2.5 patch "Money Problem"

[nataliaoaks]

Okay, so I recently patched RSII to 2.5 beta patch and I was disappointed to see that the economy in the game is really low. On the previous patch I gain 40k gold in 1 turn, but now I am gaining -3k in the first turn of my Roman Campaign. This sucks!

Is this intentional or what? I prefer 40k gold gains per turn, it is more real in a 0 turn recruitment.
Can someone help me or give me advice about it? I love playing RSII but this latest patch sucks, big time.

[Nerouin]

Your economy will jumpstart around when the first Roman rebellion hits.

Would you really like the game to be incredibly easy?

[nataliaoaks]

Your economy will jumpstart around when the first Roman rebellion hits.

Would you really like the game to be incredibly easy?

The game is already hard itself. I play on VH/VH difficulty. The economy is quite stupid to be real. In 1 turn you can only create 1 building in 1 city "only".

[DeWitt8]

The game is already hard itself. I play on VH/VH difficulty. The economy is quite stupid to be real. In 1 turn you can only create 1 building in 1 city "only".

Really, the roman campaign isn't that hard. VH battles is your own choice. But if you don't have enough money go and disband some units. Find a solution. It's not the campaigns fault.

[Primo]

The game is already hard itself. I play on VH/VH difficulty. The economy is quite stupid to be real. In 1 turn you can only create 1 building in 1 city "only".

Sorry to say that, but:

If you don't bother to read the official threads, why do you come and complain?

VH campaign is bugged. Don't play it. But if you do, then don't come and complain.

Apart from that: The roman campaign start is very well possible. There is a tutorial about starting as the Romans - look for it in the official threads.

[Disco]

You've got a very large army upkeep to deal with, and your empire is about to collapse. Put those bodies to use and things will turn around soon.

[dvk901]

Very Hard battles are just nonsense...the AI gets so many bonuses they're all supermen.

Very Hard Campaign setting is a disaster. Both the player and the AI get huge economic bonuses, and it ends up be way more easy than 'Hard'. Play H\H and you will have the best experience.

As was said, it's a bit hard at first, but Rome was in dire straights, and you need to be the 'savior'.

[RafoutRoud]

Very Hard battles are just nonsense...the AI gets so many bonuses they're all supermen.

Very Hard Campaign setting is a disaster. Both the player and the AI get huge economic bonuses, and it ends up be way more easy than 'Hard'. Play H\H and you will have the best experience.

As was said, it's a bit hard at first, but Rome was in dire straights, and you need to be the 'savior'.

Yeah...I'll be brutally honest. I take pride in playing on the toughest settings all the time.... but I was getting fed up of the supermen. They get stomped with cavalry...but when your toughest infantry like... a Sythia-Parthica first cohort gets demolished by some crap infantry....it becomes unrealistic. It also means you can't use infantry in any sort of serious offensive capacity - guard mode is the order for the day.

I didn't know about the economic bonuses on VH though, that's a shame... for my Roman campaign. That said, I didn't have any big financial problems on campaign hard with the Seleucids.

[dvk901]

I imagine that the way CA 'intended' the setting to work was that the AI got big economic bonuses and NOT the player, but they mistakenly gave them to both. The end result has always been that a VH campaign setting gives more money to the player than they should get.

[RafoutRoud]

I imagine that the way CA 'intended' the setting to work was that the AI got big economic bonuses and NOT the player, but they mistakenly gave them to both. The end result has always been that a VH campaign setting gives more money to the player than they should get.

While we're here. How much better is the Alex.exe to BI?...more naval invasions I recall...but that's about all I can remember.

[Nerouin]

While we're here. How much better is the Alex.exe to BI?...more naval invasions I recall...but that's about all I can remember.

On the campaign map, the AI sends big stacks at you rather than numerous small stacks. In battles, the AI behaves somewhat more intelligently.

Naval invasions were implemented with the BI AI.

[dvk901]

I have found that it is only 'marginally better'. I guess it depend on what you're after. Supposedly, the AI retrains units (never seen it happen), and 'storms' work in Alex. You lose shield wall, I think, and naval invasions are no better than BI IMO. I use BI all the time and find it to be more stable for my needs.

[Ferdiad]

How do you explain units with gold chevrons and a full amount of men then?

[Primo]

Well, on Alex naval invasions are very frequent, in fact, the AI romans almost build a bridge from Italy to Iberia with all their ships.

Another big advantage of Alex is the fixed Phalanx bug. You also have the Testudo formation, though I never use it.

[LoGaL]

ye phalanx sucks badly in the other exe,, they drop the sarissa and loose formation very easily

[RafoutRoud]

Lose shieldwall? lolnah

[Ferdiad]

ye phalanx sucks badly in the other exe,, they drop the sarissa and loose formation very easily

Phalanxes are fine in ALX.

[dvk901]

Hmmm...didn't know that.

[RafoutRoud]

Lol, I might just buy Alex from steam then, since my rtw is all steam.

Is it also possible for me to import shieldwall to the Alex exe?

[Primo]

Is it also possible for me to import shieldwall to the Alex exe?

Only by modifying the exe, which is illegal.