Hayasdan questions (can't build buildings in certain cities and recruitment questions)

[The Computer Illiterate]

1. I'm wondering why I can't build any level of military colony in antioch, it's the only greek city that I can't seem to do this in.

2. What's the reasoning behind removing khalide and armenian cataphracts from certain cities after upgrading from a caucasian tribal kingdom to a satrapy? I saw this in one or two cities and thought it was odd while these units remained elsewhere.

[Shoebopp]

1. Any level of Foreign Military Colonies cannot coexist with Hellenic Metropoleis (3rd level of Hellenic Poleis). Since Hellenic Poleis cannot be destroyed, settlements that start with Hellenic Metropoleis, and any that upgrade to one, can never build Foreign Military Colonies. Antiochea, Pergamum, and Alexandreia are the biggest offenders starting with Hellenic Metropoleis, but Sardeis, Ephesos, and Salamis are in danger of achieving level 3 Hellenic Poleis in a few dozen turns as well. Conquer those settlements fast if you want to be able to build Foreign Military Colonies there. However, in the upcoming patch (2.35a), Antiochea and Alexandreia will be downgraded to level 2 Poleis at the start of the game.

2. I'll let a historian answer this one, but if I had to guess, the shift in government style from tribal to satrapal means that you had to rely more on local troops than core Armenian ones

[Camcolit]

I am playing a Hayastan campaign and had the same question. If the rationale for not allowing any local recruitment is that there are too many Greeks then you should be able to recruit some Greeks, or kick the Greeks out. As it is you can recruit a theureophoroi every 25 turns or a light Greek cavalry unit, lol.

[Sarkiss]

2. What's the reasoning behind removing khalide and armenian cataphracts from certain cities after upgrading from a caucasian tribal kingdom to a satrapy? I saw this in one or two cities and thought it was odd while these units remained elsewhere.

i havent been active on the team for ages so take everything i say with a pinch of salt.

i cannot think of any reason why those two units should be removed, especially the catas. aside from certain units following general upgrade/reform paths where the logic of "improve and discard obsolete" applies, i cannot remember the reasons why units that dont follow this pattern would disappear. perhaps due to limitation to how many units a building can enable? i remember there was a case of losing the staple skirmisher units after an upgrade - i.e. upgrading building in Armavir would enable thrueos heavy infantry (iirc) in that region but you'd lose ability to recruit the mainstream foot archers etc. i thought those inconsistencies may have been ironed out, or may have been simply left as were due to lack of manpower on the part of the team. or perhaps there was more research and developments done since and it is intentional?

[The Computer Illiterate]

replying to shoebopp

1. That makes sense. It's really unfortunate that you can't destroy those things or at least recruit from them like the greeks can (use them as local troops).
2. That could be it but it's weird it only happens in a few areas (I think edessa is an example), well, hopefully this is either intended or the devs know to fix it now

[Camcolit]

As Hayastan I can't build the highest level of local military buildings (important because they often give the only troops you'd want) unless I have a Philhellenic Satrapy. This requires a minor Hellenistic settlement. So I am now destroying any satrapies, building philhellenic to access these, then building satrapies again... But if you have a Hellenistic metropolis (Antioch) you can't build any level of local military colony . As an eastern faction you are reliant on having Greek populations to get non-Greek troops... None of this is making any sense to me, if I am missing something please point it out.

[Shoebopp]

upgrading building in Armavir would enable thrueos heavy infantry (iirc) in that region but you'd lose ability to recruit the mainstream foot archers

Sorry for being pedantic, but the change in recruitment from Western Iranian Archer-Spearmen to thureos troops is caused by the Thureos Reforms. You could speedrun developing Armavir's factional government and access upper tier troops while retaining the ability to train archers if you'd like

[eyelurker]

You should check out Pahlava then. They actually heavily rely on hellenic polis for their government because you can only build satray in certain city and hellenic polis city otherwise you stuck with the dreadful border march.

[Camcolit]

Pahlava's government and recruitment is an incoherent mess in my opinion https://www.twcenter.net/forums/show...Pahlava-Issues , but it's still the faction I play most.

[QuintusSertorius]

As Hayastan I can't build the highest level of local military buildings (important because they often give the only troops you'd want) unless I have a Philhellenic Satrapy. This requires a minor Hellenistic settlement. So I am now destroying any satrapies, building philhellenic to access these, then building satrapies again... But if you have a Hellenistic metropolis (Antioch) you can't build any level of local military colony . As an eastern faction you are reliant on having Greek populations to get non-Greek troops... None of this is making any sense to me, if I am missing something please point it out.

This is easily fixed by dropping the requirement for the eastcol_three to hay_satrapy, rather than hay_philhelsat as it currently is. Which I've now done.

It came about because the Philhellenic Satrapy is "higher" than the regular sort (because they have to be in a hierarchy) but it's also the last non-elite government. So it doesn't make sense to use it as a prerequisite (and isn't used as such for any other buildings).

[QuintusSertorius]

2. What's the reasoning behind removing khalide and armenian cataphracts from certain cities after upgrading from a caucasian tribal kingdom to a satrapy? I saw this in one or two cities and thought it was odd while these units remained elsewhere.

The Cataphracts are only available in Armavir and Shamushat, are are still available in both of their post-reform governments.

The Khaldilae aren't in the later government pools for Armavir.

[Camcolit]

This is easily fixed by dropping the requirement for the eastcol_three to hay_satrapy, rather than hay_philhelsat as it currently is. Which I've now done.

It came about because the Philhellenic Satrapy is "higher" than the regular sort (because they have to be in a hierarchy) but it's also the last non-elite government. So it doesn't make sense to use it as a prerequisite (and isn't used as such for any other buildings).

Cool, thanks!

[benfras]

Is it intended that one cannot build normal satrapies (and the seat of power) in places with Hellenistic poleis? If Tigranes moved his capital to Antioch, should we not be able to build it there?

[Camcolit]

The hellenic poleis system is pretty clunky and kind of screws over eastern factions. The Greeks can put these outposts everywhere which mess up your government and recruitment and can't be removed.

[QuintusSertorius]

Is it intended that one cannot build normal satrapies (and the seat of power) in places with Hellenistic poleis? If Tigranes moved his capital to Antioch, should we not be able to build it there?

There's no mechanical restriction, it's more likely the culture requirement and geographical restrictions are the issue. In any case, the Philhellenic Satrapy is designed for places that already have a polis.

The hellenic poleis system is pretty clunky and kind of screws over eastern factions. The Greeks can put these outposts everywhere which mess up your government and recruitment and can't be removed.

Hayastan, Pahlava and Nabatu all have special governments allowing them to take advantage of pre-existing polis buildings. Pontos can use them directly. That's not really screwing them over.

[Camcolit]

The special governments are crap though. You get to recruit low-tier Greeks at a virtually useless rate. What you get is effectively a low-tier Greek government that an actual Greek faction would never use.

[QuintusSertorius]

The special governments are crap though. You get to recruit low-tier Greeks at a virtually useless rate. What you get is effectively a low-tier Greek government that an actual Greek faction would never use.

They give you the combined recruitment of helcol_one and polis_two. That's not crap. Though I don't remember now if that's a change that came after the release of 2.35.

[Camcolit]

As Pahlava why would you ever want comparatively vastly inferior Greek cavalry? There is no end of better cavalry in the area of the map you are given the Philhellenic option. The other things I seem to get from them is artillery (don't use it and don't think Pahlava often historically did), hoplites (would be pretty bizarre in a nomad army), and various assorted junk like slingers, inferior toxotai, skirmishers that like hoplites don't fit and anyway you have your own, etc.

I played a game relatively recently and didn't notice any difference in the recruitment but could be wrong. In any case the point would be to allow Pahlava to build its own governments and recruit plausible eastern and nomadic troops in its core territory, not more low tier Greeks.

[QuintusSertorius]

As Pahlava why would you ever want comparatively vastly inferior Greek cavalry? There is no end of better cavalry in the area of the map you are given the Philhellenic option. The other things I seem to get from them is artillery (don't use it and don't think Pahlava often historically did), hoplites (would be pretty bizarre in a nomad army), and various assorted junk like slingers, inferior toxotai, skirmishers that like hoplites don't fit and anyway you have your own, etc.

I played a game relatively recently and didn't notice any difference in the recruitment but could be wrong. In any case the point would be to allow Pahlava to build its own governments and recruit plausible eastern and nomadic troops in its core territory, not more low tier Greeks.

You have plenty of places you can recruit eastern cavalry from, the point is that it gives you superior Greek infantry.

[Camcolit]

It doesn't though, it gives you trivial numbers of infantry that don't fit your army composition. This amounts to 1 thureophorio per 25 turns and no machariophorio, the last time I checked. I pointed this out before and you said that you can't expect to be able to recruit significant numbers of Greek infantry as Pahlava, and I agree, but then where is the 'taking advantage' of the Greek poleis that you cannot destroy? You can't have it both ways.