EB 1.0: Teaser 1

[Strategos Alexandros]

Awesome trailer! Can't wait to play the new version! Have a balloon for your trouble

[Foot]

is there gonna be a romani intro? if there is can we PLEASE see it?

There will be, but no you can't see it because it hasn't been done. Kampfkrebs has only just joined the team, and he's only had time to finish one intro so far.

Foot

[Hooahguy]

so can we see that one?
and how many will there be?
seems like a waste of time to do an intro for every faction. maybe one for the nomads, one for the eastern greeks, one for the w. greeks, one for romans, one for barbarians, ect.

[abou]

1. No.
2. One for each faction.
3. Why would that be a waste?

[Digby Tatham Warter]

so can we see that one?
and how many will there be?
seems like a waste of time to do an intro for every faction. maybe one for the nomads, one for the eastern greeks, one for the w. greeks, one for romans, one for barbarians, ect.

Yeah baby, and the one for the eastern greeks should of course be AS based.

[Hooahguy]

1. No.
2. One for each faction.
3. Why would that be a waste?

1. y not
2.
3: a waste of time

[MiniMe]

. Now, when you conquer a territory and build a type4 government there, an allied ruler or puppet ruler will be spawned and will enter the city. He will have a local bodyguard and will have no mobility - he is to remain inside the city.

1. I presume "puppet" to become a member of the family in a way of adoption, right?
2. And every Government IV province will always have a "puppet ruler", right?

If so, I'm afraid that clan's "own" family branch would be reduced greatly and and may be would disappear at all, replaced by an horde of local puppets

[Foot]

1. y not
2.
3: a waste of time

1. Because we don't want to give away something that we are all quite proud of before the release of 1.0.
2. We have always decided on one for each faction, how else can we make explicit the differences in the goals and culture of each faction. Not even the Arverni and Aedui could have the same faction intro.
3. It could be argued that writing individual descriptions per faction per building is a waste of time. We did because we love our mod and want each faction to be unique. Just apply that reasoning to the faction intros.

Foot

[Foot]

1. I presume "puppet" to become a member of the family in a way of adoption, right?
2. And every Government IV province will always have a "puppet ruler", right?

If so, I'm afraid that clan's "own" family branch would be reduced greatly and and may be would disappear at all, replaced by an horde of local puppets

No that is incorrect. The puppet ruler does not join the family tree and so does not reduce the number of real family members.

Foot

[Digby Tatham Warter]

3. Why would that be a waste?

One feels that hooahguy14 may indeed percieve it as a waste of time, perphaps due to an unreasonable sense of fear that EBv1.0 may be delayed due to the shear number of intro videos needed.

Are you doubting Mr Kampfkrebs ability to be prolific in said area?

[Kampfkrebs]

Good, but I felt it could have been longer and more epic; it just wasn't worthy of EB.

This statement compared to

seems like a waste of time to do an intro for every faction.

this, is rather annoying

I understand that you cant wait to see as much intros as possible.
But the problem is, Im the only one atm, who does video editing in general (recording shots, edit them and stuff). My comrades provide me with a payload of ideas and - most important - suitable music.
But my main problem remains: I havent a team of cutters/people who record as many cool scenes as possible. Besides this I wont do simply one "style" of intros for all factions. I try to find every factions unique style, and I think this goes very well atm (for those who saw my work already).
And, of course, Im an artist. And like every artist I have hours where I can work 24hours and still have new ideas, and sometimes I have a cliffhanger for a week, and do nothing, but this is the risk of the buisiness

[Foot]

One feels that hooahguy14 may indeed percieve it as a waste of time, perphaps due to an unreasonable sense of fear that EBv1.0 may be delayed due to the shear number of intro videos needed.

Are you doubting Mr Kampfkrebs ability to be prolific in said area?

EB 1.0 will certainly not be held up for the campaign intros. The faction intros will be an ongoing thing, and only one will appear in 1.0.

Foot

[MiniMe]

No that is incorrect. The puppet ruler does not join the family tree and so does not reduce the number of real family members.

thanx for explanation =)

[Lysander13]

Geez...some of you guys are something else. Complaints about a "teaser" video being too short and not worthy of EB??...Huh?
Ummm...It's a teaser video. Comments like it seems like a waste of time to do intro videos for each faction. C'mon, you've gotta be kidding me? Little things like this is what adds that professional polish to a mod. There's just no making some people happy.

[shlin28]

Great work, I cannot wait for 1.0 to come out!

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Someone said "last one" in relation to talking about 1.0. It definitely isn't the last release for EB on RTW.

[Hooahguy]

EB 1.0 will certainly not be held up for the campaign intros. The faction intros will be an ongoing thing, and only one will appear in 1.0.

Foot

oh, so which faction will that be for? or are you not telling?....

One feels that hooahguy14 may indeed percieve it as a waste of time, perphaps due to an unreasonable sense of fear that EBv1.0 may be delayed due to the shear number of intro videos needed.

Are you doubting Mr Kampfkrebs ability to be prolific in said area?

very true

[Rhipsaspis]

*Screams like a girl*
I stay off the internet for a few days and then find this, what a great present!

[Hooahguy]

Someone said "last one" in relation to talking about 1.0. It definitely isn't the last release for EB on RTW.

somewhere over at the TWC said that this was going to be the 2nd to last release of EB for RTW.

[Digby Tatham Warter]

Little things like this is what adds that professional polish to a mod.

Your not wrong there mi old sausage, infact one could say that workmanship of this calibre demands the polish. And boy does this mod suck in the goodies and detail.
Has anyone ever done a rough tally of hours spent on this mod so far? I tell people(partly to help justify all the hours I sit infront of it) that many thousands of hours have been lavished upon said work, it's not just a game but an historical masterpiece!

[Lysander13]

Your not wrong there mi old sausage, infact one could say that workmanship of this calibre demands the polish. And boy does this mod suck in the goodies and detail.

I'd rep ya for your post if there were such a thing here...

[LusitanianWolf]

OMG, EB 1.0 IS COMING!!!!

[TWFanatic]

Geez...some of you guys are something else. Complaints about a "teaser" video being too short and not worthy of EB??...Huh?
Ummm...It's a teaser video. Comments like it seems like a waste of time to do intro videos for each faction. C'mon, you've gotta be kidding me? Little things like this is what adds that professional polish to a mod. There's just no making some people happy.

My ego is throbbing right now, but I know you're right. I suppose its the fact that this is the only EB trailer I've ever seen that makes me wish it would be better.

Just you wait till you see the first intro.

I'm glad to hear it will be better than the teasers.

[I Am Herenow]

Cool! :D

Just a few questions:

1. If you won't have time (for this release) to give ousted puppet rulers movement points, I understand, but could you at least kill them off like those spies that let you see more of the map at the start of the game? I can just envisage having loads of random armies with just one general in enemy territory - not very historically accurate, surely! Another option, I suppose, is to make them Eleutheroi when they're ousted (as if they went into hiding after failing you or something).
2. As the cilent rulers are Generals, have you had to use up an additional unit slot for them, or have you copied and pasted some BI features somehow? :S
3. Will you still be able to recruit, build etc. in Type IVs?
4. What will be the point of Type IVs now, with all this additional hassle? Won't everyone now just build IIIs in areas where only IIIs and IVs are available? No offence, BTW.
5. Will this feature be available to all factions?
6. Will client rulers be of the conquering faction's ethnicity or of the conquered province's ethnicity (or of the ethnicity of the surrounding area)?
7. Just a small thing, but in that picture of Taras being besieged, there are tents in the sea!

[Foot]

Cool! :D

Just a few questions:

1. If you won't have time (for this release) to give ousted puppet rulers movement points, I understand, but could you at least kill them off like those spies that let you see more of the map at the start of the game? I can just envisage having loads of random armies with just one general in enemy territory - not very historically accurate, surely! Another option, I suppose, is to make them Eleutheroi when they're ousted (as if they went into hiding after failing you or something).
2. As the cilent rulers are Generals, have you had to use up an additional unit slot for them, or have you copied and pasted some BI features somehow? :S
3. Will you still be able to recruit, build etc. in Type IVs?
4. What will be the point of Type IVs now, with all this additional hassle? Won't everyone now just build IIIs in areas where only IIIs and IVs are available? No offence, BTW.
5. Will this feature be available to all factions?
6. Will client rulers be of the conquering faction's ethnicity or of the conquered province's ethnicity (or of the ethnicity of the surrounding area)?
7. Just a small thing, but in that picture of Taras being besieged, there are tents in the sea!

1. I don't know. We can't kill them off as the script is long enough as it is.
2. Unit slots aren't needed for generals. You just spawn a character and give him any unit and that unit becomes a bodyguard.
3. Yes, you can still recruit and build in Type IVs.
4. We implemented it because we felt it would be a cool addition for those players who truly like to roleplay their governments. For all others, it certainly makes more sense to build a Type III (though they won't be able to recruit recruitable generals).
5. Yes
6. They don't have an ethnicity.
7. This always happens with the siege graphic when it is used around a town near a body of water. The model is placed regardless of what the terrain is like underneath, so sometimes it will go into mountains and other times it will float on the sea.

Foot

[I Am Herenow]

6. They don't have an ethnicity.

Thanks for answering my questions, but I'm a bit confused about your answer to question 6: the client ruler from those screenshots looks Roman, but then again it was Rome taking a city in Italy. But surely they either have to look Roman, or Celtic, or something?

[Foot]

Thanks for answering my questions, but I'm a bit confused about your answer to question 6: the client ruler from those screenshots looks Roman, but then again it was Rome taking a city in Italy. But surely they either have to look Roman, or Celtic, or something?

Oh right, I see. I thought you were referring to the ethnicity traits. Because of the game hardcodes, the puppet rulers use the names and pictures of the controlling faction. Thus if you played as the romans all the puppet rulers would have a roman picture and a roman name. If you played as the Saka, they would have a nomad picture and a saka name.

Foot

[I Am Herenow]

Because of the game hardcodes

Would you ideally have wanted a different system? The one you have just described seems logical to me.

[Foot]

Would you ideally have wanted a different system? The one you have just described seems logical to me.

Yes, I would have prefered that the puppet rulers could be given names and portraits suitable to the region that they then command. All is not lost, however, as it could be said that the puppet ruler has to some extent taken on the trappings of the faction's culture who has installed him into power.

Foot

[Teleklos Archelaou]

The point of type4's is this: as we have intended all along, type4 govts (i.e., "allied govts") should be used in cities that already are very large and have good local recruitment different from your faction. If you are romans and you take Syracuse, you might use it. If you are Getai and take Athens, etc. That way you don't have to build them up a lot - you get a "free" general to help control them, you get the best local MIC's possible, and they make you lots of money with (generally) trade bonuses. Don't use type4's for provinces with a similar culture to your own. And don't use them for small cities, since you can't build them up as large with the maximum number of your faction buildings. This new addition makes all of this even more "perfect" in our minds. Plus we changed the "allow ai local taxation" sliders and buttons to "allow total local autonomy" and such, to further clarify these things.