Getai rebellion in Pella

Hi. I hope this is the right place to report this. Playing as Makedonia I had destroyed Getai (much as I attempted to gain them as vassals, I unfortunately must have killed their final fm in the decisive battle outside Kapidava). After then taking Kapidava from the Eleutheroi and ending the turn I was greeted with the message that Kapidava had rebelled and raised the banner of the Getai again. I checked Kapidava and....it was still firmly under my control, though there was a large Getai army a few tiles away. I decided to make an alliance with them and give them Kapidava - thinking this was the rebellion that had been described by the message I had received.

However, while checking out my other territories I discovered that my capital, Pella, had actually rebelled to the Getai - not Kapidava. I'm assuming this is a bug.

A bug we can't do much about. Faction re-emergence doesn't work properly, but any attempts to fix it break it entirely.

Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius

A bug we can't do much about. Faction re-emergence doesn't work properly, but any attempts to fix it break it entirely.

...then if you can't fix, maybe it is time to scrap it entirely. I know it's tough decision, but the mess with reemergence made me ragequit two campaigns already...

Originally Posted by Sar1n

...then if you can't fix, maybe it is time to scrap it entirely. I know it's tough decision, but the mess with reemergence made me ragequit two campaigns already...

The patch will feature a cut-down version which might reduce this phenomenon, but only further playtesting will show whether or not that's true.

It's not going, though, because to do so would make the game much easier for the human player, and reward blitzing factions out of existence.

Okay. I do not know much about scripting but...well, the language isn't that hard to decode when you see it. I am just not familiar with allowed formulations and what is possible to do via campaign script. The way I see it...maybe it's wrong trying to pin the reemergence to public order.

Could it be possible, instead, to start it this way: if faction is destroyed, start monitor checking ownership of the reemergence provinces for the faction. If one of them is rebel, kick in the reemergence script. This way, you could leave the unrest script in place, and when a reemergence province rebels, it will trigger reemergence.

Thoughts? Maybe I am suggesting something that was already thought of and discarded, or isn't possible....

It's more fundamental than that; the command that's supposed to make them re-emerge in a specified location when triggered doesn't work.

Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius

It's more fundamental than that; the command that's supposed to make them re-emerge in a specified location when triggered doesn't work.

Then...maybe not use that, but instead, spawn a doomstack that will right away walk to the settlement and besiege it, like the scritped siege of Sinope for example? Maybe give it an artillery piece so they can attack right away...

Not going to work for non-hording factions, they need the re-emergence to resurrect them as a faction. That's why they can die by losing their settlements even when they still have FMs.

Ah. Hm....

I'm the kind that pokes and pokes and pokes...and I've noticed one thing...again, it might be stupid. There's a tutorial on workshop about this, and from what I can see, there's ust one difference. EBII uses adjusting the public order via script, while in that tutorial, it's done via spawning and destroying buildings. There might lie the crucial difference. M2 engine is messy in this regard, recalculating public order and income only after certain actions. Often I've noticed that, for example, moving a governor out and back in a settlement results in public order and income different than it was before moving, saving and loading also causes the recalculation, but maybe it's not recalcualted at instant when you fire up an event, but only at turn end as periodic update, while spawning building might be the kind of action that triggers recalculation.

We used to use the building constructing/destroying variation, it made no difference to the "wandering re-emerge" problem. On the other hand, it did sometimes result in buildings that failed to be destroyed, filling up the settlement.

Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius

We used to use the building constructing/destroying variation, it made no difference to the "wandering re-emerge" problem. On the other hand, it did sometimes result in buildings that failed to be destroyed, filling up the settlement.

Ouch. It sounds like it's simply too complex, so it takes too long to run and is cut short by a timer in the engine to prevent hangups. Same thing that causes autosave corruption-saving takes too long, and is cut short.

Originally Posted by Sar1n

Ouch. It sounds like it's simply too complex, so it takes too long to run and is cut short by a timer in the engine to prevent hangups. Same thing that causes autosave corruption-saving takes too long, and is cut short.

Which is why the new formulation in the patch is much simpler. No unrest caused by taking former capitals, no secondary triggering script, only one settlement per faction.