[RTW] Comments, Questions and Wish List

**Fr3Nzy** · 12-21-2005, 15:42

Greetings.

I'm seriously addicted to RTW (with BI and Bug Fixer 2.06), however there's a few well known trends in the campaign that can make it a little samish the umpteenth time round. . .

To get to the point i'll just blurt out a short list of things i would like to see change and why.

1) Egypt - Fantastic faction really and my beef with them has nothing to do with their units (none of which i find to be overpowered). However, as an AI faction they always dominate the Middle East (a cash 'problem' more than a units problem i think) and never engage in naval invasions. I'd much prefer to see the Selucids survive into at least the half way point and would really enjoy Egyptian landings across the Aegean or into Italy or Spain or even into Eastern North Africa (which they seldom ever do, unless provoked, by a human faction there). What's up with this? Is is possible to easily mod the inclination for AI naval invasions or their expansion trends? If so, please tell me how.

2) Scipii AI. Now, sometimes, when they fail to secure Carthage, they do absolutely nothing but build 4 or 5 full stack armies in Capua and let them sit there forever. Why don't they ever march through Julii lands to secure their own piece of Europe or perhaps even naval invade another continent (like Spain or Asia Minor)? Is there a way i can fix this?

3) Giving Regions to the AI. I've heard that you can't do this for some reason, but that is false (i run Version 1.3/1.4). You can negotiate a region gift if the region in question was formerly owned by the recieving faction. I've done this alot. But recently, just before shutting down (and after saving) i tried to give Spain, my long term allies, all of my provinces, all 56 of them, as well as 100 000 denari just for map information and they took offence and declined. I tried this with other factions in exchange for a cease fire and all of them declined. No one wants my world wide empire. Silly. Is there a Diplomacy fix to make giving regions (not as extreme as my example) attractive to the AI?

That pretty much sums up my Campaign peeves. Theres a million Battle Map peeves which are well known to us all, but i won't go into any of that. The AI is often stupid, and likely always will be. . .

Oh and interestingly enough, on the subject of Naval Invasions, in my girlfriends campaign, Macedon had captured Cycrenacia (sp?) the coastal town to the north east of Siwa. I've never seen that happen before and it was refreshing to note.

Finally a question on Campign Difficulty Modes. I've heard they are screwy. I typically play on Hard/Hard. What's the deal here, is that indeed 'hard' or is medium harder? I don't understand the greviance on this. Explain this 'bug' to me please.

Thanks.

Fr3Nzy.

**Kickius Buttius** · 12-21-2005, 15:56

Macedonia sometimes gets Cyrenicia due to rebellion- it isn't because Macedonia mounted any sort of invasion. If a city rebels against the rebels, it reverts to the original owning faction. In the case of Cyrenicia, this is for some reason Macedonia.

I can confirm your experiences with the campaign map. I have also found that, as either the Scipii or the Brutii, taking Caralis causes the Julii to sit in their lands without taking action against Gaul for thirty years or so. At least that has happened in four different games that I have played. It was wonderful playing the Brutii and being attacked, in Greece, by a never ending stream of Gallic armies.

**Nfilheim** · 12-21-2005, 16:40

As for the Spanish not taking your empire for your entire empire, I think the problem is that asking for map information can be considered a hostile action. I've lost alliance (Alliance in Tatters!) by asking to trade map info with my allies. I guess they figure that if you know what they own, it's just the beginning of you figuring out invasion plans to get it for yourself!

I've also seen Macedonia in control of Cyrenaica, nice if they get knocked out of Greece by the Brutii, they remain in the game. I've also seen Greece take over Kydonia (Rhodes), and before in RTW version 1.5 when naval invasions were broke, I saw Numidia nearly eliminate Carthage. They even took the island of Palma and Carthage itself! It was refreshing to see Numidia kicking butt like that.

Dacia also did exceptionally well. They controlled as far west as Iuvavum (I think, above Italy?) and made Germany their protectorate, as far right as the lowest Scythian settlement near Thrace, captured Macedonian cities, as well as Thracian ones, all before being dismantled by the British and Julii. I think they had around 7 or 8 cities at one point, the most I've ever seen them hold.

As for Egypt, I've had games where they marched armies to Lepcis Magna, and took that over, but never went much further to challenge Carthage itself.

**RemusAvenged** · 12-21-2005, 20:52

I think your right and that camping mega-powers is one of the biggest problems with the strategy phase. If they'd just get off their ass they could rock, (or at least be a ball to duel) but they just sit and ruin any chances for themselves. If Scipii or Julii want to horde at home the least they can do is smack down SPQR

I think I've seen Scipii not invade Carthage and Julii not fight Gaul more then not. Isn't that the sole reason they exist? Atleast Brutii usually never fails to get into Greece.

As for Egypt I think they are the most worthless sack. Great armies and potential but way too far in BFE.

I'm going to try RTR 6.2 to see if this helps alleviate some of the problems.

**Fr3Nzy** · 12-22-2005, 03:08

Thanks for the info on Cyrenicia, Kickius Buttius. Strange quirk, i was hoping they had indeed naval invaded it. Oh well.

I recently changed the prefers_naval_invasions no to prefers_naval_invasions yes in descr_sm_factions.txt for all factions except Scythia, Germania and Gaul then took the fog of war away with the console command and sat there, as the Brutii, 'end turning' for 100 years. I didn't see a single naval invasion (i hadn't seen before). . . although Carthage and Greece made repeated drop offs onto Sicily to stave of Scipii incursions, which worked, and thus effectively 'broke the Scipii' (who hoarded in Capua yet again. . .)

*head butts wall*

Oh, the 'Balanced Smith' and 'Trader Caesar' lines in another file, do they actually have a discernable effect in game? For instance, if i changed the more modest factions to 'something Caesar' or 'Ghengis and say made Egypt a 'Trader Builder' would that make for differing campaign trends?

Finally RemusAvenged, RTR (Rome Total Realism) looks very sweet indeed. However it seems from my recent investigation of their site, that it's only for RTW 1.2. Is this the case or is it compatible with 1.3/1.4 or even the latest patch?

Love to know.

**Ludens** · 12-22-2005, 16:57

Welcome to the Org, Fr3Nzy

All the problems you describe can be solved with the 1.5/1.6 upgrade that can be found here.

As for your question on R:TR: the new patches (and 1.5/1.6 followed very shortly on 1.3/1.4) have not been out long enough for the modmakers to port their mods. IIRC the next version of R:TR will be either for BI or for R:TW 1.5.

**Seasoned Alcoholic** · 12-23-2005, 19:56

Originally Posted by Fr3Nzy

Oh, the 'Balanced Smith' and 'Trader Caesar' lines in another file, do they actually have a discernable effect in game? For instance, if i changed the more modest factions to 'something Caesar' or 'Ghengis and say made Egypt a 'Trader Builder' would that make for differing campaign trends?

These are AI construction / recruitment biases. The AI will use them as a preference for these purposes, but will use some common sense when and where necessary.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

AI Construction and Recruitment Biases

[EDIT:]IMO, you should change the default construction / recruitment biases as you see fit, the default ones offer little to the differentiation of a campaign.