Announcement: Europa Barbarorum II 2.2r released!

[QuintusSertorius]

Does the CTD at turn 253 apply to all 2.2d games? I am wondering whether I should continue the campaign I started or wait for 2.2e.

I don't know; it should only happen on an Arevaci game (since they're the only ones who should be shown the message), and I've seen games going well past turn 253. Someone on our internal forum is reporting on 1000 turns with 2.2d2.

[daniboy630]

Great mod so far i been playing since rome 1, but my fav faction Baktria need some love, the Kamandar i Pahlavi doesn't have bow when are loosing some arrows

[Haydn91]

Thank you, Sertorius

[Porphyrogenita]

The Hollow Roman Empire:
I have noticed that when Rome expanded into SE France, and held 3-4 provinces there long enough for the cities to grow (and hence get a nice square city icon), it seems to have had very few troops to defend them with. when the Gauls launched their reconquista the cites fell with almost no struggle and the Romans collapsed back in to northern Italy - and all downhill from there. In a recent game I noticed the Romans had (with some assistance) conquered northern Italy but again seemed to be very lacking in troops since those cities fell like a pack of cards as soon as the Gauls attacked. I wonder if the Roman government tree is causing a disproportionate difficulty for the AI and its production of money generating buildings. I also note that maintenance costs will be halved for 2.2e but this will benefit all the AI so is unlikely to assist the Romans. I suspect it will however greatly strengthen the larger/richer powers since they will have just doubled their existing advantage even if the ratios remain the same.

[QuintusSertorius]

The Hollow Roman Empire:
I have noticed that when Rome expanded into SE France, and held 3-4 provinces there long enough for the cities to grow (and hence get a nice square city icon), it seems to have had very few troops to defend them with. when the Gauls launched their reconquista the cites fell with almost no struggle and the Romans collapsed back in to northern Italy - and all downhill from there. In a recent game I noticed the Romans had (with some assistance) conquered northern Italy but again seemed to be very lacking in troops since those cities fell like a pack of cards as soon as the Gauls attacked. I wonder if the Roman government tree is causing a disproportionate difficulty for the AI and its production of money generating buildings. I also note that maintenance costs will be halved for 2.2e but this will benefit all the AI so is unlikely to assist the Romans. I suspect it will however greatly strengthen the larger/richer powers since they will have just doubled their existing advantage even if the ratios remain the same.

Low garrisons is a universal AI problem, not a Roman-specific one. There seems to be some sort of AI-specific order boost that allows them to use garrisons that would be impossibly low for the human player.

In any case, I see no reason to assist the Roman AI in having even easier conquest prospects into an area we don't even want them going into if they haven't consolidated Italy first. They have huge recruitment prospects in Italy, they definitely don't have any shortage of troops. Outside of Italy, they can build Allied Governments, which give plenty of local units.

[Porphyrogenita]

This is the northern half of the Roman Empire:

And this is the southern half:

Note how few troops the Romans have. I don't want them to have excessively conquest opportunities but rather to consolidate what they have taken.
Maybe this is an issue with all the AI factions?
Regards
P

[QuintusSertorius]

It's all the AI factions; look at all the other settlements on your screenshots, with the exception of Delminion. All those Epirote settlements have skeleton garrisons, so do the Carthaginian ones.

There is no functional setting we can change to make the AI use bigger garrisons, they always use the bare minimum they can. Furthermore, they seem to get some sort of hardcoded bonus to order, because if the player had garrisons that small, they'd be facing repeated rebellions.

[bordinis]

The romans are a lot weaker in 2.2d in all my campaign they got crushed either by greeks or boii or other gauls. Greeks now expand overseas like crazy so roman CAI always watchful and vigilant while other take advantage of it and slowly destroy it. So yeah, there is some truth behind what he says. The roma CAI is not what it used to be ')

[Kaskad]

Hi Porphyrogenita. I also play with Epeiros, do you face any problem with your governor at Thermon, who gets stuck in after a few turn ? I face this issue in each of my games (EB2.2c and .d), the gov form is Allied (Democracy) ...

[Porphyrogenita]

Hi Porphyrogenita. I also play with Epeiros, do you face any problem with your governor at Thermon, who gets stuck in after a few turn ? I face this issue in each of my games (EB2.2c and .d), the gov form is Allied (Democracy) ...

Hi Kaskad,

I always use Epeirote Administration for Thermon (in fact for everything except border northern areas, and have not had this issue. Is the Governor a client ruler or one of you FM?
I vaguely recall some previous posts about similar issues with FM getting stuck in cities but I have no idea what the outcome was.

Regards
P.

[Kaskad]

The gv is a client ruler. If I recall well I did not find this issue when I used Epeirote Adm indeed....

[DaGrenadier]

A noob question but are the animation files supposed to go to mod/data/animations or MedIITW/data/animations ?

[QuintusSertorius]

A noob question but are the animation files supposed to go to mod/data/animations or MedIITW/data/animations ?

It goes in mods\ebii\data\animations\ - NOT in your MedIITW\ folder or you'll ruin your vanilla game.

[DaGrenadier]

Ah I see. One more question tough, My Hastati,Principes and the socii are in a weird formation in default mode, the soldiers are standing in a line with arms length of space between them but when i press loose formation they go back to the tight regular shoulder to shoulder formation,. is it a bug or a new feature?

[QuintusSertorius]

Ah I see. One more question tough, My Hastati,Principes and the socii are in a weird formation in default mode, the soldiers are standing in a line with arms length of space between them but when i press loose formation they go back to the tight regular shoulder to shoulder formation,. is it a bug or a new feature?

New feature.

[DaGrenadier]

New feature.

Ok, What is the reason for that?

[Kull]

Ok, What is the reason for that?

Please read the link in the first post. Basically, the evidence points toward the "loose formation" as bring the standard.

[Valkorh]

I have a problem with the roman office system. After about thirty turns the characters stopped getting any eligibility traits above the level of quaestor, including former consuls and praetors and I effectively lost the ability to lead armies with Imperium holding FMs. Is this a bug or is there a change in the system from 2.2b? Thanks for the reply!

[QuintusSertorius]

I have a problem with the roman office system. After about thirty turns the characters stopped getting any eligibility traits above the level of quaestor, including former consuls and praetors and I effectively lost the ability to lead armies with Imperium holding FMs. Is this a bug or is there a change in the system from 2.2b? Thanks for the reply!

It's a bug due to the removal of all AntiTraits; they need a more considered treatment. In 2.2e they'll be re-enabled pending a proper resolution in 2.3.

[Porphyrogenita]

I'll demolish the govt and see if I can replicate the issue. I have had foot client-ruler generals in winter have so few movement points they can't move but not often. I "think" when you add client ruler attribute (-50%? movement) and attuned governor traits together you don't have much in the way of MPs to spare. Other attributes may further reduce MPs. I'll let you know how it turns out.