Rome 2 Patches, Hotfixes, Betas and Such (patch 17 live!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord of the Isles

I see Slaists' advice is to use my own skirmishers as mutual cannon fodder but it seems a little contrived to plan strategy around compensating for CA's weird changes.

---

@Lord of the Isles, to be fair, that skirmisher vs skirmisher matching before the forces engage is historically accurate. That was called the skirmish phase of the engagement. In Rome 1, it was practically non-existent since missiles were very ineffective. In Rome 2, it is critical. Also, skirmishers in RTW 2 are very vulnerable to cavalry charges. Much more so than in previous TW games. So, that's a counter.

But otherwise, I agree, slings are too effective against armored units. The deflection probability for shields should be raised and probably added to armor for units that are highly armored but have no shields (sling damage could stay as is). Probably the CA did not do this in order not to nerf javelins, which in my opinion are correct now.

What was the skirmishing phase all about? I guess the point wasn't to see which side is better at throwing rocks at each other?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sp4

What was the skirmishing phase all about? I guess the point wasn't to see which side is better at throwing rocks at each other?

---

If you had no skirmishers or other such light troops you'd have no advance companies moving forward towards the enemy battle line. Thus your medium and heavy infantry would have to pave the way but unlike skirmishers they more or less need to be in formation or at least in a coherent battle line. Enemy skirmishers pelting your guys all the way from your battle line to theirs will disrupt the formation, make you lose men and morale and also will make it more likely for your troops to lose battle line cohesion in the chaos of being harrased and thus you end up with wedges which can get surrounded and massacred in melee.

Also, sling stones and bullets are deadly. Do not think a sling is what you use at home with some small pebbles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU87f5o8vMg

Skirmishing was just the missile troops doing their thing while they could for the reasons Myth mentioned because dense formations made great targets. Of course they were first to engage having ranged weapons. And generally, being lightly armed and armored, they eschewed melee and kept their distance. When the enemy had light troops also, they naturally had a shoot out.

My guess is that they would throw their javelins and sling shot and hastily get out of Dodge. Once the melee forces joined they needed to go somewhere else, preferably safe from enemy cavalry!

Update on patch 8 and the new DLC:

Quote:

---

Hiya guys,Just a heads up to let you know that we’ve pushed back the release of the Caesar in Gaul Campaign Pack slightly toTuesday 17th December in order to give us a bit more time to squeeze in some additions to the accompanying patch. The good news is that the extra changes we’re squeezing in will have a knock-on benefit to the main game, so even if you don’t purchase the DLC you’ll still see improvements.
Patch 8 will be hitting at the same time as the Caesar in Gaul DLC and as well as activating the DLC will bring with it some improvements, including:
• Technical and performance issue updates including crash fixes.
• New culture system – culture no longer works on 100%-0%, instead aiming to achieve an equilibrium between the cultures present in a province, relative to their respective culture points.
• Additional AI fixes.
• The Post-battle loading screens for Custom/ Multiplayer battles are now interactive, after load so the player can see kills/losses of other armies in battle.
As Caesar in Gaul has moved back slightly, the patch after it is going to go into Public Beta quite soon. We plan to put Patch 8.1 into open beta 48 hours after launch of Caesar in Gaul, which will bring additional improvements to the main game, including:
• Improvements to siege artillery using flaming projectiles appropriately (when attacking walls and towers).
• Additional fixes to AI and pathfinding.
• Fixes to issues with AI’s interaction with walls in siege battles, enabling a more effective use of siege towers and ladders.

---

Ah.. I always thought it was a bit weird how the only ranged units Rome had in the early game of Rome 1 were people throwing spears. I just thought that would be really inefficient as a way of shooting at someone especially because everything shot back... might as well go with longer range...

I read about it a little today and found they even did it up to and during the Napoleonic wars. I thought it kind of became meh once artillery was developed to a certain point. It makes me wonder why people still bothered with ordered formations and firing lines if everything else seems to have been aimed at breaking them apart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sp4

Ah.. I always thought it was a bit weird how the only ranged units Rome had in the early game of Rome 1 were people throwing spears. I just thought that would be really inefficient as a way of shooting at someone especially because everything shot back... might as well go with longer range...

I read about it a little today and found they even did it up to and during the Napoleonic wars. I thought it kind of became meh once artillery was developed to a certain point. It makes me wonder why people still bothered with ordered formations and firing lines if everything else seems to have been aimed at breaking them apart.

---

Javelin throwing ended up being an Olympic sport for a reason ;)

Wonder why slinging was never included though, LOL. Actually, just read up on it: one of the first Olympic events was javelin throwing WITH a sling.

Then there is this too:

Quote:

---

Film exists of Spanish Civil War combatants using slings to throw grenades over buildings into enemy positions on the opposite street.

---

(from Wikipedia)

Slinging grenades.. of course, it's pretty genius. Nothing could go wrong! :D But then.. they're shooting at us, we're shooting at them, why don't we try flinging grenades over buildings while we're at it, all in danger anyways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sp4

Ah.. I always thought it was a bit weird how the only ranged units Rome had in the early game of Rome 1 were people throwing spears. I just thought that would be really inefficient as a way of shooting at someone especially because everything shot back... might as well go with longer range...

I read about it a little today and found they even did it up to and during the Napoleonic wars. I thought it kind of became meh once artillery was developed to a certain point. It makes me wonder why people still bothered with ordered formations and firing lines if everything else seems to have been aimed at breaking them apart.

---

because until napoleon artillery was usually a secondary weapon and rarely used offensively. the ordered formations were to make it less likely that men break and run and at the same time it was needed to resist the heavy cavalry charges. although it started to show signs of being outdated, the infantry formation can still be defended in that era. ww1 however, thats a completely different story. what a waste of human lives that was :/

Patch 8 notes:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Gameplay Improvements

Campaign


-It is now possible to levy units from satrapies and client states. This works in a similar manner to mercenaries, but these units have normal recruitment and upkeep costs, and come from the locally available unit roster.
-Infantry and cavalry units now have different campaign movement extents. Infantry units are slower than before, while cavalry units are faster than before. Armies always move at the speed of the slowest unit. Now cavalry-only armies actually move faster.
-Cinematic borders can now be displayed in campaign and battle by pressing [ALT] + [K] keys (by default).
-New industrial building chain: Quarry and mine buildings are now available for construction in minor settlements for all factions.
-Fixed an issue that prevented the AI from blockading the Brundisium port.
-Improved cultural conversion mechanics.
-Exempting a province from tax now sets its food consumption to zero (this wasn’t previously registering).
-In Multiplayer Campaign mode, when a player-owned settlement is attacked by the AI, the player will no longer have the option to sally forth, when the ‘fight manual battles’ option is disabled.
-Improved disembarkation areas in some coastal battle maps.
-Special abilities in battle have undergone rebalancing.
-Changed victory conditions in grand campaign for all playable factions. The number of regions the player needs to control in order to win the game has been reduced.
-Removed a number of misleading treachery types from Diplomacy, so now a faction that breaks a treaty and then signs it again within 10 turns won’t get treachery penalties.
-Campaign AI is now less likely to declare war on too many factions.


Battle


-Added new Barbarian major port battle map.
-Enemy reinforcement banners no longer begin battle as visible, thereby initially hiding the units’ positions in battles.
-Added visualisations to denote the range of targeted abilities in battles, so the player will know which units will be affected.
-Fixed a bug which caused the frame rate drop when it rained during battles.


Usability Improvements


Campaign


-After researching a technology on the campaign map, the zoom-to-location button on the Research Complete message will now zoom to the correct location.
-Faction list in Diplomacy now sorts alphabetically by default.
-The Toggle UI shortcut ([K] key by default) now works with Campaign modes.
-Treachery warnings now show reliably when you are declaring war and have current treaties with that faction. The warning also shows when the player breaks a treaty and tries to declare war, while the treaty is still in the process of being broken.
-Fixed the top and bottom of the Campaign tactical map to prevent it from being clipped at high resolutions.
-Added borders to the campaign tactical map so regions at the edges can be seen more centrally and are not blocked by the diplomacy user interface.
-Fixed a conflict which meant automatically constructed siege equipment prevented the player from building anything else.
-General’s skills and army traditions which lower upkeep costs will now update the recruitment panels correctly.
-Agent ability Intercept Orders success event-messages will now display which specific armies/settlements are revealed.
-Improved trees on the Campaign map.

Battle


-Post-battle loading screens for Custom/Multiplayer battles are now interactive, so the player can see kills/losses of armies in battle.
-When reinforcing an ally in a campaign battle using multiple armies, the unit cards in battle will now be adapted correctly to the number of unit cards and fit the screen correctly.
-It is now clearer in the battle UI when auto-trigger is enabled on ability buttons.
-Improved lighting and vegetation in Atlantic climate battles.

Patch 8.1 notes:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Gameplay Improvements



Campaign


-Improved AI parameter balancing: increased tactical focus and aggression, especially for major factions in both Grand Campaign and Gaul Campaign.
-Improved campaign AI raiding behaviour. AI factions are now more likely to raid during campaigns.


Battle




-Siege artillery now uses flaming projectiles appropriately (when attacking walls and towers).
-Fixed an issue in siege battle AI which could lead to the general's unit exposing itself to attack when trying to use its special abilities to support assaulting units on walls.
-Fixed a pathfinding issue which could cause units to retreat from siege towers and ladders once they had docked to walls. This was most common with AI units due to the sequence in which it issues unit orders.
-Fixed a range of issues with the AI's interaction with walls in siege battles, enabling the AI to conduct a more effective assault using siege towers and ladders.
-Improved the tactical co-ordination between different sub-groups of units when assaulting the walls in siege battles. When the AI attempts to enter the settlement via the gates, it is now able to do a better job of first eliminating the threat of boiling oil.
-Fixed an issue which caused units to march off in a random direction when reforming on a siege tower.
-Improved the behaviour of units when a unit on the ground is ordered to melee-attack a unit on the walls.
-Boiling oil no longer causes incendiary damage (so won’t burn battering rams for example).
-Improved pathfinding when attacking units on walls with units on the ground or vice versa.
-Improved attacking siege AI’s interaction with walls, and its use of battering rams.

Glad to see all of the AI improvements. Also glad to see the oil tuned down a bit.

Also, its a 1.1 gb patch. Wow. Though most of that is probably the new DLC.

EDIT 2: download is 1.5 gb with the new DLC and 1.1 without. This is a massive patch.

All of those changes look great. But uhh...what about the cultural conversion mechanics? Anyone know what, exactly, the changes are?

From what I understand cultural conversion will now find a balance between competing cultures within the same province instead of 1 culture going to 100% pushing the others to 0%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

From what I understand cultural conversion will now find a balance between competing cultures within the same province instead of 1 culture going to 100% pushing the others to 0%.

---

oooh, so this has a few implications.

1. An overall drop in cultural benefit toward public order? Or did they rebalance the amount of public order from each unit of culture?
2. No more using a cultural conversion building for 10-15 turns, they removing it altogether for another building?
3. As an example: In southern Italia, that Syracuse has already culturally bled into the boot, and unless they are removed will continue to influence the culture with its Hellenistic influence. This will create a ratio within the lower most settlement in the boot based on buildings built and agent/general culture converstion ratings. This will make it more difficult to maintain public order, and also makes it more fluid, as settlements near your own settlement affect it, you don't have to conquer it to influence the culture. Is this a correct assumption?

Patch 8.1 coming on the 19th. It's supposed to dramatically increase AI aggressiveness. No point in staring a new campaign now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Also, its a 1.1 gb patch. Wow. Though most of that is probably the new DLC.

EDIT 2: download is 1.5 gb with the new DLC and 1.1 without. This is a massive patch.

---

The DLC isn't going to be very big. Most of it is probably the new campaign map.

Just booted my game and saw that the main menu background changed to reflect the expansion (even though I don't have it) and came here to see the change log. Then I saw this; "Campaign AI is now less likely to declare war on too many factions." I really hope this works in practice, cuz it's definitely one of the main culprits in the early demise of the historically powerful expansionist factions like Rome. Don't understand why it took 8 patches to address this, but when the AI is at war with 7+ factions at once how can it hope to survive?

By way of game design, the powerful expansionist factions are more vulnerable to early extinction than the smaller defensive ones. They get to sit back and play the counterattack game while factions like Rome, Carthage, etc exhaust themselves fighting ruinous wars on multiple fronts and then collapse easily with no way left to defend themselves. CA need to add more diplomatic options so that large powerful factions can use diplomatic savvy or demonstrations of force to further their expansionist agendas without entering into direct conflict. Survival needs to take priority over reckless offensives, especially when considering the AI's poor balance of power estimates when confronting the player. It'd be nice if the AI could settle disputes quickly and bring the smaller factions to the negotiation table without the need for long protracted wars. And most importantly, the AI needs to settle other disputes as quickly as possible when attacked by the player so that it can focus its forces to deal with it.

Right now, I find that if you play on any difficulty higher than normal the AI will sit there and continue to fight with multiple factions while you knock off its settlements one after the other and refuse any offers of peace when it's clearly in its best interests to do so until it's way too late. More diplomatic options are needed, for the AI's sake alone.

EDIT- After playing for a few hours I see that phalanx on phalanx warfare is literally over in seconds from first contact. You don't even have time for flanking maneuvers, the phalangites on both sides (comparable units) are almost completely destroyed by the time you get there even if you launch the move as soon as they come into contact :rtwno:

Also, has anyone been able to levy troops from a client yet in an existing campaign? Not working for me so far.

2nd EDIT- So levying troops from clients is now working for me in a Patch 7 campaign. Sorted itself out somehow. I also see that seasons have somehow been implemented in the main game now, for anyone using a tpy mod you see a seasonal symbol right next to the date at the lower right of the campaign map (and you can mouse over as well). I'm wondering if anyone has actually seen changes (snow) on the campaign map or a campaign battlefield yet, or any campaign effects? I created a few custom battles up north and there was snow on the ground. I hope the modders can take advantage of this in the grand campaign.

Also, people are saying that the rain lag has been fixed.

I just noticed that my replay saves do not replay my battles. They show my deployment and then the AI plays the battle its way. Quite a difference I can tell you! Has this been messed up like this for very long? They used to work back in October I’m sure.

Replays are very hit and miss. Contrary to public belief its not an actual reply where it records your every move. Rather it tries to predict your moves, oftentimes getting them wrong. This is the way its been for a while, I recall that in Rome 1 vanilla I played an epic custom battle as Carthage against the Romans. I won by the skin of my teeth, and in the excitement I wanted to save the replay. So the next day Im telling my buddy about this awesome battle and he comes over to watch the replay. So we watch it, and in the replay, I lose. It was actually a pretty pathetic loss, with most of my men routing in the first 5 minutes. Ever since then I never saved a replay in a TW game.

Just found this on .com... hilarious and sad at the same time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CBtqiA7iQw#t=14

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Replays are very hit and miss. Contrary to public belief its not an actual reply where it records your every move. Rather it tries to predict your moves, oftentimes getting them wrong. This is the way its been for a while, I recall that in Rome 1 vanilla I played an epic custom battle as Carthage against the Romans. I won by the skin of my teeth, and in the excitement I wanted to save the replay. So the next day Im telling my buddy about this awesome battle and he comes over to watch the replay. So we watch it, and in the replay, I lose. It was actually a pretty pathetic loss, with most of my men routing in the first 5 minutes. Ever since then I never saved a replay in a TW game.

---

It works pretty well in Shogun 2. I have no idea what they changed between then and now or why the felt they had to make it stop working but there's that.

The patch 8.1 beta is currently up.

Here are the patch notes again:

Quote:

---

Patch 8.1



Gameplay Improvements




Campaign


-Improved AI parameter balancing: increased tactical focus and aggression, especially for major factions in both Grand Campaign and Gaul Campaign.
-Improved campaign AI raiding behaviour. AI factions are now more likely to raid during campaigns.


Battle




-Siege artillery now uses flaming projectiles appropriately (when attacking walls and towers).
-Fixed an issue in siege battle AI which could lead to the general's unit exposing itself to attack when trying to use its special abilities to support assaulting units on walls.
-Fixed a pathfinding issue which could cause units to retreat from siege towers and ladders once they had docked to walls. This was most common with AI units due to the sequence in which it issues unit orders.
-Fixed a range of issues with the AI's interaction with walls in siege battles, enabling the AI to conduct a more effective assault using siege towers and ladders.
-Improved the tactical co-ordination between different sub-groups of units when assaulting the walls in siege battles. When the AI attempts to enter the settlement via the gates, it is now able to do a better job of first eliminating the threat of boiling oil.
-Fixed an issue which caused units to march off in a random direction when reforming on a siege tower.
-Improved the behaviour of units when a unit on the ground is ordered to melee-attack a unit on the walls.
-Boiling oil no longer causes incendiary damage (so won’t burn battering rams for example).
-Improved pathfinding when attacking units on walls with units on the ground or vice versa.
-Improved attacking siege AI’s interaction with walls, and its use of battering rams.

---

So reports are saying that boiling oil has been nerfed, which makes me very, very happy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

The patch 8.1 beta is currently up.

Here are the patch notes again:



So reports are saying that boiling oil has been nerfed, which makes me very, very happy.

---

Um, boiling oil was nerfed with patch 7 already. It was killing a dozen or so units before the "neutral regime" kicked in due to enemy troops being inside the gateway. Pretty much, boiling oil, was useless since patch 7. I almost felt like removing it altogether through modding since it was detrimental for defenders (boiling oil would start to pour on your own troops as the enemy gets pushed back through the gates).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

Um, boiling oil was nerfed with patch 7 already. It was killing a dozen or so units before the "neutral regime" kicked in due to enemy troops being inside the gateway. Pretty much, boiling oil, was useless since patch 7. I almost felt like removing it altogether through modding since it was detrimental for defenders (boiling oil would start to pour on your own troops as the enemy gets pushed back through the gates).

---

Are you sure about that? I was playing with patch 7 when the oil killed about 1,500 of my men in about 2 minutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Are you sure about that? I was playing with patch 7 when the oil killed about 1,500 of my men in about 2 minutes.

---

:laugh2: OUCHIE!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

:laugh2: OUCHIE!!

---

To make things worse, it was my own oil. I was defending and sent my defenders out to attack the attackers and I didnt realize that there were a few enemies by the gate and before I knew what was going on most of my defenders were dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Are you sure about that? I was playing with patch 7 when the oil killed about 1,500 of my men in about 2 minutes.

---

@Hooahguy, LOL, you hit it right in the bull's eye: the oil is more damaging to the defenders, especially if defending with hoplites. Hoplite phalanx has a "push-forward" programmed into them. So, after a little while, they succeed in pushing the enemy out through the gate. I am not sure exactly where the ownership trigger is located, but it's somewhere inside the gatehouse. Once your men cross that point, the gate ownership passes back to the defender and... the oil starts pouring again right on top of the defenders :)

On the opposite side of the token: as soon as the AI attacker crosses that point from the other side, the gate ownership becomes neutral and the oil stops pouring. In effect, oil rarely kills too many attackers, but is very detrimental to successful defenders.

As far as nerf is considered, patch notes to 7 said the oil damage has been reduced. The biggest nerf for me though is the gatehouse control. Now, it is sufficient for the attacker to get one unit inside the gatehouse to neutralize it despite the defender still having majority within the control radius. Before patch 7, control radius was smaller, and centered more towards the town center so the attacker had to push the defenders away from the gate to neutralize oil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

@Hooahguy, LOL, you hit it right in the bull's eye: the oil is more damaging to the defenders, especially if defending with hoplites. Hoplite phalanx has a "push-forward" programmed into them. So, after a little while, they succeed in pushing the enemy out through the gate. I am not sure exactly where the ownership trigger is located, but it's somewhere inside the gatehouse. Once your men cross that point, the gate ownership passes back to the defender and... the oil starts pouring again right on top of the defenders :)

On the opposite side of the token: as soon as the AI attacker crosses that point from the other side, the gate ownership becomes neutral and the oil stops pouring. In effect, oil rarely kills too many attackers, but is very detrimental to successful defenders.

As far as nerf is considered, patch notes to 7 said the oil damage has been reduced. The biggest nerf for me though is the gatehouse control. Now, it is sufficient for the attacker to get one unit inside the gatehouse to neutralize it despite the defender still having majority within the control radius. Before patch 7, control radius was smaller, and centered more towards the town center so the attacker had to push the defenders away from the gate to neutralize oil.

---

I don't know about control seen as I've not noticed any significant difference but with patches 7 and 8 I've found boiling oil a great help. If you position a group of cheap spearmen (levee's that can shield screen will do nicely) just inside the gate, not in the gatehouse itself, then you will see hundreds of casualties from the oil. The spearmen are useless at killing, but hold the enemy in position and tangle them up well enough to keep them in range of the oil for a long time. It also works with raorai or triarii if playing as rome. The trick is to not be inside the gatehouse, as then you get burnt too, but just your side of it. For phalanxes you could still do it, but not in phalanx formation. In phalanx formation your troops will indeed push forward, but in normal formation they will only do so if the enemy back off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sociopsychoactive

I don't know about control seen as I've not noticed any significant difference but with patches 7 and 8 I've found boiling oil a great help. If you position a group of cheap spearmen (levee's that can shield screen will do nicely) just inside the gate, not in the gatehouse itself, then you will see hundreds of casualties from the oil. The spearmen are useless at killing, but hold the enemy in position and tangle them up well enough to keep them in range of the oil for a long time. It also works with raorai or triarii if playing as rome. The trick is to not be inside the gatehouse, as then you get burnt too, but just your side of it. For phalanxes you could still do it, but not in phalanx formation. In phalanx formation your troops will indeed push forward, but in normal formation they will only do so if the enemy back off.

---

Probably that's the difference. I tend to put hoplites by the gate (inside the walls) in 1-line phalanx formation (3-4 of them) and entice the AI to attack that formation through the gate. Hoplite phalanxes kill the attacking AI, but also push the AI back through the gates and at that point they get burned by their very own oil. Pulling them back does not work either since then they get slaughtered in their back by the attackers.

Some interesting things I've noticed playing with the 8.1 beta, the CAI seems to be making more post battle adjustments after suffering losses. This was most evident for me in the early game as Epirus on Hard. Initial clashes against Sparta where my levy phalangites and cavalry made the difference, had the Spartans come back with a force composed almost entirely of peiriokoi pikes with some mercenary citizen cavalry. I've literally never seen such a composition in a Spartan army before. When Athens got into the mix, they suffered a catastrophic loss where my cavalry tore their flanks to pieces. They came back with forces led by hippeus heavy lancers with several units of Tarantine merc cav as well.

The AI also seems to be sallying out of non-walled settlements more often to fight in the open ground. CAI allies also seem to come to each others aid faster. Some well played agent actions as well, I've definitely been pleasantly surprised in some regards. Of course it still struggles abysmally in any siege-related affairs, but for the most part I've never noticed this other stuff I mentioned before. Don't know if anyone else has, but I'd be interested to know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Some interesting things I've noticed playing with the 8.1 beta, the CAI seems to be making more post battle adjustments after suffering losses. This was most evident for me in the early game as Epirus on Hard. Initial clashes against Sparta where my levy phalangites and cavalry made the difference, had the Spartans come back with a force composed almost entirely of peiriokoi pikes with some mercenary citizen cavalry. I've literally never seen such a composition in a Spartan army before. When Athens got into the mix, they suffered a catastrophic loss where my cavalry tore their flanks to pieces. They came back with forces led by hippeus heavy lancers with several units of Tarantine merc cav as well.

The AI also seems to be sallying out of non-walled settlements more often to fight in the open ground. CAI allies also seem to come to each others aid faster. Some well played agent actions as well, I've definitely been pleasantly surprised in some regards. Of course it still struggles abysmally in any siege-related affairs, but for the most part I've never noticed this other stuff I mentioned before. Don't know if anyone else has, but I'd be interested to know.

---

I think, I've seen this before the patch 8.1. I suspect it is not related to AI trying a different composition but rather to the AI rebuilding its destroyed army to the very latest standards (higher tier barracks, etc.). So, you destroy the AI's starting army and they come back with a stronger one since their barracks had an upgrade.

AI armies recruiting a ton of mercs after a loss is also not really new.

By the way, guys, what do you see as your current game version? I have beta enabled but I see it as 1.8.0 not 1.8.1... hmm... wondering if the seige patch has made it through for me.

It's correct, I saw a post about it on .com and somebody from CA confirmed it.

I seem to be having problems with the faction events since patch 8.1 beta. The game seems to be ignoring the choices I make. For example, a slave was kidnapped by a rival faction, I choose to buy her back rather than kill her or do nothing, but the actual result is that she is assassinated. This has happened on at least 2 other events so I know the game is not using the choices I make.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seyavash

I seem to be having problems with the faction events since patch 8.1 beta. The game seems to be ignoring the choices I make. For example, a slave was kidnapped by a rival faction, I choose to buy her back rather than kill her or do nothing, but the actual result is that she is assassinated. This has happened on at least 2 other events so I know the game is not using the choices I make.

---

I've noticed this a few times as well. Pre-patch 8, too.

Just noticed something screwey with archer towers after patch 8...

I'm defending in a siege (Level 1 barb fort) and when the AI comes up to burn my gate (the main gate in the middle), the archer towers either side stopped, first one then the other a minute later. I thought that maybe they introduced ammo for the towers...

So after waiting 10 minutes for them to set fire to the gate in the rain, they succeed and run away to let it burn down - suddenly the archer towers come back to life and start firing again!

All I can think of is the towers prioritise the closest unit to the gate if it is being attacked and maybe didn't have line-of-sight for that unit, so they just did nothing and ignored all the other enemies milling around until that one closest unit stops attacking... but I've never noticed the towers stop firing no matter how close the walls they are...

Anyone else seen this? Didn't Shogun 2 let you set targets for towers? ..or maybe I'm imagining things... anyway, they should!

Never thought about the thing with the towers but I'll keep an eye out. Line of sight-issues sounds reasonable, not sure how that works in general.

On a different topic: the longer I get into my campaign (or possibly more with every patch) after a new turn starts the game "freezes" as the Events pop up. The window is marked in gray and I can move the arrow but not open up anything except the chat window (?), and so far I haven't found out a way to get past it. This happens with all sorts of events, for instance characters gaining a trait or cancellation of a trade agreement. I've tried pressing escape, clicking a hundred times on the "OK"-button in the middle of the popup and pretty much facerolled the keyboard to find a way out but nothing seems to work. Does anyone else experience this? Is it a bug or a feature I'm not getting?

Kind regards

Bellicin, I’m playing Rome and this happens now when I get a triumph. Grey panels and a freeze. I’m able to do a CNTL-S save, reload and then proceed. You do loose the turn events, though.

Patch 9 now in beta!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Technical and performance improvements:
Performance and memory optimisations in Campaign modes.
Further work to reduce the CPU costs during battles.
Improved framerates when units clash in battles.
Siege battle performance optimisations.
Eliminated several rare crashes found in battle scenarios.
Support for AMD switchable graphics:
Game now correctly detects and reports the discrete GPU on an AMD switchable graphics configuration (primarily laptops with an Intel integrated GPU and a discrete AMD mobility GPU).
This fix ensures that the ‘unlimited video memory’ graphics option is enabled correctly on AMD switchable configs.
Note that the Catalyst Control Centre Switchable Graphics UI must be used to select between the discrete and integrated GPUs for each application that the player wants to run.
Support for ‘Virtu MVP’ Desktop Switchable Graphics:
Virtu MVP is a common OEM-installed application for selecting GPUs in a multi-GPU desktop configuration e.g. a desktop with an Intel integrated GPU and a discrete desktop GPU – both typically routed to the same motherboard display output connector.
We now correctly detect and report the correct GPU used in this scenario.
Note that the Virtu MVP Control Panel application must be used to select between the discrete and integrated GPUs for each application that the player wants to run.
New option in the Advanced Graphics Settings menu, for selecting between graphics cards / GPUs when more than 1 is available.
Support for multi-GPUs with multi-monitor configurations:
Game now detects multiple GPUs and allows the player to pick which GPU is used to render the game.
In this configuration multiple GPUs are shown in a combo-box in the Advanced Graphics Options UI.
Improved video-memory detection to prevent the game from sometimes detecting the video memory limit from the wrong/lower graphics card in a multi-GPU configuration.

Battle AI and behavioural improvements:
Improved pathfinding of siege vehicles near walls.
Improved multiple siege ladder functionality parameters.
Improved siege vehicle docking placement.
Units now consistently disembark from ships with raised bows.
Improved AI infantry awareness of cavalry, making infantry brace when threatened by a charge.
AI controlled units are now more likely to use flaming arrows against elephants where available.
Improved logic of multiple battle maps, to allow the AI to interact with these maps better and cause fewer behavioural issues.
Improved AI General's use of special abilities.
Rebalanced AI's battle-plan analyser/attack-or-defend decision making, to take into account that the enemy alliance may have weaker but longer-range missile units, to prevent static behaviour under missile fire.
In ambush battles, the defender’s units which are under missile fire that outranges their own are now more likely to respond by moving to intercept the missile unit attacking them.
Altered some of the AI's usage of various ammo types.
Pike Phalanx now reform properly once engaged in melee.
Idle units attacked when set to Formed Attack attempt to keep their current facing.
Formed attack charges will now penetrate less than free attack barbarian charges.
Attacks from units in formation are now more powerful than attacks from unformed units.
Reduced the chance of units walking while routing from the battlefield.
Routing units no longer turn around/play matched combat animations as they are being killed.
Units now no longer head through breach in a wall rather than using the siege engine they are attached to.
Artillery with special ammo now show the correct model while loading the weapon: e.g. animal carcasses.
Reduced instances of unit collision which caused jittering on the battlefield.
Eliminated a battle replay desync caused by presence of war dogs units.
Units now correctly stop firing at a building if they take ownership of it.
During multiplayer siege battles, the defender can now see the attacker's units during deployment.
Rebalanced hit-point bonuses for officers and standard bearers.
During battles, units can now burn down open gates with torches.
Men positioned on a gatehouse will no longer die when the gate is destroyed.
Artillery ships can now consistently disembark.
Added more effective collision detection to barbarian watch towers in encampment battles.
Charging at Pikemen now consistently selects the correct matched combat animation, keeping pikemen in line more effectively.
When dog handlers unleash their dogs, the handlers will no longer attack as well.
Added blood to chariot horses and drivers, and to attackers and defenders during knockdowns. (Only active if the player owns the Blood and Gore DLC.)
Artillery on ships can no longer be picked up (previously resulted in loss of unit control).
Improved unit reforming on the battlefield.
Projectiles no longer remain in mid-air when the siege weapon that fired them is destroyed.
Improvements to naval disembarking functionality.
Technical improvements across a range of battle maps (including pathfinding, deployment, general unit interaction, walls, gates, battle tooltips etc).
Multiple minor unit behavioural improvements.


Campaign AI improvements:
AI no longer underestimates its strength when ending a move in Forced March stance within a settlement.
Campaign AI now considers maintaining sieges for longer, in order to build more siege equipment.
Campaign AI now less likely to sue for peace shortly after declaring a war.
AI factions now recruit more siege units.
Revised the Campaign AI settlement occupation decision system.
Adjustments to Campaign AI Financial Management.
AI factions are now much less likely to declare war on distant factions.
Adjustments to composition of recruited forces.
Improvement to Campaign AI food management.

General Battle Improvements:
Eliminated an exploit allowing players to bypass unit-caps in custom and multiplayer battles by modifying a saved army setup.
Units can no longer use loose formation when manning siege equipment.
Buhen (Egyptian battle map) is now playable in custom battle mode.
Caltrops are now placed in more uniform rows.
Tortoise formation is now unlocked in the Seleucid faction when the player owns the Greek States DLC.
Improved multiplayer responsiveness: movement paths and attack arrows are now shown instantly upon giving the order. (Previously the game waited for all clients to confirm the issued order, causing a small delay).
Multiple combat animation blending tweaks.
Orders issued on lower framerate machines now register more effectively.
Added a horse bonus upgrade icon to show different levels of horses on their unit cards.
Improvements to group collision sounds during battles.
Pre-battle voiceover no longer occasionally cuts out.
Tweaks to some Hellenic unit looks to make them more distinct.

General Campaign Improvements:
Added a countdown timer to the Exchange Panel in Multiplayer Campaign mode.
Settlements on the campaign map will no longer continue to emit smoke from damage or construction when they are no longer damaged/under construction.
Right-clicking the mouse during the end-turn cycle in campaign while an agent/army is selected will no longer trigger audio responses from the selected agent/army.
Opening and closing the pause menu, while the Declare War On *Overlord/Make Peace With Satrapies panel is open in Campaign mode, will no longer close the panel and make peace with the satrapies.
An army in Forced March stance will now have their Recruit Units button reactivate immediately when they are put back into the Default stance.
Replacing an immortal general will no longer trigger a General Wounded message in Campaign modes.
The Zoom To Location button no longer pans the camera to the bottom-left corner of the Multiplayer Campaign map when pressed with an army selected.
The Nervii faction is now immune to snow attrition in the Grand Campaign.
If a general reaches level 25 in a statistic, all of the attribute increases and abilities granted by that statistic will consistently remain.
Addressed a rare issue during campaign ambush battles where, if the user conceded defeat, they might suffer no losses and could then retreat.
When recruiting a unit on the same turn as a researched technology that replaces that unit type is completed, the unit recruitment will no longer be cancelled.
Fix to allow Praetorians to be upgraded to Praetorian Guards once the appropriate technology has been researched.

Battle rebalancing:
Improved behaviour and benefits of Formed Attack ability.
Slightly reduced the spacing of melee units.
Widened the pike cone-of-engagement, so they can hold off units more effectively.
Reduced pike damage.
Reduced the mass (and therefore impact) of chariots and elephants.
Major adjustments to unit costs, to better reflect the combat value of units; there is a much greater spread of values now. For example Oathsworn now cost 1340, Celtic Warriors 350.
Adjustments to unit speeds, stats, and more to help diversify the unit rosters, and give more distinct roles on the battlefield.
Improved AI army compositions in campaign mode, when a faction doesn’t have access to early land or navy units.
Campaign AI is now more focused on acquiring early military technologies.
Certain total casualty morale penalties have been set to 0 so there is less stacking of morale effects.
Reduced minimum hit chance, base hit chance and maximum hit chance for melee combat.

Campaign rebalancing:
Auto-resolver balancing:
Smaller defensive bonus in minor settlement battles
A small global penalty for the player in autoresolved battles
Unit threshold has been increased, so severely damaged units are less likely to survive an auto-resolved battle.

Looks good! Nothing awe inspiring but steady work such as this will polish Rome II and I'm all up for that! I like the change to unit costs. Maybe now it will make sense to stick with tier 1 and 2 units for reasons other than roleplaying and handicapping oneself.

"During battles, units can now burn down open gates with torches." :shame:

Looks like things have now become desperate. I get the feeling that R2/Warscape will never live this particular weakness down.

Quote:

---

AI factions are now much less likely to declare war on distant factions.

---

Good, maybe this will reduce some of the ridiculous hate for Carthage. It just boggles the mind that factions on the other side of the mediterranean or even landlocked factions immediately declare war as soon as contact is made especially on an empire known for trade.

Well, after a night of playtesting 9beta I can say that my battles have now become plagued with units becoming non-responsive after initiating flanking maneuvers. I have to continuously babysit any units I've sent to attack the flanks of the enemy forcing me to repeatedly pause the battle. Common example; I give orders to attack the flanks of an engaged enemy, my unit closes at first, but then soon after contact they stop attacking. They just stand there looking at the enemy 2 feet away. I click to attack again, sometimes they respond, sometimes they don't. I double-click and they then shuffle around a bit reorganizing and attack. Spear units in particular can stop attacking yet again even after these measures.

Another example, I attack an enemy in the flank and they turn around to a man (ie not just the rear of the formation, but everyone) to fight off the attack. Meanwhile my unit that was already engaged with them just stops attacking them altogether and watches, so I have to issue attack orders again. Now this enemy unit is getting attacked from the rear with no one fighting back, which would be bad enough, but somehow their loss rate doesn't reflect it (as if they're not actually being attacked from behind). This has happened even after they get attacked by heavy shock cav while pinned against pike units. Many men get knocked down, then after they all turn around to deal with the cav while my pike unit previously holding them in place just stops attacking. Probably the reason the attacked enemy unit can turn around in the first place, it's like status between the 2 previously engaged units switches to disengaged when one gets hit in the rear.

Yet another example, attacking engaged enemy spear units on both flanks. My flanking units either stop attacking altogether, or they never close enough to actually make contact with weapons, even after repeated attack-clicking. The problem here is that you often can't tell that this is happening while you're trying to watch the entire battlefield cuz the units look like they're engaged from the distance. I first noticed it when units I had flanked seemed to have remarkable morale, holding out long after what I've become accustomed to seeing. After close inspection to see what the hell was going on I noticed the problem, then afterwards I found instances of it happening in every battle that I attack the enemy in the flanks, so now I check for it as SOP.

Has anyone else experienced this? Don't see anything in the patch notes that would indicate they changed any behavior for units getting attacked in the flanks, but from what I've seen so far the 'bug' (I hope) only affects units attacking enemies in the rear/sides. I'll take some screens next time.

So here's another example of the problem, but under different circumstances. This happened during a test in a custom battle. In the first screen (a composite to show unit info), a unit of triarii was engaged with my unit of pikemen on the far left, just like the other 4 units are also engaged with pikes right on down the short battle line. It so happened that as I moved a unit of coastal levies around to flank them they were attacked by the Roman general's cav right off to the left. The triarii then proceeded to disengage from my pikemen and turn around to assist their general (indicated in yellow).

Not only did they manage to turn their backs on my pikes without losing a single man, but my pikemen never even attempted to attack them from behind, even after repeated attack orders. The yellow curve indicates where the triarii were redeployed, and the red engagement arrow from my pikes is still clearly visible even after they're long gone (after that they ran off to chase my shock cav back in the distance). As you can see they still have 154 men, which was the same amount they had when they disengaged from my pikes.

I then tried to attack the cav with no luck. It wasn't until I moved them a bit that I could finally get them to attack the general. The problem seems to have something to do with how units are interacting with the back of other units, even after already being engaged with them from the front.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://i.imgur.com/YB6Ji1e.jpg

This next one is a new bit of comedy I noticed as well, in the same test. A unit of triarii decided to chase off some peltasts come Hell or high water, so I decided to have some fun and let them go for a run. The distance in the screen is the closest they would get, but every few seconds one of my axemen would decide to turn around and commit suicide, like the fool under the arrow. My unit was full strength at the start of the chase, but as you can see they already lost 8 men from this behavior. Remember, no contact was ever made between the 2 units, but even my unit's status indicates that they've been "attacked in the rear." Incidentally, even though the triarii never got closer than in the screen, every time they stuttered to kill someone that turned around, they caught right back up to my peltasts. Triarii can run down Agrianian axemen? :dizzy2:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://i.imgur.com/Hu751jY.jpg

Haven't noticed this myself (but I'll keep an eye out for it...), but could it be something to do with the patch changes to formation attack? Could you test it with formation attack switched on/off?

I suppose you could look at it one of two ways; either it's another example of one of CA's changes breaking more than it fixes, or, if you're being generous, this is what beta patches are for... ;)

New hotfix:


Multiplayer battle-replay desync addressed.
Issues with trees in battle-maps addressed.
Additional cost-balancing to Chariots and Elephants.
Units no longer mistake bastions for wall breaches in settlement battles.
Further battle map technical and performance improvements.

My heart almost skipped a beat upon reading this, LOL. then I realized that I had misread it and that the hotfix has addressed multiplayer battle replay desync rather than multiplayer campaign desync... Sigh...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

New hotfix:


Multiplayer battle-replay desync addressed.
Issues with trees in battle-maps addressed.
Additional cost-balancing to Chariots and Elephants.
Units no longer mistake bastions for wall breaches in settlement battles.
Further battle map technical and performance improvements.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fridge

Haven't noticed this myself (but I'll keep an eye out for it...), but could it be something to do with the patch changes to formation attack? Could you test it with formation attack switched on/off? ...

---

I'll keep testing and trying different combinations, but it's often difficult to test the way you want cuz the AI behaves so inconsistently at times and ruins the tests. I'm of the same mind as you in regards to the possible cause being the changes to formation attack, and possibly just their continuous work with trying to keep units in formation during battle. Maybe this has come as an unintended consequence of trying to keep everyone pleased with all the complaints of units losing formation. I'm finding the behavior so rampant now that I'm getting paranoid as to whether any of my units are actually fighting to their fullest capability. With spear units, even when they seem to be attacking each other I frequently see only a couple of men actually fighting while the great portion of the unit just stands perfectly still (yes, I'm talking about men simply standing right in front of their enemy as well at the point of contact, not just the back of the unit).

Here are 2 more examples, with new variables; In the first screen, a unit of Parthian cataphracts charged into my battle line and fell into a unit of thorax pikemen. The yellow bracketed line indicating where the pikemen were deployed at the time. The cataphracts attacked in wedge and were bunched up to the left of the center of the screen. Shortly after, I sent a unit of thorax swords, that were positioned behind the phalanx to the right, to attack a unit of Parthian swords descending to attack a unit of cav off to the right (yellow arrow on the right).

When this happened the cataphracts that were engaged with my pikemen began to slide along the battle line to the right to attack my thorax swords. As this happened my pikemen just stopped attacking them (even though the cataphract unit card says "attacked in flank") . Every time I clicked attack thereafter the entire unit would shuffle a few steps to the left, without actually attacking (yellow arrow indicating). Like a carriage return on a typewriter, they just kept shuffling to the left until they just opened a huge door in the battle line. The red attacking arrow still clearly visible.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://i.imgur.com/tSddih8.jpg

This next screen is a closeup of what was happening on the right flank in the first screen. I had sent 2 units of cav into the rear of a unit of Parthian swords and noble blood cavalry that were engaged with my pikes there. They eventually routed, but in the meantime a unit of Parthian swords had attacked one of those cav units which I mentioned in the first screen, and I in turn sent a unit of thorax swords to attack their flank (red arrows indicating). That scrum has 2 units of my thorax pikes and 2 units of my cav in it that are now sitting and doing nothing even though each one had been given attack orders. They made no effort to chase off the routing units, the red attack arrow still clearly seen going off in the distance for the unit of cav (I moved 1 unit of cav out for better visibility). The cav unit left behind has been getting attacked in its flank and not reacting to it (card indicating), except for 1 or 2 horsemen on the edge facing the Parthians. In the meantime, my unit of swords that was supposed to be attacking the Parthians from the left would never make contact, no matter how many times I gave an attack order. They just sat nearby until they started mixing it up with the cataphracts from the first screen.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://i.imgur.com/pOXkHXE.jpg

I can't be the only one experiencing this, I think everybody should observe their battles carefully, cuz this bug is huge as far as I'm concerned and needs to be addressed before Patch 9 goes live. I saw some mention on the official forum from people issuing attack orders to cavalry and then having them stop right before contact. This too has happened to me.

Videos would be a lot easier for demonstration purposes, but Fraps doesn't play nice with R2 on my machine.

I commonly see odd AI behavior described above since the beta patch.

Many times it seems that a couple enemy troops stray from their formation, and it holds your entire formation away from engaging. Furthermore, then they and your other units start to slide around in very odd ways. I am having to micromanage them a lot more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://i.imgur.com/pOXkHXE.jpg

I can't be the only one experiencing this, I think everybody should observe their battles carefully, cuz this bug is huge as far as I'm concerned and needs to be addressed before Patch 9 goes live. I saw some mention on the official forum from people issuing attack orders to cavalry and then having them stop right before contact. This too has happened to me.

Videos would be a lot easier for demonstration purposes, but Fraps doesn't play nice with R2 on my machine.

---

I'll have a look at it later. I have not played with the new patch yet. Didn't have a lot of time but I should be able to tonight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mhantra

I commonly see odd AI behavior described above since the beta patch.

Many times it seems that a couple enemy troops stray from their formation, and it holds your entire formation away from engaging. Furthermore, then they and your other units start to slide around in very odd ways. I am having to micromanage them a lot more.

---

Can definitely confirm this as well.

Another problem that happens often once the battlefield is littered with units is that a significant portion of a unit (sometimes more than half) charging to attack, especially cavalry, just stops in place completely leaving the charge bonus severely diminished. And it's very difficult to tell why they've stopped, it's not as if they get attacked by another unit while they're charging. Might have something to do with the problem Mhantra mentioned.

All in all, I'm finding combat with this new patch pretty frustrating. :sad:

Patch 9 went live today, just a heads up.

Patch 9 is just great, especially for MP players. You can't spam ele&chariot or elite inf etc. All units' recruitment cost increased and that makes you think twice when you building an army.

Patch 9 has greatly improved the game for me. Battles are much faster now (performance wise). The campaign AI is now more challenging. A test game as Rome revealed that one can no lonegr afford not to finish off the Etruscan league (letting them huddle on Corsica). They WILL take Rome if left to their own devices. Carthage is sending stacks into Magna Graecia and retreating back out to sea, where their warships will cover their transports. The Venetii came down with almost 2 full stacks to raid and generally be a pain in my butt. Looks great so far!

LOL, looks promising. I should give Rome another try over this weekend.

OK, jumped into it ;)

An undocumented change (seemingly): when you ambush an army in the forced march stance, now, your reinforcements do join the battle (was not true before patch 8: an ambush was a 1 on 1 fight). Not sure about the standard ambush situation: whether armies in range join or not.

I'm finding agents are quite aggressive in the CIG campaign I'm playing, and frankly pretty freaking dangerous. I've flipped a good half dozen early in this campaign at the front and still some got through, isolated one of my two main stacks and then shuffled in units that were so far off map I never saw them and proceeded to decimate one well made and seasoned armies.

And this was with me using bunches of spies on recon to avoid this very scenario, yet to no avail.

While I can handle this agent spam thing that CA has going, I do not however consider it well balanced. Agents should have some impact on campaigns but not be the decisive factor in it, they are a component of war, not the thing itself.

When in the early course of a campaign I have no less than a dozen spies when my imperium should allow me only four proves the absurdity of this onslaught. In my main campaign as Greece I have like 40 or 50 agents, it's really rather comical.

I should add though that I do find the most recent patches have vastly improved the game, and quite frankly made it a lot harder, all to the good.

So we're talking game balancing now. The main items still a bit broken that I hope they still look at are sieges and the politics module which I still feel needs a complete overhaul.

But still, I'm having some pretty good times in both the main campaign and CIG, in fact in many ways, I like CIG better than the main campaign, it's so nice to have weather back and as much as I hate agent spam, it is nice having them live long enough to flesh out their skills completely and put them to use (and same for generals).

Yes patch 9 is a good one but is it just me or the zombie faces have returned ? In the distance all my legionnaries have this blank face and I haven't seen that since before the first patch.

So now I'm ashamed that I spent what appears to be 500 euro on a stripper but I'm still stingy and have not gotten CIG...

I thought you had to buy that and all.

It seems, diplomatic reliability checks have been improved. Yesterday, I canceled a war that I had started because the target had become a client state of an ally of mine. Before patch 9, this would have resulted in a reliability hit. Now: no change in reliability.

Tech trees have been rebalanced. Rome, for example, no longer has a tech that gives +50% to ammo (or I might be missing something, LOL). Others (players of different factions) report similar techs having been move higher up the tech tree.

Hey, new content from steam ! The african elephants are here and camel arcchers and stuff fror the epirote roster. A gift from CA !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alcibiade

Hey, new content from steam ! The african elephants are here and camel arcchers and stuff fror the epirote roster. A gift from CA !

---

Patches are not gifts :D

That said it seems quite nice. Havent updated since october, maybe i should.

Hmm, sparing the elephant part, it seems they just cut and pasted some extra units from Macedon's roster :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

Tech trees have been rebalanced. Rome, for example, no longer has a tech that gives +50% to ammo (or I might be missing something, LOL). Others (players of different factions) report similar techs having been move higher up the tech tree.

---

Yep, I noticed that tech for extra ammo go missing in my current CIG campaign as Rome, I was looking for it after my last tech research had finished and spent awhile looking for it before giving up in a bit of confusion thinking maybe I just imagined it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Makrell

Patches are not gifts :D

That said it seems quite nice. Havent updated since october, maybe i should.

---

Well, I forgot to add the ironic accent. For the glory of those cute elephant ears I can't play my favorite mod for a while.

Stupid Dumbo patch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sp4

I thought you had to buy that and all.

---

Yeah but they priced it as much as a standalone game :stare:

Here is the info from the official thread:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7406/1...7c74a1a8_z.jpg

If you’re wondering why there’s a small ROME II update downloading via Steam today, wonder no more. We thought it was high time for some additional content!

We now have a beautifully-designed African elephant model, which you can see here in all its large-eared majesty. This model replaces the generic elephant model in ROME II currently used by all African Elephant units.

We’ve also rounded out the unit-roster of Epirus with some tasty extras. They can now recruit Thessalian Cavalry, Royal Peltasts and Illyrian Coastal Levies to bolster their forces. Plus, you’ll find Epirus gets a brand-new Mercenary Indian War Elephant unit to hire.

You’ll see these in action when you face off against Epirus, or be able to use them yourself if you have the Greek States Culture Pack DLC.

Enjoy the update, and see you on the field of battle!

Diplomatic lose-lose situations are still in the game post patch 9.

Example:

Turn 1: Steadfast Rome joins its ally Sparta in the latter's war against Epirus. Rome takes Apollonia. Rome's allies Syracuse and Sparta are happy campers.

Turn 2: Epirus sues for peace with Sparta and becomes a client state of the latter. Rome observes that its ongoing war with Epirus will erode Rome's relationship with Sparta. Rome offers Epirus a peace deal. Epirus accepts. Rome is still steadfast.

Turn 3: Epirus declares war on its new-found master: Sparta. Rome is offered two choices: A) join the ally, Sparta in its defensive war; B) break the alliance. Rome chooses A and goes from "steadfast" to "untrustworthy" globally (for breaking the truce with Epirus despite the latter being the aggressor). The effect of this reliability drop is that allies Sparta and Syracuse break their trade agreements with Rome even though "on the paper" they both are happy (very green and friendly)...

That's just .... if you ask me. This makes any diplomatic efforts in R-2 totally un-enjoyable since it is a given constant that allies will declare war on allies (or factions that have treaties with you).

This "mechanism" was also present in release versions of Empire Total War and Shogun 2 but was fixed with later patches so that siding with one of the allies did not affect diplomatic reliability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth

Yeah but they priced it as much as a standalone game :stare:

Here is the info from the official thread:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7406/1...7c74a1a8_z.jpg

If you’re wondering why there’s a small ROME II update downloading via Steam today, wonder no more. We thought it was high time for some additional content!

We now have a beautifully-designed African elephant model, which you can see here in all its large-eared majesty. This model replaces the generic elephant model in ROME II currently used by all African Elephant units.

We’ve also rounded out the unit-roster of Epirus with some tasty extras. They can now recruit Thessalian Cavalry, Royal Peltasts and Illyrian Coastal Levies to bolster their forces. Plus, you’ll find Epirus gets a brand-new Mercenary Indian War Elephant unit to hire.

You’ll see these in action when you face off against Epirus, or be able to use them yourself if you have the Greek States Culture Pack DLC.

Enjoy the update, and see you on the field of battle!

---

High time for additional content... yes. I think they meant it was high time to finish working on the game they released half a year ago.

Way to be positive about it :clown: Seriously though, Epirus needed some love. As does Sparta. But the Spartan update will come when the 300 sequel comes out, I'm sure of it.

Played some more with 9.1, a VH Roman campaign started fresh. Interesting observations regarding AI expansion: I finally see larger AI states forming.

This is pleasant for the eye (the map is less colorful) but has an (un?)-expected consequence though.

Before patch 9.1., my Roman legions would face 6 to 7 foaming-mouth AI mini-factions in and around Northern Italy (South and North of the mountains). Each of those would field up to 4 armies for a whooping 28 army total. Now, with patch 9.1, when I arrived in Northern Italy, Liguria had consolidated it all (all of Gallia Cisalpina + 4 regions on the Northern side of the Alps). So, instead of 28 armies I had to face only 4... :) I suppose, Liguria could have trained up to 6 armies at that point, but had not caught up yet. Still, even with 6 armies, the difference is huge relative to the 28 armies I'd have to face in earlier versions of the game.

It would seem, with patch 9.1, pikes are spaced closer together again ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

Diplomatic lose-lose situations are still in the game post patch 9...

---

Yeah, they need to get that sorted already. Not to mention introducing greater overall diplomatic influence for powerful factions. Isn't it about time we were able to command our subjugated territories to stop their wars against our allies?! If I'm asked to join a defensive war by an allied state, then decide that the best way to support my allies without compromising my empire's efforts elsewhere is to simply go and put down the hostile faction and quickly subjugate it, shouldn't I now have near total control over their diplomacy? Especially a satrap? At least immediately after subjugation and for a period of years after while hostility towards me (the conqueror) either subsides or rises to the level of belligerence or revolt.

These are essentially my territories now, I let them continue their existence with the condition that my empire is in now in control. Instead I suffer dip penalties with my allies now because I made a treaty with the enemy, then get asked by my allies again to join their war against my new satrap. :dizzy2: - Or how about the fact that you let a faction live then you have to be extra nice to them for years just to get a trade agreement out of them for a few coins? They need to fix that mess... make it nice!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Not to mention introducing greater overall diplomatic influence for powerful factions. Isn't it about time we were able to command our subjugated territories to stop their wars against our allies?! If I'm asked to join a defensive war by an allied state, then decide that the best way to support my allies without compromising my empire's efforts elsewhere is to simply go and put down the hostile faction and quickly subjugate it, shouldn't I now have near total control over their diplomacy? Especially a satrap? At least immediately after subjugation and for a period of years after while hostility towards me (the conqueror) either subsides or rises to the level of belligerence or revolt.

These are essentially my territories now, I let them continue their existence with the condition that my empire is in now in control. Instead I suffer dip penalties with my allies now because I made a treaty with the enemy, then get asked by my allies again to join their war against my new satrap. :dizzy2: - Or how about the fact that you let a faction live then you have to be extra nice to them for years just to get a trade agreement out of them for a few coins? They need to fix that mess... make it nice!

---

Yes, this is very anoying with the satrapies, since they are practicaly litle more than a province of your faction, they shouldnt have options to deny their overlord a trade agreement, which is something that since the game release hasnt been fixed yet.
In my current campaign and for more than 30 turns my satrapy Rome, with attitude very friendly doesnt want to trade no mater what.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

It would seem, with patch 9.1, pikes are spaced closer together again ;)

---

Also i think that they now fall in grater numbers from missile fire.

I feel a little idiot to ask, but has anyone ever managed to use arti in a defensive siege battle?
Every time im defending a walled city with balistae or scorpion towers ive never actualy seen them in battle, does anyone now how ths works??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nearchos

I feel a little idiot to ask, but has anyone ever managed to use arti in a defensive siege battle?
Every time im defending a walled city with balistae or scorpion towers ive never actualy seen them in battle, does anyone now how ths works??

---

@nearchos, you have to deploy those before the battle. The deployables appear on a separate tab similar to fleets in combined land+navy battles. However, I have to warn you, the deployable wall artillery is pretty useless. There is only 1 artillery piece per unit and the firing arch is very narrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nearchos

Also i think that they now fall in grater numbers from missile fire.

---

It appears the missile damage has been raised across the board and armor piercing damage as well. Probably, it is now back to where it was upon RTW 2 release. Alas, historically the period was dominated by machine-gunner slinger hordes ;)

Dunno, where did the CA got the idea missiles had to be boosted again. I had not seen anyone complaining about weak missiles before patch 9, LOL...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slaists

... Dunno, where did the CA got the idea missiles had to be boosted again. I had not seen anyone complaining about weak missiles before patch 9, LOL...

---

Let me venture a guess that it was people in multiplayer crying about not being able to deal with pike spam.