Fans suggestion thread for future releases

[Lusitanio]

Pathfinding is broken in sieges, nothing we can do about that.

Indeed, but despite that, EBII actually has one of the best behaviour for the AI during sieges. I have seen a lot worse in TATW DAC were the enemy troops just ignored my troops and tried to reach the center as soon as possible, while being killed by my guys.

[Jurand of Cracow]

To avoid this bad AI behaviour in siege battles, just keep a single unit in the town square. That way the AI won't try to reach it ASAP, meaning going through your lines like crazy.

This is a useful piece of information. I didn't know this. Thanks!
Any other secrets making the battle experience better?

Not happening. They represent one of the most common sorts of levies available to Hellenistic powers all over the place. They are a garrison mainstay, not something for the battle line.

(on Pantodapoi) - me, I partially agree with Quintus. I think Pantodapoi were also used for the battles. I think they should have been made more useful for the battles. I think it makes little sense to have them in the armies for now - there're plenty other units more useful and with reasonable prices. The Pantodapoi should have a better value/price ratio to make the player using them in the armies, not only for the garrisoning.

Indeed, but despite that, EBII actually has one of the best behaviour for the AI during sieges.

I've got little experience in the EBII with defensive sieges, but I've made a few storms of the palisaded (2.35) and walled (2.3) cities and I was quite happy with the AI behaviour. I've even experienced great situation when enemy javelins took another street, move to the back of my general and throw the javs in his back (those Arioi with 13 attack - that was painful ;-).

[Lusitanio]

About the Pantodapoi, last time I did a Seleucid campaign, they were one of my most used infantry unit in the game, always serving as garrison in my cities, which was their role.

Nice to know that you have a good experience in sieges Jurand. I actually have plenty of siege experience because I love to see the cities and buildings so I almost never auto-resolve those battles and one of the good things about those type of battles is that you can actually loose when defending a city, walls do not guarantee victory. Still, it will be better/harder in future versions because the team will include the ideas of the sieges submod.

[Jurand of Cracow]

one of the good things about those type of battles is that you can actually loose when defending a city, walls do not guarantee victory. Still, it will be better/harder in future versions because the team will include the ideas of the sieges submod.

I second the motion to include the sieges submod into the EBII !

Yes, the walls don't guarantee victory but they should be an advantage, nevertheless. In my experience, the walls in the more recent TW games don't provide much value for the defender. Sometimes it's even better to withdraw and let the enemy enter the settlement (and the youtuber Legend of the TW shares this opinion, as I could see in one of his campaigns I've checked). This is because they prevent the player from his main tactics - maneuver and concentration of the forces to make a breakthrough. It's usually a crude force that wins. I've had a few great defensive battles in the SSHIP - some were lost, but some were won even against a superior enemy.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Lusitanio]

I second the motion to include the sieges submod into the EBII !

Yes, the walls don't guarantee victory but they should be an advantage, nevertheless. In my experience, the walls in the more recent TW games don't provide much value for the defender. Sometimes it's even better to withdraw and let the enemy enter the settlement (and the youtuber Legend of the TW shares this opinion, as I could see in one of his campaigns I've checked). This is because they prevent the player from his main tactics - maneuver and concentration of the forces to make a breakthrough. It's usually a crude force that wins. I've had a few great defensive battles in the SSHIP - some were lost, but some were won even against a superior enemy.

I haven't tried the sieges submod but it seems to have a good effect on sieges, still I will wait to see how the team includes it in the main build and then test it.

Indeed, I agree with you. Walls should be harder to take, especially when dealing with bigger cities/fortifications, but it's hard to find a middle ground between harder to take walls and almost impossible to take walls. Still, I think the team will do a good job on that and the playtesters will make sure that it works as intended.

A good example on what should't be done is the CA new game, the 3 kingdoms, when in a short video of a siege battle, the attacking soldiers bypassed the walls in seconds with ropes (damm those chinese spidermans) and the AI didn't even bothered defending the walls.

[Rad]

Damn Pantodapoi lovers!

[Master Celeborn]

Frirst thank u for your work and i want said Eb 2 is a great mod. But during my gamingtime few ideas come in my head toimprove the mod. What do u want with them,it is just a player perpective,but i would like toknow what d o u think.

1. can tribes ai factions with one or 2 settlment at start can get auto expansion scripts like in dac. Thoses faction will stay lesslong on their ass in one province. Auto expansions until 3 settlments is reached.

2. The map is good, but i thik the map is over extended alittle bit and some importants cities are missing. I prefer to have a smaller area, but more detailled to play. I think ethiopia, south arabia and India sould be cutted fromthe game. At least, jerusalem should be in game for egypt, because egypt doen't have the income to sustain his army and can't rival he seleucids. One more settlement to to saka region willbe ice also.

3. Why cut india? ecause india was never focused on west and they stay in their interior struggles. They also stay insucotinent politic and never tried to invade seleucid empire. Will be better to remove the faction and replace themby aother one. For ethiopia, in reasons of egine limits, it cant be properly implanted ingame and I prefer see axum fully removed. itwill e goodonly if khushis implantes.

4. i know one faction is in wip, i hard this is belgica. But i have 3 more factions suggestions. 1. the other numidian kingdom, will be pertienentthey were importat as the curre existint (massylia) also, we have 3 gaulish factions, 2 iberians ad 2 germanic but one numidian. 2. i recommad also the caledones to balace british isle and avoid prittaoi to become op with monopol of the island. the last is the illyrians who are the most missed faction forme.

5. i will like to see merchands and vanilla missions reactivited in game.

6. Have 2 seasons by years will be more balanced to me. The game is going to slow

[Ganos Paran]

Damn Pantodapoi lovers!

Tremble before our endless hordes of garbage spearmen!

[Pattonius]

Ranged weapons need a buff at least when used against unarmored troops.It's just silly to see a unit of half nude greek skirmishers get shot in the back at point blank range by 160 javelins and lose 20 men. Or have a unit of elite archers fire at a bunch of horse archers without any armor and barely kill anyone even if the HA are stationary.Or elephants 2 units of greek skirmishers, hundreds of man,throwing their spears and nothing happens. It's neither realistic nor fun to see unarmored units tank ranged attacks as if they are wearing full armor.

I'll lend my support, for what it's worth, to the idea of addressing this. I understand that EBII ranged units are meant to ​skirmish​ and not to brutally slaughter entire armies by themselves (like the archers in Shogun II and Rome II), but it's jarring to watch 240 javelins rain down on a group of shirtless men only to have 14 of them fall as a consequence. Visually, it looks like it should be absolutely devastating, but that isn't the outcome you get. I understand it's probably weakening the unit (HP and such) and of course lowering morale, but the casualties just don't match the visuals. Coming off a Shogun II binge (where watching arrows annihilate soldiers is half the fun for me), I can't help but frown.

Buffing is probably not a good idea for balance reasons, but might it be possible to tweak the animations? Reduce the number of arrows/javelins visible to the player, for example, or adjust how many men in the unit appear to throw or shoot at the enemy. As it is I force myself to avoid watching my ranged units too closely lest I be pulled out of my immersion.

I've actually had the thought that I'd probably be better off limiting my ranged units to settlement defence and instead using the upkeep I'd pay for adding more to my army to support an extra unit or two of cavalry instead. I won't do this for historical reasons, but I suspect I'd probably win battles faster and with more enemy dead if I were to forgo ranged entirely. They just don't seem to make a decisive contribution the way I use them (screening my line, attacking enemy skirmishers/ranged, then falling back behind the line to await opportunities).

[QuintusSertorius]

Frirst thank u for your work and i want said Eb 2 is a great mod. But during my gamingtime few ideas come in my head toimprove the mod. What do u want with them,it is just a player perpective,but i would like toknow what d o u think.

1. can tribes ai factions with one or 2 settlment at start can get auto expansion scripts like in dac. Thoses faction will stay lesslong on their ass in one province. Auto expansions until 3 settlments is reached.

Most factions already have a scripted "opening move" to get them onto their first conquest. They are not guaranteed to succeed, and thus each game is different because something they do, sometimes they don't.

We have no plans to do any more than that. Not least because we intend that the early game, where the Rebels still exist, lasts as long as we're able to preserve it. The mod is supposed to last up to 1100 turns, if the Rebels are all gone within 100 turns, the mid-game clash of superfactions comes really early, before the end-game which is a foregone conclusion.

2. The map is good, but i thik the map is over extended alittle bit and some importants cities are missing. I prefer to have a smaller area, but more detailled to play. I think ethiopia, south arabia and India sould be cutted fromthe game. At least, jerusalem should be in game for egypt, because egypt doen't have the income to sustain his army and can't rival he seleucids. One more settlement to to saka region willbe ice also.

3. Why cut india? ecause india was never focused on west and they stay in their interior struggles. They also stay insucotinent politic and never tried to invade seleucid empire. Will be better to remove the faction and replace themby aother one. For ethiopia, in reasons of egine limits, it cant be properly implanted ingame and I prefer see axum fully removed. itwill e goodonly if khushis implantes.

Sorry, the map isn't up for discussion. The changes you're suggesting are far from trivial, and would mean major reworking of the entire mod. We already have a revision of the map underway, and that will run its course. We're not removing existing factions.

4. i know one faction is in wip, i hard this is belgica. But i have 3 more factions suggestions. 1. the other numidian kingdom, will be pertienentthey were importat as the curre existint (massylia) also, we have 3 gaulish factions, 2 iberians ad 2 germanic but one numidian. 2. i recommad also the caledones to balace british isle and avoid prittaoi to become op with monopol of the island. the last is the illyrians who are the most missed faction forme.

The new faction slots are pretty much a closed discussion, now.

5. i will like to see merchands and vanilla missions reactivited in game.

The vanilla missions would make no sense for a total conversion mod. We already have scripted events for many factions, with more to come, so I don't see what they'd add.

6. Have 2 seasons by years will be more balanced to me. The game is going to slow

Not going to happen, the mod is designed with 4 seasons per turn in mind, we're not rewriting the entire script, many traits and a host of other things to change that.

[Rad]

Tremble before our endless hordes of garbage spearmen!

Nah fam, I'll just kill them. I'll kill them all.

[Master Celeborn]

Thank for u responding. At least reduce the movement points on the map to slowdown expansion is two seasons by years is out of discussion. 1100 turns is a lot and I want something to do at turn 1100.

But ty for your mod above else. Maybe sakas can get more money,be cause the faction will be fast in an abyssal gap.

** Allso, i am playing agin myself in an hotseat campaign where I all 27 factions at same time and I have a lot of fun.

[Aodh Mór Ó Néill]

Just a few thoughts on the KH:

- Maybe its not possible in with the Med II engine, but I think it would be cool if Spartiate potential spouses/adoptees could have the traits for completing the agoge, like in EB I (not comparing it this mod, just taking ideas from it).

- I think there's historical basis for allowing KH family members to partake in mercenary service. Mercenaries were such a big part of the Hellenic world, and there's plenty of historical precedence for famous Greek mercenaries (the Ten Thousand, Xanthippus etc). Maybe have them take part in it from Sparta, which saw widespread merc recruitment?

- Not to be an annoying fanboy, but I do think the Lakonikoi hoplitai should be slightly buffed. From what I can see (although I could barely make head nor tails from the EDU), they just seem to be regular hoplitai with worse armour. I think it would sense for them to have slightly increased morale, or stamina, especially since their ranks were filled with Spartiates/hypomeiones/mercenaries, as opposed to the usual levies.

Again, I'm terrible at reading the EDU, so if they do have some increased stats from the hoplitai then just ignore this.

[Roma_Victrix]

I second the motion to include the sieges submod into the EBII !

Yes, the walls don't guarantee victory but they should be an advantage, nevertheless. In my experience, the walls in the more recent TW games don't provide much value for the defender. Sometimes it's even better to withdraw and let the enemy enter the settlement (and the youtuber Legend of the TW shares this opinion, as I could see in one of his campaigns I've checked). This is because they prevent the player from his main tactics - maneuver and concentration of the forces to make a breakthrough. It's usually a crude force that wins. I've had a few great defensive battles in the SSHIP - some were lost, but some were won even against a superior enemy.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

If it were real life I would obviously strongly oppose the idea, but as far as the capture-the-flag siege mechanics of the game are concerned, letting a large portion of the enemy rush towards the city square to fulfill victory conditions allows them to be cut off and flanked with no escape. All you have to do is keep troops, preferably cavalry, on the wings, send them around some urban streets on either side and voila, suddenly your enemy has troops in front and behind them. Unless the enemy army is far superior and larger, it almost always causes panic and routs all of them within minutes. Well, at least all the units that become stuck while the others are too busy fighting at the walls or skulking just outside the walls of the settlement as missile troops or whatnot. Whenever they do that, I just send one or two cavalry units out another gate, rush them around the city/town, and BAM, those units are suddenly accosted as well and usually rout pretty fast due to being lightly-armored skirmishers/slingers/archers.

[Rad]

Siege defense - Either the AI exploits you, or you exploit the AI.

Let's say that you have the weaker force. Why else would you allow the AI to storm the city?

Option A: Defend the walls.
Bad idea. In my experience, the AI will pool ALL its troops into one siege engine and the gate (if the ram does not catch fire), overwhelm that section of the wall with sheer numbers and then work its way left and right. Chain routs, chain routs everywhere!

Option B: Defend the center.
Not nice, not accurate, but within the confines of the game, it gives you the fighting chance the damn walls should be giving you. It's kind of an urban Thermopylae. A lot of the enemy attacks the few of you, gets tired and pelted with misiles. You fight to the death, the enemy doesn't. Chain routs, chain routs everywhere!

What I like to do is to offer token resistance on the walls and then defend the center. Any prisoners I take are released in order to counter the locked morale advantage I have.

[QuintusSertorius]

You left out option C : Sally out and fight on the field. Usually happens when the AI is trying to blockade you for a while and you pre-empt them before your men lose too much to starvation. Depends entirely on how good the attacking force is, and how capable your garrisons are. I find that Greek levies (incuding levy hoplites) are pretty sound as long as they have good leadership.

[Rad]

You left out option C : Sally out and fight on the field. Usually happens when the AI is trying to blockade you for a while and you pre-empt them before your men lose too much to starvation. Depends entirely on how good the attacking force is, and how capable your garrisons are. I find that Greek levies (incuding levy hoplites) are pretty sound as long as they have good leadership.

You must have missed it. I'll quote myself.

Let's say that you have the weaker force. Why else would you allow the AI to storm the city?

If you can, sally out and win the day. I do it whenever I can because I hate losing troops to attrition/starvation and filling up the numbers with merging afterwards is hell. I talked about situations where the player can't do that due to a lack of troops.

[Master Celeborn]

hi do u will add another faction, if yes what is the new faction

[QuintusSertorius]

You must have missed it. I'll quote myself.



If you can, sally out and win the day. I do it whenever I can because I hate losing troops to attrition/starvation and filling up the numbers with merging afterwards is hell. I talked about situations where the player can't do that due to a lack of troops.

I fight almost all my battles outnumbered, sieges are no different. My usual garrison is an FM plus two units of Hoplitai Haploi, one of Akontistai and one of Toxotai. Larger settlements might also have a single unit of Hippakontistai.

I won't throw that out against a full stack; but if it's a half stack, I will.

hi do u will add another faction, if yes what is the new faction

We're not prepared to say, yet.

[cecxla]

My suggestion is, if it's doable and not too complicated, to make another later game campaign, maybe starting at the period when Parthia took over Iran, that way those who would rather play a later date won't have to go through 500 or some other amount of turns to reach it.