Faction Reforms

**bobbin** · 08-25-2010, 18:48

Originally Posted by Balbor

Thankfully M2TW also let you simulate the decline of the successor states military power, by reducing the amount of elite cavalry (and other units they rejected) available to them as time passes etc.

That wouldn't be something we would want to do, if a successor state is powerful and prosperous it would very odd to start cutting their access to elite units just because a set date has been reached.

**Ca Putt** · 08-25-2010, 19:51

now that's good news, looking forward not to fight TAB fullstacks from the minor state seleukeia.

**Ichon** · 08-26-2010, 01:31

Originally Posted by bobbin

That wouldn't be something we would want to do, if a successor state is powerful and prosperous it would very odd to start cutting their access to elite units just because a set date has been reached.

So will you model it the other direction? When a successor state loses territory the quality of its armies decrease? I doubt it somehow but would be good news if it happens. Personally I think changes could be modeled based on likely changes viewed in what happened in other states which did continue in history in the vicinity but that could be a bit too much "alternate history" even so.

**Rahwana** · 08-26-2010, 10:29

if it was kingdoms, I believe it should be easily modelled, such as No recruiting of Klerouchikoi Agemata for Ptolemies if they lost ~~Krak De Chevalier~~ Alexandreia, just like those ol Hospitallers do

**bobbin** · 08-26-2010, 11:13

Originally Posted by Ichon

So will you model it the other direction? When a successor state loses territory the quality of its armies decrease? I doubt it somehow but would be good news if it happens. Personally I think changes could be modeled based on likely changes viewed in what happened in other states which did continue in history in the vicinity but that could be a bit too much "alternate history" even so.

Depends on what territory they lose, this is just part of the normal game though. If they lose their core regions for elite cavalry recruitment they will obviously have lost the capacity to train elite cavalry, no need to do anything else.

**Iraklis** · 08-26-2010, 11:31

Ok, not so relavent or irelavent... about the armor upgrades, in the M2TW it only shows upgrade of armor as a +1 is that an actual number or is there an other number "under", in the code?
And is that number hardcoded or can it be changed? It sounds a bit weird to me if a unite upgrades from, lets say leather to chain and gets only +1 since i would expect the deference to be more substuntial than that.
(keep in mind i am not an expert so if i am wrong in my beleafs feel free to hang me, also sorry for the typos, i am dislexic and english isnt my first language)

**Foot** · 08-26-2010, 12:05

Originally Posted by Iraklis

Ok, not so relavent or irelavent... about the armor upgrades, in the M2TW it only shows upgrade of armor as a +1 is that an actual number or is there an other number "under", in the code?
And is that number hardcoded or can it be changed? It sounds a bit weird to me if a unite upgrades from, lets say leather to chain and gets only +1 since i would expect the deference to be more substuntial than that.
(keep in mind i am not an expert so if i am wrong in my beleafs feel free to hang me, also sorry for the typos, i am dislexic and english isnt my first language)

The armour upgrade is actually +2.5 (rounded down). This value is hardcoded.

Foot

**Iraklis** · 08-26-2010, 14:56

Thanks for the reply.

**Ichon** · 08-26-2010, 15:49

Originally Posted by bobbin

Depends on what territory they lose, this is just part of the normal game though. If they lose their core regions for elite cavalry recruitment they will obviously have lost the capacity to train elite cavalry, no need to do anything else.

Hmm... so then the elite units will often be attached to AOR region not the factions roster? That is better though is there a way doing that to prevent the faction which gains control of that region from then producing that unit? Or are you doing it some other way with a building or something?

**bobbin** · 08-26-2010, 16:16

Originally Posted by Ichon

Hmm... so then the elite units will often be attached to AOR region not the factions roster? That is better though is there a way doing that to prevent the faction which gains control of that region from then producing that unit? Or are you doing it some other way with a building or something?

Err..have you played EB1? It will be a bit like that but more complex. Like EB1 most elite units will be tied to their respective factions and AOR's are done on a per unit per region basis. I'm not going to go into the specifics of how it's done in EBII as that will be saved for a future preveiw.

**B-Wing** · 08-26-2010, 17:53

Originally Posted by bobbin

Err..have you played EB1?

Doesn't sound like it.

Ichon, in EB each faction has two unique lines of building trees which only they (and possibly one or two other similar factions) can recruit from. So, a level 5 Roman barracks won't provide any units to Carthaginians if they take over the city, for instance.

**Ichon** · 08-26-2010, 19:28

Originally Posted by B_Ray

Doesn't sound like it.

Ichon, in EB each faction has two unique lines of building trees which only they (and possibly one or two other similar factions) can recruit from. So, a level 5 Roman barracks won't provide any units to Carthaginians if they take over the city, for instance.

I remember that in RTW several different mods not just EB made use of those unique building tree lines but I haven't seen that done in MTW2. I guess the capability is still there just most mods don't use it instead prefering to phase in units over time or restrict to AOR.