1.2 Overview & Previews Collection

[corsair831]

Aren't the Veneti always rolled over by Rome in turn 3 lol?

[Dead*Man*Wilson]

This is true, but such is the fate of many factions in the GC, big or small. Unless it's Rome, of course haha.

Thanks for the feedback Dresden.

[Dresden]

The thing is, we have 41 playable factions already in the GC alone for 1.2. That doesn't include all of our custom playables in the other campaigns and our entirely custom Mac Wars campaign. So you can imagine how much work it is simply having those either polished, overhauled, properly done in the first place, or just well balanced. Also, we want to have some factions you will come across in the campaign that are unique and surprising in that they have their own rosters/flair to them. The fact that they aren't playable is actually a bonus in that situation.

[Dead*Man*Wilson]

Oh, I totally understand, Dresden. I was responding to corsair831, not criticizing the decision making involved in this mod.

41 total factions for GC, huh? Sounds like we might be in for some surprises that weren't necessarily mentioned in the preview

[FlashHeart07]

I dont think we have anything hidden atm regarding factions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dresden]

There are just that many playables in the Rome 2 GC almost anyway. Then we add in our custom ones and the list gets larger than you think.

I believe it was 41 but I could be wrong, my brain gets addled from modding sometimes.

[Ritter-Floh]

I dont think we have anything hidden atm regarding factions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i think you do not know my latest planned additons for 1.2 (Thorax, Thureos and Armoured Hoplites for every single faction - ah forget about this, a new faction with a roster full of Thorax units, you will love my Thorakitai Sphendonetai)

[FlashHeart07]

i think you do not know my latest planned additons for 1.2 (Thorax, Thureos and Armoured Hoplites for every single faction - ah forget about this, a new faction with a roster full of Thorax units, you will love my Thorakitai Sphendonetai)

Noone expect the spanish inquisition.. My bad.. What I ment was, Noone expected the amount of new beards you were going to add


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Efix]

I don't know if its even possible but it would be amazing if the CAI could have specific goals in separated phases that would ultimately lead some faction to recreate history as much as possible.

Ex Macedon
Phase 1 : Conquer and hold Greece and Thrace. (eventually in war with the roman phase conquest of Greece)
Phase 2 : Shifting conquest to Asia Minor.
Phase 3 : etc

In the process they would go to war with faction who block them from achieving those goals, have treaties with faction that don't treat them directly until they do later on.
That would make the AI behavior and campaign planning somewhat relevant i think and could keep the mid to late game interesting since they will ultimately all go to war over frontier territories if they have to and so the player will have to create buffer states etc. It should also help them make big uniform credible historical empires without the player having to go above and beyond trying to manipulated the AI behavior to achieve that. I would love so much to see the CAI making native territorial integrity his top priority over everything else.

[Tenerife_Boy]

I don't know if its even possible but it would be amazing if the CAI could have specific goals in separated phases that would ultimately lead some faction to recreate history as much as possible.

Ex Macedon
Phase 1 : Conquer and hold Greece and Thrace. (eventually in war with the roman phase conquest of Greece)
Phase 2 : Shifting conquest to Asia Minor.
Phase 3 : etc

In the process they would go to war with faction who block them from achieving those goals, have treaties with faction that don't treat them directly until they do later on.
That would make the AI behavior and campaign planning somewhat relevant i think and could keep the mid to late game interesting since they will ultimately all go to war over frontier territories if they have to and so the player will have to create buffer states etc. It should also help them make big uniform credible historical empires without the player having to go above and beyond trying to manipulated the AI behavior to achieve that. I would love so much to see the CAI making native territorial integrity his top priority over everything else.

In reality, that could be ccertainly done by adding those Phases as the chapter goals but let me tell you a thing:

Conquering Thrace and Asia Minor and so on would be a Phillip II and Alexander sort of campaign BUT (and here's the key thing) by the timeframe the mod is set up, the rulers were Antigonid dinasty under Phillip V ? and his successors (correct me if I'm wrong) what could be interesting would be

¿What were his plans by this time?
A) Unifying again the Alexander Empire?
B) Fight the hell out of Pyrrhus?
C) Rise the economy and go left against romans?
D) Any other.



I'm saying this because I know Diadochi and their Epigonoi got different goals for their empires, some wanted to "make Alexander empire great again" while others refused it.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Philip V. was king from 221 BC to 179 BC. King of macedon in this timeframe was Antigonos Gonatas (the guy who is even in vanilla king) after his victory over the Celts in the battle of Lysimacheia at 277 BC.

[Tenerife_Boy]

Yeah whatever! that's not the main point of my argument

[Axaios]

On the map swap - I always thought that IA map is more sloppy in eastern regions and in Germania, so they have less provinces overall. Having walled Syracuse and Jerusalem should outweigh it though....

[Dresden]

It is true there is a loss of some regions on the very southeast and very northeast. In general, most campaigns aren't centered around those areas. But, yes, we lose a little bit of complexity there. Overall, though, the map gains quite a few regions in total and the core areas are vastly improved in terms of number of regions and province layout. I think there are around 15 more regions in the IA map.

Also, it seems the AI has better pathfinding on most of the later DLC maps.

[philler]

I am sorry for being stupid, but what exact benefits has the better pathfinding for players? I have an idea, but could you give some concrete example?

The second question I would like to raise relates to the intended tribal unification system. From my perspective, this is the main addition (if its going to be incorporated in 1.2). I would like to know more about that. For example, will these endangered factions band together as confederation/league or only as millitary allies. As we all know, allies are often very passive even in the situation, when you ask them to attack concrete region/army. Also, player can avoid of declaring war to both millitary allies simultaneously by diplomacy - you just need to find another faction, that is in war with the enemy you want to fight against and join him in war. The millitary allies would be potent only in times, when they could get rid of the fear (that is serious problem in the later game) and declare war on you together. I know, it is little bit early to answer my question, I just ask you to present your flow of ideas/intentions. Thanks in advance

[Plasmaface]

Can't wait!

[Maetharin]

IMO interesting to see would be the rivalry between Antigonos Gonatas and Pyrrhus
As of now, they're portrayed as the best of friends, whereas in actuality, they were at war before Pyrrhus ever attacked Sparta!

He was actually crowned King of Macedon, but left Antigonos the coastal cities (no idea if that included Pella), which left Antigonos with enough men to pursue him to the Peloponnes
Pyrrhus was obviously a tactical mastermind, but he was a strategic dunce IMO

So IMO Epirus should only have Apollonia in Greece and be at war with Macedon instead of Sparta

[Ivan_Moscavich]

Better pathfinding allows the ai to more effectively navigate the campaign map. Especially taking into account crossing the sea sections for amphibious landings.

It also defends more effectively in home territory.

[Dresden]

IMO interesting to see would be the rivalry between Antigonos Gonatas and Pyrrhus
As of now, they're portrayed as the best of friends, whereas in actuality, they were at war before Pyrrhus ever attacked Sparta!

He was actually crowned King of Macedon, but left Antigonos the coastal cities (no idea if that included Pella), which left Antigonos with enough men to pursue him to the Peloponnes
Pyrrhus was obviously a tactical mastermind, but he was a strategic dunce IMO

So IMO Epirus should only have Apollonia in Greece and be at war with Macedon instead of Sparta

We are starting around the time Pyrrhus is in Italy and moving to Sicily. Also when the Gallic migration/invasion hits Greece. So I think there was an uneasy truce at that time. If you look at the map preview you will see its a different starting situation from vanilla and we have a new faction holding south-central Greece. As with Italy (and really any region), its almost impossible to represent the extremely varied cities and political situations. Take, for example, the presence of Roman colonies, latin rights vs allies vs locals etc - all of which is not really represented by a simple regional control.

I am sorry for being stupid, but what exact benefits has the better pathfinding for players? I have an idea, but could you give some concrete example?

The second question I would like to raise relates to the intended tribal unification system. From my perspective, this is the main addition (if its going to be incorporated in 1.2). I would like to know more about that. For example, will these endangered factions band together as confederation/league or only as millitary allies. As we all know, allies are often very passive even in the situation, when you ask them to attack concrete region/army. Also, player can avoid of declaring war to both millitary allies simultaneously by diplomacy - you just need to find another faction, that is in war with the enemy you want to fight against and join him in war. The millitary allies would be potent only in times, when they could get rid of the fear (that is serious problem in the later game) and declare war on you together. I know, it is little bit early to answer my question, I just ask you to present your flow of ideas/intentions. Thanks in advance

Pathfinding just seems better on the newer maps, which means the AI moves/responds in a better manner. It could just seem that way and actually isn't, since some of the maps are smaller and that could be what causes it.

For Tribal Unification, the idea would be that if the player (after a certain level of power/imperium) invades a region, the other factions in that region may join the war to defend their neighbor. If they are the same/similar cultures, the factions would declare war on the player. It would not use the confederation mechanic. It would use diplomatic scripting that changes the "stance" of the faction toward the other faction, effectively making them hate you. We want to be careful with this feature as it could become too "gamey" if not properly implemented.

[Litharion]

I am sorry for being stupid, but what exact benefits has the better pathfinding for players? I have an idea, but could you give some concrete example?

The second question I would like to raise relates to the intended tribal unification system. From my perspective, this is the main addition (if its going to be incorporated in 1.2). I would like to know more about that. For example, will these endangered factions band together as confederation/league or only as millitary allies. As we all know, allies are often very passive even in the situation, when you ask them to attack concrete region/army. Also, player can avoid of declaring war to both millitary allies simultaneously by diplomacy - you just need to find another faction, that is in war with the enemy you want to fight against and join him in war. The millitary allies would be potent only in times, when they could get rid of the fear (that is serious problem in the later game) and declare war on you together. I know, it is little bit early to answer my question, I just ask you to present your flow of ideas/intentions. Thanks in advance

To add to what Dresden said, the war declaration against the player is triggered by a script.