Disconnect between Attila and patched Rome 2

[Darios]

I sometimes wonder how much the team that patched Rome 2 and the team that built Attila communicated with each other. I say this because I have noticed two very interesting issues in Attila that were previously patched/fixed in Rome 2

1) In Attila a fleet of transports is capable of defeating a naval fleet in the simulator

2) In Attila, poor single settlement factions are again capable of fielding multiple stacks. It brings back bad memories of hordes of Saharan tribes overwhelming Rome.

These are issues that were fixed in Rome 2 and drastically improved my experience by helping major factions be major factions. The last few times I played Rome 2, the Seleucid Empire and Rome both became powerful forces in their respective parts of the world. Attila would do very well to implement these improvements as well. As it currently stands, the Sassanid Empire has around 10 puppet states. As a result, the Eastern Roman Empire ends up facing up to 20-30 full stacks in the East once the Sassanids declare war. It is possible to hold the eastern provinces in a ERE campaign but it comes from fighting 3-4 battles on the battlefield every turn due to the sheer number of enemy armies. Wars were historically decided by a single (or a handful of) major battles, not by endlessly encountering full stacks of enemy armies. The Sassanids themselves should be able to field multiple stacks but I see no reason to why factions like Arran, Parthia, Aria should be doing the same. Hopefully the developers plan on looking into this issue in Attila.

[helmersen]

I agree. The AI can field way too many armies at once, it's ridiculous, frankly. In my campaign, the Sassanid Empire had about 4-5 cities left, as well as three puppet states. Now, I know that puppet states do contribute a certain amount of gold each turn, but these are not large puppet states either. Anyway, the Sassanids are standing outside of my cities with literally 7-8 FULLY stacked armies, with mostly expensive horse and infantry unites. If this were the player, I can only imagine how great the upkeep must be! I am a huge empire myself by now, owning about 4 puppet states myself, and I can barely keep around 7 going (money is super tight, however). I can understand how hordes can have so many armies, but for an established empire much smaller than myself... it's just game breaking, really. And dont get me started on the armies of the puppet states either.. How can ONE city field up to three fully stacked armies? Oh, brother..

[PointOfViewGun]

The single settlement full stack nations are probably a product of the king's purse that provides a set and sizable income to any faction. An advantage that's most likely given not to have larger empires easily digest smaller ones.

[Darios]

The single settlement full stack nations are probably a product of the king's purse that provides a set and sizable income to any faction. An advantage that's most likely given not to have larger empires easily digest smaller ones.

Therein may lie the problem. I'm still not exactly sure how the imperium system works in ATW as it tends to increase for me at random times without conquering any additional territory, but I do not see any justification for vassal states and minor Saharan tribes having the capacity to field multiple stacks. Rome 2 played so much better once this issue was addressed, I'm surprised that it was not implemented into ATW.

[PointOfViewGun]

Therein may lie the problem. I'm still not exactly sure how the imperium system works in ATW as it tends to increase for me at random times without conquering any additional territory, but I do not see any justification for vassal states and minor Saharan tribes having the capacity to field multiple stacks. Rome 2 played so much better once this issue was addressed, I'm surprised that it was not implemented into ATW.

When measuring Imperium you have to consider your overall power. That includes a lot of stuff (armies, wealth, etc.) and not just conquering territory.

I always seen single settlement nations fielding one full stack but never seen them field two full stacks in ATW.

[Cope]

The single settlement full stack nations are probably a product of the king's purse that provides a set and sizable income to any faction. An advantage that's most likely given not to have larger empires easily digest smaller ones.

This is probably correct. The "main factions" get a base income bonus so that they don't just disintegrate.

However, CA appear to have done it the lazy way by giving factions like the Sassanids a flat income bonus instead of a percentile modifier or a slider which changes depending on their regular income. What this means is that it is virtually impossible to cripple some factions economically because no matter what you do - aside from wiping them out - they will still be able to stack spam.

When measuring Imperium you have to consider your overall power. That includes a lot of stuff (armies, wealth, etc.) and not just conquering territory.

I always seen single settlement nations fielding one full stack but never seen them field two full stacks in ATW.

I have seen single settlement nations routinely fielding more than one full stack - but then again, maybe this has to do with which factions we're talking about and also what game difficulty you're playing on. Typically I'd say playing on Normal mode gives stops some of the AI's most blatant cheating, but it still happens for some factions (the Sassanids are an obvious example).

[Darios]

Typically I'd say playing on Normal mode gives stops some of the AI's most blatant cheating, but it still happens for some factions (the Sassanids are an obvious example).

4-5 turns into my ERE campaign the Garamantians attacked two of my cities in Libya at the same time with full stacks.

It destroys game balance because if I defeat a Vandal or Gothic stack then they're more or less finished finished as a viable threat to anyone on the campaign map. If I defeat an army from Aria then rest assured that they probably have a couple more lurking near by and by the time I defeat them they are already sending more to the front.

[Humble Warrior]

Wasn`t Rome 2 supposed to get a patch with similar improvements to Attila? I`m sure they said there would be one about the same time.

[Cope]

4-5 turns into my ERE campaign the Garamantians attacked two of my cities in Libya at the same time with full stacks.

It destroys game balance because if I defeat a Vandal or Gothic stack then they're more or less finished finished as a viable threat to anyone on the campaign map. If I defeat an army from Aria then rest assured that they probably have a couple more lurking near by and by the time I defeat them they are already sending more to the front.

I have to admit that the way they've dealt with the AI in ATW is exceptionally frustrating compared to games like EU IV because the only strategy it appears to have is to try and dog pile the player. It's just one contrived problem after another, non of which have any viable solutions outside of achieving supreme military domination.

One massive problem is the near total lack of logistics in the game which means that the AI can strike using its doom stacks wherever it likes, whenever it likes. You know, you can take logical steps to protect your borders by constructing strong points, but it makes not one shred of difference because the AI just uses its instant fleets to sail half way around the map to attack you where you have no men. Again, this would be "okay" if you could actually catch transport fleets with your own navies, or if they took meaningful attrition, but you can't and they don't. You can't even block straits with navies. The same goes for AI armies that move into your territory - they can move at will without suffering any form of noticeable attrition which leads to endlessly infuriating situations where one AI stack will slip through your lines and then proceed to wreck your entire interior whilst you try and hunt them down - either that or you have constantly fight 4 vs. 20 minor settlement battles.

I can't tell you how irritating it is when a steppe nomad tribe such as the Roxolani appears in fleet form the Eastern Mediterranean, constantly runs away from you when you try and chase them with your navy, and then doubles back and blows up somewhere like Cyprus when you've been forced to divert your attention elsewhere. You know the sea just offers no defensive barrier or obstacle whatsoever which is a total joke. The very notion of the Huns just sitting in the Mediterranean for years on end (which everyone has seen them do) is completely ridiculous.

Mainly it's just poor design from CA who have given the AI telepathic abilities to know exactly where they can move or attack without being challenged (basically fog of war hacking) without offering the player any real tools to deal with the situation. You know, what's the point in wasting gold on navies to best the AI's douchey little transport fleets when you can never catch them? The answer is non. It just creates an irritating challenge instead of an enjoyable one.

[Humble Warrior]

I have to admit that the way they've dealt with the AI in ATW is exceptionally frustrating compared to games like EU IV because the only strategy it appears to have is to try and dog pile the player. It's just one contrived problem after another, non of which have any viable solutions outside of achieving supreme military domination.

One massive problem is the near total lack of logistics in the game which means that the AI can strike using its doom stacks wherever it likes, whenever it likes. You know, you can take logical steps to protect your borders by constructing strong points, but it makes not one shred of difference because the AI just uses its instant fleets to sail half way around the map to attack you where you have no men. Again, this would be "okay" if you could actually catch transport fleets with your own navies, or if they took meaningful attrition, but you can't and they don't. You can't even block straits with navies. The same goes for AI armies that move into your territory - they can move at will without suffering any form of noticeable attrition which leads to endlessly infuriating situations where one AI stack will slip through your lines and then proceed to wreck your entire interior whilst you try and hunt them down - either that or you have constantly fight 4 vs. 20 minor settlement battles.

I can't tell you how irritating it is when a steppe nomad tribe such as the Roxolani appears in fleet form the Eastern Mediterranean, constantly runs away from you when you try and chase them with your navy, and then doubles back and blows up somewhere like Cyprus when you've been forced to divert your attention elsewhere. You know the sea just offers no defensive barrier or obstacle whatsoever which is a total joke. The very notion of the Huns just sitting in the Mediterranean for years on end (which everyone has seen them do) is completely ridiculous.

Mainly it's just poor design from CA who have given the AI telepathic abilities to know exactly where they can move or attack without being challenged (basically fog of war hacking) without offering the player any real tools to deal with the situation. You know, what's the point in wasting gold on navies to best the AI's douchey little transport fleets when you can never catch them? The answer is non. It just creates an irritating challenge instead of an enjoyable one.

That really should`ve been fixed by CA by now. It`s like they just took a cheap way out with ships in R2 and still did just nothing to make it better. Family trees are only good because the player complained hard about it. Do we have to whine about every single thing or CA just won`t bother? This is how it always looks like to me. It`s becoming a 24 hour job of it with those guys and then when they say `We listened to the fans`, they have only done half a job.

[Osbot]

I sometimes wonder how much the team that patched Rome 2 and the team that built Attila communicated with each other. I say this because I have noticed two very interesting issues in Attila that were previously patched/fixed in Rome 2

1) In Attila a fleet of transports is capable of defeating a naval fleet in the simulator

2) In Attila, poor single settlement factions are again capable of fielding multiple stacks. It brings back bad memories of hordes of Saharan tribes overwhelming Rome.

These are issues that were fixed in Rome 2 and drastically improved my experience by helping major factions be major factions. The last few times I played Rome 2, the Seleucid Empire and Rome both became powerful forces in their respective parts of the world. Attila would do very well to implement these improvements as well. As it currently stands, the Sassanid Empire has around 10 puppet states. As a result, the Eastern Roman Empire ends up facing up to 20-30 full stacks in the East once the Sassanids declare war. It is possible to hold the eastern provinces in a ERE campaign but it comes from fighting 3-4 battles on the battlefield every turn due to the sheer number of enemy armies. Wars were historically decided by a single (or a handful of) major battles, not by endlessly encountering full stacks of enemy armies. The Sassanids themselves should be able to field multiple stacks but I see no reason to why factions like Arran, Parthia, Aria should be doing the same. Hopefully the developers plan on looking into this issue in Attila.

Wait, on point one what are you talking about. This is impossible.

I've auto-resolved 1 navy stack vs FOUR transport flotillas MULTIPLE times and my navy nearly flawlessly kills them.

On your second point. Not realistic, true. However if the AI didn't cheat to get more stacks the game would be absolutely garbage. It wouldn't be able to do anything. You'd have a 40 dollar coaster.

[Darios]

I'm guessing that the honeymoon period for ATW is now over. The game had a great launch and is miles better than Rome 2 was at this stage. It seems that most of the game's issues are ones that CA can ultimately fix with patching so I have high hopes. The game is challenging but as Mr. Leving stated, it's more of a "let's throw endless stacks at them until the AI hits a weak spot and they collapse" approach that makes for constant battles where I am defending minor settlements against multiple full stacks. Playing multiplayer campaigns as either the WRE or ERE are essentially off the table as a result.

[Yerevan]

I sometimes wonder how much the team that patched Rome 2 and the team that built Attila communicated with each other. I say this because I have noticed two very interesting issues in Attila that were previously patched/fixed in Rome 2

1) In Attila a fleet of transports is capable of defeating a naval fleet in the simulator

2) In Attila, poor single settlement factions are again capable of fielding multiple stacks. It brings back bad memories of hordes of Saharan tribes overwhelming Rome.

These are issues that were fixed in Rome 2 and drastically improved my experience by helping major factions be major factions. The last few times I played Rome 2, the Seleucid Empire and Rome both became powerful forces in their respective parts of the world. Attila would do very well to implement these improvements as well. As it currently stands, the Sassanid Empire has around 10 puppet states. As a result, the Eastern Roman Empire ends up facing up to 20-30 full stacks in the East once the Sassanids declare war. It is possible to hold the eastern provinces in a ERE campaign but it comes from fighting 3-4 battles on the battlefield every turn due to the sheer number of enemy armies. Wars were historically decided by a single (or a handful of) major battles, not by endlessly encountering full stacks of enemy armies. The Sassanids themselves should be able to field multiple stacks but I see no reason to why factions like Arran, Parthia, Aria should be doing the same. Hopefully the developers plan on looking into this issue in Attila.

Exactly ! It surprised me too, to find the same downsides than in R2. And it's the reason why, while I enjoy Attila's campaign more than R2, I won't let myself waste more time playing it in its actual state. I'l wait until those issues are repaired by CA or by modders. Unfortunately I trust modders more.

I'm guessing that the honeymoon period for ATW is now over. The game had a great launch and is miles better than Rome 2 was at this stage. It seems that most of the game's issues are ones that CA can ultimately fix with patching so I have high hopes. The game is challenging but as Mr. Leving stated, it's more of a "let's throw endless stacks at them until the AI hits a weak spot and they collapse" approach that makes for constant battles where I am defending minor settlements against multiple full stacks. Playing multiplayer campaigns as either the WRE or ERE are essentially off the table as a result.

In the long terms the CAI makes the experience wuite repetitive and absurd. All those minor settlement battles becomes quikly tedious. I watched some ERE or WRE campaigns on Twitch and I really wonder how those players find the patience to fight all those loosing battles; in their overwhelmed small settlements, 4 times a turn, just in order to kill a few more soldiers than the autosolve would. Are they really having fun because it looks like a boring job. This is so tedious ! lol

You can't even block choke pooinyts with the broken ZOC system, my god, there's no way stoppping the tsunami.