Rio V.5 Britannica Rebalanced Patch Info

[Riothamus]

This Downoad is also in the Rio Downloads section and is open here for discussion



For both mod switcher and RAR

Rio V.5 Britannica II rebalanced for both the mod switcher and RAR
http://hosted.filefront.com/Rioth
Britain rebalanced in both 432AD and 463AD campaigns to give the historical feeling of the Saxon advent.
-minor tweaks to most faction to give a historical flow..Copies over the mod switcher or RAR Version

[margio]

Ciao Rio, installed Rio V.5 Brit. Rebalanced I have played few turns with both 432 and 463AD campaign with Saxons. Few turns are not enough to deeply test the changes, but what played on both campaign and through 3 years is awesome and really challenging !
432AD seems easier: first you have to capture Londinium (and you have a strong enough army), while you have time managing Anglii and Frumwaestm Land (really unpronounceable this town name...), and then direct to Caer Cynwiddion (even this one...) to free the way to Anglii. Encounters with enemy are few, and seems that they are waiting your moves. I was sieging Icenorum to come back to Ceintii then, when I started 463AD. That's what happened after 3 years.
463AD seems harder: true that you have 4 towns (I am surprised that Saxons hold Samarobriva), but three are with people close to rioting so you must immediately manage the towns. Even Londinium have much more and experienced units than the Rebel Londinium in 432AD.
I must say that I lost Ceintii on second turn for revolt , and when after Londinium, I tried to re-capture I found a strong and gold experience awarded rebel army that defeated me , even loosing a lot of men . So now, while managing unhappiness in Samarobriva (really hardtoplease those people...!) I have to re-build my army, hoping that Samarobriva will be not attacked (hard to believe...) and restart conquest. Again is what happened after 3 years.
As I said I played through 3 years only on both campaign, but first and better feeling is for 463AD. Maybe after several years the situation changes, but... see you here with 463AD campaign .
A very good "rebalancement" .

[Riothamus]

Ciao Rio, installed Rio V.5 Brit. Rebalanced I have played few turns with both 432 and 463AD campaign with Saxons. Few turns are not enough to deeply test the changes, but what played on both campaign and through 3 years is awesome and really challenging !
432AD seems easier: first you have to capture Londinium (and you have a strong enough army), while you have time managing Anglii and Frumwaestm Land (really unpronounceable this town name...), and then direct to Caer Cynwiddion (even this one...) to free the way to Anglii. Encounters with enemy are few, and seems that they are waiting your moves. I was sieging Icenorum to come back to Ceintii then, when I started 463AD. That's what happened after 3 years.
463AD seems harder: true that you have 4 towns (I am surprised that Saxons hold Samarobriva), but three are with people close to rioting so you must immediately manage the towns. Even Londinium have much more and experienced units than the Rebel Londinium in 432AD.
I must say that I lost Ceintii on second turn for revolt , and when after Londinium, I tried to re-capture I found a strong and gold experience awarded rebel army that defeated me , even loosing a lot of men . So now, while managing unhappiness in Samarobriva (really hardtoplease those people...!) I have to re-build my army, hoping that Samarobriva will be not attacked (hard to believe...) and restart conquest. Again is what happened after 3 years.
As I said I played through 3 years only on both campaign, but first and better feeling is for 463AD. Maybe after several years the situation changes, but... see you here with 463AD campaign .
A very good "rebalancement" .

Margio, your feed back has become so invaluable to me Just one question... if your playing on h/h. The British AI is seems passive. In the 432AD Campaign there are two huge armies(in Cent and near London) You avoided Cent and attacked London?(I'm wondering what the AI did with the two huge british armies?? lol...I'll test it out a few times to see. I'm glad the 463AD campaign is thus far tough. I want the experience on h/h to be a great challenge....not only for the Saxons but also for the Romano British.
The Saxons were settling in Gaul and raided Britain from there in the 460sAD. In 469Ad a British King(Riothamus)led an expedition down there and defeating them in several battles along the Loire River before being pounced upon by a huge invading Gothic army from the South.

[cherryfunk]

Rio, I hate to say it but I think the new Britain is seriously unbalancing the overall map. You have about 24 regions in Britain, at about twice the density of cities in Italy or France, which gives Britain far more productive capability. This is particularly strange because Britain should have LESS population than Italy or France or Germany, not more -- so you've made the map the inverse of historical reality.

Now, if you're just playing on the island, it's fine. But you have to consider the island in the larger context. If the Saxons conquer all of Britain, and the Franks conquer all of France, the Saxons are going to be outproducing the Franks by at least 2:1, because they have that many more cities earning money and producing soldiers. It seems to me that this is unbalanced and unhistorical...

[Riothamus]

Rio, I hate to say it but I think the new Britain is seriously unbalancing the overall map. You have about 24 regions in Britain, at about twice the density of cities in Italy or France, which gives Britain far more productive capability. This is particularly strange because Britain should have LESS population than Italy or France or Germany, not more -- so you've made the map the inverse of historical reality.

Now, if you're just playing on the island, it's fine. But you have to consider the island in the larger context. If the Saxons conquer all of Britain, and the Franks conquer all of France, the Saxons are going to be outproducing the Franks by at least 2:1, because they have that many more cities earning money and producing soldiers. It seems to me that this is unbalanced and unhistorical...

Its a good point cherryfunk but what I did was to raise the armies upkeep for the Celts, Saxons, Picts and Romano British. Having expensive units(especially the warlord) curbs a factions expansion. This is very difficult to do but I tested exactly for that(an uberfaction). It may need some more tweaking but from testing this(about 60 hours ) The faction that conquers the island needs to be careful of not over extending itself financially.

I have lowered the population of some the cities. The 463AD has a lessor population than in 432AD. I did this with most of the cities there and took away many starting buildings...The Saxons have hardly anything in there cities.....but I may even go further and reduce most the remaining cities to just 3 to 4 thousand...The Islands cities are poor when compared to Italy or ERE cities. They are similar to those in Europe.

When testing this the Super powers that emerge Europe are the Ostrogoths, Franks and Visigoths..If the Saxons conquer the island and try to invade the mainland(usually a hard dog fight once they defeat the Romano British with the Celts)They get smashed. By the time any one of them conquer the whole island , there are four or five very powerful factions.

I'm not saying this may need to be further refined but it is great experience to play one of the island factions now.

[margio]

Ciao Rio, glad to help
I have played both through three years with h/h settings.
Concerning 432AD, it happened the following:
* Starting Turn: Saxon army near Ceintii, which had some units inside and a big RB army near, and I could see a big RB army near London.
* Second Turn: Saxon army didn't move, Ceintii was filled by few units and the others went away. Near London remained an RB family member alone, while all units went away. Saxon army moved to siege London.
I do not know where went RB units becasue the Fog of War was ON, but if I remember well the units near London went toward Icenorum.
* Third turn: London captured
* Fourth Turn: two RB army back to London, but the feeling was that they left some units in others RB towns
* Fifth Turn: the two RB army and the family member didn't move (not even joined), I attacked and even if not easy, I defeated them fighting separately in one battle.
On the following turns the RB seems to wait my actions, but Rebels too, while in 463AD RB and Rebels fought each other and tried to siege London, while I was far with my army.

[cherryfunk]

Its a good point cherryfunk but what I did was to raise the armies upkeep for the Celts, Saxons, Picts and Romano British. Having expensive units(especially the warlord) curbs a factions expansion.

That seems like a very unfair fix, now those factions have to pay more for the same quality units, to make up for the fact that you gave them too many cities? I really don't like it.

Further, the increase in the number of cities:

-- Allows Britain to outproduce the continent 2:1 -- they can overwhelm the enemy just by being able to produce twice as many units in the same time frame.

-- Means that Britain takes twice as long to conquer, since it requires twice as many seiges. So once you have it, it's easier to defend.

And all for what? The region balance was perfect in Rio IV, there was no need to double the number of regions in Britain. It makes no sense to me.

And it just feels wrong. For the map scale, having all those cities crowded onto the island feels totally unbalanced to me. Why would that one corner of the map be so different from all the rest? If you want to do a Britain sub-campaign, use a huge Britain map, don't unbalance the existing one.

I hate to say it but I'll have to go back to Rio IV, I just can't play with this new Britain. I think you should seriously consider undoing this, you had a great region balance and now in my opinion it's totally unbalanced. You know I love your work, but in this case I think you've gone down the wrong path.

Oh, and another question -- I started up a Rio IV campaign as the Huns (463AD) and huh! What's going on with that faction? They have 1 region, 1 family member, NO units, and -15,000 denari! Why did you cripple them like that? They're totally unplayable. I was looking forward to trying to rebuild the Hun empire, but couldn't play the campaign because of how you set it up.

[Riothamus]

That seems like a very unfair fix, now those factions have to pay more for the same quality units, to make up for the fact that you gave them too many cities? I really don't like it.

The Saxons in Britain at this time were mercenaries...They were not a united faction, thus the higher unit upkeep can be explained. They of the other factions ,except the Romano Brits there (Britain) have the highest upkeep. Also the other factions there, the Celts, Picts and even the Romano British were not really factions as in the same sense as the Franks, Ostrogoths, Visogoths ect... They were more a loose confederation of tribes. To raise an army ment payment by the leading warlord by booty thus again an expensive endevor. Upkeep for them should be a little higher than it was previously.

Further, the increase in the number of cities:

-- Allows Britain to outproduce the continent 2:1 -- they can overwhelm the enemy just by being able to produce twice as many units in the same time frame.

-- Means that Britain takes twice as long to conquer, since it requires twice as many seiges. So once you have it, it's easier to defend.

Oh, and another question -- I started up a Rio IV campaign as the Huns (463AD) and huh! What's going on with that faction? They have 1 region, 1 family member, NO units, and -15,000 denari! Why did you cripple them like that? They're totally unplayable. I was looking forward to trying to rebuild the Hun empire, but couldn't play the campaign because of how you set it up.

The increase in the cities does create some issues some are turned into mostly rebel held poorly built up towns,(this can and will be further modified) they will not produce much and will be a task for it not to rebel if overtaking and remember there are 4 factions battling it out up there and there is 200 provinces in the game. This I firmly believe a matter of balancing correctly.

The Huns in 463AD were very fragmented. The many Rebel cities there are the representation of the political break up. There even a province about 10 years into the game that rebels back over to the Huns but if they hold of the Slavs they will go back into + finances and can begin expanding again.
I took them out of the Rio V but I'm open to putting them back in.

Your argument is well taking cherryfunk and a good one and can help me further modify whats needs to be done. I can understand where your coming from.

[cherryfunk]

The increase in the cities does create some issues some are turned into mostly rebel held poorly built up towns,(this can and will be further modified) they will not produce much and will be a task for it not to rebel if overtaking and remember there are 4 factions battling it out up there and there is 200 provinces in the game. This I firmly believe a matter of balancing correctly.

In the long term, you CAN'T balance this. You gave Britain twice the population density of any other part of the map. A hundred years into a campaign, it doesn't matter how low you set the starting populations -- Britain will have twice the economic power that it should. That can't be balanced. And I have no idea why you did it in the first place. You had a GREAT regional balance before. Now it makes no sense to me at all...

The Huns in 463AD were very fragmented.

Sure, and they should be a weak faction, I agree. But you made them UNPLAYABLE. You can't -- you just CAN'T -- set a faction up like that, with NO units? NO money? How is it fun to play? All it did was piss me off. Rios, EVERY faction should be set up so it has a chance, and EVERY faction should have something to work with at the campaign start; a couple of family members at least, a few units, a diplomat and a spy.

Sticking one family member in one region with no units and no money just makes no sense at all. It doesn't make any gameplay sense -- who's going to want to play it? And it doesn't make any historical sense -- how on earth does a single family member represent a tribe, no matter how small? Where are his followers?

[Riothamus]

In the long term, you CAN'T balance this. You gave Britain twice the population density of any other part of the map. A hundred years into a campaign, it doesn't matter how low you set the starting populations -- Britain will have twice the economic power that it should. That can't be balanced. And I have no idea why you did it in the first place. You had a GREAT regional balance before. Now it makes no sense to me at all...


Sure, and they should be a weak faction, I agree. But you made them UNPLAYABLE. You can't -- you just CAN'T -- set a faction up like that, with NO units? NO money? How is it fun to play? All it did was piss me off. Rios, EVERY faction should be set up so it has a chance, and EVERY faction should have something to work with at the campaign start; a couple of family members at least, a few units, a diplomat and a spy.

Sticking one family member in one region with no units and no money just makes no sense at all. It doesn't make any gameplay sense -- who's going to want to play it? And it doesn't make any historical sense -- how on earth does a single family member represent a tribe, no matter how small? Where are his followers?

You don not know my mod well enough. In the Rio mod you can add economic trade(by a system thats implemented) to specific city, regions or whatever thus increasing a particular regions economic output. This is in the economic, military or capital city trade system thats now in place.

Within my user guide:

Trade
a no trade icons: cities still trade to adjacent settlements on land and by sea trade routes
b trade icons: appear in capital cities and show what is traded. Trade is also enhanced
c economic buildings: buildings displayed for construction for the type of trade. Trade is enhanced

This method constitutes the amount of a cities economic production. You are wrong to think as you are... cause you are thinking in accepting the standard way of how to balance the games economics. Production on the Island can further be controlled or other regions enhanced to reduce its potential production by this system, thus making it poor in comparison to other large regions. This can be done with a historical context. I did this because I refuse to be a bounded to the standard ways of modding and to enhance gameplay within a historical context.

I respectfully disagree your position about the Huns. We can just leave it at that.

edit: sorry I pissed you off :O(

[cherryfunk]

Obviously it's your mod and you're the boss, but for me, personally, I can't play on a map that has such a disparity in region balance. Regardless of how well you balanced the economy, it doesn't 'feel' right to me. And it makes no sense either -- why you'd want to do it in the first place, I just don't understand.

As for the Huns -- you really think giving a faction one family member and NO units, and a huge deficit, makes sense? Really? You think it's fun for a player to start that campaign? It seems to me that you must have never playtested the Huns, because if you'd spent five minutes with them, you would realize that this is what the first 10 turns of the 463 Hun campaign are like:

-- Turn one: turn taxes up to very high, hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

-- Turn two: hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

-- Turn three: hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

-- Turn four: hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

-- Turn five: hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

-- Turn six: hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

-- Turn seven: hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

-- Turn eight: hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

-- Turn nine: hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

-- Turn ten: hit 'end turn' and pray that nobody attacks your one city.

How do I know this? Because I played those ten turns, and then I quit the campaign and said 'screw this.'

There's not a RTW player in the universe who would think that was fun. We may disagree, but I challenge you to find a single player who supports your Hun setup. You won't. As the mod creator it's your responsiblity to ensure that EVERY playable faction is FUN and has a reasonable chance at victory. You have not done this.

I also noticed that Rio IV still has many holes. No victory conditions for factions -- why haven't you done this yet? The faction selection maps are still incomplete or missing entirely. Most factions start with no agents, no proper set-up on the map (no watch-towers, which are CRUCIAL on a map this big, no forts, illogical placement of field-armies and family members, etc.)

I wish that you would spend more time polishing your mod -- finishing all of these little details -- and balancing ALL factions, rather than diving into new features, as innovative as they may be, or obsessing over Britain, which is one corner of the map and entirely irrelevant to at least 2/3rds of the factions in the game...

Sorry if I'm being harsh, but I think your mod has the potential to be one of the best ever created, and I see you neglecting all these little details which are essential for a polished, complete mod.

[Riothamus]

Your feed back is much appreciated Cherryfunk. I think your points are sound and are taking into consideration. I have further rebalanced the Britannica Patch with your concerns in mind.

As the mod creator it's your responsiblity to ensure that EVERY playable faction is FUN and has a reasonable chance at victory. You have not done this.
.

This is not my responsibility. The Burgundians, Picts, Suebi, and a few other factions do not have a reasonable chance to win this game nor should they according to history....They have never the less a chance a tiny one but win conditions have been lowered for them also. Is this fun or a mega challenge for a player?....some would think both you probably not but this is the philosophy of the mod.

You keep saying the Rio IV Mod but the Rio IV Mod has been upgraded to Rio V not too long ago so your playing with the latest upgraded mod. Your not being reasonable by points about a an older mod that has been upgraded to a newer one. Alot has been done to polish it along with the Rio V 5.5 patch and Britannica rebalanced. In the Rio V I took out the Huns completely in the 463AD campaign and using the Bulgars. I'm not adverse to putting them back in. I'm not sure to what capacity if I do....open to your ideas.

DL the Rio V and then the patch then we can resume are discussion so we are on the same page

THE MOD SWITCHER VERSION

Rio IBFD V Mod switcher and Rio IBFD V Mod switcher 5.5
http://hosted.filefront.com/Rioth
http://s1.quicksharing.com/v/7461556/RIO_V.exe.html
Rio V 5.0... Target destination: C:\Program Files\Activision\Rome - Total War
Rio V 5.5 ...Open the 5.5 folder, click on the 'rio' folder Then copy or paste it over the rtw folder(where your game is) copying over the 'rio' files. This will copy over the 5.0 mod switcher.

[cherryfunk]

This is not my responsibility.

It is your responsibility. Every playable faction should have victory conditions and some chance of achieving them. If they don't, then either make them unplayable, or represent them with 'rebels'. This is Modding 101. Basic stuff.

You keep saying the Rio IV Mod but the Rio IV Mod has been upgraded to Rio V not too long ago so your playing with the latest upgraded mod. Your not being reasonable by points about a an older mod that has been upgraded to a newer one.

I do have Rio V but I can't play it. The changes to the map and the bizarre fixation on Britain makes it unplayable for me. It doesn't look or feel right -- you're scrolling across the map with cities well spaced out, and then you get to Britain and all the cities are crowded in like sardines. Why? I still can't for the life of me figure out why you did this. Maybe you love it, maybe all of your other fans love it, but for me it's unplayable.

So I've gone back to Rio IV.

[Riothamus]

It is your responsibility. Every playable faction should have victory conditions and some chance of achieving them. If they don't, then either make them unplayable, or represent them with 'rebels'. This is Modding 101. Basic stuff.


I do have Rio V but I can't play it. The changes to the map and the bizarre fixation on Britain makes it unplayable for me. It doesn't look or feel right -- you're scrolling across the map with cities well spaced out, and then you get to Britain and all the cities are crowded in like sardines. Why? I still can't for the life of me figure out why you did this. Maybe you love it, maybe all of your other fans love it, but for me it's unplayable.

So I've gone back to Rio IV.

cherryfunk please don't post on this(Rio)forum again since you are going to try and tell me what my responsibilities as modder is. This is where I draw the line. I take offense and I'm quite incensed that you think you have a right to tell that I'm being irresponsible on how I perceive my mod should be representative of other factions. I gave you a chance to retract that statement of yours and you didn't and you again had to foolishly throw it back at me. This is where we part. Please don't respond anymore to this because I'm quite through trying to explain myself. I've tried to be respectful to your criticisms and some were constructive but I feel insulted and your remark is totally out of line.

[Riothamus]

Rio V.5 Britannica II rebalanced: Replaces the first Britannica rebalance


For both mod switcher and RAR

Rio V.5 Britannica II rebalanced for both the mod switcher and RAR
http://hosted.filefront.com/Rioth
http://s9.quicksharing.com/v/6503953...lanced.7z.html
Britain further rebalanced in both 432AD and 463AD campaigns to give the historical feeling of the Saxon advent.
-econ and upkeep adjustments
-minor tweaks to most faction to give a historical flow..Copies over the mod switcher or RAR Version

[Riothamus]

I had to make a few final minor adjustments in the descr_stat file
Please re dl the Britannica II if you had already done so before this post.
Apologies before any inconvenience..All dl sites now have the site address below
-now balanced in the context of the entire game
-historical generals for RB placed in proper family trees...this also avoids ctd.
- info in read me.

For both mod switcher and RAR

Rio V.5 Britannica II rebalanced for both the mod switcher and RAR
http://hosted.filefront.com/Rioth
http://s9.quicksharing.com/v/6503953...lanced.7z.html
[B]Britain further rebalanced in both 432AD and 463AD campaigns to give the historical feeling of the Saxon advent.

[margio]

Ciao Rio, installed new Britannica II and started playing Saxons 463AD (VH/H)... are you sure that you added just few minor adjustments ... or you just made thoughest Saxons work...? Bad boy ... (jocking ...)
You really gave me a very very hard work with Saxons: four towns (which three rioting after first turn), 1000 denarii (one or two buildings only), a very strong and skilled RB army in London (...and if you don't capture London on second turn means defeat)...
OK... hard fight... hard economy... hard task... hard work...
GREAT ! CHALLENGING ! Accepting the challenge!!!
See you on report thread ...!

[Riothamus]

Ciao Rio, installed new Britannica II and started playing Saxons 463AD (VH/H)... are you sure that you added just few minor adjustments ... or you just made thoughest Saxons work...? Bad boy ... (jocking ...)
You really gave me a very very hard work with Saxons: four towns (which three rioting after first turn), 1000 denarii (one or two buildings only), a very strong and skilled RB army in London (...and if you don't capture London on second turn means defeat)...
OK... hard fight... hard economy... hard task... hard work...
GREAT ! CHALLENGING ! Accepting the challenge!!!
See you on report thread ...!

Thanks Margio. ...It appears one or the other or both are best fought on VH. The Rb as you said (pm I think)move around like their rebels on the map The RB AI is quite difficult to manipulate..so hard to balance the fighting part. Sometimes the AI Saxon stands around too... waiting for something. Although, I felt I got the econ right in the context of the whole game. Money will be tight.
I'm tried to not make London a do or die situation...hopefully. The AI may not finish you off. I reduced the cities economics and population so its no longer a tremendous boost.

I've been working on scripts for spawning armies again. fun fun fun.

edit: Just to further reiterate on the Saxon/Angli/Jutes that were invading Britain were more like Mercenaries than a faction. Its a comparable historical situation to Eric the Red or Lief Ericson in the sense of them looking to carve out a kingdom(not that you don't know this Margio but thought I should explain it here again)If I had them in Northern Germany as their base then they would more represent them like other factions in the game, lower upkeep, cities more upgraded ect... but I don't. They need to carve out a homeland or dissipate back into the sea and unfortunately at the the RB expense. On a bit lesser scale I did this with the Gaels with their invasion-migration into Pict lands. The goal is for the Gaels and Saxons clash eventually to a head with their large Kingdoms. This happens quite often when the AI plays out the game. Hopefully it will happen for the Great Bretwalda Margio

[margio]

Ciao Rio,
Bretwalda Margio had his very hard times to go other than 2/3 years campaign (463Ad H/VH) before to find the right strategy and avoid bankrupcy and/or defeat!!! I left all towns and/or two or three of them... disbanded all units not in the army close to Londinium and/or only peasants... conclusion ...
Now after two or three trials (maybe 5 or 6 ...) I found the right one... maybe... Left Samarobriva and Anglii destroying all possible buildings (the sea and enemy territories on the way to Ceintii are a problem for happiness and economy), trasferred all units to Ceintii and Frumwaestm Land (to make people at least disillusioned... anyway Ceintii rioting), built Ull and Wotan temple (to help disillusion...), now attacking London with siege towers. I don't know what will happens on 464 or 465, but the feeling is that I am on the right way... maybe... otherwise I will look for another one ...

[Riothamus]

Ciao Rio,
Bretwalda Margio had his very hard times to go other than 2/3 years campaign (463Ad H/VH) before to find the right strategy and avoid bankrupcy and/or defeat!!! I left all towns and/or two or three of them... disbanded all units not in the army close to Londinium and/or only peasants... conclusion ...
Now after two or three trials (maybe 5 or 6 ...) I found the right one... maybe... Left Samarobriva and Anglii destroying all possible buildings (the sea and enemy territories on the way to Ceintii are a problem for happiness and economy), trasferred all units to Ceintii and Frumwaestm Land (to make people at least disillusioned... anyway Ceintii rioting), built Ull and Wotan temple (to help disillusion...), now attacking London with siege towers. I don't know what will happens on 464 or 465, but the feeling is that I am on the right way... maybe... otherwise I will look for another one ...

Bretwalda Margio, I think this last choice is agood strat. The RB is strained financially for carrying a large army so even if you are defeated while seiging London all shouldn't be lost. Other Rb cities would be vunerable or Rb may decide to move troops from London to elsewhere opening a chance for another seige

I finished a final version of balancing Britainnica. There were still a few wrinkles in it I wanted to straighten out. I'm not sure if I should wait and put it in with other upgrades like 7.3 IBFD units, wall corrections, ect... in a future Rio VI. What do you think? I hate to again throw in another patch so soon but dam I'm really happy with it(I played both RB and Saxons on H/H several times and it was intense to say the least.

Also do you think London should have Large walls? This would make the Saxon Siege tower non usable. I saw a third century illustration of the London wall with drum towers as described by Patricius
In Rio VI I'm going to restore Large walls in some starting cities ..Roman cities and a few cities that were conquered by Barbarians.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/threecounties/w..._time/04.shtml