The Greatest things in EB

Keep them short;

Carthage (can't spell their new name) has reinforced both Sicily and Spain by ship, to the extent that they are winning in both places. I've never seen them do other than in token amounts.

Giving the AI massive doses of money when they are broke pissed me off at the start, but i now see that it is quite effective in keeping the AI factions viable as interesting opponents.

Giving AI generals massive leadership bonuses at the very hard levels. I don't know if this is a script or what, but it make battles hard in a way they weren't before. This has been the slowest conquest game (as the Romans, but only starting with three cities) i've played, even more so than the Bouis mod (which was hard).

Best things
1. The Map layout, and the number of provences
2. the strength of the rebels
3. the new animations of cav, pikemen, etc
4. Upkeep costs

Worst things
1. BRIBES
2. Bugs / CTDs
3. the fact that the Sahara can be conqured
4. the Yuezhi faction
5. no faction in south or central africa to balance out the Ptolomies and Carthagians

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marinakis

Worst things
3. the fact that the Sahara can be conqured

---

AFAIK the sahara only appears "conquered" if u turn off fow. if u just play normally i beleive you won't hav this problem.

Yeah, the vast majority of the Sahara is inaccesible.

i thought i was the greatest thing in EB.. :bigcry:

What's this about the sahara?

The sahara can be conquered, yet if you look closely you can see that the vast majority of it cannot be accessed. There is a province in the extreme north of it that is almost the only part that can be moved to in the Sahara.

So you can't conquer most of the cities there?

There aren't any cities actually in the Sahara (it was probably smaller back then, anyway, wasn't it?). We have some on the edges of the desert.

Yeah, the Sahara gets bigger every year.

Anyway, there is only one city on the very edge of the Sahara province, the vast majority of the province is inaccesible, and it generates very little income.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big_John

i thought i was the greatest thing in EB.. :bigcry:

---

AHAHAHAHHAHAH:laugh4: kudos johny!

the best thing for me is the longevity(sp?) of the game and how it just doesnt get boring after youve conquered here and there.

The Realism!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big_John

i thought i was the greatest thing in EB.. :bigcry:

---

I think you are.

:knuddel:
wel perhaps not like that but mate you're just :2thumbsup:

One of my favourite things is that the mod has many distinctive units. Im RTR most of the units are just like many other units with minor changes in stats and appearance. Vanilla had distinctive units but had to resort to fantasy. Barbarora, mainly because of the care put into the barbarian factions has many interesting units to compliment the endless phalanxes of the south and east. Units such as:

Ethiopian Agema
The British Swordmasters
The gaelic hammer wielders

(sorry for not using proper names I can't remember them).

it's also funny that these new historical units are more interesting than the fantasy ones anyway. i mean, look at bull warriors, they were ugly and boring, whereas EB has awesome units like indian longbowman and those goidilic hammer guys.

Good Things:

GREAT unit skins and animation!!!
GREAT map,nice colours and map objects,i can see a lot of work has been done for these!!!

Bad Things:

Too many celtic facions(3?).What for?they bring the same units in the game and take up slots and leaves no room for other factions that could bring balance in the game(fun and realism),in my opinion there was no need for 3 celtic factions(lets say nothing about the iberians).Two of them could of been enough(one in gaul one in britain),i just can't see the benefits it brings and i think it's a mistake to try and make more factions that have the same units,if u did these with the celts why not with the germans?or the thracians?they had a lot of tribes too that had historical importance in these period...i dont think its fair for the other cultures.Its your choice but i see u have good skinners and animators,why waste these on factions identical to one another.I fail to see what benefits it brings,the gauls will certainly fight amongs eachother and leave the romans to expand and kick the crap of them.
Another bad thing in my opinion is that there are too few cities(provincies)...u just conquer once city and get 1000 miles of land?no realism here,put more provinces(please!!!!!)
I havent started to conquer Sahara but i hope it can be conquered otherwise whats the logic in placeing provinces there and cities if u cant conquer them?I think it would be nice if u can,brings options to the player and makes the game more fun and realistic(everyone could go anywere he wanted).Also u can scrip the AI to expand somewhere else or something,no need to make unconqerable provincies(stupid ideea)!
U can also make the rebels behave more aggresive or not depending on the historical data.It will bring more fun to the game.


Keep up the good work!!!

I like the little things that were worked in, like the fun facts about biuldings and the gods that tmeples were erected for and the bios on the people. The new trate system is very well thout out as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saturn

Too many celtic facions(3?).What for?they bring the same units in the game and take up slots and leaves no room for other factions that could bring balance in the game(fun and realism),in my opinion there was no need for 3 celtic factions(lets say nothing about the iberians).Two of them could of been enough(one in gaul one in britain),i just can't see the benefits it brings and i think it's a mistake to try and make more factions that have the same units,if u did these with the celts why not with the germans?or the thracians?they had a lot of tribes too that had historical importance in these period...i dont think its fair for the other cultures.Its your choice but i see u have good skinners and animators,why waste these on factions identical to one another.I fail to see what benefits it brings,the gauls will certainly fight amongs eachother and leave the romans to expand and kick the crap of them.
Another bad thing in my opinion is that there are too few cities(provincies)...u just conquer once city and get 1000 miles of land?no realism here,put more provinces(please!!!!!)
I havent started to conquer Sahara but i hope it can be conquered otherwise whats the logic in placeing provinces there and cities if u cant conquer them?I think it would be nice if u can,brings options to the player and makes the game more fun and realistic(everyone could go anywere he wanted).Also u can scrip the AI to expand somewhere else or something,no need to make unconqerable provincies(stupid ideea)!

---

The reason the Casse are included has been answered, ad nauseum, so here it is:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=59394

The Arverni and Aedui were in a civil war at the time--not really something that can be represented by having rebels. You need 2 factions to represent this properly. Besides, some people gripe that there aren't enough Celtic factions, and there are too many Hellenic ones. Can't please everybody, I guess.
:juggle2:

As for more provinces or settlements, we're at the limit. The game can't handle any more. So that's it. You can't actually conquer the Sahara. Most of it is inaccessible desert. You can conquer the city at the northern edge of it, however. The map has to be rectangular, so if you leave out the Sahara, you'd also lose the Arabian peninsula. If you tilt the map, you'd cut out the northern steppes. Neither of those is something we wanted. ~;)

Also, factions that share units help are great because we're working under both model and unit limits. If every faction had a completely unique unit roster we'd either have about 5 units per faction or no regionals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saturn

Too many celtic facions(3?).What for?they bring the same units in the game and take up slots and leaves no room for other factions that could bring balance in the game(fun and realism),in my opinion there was no need for 3 celtic factions(lets say nothing about the iberians).Two of them could of been enough(one in gaul one in britain),i just can't see the benefits it brings and i think it's a mistake to try and make more factions that have the same units,if u did these with the celts why not with the germans?or the thracians?they had a lot of tribes too that had historical importance in these period...i dont think its fair for the other cultures.Its your choice but i see u have good skinners and animators,why waste these on factions identical to one another.I fail to see what benefits it brings,the gauls will certainly fight amongs eachother and leave the romans to expand and kick the crap of them.

---

Any faction suggestions? I've heard people complain there are too few barbarian factions, there are TOO many hellenic factions. As Malrubius says, we can't please everyone. Iberia was included as they were important, both giving the Romans & Carthaginians a hard time. The Thracians were not as powerful at this period as they used to be and can be better represented as rebels, except the Getai who are in.
And the Gauls did indeed fight eachother, and because of the civil war the Romans were able to conquer them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saturn

Another bad thing in my opinion is that there are too few cities(provincies)...u just conquer once city and get 1000 miles of land?no realism here,put more provinces(please!!!!!)

---

As Malrubius pointed out, we are at a limit. Plus, Ive heard other people say they enjoy having a bit of space between cities to avoid Siege: Total War.

I dont demand more hellenic or celtic or more thracian factions just that having 3 celtic factions is unfair for the other cultures like the germans or thracians(also sarmatian or iberians in a way)...i would of liked balance thats all :) not too many of one culture(they also bring the same units,so nothing new to the game...even if they dont take unit slots and that beeing a good thing).Yes they were in a civil war but when they werent in a war amongs eachother?the only time when they got an agreement was when the romans attacked.I was just thinking that 2 celtic factions one in Britain and one in Gaul would of been enough(we still have the iberians that are a mixture of celts and natives and by no means they should be taken out cuz they r too important anyway).The other slot could of been used for the Illirians for example,they gave a hard time to everyone in the region(u ppl made great skins and i would of liked to see what u would of done to the illyrians :D heh)As for the map and regions...u could of done the map larger,so we had more space between the cities,a lot of important cities arent represented and also u could of made the units more expensive and longer to creat and this could also put a bigger accent on the strategy u use in the battle.Eh, anyway :) its a good mod and i look foward to see it done so like i said...keep up the good work!!!

Its not a question of map size. We have 199 cities and RTW doesnt allow more. No mod can have more cities then EB have. Thats it.
The only way would be to cut out east postion of map (make it smaller) and use this delated cities to create new cities somewhere else. But this is not an option.
Illyrian serteinly is not a good choice.
Half of its land is under Epirothes rule when mod starts and we have already many faction in that region. Its owfoul choice. Aedui/Arveni are much better more historicly importent and more game wise interesting choice iMO.

I like it as it is, though I would be happy with some of bugs cleared up and Roman Flags on Roman Skins and that's about it really:denmark: :england: :france:

If you switched to the BI engine could you have an extra faction slot?

Apparently porting to 1.5 allows that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saturn

...having 3 celtic factions is unfair for the other cultures like the germans ....I was just thinking that 2 celtic factions one in Britain and one in Gaul would of been enough....

---

Well, I think others have answered this sufficiently, but I'll add a few comments.

I note you haven't called for changes to the Greco-Macedonian culture, and I don't need to mention how many factions share that. EB doesn't make judgements on cultures but rather which factions / states warrant representation.

EB has endeavoured to represent the period, it's feel and ambience as accurately as possible. In this period all three Celtic factions were explicitly noted for their regional significance and interaction with other factions through trade, diplomacy and warfare.

Having two Gaul factions demonstrates the inherent weaknesses they had and challenges they suffered when attacked from without. Having a homogenous pan-Gallic faction is quite ridiculous. The akin to having all the Greco-Macedonian factions join together. The Arverni and Aedui were significant states in their own right, as attested to through material culture and literary sources.

The Germans haven't to date been given another faction because:

1. For most of this period, the Seubi confederation dominated Germanic events (Cimbri / Tuetone migration the exception).
2. We believe that the current depiction plays out more accurately. By not splitting the Germans, they represent a more potent force / threat to other factions to their south.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saturn

...Eh, anyway :) its a good mod and I look forward to see it done so like I said...keep up the good work!!!

---

Thanks, glad you're enjoying it. We should have a much improved version for you soonish.


my2bob

The beta of this mod is already great, but I cant wait for a better version,the romans with the correct flags and speaches, less CTDs and better loading times as well as all the cards and descriptions converted.

The best thing this mod has is the realism, the attention to detail and history facts, the challenging campaign for any faction (some are really dificult) and the looks (everything from units to the world map is good looking)

The attention to detail put in here is very good and the team working on this deserves to see their work played by many people, because this is in my opinion the best thing RTW has seen after the release.

The second best thing is the traits system invests each General with a unique value that takes them from just another group of stats to real characters.

The best thing is it is only the beta.

Best Thing - the Challenge, the AI bonuses, the realism

Problem - Sweboz completely uncontested initially

Best Things - traits, scripted events/messages, historical facts "This year in history...", difficulty, realism, government buildings, helpful EB members

Things to improve - crashes (mostly found/fixed now I think), crazy bribing diplomats, minor cosmetic things, loading bar ~;)

Also, is it at all possible when a spy has managed to open the gates, to keep the gates shut until battle deployment is over? I mean, its kinda easy to defend when you know its coming, but if they appeared shut in the troop deployment phase, then opened when the battle started it would make it a bit more hectic. I know its probably impossible, but just asking.

Best thing: Little naked men

Worst thing: Underpowered elephants (my slingers absolutely whipped some in melee combat)