Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131415 LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 285

Thread: [Submod] Strategikos

  1. #261

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Quote Originally Posted by Colos1987 View Post
    Hi,

    I have a CTD of this mod on startup, using the latest version for 2.4a. I did everything as instructed, the mod launcher finds my exe, but says "Unknown version, not good". Using retail version of the base game. Vanilla EB2.4 works fine.

    Thanks,
    Colos
    Hi,

    It looks like EOP is not recognizing your med2. The submod uses a now very old version of the tool, apparently not compatible with your edition. With the last iterations, even pirated versions work. I'm afraid I don't have a solution for you, other than waiting for the next version, sorry.

  2. #262

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Hi,

    Okay, thanks for checking. Is there any workaround until the next version drops? Like, buying the steam version of the base game or something like that?

    Colos

  3. #263

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Quote Originally Posted by Colos1987 View Post
    Hi,

    Okay, thanks for checking. Is there any workaround until the next version drops? Like, buying the steam version of the base game or something like that?

    Colos
    If you still have the key of your current version, you can register it in steam without having to buy the game.

  4. #264
    pilatus's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Germany, Munich
    Posts
    160

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Hi Erken, do you have some new teasers for us?
    Would it be possible to share the named regions and minor towns before the rest? I'm so excited and impatient ...I want to play EB2 with this masterpiece of mod.

  5. #265

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Quote Originally Posted by pilatus View Post
    Hi Erken, do you have some new teasers for us?
    Would it be possible to share the named regions and minor towns before the rest? I'm so excited and impatient ...I want to play EB2 with this masterpiece of mod.
    I'll do a preview soon, notably about minor settlements. I just want to finish this part first.
    I have been tempted to do a truncated version of the submod, but disassembling things was so disheartening that i have instantly renounced :p
    Scripts around minor settlements are the last complicated thing though, after this there is still work but it will be much more linear and comfortable (no more design choices, a lot of functions already done, etc).

  6. #266

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    This looks very cool and something for me to try out. Thank you for creating it!

  7. #267

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    will the new version be save game compatible?

  8. #268

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    will the new version be save game compatible?

  9. #269

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Quote Originally Posted by sarpedon21 View Post
    will the new version be save game compatible?
    No, it modifies some of the vanilla files, so not save compatible.

    Otherwise the preview is coming. I had to update the submod for eop v4 (what wasn't planned nor a mere formality) so i am just a little late ^^...

  10. #270

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    So, in the next version (as always all is optional):

    About minor settlements:

    • They now use models slightly smaller than regional capitals.
    • Barbarian and nomadic models are replaced when uppgraded by more urbanized factions.
    • Minor settlements under player control are permanent, and have their own little scroll:


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    • If you don't control a minor settlement on your territory, you lose its part of the regional income (their economical weight depends on their level and if they are close to the sea/a river).
    • In case of rioting in the regional capital, minor settlements can rebel.
    • Most of them have some historical info on their scroll (sometimes very laconic though).
    • (population is currently bugged in eop, pay no attention to the 0)
    • Minor settlements in foreign territory have a different scroll:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    • "Intelligence report" displays info about the garrisons (a spy is required).
    • "Buy supplies" does what it says (if you have an expeditionary force in a nearby region and depending on diplomatic relationships with the owner, etc).
    • "Incite defection" is a part of a wip script and also requires a spy (in brief, you will be able to finance rebels and provoke defections).
    • "Call for surrender" can save you a battle, but you can then only occupy the minor settlement, and this one could betray you later on during your expedition.
    • "Besiege": since foreign settlements aren't permanent, you need to use this option to start a siege.


    Why this system?

    1. Thus AI factions won't be slowed down during their expansion against other AI factions.
    2. Minor settlements will always be garrisoned.
    3. Units of this garrisons have free upkeep (so no impact on AI economics).
    4. Scripts will make this garrisons appear and attack in some (the worst) circumstances.


    • If you don't capture minor settlements, they will be used as rear bases by the enemy and your supply lines will then be affected.
    • When you capture the regional capital, minor settlements not under your control will either submit or pursue the fight.


    Other:

    • When you open an enemy army scroll (land or naval force), its general/admiral could decide to attack (your scouts have been spotted!)
    • There could also be very limited information, if any.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    • With a right click on the destination of a port scroll, you will be able to locate this one (useful when the port use the region name).

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    • Nomadic camps can now be directly attacked without any siege engine.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    • Units on their scrolls are now displayed at their real size (so with a better quality and not stretched).

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    • Wonders no more use forts, and some of them are slightly resized or moved (notably Zeus).

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    • Settlements and land forces standards no more change of color depending on garrison/army size.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    • Strategikos options are now available via esc, like the game options (i know, nobody cares xD).

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Otherwise, it was the last preview (yes i am lazy). From now, it's a release or nothing :p

  11. #271

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Despite the possibility of sounding extremely hyped, Strategikos makes me dream again like a child about what I thought that next TW games could become, but didn't

    Minor settlements system is a fundamental "return" feature (by the days of Dominion of Sword, when it was thought that it could be possible, but at the end was messing around the poor Creative Assembly CAI) that not only would slow down the player expansion, having to take seriously these settlements (apart from EBII rebel script) to avoid internal revolts while campaigning outside our territories, but the added possibility to have specific diplomatics/resources from such minor settlements is what makes it to feel natural and deeply strategic!!!

    The removal of flags colour army distinction is also such a great addition, increasing the importance of spies and scouting before launching any attack: rush it and you may be suprised...

    Thank you very much, again very impressive!!! Please, take your time, no need of more previews, let's cultivate our patience as players while modders manage to still enhance a very old game

  12. #272

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    First time I've been excited about something total war related in quite some time. Amazing work

  13. #273

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    I appreciate the general attention to detail here and particularly like how important spies and scouting could be in the next release. Thank you for your efforts Erken.

  14. #274

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Oh.
    My.
    .
    God.

    What a hell of a preview!
    Erken, I'd like to applaud you and your efforts - if you really manage to release this update, you may well manage to make me skip sleep in favour of some spare time for playing this.
    For as long as EBII exists, the removal of the permanent forts (the minor settlements in the context of EBII) has been one of the (if not THE) saddest changes the EB Team made.
    I very well understood their reasoning, mind you, but it made me sad, nevertheless.
    If you really manage to bring those settlements (and thereby a significant portion of strategy and life!) back to the EB II strategy map without crippling the AI ... hells, I'm hyped now, very much so.

    Infact I'm giddy about something TW-related for the first time in many many years.
    I'm giddy at a level I last had when EBII was released for the first time.
    I haven't been playing EBII (or any TW title or infact any games in general) lately but your mod could very well change that.
    And it's not the conquerable minor settlements alone. It's the many many many names on the map (which make it feel so much more alive and contested and interesting), and the changes to the army/garrison flags and ...

    See, I have played EB 2.4a for a bit and of course I did it with your "temporary" Strategikos mod for it. It already blew me away with all its options and possibilities. Imagining all those goodies you previewed for the incoming update is simply making me smile, from ear to ear.


    EDIT: I just re-read the whole thread and now I cannot wait for the update to be released, heh.
    (For example I had half-forgotten great ideas like the civil navigation script which will be extremely helpful for RPing the Romans (or Qart-Hadashtim) and their election systems, for example. )

    More seriously: of course I will wait patiently. I waited for three or four years to see EB I 0.71 be released, I waited seven years for EB II ... and I also waited several years combined for all of their updates. What I wanted to express is just that it's been a long time since previews made me anticipate something so very much. I cross my fingers that it all works out perfectly well and we'll be able to enjoy this work of love.

    EDIT 2:
    One question - will the "garrison/army flag" and "scout capturing" systems be optional?
    I just thought about playing with a the minor faction who starts with one settlement only and are in debt after turn one.
    Losing that one spy all factions start with will leave me completely blind then, right?

  15. #275

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowwalker View Post
    One question - will the "garrison/army flag" and "scout capturing" systems be optional?
    Yes, both are optional. You cannot disable/enable flags for garrisons and not for armies though, and the parameter used doesn't work for fleets.

    Almost everything is optional on a way or another. Some percentages cannot be adjusted, but it's only when it has no real interest. For example, there is a script where agents and generals using ports to travel can be killed by a storm or captured by pirates (and then a ransom is paid, at least for diplomats and generals). You can disable this script, but its probabilty cannot be adjusted, since a high value would have no sense and a small modification would be imperceptible. Also some scripts cannot be enabled for the AI and not for the player for obvious reasons.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowwalker View Post
    I just thought about playing with a the minor faction who starts with one settlement only and are in debt after turn one.
    Losing that one spy all factions start with will leave me completely blind then, right?
    Having no spy will only prevent you from seeing the garrison of foreign settlements. When an enemy army is on your territory, you need neither spy nor scouts since the population and local patrols are constantly sending reports (you will need spies to infiltrate military forts though). In enemy territory, you just need to place a military force on the edge of the enemy zone of control, and then opening the army scroll is like sending scouts.

  16. #276
    pilatus's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Germany, Munich
    Posts
    160

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Can't wait anymore...

  17. #277

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    I'm absolutely hyped as well, got my EB II running again and am playing with the "adapted 2.35 version" at the moment.
    There are so many little and not-so-little improvements in this mod already - I can't wait to see the full new version enhancing EB 2.4a.

    @Erken:
    There's one thing I'd like to propose - you made it impossible to sail from Carthage to Nurri (Sardinia) directly.
    Now while I love the movement restrictions in general - this one doesn't seem too realistic to me.
    Historically, Sardinia was one of the regions that had the closest (trade) ties to Carthage, only surpassed by western Sicily.
    And as far as my history knowledge goes, the carthaginian ships didn't sail from Carthage to the western tip of Sicily, then all along the coast to southern Italy, up to Etruria and then doen along Corsica and finally, Sardinia.
    I may be wrong, of course, but all sources I read about these trade routes seem to indicate that the route between Sardinia and Carthage was a very direct one, instead.
    Would you consider re-adding this route?

    It's odd from a gameplay persective as well, by the way - since the route from Nurri to Adrumet/Qart-Hadasht/is so long and complicated now there's no direct trade between Sardinia and northern Africa anymore - the trade routes from Nurri (even at full port development) only reach to the western coast of Italy (from Capua upwards). If you capture Massilia there's even trade with that - but not with the historically most important trading partner.

    It's not a really big deal just because Nurri is getting rich nevertheless, but it feels odd to be honest.


    Anyway - very much looking forward to this, keep up the outstanding work!

  18. #278

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowwalker View Post
    @Erken:
    There's one thing I'd like to propose - you made it impossible to sail from Carthage to Nurri (Sardinia) directly.
    Now while I love the movement restrictions in general - this one doesn't seem too realistic to me.
    Historically, Sardinia was one of the regions that had the closest (trade) ties to Carthage, only surpassed by western Sicily.
    And as far as my history knowledge goes, the carthaginian ships didn't sail from Carthage to the western tip of Sicily, then all along the coast to southern Italy, up to Etruria and then doen along Corsica and finally, Sardinia.
    I may be wrong, of course, but all sources I read about these trade routes seem to indicate that the route between Sardinia and Carthage was a very direct one, instead.
    Would you consider re-adding this route?

    It's odd from a gameplay persective as well, by the way - since the route from Nurri to Adrumet/Qart-Hadasht/is so long and complicated now there's no direct trade between Sardinia and northern Africa anymore - the trade routes from Nurri (even at full port development) only reach to the western coast of Italy (from Capua upwards). If you capture Massilia there's even trade with that - but not with the historically most important trading partner.
    Here is a version where you can sail from Africa to Sardinia. It was available in a folder with other optional things previously, i have forget to include this folder at a point apparently. I don't remember if it's save compatible, but it goes in ebii/data/world/maps/base and you need to delete map.rwm.

    Of course there was trade routes between Sardinia and Africa, but war fleets are more limited in terms of navigation. Here is a something i have posted on the org some years ago:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    I have done a little research to try to determinate what maritime routes could be added or not to my coastal navigation system (currently only based on the Orbis tool). The reference performance i have used is the crossing from Byzantium to Heraclea (Xenophon, Anabasis): 129 sea miles (236 km) in 16-18 h. This is a controversed datum, due to some variants in the manuscripts (1), and the way the text is understood (2) (navigation under roar exclusively or also under sail). But it has the advantage of offering a maximum performance for the daily crossing of a war ship, and thus at least justifiably exclude the following longer routes (Distances from Orbis):

    The shortest route Crete - Africa (Kaudos - Chersaunesos Akra): 292 km
    The route Balearic Island - Sardinia: In this case i have just the distance for Palma - Caralis (736 km), so not with the closest start and ending point, but this doesn't change the result (350 km with google map, as the crow flies, for the shortest itinerary, so without taking into account the real routes determined by streams and winds).
    The shortest route north-south in the Black Sea (Chersoneos - Karambis): 309 km

    Now, a disputed case, the direct toute Sardinia - Africa (Caralis - Tabraca): 262 km

    This last route could seem not so impossible, particulary when you consider that Caralis is in the gulf of Cagliari, so not the southest point. By taking a start point further south, the distance would be comparable to the crossing mentioned by Xenophon. Nevertheless, beyond the controversial character of this last travel as mentioned above, different factors seem to be redibitory (and explain why this route is not used by Orbis for the coastal navigation):

    1 - The itinerary Byzantium - Heraclea constantly follows the coastline, thus allowing to land at the approach of a storm, and for the midday meal.
    2 - The performance described by Xenophon is not regarded as common: "The context of the passage suggests that, for many triereis, the journey would have taken more than a day"(Ian Whitehead, "Triereis Under Oar and Sail")
    3 - Byzantium - Heraclea is a forced itinerary, that would have been shorter in ordinary conditions: "It is a long day's voyage for a war-ship, using her three banks of oars, from Byzantium to Heraclea, and between these two there is not a single Hellenic or friendly city, but only these Bithynian Thracians, who have a bad reputation for the savagery with which they treat any Hellenes cast ashore by shipwreck or otherwise thrown into their power." (Anabasis VI,4)
    4 - Xenophon seemingly doesn't talk about an entire war fleet (an army could easily keep the Thracians at distance and leave before any large gathering). A war fleet, like in the context of the mod, would also necessarily be slowed by the supply ships, and his performance would thus be significantly lesser, and then not viable.
    5 - From a strategical perspective, even if the route Caralis - Tabraca was usable for a war fleet, there is no doubt that the crew would be disadvantaged by its fatigue in case of "welcoming committee" (a fortiori when the ending point can by necessity be easily estimated)

    An indirect route between Caralis and Tabraca also exists, via Galita ("This route is fractionated or not by our sources, whether they consider or not the isle of Galita as a step." Pascal Arnaud, in "Les routes de la navigation antique, Itinéraires en Méditerranée"). Nevertheless, Galita is a tiny isle, with "200m high cliffs and is accessible only in the south on the bay Escueil de Pasque" (Wikipedia), and visibly not able to shelter a war fleet. Moreover, the restricted available space would in all likelihood be already occupied by fishers and merchants.

    So, in conclusion...no route to add...(i like this kind of conclusion)

    Otherwise, two interresting books on and around that subject:

    Trireme Olympias, the final report
    Les routes de la navigation antique, Itinéraires en Méditerranée

    (1) "Xenophon on the Speed of Triremes" by Herman Wallinga, in "Trireme Olympias, The Final Report"
    (2) "Triereis Under Oar and Sail" by Ian Whitehead, in "Trireme Olympias, The Final Report"

    My reasoning is probably questionable though (even if of course i am perfectly right!), and i know that most of players don't care if their rowers are doped or not (players should not be allowed to play), so it will also be optional in the next version.

    Otherwise, since i am here, some of the things i have done recently (there is more but it's still wip, so you won't see it :p):

    The army compositions (a less archaic system than previously, and called with the recruitment/building advice button).
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    New colors (more discreet) for the movement areas and enemy zone of control (here again it's optional, and you can also make them invisible)
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    A more naturally integrated version of the calendar's tooltip:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Also minor settlements names and models now appear as your faction discover them, like any vanilla settlement.

  19. #279

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    You keep amazing me, Erken.
    First off: thank you for your detailed reasoning about the Sardinia route.
    In my book this reasoning is not questionable at all, it's just unfortunate that the game cannot make the distinction between a trade ship (as in: the availability of a trade route) and a war fleet.
    I agree that war fleets most probably didn't sail from Africa directly to Sardinia - at least I haven't seen anything like that mentioned anywhere.
    I am no history professional, though - just some guy who has fallen in love with what is basically 800 years of misfortunes, military shortcomings and facepalm moments (also known as "the history of Carthage").

    Anyway - I much appreciate your answer and I also appreciate the file(s), will install them immediately.

    About your 3 (well, 4 actually) teasers - this submod just gets better and better.
    I wonder if there's any chance it is included into the mainmods' next version.
    Your proposed changes and additions improve "vanilla" EB in so many ways, it's simply incredible.
    For example - I'd never thought that the movement zone graphics needed an improvement.
    But after seeing that screenshot above I realize how immersion-breaking and "gamey" it looks at the moment. Great idea (yet again)!

    In general I like the fact that you include so many "tables"/menus (like the one for the army compositions), as I like the graphical approach of these menus very much.
    Feels very "antique", indeed.

    Two questions about the minor settlements that occured to me after reading the previews for the umpteenth time (yes, I re-read them regularly ):
    1. The information in the "infrastructure" section is tied to the infrastructure of the provinces' main settlement, right? So if it reads "size: large town, wooden walls" it's because the main city has wooden walls?
    Or is it independent? (If independent: can the player influence the infrastructure in minor settlements?)
    Also: the info at the granaries ("6 siege turns") - does this mean that a siege of the minor settlement (provided it has a garrison inside) would take 6 turns, too?

    2. The names of the minor settlements that are shown at the manp do NOT change with the ownership of the main settlement, correct?


    Also: what do the hints under the unit names in their unit cards mean ("nomos of xy", "client of xy", "recently hired", etc) - is this just an indication where the unit was trained, just like in the RTW submods some decades ago?
    (Speaking of RTW: I remember a submod for EB I where sending a FM to a certain settlement and leaving him there for a turn would give him (for example in Rome) the "Legio I - Italica" ancillary and the Legatus trait. Added a whole other layer of immersion to the roman campaign. )


    Anyway #2: thanks again, your post was not at all helpful in my attempt to gather some patience about "Strategikos for 2.4a" ... but your teasers are much appreciated, as usual.
    Last edited by Shadowwalker; October 06, 2024 at 11:14 AM.

  20. #280

    Default Re: [Submod] Strategikos

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowwalker View Post
    1. The information in the "infrastructure" section is tied to the infrastructure of the provinces' main settlement, right? So if it reads "size: large town, wooden walls" it's because the main city has wooden walls?
    Or is it independent? (If independent: can the player influence the infrastructure in minor settlements?)
    Also: the info at the granaries ("6 siege turns") - does this mean that a siege of the minor settlement (provided it has a garrison inside) would take 6 turns, too?

    2. The names of the minor settlements that are shown at the manp do NOT change with the ownership of the main settlement, correct?


    Also: what do the hints under the unit names in their unit cards mean ("nomos of xy", "client of xy", "recently hired", etc) - is this just an indication where the unit was trained, just like in the RTW submods some decades ago?
    (Speaking of RTW: I remember a submod for EB I where sending a FM to a certain settlement and leaving him there for a turn would give him (for example in Rome) the "Legio I - Italica" ancillary and the Legatus trait. Added a whole other layer of immersion to the roman campaign. )
    1 - No, it's the level of the minor settlement. For now, each time the regional capital is upgraded, one minor settlement is also upgraded (always the smallest of the province, and only if it's level is lower than that of the capital). I will probably make it random later (at least partially). At a point i was tempted to let the player decide, but it would have mean an additional cost and some micro-management not really necessary from my point of view.

    The granaries are used for different things, and it indeed indicates the number of turns before surrender (6 is a placeholder here though, i am still working on this). When you are besieged, the available food is used and is not automatically regenerated when the siege ends. I won't explain my supply system now, but in brief for each military campaign a region is used as a strategic base and so supplies come from its granaries, etc.

    2 - Some of them change, but only when the minor settlement is captured, not the capital. For example Palermo is named "Sys" by default and under carthaginian control, "Panormus" for romans, "Panormos" for hellenistic factions. Some minor settlements also have a name only for some owners (eg "Olbia" in Sicilia for hellenistic factions), otherwise they are simply named "Minor Settlement" (it's just for a few of them)

    3 - "nomos" is for the Ptolemaioi, and it indeed indicates where the unit was originally trained. It's "polis", "legion", "district", satrapy", "people (of)" for other factions. "Clients" is for allied states. "Hired this season" is for mercenaries, after it's "Hired 1 season ago", etc, and optionaly it also indicates the loyalty and discipline of this units. In brief, their service can be limited in time, and their loyalty even more limited...

Posting Permissions

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