Enemy stacks

[Modern day Ceaser]

Hi everyone I'm new on the forums and new to Roma Surrectum 2. I've downloaded the 2.6 patch and am currently around 10 turns into a 1 turn Rome campaign which seen as though it's my 1st play through I'm playing on m/m. I'm loving the mod it's just what Rome should have been but the one point which I'm disappointed with is the enemy stacks, fair enough Hannibal had a big army but any other army I come across ( I sent a legion over to Carthage) and Carthage sent out an army of a general and only a couple of units. Greece has just betrayed me and besieged Messana but only with 4 units. can anyone tell me whether this is normal for the enemy to send so little troops as it's not much of a challenge to fight them of and kind of dampening my experience a little.
I was hoping when Greece betrayed me and went for one of my cities they'd do it with force.
Also do enemy's send troops over to invade Italy as I know this never really happened in Rome.
Sorry to ramble any help would be appreciated (remember this is my 1st playthrough on my 1st mod so just learning how things are different to Rome)

Thanks

[Zumuk]

Make sure you have the script running every time you load your campaign (you'll get 1 denari as a confirmation). Also, for a better experience, take your time and develop your economy before venturing far into enemy territory, I believe the house rules are 20 turns or something similar. Instead of sending an army to atack Carthage directly, why don't ya try and replicate Scipio's campaign on Iberia before launching a full on invasion on Africa? In my opinion, roleplaying is a key element for the full enjoyment of this mod.

[century x]

It is one turn so troop development is much slower.
Did you rush them and did not give them time to develop their troops and economy?

[Modern day Ceaser]

I haven't rushed them, as my game is now I'm just laying siege to my first city ( the huge Greek city at the bottom of scicily). I've been building up my cities and have now pulled my legion back from Carthage onto the mainland as a rebel army gas turned up.
I've triggered the script every time I've played so far.
With the enemy stacks I just thought I'd come up against more bugger army's as they have the same time to recruit as I do. The Greek City had 4 units which tried to siege Messana so I took care of them then latex siege, there is only 1 unit in the city so auto resolve will take care if them no problem.
With regard to the role playing I will give that a go to make the game more interesting.

Thanks for the replies

[Modern day Ceaser]

Hi I have activated the script every time and so far have been taking my time and building up the settlements I own. The Greek City South of scicily will be the first settlement I will have captured and I cant resist it, they sent a four unit army out which I beat and now there is only the general unit in the huge city.
I realise the development is slower but I thought the enemy would be building armies like I am so instead of my full stacks against their small armies it would be more evenly matched.
Good idea to play more of a role playing game, I will try that out.
Thanks for the replies

[Modern day Ceaser]

H

[Modern day Ceaser]

Hi I've tried to reply a couple of times but they haven't showed up when I send them so I'll try again.
I have activated the script every time and so far I'm just about to take my first settlement ( surakousa) from the Greeks, they sent a 4 unit army out which I best and now there is only the general unit left so I can't resist.
So I'm not really rushing it and I'm just building up my settlements I have.
I will try and play a more role playing game it's just I thought the enemy would be building army's like I am but so far I've just come across ones which were only about 5 units.
I've brought my army back from Carthage back to these land to deal with a rebel army.
Once i secure all of Italy would you say to conquer across to Iberia or sail straight there.

Thanks for the replies

[ur-Lord Tedric]

................ I've downloaded the 2.6 patch and am currently around 10 turns into a 1 turn Rome campaign which seen as though it's my 1st play through I'm playing on m/m. ..............................
Also do enemy's send troops over to invade Italy as I know this never really happened in Rome.
...........

Good (and best IMHO) choice - 1 turn will give you a good balance between Campaign and Battles and make you think a bit more and be more concerned with losses.

If you are a little 'disappointed' (for the AI will often use less than a stack - mainly because it selecting targets, I believe, it looks at the garrison you have in said target(s) and not necessarily the armies you will have to respond with - then do try a Hard Campaign setting; for I just find it 'better'.

As for any historical armies that invaded Italy - check out Pyrhhus, who was really the last before Hannibal. The 'Macedonians' will quite often wish to try something similar and seem to have a desire to reach Cannae - however they seem to want to do this by land, and often with not many units. As I understand it (and haven't tried fully as I normally play with BI) using Alex may well result in the chance of more seaborne assaults.

[Alavaria]

The 'Macedonians' will quite often wish to try something similar and seem to have a desire to reach Cannae - however they seem to want to do this by land, and often with not many units. As I understand it (and haven't tried fully as I normally play with BI) using Alex may well result in the chance of more seaborne assaults.

If AI can reach a region of yours by land, it will prefer to do so.

Alex reduces the tendency of the AI to do naval invasions. It does it more using BI. The reason, if I recall, is the AI is pretty bad at handling naval attacks, both in terms of abandoning it's troops who then try to run home... as well as the "elite stack in one boat" thing.

[Modern day Ceaser]

Is there a big difference between the 3 exe's? I'm playing with the rtw exe and enjoying the game but from reading different threads a lot of people prefer either bi or alex. I've tried installing them but only get so far and can't get them to work. Think I'm gonna try and install them on steam and see if I have better luck.
Question is, is it worth starting a new game on one of the different exes or will I still get as good an experience on rtw exe.

[Alavaria]

You should be able to "upgrade"

ie: loading your savegame on the same version of RS2, using BI, from RTW.

But it is only one way, and apparently it goes RTW -> BI -> Alex.

[Modern day Ceaser]

You should be able to "upgrade"

ie: loading your savegame on the same version of RS2, using BI, from RTW.

But it is only one way, and apparently it goes RTW -> BI -> Alex.

So I've finally got bi and alex to work and have tried loading my save game which I moved across from rtw.exe and it's seems to work fine when I activated the script so whichever exe I decide to carry on my game with will it work fine or will I run into script or other problems down the road?
From what I understand what your saying about being one way if I use my game on alex then I always have to play it with alex for it to work, but if I use bi then I could move up to alex if I want to.
Thanks for the help I really appreciate everyone's help and opinions

[Alavaria]

From what I understand what your saying about being one way if I use my game on alex then I always have to play it with alex for it to work, but if I use bi then I could move up to alex if I want to.

For RSII, that's what has been tried before. I think it's mentioned somewhere on these forums that it shouldn't give problems.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

There are tweaks and changes (I don't know if CA ever published the changes) between RTW (v1.5); BI (v1.6); and Alex (v1.9) in the coding and, we therefore assume, the AI. It would be interesting to see if anyone knows what those changes were - if indeed they were published.

The Long and the short of it, however, is that BI is deemed to be 'better' than vanilla RTW and also introduces the 'Shieldwall', which many like - and indeed many nations apparently used. Alex is deemed better for phalanxes as that was certainly the thrust of that game. Most of the issues with phalanxes, however, are more, it seems, down to players not using them correctly - ie they try to 'fight' with them, rather than just letting them march. I must admit I was under the impression that Alex was 'better' at seaborne invasions - but I have no proof of that. Using BI I only really see them where land invasion isn't possible - ie Carthage always keen to take Sardinia (sometimes Pollentia or Sicily - but only after Sardinia. The Cimbri may go for Britain too.