What would you like to see Europa Barbarorum II

[Saint694]

i would like diplomacy fixed most of all...
then it would be difficult to defend areas if the enemy could simply walk around you when trying to defend a specific route in the alps

[Gusten Grodslukare]

The campaign map is going to be 1.3 x bigger than in EB1.

And what does that mean in comparison to for example the map in RS2? Is the map fairly the same size or larger/ smaller?

Other than that I find it highly realistic that an army can block a mountain pass. In fact the romans did station legions at mountain passes for this purpose.

Yes, I'm aware of that. But it would have been great if the faction that wants to block a mountain pass would have to put two units beside each other. If they don't the other faction could slip through. But if the authencity of the game requieres that only one unit can block a mountain pass it should of course be that way.

[Deze naam is niet echt]

If it were possible I would like to see a (temporary) realistic drop in public happiness and / or income if a highly centralized faction (e.g. Rome or Carthage) loses its capital to another faction to represent the breakdown of the governmental and administrative system; you could also have disloyal governors decide to create their own kingdom or empire due to the lack of control by the faction. As far as I know there is no such mechanic in the regular M2TW. I have no idea if it were possible to script such things though.

[Saint694]

Yes, I'm aware of that. But it would have been great if the faction that wants to block a mountain pass would have to put two units beside each other. If they don't the other faction could slip through. But if the authencity of the game requieres that only one unit can block a mountain pass it should of course be that way.

I dont think the AI would think to split units into two to block a pass

[Zmaj od Noćaja]

I'd like to see a possibility to change a culture of a city.
One of the greatest problems for an endless conquest (if you choose to play Romans) is when you reach Asia Minor, where Seleukids and Ptolemys have already upgraded their settlements to Huge cities. It's clear that they will never again be of any other culture.
I'd like to see an option to convert the culture of the city. It could be done either by degrading the city level when you choose to exterminate the population (in vanilla M2TW, when you exterminate the population many buildings are lost) OR an option allowing you to build a structure of so great happiness bonus, that you don't experience any difference in handling a huge city in Asia Minor or Egypt or Spain.

[Populus Romanus]

I'd like to see a possibility to change a culture of a city.
One of the greatest problems for an endless conquest (if you choose to play Romans) is when you reach Asia Minor, where Seleukids and Ptolemys have already upgraded their settlements to Huge cities. It's clear that they will never again be of any other culture.
I'd like to see an option to convert the culture of the city. It could be done either by degrading the city level when you choose to exterminate the population (in vanilla M2TW, when you exterminate the population many buildings are lost) OR an option allowing you to build a structure of so great happiness bonus, that you don't experience any difference in handling a huge city in Asia Minor or Egypt or Spain.

That would be a great use of the religion feature actually. But I think the team said they were using it for something else.

[Mamertine]

Flaming pigs.

But seriously, I would like to see factions evolve. Think about the cataphract refoms for the Seleukids in EB1. Rome should get that too if they go east and stay there, much like ERE did a few hundreds years later. Greece should get maniple infantry options if they go into Rome and lose a few times, the barbarians should get more armored infantry and paved roads if they sack larger civilized cities, like what really happened.

I'm not saying that they should be as in depth as Hayasdan's Persian reforms, but the thought of armies evolving as they conquer or reconfigure new units after defeat is historically accurate. And yes, flame me all you want, but this could get you LS armor for Rome earlier than normal to be in the game, not that I want LS (although I do like the arm guards that came from the Dacian wars).

That would make it amazing, even if it was just 2 or three units changing for each faction.

[smoesville]

:HMMM: The only difference between what you suggest and the reforms in EB is that they are real and thus there are very few of them. Where do you stop with the other reforms? Which factions affect which? Do you choose factions close to one another or ones far away? If they are far away then in many cases you will never see the reforms since the faction may well be dead by the time the reformist faction reaches the area. It would open a can of worms that would get messy, very very quickly.

Edit:
I could be wrong but i don't think that the LS was a response to a specific threat, just a general advancement in military technology.

[Mamertine]

:HMMM: The only difference between what you suggest and the reforms in EB is that they are real and thus there are very few of them. Where do you stop with the other reforms? Which factions affect which? Do you choose factions close to one another or ones far away? If they are far away then in many cases you will never see the reforms since the faction may well be dead by the time the reformist faction reaches the area. It would open a can of worms that would get messy, very very quickly.

Edit:
I could be wrong but i don't think that the LS was a response to a specific threat, just a general advancement in military technology.

Advancement is brought on by necessity and efficiency like amost all advancements, military or otherwise. But this was not just something to justify LS.

This would mainly be for advancements for militaries that are outdated. Like Makedonia, Hellas, Carthage, etc. getting a few maniple formation units after losing a few major battles to Rome, or possibly conquering a few Roman armies (for Carthage, they always picked up the superior Roman equipment after a fight). That is something that would have probably happened if they survived longer. Or Rome getting cataphracts, that is something that did happen, only later. One that would be cool is Ptolemai getting more native or levantine units if they lose a bunch of units that are Greek or go under a number of soldiers on the map. Like Getae taking over Pella and having a whole armory from a major faction to themselves, so some units will go from a leather cap to an iron helm and cuirass, same for other barbarians, etc.

Mainly things that happened IRL or would have probably happened, but could be huried up. This I leave up to the EB team, I would trust them with whatever they decided. It is realistic to think some of these things would have happened if "this" happened instead of "that".

Something that was really ambitious and amazing was the Persian reforms. That never happened IRL, but it was a hypothetical that can be backed up. I wouldn't expect that for all factions, more like something similar to the catapract reforms, but 1 or 2 for half the factions.

I am not asking for elephant-mounted berserkers...although.

Edit: I would personally like to see the Getae have some "civilized" reforms like stone walls, paved roads, and better armored units after taking larger Greeks or Roman settlements (the armory thing). They were supposed to be somewhere between barbarian and civilized in EB1, but ended up being 90%+ barbarian, imo.

Makedonia, too. They seemed to adapt fine in the past.

[smoesville]

I think a lot of these reforms would be cool if they were lead by men as well circumstance. More like the Augustan reforms in EB where it takes a clever ambitious man to enact change. Think of Makedon, they prospered to start with under Phillip who created the new model army and over time, less capable men slowly changed it so it was basically a race for the longest spear because they had forgotten the use of the rest of the army. It would take a great man to change their ways imo as well as possibly study in a military academy. The units gained could well be just slightly retextured originals to make them fit their new faction (from a modding perspective that wouldn't be hard, i think the main problem is they would be better as new units but the upper limit of troop types would get in the way of this).

[Colos1987]

Well, in Amricas expansion there is a feature which allows some Indian tribes to "learn" the ways of the gunpowder from the colonizing powers by simply fighting them. That feature could be used to get some military and infrastructural upgrades.

C

[smoesville]

Yes that was used in EB for the cataphracts of AS. As i said it would be cool to make it so the general who was defeated or defeated a certain tech only got it if he was clever (he sees the import of such tech) or else it will take longer for less innovative minds to realise how imperative it is to change.

[Saint694]

It would be good if that could happen, but im sure i read somewhere that EB were already in danger of reaching the troop limit, so they needed to take out units what are similar to each other...

[smoesville]

That's what i'm saying, if it's the same model using a different texture then it won't take up another unit slot, it can just be activated for a certain faction using scripts. Too similar is a problem, the same unit isn't, textures can be set for certain factions.

[Andrew1994]

New cities models as it has been done with numerous unique cities in TATW

[Murfmurf]

New cities models as it has been done with numerous unique cities in TATW

Check the latest preview mon frere

[smoesville]

New cities models as it has been done with numerous unique cities in TATW

They won't be unique ie. no city for Rome or Athens specifically, they will be new cities that are historically accurate though there will be small compromises due to the way the cultures have to cover disparate groups like barbarians

[zeppelin01]

I'd like to see some way to choose which unit is the bodyguard of a given character. This has been done in the third-age as a submod: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=490115. I think it would be great to have an archer bodyguard unit, or a heavy infantry imagine an argyraspiades bodyguard unit for example! it could be done by a script. For example, a general who excels in the agoge training in Sparta "decides" he prefers hoplites as his bodyguards...

[zeppelin01]

OR it could be a retinue like "argyraspiades general" or "argyraspiades guard"

[Mamertine]

I think a lot of these reforms would be cool if they were lead by men as well circumstance. More like the Augustan reforms in EB where it takes a clever ambitious man to enact change. Think of Makedon, they prospered to start with under Phillip who created the new model army and over time, less capable men slowly changed it so it was basically a race for the longest spear because they had forgotten the use of the rest of the army. It would take a great man to change their ways imo as well as possibly study in a military academy. The units gained could well be just slightly retextured originals to make them fit their new faction (from a modding perspective that wouldn't be hard, i think the main problem is they would be better as new units but the upper limit of troop types would get in the way of this).

I would be all for that as long as they were not exactly like the Augustan reforms. In all the times I've played EB1 I have never had the Augustan reforms, the circumstances are too specific and take too long.

I don't want to have the reform prolonged 80+ turns just because I can't find a general that is clever/intelligent/disloyal, etc.

Now, if there were exceptions like:

-A clever general must win 2 battles against and army with x units
or
-A not clever general must win 4...

I would be fine with that.