increase casualties recovered

I wanted to ask one thing ... Where is the file that acts on casualties recovered?

I think we should most increase the casualties recovered, but only for the winners (in the case of clear victory).
So you can avoid the problem of constantly having to retrain the troops (which may be very distant from the right place to train).:stars:

EB2 would make this more playable and fun.

I had mentioned this in the topic "snowball effect", but feared that the modders do not see. I think that would be a change that would solve many annoyances.
You can bring the troops away, without losing their power to push the rebels to blame for meetings or other events.
Excuse me for noise, but this topic is particularly close to my heart ...:rtwyes:

Bye:italy:

I wonder if its hardcoded or not, sounds like it is... but I agree it would be nice to up the healing rates... Of course it would also be possible to give better traits for healing casualties.. I mean, most armies did have medics, right.. or atleast and equivalent.

I'd be happy with better traits and ancillaries.

true ... but excluding ancillaries an traits, I noticed that some units (like mercenaries) recovering many more men. Obviously each has a different arrangement to have recovered casualties.

I am very interested to know how does this mechanism ..

Only winners can recover casualties, as they control the field and can simply kill/capture the enemy wounded. There is a trait characteristic that increases the chances of an army's casualties recovering, though. You can just add BattleSurgery 15 to the Green, Blooded, etc traits.

Maybe we could just lower the lethality or something so that less men die during battles, but also lower morale so they rout more easily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by desert

Maybe we could just lower the lethality or something so that less men die during battles, but also lower morale so they rout more easily.

---

Thats changing far to much for battle casualties.

So the amount of recovered casualties is adjustable? Sounds great. I wonder if they really want to up the amount of healed though. It would be nice to have my Hetairoi on a protracted campaign over many lands.

I've already told you how to do it. The higher the BattleSurgery modifier is, the more likely the units are to survive. Just add "BattleSurgery xx" to whatever trait your generals have and that'll do the trick.

Well, you could have it so more casualties heal, or you can just lower the number of casualties in actual battle.

So, say, a unit of levy hoplites would whittle down some Thracian spearmen, but the Thracians have to take relatively high casualties to rout. But if the phalanx is penetrated and Haploi start dying, the hoplites will rout.

I admit that it might be impossible to fine-tune morale and lethality well enough for this to work, as I have never messed with them myself, and it might be that the current lethalities can't just be scaled down proportionally.

The issue is that we don't want the battle taking several hours. RTSes are games that abstract battle. So I think that the current casualty rate is good, we should just get way more units back. This would making losing to a giant stack of celts in your home territory really bad.

So I guess it's the age-old question of "How much realism is too much?".

Regarding casualties recovering... I noticed that men lost due to missle fire have a higher probability of recovering. So I guess that the probability of units recovering is among other things affected by the way casualties were inflicted.

Yeah, sometimes you see weird things: for example, taking 1500 casualties in a battle, and all 145 men lost from 1 unit healing while no one else does. :inquisitive:

Friendly-fire casualties (non-elephant related) are probably the most likely to heal, in fact.

I do not believe they recovered the casualties seen in EB or medieval 2 they are just playing for a long campaign and expand the territory.:sad:

More casualties recovered is also realistic because not many fighters have died in battle, but simply lost your senses (for the fear or suffered a stroke).

The fact of winning a battle clearly lost half of its army does not make sense ... :stars:

I would like that after a battle won my army is still strong enough to pursue an invasion, if I return back to retrain is useless.:italy:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

More casualties recovered is also realistic because not many fighters have died in battle, but simply lost your senses (for the fear or suffered a stroke).

And Romans got nailed sandals for the purpose to kill anyone lying on the floor.... they will mostly dies when trampled by many men wearing nailed sandals.....:laugh4:

Even without the nails, they will still be killed with sheer trample force.... remember the Rock concert?:smash:

Increasing casualties recovery might be realistic, but it does not necessarily follows that it would make a better gameplay. It is usually the human player who wins most of times and would thus get an unfair advantage over the AI (who is mentally-challenged already). So one should be very carefull here...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by V.T. Marvin

Increasing casualties recovery might be realistic, but it does not necessarily follows that it would make a better gameplay. It is usually the human player who wins most of times and would thus get an unfair advantage over the AI (who is mentally-challenged already). So one should be very carefull here...

---

I am not convinced of this.
In my opinion it would be favored only those who won.

If the human player loses a battle at the border of his territory: to curb the invasion enemy becomes very difficult because the enemy army was still intact its strength.:devilish:

Having recovered most victims do not favor anyone in particular, but only the speed invasions ...
so throughout the game will focus more on the battles in open fields instead of continuous sieges as now (and unrealistic).

my proposals to improve the game remains essentially the usual 2: Improve sieges (battle map) and an increase in victims recovered (almost to the point of having the same first-army).:2thumbsup:

You forget that the losing side gets to recover casualties in MTWII through Ransom. That should lower the attrition nicely AND add in a "spoils of war" component, as if the winner had looted the loser's battle camp and gets money (in this case the post-battle "loot" is the ransom money).

There's also a Spoils of Victory mod for EB I. I'm not sure how it works, but if you win a medium or big battle, the FM in charge gets a temporary "Enemy Camp Captured" trait that reduces movement.
I think it also adds money to your treasury, but I've never been able to personally verify that.

From the Minimod pack: "Spoils of Victory for EB; by V.T. Marvin (Well basically after a large battle you’re able to get some profits out of the dead bodies left on the battlefield, collecting metals , weapons and armors ,which translate into mnai)"

So maybe we could have it both ways?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

So you can avoid the problem of constantly having to retrain the troops (which may be very distant from the right place to train).:stars:

EB2 would make this more playable and fun.

---

Why precisely should you avoid this problem? Logistics has been a constant problem in warfare. The player wins more battles than the AI does, so this would be a great advantage to the player. In EB1, the AI has a significantly higher recovery rate than the player, and yet I don't see anywhere that people are getting overrun by regenerating enemies.

I think the suggestion would cause only easier blitzing, which we do not want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bovi

Why precisely should you avoid this problem? Logistics has been a constant problem in warfare. The player wins more battles than the AI does, so this would be a great advantage to the player. In EB1, the AI has a significantly higher recovery rate than the player, and yet I don't see anywhere that people are getting overrun by regenerating enemies.

I think the suggestion would cause only easier blitzing, which we do not want.

---

Under the present system (seen in EB and Medieval 2) almost all the battles of the field become "Pyrrhic victories" like victories totally useless because you lose 3 / 4 of your army.

The only battles sieges are useful: this is really unrealistic. :wall:

To avoid too rapid expansions just lower the costs of maintaining unity of the barbarians. besides this we can generate (with script) full army of rebels, when someone enters a rebel province ...
Become so difficult to capture the rebel provinces and the expansion of the area will be slow.

But simultaneously we have the pleasure to fight with our trusty army many battles before you have to train.
If you make it strong rebels (but only in defense) there is no longer the problem of rapid expansion ...:2thumbsup:

But then, where is this blessed file that acts on the recovery of victims?
None have been able to explain.:tongue:

If you lose 3/4 of your army against the AI, then you are definitely doing something wrong. You should work on your tactics.

Ye gods man 3/4's of you army! Most of my battles are 10% or less casualties which i think is pretty realistic. Medieval 2 casualty rates are higher but i think thats more to do with stats and i fully trust the team will sort it out come EB2.

MIITW does away with lethality but instead uses a global pseudo-lethality multiplier. And yeah, I feel for Mr.75% casualties. I've taken 1%-70% casualities in victorious field battles.

No only would higher heal rates be more realistic, it would work better for RPing since you don't constantly lose all your guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

MIITW does away with lethality but instead uses a global pseudo-lethality multiplier. And yeah, I feel for Mr.75% casualties. I've taken 1%-70% casualities in victorious field battles.

No only would higher heal rates be more realistic, it would work better for RPing since you don't constantly lose all your guys.

---

Let me give an example of my gaming experience.

Commanded the Romans and had to protect a city of Dalmatia just won against Geta.
I started from Rome with 5 hastati, 4 principes, 3 triarii, 2 equites, and the general (who was also the surgeon).
In the street I had to attack the rebels which obstructs the passage.
Then, at Patavium, I had to bear the attack of a germanic horde.
In these two passages I have lost already 30% of my army.
Arrived in Dalmatia, I defeated the horde of Geta losing another 30% of my army.
Moral of the story, it has rapidly come another horde of Geta, it has destroyed my army and conquered the Dalmatia.:wall:

I still believe that the casualties recovered are too low and it makes it too cumbersome to the game (sometimes boring).:wall:

Look at this equation:

few armies around + all armies full + increase casualties recovered = large and significant battles
:rtwyes:

But where is that damned file?
Could perhaps be the export_descr_unit?

There's no file you can edit that directly controls the casualty recovery rate (hardcoded i believe), the best you can do is to do what Cullhwch said with the traits, that will work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

I started from Rome with 5 hastati, 4 principes, 3 triarii, 2 equites, and the general (who was also the surgeon).
In the street I had to attack the rebels which obstructs the passage.
Then, at Patavium, I had to bear the attack of a germanic horde.
In these two passages I have lost already 30% of my army.
Arrived in Dalmatia, I defeated the horde of Geta losing another 30% of my army.
Moral of the story, it has rapidly come another horde of Geta, it has destroyed my army and conquered the Dalmatia.:wall:

---

To everybody his own...:inquisitive:
To me the moral of the story would be that this exactly what I deserve. Newly conquered and border provinces could be rebellious and would demand significant resource (namely the Army) investment into their subjugation and protection.

Casualty in RTW a are a fair GAME REPRESENTATION of troubles that you woud have in "real life" - disease, desertion, garrisoning of lots od places, contless of minor skirmishes with natives, reconneissance details, gathering of supplies, etc, etc.

If your casualties seem too high, make sure that you are playing on MEDIUM battle difficulty - this is what EB was ballanced for. If still, try play on EASY...:idea2:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

:no::no::no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

There's no file you can edit that directly controls the casualty recovery rate (hardcoded i believe), the best you can do is to do what Cullhwch said with the traits, that will work.

---

I have already tried to change the trait or ancillaries, but the game crashes when I start the campaign. why?:tongue:

Frequent issues.

I'm trying to mod EDCT and any tiny change I do means the game crashes.

Stop using Notepad to edit Unicode files, it has no idea how to treat those.

Get a free Unicode-aware editor. There are lots available, but Crimson or Notepad++ should be sufficient. Google them.

Thank you very much guys:thumbsup:
:italy:

Now I try to play EB with these particular changes ...
we'll see how it will be ...

I would like to clarify that I do not intend to put any criticism of the EB mod, which I consider the best ever.
First I tried "casus belli" and "Roma Surrectum" excellent mod, but too focused on the Romans.:smash:

Excuse me, modder to EB, if I wanted to modify their great masterpiece.:grin2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

:italy:
Excuse me, modder to EB, if I wanted to modify their great masterpiece.

---

Is he being rude or is this just geniuenly bad english?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blxz

Is he being rude or is this just geniuenly bad english?

---

Scusate amici inglesi, purtroppo parlo un pessimo inglese, cercate di intendere nel bene quello che dico.
Sono persona che raramente tende ad essere scortese.
Se dico qualcosa di male perdonatemi, sicuramente non l'ho fatto intenzionalmente... ciao

Quote:

---

Excused friendly English, unfortunately I speak a very bad English, tried to mean in the good which I say. They are person who very rarely stretches to being discourteous. If I say something badly you pardon to me, sure not l' I have made intentionally… hello

---

I think the smilies in the original post indicate a friendly context.

As foretold, I tested the game with the following modifications:

I added in exp_descr_character_traits on all family-trait (example gens Cornelia) I add battleSurgery 50

in exp_descr_unit I plus 1 / 3 the cost of maintenance of all units

:smash:
The result was this:

-I lifted the fog of war to monitor the effects
-I started a campaign with the Romans
-I quickly found difficult to capture the rebel provinces
-after 18 turns I had taken only Tarentum
-I noticed that after 40 turns the geography of the other factions remained unchanged
-after 50 turns I got the sicilia
-after 74 turns I came to Spain and now I'm facing the Carthaginians and Iberians

note:
*more troops battlesurgery buying experience easier
*the expansion of the factions is slow and there is never the "snowball effect"
*in the Balkan and Greek area survive all factions (at least up to where I arrived 88 rounds)
*I was able to bring my full army from Rome to Sucum Murgi: 6 battles facing and having an army yet discreet, very good!
*There are few armies around but solid and seasoned
*after a great battle won there are no more enemies for 10-15 turns
*production is very slow
*I note with pleasure that Seleucid does not succumb to the Ptolemaioi
*the game is generally much more realistic

advice at all to try a similar game experience I'm enjoying a world:rtwyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

As foretold, I tested the game with the following modifications:

I added in exp_descr_character_traits on all family-trait (example gens Cornelia) I add battleSurgery 50

in exp_descr_unit I plus 1 / 3 the cost of maintenance of all units

:smash:
The result was this:

-I lifted the fog of war to monitor the effects
-I started a campaign with the Romans
-I quickly found difficult to capture the rebel provinces
-after 18 turns I had taken only Tarentum
-I noticed that after 40 turns the geography of the other factions remained unchanged
-after 50 turns I got the sicilia
-after 74 turns I came to Spain and now I'm facing the Carthaginians and Iberians

note:
*more troops battlesurgery buying experience easier
*the expansion of the factions is slow and there is never the "snowball effect"
*in the Balkan and Greek area survive all factions (at least up to where I arrived 88 rounds)
*I was able to bring my full army from Rome to Sucum Murgi: 6 battles facing and having an army yet discreet, very good!
*There are few armies around but solid and seasoned
*after a great battle won there are no more enemies for 10-15 turns
*production is very slow
*I note with pleasure that Seleucid does not succumb to the Ptolemaioi
*the game is generally much more realistic

advice at all to try a similar game experience I'm enjoying a world:rtwyes:

---

I'll se for meself on this one:yes:

I will also try your spagetti out...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

As foretold, I tested the game with the following modifications:

I added in exp_descr_character_traits on all family-trait (example gens Cornelia) I add battleSurgery 50

in exp_descr_unit I plus 1 / 3 the cost of maintenance of all units

:smash:
The result was this:

-I lifted the fog of war to monitor the effects
-I started a campaign with the Romans
-I quickly found difficult to capture the rebel provinces
-after 18 turns I had taken only Tarentum
-I noticed that after 40 turns the geography of the other factions remained unchanged
-after 50 turns I got the sicilia
-after 74 turns I came to Spain and now I'm facing the Carthaginians and Iberians

note:
*more troops battlesurgery buying experience easier
*the expansion of the factions is slow and there is never the "snowball effect"
*in the Balkan and Greek area survive all factions (at least up to where I arrived 88 rounds)
*I was able to bring my full army from Rome to Sucum Murgi: 6 battles facing and having an army yet discreet, very good!
*There are few armies around but solid and seasoned
*after a great battle won there are no more enemies for 10-15 turns
*production is very slow
*I note with pleasure that Seleucid does not succumb to the Ptolemaioi
*the game is generally much more realistic

advice at all to try a similar game experience I'm enjoying a world:rtwyes:

---

:yes: Thank you kindly for posting this, I'm definitely going to try this out :beam:

Hi Aulus Caecina Severus, these are very interesting results of the test of yours, thanks for trying this out.:bow:
However, I have a question - how did it happened that the increased recovery rate impleded your expansion so much? I have presumed that battle surgery affects only the victor of a battle and therefore if you would keep on winning, you will be the one who profits from this change (i.e. AI army would by crushed as usual, whereas your army will recover to almost full-strenth). Or is my reasoning wrong?
Could you please elaborate a little bit on your observation how and in what ways this modification affects the gameplay?

Thank you once more, respectfully

V.T.Marvin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by V.T. Marvin

Hi Aulus Caecina Severus, these are very interesting results of the test of yours, thanks for trying this out.:bow:
However, I have a question - how did it happened that the increased recovery rate impleded your expansion so much? I have presumed that battle surgery affects only the victor of a battle and therefore if you would keep on winning, you will be the one who profits from this change (i.e. AI army would by crushed as usual, whereas your army will recover to almost full-strenth). Or is my reasoning wrong?
Could you please elaborate a little bit on your observation how and in what ways this modification affects the gameplay?

---

it's true that the winners are much favored by this system.
that is why I was able to expand (but with difficulty).

But I played with medium difficulty. If I played with utmost difficulty would be difficult to replicate this expansion.

In fact I create full armies in order to not lose battles. If you go around with a small army will be destroyed and you'll certainly is detrimental to your country.
If you lose a battle, your empire is in serious danger. This occurs because the AI has a highest casualties recovered and therefore can penetrate deeply into your territory after a possible victory.
This game is not only difficult if you are well organized.:yes:
It's also very realistic.

Attention: but I have yet to come into contact with Germani, their incursions from the north could be devastating with this system that I set. Think about this.

For now I think that I was gone all too well in my campaign:tongue:

you can download exp descr unit this:

http://files.filefront.com/export+de.../fileinfo.html

Warning: In EB/sp game backup

also i'm going to add exp descr character traits...:2thumbsup:

From a gameplay standpoint, I don't think EB1 has too many casualties. I still have many of my original units in my Getai campaign in 210 BC and I'm far from an expert player.

From a realism standpoint, I have no idea. Just remember that casualties would also include those wounded so that they can't fight anymore, not just deaths.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elukka

From a gameplay standpoint, I don't think EB1 has too many casualties. I still have many of my original units in my Getai campaign in 210 BC and I'm far from an expert player.

From a realism standpoint, I have no idea. Just remember that casualties would also include those wounded so that they can't fight anymore, not just deaths.

---

is true that many more survivors could not fight. :stars:
But it is also true that certain units, such as auxiliary or veliti were reinforced by mercenaries or native people of the place.
The winner had a way to conquer the field, and could receive reinforcements from the homeland or recruit people.
In other cases, the soldiers badly equipped and poor stole their weapons high armor to the dead: this allowed them to be well equipped and to be part of the elite troops.
I do not say after a painful victory, but after a clear victory winners almost returned to initial numbers.
certain units should be allowed to regenerate as the generals unit at every turn that passes.
I am referring to units like the peasants, the auxiliaries, the barbaric bad equipped, etc.

But... how do the units of the generals to regenerate after each turn?
what is the mechanism?
is a hardcode or not?
:shocked2:

Answer me if anyone knows ...:tongue:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aulus Caecina Severus

But... how do the units of the generals to regenerate after each turn?
what is the mechanism?
is a hardcode or not?
:shocked2:

Answer me if anyone knows ...:tongue:

---

FM's will regenerate guard strength automatically, so I guess it would be hardcoded. not sure though.

so how? if it is hardcoded, then there is something in the .exe

Hardcoded.