Roma Surrectum II: Suggestions, issues with One-Turn Campaign

[dvk901]

I spent most of yesterday modding in the gaps in the one-turn campaign, adding missing family members/traits that are in the 0-turn campaign but not the one-turn campaign. People such as Scipio Africanus, among others who are not in it oddly enough.

I added some non historically accurate characters such as Julius Caesers family, Gaius Marius and Julia, the Junius Brutus family with relevant traits.

Anyway, disappointed to hear there's no rebels in this campaign I thought it would have been the same. Though I don't know if I'd go back to playing my 0-turn campaign, just got tiring fighting stacks upon stacks of enemies even after having assassins on their major cities breaking up their elite military barracks and killing their family members.

I prefer the one-turn campaign because it means something if you destroy an enemies stack or you loose your own army where as in the 0-turn campaign it's borderline meaningless.

Anyways I'll continue doing some testing and I'll provide some feedback on the Roman campaign I'm working on for 1-turn campaigns.

You need to be careful doing that. Characters added to the strat files that are not family members have a nasty habit of being cloned....and when one dies, so does your campaign. I hope you used the 'sub_faction' statements adding these so the game won't clone them. As for the lack of a rebellion, there are a number of issues here that just involve a ton of work no one was willing to do, TBH. For one thing, not only does the economy have to be totally different, and unit costs and upkeep, but also the scripts themselves...which were written for 0-turn. The Roman Rebellion script for the Play_Rome campaign would be a disaster to throw into the 1-turn campaign. It just wasn't written for it. So the 1-turn campaign has to be an entirely separate campaign. Also, many players have reported that the absence of the Free Barb faction, in the Roman campaign, have affected balance of speed of expansion. There was no way to prevent this and still have a Roman Rebel faction. Just one more reason that Campaigns were split up individually. Ideally, there should be a 1-turn Roman campaign that is totally separate from all the others. It's just the time and coding and time, time, time....

I'll sum up what's wrong with 1 turn campaign.
The mechanics and logic of 1 and zero turns are very different, therefore it cannot function with the same rules, so dont be shocked by what i say.

1) Character movement is too big: every turn, you can if you wish so besiege a town, and even go further than the next enemy town, seriously disrupting the enemy military infrastructure; this is no zero turn where 3 stacks are blocking your way each turn, in 1 turn once you defeat an enemy army you easily have 4 or 5 turns of liberty to attack them before they reconstruct an army.

2) Barracks construction time is too low: once you conquer a town, it takes no more than 8 turns before its able to build decent medium units, therefore the military progression is way too quick, and the "assimilation" of a province not accurately depicted;

3) AI has tendency to completely empty it's border towns by producing troops(who incidentally have very low population) because they are closer to the front, therefore its destroying its ability to develop towns into more powerful unit-pumper since its always low pop and never evolving;

4) Many buildings which made sense in 0 turn modfoldered campaigns are useless in 1 turn nonmodfoldered campaign: mainly region determination, roman governements, and weapon metal imports;

5) The treasury income is what imbalance 1 turn economy greatly. basically when you start off, you have 1 or 2 strong armies and start earning 20K per turn, allowing you to instantly rush your surroundings and expand your empire in just a few turns, catching the AI unprepare and undevelopped; however when you develop and conquer, your ability to raise funds , just like in 0 turn, comes to an equilibrium.

If i had to sum up 1 turn as it exists now, it's a massive military rush without constraints.

Aside from the points mentioned earlier, i'd add the following proposals:
- remove elite barracks from the capital;
- tone down armies available :depending on the size of the empireand the number of front, there should only be 1 army, sometimes 2, available;
- tone down units upkeep a bit and remove treasury income or seriously tone it down so that it only allows the economy to turn a small profit on turn 2;

As you say, the mechanics of a 1-turn campaign are radically different from a 0-turn. And I can see the necessity to slow down other things as well. What bothers me, though, is the prospect of removing the things that make RS2 unique in the first place, or items that are 'depth' issues. You say remove path choice buildings, political buildings, the economic setup that is in the 0-turn, etc. These are things that make RS2 what it is.

But removing the elite barracks is probably a good idea.

[Cynik]

You need to be careful doing that. Characters added to the strat files that are not family members have a nasty habit of being cloned....and when one dies, so does your campaign. I hope you used the 'sub_faction' statements adding these so the game won't clone them. As for the lack of a rebellion, there are a number of issues here that just involve a ton of work no one was willing to do, TBH. For one thing, not only does the economy have to be totally different, and unit costs and upkeep, but also the scripts themselves...which were written for 0-turn. The Roman Rebellion script for the Play_Rome campaign would be a disaster to throw into the 1-turn campaign. It just wasn't written for it. So the 1-turn campaign has to be an entirely separate campaign. Also, many players have reported that the absence of the Free Barb faction, in the Roman campaign, have affected balance of speed of expansion. There was no way to prevent this and still have a Roman Rebel faction. Just one more reason that Campaigns were split up individually. Ideally, there should be a 1-turn Roman campaign that is totally separate from all the others. It's just the time and coding and time, time, time....

Yeah I added the new family members under the sub-faction part, this is how I put it;-

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

;;;family members
character_record Decius Fabius, male, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 7, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Marcus Fabius, male, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 3, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Amulius Fabius, male, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 1, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Faustina, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 48, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Poppaea, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 29, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Alypia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 20, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Fadia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 12, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Licinia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 13, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Minervina, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 12, alive, never_a_leader
;;sub_faction wives
character_record Metella, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Eutropia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Severina, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Antistia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Domitilla, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Alfidia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Helena, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 16, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Marcia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 32, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Aurelia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 14, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Julia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 14, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Atia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 14, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Servilia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 14, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Cornelia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 1, alive, never_a_leader

relative Quintus Fabius, Faustina, Sextus Fabius, Marcellus Fabius, Licinia, Minervina, end
relative Sextus Fabius, Poppaea, Fadia, Decius Fabius, Marcus Fabius, end
relative Marcellus Fabius, Alypia, Amulius Fabius, end
;;;;sub_faction characters;;;All chars. are 'sub_faction romans_brutii'.
relative Lucius Paullus, Metella, end
relative Gaius Varro, Antistia, end
relative Gaius Flaminius, Eutropia, end
relative Gnaeus Geminus, Domitilla, end
relative Publius Scipio, Severina, PubliusA Scipio, end
relative PubliusA Scipio, Helena, Cornelia, end
relative Gaius Iulius_Structus, Marcia, GaiusA Iulius_Structus, Julia, end
relative GaiusA Iulius_Structus, Aurelia, end
relative Gaius Marius, Atia, end
relative Marcus Iunius_Rufus, Servilia, end
relative Atilius Regulus, Alfidia, end

Hopefully the campaign doesn't end as you say but so far it's going quite nicely. Hannibal ambushed our Northern most army killing off the bulk of that army leaving only under a thousand men alive to retreat to Arretium.

I brought Publius Scipio Africanus up from Sicily (where I spawned him) to out Hannibal and Maharabal in successive battles, then removing them from Genoa. After retraining his legion he went straight to Carthage as his father was in Iberia was a doing a good job of cleaning up and didn't need him.

Took Carthage and got 2 heroic victories and fought off another script-spawned stack outside Carthage. Though as he landed in Africa he got the Political General trait which is very annoying as he has nothing to indicate he is a bad general. He has all positive traits expect for that one.

The economy is fine so far 8 years in going down to <10k every turn or borderline 0. I'll post some pictures later when the campaign develops properly.

Also I completely understand about the 1-turn campaign not getting the same attention due to time restrictions due to the immense amount of work required to even get this far and to find people willing to test your campaigns properly. I'll do my best to help out with feedback on this one and hopefully we can flesh this out a bit more to make it something special.

By the way a 'quick fix' could be just spawning Free people "roman rebels" outside cities that have rebelled. I'm assuming you can still make cities rebel with a script even if you don't have a specific faction to give them to. Anyways hope the team gets a breather to be able to get around to this since I think quite a few people love the RS2 direction but would prefer it in a 1-turn format

[Siegfriedfr]

As you say, the mechanics of a 1-turn campaign are radically different from a 0-turn. And I can see the necessity to slow down other things as well. What bothers me, though, is the prospect of removing the things that make RS2 unique in the first place, or items that are 'depth' issues. You say remove path choice buildings, political buildings, the economic setup that is in the 0-turn, etc. These are things that make RS2 what it is.

But removing the elite barracks is probably a good idea.

Well imo the whole game was designed with 0-turn and modfoldering in mind. Either you modfolder 1 turn as well for each campaign, or you need to "rethink" how the game works in 1 turn and do some concessions

Edit: i'll do somewhat of an "alpha" version of my ideas, test it, and send it to you.

[CenturiO-LuciuS-VorenuS]

I'll sum up what's wrong with 1 turn campaign.
The mechanics and logic of 1 and zero turns are very different, therefore it cannot function with the same rules, so dont be shocked by what i say.

1) Character movement is too big: every turn, you can if you wish so besiege a town, and even go further than the next enemy town, seriously disrupting the enemy military infrastructure; this is no zero turn where 3 stacks are blocking your way each turn, in 1 turn once you defeat an enemy army you easily have 4 or 5 turns of liberty to attack them before they reconstruct an army.

2) Barracks construction time is too low: once you conquer a town, it takes no more than 8 turns before its able to build decent medium units, therefore the military progression is way too quick, and the "assimilation" of a province not accurately depicted;

3) AI has tendency to completely empty it's border towns by producing troops(who incidentally have very low population) because they are closer to the front, therefore its destroying its ability to develop towns into more powerful unit-pumper since its always low pop and never evolving;

4) Many buildings which made sense in 0 turn modfoldered campaigns are useless in 1 turn nonmodfoldered campaign: mainly region determination, roman governements, and weapon metal imports;

5) The treasury income is what imbalance 1 turn economy greatly. basically when you start off, you have 1 or 2 strong armies and start earning 20K per turn, allowing you to instantly rush your surroundings and expand your empire in just a few turns, catching the AI unprepare and undevelopped; however when you develop and conquer, your ability to raise funds , just like in 0 turn, comes to an equilibrium.

If i had to sum up 1 turn as it exists now, it's a massive military rush without constraints.

Aside from the points mentioned earlier, i'd add the following proposals:
- remove elite barracks from the capital;
- tone down armies available :depending on the size of the empireand the number of front, there should only be 1 army, sometimes 2, available;
- tone down units upkeep a bit and remove treasury income or seriously tone it down so that it only allows the economy to turn a small profit on turn 2;

I'm currently out of work for a period of 3 to 6 months so i have a vast amount of time to play RS II , just about 8-10 hours a day..every day ;-)
I have played the very early Beta of RS II more then 2 years now and Since Release Day i play a Roman "1 Turn Campaign" so at the moment I'd like to validate most of Siegfriedfr results
with more exception "the money" i think the way of playing RS II it´s a important factor.

I'd like to playing the Romans historically not absolutely but in as many aspects as I can one is Historical expansion only!! ...therby i following a Guide made by Candelarius which iv'e download somewhere here on TWC...(it´s great for those who like roleplaying and managing family members & Generals) and in this particular case i've had enough money to live out and build up economy not more.

i take some screens now and upload it to explain what i meen

hope it helps anyway

one last thing
I'd like to take this opportunity to give something back to the Devs of RS II and their great achievement

If you need anyone to test special things in 1 Turn Campaigns I'm be available at all times and sorry for my bad english i'm German

CenturiO-LuciuS-VorenuS

[dvk901]

I'll sum up what's wrong with 1 turn campaign.
The mechanics and logic of 1 and zero turns are very different, therefore it cannot function with the same rules, so dont be shocked by what i say.

1) Character movement is too big: every turn, you can if you wish so besiege a town, and even go further than the next enemy town, seriously disrupting the enemy military infrastructure; this is no zero turn where 3 stacks are blocking your way each turn, in 1 turn once you defeat an enemy army you easily have 4 or 5 turns of liberty to attack them before they reconstruct an army.

2) Barracks construction time is too low: once you conquer a town, it takes no more than 8 turns before its able to build decent medium units, therefore the military progression is way too quick, and the "assimilation" of a province not accurately depicted;

3) AI has tendency to completely empty it's border towns by producing troops(who incidentally have very low population) because they are closer to the front, therefore its destroying its ability to develop towns into more powerful unit-pumper since its always low pop and never evolving;

4) Many buildings which made sense in 0 turn modfoldered campaigns are useless in 1 turn nonmodfoldered campaign: mainly region determination, roman governements, and weapon metal imports;

5) The treasury income is what imbalance 1 turn economy greatly. basically when you start off, you have 1 or 2 strong armies and start earning 20K per turn, allowing you to instantly rush your surroundings and expand your empire in just a few turns, catching the AI unprepare and undevelopped; however when you develop and conquer, your ability to raise funds , just like in 0 turn, comes to an equilibrium.

If i had to sum up 1 turn as it exists now, it's a massive military rush without constraints.

Aside from the points mentioned earlier, i'd add the following proposals:
- remove elite barracks from the capital;
- tone down armies available :depending on the size of the empireand the number of front, there should only be 1 army, sometimes 2, available;
- tone down units upkeep a bit and remove treasury income or seriously tone it down so that it only allows the economy to turn a small profit on turn 2;

I agree that the 'mechanics' of 1-turn may be a bit different, but:

1. Upon what do you base this finding? Character movement on the scale of the RS2 map is based on reality, nothing else. I actually measured the distances that armies could move on this map, and 'conservatively' arrived at the movement points given based
on that marching time of the typical army. It wasn't just some arbitrary figure we threw in. Accurate movement on a map that matches the scale of the map also helps the AI move better.

2. Agreed.

3. That may be so, but increasing the population growth is the only way to counter that, and it's also one reason that 1-turn campaigns are SO hard to configure. You basically 'throttle' the AI by limiting what it can recruit, and then you CAUSE the problem of the AI compensating by recruiting anything it can from anywhere it can. But if you increase population growth, then you have the 'other' bad problem of huge growth. This is a problem SPECIFIC to one turn play, and not seen in 0-turn because population growth doesn't matter 'as much'.

4. I disagree, and can't imagine that you can actually prove that. In our Beta Testing, the AI had no difficulty with any buildings as long as they didn't block access to barracks. And in the one turn campaign, the building restrictions are not the same as they are in the modfoldered 0-turn ones. As far as I'm concerned, you would just remove part of the depth of the mod by removing parts of the economic structure that the AI has no issue with. I agree that the Roman AI may have difficulty with the Government buildings, but then you would remove the Roman part of this campaign's depth as well. It already doesn't have the rebellion. I seriously think you would have to test this to see if Rome DOES have issue with it's buildings, rather than assuming it does. My experience has been that if the AI is presented with an opportunity to recruit more, better, or different units...it will build anything to get to them.

5. I agree that the treasury settings may be 'off' for the one-turn campaign, but I seriously doubt that they cause 'imbalance' just because they are there. The reasons for those settings are part of the whole base for RS2's economic system. Remove it, and you might as well just throw a Vanilla EDB in it with a few of RS2's buildings. In effect, what I'm saying is that I can't believe the RS2 economic system CAN'T work with one-turn. I do think the settings probably have to be scaled down some for a number of factions. The Arverni, Belgae and Boii were tested, and the tester said they were OK.

Elite Barracks removed. OK. That can be done.
I have already been working on removing a lot of units from factions in one-turn. I realize there are too many.

In effect, what I am hoping to see is a way to eventually offer one-turn options in the modfoldered campaigns. That's why I put, basically, the one EDB file that has ALL the buildings in it. If we can come up with a decent configuration by adjusting the settings in this campaign (the one-turn), I can duplicate those settings and create an optional one turn file(s) for the already modoldered campaigns. That's really important for the Roman campaign, because then people could experience the rebellions as well.

[CenturiO-LuciuS-VorenuS]

I agree that the 'mechanics' of 1-turn may be a bit different, but:

1. Upon what do you base this finding? Character movement on the scale of the RS2 map is based on reality, nothing else. I actually measured the distances that armies could move on this map, and 'conservatively' arrived at the movement points given based
on that marching time of the typical army. It wasn't just some arbitrary figure we threw in. Accurate movement on a map that matches the scale of the map also helps the AI move better.

2. Agreed.

3. That may be so, but increasing the population growth is the only way to counter that, and it's also one reason that 1-turn campaigns are SO hard to configure. You basically 'throttle' the AI by limiting what it can recruit, and then you CAUSE the problem of the AI compensating by recruiting anything it can from anywhere it can. But if you increase population growth, then you have the 'other' bad problem of huge growth. This is a problem SPECIFIC to one turn play, and not seen in 0-turn because population growth doesn't matter 'as much'.

4. I disagree, and can't imagine that you can actually prove that. In our Beta Testing, the AI had no difficulty with any buildings as long as they didn't block access to barracks. And in the one turn campaign, the building restrictions are not the same as they are in the modfoldered 0-turn ones. As far as I'm concerned, you would just remove part of the depth of the mod by removing parts of the economic structure that the AI has no issue with. I agree that the Roman AI may have difficulty with the Government buildings, but then you would remove the Roman part of this campaign's depth as well. It already doesn't have the rebellion. I seriously think you would have to test this to see if Rome DOES have issue with it's buildings, rather than assuming it does. My experience has been that if the AI is presented with an opportunity to recruit more, better, or different units...it will build anything to get to them.

5. I agree that the treasury settings may be 'off' for the one-turn campaign, but I seriously doubt that they cause 'imbalance' just because they are there. The reasons for those settings are part of the whole base for RS2's economic system. Remove it, and you might as well just throw a Vanilla EDB in it with a few of RS2's buildings. In effect, what I'm saying is that I can't believe the RS2 economic system CAN'T work with one-turn. I do think the settings probably have to be scaled down some for a number of factions. The Arverni, Belgae and Boii were tested, and the tester said they were OK.

Elite Barracks removed. OK. That can be done.
I have already been working on removing a lot of units from factions in one-turn. I realize there are too many.

In effect, what I am hoping to see is a way to eventually offer one-turn options in the modfoldered campaigns. That's why I put, basically, the one EDB file that has ALL the buildings in it. If we can come up with a decent configuration by adjusting the settings in this campaign (the one-turn), I can duplicate those settings and create an optional one turn file(s) for the already modoldered campaigns. That's really important for the Roman campaign, because then people could experience the rebellions as well.

i missed some points in my post when i write I'd like to validate most of Siegfriedfr results with one exception

but i totally agree with the facts dvk has written in his last post

here my Screens from my 1 Turn campaign with Rome ,after beating Hannibal in Italy ,the next few Turns (15-20 i think) i've tried to built up economy to maximum as possible (i do this in every Settlement i own before conquering other provinces)...then i take my focus on the Citys Bononia,Patavium,Mediolanon and Taurasia..after i had Conquered all this Settlements the same step as before built up economy and reinforce my Army and so on . i 'm now at 592 AUC passed Imperial Reforms 582 AUC and 6 Legions with a small contingent of auxillia are already recruitet and prepare on the frontlines to defend the empire...but i cant say i have too much money ,at this time only to survive..
auxillia Legions are still remain as a dream which not becomes true

[tone]

Yeah I added the new family members under the sub-faction part, this is how I put it;-

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

;;;family members
character_record Decius Fabius, male, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 7, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Marcus Fabius, male, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 3, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Amulius Fabius, male, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 1, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Faustina, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 48, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Poppaea, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 29, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Alypia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 20, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Fadia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 12, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Licinia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 13, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Minervina, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 12, alive, never_a_leader
;;sub_faction wives
character_record Metella, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Eutropia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Severina, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Antistia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Domitilla, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Alfidia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 31, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Helena, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 16, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Marcia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 32, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Aurelia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 14, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Julia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 14, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Atia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 14, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Servilia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 14, alive, never_a_leader
character_record Cornelia, female, command 0, influence 0, management 0, subterfuge 0, age 1, alive, never_a_leader

relative Quintus Fabius, Faustina, Sextus Fabius, Marcellus Fabius, Licinia, Minervina, end
relative Sextus Fabius, Poppaea, Fadia, Decius Fabius, Marcus Fabius, end
relative Marcellus Fabius, Alypia, Amulius Fabius, end
;;;;sub_faction characters;;;All chars. are 'sub_faction romans_brutii'.
relative Lucius Paullus, Metella, end
relative Gaius Varro, Antistia, end
relative Gaius Flaminius, Eutropia, end
relative Gnaeus Geminus, Domitilla, end
relative Publius Scipio, Severina, PubliusA Scipio, end
relative PubliusA Scipio, Helena, Cornelia, end
relative Gaius Iulius_Structus, Marcia, GaiusA Iulius_Structus, Julia, end
relative GaiusA Iulius_Structus, Aurelia, end
relative Gaius Marius, Atia, end
relative Marcus Iunius_Rufus, Servilia, end
relative Atilius Regulus, Alfidia, end

Hopefully the campaign doesn't end as you say but so far it's going quite nicely. Hannibal ambushed our Northern most army killing off the bulk of that army leaving only under a thousand men alive to retreat to Arretium.

I brought Publius Scipio Africanus up from Sicily (where I spawned him) to out Hannibal and Maharabal in successive battles, then removing them from Genoa. After retraining his legion he went straight to Carthage as his father was in Iberia was a doing a good job of cleaning up and didn't need him.

Took Carthage and got 2 heroic victories and fought off another script-spawned stack outside Carthage. Though as he landed in Africa he got the Political General trait which is very annoying as he has nothing to indicate he is a bad general. He has all positive traits expect for that one.

The economy is fine so far 8 years in going down to <10k every turn or borderline 0. I'll post some pictures later when the campaign develops properly.

Also I completely understand about the 1-turn campaign not getting the same attention due to time restrictions due to the immense amount of work required to even get this far and to find people willing to test your campaigns properly. I'll do my best to help out with feedback on this one and hopefully we can flesh this out a bit more to make it something special.

By the way a 'quick fix' could be just spawning Free people "roman rebels" outside cities that have rebelled. I'm assuming you can still make cities rebel with a script even if you don't have a specific faction to give them to. Anyways hope the team gets a breather to be able to get around to this since I think quite a few people love the RS2 direction but would prefer it in a 1-turn format

There's no reason why there couldn't be a seperate mod foldered one turn Roman campaign or a whole submod that replaced the zero turn EDU and EDB (largely) files in each camapign with one turn.

[Siegfriedfr]

I hope we can help you improve 1 turn for the non submodders outthere Dvk! Please don't feel offended by what i say... if you dont agree with me in the end you'll do your RS2 updating and that's all.

I agree that the 'mechanics' of 1-turn may be a bit different, but:

1. Upon what do you base this finding? Character movement on the scale of the RS2 map is based on reality, nothing else. I actually measured the distances that armies could move on this map, and 'conservatively' arrived at the movement points given based
on that marching time of the typical army. It wasn't just some arbitrary figure we threw in. Accurate movement on a map that matches the scale of the map also helps the AI move better.

I base my findings on AI behaviour and experience playing total war mods; and what I propose really is for the sake of gameplay:
1) the AI only ever attacks cities close to its shared borders and will never plan a “deep” attack into your homeland
2) Regarding accuracy of movement compared to reality, the pilgrimage from burgidala to jerusalem took 170 days, so I believe within the limitation of RTW engine, searching for marching accuracy is a waste of time, it can’t be done. Its not accurate now, and wont be with less either.
3) I “feel” that movement points (240) advantage the player much more that it advantage thes AI. I can attack their capital by rushing trough land to their capital. They can’t. All thanks to big movement points.
4) Reduced movement points helps reduce the pace of the campaign so that you're not besieged every turn.

I reduced it to 160, but 180 could do.

3. That may be so, but increasing the population growth is the only way to counter that, and it's also one reason that 1-turn campaigns are SO hard to configure. You basically 'throttle' the AI by limiting what it can recruit, and then you CAUSE the problem of the AI compensating by recruiting anything it can from anywhere it can. But if you increase population growth, then you have the 'other' bad problem of huge growth. This is a problem SPECIFIC to one turn play, and not seen in 0-turn because population growth doesn't matter 'as much'.

Maybe more growth bonus could be added to low lvl buildings? They will be nullified later on anyway.

4. I disagree, and can't imagine that you can actually prove that. In our Beta Testing, the AI had no difficulty with any buildings as long as they didn't block access to barracks. And in the one turn campaign, the building restrictions are not the same as they are in the modfoldered 0-turn ones. As far as I'm concerned, you would just remove part of the depth of the mod by removing parts of the economic structure that the AI has no issue with. I agree that the Roman AI may have difficulty with the Government buildings, but then you would remove the Roman part of this campaign's depth as well. It already doesn't have the rebellion. I seriously think you would have to test this to see if Rome DOES have issue with it's buildings, rather than assuming it does. My experience has been that if the AI is presented with an opportunity to recruit more, better, or different units...it will build anything to get to them.

I can’t technically prove that the RTW engine’s AI doesn’t understand building chains; i assumed it's a known variable within the RTW modding community (RTR, EB claim it). I observed that it has preferences: military/economy/growth/order in that order.
What I meant is that sure, those chains buildings without units have embedded bonus in them and if the AI decide that “oh I need such stat and this building has ideal stat/cost ratio”, then it will build them; but it’s not building weapon metal imports because it opens the path to better military, nor does it build regional focus because it WANTS to make a fortified region. It’s all pure randomness here, and in mods who use building chains, it’s handled by the script, not the AI.
Let me propose an alternative solution: instead of having the AI make a random choice, every city should be either fortified, economic or merged from turn 1.

5. I agree that the treasury settings may be 'off' for the one-turn campaign, but I seriously doubt that they cause 'imbalance' just because they are there. The reasons for those settings are part of the whole base for RS2's economic system. Remove it, and you might as well just throw a Vanilla EDB in it with a few of RS2's buildings. In effect, what I'm saying is that I can't believe the RS2 economic system CAN'T work with one-turn. I do think the settings probably have to be scaled down some for a number of factions. The Arverni, Belgae and Boii were tested, and the tester said they were OK.

I don’t call for the suppression of the treasury of its bonus, but indeed a toning down. Also, you admitted yourself repeatedly that 1 turn was poorly tested so you can’t bring up those 3 testers of the barbarian factions as a solid base to say everything is fine, especially considering that RS2 has a major 0-turn fanbase. As it stands, there is no economic challenge AT ALL in 1-turn.
What I did: I reduced treasury tax bonus by 2/3 in my campaign. I like this kind of tight economy, but it’s probably over the top, as certain factions (the big ones) are in the red on turn 2. But I didn’t touch the armies available yet.

In effect, what I am hoping to see is a way to eventually offer one-turn options in the modfoldered campaigns. That's why I put, basically, the one EDB file that has ALL the buildings in it. If we can come up with a decent configuration by adjusting the settings in this campaign (the one-turn), I can duplicate those settings and create an optional one turn file(s) for the already modoldered campaigns. That's really important for the Roman campaign, because then people could experience the rebellions as well.

If you modfolder the Roman campaign, I can understand you want to keep the building chains you worked hard to create because its easy to disable it for the AI, but for other things, I stand firm in my arguments: too fast paced, too much money.

Btw do you have some kind of working document regarding building chains? the community is eagerly awaiting for sucha thing.

[tone]

The other option is to increase unit cost/upkeep and it could be worth experimenting with this. Please feel free to do so.

[Siegfriedfr]

about scripted armies.

They spawn too fast for the recruitement/retraining/shipping/moving pace of 1-turn.

If i read the script correctly they will keep spawning until a faction is completely destroyed, which means for an undeterminate amount of time, if you conquer core cities of a faction, you'll have to fend off elite unit stacks every 3/4 turns with an evershrinking army that you need alot more time to replace than in 0-turn.

A limit needs t be imposed on those stacks like for example the emergency levy traits cannot be acquired when ALL the settlements that make the trait appear are conquered, but as long as ONE of those settlement is "free", the trait and the scripted armies can spawn.

[Cynik]

Theirs one trait problem I've noticed in my campaign, I'm at 610 A.U.C at the moment;-

Disinherited trait when the heir succeeds to power
I've noticed this more and more with every faction leader I've had, they all seem to be getting the disinherited trait, which would mean that the game thinks they are being disinherited by becoming faction leader as they are no longer the heir.

If that is the case then perhaps in the script when a faction leader comes to power, you could add a line to blanket remove the disinherited trait from the faction leader.

There are other minor ones but I haven't confirmed their permenant affects such as old (50+) family members being brought into the family through marriage have 'young' as a trait.

I haven't confirmed whether that stays with them throughout their life or even the next turn however on the screen where they appear for the first time as a marriage proposal they always appear as young regardless of their age.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[The Sweeper]

I bet the answer is terribly obvious and I'm just being a complete idiot, but what are the differences between the One-turn and 0-turn campaigns? I'm new to RS2 and I find most of this mod confusing enough as it is.

[Cynik]

I bet the answer is terribly obvious and I'm just being a complete idiot, but what are the differences between the One-turn and 0-turn campaigns? I'm new to RS2 and I find most of this mod confusing enough as it is.

It's basically about unit creation. So one-turn campaign it takes one-turn to make a unit and in 0-turn it takes 0-turns to make a unit.

Also because 0-turn is mod-foldered there are more scripted events in that then in the 1-turn campaign like large rebellions lead by another proper AI faction (e.g Roman rebels).

[The Sweeper]

Oh yes. Terribly obvious like I thought it'd be. Thanks apple! (+ Levantos!)

[CenturiO-LuciuS-VorenuS]

a strange thing occurred last night playing my Campaign for 3 or 4 hour's ..the advisor pops up again calling me to load the RS II script
i'm sure that i load the script so i take a look into RTW console and it seems that the script is already running correctly.. adding population + money ect...


another small question
is it possible for the Roman Familymembers to become Imperator in a 1 Turn Campaign or
is it a feature that is 0 Turn only ? I've seen there is a Trait in export_descr_charactertraits.txt ...
i think i must get this trait to a Familymember which is Factionleader or Heir
and after this he must stay in Rome is this correct?

[Tis Holiness]

siegfriedfr youve complained way to much. if you want to tweak it, tweak it for yourself, if not stop complaining and play a diffo mod! moan after moan after moan! grr tis annoying!

[Úlfhéðinn]

siegfriedfr youve complained way to much. if you want to tweak it, tweak it for yourself, if not stop complaining and play a diffo mod! moan after moan after moan! grr tis annoying!

Though I agree with you that too much complaining can become tedious I would have to say you misunderstand the point of this thread.
It is a thread to give feedback about the shortcomings/bugs in the 1-turn campaign mod and as you can see Siegfriedr gives relevant and constructive feedback and he also adds possible solutions.

If you don't like reading contructive feedback concerning issues in the 1-turn mode - read another thread

[gary]

I have just bought Rome gold addition BI from play.com... hopefully it will come this week. cannot wait to play this i loved the first RS, i also loved RTR and SPQR... so it has been a wile since i have played any rome mods, spent alot of time doing mods for empire and NTW.

[CenturiO-LuciuS-VorenuS]

a strange thing occurred last night playing my Campaign for 3 or 4 hour's ..the advisor pops up again calling me to load the RS II script
i'm sure that i load the script so i take a look into RTW console and it seems that the script is already running correctly.. adding population + money ect...


another small question
is it possible for the Roman Familymembers to become Imperator in a 1 Turn Campaign or
is it a feature that is 0 Turn only ? I've seen there is a Trait in export_descr_charactertraits.txt ...
i think i must get this trait to a Familymember which is Factionleader or Heir
and after this he must stay in Rome is this correct?

now i do answer this question by myself and here are some screens
of my first Imperator Cesar...and i hope this could help to sort out the traits that working correctly or not





















...
..

[Player 1.0]

This is the one turn campaign menu, but missing the battle time off button. Why??
45 minute is very few time in battle....

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: