What are the main things you want to see fixed from EB1 in EB2???

[Cyclops]

... gold chevroned peasants stand as gods on the battlefield. ...

Yes there is a "resolution" problem with the improvement in a unit over 10 levels of experience, especially at the bottom end. A slinger witrh "1" attack, plus 9 for experience winds up being ten times as deadly, whereas a unit with 10 attack merely doubles its deadliness.

The proposed autodisbanding militia feature will go a long way to fixing this I'm sure.

I do like the idea of some experience being available. Military doctrine does recognise the value of veteran troops over greenhorns.

I see this as a factor when translating historically described units into game terms. Alexander's men kicked some, big time. The Romans managed to beat the later Macedonians who used a similar unit set-so do we rate Romans higher than the victors of Gaugemela?

I see part of this equation being Alexander's army included a huge proportion of veterans of Philllips many campaigns, whereas the Diadochi troops the Romans fought were probably less well lead but also less "professional", that is not having been in the field as a cohesive force for sustained periods.

IIRC there's an episode in the Gallic wars where Caesar hires a mercenary German cav unit which procedess to trounce all the Gallic cav it meets. Is this because the German cav is intrinsically better, or was it an experienced unit vs green ones?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The Gallophile in me wants it to be the second option. As if germanic cavalry could defeat its gallic equivalent straight up! [scoffs ignorantly]

I'm confident there will be a sensible position reached in the way the game is presented. Pretty much every decision has been subject to examination.

On the question of Epic-ness (epic-osity? epic-centricity?), I think its there.

I think we're seeing at least the same attention to detail, respect for the sources, and love of the subject than in EB1. Certainly the excellent work already done meets the highest standard we could set. Its a luxury having dedicated people doing such a thorough job for free.

[Cyclops]

...The proposed autodisbanding militia feature ...

Something just occured to me. Could different groups of units be autodisbanded over different timescales?

EG all units with the militia tag get demobbed annually (someone suggested each Autumn).

And maybe there could be units tagged mercenary which get disbanded after 5 or 10 years? Elites could get 20 or even 40 years (like the white haired silver shields who fought with Phillip and Alexander and even afterwards). OMG OMG.

I haven't though it through but a sliding scale of unit lifespans might allow for some unit "maturity" but without them becoming elite zombie legions ("you see these chevrons I got? My Pappy earned them back in the First Punic War, but somehow it makes me a better soldier. Why? Hardcoded, sonny!").

edit-I forgot, the gobal disband would be at a fixed time, not a countdown for each unit. Damn.

[Ibrahim]

Something just occured to me. Could different groups of units be autodisbanded over different timescales?

EG all units with the militia tag get demobbed annually (someone suggested each Autumn).

And maybe there could be units tagged mercenary which get disbanded after 5 or 10 years? Elites could get 20 or even 40 years (like the white haired silver shields who fought with Phillip and Alexander and even afterwards). OMG OMG.

I haven't though it through but a sliding scale of unit lifespans might allow for some unit "maturity" but without them becoming elite zombie legions ("you see these chevrons I got? My Pappy earned them back in the First Punic War, but somehow it makes me a better soldier. Why? Hardcoded, sonny!").

edit-I forgot, the gobal disband would be at a fixed time, not a countdown for each unit. Damn.

I beg to disagree on elites (in part); while its true that no unit lasts forever, it is however common for regiments to last longer; roman legions were known to last for centuries after being raised in the late republic. IIRC, LEG. XX lasted 3 centuries or so, and I recall one legion lasting 5 and a half centuries. and I am aware of Argyraspides being maintained by the selecids for extended periods of time.

the trick is to make experience effect less. luckily, M2TW is just that in regards to experience.

[Phalanx300]

In EBI there were Germanic units which possesed swords but didn't use any spears. Personally think that owning a sword didn't equal using it at a primary weapon. Like the Cherusci being known as sword owners doesn't mean they don't fight primerely with spears.

[vartan]

In EBI there were Germanic units which possesed swords but didn't use any spears. Personally think that owning a sword didn't equal using it at a primary weapon. Like the Cherusci being known as sword owners doesn't mean they don't fight primerely with spears.

That's correct. But there is one problem. In RTW and in M2TW, as far as I know, units can only have two weapons: primary and secondary. The Cherusci swordsmen in EBI were given two thrown javelins (spears) as primary, and a sword as secondary. Certainly the Cherusci could (did* more likely) have a SPEAR that they carried with them, but in the aforementioned games (RTW/M2TW) the unit cannot have 1) javelins, 2) spear, and 3) sword, but rather only a combination of two of these. That is unfortunately why the Cherusci swordsman does not carry a fighting spear in-game.

[Hannibal Khan the Great]

That's correct. But there is one problem. In RTW and in M2TW, as far as I know, units can only have two weapons: primary and secondary. The Cherusci swordsmen in EBI were given two thrown javelins (spears) as primary, and a sword as secondary. Certainly the Cherusci could (did* more likely) have a SPEAR that they carried with them, but in the aforementioned games (RTW/M2TW) the unit cannot have 1) javelins, 2) spear, and 3) sword, but rather only a combination of two of these. That is unfortunately why the Cherusci swordsman does not carry a fighting spear in-game.

If only there was EB Mount and Blade.....

[jirisys]

If only there was EB Mount and Blade.....

Heck it'd be the best game ever

Too bad you need to carry projectiles as a weapon too

~Jirisys (Khergit Khanate)

[Phalanx300]

That's correct. But there is one problem. In RTW and in M2TW, as far as I know, units can only have two weapons: primary and secondary. The Cherusci swordsmen in EBI were given two thrown javelins (spears) as primary, and a sword as secondary. Certainly the Cherusci could (did* more likely) have a SPEAR that they carried with them, but in the aforementioned games (RTW/M2TW) the unit cannot have 1) javelins, 2) spear, and 3) sword, but rather only a combination of two of these. That is unfortunately why the Cherusci swordsman does not carry a fighting spear in-game.

I see, well this certainly answers my question. Thanks.


And yes Hegemon mod is nice and clearly EB inspired. Yet they put their own view in it which I don't always like. Like having Germanic pikemen without shields. Whiel its said some Germanics had overly long shields that doesn't equal no shields. Seeing the symbolic importance of shields in Germanic society as well...

[Brennus]

I would like to see two key things fixed:

1. I would like to see a more robust Seleucid Empire. I don't like how Baktria tends to sweep across Asia at the expense of the AS, very innacurate in my opinion. Obviously don't make the Seleucids an unstoppable force but just less prone to collapsing within a ten year gap. I know this can be prevented with the add_money cheat but i would rather see the Seleucids have a fighting chance.

2. Most importantly! I would like to see Rome and Carthage actually fight. As a fan of Celtic factions I am sick of watching Sicily remain in peace whilst the Roman legions march towards the English channel. Yes I know I should use the force diplomacy mod but I would rather , as above, watch history unfold.

A few more factions to slow the Sweboz down would be nice but I will settle for the above happily.