Thanks - much appreciated.
Well I think it's a basket case. Steam won't let you have the two steam library files on the same drive (I only have 1 drive). I can work around that by editing a specific steam file to allow 2 and specifying it. I can also create a copy of the game into another location on the drive, but steam knows it is a steam game and always launches steam and goes back to the just-auto-updated steam library file). It then cannot find the file it needs because of course they are not in the steam folder! Even if they were the pathnames would be too long... And to think I tossed my CD version a few years ago! So yes having faithfully followed the instructions on page 1 (and I also checked the little FAQ page), success is not an option! Maybe I can get hold of the combo kingdoms version on GoG or something.
Yeah. Thats the thing I understand of the change. You cant really get enough "makedonians" to get what would usually be a level 3 colony in those palces. You are capped at 2. The thing is that bringing the alternatives doesnt make the ones that you could already get dissapear. To represent this scenario, wouldnt it be more "consistent" to have still level 3 in those places but checking for the conditions already in place, have them give the same phalanx units that level 2 and a bit more more of the other types in thso regions? Kind of like an hybrid between reform colony and the level 3 colony as it exists now. And then you have the option to upgrade to reformed if you want more total recruitment and to forfeit phalanxes.
We will either find a way, or make one.
People can anyone tell me how can I install updates, for example updates that are shown on twitter, FB and etc.
The way I rationalise it is this. By the time the option of reform comes around, phalanx-style warfare is waning, so the influx of newcomers would also stimulate changes from the existing settler base.
The thing is all those places are actually capped at the second tier, this just gives you an option to expand further at the cost of your phalanx. There are also quite a lot of places which never offered phalanx units in the first place, and so don't suffer from this particular issue.
Those are previews for what will be included in the patch we're working on. You can't get them until we release it.
oh, am happy to hear patch is incoming. thank you guys
I see. I guess it could make sense, and after all as you said its kind of a limitation we have. But still, I dont feel like phalanxes were really set aside that much at the date. Past the reform date, Makedonia kept relying on it basically until the conquest by rome (in fact part of its failure its often attributed due to it relying too much on it and not supporting it enough with other kinds of troops) and the big hellenistic powers stil used it as its core in the main battles of the later syrian wars and against rome, even if the new kinds of troops were used as well. Heck, even Ptolemaics who lacked the manpower to properly field it at some point resorted to using antive phalanxes rather than other troop types.
I dont really feel like the makedonian phalanx style of fighting was abandoned per se in favour of new methods. It was always more like either you couldn't field it even if you wanted to due to lack of manpower, and that the powers that used it were subdued or desintegrated. It feels like they kept using it as their core when they could almost till the end in most cases. Phalanxes basically dissapeared because in the zones where they used to exist, after the ton of conlicts that underwent in those zones you had left at the end Rome and Parthia, neither of which used them.
One question. Could there be, as part of the guide update, a map showing which level of poleis can be reached in every province and also amrking the palces that allow level 3 colony? I remember finding very helpful the one with starting poleis (which may need updates now) and this would be too, or even more for some factions.
Last edited by Jervaj; May 11, 2020 at 05:55 AM.
We will either find a way, or make one.
Hello, can someone tell me how large the EB II folder is after installation, I just got my hands on a new laptop so I am in the process of re-installing EB, unfortunately I use Steam and only have one partition, so I will have to split the hard drive to be able to create another Steam library that isnt in program files, I would like to make a partition as small as possible, for EB II only since this laptop doesnt have a big hard drive, for that reason I would prefer to make just big enough to cram EB II installed on MTW 2 to save hard drive space
thanks in advance
Mine is 17.3 Gb. FWIW I reinstalled steam into c:\steam and eventually got EB2 working (after getting SS 6.3/6.4 working). But I'm using Win7/64bit with no UAC and both kingdoms and medieval2 exes set to run as administrator and (as above) with the m2tw exe copied and renamed kingdoms in the relevant folder... and for some reason two of the ai factions DoW me every tun despite being happy (very happy) to make peace with me every turn.
Part of the issue Jervaj is that there's just not enough "alternate history" options in EB2 aside from a few reforms.
FREE THE NIPPLE!!!
Part of the issue we have with Hellenistic reforms is that in reality they didn't move in one direction. Different states experimented with different combinations of troops and changed back and forth with their fortunes. However, the game isn't set up to allow that sort of organic change at the level of individual settlements, and even if we could do it, each shift would zero the recruitment pools.
Note that the Ptolemaioi don't have any difficulty getting phalanxes, having both Alexandreia and Memphis, which can get level 3 colonies.
I've no idea about updates to the guide, but I can give you the list of places that allow a level 3 colony: Alexandreia, Memphis, Antiocheia, Mysia, Lydia, Syrakousai, Pella, Thessalia, Seleukeia, Ekbatana, Susa and Persis.
Which, I'm afraid, is by design. It's a part of making factions distinct and the experience of playing them different from each other.
How does the team determine abundance of falcata and kopis within units that have them mixed with xiphos/gladius? I'm curious because no current Iberian unit has enough falcatas to get them AP, while Greek units tend to have AP due to kopis prominence.
neither falcatas nor kopis should get AP I think. I happen to have a replica - while the blade is heavier and wider it doesn't have a focus point like axe or pick-axe, and there is no reason it should be anything more than a higher grade sword.
I second that. It's all about physics (more details below for those interested).
For projectiles, penetration depends on three things: speed and sectional density (mass divided by surface of contact) of the projectile and physical properties of the material of both target and projectile. The higher the speed and the sectional density the more the projectile penetrates. That's why arrows with narrow heads (bodkin) penetrate more than broad headed arrows, because of the higher sectional density.
For melee weapons, the physics is the same except that some additional thrust can be added after the initial blow to further increase penetration (it doesn't work well for slashing, though). A pickaxe is better at penetrating armour than an axe, which is better than a sword, whatever its shape. Maces/clubs are not that great (quite low sectional density), but they make up for this in blunt force (so inflicting damage through armour without even piercing it).
So, for the sake of realism, only maces, clubs, axes and pickaxes should have the AP attribute in EBII.
For the sake of realism the AP attribute, i.e. ability to somehow get around the opponent armor, probably should be guided more by the units level of professionalism. Otherwise it's creating false positives when a bunch of levies armed with fire-hardened clubs is more threatening than a unit of sword and spear carrying professionals. Nevermind that those levies wouldn't even last long enough to capitalize on their theoretically armor-bypassing weapons if they were thrown against, let's say, a maniple of the late Republic legionaries. On the other hand a professional could be trained to aim for unarmored body parts.
Last edited by Satapatiš; June 16, 2020 at 09:44 AM.
Furthermore, I believe that Rome must be destroyed.
Very interesting idea! Professionals and elites could get this attribute, making them more valuable against similarly equipped, but less skilled opponents.
On the other hand, clubs, maces, axes and the like do bypass/defeat armor in one way or another. Units armed with such weapons should keep the AP attribute regardless of skill - balance being achieved via scaling their attack rating according to the weapon and the skill of the user.
Last edited by Rad; June 16, 2020 at 10:33 AM.
The ability of veterans and elites to get around not only the armour, but also the shield and the overall defence stats, is already represented by the higher attack value. IMO, the AP attribute should be used only for the weapons that are better than others at defeating armour, even in the hands of an inexperienced warrior. Of course, it should be properly balanced so that levy clubmen cannot slain late roman legionaries with ease... Maybe lowering a bit more the attack and defence stats of AP weapons users can help.