Faction balance in 1.1

[QuintusSertorius]

Now before I say anything else, I'm not having a go at the team or the specific individual(s) involved in altering stuff for balance. I know it's a very difficult thing to do, and that even the slightest changes can have unforeseen consequences in this regard.

This is just an observation. In 1.0 Makedonia and Baktria were the factions who often turned into monsters, consuming all that fell in their path. In 1.1 Baktria have been very effectively dealt with, but if anything Makedonia seem to have gone the other way.

I've seen countless progression posts where AI Makedonia basically becomes just Mytliene, crushed between rampant Epeiros and redoubtable Koinon Hellenon. In my own game, even with Epeiros (who I'm playing) removed from the equation in Greece, Makedonia still get annihilated. Even with assistance they seem incapable of actually holding back (never mind beating) KH on fair terms.

Anyone else noticed this?

Any other balancing observations people have noticed with more playing of 1.1?

[bovi]

This balance is really really hard to get right, as you say. The area around Greece is filthy rich with plenty of mines and nearly limitless trade opportunities, so whichever faction gets an upper hand tends to quickly devastate the others.

[QuintusSertorius]

Are any of the four provinces more significant than the others? In my game KH only have Korinthos, Sparte, Athenai and Chalkis, yet seem able to churn out loads of quality troops. Makedonia meanwhile have Pella, Thermon, Demetrias, Serdike and Ambrakia, yet seem to be struggling to produce anything. Course they also seem averse to recruiting phalanxes, but that's another issue.

Do I need to let them take Epidamnos (rebel, I keep bumping up it's garrison) and it's mines to balance things out?

[Victor1234]

Not really. In my games, the KH are destroyed by Makedonia usually, but the fight must take alot out of them, because then Epeiros usually sneaks in the back and takes most of what Makedonia had. The situation ends up being that Epeiros becomes roughly the size of Epeiros and Makedonia at the start, and Makedonia becomes the same size (in the same area...) as the KH.

Since I really only play the Seleucids in any depth, I can say the balancing around there is for the better. Parthia is an absolute monster now in 1.1, compared to 1.0. They start with two small settlements and rarely expand north like they used to in 1.0, but when they start going south, I'm practically stopping them at Seleukeia!

In 1.0, when I focused on the west, the Parthians and Baktrians played along and never backstabbed me in 80 years of gameplay until I turned east to destroy them (they expanded north and south, respectively, eventually eliminating the Saka and really thrashing the Sarmatians). Now, they not only attack me, but they do so early, and I'm so powerless to stop them. It's great fun.

In the west, the Egyptians are definately more of a challenge, as they throw better quality troops at you than before. The two extremely noticeable things in the west are:

1) Carthage doesn't try to take Hispania at all. They focus entirely on North Africa. Their few starting holdings there are then easily gobbled up by the Iberians.

2) The Romans roll over the Gauls, everytime, all the time. The Romans usually reach Normandy at around 230-220 BC

[Apgad]

1) Carthage doesn't try to take Hispania at all. They focus entirely on North Africa. Their few starting holdings there are then easily gobbled up by the Iberians.

Hmm, interesting observation. I'd also noticed Carthage staying in Africa initially, but in a couple of longer campaigns after many years they have suddenly exploded and taken all of Iberia and half of Gaul. I'd supposed that they were biding their time and building up their economy until they got their reformed units, and then started kicking arse (pun intended).

As for Epiros/Makedonia/KH - I find that things are pretty evenly split as to who gets the upper hand in their neck of the woods. There's no clear dominator as far as I've seen. That suggests to me that the balance is pretty well spot on.

[Victor1234]

Since I'm unsure whether this is a bug or if it's intended, I thought I'd put it here since this thread seems to be about how things develop in people's games......

Is it normal for the Marian reforms to fire in 235 BC if the AI is playing the Romans?

Playing as the Seleucids, I had sent a spy to Rome at around 238 BC to keep an eye on their development, and they had the Polybian reforms already when my spy entered the city, but now that I look again, there's the Marian reforms marker and two Marian legionary first cohorts in the city of Rome.

[/Bean\]

In my campaigns Makedonia used to always get squashed, but now adays they lose Pella in the first turn, and their southern Greek holdings soon later, though they keep Myteline and Demetrios for ever. The garrison in Demetrios becomes one of the most experienced armies in the world, and no matter how small, constantly defeats the stacks sent against it from both Eperos and KH. They also usually take Pergamon and Byzantion as well, and send a few armies to try and retake Pella but never do. I'd say the faction that usually gets unfairly annihalated every time is the Adeuii, who cant stand against the pressure from Rome, Arverni, the Sweboz and sometimes Lusotania.

[Swordmaster]

Compared to the 0.81 days, the balance is admirable in the game nowadays. Not seeing Epeirotes in the Baltic or Baktrians in Carthage is really okay for me.

[QuintusSertorius]

Compared to the 0.81 days, the balance is admirable in the game nowadays. Not seeing Epeirotes in the Baltic or Baktrians in Carthage is really okay for me.

Again I'm not saying it's terrible, just that there are a few noticeable trends which might be things to address in 1.2, assuming it does anything more than incorporates all the fixes.

[Ludens]

Please remember that in spring 272 BC, the Antigonids were in a weak position. Macedonia had borne the brunt of the Galatian invasion; significant portions of its population (especially the wealthier part, which provides the better soldiers) had migrated to the east; and Phyrrus had just ravaged Macedonia proper and captured Pella, and was still in vicinity; while Antigonus' army was occupied in the south with another rebellion of Greek poleis. Basically, if Phyrrus had stuck to trying to capture Macedon, the Antigonids would most likely not have recovered.

In my campaigns Makedonia used to always get squashed, but now adays they lose Pella in the first turn, and their southern Greek holdings soon later, though they keep Myteline and Demetrios for ever. The garrison in Demetrios becomes one of the most experienced armies in the world, and no matter how small, constantly defeats the stacks sent against it from both Eperos and KH.

That is simple A.I. stupidity. For some reason the A.I. persists in attacking cities with stacks that are slightly too weak to take it.

[QuintusSertorius]

The KH in comparison don't garrison Rhodes that strongly.

I've seen one, sometimes two full stacks sitting outside Rhodos doing nothing many times before.

Please remember that in spring 272 BC, the Antigonids were in a weak position. Macedonia had borne the brunt of the Galatian invasion; significant portions of its population (especially the wealthier part, which provides the better soldiers) had migrated to the east; and Phyrrus had just ravaged Macedonia proper and captured Pella, and was still in vicinity; while Antigonus' army was occupied in the south with another rebellion of Greek poleis. Basically, if Phyrrus had stuck to trying to capture Macedon, the Antigonids would most likely not have recovered.

Which is a good reason for their starting weakness. However, for reasons beyond my understanding of the balancing, it seems to persist long past their initial position. In three different 1.1 games, they'd basically have been swallowed up within ten years without help, and even 40 years after that position they were still unable to equal KH.

On the flip side, not too long after our start in the game, Epeiros became an irrelevance, yet their strength sustains them for decades.

That is simple A.I. stupidity. For some reason the A.I. persists in attacking cities with stacks that are slightly too weak to take it.

Which is even more stupid if it actually manages to take the settlement, because it immediately revolts.

[Kromulan]

I have noticed that Epirus is more active, which is decidedly NOT to Mak's advantage. As Getai, I took out Epirus (not my fault. . . they were there) and Mak crushed KH and expanded into Asia Minor.

In my Saka campaign, I wasn't there to take out Epirus, so Mak got squashed between them and KH (mostly by Epirus). I assume it's the elephants that are tipping the balance, but I can't be sure. I know in my 1.1 campaigns (only 2), Makedon seems to have little trouble with KH, but Epirus has taken them out both times.

Sample size 2 isn't exactly statistically valid, but I'll gather more data points as time goes on.

[a completely inoffensive name]

In every single one of my campaigns, there is always a Teal and Yellow Death that consumes the entire eastern mediterranean. Luso always takes all of Iberia and has a never ending war with adueii who has always taken all of gaul.

[Aodhan]

Its seems to me that in all of my games (on medium difficulty, I just yesterday switched to hard) the Casse sit around after taking Cornwall, The Lusitani take Iberia, the Romans take Cis Alpine Gaul quickly and then take Massalia, but seem to have trouble actually getting farther into Gaul, the Sweboz hammer pointlessly on the Aeudii but no one ever wins, and the Aeudii and the Averni never seem to seriously dent each other. While in the Eastern Mediterranean the Seleucids or Ptolomoi take almost everything and then endlessly bang on whatever is left to conquer. I haven’t studied what happens in the Steppe much though.

Oh yeah, and Epiros seems to take Pella and make its way west to Byzantium and stops there while it fights of the Getai and who ever is left in the Peloponnese, Macedon or Koinon Hellenon.

Please excuse me for any misspellings of faction and place names, I was in a hurry and didn’t have time to check the correct spellings.

[QuintusSertorius]

I have noticed that Epirus is more active, which is decidedly NOT to Mak's advantage. As Getai, I took out Epirus (not my fault. . . they were there) and Mak crushed KH and expanded into Asia Minor.

In my Saka campaign, I wasn't there to take out Epirus, so Mak got squashed between them and KH (mostly by Epirus). I assume it's the elephants that are tipping the balance, but I can't be sure. I know in my 1.1 campaigns (only 2), Makedon seems to have little trouble with KH, but Epirus has taken them out both times.

Sample size 2 isn't exactly statistically valid, but I'll gather more data points as time goes on.

In my sample size of three, every time Epeiros is taken out of the equation it's KH who defeat Makedonia.