[Community] Campaign Experience - Share Your Empire

[zsimmortal]

I turned on this faction for a moment. I moved my army from the settlement with the walls and began to besiege the strong army of Bactria, probably in the first round. Bactria's army came out fighting the city and had a big advantage. I had a heroic victory without losing any unit, only some of the archers' horses escaped. Ha ha ha.

Wow I started over again and went directly to Harev. Your trick works a lot better than what I did. Thanks.

[zoner16]

Played Armenia for a few more years. Manged to subdue both Colchis and Ardhan (after a harrowing mountaintop battle, horse archers rule), but zsimmortal is very correct in that once you start falling economically, the death spiral becomes almost impossible to climb out of.

The main issue still feels like the lack of predictability of your economy which comes down to the fact that your actual income still feels like it has very little to do with what the UI is telling you you are going to make, and is exacerbated by the amount that your income shifts between summer and winter being both large and very hard to predict (unlike food, which makes a lot more sense). Since the UI can't be trusted and there are so many modifiers for the real income from any given building decision, formulating a plan to pull yourself out of a bad economic state gets very challenging, and if you go bankrupt, there's basically no answer.

Perhaps a lowering of maintenance costs would help this? Most building chains are already a significant investment (which could be raised a bit in quid pro quo), and the slot system with all the building tradeoffs means you've already got a lot to consider when deciding how to spec out a region.

Also, perhaps I'm alone in this, but the way the building icons are set up with the small illustration over the washed out background makes them very difficult to discern, especially since a lot of them look fairly similar. I realize that they're an intentional throwback to the Rome 1 icons, but Rome 1 had a very different UI that made those issues a lot less of a problem. I'm not sure how much can be done about this without changing them entirely. Maybe some better building chain color coding?

[Julio-Claudian]

[stevehoos]

Played Armenia for a few more years. Manged to subdue both Colchis and Ardhan (after a harrowing mountaintop battle, horse archers rule), but zsimmortal is very correct in that once you start falling economically, the death spiral becomes almost impossible to climb out of.

The main issue still feels like the lack of predictability of your economy which comes down to the fact that your actual income still feels like it has very little to do with what the UI is telling you you are going to make, and is exacerbated by the amount that your income shifts between summer and winter being both large and very hard to predict (unlike food, which makes a lot more sense). Since the UI can't be trusted and there are so many modifiers for the real income from any given building decision, formulating a plan to pull yourself out of a bad economic state gets very challenging, and if you go bankrupt, there's basically no answer.

It's a brilliant mod, but what you describe is the issue I see long term. Once you get in a spiral, there's no getting out. I am all in for complexity and difficulty, but this seems a lot like a cuneiform economy.

[zsimmortal]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

An unfortunate end to my campaign. Seleucids decided they could spare 4 full armies to attack my small kingdom.

[Petellius]

Ouch... yeah Parthia is without doubt one of the hardest starts in AE. Bravo for getting as far as you did!

[zsimmortal]

Ouch... yeah Parthia is without doubt one of the hardest starts in AE. Bravo for getting as far as you did!

It's pretty hard at the start, but once you get the gold to level 2 with a trade partner, it gets a lot better. From reloading at an earlier spot, getting lucky breaks with how the Seleucids behave is generally the only real way to get out of the mess of the early start.

One thing that bothers me is how disproportionate the garrison power is though. Parthian garrisons are effectively doormats compared to other cultures (that I tried at least). The most egregious example is their next door neighbour having Hypastists of the Agema, Silver shield phalanxes, Silver shield thorakitai and a Tarantine cavalry unit, while they get a handful of levies and archers.

I know that the idea is that the Parthians are mostly cavalry and have to rely on auxiliaries to fill the ranks (kind of similar for other factions to a certain degree), but if Baktrians can have native units, I don't get why Parthia can't even get one or two Iranian infantry units. I leave it up to you guys since you clearly know what you're doing. It's a very good mod that is incredibly innovative, I just have some minor grievances.

[Sheridan]

It's pretty hard at the start, but once you get the gold to level 2 with a trade partner, it gets a lot better. From reloading at an earlier spot, getting lucky breaks with how the Seleucids behave is generally the only real way to get out of the mess of the early start.

One thing that bothers me is how disproportionate the garrison power is though. Parthian garrisons are effectively doormats compared to other cultures (that I tried at least). The most egregious example is their next door neighbour having Hypastists of the Agema, Silver shield phalanxes, Silver shield thorakitai and a Tarantine cavalry unit, while they get a handful of levies and archers.

I know that the idea is that the Parthians are mostly cavalry and have to rely on auxiliaries to fill the ranks (kind of similar for other factions to a certain degree), but if Baktrians can have native units, I don't get why Parthia can't even get one or two Iranian infantry units. I leave it up to you guys since you clearly know what you're doing. It's a very good mod that is incredibly innovative, I just have some minor grievances.

That's because the garrisons aren't balanced appropriately for all factions yet. In fact, Parthian garrisons are how we envision them - it's the other factions that are overpowered. This is being corrected. I agree with you completely as far as units goes, I'd also love to see some more heavy or at least versatile type of Parthian infantry. This is something we're definitely adding.

Side note, agree with Petellius. That was impressive. Looked like a fun battle!

[stevehoos]

I worry about the suggested "normal difficulty" because the AI just lets you live in peace once you get big enough. I have 500,000 in the bank with Macedon and have taken Rhodes and a few other settlements. I think Macedon is the easiest start of all the current factions. Did you all adjust the aggressiveness of the campaign AI on normal settings to augment the other normal setting difficulties such as Public order etc?

[zsimmortal]

That's because the garrisons aren't balanced appropriately for all factions yet. In fact, Parthian garrisons are how we envision them - it's the other factions that are overpowered. This is being corrected. I agree with you completely as far as units goes, I'd also love to see some more heavy or at least versatile type of Parthian infantry. This is something we're definitely adding.

From what I know of Iranian history, tribesmen from hilly regions generally formed the bulk of the good infantry. Happy to hear about garrisons, it's really unfortunate that I can't even consider assaulting a city due to the lack of reliable infantry compared to the garrison's elite force!

[Harry-TW]

I used to play against sansanids (mod realms played with india), but to defeat them (3-4 armies attacked me) I had to relate heroic victories separately with every army. In addition, there was a strong infantry there. Maybe how would you wait for Baktri's attack (if they attacked in the open, that would work) because a war with such a big opponent is difficult. It's better that they move the troops west. Before the war with them, it would be worth to colonize the lands in the north. And even if there was a war with them, it would be nice if they signed a peace for some time, one could develop a little, for example rich Harew.
Btw with Partia better save and load xD.

[Sheridan]

I worry about the suggested "normal difficulty" because the AI just lets you live in peace once you get big enough. I have 500,000 in the bank with Macedon and have taken Rhodes and a few other settlements. I think Macedon is the easiest start of all the current factions. Did you all adjust the aggressiveness of the campaign AI on normal settings to augment the other normal setting difficulties such as Public order etc?

I find the AI too passive as well under some circumstances. The next thing we're going to do is to add specific personalities for the major factions, making them consistently inclined to dominate and expand. Randomness will persist for minor factions. The CAI diplomatic behaviour is identical on each difficulty setting, which is of course subject to change. In terms of economy, nobody on the team is satisfied with its current state. We had to cave in to the complaints about how 'hard' the campaign was. There will be changes in the nearest future, making it more difficult but also all-round balanced.

[BDgilmartin]

the building / city management is a bit unusual for me playing as romans.

1. It took me 4-5 campaigns [campaigns, not turns] to figure out how to get cash flow positive; build farms, then build baths, then try to get as many of the resource buildings constructed to establish trade with every single empire that i could possibly manage. Now i've got more money then i could ever use.

2. Speaking of trade; By 175BC there appear to be almost no factions that are exporting resources, in spite of having them. I'm trading with all but 2 empires that have adjacency/sea routes and only 2 of them appear to be exporting any resource to me.

3. Speaking of Baths; the 5th tier city building 'colonial civium romanorum' has a squalor rating of 0, versus all other buildings that have a squalor rating of 8, i get the feeling this is not intentional. But regardless i am very grateful for it because Squalor is probably the most expensive feature to manage here. my treasury is 1.3m right now [I have like 8 armies in the field as well and 4 navies] but i couldn't upgrade rome past tier 2 because squalor would have kicked in. One of the tragic things about Rome 2 and these subsequent total war titles is the 6-4 slot limit on construction which really hampers your ability to take full advantage of the building trees. I assume this is hard coded.

[Petellius]

We're looking into AI trading problems. I noticed this pretty early on and we're attempting to change the CAI a bit so they will do.

[Spariel]

Question regarding objectives, I've reached the third one for Rome called "Hail Caesar", and the 'rewards' for it are really harsh. For example, for the next 150 turns after conquering Gaul you get -10 public order in all provinces, along with a variety of other maluses. At first I was really enjoying the objectives and how they both guided you and set a good story, but now I've been heavily discouraged from finishing conquering Gaul. Are you guys going to keep it that way? Why did you decide to make it so detrimental to the player?

[ant191]

68 turns into a Rome campaign, started on update 1.01f (with the tougher economy). The year is 169 BC and I have achieved the first 2 main objectives of neutralising Carthage and winning the Fourth Macedonian War. Starting to make my way through Gaul now (partially as it's the next objective, mostly because the AI I'm trading with isn't building lead resource building and damn I need me some lead for the sanitation tree.

Loving it so far. Toughest opponent thus far has been the Seleucids, with the battles being in the region of 10,000 on 10,000. Eventually, I had to make peace to focus my depleted forces elsewhere, though after several victories and I probably could have pushed a bit further into Mesopotamia. Egypt was surprisingly easy to pacify, Spain not so much (probably because I've had to deal with a revolt every other turn).

Any questions do let me know!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Question regarding objectives, I've reached the third one for Rome called "Hail Caesar", and the 'rewards' for it are really harsh. For example, for the next 150 turns after conquering Gaul you get -10 public order in all provinces, along with a variety of other maluses. At first I was really enjoying the objectives and how they both guided you and set a good story, but now I've been heavily discouraged from finishing conquering Gaul. Are you guys going to keep it that way? Why did you decide to make it so detrimental to the player?

Long story short, if you're not already aware, following Caesar's conquest of Rome would start to undergo major changes in all spheres. This all culminated in the Final War of the Roman Republic and Octavian's victory over Antony at Actium. A dev can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the negative effects of this objective are relatively historically accurate and this mod values history, I mean just look at the historical timeline notification at the start of each turn.

Personally, I love the fact conquering Gaul means degative debuffs because it is historically accurate. I've already been dealing with unloyal generals so I kind of want a civil war.

[Spariel]

Long story short, if you're not already aware, following Caesar's conquest of Rome would start to undergo major changes in all spheres. This all culminated in the Final War of the Roman Republic and Octavian's victory over Antony at Actium. A dev can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the negative effects of this objective are relatively historically accurate and this mod values history, I mean just look at the historical timeline notification at the start of each turn.

Personally, I love the fact conquering Gaul means degative debuffs because it is historically accurate. I've already been dealing with unloyal generals so I kind of want a civil war.

I would agree with the civil war aspect if it meant finally stabilising and becoming an empire, but I don't believe that is how it works. Currently it seems as though it's all negative with no payoff.

[ant191]

I would agree with the civil war aspect if it meant finally stabilising and becoming an empire, but I don't believe that is how it works. Currently it seems as though it's all negative with no payoff.

Very true, I see your point. At the moment we'll just have to wait and see what the next objective is and what happens after. My guess is it'll be Britain/Syria.

[ThirdLegion]

Playing as Pergamon my initial expansion into Greece and Macedon failed hard due to constant rebellions and massive economic problems. I had to retreat back to my capital, only defending and stabilizing the economy. After a good few turns I managed to push out again, first a bit against the Seleucids and then to Macedon, where I layed siege to Pella with 2 almost full stacks. Unfortunately I was at war with the Thracians to the north aswell, who came down and attacked with 3 full stack armies. So the upcoming battle was my 6000 men against 16000 Thracians/Macedonians, and because I got attacked at a weird angle my forces were split and surrounded. This was probably the most insane battle I ever played in any Total War campaign, at one point almost every single unit on the battlefield was wavering due to the enormous casualties on both sides. It ended in a truly Pyrrhic victory with me losing 4000 and the enemy 12000 men. My Agema cavalry saved the day, 3 units of them each having 1500 kills.

Here is some post battle carnage:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[LB8888]

Thanks for all the hard work in putting the mod together. I played about 30 turns as Rome, and I'll give my thoughts and critiques of the mod so far.
The first dozen turns or so are a challenge as you try to figure out the economic system....it sort of reminded me of the Roman campaigns on Atilla vanilla, which were initially quite difficult. By turn 30 my Republic is making so much money that steamrolling the map is inevitable.
My suggestions for the mod....with the each settlement locked into a maximum build of I think 6, or 4 slots....you just can't implement all the different buildings that you guys created. Probably best to streamline the building choices by eliminating some of the build options. Yeah, I know that sounds rough and it's nice to be able to make your own choices in building settlements...but there's too many choices and not enough building slots for them.
Second, the AI will never be perfect....but when the Cimibri confederation is willing to be my puppet state just by offering them a trade agreement, then something is broken. Considering from Caesar's account the Germans didn't even like importing or trading goods, mostly just selling their own plunder, the AI is silly sometimes. Don't know how hard it is to modify AI behaviour.
Lastly, just a bug...the tar resource building on Sardinia is maxed at level 1 instead of level 3.
All in all, refreshing campaign....and I'm very happy with how engaged and open to suggestions the modders of this community have been....hence my two cents on the mod so far. Thanks, and keep up the good work.