Hordes!

**Kraxis** · 09-30-2005, 18:27

Originally Posted by Bob the Insane

Can't spek for CBR of course but in my WRE game I think I have seriously messed things up for myself but try to force wide speard adoption of Christianity....

Yes, in WRE I think it is a far bigger problem. Already racked with widespread unrest and a lousy economy, I think it is better to keep going with the mixed system until you have stabilized the empire. Sadly I can't see where that will go. So far I have been in great trouble several times with cities blowing over with unrest. That has forced me to keep upgrading the buildings for happiness and law. Several cities also have daily games to keep them in line. Alexandria is also problematic with the 44000 inhabitants. No army can keep them down.

It has become a real chore to find suited governors, looking only at law, happiness and unrest factors in his capabilities.

**professorspatula** · 09-30-2005, 18:57

These hordes definitely make the game a bit more interesting. You can't just finish certain factions off without setting yourself up for more troubles from them in the future. It now makes sense if the enemy faction has 2 settlements left, that you take the largest settlement first so when the final one falls, the horde that emerges is smaller. I'd be interested to see if the mods try to expand the map again and add lots more provences. That would dramatically reduce the effectiveness of the horde as a force as it would only be able to make an impact on a smaller proportion of land. Currently hordes can have enough men to take a fair chunk of land or wipe out a large part of your army.

**Kraxis** · 09-30-2005, 19:07

I think the mods would be going in the wrong direction with more settlements. That means less fieldbattles and the Hordes will be weakened severely. What if the Sarmatians, Butgundians and Goths all start with 4 cities. How many chances are there that we would see those and the two starting Hordes on the map? The Hordes would simply be swallowed up by more cities. And with no Hordes we will see a marked decline in the push-effect on the two Roman empires.

**TB666** · 09-30-2005, 19:14

I think CA did the right move with actually reducing the number of provinces instead of increasing them.
So I agree with you Kraxis that more provinces will make horde kinda weak.
Right now they are feared because every settlement is important.

**Mongoose** · 09-30-2005, 19:14

Dumb question:Do hordes slow down after reloading?

**TB666** · 09-30-2005, 19:19

Originally Posted by mongoose

Dumb question:Do hordes slow down after reloading?

In my games, no.

**Steppe Merc** · 09-30-2005, 19:19

Originally Posted by Kraxis

I think the mods would be going in the wrong direction with more settlements. That means less fieldbattles and the Hordes will be weakened severely. What if the Sarmatians, Butgundians and Goths all start with 4 cities. How many chances are there that we would see those and the two starting Hordes on the map? The Hordes would simply be swallowed up by more cities. And with no Hordes we will see a marked decline in the push-effect on the two Roman empires.

Well, I think more provinces are key. They allow expansion of the the map, and make it harder for people to conquer historically difficult lands. Besides, there were a lot more cities than are represented, not less.

And by having more factions, as some mods do, it alows the amount of field battles to be the same, as well as creating "push effects".

**Kraxis** · 09-30-2005, 20:41

Originally Posted by Steppe Merc

Well, I think more provinces are key. They allow expansion of the the map, and make it harder for people to conquer historically difficult lands. Besides, there were a lot more cities than are represented, not less.

And by having more factions, as some mods do, it alows the amount of field battles to be the same, as well as creating "push effects".

I do not agree. Of course there were more cities, more than can ever be put on the map. That is not the point.

The push-effect is the Hordes' incursions into Empire territory. Without the Hordes the barbarians would have a hard time pushing into the Empires. If the Huns and Vandals are soaked up by the increased numbers of Goth, Sarmatian and Burgundian cities (not to speak of Frank and Alemanni cities) then where will the push come from? The Huns and and Vandals are exhausted from their march (most units have returned to peasantry). The Goths, Sarmatians and Burgundians are weakened by losing lots of units and cities (percentagewise). Left are only the western barbarians that so far in my games have done little against the two empires (indeed the Franks have expanded eastwards).

But of course, I cannot and won't stop you from making more cities. It would be a great way to actually see if I'm right or not. And in the end I could personally chose not to play the mods with many cities (though the general trend was towards lots of cities).

**rebelscum** · 09-30-2005, 20:50

Hordes!
you can get some cream for that.

**Steppe Merc** · 09-30-2005, 21:21

Ok, I didn't understand what you meant before. Now I get were you're coming from.

And I admit it's not as big of a deal with the mod I'm with, since there shouldn't be a huge amount of hordes running into the civilized folks. But I can see the desire to do so in BI, however I wish there was a better way to represent them. Can a faction choose to go horde without losing their city? For example, if they know that a huge army is coming, can they go horde, and run away from them? Probably not...

**HoreTore** · 10-07-2005, 02:37

Originally Posted by Kraxis

I do not agree. Of course there were more cities, more than can ever be put on the map. That is not the point.

The push-effect is the Hordes' incursions into Empire territory. Without the Hordes the barbarians would have a hard time pushing into the Empires. If the Huns and Vandals are soaked up by the increased numbers of Goth, Sarmatian and Burgundian cities (not to speak of Frank and Alemanni cities) then where will the push come from? The Huns and and Vandals are exhausted from their march (most units have returned to peasantry). The Goths, Sarmatians and Burgundians are weakened by losing lots of units and cities (percentagewise). Left are only the western barbarians that so far in my games have done little against the two empires (indeed the Franks have expanded eastwards).

But of course, I cannot and won't stop you from making more cities. It would be a great way to actually see if I'm right or not. And in the end I could personally chose not to play the mods with many cities (though the general trend was towards lots of cities).

Well, that depends on where you put those cities. You don't have to increase the number of cities for the barbarians. That would be rather dumb...
You can for example add some new settlements in England, Greece, Italy, Arabia or Spain without affecting the push. And if they're made right, they won't make the empires stronger either.

And if it's possible to add a faction or to, you can actually increase the push by adding them as barbarian horde factions like the Lombardi or Franks.