Suggestion - Raising the Troops

[Foot]

Firstly a great thanks to the many hands who have worked and are still working on the great mod that is Europa Barbarorum. The depth of the traits and ancilleries makes for a game which is more fascinating and involving that I could ever of dreamed RTW to be.

Anyway, I've currently been playing as the Casse and there are a couple of points that I would like to raise.

Firstly, there is the question of levy troops and standing armies. I understand that the economic position especially at the beginning is meant to be difficult so a standing army, of course, would be very expensive. However this does leave your position very dangerous. Take the Casse, with one province and three family members they either have to expand very quickly or dispand all their troops just to make money (I use the Casse as an example because it is they who I have played the most). Either way you end up with a very small army and considering that there are two eleutheroi armies of 1100 and 600 troops this ends up as a very difficult opening gambit for the player, in fact you either make it or you don't, there is no try. Having a small professional force makes sense, but what of the farmers and other non-military workers who could easily make up a defensive force if the enemy army was marching into your territory? There are of course the Lugoae are of course meant to be those people, the levied troops (or at least thats what I understood from the description text), yet as they take a turn to build, by the time you are aware of the enemy coming you've only got a turn left, not enough time to raise an army to withstand 1700 troops by anyones measurment.

I was suprised, after all the many expostions on the Celtic armies of the day, that there were no troops with 0-turn recruitment. If I understand correctly the Lugoae are farmers by trade but act like a militia in times of need - an ancient day TA (for the British out there). If there is a reason for not having this in place then I am sure that it is a good one (none of EB is half-arsed, of that I am sure). However until such time I would like to put forward a few of proposals my self.

1.You give the Lugoae the lowest upkeep you are willing to give (but keep them at 1-turn recruitment) which would allow a large number of these fine troops to be kept on ready alert for when the enemy come a knocking. This would represent the farmers being called up as a defense force and allows for the keeping of 1-turn recruitment. However it does mean that these guys could be used as a cheap invasion force and would be overly used above what they historically would have been used as. Not a good idea, in my opinion.

2. You give the Lugoae 0-turn recruitment and a much lower recruitment cost but a very very high upkeep. This would represent the farmers being called up for service, but because they are being called up they cannot work in the fields which would put a dent in the economics of a province quite severely. This also stops them from being used as a cheap invason force that idea no.1 brought in. Not too bad.

The third idea is based upon that massive scripting machine that you have working in the background and so I'm not sure if it is even possible to do, but perhaps it is.

3. When an enemy, neutral (possibly allied if they don't have military access) enters one of your provinces then a number of units of Lugoae are generated automatically in the province centre. These troops last for one turn only (which stops them from being used as a cheap invasion force) and are deleted at the beginning of your next turn. If an enemy army is still in the province then Lugoae troops are again generated in the province capital (but only after the other ones are deleted).

Obviously an unlimited number would not be avaliable so a couple of points on the number that can be spawned.
- The number of Lugoae troops spawned cannot be more than x% of the enemy army(s).
- The number of Lugoae troops spawned cannot be more than x% of the total population of the province capital (x is dependent on type of government perhaps)
- After the battle x% of the casulties inflicted on the Lugoae troops are deducted from the total population of the province capital. (x is whatever the percentage that the capital population represents of the total province population)
-Some sort of economic hit should apply here. Perhaps give a bad harvest that turn.
- Possible bonuses from traits and ancillaries for General in command of province.

Personally I really like the feel of the third idea, but whether it is possible or worth the effort I don't know.

The second point that I just wanted to add voice to is that there must be an easier way of getting a spy or diplomat across water than building a entire fleet of ships. Perhaps a ship unit that is very cheap and can only carry agents, or, if possible, give the agents the ability to walk on water, they must have the ability to get a chartered boat across the channel, or do traders not take old men and shadowy people in their boats anymore?

However, I must say that the Open Beta is far better than I had possibly imagined. You all rock EB members.

Foot

[Malrubius]

The second point that I just wanted to add voice to is that there must be an easier way of getting a spy or diplomat across water than building a entire fleet of ships. Perhaps a ship unit that is very cheap and can only carry agents, or, if possible, give the agents the ability to walk on water, they must have the ability to get a chartered boat across the channel, or do traders not take old men and shadowy people in their boats anymore?

However, I must say that the Open Beta is far better than I had possibly imagined. You all rock EB members.

Foot

Thanks for the feedback!

I can make diplomats and spies move further, but not across open water. I think some type of cheap defenseless transport is in order, here. Maybe we'll have that figured out for a later version.

[Simetrical]

The problem would be allowing agents to use it but not armies.

[Dunhill]

I like the ideas about cheap farmer troop call ups. It sounds very realistic and solves the standing army costs suffered by some of the factions. I'd say its a good solution.

[CorporateSlave]

I like the idea as well, especially if the third type is possible. Good call!

I think such units should only be available to "home countries", such as those that have type 1 government, reason being that farmers from an allied tribe to yours would not automatically wish to die to protect their lands, or maybe the % and quality of troops should decrease based on the government type (home countries get the best levy). Newly conquered lands should not provide very much in terms of levy, as the farmers are still upset about the last war.

Quality and combat stats of these units should be sufficiently low to simulate their poor training. In addition to spearmen it would be good to have some archers or skirmishers, because not everyone would be able to afford a spear, and young boys and old men might prefer the less strenous exercise of the bow.

Also, Romans should not get very many soldiers that way, as they rely more on professional soldiers, especially late in the era. Carthaginians often use mercenaries, so I doubt the farmers would be very excited to protect them. The nomadic people, like Sauromatae or Yeuzhi, can probably get many excellent horsemen and horsearchers that way, because many regular folks are hardened by life on the steppe over there.

I always wanted a feature like that implemented in the game. It's a lot more realistic than forcing the barbarians to maintain a large standing army. Plus, it will be a lot harder to conquer the world quickly that way, and prolong the enjoyment.

Unfortunately, I don't know that much about the Gaulish Wars. But for the historians on the Board, I have a question - when Caesar invaded, did the common folks rise against the Romans, or did they still consider it an extension of the old inter-tribal warfare/dynasty struggle?

[Dayve]

The idea of using scripting to call up troops in times of need i think personally is a wonderful one... Is it possible?

[Sdragon]

Just sounds like another poplulation stripping trap for the ai to fall into to me.

[Foot]

It doesnt effect the population unless the troops lose casulties and only a small percentage of those casulties would be translated to a drop in population (these are people from the fields the town). Therefore there would be no drop in the population. In fact, the AI would hardly be able to use it because their populations are so low to begin with. If they are hitting 400 population then that would translate into 200 extra troops in the form of militia if the province comes under attack.

Foot

[LorDBulA]

Idea number 3 is not possible.
I wish that RTW scripts where so flexible.
We cant disband/destroy units by script.

[Sartaq]

I agree with the idea of allowing large, cheap forces to be called up faster. The no standing army mechanic is somewhat broken without that ability IMHO.

[Teutobod II]

I like the idea as well, especially if the third type is possible. Good call!


Quality and combat stats of these units should be sufficiently low to simulate their poor training. In addition to spearmen it would be good to have some archers or skirmishers, because not everyone would be able to afford a spear, and young boys and old men might prefer the less strenous exercise of the bow.

in Germania everybody was actually armed and ready - except for the slaves everyone reaching "manhood" was given a spear and shield by his clan

[Hildico]

Is it possible to implement 0 turn recruitment for selected units only?

If it is then Foot's second recruitment suggestion seems like the best option to me (although it might end up seeming a bit weird if you end up with some sort of peasant mob costing more in upkeep than elite heavy cavalry, say)

As another suggestion, in addition to the existing mercenaries (professional soldiers for hire) in a province, recruitable by anyone, could you have some other low level units available only to the province owner (possibly culture and/or government dependent) that would represent the local militia being called up?

[Ludens]

I think the problem is not so much creating easy-to-recruit militias, but preventing the A.I. from spamming them all over the place, depleting its own populations and bankrupting itself with the upkeep.

It would be nice if we could simulate garrisons and militias, but neither the game engine nor the A.I. are suited to it.

[Spitful]

Just give the militia 0 movement points so theyre stuck in cities.

[Ludens]

Just give the militia 0 movement points so theyre stuck in cities.

It might work. However, the A.I. probably won't realize that when it's recruiting them and might end up with immobile stacks. Has anyone ever tried this?

[khelvan]

We can't give a unit 0 movement points, we can only give a named character 0 movement points.

[Byzantine Mercenary]

how about making the militia a family member with the militia as a retinue, he could be really old, say 99 then he would only last 1 turn, you could also reduce his movement allowance a bit to stop him being used for attacks

[Slartibardfast]

Just finished my third go at EB. Arverni, Sweboz and now the Casse for about four or five hours each.

As the Casse (Easy/Medium dificulties) I was actually making a profit by two years (8turns). This came at the expence of no Non-Family Member army units and a disbanded navy, whilst controlling both Southern Brittish provinces and I've only fought one battle.

This position should mean that all the trade fleets from mainland Europe, Scandinavia to the Pillars of Herakles, to the rest of Britain and Ireland and vice versa, and all the trade has to go through my ports. This sea trade rout was far bigger bickies than the 'Amber Road' but added nothing to the economy.

I estimated that I needed an income profit margin of over 6000 per year to support an army capable of dealing with one of, and hopefully both, the stacked rebel armies on my turf with a little left as a bursary for unit replacement and future economic improvement.

So for the last 86 turns I've been building anything that will lead to economic growth or enable poulation growth to built up the economy. During this time no rebel faction or army showed any interest in accepting a bribe, and all non garrison units from the entirity of Greater Britain are presently in my territory. No assasination attempt has been successful either.

The thing is all of this wouldn't be too bad if I'd started with an an army capable of defending my territory and an economy capable of supporting that army plus a tiny bit extra for eventually spending on more units or provincial inprovements.

This would of facilitated several major protracted hard fought military campains with all neighbouring Independants for domination, and repressing the two rebel armies arising from my sickeningly happy provincial population.

As a console playing friend who was sitting with me as we comentated on the Game, "were's the game?"

[Teleklos Archelaou]

You chose to play the Casse, disbanded your army to build up your economy first, and then are unhappy that it's extremely difficult?

It's supposed to be the hardest faction to play in all honesty.

[Malrubius]

I think another option is to have young Barae continue his conquering spree across the British Isles, relying on his skill in battle to see you to victory.

[Dooz]

You chose to play the Casse, disbanded your army to build up your economy first, and then are unhappy that it's extremely difficult?

It's supposed to be the hardest faction to play in all honesty.

I'm currently playing a Casse campaign, and it's actually been quite easy to be honest. I am playing on M/M however. Is there a certain ideal difficulty EB should be played on or was intended for? Or do the same vanilla rules apply?

[Malrubius]

Very hard campaign should give you the most lively AI aggression (especially with Eleutheroi laying siege to your cities). Medium or Hard battles should be fine.

[Dooz]

Very hard campaign should give you the most lively AI aggression (especially with Eleutheroi laying siege to your cities). Medium or Hard battles should be fine.

I don't like the idea of really aggressive Eleutheroi. Perhaps a Hard campaign with Hard battle difficulty will be the best choice for me. The AI doesn't get too crazy with the bonuses in Hard battle difficulty right? Really bad units won't be able to beat really good units of mine?

[Divinus Arma]

IMHO, He does have a decent point on the 0 Turn High upkeep army. There is a big problem with this if the recruitment cost is cheaper than the upkeep for a 0 turn unit: What is to stop the player from just disbanding the army every turn and buying a whole new army? Hypothetically, the player could have a cheap permanent defensive force, also useful for brief incursions into enemy territory.

The 0 turn army should cost the same amount in recruitment as upkeep. This would make a levy army expensive to recruit and expensive to maintain, but still meet the primary needs of an immediate and poorly equipped defense force in times of crisis since a player can generate ten units in 1 turn. Also, this should only be available in the homeland govts type, to reduce exploitation.

Interesting concept. It actually brings to mind the concept of a "seasonal local" force, which, of course, would be your original #2 idea. Because the upkeep is prohibitively expensive, it would make no sense to maintain the army beyond 1 turn. The benefit of this is that we can geographically prohibit the movement and use of a unit. While I can't think of a specific unit that engaged in this type of behavior, the concept of a seasonal local force is this: raised for one season, and disbanded immediately to be replaced by a new "seasonal local force" that has the duty for that season. They would be unable to garrison in forts or cities because of cost, and unable to travel very far outside of a territory because a 1 turn movement restriction would be in place due to this cost.

The obvious crippling drawback is that the AI would abuse this with our current scripting in place. The AI could create ten units from that city each turn, and because money is automatically pumped into its coffers, they could do this every turn AND maintain the previous stack of ten. In ten turns, you would have uncontrollable hordes at your door step! GAH!

[Nagarythe]

I think the best way to play with casse is playing in a very agresive way. First turn you keep all your troops and march forward ictis. With two cities, your economy should be fine. Then, you take barae and march onto the smaller of the two eleutheroi armies. You should defeat them if you are a good general. Then be sure to end your movement on your territory, if not, the other army will attack you. Meanwhile, you should be recruiting more troops in camulosadae. You go back, retrain your units, and take other two units. I went to encounter the other eleutheroi army and the odds where 3:5 against me. But, again, if you play well you should be able to obtain a heroic victory. From now on, you are free to conquer all the isles, no more armies will attack you. But these first battles are decisive, you can't loose any of them.

Furthermore, barae became an excellent character, with the traits "crushes his enemies" and something like "victory agains all odds", so he could improve even more his abilities in the next battles.

[Malrubius]

Furthermore, barae became an excellent character, with the traits "crushes his enemies" and something like "victory agains all odds", so he could improve even more his abilities in the next battles.

Glad to know somebody is getting the "victory against all odds" trait!

[Dooz]

I think the best way to play with casse is playing in a very agresive way. First turn you keep all your troops and march forward ictis. With two cities, your economy should be fine. Then, you take barae and march onto the smaller of the two eleutheroi armies. You should defeat them if you are a good general. Then be sure to end your movement on your territory, if not, the other army will attack you. Meanwhile, you should be recruiting more troops in camulosadae. You go back, retrain your units, and take other two units. I went to encounter the other eleutheroi army and the odds where 3:5 against me. But, again, if you play well you should be able to obtain a heroic victory. From now on, you are free to conquer all the isles, no more armies will attack you. But these first battles are decisive, you can't loose any of them.

Furthermore, barae became an excellent character, with the traits "crushes his enemies" and something like "victory agains all odds", so he could improve even more his abilities in the next battles.

I took a completely different route. I disbanded what I had to, and waited... for a few years I built up my starting town and economy and when I was good and ready, I launched my attack. After about 14 years, I conquered both islands. Then I sent Barae and the men back home... and waited... another few years, and my island stronghold was rolling in cash.... or.... gold coins? A 50,000+ mnai reserve is a good thing. After building up a formidable invasion force, I attacked Europe under the leadership of Barae's grandson and now king, Lugad. And the rest is history...

[Sartaq]

I think the best way to play with casse is playing in a very agresive way.

I agree. It's the most fun way IMO. Make sure you take Ictis first and not Ratae. I learned that the hard way.

[Foot]

The way I played it was to disband my troops and establish an economic stronghold. But after only a couple of years the roaming Eleutheroi armies started to sniff around inside my province. I began to build a defence force to meet them on the field: the Belgae warriors were my solid centre, supported by two units of Lugoae and two units of the archers. First I took out the small army, but recieved a lot of damage from them (six units of javelin wielding skirmishers is not good for morale) so I had to spend a few turns building up my army again. Then I launched an attack on the second, larger, army and won a close victory (600 vs 1100 is fricking tough). Then I took Ratae because I knew that Ictis was about as agressive as a meerkat. I am currently deciding whether to take the easy route and take Ictis or elminate further threats from Yns-mons. The city north of Ratae seems to be quiet for the moment.

I am playing on H/H.

But apart from that I still believe that work should go toward working in a reliable defence force seeing as the economy does not support standing armies.

Personally I would like to see cities making less than they do and have armies less expensive, because the only way to survive is to expand which doesn't really fit well with history, non? It should be less profitable to take a city, but I completely understand that the balance is still being worked upon.

Still, expansion shouldn't be a necessity, it should be a luxury. Damn CA for hardcoding everything. Didn't they realise that geniuses would try to mod their game Ah well, I am sure you will do the best you can.

Keep up the good work.

Foot

[Foot]

Double Post.