Extended Cultures Discussion

[Zarax]

We're meeting some unexpected instability during map testing, which is delaying releases so far.

[Ballpoint202]

We're meeting some unexpected instability during map testing, which is delaying releases so far.

Thanks for your efforts. This is my favorite mod and I'm really looking forward to the next version.

[Silver Legionary]

XC website appears down, specifically the beta test files section. For maintenance?

[Zarax]

It's down because of a malware attack, I'm working on a fix

[Zarax]

File access should be back online.

[Stath's]

Would you suggest playing with the Bosporan Kingdom ? Or does it have any AOR problems? Or maybe should I wait for the next version?

[Zarax]

Should be ok although provincial campaigns never got as much attention as regular ones...

[Metaluis90]

Any news on this excellent mod?

[Zarax]

We're working on hinterland development, it's a system that will add another layer of compexity along with governments.

[Metaluis90]

Glad to hear it's still alive!

[Silver Legionary]

You're not the only one. XC rewards our stubbornness, lol.

Zarax, by hinterland development, do you mean something like Roma Surrectum II's 'settlement focus' aspect?
Because that's great, if so, I've always been baffled that in-game systems like that in mods are uncommon(it adds a LOT to the 'experience' of it all, if you get my meaning, and it's useful on practical levels too), and for XC to have that on the books is good news indeed!

[Zarax]

Not sure how it works there, for XC we're trying to make a system in which you can decide to develop the settlement in favour of one class (farmer middle class/aristocracy/merchant), which in turn will affect the availability of some units/buildings plus of course traits.
It's proving quite challenging to harmonize, however we're confident we can overcome the issues and offer a new layer of depth in similar scale as the government system.

[Cheiftan]

Glad this awesome mod is still going , did you know your mod is featured on TotalWarGeneral (4chan)

[Zarax]

Really? Wasn't aware of it...

[Silver Legionary]

Not sure how it works there, for XC we're trying to make a system in which you can decide to develop the settlement in favour of one class (farmer middle class/aristocracy/merchant), which in turn will affect the availability of some units/buildings plus of course traits.

No, that's more-or-less what I meant, so the analogy fits lol.
(In RSII you can choose for a settlement to be economically inclined at the expense of less military capability, military-inclined at the expense of less economic capability, or be inclined to both if you have a lot of money and time/turns to spare to make it happen. XC seems to be making it more specific than just "military, money, or both?", as what you said states.)

No hurry, of course, doing big things like this properly is supposed to take time; good luck making it happen!

[Architect of Doom]

Could someone tell me the difference between XC and XGM? I have played both some time ago, but I can't remember.

[Silver Legionary]

I'll attempt a analogy for that that isn't many walls of text.

So, XC involves lots of micro-management/many serious considerations regarding the flow and future of your current campaigns must be made quickly, and often, in order to SURVIVE, let alone prevail at all.

XGM has all of that as well, but not to XC's degree, it's more focused on having large battles, having them occur often, and not having to worry about being unable to field enough troops/field sufficiently powerful and varied units unless you've badly neglected it.
It's a bit less difficult overall(besides actual battles, which are still very tense affairs), it's more "arcadey" if you will.
...Think I nailed it.

[Zarax]

XC is also a bit more focused on historical accuracy and has a bit more marked characterization between factions.
Try playing Carthage for example in XC and you'll see a lot of differences...

[debux]

Also, small detail, whcih could be just a personal appreciation, but I really can't understand the option for having 1 or 2 HP's in every unit, and having the battles "balanced" according to those two options. Having one 1HP turns missle units into the masters of the battlefield, whereas 2HP makes infantry the sole viable option for battles. I really can't understand it. In contrast, I feel that XC has been able to achieve a good balance between melee/missles/charges with only one HP.

I wish I could give more differences, but it's abeen a long time since I gave XGM another shot. The implications of having to choose for 1HP or 2HP makes it unplayable to me. XC feels also a lot better built up campaign-wise, giving you more city-management options as well as well fleshed out characters, among other features I don't remember seeing in XGM.

[SuperTechmarine]

Is there a way to make a whole faction join you when you kill their faction leader? I was playing as Pyrrhus of Epirus, conquered all of Italy, then Macedonia attacked me, took the field against them near Pella, killing their King and destroying their entire army. Since Pyrrhus was a claimant and with a great victory under his belt, wouldn't the nobles and the army crown Pyrrhus as the new King of Macedon?