Org Mobile Site
Thread: Mercenary modifications
I started this on money script tread but don't want to take over their post.From what i have checked , AI has tendency to get all mercenaries in game available and player ends up fighting hordes of those on each turn.
I believe, in addition to unlimited money, mercs are second reason for infinite stacks by AI.
Personally i prefer to fight stacks of elite faction units , then uniformed armies with semi elite mercs units.I want Getai to fight me with mostly Getai units, and KH with theirs, not same armies for both
This is a work in progress , so feel free to add any comments or sugestions.
Since mercenaries appeared to be mess right now, i'm going to start from scratch.
I will run then test with other money scripts too.
I am planing to add some more units gradually, but will take time considering that i don't want to end up at same place that i was at start( fighting stacks of mercenary phalangitai , thureopoi and hippeis).
With final goal to keep game challenging , and slow enough for human player to expirience most of details (ex. celtic reforms )
05/26/07 addition:
-added 30% more units (mostly infantry units)
- units mostly recruitable by regional origin
- for more, see post bellow please
05/28/07 :
- minor balancing of some units spawn rate and amount (some cavalry units were spawning in huge numbers)
- added some mercenaries trying to help Pontus with Sinope.
06/23/07 :
This modification is now available as a part of AI balancing mod , that Redmeth and I worked on in this thread:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=87649
I believe, in addition to unlimited money, mercs are second reason for infinite stacks by AI.
Personally i prefer to fight stacks of elite faction units , then uniformed armies with semi elite mercs units.I want Getai to fight me with mostly Getai units, and KH with theirs, not same armies for both
This is a work in progress , so feel free to add any comments or sugestions.
Since mercenaries appeared to be mess right now, i'm going to start from scratch.
I will run then test with other money scripts too.
I am planing to add some more units gradually, but will take time considering that i don't want to end up at same place that i was at start( fighting stacks of mercenary phalangitai , thureopoi and hippeis).
With final goal to keep game challenging , and slow enough for human player to expirience most of details (ex. celtic reforms )
05/26/07 addition:
-added 30% more units (mostly infantry units)
- units mostly recruitable by regional origin
- for more, see post bellow please
05/28/07 :
- minor balancing of some units spawn rate and amount (some cavalry units were spawning in huge numbers)
- added some mercenaries trying to help Pontus with Sinope.
06/23/07 :
This modification is now available as a part of AI balancing mod , that Redmeth and I worked on in this thread:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=87649
so far this is progress of my campaing with modified mercenary file:
Year is 220 BC, VH/M, huge size units:
These are some armies that i am running into with spies:
Seleukids
Sauromatae
Pahlava
There is several of these 1/2 stacks roaming around in each faction, and if human player tries to attack, AI will gather them up into full stacks before he attacks.
It is good that AI is making switch from starting units to eltes around this period, considering that reform for Gauks and Casse is at 220. If it happens before,those 3 factions would be seriously underpowered and run over in no time.
Stalemate in Greece is quite interesting, all 3 sides have roughly same amount and quality of units.
Getai ...one game they will explode and take 1/4 of the whole map, another they will just stand still.
Sweboz is late, but now they got several stacks, and they are moving(not infinite stacks though)
and this is army size graph :
As you can see almost all armies are sizable with faction size.And when i compared armies sizes with my Makedonian campaing that has regular mercenary script, it's same.
Things to work on :
1.See how to trigger AI for making more armies, without unbalancing factions.(just to make it bigger challenge)
2.Resolve Getai stalling ( i think has to do with tons of cheap units that they have at beggining )
3. Sweboz possibly needs some help to get started, so maybe to add some extra mercs in their starting area
4. Eleutheroi needs to stay strong so factions will use up their original units on them(that way will be encouraged to recruit new elite units faster). Plus they should represent challenge for human player, to prevent blitzing them early in the game. Will see how to get that done.
Year is 220 BC, VH/M, huge size units:
These are some armies that i am running into with spies:
Seleukids
Sauromatae
Pahlava
There is several of these 1/2 stacks roaming around in each faction, and if human player tries to attack, AI will gather them up into full stacks before he attacks.
It is good that AI is making switch from starting units to eltes around this period, considering that reform for Gauks and Casse is at 220. If it happens before,those 3 factions would be seriously underpowered and run over in no time.
Stalemate in Greece is quite interesting, all 3 sides have roughly same amount and quality of units.
Getai ...one game they will explode and take 1/4 of the whole map, another they will just stand still.
Sweboz is late, but now they got several stacks, and they are moving(not infinite stacks though)
and this is army size graph :
As you can see almost all armies are sizable with faction size.And when i compared armies sizes with my Makedonian campaing that has regular mercenary script, it's same.
Things to work on :
1.See how to trigger AI for making more armies, without unbalancing factions.(just to make it bigger challenge)
2.Resolve Getai stalling ( i think has to do with tons of cheap units that they have at beggining )
3. Sweboz possibly needs some help to get started, so maybe to add some extra mercs in their starting area
4. Eleutheroi needs to stay strong so factions will use up their original units on them(that way will be encouraged to recruit new elite units faster). Plus they should represent challenge for human player, to prevent blitzing them early in the game. Will see how to get that done.
Great work here, many thanks.
The diversity of mercs is a good thing, but having them in only limited numbers (no more 3-4 units of the same type available foe recruitment) and having them spawn at greater intervals is the way to go. Also some strong units should be kept limited to only their province of origin. The Thessalian heavy cav only in Thessalia as I remember you could recruit in some neighboring provinces. Thracian Peltasts only in Thrace, Galatians especially wild-men only in Galatia, the Kluddolon perhaps in a few more provinces etc.. The one who gets some good mercs in his army should feel lucky that he got them.
I noticed in this version you reduced the typed of units available, for future versions maybe try and make more types available for recruitment. Just my opinion.
And maybe you could upload the file and tell people where to put the file, I had to search for the file and I had 2 because I play with BI and made a few changes to do that.
Anyway
The diversity of mercs is a good thing, but having them in only limited numbers (no more 3-4 units of the same type available foe recruitment) and having them spawn at greater intervals is the way to go. Also some strong units should be kept limited to only their province of origin. The Thessalian heavy cav only in Thessalia as I remember you could recruit in some neighboring provinces. Thracian Peltasts only in Thrace, Galatians especially wild-men only in Galatia, the Kluddolon perhaps in a few more provinces etc.. The one who gets some good mercs in his army should feel lucky that he got them.
I noticed in this version you reduced the typed of units available, for future versions maybe try and make more types available for recruitment. Just my opinion.
And maybe you could upload the file and tell people where to put the file, I had to search for the file and I had 2 because I play with BI and made a few changes to do that.
Anyway
The code should replace the original code in file "descr_mercenaries" in EB\Data\Campaign\imperial_campaign folder, AFAIK...
Originally Posted by Redmeth:
Great work here, many thanks.
The diversity of mercs is a good thing, but having them in only limited numbers (no more 3-4 units of the same type available foe recruitment) and having them spawn at greater intervals is the way to go. Also some strong units should be kept limited to only their province of origin. The Thessalian heavy cav only in Thessalia as I remember you could recruit in some neighboring provinces. Thracian Peltasts only in Thrace, Galatians especially wild-men only in Galatia, the Kluddolon perhaps in a few more provinces etc.. The one who gets some good mercs in his army should feel lucky that he got them.
I noticed in this version you reduced the typed of units available, for future versions maybe try and make more types available for recruitment. Just my opinion.
Couple of problems there:Great work here, many thanks.
The diversity of mercs is a good thing, but having them in only limited numbers (no more 3-4 units of the same type available foe recruitment) and having them spawn at greater intervals is the way to go. Also some strong units should be kept limited to only their province of origin. The Thessalian heavy cav only in Thessalia as I remember you could recruit in some neighboring provinces. Thracian Peltasts only in Thrace, Galatians especially wild-men only in Galatia, the Kluddolon perhaps in a few more provinces etc.. The one who gets some good mercs in his army should feel lucky that he got them.
I noticed in this version you reduced the typed of units available, for future versions maybe try and make more types available for recruitment. Just my opinion.
- I tried keeping all mercs in pool with delayed spawn (2x, 3x 5x and 10x ), and result is that AI was not making faction units , but rather would park lone general in region with several merc units and wait till they spawn to recruit.
-Some of the factions are have tendency not to recruit cavalry in their barracks or they do it very rarely, for some reason. Namely Aedui, Arverni , Rome, Getai, Lusotannan, Pontus ....
- Rome has enough mnai to build all barracks upgrades before Polybian reforms, so AI never produces Polybian units...
- I am working on "wild men " recruitment, and plan is that they are available in 3 provinces: Galatia, Mrogaedu and Arvernotorg . That way Arverni and Aedui will have some heavier units before reform kicks in.
- For every mercenary unit that recruits ( especially infantry ones) , AI will not recruit one of faction elite units.He will recruit starting lower tier unit though (ex hellenic native sperman..) in their barracks.Thats why i have to slowly bring infantry back into the merc pool... They will replace some of the cavalry eventualy though.
I am trying to change money cap (raise for 50% or 75 %) at present time to see if that encourages them to recruit cavalry in barracks or not.
I would like to see some units available as mercs in certain regions , like Syrian archers , Belgian spearmen, but they are not on merc list and i am not sure if i can use them from faction scripts without messing something up .
Btw, peltastaithrakioi merc are already available in some provinces that have Getai population, adding them in more will get AI buying them over cavalry....Their presence in Makedon areas is historical too, since Phillipos and Perseus allowed them to resettle there after 2nd Makedonian war , hoping to boost recruitment base.
It is still work in progress though, so list will be changed more....slowly , since it is so easy to mess up AI's recruitment balance.
Originally Posted by mlp071:
-Some of the factions are have tendency not to recruit cavalry in their barracks or they do it very rarely, for some reason. Namely Aedui, Arverni , Rome, Getai, Lusotannan, Pontus ....
Poor cost-efficiency ratio I would imagine. The Pontic Katpatuka Asabara have it particularly bad - their price tag is around the level of the Hai and Pahlava archer-cataphracts, but stats are virtually identical to the Mada Asabara...-Some of the factions are have tendency not to recruit cavalry in their barracks or they do it very rarely, for some reason. Namely Aedui, Arverni , Rome, Getai, Lusotannan, Pontus ....
I'd be a bit leery of that sort of return for my Mnai too.
Nice to see work in progress. I agree with Watchman on the cavalry issue. All the factions you mentioned have a very poor quality cavalry pool and/or require highest level MICs or in the case of the Aedui/Arverni two reforms before they can recruit even half decent cavalry.
About Rome I believe they do upgrade to Polybian reforms at some point. They did so in all my campaigns using the money script. It just takes time.
As for the money cap. There is a reason I made it so low in my script. It's very simple. Putting it high, say 100 000 before the first reduction of 30 000, the cumulative effect of the money assistance and their normal income trough trade/mining goes over the top. I dosen't really help to reduce 30 000 from the AI treasury if the have an income of say 80 000 - 100 000 per turn after paying the upkeep for their units.
Next turn once again the same 80 000 - 100 000 and the AI treasury just keeps building. That is the reason I put the "High End" safety of -150 000 to any faction that got 200 000 into their treasury. Some factions never achieve that sort of monster economy, so they don't really need High End cap. Some factions actually go static with the High End cap.
Increasing the cap too much, only leads to the AI endlessly recruiting elite stacks and mercs, plus the inevitable bribery of any city you conquer without a governor present.
I noticed this wonderful effect when playing the Casse.
I had over 350 000 mnai in my treasury and suddenly get the event message: Richest faction. Arche Seleukeia. Disabling fog of war I noticed they had something like 14-15 full stacks and numerous smaller ones running all over the place. And still a treasury of over 350 000 mnai and rising.
That sucked on so many levels I started to feel sick. How do you compete against that? And they were not the only ones. Carthies were the richest next turn. Then Rome and Koinon, followed by Baktria...
I'm not saying your idea of increasing the cap is bad. Just wanted to warn of an unfortunate problem that you will have to overcome one way or another.
About Rome I believe they do upgrade to Polybian reforms at some point. They did so in all my campaigns using the money script. It just takes time.
As for the money cap. There is a reason I made it so low in my script. It's very simple. Putting it high, say 100 000 before the first reduction of 30 000, the cumulative effect of the money assistance and their normal income trough trade/mining goes over the top. I dosen't really help to reduce 30 000 from the AI treasury if the have an income of say 80 000 - 100 000 per turn after paying the upkeep for their units.
Next turn once again the same 80 000 - 100 000 and the AI treasury just keeps building. That is the reason I put the "High End" safety of -150 000 to any faction that got 200 000 into their treasury. Some factions never achieve that sort of monster economy, so they don't really need High End cap. Some factions actually go static with the High End cap.
Increasing the cap too much, only leads to the AI endlessly recruiting elite stacks and mercs, plus the inevitable bribery of any city you conquer without a governor present.
I noticed this wonderful effect when playing the Casse.
I had over 350 000 mnai in my treasury and suddenly get the event message: Richest faction. Arche Seleukeia. Disabling fog of war I noticed they had something like 14-15 full stacks and numerous smaller ones running all over the place. And still a treasury of over 350 000 mnai and rising.
That sucked on so many levels I started to feel sick. How do you compete against that? And they were not the only ones. Carthies were the richest next turn. Then Rome and Koinon, followed by Baktria...
I'm not saying your idea of increasing the cap is bad. Just wanted to warn of an unfortunate problem that you will have to overcome one way or another.
Yeah , i am thinking same 150000-200000, with less mercenaries will prevent big number of stacks.
And will hopefully induce AI to get like 30-40% more of the troops , i hope.That would be sort of ideal number.With 100000 cap AI is still little sluggish , with not to many mercs around.
I am finishing extended version of Descr_merc (70% done) then will try it and see if AI needs more encouragment than that.
Should be all known by tommorow night
And will hopefully induce AI to get like 30-40% more of the troops , i hope.That would be sort of ideal number.With 100000 cap AI is still little sluggish , with not to many mercs around.
I am finishing extended version of Descr_merc (70% done) then will try it and see if AI needs more encouragment than that.
Should be all known by tommorow night
If the AI has large empires, and collects revenue 'over the top', shouldn't there be something to spend it on? Historically speaking, some empires did indeed collect 'large' tax revenues, but they ALWAYS found something to spend it on, whether that be troops, large public monuments (or buildings), waste, games, etc
There appears to be a problem with the economic model if such a problem occurs.
Rather than inventing a 'cap', and subtracting money from that which is available, shouldn't the costs be re-scaled, such that anyone with heaps of money can actually spend it on really cool stuff? Maybe some of the 'really cool stuff' is existing buildings and capabilities that is simply too cheap?
In my challenge mod, I multiplied the cost of buildings by 2x up to 20x the existing costs (more at the higher end), and this serves to soak money up. I also increased the costs of troops (recruitment more than maintenance, but whatever).
Just highlighting a different way of thinking about the problem, rather than artificial caps on revenue.
Cheers,
Hunter
There appears to be a problem with the economic model if such a problem occurs.
Rather than inventing a 'cap', and subtracting money from that which is available, shouldn't the costs be re-scaled, such that anyone with heaps of money can actually spend it on really cool stuff? Maybe some of the 'really cool stuff' is existing buildings and capabilities that is simply too cheap?
In my challenge mod, I multiplied the cost of buildings by 2x up to 20x the existing costs (more at the higher end), and this serves to soak money up. I also increased the costs of troops (recruitment more than maintenance, but whatever).
Just highlighting a different way of thinking about the problem, rather than artificial caps on revenue.
Cheers,
Hunter
Hunter, in my script the "cap" is the point where the AI stops receiving bonus money, after they go under again bonus money will be received again depending on the various conditions (first 20 years 1200 for everyone to build up and then depending on the number of provinces different bonuses).
Originally Posted by Southern Hunter:
If the AI has large empires, and collects revenue 'over the top', shouldn't there be something to spend it on? Historically speaking, some empires did indeed collect 'large' tax revenues, but they ALWAYS found something to spend it on, whether that be troops, large public monuments (or buildings), waste, games, etc
There appears to be a problem with the economic model if such a problem occurs.
Rather than inventing a 'cap', and subtracting money from that which is available, shouldn't the costs be re-scaled, such that anyone with heaps of money can actually spend it on really cool stuff? Maybe some of the 'really cool stuff' is existing buildings and capabilities that is simply too cheap?
In my challenge mod, I multiplied the cost of buildings by 2x up to 20x the existing costs (more at the higher end), and this serves to soak money up. I also increased the costs of troops (recruitment more than maintenance, but whatever).
Just highlighting a different way of thinking about the problem, rather than artificial caps on revenue.
Cheers,
Hunter
In principle this is sound advice. Just one problem, RTW AI. For the AI factions with the exception of the Eleutheroi their primary focus is always troops. Recruited or mercenary.If the AI has large empires, and collects revenue 'over the top', shouldn't there be something to spend it on? Historically speaking, some empires did indeed collect 'large' tax revenues, but they ALWAYS found something to spend it on, whether that be troops, large public monuments (or buildings), waste, games, etc
There appears to be a problem with the economic model if such a problem occurs.
Rather than inventing a 'cap', and subtracting money from that which is available, shouldn't the costs be re-scaled, such that anyone with heaps of money can actually spend it on really cool stuff? Maybe some of the 'really cool stuff' is existing buildings and capabilities that is simply too cheap?
In my challenge mod, I multiplied the cost of buildings by 2x up to 20x the existing costs (more at the higher end), and this serves to soak money up. I also increased the costs of troops (recruitment more than maintenance, but whatever).
Just highlighting a different way of thinking about the problem, rather than artificial caps on revenue.
Cheers,
Hunter
I dosen't matter what goody expensive city improvements are available, their primary focus is always military. They will keep recruiting until they run out of money or population. And with the money and population scripts neither will ever happen.
Plus, the downside is that if building and troop prices are increased, the human player which receives no cash assistance will never be able to build the kind of infrastructure that gives them a fighting chance against a large AI faction.
You can be the best tactician in world but no matter how good you are five or six stacks of enemy elites during the same turn is more than a half stack of mediocre troops can handle. Unless you use all slinger armies.
And at that point the game becomes more of a chore than a game. How many AARs and games have been abandoned to the AI stack parades?
Historically, only Rome fielded a large number of standing armies and that was in the Imperial Era. All other nations had a core of professional troops as the center of their army and then used levies and mercenaries to bolster their fighting power during large campaigns.
When the war was over those levies went home to continue farming or whatever else they had been doing before the war. During the Republic, Rome did the same. Land grants to veteran troops got them back to the general population. And while some troops did re-enlist, those where more akin to the professional core troops of other nations.
I don't mind AI full stacks. I just think they should be fewer and further in between. And not all elite units either. And when they loose one, It should really hurt. Not just be a minor annoyance that gets responded to by sending four or five fully elite stacks the next turn. And even if that was possible for some factions, the AI should not be able to keep doing that indefinately. Sooner or later they should face the reality of having no one to recruit and no money to do the recruiting with.
Had Trajan lost the legions he took with him to Dacia, without conquering it, I doubt very much he would have tried again. And certainly not in the next three months after his defeat. He might not have tried at all. And loosing that many men will take decades to recover from. Not three months.
@The Errant:
1. You’re right about the importance of heavy losses to ancient states/empires. When Romans lost 2 armies in 105 BC in battles against Germanic tribes (some 80.000 men!), that, coupled with some other wars that dragged manpower and changes in agriculture structure (number of free peasants decreased in favor of great slaver-powered latifundia), led to introduce marian reforms in recruitment system, when there no more conscripts obliged to arm themselves in proper fashion, but volunteered professionals paid and fully equipped yb the state. Again, when in 190 BC Antiochus III The Great lost in battle of Magnesia over 50.000 men army, he had to surrender and sign humiliating treaty with Rome, as he had little money left to pay new troops and still had many boundaries endangered (like with Bactria, Pontos and Parthians).
2. What about Your money script? Is it updated to be compatible with EB v2 patch? The Redmeth’s already is and I’d like to compare them. And maybe there will be a common-built money script to be added in final release of EB, together with final mercenaries script?
1. You’re right about the importance of heavy losses to ancient states/empires. When Romans lost 2 armies in 105 BC in battles against Germanic tribes (some 80.000 men!), that, coupled with some other wars that dragged manpower and changes in agriculture structure (number of free peasants decreased in favor of great slaver-powered latifundia), led to introduce marian reforms in recruitment system, when there no more conscripts obliged to arm themselves in proper fashion, but volunteered professionals paid and fully equipped yb the state. Again, when in 190 BC Antiochus III The Great lost in battle of Magnesia over 50.000 men army, he had to surrender and sign humiliating treaty with Rome, as he had little money left to pay new troops and still had many boundaries endangered (like with Bactria, Pontos and Parthians).
2. What about Your money script? Is it updated to be compatible with EB v2 patch? The Redmeth’s already is and I’d like to compare them. And maybe there will be a common-built money script to be added in final release of EB, together with final mercenaries script?
Originally Posted by Darth Stalin:
@The Errant:
1. You’re right about the importance of heavy losses to ancient states/empires. When Romans lost 2 armies in 105 BC in battles against Germanic tribes (some 80.000 men!), that, coupled with some other wars that dragged manpower and changes in agriculture structure (number of free peasants decreased in favor of great slaver-powered latifundia), led to introduce marian reforms in recruitment system, when there no more conscripts obliged to arm themselves in proper fashion, but volunteered professionals paid and fully equipped yb the state. Again, when in 190 BC Antiochus III The Great lost in battle of Magnesia over 50.000 men army, he had to surrender and sign humiliating treaty with Rome, as he had little money left to pay new troops and still had many boundaries endangered (like with Bactria, Pontos and Parthians).
2. What about Your money script? Is it updated to be compatible with EB v2 patch? The Redmeth’s already is and I’d like to compare them. And maybe there will be a common-built money script to be added in final release of EB, together with final mercenaries script?
Sorry to dissapoint you. But I'm one of the few lucky beta testers and I'm currently running the internal version of EB on my computer. Not the updated 0.81a v2.@The Errant:
1. You’re right about the importance of heavy losses to ancient states/empires. When Romans lost 2 armies in 105 BC in battles against Germanic tribes (some 80.000 men!), that, coupled with some other wars that dragged manpower and changes in agriculture structure (number of free peasants decreased in favor of great slaver-powered latifundia), led to introduce marian reforms in recruitment system, when there no more conscripts obliged to arm themselves in proper fashion, but volunteered professionals paid and fully equipped yb the state. Again, when in 190 BC Antiochus III The Great lost in battle of Magnesia over 50.000 men army, he had to surrender and sign humiliating treaty with Rome, as he had little money left to pay new troops and still had many boundaries endangered (like with Bactria, Pontos and Parthians).
2. What about Your money script? Is it updated to be compatible with EB v2 patch? The Redmeth’s already is and I’d like to compare them. And maybe there will be a common-built money script to be added in final release of EB, together with final mercenaries script?
There are enough changes in the internal version of the EBBS file that I can't release a new money script based on it. Not before the next public release of EB anyway.
My script has the drawback of having too many AI mercenary armies and too few factional ones. The very problem mlp071 is trying to fix.
I'll get back to modding the money script when the next version goes public. Until then use Redmeth's or Sheep's. You can use mine if you don't mind that it's not updated. Or make your own.
If there is an aspect you find lacking or plain wrong, don't be afraid to try your own version.
@TheErrant
Besides beta-testing perhaps when the public release gets closer you could prepare an improved money script and talk to the team and get their opinion and advice so maybe the next public release could have an "official" improved money script. As I am quite sure that whatever the team produces is better than what a few guys can do on their own.
Besides beta-testing perhaps when the public release gets closer you could prepare an improved money script and talk to the team and get their opinion and advice so maybe the next public release could have an "official" improved money script. As I am quite sure that whatever the team produces is better than what a few guys can do on their own.
This is some great stuff! I've never seen even in screenshots that the AI was actually capable of building such balanced armies. It seems CA did a better job on RTW then we give them credit for. And all it took was to limit the Merc spawns.
Just a quick update...since i said i will be done by tonight ..
Well i am not
, due to family, but i got extended script ready.Working on testing right now (yeah hail king of the Britts , lol)
Some quick informations:
- raised mercenary numbers for 30-40%, at least.
- units will come with expirience according to the price , 0-3500 mnai= 0 xp , 3500-6500= 1 xp, 6500+ 2= xp
- there is total of 64 different mercenary units that is available in EB att , and all will be available to recruit(unless there are bugged). I am trying to spice up a little bit,but 64 on such a huge map is not quite a bit.
- i did rewrite mercenary availability in regards to geographical origin as best as i was able, ex..goidilic mercenary units will be available in Ireland, Kluddolon in Galatia and nearby areas only, etc...Hopefully all greek units are removed from areas accross India
I will test it on The Errant's and Redmeth's script , just to see is there any significant difference.So will take couple of days.
hopefully tests will be good, or back to writing codes, hehe
Well i am not
, due to family, but i got extended script ready.Working on testing right now (yeah hail king of the Britts , lol)Some quick informations:
- raised mercenary numbers for 30-40%, at least.
- units will come with expirience according to the price , 0-3500 mnai= 0 xp , 3500-6500= 1 xp, 6500+ 2= xp
- there is total of 64 different mercenary units that is available in EB att , and all will be available to recruit(unless there are bugged). I am trying to spice up a little bit,but 64 on such a huge map is not quite a bit.
- i did rewrite mercenary availability in regards to geographical origin as best as i was able, ex..goidilic mercenary units will be available in Ireland, Kluddolon in Galatia and nearby areas only, etc...Hopefully all greek units are removed from areas accross India
I will test it on The Errant's and Redmeth's script , just to see is there any significant difference.So will take couple of days.
hopefully tests will be good, or back to writing codes, hehe
Sounds good just be sure certain mercs show up only after their reforms.(I.e no Goidilic units until Celtic reforms ect.)
Originally Posted by :
- there is total of 64 different mercenary units that is available in EB att , and all will be available to recruit(unless there are bugged). I am trying to spice up a little bit,but 64 on such a huge map is not quite a bit.
Be careful there. Many units that have mercenary attribute in EDU are not mercenaries. They have this entry because It lets us use another texture for this unit using "mercenary trick" ( dont know exactly how it works though ).- there is total of 64 different mercenary units that is available in EB att , and all will be available to recruit(unless there are bugged). I am trying to spice up a little bit,but 64 on such a huge map is not quite a bit.
Originally Posted by LorDBulA:
Be careful there. Many units that have mercenary attribute in EDU are not mercenaries. They have this entry because It lets us use another texture for this unit using "mercenary trick" ( dont know exactly how it works though ).
Be careful there. Many units that have mercenary attribute in EDU are not mercenaries. They have this entry because It lets us use another texture for this unit using "mercenary trick" ( dont know exactly how it works though ).
Yeah those i didn't count, just ones that i was able to spawn in mercenary pool.But the ones that are usable will help to break steady diet of hoplitai, thureopoi, phalangitai and peltastai
At least i hope so...
Originally Posted by The Celt:
Sounds good just be sure certain mercs show up only after their reforms.(I.e no Goidilic units until Celtic reforms ect.)
If you played Casse ( god knows i am close to starting to run their campaings in my sleep, after like all these test runsSounds good just be sure certain mercs show up only after their reforms.(I.e no Goidilic units until Celtic reforms ect.)
), you will notice that some are buildable, well 1 of them pre-reforms.I went for a slightly different approach:
1. Reduced the recruitment costs by 50% (but kept the same upkeep costs). This led to higher numbers of troops and consequently, the AI diversifies the troops created in the barracks. They create all kinds of troops (cavalry, missile,
2. Since costs are lower, I adjusted Redmeth's money script to give much less money to the AI, with extra help according to the number of cities. I also lowered the cap to 10.000 instead of 100.000
3. I give very little money assistance to the "slave" faction. This happens because the AI has a nasty tendency to waste small armies against well-protected cities.
4. I used MLP071's previous mercenary file, but replaced all values according to the following rule:
1) Increased 4 experience levels for every unit
2) Costs for units with experience level 4 are Base Value x 2,19
3) Costs for units with experience level 5 are Base Value x 2,67
4) Costs for units with experience level 6 are Base Value x 3,24
Results:
I haven't got enough time to test much of this modifications, but now there are more units on the campaign map and the AI moves agressively against the rebel cities in order to conquer them.
There is a good balance between the greek factions and also between the celtic factions.
Mercenaries are seldom recruited (the price now is too high) but it does happen to appear a recruiting faction now and then. Mostly, factions rely on their own units. After a few years, the Germans started producing their elite Wolves.
There is a faster pace to the game, since the factions have enough money to make units and buildings. I was specially worried with the fact that the Seleucids expanded quickly and powerfully. With much less money, they now remain somewhat stable, giving the oportunity to the weaker neighbours to move against the rebel cities around and to attack even the Seleucid cities.
I'll keep going with the campaign and see what comes out of it.
1. Reduced the recruitment costs by 50% (but kept the same upkeep costs). This led to higher numbers of troops and consequently, the AI diversifies the troops created in the barracks. They create all kinds of troops (cavalry, missile,
2. Since costs are lower, I adjusted Redmeth's money script to give much less money to the AI, with extra help according to the number of cities. I also lowered the cap to 10.000 instead of 100.000
3. I give very little money assistance to the "slave" faction. This happens because the AI has a nasty tendency to waste small armies against well-protected cities.
4. I used MLP071's previous mercenary file, but replaced all values according to the following rule:
1) Increased 4 experience levels for every unit
2) Costs for units with experience level 4 are Base Value x 2,19
3) Costs for units with experience level 5 are Base Value x 2,67
4) Costs for units with experience level 6 are Base Value x 3,24
Results:
I haven't got enough time to test much of this modifications, but now there are more units on the campaign map and the AI moves agressively against the rebel cities in order to conquer them.
There is a good balance between the greek factions and also between the celtic factions.
Mercenaries are seldom recruited (the price now is too high) but it does happen to appear a recruiting faction now and then. Mostly, factions rely on their own units. After a few years, the Germans started producing their elite Wolves.
There is a faster pace to the game, since the factions have enough money to make units and buildings. I was specially worried with the fact that the Seleucids expanded quickly and powerfully. With much less money, they now remain somewhat stable, giving the oportunity to the weaker neighbours to move against the rebel cities around and to attack even the Seleucid cities.
I'll keep going with the campaign and see what comes out of it.
It seems a better idea to double the price for mercs for the AI factions instead of halving the factional ones.
I'll try that latter today...
If all goes as expected, it should behave close to JRMC alterations regarding army compositions...
Cheers...
I'll try that latter today...
If all goes as expected, it should behave close to JRMC alterations regarding army compositions...
Cheers...
Originally Posted by JMRC:
I went for a slightly different approach:
1. Reduced the recruitment costs by 50% (but kept the same upkeep costs). This led to higher numbers of troops and consequently, the AI diversifies the troops created in the barracks. They create all kinds of troops (cavalry, missile,
2. Since costs are lower, I adjusted Redmeth's money script to give much less money to the AI, with extra help according to the number of cities. I also lowered the cap to 10.000 instead of 100.000
3. I give very little money assistance to the "slave" faction. This happens because the AI has a nasty tendency to waste small armies against well-protected cities.
4. I used MLP071's previous mercenary file, but replaced all values according to the following rule:
1) Increased 4 experience levels for every unit
2) Costs for units with experience level 4 are Base Value x 2,19
3) Costs for units with experience level 5 are Base Value x 2,67
4) Costs for units with experience level 6 are Base Value x 3,24
.
1. It's dangerous to mess with these as it can screw up game balance and halved is way too cheap IMO, we're trying to prevent stack parades right?I went for a slightly different approach:
1. Reduced the recruitment costs by 50% (but kept the same upkeep costs). This led to higher numbers of troops and consequently, the AI diversifies the troops created in the barracks. They create all kinds of troops (cavalry, missile,
2. Since costs are lower, I adjusted Redmeth's money script to give much less money to the AI, with extra help according to the number of cities. I also lowered the cap to 10.000 instead of 100.000
3. I give very little money assistance to the "slave" faction. This happens because the AI has a nasty tendency to waste small armies against well-protected cities.
4. I used MLP071's previous mercenary file, but replaced all values according to the following rule:
1) Increased 4 experience levels for every unit
2) Costs for units with experience level 4 are Base Value x 2,19
3) Costs for units with experience level 5 are Base Value x 2,67
4) Costs for units with experience level 6 are Base Value x 3,24
.
2. The cap is way too low some factions were rich and while the lower cap may work for the big ones (maybe) it clearly can stop the little guys. Just exterminating a city would take a small faction over the cap
3. The slave faction should be strong and a challenge, AI factions shouldn't blitz and expand at completely ahistorical rates, wasting small armies and even large ones is ok in my book
4.This I like, veterans should be available but really few and the high cost should simulate things like hiring a tribe's best men or a chieftain's bodyguard. Something along these lines.
Sorry to be a downer, but that's how I see things
Originally Posted by Redmeth:
4.This I like veterans should be available but really few and the high cost should simulate things like hiring a tribe's best men or a chieftain's bodyguard. Something along these lines
Maybe this could be represented by having a rarely appearing and markedly more expensive higher-exp version on top of the standard merc unit entries ? Not everyone who heeded the drums and down-payment cash of the mercenary recruiter was a hardened veteran after all; but on the other hand amalgamations of crack "old hands" from disbanded formations and scattered armies, or simply experienced formations without a paymaster, would logically also be available every now and then.4.This I like veterans should be available but really few and the high cost should simulate things like hiring a tribe's best men or a chieftain's bodyguard. Something along these lines
Originally Posted by Redmeth:
1. It's dangerous to mess with these as it can screw up game balance and halved is way too cheap IMO, we're trying to prevent stack parades right?
2. The cap is way too low some factions were rich and while the lower cap may work for the big ones (maybe) it clearly can stop the little guys. Just exterminating a cities would take a small faction over the cap
3. The slave faction should be strong and a challenge, AI factions shouldn't blitz and expand at completely ahistorical rates, wasting small armies and even large ones is ok in my book
4.This I like veterans should be available but really few and the high cost should simulate things like hiring a tribe's best men or a chieftain's bodyguard. Something along these lines
Sorry to be a downer, but that's how I see things
1. It's dangerous to mess with these as it can screw up game balance and halved is way too cheap IMO, we're trying to prevent stack parades right?
2. The cap is way too low some factions were rich and while the lower cap may work for the big ones (maybe) it clearly can stop the little guys. Just exterminating a cities would take a small faction over the cap
3. The slave faction should be strong and a challenge, AI factions shouldn't blitz and expand at completely ahistorical rates, wasting small armies and even large ones is ok in my book
4.This I like veterans should be available but really few and the high cost should simulate things like hiring a tribe's best men or a chieftain's bodyguard. Something along these lines
Sorry to be a downer, but that's how I see things
No prob. I'm just experimenting anyway.
However, I do realize that I'm after a little more of a challenge at the expense of some historical accuracy. In my last campaigns, I destroyed Epeiros and the Gauls in a few years (though the Gauls should remain powerful until Julius Caesar crush them, more than 200 years later, so there goes the historical accuracy...)
So, for me to face stack after stack of enemy troops is not bad, as long as I can recover my losses and keep making punitive raids into their territory to cripple their economy and military capacity. That's why I halved the recruitment cost, though I retained the upkeep cost: the AI keeps recruiting and I keep recovering.
I agree that the slave faction should be strong, but most of the time the AI is not clever enough to mass a force against a powerful city and instead it wastes its troops, keeping itself too weak to face my units later. More importantly, the AI doesn't replenish its forces. So, many times I'm facing a full stack of half-completed units. Also, the rebels in the cities tend to be much static, while if the cities belong to some faction, they move around. The fact that the AI doesn't know how to face a siege (few units in the walls and lots moving below the towers, waiting for the slaughter) leads to many boring siege battles.
As for the merc vets, the logic behind the upgrade to higher levels of experience is this: no employer would give 2x ou 3x the value of his house troops for an inexperienced band of mercenaries. Now, if they have experience 4, 5 or 6, it will compensate. In fact, they should not have a higher recruitment cost, but a much higher upkeep cost. However, this would lead to the problem that we are trying to avoid: too many mercenaries and few house troops around the campaign map. Since mercs now are very scarce (with MLP071's changes, at least they are worth the money).
As for the cap, I haven't had time to understand the implications, but I noticed that many times the AI just keeps the money in the "bank", waiting for an enemy to exterminate one of their cities and reap a fat reward. So, its better to let them have just enough to produce lots of troops.
For instance, in one of my experiences, Palmyra rebelled against the Seleucids and became a Saba territory for a long time, until the Seleucids could gather a large enough army to take it back. Nearer to the Baktrian border, another Seleucid province rebelled (remaining "slave") and again, the Seleucids took a lot of time until taking it back. And it happened because they were nearly bankrupt... if the cap was 100.000, they could build an army much faster.
Originally Posted by JMRC:
As for the cap, I haven't had time to understand the implications, but I noticed that many times the AI just keeps the money in the "bank", waiting for an enemy to exterminate one of their cities and reap a fat reward. So, its better to let them have just enough to produce lots of troops..
There is no connection between the funds a faction has and the money you or any other factions gets from exterminating a city. The income received from exterminating is solely based, as far as I can tell, on city and thus number of people killed, the bigger and more populated the city is the more money you get. The money is not deducted from the faction the exterminated city belonged to.As for the cap, I haven't had time to understand the implications, but I noticed that many times the AI just keeps the money in the "bank", waiting for an enemy to exterminate one of their cities and reap a fat reward. So, its better to let them have just enough to produce lots of troops..
Concerns about mercenaries with very high lvl of exp is that AI will calculate battle outcome unrealistically, as it in case of general's stars.
I tested little bit with 3+ xp before and was creating havoc.That is , it will with addition of all mercs that i am slowly bringing back into the game.Higher prices are my way of representing their higher upkeep cost, otherwise i have to play with some other files, which can backfire since AI is looking into buying cost , not upkeep cost.Plus higher upkeep could cripple AI in making more of faction elites.
But i will play with that again , as soon i get to the point of optimal amount of mercenaries available.
Presently i am trying to balance their amount and respawn rate, which will be different between the regions (some will spawn faster, some slower) probably.
But thats for the future , as is their xp.
I would call that "fine tunning".
Fixing this file is really slow process, due to limitations of the game and small #'s of mercenary troop types available.
Plus , i can tell you honestly , DESCR_MERCENARIES is one of the buggiest files that i have encountered in this game.Add to many mercs or not enough and none will spawn in that region, just an example
I did mention moving cap, up or down . But as it is now , i don't see anything that needs to be redone in money scripts, they are just fine IMHO.
I tested little bit with 3+ xp before and was creating havoc.That is , it will with addition of all mercs that i am slowly bringing back into the game.Higher prices are my way of representing their higher upkeep cost, otherwise i have to play with some other files, which can backfire since AI is looking into buying cost , not upkeep cost.Plus higher upkeep could cripple AI in making more of faction elites.
But i will play with that again , as soon i get to the point of optimal amount of mercenaries available.
Presently i am trying to balance their amount and respawn rate, which will be different between the regions (some will spawn faster, some slower) probably.
But thats for the future , as is their xp.
I would call that "fine tunning".
Fixing this file is really slow process, due to limitations of the game and small #'s of mercenary troop types available.
Plus , i can tell you honestly , DESCR_MERCENARIES is one of the buggiest files that i have encountered in this game.Add to many mercs or not enough and none will spawn in that region, just an example
I did mention moving cap, up or down . But as it is now , i don't see anything that needs to be redone in money scripts, they are just fine IMHO.
This is test with new additional mercenaries, and i am pleased with outcome.
Changes were made to recruitment area, and some new units were added for recruitment.I did not create any new units, just used ones that were in files already. I tested all of them on battlefield also, as best i could , so there is no possible CTD .
Alot of times, you will not notice mercenary units in armies , since i tried to match mercenary units with geographical and AoR areas.If i made some mistakes , feel free to let me know here or message me.
Celtic first reform units, some of them, will be available for recruitment as mercenaries , but only post reforms(past 220BC).
This time factions expanded little faster then previous time. I was testing on VH/M with The Errant's script:
- Celts got their reforms and they were producing new units by 215 BC
- Romans got Polybian reform in 210 (didn't have Sicilian teritory for earlier). My spy found full stack of polybians near Arminium in 201 BC.
- Baktria, Sweboz and Qarthadastim are big powers,with couple of more pushing strong.
- Saka is only faction that is destroyed (213 BC)
Now, important things, AI was buying mercenaries in reasonable amount,when he needed units fast to fill in the holes in armies.
All factions had sizable armies that would be challenge for Human player , but there was no infinite stacks.
Example, Sweboz probably had 6-8+ stacks total in 200 BC when you put all units in the field togheter(not garrison ones). With almost 30 provinces they were capable of producing at least 1 stack/per turn.
Armies composition was quite realistic, meaning all factions had ratio between local levies and elites around 40/60% or 50/50%. Exceptions were Baktria and KH, they were fielding around 70% levies. Faction elite units started to show up around 245BC.
Also, armies were nicely shaped by regions where they were operating.I found these Romani and Qarthadast armies in Iberia:
It was same with Getai units in Asia Minor (they had Hoplitae, Akonistai...). Sweboz and Sauromatae were fighting in Baltic area using mix of their homeland troops and local baltic ones. Romani Legions in Gaul had Celtic levies and main romani units 40/60% ratio.
And btw , everyone is always broke
Will be runing one more test with Redmeth's script, in order to see what else can be improved by comparing these 2 tests.
I am posting other best faction armies that i run into bellow, and i appologize about this very long post :
Changes were made to recruitment area, and some new units were added for recruitment.I did not create any new units, just used ones that were in files already. I tested all of them on battlefield also, as best i could , so there is no possible CTD .
Alot of times, you will not notice mercenary units in armies , since i tried to match mercenary units with geographical and AoR areas.If i made some mistakes , feel free to let me know here or message me.
Celtic first reform units, some of them, will be available for recruitment as mercenaries , but only post reforms(past 220BC).
This time factions expanded little faster then previous time. I was testing on VH/M with The Errant's script:
- Celts got their reforms and they were producing new units by 215 BC
- Romans got Polybian reform in 210 (didn't have Sicilian teritory for earlier). My spy found full stack of polybians near Arminium in 201 BC.
- Baktria, Sweboz and Qarthadastim are big powers,with couple of more pushing strong.
- Saka is only faction that is destroyed (213 BC)
Now, important things, AI was buying mercenaries in reasonable amount,when he needed units fast to fill in the holes in armies.
All factions had sizable armies that would be challenge for Human player , but there was no infinite stacks.
Example, Sweboz probably had 6-8+ stacks total in 200 BC when you put all units in the field togheter(not garrison ones). With almost 30 provinces they were capable of producing at least 1 stack/per turn.
Armies composition was quite realistic, meaning all factions had ratio between local levies and elites around 40/60% or 50/50%. Exceptions were Baktria and KH, they were fielding around 70% levies. Faction elite units started to show up around 245BC.
Also, armies were nicely shaped by regions where they were operating.I found these Romani and Qarthadast armies in Iberia:
It was same with Getai units in Asia Minor (they had Hoplitae, Akonistai...). Sweboz and Sauromatae were fighting in Baltic area using mix of their homeland troops and local baltic ones. Romani Legions in Gaul had Celtic levies and main romani units 40/60% ratio.
And btw , everyone is always broke
Will be runing one more test with Redmeth's script, in order to see what else can be improved by comparing these 2 tests.
I am posting other best faction armies that i run into bellow, and i appologize about this very long post :
You mention spies in your comments go in the /showme/ebbs script and search for "perfect_spy" remove the ";" from the start of the line and there you have it the perfect all-seeing eye of Mordor(tm) used for testing purposes only of course.
Very nice results truly encouraging love the steppe armies.
Very nice results truly encouraging love the steppe armies.
Nice stacks. Some of those are scary too. Samnites and Perdites are some of the best Roman units during the Camillan era.
Love the Steppe stacks. Great unit composition. And a Koinon stack with siege engines, damn good. I almost never see the AI field those.
They all look balanced. Some are tougher than others, but the levy stacks are good too.
Very impressive work here mlp071.
I second Redmeth' on the perfect_spy command. For testing purposes the all seeing eye of Mordor is your best friend.
Love the Steppe stacks. Great unit composition. And a Koinon stack with siege engines, damn good. I almost never see the AI field those.
They all look balanced. Some are tougher than others, but the levy stacks are good too.
Very impressive work here mlp071.
I second Redmeth' on the perfect_spy command. For testing purposes the all seeing eye of Mordor is your best friend.
Originally Posted by The Errant:
I dosen't matter what goody expensive city improvements are available, their primary focus is always military. They will keep recruiting until they run out of money or population. And with the money and population scripts neither will ever happen.
And at that point the game becomes more of a chore than a game. How many AARs and games have been abandoned to the AI stack parades?
I don't mind AI full stacks. I just think they should be fewer and further in between. And not all elite units either. And when they loose one, It should really hurt. Not just be a minor annoyance that gets responded to by sending four or five fully elite stacks the next turn. And even if that was possible for some factions, the AI should not be able to keep doing that indefinately. Sooner or later they should face the reality of having no one to recruit and no money to do the recruiting with.
Precisely the problems I was trying to avoid. I dosen't matter what goody expensive city improvements are available, their primary focus is always military. They will keep recruiting until they run out of money or population. And with the money and population scripts neither will ever happen.
And at that point the game becomes more of a chore than a game. How many AARs and games have been abandoned to the AI stack parades?
I don't mind AI full stacks. I just think they should be fewer and further in between. And not all elite units either. And when they loose one, It should really hurt. Not just be a minor annoyance that gets responded to by sending four or five fully elite stacks the next turn. And even if that was possible for some factions, the AI should not be able to keep doing that indefinately. Sooner or later they should face the reality of having no one to recruit and no money to do the recruiting with.
Some potential actions are to
a. Increase capital prices for troops, thereby making troop losses much more costly WITHOUT making upkeep any harder, or bankrupting anyone at the start. In my challenge mod prices are doubled, and could be increased further.
b. Stagger the money given to a faction so that it gets LOTS every now and again, and builds troops AND buildings with what is left. The residue will probably go on more troops.
Just suggestions, but logical ones it seems to me :P
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO