Fans suggestion thread for future releases

[Cleitus the Pink]

Let's say we have phalangitai and ageman phalangitai against Marian Legionaries. If their guard mode is on, they will take some casualties from the pilla and then pin the Romans down, neither side inflicting many casualties. Now if you turn the guard mode off... The formation will kinda be ruined. Every phalangitai will rush in for the kill and you'll see the Legionaries make mince meat out of your units. At least that's what happened when I tested it in custom battle. The only way I was able to salvage the situation was literally ramming all my cavalry into the back of the Romans. I guess you could say that is somewhat historical... but the phalangitai die just a little too fast for it to make sense.

agema*

[Sar1n]

Sar1n, but they DO have killing power. Just turn off their guard mode.

Yes, but what I'm talking about is specifically situation when any unit charges the phalangitai from the front. There, the phalangitai will hold, but won't inflict as many casualties as they did in real life.

[Shoebopp]

I would like to suggest making Caucasian Lancers available after the Thureos instead of the Thorakitai Reforms, but only to Hayastan governments. This is for the same reason that Bosporan Horse Archers are available after the Thureos instead of the Thorakitai Reforms, but only to Bosporan governments. Think of it as certain factions/regions being the innovators of heavier troop types, with those ideas spreading to other regions/factions. In this case, the Caucasian Lancers available to all Foreign Military Colony factions around Media would still be restricted to after the Thorakitai Reforms - they represent Caucasian Lancers or their military traditions that have settled/diffused there after some 50 years.

[Shoebopp]

Could there be a certain class of buildings that, when built, prevent the new revolts script in the region, but at a hefty tradeoff? Three that come to mind are:

1. Tax Exemption: Incurs a -400 to Improvements income or -50% to base tax
2. Cultural Autonomy: Prevents ALL cultural conversion granted by that faction's buildings. Any government or colony building's religion bonus now check for the absence of this building before applying the conversion
3. Grain Dole: Completely drains all farming improvements

A Python script can append a check for the absence of these kinds of buildings to each code block in the new revolts script. Revolts will not occur if a less oppressive means of governance is incorporated.

I promise I based this suggestion off of history this time. The early Achaemenids enjoyed fewer revolts due to their religious tolerance (Cultural Autonomy) and, initially, fairer taxes to peoples who submitted peacefully (Tax Exemption). Likewise the Romans managed to quell the masses with grain doles (Grain Dole) from the rich agricultural regions of Tunisia and the Nile, with revolts occurring only when this dole is not delivered. Meanwhile the Sassanids faced defection from their military and populace alike to the Arabs due to their religious oppression and corruption.

Conversely this feature would give the option to avoid endless mini stacks to players who prefer to only fight large battles against other factions, even if it means having less income to work with or suffering from long term civil unrest.

[QuintusSertorius]

Quite simply, no. The revolts script is a pretty simple, but long, single-monitor script. Adding any of those sorts of nuances would hugely complicate it. If it's too frequent it can be reduced, but it serves a specific purpose of removing the concept of "safe" internal regions.

[realm56]

I took a look at the Baktria, Sauromatia, Iran and Saka mercenary pools and the mercenary events in the region and found that it did not really evolve with the times come the late nomadic invasions. As such I have a few suggestions to further flesh out these migrations by altering the mercenary pools of the pools mentioned.

• The Baktria and Saka pools could replace the pointed hat sakas in the pools with Turan riders during or after the Turan Raids and/or the Toghri's invasion. The same could be done to introduce Turan archers into these same pools after said events have occurred. As it stands now, the archers are only available in the Turan enclave and select few foreign garrisons in Dahyu Haomavarga, Kangha and Skythia. The riders in particular are non-recruitable (Only seen in Turan raid stacks and the Toghri's amry of the Right) for the time being, perhaps even introducing them into the Turan enclave recruitment pools. Perhaps further down the line, the Turan units in the mercenary pools mentioned previously could even be replaced by the Tocharians if they come at all....
• The Sakan mercenary events at the start of each spring could increase in frequency when they have been muscled out of their lands by Turan, Juki and other trespassers, perhaps these very same trespassers could hire themselves out as mercenaries to any power residing in the region, replacing the pointed hat sakas with Turan or possibly Tocharian units (Hire us or be raided!) when they come.
• Past the Late Saka migrations, Sakastan horse archers and/or Sakan foot archers could possibly make themselves available for hire in the Baktria (Sakastan riders),India (Sakastan riders and saka archers) and Iran (Sakastan riders and/or saka archers) pools.
• For the Sauromatia and Skythia pools, to better reflect the Alan invasions, Alan Riders could be introduced into the pool at the expense of some Skythian or Sarmatian riders to simulate gradual displacement. The Alans could also possibly make their way into the Armenia pool.
• The Saka horse archers in the Saka pool could be partially/totally replaced with Asanan riders come the Tocharian 3rd wave.

[Khevsur]

I would like to suggest making Caucasian Lancers available after the Thureos instead of the Thorakitai Reforms, but only to Hayastan governments. This is for the same reason that Bosporan Horse Archers are available after the Thureos instead of the Thorakitai Reforms, but only to Bosporan governments. Think of it as certain factions/regions being the innovators of heavier troop types, with those ideas spreading to other regions/factions. In this case, the Caucasian Lancers available to all Foreign Military Colony factions around Media would still be restricted to after the Thorakitai Reforms - they represent Caucasian Lancers or their military traditions that have settled/diffused there after some 50 years.

I do not understand why they were called Caucasian Lancers. In that era, Iberian(Kartvelian) Lancers played a leading role in the Caucasus.
I think they will learn and fix it.



It is most unfortunate that they do not recognize the Kartvelian tribes.They think that the Colchians, Chalybes and Iberians are different people, But in world history these are Kartvelian tribes. The Kingdom of Iberia was founded by the Colchian(Kartvelian) tribes Meskhetians ( Moschoi , Mushki), Accordingly the Colchians and the Iberians are one and the same people.According to Hecataeus of Miletus - Moschoi are Colchians.According to old Armenian sources, the Chalybes are Chans ( Chani, Lazi- Kartvelian tribe). Most of the population of Pontus were Kartvelian tribes. I uploaded a lot of material about it. But they do not want to believe it.I do not know why this is happening. Unfortunately they are madly deleting my posts.And they forbid my freedom of speech.Although I helped them many times. Game Team think they have more knowledge than Scientists





Ethnogenesis of Kartvelian

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Further information: Prehistoric Georgia
Most historians and scholars of Georgia as well as anthropologists, archaeologists and linguists tend to agree that the ancestors of modern Georgians inhabited the southern Caucasus and northern Anatolia since the Neolithic period.[38] Scholars usually refer to them as Proto-Kartvelian (Proto-Georgians such as Colchians and Iberians) tribes.[39]


The Georgian people in antiquity have been known to the ancient Greeks and Romans as Colchians and Iberians.[40][41] East Georgian tribes of Tibarenians-Iberians formed their kingdom in 7th century BCE. However, western Georgian tribes (Colchian tribes) established the first Georgian state of Colchis (circa 1350 BCE) before the foundation of the Iberian Kingdom in the east.[42][43] According to the numerous scholars of Georgia, the formations of these two early Georgian kingdoms of Colchis and Iberia, resulted in the consolidation and uniformity of the Georgian nation.[44]


According to the renowned scholar of the Caucasian studies Cyril Toumanoff, the Moschians also were one of the early proto-Georgian tribes which were integrated into the first early Georgian state of Iberia.[43] The ancient Jewish chronicle by Josephus mentions Georgians as Iberes who were also called Thobel (Tubal).[45] David Marshall Lang argued that the root Tibar gave rise to the form Iber that made the Greeks pick up the name Iberian in the end for the designation of the eastern Georgians.[46]


Diauehi in Assyrian sources and Taochi in Greek lived in the northeastern part of Anatolia, a region that was part of Georgia. This ancient tribe is considered by many scholars as ancestors of the Georgians.[47] Modern Georgians still refer to this region, which now belongs to present-day Turkey, as Tao-Klarjeti, an ancient Georgian kingdom. Some people there still speak the Georgian language.[48]


Colchians in the ancient western Georgian Kingdom of Colchis were another proto-Georgian tribe. They are first mentioned in the Assyrian annals of Tiglath-Pileser I and in the annals of Urartian king Sarduri II, and are also included western Georgian tribe of the Meskhetians.[43][49]


Iberians, also known as Tiberians or Tiberanians, lived in the eastern Georgian Kingdom of Iberia.[43]


Both Colchians and Iberians played an important role in the ethnic and cultural formation of the modern Georgian nation.[50][51]


According to the scholar of the Caucasian studies Cyril Toumanoff:


Colchis appears as the first Caucasian State to have achieved the coalescence of the newcomer, Colchis can be justly regarded as not a proto-Georgian, but a Georgian (West Georgian) kingdom ... It would seem natural to seek the beginnings of Georgian social history in Colchis, the earliest Georgian formation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgians#Origins

The Iberian Horseman Of The First Century

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I. Gagoshidze
THE IBERIAN HORSEMAN OF
THE FIRST CENTURY
(Summary)
The paper is part of a monograph, “The
Kingdom of Kartli (Iberia) and Rome in the 1st
cent. B.C – 1
st cent. A.D”, compiled in 1996-1998
with the financial aid of the INTAS and dealing
with the Iberian military equipment (weapons,
armour, harness).
The present paper is primarily based on the
rich archaeological collection of weapons, armour
and parts of harness, obtained during the
excavations of the royal palace at Dedoplis Gora,
though all other relevant finds of the same
chronology, coming from other regions of Georgia
at the disposal of the author, have been taken into
consideration as well.
Besides, 25 representations of armoured
horsemen engraved on the bone plaques
discovered at the royal palace of Dedoplis Gora
have been included in the study. One of the
plaques even depicts the scene of combat between
armoured horsemen.
As during the 1st cent. B.C. – 1
st cent. A.D.
Rome led the whole world in the military field, the
paper deals with the local finds in relation to the
Roman material, as well as data provided by
Graeco-Latin narrative sources.
Archaeological finds corroborate the
information of written sources, which names
lances and bows as the principal weapons of the
Iberians. According to the same sources, their
military forces comprised both infantry and
cavalry, the latter being divided into lightly and
heavily armed horsemen.
The Georgians used a compound bow - its ends
covered with bone plates – similar to the Roman
bows. But, a more advanced type of bow has been
found at Dedoplis Gora – not only the ends, but
also the middle part of it was covered with bone
plates. Bows of this type were introduced into
Europe by the Huns only in the period of the
Völkerwanderung.
The close contacts established by the kingdom
of Iberia with nomadic tribes of the Eurasian
steppes account for such early penetration of the
Hunnish bow into Georgia. The Iberian state
power holding tight control over the Caucasian
passes not only managed to exploit nomadic
military forces for the political benefit of Kartli,
but, to some extent, even regulated their peaceful
trade with Western Anterior Asia and eastern
Roman provinces. This key strategic element
guaranteed the petty kingdom of Iberia its fairly
important place within the political scope of the
superpowers of that period – Rome and Parthia.
The so-called Sarmatian-type three-winged
hooked arrowhead represented the only type of
military arowheads in Iberia of the Early Roman
period. More than 800 such arrowheads were
discovered at Dedoplis Gora. As a rule, they were
placed in quivers with bows.
The fact that along with the ordinary iron
socketed spearheads, Sarmatian spearheads with
hooped sockets were found allows the author to
suggest the presence of Sarmatian warriors in the
garrison guarding the royal palace of Dedoplis
Gora.
Spear shafts of the Iberians, like those of the
Romans, ended in iron knobs.
Iberian warriors used to fight with long
piercing swords and unlike the Romans, wore
short daggers attached to the right thigh.
The principal type of iron defensive armour in
Iberia was lorica squamata, though the Roman
influence probably accounts for the discovery of
lorica hamata at Dedoplis Gora. Unlike the
Romans, the Iberians did not use metallic helmets.
A fairly complete picture of harness is
provided by engraved bone plaques unearthed at
Dedoplis Gora. Their local origin becomes clear
judging by both representations of horsemen and
horse harnesses and inscriptions engraved on
some of the plaques, done in the so-called Armazi
script, spread in Georgia. Garments of equestrians,
hunched saddles, girth, reins, halter, ribbons
139
attached to breast, horse-hair and belly, as well as
their buckles are clearly discernible. Actaully,
only the following metallic details have survived:
rings, buckles, bridles. It can be concluded that,
apart from traditional bridles with cheek-pieces,
simple, quite modern bridles were also in use in
Georgia of the 1st cent. as a result of the contacts
with Rome. The analysis of representations on the
bone plaques proves that the Georgians were
familiar with curb-bit and snaffle-bit attached to
horse together with ordinary bridle in order to halt
the horse immediately and achieve swift
maneouvring.
There were no stirrups in the 1st cent., but
riders used to drive horses by spurring them,
especially during the battle.
Military equipment of the Iberians in the 1st
cent. fully met all the requirements and standards
of that period. This, in turn, predetermined, to
some extent the further internal and international
political and military successes achieved by the
kingdom of Iberia in the context of the
international competition of Rome and Parthia.
The most vivid example of those developments
was the territorial expansion of Kartli at the
expense of Albania and Armenia, as well as the
fact that by the beginning of the 2nd cent. the
borders of Iberia reached the Black Sea littoral.



http://dspace.nplg.gov.ge/bitstream/1234/238873/1/Dziebani_Saqartvelos_Arqeologiashi_2004_N13-14.pdf

[bismarck 1899]

Don't know if that was changed but I seem to have more rebellions now. Maybe bad rng but I think I got one reb army every turn as Ptotolomys

edit: I guess it was actually bad luck. I did not have many rebellions for the next 30 turns.

[realm56]

Don't know if that was changed but I seem to have more rebellions now. Maybe bad rng but I think I got one reb army every turn as Ptotolomys

I don't think the spawn rates have been changed in between post 2.35A patches. As Ptolemies, you do start with a reasonably large empire so your chances of at least one rebel stack popping up somewhere is higher than most, additionally, they start with a couple of troublesome regions (regions with around 8% chance of spawning a rebel army every turn) in the from of Syria kai Phonike (Akko) and Pamphylia (Side). Perhaps you did get unlucky with RNG which is not out of the question.

[Shoebopp]

I don't think the spawn rates have been changed in between post 2.35A patches. As Ptolemies, you do start with a reasonably large empire so your chances of at least one rebel stack popping up somewhere is higher than most, additionally, they start with a couple of troublesome regions (regions with around 8% chance of spawning a rebel army every turn) in the from of Syria kai Phonike (Akko) and Pamphylia (Side). Perhaps you did get unlucky with RNG which is not out of the question.

IIRC the new revolts script made it so that EVERY region in the game is a Troublesome Region. You're right about Pamphylia though, that region is affected by the separate Pisidian Raids script. So you have two sources of rebels in Pamphylia... and Phygia. Also Galatia still has its Galatian Independence script which spawns armies even more frequently. Combine all of this and controlling Asia Minor as a Hellenistic faction becomes a full time job for the unlucky FM who is tasked with keeping the region stable.

[QuintusSertorius]

I don't think the spawn rates have been changed in between post 2.35A patches. As Ptolemies, you do start with a reasonably large empire so your chances of at least one rebel stack popping up somewhere is higher than most, additionally, they start with a couple of troublesome regions (regions with around 8% chance of spawning a rebel army every turn) in the from of Syria kai Phonike (Akko) and Pamphylia (Side). Perhaps you did get unlucky with RNG which is not out of the question.

Actually, spawn rates in the revolts script went down after R1.

IIRC the new revolts script made it so that EVERY region in the game is a Troublesome Region. You're right about Pamphylia though, that region is affected by the separate Pisidian Raids script. So you have two sources of rebels in Pamphylia... and Phygia. Also Galatia still has its Galatian Independence script which spawns armies even more frequently. Combine all of this and controlling Asia Minor as a Hellenistic faction becomes a full time job for the unlucky FM who is tasked with keeping the region stable.

Not quite, there is still a Troublesome/non-Troublesome distinction in the revolts script, those 17 provinces have a higher frequency and shorter cooldown than everywhere else. Even they were reduced in frequency after R1.

[realm56]

As it currently stands, Kabyle and Ankara are not attractive locations for large scale Hellenistic Colonization during the Hellenistic Era and there was compelling historical reasons for this (There were more pressing locations in need of colonists as far as the Diadochi were concerned...). However, the following alterations to the Hellenistic Colony Pools in these two regions would make them far more attractive and make them more novel locations to install military garrisons as far as recruitment is concerned and symbolize the more hellenized and professionalized aspects of the native populations from whence these warriors came for these two regions as far as gameplay was concerned:

Kabyle:

• Katoikoi Thraikes: x1 or 2 for lvl 1 and x2 or 3 for lvl 2.
• x1 Raskumezenai or x1 Thraikioi Mezenai at lvl 2.

Ankara:

• Katoikoi Galatai: x2 for lvl 1 and lvl 2.
• x1 Ambaktoi Kington at lvl 2.

A % HP culture unlock restriction (Akin to the current system for Socii units in Italia for Rome) could also apply to these amended pools to ensure that they are not recruitable out of the gate as soon as the colony buildings are built.

[Shoebopp]

As it currently stands, Kabyle and Ankara are not attractive locations for large scale Hellenistic Colonization during the Hellenistic Era and there was compelling historical reasons for this (There were more pressing locations in need of colonists as far as the Diadochi were concerned...). However, the following alterations to the Hellenistic Colony Pools in these two regions would make them far more attractive and make them more novel locations to install military garrisons as far as recruitment is concerned and symbolize the more hellenized and professionalized aspects of the native populations from whence these warriors came for these two regions as far as gameplay was concerned:

Kabyle:

• Katoikoi Thraikes: x1 or 2 for lvl 1 and x2 or 3 for lvl 2.
• x1 Raskumezenai or x1 Thraikioi Mezenai at lvl 2.

Ankara:

• Katoikoi Galatai: x2 for lvl 1 and lvl 2.
• x1 Ambaktoi Kington at lvl 2.

A % HP culture unlock restriction (Akin to the current system for Socii units in Italia for Rome) could also apply to these amended pools to ensure that they are not recruitable out of the gate as soon as the colony buildings are built.

So, it's like you're still settling Hellenes, but these Hellenes diffuse their cultural AND military traditions to the local Thracians/Galatians, and as a result the locals now fight as heavier infantry? I'm all for this, except for one thing. Katakoi is synonymous to "colonists", Katakoi Thraikes and Katakoi Galatai are Thracian and Galatian Colonists, respectively. You wouldn't have natives "colonize" their own lands, would you? Although this could be one of those cases where the same unit represents different fighting styles/cultures/peoples. Such is the case in how the Bosporan Horse Archers recruitable in the Caucasus represent the local Caucasians and settler Siraces adopting heavier armament, not colonizing Bosporans necessarily. And in this case particularly the "Katakoi" are really just locals fighting using state-funded armament. As a side note I still laugh at how the Diadochi state equip a bunch of Thracians (7 armor before Thorakitai Reforms, 9.5 armor after) better than their pre-Thorakitai Thureos troops (4 armor) and post-Thorakitai Thorakitai (8 armor). Wonder if all these heavily armed Thracians will pull off a Spartacus

TDLR: Great idea!

[QuintusSertorius]

A % HP culture unlock restriction (Akin to the current system for Socii units in Italia for Rome) could also apply to these amended pools to ensure that they are not recruitable out of the gate as soon as the colony buildings are built.

Just on this point, culture-linked recruitment is a non-starter. I'm trying to remove that last vestige of it in the socit precisely because it doesn't work very well as a mechanic. Culture changes too quickly in the mod for it to be an effective switch.

[Pooploop]

Quintus, connected to the post that Shoebopp posted, how the heck does one know what path to take in developing a province? Playing as Makedonia, in the early game you can't even view the "top-tier" governments because you still need to unlock those by taking Syria. I kind of see three general trends: Hellenizing (so trying to get highest level of Hellenistic military settlers and highest level polis), tributary "allies" (more like vassals but pretty self-explanatory), and finally, the weird one, native governments (so highest level native governments with highest level foreign military settlers). I thought, back then, that it was the goal to get every province to Hellenize, and that tributary governments were a "softening" measure so to speak, an intermediary phase to quiet agitated, recently-conquered provinces to make them more amenable to Hellenic colonization. Now, that's obviously not the case. When does one decide to pick one of the three trends, and why even use tributary governments if the native government "trend" is better long term?

[Shoebopp]

Quintus, connected to the post that Shoebopp posted, how the heck does one know what path to take in developing a province? Playing as Makedonia, in the early game you can't even view the "top-tier" governments because you still need to unlock those by taking Syria. I kind of see three general trends: Hellenizing (so trying to get highest level of Hellenistic military settlers and highest level polis), tributary "allies" (more like vassals but pretty self-explanatory), and finally, the weird one, native governments (so highest level native governments with highest level foreign military settlers). I thought, back then, that it was the goal to get every province to Hellenize, and that tributary governments were a "softening" measure so to speak, an intermediary phase to quiet agitated, recently-conquered provinces to make them more amenable to Hellenic colonization. Now, that's obviously not the case. When does one decide to pick one of the three trends, and why even use tributary governments if the native government "trend" is better long term?

I can provide some answers. Makedonia's Imperial Reform is a little annoying, since like you said you can't build Supervised Hellenic Administration until so, but you can't build normal Hellenic Administration in provinces already containing valuable Hellenistic Military Colony. The best course of action is to bite your tongue in these initially colonized provinces (Ambrakia, Demetrias, Pergamon, etc), build a Military Administration there temporarily, and blitz for the Imperial Reforms. You can do so quite easily by amassing about 30,000 mnai, then buying Ipsos and Antiochea from the Seleucids in one turn. It kinda ruins the joy of conquering those regions yourself, but it's a solution for those who like building stuff. The other option is to destroy those military colonies and build Hellenic Administrations there before going on a length conquest of Mediterranean Anatolia. That's the "legit" way of doing so. You won't miss those colony points either, since after developing all of Hellas you will acquire 7 colony points per turn.

Tributary governments slowly increase your faction's culture. While the government converts to Eleutheroi by sapping away other cultures, your puppet governor himself boosts your faction's culture thanks to his above-average influence stemming from the client ruler trait. The overall result is that civil unrest decreases over time. Once civil unrest is low enough you can set this region on the path to hellenization by building factional governments and installing colonies and poleis. However, using client rulers comes with its drawbacks. First, the cultural conversion/civil stabilization is a low slower than just immediately colonizing the place. Second, having a client ruler decreases the number of family members the game engine allows you. Finally, tributary governments have fewer construction options and come with several income penalties.

The native government/foreign military colony combo is actually terrible long-term in areas formerly held by the Achaemenid empire. The latter converts to extremely high levels of Eastern Imperial, even chewing into Hellenistic Polities for a level 3 (up to 65% conversion) colony. And the troops provided by the foreign military garrisons don't actually originate from the region itself - their origin follows the Achaemenid practice of settling nearby troublesome populations into key regions. So Galatia's foreign military colony provides you with Akkadians, Thracians, and strangely enough some basic Galatians. On the other hand, a Tributary government in Galatia will provide you with the full selection of Galatians barring those colonists.

Overall, just build factional hellenistic governments whenever possible. You have a ton of colony points thanks to controlling Hellas, you can just send a well-educated FM who spent his early life in the level 2 school in Athenai to initially stabilize the region, and quite frankly, cultural conversion in EBII is satisfying as hell. If you really want a regional specialty to flesh out your army, build Tributary governments, but don't hire a client ruler. The happiness/law bonus from those governments will suffice. And if you really want troops far away from a controlled region, build foreign military governments only outside of the former Achaemenid Empire (and Egypt. Egypt is an exception). The regions feasibly within your control are Thrakia, Skythia, and Egypt, with other notable recruitment pools located in Italy, Sicily, Africa, Iberia, Gallia, Central Europe, Sauromatia, and Arabia.

[Pooploop]

Shoebopp, Supervised Hellenic Administration also gives a good native roster selection right?

[Shoebopp]

Shoebopp, Supervised Hellenic Administration also gives a good native roster selection right?

No, it's the Native and Supervised Native Administration that provides better local troops, but doesn't offer much in the way of advanced infrastructure. Hellenic and Supervised Hellenic Administrations provide one unit of Xystophoroi/Aspidotai and a few local levies, but almost all infrastructure are available.

[Pooploop]

So, let's say I wish to "preserve" the availability of Thracian or Illyrian rosters IN their native provinces...I'll have to go with sticking with tributary governments?

[Shoebopp]

So, let's say I wish to "preserve" the availability of Thracian or Illyrian rosters IN their native provinces...I'll have to go with sticking with tributary governments?

Correct, tributary and native governments. Native governments either without foreign military colonies in old Persian lands or with foreign military colonies outside of them are the way to go. That way you get excellent troops inside and around your regions. Best of both worlds.