Announcement: Europa Barbarorum II 2.35 released!

[Jurand of Cracow]

Curious about the really long lived temporary unrest in some Eastern provinces - I thought it usually decayed at 5%/turn but this seems to last forever?
Eg Marakand has 50% yellow unrest and I started the game as Baktria with it. Turn 172 and it is still there.

Sounds like that EBII additional unrest. According to the map of those regions Marakanda should indeed have +50%.

In my notes I've got the following:

Unrest:
- new conquests: instant 30% unrest, declines at a rate of 5%, sacking -30% unrest and enslaving -40% (?) (also declines 5% a turn),
- foreign cultures: max. 50%, with half of your culture: 20%, which only subsides as you convert them (Allied Governments fast-convert to "Independent")
- rebels cause unrest as well as devastation (declines 5% a turn after rebels killed)
- difficult regions script:
o every winter there are 5% chance that a Rebel army (8 units) spawns in the region accompanied by an important rise of the unrest (between 10 and 20%),
o the presence of the Rebel stack in the province will add unrest as well as the scripted addition, based on the size of the stack and how long they've been in the province
- province-specific natural unrest typical for a province (there's been the map of this unrest, for most regions between 10 and 55%, with two worse 75% and 100%)
- famine - the bigger cities, the more difficult (but it's still pretty low compared to the other mods and other sources of unrest);
- distance from capital - as in the vanilla M2TW and other mods;
- spies (somehow)
- general’s influence: negates the culture-induced unrest (may also incite unrest, as in Allied Govt there should be an Allied General).

[Shadowwalker]

Sounds like some other form of unrest is triggering that; there's a lot of culture-based unrest in the east. Also could there be Rebels hidden anywhere in the province?

I doubt that this is caused by rebels.
In all my Baktria campaigns in EB 2.xx Marakanda was always hard to keep under control - in my opinion the main reason for that situation is twofold: the low percentage of greek culture there and the region being part of a scripted higher permanent unrest (like Taras/Tarentum). Never checked the latter in the campaign-script, though, so I could be wrong.

@ Porphyrogenita:
You could establish a polis/greek colony/high influence governor there. In my experience that's the quickest way to stabilize the public order.
Disadvantage (especially early in a campaign, when Marakanda is your bulwark against the inevitable Pahlava incursions) is the lack of good garrison troops on the lower levels of Polis/colony.

No plans for any factional units for any of the Hellenistic factions. Not including bodyguards, Baktria don't have theirs yet.

Since the bodyguards of Baktria were among the most beautiful (and strongest) units in EB 1, I am very curious about their appearance in EB 2.

I know that EB 1 is no secure base for anything we will see in EB 2 .... but will Baktrias bodyguards be once again slightly stronger than other hellenistic retinues?
Or will they be "just" regular Somatophylakes Strategou?

[QuintusSertorius]

I doubt that this is caused by rebels.
In all my Baktria campaigns in EB 2.xx Marakanda was always hard to keep under control - in my opinion the main reason for that situation is twofold: the low percentage of greek culture there and the region being part of a scripted higher permanent unrest (like Taras/Tarentum). Never checked the latter in the campaign-script, though, so I could be wrong.

@ Porphyrogenita:
You could establish a polis/greek colony/high influence governor there. In my experience that's the quickest way to stabilize the public order.
Disadvantage (especially early in a campaign, when Marakanda is your bulwark against the inevitable Pahlava incursions) is the lack of good garrison troops on the lower levels of Polis/colony.

Marakanda doesn't start with scripted turmoil, nor is it part of the Troublesome Regions script. Nowhere has permanently scripted unrest; unrest only comes in the form of directed turmoil, which declines at 5% a turn and requires a trigger.

Since the bodyguards of Baktria were among the most beautiful (and strongest) units in EB 1, I am very curious about their appearance in EB 2.

I know that EB 1 is no secure base for anything we will see in EB 2 .... but will Baktrias bodyguards be once again slightly stronger than other hellenistic retinues?
Or will they be "just" regular Somatophylakes Strategou?

To be honest, I have no idea yet. The concept looks heavier than Hetairoi, but we'll have to see it to stat it up. They have their own slot, so there's no automatic need to stat them up the same as Hetairoi.

[Shadowwalker]

Marakanda doesn't start with scripted turmoil, nor is it part of the Troublesome Regions script. Nowhere has permanently scripted unrest; unrest only comes in the form of directed turmoil, which declines at 5% a turn and requires a trigger.

That's odd. It might be worth to have a closer look at the province since AI Baktria - even with all it's governor bonuses - always loses the region to rebellion rather sooner than later, which is most curious for a province so close to the capital.

To be honest, I have no idea yet. The concept looks heavier than Hetairoi, but we'll have to see it to stat it up. They have their own slot, so there's no automatic need to stat them up the same as Hetairoi.

The confirmation of a dedicated slot is good news. Looking forward to see this unit ingame one day.

[Porphyrogenita]

Here is a pic of Marakanda:



Turn 232. Same except for some changes to the civil unrest as on Turn 1.

- new conquests: N/A
- foreign cultures: N/A - represented directly as "Civil Unrest" [right? ]
- rebels: No rebels
- difficult regions script: Not one of those regions:
- province-specific natural unrest typical for a province (there's been the map of this unrest, for most regions between 10 and 55%, with two worse 75% and 100%)
- famine: N/A represented as skulls to the other mods and other sources of unrest);
- distance from capital: N/A represented as wheels;
- spies: N/A: no spies
- general’s influence: N/A - no general present.

So the winner is the province specific unrest. It is technically not permanent since it only apply to the non-natural owner.
Which means, it seems, that Baktria is not the natural owner of Marakanda (whereas Baktria and Oskobara are).
Just to be sure I'm not completely nuts, is there a file I can check that contains info. on the natural owner (if any - I guess for some it could even be Eleutheroi), of the provinces?

Thanks for your input everyone - it was really baffling me.

Regards

P.

[Shadowwalker]

Just to be sure I'm not completely nuts, is there a file I can check that contains info. on the natural owner (if any - I guess for some it could even be Eleutheroi), of the provinces?

You want to check the descr_strat.txt, which you find at data/world/maps/campaign/imperial_campaign.

Search for the entry "faction_creator".

[QuintusSertorius]

The descr_regions lists the "founder" of the province.

[_Tartaros_]

could also be a scripted "turmoil" for this settlement

[Porphyrogenita]

And the answer was: faction_creator f_parthia
So it really belongs to Parthia. I just assumed it Baktrian - and that the non-natural owner penalty would not be reflected as what Ive always seen as being "temporary" unrest. Live and learn!
Regards
P.

[QuintusSertorius]

could also be a scripted "turmoil" for this settlement

There isn't any for this settlement.

[Roma_Victrix]

I'm confused about something. Are the "Aethiopioi" units in EBII supposed to be Nubians of Kush, i.e. ancient Sudanese? Or are they supposed to be actual literal Ethiopians/Eritreans from city-states that what would coalesce and become the ancient Kingdom of Aksum by the 1st century AD (and later medieval Abyssinia under the Solomonic emperors)? It's a shame the Greeks (and Romans) seemingly generally labelled any sub-Saharan East African peoples they came across as "Aethiopioi", but I'm curious if you guys make a distinction. I admittedly haven't read their unit description in a while. It will be a long time before I, as the Romani faction, will be able to recruit them, since I'm still restricted to the Western Mediterranean at about turn 275.

[Porphyrogenita]

Which file should I edit to give the Pahlava the ability to upgrade a converted camp in Nisaya to Pahlav Shahwar Shahrab : Presumably I would need to add the royal_core attribute to it?
Regards
P.

[bitterhowl]

Sorry for maybe misplacing this question - in tactical battles units have some delay before following my orders. Is it a feature, and if yes - it made by campaign_script or not? Thanks for attention!

[QuintusSertorius]

I'm confused about something. Are the "Aethiopioi" units in EBII supposed to be Nubians of Kush, i.e. ancient Sudanese? Or are they supposed to be actual literal Ethiopians/Eritreans from city-states that what would coalesce and become the ancient Kingdom of Aksum by the 1st century AD (and later medieval Abyssinia under the Solomonic emperors)? It's a shame the Greeks (and Romans) seemingly generally labelled any sub-Saharan East African peoples they came across as "Aethiopioi", but I'm curious if you guys make a distinction. I admittedly haven't read their unit description in a while. It will be a long time before I, as the Romani faction, will be able to recruit them, since I'm still restricted to the Western Mediterranean at about turn 275.

They're a mixture of peoples, not just Nubian/Kushitic. The unit descriptions will say which peoples in particular are responsible for the concept.

Which file should I edit to give the Pahlava the ability to upgrade a converted camp in Nisaya to Pahlav Shahwar Shahrab : Presumably I would need to add the royal_core attribute to it?
Regards
P.

You've have to edit the descr_regions, which only applies to new campaigns.

Sorry for maybe misplacing this question - in tactical battles units have some delay before following my orders. Is it a feature, and if yes - it made by campaign_script or not? Thanks for attention!

It's intended, and might be in the battle_config.xml. I couldn't say for certain without trawling the battle-related files, and I'm not at home.

[bitterhowl]

Thanks again for the answer! I'll be very pleased for that parameters from .xml any time you can tell them.

[Porphyrogenita]

Thanks QS,
I added "royal_core" to the end of the relevant line for the city in the descr_regions files, deleted the map.rwm files and it turned out to be save game compatible - so now I have my Pahlav Shahwar Shahrab in the city of Nisaya with roads .
Many thanks!
Regards
P.

[Rad]

I'm about to start the 17th battle for Axum - don't you people dare talk about unrest.

[NapoleonMaster]

btw, has anyone reported that the Galatikoi Katoikoi are silent?.

If not, then they certainly are voiceless.

[Rad]

Folks, the faction re-emergence script just fired up for the Antigonids and a fresh army spawned near Pella. Trouble is, they weren't a dead faction, having already re-emerged in Thessaly some turns ago. Is that intended or what?

[Roma_Victrix]

Folks, the faction re-emergence script just fired up for the Antigonids and a fresh army spawned near Pella. Trouble is, they weren't a dead faction, having already re-emerged in Thessaly some turns ago. Is that intended or what?

For my campaign, Epeiros has re-spawned twice now, the first time with an army in Epeiros and their settlement in the very reasonably close location of Illyrian Dardania/Paeonia just north of Makedonia. The second time, however, they spawned an army in Epeiros but with a settlement east of the Kyrgyz Lake Issyk Kul on the easternmost fringes of the map, i.e. Xinjiang in westernmost China. LOL. I guess I'll just have to conquer half of the continent of Asia just to reach and defeat them and win the campaign as the Roman faction.

You know, because they have to be destroyed as one of the victory conditions.

I've actually had this problem before, and they spawned/rebelled and took over a settlement somewhere almost as ridiculous, like in the middle of Persia.