How to reduce unrest level?

[alpharomeo]

Are you sure about this? I remember the colony government buildings give 1% cultural conversion but the direct rule buildings don't. Also, client rulers tend to have more positive traits in my game. I just let them them grow to be attuned governors so that their higher influence convert the populace.


Economically, Baktria starts out rich but, being landlocked, it can only trade with its neighbors. By the time it comes in direct contact with them, it generally means war, and external trade drops to 0. I was stuck on survival mode probably for more than 100 turns, constructing only with ransom money, holding the line against the Pahvalah, Saka Rauka, Seleucid, while expanding into Takshashila. At VH/VH, I was getting a full stack from each every few turns. I could only afford a 2-3 stacks spread over 4 fronts, with a big portion tied to one-turn distance from their hometown because of unrest. What a thrilling time it was! I survived only because Takshashila over-expanded into Seleucid territory and didn't garrison properly its rear cities.


BTW, it would be nice if capturing a camp after a battle actually brings in cash It feels so much better with more rewards.

[QuintusSertorius]

The Native Colony isn't a government building, and it converts to a foreign culture.

[ImperatorMaximus]

Just ally with a couple of your neighbors, allies will never attack you. As Baktria I would ally with Saka Rauka and also with Takashila if I was thinking of conquer land from Seleukids. Even if you wanted some land from Takashilla for example you can just buy it once you have more money, only the capital can't be bought, either than that is just a matter of having lots of money.

[nvm]

Well yeah it is somewhat a mistake to take on Seleucids while Saka and Taksashila still exist, you could have at least waited until they are at war with Hayasdan and Parthia (they usually get in a war sooner or later)

The Saka may not accept an alliance, but if you beat them bad enough you may be able to vassalize them instead, which will create an alliance, and you will not have to go all the long way to take their cities. Not to mention deal with them turning into a horde after being destroyed. Afterwards you can take on Taksashila. And trust me, even if you don't get colonies, holding their land will be a lot easier than Marakanda.

[alpharomeo]

In retrospective I should have allied with the Pahvalah right from the start. It's the only faction with which there was no rebel settlement to fight over.

Sakarauka wanted Chach and Alexandria-Eschate, which were within 1-turn striking distance from Marakanda -- too close for comfort. Takshashila wanted Oska-something-something (I always confuse it with the town north of it), which has high strategic and trade value (it had roads to many other settlements and controls the fastest road into Baktra from the east). I waited until the defending rebels were worn down by the Saka and Takshashila and took the settlements right under their noses. I guess they didn't like that and they attacked me.

On the west, I was just observing the Seleucids and Pahvalah fighting it out. Then my spy spotted those cataphract units and I got really worried. So I united forces with the Seleucids in the defense of Antigoneia, with the objective of eliminating those units, thinking they can't be replaced without high-tier buildings. Turns out, Pahvalah could produce 2 cataphracts and a full stack every year or so .

So, just for getting a good defensive position, I ended up with 3 war fronts.

At some point, the Takshashila cut off my only road to the Seleucid lands. I thought it was the perfect time to stop paying tribute. The Seleucids declared war on me instantly. They even sent a few stacks through hostile territory to attack me!

Either way, I was now surrounded by 4 enemies. For a long time, I just held off in the line while moving against the poorly garrisoned Takshashila towns in the east. With the added income, I could now gather enough force to both garrison and counter-attack in the west. Even then, with less than 2/3 stack, I had to wait for a lull between those yearly invasions.



I did ask the Pahvalah for a ceasefire, after they were down to one city (I wanted a buffer against the Sauromatae). They would not hear anything of it, even though I had almost a full stack parked outside their city and they had only have 2 defending units. So I took the town and found out they horded! Curiously, as a horde, they accepted my ceasefire offer (why? they had 4 full stacks with 4 cataphracts in each).

There is a glitch with horde behaviour though. They took a Sauromata camp but it rebelled. They didn't try to take it back. It just sat there, wandered around near my border, and sat there. At one time, they sent 1 full stack across, but I reinforced my nearest city with a full stack, so it turned back. However, seeing the devastation spreading across, I got an idea. I went to take over the rebel camp and exchanged it with them for alliance and cash (they had plenty of cash). Now they are happily settled in their new home far away in the steppes, insulating me against the Sauromatae and fighting my other enemy the Sakarauka.




Some people complained about the CAI but it had some interesting moves. Many times, the Saka just besieged my settlement but didn't assault, forcing me to sally and expose my troops to their arrows. When I was approaching a nearly empty Pahvalah camp, the AI sent many small stacks on my way. Naturally, I attacked them in open field, getting more casualties than I would, had they concentrated to defend that camp. Those horse archers could not spread loose inside a camp and while my archers outside can (too bad the BAI does not exploit that advantage better). The Seleucids just park their stack and devastate my countryside, forcing me to take the offensive against their heavier infantry (too bad the BAI kept chasing my cavalry with their infantry, and getting its units separated).


I don't know if that CAI behaviour is intentional but it sure exceeded my expectations!

[nvm]

So you've made it. Well done! Here's a hint:Once you take enough cities from Seleucids, they will offer you to restore the same terms as the ones you started the game with, but you don't have to take that offer. Instead, you can take more cities from them (I think 1 or 2) and that will make them recognize your independence, which will give you more government options, but also result in the war with you and Seleuicds ending immediately! I'd say it's useful if you want to get them off your back for a bit but they don't accept that.

[alpharomeo]

Thanks. I got independence too, as you said. For the first time, I have only 1 enemy. I don't know if it's related, but now rebel stacks are popping up like crazy all over my kingdom.

[shogon]

Thanks. I got independence too, as you said. For the first time, I have only 1 enemy. I don't know if it's related, but now rebel stacks are popping up like crazy all over my kingdom.

Maybe that has to do with civil unrest and stuff? I too experience these in my various campaigns, but I always try to leave a few troops (maybe a general or two, along with some skirmish / fast cavalry) in my home provinces encase things like that occur. It's a real pain playing as the Selukids, and having to spend 4+ turns going to your eastern provinces for a measly stack of rebels.

[nvm]

No, rebel spawns are completely random. Although I believe there is a define which can control just how frequent they are, I don't know if the EB team had changed it.

I do think Seleucids have to deal with a few pre-spawned stacks though.

[QuintusSertorius]

There's a single value at the top of the descr_strat that determines how frequently "bandits" spawn. The lower the number is, the more frequently they appear. There's one for pirates underneath it.

The Seleukids start with four pre-placed Rebel stacks as "bandits" too.

[alpharomeo]

There's a single value at the top of the descr_strat that determines how frequently "bandits" spawn. The lower the number is, the more frequently they appear. There's one for pirates underneath it.

Thanks. I double the value. I appreciate the support.

[QuintusSertorius]

Thanks. I double the value. I appreciate the support.

Note that won't have any effect whatsoever on a game that's already in progress. Changes to the descr_strat are only applied with a new campaign (and after you've deleted the map.rwm).

[f0ndiE^]

I play as Averni and after I finished Rome (I already had Britain, whole France and the north, where the swebos were), I was thinking where to expand next. Well, my ally Auernoi decided that for me when they attacked Epiros. War in Greece lasts for like 100 turns already with KH, Epeiros and Makedon respawning like 2-3 times already cos of that ING nonsense unrest. I dont have much time to do in game research and i play time from time for like 2-3 hours so please, tell me this:

When you want to be so realistic, explain to me, how can a city with 600 ppl (yea, I let it rebel then enslaved cos I cant kill them) in it rebel againts 2 600 army with taxes on low, with own spies within it etc...? Seriously, very often there is nothing I can do. Then I see how CAI takes w/e city they like and it almost never rebels with 4 units in it - pathetic justice imho. My faction leaders have almost always minimum of 4+/10 influence and more because I use them in my main army - does this count somehow?

I am also not much of a guy about traits, I dont care at all. I just take some general I like (Faction leader, heir usually or someone with high loyality so my army wont rebel and i play. I noticed that its is much better to leave a city without a general - in like 90%. Lately though, more often I read how traits are so good in this game and that its worth the time to read/care :o, so I actually might change my attitude about this.

Basically, you have to wait until your culture is high enough in newly taken regions until it calms down, which is like 100-150 turns. Until then you have to keep a big army there :/. Although I agree that it shouldnt be 2ez to take new cities, this is 2hardcore. I cant imagine how I can take half the world with this. I could won already btw, with 52 regions I only need to destroy Auernoi, but I wont, I enjoy our alliance.

Ty for advice & tips.

[QuintusSertorius]

I play as Averni and after I finished Rome (I already had Britain, whole France and the north, where the swebos were), I was thinking where to expand next. Well, my ally Auernoi decided that for me when they attacked Epiros. War in Greece lasts for like 100 turns already with KH, Epeiros and Makedon respawning like 2-3 times already cos of that ING nonsense unrest. I dont have much time to do in game research and i play time from time for like 2-3 hours so please, tell me this:

When you want to be so realistic, explain to me, how can a city with 600 ppl (yea, I let it rebel then enslaved cos I cant kill them) in it rebel againts 2 600 army with taxes on low, with own spies within it etc...? Seriously, very often there is nothing I can do. Then I see how CAI takes w/e city they like and it almost never rebels with 4 units in it - pathetic justice imho. My faction leaders have almost always minimum of 4+/10 influence and more because I use them in my main army - does this count somehow?

I am also not much of a guy about traits, I dont care at all. I just take some general I like (Faction leader, heir usually or someone with high loyality so my army wont rebel and i play. I noticed that its is much better to leave a city without a general - in like 90%. Lately though, more often I read how traits are so good in this game and that its worth the time to read/care :o, so I actually might change my attitude about this.

Basically, you have to wait until your culture is high enough in newly taken regions until it calms down, which is like 100-150 turns. Until then you have to keep a big army there :/. Although I agree that it shouldnt be 2ez to take new cities, this is 2hardcore. I cant imagine how I can take half the world with this. I could won already btw, with 52 regions I only need to destroy Auernoi, but I wont, I enjoy our alliance.

Ty for advice & tips.

Life is hard when you're a foreign conqueror far outside your natural zone of influence. EBII isn't designed to allow you to easily "take half the world", each faction has it's own natural space and outside that they'll struggle. You're discovering the lesson learned across the ages: it's much easier to take than to hold.

Culture matters, yours is divergent from the Hellenistic Polities that prevails in Greece, and until you've converted them (which takes a long time unless you have a building with a conversion factor on it), they'll be unhappy with your rule. Even the best governor has a small impact compared to the penalties of having a different culture. Your best bet is to put Allied Governments there and leave them be.

Also note that isn't 600 people, it's 600 households.

[f0ndiE^]

But how could Rome took half the world then... u know...back in the day?

[QuintusSertorius]

But how could Rome took half the world then... u know...back in the day?

Cultural conversion. Something you don't really have much access to as the Arverni.

[f0ndiE^]

Cultural conversion. Something you don't really have much access to as the Arverni.

Fair enough . Ty for information!

[Hummer]

Rome also spent the entire time frame of the game of 1000 turns plus another hundred and fifty years while they were conquering.
If you played a campaign trying to follow the historical expansion of Rome you would most likely think it was going rather slow...

[alpharomeo]

I tried one more thing to understand the unrest issue last night.

I took over a Pergamon city as Pontus and checked that there was no unrest right after taking over (only cultural difference). I sealed off all access to the city by placing units at the choke points all around. No diplomat, spy, or assassin should be able to get inside the area. I didn't move the FM general. I only built allied gov buildings. For 3-4 turns, the unrest slowly increased from 0% to 25%. The governor traits didn't change.

I did not understand any better.