Help with advice -new to EB v1.0

[apoll]

Hello...just downloaded EB v1.0 and it is an amazing simulation...but I need some advice from you all...

...I am into realism...and played the campaign as the Romans at the very highest difficulty in the campaign and battles; I find now in the mid 160s that I am being picked on like you wouldn't believe...I am public enemy number one...the Germans...the Gauls etc...everyone is at war with me and very agressive...no one will respond to any requests for ceasefires and basically I am being worn down with dark green stack after stack attacking my gains...I am losing and have been pushed back to almost my starting positions. I would like some advice on what is the best setting for the capmaign difficulty and the battles....for realistic balance so I don't attract every crazed faction out there. Would it be better to have hard campaign and very hard battles? Is this more realistic? (The very hard battles mean even slingers seem to be able to sort out my Principes at times...which is just not realistic at all.) Grateful some advice here.

Also...what other mods, on top of EB v1.0, should I use? What about some formation mods? There seems to be a balanced script mod? Is this good and what does it do? The force diplomacy mod looks interesting but it seem like cheating to me if you can force a faction to do what you want. What other mods are 'must have'?

Thanks in advance...and I look forward to some ideas.

regards,

Apoll

[Ignoramus]

(This is the EBII forum)

EB is meant to be played with medium battles an very hard campaign difficulty.

[apoll]

Ah...wrong forum! Opps.

apoll

[paullus]

yeah, VH campaign - M battle is the recommended setting, and while we don't "recommend" the force diplomacy mod, I know there are plenty of times that you know your enemy should take a deal, but the AI is unable to understand the concept of honorable defeat and settlement. So that might be a good one to try.

And way to go playing a campaign into the 160's on VH/VH! Wow.

[Strategos Alexandros]

For someone new to the gme I would recommend playing on medium or hard campaign as the AI is less likely to attack you for no reason and the diplomacy works better.

[Sarkiss]

For someone new to the gme I would recommend playing on medium or hard campaign as the AI is less likely to attack you for no reason and the diplomacy works better.

definitely. you can hardly say that diplomacy "works", however, regardless difficulty level.
i played it for months and months now, tried VH, but eventually turned to H (some even prefer Medium) campaign for good. VH unbalances things imo.

[Theodotos I]

Yeah, kudos on a newbie getting that far. I still can't bring myself to play more than a few turns with the Romani--I'm still too burned from vanilla. Same with the Ptolies, I see those Mummy Returns guys in my dreams. I know everyone's put a lot of work in those factions, and they look a LOT better, but I just can't do it. Eventually, I guess.

[NeoSpartan]

well... as people have pointed out RTW's AI does not understand what diplomacy is. So IF you are trying to "RolePlay" then VH Campain diffuculty will make it imposible. Probably so will H.

I suggest you get the Force Diplomacy mod. I ain't 100% AI stupidity safe but it works.

[pezhetairoi]

Applause for your valiant fight all the way to 160 on VH VH. For a newcomer that is REALLY good.

[apoll]

Ok...thanks to all who replied....yea...I made it to the 160s...but not for much longer....those stacks just keep coming and my income is down to a piddling amount...so can't regenerate my veterans quickly enough. I will be overrun soon...and the Carthaginians are playng up now. I lasted for so long just be standing still....never ex[pamded for decades as I found I just didn;t have anough armies to considate won provinces...

So...medium battle is about right? In terms of realism...not too unbalanaced? Any mods to help here? And I'm on a VH or H campaign? Is that what everyine is saying? I take it VH VH is just TOO unbalanced then...

regards,

apoll

[Apgad]

Ahh, just checking, but you are activating the script each time you load a save game, right? The years can really fly by if you don't...

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

I'd recommend Hard Campaign and Medium Battles with no time limits on battles.

The Hard campaign leads to an aggressive AI, but not unreasonably aggressive, they will respond to good diplomacy (especially gifts of money.)

Medium battles work best when you allow the enemy to outnumber you by at least 1.5 to 1. Preferably 2 to 1 if you have good quality troops. Obviously the AI can't be as clever as you in a battle, but allowing the AI to have more men than you compensates for this and gives you a challenge.

Also allowing the enemy to have a strong numerical advantage means that when you lay siege to an enemy city, the garrison will very likely sortie out of the gates and attack your army on the next turn, rather than just sitting and waiting until they run out of food.

I prefer to try and avoid the game becoming "Rome: Total Siege".

Finally, losing battles is even more fun than winning, on Medium Battle difficulty! The most rewarding game is often one where you lose a few battles but win the war, the final victory is more satisfying because there's a big element of revenge in there! So that's what I try and aim for.

[NeoSpartan]

Ok to figure out what dificulty you want to play you must ask your self one key question.

"What type of game are you looking to play????"

Your answer to that question will dictate what type of difficulty you should set.

Let me give you a list of common game styles and difficulty recommendations:

1. Sim City: EB
--All/most of what u do is to sit and build up your cities, you expand very little and very slowly. Your goal is to have fun building up ur cities, expanding here and there, and doing diplomacy.
--Recommended settings: M/M, or M/H or VH if you want a challenge in the battlefield.

2. Roleplaying with STRICT historical accuracy.
--This is mainly done with the Romani (at least those are the strict roleplaying games I've seen). Here the goal is to expand as your faction did historcially (both time wise and territory wise) have armies composed of units as they really did. In addition you have all sorts of rules and limits such as no marching in wintertime, no captains leading armies outside of your lands, no bridge battles (abuse), no assulting walled cities, etc...

--Recommended settings: H/M, as the AI is not as agressive as in VH/M. U can also do H battle difficutly if u want a challege, but YOU don't go battle difficulty VH because that will force you to use abusive tactics such as spamming Elite only armies, bridge battles, high hill battles, etc..

3. Roleplaying with historical accuracy but not so strict.
--This is done by most people playing EB in one degree or another. Some people have strict campaing rules of exapansion others not as strict.
--Recommended settings again vary on how strict people are to the rules. Usually they go with similar setting as in Strict historical accuracy.

4. AI Battle enhansing gameplay, with small roleplaying. (This is what I do )
--The goal is to expand somewhat historical, BUT set campain rules to give the AI a better chance at beating you, instead of dictating when and where you should expand. Exaples of these AI battle enhacing rules are: (a) no hill battles, (b) no bridge battles, (c) no spamming Elites, (d) playing with Fatige Off, that way the AI won't tire its troops. (e) no spamming slingers (it was a bigger issue back in .81x)
--Recommended settings: VH/H with Fatige Off! or just VH/VH

5. RUSH 'EM!! (one of my favorite gameplay styles)
--Just F*! it have fun and fight. No rules, no nothing. Blitz the AI, train all elites expand fast, and just kick ass.
--Recommended settings: VH/VH or VH/H battle fatige OFF! OR go creazy and do VH/VH with Fatige off.

[V.T. Marvin]

@ NeoSpartan - your post should be stickied on the main forum as a "Campaign difficulty guide" or something like that - the "what is recommended difficulty for EB" question is being asked quite often and your reply seems to me very comprehensive and sensible indeed.

[NeoSpartan]

thx Marvin...

[V.T. Marvin]

You´re welcome!

[apoll]

Yea...tks NeoSpartan for that. In the end, I've gone for vh campaign...and m battles. Hopefully this will be a bit more realistic.

apoll