Fans suggestion thread for future releases

[QuintusSertorius]

Hi,

I am playing with battles on VH, and typically when I charge a low-tier Greek javelin unit with heavy lancer cavalry, it can sometimes take minutes for that low tier javelin unit to rout. Is this a result of the battle difficulty? I really don't like playing on lower battle difficulties considering how easy it is to exploit the AI to begin with.

Yes, that's a result of battle difficulty, which increases defensive skill, morale and stamina of opposing units. The battle mechanics were balanced on Medium difficulty, not Very Hard.

In any case, you shouldn't be leaving cavalry in melee, but pulling them out and re-charging until the unit they face breaks.

[Jurand of Cracow]

Yes, that's a result of battle difficulty, which increases morale and stamina of opposing units.

What's the value of these bonuses in the M2TW? I recall it was +4 for Hard in both variables in RTW (and +7 for VH).

No, Saka, Numidia and either Sweboz/Lugiones are harder.

Pontos is in a rich location with access to good and varied units.

Hi QS, this brings me to the question: are you going to update the descriptions of different campaigns in 2.35? (eg. Hayasdan is still described as Nigh-Impossible, afair.
If not, maybe something like a first-glance description of the factions on TWC webpage?

Besides - are the Ptolemaioi getting any change in the 2.35?

cheers
JoC

[QuintusSertorius]

What's the value of these bonuses in the M2TW? I recall it was +4 for Hard in both variables in RTW (and +7 for VH).

No idea, we've never been able to confirm exactly what their impact is.

Hi QS, this brings me to the question: are you going to update the descriptions of different campaigns in 2.35? (eg. Hayasdan is still described as Nigh-Impossible, afair.
If not, maybe something like a first-glance description of the factions on TWC webpage?

I think Cohors_Evocata might have had a look, but I'm not sure now.

Besides - are the Ptolemaioi getting any change in the 2.35?

cheers
JoC

Their missions both now work properly. There's a new hardcoded emnity between Philadelphos and Gonatas, as long as one of them is the human player (same as that between Pyrrhos and Gonatas).

Otherwise there's the adjustment of Ethiopian pools.

[Sudden Death]

Yes, that's a result of battle difficulty, which increases defensive skill, morale and stamina of opposing units. The battle mechanics were balanced on Medium difficulty, not Very Hard.

In any case, you shouldn't be leaving cavalry in melee, but pulling them out and re-charging until the unit they face breaks.

I mean I don't typically leave lancers in melee, I'm just pointing out that when that occurs, skirmishers on VH have superhuman morale.

Plus historically even though the hetairoi are primarily shock cavalry, they were also extremely formidable in close combat against infantry formations. Their kopis was particularly deadly when used from above. I can provide the relevant sources if you want extra information.

But I realise that the AI units on VH get very big bonuses.

For the sack of combat realism, would you recommend that perhaps I opt for VH/M instead?

[Jurand of Cracow]

... skirmishers on VH have superhuman morale. ... But I realise that the AI units on VH get very big bonuses... For the sack of combat realism, would you recommend that perhaps I opt for VH/M instead?

As I understand, in the EBII framework the AI bonuses become much more important than in the other mods. This is because EBII has very low initial morale for all units as compared to the other mods (I reckon it to be 20-40% of those other mods). I mean, any +1 buff for morale is much more important than in the other mods: moving from 2 to 3 morale has more impact than moving from 6 to 7. The lower tier the units is, the more important the effect is.

A related issue is that the generals' +morale bonuses get also more important. I mean: +1 morale in EBII make a bigger change on the battlefield (again, two-three times, maybe five times, however you'd count it) than the same +1 in the other mods. It should be viewed in combination with fact that the human player is better at sending the general-led armies to the battles and perhaps also at nurturing generals with high influence (a side issue is that it makes it also important to have a precise information on the true Influence for the player). To some extent it is negated by the fact that +morale bonus (applied to all the friendly units on the battlefield) has been translated in the EBII into +Chivalry (called here "Influence") bonus (applied only to the units in proximity of the general).

Three issues I don't know:
1) what kind of the special bonuses do the AI generals get in EBII - I think they should get it, just to level up the playing field with the player.
2) if the EBII team found a trick to prevent the AI from using non-general-led armies (I haven't seen any mod that would achieve it in the M2TW engine).
3) I'm not sure if all +morale benefits have been translated into +Influence, or there're still some left outside this system (I've had a look at it one year ago, as seen in that linked entry).

Anyway, I personally play battles at H, just for the AI to make up with the described mechanism and with the very basic fact that the player can learn on his own mistakes while the M2TW AI is actually not an AI - in the sense it cannot learn.

And I may be missing something, this is just an outsider view :-)

(besides - thanks QS for the answer)
JoC

[QuintusSertorius]

I mean I don't typically leave lancers in melee, I'm just pointing out that when that occurs, skirmishers on VH have superhuman morale.

Plus historically even though the hetairoi are primarily shock cavalry, they were also extremely formidable in close combat against infantry formations. Their kopis was particularly deadly when used from above. I can provide the relevant sources if you want extra information.

But I realise that the AI units on VH get very big bonuses.

For the sack of combat realism, would you recommend that perhaps I opt for VH/M instead?

As I said, we've balanced the combat mechanics on Medium difficulty. That is the recommended battle difficult, not Very Hard. The whole point is that while some units will rout easily, they will rally and return to the fight if allowed to flee.

Instead of the previous situation where routs only happened once a unit was so depleted, they'd never rally. And every battle was a slog. Light cavalry especially will flee quite easily, but return time and again, since they don't need many losses to bug out.

As I understand, in the EBII framework the AI bonuses become much more important than in the other mods. This is because EBII has very low initial morale for all units as compared to the other mods (I reckon it to be 20-40% of those other mods). I mean, any +1 buff for morale is much more important than in the other mods: moving from 2 to 3 morale has more impact than moving from 6 to 7. The lower tier the units is, the more important the effect is.

A related issue is that the generals' +morale bonuses get also more important. I mean: +1 morale in EBII make a bigger change on the battlefield (again, two-three times, maybe five times, however you'd count it) than the same +1 in the other mods. It should be viewed in combination with fact that the human player is better at sending the general-led armies to the battles and perhaps also at nurturing generals with high influence (a side issue is that it makes it also important to have a precise information on the true Influence for the player). To some extent it is negated by the fact that +morale bonus (applied to all the friendly units on the battlefield) has been translated in the EBII into +Chivalry (called here "Influence") bonus (applied only to the units in proximity of the general).

Three issues I don't know:
1) what kind of the special bonuses do the AI generals get in EBII - I think they should get it, just to level up the playing field with the player.
2) if the EBII team found a trick to prevent the AI from using non-general-led armies (I haven't seen any mod that would achieve it in the M2TW engine).
3) I'm not sure if all +morale benefits have been translated into +Influence, or there're still some left outside this system (I've had a look at it one year ago, as seen in that linked entry).

Anyway, I personally play battles at H, just for the AI to make up with the described mechanism and with the very basic fact that the player can learn on his own mistakes while the M2TW AI is actually not an AI - in the sense it cannot learn.

And I may be missing something, this is just an outsider view :-)

(besides - thanks QS for the answer)
JoC

Precisely, morale is deliberately calibrated as above, to ensure battles aren't just won by attrition. It also makes the general more important as a steadying influence (along with any units which inspire those nearby).

1) They get the AIGeneral trait in addition to anything else on their sheet:

Trait AIGeneral
	Characters family
	Hidden

	Level AIGeneral1
		 Description Hidden_desc
		 EffectsDescription Hidden_effects_desc
		 Threshold  1

		 Effect Command  1
		 Effect LineOfSight  2
		 Effect SiegeEngineering  50
		 Effect Attack  1
		 Effect Chivalry  1
		 Effect BattleSurgery  10


	Level AIGeneral2
		 Description Hidden_desc
		 EffectsDescription Hidden_effects_desc
		 Threshold  2

		 Effect Command  2
		 Effect LineOfSight  4
		 Effect PersonalSecurity  1
		 Effect SiegeEngineering  75
		 Effect Attack  2
		 Effect Loyalty  1
		 Effect Chivalry  2
		 Effect BattleSurgery  20
		 Effect HitPoints  1

	Level AIGeneral3
		 Description Hidden_desc
		 EffectsDescription Hidden_effects_desc
		 Threshold  3

		 Effect Command  3
		 Effect LineOfSight  6
		 Effect PersonalSecurity  2
		 Effect SiegeEngineering  125
		 Effect Attack  3
		 Effect Loyalty  1
		 Effect Chivalry  3
		 Effect BattleSurgery  30
		 Effect HitPoints  2

2) Not possible, really, z3n has done about as much as he can to prevent fragmentation, but it's deep hardcode stuff.

3) We use a mixture of Chivalry and TroopMorale.

[Rad]

I havent had issues routing ai units on vh diff.

[InsaneAbacus]

okay this probably has been awnsered multiple times before, but I remember someone saying EB II has two faction slots remaining and thus atleast in theory there could be new factions to EB II....

What are you personal thoughts about adding "Syracuse" as new faction? I know there have been like dozens questions like this and I wouldnt be suprised if you would get annyoed. However the more I look at the EB II map, the more I like the idea of playing a small faction between two superpowers.

[Lusitanio]

What are you personal thoughts about adding "Syracuse" as new faction? I know there have been like dozens questions like this and I wouldnt be suprised if you would get annyoed. However the more I look at the EB II map, the more I like the idea of playing a small faction between two superpowers.

Trust me mate, Syracuse won't be added to the game as a faction, altought it would be good to have them, there are other interesting factions that were more important at that time (historically speaking).But you can use a submod to play with Syracuse, just check the submod thread

[InsaneAbacus]

Trust me mate, Syracuse won't be added to the game as a faction, altought it would be good to have them, there are other interesting factions that were more important at that time (historically speaking).But you can use a submod to play with Syracuse, just check the submod thread

Ah thats pretty nice to know. Gonna check it out.

which interesting factions do you speak of?

[QuintusSertorius]

Categorically ruled out. But I did make them as an alternative to Epeiros in my own personal submod, which I will try to resurrect with 2.35.

Fun fact: Pyrrhos' son Alexandros is the grandson of the Syrakousan tyrant Agathokles.

[HarkonRules]

Fun fact: Pyrrhos' son Alexandros is the grandson of the Syrakousan tyrant Agathokles.

Nice. This actually makes your "Epeiros as Syracuse" mod all the more appealing.

[QuintusSertorius]

Nice. This actually makes your "Epeiros as Syracuse" mod all the more appealing.

It's given it a whole new sense of purpose. Alexandros, as the sole survivor of the Epirote royal family, is a proto-tyrant-in-waiting, scheming to restore the grandeur of his grandfather's empire. However, he's neither FL nor FH when I rework it, the FL is Hieron (of course) and the FH is Leptines, who is an older man and the "power behind the throne".

[InsaneAbacus]

It's given it a whole new sense of purpose. Alexandros, as the sole survivor of the Epirote royal family, is a proto-tyrant-in-waiting, scheming to restore the grandeur of his grandfather's empire. However, he's neither FL nor FH when I rework it, the FL is Hieron (of course) and the FH is Leptines, who is an older man and the "power behind the throne".

Do you also adjust faction/general symbols from the "epirote dog" to a more appropiate symbol once you finished your submod?

[QuintusSertorius]

Do you also adjust faction/general symbols from the "epirote dog" to a more appropiate symbol once you finished your submod?

No, I don't do graphics, only code/text. If someone else wants to make something up, it would be welcome.

[Lusitanio]

The submod thread: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...akousai)/page4
However, I must advice that it is not updated to EBI 2.3, but QS wrote that he is going to update it when the next version comes out, so just wait
I'm talking about the Belgae that altought still not officially confirmed by the team, I have read from a script that QS posted some time ago and from what I understood, they will be one of the new factions.
From the other, I'm not sure, the Galatians don't seem to be because the Team members have already replied to some post about that saying they do not plan to add them as a faction.
So perhaps it will be a faction on the east side of the map mostly because the west is already full of factions.

[BHL 20]

The other faction will probably be the Dardanoi.

[Jurand of Cracow]

Or Ardiaioi or Liburni?
(Dardanoi seem too close to Makedon and Geatai, while Ardiaioi or Liburni could make the Roman life and expansion a bit more difficult?)

[QuintusSertorius]

The Dardanoi were the only real Illyrian power at our start date (and indeed drove off the Galatians when they came knocking a few years earlier). If they were a faction, they'd have two starting provinces and be allied to Epeiros.

[Ivir Baggins]

The Dardanoi were the only real Illyrian power at our start date (and indeed drove off the Galatians when they came knocking a few years earlier). If they were a faction, they'd have two starting provinces and be allied to Epeiros.

Which two provinces would that be? Dardanion for certain; Delminion for the second? Or Epidamnos?