Total Realism gone unrealistic...rant

Sorry, but I think with 4.0, RTR has gone over the border of realism to simply 'more complicated'. This is from the readme:

"
- CARPENTER & CARPENTER'S WORKSHOP: It is now necessary to construct a Woodworking building in a coastal province in order to build any type of port. The first two levels of port buildings require a Carpenter, and the last level requires a Carpenter's Workshop.

- SOFT STONE QUARRY & HARD STONE QUARRY: These quarries are necessary to construct in order to build many of the large scale stone projects in the game. These include Large Stone Walls, Epic Stone Walls, the Imperial Palace, the last two tiers of temples, and the Coliseum. They require your province to have the Stone resource. If it does not, you must collect a large enough labour force in order to import it from afar. Check the in-game tech. tree for any further information. Right click a province on the campaign map to check if it has the Stone resource.

- LABOUR PARTY & LABOUR FORCE: These two 'buildings' are necessary in the case that your province doesn't have the stone necessary to construct the proper buildings. In this case, you must collect a large enough labour force in order to import the resources from a neighbouring province. They imbue a -.5% growth penalty, and a -1% growth penalty, respectively. See the in game tech. tree for any further information. "

Eh... this is getting silly. It's natural to assume that there WILL be a carpenter in a town. And if a city is big enough to have stone buildings, it WILL import stone or dig marble in a quarry. And, the slaves used for labour are not counted in the provinces population (they can't be recruited), so why would using them have any impact on population growth? Because the wives of good citizens have less hunky slaves to mate with? The game is beginning to look like Settlers. What next? A Woodcuter building necessary for Carpenter? A Butcher for provinces with 'pigs' resource and Baker for those with 'grain' resource, that produce food needed to build a mine? I'm already having my doubts about the Blacksmith building in vanilla, and here they're adding more useless craftsmen. Total Realism, indeed.

Seems a bit silly, yes. The Emperor of Rome should hardly have to spend his time building carpenters' workshops, should he?

IMO the whole techtree concept is unrealistic and should be seen as a game element. The RTR mod took that game element a bit further.

Since this thread is already a rant...

I would like to see a TW game in which you use policy and diplomacy to form your empire. With resources (be it treasury, recruits, etc) being the only restriction. R:TW already has the restriction with resources, so I wonder wether the building techtree can be somehow transformed into different policies. A shame that units cannot be restricted, if a player wants to make armies composed of Triari there is nothing that can stop him. It would be realism if that could be achieved.

:continues to dream:

Quote:

---

A shame that units cannot be restricted, if a player wants to make armies composed of Triari there is nothing that can stop him. It would be realism if that could be achieved.

---

If units could be made more speciallised, then this could be made possible. If Triari were helpless if outflanked / or be very vulnerable to archery. If all units had a big weakness, then any balance army would always beat an army of one unit type, as they would be able to exploit that weakness. But this brings up other realism issues. *Sigh*

You are too strict, eadungas. All is correct. It's TOTAL REALISM mod. So it must have all these carpenters, labourist, masons, etc. I'm sure in next release they will have individual name for each soldier, management of salaries for different workers, food management, map scale 1:1 and requirement for iron to build any good troops.

No, I meant something else. For example units that are made out of nobles. There is no unlimited supply of them, yet you can build them as much as you like. Or the fact that it takes years to train a proficient longbow archer, and when to many are recruited you are actually depleting the pool of longbow archers...

pool, mercenary pool, I still believe that the mercenary system is far better than the current uninnovative standard RTS system. In M:TW it was impossible to use it since the AI refused to hire them enough. But in R:TW this is no longer the case, but now we are left being unable to change the skin to suit the hiring faction. And we can't hire mercenaries inside settlements and buildings do not affect the rate of regeneration. If that was all possible and we could make buildings unique it would get pretty close to being realistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dead Moroz

You are too strict, eadungas. All is correct. It's TOTAL REALISM mod. So it must have all these carpenters, labourist, masons, etc. I'm sure in next release they will have individual name for each soldier, management of salaries for different workers, food management, map scale 1:1 and requirement for iron to build any good troops.

---

LMAO

i dont understand why the bodyguards are late 1st millenium bc praetorians as early as 250 bc

i miss having that cavalry and it is totally unrealistic

Normally I'd let Giaus answer for himself but I he's in the middle of a move so I thought I'd give it a try.

First off you have to keep this in context. RTR is striving to improve the realism in RTW, this does not mean that it will be a complete simulation of reality. Any element of the game taken in isolation without reference to it's level of abstraction will appear ludicrious.

For instance the "buildings" of total war do not of course represent single buildings anymore then the city in a province represents a single settlement. They represent a commitment to a specific aspect of a society ( temples for example) or a commitment to an infrastructure (blacksmiths - metal working, weapons creation, etc.). They are an abstraction.

By adding a lumber industry requirment (and the need for forests to support it) the realism mod has added more realism to the building of naval power. It this all of a sudden vastly more realistic then the existing system? No, but it is a modest step forward.

The Stone quarry labor system similarly deals with stone working. Quarrying stone and moving it is very labor intensive. Having to transport such heavy loads requires more labor. Again, a modest advance in realism.

As to why the "cost" of labor is pop. This is the fundamental underlying economic model of RTW. What this reflects is the fact that labor spent on shifting stone for large public projects is not labor spent on private projects that would increase quality of life and improve birth rate.

More importantly the out come is that some areas will naturally have less populated cities then others due to natural constraints.

Good ideas, tommh! So there is only one thing left - rename game from "Total War" to "Total Management". I hope it will be the best economic simulator.

I think I will continue to use it, until I find a better one...or Activision releases an AI - Fix. With the current AI, Rome ist not worth much more, than being an economic simulation. (allright, I am exxagerating, but this is a thing I really hope for)

I am working on a mod to remove the new buildings. Not only is it a little over-the-top management-wise, but the AI apparently isn't building any ports now. I have the files ready but I am at work... so I will have to test them tonight.

tommh has a good point. The question at task here, I think, is not one of realism, per say, but of abstraction and where that abstraction is focused and what style of gameplay is desired. Abstraction vs. realism is probably a bigger issue in strategy/wargames than in any other type. Games like StarCraft and Warhammer 40,000 are both realistic in that they utilize real-world physics (namely what a high-velocity explosive shell will do to the human body) as well as realistic interaction with terrain, tactics, and in WH40k, soldier morale. However, all these things are heavily abstracted so that the focus of the game is on beating the living tar out of your opponent, which is why people play them and love them. WH40k, being a tabletop wargame, has no economic model at all, needless to say, and StarCraft's is also heavily abstracted.

On the other end of the spectrum, of course are games like Imperialism and Settlers, where the economic/industrial model is given in superb depth of realism and detail, to, as eadingas, the point of needing a guy to plant the trees that another guy cuts down for someone else to plane and so on and so forth. And then there's Imperialism, where you need forests to cut down to plane to turn into paper to educate a man who can, with the aid of a military academy, ranches, mines, a steel mill, railways, etc, become a cavalryman. While the focus and realism of these strategy games is heavily upon the economic/industrial, the actual combat of these games is where the abstraction comes in. Settlers, you have absolutely no micro-management control over your soldiers and the combat is purposefully comical. Imperialism, it is highly Heroes of Might & Magic style, with the wargames-style hex map and "This one guy represents a regiment" play. Of course, the complete lack of tactics this engenders perfectly represents the *ahem* idiotic manner of warfare of the European Age of Imperialism that the game is set in.

Somewhere in between, though heavily focused on the side of combat-realism/economic-abstracted, is Rome. Y'know, Rome Total War, not Rome Total Build Crap. The strategic engine, everything from religion to diplomacy, is entirely built to facilitate the combat end of things.

I think what is being attempted with this latest version of RTR, and by others, too, like the mod I saw (who's author's name unfortunately slips my mind at the moment) that has incorporated research "buildings", is trying to find a balance between the two ends and brings us to a point where the abstraction on both ends has been minimized, so that we have much deeper control over our realms, which has always been a treasured facet of "empire-building" games, which is a category RTW is much closer to than RTS games (unless you just play MP and custom battles).

And it's not that hard to remove the new buildings from the techtree if you would rather not have them, but like all the other multitude of improvements that RTR brings. ; )

Cheers,

Bacchon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacchon

And it's not that hard to remove the new buildings from the techtree if you would rather not have them, but like all the other multitude of improvements that RTR brings. ; )

---

In fact, I've just done exactly that, though for different reasons than the above poster. I don't think they're necessarily bad additions, though I do think they're unnecessary. I'm not going to get into the realism/abstraction argument.

Instead, I'm more concerned about whether the AI can handle them. In my limited RTR 4.1 experience, the AI does not seem to build enough ports. I could be wrong, the AI may be building them later than I would expect because of increased build times, or there may be other factors at work. I can't be sure. But I don't want to risk it - the AI in this game has enough problems already that I don't want to make it's job any harder.

Fact still remains, it is ten times better than vanilla total waste....yes

.....Orda

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by richarnd

In fact, I've just done exactly that, though for different reasons than the above poster. I don't think they're necessarily bad additions, though I do think they're unnecessary. I'm not going to get into the realism/abstraction argument.

Instead, I'm more concerned about whether the AI can handle them. In my limited RTR 4.1 experience, the AI does not seem to build enough ports. I could be wrong, the AI may be building them later than I would expect because of increased build times, or there may be other factors at work. I can't be sure. But I don't want to risk it - the AI in this game has enough problems already that I don't want to make it's job any harder.

---

I must echo this sentiment. There are some truly excellent ideas and features in RTR but I feel that some were implemented much too quickly and without sufficient testing. My biggest concern for any mod is its impact on the AI and whether it improves or harms its chances of mounting a successful campaign against me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spino

I must echo this sentiment. There are some truly excellent ideas and features in RTR but I feel that some were implemented much too quickly and without sufficient testing. My biggest concern for any mod is its impact on the AI and whether it improves or harms its chances of mounting a successful campaign against me.

---

I'll agree with that concern, for certain. I didn't have enough time to try out RTR before having to reinstall everything (apparently "Format this drive" means format entire physical drive, not just partition), so I don't know for sure, but as the Carthagians on VH/VH I was walking all over Italy and Spain within a couple decades of the start. Seemed like the AI didn't know what to do with itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dead Moroz

Good ideas, tommh! So there is only one thing left - rename game from "Total War" to "Total Management". I hope it will be the best economic simulator.

---

What's with the attitude?

Well, I spoke too soon. I did remove the new buildings (quarries, carpenters, and labor parties) and any requirements other buildings had for them, but now I'm having problems getting RTR to run. I can select the campaign and pick a faction, but when I click the button to play, it goes back to the RTR splash screen.

Anyone know what I might be doing wrong?

To be specific, I removed all of the new entries in export_descr_buildings and any requirement existing buildings had for them. I also removed the new lines in export_descr_buildings_enum.

If you have advice or even an already-cleaned up set of data files, It would be appreciated.

Did you remove the entries in export_buildings and any mentions of the buildings in descr_strat?

Ok, whew. Got it figured out. You have to remove the buildings from the descr_strat.txt file as well. (Can't have buildings that don't exist). Works fine for me now. Not much playtesting yet, but I have been defeated by a Greek navy ~:) .

Let me know if anyone wants it posted.

If you want to completely remove the changes, these are all the files that had changes made for the new buildings and resources:

buildingsexport_descr_buildings.txt
descr_regions.txt
Rome_Total_Realism_v4.0_regions_and_settlement_names.txt
imperial_campaign_regions_and_settlement_names.txt
export_descr_buildings_enums.txt
export_buildings.txt
descr_strat.txt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spino

I must echo this sentiment. There are some truly excellent ideas and features in RTR but I feel that some were implemented much too quickly and without sufficient testing. My biggest concern for any mod is its impact on the AI and whether it improves or harms its chances of mounting a successful campaign against me.

---

These are my feelings too. I look for improved gameplay from the AI. The game I played I thought the ZOR was an interesting idea but it causes the AI to build more town militia and peasants than before. I also thought the new building requirements were interesting but the AI doesn't know how to deal with them. These ideas really should have been tested more before incorporating them.

I've never tried it, but have followed threads about it here and at TWcenter.
It seems like they have been very eager to throw new stuff in, and there has been too many issues for me to want to play it.
At least they get a large amount of beta testers to test a lot of different concepts on. :dizzy2:
Tweaks to help the AI perform at it's full potential (and beyond!) is something that a good TW mod should emphasize on. This takes time and careful testing.

Quote:

---

The road to hell is paved with things that seemed like a good idea at the time.

---

tommh there is a problem with your patch. After replacing the 4 files you made, the game won't start anymore.

Sorry about that. Trying to post (tested!) fix but I can't get on TWC. I'll keep trying.

i must say rome julii color in rome total realism 4.1 - this is not historical and not realistic.


rtr 3.2 (rome julii color and units) much better and historical :medievalcheers: :deal2:

There are other mods thans Total Realism.

I made a mod for myself that I released for other to enjpy also if they wish, bascially because of some of the problems and really the direction RTR was going. Hs mod actually made me get off my rear end and make the game in the way I would like it. I thank him for that!

As to realism I find it funny, really I do. Isn't it realism to Have no wait times for units? I mean each turn IS 6 months! Plus build times for Buildings are too long. These 2 Items here have a Major impact on realism.

I feel RTR isn't really Realistic, just more of a management game over a wargame. This is just my opinion.

I know my mod isn't the best for some, but a few people seem to really like it. I have another with Eyecandy that I havent released. I beleive in Keeping the modding Simple.

The AI has problems, adding to it is was you see in 4.0. It would be hard to moddify a game with no AI issues much less with issues. lol

Also to be honest talking with alot of other modders, The general consensus is that RTR is an EGO mod and not a mod really made for the community. I did not say this was my opinion, but it is the opinion of MANY people I spoke with. This could explain why the game is not living up to the downloaders expectations. It was made with them in mind, but made of the designer.

Grant it, I make no exception for myself, I ALWAYS clearly stated that my mod was made for me and I hope others would like it. But Gaius' mod give the impression of being made for the fan when its possible it wsa made for another reason, some would say glory and ego. To be honest I don't know fdor sure yet, I am still in the middle.

Lt_1956

Oh, here is my mod if anyone wishes to download it.

I know some may not like it, But I do and so do some others and thats enough for me.

Here is the Readme and Link.

http://www.russiananimation.com/mods/lt/Spqrv5.zip

NOTE: Please make sure you play Prolog first before adding the mod, or game will crash. Mod is designed to be installed on a clean install of RTW.

1. Trivium Mod files added to this mod.
2. Lesser General Now rides with Cavalry instead of Centurion
3. Centurion Added to Cohorts
4. Macoi’s Shield Mod added to this Mod. +2 Small, +3 Medium, +4 Large Shields. This also has the effect of making cavalry less powerful, which is more accurate, Cavalry not changed.
5. Building Times adjusted so certain buildings are built in a realistic amount of time, quicker.
6. End date for the Game is now 180AD instead of 14AD
7. Imperial Campaign still available with this Mod.
8. ALL nations playable have been added to this mod.
9. All units have no wait time, you can now build as many as you can afford in a turn, 9 units per city. This is more realistic since Each turn represents 6 Months. This doesn’t affect the AI except for larger armies. It has no adverse effect on draining AI populations, Populations still climb.
10. All Units have had their Upkeep cost Halved. Ships, special units excluded this was done because it was increasingly hard to maintain decent armies in the field, you may have the money to build them, but couldn’t afford the upkeep. This does not effect the game except to allow you and the AI larger armies, They AI also tends to be more aggressive now with this adjustment.
11. Reduced Pigs, and Dogs to 40 men and 40 Animals on Huge Setting.
12. Siege Engineers have been set to 60 men on Huge Settings for all siege weapons.
13. Pilum range increased to 45, this allows the pilum to be thrown quicker before the enemy engages.
14. Chariots have increased charge adjustment, helps make them a little more effective.
15. Spartans Morale increased to reflect never retreat, never surrender. Lol
16. Head Hurlers have had their heads lowered to 1 hit point, and have Frighten foot, mounted added. Also increased Attack points.
17. Gave all Spearmen Spear attribute to give bonus against cavalry charge, also Triarii have Phalanx now. This makes cavalry charges on Spearmen Suicide. And now Spearmen are useful cavalry counters.
18. Removed Arcani, Druids, and Screaching Women from Campaign game, still available in Custom games.
19. Certain Barbarian Units have had their Armour Lowered or removed because they are not wearing any. But this doesn’t make them easier to kill, other factors in attack may have been adjusted.
20. Increased Number of Arrows for Archers to 40, 50 for slingers. This works since archers aren’t as powerful with the shield mod.
21. Increased Ammunition for Siege Weapons.
22. Made Assassins more effective to start with, this allows them to be more useful than originally.
23. Fixed Egyptian axemen, lowered their stats to make them more balanced.
24. Rams have been given increased Health and Flame resistance, this allows you to make it to the door. Lol
25. AI has been tweaked to correctly use Hardy. Game was bugged and it was reversed. Wrong units tired.
26. Flame Arrows have been adjusted to prevent Lag when used, less effects in the air. Sorry, But no Lag!
27. Shipbuilding Times have been increased to prevent the AI from Building too many fleets.
28. Urban Cohorts are now an upgrade for Town watch, they have been reduced, but are very strong. This is realistic since Urban cohorts were police and were never used in the field. Build a Royal Barracks and the Town watch is replaced by Urban Cohorts. J 160men Huge setting.
29. Praetorian Cavalry and Cohort are now available to Senate only. This is realistic and makes Rome harder to Take Later on.
30. Adjusted the Campaign AI each nation has been changed in how they treat you, improves gameplay. AI nations last longer and allows human player to conquer different cultures.
31. Carthage, Cities_States, Macedon, Briton, and Gaul have been given more provinces that were Rebel.
32. Forts and watchtowers are Cheaper for Romans cost 50D this reflects Legions building camps every night, and their engineering ability to use the local materials.
33. Roman Cohorts 100 men, Archers 120 men , Velite & Javelin 140men, cavalry 80 men per unit. Body Guards 48. Barbarian Units increased in number Peasants Warband 240 men, Swords, Axes, naked fanatics 160 men etc., Barbarian Cavalry 100 men. Greek Units increased in Number Lower units increased to 200, Medium 140 Elite 100 Cav 100 men. Egyptians same thing as well as Eastern units. Lower quality units are higher in number to reflect their cheap sacrifice factor.
34. Elephants added to Egypt, if they now own a province with that resource, they could build them.
35. Elephants and Chariot unit size were reduced to reflect the new unit adjustments.
36. Adjusted Happiness levels for certain buildings, this resolves Squalor problems.
37. Changed Bodyguard to Praetorian for Romans, and Changed bodyguard for other nations to better units!
38. Added Heat changes so units correctly get tired from heat, its was reversed, I finally added that. This is separate from the hardy bug.
39. Added Experience chevrons to Taverns, Royal Barracks, and Academies. Building these gives more experience to troops.
40. Triarii Can now be built when Principes can be built. Triarii before were never used because Marius reforms arriving to soon.
41. Added Centurions to Siege weapons, and added standards or Officers to other nations units. Removed Centurions from Roman light units.
42. Adjusted Ship hit points to allow ships to sink more often. Less armor points, greater attack points. Increased Mental stats.
43. Adjusted Mental stats for all units, increased at different levels for different units, this allows them not to rout as quick, mind though that this is a small adjustment, so do not expect suicide units. Adjusted just enough to get more kills before routs. Routs are necessary since that is how MOST casualties were received in ancient times.
44. Gave siege units more siege weapons, Scorpions 6, Ballista’s 4.
45. Reduce the Number of Large Elephants Max number is now 12 instead of 24
46. Reduced number of Chariots to 3, which means on huge settings 12 chariots.

The Mod is designed to be played on Huge settings, But large will work, but units will be cut in half. This game is also advised to be played in Normal Setting as its already hard and a higher setting may overwhelm a player. This mod has been seriously Beta tested and should cause NO problems with the game or crashes. Other Mods may conflict with the game, please keep this in mind when adding other mod adjustments. Make sure you backup all files that this mod will replace, so you can play the game as it was originally released if you choose too.

Final advice beware for the Northern Barbarians, The Romans will ALWAYS be outnumbered, in the beginning the Roman units aren’t the best, but later the better units will pay off. Start building your Legion quickly, and using auto-calc can help since the game gives you an advantage over field battles. Barbarian Armies can number more than 4000 men the Biggest Legions you can hope for are 2000. J The game has been tested and designed for the Roman players, I cannot say if its easier for the other nations, I believe it was CA intent to have this be played as ROME, since it is called ROME: Total war and not Nations Total war.

Special thanks goes to Uwe, Userfriendly, Spartan, Trivium team, Macroi, Webbird, And all the other Modders that have contributed to the forum and each other to make this mod and others possible. J
Lt_1956

any new unit ???
screens plz if you have new units :book:

LT, that website is down or broken. Do you have a working link? I would like to try out your MOD.

Turbo: SPQR Mod link does not work because there is newer version available.

http://www.russiananimation.com/mods/lt/SPQRv6.zip

See more details here

I must say that I really see no point in the carpenter/quarry/labor force buildings. They're certainly not realism-related, and they just seem completely pointless overall. If you really want longer build times for port structures, why not just increase the build times and be done with it? I'll wait to see what Gaius has to say in their favor before I make my final judgment, however.

-Simetrical

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

i dont understand why the bodyguards are late 1st millenium bc praetorians as early as 250 bc

i miss having that cavalry and it is totally unrealistic

---

Apparently someone sold him on the idea that Roman Generals shouldnt have cavalry bodyguards.

Its really a baseless opinion and all it does is serve to make the Roman generals less mobile than other factions.

Generals are of the Equestrian class after all. Some of the other changes are pretty dubious.

Havent had a chance to see what I think about 4.0 yet myself. By the time I noticed it the link is apparently broken.

Apparently someone sold him on the idea that Roman Generals shouldnt have cavalry bodyguards.

Its really a baseless opinion and all it does is serve to make the Roman generals less mobile than other factions.

Generals are of the Equestrian class after all. Some of the other changes are pretty dubious


This irks me. Your opinion, being based on as stated nil experience with the mod and a complet adsence of knowlege as to the arguments involved is the one that is baseless.

Very briefly:

Roman armies did not feild effective Heavy cavalry throughout this period. At the approx rate of 1 man in the game being approx 15 men in reality the ROman General units represent complety unrealistic masses of HC and give the ROmans a completly unrealistic force structure.

Roman Generals (acually consuls and proconsuls with the occasional legate) were not of the Equestrian class but were of the Senatorial class. They were not placed at the head of cavalry forces ( a role filled by the Equestrian prefects) and did not lead massive cavalry charges (this was the Macedonian tradition). TO have them in this role is very unrealistic.

To the extent that Roman generals had a 'official' bodyguard unit, that unit was infantry. Their are numerous examples of this. Thier is no examples from history of Roman companion style HC charges by Roman Generals from this period.

Roman commanders only rarely engaged inc combat themselves. When they did they frequently engaged on foot (for example J. Ceasar) although their a few examples of them engaging on foot (although these are almost always examples of Devotio).

A case could be made for making the Generals equites and reducing or eliminating the production of equites in the early game. This would be a reasonable approach as well but runs into the "suicide General" problem. One advantage of infantry generals is that they do not suicide charge. This also means that attempts to make the General purely a command unit will also fall.

Overall, the Generals unit has to serve too competing purposes, a actual command unit, rallying troops etc, and a effective battlefield unit. While having them be cav served the first moderatly well it made Roman play unrealistic and less fun. Having to acctually play with the historic Roman weakness in cavalry makes the game both more realist and more challenging.

I agree with TOMMH.

I've been playing with RTR v4.1 for a while now and I prefer General's infantry guards to the cav option, mostly because it goes some way to removing suicidal generals leading unsuported cavalry charges. It is not a perfect solution but it is better than anything anybody else has come up with.
I also prefer this option because I feel it is more 'realistic'. As TOMMH as stated, in the days of the First Republic Roman armies were usually commanded by Senate appointed men of the Senatorial class who were not in the business of leading charges - of any kind.
Roman armies were infantry armies and it is well documented that Roman cavalry was generally pretty crap. The best cavalry in roman armies was usually mercenary Gallic or German cavalry. Julius Caesar relied heavily upon his good german cavalry when he campaigned in Gaul.

While I agree that there are issues with RTR, it is a better product/game experience than the original vanilla that CA dumped on us. I shall continue to support the efforts of ALL modders who give of their time and much else for the benefit of gamers like myself and - IN MY OPINION - RTR v4.1 is an excellent attempt to bring a more realistic and enjoyable experience to what is basically a very good product.

Some of you may disagree. I have no problem with that. Individual preference is something I will always respect.

Each to their own!!!!

~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommh

Apparently someone sold him on the idea that Roman Generals shouldnt have cavalry bodyguards.

Its really a baseless opinion and all it does is serve to make the Roman generals less mobile than other factions.

Generals are of the Equestrian class after all. Some of the other changes are pretty dubious


This irks me. Your opinion, being based on as stated nil experience with the mod and a complet adsence of knowlege as to the arguments involved is the one that is baseless.

Very briefly:

Roman armies did not feild effective Heavy cavalry throughout this period. At the approx rate of 1 man in the game being approx 15 men in reality the ROman General units represent complety unrealistic masses of HC and give the ROmans a completly unrealistic force structure.

Roman Generals (acually consuls and proconsuls with the occasional legate) were not of the Equestrian class but were of the Senatorial class. They were not placed at the head of cavalry forces ( a role filled by the Equestrian prefects) and did not lead massive cavalry charges (this was the Macedonian tradition). TO have them in this role is very unrealistic.

To the extent that Roman generals had a 'official' bodyguard unit, that unit was infantry. Their are numerous examples of this. Thier is no examples from history of Roman companion style HC charges by Roman Generals from this period.

Roman commanders only rarely engaged inc combat themselves. When they did they frequently engaged on foot (for example J. Ceasar) although their a few examples of them engaging on foot (although these are almost always examples of Devotio).

A case could be made for making the Generals equites and reducing or eliminating the production of equites in the early game. This would be a reasonable approach as well but runs into the "suicide General" problem. One advantage of infantry generals is that they do not suicide charge. This also means that attempts to make the General purely a command unit will also fall.

Overall, the Generals unit has to serve too competing purposes, a actual command unit, rallying troops etc, and a effective battlefield unit. While having them be cav served the first moderatly well it made Roman play unrealistic and less fun. Having to acctually play with the historic Roman weakness in cavalry makes the game both more realist and more challenging.

---

I would think that having an infantry general would increase the chances of the general being killed during a rout. The AI routs a lot, so the attrition on its generals would be very heavy.

often the reason the AI routes is because it's general has already led a suicide charge and died! It seems from my experience to lead to somewhat higher AI general survival and it definetly helps with allied ai controlled generals. Of course, better general AI from CA is the better answer.

Anyone wonder if Gaius will be back to fix his mod? Or maybe someone else should take up the torch like Vlad or something I believe he has fixed some stuff already for the mod.

Lt

Gaius should be back eventually. Moving takes time, you know.

-Simetrical

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lt1956

Anyone wonder if Gaius will be back to fix his mod? Or maybe someone else should take up the torch like Vlad or something I believe he has fixed some stuff already for the mod.

Lt

---

nowonmai over at twcenter is part of the RTR team and has proposed some stuff for a v4.2 to be released in Gaius absense. Link:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index...howtopic=17786

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommh

often the reason the AI routes is because it's general has already led a suicide charge and died! It seems from my experience to lead to somewhat higher AI general survival and it definetly helps with allied ai controlled generals. Of course, better general AI from CA is the better answer.

---

Does the Generals MOD use all infantry generals? The last Generals MOD I looked at (3.2) had the Romans as infantry and most of the rest as cavalry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eadingas

Sorry, but I think with 4.0, RTR has gone over the border of realism to simply 'more complicated'. This is from the readme:

---

Hey, why bother to comment on this? You're part of a mod team that will make things more realistic than RTR can hope to. No need to even talk about RTR ;)

I made a patch removing carpentries etc. They will not mess the game, you may continue with the game in progress.

http://rtw.biges.org/RTR_4.1_no_extra_buildings.zip

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexandr III. Biges

I made a patch removing carpentries etc. They will not mess the game, you may continue with the game in progress.

http://rtw.biges.org/RTR_4.1_no_extra_buildings.zip

---

I installed the 4.1 Total Realism and then i added the "no extra buildings 4.1" file. But then when i load my old saves the game crashes. They worked with RTR 4.1 without the "no extra buildings 4.1" file. Does anyone know the reason for that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turbo

Does the Generals MOD use all infantry generals? The last Generals MOD I looked at (3.2) had the Romans as infantry and most of the rest as cavalry.

---

The Romans, Dacians, and Greek Cities use infantry. All other factions have some form of cavalry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wrangel

I installed the 4.1 Total Realism and then i added the "no extra buildings 4.1" file. But then when i load my old saves the game crashes. They worked with RTR 4.1 without the "no extra buildings 4.1" file. Does anyone know the reason for that?

---

Do you have other mods installed?

Simetrical:

No, i only have RTR 4.1 and previous versions of RTR installed.

Perhaps the problem is in the file. I downloaded what I presume is the same file over here, though, and it worked fine for me. Hmm.

-Simetrical

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simetrical

Perhaps the problem is in the file. I downloaded what I presume is the same file over here, though, and it worked fine for me. Hmm.

-Simetrical

---

Does this only work with the 4.1 or does it work with 4.2 as well?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommh

often the reason the AI routes is because it's general has already led a suicide charge and died! It seems from my experience to lead to somewhat higher AI general survival and it definetly helps with allied ai controlled generals. Of course, better general AI from CA is the better answer.

---

If thats the case why not change all the generals to infantry?

Finnally got it the game not to crash... but the file does not seam to work. I started a provincial campaign as the Julii and the first thing i saw was that i could build a Carpenter... damn! Is there anyting else you have to do when you add the files to the data directory?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simetrical

Perhaps the problem is in the file. I downloaded what I presume is the same file over here, though, and it worked fine for me. Hmm.

-Simetrical

---