RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tungri_centurio

no late game small rebellions?

---

Oh, I was always after these - but not scripted ones.

I would much rather see rebellions based upon Loyalty and have serious tests done whenever the Faction Leader changes. I'd rather the player have no idea when a new Otho/Galba/Vitellius would appear.

Indeed I'd like to see all the scripts reduced, except perhaps the first; and maybe, just maybe, an alternate start offered that takes the start time back again to the Etruscan wars (where you could use the 'Rebels) - and really show how Rome2 could have looked on a Rome1 engine.:thumbsup2

@tungri_centurio ,, yes but should also their description could be as a bodyguard. They were disbanded by Otho in the year of the 4 emperors as they were loyal to Nero. This offended the Batavi greatly and was one of the causes of the Batavia revolt the next year in 69 AD. But they were reinstated a few years later again under a different name. If the unit was brought in the next patch but made unrecruitable for a certain number of turns under a scripted Batavian rebellion it would be close to reality.

But which unit in the game would you get rid of to support the Equites Singulares Augusti - of which there was indeed only ever a single unit?

The Praetorian cavalry surely are enough?

Maybe give the recruited generals the germanic bodyguard and the FM the Pretorian bodyguard,
So you have a differens there.but most of all i like to see a tungrian cohors;-D they where verry loyal to Rome
And did not join the batavi rebellion.

i´ve just reinstalled rs after recovering from the collosal mind:wub: rome2 gave me. just wanted to praise you guys some more for what you´ve done with the mod. i´m also glad to hear that you´ve decided to continue improving it, awesome :)

Any updates on RS2 from anyone please :) ?

Having thought more about the Economic vs Fortified cities - here's an idea:

Right now the Barracks, Smith, Regional Focus and Trading Centers have interdependent bonuses, i.e. you need Fortified City to build highest level of Barracks, or Economic City to get the full benefits of the Trading Centers. We want to split off economic and military development and make it permanent, whilst not affecting the ability of another faction to develop the city in another way.

Let's combine then the barracks and the regional focus trees into an indestructible government/development tree. At the highest level of this building chain you'd have two mutually exclusive options - economic vs. military specialization. Now, all the economic building trees can be built by anyone and upgraded to the fullest, but only the presence of economic specialization will grant bonuses for the higher levels of those building chains. For example, the presence of economic specialization grants the trade/tax increase for a trade fort, major river port, mine complex, etc.

However, we want this to be faction specific, so the bonuses should require building_present economic_specialization(of faction X) and faction X, building_present economic_specialization(of faction Y) and faction Y, etc. Thus, if the region gets conquered by another faction, it won't be hamstrung by the decisions of the previous owner. This will not allow the recruitment for another faction to be destroyed, but hey that would make the game more challenging. The only problem I see is that factions sharing barracks(e.g. Celts, or Diadochi) would be able to screw each other's decisions. But still, an argument could be made (historically), that those factions are of similar culture and would not try to radically change a region owned previously by the other one, but would rather use the already existing infrastructure.

The economic specialization should grant basic troops (skirmishers, light infantry and cavalry, perhaps no mercs), while the military spec should give access to the best troops of the faction (plus mercs). I think the armor/weapon bonuses should be independent of those specializations - I find that bronze/silver upgrades make a disproportionately big difference in battles (I play on H/H, maybe that has an effect), so the AI will end up with useless light troops.

Further, there should be one more upgrade for the great cities - Rome, Alexandria, Seleucia, Antiochia, Carthage, Carthago Nova, Pergamon, Pela, basically every city that now has national treasury in it. The upgrade should allow to combine both specializations, reflecting the fact that those cities were so populous and prosperous that they could serve both functions - military and economic.

Hello I would like to propose if it was thought to include Bactria for any future RS2 version?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iskandar

Having thought more about the Economic vs Fortified cities - here's an idea:

Right now the Barracks, Smith, Regional Focus and Trading Centers have interdependent bonuses, i.e. you need Fortified City to build highest level of Barracks, or Economic City to get the full benefits of the Trading Centers. We want to split off economic and military development and make it permanent, whilst not affecting the ability of another faction to develop the city in another way.

Let's combine then the barracks and the regional focus trees into an indestructible government/development tree. At the highest level of this building chain you'd have two mutually exclusive options - economic vs. military specialization. Now, all the economic building trees can be built by anyone and upgraded to the fullest, but only the presence of economic specialization will grant bonuses for the higher levels of those building chains. For example, the presence of economic specialization grants the trade/tax increase for a trade fort, major river port, mine complex, etc.

However, we want this to be faction specific, so the bonuses should require building_present economic_specialization(of faction X) and faction X, building_present economic_specialization(of faction Y) and faction Y, etc. Thus, if the region gets conquered by another faction, it won't be hamstrung by the decisions of the previous owner. This will not allow the recruitment for another faction to be destroyed, but hey that would make the game more challenging. The only problem I see is that factions sharing barracks(e.g. Celts, or Diadochi) would be able to screw each other's decisions. But still, an argument could be made (historically), that those factions are of similar culture and would not try to radically change a region owned previously by the other one, but would rather use the already existing infrastructure.

The economic specialization should grant basic troops (skirmishers, light infantry and cavalry, perhaps no mercs), while the military spec should give access to the best troops of the faction (plus mercs). I think the armor/weapon bonuses should be independent of those specializations - I find that bronze/silver upgrades make a disproportionately big difference in battles (I play on H/H, maybe that has an effect), so the AI will end up with useless light troops.

Further, there should be one more upgrade for the great cities - Rome, Alexandria, Seleucia, Antiochia, Carthage, Carthago Nova, Pergamon, Pela, basically every city that now has national treasury in it. The upgrade should allow to combine both specializations, reflecting the fact that those cities were so populous and prosperous that they could serve both functions - military and economic.

---

This is a very good idea, and I recently stumbled upon it myself whilst testing and trying to make all these buildings work right. As you note, other factions being able to build them is a problem, and giving bonuses IN them is a problem, simply because you don't want someone else determining what your economic or military focus should be. So I am rethinking the economic\fortified city buildings and how they work, and what is related to them. As it stands, there is not a clear enough 'difference', shall we say, that would mimic the M2TW system of cities and 'fortresses', which is actually how I would like these to work.

I've also had difficulty making the changes visible on the strat map...my conversion of the mining tree didn't work (it caused random CTDs). Should've known better. Every time I've messed with the mining tree I get into trouble. So I'm also thinking of another way to better represent this.

@dvk901 - have you tried to work with those animations we have talked about earlier :) ?

I got only so far with them and then had some RL issues come up that have sucked up most of my time. Still gathering ideas and fixing things as people report, but haven't had a lot of time for serious work on this. Sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dvk901

I got only so far with them and then had some RL issues come up that have sucked up most of my time. Still gathering ideas and fixing things as people report, but haven't had a lot of time for serious work on this. Sorry.

---

No problem dvk901 just take your time and do what is important for you first and foremost. I thank you for your response.

How about:

Any faction has unit limits depending on their total population and of course economy
just like in empire total war if i remember correct
this will prevent the massive stack spawning
and also it is possible to create better and balanced stacks.

sorry if anybody already posted this idea i have no time for reading all of the posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sellmax

How about:

Any faction has unit limits depending on their total population

---

I dont think this is possible with the Rome engine (I could be wrong).

The economy is the only way to limit troop numbers afaik.

Any news on updates it's been a while since I was here :) ?.
I have RSII 2.6 but maybe there was something new.

This is one of the greatest TW mod ever made. Playing Cartago is so hard and so fun. It is really just one thing I really miss and that is the need for a big army to get supply while outside a settlement. As it is now huge armies can walk about being fully supplied and 100% fit for fight always. The AI can amass a large number of stacks and not having to move them ever. Is this realistic? Even Hannibal depended on friendly tribes when crossing the alps and staying in Italy for a loong time.

I wonder if a supplies system like in Stainless Steel would be possible with Rome? Doubt it or else it'd be done already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by High Fist

I wonder if a supplies system like in Stainless Steel would be possible with Rome? Doubt it or else it'd be done already.

---

I really don't think its possible :(. If not any good modder would have done it by now.
Or maybe it can be done via ancillaries or traits but still don't think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TRON ŘĭnzŁȅr

I really don't think its possible :(. If not any good modder would have done it by now.
Or maybe it can be done via ancillaries or traits but still don't think so.

---

Traits, yeah. You could add several levels, as you go up you will get more and more penalties, and ending turn in a settlement resets you to the bottom.

If I recall, Stainless Steel had it only as a player handicap, the AI did not get it as the AI just gets itself the max level and you wipe it out because the AI doesn't "know" how to handle it.

You can script taking money away from the player and the AI for armies in the field, which is a good idea...it's just that it's something you don't visually 'see' happening, so it becomes a 'ghost' way of taking money away. Still, I have done it in a test install I use, and I rather like the idea.