: ~:angry:
Anyway.. konny.. did you noticed and saw that AI is really training the best unit's it has.. I mean, do I played maybe more EB on Alex then other gamers here... but, after AI gains the Army barracks and/or royal in the east.. you can not.. I will say that again - you can not beat him! Neither AS or Aegypt.. It is clearly impossible!!!
EBBS script is not a friend of EB on Alex.exe! And even those construction or share systems either.. You know that in about 250 bc.. Almost all of Aegypt or Seleucid towns have Royal or Army barracks?! I know! I have reached Alexandria and Babylon with Epeiros spy!
Some City Mod or 'balance' of construction times or balance of EBBS script is needed for EB 1.1, even if it means adding Army Barracks to all capitols and then make Main barracks construction time like 5 or 10 times longer.. because AI is going to win either way.. Unless you cheat!:thumbsdown: ...
I am working right now on one basic balance mod for EB on Alex.. I just can't take this hard Alex AI engine with EB way's that are made for RTW engine.. It will mess your game.. you will see after 250 bc:whip:
This sounds Great!
I'm waiting on my copy of Alexander to try this out, just gotta wait 'til it arrives :dizzy2:
I was thinking one way to test if the AI is retraining units is to check if the population changes in the city, I'd test it on the huge unit size setting.
Is there a way to check a city's pop without a spy or a unit next to it?
Well... you know, I am not sure, It's a big surprise to me that my friend konny noticed this after I thought for a long time that it is either a bug or EBBS script that trrigers some armies to jsut pop-up!... The prob is that now that we know that - 'now' is the time to test .. because I am seriously doubting that AI is retraining troops!:yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix Constantus Alexander
So.. one can now see some situation in Campaign Map.. and then he could just follow the AI moves.. I never did that before really, I most start now.. but with a new campaign that has Immortal fix from the start!:coffeenews:
Just to add a comment about the night battles.
First of all, Even in BI descr_start.txt only one general has 'NightBattleCapable 1' trait from the start .. In EB there are none..
So either you can play night-fights at the start with Pyrros (that has enough traits to pull that of right away, but 'no' he has no 'NightBattleCapable' trait) or any general that is 'strong' with his traits at the game start.
OR you can open eb/data/world/maps/campaign/imperial_campaign/descr_start.txt
And add 'NightBattleCapable' trait to anyone! That should look like this:
; ####################################################################
; ######### Start of factions section
; ####################################################################
; ---------------------------------------------------------
; ######### seleucide - SPQR (Romani) #########
; ---------------------------------------------------------
faction seleucid, balanced caesar
denari 5000
settlement
{
level city
region Latium2
year_founded 0
population 8770
settlement_tax 51
plan_set default_set
faction_creator seleucid
building
{
type core_building governors_palace
}
building
{
type uniques1 oneone
}
building
{
type defenses stone_wall
}
building
{
type amphitheatres game_field
}
building
{
type equestrian stables
}
building
{
type healing doctor
}
;WG building
; {
; type Barracks_A city_barracks_A1
; }
building
{
type smith blacksmith
}
;WG building
; {
; type hinterland_roads roads
; }
building
{
type port_buildings shipwright
}
building
{
type farms2 grain_silo
}
building
{
type market market
}
building
{
type hinterland_farms farms+2
}
building
{
type temple_of_governors temple_of_governors_large_temple
}
}
settlement
{
level large_town
region Etruria
year_founded 0
population 3980
settlement_tax 51
plan_set default_set
faction_creator seleucid
building
{
type core_building governors_villa
}
;WG building
; {
; type Barracks_A militia_barracks_A1
; }
building
{
type healing doctor
}
building
{
type amphitheatres game_field
}
building
{
type defenses wooden_wall
}
building
{
type smith blacksmith
}
building
{
type hinterland_farms farms+1
}
building
{
type farms2 granary
}
building
{
type port_buildings port
}
building
{
type market market
}
;WG building
; {
; type hinterland_roads roads
; }
building
{
type temple_of_governors temple_of_governors_temple
}
}
settlement
{
level town
region Umbria
year_founded 0
population 1950
settlement_tax 51
plan_set default_set
faction_creator seleucid
building
{
type core_building governors_house
}
building
{
type defenses wooden_pallisade
}
building
{
type amphitheatres game_field
}
building
{
type port_buildings port
}
building
{
type navy_port naval_bay
}
building
{
type hinterland_farms farms
}
building
{
type market trader
}
building
{
type temple_of_fun temple_of_fun_shrine
}
}
settlement
{
level city
region Campania
year_founded 0
population 6740
settlement_tax 51
plan_set default_set
faction_creator seleucid
building
{
type core_building governors_palace
}
building
{
type uniques3 threetwo
}
building
{
type defenses wooden_wall
}
;WG building
; {
; type Barracks_A militia_barracks_A1
; }
building
{
type smith blacksmith
}
;WG building
; {
; type hinterland_roads roads
; }
building
{
type port_buildings port
}
building
{
type navy_port naval_bay
}
building
{
type hinterland_farms farms+1
}
building
{
type farms2 granary
}
building
{
type healing doctor
}
building
{
type amphitheatres game_field
}
building
{
type temple_of_farming temple_of_farming_temple
}
building
{
type hinterland_uniques2 uniqueroad1
}
}
settlement
{
level town
region Apulia
year_founded 0
population 1110
settlement_tax 51
plan_set default_set
faction_creator seleucid
building
{
type core_building governors_house
}
building
{
type defenses wooden_pallisade
}
building
{
type hinterland_farms farms
}
building
{
type market trader
}
;WG building
; {
; type Barracks_A muster_field_A
; }
building
{
type amphitheatres game_field
}
building
{
type port_buildings port
}
;WG building
; {
; type hinterland_roads roads
; }
building
{
type temple_of_forge temple_of_forge_shrine
}
}
; City: Rome
; Region: Latium
; --------------------
character Manivs Romanvs, named character, leader, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 65, , x 95, y 127
traits NaturalIntelligence 4 , NaturalCharisma 5 , NaturalEnergy 3 , Temperament 2 , Selflessness 3 , Loyalty 4 , TurnsAlive 6 , ManivscvrivsBiography 1 , Plebeian 1 , notPlebeianTribune 1 , notPlebeianAedile 1 , notQuaestor 1 , notPraetor 1 , notConsul 1 , NovusHomo 1 , Censor 1 , CommandExperience 4 , GoodTactician 1 , GoodLeader 1 , GoodDefender 1 , PoliticsSkill 3 , GoodAdministrator 2 , Austere 1 , Disciplinarian 1 , YearsPassed 2, GensCvria 2 , CvrivsDentatvs 1, NightBattleCapable 1
ancillaries family_retainer
This is just an example.. In my opinion that NightBattleCapable 1 trait should only be given to the Barbarian and Nomad factions at the game start.. After EB 1.1 comes out, there will be one small balance mod for EB that is using Alex.exe .. Due to the much more advanced ALX.exe engine - The way EB gameplay is mented to be played by the EB team is now in question, at least for me that had some issues even for EB on RTW.exe - but I managed to play it anyways.. But after I used Alex.exe for some time I gain doubts :shrug:
So, it is at least two of us ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Maksimus
I think, I had not ended the turn in which the Epeirote army miraclous recovered, if so I will post a screen of what I have seen. I have also seen that same miracle in Pella: the garrison there was depleted to the strength of 1/4 stack, but when the enemies gave Makedonia a break of two turns the garrison was again a full stack. Not enough time to raise so many new units to merge them with the original garrison, and they didn't have any field armies or nearby towns to bring in reinforcements.
I am running my own money script anyways.Quote:
EBBS script is not a friend of EB on Alex.exe!
If they're retraining and abusing perhaps you should lower the campaign difficulty, we were thinking of changing the recommendation from VH/M to H/M.
I know that on M/M for example the AI does not recruit mercs. So maybe on H/M or M/M they won't retrain, AI doing mass retraining is an abuse as they often get away from battles with a few troops left of different kinds...
EDIT: What battle difficulty are you playing on, seeing AI elites is good but playing VH or even H against them will mostly frustrate you, not improve the difficulty...
I am playing M/M....Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
I am using VH/VH... And I want AI to be VH on campaign, that is as smart as possible and EBBS script can be altered.. But the point in my post was not the difficulty as such.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
Well maybe VH for battle is somewhat really to much (because of +7 hidden moral and attack to your enemy), because you get to watch your elites slained by some native low-end units - and you don't want to look at that :no:
My remarks were really about EB balance due to the game engine of ALex.exe
Because - ''Due to the much more advanced ALX.exe engine - The way EB gameplay is mented to be played by the EB team is now in question''
And that is true.. You see.. Alex is using it's options much better, even one EASY difficulty on ALX.exe is compared to MEDIUM on RTW.exe or Even HARD!
That is because ''Human has a brain and AI money and buildings'' solutins are widely excepted by various EB team members that answered my questions about EB balance. That is NOT a solutin for Alex.exe engine and AI it uses!
In EB game based on ALex.exe - it is really important to make Human and CPU more even.. And it is not acceptable for AI to have army and royal barracks in all of it's settlements until the age of 250BC:no: Especially that remark goes for Seleucid's and Aegypt!...
There should be numerous solutions 'or just one':laugh4:
Working on money scripts is really a delicate thing when you think you found a balance it may be just a fluke etc, you need patience to run a lot of tests.
Some tweaks to balance and the money script for 1.1 are coming but nothing spectacular.
If you cut the AI's money he'll stall and be engulfed by other factions, if you give him few barely enough the fool spams militia which is bad, too much money usually leads to a better experience but too many stacks for some factions like AS, Ptolies if you add retraining to that it's clearly hell.
First the EB team doesn't officially support Ales so If the Alex engine is all that you say it is (I'm sure it's better but I'm a bit skeptic about how much better) and you want to find a good balanced script for Alex make a small team or just collaboration talk to others interested in Alex or who worked with money scripts before as this kind of stuff needs a lot of testing to get right.
And really you shouldn't play on VH battle, did you play 0.81 btw are the AS spamming more stacks that in that version? The problem wouldn't be that they're a lot of elites among them but the fact that you can't destroy them before they retrain them.
I think that should proof the AI ability to retrain units with the ALX.exe:
https://img87.imageshack.us/img87/6545/retrainao5.jpg
You see Taras one turn after the garrison was reduced to nearly nothing by fighting. You can see that all units are full strength. That is first of all impossible to get with merging units, because you will always have a very small unit of each type left.
The red marked units have a lot of experince and are supposingly the forces that fought the Romans the turns before. The last one (yellow) seems to be the unit that has been raised in this turn.
And here is one more:
https://img156.imageshack.us/img156/...etrain2tf7.jpg
This is Alexandreia-Ariana a few turns after it has been conquered by Baktria. There had been two MICs, the AS factional one is useless for Baktria, but with the regional MIC they are able to raise/retrain the marked units.
Now, see that all units that can be retrained by this MIC are full strength (green marked), while all those that cannot be raised there (red) are understrength. May be they had raised some of them meanwhile, but cetainly not the silver chevron archers. And there had been no merging only, because that must have - again - left some units understrength. I think that the last two (yellow) were raised since conquest because they seemed not to have been part of the conquest force.
That's a bit too much for to handle both for the player and for a weaker AI faction and coupled with the pop replenishment script and the money script makes the AI-owned large factions beasts...
And you say you play on M/M... it's nice to see the AI do it but it will create too many battles that are too tedious... I don't know why they didn't limit retraining to 1 unit or hell max 3.... bummer.
sorry, didnt go trough the whole thread... does AI retrain with 1.5?
i noticed that when a city (Ptolies) with unrest gets some population, soldiers killed the garison would be back to its full strength the next turn. i play with BI though, is it the same on 1.5?
I have a Collector's Total War edition that includes STW, STW-MI, MTW, MTW-VI, RTW, RTW-BI, stupid bonus material, and, what is of most impornace, Rome Total War - Alexander.
On my previous computer I had no problems installing it. On my new one installation procedure halts with message "error -1".
Anybody familiar with the problem?
2Konny: I feel total noob to ask it, but how do you enable "perfect_spy" in 1.0?
You should just read the first thread.. but, ok.. IT DOES:yes: To install Alexander you need RTW + 1.5 patch even without BI.. so yes. It is also save-game compatible with BI and RTW EB 1 save-games..:beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarkiss
It is first of all a problem for the AI itself. The human player will most likely hunt down all enemy units on the tactical screen and take towns in the first attempt. The AI on the other uses autocalc, where always a number of enemies survive. And the AI usually needs three or four attempts to take a town.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
That makes every province that has survived an assault or two a real hard nut to break. I see it the last now 30 years in Pella. It is constantly under attack by three strong factions but they are not able to take it because Makedonia has several tripple gold chevron full strength elite units inside.
It doesn't do so much on the AI field armies, because these often stay away from towns very long; and with the EB recruitement system units can only be retrained in their parent provinces (can be quite a lot, if you are for example moving an army of Hoplites around the Eastern Mediterranian).
So, no need to "panic" or change the script. The player must be aware that, using the ALX.exe, he has to strike fast, hard and brutal; otherwise he will breed the enemy an experinced crack army. RTW:Alexander was a game in which the player was expected to blitz the AI. Therefore, I think, was the AI retraining implemented. So, its missing in RTW and BI is not a bug, it's a feature to make the game easyer.
It's in the EB-Script, quite to the top. Delete the ";" and you'll have him everytime you launch the script.Quote:
2Konny: I feel total noob to ask it, but how do you enable "perfect_spy" in 1.0?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
Even if you are to use 'vanilla' EBBS for Alex on EB 1.1 - it would not be the problem as it is.:no:
The prob is ''how to keep pace'' with CPU in terms of ARMY numbers and quality! Because, anyways, you can't keep pace in infrastructure constructions due to the EBBS.. but! -Army is something you need to win, and you don't have much money due to the current EB team politics - that is based on RTW.exe engine and ''slow motion''... :whip:
Most of players realy focus on their Army needs and on enemies Armies throughout the whole game. And because of very small construction time for barracks couple of factions that have 4+ regions are going to win always - while you are going to go bankrupt (or win only if One millitary genius comes to help everyone:shame: )
So.. I think there are numerous solutions for Alex.exe engine to be more playable and for anyone... I will just type two now:
1) First; Make all factions have at least one (or more for large factions) army barracks in their capitols from the start! And then raise construction times for barracks in general to about 5 or 6 times..
That way, anyone that finds money (by sacking or great victories) could be able train nice units (even if it is only one) and the AI would not have EVERY town with Army or Royal barracks where he can train retrain elites all the time. This way, even if CPU has full stack's of army - it will be limited to medium of lower valueted units with maybe 10% of elites (let me add, that this way human has about 5 and CPU about 30% of elite units). And medium and native units you can kill. I have tested this and it is one clear solutin (note: construction times should be addressed for factional - not regional barracks)
2) Second; Make more money in stake for Human player so he does not have negative account in his next 2 turns. I have tested this by adding the +10 times value to resources - and that only allows some plus of about 850 minai for Makedonia per turn (for example) ... But there are other ways to add money..
Also, there are numerous versions of solving some nasty issues of this .. one can be City mod.. one can be EBBS script changes.. etc.. etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
I am very sorry to hear EB team does not support Alex.exe engine because this is just one formal way to use and play EB - I am sure all of use that use Alex.exe really support and care for EB team efforts and have the best wishes for all future developments of this wonderful RTW mod :shame:
And I am not sure for 0.81 and if you are skeptic about how much AI on Alex.exe is better - try it for 10 turns!:yes:
be well my friend!
And Konny.. Thank you for that post that proofs retraining. I haven't got the time to play my campaign for two days:bow:
The situation with several factions is really odd when you won't make any money the first 20 turns and have to run around and fight. I think there can be some easy sollutions by rasing the game economy at game start - not dramaticly, but a little by adding a mine here and there, raising the population in this or that town, building a harbour or two etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maksimus
That must not necessarily be in one of the players starting towns, but one that he has a fair chance to conquer very soon, like Pontos & Pergamon.
Changing the money script to your means is quite easy: Every money help has a cap. But that is very high, so lower it to, let's say, 5,000 or 10,000 mne (I have at 0, but that seems to be not enough with ALX.exe and VCs asingned). You'll see definitly a difference.
I agree, there should be changes made in that direction.. btw I have used your post-proof of retraining as one geat example in http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=134572.. thread ..and, konny.. did you get my PM?Quote:
Originally Posted by konny
Playing AS on VH Campaign with RTW, Baktria conquered two cities in India while at war with me (I was quite holding back in cities defense, but not able to go out for some time), so they flanked on campaign map and started to bribe my cities after conquering part of India ;-). So that is maybe matter of particular camplaign more than anything else...Quote:
Originally Posted by Maksimus
You don't use Alex?.. Well, the bribing part is due to EBBS script and the fact that any level of palace can train diplomats (and that is not good)..Quote:
Originally Posted by llib
And, can you specify the year in wich Baktria took Indian provinces.. The one in this thread is 246bc...
I believe the AI is the one unable to cope with this too, I guess this accounts for the slow expansion Tellos noticed in a pic of an Alex campaign, the Romans would have a hell of a time taking Taras if they ever could, and in Gaul the civil war will probably be never won since autocalc gives such results. I believe Alex was you Alexander vs the computer Persian Empire and there was no computer vs computer action going on or very limited... Unless there's an exe switch to turn off retraining or some sort of option I'll stick to BI the AI expansion and different scenarios playing out are a good part of EB, and plus I like to roleplay and not have to fight a lot of battles each turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by konny
I suppose that was more the result of Epeiros killing so many AI factions. I have a Casse campaign in the 240s with ALX.exe and there is a lot of more expansion on the map (screenshot tonight).Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
I don't think that there are more battles for the human player, in particular because the AI is much more merging its stacks and does not have the money to raise more armies than with the BI.exe. The difference is that the AI armies are now much better - "You have the brain, the AI has the chevrons". :whip:Quote:
and plus I like to roleplay and not have to fight a lot of battles each turn.
Yes, you have a PM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maksimus
Interesting konny, looking forward to those screenshots. I'm curious about how strong the Seleucid and Ptolemies are in 240.
I'm interested in this but sadly don't have the time or the free HDD space to keep multiple versions of EB. I haven't played a campaign since the beginning of summer, modding is appealing cause you can make changes to the game but on the other hand the moment you feel there's something wrong you stop playing and start changing it thus abandoning your campaing. I keep planning a great Getai campaign for when EB will be complete, but it's been hard to get myself to start it knowing that the project was not 100% complete yet, I hope 1.1 will also bring me the peace I need to give myself the ultimate EB for RTW experience that I contributed to this project for. :yes:
You can contributed to this project to... If EB team is allowing it? What do you think..?? Konny and I and Lgt are wanting to work on this when 1.1 comes.. can you help?? My neighbor :beam: !
Excellent! .. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by konny
The ALEX-installer has a bug. It checks the drive C for enough discspace, regardless of the installationdrive.Quote:
Originally Posted by MiniMe
Fortunately you dont have to install ALEX to play EB on ALEX. The only files that are needed are chat-filter.san and the RomeTW-ALX.exe.
The exe can be directly copied from the CD.
chat-filter.san is packed in the CAB files on the CD. CAB-extractors can be found on the net, i used a tool called "i6comp".
Hope that helps.
cheers
Gerhard
Sure, I guess I could help you guys but it depends on what your scope is and what you want to do, I'm not for major changes to infrastructure or stuff like that and I also worked on too much money script stuff to last me at least a year :beam: . But I'm interested in trying EB with Alex when 1.1 comes out for sure and if you guys hope to improve the gameplay and the experience it provides without turning it into something else then I'll see what I can help with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maksimus
It does help really it's just that it is not that easy to make post like yours in the main post.. see, I never used CAB .. and tell you the truth I am not sure if the whole engine is just in *exe.. so.. I am no expert at that.. but thank you very muchQuote:
Originally Posted by Gerhard
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
https://img353.imageshack.us/img353/3482/236aq2.jpg
https://img464.imageshack.us/img464/5791/233yt3.jpg
Human player: Casse
ALX.exe
Difficulty: M/M
Money script: Konny's for EB 1.0
Victory towns assigned: Yes
descr_strat: changed
(so, probably the most "irregular" EB conditons you can play)
Somme comments:
The Victory Conditions seems to have an impact on the Roman AI. They had conquered Taras in 272 BC, Rhegion short thereafter. Then they went for the Northern towns, but did not go on in the North when they lost Taras by rebellion a couple of years ago. They even managed to lose Capua to the crack Epeirote garrison in Taras, but took it again in 234 BC. Now they are going again for Taras. They had also attacked Messana, causing the scripted war with Karthago. But since the Poeni refuse to fight there is nothing going on on Sicily.
I am a bit worried about the Romans becuase they have the smallest army of all factions. I thought my money script responsible for that, but they have some 25,000 mne cash and top level barracks in all towns. But may be they even need more. I will change that script on the weekend.
Another one who seems to be much influenced by the Victory Conditions is AS, but in a negative way. They allready hold so many VC towns from the start that they are not really defending themselves. I think, that is reason, because I hardly see any AS armies but strong garrisons everywhere. Something that has to be changed too.
Baktria and Armenia are pushing into AS territory and leave the steppe alone, that's fine too.
Definitly a result of the ALX.exe and the retraining is the existence of Makedonia at all. They are under constant attack by Epeiros, KH and Getai for now about 40 years, and were not only able to hold Pella but to expand as well (what had them brought a war with Pontos, BTW). The same is for Epeiros@Taras.
So, if we would make a building that allows the Eleutheroi to retrain their forces in specific towns, we wouldn't need any scripted Zombee stacks to prevent the AI from expanding in those regions with the ALX.exe. The human player will be able to take these towns and, if he wishes, build a Roman Empire along the Baltic Sea. The AI can't do so because it is making the garrison with every failed attack stronger.
Of course, that should not be in all provinces, only in those along the Danube or in the Alps that we don't want the AI to conquer.
Konny, can you just add what is that you 'use' on top of the EB vanilla *txt?
What exactly... in the script and/or in the your game... I thought Redmeth wanted the vanilla EB on Alex.exe screens?:inquisitive: no?
As for the money script, that is not so much different to the (new) EB money script, but uses more extreme values and no time progression. But I am going to change that anyways and link it to the Victory Conditons, using values that are closer to the EB standards.
See also: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=92691
The Victory Conditions were a discovery by JMRC, that I had picked up some time ago. Callicles, MiniMe and me are testing several settings to influence the direction of AI expansion. The results are promising and because it is RTW 1.5 compatible, the EB team might consider to make their own in the future (at least that's what was posted in the respective thread by team members).
See also: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=86313
The changes in descr_strat mainly influence the start of the game. In the 230s still is important the reduced rebell spawn rate (now about 1 random rebell army every 10 years on the entire map) and the changed priorities for AI aggression, these were set for the most factions against the rebells in the original EB version.
See also: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...6&postcount=80
For the rebell spawning, I am thinking on replacing the random rebells with real rebell armies, including FM, that pop up when public order falls under a specific value in a given province. But I don't know if checking public order by script is possible at all.
Ok, can you test that script with Casse on VH/VH of VH(campaign)/M and just End-turn for 50 turns or so.. and then post ? I just think that Aegypt is too strong here.. really.. can you do something about that?Quote:
Originally Posted by konny
You cant program the AI, the only thing you can do is deny or give them money, either way one of them is going to win, that's not even that bad really, the Ptolemies did historically beat the Selucids back to babylon IIRC.
https://img372.imageshack.us/img372/...cempirewi4.png
https://img372.imageshack.us/img372/...bcwebsmoa6.jpg
The first is about 290bc ad the second is in 200bc...and note here about the Syrian Wars.. the Wiki source for this short copy-past issue
First Syrian War (274-271 BC)
A decade into his rule, Ptolemy II faced Antiochus I, the Seleucid king who was trying to expand his empire's holdings in Syria and Anatolia. Ptolemy proved to be a forceful ruler and skilled general. In addition, his recent marriage to his court-wise sister Arsinoë had stabilized the volatile Egyptian court, allowing Ptolemy to successfully carry out the campaign. Some feminist interpretations of history even claim that it was Arsinoe's brains and talent which won the war.
The First Syrian War was a major victory for the Ptolemies. Antiochus took the Ptolemaic controlled areas in coastal Syria and southern Anatolia in his initial rush. Ptolemy reconquered these territories by 271 BC, extending Ptolemaic rule as far as Caria and into most of Cilicia. With Ptolemy's eye focused eastward, his half-brother Magas declared his province of Cyrenaica to be independent. It would remain independent until 250 BC, when it was reabsorbed into the Ptolemaic Kingdom.
Second Syrian War (260-253 BC)
Antiochus II succeeded his father in 261 BC, and thus began a new war for Syria. He reached an agreement with the current Antigonid king in Macedon, Antigonus Gonatas, who were also interested in pushing Ptolemy II out of the Aegean. With Macedon's support, Antiochus II launched an attack on Ptolemaic outposts in Asia.
Most of the information about the Second Syrian War has been lost. It is clear that Antigonus' fleet defeated Ptolemy's at the Battle of Cos in 256, diminishing Ptolemaic naval power. Ptolemy appears to have lost ground in Cilicia, Pamphylia, and Ionia, while Antiochus regained Miletus and Ephesus. Macedon's involvement in the war ceased when Antigonus became preoccupied by the rebellion of Corinth and Chalcis in 253 BC, possibly instigated by Ptolemy, as well as an increase in enemy activity along Macedon's northern frontier.
The war was concluded around 253 BC with the marriage of Antiochus to Ptolemy's daughter, Berenice Syra. Antiochus repudiated his previous wife, Laodice, and turned over substantial domain to her. He died in Ephesus in 246, poisoned by Laodice according to some sources. Ptolemy II died in the same year.
Third Syrian War (246-241 BC)
Also known as the Laodicean War, the Third Syrian War began with one of the many succession crisis that plagued the Hellenistic states. Antiochus II left two ambitious mothers, his repudiated wife Laodice and Ptolemy II's daughter Berenice Syra, in a competition to put their respective sons on the throne. Laodice claimed that Antiochus had named her son heir while on his deathbed, but Berenice argued that her newly born son was the legitimate heir. Berenice asked her brother Ptolemy III, the new Ptolemaic king, to come to Antioch and help place her son on the throne. When Ptolemy arrived, Berenice and her child had been assassinated.
Ptolemy declared war on Laodice's newly crowned son, Seleucus II, in 246 BC, and campaigned with great success. He won major victories over Seleucus in Syria and Anatolia, briefly occupied Antioch and, as a recent cuneiform discoveryproves, even reached Babylon. These victories were marred by the loss of the Cyclades to Antigonus Gonatas in the Battle of Andros. Seleucus had his own difficulties. His domineering mother asked him to grant co-regency to his younger brother, Antiochus Hierax, as well as rule over Seleucid territories in Anatolia. Antiochus promptly declared independence, undermining Seleucus' efforts to defend against Ptolemy.
In exchange for a peace in 241, Ptolemy was awarded new territories on the northern coast of Syria, including Seleucia Pieria, the port of Antioch. The Ptolemaic kingdom was at the height of its power.
Fourth Syrian War (219-217 BC)
Upon taking the Seleucid throne in 223 BC, Antiochus III (241–187 BC) set himself the task of restoring the lost imperial possessions of Seleucus I Nicator, which extended from Greco-Bactrian Kingdom to India in the east, the Hellespont in the north, and Syria in the south. By 221 BC, he had re-established Seleucid control over the eastern provinces and taken Anatolia back from his rebellious uncle Achaeus. The ambitious king turned his eyes toward Syria and Egypt.
Egypt had been significantly weakened by court intrigue and public unrest. The rule of the newly inaugurated Ptolemy IV Philopator (reigned 221-204 BC) began with the murder of queen-mother Berenice II. The young king quickly fell under the absolute influence of imperial courtiers. His ministers used their absolute power in their own self-interest, to the people's great chagrin.
Antiochus sought to take advantage of this chaotic situation. After an invasion in 221 BC failed to launch, he finally began the Fourth Syrian War in 219. He recaptured Seleucia Pieria as well as cities in Israel, amongst them Tyre. Rather than promptly invading Egypt, Antiochus waited in Israel for over a year, consolidating his new territories and listening to diplomatic proposals from the Ptolemaic kingdom.
Meanwhile, Ptolemy's minister Sosibius began recruiting and training an army. He recruited not only from the local Greek population, as Hellenistic armies generally were, but also from the native Egyptians, enrolling at least thirty thousand natives as phalangites. This novel choice paid off, but it would eventually have dire consequences for Ptolemaic stability. In the summer of 217, Ptolemy engaged and defeated the long-delayed Antiochus in the Battle of Raphia, the largest battle since the Battle of Ipsus.
Ptolemy's victory preserved his control over Coele-Syria, and the weak king declined to advance further into Antiochus' empire, even to retake Seleucia Pieria. The Ptolemaic kingdom would continue to weaken over the following years, suffering from economic problems and rebellion. Nationalist sentiment had developed among the native Egyptians who had fought at Raphia. Confident and well-trained, they broke from Ptolemy in what is known as the Egyptian Revolt, establishing their own kingdom in Upper Egypt which the Ptolemies finally reconquered around 185 BC.
Fifth Syrian War (202-195 BC)
The death of Ptolemy IV in 204 was followed by a bloody conflict over the regency as his heir, Ptolemy V, was just a child. The conflict began with the murder of the dead king's wife and sister Arsinoë by the ministers Agothocles and Sosibius. The fate of Sosibius is unclear, but Agothocles seems to have held the regency for some time until he was lynched by the volatile Alexandrian mob. The regency was passed from one adviser to another, and the kingdom was in a state of near anarchy.
Seeking to take advantage of this turmoil, Antiochus III staged a second invasion of Coele-Syria. He made an agreement with Philip V of Macedon to conquer and share the Ptolemies' overseas territories, although this greedy alliance did not last long. Antiochus quickly swept through the region. After a brief setback at Gaza, he delivered a crushing blow to the Ptolemies near the head of the River Jordan which earned him the important port of Sidon.
In 200 BC, Roman emissaries came to Philip and Antiochus demanding that they refrain from invading Egypt. The Romans would suffer no disruption of the import of grain from Egypt, key to supporting the massive population in Italy. As neither monarch had planned to invade Egypt itself, they willingly complied to Rome's demands. Antiochus completed the subjugation of Coele-Syria in 198 and went on to raid Ptolemy's remaining coastal strongholds in Caria and Cilicia.
Problems at home led Ptolemy to seek a quick and disadvantageous conclusion. The nativist movement, which began before the war with the Egyptian Revolt and expanded with the support of Egyptian priests, created turmoil and sedition throughout the kingdom. Economic troubles led the Ptolemaic government to increase taxation, which in turn fed the nationalist fire. In order to focus on the home front, Ptolemy signed a conciliatory treaty with Antiochus in 195, leaving the Seleucid king in possession of Coele-Syria and agreeing to marry Antiochus' daughter Cleopatra.
Don't get me wrong .. it's just that Aegypt had their as Seleucid's had their moments of victory... And. Aegypt is really to strong for 236bc, with chances to go deep in Asia and taking all Asia Minor.. that is really too soon :(
what do you want him to do about it though? what CAN you do? nothing, except edit money, which if he's using Konny's script is tipping the favor in the Seleucid's favor money wise anyway, AI is unprogrammable, the best we can do is victory conditions, and all that jazz to try to influence them to expand a certain way or direction, and thats all. sometimes a yellow, silver or blue death are inevitable and should be expected as the norm rather then the exception, thankfully with good micromanagement of the middle east ive managed to keep the Seleucid's and Ptolemies balanced when it comes to the middle east in my Mak campaign.
Sounds good.
Key question - how can we help AI factions to defeat one another? From Konny's screenshots, it looks like the AI finds it difficult to expand into anything other than rebel-held territory. That is a bit of a game-breaker.
One idea: set up a "days of thunder" trigger, which has a 1 in 100 chance of taking place for any given faction on any given turn. If it activates, it "captures" the historic faction capital (if it's not already owned) and spawns two or three highly capable armies led by top-notch generals. This might give the AI the wherewithal to expand for a while, until those armies were depleted.
Has the added advantage of creating nasty late-game challenges for a human player who thinks he's conquered the map.
Another (similar) idea: have a "days of thunder" trigger that will run auto_win attacker before every AI vs AI battle for 20 turns. I don't think this would work, but maybe we could do something similar?
Another (similar) idea: have a [ blah blah blah ] that automatically replenishes the armies of AI characters with certain traits (eg "in AI enemy territory"). At least that way they'll be balanced against the auto-replenishing defenders.
You did not get me as I wanted.. does not matter:laugh4: ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoofa
I was refering to Konny as he is a 'part' of Alexander Team - like me:yes: .. ... but it's just that he did not added that in his signature so one can belive that I am making bad remarks .. konny is my comrade here :laugh4:
anyways these kind of talks that include 'modified' *txt for EB on Alex.exe are now moved to this thread https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=96135
see you there .)
Just thinking, it would actually be pretty cool if we could set AI battles permanently to "auto_win attacker". It'd have no effect on human players (because we actually play out our battles), but it would mean that the AI would be constantly swapping territories back and forth.
Even if auto_win attacker isn't possible, there might be a way of favouring the attacker. For example, you could create traits that give attacking generals ten command stars, or significant bonuses to the valour of their bodyguards. These bonuses wouldn't apply in human vs AI battles (perhaps the traits could be temporarily nixed whenever the prebattle screen started up). But in AI vs AI battles, they'd shift the balance strongly in favour of the attacking army.
Another thing to do might be to run auto_merge troops for every AI army at the start of every turn. That way they're less likely to retrain everyone and end up with a stack full of gold chevron troops.
You know what'd be fun with this? Set it up so that a script triggers a few turns beforehand saying "You have been warned". That's all. No actual specific information about WHERE the days of thunder will start - just a warning that some faction somewhere is about to go nuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtwisties
- mr.twisties.tension.ratcher
Hello again chaps, have been following your progress and is looking good, finally managed to get time to start a campaign with alx and konny's scripts, let you know if anything interesting happens.
Anyway, I had a thought in regards to the AI retraining issue. Is there evidence of the Eleutheroi retraining its troops in sieges etc? There would be obvious implications if so :inquisitive:
Cheers
For Mrtwisties
Maybe the trrigers are not the best solutin.. do I am for it to be tested anyways..
Still, one of the solutions may be the 'advanced' barracks system, well, not really a system at all, it's rather a 'tweaked' way of chosing wich faction can have low or high-end units and to what extend in what period of the game..
That should work like this (and this is apart from your suggestions that could work)::
The capitols of the factions would have (that means one region with a homeland resource as capital) at least an army barracks from the start (even do some could have a city one's) or (in the case of nomads) other buildings that would enable them to train medium army and elites (but not the finall-end ones) from the start in just one city (the capital)..
So, now, you have an option to have elites and it is up to you to manage your money. Some players (more aggressive ones) will use money after sacking a city to give their army a small boost - of maybe just one reliable unit that could help alot in a battle - one elite) - but just at one place - in your capital, so even if you have money you can't raise much at all - but you have one great motivation to fight and to look all those nice units you could train ,)
Second.. And I will leave this post comment only in terms of Factional barracks by now.
Construction times for barracks (or atleast for city to royal) should have 4-5 od 6-8 higher construction times. That way Human player wont end with an Empire of 20 regions, and one army barracks while CPU has Army and Royal bs in Every town untill 240bc (like AS or Aegypt). Plus you won't end fighting much more advanced Alex.exe AI that RETRAINS his elites ANYWHERE while you have to drag them form 'America'! So you don't end with a gap that really - I mean really - disables you to win ! You just can not win armies full of elites that are being retrained by Alex engine all the time and Everywhere!
And plus.. MAAntonius gave us a green light to use City Mod for Alexander EB 1.1 when he makes one for it .)
So in a way of expansion - the barracks could be one very and more important 'trigger' than other solutions.. there is also a question's of share.. but that will be the topic later .)
If you look at the export_descr_buildings.txt you can see thisQuote:
Originally Posted by overweightninja
;;;
}
building barracks
{
levels muster_field militia_barracks city_barracks army_barracks royal_barracks
{
muster_field requires factions { slave, }
{
capability
{
}
construction 3
cost 900
settlement_min town
upgrades
{
militia_barracks
}
}
militia_barracks requires factions { slave, }
{
capability
{
law_bonus 1
}
construction 6
cost 3000
settlement_min town
upgrades
{
city_barracks
}
}
city_barracks requires factions { slave, }
{
capability
{
law_bonus 1
trade_base_income_bonus bonus 1
}
construction 9
cost 7500
settlement_min town
upgrades
{
army_barracks
}
}
army_barracks requires factions { slave, }
{
capability
{
law_bonus 1
trade_base_income_bonus bonus 2
}
construction 12
cost 12000
settlement_min town
upgrades
{
royal_barracks
}
}
royal_barracks requires factions { slave, }
{
capability
{
law_bonus 2
trade_base_income_bonus bonus 2
}
construction 15
cost 15000
settlement_min town
upgrades
{
}
}
}
That means the Slaves are not retraining - and In the game it is quite clear they don't add the numbers of their armies after one defense (wich is not the case with factions .)
I like this idea, and am interested to see how it develops. I think it'd cut out a lot of AI retraining. But even if it works beautifully I'd still be concerned about medium troops in some areas being constantly retrained by the AI and ending up with all gold chevrons. One or two units like that is okay. An army of them completely changes the battle dynamic and renders it unhistoric - you might as well play on VH/VH.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maksimus
Forcing the AI to auto_merge units at the start of its turn seems to me to be a useful, low impact part of the solution (if it's at all possible). That way the AI will end up with one or two units of uber-gold Pezhetairoi, rather than four or six.
This idea was already tested by myself in numerous modds for RTW, that changed the way AI plays in the general picture, those AI 'tweaks' should follow as one City Mod version would be implemented (or one that could 'copy' that idea). In my examples I always used the 'big city start's and stays big during the game' like it was often the case in history, so one 'can' develop small town into Imperial one, but with alot of effort, construction time and money..Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtwisties
AI on Alex.exe is not automerging because it is 'smart' in a way it makes it harder for us to win.. That engine is gold! So we all have to count we must run and strike fast after one victory to destroy enemy as a whole - if we don't want that army to came back after it fils it's rank's again .. The barracks system will make much of that to be 'controled' ... Like, you know that Royal Barracks are in Alexandria.. so you know that if you strike elites - only the natives would be able to fight even as retrained..
That is one balance in the middle of advanced AI engine and human needs to win .. Also.. celtis reforms are acctually one more reason that barracks system should be worked on..
btw, I use VH/VH it's just that I am waithing Konny to upload his 'modded' script for EB on Alex for me to test it on VH
Oh, okay. I'm probably not that interested in an EB mini-mod that's geared for VH/VH, and am pretty concerned about letting the AI develop golden stacks of anything, since although the human player might capture such a city, the AI definitely wouldn't.
Reckon we might have different philosophies, mate. Good luck with it!
This is really not an EB mini-mod that will be geared for VH/VH game, It is very possible this thread would carry 2 or more optional minor 'tweaks' mod's and one 'whole' so, you shouldn't be concerned.)Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtwisties
The Alexander EB will not be made for VH/VH, It is tested on medium by konny and the only VH that could be recommended is campaign VH (and that would be me to say it :laugh4: - just because I am one 24 year old RTW veteran that won tournaments on it)
By what we know AI on Alex is not ending up with all gold chevrons or even silver as much as one could belive... the point is that barracks system should prevent that .. Let me note, I play always on VH/VH and I started Epeiros and reached Alexandria and I never fought an army with above level 4 experience, so we don't have much different philosophies my friend
It's just that most of what you are suggesting (or all of it) is open for talks and test-modding but with Konny, he is the one that is currently messing with a EBBS - and he has my full support.. I doubt he will ever leave CPU unbeatable.. So you should not worry, stay around during the test's so you can see it your self.. Hell I will post tomorrow segments of my VH/VH campaign so anyone can see that there are NO golden stacks of chevrons for CPU..
What I wa refering as gold - Was The Engine Of Alexander - not the diffuculty
And after all, most of downloads and files will be separated, so you can chose what to use.. maybe there would be one 'lighter' and one 'harder' version's of the mod.. Who know's .. we are in beta fase of discussion yet .)
And here i go, migrating from old alex thread.
At last i got my EB and now begin to test it immediately. Made a few short runs with BI exe to note campaign flow there, then switched to alex, starting new campaign. Here are my observations.
Human player: Casse
RomeTW-ALX.exe only (alex not installed)
Difficulty: H/M (not fought many tac battles anyway)
EBBS script: original, then changed (see below)
Victory towns assigned: no
descr_strat: "options +prebattle_night_battle_tickbox", NOT "options bi" (see below)
I confirm that AI factions have a tough time expanding, despite AI being more active in general under alex... It wasn't a prob in XGM, where rebels are weak and unscripted, but in EB many rebel towns eventually get half-stack garrisons full of golden chevrons... This doesn't mean that AI can't expand at all (Lusitans took Numantia in 255!), but smaller factions tend to stagnate most of the time, falling in dire debt under high upkeep rates and still reluctant to attack rebel cities.
Now i think that "difficult start help" (what a misnomer!) in EBBS (section 5a) isn't up to the task. Now, it gives 20000 mnai per year to all factions short of 5000 mnai, which is excessive for larger ones (not to mention makes pointless such things as naval blockades) and not enough for smaller factions (eg checked stagnating Pontos in 253 and found them losing over 7000 per turn - that's about 30000 per year, EB original script can't solve this). There is also per-city help in EBBS, but again, it's useless for smaller factions. Also i checked konny's and Davor's scripts and found it less than ideal... so here is my variant, applied in mid-campaign circa 250 with great effect.
It is divided in two parts for each faction:
1) This part will cover any debt as big as 65536 mnai (per turn)...
monitor_event FactionTurnStart FactionType romans_julii
and not FactionIsLocal
and Treasury < -32768
console_command add_money romans_julii, 32768
end_monitor
monitor_event FactionTurnStart FactionType romans_julii
and not FactionIsLocal
and Treasury < -16384
console_command add_money romans_julii, 16384
end_monitor
monitor_event FactionTurnStart FactionType romans_julii
and not FactionIsLocal
and Treasury < -8192
console_command add_money romans_julii, 8192
end_monitor
monitor_event FactionTurnStart FactionType romans_julii
and not FactionIsLocal
and Treasury < -4096
console_command add_money romans_julii, 4096
end_monitor
monitor_event FactionTurnStart FactionType romans_julii
and not FactionIsLocal
and Treasury < 0
console_command add_money romans_julii, 4096
end_monitor
...and leaves treasury within certain range (0-4095 mnai in this case) afterwards. One can get lesser values and even exact zero treasury continuing this pattern (note last 2 bonuses are equal and last bound is 0), but script becomes bloated soon and i don't think it's really necessary.
2) This part will help small factions only!
monitor_event FactionTurnStart FactionType romans_julii
and not FactionIsLocal
and Treasury < 5000
and I_CompareCounter seasonCounter = 4
if I_NumberOfSettlements romans_julii < 5
console_command add_money romans_julii, 5000
end_if
if I_NumberOfSettlements romans_julii < 4
console_command add_money romans_julii, 5000
end_if
if I_NumberOfSettlements romans_julii < 3
console_command add_money romans_julii, 10000
end_if
end_monitor
It's nothing more than modified original EBBS section-5a script. It gives 20000 mnai per year if AI faction has only 1-2 cities, 10000 in case of 3 cities, and 5000 if 4 cities (i noticed that after gaining 3-4 regions AI factions finally can take care of themselves and perform well, but some further faction-specific tweaks are possible). Now human tactics of targeting AI economics makes some sense, at least when fighting large empires (we can always pretend that enemy resorts to desperate measures when he's reduced to last 2-3 regions).
Reloading game with new script variant had a couple of sleeping factions almost immediately awake and going on conquest (though i'm still worrying about gauls, still beaten by rebel garrisons). But, if script alone won't be enough, there are other possibilities, eg giving AI generals command traits vs rebels (not sure if they affect autocalc, though), in similar giving rebel generals negative traits vs neighbouring AI (thus making certain factions harder to take certain regions and leading to more historical expansion), aging some rebel generals, so they die early and garrisons come out... All such changes can take into account human player's faction proximity - luckily most edits then will affect campaign script and descr_strat, not the background script.
Also tried to destroy some factions (using auto_win cheat) - and all the pictures were shown with no probs (though text stated something about Romans rejoicing, despite the fact that destroyers were the seleucids).
For testing purposes as the Casse, I'm pretty sure you will find this small executable very useful
http://www.usaupload.net/d/ueyssz5v6jm
It's an autoclick program you start it set it to unlimited and the interval at something like 30 secs than you can position the mouse over the end turn button and let it autoplay. The only thing that stops it are adoption events so you'd need to check on it from time to time but it sure helps that you don't have to click end turn and be around the computer for too long.
The -ai switch doesn't work cause you can't start the script, you can use this with the -ne switch to leave the game in windowed mode too.
So they can't run the script from descr_strat.txt?Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
I assume not, since that's not what you guys have been doing. But what stops it from working, do you know?
Also Redmeth, do you know any programs that can automate keypresses like enter and esc? I've been hunting around for some to coerce my year jump script into actually working. If I can also get it to work with the EBBS, it could become a really useful testing platform - all of the factions will be played by the AI, and there'll be nothing that pauses it.
Well I remember trying it and the 4tpy didn't work for sure, descr_strat and campaign_script are run once at the beginning of a campaign so that's why all the stuff that needs counters to check for different condition each turn and so on needs to be in EBBS. I can't give a good explanation like a scripter could but it won't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtwisties
I don't have one but I looked till I found this small bastard (the autoclick one) for more than an hour and went through 10+ others before I found this one that did exactly what I wanted (on a Romanian site of all places). So keep googling...Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtwisties
I don't really like city mod because it gimps certain factions too much (like the steppe factions and the barbs IMO) EB thrives on what if scenarios and perhaps if the celts would have conquered Rome perhaps they would have expanded to large cities.
I don't really know how it works now but in the beginning I know that it was too penalizing on the "uncivilized" cultures.
EDIT: You guys have a lot of ideas, but make sure you test them out and put them in one at a time if possible, it's all a bit chaotic now but I hope it will turn out OK, keep in mind that in many cases less is better as long as it works so do try not to go overboard with the changes...
Some Questions about using Alex.exe for EB.
1) Wich are the Known fixes for EB 1.0 and where I can find it?
2) If I will use the Alex.exe to play EB, could I use the unofficial modding projects for EB such as "City MOD" or "EB Tweakes"?
3) Is possible to use some features of BI in ALEX.exe EB, such as Warcry, shiledwall, schiltrom, swim ability?
2 Maximus: would you be so kind as to post the list of cnanges you are going to apply?
1) Here is an EB team member thread that deals with fixes https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=93820 - thank Bovi there, I note that those fixes are included in the *txt files that are modded for Alexander (*txt files EB team officialy made as fixes were the base for *txt changes thet lead to Alex.exe for EB.)Quote:
Originally Posted by marseu
2) Yes, I think there will be no probs at all, only if the *txt files overlap you should use the manual to add Alex.exe featrues
3) We are working on it.. LGK is the one master here and it should be done for EB 1.1 .)
Will do.. it's just that we are really in beta stage in testing here, we are consolidating ideas and finding the 'path' solutions for some aspect's of the game - and we are not so powerfull to have a hidden forum :laugh4:.Quote:
Originally Posted by MiniMe
You see, The AI is retraining and grouping all the time, so that either must make a player to play fast a furious or just loose, and we don't want that, we also don't want to limit the retraining capability of CPU with more and more triggers, we will rather use some 'simple' EBBS script options that anyone could change back or 'tweak' to his needs
So all we do is transparent and clear as a sky (well like a clear sky.)
But!
Let me be short for now (because the main post of this thread will be edited with a the list of cnanges we are going to apply). First of all there are numerous issues in the main Alex.exe thread that need to be addressed - Like:
How to make EB more friendly to the Human player in Alex (that means to make several + bonuses that will be added for buildings that have none)? How to help human player develop without having to go to Total War against the CPU just to survive - in AlexEB player can't waith to develop by 'slow-pace' like it is mentioned (that means adding some infrastructure to all factions (+also building time) and also adding some mines in rebel regions near small factions - like Pergam or Sidon or region West of Armenia.. so someone 'would really lilke' to play with them, also make nomads more 'likely' to gain money - if you can notice - they have the one of the biggest minuses after 10 turns)... etc
All this will be more deeply measured in some time. It's just we don't have a hidden forum for this as I said.. so sorry if this seems -not so serious- now, but I am sure that one or two mods would be for EB 1.1 100%ž
be well.)
Would be glad to test your project after I finish my yellow campaign with Konny's current win conditions.
Best regards
MiniMe.
Most ot those ideas are already made.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmeth
Don't worry about City Mod.. I asked MAAntonius to make it 'friendly' for us just so we can see or use some features, I even told him the same as you now in his thread - I belive that the "uncivilized" cultures should not be 'crumpled' that much... :no:
But the scope for EB Aalexander is that Big Ancient Cities - should be big from the start and in 100 turn, not like in EB 1 based on RTW, that when you reach 100 or 200 turn's almost 70% of AI factions cities are Large or Huge with Army and Royal barracks (wich means btw you will 'NEVER' win on H or VH campaign difficulty due to the ALX retrainig features), enormus ports and walls and populations..
Still, due to the retraining features of Alex - that posibility is somewhat less frightening..
And may I add that no Alexander Member is going to confront the historic note in any major aspect of EB game - that is one reason I use EB, but there are just some issues left - fo PM's:laugh4:
And Redmeth - thank you so much for being here - we really need your suggestion's and advice support:bow: also, any suggestions are welcome too:bow: