Page 4 of 372 FirstFirst 12345678910111213142954104 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 7428

Thread: [Feedback] Questions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

  1. #61

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Is it me or have battles become faster? Like, much faster. I see men dropping like flies, even heavily armored ones
    Not just you. The casualty rates are much higher in my opinion. I would like to add that the two big field battles I've fought were exciting, dynamic, close-run things and Kam has done wonders to make battles challenging and fresh.

  2. #62

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    1. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=837466180, http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=837466305 (Pyrrhos in the sea. I think this is a vanilla ai bug..)

    2. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=837466345, http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=837466382 (When start, there is no field of mars. But I can recruit blocked units. Is it intended or not?)
    http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=837466102

    3. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=837466030 (No description. That's it)

    3-1. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=837466067 (I think this is a description error. There are three baggage trains.)

    4. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=837466135 (This is just a question. I thought when we recruit equites, It needs equites. But in game, it needs patricii. Did I know wrong? I'm wondering about it.)

  3. #63

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Rome can recruit barracks tier units as it says in the description. The missing building description is a known bug and is due to resolution sizes. Equites belong to the patricii population group.

    Edit - just to show you what I mean by the resolution issue, here is Rome in my game:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Last edited by Dresden; January 07, 2017 at 08:25 PM.

    ----> Website -- Patreon -- Steam -- Forums -- Youtube -- Facebook <----

  4. #64

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Thank you very very much for your detailed reply.

    The problem is solved!

  5. #65

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    At first it was appeared apparently. But after I save the game. It doesn't appear as before. So this is what you said? (3, 3-1 problems)

  6. #66
    RollingWave's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Taiwan
    Posts
    5,085

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    A few thoughts

    1. Steppe factions sometimes still end up just killing themselves via starvation it seems.
    2. The various edicts, could they possibly be done to interact with the population and supply system? I think that would be rather helpful if I could use edict or certain buildings to change my supply or population situation more quickly.
    3. This is more tied to the hard core mode submod but I'll list it here as well, the other aspects are doable, but the -50 public order for provincial instability is just too much. and there's no way to get around it or make it go faster. it make more sense to either make it -50 but is more like -5 per turn (at least until it drops below a certain number.) or -10 to -20 but drops slower?
    4. overall, probably the best way to make the game harder is to make the imperium levels more damaging especially with regards to diplomacy.
    5. I notice that trade agreement seems easier to acquire now, which make sense especially for factions with no real conflict of interest.
    1180, an unprecedented period of peace and prosperity in East Asia, it's technology and wealth is the envy of the world. But soon conflict will engulf the entire region with great consequences and lasting effects for centuries to come, not just for this region, but the entire known world, when one man, one people, unites.....

  7. #67

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Hey DEI architects (dresden, kam and co.)

    I just wanted to weigh in with a massive thank you for one minor facet of this incredible update -- Barbarian armies are perfect. Literally. When I face them down across the battlefield they're a fearsome mass of javelin-hurling, shock-charging and howling warriors and I genuinely have fear in my heart even against mid-quality Gallic foes. In 1.1 I scythed through tribal armies with hardly any casualties, but now being at war with the tribes feels like the life and death struggle it should be.

    That's an incredible achievement. So thanks. It's giving me great joy.

    Game of the Fates
    Mod of the week on hold -- I've played nearly every RTW mod out there.
    BOYCOTT THE USE OF SMILEYS! (Okay, just once)
    Antiochos VII...last true scion of the Seleucid dynasty...rest in peace, son of Hellas.
    I've returned--please forgive my long absence.

  8. #68
    RollingWave's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Taiwan
    Posts
    5,085

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Another note, Sarmatian NOBLE Horse Archers costs warrior class and not you know... noblemen class. there's almost nothing in the early Saka roster that cost noble class.

    A bit more thoughts on the food and population thing.

    1. things like migration edict should definitively effect population pretty significantly (it probably also should have a negative bonus, like significantly increase culture penalties. BUT increase culture conversion obviously.)
    2. If settlement A is next to settlement B and both owned by the same faction, and province B is devastated but settlement A is full, shouldn't the script allow for transfer of food to settlement B? (at least to a degree. )
    Last edited by RollingWave; January 07, 2017 at 11:48 PM.
    1180, an unprecedented period of peace and prosperity in East Asia, it's technology and wealth is the envy of the world. But soon conflict will engulf the entire region with great consequences and lasting effects for centuries to come, not just for this region, but the entire known world, when one man, one people, unites.....

  9. #69

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    I have never been so happy to see thueros reform. Finally I can put commoners/cannon fodder to a good use.

  10. #70

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Something odd happened to me just now.

    I'm playing as Rasenna, which has the same faction symbol as the Etruscans usually have, and was attacked by Rome during the end turn movements. After a good defensive fight which ended with my last units routing, although they had many men left and were fighting very well, I lost my capital Arretium. My neighbours, the Celtic Ligurians with whom I have a non-aggression pact, attacked the Romans in Arretium and liberated the city.

    The first result of the Ligurians action resulted in me and them being in a military alliance, which often happens when a faction liberates another faction. The second result was that the liberated owners of Arretium wasn't my faction but The Etruscan League. The banner flag of the Etruscan League army has the same symbol as the Rasenna faction but is red instead of blue. When I hover the mouse over the unit to see the name of the army, the faction symbol in the window is Rasenna blue instead of red. The same when I hover the mouse over the province to see the name of it.

    I thought that Arretium was owned by the Etruscan League by this time in the history, although being subjects of Rome, and that the faction called Rasenna (The People) in DeI 1.2 was the Etruscan League called by the collective name of The Etruscans. But it seems that you have made an alternative history and decided that Rasenna isn't the Etruscans but some other faction.

    It would've been great if you could change the faction of Rasenna to be the rightful owners of Arretium. It doesn't matter if you call them The Etruscan League or Rasenna because that should be the same faction with different names.
    Last edited by Gusten Grodslukare; January 08, 2017 at 12:45 AM.

  11. #71

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    ???????????????????????

  12. #72

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusten Grodslukare View Post
    Something odd happened to me just now.

    I'm playing as Rasenna, which has the same faction symbol as the Etruscans usually have, and was attacked by Rome during the end turn movements. After a good defensive fight which ended with my last units routing, although they had many men left and were fighting very well, I lost my capital Arretium. My neighbours, the Celtic Ligurians with whom I have a non-aggression pact, attacked the Romans in Arretium and liberated the city.

    The first result of the Ligurians action resulted in me and them being in a military alliance, which often happens when a faction liberates another faction. The second result was that the liberated owners of Arretium wasn't my faction but The Etruscan League. The banner flag of the Etruscan League army has the same symbol as the Rasenna faction but is red instead of blue. When I hover the mouse over the unit to see the name of the army, the faction symbol in the window is Rasenna blue instead of red. The same when I hover the mouse over the province to see the name of it.

    I thought that Arretium was owned by the Etruscan League by this time in the history, although being subjects of Rome, and that the faction called Rasenna (The People) in DeI 1.2 was the Etruscan League called by the collective name of The Etruscans. But it seems that you have made an alternative history and decided that Rasenna isn't the Etruscans but some other faction.

    It would've been great if you could change the faction of Rasenna to be the rightful owners of Arretium. It doesn't matter if you call them The Etruscan League or Rasenna because that should be the same faction with different names.
    That is the emergent faction in that region which represents political dissidents/alternative factions within that area. So, for now, its named the etruscan league. I already fixed their icon in the latest update. But, anyway, many emergent factions will have similar names to regions they come from, they are supposed to represent alternative political factions in that area. We haven't perfected them all yet, there are hundreds of new factions.

    ----> Website -- Patreon -- Steam -- Forums -- Youtube -- Facebook <----

  13. #73
    KAM 2150's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gdańsk, Poland
    Posts
    10,899

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Quote Originally Posted by thakey View Post
    ???????????????????????
    ??????????????????
    Official DeI Instagram Account! https://www.instagram.com/divideetimperamod/
    Official DeI Facebook Page! https://www.facebook.com/divideetimperamod

  14. #74

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    KAM, I think the previous posters vague and aggressive use of the multiple question mark technique was an attempt to reference the hoplite unit wavering due to flanking.

    The multiple question mark technique, along with the multiple exclamation mark technique, is a time honored and proven way to piss me right off.
    Last edited by Dresden; January 08, 2017 at 03:30 AM.

    ----> Website -- Patreon -- Steam -- Forums -- Youtube -- Facebook <----

  15. #75

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    I've also noticed that with phalanxes, for what it's worth. Playing as Parthia my units will stay until they're over half dead (these are levies, being shot at by horse archers and literally doing nothing) yet my phalanxes will rout extremely quickly when fighting hoplites.

    Other than that I've noticed the AI just being more... antagonistic. Just better formations that really hamper my own and force me to adapt and actually use cavalry to try and stop really good formations from forming before they do. Best combat I've played in a TW game.

    Another thing though is that I'd like to say a lot of the games where you start as one region (Macedon, Parthia I've played so far) seem really difficult. As in, after I defeat an AI's army (in Parthia's case, Saka Ruaka), I can't overcome their garrison, and while I fall back to replenish/recruit (which takes a very long time even when I have economic buildings) they spam me with 3-4 agents, take or kill all of mine and generally screw me over and there's not a lot I can do about it.

  16. #76

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    OK, so I've been messing around with 1.2 (mostly with Meroe) and here are my impressions, first the things I like:

    1. I really like the new economy system. Now, maintaining an army is busy work and I even had to only keep my better tier units and levy the commoner troops when needed. Awesome! Hope the concept remains the same.
    2. I really, really, REALLY love how resources are set up. As Meroe, I was poor as - but as soon as I took over Aksum and their gold I became filthy rich. I really love how precious resources are, I hope it stays that way.
    3. New battle AI. It is great, it fills in gaps (and exploits them), flanks, holds the line and sometimes keeps units in reserve. Improvements are massive and noticeable so very good job on getting the brain dead AI to actually be competent.
    4. Cavalry and overall charges. I really like how you portrayed the initial clash, a brutal and high casualty moment. I think this is quite accurate and the clashes are just gorgeous and brutal to look at.
    5. The population system. I began a campaign against Egypt in the north, won a battle but decided taking on the 2nd reinforcing stack is risky and since I didn't have enough warriors / nobles I decided to retreat. Normally I would take my chances and try, but now my army is not as easily replaceable and if I have to only rely on commoner drafts I will lose miserably. My campaign was unsuccessful and that was great! The UI is kinda buggy though and sometimes fails to display information but overall this is a great feature and is working like a charm within the game.
    6. This is a minor detail but I love that the first salvo of arrows actually kills someone now ; also, different ranges on missile units is a cool new addition, now superior missile factions are actually superior in more ways than just armored archers.

    What I don't really like:

    1. The overall battle speed. I understand it is done this way to help the AI, but I feel the battle AI is quite decent now. Maybe you can tone down the kill rate by 30-50%? Only the kill rate, as I mentioned above the initial charge clash is amazing and should stay that way but soldiers in line formation combat die way too fast when pitched against evenly matched troops.
    2. Sometimes the campaign AI acts weird. As Meroe, I had one of the south Arabian factions declare war on me. I defeated their armies a couple times and they asked for peace. I accepted, and in the following turns we signed non aggression and trade agreement. What happened was that this "full green" faction on the diplomatic map suddenly declared war on me (I was friends with the rest of the Arabs I came in contact with). Also, after they declared war the next turn I sued for peace and they insta accepted it with "high" chance. Then 2-3 turns in they declare war on me, repeat the above etc.



    I will post more impressions / bugs once I play more. Overall it feels as a legit expansion pack to an AAA game so all I can say is hats off to you guys! Great job!

  17. #77

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Thanks for the detailed feedback. KAM could answer better but I think the kill rates are necessary to see the AI behavior we now have. I realize it may not be what many expect from DeI combat but KAM is trying to make battles difficult like our campaigns and actually have dynamics. So kill rates may unfortunately be tied to that

    ----> Website -- Patreon -- Steam -- Forums -- Youtube -- Facebook <----

  18. #78

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    That would be a bummer but I do understand. Anything will do, even a slight decrease by 10% will make it better at this point if it is possible and doesn't mess up with the AI too much. Maybe combine that with troops routing a bit earlier if it's possible, just giving ideas don't get me wrong


    I will also try another faction with a more professional army than Meroe, maybe the high death count is also tied to my bare chest warriors

  19. #79

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    Quote Originally Posted by Augustusng View Post
    Could just be a mistake. A lot of the new roster overhauls were added fairly recently, so there might still be something off in their population assignments.
    Alright, thanks. I'll keep posting similar issues then

  20. #80
    rbt's Avatar Libertus
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    75

    Default Re: [Feedback] Impressions, Critiques and Requests for 1.2

    I'm not sure about new hoplite's phalanx, I see it should works like pikes, but imo hoplites in phalanx formation should have bonus to defence like pikes. Now hoplites are weak in my opinion, it's better to not use phalanx, because debuff is to big.

    Aedui faction Gaesatae unit - those stats, morale, passive abilities and 4 javelins - wow. I can't win vs them, because it is so good unit at the begining of game. Is it balanced?

    I'm not sure in units cost balance at all, another example skirmishers in Massalia roster - Psiloi Akontistati (worst stats - 339 cost) and Gaeroas (better stats - 313).

    Last one, imo units upkeep bonus for AI is to big, because one city factions can have 2 full stacks armies.

    Great mod, keep going!

Posting Permissions

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