Is my perfect game of EB possible?

[QuintusSertorius]

I've been musing now and again about playing EB1 once more. I haven't played in literal years, my game is installed on an old shuttle PC that I'm not sure will actually boot any more (fortunately I grabbed all my files from it the last time it worked). I remember some of the good times I had playing EB (CTDs permitting), but I also remember how much the AI behaviour annoyed me, and resulted in a huge amount of "management" overhead to make it enjoyable.

So are there any easy fixes (ie things that involve little edits to text files, rather than inventing new scripting) to my issues that don't require me to spend half of my play-time managing the AI factions?

First and foremost, how do I slow the game down? By which I mean how do I make the AI less aggressive towards other AI factions? I don't want to see a faction vanish within 20 turns because they've been steamrollered, and I don't want all the Eleutheroi gone within 50. This took up most of my time; I'd be constantly pumping money into the Eleutheroi faction and adding troops to their garrisons in key areas to maintain their freedom. I'd also move stacks of other factions troops elsewhere (sometimes marooning them on that island on the bottom of the map) or use the save-load bug to trick them into besieging another faction's settlement rather than harass the Eleutheroi.

Is there a more elegant way to do this? Can I script giving the Eleutheroi a lot more money? I do play with the City Mod, but this only tinkers around the edges.

Second, is there any way to make the AI go in at least vaguely historical directions? Like making AI Rome go south first, rather than start the Gallic Wars two centuries too early? And make Hayasdan and Baktria go south to threaten the Seleukids, instead of haring off into the steppe?

Third, is there any way to break the battle AI of it's stupid "matching" behaviour which makes it incapable of holding a line? Just once I'd like to be able to win by doing something clever, rather than my attempt to flank causing the AI to break its line and turn its formation into easily exploited chaos. As a supplemental, is there any way to stop AI generals charging into my well-prepared spearmen and acting like commanders? I've tried both Darth Mod and Sinhuets, neither work. Additionally, is it possible to delete the player formation files altogether? I do all my deployment and movement manually, and a few times I've accidentally hit something that's tried to use a default formation and messed everything up.

Fourth, is using bi.exe worth it? I tried it once and I just got all the over-aggressive issues of before, except now the AI would attack by sea as well as land. Worse, factions I had no interaction with whatsoever would drop pathetic little stacks of 3-5 units on a regular basis causing much annoyance but no real threat.

[d'Arthez]

From my experience it helps if you give the Eleutheroi much more money per city / turn. In the region of adding about 50% (anything less than 3500/city/turn and you won't see anything happening). That way they will develop their economies a bit, replace troops, and even recruit new units. With the funds provided by the scripts, I have seen but little improvement, and then it tends to be restricted to a few cities only.

Another problem that cannot easily be circumvented is that garrison strength depends in large part on the presence of a general. After 40-50 years the Eleutheroi generals start dying, and that makes the Eleutheroi cities a lot easier to conquer for the AI (due to autocalc giving undue weight to command stars). I don't think there is a way to make any general immortal through traits, so that shortcut won't help you (I am sure you really don't care that much for the Eleutheroi generals having unrealistic ages). So unless you modify the scripts to start recruiting new Eleutheroi generals, that will pose a huge problem to your playing style from 230 BC onwards. You could even tinker with the AI Eleutheroi generals to give them even more command stars, thus making it harder for AI to take over these cities.

For point 2: Some people have reported some successes with editing "descr_win_conditions", but I am not sure if it actually does anything. If it does work, it would greatly reduce the amount of manual labour you would have to put in to direct factions towards targets you'd like them to go for.

AI tends to expand north and northeast first, unless there are easier targets available. Seems the way the engine is programmed. What you could do to reduce ahistorical expansion is to add / remove units from the garrisons in the offending regions, to ensure that chances of success for ahistorical invasions are rather low. Hopefully that will encourage the AI to do what you want it to do. However, things like Romans eying Greece are much harder to even try to implement. One option would be to create a scripted Roman army to invade Greece as you'd like it (you can copy and edit the Xanthippos script for that purpose). If it is a lot stronger than whatever city is next to it, chances are it will initiate war. Sadly creating a script to trigger on the relevant conditions being met (other than turn number) is impossible. So you would be best off doing that bit manually.

As for battle AI, I have no suggestions.

[QuintusSertorius]

Thanks for that, d'Arthez. I'd been giving the Eleutheroi in the region of 100k per turn via the console, but it sounds like that was far too small to have any meaningful impact. I was also adding troops to garrisons of major cities in the firing line, but they also had an annoying tendency to wander off and try to play bandit.

I didn't even think about the generals dying off, and had no idea they weren't replaced. I wonder how intensive a piece of work it would be to edit the script to let them replace family members the same as other factions?

I discover I have an edited descr_win_conditions, but I'm not convinced it does anything. I've played before and it was still a problem - the priority was always north. I guess abusing the save-load bug to make them besiege places will have to continue.

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

From my experience it helps if you give the Eleutheroi much more money per city / turn. In the region of adding about 50% (anything less than 3500/city/turn and you won't see anything happening).

How did you do that? Which file?

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

First and foremost, how do I slow the game down? By which I mean how do I make the AI less aggressive towards other AI factions? I don't want to see a faction vanish within 20 turns because they've been steamrollered, and I don't want all the Eleutheroi gone within 50. This took up most of my time; I'd be constantly pumping money into the Eleutheroi faction and adding troops to their garrisons in key areas to maintain their freedom. I'd also move stacks of other factions troops elsewhere (sometimes marooning them on that island on the bottom of the map) or use the save-load bug to trick them into besieging another faction's settlement rather than harass the Eleutheroi.

I've actually been thinking about trying the Easy campaign difficulty, which I've never done before. Maybe that will make the AI less aggressive generally, and if it gives me bonus income, I can spend it on having large garrisons on my borders, which normally I can't afford as I'm a big spender on town building.

I play on BI, but only to avoid CTDs. The little naval invasions can become annoying if you're not at war with the invader, because they are ahistorical.

But basically, I've become resigned to only playing the first 50 years of a campaign, and giving up after that when the differences between EB and real history become too great.

Also, you might find this blog interesting:
http://www.matchstickeyes.com/2013/1...-good-4x-game/

[d'Arthez]

My memory is a bit fuzzy on the subject, but that is probably due to the fact that it was 6 years ago, when I played with it years ago in EB 1.0, or EB 1.1. I found that around the 3200 / city / turn mark the Eleutheroi do not immediately get itself in massive debt, and actually do something. Prior to EB 1.2, the Money assistance scripts were rather basic. And I am not sure if the current iterations are as generous as they should be for the Eleutheroi for your purposes.

It should be in the EBBS-script, under the money assistance section. If my memory has not abandoned the script should be something like this for the Eleutheroi:

monitor_event SettlementTurnStart FactionType slave

and not FactionIsLocal
console_command add_money slave, 3200
end_monitor

(For some reason the quoting function does not work as intended.)


This check runs for every Eleutheroi controlled city. So at the beginning of the game that amounts to about 400 000 Mnai. And that income will reduce as Eleutheroi cities get conquered. You can combine this with a treasury emptying script before then, so that the AI does not hoard money, nor has too little income to actually do something.

One thread that discusses the issue of money scripts in earlier versions can be found here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...out-on-the-AI)

But please don't take my word for gospel. I would suggest to Quintus that he runs a few tests (Casse auto-end turn), to see if the AI is doing things "right" (and that the Eleutheroi don't go through the roof or the floor in the factional financial rankings). Striking a balance will be a rather delicate affair. But it does seem doubtful that the AI will spend the Eleutheroi money in the most optimal manner. It could be "first come, first serve", and thus you may find Pergamon neglected while Ubar gets fully built up.

Lack of replacements for dead generals is one of the most important reasons for the collapse of the "Eleutheroi Empire" from 230 BC onwards (that and the fact that they often cannot replenish their troops due to inadequate funds). As for recruiting AI general to replace the fallen governors, I have not tried that myself to be honest. It should be possible, but I have never tried to create a script for this purpose (and it is probably not easy to create one). The alternative would be to seriously nerf the AI's Command Stars.

[QuintusSertorius]

I've just started another Epeiros-as-Pergamon game (so ironically Pergamon is no longer Eleutheroi). I've been gifting something in the region of 800k a turn via console and they do seem to be much more active than I remember - there are even pirates! Though at best it's just slowing the other AI factions, the Romans are still determined to go north rather than south and into Sicily. I did think about financially penalising the Romans, but I remember that to be a very tricky balance that ends up over-compensating in both directions, since if the AI gets too poor it goes completely inactive.

I stole Krete which has stabilised my financial situation, but otherwise I'm playing a game of assassins and spies in my neighbourhood, rather than conquest.

Is there any way to trigger unrest with the console, besides adding population?

[d'Arthez]

I think 800k / turn will prove to be overkill, since the AI will have enough money to build up most settlements. Thus you might find Eleutheroi cities much more tech-advanced than what is really historical. Which can be a bit of a problem once someone conquers a few of those cities. On the plus side, you should see them recruiting troops now as well, and that should definitely slow down AI expansion.

For new campaigns it is possible to alter natural unrest in a settlement, but that does not work with ongoing campaigns. In ongoing campaigns you can use spies and adding population. I would probably go with the spy option - it rules out the option of building up governor's palaces, and other high-tech buildings. Just don't forget to compensate yourself for maintaining these spies.

An option that may work for you to reduce unwanted migrations is to create non-moving full-stacks of elites at the chokepoints you don't want them to cross (give them a general + give the general a trait to make movement points close to zero). I have not tried this myself, and it will leave you with a nasty problem of getting rid of these stacks once they have served their purpose. What may also help is to move the offending stacks to their historical targets (Sicily for the Romans for instance), and then reload the game. If you don't reload, the stack will probably still retain its original destination. Reloading seems to undo all the plans AI has made on the strategic map, and thus new plans will have to be formed. (This is also a reason that the strategic AI can be so poor in load-heavy campaigns).

[QuintusSertorius]

I'm playing with the City Mod, so that should constrain most Eleutheroi settlement growth. I've not noticed a lot of tech development so far, but it's only 258BC. I have noticed a much more active Eleuetheroi, which is for the better.

Guess I'll have to stick with the spies method. Though it seems pretty hit and miss whether you get revolts; so far Ipsos has proved immune even though I've gotten rioting once or twice - even with four assassins destroying happiness-creating buildings and the public order rarely being above 80%.

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

The alternative would be to seriously nerf the AI's Command Stars.

This sounds like a great idea! How would I do that?

I've always wanted EB battles where I don't have to wipe out 3/4 of the enemy army or kill the enemy general before the whole army routs. Brilliant flanking moves are less exciting for me when the enemy fight almost to the death like the Theban Sacred Band at the Battle of Chaeronea.

[d'Arthez]

Those traits are probably hidden in export_descr_character_traits. Sadly changes to that file are probably not save game compatible.

[Bodeni]

Easy difficulty is annoying in that it doesn't offer a challenge. However, it does make the AI much less aggressive and seems to limit the elite unit/merc spam you get with hard/very hard. Keeps the Independant factions alive for a more reasonable time too. I use this is conjunction with the "force diplomacy" mini mod so I can role play more historical campaigns. I've not yet noticed a money boost for the player on Easy, but then again I just use add_money and keep my troops to a realistic amount/quality.
Far from perfect but very good for AARs or RP. Wish I could remember how to set up faction swapping again, made campaigns even more interesting.

[d'Arthez]

The only "money boost" you get on Easy is an increase in Trade income. You get 1.2 x Trade income on Easy, 1.00 on Medium, 0.92 on Hard and 0.85 on Very Hard if memory serves. Hardly earth shattering in EB.

[QuintusSertorius]

I always play on M/M - I don't like the AI getting bonuses in battle, nor them getting even more money on the campaign map. Maybe I should have gone E/M, if that means they're less aggressive towards each other?

I used some FD at the start to get some ceasefires, though ironically I haven't needed it since then. The AI is surprisingly reasonable when I've only taken one settlement off them and beaten everything they've sent my way.

I'm about to liberate Athenai, which has fallen to Makedon, and gift it back to Koinon Hellenon. I wonder if it's a losing prospect in the end, though. At least KH always have Rhodos, assuming I don't steal it, to keep them in the game. I might gift-migrate them to the Bosporan Kingdom if they continue to struggle and let Makedon have Greece.

[QuintusSertorius]

Is this convoluted? I've installed Koinon Hellenon in Kyrene (to give them an extra source of income besides the fallback of Rhodos). Now I'm looking to install Makedonia in Mesana, so that there's some actual tension and fighting on Sicily. As it stands Syrakousai is still independent and the Qarthadastim otherwise have the run of the place.

It's 243BC, there's still a load of unconquered territory, but my recent actions have broken quite a few alliances (the Ptolemies stuck with me rather than the Qarthadastim - don't know if that means a new ahistorical war in the desert or if they'll continue ignoring each other).

I'm wondering if I should have a go at a Qart-Hadast game; they have a lot of units just like the Greek ones I like (hoplites, thureophoroi, etc) and loads of merc options too.

[d'Arthez]

I would say that would partly depend on the political relationships between SPQR, Makedonia and Qarthadastim. One can reasonably argue that control of Sicily has some merit before attempting to expand eastward. Not to mention that it might be better for Makedonia to try and limit the SPQR expansion, fearing that the Romans will aim to expand to Greece / suppress Greeks in the colonies.

You can also declare war via a custom-made script between two AI-factions. So in terms of getting things interesting, that may do the trick, especially if you can argue that expansion eastward is blocked by Pergamon.

With regards to sustaining KH in mainland Greece: I find that they need to take Korinthos to sustain themselves in Southern Greece. Sometimes they will take Korinthos after Athenai has fallen. But that is the exception rather than the rule. Part of the reason is that Korinthos puts pressure on both Sparte and Athenai. Conquering Korinthos will effectively reduce the borders for KH. It might be better to transform KH in a Bosporan Kingdom, also to keep things interesting around the Crimea.

I think desert wars between Ptolemies and Qarthadastim is not high on the agenda for either faction. the KH base in Kyrene could however blow up and cause a "full-scale" war between the two of them.

[QuintusSertorius]

Ultimately it's a western Greek outpost, so at least there won't be huge culture penalties, and it's not as if adventurers from the mainland haven't tried their hand in Sicily before. I could imagine some aristocrat chafing under Qarthadastim dominion appealing to Makedonia for aid.

I'm trying to avoid scripting if possible, things get really messy and complicated fast if I do.

Ironically, they've took Korinthos themselves, then re-took Athenai recently, so your prediction was pretty accurate. I'd love to install them in the Bosporous, but there are some massive stacks of Eleuetheroi chock-full of horse archers, and both Chersonesos and Pantikapaion have stone walls (and big garrisons). Maybe later if I'm stuck for things to do I'll give them a go, but stone wall-sieges are hardcore.

Let's hope you're right about the desert war. Both have had a go at Kyrene, which is why I thought it would be in better hands having a proper faction controlling it. Even if independence is ahistorical after 250BC.

[QuintusSertorius]

I love it when the AI gives you justification to act. I've been waiting around for stuff to do since liberating Athenai and installing a pro-Makedonian regime in Messana. Now the Seleukids attacked Nikaia, giving me a pretext to annex Ipsos; and Pontos took Sinope, requiring the Greek communities there to be liberated, and self-government restored.

As a balancing factor, I'll take Mazaka and give it to Pontos, since after over 30 years they've finally done something. It might also spark war between Pontos and the Seleukids.

[QuintusSertorius]

Haha, and now the Ptolemaioi have broken our long-standing alliance with a big, three-pronged invasion. I've already smashed the biggest force, the smallest retreated and I'll be taking Side off them. I'd like Kypros as well, but I'll leave that for the next war. One province per major conflict is plenty.

Also musing on taking Rhodos for the shipyards. Koinon Hellenon are definitely the rising power in Hellas now, and they did break off our alliance. Ingrates.

[d'Arthez]

Have the Ptollies taken Antioch? If they have (and not lost Tarsos) that will mean a permanent border with the Ptollies and the Seleukids. That can get pretty nasty, if they decide in typical RTW-fashion that you are the bigger threat to their existence. The only logical faction to gift Tarsos to will be Pontos, in the hopes of getting a border from the Mediterranean to the Black Sea (Trapezous, Mazaka, Tarsos, Amaseia will do - Trapezous means also borders with Hayasdan, and possibly the Sauromatae). I am not sure if that will make much difference though, especially if Pontos has allied with the Ptollies.

How is the situation around the Bosphorus?

[QuintusSertorius]

If I'm remembering right, the Ptolemies have Antioch and retain Tarsos. However, I gave Mazaka to Pontos after the last war with the Seleukids (as punishment, and in the hopes of getting them fighting each other), so I no longer share a border with the Seleukids. Pontos also took Ani-Kamah recently, so they share a border with the silver death. I think I can handle sharing one with the Ptolemies after I take Side, besides they'll be a more active belligerent than the Seleukids were.

I don't think Pontos and the Ptolemies are allies. That'll be something to watch for. Pontos don't have Trapezous, it's Eleuetheroi. I just put a client ruler in Sinope (did a settlement swap with Pontos, who'd just taken it).

The Bosphorus is Eleuetheroi. Pantikapaion and Chersonesos have massive stacks inside and stone walls, and there's a full-stack rebel army wandering around Crimea as well. AI Sauromatae have given up on it, I think. Olbia, and Kallatis are still Eleutheroi as well, though I've taken Byzantion.

[d'Arthez]

In my games, Sauros tend to take Olbia rather quickly, and often descend southwards to Greece. Glad that has not happened in yours. If memory serves, you can even recruit horse-archers from Kallatis as regional troops, which would greatly aid in reducing troubles from the north. Though that would be more of a last-resort than a highly-desired expansion for Pergamon.

I expect Makedonia to try and expand northwards, towards Serdike and Naissos. Sooner or later they and the Getai will meet up, and that will set the stage for a three-way conflict in all likelihood. It will be tough if Makedonia can develop mines in Pella, Dalminon and Segestica. On second level mines, that would net them close to 12k / turn in extra income, which cold spell a lot of trouble for you and their other neighbours. Though it may help if you can get a three way war going in Sicily ...

Whatever you do, you cannot afford to let Greece fall completely in Makedonian hands.
If Ptolemies wipe the floor with the Seleukids, that does not leave you in a good position. Because of the shared MIC, you might get more than your share of elite troops directed towards your border. Even if they don't do it, you can't risk a border with both the Yellow Death and the Silver Death. At best you might be able to gobble up the cities on the sea, but that can create a very lengthy border, far away from your capital. Far from ideal. Especially if you also have to dedicate a fair portion of your resources to Greece and your borders with Pontos.

Naturally speaking, Kypros should be rather safe for you to take, and could serve as an excellent naval basis (along with Rhodos), to keep trade and piracy under control. An alliance with the KH could prove rather useful (if you can get them to expand eastward from Kyrene), but that alliance has just expired. Depending on Saba expansion, something similar may hold for them. Saba does have the advantage that they certainly won't be much of an issue in Greek affairs.

So lots of plotting, conniving and planning to do for your campaign. Nice.

[QuintusSertorius]

As well as channeling huge amounts of funds into the Eleutheroi (in the 400k-800k region every turn), I've been bolstering their garrisons periodically to slow the AI down. Mostly to stop SPQR rampaging into Gaul 200 years early. The Sauromatae have been rather quite, their only significant southwards move is into Hayasdan, which I've been keeping an eye on.

Makedonia took Serdike, but they were too slow for Naissos, which the Getai have. So I expect a conflict there, though I've been pulling their stacks south to prevent the encroachment of KH who are suddenly dominant in Greece. After a long time fearing Makedonian triumph, that conflict has now flipped in the opposite direction. KH not only took Korinthos, but also Chalkide and are now pressing on Demetrias. Dalminion and Segestica are still independent, as indeed is Epidamnos. For the moment they're outside the conflict I managed to trigger in Sicily between the Qarthadastim and Romani.

On the Ptolemies, they've all but won the Syrian War; they have Tarsos, Antiocheia, Sidon and Damaskos. After I take Side I think I'll restore the Seleukids to some of those to reinstate the conflict. I'm going to leave Kypros alone for now; while I'd like the trade control, the extra money will make things a little too easy for me.

Saba are an interesting possibility; if the Ptolemies take the deep desert settlements, Meroe and Axum, I may switch them to Saba to create some strife.

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

I've just started a Sweboz campaign, on Easy campaign difficulty. I have the EBBS money script modded to give most factions only one-third of the EB bonus funds they get per settlement by default. Exceptions are the Seleucids, who only get on-sixth of their normal bonus, the Ptolemies who only get one-tenth of their normal bonus, and lastly the Eleutheroi who get one-third more than normal.

The idea is to make a really slow-paced game, and hopefully with the Seleucids and Ptolemies having a difficult time.l Everything looks normal so far, but I'm only on 270 BC.

I've actually been thinking about trying the Easy campaign difficulty, which I've never done before. Maybe that will make the AI less aggressive generally, and if it gives me bonus income, I can spend it on having large garrisons on my borders, which normally I can't afford as I'm a big spender on town building.

I play on BI, but only to avoid CTDs. The little naval invasions can become annoying if you're not at war with the invader, because they are ahistorical.

[QuintusSertorius]

I'll be interested to hear how it goes.

[The Stranger]

is there any notable difference between using EB on BI or on vanilla 1.5?

[QuintusSertorius]

is there any notable difference between using EB on BI or on vanilla 1.5?

Yes, with BI.exe you get naval invasions.

However, those naval invasions are as useless and irritating as the land invasions you often get from factions who share a border with you (usually a stack comprising 2-5 units, delivered every few turns, which is annoying but in no way threatening). Only now it's anyone else sharing the same body of water as you. I played one game with BI.exe and never did it again.

[The Stranger]

but no hordes or religion, more factions or whatever?

[QuintusSertorius]

but no hordes or religion, more factions or whatever?

Nope, it isn't a mod, just a change in executable, which changes the AI.

[moriluk]

I have experimented with disable_ai to slow things down but teh emipres get filthy rich in the process, so i counter that by taking money away and adding money to the smaller factions. Even still, this only does so much.

There is nothing I can do to stop Armenia from expanding north instead of south. pontos also likes to cross into byzantine adn then create an empire in bulgaria, romania, and ukraine and ignore their homeland.

There is nothing I can do except move_character and add_money -40000 to stop luso and germany from having empires early on. and even this doesn't seem to work unless they die early.

out of 50+ campaigns i have only twice seen parthia do any thing relevant other than die or get confined into one city with 8 fms making it nearly impossible to take. it seems they start their reforms but then screw it up rendering them unable to recruit any units.

I have also upgraded the pontic and armenian specific infantry and it seems to help a tiny bit, very tiny bit.

i have found almost no naval invasions using alex.exe. bi.exe uses them but as it has been said they are uselss and annoying. The punic war always starts with a stack of peasant skirmishers form sardinia or corsica landing in italy. But i do miss "shield-wall".

i have found that ai rome and makedonia have the least historical armies. they both like to spam out cheap foreign levies with random faction troops mixed in. AI rome is only fun to fight if they are in marian era. At least then you are mostly fighting roman units.

what makes me unhappy is that some of the complaints in op are still being addressed in rtw2.

whenever i do the faction swap via Hax's guide, all my governments break and the game starts crashing.