Fans suggestion thread for future releases

[Lusitanio]

What we could do is create new animations so that some units could use the spears in different ways and demonstrate different ways of using the spear as a weapon.

[RodriguesSting]

I believe that's already the case, with units using undergrip and others overgrip?

[Just let me post]

That would be much apprieciated, and potentialy satisfying both camps

*thrusts underhand argument*


P.S. If I got the shield in that duel, and Rad grabbed his spear two handed overhand, making it a rather poor oar, I would die laughing, thus disproving effectiveness of underhand grip :S

[Kilo11]

So, I didn't share this earlier, but only because I was pressed for time on my (quippy) response. But a friend and me often fought each other using (rather shoddy) recreations of antique weapons during our high school days. We had wooden gladii, long and short spears, disc shields, and also a small array of other more ridiculous things (nets and chains and whatnot; basically anything we saw in Gladiator or the original Spartacus movie). Doing one-on-one fighting, I found overhand and underhanded grips to be similarly effective, but very dependent on the situation. However, I only found them to be similarly effective because of the fact that we were fighting one-to-one. Thinking back on how I used the spear alone, or the spear and shield together, I would say with certainty that in formation overhand would be far superior. I know it was more maneuverable that way, had more force in thrusting, and was easier to return to attack position when batted away. The one scenario where I remember underhand being (possibly) better was when the shield being used was very small. In that case, holding the shield above the spear allowed one to guard one's center while thrusting, and also use the shield hand to partially guide the thrust. It was a small advantage gained by underhand, but it was there. That being said, it was only in one-on-one combat with a small shield that such tactics proved helpful. In general, I would always use overhand, largely for the reasons Rad gave above.


P.s. For anyone interested in hands-on research, I would love to again do some spear and shield battling! I challenge you all!

[RodriguesSting]

On the topic of suggestions, back on Gauls, I would like to suggest to remove the Confederation and Top Government from places that are not supposed to have them. You can theoretically build confederations everywhere but outside of Gaul they will offer no pool whatsoever, and I believe the top government should be built only in the capitals?

[Just let me post]

P.s. For anyone interested in hands-on research, I would love to again do some spear and shield battling! I challenge you all!

When the coronavirus quarantine is over, I will look for you, I will find you and I will spear you

[Rad]

Not if I get him first!

[Kilo11]

When the coronavirus quarantine is over, I will look for you, I will find you and I will spear you

Not if I get him first!

Looking forward to it, lads!

[Lusitanio]

Looking forward to it, lads!

I will bring the popcorn

[QuintusSertorius]

On the topic of suggestions, back on Gauls, I would like to suggest to remove the Confederation and Top Government from places that are not supposed to have them. You can theoretically build confederations everywhere but outside of Gaul they will offer no pool whatsoever, and I believe the top government should be built only in the capitals?

The lack of pools is supposed to be a giveaway, but given it's a higher-tier government, they can also be restricted by upgrade paths.

I'll have a look. EDIT: In fact they are restricted in the upgrade paths. You can only build the Confed in Gaul, and the higher tier one in a specific place (though not sure when I applied that to the build). Unless you're talking about the Boii one?

[RodriguesSting]

I will grab some screenshots of the confederation issue later. It can be built. The top tier one, though, just appears in the building manager I think. Anyway I will see if I drop it on bug reports.

[RodriguesSting]

After losing a campaign because of a storm in a LAKE in Gaul killing my forces and generals (weren't even close to it), is there any possibility of removing those lakes / small in-land seas to something prone to less y behavior (including spawning pirates)?

[RodriguesSting]

So while I was exploring the Eremos (more specifically, trying to raid it), I noticed Generals there have a very high tendency to die to "natural disasters", which would make it a fantastic way to get rid of some useless generals, specially for factions like Carthage, KH and Seleukids who can get outright noxious generals. Problem is, Eremos is kinda inconvenient to access for them. Would it be possible to integrate some Mediterranean islands to it? Like Patmos. And then raise the natural disaster probability so it is a more or less assured way to execute a general without having to sink a boat.

[Jurand of Cracow]

My five cents: intentionall killing of bad generals is not historical - the ruler had no such powers. The mod should prevent cheap tricks to enable it - or punish such a behaviour in some way. In the Byg's Grim Reality for the SS it was the issue of personal wealth of a general - killing a general was a net loss for the player as many thousands had been invested in him before.

[antiochos_hierax]

Well, incompetent or rebellious generals/ ministers could be exiled or outright killed if the king willed it. Look what happened to Hermeias under Antiochus or Menelaus (client ruler in a way) executed by Antiochus V. But I agree, I find it more interesting to keep incompetent generals alive

[Rad]

My five cents: intentionall killing of bad generals is not historical - the ruler had no such powers. The mod should prevent cheap tricks to enable it - or punish such a behaviour in some way. In the Byg's Grim Reality for the SS it was the issue of personal wealth of a general - killing a general was a net loss for the player as many thousands had been invested in him before.

I agree that FM shouldn't be killed off. Currently, I am dealing with weak Kingetos and failed Druids - I just leave them in peaceful provinces to build stuff while the good generals fight.

[RodriguesSting]

Furthermore, some traits do imply the character would be killed off - like Atimia and Disgraced General for Carthage. And the Pretender for the Seleucid -- the game is telling us we should try to kill that character asap.

Anyway, any particular reason why Numidae, Nabateans, and Celtiberians don't have priestly traits?

[antiochos_hierax]

are there any plans on making rome and carthage more likely to go to war with each other? The war that starts after Messana is taken (by Carthage most times) ends very quickly and Rome rarely declares war on Carthage again, preferring to expand north, leaving Sicily to Carthage.

[sigurdr]

I agree with this about Rome and carthage. I actually quite enjoy the fact that carthage go for iberia and rome for Northern Italy and Southern gaul as it should make a war between them epic. This never seems to happen. The squabble over corsica and sardinia but that is it. Has anyone seen them fight out a proper war? Maybe I just haven't played enough turns

[QuintusSertorius]

are there any plans on making rome and carthage more likely to go to war with each other? The war that starts after Messana is taken (by Carthage most times) ends very quickly and Rome rarely declares war on Carthage again, preferring to expand north, leaving Sicily to Carthage.

I agree with this about Rome and carthage. I actually quite enjoy the fact that carthage go for iberia and rome for Northern Italy and Southern gaul as it should make a war between them epic. This never seems to happen. The squabble over corsica and sardinia but that is it. Has anyone seen them fight out a proper war? Maybe I just haven't played enough turns

All the scripted war triggers now change the AI stance as well, which should make any of those less phoney.