Distance to Capital

[iamme]

This makes me very angry. I have cities revolting purely off of this. How can I remove or at least nerf this?

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Ah, everyones favorite answer...

[soibean]

make your capital as centralized as possible, build happiness buildings, put more soldiers in your cities... the usual stuff

[Kugutsu]

Im pretty sure its hardcoded, so you cant nerf it. If you know what you are doing, you can increase the happiness bonus given to you by buildings to minimise the effect.
Or let them revolt, and when you recapture them, slaughter the inhabitants. That'll teach them to be revolting, and it will keep them quiet until they breed back up to capacity again...

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Im pretty sure its hardcoded...

And there it is...

...If you know what you are doing, you can increase the happiness bonus given to you by buildings to minimise the effect.

I usually double the garrison happiness and add law to educational buildings.

[Kugutsu]

Personally I think distance to capital is no bad thing. In those days, if a province was 500 miles or more from the capital, its only natural that it would only feel loosely affiliated.
Far more annoying for me is squalour. Rather than reaching a point where it negatively affects order, it should instead create massive growth penalties, so the population effectively stops growing. But I have said this before in another thread...

[iamme]

really?.........

Just so you know im talking about the seleucid start position where in some cities there is an 80% penalty.
..........................

[Foot]

really?.........

Just so you know im talking about the seleucid start position where in some cities there is an 80% penalty.
..........................

There is a point to that you know, the seleucids had a hard time keeping their eastern most provinces from rebelling.

Foot

[Geoffrey S]

really?.........

Just so you know im talking about the seleucid start position where in some cities there is an 80% penalty.
..........................

Seleucids are meant to be tough. In the West there's the threat from the Ptolemies and the various other successor states, to the east the steppe can be a constant pressure. You can try to hang on to both, but if that isn't feasible it may be more worthwhile to focus on one or the other, and let the rest rebel; conquer those areas again later on, once at least one border is more secure.

[iamme]

but then the seleucid victory conditions would be close to impossible. look how spread out your empire would have to be not to bash EB, but in RTR there were so many +happy buildings you could build quickly that it never was a prob. so what buildings should I build. please be specific.

P.S. Smiles are cool!

[Kugutsu]

There are loads of building that give happiness. From memory:
Roads
Walls
Temples
Sanitation
Government (type 1 is normally better than type 4...)
healers
Garrisons
games fields

this list is by no means exhaustive. Read the building descriptions in game, and work out whats best to build.
One thing: Dont think you can win quickly with EB. You cant. You need to play a long game, and for seleukia that might mean sacrificing provinces and picking them up again later. The goal of EB is realism, and realistically a huge empire will be hard to hold together. You need to work at it, and probably have very large garrisons to make your presence felt near the fronteirs. Thats how it would have been...

[iamme]

hmph.........

Ok my friend you have inspired me.

I SHALL PERSEVERE

[Geoffrey S]

but then the seleucid victory conditions would be close to impossible. look how spread out your empire would have to be not to bash EB, but in RTR there were so many +happy buildings you could build quickly that it never was a prob. so what buildings should I build. please be specific.

Yes, the seleucid victory conditions would be difficult. But remember that historically, that empire only got smaller as time progressed, losing territory to Parthia, Romans and many others, and was consistently plagued by rebellions. It may be impossible to hold on to all the territories you get at the start, but the best solution is to tighten your empire: decide which provinces are most profitable near your heartlands, concentrate on those, and let the rest go their own way. Build up the economy in the centre, make a solid base for later conquests, form a core army. After that you can think about conquering other factions or areas you've lost, and it'll be much easier to keep order in those areas since you'll be conquering gradually, rather than having to upgrade numerous provinces in one go. Above all, take your time and don't be afraid to abandon provinces costing more effort to hold on to than they're worth.

[Lord Gruffles]

Ok, now you're all making me want to try the Seleukids. I don't think I've ever played them past 20 years (just because I like to start from scratch not have an empire handed to me.)

I've sort of equated EB's Seleukid Empire to BI's Western Roman Empire. You get a big mess to try to fix/hold on to.

Hey, someone has been reading the faction description! No fair!

I can neither confirm nor deny this!

[Lord Gruffles]

really?.........

Just so you know im talking about the seleucid start position where in some cities there is an 80% penalty.
..........................

The first thing I do as the Seleucids is move my capital to Babylonia.

Even Alexandrai knew the key to his empire was in Babylonia! ;)

[Teleklos Archelaou]

The first thing I do as the Seleucids is move my capital to Babylonia.

Even Alexandrai knew the key to his empire was in Babylonia! ;)

Hey, someone has been reading the faction description! No fair!

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

Hey, someone has been reading the faction description! No fair!

Me too! I spent a big amount of my playing time in my first campaign to read all these nice detailed descriptions, especially the ones of the numerous new wonders. This added quite a lot to the gaming fun. The descriptions are really priceless. And reading the faction description is a must-do for a new campaign, of course.

[DeathEmperor]

The win conditions for the Seleukids are incredible, but not impossible. I'm playing a h/m campaign as them and I have to say it's the most fun I've had playing a campaign in ANY Total War game, mod, or expansion.

I decided to try and keep the whole empire together, and it was difficult to say the least. I was at war the Ptolemaioi from the get-go and I actually lost a few cities to them before my armies got to the front and kicked them back to Egypt. In 255 b.c. the Parthians and Baktrians rebelled at the same time and I had a war in both the south and the east (Pontics broke away but never attacked and the Hayasdan remained loyal throughout it all).

Right now it's been 15 game years since then and I still haven't destroyed any of those factions, although I have conquered and burned a few of their cities.


Most of time is now spent building up my cities and their defences, reforming my armies, and consolidating what conquests I've made. EB rocks!