Page 16 of 92 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516171819202122232425264166 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 320 of 1840

Thread: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

  1. #301

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Genghis Skahn View Post
    I'd like to suggest something for the Teutonic System.

    These are some of my thoughts from a 2.05b Arevaci playthrough. Currently I feel that it's too hard for Teutonic system factions to get new FMs, and that perhaps some sort of script or something can be developed to increase the likelihood of adoption events?? I lost 3/5 FMs to Qarthadastim assassins in the early game(nearly game overing me) before I could even recruit an assassin to counter them of my own--before I even had the money to buy one, or a city to buy them from! Besides that, while the number of my cities kept growing(luckily my faction leader proved too difficult to kill for the assassins, otherwise I was defenseless) my number of governors didnt(I still only had 2 FMs), leaving me unable to garrison newly conquered cities with the governors I'm supposed to have if I want increased culture and to be historical with my nation building. I don't have any serious problems with the teutonic system other than this, there simply must be a better and more reliable way for us Teutonic users to get more family members over time--because they're not as reliably replaced like factions which have children. I think there seems to be a cap on FMs related to cities possessed(adoption events tend to happen more frequently after a member has died or new territories have been conquered I think), this makes transitions between governors also more unpleasant, as a FM must die before a new "slot" opens, and even then there is only a chance of adoption. We cant get incumbent governors to groom their sons to take their places as governors, putting us at a disadvantage. I'm simply not getting as many FMs as I need or as I should have I think, and I think it makes Teutonic factions UP to play as.

    I did end up getting a few more FMs over time following these assassinations, enough for me to govern a few of my iberian cities(but not nearly all or most of them), but it came too little and too late. After capturing 5 territories in western north africa, I only had 2 new FMs spawn(one was after my faction leader died, so technically I only got one new family member in total), despite needing several to properly convert culture to the 3 camps I conquered(where migration governments cant be installed and only allied oligarchies can be built)

    Sorry if my request seems ridiculous in any way
    Full support to this.

    I always want every city to have its governor because it is what makes sense. Some are good other not that much but it feels so unnatural and ahistorical to not having someone in charge in each province and ready to prepare a defence in case of attack. Its difficult always at the start, although with familly trees tends to get better as the game goes with teutonic in the best case you are gonna be lacking 2-3 governors (not even dream of having people left for campaign armies) and often a lot more. I remember sometimes having 2-3 FM only for like 10 cities and that was one or two hundred years into the game

    We will either find a way, or make one.



  2. #302

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    I cant enjoy playing factions that use the current teutonic system due to the points already stated. I agree that something needs to be done to improve it.

  3. #303
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,401

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    If it's something that can be changed (especially if it's just a number someone that determines the ratio) I'm not opposed to it in principle. Critical thing is I don't know how you'd do that - so if anyone does then it's certainly something we'd look into.

  4. #304
    Foederatus
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Northern South America
    Posts
    28

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Hi.
    About the teutonic system I had the same issue and then a different one. I have been playing with Aedui for 60 or so turns on version 2.04 and when my FL died the supposed to be next FH took the place as FL, because my FH was a low influence drunkard (but I had train him as a great warrior, and have some authority when he woult take command of the faction) he continued to be faction Heir and I had a Carnute FL (that's fine we are a democratic confederacy), but then as I got 8 provinces and just 4 characters my FH started to pick adoptions and all of them are Auedui (I have 3 of them now), but my older characters have more than 50 and no kids whatsoever (no other tribe younger characters) so I am concerned there will be just Aedui and no other tribe represented in 40 turns. As far as I remember the adopted characters are assigned to the older character until he gets 4 children and the the system goes to fill the next older character with 4 guys, etc...
    So the proposal/question: Is it possible for the initial guys to have some children of their own (at least daughters) so not only the older characters gets adopted kids and that way have a more diverse confederacy? It is a shame to see the effort put in creating the tribal traits to be lost in the first generation...

  5. #305

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Later AI army composition is about 75-90 % levies with no FM , if anything can be done about that to get to a 50-50 ratio.
    Most armies in the Greece area no matter who you fight field 5-10 Psiloi 2 Thureporoi maybe 1-2 Hoplites & Skirmisher Cav.
    Not exactly ideal for attacking cities yet that's what they do . Carthage & Rome along with the Iberian Area field pretty decent armies , actually most of the west for that matter but the east just becomes 90 % levies.

  6. #306
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,401

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by rovert View Post
    Later AI army composition is about 75-90 % levies with no FM , if anything can be done about that to get to a 50-50 ratio.
    Most armies in the Greece area no matter who you fight field 5-10 Psiloi 2 Thureporoi maybe 1-2 Hoplites & Skirmisher Cav.
    Not exactly ideal for attacking cities yet that's what they do . Carthage & Rome along with the Iberian Area field pretty decent armies , actually most of the west for that matter but the east just becomes 90 % levies.
    Is the AI mostly building Allied Governments? Because that would explain the ratio, especially if they never bother upgrading to the second tier.

    It may also be a consequence of the new money script; if they're poorer they may splurge on levies when they have money. Though it shouldn't be overriding the recruit_priority_offset.

    There is also the issue that most of the eastern roster is levies (apart from cavalry); we don't have units like Kardakes or Galatianised Infantry in the test build.
    Last edited by QuintusSertorius; October 26, 2015 at 08:59 AM.

  7. #307

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Is the AI mostly building Allied Governments? Because that would explain the ratio, especially if they never bother upgrading to the second tier.

    It may also be a consequence of the new money script; if they're poorer they may splurge on levies when they have money. Though it shouldn't be overriding the recruit_priority_offset.

    There is also the issue that most of the eastern roster is levies (apart from cavalry); we don't have units like Kardakes or Galatianised Infantry in the test build.
    My guess would be the Governments , they almost always have Allied built when they take territory & from what ive seen there is alot more levies to come .

  8. #308

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    As much as I would like to see another Hellenic faction (Syracuse, by preference), I would rather if you implemented the Etruscan faction. They were a fascinating people and fought much in the style of the Hellenes so the roster would be similar as the Hellenic one with some minor additions, such as the Etruscan chariots and axemen.

  9. #309

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Can we please get rid of the AI having infinite free money? It's unbalancing and leads to extremely unrealistic situations like a two province Saka being able to afford much larger armies than a much wealthier player-controlled Baktria.
    Additionally, it means that they are able to spawn endless supplies of replacements regardless of their economic situation, which is incredibly unrealistic.
    Last edited by Laser101; October 31, 2015 at 07:35 PM.

  10. #310
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,401

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser101 View Post
    Can we please get rid of the AI having infinite free money? It's unbalancing and leads to extremely unrealistic situations like a two province Saka being able to afford much larger armies than a much wealthier player-controlled Baktria.
    Additionally, it means that they are able to spawn endless supplies of replacements regardless of their economic situation, which is incredibly unrealistic.
    It doesn't have "infinite free money". It has:
    1) Debt relief to push it back out of negative (when below -5k they get +8k)
    2) A small kings purse bonus when they shrink below a certain size (topping at 3k a turn if they have only one settlement)
    3) A "spring bonus" (ie every four turns) of 12k-25k - but only if they have less than a minimum number of settlements (usually 5).

    There are limits to what we can do with the AI, it is hardcoded to prioritise recruitment above all else. That means it spends almost all the money it makes on recruiting and going into debt. The alternative is AI factions that go passive when they run out of money. That isn't an alternative - do you really want them doing nothing? That's pretty unrealistic too, with the added bonus of making for a dull game.

    As for the Saka, for example, we don't have a good way of representing the fact that steppe peoples were self-sustaining for the most part. You can't make units have lower upkeep for some factions and not others.

  11. #311
    z3n's Avatar State of Mind
    Patrician Artifex Modding Staff Director

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,314

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    It's unbalancing
    I should point out that every single mod out there that I've ever played (even in RTW) has something like this implemented simply because it is in fact balancing rather than unbalancing. EBII's is actually pretty gentle compared to some I've seen which feature continuous help no matter the circumstance.

    There is literally nothing we can do in regards to the AI and how it interacts with its financial state, all of that is hardcoded behaviour except for a few 'minor' changes to its personality i.e. what building types it prioritizes over others and even then that often gets overridden by unit recruitment priorities and an inability to handle or control debt. Keep in mind the AI just like you starts off in debt often, and since it won't ever disband its units etc etc... It will simply drop straight into endless debt while choosing to defend its cities and never really take opportunity to expand.
    Contributor in The AI Workshop
    AI/Game Mechanics Developer for Europa Barbaroum II
    Developer of The Northern Crusades
    Retired Lead Developer for Classical Age Total War
    Rome: Total Realism Animation Developer
    RTW Workshop Assistance/MTW2 AI Tutorial & Assistance
    Broken Crescent Submod (M2TW)/IB VGR Submod (BI)/Animation (RTW/BI/ALX)/TATW PCP Submod (M2TW)/TATW DaC Submod (M2TW)/DeI Submod (TWR2)/SS6.4 Northern European UI Mod (M2TW)

  12. #312

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    It doesn't have "infinite free money". It has:
    1) Debt relief to push it back out of negative (when below -5k they get +8k)
    2) A small kings purse bonus when they shrink below a certain size (topping at 3k a turn if they have only one settlement)
    3) A "spring bonus" (ie every four turns) of 12k-25k - but only if they have less than a minimum number of settlements (usually 5).

    There are limits to what we can do with the AI, it is hardcoded to prioritise recruitment above all else. That means it spends almost all the money it makes on recruiting and going into debt. The alternative is AI factions that go passive when they run out of money. That isn't an alternative - do you really want them doing nothing? That's pretty unrealistic too, with the added bonus of making for a dull game.

    As for the Saka, for example, we don't have a good way of representing the fact that steppe peoples were self-sustaining for the most part. You can't make units have lower upkeep for some factions and not others.
    The problem with this is that it means that AI factions can recruit a large group of units every year and never have any issues with maintenance, regardless of their economic state. It also means that they can easily replace their entire army immediately after it is completely wiped out. This makes battles rather unrealistically pointless.
    My specific issue is with AI factions being able to afford multiple full stacks in situations where a player would be unable to afford any. This breaks game balance.
    The nomadic and barbarian factions should probably get a large number of free-upkeep units in settlements/camps to represent that their troops are not consuming supplies while not on campaign.

  13. #313

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser101 View Post
    The problem with this is that it means that AI factions can recruit a large group of units every year and never have any issues with maintenance, regardless of their economic state. It also means that they can easily replace their entire army immediately after it is completely wiped out. This makes battles rather unrealistically pointless.
    My specific issue is with AI factions being able to afford multiple full stacks in situations where a player would be unable to afford any. This breaks game balance.
    The nomadic and barbarian factions should probably get a large number of free-upkeep units in settlements/camps to represent that their troops are not consuming supplies while not on campaign.
    I have to disagree on that, according to my latest play in 2.05c the AI does recruit massive armies but if those stacks were destroyed within the first 12-30 turns, depending on the units replenishment rate, the AI would field fewer and fewer armies. Although they have income their manpower certainly isn't unlimited. It is true that due to this small factions can maintain relatively large armies but once they are defeated it will be hard for them to recover the losses and in the mean time you still could recover your monetary losses due to the campaign. Battles become frequent yes, but not pointless. Utilizing strategical points to block enemy advances and unit preservation breaks those AI advantages.

  14. #314
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,401

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser101 View Post
    The problem with this is that it means that AI factions can recruit a large group of units every year and never have any issues with maintenance, regardless of their economic state. It also means that they can easily replace their entire army immediately after it is completely wiped out. This makes battles rather unrealistically pointless.
    My specific issue is with AI factions being able to afford multiple full stacks in situations where a player would be unable to afford any. This breaks game balance.
    The nomadic and barbarian factions should probably get a large number of free-upkeep units in settlements/camps to represent that their troops are not consuming supplies while not on campaign.
    As CenturionMarius said, the caps on unit refresh are the same for player and AI, unless the AI has lots of settlements (and even then it's constrained) they don't have unlimited manpower, even if they never go bankrupt. Furthermore, most of the slots to recruit are available in winter, and they don't have lots of money til spring (that's deliberate). The mercenary pools are similarly constrained in size and refresh, no matter how much money you have, there are no infinite sources of troops.

    We are not going to get away from the AI being able to afford units in situations where the player cannot. There is no way around that besides letting the AI go into debt, which is it unable to manage its way out of. The AI has no economic management skills whatsoever, no matter what AI "personality" you choose every single one of them will bankrupt itself by spending every penny it has on recruiting units, as long as it has units available.

    As for your last point, the AI never stations it's units in its settlements, so free upkeep slots are largely irrelevant.

  15. #315

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    If attainable, one idea that might be interesting is the follow: only a blockade by land and sea would starve a coastal city. It would enhance the importance of the navy and would in accordance to the EB team guide lines.

    Thx
    Last edited by Lucio Domicio Aureliano; November 03, 2015 at 11:53 AM.

  16. #316
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,401

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucio Domicio Aureliano View Post
    If attainable, one idea that might be interesting is the follow: only a blockade by land and sea would starve a coastal city. It would enhance the importance of the navy and would in accordance to the EB team guide lines.

    Thx
    If it's technically possible in the M2TW engine, I'd be in favour. Though it is something that would benefit the player since the chances of the AI properly co-ordinating navies and armies is slim.

  17. #317

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    If it's technically possible in the M2TW engine, I'd be in favour. Though it is something that would benefit the player since the chances of the AI properly co-ordinating navies and armies is slim.

    I agree, this is why i believe the AI should be exempt from coordinating in such a fashion...

    Thx

  18. #318

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Unfortunately this is AFAIK not something we can in any way track in the script, therefore alas impossible on M2TW:K engine.

    ...................................................

  19. #319

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by V.T. Marvin View Post
    Unfortunately this is AFAIK not something we can in any way track in the script, therefore alas impossible on M2TW:K engine.
    That's unfortunate. Very well, house rules it is . Thank you V.T. Marvin
    Last edited by Lucio Domicio Aureliano; November 03, 2015 at 03:31 PM.

  20. #320

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    As CenturionMarius said, the caps on unit refresh are the same for player and AI, unless the AI has lots of settlements (and even then it's constrained) they don't have unlimited manpower, even if they never go bankrupt. Furthermore, most of the slots to recruit are available in winter, and they don't have lots of money til spring (that's deliberate). The mercenary pools are similarly constrained in size and refresh, no matter how much money you have, there are no infinite sources of troops.

    We are not going to get away from the AI being able to afford units in situations where the player cannot. There is no way around that besides letting the AI go into debt, which is it unable to manage its way out of. The AI has no economic management skills whatsoever, no matter what AI "personality" you choose every single one of them will bankrupt itself by spending every penny it has on recruiting units, as long as it has units available.

    As for your last point, the AI never stations it's units in its settlements, so free upkeep slots are largely irrelevant.
    My main problem is with the issue that I frequently see AI factions with only one or two provinces who nevertheless have several full stacks of troops. The reason why this is an issue is that it leads to 1-2 province factions having larger armies than the Seleukids, Rome or Carthage, which doesn't make sense. The other point is that they never seem to do anything with them; e.g. I frequently see Makedonia lose its southern provinces to KH, yet not bother trying to retake them despite having a huge army sitting around near Pella. However, this is probably an inherent AI behaviour problem...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •