Faction Reforms

**Serious** · 07-30-2010, 01:01

Hello, I am new to this website. I came here to inquire upon the topic of faction reforms. I would like to know if any new reforms are being put in place. I would also like to say that I think all factions should, after a certain date receive a massive reform.

" You have single handedly orchestrated the creation of the physical emodiement of my own personal hell."

**abou** · 07-30-2010, 02:17

We've discussed reforms internally, their potentials, and what to implement, but have not done so yet. We have a lot planned, but nothing concrete excepting the more obvious ones.

**Moros** · 07-30-2010, 13:52

No not all factions would get a massive reform. Most will have units which progress over time, as there was a general increase and evolutions in armour. Which will be represented by using the armour upgrade function. This however will not be dependant on the creation of a building but rather meeting certain conditions set by the script. Some factions will indeed see much larger and fundamental changes, that are more than just some changes and improvements in armour. The Romans are a great and good example of such a faction. They are of course not the only ones, but for details and other reforms I'll have to refer you to future previews.

btw: welcome to the .org!

**Cyclops** · 08-24-2010, 06:28

Originally Posted by abou

We've discussed reforms internally, their potentials, and what to implement, but have not done so yet. We have a lot planned, but nothing concrete excepting the more obvious ones.

I'm guessing the obvious ones are the ones in EB. Roman (Polybian, Marian, Imperial?) AS and Baktrian Katas, Karthi heavies, Keltic and Germani militarisiations and the horsey horseys settling down at last (actual reform names TBC).

I know Hai become Persia was in EB 1.2, is that one of "the obvious ones"? It was a bit of an *alternate reality one.

It might open the way for thoughtful sub modders (not me though, I am no modder at all, just a speculator) who see a choice for the Karthis (should they survive beynd their historical use-by date) to face a similar choice that Rome did: remain a Republic or go Monarchic (IIRC the Shophets seem to have kept a close eye on the Barcids in case they tried to make the change).

Maybe there'd be scope for Saba (and any other Arabian factions that may or not be in EB2) to Go Greek or Not Go Greek. I see Nabatea as a proposed faction who may have gone a bit Greek whereas Saba did not, did they face a choice in this? Perhaps that could be a choice for Pontos, where historically they embraced Greek culture but maybe they had an alternate future as a more Iranian culture too, with more horseys and less javelin armed heavy inf.

**Balbor** · 08-24-2010, 10:15

There is huge potential for making the Reforms really hardcore, such as Rome only gaining mail armour after fighting against celts wearing mail etc. M2TW makes reforms very easy as new recruitment and buildings can be triggered by events, but this is a really simply, linear way of doing things. The romans went through the Marian reforms because they was fighting against too many enemies and was running out of man power, not because they suddenly decided one day to do things differently.

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.

**Blxz** · 08-25-2010, 16:48

As I built my first army today entirerly composed of Seleucid TAB's and Cataphracts I wondered how annoying this game would be with limited recruitment. Then I just went and killed everything to forget how sad I felt. Declining military power does not sound fun...

**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.