Napalm and vreconstruction

[Yerevan]

So, I've seen the AI using raze a lot. What I don't see much is the AI rebuilding on top of a razed colony. But I'm only playing two campaigns ; not enough to draw a conclusion.
I'm curious about what people you see in their campaigns concerning abandonned and razed territories. Does AI factions rebuild their own territory after it has been nuked or rebuild, as a mifgrating faction, on an abandonned or razed province ?
Iyt looks like the overuse of this feature doesn't make so much sense atm.

[MasterBigAb]

I have also only played one campaign so far, however around 400 turns and 80 hours - and half of the world is burnt down.
Sometimes the AI rebuilds settlements but they get razed faster then they are rebuilt, so overall it almost seems like it is getting more and more burnt land over time.

I like it in general, but it needs some slight correction. A little less razing and way more resettling IMO.

[Yerevan]

I have also only played one campaign so far, however around 400 turns and 80 hours - and half of the world is burnt down.
Sometimes the AI rebuilds settlements but they get razed faster then they are rebuilt, so overall it almost seems like it is getting more and more burnt land over time.

I like it in general, but it needs some slight correction. A little less razing and way more resettling IMO.

THat's what I fear. But if it's really like that it's a perfect base for a Tolkien's world mod. Orcs will love the Razing Hordes mechanism !

[stevehoos]

The feature is bordering on ridiculous, why would any army destroy potential loot and then negate their chance to eat? Will just burn everything and then go out to eat later at the Prancing Pony; Hooray! Burn all 100 square miles, onward men! I knew this feature would be ubiquitous and absurd in the campaign.

[von stoker]

Just finished my Saxon campaign. I never saw the AI occupy any conquered settlement. They either loot, sack or raze it and go on their way.
I spent 13000 to colonise a desolate settlement only to have 2 German separatist armies capture it and immediately raze it. These are migrating armies that you would think would want to settle.
Picts and Caledonians when they captured any of my towns would only sack or loot them, not occupy them.
When I returned to mainland NW Europe after conquering Britain there were only 3 factions with settlements, The Danes with 1 and the Quadi with 3 and the Gauls with 2. (Also Roman separatist had control of Italia). All other factions were migrating and all other regions were desolate.
I sent my spy to Rome and Constantinople and it seemed like the rest of Europe was in the same state.
After defeating the Gauls, pretty much of the rest of the game was spent saving up money and occupying desolate regions. It was a real grind to get to 450AD and finally end the campaign.
In future campaigns I will use a Nomads only can raze mod. Unfortunately it probably wont change that factions will occupy, they will just loot or sack instead.
@MasterBigAB. Agree with you there, needs work.
@stevehoos. Agree. It is unrealistic for non Nomad factions to destroy their (potentially) own lands for no reason.

[jtfjtfjtf]

I've been playing with Radious Mod and it seems to correct the swiss cheese effect. Now it's like a race to get to the open region to rebuild it.

[Yerevan]

The feature is bordering on ridiculous, why would any army destroy potential loot and then negate their chance to eat? Will just burn everything and then go out to eat later at the Prancing Pony; Hooray! Burn all 100 square miles, onward men! I knew this feature would be ubiquitous and absurd in the campaign.

Maybe CA have let themselves carried away by the myth of Attila a tad too far. In France we have this old saying "where Attila go the grass doesn't grow anymore". I think CA took this too litteraly. Attila did burn cities, that was part of the total war thing, but he wasn't feeding his horses with stone. Why would he burn the source of supplies for his armies and their mount.
Do invaders, who need food for theit forces practice the scortched earth policy, I don't know , but as you say i's not logical. The defenders ; its another story. Maybe they ll resort to it as a desperate measure. But not systematically.

Just finished my Saxon campaign. I never saw the AI occupy any conquered settlement. They either loot, sack or raze it and go on their way.
I spent 13000 to colonise a desolate settlement only to have 2 German separatist armies capture it and immediately raze it. These are migrating armies that you would think would want to settle.
Picts and Caledonians when they captured any of my towns would only sack or loot them, not occupy them.
When I returned to mainland NW Europe after conquering Britain there were only 3 factions with settlements, The Danes with 1 and the Quadi with 3 and the Gauls with 2. (Also Roman separatist had control of Italia). All other factions were migrating and all other regions were desolate.
I sent my spy to Rome and Constantinople and it seemed like the rest of Europe was in the same state.
After defeating the Gauls, pretty much of the rest of the game was spent saving up money and occupying desolate regions. It was a real grind to get to 450AD and finally end the campaign.

If this mean that the migrating factions never settle, this is a pity. The whole feature is super interesting, but it has to be well implemented. What decide the AI to stop its migration and settle, qnd how often does it happens. It's what I woudl like to ask CA.

I've been playing with Radious Mod and it seems to correct the swiss cheese effect. Now it's like a race to get to the open region to rebuild it.

You know what he changed for that ?

[Huberto]

So, I've seen the AI using raze a lot. What I don't see much is the AI rebuilding on top of a razed colony. But I'm only playing two campaigns ; not enough to draw a conclusion.
I'm curious about what people you see in their campaigns concerning abandonned and razed territories. Does AI factions rebuild their own territory after it has been nuked or rebuild, as a mifgrating faction, on an abandonned or razed province ?
Iyt looks like the overuse of this feature doesn't make so much sense atm.

It needs to be balanced better; however I have noticed the AI rebuilding in my Vandal campaign, mostly Roman culture factions, like the Septimanian (?), also West Roman Separatists. Some of the barbarian factions have colonized a desolate area or two as well. My impression overall is if you want to understand what is happening in Attila, it's best to see the CAI as focused on the player. The AI doesn't look after its own interests as much as making sure that yours are thwarted.
-----------------

Just a note on desolation as a game feature: imo this represents refugee populations abandoning regions and settlements more than it is about barbarians putting every last structure to the torch -- despite the silly napalm animation.

Two questions about desolation come to mind:

1.) did Roman or other populations abandon entire regions in the 5th Century?

2.) does desolation strike the right balance in the game, with enough factions becoming stronger and being able to stay strong? My experience is that almost all the barbarian factions become very weak, perhaps because they waste their time attacking the player and raiding/sacking instead of building up devastated regions. In history, the West was competitively divided up by Franks, Saxons, Ostrogoth, Visigoth, and Vandal.

I find WRE and ERE get wiped out or reduced to irrelevance by 405 or so and therefore ERE should be strengthened. The separatist Roman factions that rise up are sort of cool however.