Thread: Europa Barbarorum 2.08e is released!

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    I don't mean offend anyone but I really see little point in having an indian faction..
    It's not a matter of taste for me but a matter of resources, by which I don't mean lack of history but rather manpower working behind the mod of EBII, 8 limited culture slots, how hard it is to create, skin, model units and how much time it takes..
    Why add an indian faction with it's obligatory provinces, culture slot, time consuming modeling time when the mod is extremely short on manpower. Many people are complaining with historical facts (which seems plausable although I cannot check) against lack of settlements in iranian peninsula, there is a confirmed (I think) talk of combining provinces in Britain to add more settlements to more logical(?) places and there is a culture representation/empire overstability problem related to game engine people are trying to overcome.
    Remove indian faction and get one culture slot to balance things out as you see fit, get an extra faction slot added to other free two slots and maybe have more than one or two rebel AI factions for improved gameplay, get some extra settlements that you can distribute, get rid of a script or more in the future which will take it's toll on the game engine to represent the indian factions independence from a gamewise nonexistent empire..

    I will play and support the mod nonetheless no matter what the team decides..

  2. #2

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    It does seem odd to argue BOTH that a veneer of Greek culture at the top of society in Massalia is a poor reason to change the cultural settings their but that a thin veneer of Celtic overlordship in Thracia and possibly even Germany makes them...well...Celtic.

  3. #3
    clone's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    greece
    Posts
    3,465

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    is the team going to add a building that is going to represent palaces
    When a nation forgets her skill in war, when her religion becomes a mockery, when the whole nation becomes a nation of money-grabbers, then the wild tribes, the barbarians drive in... Who will our invaders be? From whence will they come?”
    Robert E. Howard



  4. #4

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    I wasnt asking for cutting the map and removing takshilla myslef, speccially after all the work done. And as someone said there was a notable indian influence and relations in that part, speccially having baktria in the equations as they did arrived to the actual edges of the map.

    But for that part I udnerstand there can be reasonable arguments for and against. Im mostly neutral, but now I feel that changing that would be lossing a ton of work.

    My idea was more of removing just the culture and replacing it with eastern imperial (or eastern tribal and changing to eastern imperial after the reform). It not optimum nor the best representation, but it feels like a good compromise having in account the limited resources.
    We will change having an edge of the map and one faction slightly worse represented and allowing for a much improved mix in whole western europe.

    We will either find a way, or make one.


  5. #5

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    AS H/M 20 turns.

    Economics. I felt I had to get rid of my elephants (blub) and fleets immediately to balance the books and made much use of the free upkeep in minor settlements to shave off more expense.
    Nor did I think I would be able to hold all of the settlements that began on red, and so carried out a scorched earth policy to boost my treasury in Tarsos, Asaak, Antiocheia-Margaine and Harmozeia, using the withdrawing troops to bolster nearby cities. This got some of them into the blue.
    It has been difficult thus far to built my economy as the emphasis has been absolutely on using temples and games' fields to stave off more lost cities. At this stage a successful saboteur can set you back years, so investing in spies early instead of troops is a sensible precaution.

    I am feeling my way around the government buildings and haven't changed anything. They give a more than satisfactory range of factional and native troops for myself, who isn't too fussed about battlefield eye candy and pockets-full of elites.
    It allows you to assemble balanced garrisons with sufficient punch to venture out if you need to. The high state of unrest and the shortage of money means offensive armies led by FMs will have to wait for another decade or maybe two.
    I have my eye on Ephesus, but it may as well be on the moon for now. Around me, The Ptolemies are just starting to gather round Tarsos. I do think the AI factions undergo a step change of aggression after about 20 turns. All over the map they have switched on and started really going for nearby rebel settlements. Diplomacy has not been too fraught, with minor sweeteners thrown in by me to oil the wheels.
    I have been besieged by rebels a couple of times, though I have made a lot of use of watchtowers, meaning I have seen them coming. The rebel armies lurking along the trade lanes have been quiet small.

    BAI. I too have seen more evidence of units charging front line only in this game. AI rebel armies (all I have faced) have been small but not ill-formed. They skirmish and flank particularly well. They always seem to have twice as much ammunition as me and keep pelting away long after my guys are out.
    I have twice seen Eastern slingers take a rear charge from 38 bodyguard cavalry with few sent flying, after which they turn round and start swishing away with their penknives until I am forced to withdraw.
    The only other oddity has been the sight of three different rebel generals charging their Hippeis straight into phalangists from the front at the start of battles.

    It will be interesting, now the AI factions are ramping up, to see how the next 20 turns go and how much the violence accelerates.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Back to some play feedback. Now Im playing a pair of campaigns with Makedonians and Bosphorans. I will post any interesting finds I find.

    So far I would like to say some things. First is that coming of age should be reviewed. Isnt only from this two campaigns but all I played last patches with familly tree factions. 80-90 FM coming of age are sharp/uncharismatic/langourous. Happens with all factions too much times to seem a coincidence.
    Adoptions and marriages seem to work fine though as I see all kind of FM there.

    Second, the changes to Epeiros have created a weird situation where they conquest capua almsot every time. Romans have a nice amount of forces and I think they could easily recover Cpaua (which is ussually almost ungarrisonned) and even take Tarentum but they always prefer to focus north and kill the rebel stacks there, maybe taking Felsina and pretty much ignore Epeiros.
    Also as makedonia Pyrrhus doesnt atack Pella anymore. I had to restart several times, due to an error I will comment now, an every times he goes back to a minor settlement in their territory. later on 2 other generals atacked it with not much troops, and when finnally Phyrrus came with his full stack and sieged they offered ceasefire and I could avoid the attack.

    I didnt know if you saw my post earlier about the rebel fleets. It gets better as the turns go on but at the start is a real pain as you cant field anything to face them.

    About the problem I had. With my Makedonia campaign for some reason I had a lot more crashes tha usual. Having played a few minutes only the game crashed several times. Also it happened twice that the crash happened when saving so loading the game will instaly crash the mod and forced to delete the savefiles and start over.

    We will either find a way, or make one.


  7. #7
    z3n's Avatar State of Mind
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,636

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Was this an intended change? What was modified?
    This was a side effect of ordering the AI to activate its ability to make shieldwalls, when a unit can't shieldwall it forms itself into what vaguely looks like a shieldwall but isn't. I originally did it for one specific unit and it ended up affecting all of them due to the blunt hammer tactic I have to take. I'll fix it eventually and narrow it down to just one type which is possible.
    The AI Workshop Creator
    Europa Barbaroum II AI/Game Mechanics Developer
    The Northern Crusades Lead Developer
    Classical Age Total War Retired Lead Developer
    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)

  8. #8
    z3n's Avatar State of Mind
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,636

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    I too have seen more evidence of units charging front line only in this game
    This seems to imply previous versions were better, am I understanding it correctly? Or do you think this one improved upon that?

    Also what are peoples opinions on the subject, is it a unit specific problem? I personally find Pantodapoi painfully hard to charge which while completely and utterly realistic can be aggravating when used to a playing a game. (By the way I always give them a running start about 15 meters or so ahead of where there charge would start)
    The AI Workshop Creator
    Europa Barbaroum II AI/Game Mechanics Developer
    The Northern Crusades Lead Developer
    Classical Age Total War Retired Lead Developer
    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)

  9. #9

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Quote Originally Posted by z3n View Post
    Also what are peoples opinions on the subject, is it a unit specific problem? I personally find Pantodapoi painfully hard to charge which while completely and utterly realistic can be aggravating when used to a playing a game. (By the way I always give them a running start about 15 meters or so ahead of where there charge would start)
    Although I have quite limited experience, I'd say it's more a unit specific problem. I haven't noticed any bad charges with Pritanoi units (2.04a), but in the Saba campaign (2.03k) I had several broken charges with the Quadub.

    Just noticed something odd, the wall towers aren't shooting my attacking units. Spy got the gates opened. Bug? I recall they were shooting in previous versions.

    Edit. No need to answer about the archer towers anymore. Everything is OK, this one just haven't played enough M2TW to know that there must be enemy unit near the towers for them to attack...
    Last edited by Samson224; August 06, 2015 at 03:38 PM.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    More things I have noted playing with Bosphorans.

    First, I had some problems with cavalry when fighting a battle in a camp. The enemy outnumbered me but it was mostly infantry (strange for a camp of nomads but well) so I used a lot my cavalry to charge and itnercept the units trying to flank my infantry.
    Most times it worked fine but a few my cavalry went like crazy. One time they were running towards the enemy perfectly and suddenly when quite close to them they swiftly tuned to the right. THey went away from the objective turned back in a circle and got to it just walking.
    Two or three times happened that when ordered to atack a unit instead of heading directly towards it they directly took a weir circular path, and no charge was triggered when this happened.
    Also when the battle advanced I ordered a few units on my line centre to advance and they just spreaded, some left others right, breaking the line and going running like crazy.

    I guess theres some issue with pathfinding in camp maps.

    The other issue is mroe design wise. I dont see the point of Subject Clan goverment in camps. Allied clan costs the same, its faster to establish, gives better recruitment, better public order, more trade income and it converts culture.
    So, whats the advantage of Subject clan? Because I cant see any.

    We will either find a way, or make one.


  11. #11

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Yeah, the camps thing is pretty unavoidable. There's basically invisible walls with holes in them in the corners. If the AI is besieging you, they'll actually use their ram. Eventually you get a feel for where the pathfinding issues are. Just pretend they put up spiked pits or stuck spears in the ground in anticipation of your attack.

    I've often thought that opening up a culture slot by making Indians Forest Tribal (given how unlikely it'll be to have Germans migrate to India, I don't anticipate a problem there). How to use the extra slot, well that's a problem. Add an Illyrian-Thracian-Getae slot? An Iberian slot? Punic? Italian tribal? I'd probably pick Iberian. But it's not a huge deal, in my opinion. There's only so much you can do with the engine. Like the Massilia kerfluffle, no one is really disagreeing all that much on the history, just on how the game represents a settlement vs a region.

    What I'd like to know is how to build farms in a camp/small town! I took Asanka as the Boii noting it was 45% Euro tribal, destroyed the elite herds there and... shoot, no farms. Oh well. (Actually, the problem here is probably that only allied government is possible, no factional.)

  12. #12

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Quote Originally Posted by MisterFred View Post
    What I'd like to know is how to build farms in a camp/small town! I took Asanka as the Boii noting it was 45% Euro tribal, destroyed the elite herds there and... shoot, no farms. Oh well. (Actually, the problem here is probably that only allied government is possible, no factional.)
    Asanka cannot be converted into a city. Which I always thought quite strange, given how the province description describes the establishment of permanent settlements and hill forts during the game's time period.

    Here's a slightly outdated map showing all the regions with the mixed resource, which allows conversion from a camp to a city:



    It should still be accurate for the current version. Though I think Sala (the westernmost camp in North Africa) might be bugged for Numidia. I don't know if it's been fixed yet.

    Credit for the map goes to Gigantus.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    ^ Well im just glad none of your suggestions will come true. (taking out taksashila and epeiros)
    Then, as throngs of his enemies bore down upon him and one of his followers said, "They are making at thee, O King," "Who else, pray," said Antigonus, "should be their mark? But Demetrius will come to my aid." This was his hope to the last, and to the last he kept watching eagerly for his son; then a whole cloud of javelins were let fly at him and he fell.

    -Plutarch, life of Demetrius.

    Arche Aiakidae-Epeiros EB2 AAR

  14. #14

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Punic isnt a good choice as it wouldnt affect that many palces. It would be cool if we had the faction slots to spare.

    The best options would be either something like celitberian as you said like you said so they cant exapnd as easily outside it or something to make a break down in the core of europe, so theres some differentiation either north/south or west/east

    We will either find a way, or make one.


  15. #15

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Z3n, above.

    I quite like things that are a bit human. If I wasn't wearing a lot of armour and someone yelled "charge at those large hairy fellows over there!"....I'd think, "I'll do you a deal, and shuffle warily towards those hairy blokes over there while I see how those keen lads at the front get on."
    Who in their right mind wouldn't?

  16. #16

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    A.S. campaign 2.04a 81 turns. Very different, iv managed to conquer 3 settlements in 81 turns. One a camp,one tarsos and the other rebelled!(again, was mine originally). I have the feeling I havnt really started, yet. Im on 15,000 min profit and 13000 corruption per turn.But it can go really fast. My main worry is that I feel im being left behind(historically sound) but with the potential to compete with the big boys. Make no mistake, I have felt like the under dog from around turn 2. But its a really good faction to play if you like to think long term.
    No faction has been destroyed, yet. With Pergamon, Pontos and hayasdan having impressive kingdoms. Macedonia is reduced to korinth while the has been one horde event(massyllians).
    All in all, becoming my favourite faction.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Some thoughts on an Aedui campaign (2.04 H/M, ~100 turns):

    Scripts & Completion

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Not much to say here, since the real reform scripts do not appear to be implemented yet. There are some indications in some of the buildings about armor upgrades and reforms; I was able to receive armor upgrades for several of my units. Some of the units also referenced a "2nd Armor Reform" or something like that, though I couldn't figure out through the building browser how to unlock it. As a side note, I was unable to tell whether the armor reforms upgraded the appearance of the units on the battlefield. Do armor upgraded Bataroi appear with heavier armor on the battlefield?

    One quick question - I was unable to locate the "Industry" line in any of the building browsers for my settlements. Bibracte and Gergovia appear to have "Small Local Industry" from the start, but I cannot build any further industry in my other territories. This struck me as especially odd, because a number of other buildings (like the River Ports) specifically referenced increased trade goods due to local industry. Are the Aedui supposed to rely only on starting industry buildings? Are the industry lines supposed to be unlocked later through some sort of reform that is not yet implemented?

    A second quick question - the description of the "Confederation" government type indicates that each Confederation will lower the Authority of the faction leader. I thought this sounded like a very interesting game mechanic, and sought to plan out which tribes I would allow into my Confederation, and which I would leave as Protectorates or Allies. However, the number of Confederations I built had no noticeable effect on the Authority of my faction leader: he got to about 7 Authority while I had only 2 Confederations, and remained there while I built three more. Are Confederations still supposed to reduce the authority of the faction leader?


    Balance and Interest

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Decided to play the Aedui because I'd played a bunch of eastern cavalry factions (Saka, Baktria, Hayasdan) and wanted to try out a western faction that was more focused on infantry. Turns out the joke's on me - the Aedui have quite good heavy cavalry, and I win most of my battles with my generals' bodyguards (though usually with some infantry support). Their roster seems pretty well-balanced in terms of skirmishers, heavy infantry, and cavalry. Battles were fun, though mostly of the hammer-and-anvil variety.

    Difficulty-wise, I also thought this campaign was much harder than Hayasdan or Baktria (though perhaps not quite as hard as Saka). The numerous rebel armies and weak starting financial position make it a real struggle to expand effectively at first, especially as each new territory you conquer is immediately desolated by the surrounding rebel armies. I kept looking for an opportunity to come up for air and build some infrastructure, but instead I campaigned almost constantly for 100 turns, with every new conquest leading me on to further rebel enemies. As a result, though, I didn't really wage many wars against other factions in my first hundred turns. I tried to keep the peace with the Arverni, but ultimately turned on them when their armies pushed into Iberia, seizing most of the Gallic territories. My incursions into northern Italy also brought me into brief conflict with the Romans. Overall, though, I felt like the opening was suitably challenging without being overwhelming, and also enjoyably different and more claustrophobic than the wide open areas of the eastern map.

    The only "balance" issue I ran into was how incredibly powerful the Romans are, both in terms of unit quality and number of units, which I imagine is mostly intentional (given how badass the Romans were). However, I note with approval the decision to decrease the power of Camillan Roman infantry at least a little bit; right now, they are far and way superior to the general Gallic rosters. The only Gallic infantry that can hope to stand up to them man-for-man for long are the elite nobles and retainers, who are much more expensive and also have a smaller unit size. That said, I'll probably go back to the Aedui or the Arverni at some later point when their reforms are worked out. Fighting the Romans (even for the little bit that I did) was a much greater challenge than anything I'd run into as Baktria or Hayasdan.

    I did run into one possible issue with rebel army AI behavior. The Aedui are surrounded by powerful rebel factions, designed to slow the advance of both the player and the AI towards superpower-dom. However, I found that as the player my territory was a magnet for AI rebel armies, even ones from fairly far away. Both the Volcae (one stack) and the Ligurians (two stacks) migrated across neighboring rebel territories specifically to invade my budding Confederation. As a check on the player's expansion, I really enjoyed having all of these armies invading and desolating my territory - it greatly added to the challenge of the game. However, it also made it much easier for the other AI factions to expand rapidly, leading to some disappointing situations. For example, the Arverni conquered the territory of the Volcae with only four units, as the Volcae had sent virtually all of their forces on a long northward trek to attack me. Similarly, the Ligurians almost immediately sent two full stacks of units through Massilia's territory to attack me, which allowed the Romans to overrun all of northern Italy by turn 30 (I re-loaded and managed to grab Mediolanum and Felsina before them, the better to fight them later). Again, having rebel armies invading right and left was a very fun aspect of the campaign; however, having a player-controlled faction in western or central Europe seems to mess up the rebel AI's priorities, leaving them especially vulnerable to the ever-northward march of the Romans.

    I've also begun to notice how easy it is to placate the AI with very basic diplomatic tricks, like offering them a 100-a-turn tribute for 30 turns. I offered this sort of tribute to the Romans, and as long as the tribute held, they avoided war with me. This was despite the AI's obvious desire to crush me and take my holdings in Cisapline Gaul - the Romans piled up four full stacks of soldiers just south of the border, and milled about angrily, ready to attack. However, the AI seemed unwilling to forgo a measly 100 a turn that it clearly did not need! On the one hand, this sort of tribute-spamming seems pretty easy to exploit. On the other hand, I like that tribute options seem to make the AI more responsive to diplomacy (avoiding wars, ending wars, entering alliances, mutual attack on neighbors, etc.).

    One final topic for discussion - the Teutonic character system. I appreciate the concept behind this system - that the Aedui are a confederation of many different tribes and families, and that as such they do not have a single family tree. The result is a faction that plays differently from the other monarchy-based ones that I had previously played, which I appreciate. However, I also understand the frustrations that some people have directed at this system. The biggest problem is the lack of transparency concerning how it operates. With a family tree, the player can see whether new generals will soon be coming of age or not - even if no new generals will come for many dozens of turns, there is still an understanding of how new generals will appear. Currently, the Teutonic system does not have this sort of transparency. I received three new characters in my game, one from adoption and two from heroic battles. However, I could not figure out what was triggering these new characters. The size of my Confederation appeared to be only very weakly-related to the appearance of new family members; the last 25 turns or so I had 11 regions and 8 family members. Furthermore, my attempts to generate new family members through "heroic victories" generally failed (I received two new family members, despite winning a dozen or so heroic victories against AI rebel armies, while having less FM than settlements).

    None of this was game-breaking, but it did become a bit frustrating by the end, largely because I had no idea whether I was doing it right or not. The transparency offered by the family tree helps alleviate some of this anxiety - no matter what you do, new family members will eventually become available, and the player can watch their progress towards adulthood even as they also receive periodic adoptions or men-of-the-hour. At the very least, the player is assured that by waiting, new family members will become available. The "Teutonic" system provides no such transparency; I was left with fewer family members than I would have liked for my expanding empire, and with a sneaking suspicion that I might never have enough family members to govern all of my settlements.

    I like the use of the Teutonic system for some factions that are meant to represent confederations of smaller sub-groups, rather than unitary monarchies or republics. However, in terms of implementation, I would recommend: 1) making the incidence of new family members in the Teutonic system more responsive to the number of settlements the player controls, ideally through the rapid arrival of adoption offers when a new settlement is taken; and, 2) improving the transparency in-game of how to generate new family members under the Teutonic system, to reassure players that there are options for getting new family members.

    One final note - all three of the new family members I generated received the tribal trait "Aedui" after spending a turn in a settlement. Does the Teutonic system only generate family members of the ruling clan? If I had waited longer, would it have generated more men of the Brannovaci, Carnute, or Insubre tribes (or even other tribes, like the Semenones, Pictones, or Arevaci)?


    General Progress

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Aside from the above-noted issue with the rebel AI and the Romans, I was pretty pleased with the AI progress in this match. The Romans and Carthaginians actually fought a war fairly early, though the Romans rapidly evicted the Carthaginians from Sicily (I wonder whether there is a way to make wars in Sicily last longer; the RL wars of the Carthaginians, Greeks, and Romans in Sicily were brutal decades-long slug-fests). Once the Romans took Sicily, however, they clearly had no intention of pursuing a naval empire in the Western Mediterranean, preferring instead to stand around along their northern border waiting for the tribute I was paying them to run out.

    In Northern Europe, the Boii, Sweboz, and Pritanoi all expanded in logical fashions. I was pleased to see the Pritanoi actually send armies over the Channel to conquer some of the Belgae, connecting those two regions (even if it was somewhat in reverse of RL!). The result was an interesting Rhineland standoff between myself, the Pritanoi, the Sweboz, and the Boii. Although I stopped my campaign just as the last rebel settlements were being conquered by the Pritanoi and the Sweboz, the future interactions in central Europe would have been interesting had I continued.

    Outside of my local area, things looked pretty good. KH, Macedon, and Epirus ended up in a stalemate. Pergamon expanded rapidly in both the Balkans and Asia, conquering everything from Halicarnassos to the Danube. The Seleucids were also on the ropes, as the Ptolemies actually invaded Syria from the Levant and the Parthians overran a good chunk of the east. Had the game gone on longer, we might still have seen the re-emergence of the Gray Death, but the first hundred turns the Seleucids appeared to be on the ropes while not being totally overrun. I'm convinced that the key to longer-term multi-faction viability in the East is to ensure that the Parthians usually do well - they are the main eastern antagonist of the Seleucids in most games, and yet in most of the earlier games I played they were easily crushed by the march of the Gray Death straight through to the northern edge of the map. The point isn't to pre-determine a winner, but just to make sure that the Parthians give the Seleucids a run for their money. The same goes for the Saka, who were easily crushed by Baktria in my Aedui game. As I understand it, historically the big advantage of steppe people was that the armies from civilized regions could not operate effectively far out onto the steppe; even if the Saka or the Parni could not always pose a direct threat to the major empires, at the very least they could remain independent, and strike when the major empires were weakened by internal or external wars. It would be nice to see this sort of steppe independence preserved in some way.


    Overall, a very fun campaign, and an excellent example of the EB2 team is working to build diverse factions and play styles.

    A few final notes on topics of discussion that have come up in the last few days:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    1) I personally would have no objection to removing "Indian" culture from the game and replacing it with "Forest Tribal," given the limitations of the game engine and the small chance of the Germans and Indians ever interacting. If a new cultural grouping were to be introduced, I think that an Illyrian/Thracian tribal group would probably be a good choice, the better to represent the difficulties that outside empires had in subduing this region. All that said, I recognize that this sort of change would be a pretty substantial use of development resources, and respect that the developers might prefer to focus on other issues (like expanding unit rosters) before they revisit the issue of cultural groupings.

    2) I think that the reduction of Britain by a region or two is an excellent idea. I would strongly recommend including either Amphipolis or Mytilene, a recommendation based, of course, on my own personal fascination with that part of the ancient world, as well as the historically high level of urbanization around the Aegean during this time period, and the potential need to provide Macedon with a starting buff. Unless an Illyrian faction is to be included, I would strongly recommend against adding more cities to the eastern coast of the Adriatic.

    3) I think the idea of a separate, more aggressive "independent kingdoms" faction would be a cool idea, if it could be implemented properly. I think a single such faction would be most appropriate (rather than a new Greek rebel faction and non-Greek rebel faction); the purpose would simply be to create disparate pockets of more aggressive rebel activity, not model any actual historical connection between, say, Syracuse and Massilia or Tylis and Belgium). However, I worry that the CAI would struggle to control so many widely-disparate territories, which might in turn allow the major factions to expand *more* rapidly, rather than less.

    4) If no additional rebel faction is included, I would recommend the Insubres and the Nervi for the two remaining factions. Each would fill up a portion of the map that is currently pretty empty to start; each would help limit the rapid expansion of currently-aggressive factions (the Nervi can check the Sweboz; the Insubres can check the Romans); as separate Celtic factions, each would help limit the emergence of a single super-Celtic faction; finally, each would be relatively easy to implement, as they would be able to build on the existing rosters of the Aedui, Arverni, and Boii.


    In any event, I look forward to seeing what the team has in store going forward. Keep up the good work!
    Last edited by adun12345; August 06, 2015 at 03:56 PM. Reason: Finally figured out how Spoiler tags work lol

  18. #18

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Hello guys, it's been awhile since I tried any patches and just started using 2.04a and I noticed something wrong.

    I started a Koinon Helenon campaign, I move Areus back to mainland and gathered my forces to besiege the city of Korinthos. I built siege weapons and wait for a turn. In the turn-change period a Makedon army closes in mine and suddenly the siege was lifted immediately. This happened 3 times before and after I reinstall everything. I tried besieging the city again and the makedonians tried to attack me to relieve the siege, I lost Chremonides in the battle receiving only 1 report. After the battle however all my family members except Areus (The other 2 FM in mainland and Chremonides) died. I tried besieging the city again since after the battle the siege is relieved. Then the enemy forces from Knossos sallied out in a battle and I got to fight a battle of Knossos of which I do not besiege.

    Anyone knows what is going on? are there any solution?

  19. #19

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Cohors Evocata.

    Can I start by saying how much I like your name. It is very magisterial.

    I have no wish to see any culture removed from the game, so I am with you on that.

    I am just your average 60 year-old with some reading on ancient cultures under my belt. I would not claim to be a historian. It is not a very exact science.

    I need bend the knee to no-one though on the subject of logic. And it does strike me that to argue that Massalia should be fundamentally Celtic because while the city had a veneer of Greekness, the hinterlands did not, effectively rules out arguing in the same breath that Thracian areas with a veneer of Celtic overlordship should be represented as fundamentally Celtic. I don't know about the history, but it is logic for dummies.

    On the subject of rudeness, my experience reading the site over many years is that there is a certain amount of snippiness about, not all of which is one-sided. My advice would be that if the devs don't want feedback, the wisest course would be not to ask for it.

  20. #20
    delra's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Posts
    5,590

    Default Re: Europa Barbarorum 2.04a is released!

    Can't we allow recruitment of at least a skeleton skirmisher armies from Roman Province governments? At the moment if you want to build anything high level, you must convert the whole of Greece and Carthage from Free City to Provincia Romana. And that stops all recruitment, forever. That province's recruitment pool will just remain empty.

    At least in EB1 we had those white-robed police-like guys we could recruit from these. :-(

    provinc city requires factions { f_rome, } and not hidden_resource italy and not building_present govallied
    {
    capability
    {
    trade_base_income_bonus bonus 1 requires factions { f_rome, }
    law_bonus bonus 1 requires factions { f_rome, }
    religion_level bonus 1 requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecReligionUpdate 1
    agent diplomat 1 requires factions { f_rome, } and not event_counter ecRomeIsAI 1
    agent_limit diplomat 1
    }
    material stone
    construction 8
    cost 6000
    settlement_min large_town
    upgrades
    {
    }

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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