[Feedback] Questions, Critiques and Requests

[Katsumoto]

I know it's already been mentioned and I know part of the problem is the engine but something seriously needs to be done about the rotating phalanx issue because at this point fighting an AI phalanx is practically unplayable. It's even worse when it's phalanx vs phalanx. This occurs literally in every battle.



The result is usually myself or the AI taking ridiculous casualties. I know the phalanx has always been a pain, but I'm not kidding, the amount of rage quitting I'm doing is unhealthy. Thank you again for all your hard work.

[KAM 2150]

So far not possible to change, somehow CA made phalanx units to always flank instead of frontal attack enemies.

I know it has been quite a bit of time since I removed formation attack but when it was enabled, almost all infantry units in the game did the same thing.

[CIaagent11]

Lovely mod. Bought Rome II as a pre-order and was very dissapointed. Returned now and downloaded your mod. So I am still learning the game. Everything is going well, and I have been fighting Carthage for like 20 years now. I have taken Sicily, Corsica, Sardinia and Balearas. Carthage however, still does not want peace. I kinda want to take a break from fighting them.. it has been a long war.. and I want to fight three Punic wars, not one huge one.

What can I do to get them to accept peace?

I could never get them to accepted peace in game, but you can:
1. Use SaveParser to change the diplomatic stance. If they declare war on you again, because they hate you, you might have to redo it.
2. Write a script that declares peace. You need packfilemanager for that.
Edit: This is the line you want to add:
scripting.game_interface:force_make_peace("rom_carthage","rom_rome")
I recommend putting it in for example grand_campaign.lua into a function that gets called every turn, such as FactionCampaignScripts.

[CIaagent11]

I can't seem to get ranged units to kill anyone. Slingers or javelins get like 3 kills per battle. What am doing wrong?

[Hummer]

I quit using slingers as I found them terrible. I found them the same as you.

[CIaagent11]

I read somewhere that they have low base damage, so they are only effective if they attack unarmored units or from the side. DeI wants you to micromanage them. I will try that. I guess I'm used to the way it was in RTW where I could just have them stand behind my army.

[Pyke]

Hello,
I make a try with the new version of DEI, mods : dei ttt expanded, cultural tension, 12 TPY, dei hardcore ( only CAI) and noPO garrison as the Arverni. It was a more slower campaign than the precedent version.
On turn 130 I just occuped Celtica, Aquitania, Provincia, Britannia, Cisalpina and Raetia et Noricum.
Spain is divided between Carthage and Arivaci. Rome has all of Italia Illyria, Thacia, Macedonia, Pannonia and Greece.
On turn 135, I see that the armies of Rome were starving. So in 6 turns I have conquered Italia.
Why Rome is starving ? The bonus for the AI is no enough ?
I cannot make trade with the last dozen of factions, I think it is from the imperium level. But since the beginning it is very difficult to make trade. And I was no able to make a confederation.
I was never able to recruit a spy. No candidate.
I had a look to the save game, Rome is at imperium level 7. Maybe the stats from the imperium level are too harsh, even for the AI ?
And the lack of information on the building and their effects before constructing them is very harmful to the planning of an empire.
I understand nothing on the traits of the characters and how they evolve (if), never on the population effects on the economy.
But it is largely better then vanilla. Thanks for your works.
And sorry for the bad english.

[KAM 2150]

I can't seem to get ranged units to kill anyone. Slingers or javelins get like 3 kills per battle. What am doing wrong?

I quit using slingers as I found them terrible. I found them the same as you.

I read somewhere that they have low base damage, so they are only effective if they attack unarmored units or from the side. DeI wants you to micromanage them. I will try that. I guess I'm used to the way it was in RTW where I could just have them stand behind my army.

I score between 50-100 kills per worst archers/slingers in battle. With better ones 150-200 is nothing uncommon.

Slingers are amazing as a counter to horse archers due to range and shields. Medium and high thier slingers are also great against armoured units.

In scenario mentioned with 3 kills per battle I restreain to believe in unless there is a mod conflict as even targetting front of most armoured and shielded infantry in the game will eventually give more casualties.

What is also important is that worst archers/slingers/javeliners are not true soldiers/marksmen, they are equal to random people being given random weapon while higher tier units are trained in their usage.

[Frosthammer]

Suggestion about AI and population classes.
As i understand, AI ignore PoP system and recruit units only according to units "quality" (cdsr_military_generator_units_quality) and price. Thats why we have stack with about half nobles (1st class).
I have an idea how it can be "fixed". The idea is to mouve 1st class units to special groop. I don`t know how it called exactly - unit cast, unit class, unit group etc. And change AI recruitment group, profiles, etc... Where are AI "profile", "behaviour group" matched with type such as spearmen, infantry, missile units, cavalry and matched with some numbers (percentage i suppose). Put there are new group "elite", "1st_class" etc, wich includes units required 1st PoP class.
This should simulate AI caring about using differen classes.
I hope you get what i truing to describe, my understanding of AI recruitment mechanik low.

[_Suetonius_]

I tried Epirus on hard difficulty and really enjoyed it. It was hard but I got Rome and now moving on the Carthage. Now I'm trying Kolkhis on hard difficulty and people just can't seem to stop declaring war on me. I can't seem to get pas turn 20-30 for about 10 tries now Dropped down to normal difficulty and I'm just managing to hold on. Really liking this mod!

[thor85]

A question and some feedback on the supply system. I'm using DEI 1.2+Hardcore+Cultural Tensio.

Question: I'm playing Rome, fighting the Nervi, the Cartaginians and the Suebi in South france. I control Narbo, where I built Grain Pits, which should provide supplies in adjacent regions (right?). I move a legion in Tarraco region and, surprise! Instead of being supplied from Narbo (tarraco is an adjacent region), my army is "Foraging for Food". Why?

Feedback: I can see a total of 5 enemy Nervi and Cartaginian armies. 4 of them are facing prolongued (4+ turns) supply attrition while being in two different regions controlled by the by Suebians (their ally). Certainly, the AI doesn't seem to handle the supply system.

[CIaagent11]

Idea: Why not name gen_ factions after the settlement they rebel from, instead of bland "confederations" and "usurpers"?

[Dresden]

@thor85 Its possible the supply line is being interrupted by something, there are a lot of factors that can stop it. In terms of the AI, yes they don't really understand it. Its why we originally had them immune to the attrition but we have been trying something different in the past few updates. The idea is to make a it a bit more realistic, the AI gets punished like the player. I am not really sure which way we are going to end up on the issue. Some players want the AI to have similar rules, but in the end if its bad for the AI its usually bad for overall gameplay. Also, since the AI tends to camp out in other people's territory, it can be frustrating for the player to have them use supplies but never attrition.

@Claagent the original idea was to represent other political parties in regions but we didnt' always have a choice for that. So, thats not a bad idea at all to use the region names.

[thor85]

Hi Dresden, thanks for the reply.

My view has always been to limit the player exploits as much as possible (eg. fortified stance). At the beginning I considered that the supply system was an excellent idea to prevent nonsense invasions many regions away from the original region (like seing an Edetani army moving all the way to Egypt and conquering a couple of cities). This was specially important considering that the mod itself is, in my opinion, too oriented towards offensive actions (weak garrisons, mild cultural penalties). However, the more I play the more I notice that this problem is not always cured by the supply system.

So... while the supply system is no more than some complexity for the player, it penalizes the AI, and does not suffice to have a meaningful map after, let's say, 100 turns. Therefore, I'm tempted to start a new campaign without it (so at least I will face full-strength enemy armies) and the "De AI Arbitriis" submod. I'll let you know.

Apart from that, If I still play Rome II is just because of this mod. Thanks a lot

[Oskar_GD]

I have a question: When city garrison replenish its losses what happens to city manpower? Does garrison's losses reduse the manpower or not?

[exotoco]

Hey first of all this mod is great, would not have played Rome 2 as much without it. But would it be possible to change sabotage provisions to affect local army supply aswell. I mean its kinda in the name and it would make it more worth it for slowly wearing down bigger armies on the move. Would make counter agent actions more important. Otherwise good job

[Jay the Byzantine]

I'd like to offer an idea from my many failed(on normal /normal) campaigns: make raiding possible only with a certain amount of units / men in the army. Otherwise leaving even stragglers who can't defeat the garrison will result in rebellions. And obviously an army of 200 terrorizing a region of 15k+ makes no sense.

[Dresden]

I'd like to offer an idea from my many failed(on normal /normal) campaigns: make raiding possible only with a certain amount of units / men in the army. Otherwise leaving even stragglers who can't defeat the garrison will result in rebellions. And obviously an army of 200 terrorizing a region of 15k+ makes no sense.

It should already require 3-4 units.

Hey first of all this mod is great, would not have played Rome 2 as much without it. But would it be possible to change sabotage provisions to affect local army supply aswell. I mean its kinda in the name and it would make it more worth it for slowly wearing down bigger armies on the move. Would make counter agent actions more important. Otherwise good job

I am not sure if that is possible to be honest.

I have a question: When city garrison replenish its losses what happens to city manpower? Does garrison's losses reduse the manpower or not?

I think it may but its not restricted by it, but I could be wrong. Its been a long time since I looked into that part of the code.

[Cgma]

Hi (and sorry for bad English),
Playing game with the module i have found some parameters in popup windows that can't be changed into any language with localisation files, i mean specifically "Lua_scripts/supply system.lua" and "script/_lib/manpower/population_ui_tables.lua". Both contain text references that should be added to localisation module if anyone wants them localised. Is there a way to add those references only (to localisation.loc file) without need to touch any script itself? i'm not sure, but it might be more text hidden in the scripts since i have seen some culture specific text in factions/regions descriptions that i haven't found in the *.loc file.

Some thoughts on playing normal mode:
1. Starting amount of money is too big according to 4/12 tpy, sooner or later factions start to pay absurd amount of money for any diplomatics, other way - while you struggle to develop anything for 3rd level construction, most enemies have 4th level already... I believe cutting one "zero" from incomes/starting money for every faction would do the job, especially in 12 tpy campaigns.
2. I don't understand that supply system - it is quite ok for navies but for land units it doesn't seem to work logically, (what is the minor problem, i suppose most ppl, like me, just ignore it until parameters go to positive status

) but you would achieve the same with just using food production/reduction only without additional system. As I said i have noticed weird results of supply system like going land army into devastated region (army is included with train already recruited, i just left my region for test) and takes attrition like it haven't any supplies, so, what is for that train then if it doesn't work a single round?
3. I supposed you would work on culture system more - in the ancient times cultures has very little to do with rebelling - most conquests based on religious syncretism and asimilation, not converting population to be strictly "your culture only", the religious differencies were dominium of late antiquity - mostly christian times. I believe taxes and development/satisfaction should mostly influence regions with different cultures and converting into player's culture should take much, much longer as it shouldn't be needed to keep a region at first (yeah, well there were regions more relying on culture like Germans or semitic people, but Greeks, Romans, Africans and Persians didn't fight for cultural reasons). Anyway temple of Isis should work as good for Greeks or Romans (or even Persians/Partians, they hadn't built a single shrine there while they occupied Egipt) as for Egiptians like that was indeed in those times. i know it needs much further description and specifics to be done, but actually mod is still the same game as the vanilla, stats are different, but clue of gameplay stays the same.
4. There should be possibility (if it is possible within game's limitations) to build onagers/ballistas during siege (like ladders or rams), most armies those times never dragged heavy equipment with them, they built artillery especially for siege purposes on the place and if it was needed, Caesar built even fleets

.
5. Double or even triple time to construct higher building tiers, the same about costs (or cut one "zero" for incomes, at least lower all that factors that make later game too easy). Most UI factions have too much money as they cannot develop too much armies due to supply system, you soon can get absurd amount of money for any diplomacy with other factions if play it correctly (and it doesn't require much work really). On the other hand it seems that factions (especially met later in the gameplay) also stop to react on any logical diplomatic offers due to their wealth (and even if the game says that long term connections build positive reactions in fact it is not truth forcing you to conquest everything on the way to avoid later treacheries).
6. It would be nice to add real events like spawning Spartacus army in Italy or earthquakes within the map as they really had occured. Yeah i know it might be challenging, but some really major facts would be nice to be seen

. In contrary to dogs' units... anyone really uses them anyhow? Not mentioning, that Collosus of Rodos was gone in 234 BC (and some other wonders were just fictious).

[jeanlannes]

Hi. Thank you for making this beautiful mod that keep us playing so long after the original game was published. I would like to ask a few questions about some small issues (please forgive me if any of them have been asked before)

1. When I attack a non-walled settlement, sometimes the AI chooses to leave the city and meet me on the field (a decision I really appreciate because I hate street city battles). But I don't seem to have this option myself and I´m forced to fight every defensive settlement battle inside the city. Is that intended or is it a bug?

2. Whenever I attack an army in the fortification stance (and enemy armies use that stance too often for my personal taste, specially for the non roman ones), I´m also forced to fight the absurd forts battles (I guess forts are unfortunately unmoddable). But I seem to remember playing some time ago with the chance to siege forts. Am I wrong or am I right and you removed this option on purpose?. (I must add, as a smaller note, that I´m not sure if it happened in you mod or in another one)

3. Are the options after winning a settlement attack moddable? I'm asking because it don't seem realistic to me. IMHO I think the ones that give you money (loot and sack) should be swapped. It seems more logical to me options should be to get a bigger amount of money without taking the control of the province or to get the control gaining a smaller amount. I also think that the "raze" option shouldn't give the control of the province. You're supposed to be devastating the enemy territory, not taking it.

4. Is there a way to make romans not focusing on Greece so soon?. The only way I've succeeded in this is taking Apolonia from Epirus when they are still fighting Rome in Italy. That way, when Roman take Taras, Epirus faction is destroyed and they don't land in Greece so soon. If I don't do this, Romans get Taras, then Apolonia and after that they start fighting almost everyone around them. I think this situation is related whith my last question...

5. Is there a way to get factions making peace more often? Once two factions start a war (not only against me but also against me) it seems that the only way to stop it is one destroying the enemy (or making it a vassal). Not sure what happens when I´m not involved, but whenever I'm in war with a faction, to be wining the war clearly (destroying several of their armies and even all of them) doesn't seem enough to convince the faction to make peace with me. I just get peace offerings when I´m sieging their very last settlement (and at that moment what's the point to make peace?)

Insisting in my gratitude for the mod makers, I would also appreciate if you are kind enough to answer any of these questions.