More than a weak tendency?

[Eminos]

Hi.

The year is 233 B.C. and I'm seriously thinking that maybe I should quit this one too. I'm playing as Sabyn for the second time in a row v. 0.81 H/M difficulty. The reason for these second thoughts is that the "story" from my first try seems to repeat itself. The Seleukids are all over the place, and no one can stop them. Of course two campaigns, and not played to the end, is not enough to draw an conclusions with at least some relevance. Therefore I've got two questions:

1) Am I the only one experiencing a weak Ptolemaic empire? (and a Seleukid empire that seems to have some kind of jet engine put into their economy, that wasn't there in v 0.80)

2) Is there any hope that some historic event after 233 B.C. will turn things around? I know that 241 B.C. didn't do the trick as it used to in 0.80, at least not in the two campaigns I've tried so far. The Baktrians are now more concerned about their more powerful neighbours. I really think thats great, because I agreed with those who thought that the Baktrians were a bit overpowered in v. 0.80.

I realize that at least one "line" in this post is unnecessary, a bit provocative, but hey its boring if we always must keep our spontaneity "in the closet". Apologies to the EB-team, just got to let of some steam, (frustrated I blame it on the fact that I'm a swede who is longing for i.e. sunny and hot weather, but all we can do outside at present time is some of these (trying to sqeeze in some smileys as you can see). If I were a member of the EB-team I think I would go like this after reading this post. Those players out there simply are impossible to satisfy ;-). At the same time, hopefully, we're at least contributing by testing the mod and noticing small things and sometimes serious "issues". As I said earlier this post may be nothing, since the statistics is very bad. Two campaigns is nothing.
The fantastic EB-mod is getting better and better, but one of the hardest things to get right/optimal (whatever that may be, and I'm not the one to tell since I'm not a professional historian) is game balance. I guess that some factions really should have a hard time if you don't put in quite modest winning conditions. Now I'm beginning to slip of topic so I better stop.

[Zaknafien]

Ive played three campaigns in .81 up to circa 220 BCE or later, and have two balanced out Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires in both. I am very pleased with AI expansion in .81 right now.

Youre not playing on the recommended difficulty settings, for one thing which may affect your outcomes.

[Eminos]

OK, I was aware of that the difficulty settings wasn't the recommended ones. I will try switching to VH/M to see if it makes any difference. I doubt it. What faction did you play? I've got this bad feeling that as long as you are far away the AI balancing is better. I will test that. My guess is that there will be no problem with the balance between the Ptolemaic and Selekid empire if I play as Lusotania (wrong spelling?) e.g. or another faction far away from them. Once again not scientific at all, just a feeling based on earlier campaigns in v.0.80.

[Eminos]

What I would think be interesting to know is if someone has played as Sabyn on the right difficulty settings, and if they experienced nice balance between the two supposed giants "in the hood", Ptolies and Seleukids.

[Foot]

OK, I was aware of that the difficulty settings wasn't the recommended ones. I will try switching to VH/M to see if it makes any difference. I doubt it. What faction did you play? I've got this bad feeling that as long as you are far away the AI balancing is better. I will test that. My guess is that there will be no problem with the balance between the Ptolemaic and Selekid empire if I play as Lusotania (wrong spelling?) e.g. or another faction far away from them. Once again not scientific at all, just a feeling based on earlier campaigns in v.0.80.

You have quite literally answered your own question. Of course the game is going to be different if the player is acting in the area. Firstly the AI will zoom after the player as soon as it possibly can. Secondly, a few of the Ptolemaioi's provinces rebel to Saba control, which the player can utilise to a far better degree than the AI can. Ptolemaioi is the only faction at the beginning of the game that has any chance to subdue the Seleucid machine, and I imagine having a strong Saba doesn't aid them there.

Foot

[Dumbass]

I have also noticed a weak ptolemaioi when playing as the maks; the seleucids just steam rolled them and Pontos (R.I.P). If it wasn't for my invasion of asia minor, huge money boosts to ptolemaioi, huge money decreases from seleucids and settlements bribed from seleucids and given to ptolemaioi, I'm pretty sure they'd be dead. They're still in quite a bad situation right now. I think a way to balance this would be to make the small factions on the edge of the seleucid empire stronger, creating more resistance.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

I just want to tell that my AI behaves much better in my .81 Makedonian campaign than in my .80 Roman campaign. It's 257 BC now and...

- Sweboz, Lusotannan, Getai, Pontos, Hayasdan don't just sit around, but managed to conquer at least one province (Heruskolandam & Sucum-Murgi), or even two or three (Getai with Scorcouw and Pannonia, Pontos with Galatia and another one, Hay expanded northwards mostly). The four were completely immobile in .80

- Aedui and Arverni behaving well as they did in .80, but now also going for Massalia

- Carthage didn't conquer as much as in .80, only two desert hinterland provinces

- Rome has serious problems now. They conquered Region and the Aemilia, but since I drove Epeiros into the sea, they lost both Capua and even Roma to them!

I can go and cheat a bit and look up for the rest if anyone is interested.

[Dooz]

Playing as the Romans, with no interference in Ptolly-Seleuko affairs, I've seen the same thing. AS is totally dominant, and the Ptollies are all but kicked out from that whole area north of the arabian peninsula, only 2-3 cities left and doesn't look like they'll be holding up.

[Eminos]

You have quite literally answered your own question. Of course the game is going to be different if the player is acting in the area. Firstly the AI will zoom after the player as soon as it possibly can. Secondly, a few of the Ptolemaioi's provinces rebel to Saba control, which the player can utilise to a far better degree than the AI can. Ptolemaioi is the only faction at the beginning of the game that has any chance to subdue the Seleucid machine, and I imagine having a strong Saba doesn't aid them there.

Foot

First of all I would like to thank everybody for the response. I'm glad I didn't make a total fool out of myself, since the post wasn't written in a calm mood. Secondly I find the above answer quite interesting, since I've never realized that my style of playing is dead wrong. I've always hoped that it would be possible, playing as a small faction, to "sniff around" grabbing opportunities while the "big guys" are busy killing each other. I definitely experienced that the human player seemed to be number one on their "list of hate" but I wasn't sure. Definitely time for a change in strategy. Another thing I want to say is that I don't think that Saba under my leadership, given the style I've used, can be something negative for the Ptolemaioi compared to a AI controlled Saba. I've often given the rebellious province straight back to them and allied with them, even given them some money.
Finally, I just notice that the answer to my main question need some more statistics. There are some support for "the weak tendency" but also the opposite. I started a new campaign with the recommended difficulty settings. It's too early to say anything about that really, but this time it seems to have started off a little bit better for the Ptolemaioi. One thing that may save us, i.e. me and the Ptolemaioi, is that the Baktrians declared war upon the Seleucids during my last turn for today. Hopefully the Seleucids will get a little bit busy in the far east.

[Gazius]

I usually see the two forces balance out pretty well, sometimes the seleukids get a good push, but the ptolemy eventually spring up again to fight back, usually after the AS gets stabbed in the back.

[kevinus]

Youre not playing on the recommended difficulty settings, for one thing which may affect your outcomes.

What are the recommended settings?

Thanks

K

[Krusader]

In 0.8 and before it was the Ptolemaioi who were the steamrollers. However I think the reason they might be "worse" now is that the recruitment zone for Kleruchoi Agema (their elite phalanxes) was reduced from a whopping 32 provinces to 4.

I do think though, that perhaps making the factions around AS more hostile to them might work.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

Yup - the steamroller faction switched from the Ptollies to the Seleukids.



The Casse are finally moving.

[Tellos Athenaios]

I do think though, that perhaps making the factions around AS more hostile to them might work.

Nah, I don't think so. Parthians are now much more inclined to rebel, and that doesn't really stop AS from steamrollering on. Deviding the government cash differently might work though.

[Lysandros]

In 0.8 and before it was the Ptolemaioi who were the steamrollers. However I think the reason they might be "worse" now is that the recruitment zone for Kleruchoi Agema (their elite phalanxes) was reduced from a whopping 32 provinces to 4.

That is exactly the same I think, too. In my opinion, this reduction was too radical as it does not only affect the recruitment of the Klerouchoi Agema but other units as well.

[Tellos Athenaios]

What are the recommended settings?

Thanks

K

Campaign VH
Battle M
The reason the battle part is recommended to be played on M is that neither you nor the AI receives any unfair bonuses.