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

**Hax** · 07-31-2010, 10:47

Bear with me if this is not possible (I've never played Medieval 2) or has already been discussed, but the biggest problem in EB for me, and is in fact a problem in all Total War games I've played, is the lack of internal civil wars in factions. This is why we see the Ptolemies become so powerful most of the time in EB 1. This is why you can have a king with the charisma and martial skill of a dead crocodile and still conquer the world. This is why I (and probably many other players) often lost interest in a campaign after about 50 years, with no civilization that can harm me and no potential civil wars. I recall Barbarian Invasion vanilla having the most rudimentary of concepts for this (with Roman Empire rebels cropping up and whatnot), but it wasn't great. If only the Creative Assembly would take some hints from Crusader Kings or Europa Universalis: Rome, we'd have a game that is wonderfully immersive and realistic in more aspects of why battles are fought, rather than just focusing on increasing the graphical quality of the battlefield.

There will be some form of representation of internal strife within factions. How it works exactly, I can't say (and I don't really know, actually

)

This is why we see the Ptolemies become so powerful most of the time in EB 1. This is why you can have a king with the charisma and martial skill of a dead crocodile

I see what you did there.

**Gaius Sempronius Gracchus** · 07-31-2010, 11:40

Originally Posted by Hax

There will be some form of representation of internal strife within factions. How it works exactly, I can't say (and I don't really know, actually

)

Ooohh...I'm intrigued, sounds good. I think, in all honesty, the only real weakness of EB1 is the diplomatic/political side - and that's not really the fault of the EB team, simply a limitation of the R:TW engine. If that aspect is significantly improved then.....EB2 is going to be something else....as one poster said, there should be a better representation of the why of warfare, as well as the how.

If there was one thing that I would want to see, that I think is lacking in EB1 (and this might not be possible) is some way of representing guerilla tactics. Ambushes should catch armies spread out, for example - not in battle formation... or reconaissance (cavalry) units, and in enemy territory, foraging parties.

**Rahl** · 08-04-2010, 19:56

Originally Posted by Gaius Sempronius Gracchus

If there was one thing that I would want to see, that I think is lacking in EB1 (and this might not be possible) is some way of representing guerilla tactics. Ambushes should catch armies spread out, for example - not in battle formation...

Thats actually possible in M2TW. I was as surprised as my enemy when my King of Norway caught an enemy force in marching formation. The where standing in a long line while I was able to position my troops on every other place of the battlefield, I could attack them from the sides and crushed them. But I was not able to do this again, mainly because I play EB again.

**bobbin** · 08-04-2010, 20:33

Originally Posted by Rahl

Thats actually possible in M2TW. I was as surprised as my enemy when my King of Norway caught an enemy force in marching formation. The where standing in a long line while I was able to position my troops on every other place of the battlefield, I could attack them from the sides and crushed them. But I was not able to do this again, mainly because I play EB again.

Eh? This is what always happens when an ambush is successful, in both RTW and M2TW.

**Gaius Sempronius Gracchus** · 08-04-2010, 21:05

Originally Posted by bobbin

Eh? This is what always happens when an ambush is successful, in both RTW and M2TW.

Really? I have succesfully ambushed (and been ambushed) and wouldn't say that the ambushed armies fairly represent an army on the move.

**XSamatan** · 08-05-2010, 00:36

Than your ambush wasn't successful 100%. If it is, your would have get the situation bobbin was referring to, but otherwise the enemy would have time to organize his army. This feature is hardcoded both in RTW as in MTW2.

XSamatan

**Gaius Sempronius Gracchus** · 08-05-2010, 01:33

Thanks.... I've obviously been unlucky. I look forward to some proper guerilla tactics.... Does it make a difference what sort of units are ambushing, or is it purely chance (if you know..)?

**Rahl** · 08-05-2010, 09:47

Originally Posted by bobbin

Eh? This is what always happens when an ambush is successful, in both RTW and M2TW.

Oh...
I never saw that before, are there other conditions to be met? Like the army wants to move where your ambushing troops are standing or the tile next to them?
I didn't ambush that often, but I had successful ones and never saw that, do you need at least an good ambusher as general?

**SillySirius** · 08-05-2010, 11:28

I've had enemy armies led by captains ambush me and it should be moving into any tile next to the ambushing army that springs it.

One thing that i find annoying is when you have spotted the ambush and you go to fight and the screen pops up saying you were ambushed.

**Ichon** · 04-05-2011, 03:34

Originally Posted by SillySirius

I've had enemy armies led by captains ambush me and it should be moving into any tile next to the ambushing army that springs it.

One thing that i find annoying is when you have spotted the ambush and you go to fight and the screen pops up saying you were ambushed.

You have to "spring" the Ambush. Send in a single unit ahead and enter as reinforcements or enter the battle and retreat- the ambush is then sprung and your main engaging army is free to attack without ambush.

Main difference I'd like to see for EB2 is that foot skirmishers are handled differently. It should be possible now with generally slower speeds of infantry that the harrying ability of skirmishers is a bit better modeled. Not sure the mechanics are totally friendly to this but... hopefully something can be done. If most skirmishers can also get bonus in more terrains(not all obviously but more broad than single terrain unless that is all that culture likely ever experienced) and then other units get more negative values for some terrains as well.

**Horatius Flaccus** · 07-31-2010, 11:40

It's good to see you now are an actual EB team member (instead of an 'auxiliary') Hax, congratulations!

And I'm very interested in the way EB is going to handel civil strife, it's one of the hardest things to represent well. BC 3.0 has what seems like a good system, but it could be too 'artificial'.