Any1 played into hyper late game on zero turn?

[meerkatology]

is it playable?

im at war with only one super power on 0 turn and they are sending 10 stacks at me everyturn. Its still winnable but its gets old, is it even worse later on?

also is changing back and forth from 0 to 1 turn save compatible? im assuming its only the EDU file thats different?

[Aismov]

What do you consider "hyper late"?

I personally play 1 turn for that very reason (can't stand stack spam).

[meerkatology]

like when you are at 60+ settlements

isn't 1 turn really easy tho? are you H/H , i'm trying to avoid H battles to perserve unit balance for that reason i may need to stay on 0 turn to have a challenge =\

[Aismov]

like when you are at 60+ settlements

isn't 1 turn really easy tho? are you H/H , i'm trying to avoid H battles to perserve unit balance for that reason i may need to stay on 0 turn to have a challenge =\

Nah I play 1 turn M/M. I wouldn't say its easy but it certainly could be a bit more challenging. I play with a pretty strict set of house rules so that ramps up the difficulty (mostly I limit the number of stacks I can have to around 4-5 so sometimes it is a challenge to shuttle troops back and forth to deal with invasions). I probably would lose a 0-turn campaign with my house rules heh.

Most battles are pretty straight forward since I tend to do a lot of planning before taking any new provinces. Every now and then I get thrown a curve ball like my Carthage propraetor army (1/2 stack) getting a surprise visit of a full stack of Greeks from Cyrene. I augmented with some garbage libyian mercs, but usually it comes down to silly battle AI that lets me exploit weaknesses to win a battle I should have otherwise lost (e.g. 4 units of hastati, 1 triarii, 2 velites, 1 equites + general + random garbage mercs vs. Greek silver heavies with Sythian horse archer mercs) had I been playing vs a human.

I like fighting battles I deem "important" so I tend to like fewer stacks in my game.

[meerkatology]

Nah I play 1 turn M/M. I wouldn't say its easy but it certainly could be a bit more challenging. I play with a pretty strict set of house rules so that ramps up the difficulty (mostly I limit the number of stacks I can have to around 4-5 so sometimes it is a challenge to shuttle troops back and forth to deal with invasions). I probably would lose a 0-turn campaign with my house rules heh.

Most battles are pretty straight forward since I tend to do a lot of planning before taking any new provinces. Every now and then I get thrown a curve ball like my Carthage propraetor army (1/2 stack) getting a surprise visit of a full stack of Greeks from Cyrene. I augmented with some garbage libyian mercs, but usually it comes down to silly battle AI that lets me exploit weaknesses to win a battle I should have otherwise lost (e.g. 4 units of hastati, 1 triarii, 2 velites, 1 equites + general + random garbage mercs vs. Greek silver heavies with Sythian horse archer mercs) had I been playing vs a human.

I like fighting battles I deem "important" so I tend to like fewer stacks in my game.

i agree with trying to fight fewer more important battles just dont know how to implement, i play with strict house rules on H/M with increased unit costs by 500 to 1500% as romans as well as low taxes in all settlements at all times and 1 turn to build my own units but 0 turn for AI. its still pretty easy so far (granted i haven't gone to hyperlate game yet), you just make so much freaking money even with house rules. the problem is not just money, is that the AI can't use cavalry effectively so with M battles you will always win stack for stack with eyes closed and 1 hand behind your back theres only a possbility of losing when you going like 2-3 stack vs. 4-5 stack having to give AI reinforcement control of you other armys and... they end up getting delayed

but probably as carthage you don't make as much money as rome and isn't as safe in your starting spot. maybe going against super buffed post-marian roman legions on AI side will be a challenge?

[Aismov]

you just make so much freaking money even with house rules. the problem is not just money, is that the AI can't use cavalry effectively so with M battles you will always win stack for stack with eyes closed and 1 hand behind your back theres only a possbility of losing when you going like 2-3 stack vs. 4-5 stack having to give AI reinforcement control of you other armys and... they end up getting delayed

but probably as carthage you don't make as much money as rome and isn't as safe in your starting spot. maybe going against super buffed post-marian roman legions on AI side will be a challenge?

Agreed that you still end up with way too much money. I like to run a tight ship and I expand slow so money really never was an issue for me... I like it that way from the strategy side since you *should* be rewarded for smart economic decisions and strategic expansion. But when I can afford to build 20k buildings in 4+ settlements per turn, well heh I might try your increase in unit recruitment costs; though maybe an idea for any future patch would be another button in the launcher that gives you an option to 1.5x, 2x, or 3x, your unit and building costs. That way you make sure new players don't get annihilated and veterans get a good challenge.

Also agreed on the cavalry. The AI has always been a poor user of cavalry which I don't think anyone will really be able to fix. I think the majority of my battles would actually be losses if the AI knew how to use their cavalry properly. Without fail I can win any cav engagement by mixing my cav with light infantry and can keep any missle cavalry at bay with slingers to the point I almost feel likes it cheating to use them that way which is why I limit them to a single merc on occasion just for fun in my full stacks (I have an empty slot where I throw in a neat merc unit for variety).

[ur-Lord Tedric]

0turn is designed for those who want more battles - hence lots more stacks and rediculously easy replacement for the player.

More balance and oriented at a better campaign - 1turn.

[meerkatology]

0turn is designed for those who want more battles - hence lots more stacks and rediculously easy replacement for the player.

More balance and oriented at a better campaign - 1turn.

i actually modified for my own units to take 1 turn and AI to remain on 0 turn.

ill give 1 turn a try later, as non romans, but as romans even 0 turn is too easy, since i've decided to do medium battles.
i think on 0 turn, H/H had enough challenge, but i hate the off balance H battles

[tobi_808]

ill give 1 turn a try later, as non romans, but as romans even 0 turn is too easy, since i've decided to do medium battles.
i think on 0 turn, H/H had enough challenge, but i hate the off balance H battles

That's also my experience, 0-turn too easy, with H/H much challenge, but only through that annoying numerous "stack-after-stack" battles that at some point are no longer fun.
(I also first tried out H-battles, well to agree, yep they are off-balanced and itself not much fun after a while, so let's stick with Medium though)
I started my 1-turn campaing yesterday, my impression is, it will lead to a better campaign experience with less cheating AI, but still challenging.
Will try to post my impressions the next days ...

[Zydrius]

Hmm, I got an idea. What if unit recruitment costs in 0-turn would be increased? Let's say 2x the current recruitment price or even more? This would mean, that both player and both AI will be able to recruit less units during it's turn, and this should give some advantage after winning big battle as replacing defeated troops would take more time. This should give more meaning to battles, which in 0-turn are endless.

Has anyone tried this? How does that affect gameplay and does that ruin the AI behaviour and challenge for player?

[meerkatology]

Hmm, I got an idea. What if unit recruitment costs in 0-turn would be increased? Let's say 2x the current recruitment price or even more? This would mean, that both player and both AI will be able to recruit less units during it's turn, and this should give some advantage after winning big battle as replacing defeated troops would take more time. This should give more meaning to battles, which in 0-turn are endless.

Has anyone tried this? How does that affect gameplay and does that ruin the AI behaviour and challenge for player?

i just tried this. 500% training cost for myself and 1000% for cavalry also all advanced units take 1 turn for me. ai remains on 0 turn at normal costs. this was still too easy on H/M so i actaully went to back to H/H as i had no choice if i wanted any challenge at all. i dont think the costs matter that much for AI as they have infinite money on hard anyway. In addition i forced myself to use low taxes in all settlements to nerf my econ

the problem i have noticed with increased training costs for the player is that it throws off the intended and historical way the units are trained - you tend to wait much longer to fully develop upgrades like, vulcan pantheon and jupitor pantheon to get the most out of ur unit costs, instead of say, getting a foothold and spamming averagly upgraded units at cheaper costs to fight battles on H.

maybe if u increased upkeep and training costs equally u might perserve the incentive to train units more inline with how they were done historically. but the problem with M battles, is that AI even though it sometimes gets armies with silver chevrons, does not train full armies of elite units nor does it upgrade consistently like the player does. its usually a equal mix of skirmishers, low level units with high lvl units, so even though i hate H battles and how it throws off unit balance, im forced to play on it to have any challenge at all.

only when the AI are romans will their army be mostly of high equality units as legions are mostly all they have to train


i think the best step 1 is to use low taxes in all settlements at all times, as an alternative to increased unit costs. its eaiser to do anyway since there are many shared units as well.

[Zydrius]

Good points you stated about longer way to develop unit upgrades.

I had in mind the idea to increase costs for both AI and human player. As for my gameplay style 0-turn campaign has too many battles and in pre-mid and later game phases they become meaningless. At the moment I am quite enjoying my Rome 1-turn campaign, but if one day I turn back to 0-turn, I will try to increase unit costs or add some other "balancing" of my own to reduce the amount of battles fought and to make it harder to recover from defeats.

[Larkin]

I did, it was a lot of fun organising huge campaigns (as I was usually the aggressor), launching invasions with 10 or so armies and fighting my way through dozens of stacks. Felt very epic.

Unfortunately every time I end turn now I get a CTD so I can't play it anymore.