Progress on Patch One:

[dvk901]

I know some people have been asking about this, so I'll give an update so everyone will know. First off, all of the patch one changes are now being tested in the SVN version of RS2, and it appears that most of the problems have been corrected. Reports are that it is stable, and the nuisance CTD's have stopped. The 'snag' I have run into with the patch concerns the 'Rebellion CTD' that has occurred in a number of cases....rare, I guess, but essentially campaign ending as there seems to be no way around them. I had thought in the development of RS2 that this problem was fixed.....but apparently there were certain conditions under which this would happen that never reared their ugly heads during Beta Testing. So....

It is not possible to introduce some of the 'standard' solutions to this problem into RS2 because of the fact that we have used all 500 unit slots. Removing a unit in order to introduce a 'generic' unit that could be used to prevent this CTD would be a great deal of work as far as I'm concerned, and no matter how you add this unit it just looks out of place in this mod. And, it's just a waste of a good unit slot for a peasant or something that is purposely undesirable for recruitment. Therefore, I'm going to fix this in a different way. Fortunately, having thought about this problem and having 'tried' to assure it didn't happen, I had been meticulous about matching the cultural buildings to the 'faction_creators' of settlements, so I can use this building to correct the issue by changing the way a few units get recruited. It is a building that, at least to date, I have never seen damaged in any way....and this is most likely because the building has bonuses in it that really affect other factions more than the faction that owns it. This makes it an undesirable target for an assassin....which is, BTW, the way certain indestructible buildings that can't be repaired are getting damaged. A 'non-setttlement plan' building can't be damaged in a battle, because it doesn't physically exist on the battlemap. But buildings that are added to the game (as many are in RS2), CAN be damaged by an assassin. There's just no way to prevent that.

Anyway, this change in recruitment involves a number of low end units already in the mod that will be available in the cultural building, depending on the culture of the faction, obviously.....but, I have to remove these units from all of the barracks OR make sure that the AOR for the unit matches the AOR in the culture building. If it doesn't, it will duplicate the unit in recruitment ques, which could ALSO cause CTD's for certain factions (Greek, mainly) that are already dangerously close to the que limit of 32. So it's a bit of work I'll have to do in each campaign folder, and the reason the Patch is taking so long.

[Dull_Gladius]

Any tips on avoiding the campaign-ending rebellion bug? I think I might've actually experienced this one before but I'm not sure.

[Amorphis]

After playing EB for a few years I was sure there will be no other mod as good as EB.Well,I was wrong.
Just love it.Immersion,depth,settlement development,map,skins and so on,but most of all,my game did not crash a single time!
So before your patch is ready I have my chance to ask for some minor corrections.
1.Generals-traits and command stars.My faction heir conquered all northern Africa kicking Carthage out of it but did not get a single star,just a trait "primum pilus" which disappeared next turn.Anyway more RPG elements to the trait system would be very welcome.
2.AI expansion directions-not sure if it`s hard-coded or not but some factions are definately going in wrong direction.Gallaeci (my allies) attacking my settlements in N.Africa instead fighting Arverni,their enemies,just waiting at their borders.

Anyway,congrats to all team members and keep it up.

[Grouchio]

YOUR EXCELLENCY

The people are complaining about how their generals won't get any stars, even after 3 heroic victories and the like! Will this problem be fixed in the patch?

Also, what about the Boshphoran Kingdom and Syracuse Factions?

[MemphisRex]

Basically,just keep up the good work....Please try to work with path-finding(I know it's hard-coded but still) as some units do it pathetically during siege battles or bridge battles...and again that 'swimming' icon(I've stated it in a thread,here,http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=395270) plus the one for which i'm adding a snap below...

[CPT Worsham]

Basically,just keep up the good work....Please try to work with path-finding(I know it's hard-coded but still) as some units do it pathetically during siege battles or bridge battles...and again that 'swimming' icon(I've stated it in a thread,here,http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=395270) plus the one for which i'm adding a snap below...

I think the guy you are asking why about is an officer. Officers don't normally look like the rest of their unit.

[MemphisRex]

I think the guy you are asking why about is an officer. Officers don't normally look like the rest of their unit.

I know that buddy...but that officer "guy" is in fact an "Arverni Champion" unit...that is the reason I found it quite 'different'...

[dvk901]

Unfortunately, the Rebellion CTD can't be circumvented as far as I know while you are in a campaign.

As for General's traits, Command points and stars, we've introduced a new system of 'battle point counter' traits that are hidden....but keep track of battles fought successfully by Generals. The more battles won, the more command stars the General will obtain.
I think this is a better way of doing it, and it appears to work well.

AI expansion is a 'win-lose' situation, unfortunately. You can only do so much to 'guide' a faction in a certain direction before you actually 'commit' the faction to doing that almost exclusively. In our previous testing, we had real issues with the Gallaeci constantly attacking and invading Gaul...ALL the time. This was an undesired result, because we wanted them to be sometimes at war with Carthage (as Spanish tribes historically were). So we blocked the coast with trees so they couldn't just waltz into Gaul and start messing with the Arverni. They STILL will build ships and invade Gaul, or march east and go around into Gaul....but at least it's more difficult for them to do so. The result is perhaps a 50-50 chance that the Gallaeci will go south into Africa, or insist on going north into Gaul.

Also working on the missing icons...

[AnthoniusII]

Has the team found what cuase ctd whille fighting on stone walls in "celtic" cities?

[The Noble Lord]

So we blocked the coast with trees so they couldn't just waltz into Gaul and start messing with the Arverni. They STILL will build ships and invade Gaul, or march east and go around into Gaul....but at least it's more difficult for them to do so. The result is perhaps a 50-50 chance that the Gallaeci will go south into Africa, or insist on going north into Gaul.

It does look like that it's almost impossible to keep them out of Gaul, even though Carthage is massing its troops and is poised to attack and invade Gallaeci territory they would still be directing their troop movements against the Gaul.

[dvk901]

Has the team found what cuase ctd whille fighting on stone walls in "celtic" cities?

Is this a really common occurrence? I'm concerned, because we are using EB's 'Oppida' walls for the Barbarian factions, and they never really worked 'quite right'. We didn't have CTD's in Beta testing being reported, so I'm wondering how common this is?
If it is a very bad problem, I may have to just remove them and go back to the original ones.

It does look like that it's almost impossible to keep them out of Gaul, even though Carthage is massing its troops and is poised to attack and invade Gallaeci territory they would still be directing their troop movements against the Gaul.

The Gallaeci have the 'misfortune' to have a couple 'Free Barbarian Mini-Faction' settlements between them and Carthage.....Lusitanian and another. If the Gallaeci make peace with them, they tend to be forced north. Removing them, and making them all just normal 'slave' settlements would probably change the behavior....but then they would plow into Africa ALL the time, I'm afraid. It's kind of a no win deal there, as I said.

[Settoken]

In our previous testing, we had real issues with the Gallaeci constantly attacking and invading Gaul...ALL the time. This was an undesired result, because we wanted them to be sometimes at war with Carthage (as Spanish tribes historically were). So we blocked the coast with trees so they couldn't just waltz into Gaul and start messing with the Arverni. They STILL will build ships and invade Gaul, or march east and go around into Gaul....but at least it's more difficult for them to do so. The result is perhaps a 50-50 chance that the Gallaeci will go south into Africa, or insist on going north into Gaul.

May be it's because of the free people settlements in the south of Arverni...They tend to conquer them as soon as they can.
It really depends of the roman behavior. Who Rome attacks and when will balance the different forces in the region, and often favour gallaeci as Carthago will ally with them if Rome becomes too powerfull in africa. So they got Carthago as a buffer south, and their significant strength (which is needed to resist to carthago) turns north...
At least it is what I experienced in my 2 early roman campaign

[CPT Worsham]

Unfortunately, the Rebellion CTD can't be circumvented as far as I know while you are in a campaign.

The rebellion CTD can be circumvented even after it has been encountered during a campaign as I have done so myself, and I explained the process in this thread: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=386829

However, this requires some modding of the files by the player, and if the player does not have any experience with modding then I suggest they read a few tutorials before they start messing with the files. At a minimum a new modder should read the tutorials listed below before attempting this. It really does not take that long to perform this modification for one campaign. Suggested reading for new modders that would like to fix this on their own rather than waiting for the next patch to come out is below:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=111344

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=199276

http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...DB-Guide-(WIP)

[Pat89]

Unfortunately, the Rebellion CTD can't be circumvented as far as I know while you are in a campaign.

You could try using a cheat to add a building to the rebellious settlement that gives recruitment options to the rebel faction (eg, barracks of another culture).

[Alexander V. Suvorov]

AI expansion is a 'win-lose' situation, unfortunately. You can only do so much to 'guide' a faction in a certain direction before you actually 'commit' the faction to doing that almost exclusively. In our previous testing, we had real issues with the Gallaeci constantly attacking and invading Gaul...ALL the time. This was an undesired result, because we wanted them to be sometimes at war with Carthage (as Spanish tribes historically were). So we blocked the coast with trees so they couldn't just waltz into Gaul and start messing with the Arverni. They STILL will build ships and invade Gaul, or march east and go around into Gaul....but at least it's more difficult for them to do so. The result is perhaps a 50-50 chance that the Gallaeci will go south into Africa, or insist on going north into Gaul.

Hi, if I want to show Gallaeci a few more passageways into gual, will the changes I made to map_ground_types.tga file get the AI into move (hopefully)?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[The_Richini]

Are changes to unit stats coming out for those of us who like our battles abit shorter? Hopefully these patch changes are for the 1 turn part of the mod also I hope.

Cheers on all your work

[dvk901]

I know that buddy...but that officer "guy" is in fact an "Arverni Champion" unit...that is the reason I found it quite 'different'...

The decision to give other faction's units 'officers' was partly because we felt they were neglected in Vanilla, and also to add variety to the units themselves.

Are changes to unit stats coming out for those of us who like our battles abit shorter? Hopefully these patch changes are for the 1 turn part of the mod also I hope.

Cheers on all your work

The Sub-Mod's that Tone provided, I feel, are sufficient for the players who wish to adjust the costs or stats of units. The reason I'm leary of adding them as the defaults in the patch is because then, THEY become the defaults, and we have to change all the other options. As it is, I am including Tone's optional unit cost and stat EDU's in the '_Important_Stuff' folder so you'll have them as optional choices.

I have made some changes to the one-turn campaign, and corrections, based on a few sub-mod ideas and a few other things I felt would help. They are not as drastic as some changes are, but they should slow down the play a lot.

[MemphisRex]

The decision to give other faction's units 'officers' was partly because we felt they were neglected in Vanilla, and also to add variety to the units themselves.

I know tat buddy..but my question is/was that why an Arverni champion..??
Don't we have any other model for a Gallic captain.Just asking please don't be angry

[Brusilov]

Any posts that ask when the patch will be available have been removed. We don't know when it will be available - if we did then it would be in the post.

Also posts asking why the posts were deleted have also been deleted - they are off-topic.

[dvk901]

Not angry at all? I don't get angry...I just get even. Kidding aside, I used the Champions because it made sense from a practical standpoint. The Centurions of the Romans were a very experienced Legionary...a more 'elite' warrior, so to speak. So in as many cases as possible I used a more elite unit as an officer (not always, but often). Also, we had to use an existing model for the officers because RS2 is simply 'full'. We used every slot in DMB and EDU, so there could be no additional ones for officers.