Generals' stats, upkeep, siege battles - my impressions so far

[Pantagruel]

I made this thread to address a few points I have made from some 20 hours of playtime, and because the "General impressions" thread is so long already.

I will try to keep this short.

My main playthroughs have been as Pergamon and Makedonia. For submods I have only been using QuintusSertorius fixes for skirmishers etc.

The hours I have put into the mod so far have been very enjoyable, but a few things are putting me off.

1) During sieges, atleast against "barbarian" settlements, there are invisible barriers inside the walls, hindering the fighting from being anything other than one-on-one, making flanking impossible, etc. What I am talking about is that the barbarian camps have quite a lot of green open space inside them, but it is impossible to move your units through these spaces. The sieges therefore become tedious, far too long, and worst of all: without any tactics, since you can't move about. The sieges seems to come down to who have the most phalanx units, and poor you if you have none! Elite heavy infantry will be killed by levy phalanxes it seems. And to make matters worse: the "unbreakable morale" town square is HUGE. I kind of like this that you have to actually kill every soldier inside the city, but when you can't surround them because of an invisible wall I don't like it.

2) Upkeep as very small factions. This of course is no new problem, and it isn't even a problem, it makes the game more challenging and enjoyable. As Pergamon I had no difficulty of getting my finances up, blitzing away at the Ptolemaic in Anatolia, earning two great cities fast besides the capital. As all the minor factions which are surrounded by either strong enemy factions or rebels however I find it impossible. The choice is as I understand it either to blitz with the stacks of troops you begin with, or to disband them and build your economy. The second option I do understand and like, to work yourself up from humble beginning, buying your time, trusting in patience, - but how is that possible when you are surrounded by full stacked, aggressive rebels and/or enemy factions? I love the high upkeep on units, it's one of the features I like most, it makes you care about your troops and think more about management; but in the very beginning it seems far too harsh for anyone but the strong factions like SPQR, Makedonia, Ptolemaios etc. As Makedonia I had no issue also because I could buy very cheap militia units and skirmisher and outplay the AI. When you as a barbarian faction with one province can only buy one skirmisher unit every sixth turn however, that does not work. And you can't disband your troops as the Arverni because you will be destroyed by the Aedui, etc.

3) The last point is more serious, and I wonder if I am the only one suffering from it. My generals and governors never seem to earn any skills. My faction leader as Makedonia, which was sharp/charismatic/vigorous and conquered Sparta, Athens, all of Epirus excluding Italy, and Byzantion, ended up with just two command and three influence. Most of my generals have no +command at all, not to mention every other stat. I am lucky if a family member have more than two in loyalty. I do not notice that they earn any stats from schools and academies either. This surely must be a bug. The AIs generals usually have five+ in command, and now I am not just talking about the historical personalities like Pyrrhus.

That's all for now. Thank you for reading.

[QuintusSertorius]

1) During sieges, atleast against "barbarian" settlements, there are invisible barriers inside the walls, hindering the fighting from being anything other than one-on-one, making flanking impossible, etc. What I am talking about is that the barbarian camps have quite a lot of green open space inside them, but it is impossible to move your units through these spaces.

This is hardcoded; those spaces are "reserved" for future building, and thus aren't treated as places units can move through.

[Pantagruel]

This is hardcoded; those spaces are "reserved" for future building, and thus aren't treated as places units can move through.

You are right about this, but still what you say does not address my point, which wasn't as much that these spaces are invisible, but that there are spaces there at all, blocking the path and movement of troops, rather than enabling such maneuvering. I understand why big towns and cities should have streets, and I understand that siege battles should be sluggish; but when the battles are as slow as they are, when there is no option to burn down buildings and make new paths that way, and when the defenders have unbreakable morale, I find that your advantage as a besieger isn't just wrong with gameplay in mind, but also far too limiting historically. I write this just after having assaulted a minor barbarian town, losing to time; the battle was an initial skirmish at the walls as I broke them, supported by lots of javelineers, and then moving into the town, surrounding the town square from all corners with Getai phalanxes and moving in. The final fight at the square, me surrounding three regiments of classical hoplites from four corners, lasted for 20 minutes until I lost.

As for the second point I mentioned, about upkeep, I felt it as no issue playing as Getai. However as them you can pick and choose from surrounding rebel settlements, and some of them even have very rich mines. I am having a lot of fun in this playthrough!

[Engineer]

This is hardcoded; those spaces are "reserved" for future building, and thus aren't treated as places units can move through.

So is there nothing that can be done about these?

[caratacus]

So is there nothing that can be done about these?

Yes it is hard coded. I like the way EBII has opened up the towns though, even though your troops can't walk on the grass!

In reality, cities seldom ever withstood an attack once the defenses were breached. There was none of this turning around and fleeing a few steps from the city square. Even though greater numbers in a crampt urban space can work against an attacker, city's self containment was shattered if enemies held land inside defenses. Even if you fought off a massive army of soldiers inside breached walls they could regroup and attack again and would probably take the entire perimeter wall in the process forming an effective prison. Without food, water and suitable shelter the city would be doomed anyway.

I admit to using the extra moral defenders get in city centres in the game, by cramming everybody into the central plaza rather than attempt at repelling attackers from the walls. I shouldn't, but it makes defense so much easier in MTW2. The lack of maneuverability inside city walls therefore, isn't an issue for me from a realism perspective and I tend to enjoy long drawn out sieges anyway.

[xHolyCrusader]

So is there nothing that can be done about these?

It could be "fixed" quite easily (just time consuming), though most likely the AI won't be able to handle the pathfinding anymore

[James the Red]

It would be nice if there was something as a place holder in those spots, like a fence or something, so I can physically see where I can and can't put troops.

[HarkonRules]

What he said entirely addressed your point, are you being purposefully thick? Those "invisible barriers", "open spaces", aren't actually open spaces. They're predefined spots for buildings that aren't yet modelled, and so they're just "empty ground" for the moment, but in the future they will have buildings standing where there's apparently open spaces.

[Pantagruel]

What we've got here is failure to communicate. The point I was trying to convey was that these buildings prevent maneuvering. A silly point perhaps, since this is how it is in siege battles in all the Total War games, but EB is a little different by having longer battles and what I suspect is a larger town square. Maybe much of what I think is a problem could be fixed by adjusting the town square so that it does not give unbreakable morale, but instead boosts morale some. I'm sure people could happen to panic or kill themselves when surrounded, even in their own city.

[QuintusSertorius]

I'm sure people could happen to panic or kill themselves when surrounded, even in their own city.

No they don't, it's widely observed that if completely surrounded people are more likely to consign themselves to fighting to the death. Leave them an avenue to escape, and instead they prefer flight.

[Sarkiss]

No they don't, it's widely observed that if completely surrounded people are more likely to consign themselves to fighting to the death. Leave them an avenue to escape, and instead they prefer flight.

depends on the proximity of the enemy. have you read descriptions of the Roman's behaviour when they were trapped in their own midst at Cannae?

[ooji]

3) The last point is more serious, and I wonder if I am the only one suffering from it. My generals and governors never seem to earn any skills. My faction leader as Makedonia, which was sharp/charismatic/vigorous and conquered Sparta, Athens, all of Epirus excluding Italy, and Byzantion, ended up with just two command and three influence. Most of my generals have no +command at all, not to mention every other stat. I am lucky if a family member have more than two in loyalty. I do not notice that they earn any stats from schools and academies either. This surely must be a bug. The AIs generals usually have five+ in command, and now I am not just talking about the historical personalities like Pyrrhus.

That's all for now. Thank you for reading.

I vouch for this statement. My faction leader started with 5 star points and constantly won victories in both siege and field battles. He destroyed Sauromatae and conquered all 8 regions and fought at least 12 battles, all victories. As a result of those victories, he gained some stats that give him command skills and morale boost to his troops, but he kept on acquiring negative traits that offset those positive traits. The problem I see is that there way too many negative traits and way too few positive traits. After all those victories and nearly maxed out Authority, his command ability was reduced to 1. That is just unrealistic.

[Yayattasa]

About the maneuvers inside camps, I find it really odd CA messed it on M2TW: go play some siege on a "barbarian" camp in RTW. There's LOTS of room to manoeuvre your troops, and charges are feasible.

[Pantagruel]

Avenue of escape: surrender.

[browning]

I think the traits of the Generals is a bigger issue. It would solve all the problems ppl have with sieges and whatnot if the player could raise a General with some valuable traits and stars.

[browning]

Yes but the walls in the game are huge long compared to the reality.
In reality, most cities could man the whole length of the walls. Elevated position made up for numbers and training of the attacker force. It was very well possible to defend a fortified city from an attack, that's why walls were built and that's why we talk about sieges.
But then, sieges could last weeks or few months, but not years as in the game.

[Yayattasa]

Sieges could totally last for years.