Making Units Region Specific

[PSYCHO V]

Has anyone worked out how to make a unit only buildable in certain areas ?

Vercingetrix has been finishing off the first fully implemented unit. Once we can crack this and get one up and running, the flood gates are open

[PSYCHO V]

Oh..

1) What of this "300 unit" limit?
2) Does it exist?
3) How many units are there currently in RTW?
4) Is there some way we can leave the old units in for those that want to play MP, but make only the EB units available in SP?

[Ranika]

It is possible to make units region specific. You assign a region with an invisible resource, such as 'Spartan', and then, in the building descriptions, make it so a structure can build a unit, only if that resource is present in a province.

There is apparently a maximum of only 300 units possible to put in, I am fairly sure it has been confirmed to exist, there are a little over 200 units (?) I believe, and we could, potentially, leave in those units, by just not having any structure build them in the campaign map. However, if the limit is real, they'd eat up potentially needed spaces.

[khelvan]

Jerome Grasdyke stated in no uncertain terms that the unit limit was 300 units.

By my count, the current export_descr_units.txt contains 265 units.

We have to start deleting if we want to add many more. We also have to come up with a good system of "shared" units.

Even if we wanted to, there is no possible way to leave old units in for multiplayer play. Those who want to switch back and forth will be advised to have different directories for different mod installations.

[Tazmanius]

Firstly....why don't you contact Gauis Julius of RTR mod fame for some help/pointers re:the resourcing of recruitable units?He has already implemented a region specific Zone of Recruitment for various types to make the player think about his overall strategy/supply lines etc.(There are a few glitches which hopefully be ironed out....No Roman Legion types in Illyria?a major recruitment area historically...and some reported issues with AI recruitment tendencies...although I find enemy armies fairly balanced)

Regarding the removal/shared units.....why not make certain types generic?Peasants for example...as they are pretty much the same all over our gameworld....and,in game,are mainly used as a resource for population transfer by players...to newly conquered towns....an abstract simulation of colonization.
Other units that this could apply to...without studying the Unit texts...are possibly...Generic Phalanx types...Militia/Citizen etc.
Barbarian types...Britons,in many respects(and possibly Germans?)were the same as the Gauls...re:basic warbands etc.
Maybe.by allowing various assorted cultures to have access to generic units,rather than specific cultured ones is a solution.
That way we can have the more specialised cultural units as is/as modified...so as to retain an independent cultural diversity...and add more units as we see fit?
Better to have a generic low level cultural commonality if it allows for more troop types per faction in the long run....than be struggling and juggling with figures/units and possibly coming up short....especially if it becomes possible to mod new factions?

Would also be good if all units could be more historically represented in their numbers?If we use a scale of 1 man=10 ...then we could base unit sizes on historical models....e.g Legionary Cohort=48,Hastati/Principes=60,Triarii=30 etc.
If this was adjusted so that above figures(for these and all factions when adjusted)met the default game level(Large?)...thus 1/2 above numbers...then play on huge...this would allow us to set Barbarian units at 120 for default..and give 240 on huge.This would more accurately reflect Historical feeling of Rome battling large Tribal armies.
If possible ,maybe the mod could have a text file/readme army list with recommended structures....Roman,Macedonian etc.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Oh..

1) What of this "300 unit" limit?
2) Does it exist?

Yes. And it is unsurpassable borrowing a patch or expansion.

3) How many units are there currently in RTW?

267 units. But many of them can be retouched, replaced or deleted.

4) Is there some way we can leave the old units in for those that want to play MP, but make only the EB units available in SP?

Nope. If we want to make the MOD correctly we can't. People who want to play the MOD in MP will have to make sure the people they are playing with have the same version of the EB MOD.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

By my count, the current export_descr_units.txt contains 265 units.

You missed a couple. It's 267.

We have to start deleting if we want to add many more. We also have to come up with a good system of "shared" units.

Let's see. If we can have 32 factions, at the most, each having 7 specific units, we will have a total of 224 units. This leaves room for mercs, let's say about 40 merc units. The number of units increases to 274, which leaves space for 36 generic units. I think we can get that balanced...

Even if we wanted to, there is no possible way to leave old units in for multiplayer play. Those who want to switch back and forth will be advised to have different directories for different mod installations.

Agreed. Good points.

[Ranika]

Don't forget to count ships in there, if we use the current ones, how many is that? Eight? Probably more, I haven't bothered to count, it's a stab in the dark, really.

[eadingas]

32 factions? Isn't that way too much... if we diversify it that much, many of the factions will share most units. For example, how many diverse units will there be between, say, northern and southern gauls ? One, two?
I say we first decide how many and what factions will there be, and then we worry about lack of units place...

[Ranika]

If the Gauls were diversified, one would almost definitely by the Aedui Confederacy, they're a must, if there are multiple Gauls. Anyway, multiple Gallic kingdoms would probably share entire armies, the differences would be 'local' units, for their start positions.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Regarding the removal/shared units.....why not make certain types generic?Peasants for example...as they are pretty much the same all over our gameworld....and,in game,are mainly used as a resource for population transfer by players...to newly conquered towns....an abstract simulation of colonization.

We are studying preciselly that.

Other units that this could apply to...without studying the Unit texts...are possibly...Generic Phalanx types...Militia/Citizen etc.
Barbarian types...Britons,in many respects(and possibly Germans?)were the same as the Gauls...re:basic warbands etc.

Nope. No they weren't. That is preciselly what this MOD is all about. Recreation of History. Those ideas correspond to a Roman-centric view of History. There were a lot more professional and elite soldiers within the warring societies of Celtic and Germanic tribes. And even with the Roman-centric biased views, there are Roman excerpts talking about those men. We're not rellying on the stupid "one-size-fits-all" approach of CA.

Maybe.by allowing various assorted cultures to have access to generic units,rather than specific cultured ones is a solution.

Like I said before, we're studying that for basic units (Peasents and Town Watch). Not for others...

That way we can have the more specialised cultural units as is/as modified...so as to retain an independent cultural diversity...and add more units as we see fit?
Better to have a generic low level cultural commonality if it allows for more troop types per faction in the long run....than be struggling and juggling with figures/units and possibly coming up short....especially if it becomes possible to mod new factions?

There is enough room for them all. Even by adding factions up to 32.

Would also be good if all units could be more historically represented in their numbers?If we use a scale of 1 man=10 ...then we could base unit sizes on historical models....e.g Legionary Cohort=48,Hastati/Principes=60,Triarii=30 etc.

This is a good idea. But not using those numbers. I had tought about that to reflect the Manipular Legions and the later Cohort Legion, as well as the differences in veterans in the Early Republican Army.

If this was adjusted so that above figures(for these and all factions when adjusted)met the default game level(Large?)...thus 1/2 above numbers...then play on huge...this would allow us to set Barbarian units at 120 for default..and give 240 on huge.This would more accurately reflect Historical feeling of Rome battling large Tribal armies.

Once again you're incurring in a error. Although some "barbarian" armies were mainly large tribal armies, like in Julius Caeser conquest of Gaul, this was caused because the Gauls had just been in a large, long civil war in which most of it's professional core of soldiers had been killed. That was one of the reasons Caeser jumped on that opportunity. The other was the fact that he could sow dissent among those tribes and reap the beneficts.

If possible ,maybe the mod could have a text file/readme army list with recommended structures....Roman,Macedonian etc.

Of course. But all in due time...

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

32 factions? Isn't that way too much... if we diversify it that much, many of the factions will share most units. For example, how many diverse units will there be between, say, northern and southern gauls ? One, two?

You haven't read PSYCHO V's posts, have you? You should...

He could find more than 10 just for those...

I say we first decide how many and what factions will there be, and then we worry about lack of units place...

Nope, because we can't MOD factions yet and we have to keep the MOD running nonetheless.

[eadingas]

I didn't say stop modding, I said stop worrying :)
10 different units for each Gallic faction? Really? Wow.
But still, 32 factions or any such number... just think how long a turn will be :)

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I didn't say stop modding, I said stop worrying :)
10 different units for each Gallic faction? Really? Wow.

I didn't said 10 for every Gaul faction. I said 10 for Northern and Southern tribes. There were several in the north and several in the south.

But still, 32 factions or any such number... just think how long a turn will be :)

But it will be sooooo good....

If it can be made, that is what we'll do.

[DeadRunner]

32 factions ..............................................

in all the map

cold the marius reform be used to control the units like a era change ???like the 3 eras in medieval ???

[eadingas]

Hmm I have very serious doubts about playability of that many factions, especially given the restrictions on AI ... what this would end with would be player faction quickly conquering all the multitude of small factions and winning the game in a jiffy. That, or there would be constant chaos with nobody reaching any advantage on the map. Plus, the turns would take ages to end. The idea scares me. Do you guys still want to _play_ this mod, or just gaze in wonder at its many marvels?

(where did the 32 number come from, anyway? Isn't this just somebody's fantasy?)

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Hmm I have very serious doubts about playability of that many factions, especially given the restrictions on AI ... what this would end with would be player faction quickly conquering all the multitude of small factions and winning the game in a jiffy.

That won't happen because the player will have more difficulty to expand than in RTW's release version. In the EB MOD, it is already much harder to expand. And we're just at the beggining.

That, or there would be constant chaos with nobody reaching any advantage on the map.

This is more likely, because of the harder expansion, but not that much, because there will be a turning point in which some factions can get an edge on others.

Plus, the turns would take ages to end. The idea scares me. Do you guys still want to _play_ this mod, or just gaze in wonder at its many marvels?

What's the problem of much harder campaigns? It will increase interest, not lower it. The challenge will be that much greater.

(where did the 32 number come from, anyway? Isn't this just somebody's fantasy?)

I don't think so. IIRC, it's CA info. Hard-coded number.

[eadingas]

That won't happen because the player will have more difficulty to expand than in RTW's release version. In the EB MOD, it is already much harder to expand. And we're just at the beggining.

The player will _always_ expand faster than the AI, unless you give him a handicap, and I don't think it's possible. So the expansion may be slower overall, but it will be definitely easier with more factions than with less.

This is more likely, because of the harder expansion, but not that much, because there will be a turning point in which some factions can get an edge on others.

Oh?

What's the problem of much harder campaigns? It will increase interest, not lower it. The challenge will be that much greater.

The problem is that the hardness will not come from increased challenge, but from the game getting tedious and tiresome. From my gaming experience, many small enemies quickly become a bore, unless the AI is challenging. And we really can't do anything to change that.

I don't think so. IIRC, it's CA info. Hard-coded number.

Good to know.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

The player will _always_ expand faster than the AI, unless you give him a handicap, and I don't think it's possible. So the expansion may be slower overall, but it will be definitely easier with more factions than with less.

Yes, although it's a question for later stages - balancing the game. But by slowing the expansion you'll make life harder for the player everytime he plays the game. He won't rule over Europe in 200BC, only much later in the game.

BTW, you could discuss this with khelvan. He probably can tell you more about economical and strategical factors.

Oh?

Because some factions will always be stronger than others.

In the case of very balanced AI factions, a single battle can decide the long term fate of one faction, by unbalancing it economically and territorially enough for that faction to be crippled in the long run. But in balanced AI factions, it can happen both ways, creating imprevisibility. Probably depending on the opposing general's triats in that particular battle.

From previous experiences, I believe that this kind of balance can be achieved in the MOD. There won't be a roll-over-everyone faction...

The problem is that the hardness will not come from increased challenge, but from the game getting tedious and tiresome. From my gaming experience, many small enemies quickly become a bore, unless the AI is challenging. And we really can't do anything to change that.

But the factions will be very different from RTW's release. And since they are much more, this will enrich the strategical diplomacy game much more.

And I still hope for an improved AI in the Expansion. This MOD will continue to develop after that has been released.

[eadingas]

Because some factions will always be stronger than others.

In the case of very balanced AI factions, a single battle can decide the long term fate of one faction, by unbalancing it economically and territorially enough for that faction to be crippled in the long run. But in balanced AI factions, it can happen both ways, creating imprevisibility. Probably depending on the opposing general's triats in that particular battle.

Oh, that. I see. For a while there I thought you managed to introduce some kind of balancing event in the game :)

But the factions will be very different from RTW's release. And since they are much more, this will enrich the strategical diplomacy game much more.

Hopefully. We shall see. Don't say I didn't warn you if things go wrong, though :P

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Oh, that. I see. For a while there I thought you managed to introduce some kind of balancing event in the game :)

Nope. AFAIK...

Hopefully. We shall see. Don't say I didn't warn you if things go wrong, though :P

LOL We shall see if that happens and I'm confident we all shall sort the problems out...

[khelvan]

BTW, you could discuss this with khelvan. He probably can tell you more about economical and strategical factors.

This is as good a place as any to begin discussion on the current choices we have for playing with the AI.

I will state it bluntly, so we can be sober about this. Until CA decides to expose the AI routines AT LEAST as far as MTW, we will not be able to make EB a truly challenging game for the human player because the AI will not be able to adopt to the new population/economic balance we put in place. We cannot edit unit purchasing routines, build routines, and things that would have allowed us to change the AI to suit our needs. Instead, we get two silly hard-coded parameters, and some limited choices to choose from. Really, the AI is not modable at all, and until it is, a comprehensive change like this (or like the other hosted mods) will in the end fail to give a satisfying game experience like we all envision.

So check out my "Petition for the Exposure of AI Build Routines" in the Dungeon, because I fear that a patch which addresses this is the only way we'll reach our long-term goals.

[PSYCHO V]

OK, Verci and I have 2 units to implement. Everything is done (aside from some text that I'm still working on...and balancing) except region limitation.

Who wants to have a go at making them region specific?

Interested parties, I'll need your email.




We'll also need some play testers for balancing. Samnite has done some preliminary stuff.


Cheers

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

OK, Verci and I have 2 units to implement. Everything is done (aside from some text that I'm still working on...and balancing) except region limitation.

Who wants to have a go at making them region specific?

Interested parties, I'll need your email.

You could contact khelvan too, since he is the one investigating the regional availability for units.

We'll also need some play testers for balancing. Samnite has done some preliminary stuff.

I might be able to test them regarding balancing issues, since I'm doing many of the unit stats alteration for the MOD. You have my mail available.