A couple of ideas for 4.0.

[Iskandar]

So I had some free time this week and installed RTW again and tried Roma Surrectum.

Whether from playing, or lurking in the forum, I got a few ideas which could go well with ExRm.

1) 0-turn recruitment option. Make 0-turn recruitment possible when installing the mod. First, it's historical - entire armies were raised in a province in a matter of half or full year, if the faction had sufficient resources. Second, it won't cause stack spam fest, since in ExRm this is countered by high prices and longer province integration times, not by 1-turn recruitment. Possible problem is that an area could become severely depopulated, if the AI goes nuts.

2)Free Peoples faction. A normal, unplayable superfaction in addition to the rebels. Giving it regions where we'd like to have a faction(Syracuse, Nabatea, Illyria, Bosporans, various barbaric tribes, etc.), but can't due to the number limitation, or in critical places as to bar unwanted AI expansion significantly changes the gameplay. Bactria, for example, being the rightmost faction on the map, has little problem conquering the Indian provinces and using them unchallenged as powerful economic base. This superfaction won't become a true menace for the other factions due to its dispersion and if it can't produce troops in provinces other than ones it starts with.

3)Temple bonuses. ExRm has the multitemple system where IIRC all temples can be upgraded to minor temples and only one can be further upgraded. So let's give various distinctive bonuses for each temple formajor level or higher (beside the different priest ancillaries I mean). For example, Artemis temple could grant upgrade in missile weapons, Apollo - health bonus and a chance for the healer trait, etc., etc. The idea is to diversify these bonuses so that choosing the main temple involves more thought.

4)Unique faction buildings. Pick a trait that is characteristic for each faction and associate a building tree granting the respective bonuses. For example, Carthage can have a building that increases sea trade income and gives bonuses to ships/admirals, Pergamum can have some sort of culture bonus,etc. This could add a unique flavour to the nation you're playing with.

5)Military vs. State Official career system. Expand the Roman Leadership System also for political careers and implement it for all factions (perhaps with unique flavour for each one). Generally speaking a character, having spent two seasons with an army, resp. four seasons governing a city, should receive the according trait and the higher the service time, the bigger the bonuses. Care must be taken though, that the bonuses should not become too big - 7 or 8 command star generals should be exceptional, not common.

6)Roman style heavy infantry to be made available to a few factions at their highest level military building (but independently of the Marian reforms). The factions should be either loyal friends of Rome (e.g. Pergamum) or enemies that copied its style, like Hannibal and Pyrrhus. Of course, these imitations should be inferior to the real thing.

So, what do you think?

[Quinn Inuit]

So I had some free time this week and installed RTW again and tried Roma Surrectum.

Whether from playing, or lurking in the forum, I got a few ideas which could go well with ExRm.

1) 0-turn recruitment option. Make 0-turn recruitment possible when installing the mod. First, it's historical - entire armies were raised in a province in a matter of half or full year, if the faction had sufficient resources. Second, it won't cause stack spam fest, since in ExRm this is countered by high prices and longer province integration times, not by 1-turn recruitment. Possible problem is that an area could become severely depopulated, if the AI goes nuts.

Hmmm...you may be right, but what about the $ bonuses on higher difficulties? I'm worried that would allow stack spamming again. Plus, it would ruin the balance with the phalanx recruitment system.

2)Free Peoples faction. A normal, unplayable superfaction in addition to the rebels. Giving it regions where we'd like to have a faction(Syracuse, Nabatea, Illyria, Bosporans, various barbaric tribes, etc.), but can't due to the number limitation, or in critical places as to bar unwanted AI expansion significantly changes the gameplay. Bactria, for example, being the rightmost faction on the map, has little problem conquering the Indian provinces and using them unchallenged as powerful economic base. This superfaction won't become a true menace for the other factions due to its dispersion and if it can't produce troops in provinces other than ones it starts with.

Oooh, I'd forgotten India. Good idea.
We definitely have room for one superfaction. However, working the Indians in might be kind of hard.

There are just too many people who should be in the superfaction: India, Cisalpine Gaul, Illyria, Bastarnae, Britons, Nabatea, Bosporus, Syracuse

3)Temple bonuses. ExRm has the multitemple system where IIRC all temples can be upgraded to minor temples and only one can be further upgraded. So let's give various distinctive bonuses for each temple formajor level or higher (beside the different priest ancillaries I mean). For example, Artemis temple could grant upgrade in missile weapons, Apollo - health bonus and a chance for the healer trait, etc., etc. The idea is to diversify these bonuses so that choosing the main temple involves more thought.

The most recent update does this to an extent. It's not well-documented, though. We need to work on that.

4)Unique faction buildings. Pick a trait that is characteristic for each faction and associate a building tree granting the respective bonuses. For example, Carthage can have a building that increases sea trade income and gives bonuses to ships/admirals, Pergamum can have some sort of culture bonus,etc. This could add a unique flavour to the nation you're playing with.

I'm not a big fan of this. It's too much like a racial bonus (D&D term) for my liking.

5)Military vs. State Official career system. Expand the Roman Leadership System also for political careers and implement it for all factions (perhaps with unique flavour for each one). Generally speaking a character, having spent two seasons with an army, resp. four seasons governing a city, should receive the according trait and the higher the service time, the bigger the bonuses. Care must be taken though, that the bonuses should not become too big - 7 or 8 command star generals should be exceptional, not common.

This is actually very complex, but M. Agrippa is looking into doing something like this for Rome. If he can make it work, we'll have a template we can apply to the other factions.

6)Roman style heavy infantry to be made available to a few factions at their highest level military building (but independently of the Marian reforms). The factions should be either loyal friends of Rome (e.g. Pergamum) or enemies that copied its style, like Hannibal and Pyrrhus. Of course, these imitations should be inferior to the real thing.

So, what do you think?

Good stuff overall. I don't know about that last one, though. There were lots of reasons that a country might or might not be able to adopt Roman-style infantry. I think forcing everyone to wait until the Reforms replicates the amount of work they'd have needed to set something like that up.

One alternative might be to have well-triggered reforms for every faction, which would be awesome but incredibly complicated to script. I just don't think I'm up for that in the foreseeable future.

[Iskandar]

Hmmm...you may be right, but what about the $ bonuses on higher difficulties? I'm worried that would allow stack spamming again. Plus, it would ruin the balance with the phalanx recruitment system.

Do you mean 1 vs. 2 turns for regular vs. elite phalanx?
As for the cash bonus, we could up maintenance and recruitment prices some more - it could actually result in increasing the difference of style for M and H - one being more slower and strategical, with few engagements, the other - more frenetic, but not debilitatingly so.
Anyway, I suppose I'll try balancing this stuff myself and let you know when I have something.

Oooh, I'd forgotten India. Good idea.
We definitely have room for one superfaction. However, working the Indians in might be kind of hard.

There are just too many people who should be in the superfaction: India, Cisalpine Gaul, Illyria, Bastarnae, Britons, Nabatea, Bosporus, Syracuse

RS seems to do just fine, even though it includes regions from Britain through Sicily, Asia Minor, Nabatea all the way to the Eurasian steppes. It's one of the first differences about the gameplay that I noticed. Definitely an improvement. Perhaps make a poll and see how people react, especially those with experience from both mods.

The most recent update does this to an extent. It's not well-documented, though. We need to work on that.

Do you mean the latest hotfix? I hadn't noticed. Not well-documented as in the bonus works, but is not present in the description?

I'm not a big fan of this. It's too much like a racial bonus (D&D term) for my liking.

Ah, but that's exactly the point.They were different cultures with varying affinities and motivations which drove them to develop in unique ways, at least as long as they were independent states. The bonuses don't have to be something big, plus it makes sense to be available only on the higher city levels with some other building(s) as prerequisite. It's about further fleshing out the uniqueness of a faction, rather than providing uber-bonuses for the sake of gameplay.

I could, in fact, argue that there is already a racial bonus in the game - the Roman leadership system.

Good stuff overall. I don't know about that last one, though. There were lots of reasons that a country might or might not be able to adopt Roman-style infantry. I think forcing everyone to wait until the Reforms replicates the amount of work they'd have needed to set something like that up.

One alternative might be to have well-triggered reforms for every faction, which would be awesome but incredibly complicated to script. I just don't think I'm up for that in the foreseeable future.

Oh, well, it was just a thought. But I do think the mentioned factions deserve imitation legionaries (I can't remeber if they get them as of the current state of affairs).

As to the individual reforms - I read on some mod's forum about getting cataphracts recruitable for the seleucids. There had to be a general with a trait "curious about cataphracts"(which he gets after being beaten by heavy cavalry) and then the reforms were triggered. I can't remember where I read that,though.

EDIT: @pannonian: Doesn't excessive scripting make the game much slower? If yes, there might be better solutions.

[Quinn Inuit]

Do you mean 1 vs. 2 turns for regular vs. elite phalanx?
As for the cash bonus, we could up maintenance and recruitment prices some more - it could actually result in increasing the difference of style for M and H - one being more slower and strategical, with few engagements, the other - more frenetic, but not debilitatingly so.
Anyway, I suppose I'll try balancing this stuff myself and let you know when I have something.

Ok, keep me posted. The current system took us a long time to balance, so I admit I'm kind of attached to it. But if the 0 turn recruitment works, you're right that it would be more

RS seems to do just fine, even though it includes regions from Britain through Sicily, Asia Minor, Nabatea all the way to the Eurasian steppes. It's one of the first differences about the gameplay that I noticed. Definitely an improvement. Perhaps make a poll and see how people react, especially those with experience from both mods.

It's not so much that as I'm concerned about the different types of cultures represented. Do you think the Greeks and Celts can be effectively run by the same AI personality and formations?

Do you mean the latest hotfix? I hadn't noticed. Not well-documented as in the bonus works, but is not present in the description?

It's not present in the description. All of the high-level temples give different bonuses now, but we haven't documented that well enough for the players yet.

Ah, but that's exactly the point.They were different cultures with varying affinities and motivations which drove them to develop in unique ways, at least as long as they were independent states. The bonuses don't have to be something big, plus it makes sense to be available only on the higher city levels with some other building(s) as prerequisite. It's about further fleshing out the uniqueness of a faction, rather than providing uber-bonuses for the sake of gameplay.

I could, in fact, argue that there is already a racial bonus in the game - the Roman leadership system.

Fair enough. I wish we could do that for everyone.

Hmmm, I guess it would help guide players (and maybe the AI) to play a faction like it was IRL, but do we want to be giving that guidance?

Oh, well, it was just a thought. But I do think the mentioned factions deserve imitation legionaries (I can't remeber if they get them as of the current state of affairs).

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you knew. All of those factions get imitation legionnaires already, triggered by the Marian Reforms.

As to the individual reforms - I read on some mod's forum about getting cataphracts recruitable for the seleucids. There had to be a general with a trait "curious about cataphracts"(which he gets after being beaten by heavy cavalry) and then the reforms were triggered. I can't remember where I read that,though.

EDIT: @pannonian: Doesn't excessive scripting make the game much slower? If yes, there might be better solutions.

Excessive scripting does reduce speed, but we're not too bad on that yet.

That kind of reform triggering would be awesome (imitation legionnaires, cataphracts...not sure what else, though), but I'm not sure how to script it.

[pannonian]

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you knew. All of those factions get imitation legionnaires already, triggered by the Marian Reforms.

Excessive scripting does reduce speed, but we're not too bad on that yet.

That kind of reform triggering would be awesome (imitation legionnaires, cataphracts...not sure what else, though), but I'm not sure how to script it.

I've had a look around, and following Aradan's hint, I looked at the Org's guide to EDB, and I found this.

http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50439

Negative effects...

population_growth_bonus bonus -5 displayed the expected -2.5 in the building scroll but seemed not to affect the settlement population growth indicator on the settlement scroll. The same seems true for law_bonus and happiness_bonus. Religious_belief , however, does seem to work in the negative (this needs more testing). The general principle in actual terms is that a negative will only deduct from a positive; so a settlement with 15% law will drop to 0% law when a negative bonus of -20% is applied and not -5%.

Interestingly, giving negative bonuses to upgrades (in the format weapon_bladed bonus -1 for example) removes the unit with that weapon technology from being able to be recruited but is still listed as available in the relevant building scroll. A building that negates the negative bonus will restore the unit's availability for recruitment. Clued-up modders will see the potential for this feature

The EDB lists the following available weapon types.

; weapon_bladed [#] (upgrades heavy weapons by specified amount)
; weapon_missile [#] (upgrades missile weapons by specified amount)
; weapon_other [#] (presumably upgrades other weapons by specified amount, untested)
; weapon_siege [#] (presumably upgrades siege weapons by specified amount, untested)
; weapon_simple [#] (upgrades light weapons by specified amount)

A further look around, and EB uses weapon_siege to represent reform units. With this method, the ever-present town square could give the negative bonus to all reform units, until the reform building is built. If a single building is too simple, then one can make it a series of buildings with various prerequisites, leading to the final reform building that can be built, neutralising the negative bonus. I'm still looking around for ways to tie recruitment to traits or ancillaries though.

[Quinn Inuit]

Hi guys, could you check if this is possible?
Any chance to make some kind of militia that would appear when city is attacked? Something like home guard (retired veterans or just inhabitants that defend the homeland,..) that help fight garrison against invaders. After the siege is gone, so would be militia. Better for them than to be slaughtered or enslaved, don't you think?
I'd like to prevent huge cities being besieged and conquerd by 1 or 2 units. Just because there is only 1 general for example, although population in thousands!?! At least it could be applicable on capitals and cities of bigger importance.

This is theoretically possible, but in practice I've had difficulty making the scripts work reliably. I don't know why, but the proximity trigger I've been using doesn't always seem to work. One of the other people on here suggested using a spy and checking for immobility, but that presents a whole different set of problems.

In my Roman campaign VH/VH I've been waiting for decades for Carthage to bring it's armies from west Africa where it has 4-5 full stacks doing nothing!!! and I represent obvious threat to them. I don't really want to gain control over 5 north African cities that are protected by 1 unit per city.

The AI is very bad on defense. I recommend sitting a stack somewhere, maybe besieging them, and seeing if that does anything.

Another issue. Is it possible to make AI overseas attaks with full stacks?
Since I pushed Greeks off my Italian homeland they've been sending ship after ship but with half or quarter of stacks. They can apparently afford to send one or more full stacks once in few turns instead of sending few units every turn.

Nah, AI's just stupid, sorry.

I've had a look around, and following Aradan's hint, I looked at the Org's guide to EDB, and I found this.

http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50439

Negative effects...

population_growth_bonus bonus -5 displayed the expected -2.5 in the building scroll but seemed not to affect the settlement population growth indicator on the settlement scroll. The same seems true for law_bonus and happiness_bonus. Religious_belief , however, does seem to work in the negative (this needs more testing). The general principle in actual terms is that a negative will only deduct from a positive; so a settlement with 15% law will drop to 0% law when a negative bonus of -20% is applied and not -5%.

Interestingly, giving negative bonuses to upgrades (in the format weapon_bladed bonus -1 for example) removes the unit with that weapon technology from being able to be recruited but is still listed as available in the relevant building scroll. A building that negates the negative bonus will restore the unit's availability for recruitment. Clued-up modders will see the potential for this feature

The EDB lists the following available weapon types.

; weapon_bladed [#] (upgrades heavy weapons by specified amount)
; weapon_missile [#] (upgrades missile weapons by specified amount)
; weapon_other [#] (presumably upgrades other weapons by specified amount, untested)
; weapon_siege [#] (presumably upgrades siege weapons by specified amount, untested)
; weapon_simple [#] (upgrades light weapons by specified amount)

A further look around, and EB uses weapon_siege to represent reform units. With this method, the ever-present town square could give the negative bonus to all reform units, until the reform building is built. If a single building is too simple, then one can make it a series of buildings with various prerequisites, leading to the final reform building that can be built, neutralising the negative bonus. I'm still looking around for ways to tie recruitment to traits or ancillaries though.

The whole negative effects thing annoys me. I'd like to just be able to assign a negative effect and have done with it, instead of making sure there's a positive one to overcome first.

What about scripting the battle result to automatically create the building? Using weapon_siege to represent reform units is pretty awesome, though I'm not sure it's necessary. Why not just tie the reform units to the presence of a building? We'll have the spare building tree space to put together a whole tree of reform buildings that can be brought into existence (one for each faction), and we're paring down unit requirements to one building per unit (plus the occasional use of specialized town squares as AOR substitutes), so that shouldn't be a problem in the EDB.

Ah, found it - here under Gameplay.

But if the scripting makes it go too slow - thanks, but no, thanks.

Don't worry, we won't let the scripting get out of control. I try to add as few monitors as possible when I script.

BTW, here's an outrageous idea:
If we go with the free people superfaction, then give them what now is gaul and germany and have instead insubres and cimbri as horde factions in their historical starting places(but not hordes in 280BC). And if possible with a script - if AI controlled + coresponidng year, make them hordes.

If we make this work, we'd have large barbarian factions, not easy to conquer(superfaction is like a normal faction in its own territories, remember), and also barbarian hordes swarming over the land.

I don't think we can script turning a faction from normal to horde (dispossessing them, basically).

Also, I think we'd need a separate free people faction for that. I don't want any of the free peoples to be right next to each other. Also, I'd rather just let people who wanted to play Gaul or Germany play them, instead of making them play a superfaction.

[pannonian]

I had an idea about representing client states, or buying off local tribes/kingdoms. I checked up the mechanics with HoH.

Is it possible to test for the existence of a building in a script? I'm thinking of testing to see if a building exists in a settlement, and if so, subtract n denarii from the treasury, or alternatively add n to the treasury.

Sure. For example, to check if a settlement has any walls, you would do something like...

monitor_event SettlementTurnStart SettlementBuildingExists >= wooden_pallisade ; <-- min acceptable building level from EDB

    if FactionType romans_julii
        console_command add_money romans_julii, -100
    end_if

    if FactionType romans_brutii
        console_command add_money romans_brutii, -100
     end_if

    ; and likewise for all the other factions (except slaves)

end_monitor

If there's a building line that represents a local kingdom, that may or may not include a certain degree of Romanisation, then one might subtract n denarii from the treasury each turn, to represent paying off the local chieftains. In return, there would be a bonus in happiness, to represent cooperation with the central authority. Thinking about it, it would work a bit like the arena line of buildings. However, the logic is that one can also tie this in with unit recruitment, as befitting border tribes.

How do you think the AI would cope with this?

[marcvs agrippa]

5)Military vs. State Official career system. Expand the Roman Leadership System also for political careers and implement it for all factions (perhaps with unique flavour for each one). Generally speaking a character, having spent two seasons with an army, resp. four seasons governing a city, should receive the according trait and the higher the service time, the bigger the bonuses. Care must be taken though, that the bonuses should not become too big - 7 or 8 command star generals should be exceptional, not common.

I am currently working on such a system... first I wanted a relation-system for roman characters, but it turned into a political career system quite soon, because (for me) there is no reasonable relation system among roman characters without politics involved...

This could indeed become very complex, because a political career in Rome should definitely include senate offices. But to re-enact the senate offices would result in a very long trail of Traits&Triggers to be written and tested and I am not sure by now if it's worth the effort... I don't even know if it is possible to use the built-in mechanics for senate offices or if this would interfere with changes made ages before by the RTR team or the Roman Leadership System...

It would definitely add depth and even more roleplaying for the roman faction, but to port it over to other factions then would be quite a lot of work; and afaik the armenians had no senate offices at all.

[Iskandar]

Well 1-to-1 porting is neither desired nor historical. I meant, without getting it too complicated, to distinguish between military leaders and provincial governors (even though at times the same person had to interchange between these two roles). The bulk of the work would be to make it different for each faction though.

As for the senate offices - it doesn't have to be complicated, just 3 or 4 of the more important offices, like the tribune - general line works now. Also, my idea was more to rework triggering the traits based on the type of the family member - representing the focus they had in life. So a military leader would have mostly military traits and some governmental and vice versa for a statesman.

[Traianus IX]

Hi guys, could you check if this is possible?
Any chance to make some kind of militia that would appear when city is attacked? Something like home guard (retired veterans or just inhabitants that defend the homeland,..) that help fight garrison against invaders. After the siege is gone, so would be militia. Better for them than to be slaughtered or enslaved, don't you think?
I'd like to prevent huge cities being besieged and conquerd by 1 or 2 units. Just because there is only 1 general for example, although population in thousands!?! At least it could be applicable on capitals and cities of bigger importance.

In my Roman campaign VH/VH I've been waiting for decades for Carthage to bring it's armies from west Africa where it has 4-5 full stacks doing nothing!!! and I represent obvious threat to them. I don't really want to gain control over 5 north African cities that are protected by 1 unit per city.

Another issue. Is it possible to make AI overseas attaks with full stacks?
Since I pushed Greeks off my Italian homeland they've been sending ship after ship but with half or quarter of stacks. They can apparently afford to send one or more full stacks once in few turns instead of sending few units every turn.

[Iskandar]

Ah, found it - here under Gameplay.

But if the scripting makes it go too slow - thanks, but no, thanks.


BTW, here's an outrageous idea:
If we go with the free people superfaction, then give them what now is gaul and germany and have instead insubres and cimbri as horde factions in their historical starting places(but not hordes in 280BC). And if possible with a script - if AI controlled + coresponidng year, make them hordes.

If we make this work, we'd have large barbarian factions, not easy to conquer(superfaction is like a normal faction in its own territories, remember), and also barbarian hordes swarming over the land.

[Pat89]

Quinn...

The problem with Superfactions and multiple cultures is (amongst others), that the appearance of the settlement on the strat.map will change to the appearance of the factions own culture rather than the pre-set settlement culture...
But this only happens when the Superfaction upgrades to another city level. So you could disable the upgrading of cities for that faction... Ie, it will not be able to build a governors house or Imperial Palace...

Also... What cultures will be included in the Superfaction? Barbarian (Britons, Illyria...), Greek (Syracuse) and Eastern (India)?

[Quinn Inuit]

That was precisely my plan, actually. RS doesn't let them recruit at all, but I want to see what happens with superfactions on the loose. No special units outside of the basic AsOR, though. For instance, the Bosporans won't get to make their armoured militia outside of their AOR. (Yes, I know they don't have one right now, but I'm going to create a hidden resource for that in the next version.)

[charles the hammer]

could you do provincial campaigns for the superfactions members like you did with the independant and celtics that would add a lot of new factions. That would be really cool.

[Quinn Inuit]

That would be pretty cool, but very time-consuming. Maybe after we stop active development we could start with those.

[Caligula Caesar]

For the barbarian superfaction, why don't you include the Lusitani and (perhaps) the Saka. The Lusitani would certainly make iberia more exiting. I'm not sure if the Sakas are necessary or even doable (imagine what the corruption and distance to capital penalties must be like)

[Pat89]

For the barbarian superfaction, why don't you include the Lusitani and (perhaps) the Saka. The Lusitani would certainly make iberia more exiting. I'm not sure if the Sakas are necessary or even doable (imagine what the corruption and distance to capital penalties must be like)

Wasn't that entire wasteland area going to be added to the Terra Incognita region?

I like Lusitania

[Caligula Caesar]

Wasn't that entire wasteland area going to be added to the Terra Incognita region?

I know. In a mod I am trying to work on at the moment, I changed all the northern provinces east of the Caspian into one. I intend to at some point remove the Illyrians and put the Saka in that region. They won't do anything on their own, since I moved Campus Sakae to the top right-hand corner. But what I inted to do is script it so that a full stack of Saka horsemen appears on Bactria's eastern borders every ten or so years. Perhaps it would be possible to script in Saka attacks in ExRM in that manner (from what I have heard, the scripted Sarmatians march all the way from Jaxartes to Bosporia!).

[Quinn Inuit]

Oh, the Lusitanni, I forgot about them. Thanks for the reminder. They were definitely on my list.

How would we implement the Saka, given the current map? I'm not against the idea on principle, but I can't see how it would work with the map.

[pannonian]

If you need DMB slots, may I suggest you dump the Augustan Roman units, which come right at the end of the timeframe, after the 66BC mark? If losing the late legionaries, sagitarii, etc. means you can fit in more Gallic, Iberian and other neglected factions' units, I'd be happy to have to make do with the early era Romans. Also, would it be possible to fit in some more Greek Thureophoroi, in place of the hoplite line?