Seems all I have to do is to rename the months, will be fixed next update!
You know something is wrong when you're actually being paid to build a new building (-% construction bonus from "Broad Minded Thinker" scaled down in next the update):
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Going through the character skill tables when I was fixing this issue on the screenie above made me notice some inconsistencies I'd like to change.
For example "Nomad Warlord" base skill gives +2% melee attack at rank 1 which isn't very useful considering what kind of skills this tree contains (suited for micro HA/ranged gameplay). I'm going to change these bonuses more in line with what that tree represents as whole. There won't be any dramatic changes so if you picked some of these for your army it shouldn't make it useless for you.
If you have any suggestions on changes for some of the current trees, let me know!
Last edited by ♔Greek Strategos♔; June 12, 2017 at 11:31 AM.
Last edited by ♔Greek Strategos♔; June 12, 2017 at 01:50 PM.
I have found a serious bug in DV. Ygraine, you had changed units stats but probably forgot about something becouse elephants tested with taksashila Rajha Gaja elephants) going to to berserk immediatly after contact with opponent which makes them completly usless
Last edited by pastinho; June 13, 2017 at 02:33 AM.
Could you make a 4TPY version?
I already played a bit with the unreleased patch and it works fine in my 170+ turns Pontus campaign. Changing texts always works with current save-games.
It's part of their "design"! The mechanic illustrates that the riders lose control of the elephants in the thick of the battle.
Elephants are a very strong wildcard unit that can do terrible damage, but also do terribly bad if they start chasing a townsfolk group across half the map instead of attacking the enemy forces, run infront of a bunch of skirmishers who pepper them down (javelins are the best counter against elephants, especially skirmisher cav since they can kite) - not to mention trampling your own men!
I assume you used the Indian general unit with Rahja Gaja - having generals on elephants is very risky (I learned it the hard way when I was playing Carthage)
Dogs are a bit similar, they're decent at killing if they attack a unit that isn't heavy infantry from the flank/rear (especially moving targets), but other times they will be terrible since they'll all die to heavy infantry in melee or run after horses to the other side of the map.
There already is one. You simply download the 4TPY submod off the first post and load it before DV!
No need to wait!
I'm trying to avoid making changes that break save-games as I know it can get frustrating if you're in the middle of a long campaign.
I'll be removing an Antigonidai farm building at some point in some later patch and replace it with the hellenic version of cattle pens.
That might "break" the slot the building is in (if you've built it at all) but it's fixable with sfEdit. I'll let players know ahead of time though, and if they happened to have this building and don't know how to fix it in sfEdit they can send their save to me and I'll remove it.
Other than that I cannot think of any other changes I'm planning that is going to affect save-games.
Edit: Patch out & changelog updated!
How am I supposed to defeat 3 higher quality Lusotanan armies vs 1,5 lower quality Arevaci armies??? Both their infantry and cavalry are of better quality, even in 1vs1, the most I could get would be a phyrric victory, which will mean to lose (not possible to fight 1 by 1, there's always 2 at least connected/reinforcing each other)...
As soon as Turdetani lost their field battle and were besieged (inminent destruction), I proposed to join my confederation (high chances) and they accepted. Hence, Lusitani left and there were like 5-8 years of peace, until Lusitani beated Gallaci and declared me war. One turn prior to this, Carthage sieged Kartuba with elephants, but left due to my main army approximation to assist Kartuba. At the same time, all gallic tribes decided to declare Arevaci war (4 of them) and started to infiltrate the Iberian peninsula. Thankfully (and due to money), Cantabri joined war against gallic tribes (Edetani after a few turns by their own will), so I was able to hold northern/eastern front (Tarraco was controlled by Massalia). If not, enemies will be entering my lands from all fronts... which I love to see, but there's no possibility to beat them in the field (have to wait that they decide to assault a settlement, or I get bankruptcy).
The thing is that, even having more or less secured northern/eastern front, I just can't beat Lusitani due to their numerical and quality superiority (not able to play with cavalry numbers or quality' superiority). They started to raid Andalusia, sometimes besiege Kartuba, which I'm able to force them to retreat, but as soon as I want to attack them in a field battle, they have clear superiority (even when Kartuba's garrison sally out to help). That way, Lusitani don't have the balls to assault Kartuba, so it's a game of changing raiding and holding siege, remove the siege, etc (each turn a different option)... So I ended up bankrupt, desertation, foot shortage and famine... I guess it's the end.
Both Lusitani and Celtiberi hold 3 settlements, but they're able to recruit 2x times my armies, even with better quality... Do you think that this is balanced campaing or is just that Arevaci is a tough campaing? It seems to me that it's too much to realistically hold so many armies. Is there any possibility to tone it down?
Don't get me wrong, I love Data Venia and as other user said, I can't go back to normal DeI. It's just that there's a non-returning point which feels unbalanced in my Arevaci campaign. Maybe I should try with a different faction (e.g. Sparta) to check if things go differently. Thank you very much in advance!!!!!
P.S: In addition, I can't make non-agression pacts and alliances with Cantabri and Edetani, despite having 120+ relationships and having the same enemies, which doesn't make sense to me. I guess that they may want some money, but how in the hell can I pay if I'm already bankrupt?
Edit: P.S.2: Forgot to mention that due to more difficult diplomacy, friendly factions don't get military access, despite having the same enemies and fighting the same wars (e.g. Gallaci got super angry due to Cantabri fighting Lusitani in Gallaecia, despite only thanks to Cantabri, they were able to survive for 10 years more...). Thus, possible future allies may lose relationships due to these circumstances. In normal DeI 1.2, factions asked for military access prior to pass through your land, which I was very impressed to see.
Last edited by jdofo; June 13, 2017 at 12:14 PM.
There is a quick solution for your situation but it's a bit ''gamey''
Fortified stance. You haven't heard it from me though
Haha Thanks mate! I'm already using it with my main army on the western side of Kartuba, which I guess it's part of the reason why they don't assault the city. But Lusitani are destroying my economy and food supply due to raiding (2 armies). If I disband my half army in Iplacea, I'm death if they decide to infiltrate through that front, or either Cantabri lose against Gallic tribes and they start coming to Numantia (recruiting 3 units there in order to survive, but they'll need the support of my half army or I'll lose my capital)... :-S
@jdofo
Nice campaign description!
You make valid points and I'll try to answer them one at a time. I've only tried Arevaci in HatG so far so I cannot comment on how they perform in GC.
1. If I lower the army caps then the AI will be quite easy to beat mid/late-game, when your cap is generally higher than theirs due to imperium level (unless you fight against a large kingdom). The player will also not be able to recruit governor generals to support the stability of their regions and provinces later on when it gets increasingly difficult due to -po and corruption problems.
What I can do next update is to lower their recruitment points from 3 to 2 (this is the bonus amount extra troops the AI can recruit per turn on-top of the normal restrictions that the player abides by). So if for example the Lusitanian AI recruited 5 units per turn in their capital, they'll only be able to recruit 4 per turn instead. Hopefully this small tweak will alleviate this issue slightly without making it too easy.
2. About diplomacy pacts, I've reduced the chance of getting them due to the insane AI spam mid-/late-game when ten factions want to have NA with you, 5 want military access and 3 want defensive/military alliance. This isn't counting "Join my war, I'll join your war if you give me x money, give me x money now!" etc every time you click end turn. Most players who commented on this were usually irritated by it like 100+ turns into their game.
NA is nearly useless so I think I'll leave it as it is, but I do agree that military access should be easier to get (to avoid your allies declaring war on each other due to one of them trespassing against you when they're helping you) - this will be fixed in the next patch as I've also experienced this myself.
I appreciate feedback! Even though I play DV a lot myself, I still miss stuff and player feedback helps me balance out stuff (hopefully for the better).
About the new update, my game still start with spring in early januari. I'm using the steam version btw.
Thank you so much for the quick feedback and dedication, Ygraine! It's impressive how much motivation you and DeI modders show us, my respect. If only we had the family tree, RPG elements and possible marriages between factions and subfactions...
1. I fully agree with the tweak of recruitment points from 3 to 2. Challenging mid/late-game is vital or the motivation in the campaign will be lost. It should aleviate the massive recruitment, but just slightly into the right but challenging balance.
2. I totally agree as well, keeping comercial relationships and sharing wars with Cantabri and Edetani worked as if we had a non-agression pact, at least, or even an alliance. NA are definitely worthless. I only had to pay Cantabri like 1000-2000 to join war for each faction, which seems reasonable for our budgets. But, as you also experienced, we need easier military access for war collaboration and even improving relationships, not the opposite constraint. What about requiring common war enemies to share military access, or to be taken into account as a factor to ease its achievement between factions?
On the other hand, what about easing defensive alliance obtainment when you reach from e.g. 200 relationship value onwards with a faction? And military alliance from e.g. 275 or so, for instance? Can't say how it will work, no modding skills at all, but maybe if the buffer value is set quite high, AI won't be able to spam you unless they're in perfect relationships with you. I've only seen an alliance made by Carthage with someone else, but maybe it was too soon to reach conclusions.
I really like how AI confederates more often to face bigger enemies, it's very realistic and variable (Edetani, after taking Tarraco from Massalia, changed their confederation priorities from high to low, which is logical), but shouldn't they be closer/have higher chances to make a defensive alliance than confederating and losing their autonomy in the first place? In my case, I only proposed Turdetani to join my faction because they were going to be destroyed next turn, like RPG. I test the option, see how it goes the confederation in my economy, and I reject it if confederation provoke losses and it's not really a survival thing, despite faction is in a struggle. Is it possible to make/increase chances of AI faction, which is going to be destroyed in 1-2 turns aprox, proposing their neighbours/faction with higher relationships to join their confederation? If I hadn't have a spy near Turdetani, I wouldn't have known if they were going to be eliminated next turn...
I'm glad to share my experience, it's the least that mod users could do after all the great work done by modders. Thought it was an interesting example