Mid-Game Blues

[Cutlass]

Hi all, I've only had EB installed for a month or so but I've already racked up more hours than is healthy playing on it into the wee hours of the morning, and have been having great fun playing around with the different sorts of factions. (I have played as Sweboz twice, KH once, Carthage once, Saba once and am currently having a blast with the Getai. Haven't completed any yet, I'll get to that below.)

That said, I keep getting afflicted with a condition I like to call mid-game blues, I've had a similar thing with all the vanilla TW games, but it's delayed for a lot longer with EB. It seems that once I consolidate my starting position and destroy my immediate rivals I get sick of having to fight stack after stack of troops belonging to a faction who has no good reason to attack me, and just lose interest in my grand plans for domination. I know about the whole tribute thing to keep me in other faction's good books, but it gets to the point where even that is not enough to keep them at bay. And let me stress, it's not that I CAN'T do it, it's that I get bored of doing it.

Let me give you an example: As KH, I forced Makedonia to retreat to western Turkey, destroyed Epeiros (spelling) and was planning my conquest of Rome. But then out of nowhere, the Getai attack me, and after severely depleting my coffers hiring mercenaries to take them on (most of my resources were currently being used reinforcing my troops in Sicily.) I was brought into contact with the Sauromtae (spelling), who, surprise surprise, declared war on me, then I have Makedonia edging closer and closer to my border, and the inevitable war with the Gaulish factions and Carthage looming, and it all got a bit too much for me.

So, my question is, does anyone else get this? And if so, how do you overcome it? Or is this a sort of 'men from the boys' thing and I just need to become more hardcore?

Let me makes this clear: I am not criticising EB in any way, shape or form; it is fantastic. I'd just like some tips from the more experienced players. (I tend to play on either hard or very hard.)

Thanks.

[Basileus_ton_Basileon]

Role-playing, good philos. Role-playing.

Once you have set up a storyline, a background, characters and etc, you will have the motivation to play through your campaign. They could be as simple as the internal politics that drives military campaigns in the KH, to conquering Antiochia and everything in between as Casse in order to retrieve a particularly sacred exploding relic.

The sky is the limit, philos.

Edit: as a matter of fact, I'm going to start a Casse campaign just for that reason.

[Shadowwalker]

Cutlass, you precisely described the main reason why I never finished a Romani campaign in all those years since I started enjoying EB. I have had at least a dozen serious attempts at them ("serious" means I hit the Marian reforms and play to about 160-150 BC)... but once I have to fight my way through endless AI stacks, with the result of about five+ battles per turn (not counting the ridiculous "Heya there, it's me, your fantastic AI. I was bored so I calculated a bit around and have had a wonderful idea: I siege Massalia with three units, come out with your halfstack! Let's have twenty minutes of Total Idiocy! Ok, five of them you'll admittedly spend alone, staring at your pre-and-post-battle-loading-screens and hoping the game doesn't crash, but it nevertheless sounds like fun!" situations that I usually solve by using auto-win ) I quickly lose any motivation, roleplaying or not.

I hope for EB II, especially the better AI and some miracles by the team to reduce the number of mid-/lategame stacks (both for player and AI).

[rickinator9]

I hope for EB II, especially the better AI and some miracles by the team to reduce the number of mid-/lategame stacks (both for player and AI).

And less CTDs. But that about the little stacks attacking heavily fortified cities, I have seen that happen in medieval II

[Blxz]

And less CTDs. But that about the little stacks attacking heavily fortified cities, I have seen that happen in medieval II

There is a special magic technique for getting around the majority of them if you use a multi-core computer (which most people do).

1: Start the game to the title screen (New game, continue, etc.)

2: alt-tab to the desktop.

3: ctrl-alt-del to bring up the task manager.

4: Go to 'processes'

5: Right-click the 'rome.exe' process

6: Go to 'Set Affinity'.

7: Set the affinity to a single core and press OK.

8: Go back to the game and enjoy.



Notes: Since you are only using a single core the game might be 'slightly' slower. Also, for this reason, I suggest using a core other than 0 or 1 (whatever is the top one on your computer). I set mine to about 5 or 6 or 7 depending on my mood. This allows background processes to use the first couple of cores. The price of stability is that you will probably have to run only on Large unit sizes if you used HUGE before. Also, you MUST do this every time you start the game. There is no way (that I know of) to save the set affinities.

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

It seems that once I consolidate my starting position and destroy my immediate rivals I get sick of having to fight stack after stack of troops belonging to a faction who has no good reason to attack me.

So, my question is, does anyone else get this? And if so, how do you overcome it? Or is this a sort of 'men from the boys' thing and I just need to become more hardcore?

(I tend to play on either hard or very hard.)

Thanks.

This is why I gave up playing on the harder difficulty levels and went back to Medium difficulty. The AI recruits fewer units on Medium and also doesn't recruit mercenaries.

[seleucid empire]

medium is too easy tho, the economy you don't even have to manage that well. plus theres no rebels besieging cities. although a lot of ppl don't like that cause they send all their troops to the front and then have to bring them back cause they lose a key province to a large rebel stack

[Damnas]

Personally I find the early years of every faction far more entertaining than the later ones. The world is still big by then, possibilities are boundless, Rising from humble beginnings to establishing a powerful regional force is what I like best. I tend to get a bit disappointed in my games when AI factions get fully conquered; one less faction for me to use in my political schemes >.>

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

medium is too easy tho, the economy you don't even have to manage that well. plus theres no rebels besieging cities. although a lot of ppl don't like that cause they send all their troops to the front and then have to bring them back cause they lose a key province to a large rebel stack

Depends on your play style - mine is quite slow so medium is challenging enough for me.

[XSamatan]

Set up some house rules, use your characters only as described in their traits, this motivates me.

Use Force Diplomacy and teleport attacking foes away to have a peace period.

The Ai is somewhat improved on BI and ALX.

XSamatan

[athanaric]

medium is too easy tho, the economy you don't even have to manage that well.

That entirely depends on the faction you play, and your strategy. I, for example, play M/M, expand slowly, and manage my economy very strictly. This enables me to use the surplus money for buying off rebel stacks, bribing cities and then giving them to a third party, and so on. Plus I like peace now and then. Also I can't afford having to fight five goddamn battles per turn, as this costs too much time and gets just tedious. Not to mention CTDs, which will happen now and then in battles in spite of the precautions I took.

[moonburn]

to the op fortify your borders with forts with just 1 unit that normally keeps the getai on the north side of the danube

also the ai normally doesn´t attack until they sence weakness by your side so when they tresspass into your land put a strong halfstack next to the tresspasser and they get the message also strong garrisons in the city´s tend to help avoid stupid behaviour but once they decide it´s time to attack (normally that happens if you are involved in several wars at the same time)

as the kh there´s nothing you can do pontus and sauromatae wanna harm your greek brothers in the pontos euxinos and even carthage and the lusitanii or even the romans might start a war with you over your greek brothers

also the ptolemaioi or the arche over hallikarnasus

when sinope the bosphorans or the aiatolians are attacked you get into war you can then do 2 things send a diplomat and try to sort that out (Normally asking for the land or a big tribute roleplay that it´s bribes to shut up a few members of the koinon)

then there´s also the rebelious greeks of iberia (emporion/arse) wich might put you at odd´s with the lusitanii or the carthaginians sort that out the same way as you do for the rest or try to keep those lands
rebelious greeks or magna graecia (tarentum syracuse messana) wich might put you at war with the romans carthaginians or epirotes

messana wich might put you at war with the arverni romani or the aedui (altough it never rebelled to my side)

and ofc hallikarnassus the city that always joins you and always ends up screwing your relations with either ptolemaioi or the arche

thats what you get for playing the hoplon of all the free greeks you are their shield since you represent their original metropolis so you can either choose to fight for them or sell them out for a profit

[konny]

Well yes, that's a common problem with the Total War! A"I" and not related to EB. At some point the AI will find it prudent to attack you out of the blue regardless of the current situation. Means, it might do so when it is owing a single city, you have a strong empire, and there are plenty of rebel cities around for the AI for "peacefull" expansion. This probably was implemented to keep the game "fun".

For example I just quitted a Roman campaign in 190 BC when I was under non-stop attacks by all factions bordering me (Carthage, Aedui, Dacians, Lusotans). Not that they caused me much of a headache once I had butchered the first stacks of elites and then became spammed by hordes of Lugoae; but it simply becomes boring to fight something like the "Sixth Battle of Tolosa".

It is just that: the AI has a talent to botch the game at one point. The best thing one can do about it is to not border too many factions at a time, what means sometimes it can be a good idea to not go after all the settlements of your enemies because that will only get you in trouble with even more factions. It also depends on the faction you are playing: with someone situated right in the middle of the map, like Rome, you are more likely to feel like Germany in WWII after 50 years in the game than with one starting in a rather remote region, like Casse or Baktria.

[d'Arthez]

It is also true that some factions are more peaceful than the others. Getai never have declared war on me, in plenty of Roman, Makedonian and Epirote campaigns. And I did not even bother with forts at choking points.

[rickinator9]

It is also true that some factions are more peaceful than the others. Getai never have declared war on me, in plenty of Roman, Makedonian and Epirote campaigns. And I did not even bother with forts at choking points.

Prolly because they don't do anything most of the time

[Tanit]

Their armies get lost in the steppe trying to find the sarmatians they are at war with.

[Damnas]

Surprisingly enough, in my current Romani campaign, the Getai are being pretty active. It's only ten years in, but they're well on their way to conquering the whole of the Balkans, and have even started sending some small parties in northern Greece and Illyria (Doesn't seem to be at war with anyone though)

[rickinator9]

You should rush Illyria right now! It's has valuable mine income

[konny]

Just started a Saba campaign - and it took my Ptolemaian allies not more than ten years to send the first full stack of pikemen down into Arabia attacking me *dough*

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

Speaking of dough, konny, were you paying the Ptolemies any regular tribute? You have to pay the big bullies not to beat you up, you know....

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I had a Saba campaign where I had peace with both superpowers, bordering both, for over 50 years. I never attacked them, got super-rich off trade and mines, and sat back, enjoying managing a peaceful regional empire.

[konny]

Speaking of dough, konny, were you paying the Ptolemies any regular tribute? You have to pay the big bullies not to beat you up, you know....

No I didn't pay them any money. In fact I didn't really planned to become the ally of those degenerate Alexandrians at all. When sending around my first diplomat I often offer alliances in return for map infos in order to speed up clearing the map. To my big surprise, the Ptolees accepted.

I knew it wouldn't last forever because they always have those Aethopian cities rebelling and going over to Saba, triggering the respective war. But they attacked me before that had happened (meanwhile the first of those cities indeed did rebel into my tiny empire). Fun thing though: when the Yellow Death attacked me I asked the Grey Death for an alliance and they too instantly agreed. Let's wait and see how long it will take them to backstab me.....


Back to topic, may be a code snipet would help here? I can't say form the back of my head which of the diplomatic commands from M2TW do work with the RTW engine, but I am thinking of a piece of code that can be added to the EB script which would set your faction to "allied" with any other faction you definitly don't want to be at war with.

Say you were playing the Romans and absolutly, under no circumstances, have the wish to be at war with the Greeks at this point of the game. Now the stupid AI would have KH attacking the next Roman settlement with a big fat nasty stack. You would then add the code snipet to the script that sets "seleucids" and "greek cities" to 'allied' anytime they are not.

So the Greeks attack you. At the end of their turn they would be set back to 'allied' with you and the siege would be lifted. Then you have that stack left standing next to your town of which you get rid of by the magic of "auto_win attacker" during your turn. Don't worry on your stance with KH, because the script would set you back to allies at the end of your turn.

[Brennus]

I am experiencing exactly the same problem of Mid Game Blues as you describe in my Seleucid and Carthage games, in the latter I am perhaps five turns away from victory but having to butcher endless stacks of Aedui levies to keep my Iberian border safe is just getting tedious. In my Seleucid game I am thrashing the Ptolemies and holding my own against the Pahlava but having been doing this for ten years now and with an economy that is stagnating my relish for this campaign is dimishing.

[PureEvil[PIE]]

I'm in the same boat as Brennus I believe. With Carthage I am allied with the Aedui though, it's the Sweboz who have managed to garner quite the empire and are now sending stacks at me. I have sort of circumvented this by funding the Aedui and telling them to attack the Sweboz. With my Seleucid campaign I just got bored quite early on, didn't have much motivation in having to traverse huge distances to get to my enemies.

[edgaraurelius]

I'm very much in the mid-game blues boat. I started a campaign as Epeiros, I conquered Macedonia and drove the Koinon Hellenon out of Greece with Pyrrhos then switched gears and (thanks to Taras, which I had previously abandoned to the Romans, revolting and giving me a foothold in Southern Italy, took the same army that conquered Greece and drove the Romans out of Italy to where they only had Massalia, Patavium and Corsica; this happened in the span of 20 years (I'm not much of a blitzer) and then Pyrrhus died and my game lost a lot of steam after his death. My only acquisitions since then (another 24 years or so) have been Patavium, Rhodos, Halikarnassos, Pergamon, Lesbos and Byzantion. I'm now dreading the idea of expanding further into Anatolia or finishing off the Romans.

I wouldn't mind taking Anatolia so much if it didn't require a war with the Ptolemies, Pontos and the Seleucids. Unfortunately the Ptolemies, who had been my allies for the first 40 years in my game, made a push from Sidon and took Antiocheia, retook Tarsos and then took Side which gave me a border with them and they declared war not long afterwards. I had hoped to take the Seleucid holdings in Anatolia while the Ptolemies fought them in Syria but the prospect of continuing to face stack after stack of Ptolemaic and Seleucid armies (who are now neutral with each other) just brings the steam out of any enthusiasm I had for that save. Currently considering a Baktrian game.

[Blxz]

I have started experimenting with easy campaign difficulties and then limiting myself with some strong roleplay. Basically I tend not to field an army at all and simply go with garrison units enough to keep the town on the green/yellow face border on normal or high tax. If I need an army then I will strip garrison forces to get a halfstack or so.

This tends to keep the game challenging enough in that my forces are very spread out and require some effort to bring together and even then my army will never be huge but at the same time it reduces some of the crazy AI attacks. Plus I can focus less on fighting and more on managing my generals and towns.

The downside of course is that if I don't control myself it can get easy. So next game I might experiment with the same but bump battle difficulty up one notch to hard. So far though it has been very enjoyable and not as easy as I would have thought.

[Stark]

Has anyone tried letting AI fight all the battles? You can even put your army under AI control and then watch it as they battle the enemy. That would pretty much limit your expansion but still let you watch your battles.

I'm playing a hotseat campaign on vanilla Rome and we're planning to fight battles beetween humans like that. Has anyone tried that, will any side be in advantage? The only problem I currently see is that when units rout and then come back they're put back under player control, so you have to put them back under AI constantly. I'm not sure if that messes up AI planning, with number of units under his command changing all the time.

[Brennus]

I'm in the same boat as Brennus I believe.

I just checked the fleet I have off Phonecia and I can't see you anywhere, are you sure you got the right ship? :)

[rickinator9]

I just checked the fleet I have off Phonecia and I can't see you anywhere, are you sure you got the right ship? :)

Lulz.

I'm also having the Mid-game blues disorder with the seleucids. I'm killing off egypt and now I need to go to the southernmost egyptian city at the sea near the arabian peninsula. My guy needs to walk 10 turns and that is pretty much the only army I can afford right now. It's really difficult to resist to send that army up against parthia which has taken most of my eastern provinces.

[konny]

I'm playing a hotseat campaign on vanilla Rome and we're planning to fight battles beetween humans like that. Has anyone tried that, will any side be in advantage? The only problem I currently see is that when units rout and then come back they're put back under player control, so you have to put them back under AI constantly. I'm not sure if that messes up AI planning, with number of units under his command changing all the time.

From time to time I do place at least parts of my army under AI control. I find that the AI is doing comparably well with my units (in particular when fighting inside towns), I have the impression even better than with the enemy units.

One problem is that the AI sometimes just regoups the units under its control and does nothing until being ordered to attack. It also makes rather limited use of missles with melee units having javelins.