Improvements I'm looking forward to or Why I'm patiently waiting for EB II

[Shadowwalker]

Hello there,
instead of the next pointless question about a release date I'd rather want to share some thoughts about my expectations for EB II.
Perhaps some of you are interested in sharing their thoughts as well...

[huge-foreword-mode ]
When Rome:TW was released I unfortunately wasn't able to play it right away since my computer was barely able to start the game and crashed as soon as the intro was about to start. (The machine was just too old.)
So I continued playing M:TW and just read about Rome. Soon I learned that it wasn't even slightly historical accurate - it was infact inaccurate enough that some people started mods to improve this.
Since I'm fairly interested in history I closely followed the progress of these mods (EB in particular).
When I finally was able to buy a new computer one of the first things I did was downloading EB 0.81.
I spent about half an hour playing Rome:TW, had a short laugh and switched to EB which I still play today.
[There are only four other games I played that intensively in my life: Civilization 2, Jagged Alliance 2, Medieval: TW [the first one!] and Baldurs Gate, the latter being the only other game I still play...]

I have played a fair lot of other Rome mods as well but none of them was able to catch my attention for long, there was always something that disappointed me too much. For example Roma Surrectum: It's a really good mod and I really appreciate the amount of work and good ideas - not to mention the unbelieveable generosity to release the new environment as a gift to all R:TW players! - but I just hate fighting several stacks per turn...

But even EB - which is what Rome should have been in my opinion, infact I consider it being Rome - has some limitations/problems that I don't like. Most of them are problems of the vanilla game though:

(1) The after-battle-CTD's. This is honestly the biggest problem for me. I can't count anymore how many heroic victories or siege battle victories I lost to crashes. It's annoying me to an extend that I often after such a crash just use a single unit and the auto-win cheat for that battle.

(2) Even EB - although really successful at lowering the amount of stacks on the map - wasn't able to solve the problem as a whole. In mid-/late campaigns the enemy factions (at least the bigger ones) still field a lot of stacks which they often throw at the player faction exclusively (although this seems to be less likely when playing on lower campaign difficulties). That's why I for example always quit Romani campaigns after ~150BC. Fighting Phalanxes with the SPQR troops (and without hiring mercenary phalanxes) is difficult enough for me (I always suffer 15-30% casualties) but full stacks of Argyraspides/Pezhetairoi/Klerouchon Agema/Chalkaspides with a backup of Thorakitai, Galatikoi Klerouchoi, heavy cavalry and/or archers is just .... *shudders*.
Fighting "stacks" consisting of a few high-tier-units that besiege your well-fortified/garrisoned frontier towns is another annoyance. I know they won't stand a chance (not even doing much harm to my defenders) but obviously the AI considers 2 Gaesatae, 1 Solduros, 3 Lugoae and 1 Leuce Epos to be enough to defeat the garrison of Massalia consisting of a whole polybian legion and it's auxilia as well as the city's garrison (1 Velites, 2 Hastati, 2 Principes, 1 Triarii, 2 Iaosatae, 2 Gaeroas and 1 Pedites Extraordinarii; garrison: another 4 Iaosatae, 2 Hoplitai Haploi and 1 Celtic Lesser King....). This leads to a sally battle every turn which is completely pointless. I'd autoresolve it if it weren't for the high casualties and the following necessity to retrain the garrison in an italian settlement....

(3) The diplomacy. Or better: the nonexistant diplomacy. It is just ridiculous that you have to extinct every faction you border just to stop them throwing everything they have against your walls. It is also ridiculous that two factions that were at war for some dozen years instantly make peace (and of course ally the next turn...) as soon as one of them borders you - just to give that factions the opportunity to attack you instead.

(4) The boredom of late campaigns. Another reason why I - although I play EB for several years now - only managed to win 3 campaigns so far (Pontos in EB 1.1 and Carthage in EB 1.0 and 1.2). I had about 6 or seven SPQR campaigns where I reached the Marian Reforms (and even had one recently where my legions are Imperial ones) but I just grow bored when the only thing I have to do is fighting pesky rebels in my "safe" regions and fighting at least one enemy fullstack every turn at the frontier. I know I can't lose anymore but gaining any further process is just painfully slow because the bordering factions concentrate all their troops at my borders (even if this means that another enemy on the other side of their kingdom takes over province after province).
The mentioned SPQR campaign sees about ten fullstacks of the Seleucids in Asia Minor (Mazaka/Tarsos) and Egypt (Kyrene/Augila). Pontos (despite having only 3 provinces) has it's 3 fullstacks near Ankyra, the Sauromatae are busy filling the fifth stack at Olbia and the Sweboz have some six or seven stacks along the Rhine. *sigh*
I don't even dream of defeating three phalanx-heavy or horse-archer-exclusive fullstacks at once so it's just a stalemate.

(5) The bad BAI.... err, no. Infact that isn't something I even noticed at all. I'm probably the worst tactician ever. When I look at certain AAR's I just shake my head in disbelief. (The last example is QS's "Epeiros-as-Pergamon" game, where he shows victories against phalanx-heavy fullstacks, achieved with a halfstack of low-level-troops. I'd lose a halfstack against that enemy army ... )
Err... back to topic.

(6) The somewhat crowded map, especially in regions like greece or italy.
[/huge-foreword-mode ]

So what do I hope to see in EBII?

(1) A much lesser amount of CTD's. I strongly believe that to become true since I played some mods for MII:TW and almost never had any CTD's that were caused by hardcoded CA programming madness.

(2) A somewhat more reasonable CAI. I know this to be possible because I experienced it in some mods as well (for example the wonderful german Reconquista mod or Das Heilige Römische Reich). It would be wonderful if you could - for example by paying tributes - get a bit more peace in your campaigns.

(3) Better game mechanics about alternative history and recruitment. I mean: it is obvious that most players won't follow the history (perhaps except for some really patient SPQR players; by the way: Quintus Sertorius, I really like your guide). There's not much fun in recreating the defeat of a faction....
So most players will change the history and for example take of half of Europe with the Lusotannan. I'd really love it if the culture system could be used to allow players to "convert" the conquered regions to the faction's culture. Of course this should be a loooong process (at least as long and difficult as the second tier of the Hayasdan reforms in EB), but it should be possible at least. And it ideally should include the possibility to train factional troops in those regions at last. Not the elite ones or troops that are clearly regional (so no Thessalian Cavalry in southern Ireland) but I hope for basic units at least.
Another example: Let's say I play the Koinon Hellenon and somehow manage to conquer Gader. After a lot of efforts it should be possible to convince the inhabitants that some units of levy and classical hoplites make for a good defence of Gader. And some Sphendonetai, Toxotai and Akontistai as well...
Of course this would mean to convince the inhabitants of the superiority of the underlying culture concepts first (could be done in game terms by bringing a good amount of hellenic people to Gader - done by certain buildings - and raising the hellenic culture in Gader above 60% for the levy hoplites, slingers, javelineers and archers and above 80% for the hoplitai). And of course it should never be possible to reach a replenishment rate for these troops as high as in, say, Athenai.

(4) A lot more complex building trees. I would love to see much more differences between the factions in that part of the game and I'd love to see building trees that are big enough that you can't build everything available in the first hundred years. As I said: I love Civilization...

(5) More interesting late campaigns. Although I honestly haven't even the slightest idea how to reach that.

(6) The extensive use of dynamic events (for example for several reforms). Infact the events are one of the features I like the most about MII:TW.

(7) And of course: at least the same level of historical accuracy as in EB and a lot of information I didn't know before. That is no hope or expectation though, I just KNOW it will be that way.

(8) I felt like "YAY!!!!" when I read about the increased dimensions of the EBII map, so I'm fairly sure that a "Too crowded!"-feeling won't happen again.

(9) And I'd really love if something like the CityMod would be implemented in EBII.


A word about eyecandy: I don't bother too much with several faces for units or variations in the equipment. Don't get me wrong: I appreciate the work the team invests into this part of the game, it is in my personal case just a waste because I rarely have the time to zoom in during a battle. I'm busy with trying to keep the casualties low.
Eyecandy I really love are for example the unit and building icons on the stratmap and the map itself (I just jawdropped when I saw the map of Paeninsula Italica for MII:TW or the building icons of The Last Kingdom, just to give you an idea what I'm talking about).


That much from me for the moment.
Would love to read your opinions/wishes/expectations.

[I apologize for the rather limited english...]

[Foot]

^ win post.

Foot

[Populus Romanus]

^ win post.

Foot

LOL! I must agree with Foot. It is unfortunate that this forum does not have a reputation function.

I am looking forward most to the new factions and recruitment slots. Oh, the joy! More enemies to kill, and more units to kill them with! And then, of course, there is everything else. The stuff the EBII team has told us about, and the stuff they haven't. This mod will be awesome! Thank you for all your work!

[/shameless brown-noseing]

EDIT: you can have a balloon, shadowwalker. And there is no need to worry about your English. From the looks of it, your vocabulary is as sophisticated as mine.

[QuintusSertorius]

(5) The bad BAI.... err, no. Infact that isn't something I even noticed at all. I'm probably the worst tactician ever. When I look at certain AAR's I just shake my head in disbelief. (The last example is QS's "Epeiros-as-Pergamon" game, where he shows victories against phalanx-heavy fullstacks, achieved with a halfstack of low-level-troops. I'd lose a halfstack against that enemy army ... )
Err... back to topic.

In fairness, many of the battles I fight tend to be against those without generals, or else the FM general suicides themselves early in the battle. The morale gap that leaves means all I have to do is hold the line long enough for my flanking movements to take place. I've often got more cavalry than the AI, too, even if I have less infantry. So even if I'm outnumbered and out-quality-ed, the fundamentals go in my favour.

[Captain Jazzy]

Im just really looking to the sheer immersive complexity that EB look set to offer. The 10 extra factions, the diplomacy that can only get better, the reworked map and all the new features such as outlying region authority. Along with EB's standard of epic "historical-ness" and the stunning battlemap, its going to be one an amazing gaming experience.
So keep fighting the good fight EB team!

[Gustave]

I'm afraid there is not much to expect from diplomacy and BAI...they will be a bit better than in RTW maybe, but will still suck.

[Populus Romanus]

I'm afraid there is not much to expect from diplomacy and BAI...they will be a bit better than in RTW maybe, but will still suck.

NOOOO

[Arthur, king of the Britons]

NOOOO

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

IMO, campaign AI in M2:TW is significantly better but the battle AI is still just as bad. That said, peace is usually attainable in M2:TW mods for years on end while in Rome that is usually just a pipe dream.

[adishee]

NOOOO

your time will come, Lucas...

[Olaf The Great]

Funfact:The closer George Lucas is to Star Wars content the worse it gets.

As for campaign diplomacy, I know there's several campaign AI modules integrated with the mod stainless steel that radically change how the AI works, from peaceful, to reasonable, to ...almost as bad as Rome.s.

[QuintusSertorius]

IMO, campaign AI in M2:TW is significantly better but the battle AI is still just as bad. That said, peace is usually attainable in M2:TW mods for years on end while in Rome that is usually just a pipe dream.

To be honest, even building better armies on the campaign map (both in terms of size - not fragmenting into pathetic little armies - and composition) would be an improvement.

[Drunk Clown]

...IMO, campaign AI in M2:TW is significantly better...

In what way?

[GenosseGeneral]

well, at least in vanilla M2:TW it still has some very weird army composition (like armies consisting of militia units only, or, even worse, fullstacks of artillery). However, it is possible to have a lasting peace with the AI. hat generally improves diplomacy is that you can see what the AI "thinks" of you and your offers. the AI always keeps the balance of power in mind; it will attack those, who have not many allies and lots of enemies. this is why most M2TW campaigns start with a longe peacetime, until the first war breaks out somewhere; after the first war has started, europe will be in flames, since the AI tries to exploit its neighbours waging war somewhere else.

[Drunk Clown]

the AI always keeps the balance of power in mind; it will attack those, who have not many allies and lots of enemies.

AI vs AI? Cos they have waged war against me eventhough I was a superpower.

[Captain Jazzy]

CAI for me atleast was a great improvement in M:TW2. The most notable example being a VH Denmark game where I had a brilliant time making and breaking alliances with my neighbours against the Holy Roman Emp. France was a stalwart ally throughout the whole thing even when we bordered and the other Ai factions opperated with a semblence of intelligence and both helped and turned against me!
So I think its fair to expect a nice little improvement in EBII :)
Also showing the improvements and retained foolishness: Scotland was at peace with England and launched a massive naval invasion which I wasnt expecting... The crazy buggers ended up gaining 3 cities in Northern France as after I beat one stack they agreed to peace and moved on.

[Moros]

I'm afraid there is not much to expect from diplomacy and BAI...they will be a bit better than in RTW maybe, but will still suck.

Always teasing the fans...

[Olaf The Great]

Also, I'll admit I'm not really patiently waiting anymore, more like impatiently fidgeting. But as long as this doesn't go the way of RTR 7 I'm fine.

[kuro570]

I myself am waiting for this mod since ever since I was introduced to EB I could never play the vanilla game anymore. Since M2:TW I can't find myself playing EB as much as I used to because SS made fixed the monotonous feel out of the game and made it fun and interesting but seeing whats possible to mod in the game it seems like there may be many things that I can role play with and go back into time in EBII and play with the many features that make RTW and mods feel how outdated they are.

Probably the biggest feature I can't to see implemented in EBII is the recruitment system, with this limit elite soldier types and make factions feel a bit more historically, culturally correct. Also one of the features I've seen done in SS 6.4 the larger AI armies and not the 25 billion 4 unit insignificant armies that besiege half stack cities seem to drop quite a bit. Seeing that done gives me hope of the Ptolemic and Selucids infinite man armies less frequent or a thing of the past.

Keep up the good work and I'll be waiting for EBII while playing ShogunII ^.^

[Alrik]

AI vs AI? Cos they have waged war against me eventhough I was a superpower.

Well there is the degenerating relations, if you play hard or very hard, your relations will steadily go down until you are inevetably at war with everyone, except the Pope, who'll be your bestest friend once you've annihilated all the Catholic factions, since then you'll not be at war with any of them and undoubtably be butchering heathens.
There's also the fact that almost every faction has a few "must have" provinces and if you're a superpower, chances are that you've aquired a few of those.

As for the campaign AI, I've noticed that if you don't sell them your map, they will be more reluctant to enter your lands and if they do, wander about, while if you do, they hardly even hesitate, they march in and besiege your cities. A good discouragement to selling your map for a few florins, though as one can usually butcher the AI in vanilla anyhow, perhaps not so much, but it does show for a bit of improvement on the AI.

What I'm looking forward to the most is the very much improved pathfinding on the battlemap, there's still plenty of weirdness going on, especially in cities, but nowhere near as bad as in RTW.

One thing I'm a bit sceptical towards is the city walls, in RTW you can capture the towers, in M2TW, the defender always hold the tower as long as he/she's got a unit close by, even if the ttacker has held the tower for half the battle and has his troops all around it and the defender just now comes remotely close with a unit, as in not a chance in hell to take it back, it still starts fireing in his/her favour. (The best an attacker can hope for is an inert tower.)

Shadowwalker's (6)§3, Makes me think of Britannia (The campaign) which has this very feature, instead of religions, there's culture, and culture defines what you can build in the cities. M2TW also has the "free garrisons" and in the Main Game it is "Militia units" in Britannia, it is whatever the town/city can actually build. I'm fairly sure it's CA's way of getting rid of the pesky pesant garrisons that rule Vanilla RTW. Perhaps I'm an exploiter, but I liked Britannia's way better, combined with the culture determining what can be built, this often have the invading force leaving in favour of local troops. (Which I assume would make the citizens more happy in RL-scenario as well.)
I dunno if it is a good or bad thing, but I liked the way forts worked in Britannia as well, they also offer free garissons, but more importantly, they conrolled roads, they were fixed, as in that you didn't build them, they were there and remained, even if left unguarded and they were present at chokepoints of the road. (Just sounds to me like a way for EB II to represent lesser settlements, you might not get revinue from them, but feeding a couple of units there for free is payment too.)
But EB II is based on the Main game and not Britannica isn't it? (I Just found EB I, so you'll have to excuse my ignorance.)

[Horatius Flaccus]

It's based on Kingdoms, so all those options are available. And there will be permanent forts representing lesser settlements.

[QuintusSertorius]

It's based on Kingdoms, so all those options are available. And there will be permanent forts representing lesser settlements.

For someone who's never played M2:TW, what do permanent forts mean? Are they like mini-settlements? Do they impact your economy or ability to recruit if you take them?

[Horatius Flaccus]

In Vanilla? No. They are just forts like forts in Rome, only permanent and from stone (hence the name: Permanent Stone Forts (PSF's)). But the mod Dominion of the Sword has made scripts that influence your province income depending on whether or not you control certain PSF's.

[Alrik]

For someone who's never played M2:TW, what do permanent forts mean? Are they like mini-settlements? Do they impact your economy or ability to recruit if you take them?

They are like normal forts on the battlemap, but on the campaign map they are owned by the faction that held them last, even if left unguarded (and as permanent insinuates they don't dissapear if you leave them empty for a turn)

Also in M2TW you have a number of slots in settlements that offer to pay the upkeep for garrisoned troops, the different campaigns handle this differently. The main campaign requires that it is a unit with "militia" in the name that the settlement can build (But the main campaign have no permanent forts) and Britannia, which is the only one of the other three campaigns that I've played offer these freeslots to any unit that the settlement can currently build. (There are factions in the main campaign that have very limited militias compared to others, so "militia only" is very favourable for the Italian factions.)

I think it's something like:
Village - 2 slots
Town - 2 slots
Large Town - 3 slots
Minor City - 4 slots
Large City -5 slots
Huge City -6 Slots

Permanent Forts 2 Slots (But as they can't build anything they offer those slots to ANY two units.) If a Family Member is present he can also reqruit Mercenaries in the fort without leaving it, but that's the same as a normal fort, i think.

There's also Castles (Two types of settlements in M2TW), but I don't see the use of them in EB, not as castles anyway, though I do suppose they offer the EB crew an option of citytypes. Castles doesn't have any free garrison slots. (But you can convert a castle into a city and vice versa until they reach the higher tiers, well you can always convert a castle to a city, but not the other way around, I think it is large city = no going back.)

Edit:
Oh, I haven't checked, since it's quite some time since played Britannia (a tiny map with incredibly easy settings even on VH/VH), but I recall the forts being placed on roads and that possibly the ownership of them along with the diplomatic relations with that owner had an impact on the trade of said roads. This i spelucative, but at the time I didn't know of the impact rebels blocking roads had so it didn't occur to me then, it's a purely retrospective thought.

[B-Wing]

There's also Castles (Two types of settlements in M2TW), but I don't see the use of them in EB, not as castles anyway, though I do suppose they offer the EB crew an option of citytypes. Castles doesn't have any free garrison slots. (But you can convert a castle into a city and vice versa until they reach the higher tiers, well you can always convert a castle to a city, but not the other way around, I think it is large city = no going back.)

Actually the team stated in one of their previews that they will probably replace the Castle settlement type with Nomadic Camps or something similar, to be used out on the steppes. And castles can have free unit upkeep, I've seen other mods do it.

[GenosseGeneral]

Actually the team stated in one of their previews that they will probably replace the Castle settlement type with Nomadic Camps or something similar, to be used out on the steppes.

It was the Numidian Preview.

[Cute Wolf]

not wuite, actually....

[Satyros]

Hello , quick question :

I was rather impressed after reading about XAI BAI/CAI . Haven't tried it yet though .

Does the team plan on doing something similiar , well suited for the gameplay ( as desired by them ) of EB2?

Satyros