Europa Barbarorum 2.08e is released!

[delra]

A guy governing one my towns thinks he's in the woods, for some reason:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://i.imgur.com/GWZ8YtQ.jpg

This probably should be disabled for barbarian governors? :-( The place he's in is 3.3k size.

[delra]

Finally, someone did it! Getai took Thermon. :-D

Not really sure how I feel about a mountain tribe going all viking all around the Med... Or Thermon not revolting INSTANTLY from them.

[Kravixon01]

For what it's worth, new game as KH m/m with the latest version. Only about 6 turns in, but the Makedonia situation is already improved. Korinthos and pella have a much more serious garrison. Ill take Korinthos in another turn or two, but at least the AI KH would be sufficiently deterred for a little while (and the human KH at least has to put forth effort to take it).

[Kravixon01]

For what it's worth, new game as KH m/m with the latest version. Only about 6 turns in, but the Makedonia situation is already improved. Korinthos and pella have a much more serious garrison. Ill take Korinthos in another turn or two, but at least the AI KH would be sufficiently deterred for a little while (and the human KH at least has to put forth effort to take it).

I took Korinthos. Makedonia defended with 15 units, which I think was an improvement over past versions. I'm up to turn 10, Thermon is still independent and Pella is guarded by a full stack. Pyrrhus still has his full stack hovering near the border with Makedonia.

Also, during the attack on Corinth my siege towers refused to deploy on the walls. Infantry would push it all the way and then drop the equipment. Is this a bug or is it intentional that they don't work on large stone walls?

[Hummer]

For some reason, the lake south of Ankyra keeps having storms over it. I'm playing Ptolemoi on 2.04 for the first time since 2.01. The mod has changed a lot since then. I'm amazed. I didn't realize how much all the small incremental changes have added up. It's like a whole new mod even since that point. Excellent work all.

[Sylon]

The storms are there to destroy pirate spawns. Otherwise, pirates would randomly spawn in lakes around the map and remain there for the rest of the game.

[delra]

1. More Leves should be available in Roman provinces and more often. At the moment Roman stacks are pretty much purely heavy infantry, meaning they smash to bits everything other factions with more skirmishers in their rosters can field against them.

For example, from my game:
- Main KH stack: 7x heavy infantry (+general), rest of the stack are skirmishers of this or that sort.
- Main Roman stack: 14x iheavy nfantry units, general, 2x skirmishers.

Who wins, every single time? :-D

Basically, thanks to the way units become available in Italy (very few skirmishers, all units heavy infantry and cavalry), Romans field very heavy armies and thus steamroll the crap of other factions due to autoresolve quirks where heavier army always wins.

2. Numidian horde script must be rebalanced too, they cause so much grief to Carthage AI at the moment that Carths are unable to do anything else, anywhere overseas, they lose their overseas possessions and then start chasing Numidians around the desert, beating them, turning them to a horde, beating them some more, letting them settle, then hording them again. Forever.

I'd suggest fewer horde units to be spawned here.

3. It's still a little silly with how easily AI can keep far-away cities of wrong culture. Bosporans in Russia, Romans taking Gaul cities and garrisoning them with 1-2 units only. Bosporans in Russia without much sweat or garrison.

[QuintusSertorius]

1. More Leves should be available in Roman provinces and more often. At the moment Roman stacks are pretty much purely heavy infantry, meaning they smash to bits everything other factions with more skirmishers in their rosters can field against them.

For example, from my game:
- Main KH stack: 7x heavy infantry (+general), rest of the stack are skirmishers of this or that sort.
- Main Roman stack: 14x iheavy nfantry units, general, 2x skirmishers.

Who wins, every single time? :-D

Basically, thanks to the way units become available in Italy (very few skirmishers, all units heavy infantry and cavalry), Romans field very heavy armies and thus steamroll the crap of other factions due to autoresolve quirks where heavier army always wins.

We've had a productive discussion on this point with a number of important outcomes.
1) The Leves will become available in the socit building - until we've got a proper Italian skirmisher, they will stand in for them (and Akontistai in Greek areas).
2) Pools in both the iulsat and municip buildings will be shirinking - they are far too large (even accounting for Italy's big reserves of manpower). More specifically, in the municip, there will be some bonus recruit_pool lines just for Roma, so that if you build them elsewhere, they will give fewer troops.
3) The stats for Roman line infantry units are a little overpowered, and not as was intended. Their morale, defensive skill and attack will be coming down a touch, which should make them better balanced against other factions. Of particular note is that in the periods covered, Romans did not train frequently like Greeks (for example) did, they had to gain their experience on campaign before they became reliable. Obviously for the professionals of the Marian era, it's a different story.

So expect changes to the Romans - I may be able to reduce some of the Rebel garrisons that are designed to stop AI Rome reaching for the Baltic after all those changes. Though I think I'll leave the three armies in Liguria.

[Jervaj]

I dont understand the so easily. I see revolts every time. In the case of Romans in less than 100 turns last playthrough I saw them having 3 revolts just in cisapline.
AS has consistly at least 3-4 revolts very early on. And bosporans had one or two last play too.

[delra]

By low rebellion level I mean: Romans hold all of Gaul in my game with 1-2 units of garrison in each settlement. That simply shouldn't be the case. Same for Bosporans comfortably sitting in camps all over Russia with same low amount of garrison.

[4th Regiment]

By low rebellion level I mean: Romans hold all of Gaul in my game with 1-2 units of garrison in each settlement. That simply shouldn't be the case. Same for Bosporans comfortably sitting in camps all over Russia with same low amount of garrison.

Main problem is this northern AI expansion bug...Bosphorians, Baktrians etc should not push for empty, poor , culturally distant northern lands as default (in some alternative history and games, yes...but not always as Bosphorinas push to the Russia and Baltic..Baktrians in central Asian steppes..)

[QuintusSertorius]

I've been busy and away from home, so apologies for the slower-than-normal rate of response.

What exactly is the faction heir loyalty update?

The trait for the Faction Heir now comes with a hefty Loyalty bonus.

Failed the first Baktria mission. Defeated one of the stack at wrong region, and another stack send its army into a rebel town, only the general is moved back by script thus failing the >300 requirement.

The script is being updated to stop the spawned stacks running away. I had the same thing happen to me when I was testing it out before release.

Playing 2.03k (and j), as Baktria under recommended settings, I noticed a problem when enemy armies attacked with mixed phalanx and infantry units (for example, phalangitai and hoplitai). Because the hoplitai outpaced the phalangitai, the AI would attack in waves. First the regular infantry, then after I mopped those up the phalanx would come in completely unsupported. On the other hand, steppe cav/missile armies, as fielded by the Saka Rauka, fought in a respectable fashion. Fairly efficiently, actually. One other note: the AI seemed incapable of fighting with eastern jav cav (I've only been playing Baktria). Units like Asiatica Hippokontistai would dash back and forth (due to the skirmish feature) without firing their missiles most of the time. Melee javelin units didn't seem to have that problem.

I just started a 2.03l (same as 2.04?) campaign. I'll report back if I see any differences.

Edit: I had no problem with the first two Baktria missions, but I'm going to fail to upgrade the wall at Alexandria-Aria (the third mission) due to lack of population. I sacked the city rather than occupying it when taking it... but I don't think that made enough of a difference. Perhaps it already had the wall the mission intends me to upgrade it to?

Different movement rates is an example of us hitting limits of the engine. They are different speeds because they're different formations and we've gone for what is more realistic. For most infantry, they have the same speed anyway (0.83) so it's not an issue. However, phalanxes are naturally slower than looser formations, and tend to be 0.65. Over long distances that will obviously create big gaps.

Javelin cavalry in 2.03k suffered from the adjustment of skirmishing distances to aid horse archers. It's been pulled back again in 2.04. That will mean horse archers get caught more frequently, but unforunately there's only one value that can be amended. So either we nerf javelins by setting a value that keeps horse archers out of range of being charged, or we make horse archers more vulnerable by setting a value that lets javelin cavalry skirmish.

Umm, theres something faulty with Baktria mission. I completed it but no notification until the given turns ended and I got at the same time the failure message and the sucess one with the next mission and the colonists

Looking into these.

@ 2.04 release - praise & Epeiros question

There are some really good adjustments there, kudos! Especially like the changes to the Eleutheroi/Rebels. Making their govs stationary, was something I was going to suggest myself. Great to see them staying in their settlements - makes the game more fun imo. Also giving the Rebel generals better command and the defender trait is a good idea - plus their better recuitment abilities.

Like this one very much. Iirc, also in EB1 AI Koinon Hellenon never actually attacked Knossos. Nice to see this small, but fine change!

Indeed, the idea is to make the Rebels a more effective check on everyone else. They were something of a pushover before, hopefully that's diminished. Especially vs the other AI factions (where auto-calc is king). I still see them as the best lever to slow down the game and prevent a rush to that tedious middle/late condition where there are a handful of super-factions spamming armies endlessly.

I had just started a Epeiros campaign with 2.03k and was a little astonished, that Ambrakia had such limited recruitment abilites (eg. no phalangitai). And to be able to recruit more elite units as the hypaspistai (did I spell that correct??), Ambrakia missed the 'foreign military settlers' (or what it's called) building, to upgrade it's Epirote government building. So does "Ambrakia upgraded from epeiros5 to epeiros7" mean, they now have the needed level of the Epirote government, to recruit elite units?


Thanks for the release - will try it soon!

When placing buildings at the start in the descr_strat, the settlement doesn't actually have to meet the requirements to build something in-game. Thus we gave Ambrakia the Basilike Patris government - the very top "homelands" government, even though it has no Military Colonies (more on those later). It is, after all the seat of the Epirote royalty. Which does mean they can recruit elites (since that's the only place Hellenistic factions can recruit them) there.

Yes, you may have noticed Phalangitai are much, much rarer than they were. You need to build Hellenistic Military Colonies to get them outside of the three places with large, natural concentrations of Makedonian settlers. Otherwise, that means relying on lesser phalangites (and in the autumn release Epeiros and Makedonia will have Deuteroi Phalangitai which are not currently in the game) and mercenary phalanxes. This is entirely by design, getting souces of Makedonians for the best quality phalanxes was a Big Deal.

@ little issues / bugs / stuff - regarding v2.03k (but nothing changed by 2.04 AFAIK)

a) Phyrrhos' biography is too long as it seems. At least for me (playing at 1920 x 1080) it's impossible to see the entire biography. I tried having the 'Biography' trait both at the bottom and top of the visible traits section in the characters info scroll, but it's not possible to see it in full. Perhaps you can shorten his biography a little, so it is visible entirely?!



b) Phyrrhos gets the 'Popular General' trait x2 times. Also I get that below message every(!) turn. Iirc I got it the first time, after conquering Pella with an heroic victory.

I'll flag those.

The Popular General is one of the spoils gain messages disabled in 2.04.

c) Constructing a siege ram takes 50 turns with a small army! That's a bug, right?!?

Not a bug; small armies aren't well-suited to sieges, more units means more labour.

d) Only two small text issues as it seems... First one: 'Hellenistic Military Colony' building is mentioned, but I guess the 'Hellenistic Poleis' building is meant. Second: 'Military Colony' building is mentioned, but I guess the 'Native Military Colonies' building is meant.





PS: @ 'd)' - Sure this is only a very minor issue. And for everyone involed in the creation of EB2 and also the hardcore fans, that followed all developments from the beginning, this may seem me being over-meticulously. But I took me quite a time to realise what's going on. And I guess these little things (ie. deviating terms) can frustate interested players and/or get them very confused, as to how EB2's government system / settlement development actually works. Sure it's nothing vital or urgent, but I hope these little things will be fixed for the autum release.


Regards!

Not text issues at all, there are three separate buildings concerned, and the third doesn't display on the building browser unless you have the prerequisite of colonists. That third is the Hellenistic Military Colony (helcol) as opposed to the Native Military Colony (eastcol). But the helcol is linked to the Hellenistic Poleis (polis) building, since it increases Hellenistic politics (rel_h) culture making the upgrade of a polis easier.

EDIT: @vegetation and lighting submod
Is it necessary to reinstall the vegetation and lighting submod every time between step 2 and step 3, when one installs the newest patch?? Or do the patches not affect the files of the vegetation and lighting submod at all? The instruction is a little vague.

I don't know, Alin will.

It depended on how far the enemy had to march. Meaning if I stick my troops being attacked by an enemy army on a hill, if it's close to where the enemy army is, not too long. If it's far away, the phalanx still haven't caught up by the time the rest of the battle is finished. The AI does ok with phalanx when defending, however (doesn't march away from itself). Quick note again: that was 2.03 j & k, not l.

Correction on the Baktria missions: I did get credit for completing the third Baktrian mission (build the wall), although I took far more turns than I thought I was allowed. So far as I can tell, rewards were primarily:
1st mission - two settlers (at least I built a minor polis & a settler colony in Oskobara).
2nd mission - one settler (at least I upgraded to settler forts in Baktria).
3rd mission - relationship bonus w/Arche Seleukia, no settlers.

I presume that's working as intended. I'm pretty sure the time limit on the 1st mission is working as well: I got both the "you ran out of time" notice and "you completed the mission" notice on the same turn! 2nd mission I finished quickly. 3rd mission I'm not sure there is a time limit.

I'm looking forward to trying out independence again. Even in 2.03j I couldn't get Seleukia to recognize my independence (took 6 settlements).

Edit: And as usual, I forgot a big thank you!

We'll need to review the pre-requisites for that mission. Be careful how you spend those scarce colonist points - putting two into Baktra's Hellenistic Military Colonies is the fastest way to upgrade it's polis.

Also for anyone else using colony points as Baktria - you won't be able to put helcol buildings in Marakanda or Oskobara until you destroy the eastcol that is already present. The building giving you native phalanxes.

It was the 9600 one , and they are in the browsers of saba, epirus and baktria(theses are the only factions iv tried so far). Also I have to re select my potential successor every time I load a saved game.

Hmmm, I need V.T. Marvin to look at the code for that building.

Looking into the "save protection" part of the script. It's there to stop things getting lost or broken when you save and quit with monitors in mid-processing because you haven't completed something.

Some quick feedback on Baktria in 2.04:

I have not been able to progress very far in the new missions. I have started three separate campaigns, and all have proceeded in the same fashion. Turn two, I accept the mission to drive out the Saka, and the rebel forces appear. However, during the Turn 2 resolve phase, the Seleucid city of Antiocheia-Margiane revolts, driving out its garrison. The westernmost Saka army (that I am supposed to destroy to complete the mission) moves south and attacks the Seleucid garrison, and is destroyed in the fighting. As a result, I am unable to complete the mission, because one of my targets no longer exists.

It seems like the sudden presence of a large rebel army in Margiane is driving down public order and causing the city to revolt. Would it be possible to boost public order in Antiocheia-Margiane, or make the two Saka rebel army targets immovable, or both?

I had the same thing happen when I tested it -they've been amended now to stop them running away.

Presence of Rebel armies does indeed lower public order. The only way I could increase order in that settlement specifically, without adjusting the underlying mechanics is through law/happiness buildings.

Some questions about Baktria's missions.

1. You only need to take one of the PSFs to get two credits, taking the second one gives you no credit.

2. You get three colony points for accepting the second mission, you get no money nor colony point for other three missions.
Is this working as intended?

3. I can only successfully complete the first mission after commented out the "and TargetFactionType slave" condition for the two encounters.
Some people say they completed the first mission successfully, but I'm suspicious that they just failed their first mission and get the
"rewards" by accepting the second mission.

Can someone verify the above issues?

That's been reviewed, should be working as intended when I release the next version.

1. Start Ptolemies.
2. toggle_fow.
3. Scroll south to the province of Kush. (Sudan or sth)
4. East of the city Meroe there's a rebel general with a missing name. It's enough to hover over him to notice.

Sounds like he has an invalid name (ie one which isn't on the list for his sub_faction). I'll fix that.

I get a lot of blank faction relationship pop ups on 2.04. Also, I think this may be an old issue due to it being a siege. But the epirite force in the fort near taras sallied forth when I besieged it as rome. but all they did was form into a long line and refused to advance. When I finally advanced they moved their troops into a decent almost U shape defencive postion. OK, but they are meant to be sallying out and attacking me, not hoodwinking me into attacking them.(unless it was intentional).

I thought I'd fixed the blank diplomacy scrolls - it was an issue I was getting in testing.

Is anyone else getting them?

Just fought another battle as rome and iv noticed that when I charge my infantry, instead of charging , they walk. It says they are charging , so no problem there. Its the unit thats not actually doing much charging. on 2.04

Which units, specifically?

Quick report: had two blue screens at same day playing 2.04.

That could be absolutely anything, unfortunately. Without an error log, it's hard for us to diagnose whether there's an underlying problem.

Quick feedback on Ptolemaioi-Seleukid AI balance in 2.04:

-The Ptolemaioi starts greatly, conquering Antiocheia, Edessa, Sardis and Damaskos respectively.
-The navy management by the Ptolemaioi seems odd. They leave their main port - Alexandria - undefended and being target of constant blocked by inferior navies of other hellenistic powers and pirates.
-At it's apex of prosperity, the Ptolemaioi AI starts to act oddly, by concentrating their bulk of forces around Paraitonium and thus, leaving their newly conquered dominions at Asia minor and Syria with weak garrisons. Furthermore, the AI changes the Capital from Alexandria to Salamis -Kypros-, which has been proved to be a disastrous decision. At this point, the Seleukid starts to recapture their former territory, and together with Pergamon, expel the Ptolemaioi from Asia minor.

I'm looking into the recruit_priority_offset for navies - since adjusting it for land troops ships are now extremely low priority.

I think the movement of capitals is automatic - the AI balances distance penaties by moving its capital to the middle of its holdings. Not sure if we can prevent that.

Playing as the Ptolemaioi, I noticed in diplomacy the confirm and delete icons were switched while offering a gift. Left icon was X but was confirm and right icon was delete but was checkmark.

I've seen this reported a few times, I have no idea what the reason might be, since it doesn't affect everyone. Is it every faction?

I don't get why Baktria was messed with again. I never had a chance to try the version where completing the reforms awarded colony points. This new system sounds untested and impractical.

It was messed with again because that was only a temporary test of the "reward" for an entirely different event.

Of course it's untested, tesing is the purpose of these updates. I make no apologies for that, all of you are participating in the beta testing of the autumn release. The more things you find wrong here, the fewer of them the final release will have.

Also, I was playing a bit with AS, and when I added a colony to the building que the hellenistic polis disappeared from the que. Does this mean that the player has to choose between founding a polis or a military colony?

Yes, you need the same colonists either to:
-found a new polis_one
-found a new helcol_one
-upgrade either helcol_one to helcol_two or helcol_two to helcol_three

So it's a choice. Note you shouldn't cancel either from the queue - you lose the colonist points and have to wait for them to come round again.

A guy governing one my towns thinks he's in the woods, for some reason:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://i.imgur.com/GWZ8YtQ.jpg

This probably should be disabled for barbarian governors? :-( The place he's in is 3.3k size.

Any governor can get Supervisor, and thus Satisfied/Uncomfortable Supervisor. The problem is the triggers are broken. We've been fixing bits and pieces of the traits, but it's a major piece of work. Not sure if we'll get them all by the autumn release, but that's the plan.

1. More Leves should be available in Roman provinces and more often. At the moment Roman stacks are pretty much purely heavy infantry, meaning they smash to bits everything other factions with more skirmishers in their rosters can field against them.

For example, from my game:
- Main KH stack: 7x heavy infantry (+general), rest of the stack are skirmishers of this or that sort.
- Main Roman stack: 14x iheavy nfantry units, general, 2x skirmishers.

Who wins, every single time? :-D

Basically, thanks to the way units become available in Italy (very few skirmishers, all units heavy infantry and cavalry), Romans field very heavy armies and thus steamroll the crap of other factions due to autoresolve quirks where heavier army always wins.

2. Numidian horde script must be rebalanced too, they cause so much grief to Carthage AI at the moment that Carths are unable to do anything else, anywhere overseas, they lose their overseas possessions and then start chasing Numidians around the desert, beating them, turning them to a horde, beating them some more, letting them settle, then hording them again. Forever.

I'd suggest fewer horde units to be spawned here.

3. It's still a little silly with how easily AI can keep far-away cities of wrong culture. Bosporans in Russia, Romans taking Gaul cities and garrisoning them with 1-2 units only. Bosporans in Russia without much sweat or garrison.

1. It's more to do with the fact that Leves are the only skirmishers in the Roman roster. They don't have any other light troops and unless the AI Romans choose to install an Allied Government in northern/southern Italy, they won't have access to any. Plus the adjustment to the recruit_priority_offset value means heavier infantry is higher priority. That stops factions with lots of light options (eg Epeiros) from filling up on nothing but skirmishers, but it's problematic for those with hardly any lights.

It's also by design, to a degree. A proper Roman army was heavy infantry-heavy. For every unit of Leves, there should be 2 each of Hastati and Principes and one of Triarii. Then that should be duplicated again with Italians (who might be lighter on average, but are still mostly medium infantry). Furthermore, Italy had huge reserves of manpower, so it's difficult to justify reducing their recruitment pools.

So unless we can find some more skirmishers for the Romans, we're limited in what we can do.

2. I think we need to review hordes generally.

3. Culture penalties are very sensetive indeed. Even just raising the cap can make some places completely ungovernable, which is not the intention. Also note that when they grow beyond a certain size, the AI moves it's capital to reduce the distance penalty element.

I dont understand the so easily. I see revolts every time. In the case of Romans in less than 100 turns last playthrough I saw them having 3 revolts just in cisapline.
AS has consistly at least 3-4 revolts very early on. And bosporans had one or two last play too.

More revolts is good, especially the Seleukids. They should be at least as consumed with keeping what they already have, as with looking for new acquisitions. That's a good sign the settlement mechanics changes I made are having an impact.

Main problem is this northern AI expansion bug...Bosphorians, Baktrians etc should not push for empty, poor , culturally distant northern lands as default (in some alternative history and games, yes...but not always as Bosphorinas push to the Russia and Baltic..Baktrians in central Asian steppes..)

I think there's something hardcoded by CA that forces this behaviour, it seems to be really difficult to break the AI of the habit.

Archers + slingers make almost 50% of Pontic armies...I suggested this long ago..Both should have very very slow recruitment time...it would take life time to train and they were very little portion of real life helenistic armies, usually no more than 10% at the most, while in game it is usually way more than this

I put the recruit prioirity for missile troops right down. Their refresh rates are less than those collective rates for heavier troops. I changed all the AI personalities to balanced smith, which should make balanced forces a priority.

[z3n]

Main problem is this northern AI expansion bug...Bosphorians, Baktrians etc should not push for empty, poor , culturally distant northern lands as default (in some alternative history and games, yes...but not always as Bosphorinas push to the Russia and Baltic..Baktrians in central Asian steppes..)

They are meant to attack each other (saka/baktria and sauromatae/bosphorus). This does exist but only versus rebels. Faction against faction it works as intended (except for a few random factors). The diplomacy and long term tatrgets were all passed through a chart made by the faction coordinators, who are historians and know more than me about what is realistic and not.

[Mantaprey]

Pritanoi H/M 2.04 Turn 400/ 173BC
Mainly testing my favorite part again CAI
Maps

Player report:
Holy hill of Tara is in Scotland and Ireland

The rebellions are becoming more frequent but do not disturb empires. At best they tie up some full stacks and prevent those from fighting a war. Or as in the Interesting Events, the Romani Danube would splinter apart making it less effective cut off from Italy. Later on, it becomes a game of 'who can take it first' if its in between 2 factions. Except for vassals as they are completely passive and shy away from rebellion.


Interesting Events

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Areuakoi loves the north sea T80/253BC

By making peace with the Lusotanan from very early on the Areuakoi expand in to Gaul in T40/263BC . While Roma blocks the east and the Gaulish factions fight over each other, Areuakoi take over the independent tribes along the west and north coast all the way up to the Rhine in T80/253BC.

Faction Full T110/245BC

The Heruskoz, the last of Eleutheroi lose to the Sweboz in T110/245BC. The world is full of mighty factions.

The Eagle and the Horse T130/240BC - T300/198BC

The 2 ambitions met in north central Europe in T130/240BC. The Boii were defeated by Roma and the Areuakoi took a large chunk of the Sweboz lands. By T160/233BC Roma and the Areuakoi were at war. Their armies had been conqering northern Europe so that is where the war was fought for a long time. The mediterainian coast and sea was quiet for now. Inbetween them the Gaulish factions still fight each other blocking a direct invasion from either faction.
Roma was able to hold them back around the Danube valley while finishing off the Getai (T164) and the Skordisi rebellions. Both factions have formidable units that helps with the auto resolve. At T200/223BC the Gauls had settled the dispute with the Auernoi finishing off the Aedui only to find them selves surrounded by powerful factions. While the Boii had taken Pannonia-Illyria almost cutting of the Romani Danube from Italy.
The Areuakoi turned their attention away from the Danube to conquer central gaul T210/220BC, easing up the pressure for the Romani to claw back territory. The Areukoi easily crumbled and the Auernoi (in 24 turns/6 years) and didn't stop until they had taken Sicily by T260/208BC (in 40 turns/10 years). The Danube territories where cut off from Roma and scattered by a few rebellions, the Areuakoi scooped them up by T260/208BC.
The Romani had been reduced to annoying rebels at Brettia, Syracuse and Eturia. The Areuakoi kept them, as vassals for 40 turn/10 years before putting them down while fighting the KH and Pontus T300/198BC.

The raised culture penalty has little effect on the European Tribal States faction because most of Europe has ETS. It enables large barbarian empires like the Areuakoi. Although they had to keep fighting rebellions in Italy, Greece, Anatolia and the steppes. Generally they were able to hold their empire together.

Arche Seleukia Fights Back T80/253BC - T340/188BC

AS had to fight back against every body encroaching on their territory. It looked like they were going to collapse but the grey death returned starting in T80/253BC when Hayasdan had taken Seleukia. In their usual style they focused their armies on lesser factions and continued to dominate all the way until T340/188BC.

The 2 world powers T370/180BC

After the Romani war had ended in T260/208BC the Areuakoi continued conquering just a bit more. Pergamon, KH and Bosphoros were easily crushed only Pontus and Hayasdan held on just a bit longer than normal through rebellion. Sauromate became Areuakoi vassals and the living factions of Europe have a genuine alliance with the Areuakoi. Then silent borders as Seleukia and Areuakoi remain neutral. No other power can stand up to them besides maybe Qarthadast or the Ptolemaioi.

Pergamon Power T230/215BC

It was the largest expansion of Pergamon i have seen 12 provinces taken from Makedonia, KH, and Ptolemaioi. Streching from Histria, Makedonia, Crete and kilikia. In the end they got smashed by the Areuakoi in Europe, 6 provinces in 10 turns/2.5 years and became a AS vassal in T270/205BC.

Qarthadast in the upper kingdom T290/200BC

Qarthadast attacked the Ptolemaic Egypt in T210/220BC taking the Libyan desert. Crete had switched between KH and Pergamon when Qarthadast took it from them in T260/208BC. Then they arrived in Thebais at T290/200BC. It looked like the end for the Ptolemaioi but they fought back retaking Thebais and all the way to Kyrene by T400/173BC they were forced to abandon Crete in T390/175BC becoming Eleutheroi.

Pritanoi Rix T301/197BC

Sweboz and Areuakoi scouting parties land on my island. I start to bolster my military resulting in the Kingdom notification in T301/197BC. The Areuakoi are incresingly turning their attention towards me i can no longer hide on my island and must play the great game. First thing i did was make an alliance with the Sweboz in T370/180BC.

Conquest List

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Turn-Faction destroyed/Migration - by Faction

56 - Massylii - Qarthadast
80 - Massylii - Qarthadast
113 - Massylii - Qarthadast
128 - Boii - Roma
164 - Getai - Pergamon, Roma
177 - Makedonia - Pergamon
195 - Aedui - Aruernoi
226 - Aruernoi - Areuakoi
251 - Nabataea - AS
258 - Nabataea - AS
293 - KH - Areuakoi
299 - Roma - Areuakoi
312 - Bosphoros - Areuakoi
332 - Saba - AS
354 - pontus - Areuakoi
369 - Hayasdan - Areuakoi

Pontus Army

Pontus had become a normal faction owning 6 provinces. All the provinces had allied states except for the capital that had Basilike Patris. This is their army in T235/214BC.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Lusotannan Army

They had made an alliance early on with the Areuakoi and were at war with Qarthadast but did not fight any battles beyond Iberia. I thought their army had too many skirmishers but it turns out its kind of even. This is their army in T100/248BC look at all the slingers.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[4th Regiment]

Archers + slingers make almost 50% of Pontic armies...I suggested this long ago..Both should have very very slow recruitment time...it would take life time to train and they were very little portion of real life helenistic armies, usually no more than 10% at the most, while in game it is usually way more than this

[parthian8]

Roma H/M 20 turns.

I am playing Rome to keep a none-involved eye on the Makedonia situation, having seem someone else report Makedonia still dead in 40 turns. I feared that may be the case have seen that the Knossos situation has been resolved in favour of KH (Knossos has been duly taken).
Makedon starts quite well. The garrisons in Pella and Korinthos are stronger and the early KH attempt to seize Korinthos is thwarted. In the two games I have played Pyrrhus has not attacked Thermon and with the immovable governor in the city and buffed associated stack, it remains free. That has solved the problem of the Makedonian AI trying to consolidate there.
But.......
Twice now, it has sent its Korinth army to the minor settlement sweet of Korinth and sat there.
Makedon has now lost Pella to Epirus, and both Demetrius and Korinth now look vulnerable.
It will play on both games to 40 turns, by which time it is likely Makedon will be wiped out. The minor buffs it has received have been more than matched I think by those given to Epirus and KH, with the net effect that the net outcome is likely to be as it has been previously. I reach the conclusion stated previously that it simply seems underpowered.
The obvious thing for Makedon to do is attack Sparta. I have never seen it do this since the "Makedon Problem" emerged a few weeks ago.

[Ribtickler]

The units that walked when charging where hastati(2.04).

[jordiebenardus]

I'm going to report on my 61 turn gameplay as Pergamon in patch 2.04:
- Regarding CAI the Knossos script worked perfectly however the Makedonians lose Thermon almost instantly (turn 6/8) followed by Demetrias (turn 26) and then Pella (turn 32). Epeiros held italy for awhile then Syracuse revolted to Phyrros (turn 22). Koinon Helenon ends up capturing Pella (turn 51) and Epeiros became KH client state (turn 53). Epeiros losses its holdings in Italy and Sicily by turn 57. In the east not much changes, Baktria and Pahlava are allies smashing the Saka. The seleukid losses Tarsos to rebellion in turn 19. They stabilize a front in Syria Koile and exchanges assault with the Ptolemaioi. In the West not much changes in Spain, the "barbarians" of the west formed kingdoms painting the western map with various color. Not much progress on the Thraikian front. The Bosporitai formed a nice kingdom of Pantikapaion, Chersonesos, and Skythiapolis. Massylia had yet declare war to karthadast.

- Regarding BAI: flankings became more consistent, in my war of independence I saw some great battles the best was the Battle of Ipsos (turn 22) where two armies tried to envelope me. When I shifted my center phalanx to the left it opened a gap and an enemy Akkadian infantry rushes in that gap hitting my archers, this never happens before Im exhilarated. Flankings are conducted more consistently, I have yet to see any "flank-pause".

- Charges improve, and cohesion is on point. Javelins do become a nuisance for my army as not only damage it but also breaking a formation.

Several questions though: the Skynet message no longer appear, is this intentional? I also have received the independence message as Pergamon, does this mean the reform kicked in?

[moai17]

Getting this every turn since I defeated a Lusotannan army with 2:3 ratio. H/M, Arevakoi.

http://i.imgur.com/Ep1D6lS.jpg

[delra]

So unless we can find some more skirmishers for the Romans, we're limited in what we can do.

Could make other AIs recruit more heavies. Carthage and the Greeks most notably. Like the good old EB1 days, where everything coming to Sicily would be Elite African or Elite Iberian if not Sacred, making Romans cry bitter tears.

Also, maybe prevent AI from changing capital, so they remain more focused on their starting area, migrate less?