Too much AI cash?

[Malrubius]

but sadly enoug that army alsways gives my generals the contradictign traits : "likes easy victory" wich downs his chances of getting command stars and "clearly victorious"wich ups it...

They're not contradictory, actually, but describe 2 different things: your battle odds before the battle, and your level of success in the battle (heroic victory, clear victory, close victory, draw, etc). Fighting easy battles makes it harder to get stars. Just as in vanilla, big wins are better than big losses, but the difficulty of the battle is a much bigger component now.

I tried to make these cumulative, to let you "keep score" and see how good your generals perform, but there could be some problems with them.

"Likes easy battles" means your general has the odds in his favor before the battle. If you keep the odds 1:1, you'll get "Even odds fighter". You're likely to see "Perennial Underdog" on AI generals who are outnumbered or if you fight against the odds. "Against All Odds" is the impossible odds, like 5:1. You'd rarely see that one.

For the cumulative victory tallies, you'll see these:
- Barely Victorious: obtained through close victories.
- Normally Victorious: obtained through average victories.
- Clearly Victorious: from clear victories.
- Crushes His Opponents: from heroic victories.

There are versions for defeat, but you shouldn't ever see those, right?
Your general gets points for fighting battles and his level of victory. The harder the battle and the greater the victory, the more points he gets. The more points, the better his chances of becoming a better tactician or leader (results in command star boosts).

[jerby]

makes sense, thanks.

but (spoiler request?) how much does each of those effect your changes for command-stars.
clearly vict. ups teh chances. and Likes easy vict. downs them. do those two cancell each other out?

to make myself clear. what percentages (if it works that way) do all those traits in/decrease your chances of command-stars?

[Malrubius]

makes sense, thanks.

but (spoiler request?) how much does each of those effect your changes for command-stars.
clearly vict. ups teh chances. and Likes easy vict. downs them. do those two cancell each other out?

to make myself clear. what percentages (if it works that way) do all those traits in/decrease your chances of command-stars?

Heh, I won't go into all the details now (I'm at my day job ), but it's all there in the edct.txt for anybody who wants to look.

The cumulative victory and odds traits are just indicators of your general's history, and don't actually have any effects at this time. The big determinants are the BattleOdds and your general's energy (Vigorous or Langorous). Vigorous generals who lose very hard battles will learn more than Vigorous generals who win easy battles. Langorous generals will have a harder time than Vigorous generals.

[Iskandr]

Well, to get back to the original topic...is there any chance of maybe reducing this bonus bext patch? Or perhaps having it only function when the player has so many provinces/so much money themself? As I said, as Makedonia (or Karthasdan or Roma for that matter), it's not that big a deal. When playing Bactria or one of the other truly dirt-poor factions, it's a real buzzkill seeing your heroic victory that costs you most of your army leads to, if you're lucky, a 2 turn respite from the enemies spam armies.

In a related vein, this talk about "standing armies", while correct in the historical sense, is unfortunately rendered completely unworkable by the CA engine. For example, playing as Bactria, I have been at war with Seluekia for a little over 50 years now, with at least one siege a year. They refuse any sort of peace offer, no matter how many times I defeat them, even if I offer to give them all their cities back. I don't recall any historical examples of this level of aggression. That's not including the massive and constant spam of rebels and brigands. Additionally, the way recruiting and training works in the RTW engine makes "levying" an army for the campaign season, the historical method, impossible. Not only do units cost more to raise than maintain (approx. 4 turns of maintenance = recruitment cost) but they obviously start out as raw recruits again, when for most, if not all factions, soldiers served more than 1 campaign even if they did disband for the Winter. This is made worse by the still ahistorically slow marching rates- even with 4 turns a year, it takes an Army a year to cover what can be covered in reality in 2 months or less. Rates of march have, unsurprisingly, not changed much since the days of Alexander, and he covered vastly greater distances than would be possible using the RTW engine.

Anyway, that's just my thoughts about that...I think that, considering the essentially wrong mechanics of RTW, the EB team has done a tremendous job of making the game more historical, more realistic, more informative and more fun. I just think that in this area, the engine is winning out over the modders, and maybe more work needs to be done, if indeed it can be fixed.

thanks,
Iskandr

[Dunhill]

I've been playing a bit and I noticed that the Romans have the cash thing just about right. The tax is already set at very high at the begining, I think, and you dont go into the red right away.

However, I've tried two Getia games and I go into the red right off the bat, even with careful management I'm down to very low income at best (after deleting most of my standing army). Which I'm fine with, but it seems that without a bit of tweaking you won't live past the Makedonian mother stack that will come when you are just about ready to expand.

So, I'd say some factions might need some start cash tweaking?

Otherwise I'm very happy with the mod. It does need some final touching up, and I think the community will do a great job filling in the missing bits and pieces.

I've had no CTDs at all, and while some of the loads are a bit slow I dont mind.

Great work guys and it came with a few days to spare in my holiday vacation time.

Cheers,

[khelvan]

Sorry, the AI does not get 30,000 per turn. It gets 30,000 on the first turn only.

[galathas]

Sorry, the AI does not get 30,000 per turn. It gets 30,000 on the first turn only.

But they do get extra money dont they? I am a bit confused because most people said there is some sort of threshold. Do they get extra money and if they do how and when and how much do they get?

A second question of mine was why do i get 25 k per turn if a make the aedui my protectorate? They only had two or three provinces, where does all this cash come from?

Sorry a lot of questions but i really have to figure this out.