Page 17 of 92 FirstFirst ... 7891011121314151617181920212223242526274267 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 1840

Thread: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

  1. #321

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser101 View Post
    two province Saka being able to afford much larger armies than a much wealthier player-controlled Baktria.
    Saka was sending more troops against me when I was Baktria than any other AI opponent I played against. Pahlava, even though they only had 2 and then 3/4 cities, never produced the sort of military power that Saka did.

    I think rather than looking at the overall AI scripts for small powers that it might be worth looking at Saka specifically because they were much harder to fight than anyone else. I had to routinely kill half and full stacks every few turns against them even when i knocked them back down to the two cities they start with. I actually assumed when playing that Saka was getting a special bonus due to the fact that human controlled Baktrians have been known to rush them down so as not to deal with the horse archers. With the horse archers being better in EB II I can only assume the motivation to erase Saka is higher than in previous EB.

  2. #322
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser101 View Post
    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...
    The only reason those 1-2 province factions have larger armies is because they're not using them. Bigger factions have much higher recruitment capabilities, but if they're using their armies then they'll use up units and have to recruit more.

    Not using it's armies properly is a CAI issue which is ever-evolving.

    Quote Originally Posted by Minrog View Post
    Saka was sending more troops against me when I was Baktria than any other AI opponent I played against. Pahlava, even though they only had 2 and then 3/4 cities, never produced the sort of military power that Saka did.

    I think rather than looking at the overall AI scripts for small powers that it might be worth looking at Saka specifically because they were much harder to fight than anyone else. I had to routinely kill half and full stacks every few turns against them even when i knocked them back down to the two cities they start with. I actually assumed when playing that Saka was getting a special bonus due to the fact that human controlled Baktrians have been known to rush them down so as not to deal with the horse archers. With the horse archers being better in EB II I can only assume the motivation to erase Saka is higher than in previous EB.
    Saka has no special bonuses. They start with a Royal Clan building, which has six recruitment slots. But so do lots of other top-tier government buildings that other factions start with.

  3. #323

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Post (quite old) by Terribly harmful name in the org. The idea is to make managing a large empire a difficult task, as it should be IMO. Ty

    Recently I have been deeply immersed into SS 6.1 for M2TW, which makes for a very interesting campaign and has a nice couple of submods that add precious realism to the game, one of them being Real Recruitment and the other being Byg's Grim Reality, which is the reason I post this.*

    BTW, Byg's mod can be found here in TWC:http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=106060

    BGR III, the latest stable release of the submod, is quite an interesting pick because it adds a whole deal of events and traits around the "Faction Zeal" of yours, which gradually decreases as an Empire grows in size. While the particular explanation by the modder for it is quite shady and not very clear ("vice", "corruption" & "sloth"), the effects are no less involving, challenging and realistic because they tend to make big empires as they should be - that is,*difficult to govern. You can find a detailed explanation of the system on the mod thread, but basically the more you expand, the less loyal, able and pious your generals become. Rulers of potentially big empires must have a very strong authority to retain the cohesion and integrity of what would be far easier to do with a one province backwater, and recruitment is greatly limited by thestanding*of the particular general with the rest of the faction and his "War Council" membership, which basically means he is a trusted and important general with power over the most important military affairs in the kingdom. While your Faction Zeal is High, this might not be a big thing, but as the Empire grows so does the potential for rebellion and unruly vassals, as well as the king\emperor\high chief's own power hungry motives cause recruitment to be centralized and placed upon the hands of fewer, capable and trusted generals. The loyalty of your main body of generals and family members also tends to go down, and so does the propensity for revolt and civil war inversely.*

    The main inspiration for this came when I was playing the HRE, which is a big faction at the start of the SS 6.1 timeframe; I was having a particular tough deal with my vassals and thought: "why not in EB?". Basically, this modification would do great work not only to stop the player from having an easy time at steamrolling the whole world once a certain power base is conquered, but also to simulate the often delicate intrigue and balance of power in large kingdoms such as the Seleucid Empire and a potential Achaemenid wannabe, as well as the late Imperium Romanum. Players will be forced to rely on their trusted generals far more to conduct their campaigns, and keep an almost constant watch on their distant vassals to check for their loyalties and potential risks.*

    Overall, I think that an adapted approach to EB in the guidelines of this mod would be a great innovation and add much fun and historically accurate challenge to our campaigns.

    Edit - By "vassal", I mean FM's\Generals entrusted to ruling a province.

  4. #324
    z3n's Avatar State of Mind
    Patrician Artifex Modding Staff Director

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,253

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    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...



    This is indeed inherent AI behaviour. The CAI is meant to read and execute defensive decisions before attacking ones, therefore its settlements are prioritized in order of the most important (being Pella in macedon's case) to the least important. As such this behaviour is to be expected and in fact encouraged, due to the fact the AI unlike the player has to fight its battles using autoresolve rather than on the tactical map and must keep its settlements sufficiently garrisoned and protected with this in mind.

    The financial situation of the AI is directly linked to economic growth and defensive ability, which 1 or 2 settlement factions take into account for their defensive decisions before invading. This is why we've decided to aid the economic growth of the AI if at all possible, in order to maximize the AI's usage of armies. At present I personally am satisfied with its behavior, as it does indeed strive to emulate a mildly proficient player during its two (macedon), three or even four front wars (for example the seleucids) however this does not mean I won't strive to increase its capacity to handle situations in the future.
    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)

  5. #325

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Hi...

    I was wondering what do you guys think about the idea of tying the availability of recruits to the region population... in a way that when you recruit a unit, the population of city drops. This could be used to represent the man power available.

    Ty

  6. #326
    QuintusSertorius's Avatar EBII Hod Carrier
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,376

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucio Domicio Aureliano View Post
    Hi...

    I was wondering what do you guys think about the idea of tying the availability of recruits to the region population... in a way that when you recruit a unit, the population of city drops. This could be used to represent the man power available.

    Ty
    To be honest, that sounds like a lot of painful additional scripting to replicate a feature of EB1 that isn't necessary. We have refresh rates for each unit set in the EDB, the only thing that would do is result in the AI depopulating all their settlements as they recruit with every penny they have.

  7. #327

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    To be honest, that sounds like a lot of painful additional scripting to replicate a feature of EB1 that isn't necessary. We have refresh rates for each unit set in the EDB, the only thing that would do is result in the AI depopulating all their settlements as they recruit with every penny they have.

    After some consideration, I think you might be right... it seems unnecessary indeed. After all population size is, in a way, taken in account, since refresh rates increase in accordance with your infrastructure (like barracks, for instance), right?

    Ty

  8. #328
    Biarchus
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    637

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    You know how when playing as Rome and you get a popup of Rhegium needing to be pacified as they are traitors, then after conquering it you get another popup stating Rome's good name has been restored. Is it possible to have that popup when you are playing another faction? For example, playing as Pergamon, it would be cool to one turn see a pop up saying Rome had avenged itself of the traitors in Rhegium. Is it possible to make those popups(events) available to every nation instead of the popups being nation specific?

  9. #329

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    To understand the season it's obligatory to click on a FM and check his traits. I think due to M2TW's 2 seasons you cannot write just autumn or summer at the icon above the campaign minimap. To overcome the issue of right clicking on a FM, how would you guys feel about giving a basic notification each turn that's going to say which season it is? You can include or not include a short text but the main idea is to get a quick small notification each turn stating the season which should be read without doing anything extra and can be cancelled with a single right click..

    Am I the only one who thinks right clicking and scrolling down to a FM feels extra?

    The assassins right now are completely useless feature for me right now with the only possible agent training assassination having success chance around 33%. Doubling that chance just for the player but not for AI, is it doable? About AI assassin spam you guys are right, it's very gamebreaking but 66% chance for a player assassin to kill an unimportant figure for training should be okay I think. You shouldn't limit the player for the stuff he can abuse since everyone is playing this game with their own houserules and the main point of the game relies heavily on the player experiencing a faction. Increase the assassination chances and if the player chooses to assassinate all members of AS in 6 turns, it's his bad for his own game..

    How about calling assassins "assassination team" or something similar to represent that it's a network rather than a single man?

    How about spying network or network of spies or something similar because of the same logic?

    I feel like spying chances are pretty cool and balanced right now but would it be possible to increase their line of sight? I feel it's a bit narrow ranged right now and learning what's happening around without details (army units, leaders, agent traits, city stuff) should be pretty basic.

    Include many more loading screens and quotations for the Autumn Release. No need to read and see the same stuff often. If the research is time consuming they can just be implemented from EBI.
    Why not include unit descriptions with the unit model image at loading screens? Would be easy to implement and it's good for seeing new units, having chance to explore the unit diversity.
    This all, of course shouldn't be done if it has any effect on the game performance.

    Bonus idea: I don't know how the team or other players feel about the finance issues right now but if the general consensus is that it's too easy, a minimal upkeep cost for patrols (watchtowers) can be added. Arranging people and provisions for those people should require resources.. At my boii campaign the watchtowers were replaced with small village icons, Hayasdan has literal tower icons, small village one is fine but for Hayasdan and other factions sharing the watchtower icon model, would you guys think of making it two distanced tower models rather than a single tower? More like patrols loving around the the place kinda feel. Is it enginely possible?
    Last edited by Barnabas; November 07, 2015 at 03:27 AM.

  10. #330

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Barnabas View Post
    To understand the season it's obligatory to click on a FM and check his traits. I think due to M2TW's 2 seasons you cannot write just autumn or summer at the icon above the campaign minimap. To overcome the issue of right clicking on a FM, how would you guys feel about giving a basic notification each turn that's going to say which season it is? You can include or not include a short text but the main idea is to get a quick small notification each turn stating the season which should be read without doing anything extra and can be cancelled with a single right click..

    Am I the only one who thinks right clicking and scrolling down to a FM feels extra?
    Yes I grind end turn like it's my job, and I would hate to have to do dozens of extra clicks to dismiss that message. Usually I don't need to check what season it is all that often, because I tend to play around the temperate zone, where snow clearly marks winter, and then as I said I end turn very frequently so it's only a few seconds later that I know it's Spring, etc. Sometimes I stop and check whether it's Summer or Autumn if I was doing other things and got distracted, but I'd much rather have to click to look it up every 15-20 turns than click to dismiss it every turn. Your preferences may vary if you find yourself checking the date more frequently than I do.

  11. #331

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Construction cost and economy policy

    1.Formalize
    The unit costs are formalized by a set of formulas, it is a good feature.
    The same thing should be done to formalize the construction cost and time for buildings.

    2.Effect of economy policy
    Due to the limits of the game engine, the economy system in the game is at best a "planned economy".
    Every building has to be built by the government, the people (if there is any) can't build a market
    or improve their own farm.

    Historically, some "building"(farm,market) require little government involvement, others (large port, mine)
    require some level of government involvement. This factor should be considered.

    I think the construction cost and time should not represent the TOTAL cost and time required to
    build a building, but only part of that which has government involvement.



    Government "building" should have a construction cost modifier in addition to law,happiness,farm,trade.
    Different governments with different modifiers (either positive or negative) representing the effect
    of their economy policies on the development of various type of buildings.

    There is a construction time modifier in RTW (used by a wonder), not sure whether it is still there in M2TW.

  12. #332

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Have you discussed the current state of provinces? It feels like there are many tightly-packed settlements in Gaul, but the eastern Mediterranean shore feels empty and not nearly as important as it was during the early hellenistic era. Levant lacks some major centres in my opinion. I'm not much of a historian, but what if you added Byblos/Sidon/Tyre in Phoenicia?

    I also thought about Lysimachia or Abydos, can they be represented by minor settlements while, say, Thermon has a region of it's own? I'd even argue whether Sparta was of great significance at the time, regardless of how massively popular and overrated it is in modern culture. What do historians you talked with think?

    Would you consider removing some provinces to make space for major cities elsewhere in the distant future?

  13. #333

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by wojtekimbier View Post
    Have you discussed the current state of provinces? It feels like there are many tightly-packed settlements in Gaul, but the eastern Mediterranean shore feels empty and not nearly as important as it was during the early hellenistic era. Levant lacks some major centres in my opinion. I'm not much of a historian, but what if you added Byblos/Sidon/Tyre in Phoenicia?

    I also thought about Lysimachia or Abydos, can they be represented by minor settlements while, say, Thermon has a region of it's own? I'd even argue whether Sparta was of great significance at the time, regardless of how massively popular and overrated it is in modern culture. What do historians you talked with think?

    Would you consider removing some provinces to make space for major cities elsewhere in the distant future?
    The autumn release already has an increased number of provinces in illyria at least(not sure if there are changes elsewhere), so far as I know. I am just a fan, however. The densely packed nature of western europe has been discussed as well, and I think that might be one of the areas where we might see province reductions. Remember however, that EB is about giving all cultures as fair a depiction as possible, which is unquestionably a work in progress at the moment.

    Sidon had been in EB1 but im unsure as to whether we'll see more provinces added to that area of the levant. Again, like I said, I'm not an authority here.

    Sparta was too important in the anti-macedonian war effort and too militarily active in Hellas at the game's starting time to be removed, I believe--it's also in a nice location for coding, as one of the issues with adding another city to Hellas is the lack of space. Just read the EB year in history if you want to see sparta's potential historical significance, or read about sparta during this time period yourself. Sparta and it's military come up A LOT in the EB this year in history. Again, I'm not an EB team historian, so my word is less reliable than it could be.

    Remember as well, that the EB team has a more realistic envisioning of the spartans; Sparta isnt just in the game because people will recognize it, it's there because it was an important city. EB1's spartan hoplitai were added to represent the spartans themselves accurately, and were a re-imagining of CA's silly robe-wearing sarissa-using spartans; this was done for historical accuracy, and not for flash, as is generally the case with EB.

    I apologize if I seemed rude in anyway , your suggestion on the current state of provinces is a valid(but already noted, I believe) criticism

  14. #334

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    There are some changes on the map coming for this release, like mentioned before (most notably 2 extra provinces in Illyria - what i really like about it is that now you can control the adriatic as the Romans without going deep into the balkans like it was for a big part of our timeframe). About the extra provinces i'm not sure what the current mindset is, but it's probably something we will look at after 2.1 is released

  15. #335

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Is it possible, through scripting or otherwise, to make it so that when the army of one faction enters the realm of another faction — unless that faction is an ally/vassal — that doing so is considered an act of war (i.e., invasion)?

    AFAIK in M2TW, the AI is allowed to trample all over your lands or park a "neutral" army directly outside of your capital without suffering any consequences or loss of reputation. I wonder if there is any way around this. Apparently in Empire and later titles, AI armies don't do this because it automatically triggers a "declare war" flag....

  16. #336

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by HaHawk View Post
    Is it possible, through scripting or otherwise, to make it so that when the army of one faction enters the realm of another faction — unless that faction is an ally/vassal — that doing so is considered an act of war (i.e., invasion)?

    AFAIK in M2TW, the AI is allowed to trample all over your lands or park a "neutral" army directly outside of your capital without suffering any consequences or loss of reputation. I wonder if there is any way around this. Apparently in Empire and later titles, AI armies don't do this because it automatically triggers a "declare war" flag....
    I think this is a time period-based decision rather than a new technology thing. I can't remember what happens in Shogun, but in Rome 2, you can enter other territories with your armies and merely suffer a relationship penalty (as you do in M2TW). They used the 'no entry without access or Declaration of War' method in Empire, but skipped it in R2TW for historical reasons, I think. My assumption is that it has something to do with the land being more developed and tightly controlled by a centralized bureaucracy with an enhanced sense of "nation" that there would be very clear borders and transgressions in the Empire period that would not be looked on as severely in the Roman / Medieval periods. I don't really know of any historical basis for making this assertion, but it seems to be what CA did. Attila, for example, uses the same system of being able to enter borders without instant war.

  17. #337

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    I am for the changes in Illyria, as it seemed too empty anyways. Since we all know by now that the next release would include an "Illyrian" faction it was a necessity.
    But the argument remains.
    Too many Western European cities, not enough in the Levant.
    IMO Jerusalem and/or Sidon/Tyre should be included.
    I've also made a case for Amphipolis in Greece.
    In all my campaings Ipeiros, Macedonia and KH are fighting an everlasting war with Macedonia being the first victim nine times out of ten.
    The addition of Amphipolis would give the Macedons a fighting chance.

  18. #338
    Cohors_Evocata's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    On the crossroads
    Posts
    762

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    I would suggest re-adding (if possible) the information boxes about a faction military that pop up when you hover over their symbol in the campaign selection screen. Whilst some factions have pretty well-known strengths and weakness (e.g. Rome relying mostly on heavy infantry in the form of the legions), but I think new players might appreciate the extra information for several relatively unknown factions, such as Saba. A description for them might look something like this:

    HTML Code:
    Core of dependable South Arabian infantry, which is predominantly reliant on the spear and the bow, but lacking in early cavalry choices and somewhat lightly armored. Can later get access to Ethiopian and tribal Arabian auxiliaries.
    This somewhat of a rough draft and could obviously be adapted to the new releases as new units are added, but I think this forms a functional example. I'd be willing to write them myself (with feedback, of course), but tbh I'm not sure if this is even a feature in M2:TW or if it was dropped after Rome I.

    Secondarily, I still support the creation of a frontal attack animation for sword-armed cavalry to help them against cavalry armed with an overhead spear. IIRC it's still possible to beat Carthaginian noble cavalry with Camillan Equites in a one-on-one frontal engagement and I don't think that ought to be the case.
    I tend to edit my posts once or several times after writing and uploading them. Please keep this in mind when reading a recent post of mine. Also, should someone, for some unimaginable reason, wish to rep me, please add your username in the process, so I can at least know whom to be grateful towards.

    My thanks in advance.

  19. #339

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Doulkus Pontikus View Post
    I am for the changes in Illyria, as it seemed too empty anyways. Since we all know by now that the next release would include an "Illyrian" faction it was a necessity.
    But the argument remains.
    Too many Western European cities, not enough in the Levant.
    IMO Jerusalem and/or Sidon/Tyre should be included.
    I've also made a case for Amphipolis in Greece.
    In all my campaings Ipeiros, Macedonia and KH are fighting an everlasting war with Macedonia being the first victim nine times out of ten.
    The addition of Amphipolis would give the Macedons a fighting chance.
    I do agree that makedon is getting too ed by the KH in most of my games, and that western europe is perhaps too tightly packed--I just wish more province suggestions were less pro-hellenic in nature. Sorry if that viewpoint riles anybody up =/.

  20. #340

    Default Re: Fans suggestion thread for future releases

    Quote Originally Posted by Doulkus Pontikus View Post
    I am for the changes in Illyria, as it seemed too empty anyways. Since we all know by now that the next release would include an "Illyrian" faction it was a necessity.
    But the argument remains.
    Too many Western European cities, not enough in the Levant.
    IMO Jerusalem and/or Sidon/Tyre should be included.
    I've also made a case for Amphipolis in Greece.
    In all my campaings Ipeiros, Macedonia and KH are fighting an everlasting war with Macedonia being the first victim nine times out of ten.
    The addition of Amphipolis would give the Macedons a fighting chance.
    Weird that you know about us adding an Illyrian faction and i don't despite being a team member

Posting Permissions

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