How to become a Buddha in 5 weeks... or: THE EDU THREAD

[Athenogoras]

Athenogoras, which mods are you also involved in? You work only on EDU?

As DV says. I just do a little work of my own on mods I like. Unfortunately I dont have much time. Just the test I have done yesterday for PI set back Chivalry-release at least 1,5 day.

If yes then I will call you "EDU Mercenary". How much do you cost

A sausage and a lager, preferably czech(if not I might get cranky and rebel and find another master). I think it is a fair price.

how many turns does it take for you to be trained

None, I am scripted to appear whenever a modder is in trouble(like Superman)

and what's your upkeep?

It depends on the masters purse. Big purse big upkeep. Small purse smaller upkeep.

[Hister]

You can try to hire him from on June, until this date he is in the service of the Chivalry kingdom, in the assumption that he has fullfilled then his contract
And btw. he is not only working on the edu file, but also ai formations and all combat related files (plus some other files).

Oh I wasn't thinking of asking him to work for PI since our EDU is complete. It was meant purely as a joke really.

Something like that happened indeed, but rather later, and it led to unrest in the republic, as more and more slaves made the farming work, and the Roman farmers were bleeded out (a big theme of its own though*) ... one of the reasons of the Marian reforms.

Let's call it a feature of the mod then he he.

As DV says. I just do a little work of my own on mods I like. Unfortunately I dont have much time. Just the test I have done yesterday for PI set back Chivalry-release at least 1,5 day.

Am really thankful for your input Athenogoras! Sorry DV for me causing the delay with Chivalry.

I think you need to look further into the balance between principe-like units and hoplites. With current settings hoplites annihilates principe. The big culprit seems is in my mind the difference in delay.(6 for hoplites, 10 for principe). The delay setting is usually very powerful.

I see, will look into it!

[Zenith Darksea]

Something like that happened indeed, but rather later, and it led to unrest in the republic, as more and more slaves made the farming work, and the Roman farmers were bleeded out (a big theme of its own though*) ... one of the reasons of the Marian reforms.

This old chestnut may have been acceptable in 1900, but serious Roman scholarship has moved beyond this idea, you know. It's simply a product of imperial writers projecting aspects of their own society onto the past. The first ever mention of latifundia, for example, is to be found in Pliny the Elder's Natural History. If you look at contemporary Republican discussions of farming, there's no real hint that Roman farmers were "bleeded out". In fact, there's no real hint that there was even any such thing as a "Marian reform". In terms of the army, all he seems to have done was to start using capite censi in times of great crisis, which had in fact been done before (such as during the Second Punic War).

But on a more positive note, I am very much looking forward to PI finally being released as a full mod.

[DaVinci]

More off-topic, sorry.

This old chestnut may have been acceptable in 1900, but serious Roman scholarship has moved beyond this idea, you know.

In principle i leave this theme to the experts, what i'm not.

I only know that ca. 2005 as i made a first Roman mod project, together with Bucellarii i discussed this point in detail, including researchment of Roman citizenship, socii status, mercenaries, legion structure, roman population numbers etc.. And later on, this theme was deepened with the FRRE project.

To say it was a view of the 1900c is rather a rough simplification to me. Merely i find it pretty logical that the Roman farmers got more and more problems due to the permanent wartimes, and as these citizens had to serve in the legions without a real pay (for a lot years), afaik: just no compensation of the left farm work/income.
If Bucellarii (historian, FRRE project) comes now and says, "well, yes this view is old now", then i believe it, because he is the one who actually studies every serious source he can find of the classical Roman timeframe, including modern authors and their interpretations.
And the 'marian reforms' is just a process for me (whoever named it that way is not important), that the first time, officially it wasn't necessary anymore to be a citizen becoming a legionary, and that there has been a significant mass recruitment of non-citizens. The step to a professional roman army. Am i wrong actually? There must be reason for this process, right?

[bucellarii]

Hey alter kamerad!

You should know me well enough by now to know that I consistently adopt a position of caution when discussing a subject (ancient history) that holds my profound interest but about which I make no claims of any special knowledge

Anyway whilst it is correct to say the word Latifundium first appears during the Empire (Pliny NH 18.35) there is no universal agreement about what the word actually means. The relevant entry in the Oxford Classical Dictionary succinctly summarises modern debate about the divergent definitions. These include large pastoral ranches beginning in the 3rd cent BC; slave staffed oil-and wine producing villas (either single properties or the scattered estates of one owner) first described by M. Porcius Cato c 160 BC; any property above 50 iugera (125 ha; 309 acres) of whatever period. Regardless of which definition is considered to be the most accurate (and there are others!) Pliny suggests these large estates ruined Italy by forcing peasants from the land.

The traditional view is that the long period of transmarine expansion following the Hannibalic war massively increased the number of slaves in Italy whilst prolonged service in the legions concomitantly resulted in a decline in the population of rural citizen smallholders. Ancient literary sources seem to agree on this (i.e Appian BC 1.7-11 and Plutarch TG 8.1-3). However the archaeological record suggests a more diverse rural landscape, with villa and peasant farmer commonly co-existing during the second century. This has led revisionist modern studies such as Nathan Rosenstein’s, Rome at War: Farms, Families, and Death in the Middle Republic to challenge the concept of Italiae Solitudo. Rosenstein argues continuities rather than change marked the relationship between war and agriculture in the middle Republic; before provocatively suggesting that the vast numbers of men who continued to be conscripted away from rural households during the second century BC actually caused a population increase during the first half of the century. However his arguments are not conclusive.

Standard texts such as P A Brunt’s Italian Manpower 225 BC - AD 14 remain important when trying to understand the second century agrarian crisis, whilst more recent contributers such as C. Nicolet in his essay Economy and society, 133 – 43 BC (CAH Vol IX -second edition 1994) acknowledge the complexities of the evidence without discarding the conventional position. All this, indeed, counsels prudence; but in these pages we shall accept, broadly, the testimony of the literature: small citizen – and no doubt Latin and allied – properties did decline sharply from the second century, for a variety of reasons. However it is also worthwhile observing that Andrew Lintott writes in the same volume there are no good grounds for inferring a general decline of the small independent farmer in the second century.

The related debate about the Roman census figures and the reduction in the property qualification for legionary service during the seond century is too involved to go into here. However suffice to say that the actions taken by Marius, after being authorised to raise a supplementum for the legions in Africa, were less revolutionary than the hostile ancient sources care to admit. Nevertheless these actions are emblematic of a shift, the consequences of which were increasingly witnessed during the convulsions of the first century, that resulted in the interests of the soldiery often appearing to be intrinsically linked with the fortunes of their own leaders. As is widely accepted, the immense forces under arms during the great struggles of this period were mainly drawn from the proletarii

[Pode]

In any case, whether it happened or not IRL, it didn't happen by 234 BC. I suspect the AI's frenzied desire to recruit every living adult male may have something to do with the zero turn recruit times on some units. I don't suppose fraction turn recruit times work? Limit it to 2 or 3 units per turn?

[DaVinci]

First of all, thanks Bucellarii for these words

In any case, whether it happened or not IRL, it didn't happen by 234 BC. I suspect the AI's frenzied desire to recruit every living adult male may have something to do with the zero turn recruit times on some units. I don't suppose fraction turn recruit times work? Limit it to 2 or 3 units per turn?

Not possible with the RTW engine, as Hister says already.

The only option is indeed to limit the recruitment options down, this via edb in the recruit capabilities (buildings, tiers), and of course to look very accurate, where it makes sense to have zero recruitment time for a unit, and to increase eventually the needed turn numbers, and increase costs. Further it would help to increase the growth rates (edb and with the dr file), but only if it is secured that the AI won't spam still more units ... and btw., balancing a mod properly is a longtime-job.

[Athenogoras]

Ok...here some suggestions on stats.

First phalanx(changes in red)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

type Phalangitai Makedonikoi
dictionary Phalangitai_Makedonikoi ; Phalangitai Makedonikoi
category infantry
class spearmen
voice_type Light_1
soldier Phalangitai_Makedonikoi, 60, 0, 1.46, 0.4
attributes sea_faring, frighten_foot, frighten_mounted, hardy
formation 1.45, 0.8, 1.45, 0.8, 8, square, phalanx
stat_health 1, 4
stat_pri 1, 1, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, piercing, spear, 5 ,4.0
stat_pri_attr light_spear, long_pike, area
stat_sec 2, 1, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, sword, 8 ,3.0
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 10, 1, 3, flesh
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 0
stat_ground -2, -1, -3, 0
stat_mental 19, disciplined, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 10
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 3, 790, 316, 160, 120, 790
ownership romano_british, slave


type Phalangitai Epeirotikoi
dictionary Phalangitai_Epeirotikoi ; Phalangitai Epeirotikoi
category infantry
class spearmen
voice_type Light_1
soldier Phalangitai_Epeirotikoi, 60, 0, 1.44, 0.4
attributes sea_faring, frighten_foot, frighten_mounted, hardy
formation 1.45, 0.8, 1.45, 0.8, 8, square, phalanx
stat_health 1, 4
stat_pri 1, 1, no, 0, 0, melee, blade, piercing, spear, 5 ,4.0
stat_pri_attr light_spear, long_pike, area
stat_sec 2, 1, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, sword, 9 ,3.0
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 8, 1, 3, flesh
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 0
stat_ground -2, -2, -3, 0
stat_mental 18, disciplined, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 10
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 3, 685, 274, 160, 100, 685
ownership romano_british, slave

Hoplite

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

type Hoplitai Herakleioi
dictionary Hoplitai_Herakleioi ; Hoplitai Herakleioi
category infantry
class spearmen
voice_type Medium_1
soldier Hoplitai_Herakleioi, 60, 0, 1.34, 0.23
mount_effect horse +6, chariot +4
attributes sea_faring, frighten_mounted, hardy
formation 0.8, 0.8, 1.6, 1.6, 5, square
stat_health 1, 4
stat_pri 11, 26, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 6 ,0.23
stat_pri_attr no
stat_sec 0, 0, no, 0, 0, no, no, no, none, 0 ,1
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 7, 4, 5, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 0
stat_ground -2, -3, -2, -1
stat_mental 17, normal, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 9
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 2, 640, 256, 140, 130, 640
ownership eastern, slave

These changes will make hoplitecharge more effective(use 8 or 9 as distance)

Principes

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

type Principes Romani
dictionary Principes_Romani ; Princeps Romani
category infantry
class heavy
voice_type Heavy_1
soldier Principes_Romani+Latini, 40, 0, 1.26, 0.3
attributes sea_faring, hardy
formation 1.05, 2, 2, 4, 4, square
stat_health 1, 6
stat_pri 16, 14, pilum, 31, 2, thrown, blade, piercing, spear, 0 ,1
stat_pri_attr prec, thrown
stat_sec 14, 14, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, sword, 4 ,0.28
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 6, 5, 5, metal
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 0
stat_ground 1, -3, 0, 0
stat_mental 16, normal, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 670, 268, 160, 120, 670
ownership empire_west, slave

I changed width to make them slightly more width than hoplite. Increased mass for better performance against phalanx. Reduced delay for better overall performance(they still lose to hoplites in all terraines though, albeit not horribly defeated as before).

[DaVinci]

I changed width to make them slightly more width than hoplite. Increased mass for better performance against phalanx. Reduced delay for better overall performance(they still lose to hoplites in all terraines though, albeit not horribly defeated as before).

Bold: That's interesting.
How is the outcome with autoresolved battles?
Will the principes win due to the higher sec hp?

Quite strange: As Pode observed, Roman AI subjugates the map, besides Carthage, what i think is a good sign for the intended historical design (with a basic AI-outcome-test).

As Roman human player, how will it be possible to win vs. the greek southern Italy etc., if these factions have a lot superior Hoplites and Phalanx units available?
Or in other words (vice versa), will the Greek human player (or other factions with Hoplites/Phalanx) have an easy game vs. the Romans in AI hands?

Imo., basicly viewed, as Roman Legionaries (Hastati and Principes) have only 40 men to 60 Hoplites/Phalanx men, there should be a more sensible balance between these units.

[Athenogoras]

Bold: That's interesting.
How is the outcome with autoresolved battles?
Will the principes win due to the higher sec hp?

Not tested autoresolved battles. Obviously the phalanx need more hitpoints since their stats are so nerfed. I am very happy with the balance phalanx-hoplites. It needs to be tested with bigger battles so that the combined effects of the frighten-attribute shows. In one on one it is a even match but if a whole line engages phalanx will win every time(but not without losses). I think also this frighten-attribute (in a indirect way) makes it better for the player to actually have a thick phalanx(instead of spread out) since a more thick units allows more units per area and though the attribute affects more enemy soldiers.

In original EDU principes-like units are much weaker. I just assumed that this was intended, I simply made it so that principes becomes more strong(not less), but lose nonetheless. I also assumed the numbers of soldiers as a constant. I didnt want to change that since I assumed this also was intended.

[Hister]

I don't suppose fraction turn recruit times work? Limit it to 2 or 3 units per turn?

I'm not aware of any such kind of mechanism in RTW BI.

Bucellarii you are brilliant, your knowledge and the will to write about different historical topics amazes me.

P.S.Guys/Girls, I'm off to Croatia for a few days and probably won't have an access to net. See ya all when I return...

[Hister]

Hi guys I'm back from short Croatian vacation. Sea was great, I got sun burnt but I enjoyed as hell nevertheless I see you guys have been active on our mod - that's a nice thing to see!

First I thank Athenogoras for taking his precious time and helping me with PI. I'll apply your suggested stats and check how the autocalc battles cope with the changes and make proper adjustments.

As Roman human player, how will it be possible to win vs. the Greek southern Italy etc., if these factions have a lot superior Hoplites and Phalanx units available?

As historically you need to flank such units and when their cohesion is gone they are gone to.

Or in other words (vice versa), will the Greek human player (or other factions with Hoplites/Phalanx) have an easy game vs. the Romans in AI hands?

Player choosing Italiotae has a hard time playing them versus other factions.

Imo., basicly viewed, as Roman Legionaries (Hastati and Principes) have only 40 men to 60 Hoplites/Phalanx men, there should be a more sensible balance between these units.

I also wonder if it is true that a roman army could field less soldiers(in a full stack) than the greek hoplite armies(with 120 soldier on large). On the other hand I guess(all else equal) that the roman cities will grow faster and be more strong economically enabling them to field more armies.

Such numbers are here due to the effect we want to have on the battlefield. Hoplite units need to have a full 60 number - it is all made so because Aper wanted them to not start flanking on other units but do a straight attack. Other more professional units (non -hoplitic/spear wielding ones) are lesser in numbers to simulate in a way their rareness. All in all you can't make a perfect simulation with this game - there are things you need to swallow in order to achieve proper gameplay. I for one don't see why 40 men strong Roman unit would present a problem versus 60 men strong hoplites - we can be nitpicky yes but my time modding PI is limited. In addition I'm not feeling like changing the EDU drastically any more. Other things simply have priority in my life.

Well, my points remain for an ongoing balance-discussion imo., means eventually, campaign outcome-reports are needed, where the factions in question are played deep into the campaign.

If someone is going to help me with that prior to release of next patch that would be awesome.

I at least must say, find it odd, if Principes loose always vs. a Phalanx or Hoplite unit, not sure actually, but sounds quite ahistorical to me.

Well it's very hard to achieve a proper balance. Player can win over phalanx but needs to use flanking. Roman AI eventually wins over Italioate so I don't see this as a big problem anyways.

Hi Aper, a healthy decision to keep yourself away from RTW.

Yes but to a big loss for Total War community Anyways RL is way more important then modding if you don't plan to get yourself employed in the gaming industry that is.

One thought comes now, if Atheno is testing the units in custom battle mode, he eventually hasn't recognized that Principes must get exp points (via edb at least, it is a must, that they have 1 exp point as minimum, Triarii 2 exp as minimum).

DV has got a big point here! Proper balancing is indeed very time consuming thing.

I would at least be good to know if the current balance is intended.

I would rather let Aper answer on this one

It is also a basic mod-design decision, if those historical background things shall be considered or not.

I would say the more historicity the better!

Nice MRR guide DV!

[DaVinci]

Wow, one cannot say, that you wouldn't take enough time to reply to any kind of comments.

And btw., as i read again the MRR Guide (now after roughly 3,5 years), i was amazed of the work, that we (Bucellarii and me) put into this document, and i remembered, how well the MRR mod actually was.

[Hister]

Wow, one cannot say, that you wouldn't take enough time to reply to any kind of comments.

I try to be polite and not let anyone's questions unanswered

Yes amazing about MRR - reading that document I got a scary feeling how much more would needed to be done on PI...

[DaVinci]

You can take it as following: You provide soon the base for a proper BI-PI.

Other guys, eventually, can work further on that project.
At least PI would be worth the efforts very much. If that wouldn't be the case, i personally wouldn't have ever taken that much time into it, to improve some basic things for the balance.
Imo., serious historical shaped mods need nearly infinite time to invest ... can be a never ending job.

[Hister]

You can take it as following: You provide soon the base for a proper BI-PI.

Other guys, eventually, can work further on that project.

It's a deal although "soon" might turn out to be not so soon due to RL limitations but I'll promise to do my best for the PI's sake!

[Aper]

IIRC I balanced Principes to be defeated by Hoplitai only because of the greater number of the greeks: if you check the casualties, Principes should kill much more men before fleeing. This should be furtherly balanced making Hoplitai more expensive and slower to recruit than their Roman enemies: so we have the phalanx that is stronger on the battlefield in 1 vs 1 situations, but Principes more cost-effective and numerous. Consider that giving Hoplitai 2 turns rec time it will be VERY unlikely to see full stacks of them.

About pike phalanx, it's supposed to be nigh-invincible from the front and weak on flanks and rear; but considering that PI phalangitai are equipped like Epilektoi (elites), I made them real badass-all round strong unit, balanced making them very expensive and time consuming to train.
(they have frighten_foot for a good reason! I would never fight against those guys... )

[Athenogoras]

Aper: Good to know your thoughts on the balance.

I would never fight against those guys...

Dont worry Aper. You and me would be considered psiloi anyway. We would be throwing spears, rock and cowmanure on their fancy armour and then we would go home drinking latte in the piazza.

[Aper]

Dont worry Aper. You and me would be considered psiloi anyway. We would be throwing spears, rock and cowmanure on their fancy armour and then we would go home drinking latte in the piazza.

I assure you I'm quite scary with a 2H sword in hand... and I'm learning sword & buckler too, so that I'll be the ultimate Renaissance-era pikemen-slaughterer!!! AHAHAAHAHAHAHAH


Ehm, back on topic now...

[Athenogoras]

OK I believe you.

Back on topic:
The unit radius: The low number on hoplites makes them fight fight tight and that is ok by me. But should principes, ensiferi etc fight equally tight.(hoplites 0.23, principes 0.24). I dont think it looks good. For principes 0.3 is enough I think.

The battlespeed: High attack, low defence and little delay makes for pretty fast battles. Because of the speed of battles hoplites doesnt seem to lose formation. If we slow the battles we might see some more broken lines and enveloped flanks.
This could be done be increasing the delay by 15-20 points for all or increasing defenceskill.

Edit: I see ensiferi-units has no changed radius.