Garrison script?

[tone]

I'm thinking that with all the emphasis put on the faction's capital in terms of income generation, we probably ought to have a garrison script that runs if any faction's capital is besieged or attacked....what do people think?

[King Nud]

i for one see it as good idea i historical/realistic terms, as if a "faction" were to be defending it's capital, most of the able population of the city would rise up to repel the enemy. It would also add a whole new layer to the siege of the city.

[torzsoktamas]

It's a good idea.But if the player's capital is attacked?DO the script give the player an army?

[torzsoktamas]

It's a good idea.But will this give the player an army too?

[Alavaria]

Nah, don't do that.

Also, it would be nice if the garrison script didn't interpret "citizens rising up" as "mega elite troops that the faction can't even recruit in the first place".

[tone]

The only problem I see with the economic model as it is is that the player only needs to take a load of artillery and attack a faction's capital and take it without a siege in order to cripple that faction's economy. Maybe that's how things should be anyway? But I can imagine some people exploiting that loophole!

[Alavaria]

Hmm, that never occurred to me.

You could spread the bonus out a little and give it to "homeland" areas (which have only minor advantages over other regions at present: the market mainly). Right now, it's important to keep your capital at Very High taxes, but if your homeland regions had tax bonus (and maybe move some of that into tax, so it's even more important/worthwhile to make the tax buildings) then you would have to care about all the other settlements as well.

[torzsoktamas]

Just a question: Taking enemy capitals witch have tresury will boost my economy more than taking a simple settlement(same development)?

[Alavaria]

Just a question: Taking enemy capitals witch have tresury will boost my economy more than taking a simple settlement(same development)?

No, the treasury's bonuses are coded to only function for the faction that is supposed to have it.

We could add in some unrest or something so that Rome would be annoying to hold, though ^___^

Yes, maybe we could pick some cities that are bound to be major areas of control and add extra income to those as well? E.g a faction would have a capital as its main source of income but several other cities which are its bastions so to speak and so would also have good income. If a rival captures that type of city it should hurt but not as bad as loosing the capital.

Yeah, that's doable (since each single settlement can be identified) but would be a little annoying to do.

In the same vein, if the faction looses it capital, it may be able to rally with its other major cities and try take it back.

[MarcusTullius]

Yeah, that's doable (since each single settlement can be identified) but would be a little annoying to do.

How tedious would it be? If its too much work, then possibly leave to the side for now. I was thinking identify 2 maybe 3 cities that would have been powerhouses for different factions e.g the big port cities or a historical homeland city and adding bonuses accordingly.

[MarcusTullius]

Hmm, that never occurred to me.

You could spread the bonus out a little and give it to "homeland" areas (which have only minor advantages over other regions at present: the market mainly). Right now, it's important to keep your capital at Very High taxes, but if your homeland regions had tax bonus (and maybe move some of that into tax, so it's even more important/worthwhile to make the tax buildings) then you would have to care about all the other settlements as well.

Yes, maybe we could pick some cities that are bound to be major areas of control and add extra income to those as well? E.g a faction would have a capital as its main source of income but several other cities which are its bastions so to speak and so would also have good income. If a rival captures that type of city it should hurt but not as bad as loosing the capital.

In the same vein, if the faction looses it capital, it may be able to rally with its other major cities and try take it back.

[tone]

Certainly a thought...

Here's my current AI campaign at 643AUC. Rome is currently fielding about 16 stacks spread fairly well around its provinces.



Here's a fantastic example of the beauty of the sytem - the Belgae having lost all their mainland settlements quite a while ago to the Arverni, have now mounted a naval invasion to regain them:

[Alavaria]

That works, yeah.

If it's like 2->3 cities per faction, that's 36->54 for 18 factions ... just a matter of finding the settlement and the correct combnatation of "area#" and "r#" hidden resources.

Tell me which settlement/region should be it for each faction, and I'll see what I can do.

Though I would imagine some (pergamon, sparta) should have serious issues with no capital, the greek cities certainly should not, and macedon *shrug* should be made to survive without theirs. Same for the seleucids/egyptians...

[dvk901]

I agree that a garrison script would be good to protect enemy capitals.....but the player should know enough to protect his own capital.

Rome, Carthage the Sarmatians, the Belgae, and Seleucid have their bonuses spread out a bit more than others.

There are also already special economic bonuses for a number of key historical cities across the map that apply to anyone taking them.

By and large, it may have to be a 'house rule' that taking a faction's capital shouldn't be done right off the bat...unless you want to ruin the challenge.