Page 6 of 338 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415163156106 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 6751

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

  1. #101

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

    Triari say "Pikemen?"

  2. #102

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

    Triarii are now classified as hoplites/pike class. If you see only pikemen, you may be using a different game language.

    ---------------

    In terms of AI aggressiveness, its a hard thing to balance. If we increase it even a little bit, you will have an even harder time at small faction starts (which are really hard right now). If you edit some of those variables too much, you will also begin to see more weird behavior, like declaring war them immediately asking for peace. This happens even now since Rome 2 is a random sandbox game, but it would happen quite frequently with too many changes.

    The challenge of balancing the early game vs late game has always been hard in these games. We added the population system (and other systems) to try to prevent the game from becoming a steamroll, but there will almost always be a point at which the player has developed a solid footing and begins to march toward victory. It is very hard to stop that. We are working on a tribal unification idea but that is still in very early phases.

    Believe it or not, the AI is actually acting rationally - which may not be best for gameplay. If you are that much more powerful, then they know they probably wouldn't fare well in a war. My preference is to add difficulty through other systems and not gamey "AI always declares war" or "AI randomly declares war" type things. I may test out increasing war declaration variables a bit in the next update to see how that goes. I may also increase diplo penalties a bit more for imperium levels. Most of our feedback so far is that 1.2 is really, really hard so we have to be careful not to make the early game even more difficult.

    I can also make a version of the hardcore submod that doesn't have the economy changes.

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

  3. #103

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

    Early game is brutal indeed. Any tips for survival as Kartli?

  4. #104

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

    Glad it's not just me finding early game difficult.

  5. #105

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

    I am going to be lowering some AI bonuses at lowest difficulties next update. I want to make the difficulty levels really matter a bit more.

    But yes early game is brutal right now as a small faction. Probably a bit too hard, just as mid-late game is probably a bit too easy. Its hard to get the balance right in TW games.

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

  6. #106
    KAM 2150's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gdańsk, Poland
    Posts
    10,366

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AugustusRoman View Post
    Triari say "Pikemen?"
    Yes, that is side effect of improved hoplite behaviour as they must be in "Pike" category or AI will not be able to use them properly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenicia View Post
    Thanks guys for your work. Mod is great as always.
    But i find battles way too fast now. Last one, on hard difficulty 20/20 units (Arverni/Aedui) took around 5 minutes.
    Depends on the army composition, "barbarian" battles, especially with light troops will end in a short amount of time. I increased the speed oif battles slightly (light units battle would last the same in 1.1) because manouvering itself can take up to 5-10 minutes of battle and sadly, people (including my friends) do not really want that slow grind, also check out the popularity of faster battle mods.

    Also as I pointed out in the past, slow battles are making stuff easier and not really more historical. In real battles, bad formation placement or bad manouver would endanger entire army while with slow battles you never need to worry about it as even your light spearmen will stand up to legionares long enough for you to make complicated, NASA level of GPS guidance cavalry manouver, again, imposible in real battle

    I am not saying that I won't work for it but I also do not want slow battles for the sake of slow.

    Quote Originally Posted by Antiochos VII Sidetes View Post
    Hi Kam and Dresden,

    So I know the manner in which this poster delivered this message/screenshot was rude and infuriating, but the picture is actually a really good example of something I (and by the look of this thread, several other people as well) have experienced in many hoplite battles I've played since 1.2. As in the screenshot, I'll have a perfectly even line of hoplites with no enemy penetration whatsoever and begin to receive a flanking penalty, and hoplite units will often rout with 170, 180 and even 190 men left in the unit.

    Now I know the go-to response is to say "go look at the pike preview", but on multiple occasions i've had a completely unbroken, solid line and had this issue -- the battle system overall works great, but clearly there is a discrepancy here.

    As a couple other posts have said, hoplites actually perform WAY more effectively out of phalanx mode than they do in phalanx mode -- if I leave my hoplites in phalanx formation they usually end a fullstack vs. fullstack battle with about 50-80 kills each, often with 120-140 men left in the unit.

    If I leave it off, however, the hoplites will kill into the hundreds, sometimes the high hundreds. I suspect this is a natural consequence of more individual men being in contact with the enemy. Now the hoplite phalanx is still useful defensively, but as of right now if you're trying to win a battle turning on the hoplite phalanx formation will actually make it harder for your units to do what you need them to do.

    I totally feel you guys' pain when it comes to irritating and insulting posts like the guy who posted this screenshot with maddening and aggressive question marks -- that must be utterly infuriating. But at the same time, I really do want to ask Kam in particular -- how do we best avoid this issue? I'm trying to follow your advice in these battles to the letter, and the issue still recurs.

    This is not to say that hoplites are useless or that battles with them are broken. They're still incredibly fun experiences, and the new battle system is in my opinion a massive step forward in terms of pacing, flow and most of all difficulty. I and others just really love the mod and want to give you guys the most reasonable and useful feedback possible.

    I apologize if I've given offense in any way in this or previous comments on this issue. You guys have turned a mediocre game into a monument and that's something I could never do. Just wondering what yall's opinion is on how to prevent the flank penalty in frontal battles.
    The thing is that wavering now does not mean that unit will rout but that the unit is endagered, it will go away shortly. Also hoplites are thing of the past and I want them to be inferior (with some better tactics by the AI involved of course) to all other armies in case of performance but it is up to the player to properly command them and make good use of them. If I take away their weaknesses, they will just turn into super go to troops that are invincible. I will still work on them but overal philosophy will remain the same. I might do that hoplites will get their custom shield values so hoplon will be inferior to thureos when it comes to bonuses out of formation but will greatly improve with formation turned on (as hoplon was not a dueling shield, it was rahter bad at it).

    In case of morale stuff, I am still not done but I never had those results like posted here so it is harder to track it.

    Quote Originally Posted by gornoviceanu View Post
    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.

    30-50% would be almost like a cheat mode as AI would be neutered since it would never be able to threated you as you would have all time in the world to pull of impossible tactics in real life that AI is unable to counter. I could just make it slower and force AI to rout as lower man count but routed units have 0 defence so they would die like flies anyway. I am not finished with battle speed of course but I don’t want to make average battle to be 20-30 minutes as it only sounds like fun but in prolonged campaign is not that fun, plus makes stuff way to easy.



    If I missed a reply to someone, please let me know
    Last edited by KAM 2150; January 08, 2017 at 05:04 PM.
    Official DeI Instagram Account! https://www.instagram.com/divideetimperamod/
    Official DeI Facebook Page! https://www.facebook.com/divideetimperamod

  7. #107

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Dresden View Post
    I am going to be lowering some AI bonuses at lowest difficulties next update. I want to make the difficulty levels really matter a bit more.

    But yes early game is brutal right now as a small faction. Probably a bit too hard, just as mid-late game is probably a bit too easy. Its hard to get the balance right in TW games.
    I played Macedon campaign up to turn 100 on hard difficulty and I tried to play as Kartli on very hard difficulty. The main difference between these two campaigns was the fact that as Macedon I had tons of Greek mercenaries at my disposal. By using these mercenaries I was able to overcome hard part of the game. As Kartli I had almost no mercenaries available, that's why my campaign ended painfully.

  8. #108
    spiderknight's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Republic Of Alberta
    Posts
    657

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

    I get a ctd when i try to recruit velites.

  9. #109

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

    That would be a bug report not feedback And as it says in the bug report thread, if you get crashes:
    1. Clean out your data folder found in the Rome 2 install folder for Steam. Various mods can be active even without activating them in mod manager.
    2. Most other mods are not compatible with DeI so deactivate/remove them. Some submods may still cause issues.
    3. Reverify the game in steam to check local file integrity.
    4. Make sure you have patch 17 not 16 beta for the game itself.
    5. If none of that works, try deleting the Rome2.exe file found in the Rome 2 directory and reverifying your game cache in Steam.

    But from the sound of it, I would make sure you don't have other mods and reverify your game cache
    Last edited by Dresden; January 08, 2017 at 06:49 PM.

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

  10. #110
    Civis
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Malang city, East Java province, Indonesia
    Posts
    144

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

    Playing as Romans, I must say thanks again, I like it the new D.e.i
    My first impression is, with honest I say

    1) I enjoy learning history with new D.e.i feature "this year on history...", also, it give Me more motivation and clue what I must to do in campaign
    2) the cost of recruit and upkeep is very expensive, even after I'm using sub mod for reduced cost and upkeep, but I don't feelt it disturb Me, I know and enjoy play defensive and focus on development for now.

    ok, continue playing...

  11. #111

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

    The "Kauntikas" (Indian Spearmen) who are Taksashila's basic infantry unit have no armour rating, despite a description that describes their armour and visually wearing some armour

  12. #112
    Decanus
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Virginia, US of A
    Posts
    574

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

    Pyrrhus of Epirus: Turn 15

    Rome is dead and the Italians are free. This new Liberate action for - every - region is a game changer. Instead of conquering territories and protecting them all with 1 army against the unending multitudes of Rome, each liberated region came with its own half stack-ish army to protect it. It only took 2-3 major battles for me to defeat the Roman field armies, at which point the Etruscans, Samnites, and Lucanians laid siege to Rome and took it a couple turns later. That's the fundamental Hannibal strategy right there - only this time it actually worked. Maybe too well? Not really sure, and I really don't want to jinx my good fortune. Either way, the ability to rope together a lot of subjugated/allied tribes is definitely something I like to do in Rome 2. Feels more authentic to me.

    Of course there were some tough points along the way. The Samnites - the people I had Liberated - suddenly declared war on me out of the blue when our diplomatic status was 75 points in the positive. Yeah, I re-loaded that nonsense away. Second time through they behaved themselves.

    The movement bonus to armies from starting in friendly territories is........impressive. The Carthaginians marched from their region in Northern Sicily allllllllllll the way up the Italian toe to Cosentia. That took me by surprise. Lucky for them Pyrrhus was back in Greece putting down the treacherous Aetolians. Vengeance is scheduled for.......turns 17 or 18 depending on the Adriatic tides.

    Other impressions. It's really nice having the large treasury to start. Lots of flexibility in what you can do. However, a decent army drains that treasury suuuuuper fast. Things get real tight real quick. Mercenaries are unaffordable. Major complaint: the money it says you get from Liberating (2,000) doesn't appear. Nor does the 500 from Occupying. Not sure why. It's been that way for me since 1.1. I hope it's a bug not a feature. If I had a good economy, I wouldn't care, but when my income is negative........well, Pyrrhus REALLY needs that money and he needs it TODAY.

    Pikes. I have much to say about this and will do so in more depth in the future. For now, I will simply say that my initial impression is that KAM has outdone himself in regards to their battle performance. They are very strong when operating as a solid line - they don't JUST hold enemy infantry in place now - against weaker infantry, they will buzzsaw them off the field. They rack up respectable kills in direct engagement, which means I'm actually leveling these guys up with chevrons after a few battles. Only limited experience against tough infantry like Triarii and Principes (early). The big thing that seems to nicely balance the improved offensive power of the pikes is their vulnerability to flanking. Oh my Zeus are they vulnerable to flanking! I've seen a basic pike unit run away after losing - literally - 5 soldiers solely because they got attacked on the flank by an armed citizen. Armed citizens attack with hugs, not weapons, and they still managed to rout a pike unit. Protect those pike flanks. This is 100% not how they worked in 1.1 where pikes killed nothing, but were also impossible to kill.

    Fun, fun, fun.

  13. #113

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

    I'll continue with my unit feedback/critique, in the hopes that the DeI team is listening...


    The Indian heavy swordsmen are described as not wearing any heavy armour "making them lighter than the macemen". This isn't reflected in the stats, as both the macemen and the heavy swordsmen have identical (pretty low) armour and stamina. Also, I think the macemen should either have higher melee attack or weapon damage than the practically identical heavy swordsmen unit, both to differentiate them further and to better reflect the fact that they're all wielding a huge mace the size of a melon.

    I also think further differentiation is needed to reflect the differences in the Indian war elephants and the Indian armoured elephants. As it stands, they both have the same stamina, and only a 2 point (12 vs 14) difference in their armour. I think the war elephants should have their armour pretty much removed as per their visuals, but compensate for this via a higher stamina value than the armoured elephants.

    Considering their lack of armour, I think the pandyan spearmen should be given a slightly better melee defence stat than they have currently.

  14. #114

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

    It's not a really 1.2 feedback but I always thought that consequences of your reputation in this game is a bit overlooked and here is big and logicial potential to improve the game. Campaign AI acts very rationally in this mod, but sometimes (often?) player and AI break their agreements and they can go from Stearfast and Untrustworthy and then very quickly go back from Untrustworthy to Stearfast again. First thing you is that recover your reputation too fast and the second thing this is good time when AI can try to punish you for being treachery. For example, you have good realtions and agreements with some faction but they have nowhere to expand because of you and most likely they will never attack you. I think it would make very good sense if AI faction would try take their chances and attack factions which are treacherous. This way AI would still stay rational as it should be but will act in their own interests when others give them chance by acting in untrustable manner. I really think this is the area where diplomacy can develop and shake up AI when it's acts too passive. As of right now penalties for being treachery are very low, consequences of it is close to none and recovery of reputation is very fast.

  15. #115

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

    @Geffalrus Thanks for the detailed feedback (and to everyone, thanks for leaving feedback!) The emergent factions are a game changer, so there are new ways for the player to exploit them that I think hasn't been realized yet. The occupation options not giving money is something I haven't heard about - so thanks for reporting it. If true that means we have to reevaluate some of those things.

    @Kenny yes we are reading, so keep feedback coming its appreciated

    @Vardano next update I am changing the AI declare war variables a bit, we will see how that goes. Hopefully its not a mess!

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

  16. #116

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

    Thanks for 1.2 update.I try media atropane campaing.It has very challenging start.You just fight constant fight against armenia and his endless stack against your 1 stack which barely get replenisment because of that scorching summer and population stuff.
    But yeah.Its fun campaing.Hard but fun.

    There is somethings I need the mention tho.

    - I think some units need morale adjustments.Some expensive units have very low morale compare to cheaper ones.
    - Basic shielded units have 0 shield protection.(I didnt check late ones)
    - Exotic Animal studs still there and it seems pretty useless.

    This is the things I found out so far.I will give another feedback later.Thanks for the update again.

  17. #117
    KAM 2150's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gdańsk, Poland
    Posts
    10,366

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

    0 shield protection? You mean shield armour? That fantasy stat was taken out in 1.1 version.
    Official DeI Instagram Account! https://www.instagram.com/divideetimperamod/
    Official DeI Facebook Page! https://www.facebook.com/divideetimperamod

  18. #118

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

    I played as the Roman Nobiles (Normal/Normal). It was much, much harder than 1.1. Maybe I was doing it wrong, but I could never field more than 1.5 stacks of low grade to middling units. In 269BC Carthage declared war; in 268 Liguria; then Dalmatia in about 263 declared war and invaded the Peninsula. That tipped the balance and by 258 the last remnants of Roman resistance were wiped out near Rome.

    My reputation was always steadfast, and my relationship with Carthage was green when they declared war. The Ligurians and Dalmatae were yellow. Before that Syracuse had declared war despite being green. Perhaps I was unlucky, or incompetent, or the Nobiles' diplomatic penalties are too harsh, but it seems the AI is just a bit M2TW.

    Another thing from a gameplay perspective is that I found garrison units next to useless and it wasn't worth my while to manually fight their battles. They barely inflicted enough casualties to merit the time and effort, so I ended up auto-resolving a lot.

    However, awesome fun! I'm going to try the Equites or Patricians next.

  19. #119
    hippacrocafish's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,691

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

    The AI seem to be too friendly with each other, especially the Seleucid satrapies with their overlord. I haven't seen any of them rebel in any of the campaigns I've tried.

  20. #120

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

    Quote Originally Posted by KAM 2150 View Post
    0 shield protection? You mean shield armour? That fantasy stat was taken out in 1.1 version.
    Yeah.I mean shield protection value in armor stats.İf thats the case I wonder how frontal missile protection(Shield protection) work?

Posting Permissions

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