Announcement: Europa Barbarorum II 2.35A R3.5 released!

[bordinis]

According to what I m seeing now in the campaign since the movement was so low previously CAI armies got depleted from all those fights just before the armies could reach a settlement and reinforce. So now there is a shift into a direction that CAI fights a battle or two and comes back to garrison it s settlements not because it calculates to replenish but because the calculations from other armies to reach and siege a settlement so that in turn created an interesting aspect that CAI returns back it s armies to defend the settlements and thus replenish them or in many instances keeps full stacks inside it s settlements because of the danger to be sieged. So that small change in movement range created so called experienced armies because CAI returns mostly at the same turn it s army to settlement to defend and in turn replenishes. So I am seeing a lot of golden and silver ranks in stacks just sitting inside and defending a potential siege. Some stacks did not move for 80 or more turns probabably because CAI calculates danger to it s settlements. It is very easy now to blitz a map for a player and CAI to overpass territories to siege a player for instance. We had densely packed settlements before and nothing like this was happening now the movement range gave practical reinforcement aspect. So it gave in a sense an ability for CAI to reinforce at random which is funny.

[Dooz]

That long range AI defense of besieged settlements is one of my favorite effects of longer ranges. I was so shocked and thrilled when my Roman besiegers in Sicily got a nasty counter-surprise or two. And how they appeared from seemingly out of nowhere. (granted those reports are with a higher range than default, but the current increase is still better than it was)

[bordinis]

Yes and a good thing is that CAI defends with full stacks their outher settlements like Seleukids in my campaign.By the way AI CAN replenish units I am observing many factions in my campaign and Sweboz do have golden rank full size slingers and archers and levy spearmen and many more. So yes AI is dumb at replenishing units it often does not so but that movement range gave the opportunity for them to do it more often randomly.
I want to say that naval invasions are better now atleast a little bit. Carthage has invaded Italy and Romans having a hard time. Numidians are defeated and wandering in North Spain. Pritanoi is deep in West Europe. I also noticed many quality changes in CAI ability to build best governments a thing that was not present completely previously, for example Sweboz were not building their best governments but now they do.
The one good thing that movement range did was it made reinforcing and getting troops to desired settlements way faster through land and sea alike, so previously it was a macro nonsense and disaster. Remember the difficulty trying to replenish those awesome Units from British Isles far North? Now it s doable and less turn consuming trying to reinforce to full strenght those tribes far North. Was especially frustrating playing Pritanoi just for that. I m not saying that movement range change is perfect but it definetely made replenisment of macro way more practical. Even CAI randomly replenishes it s armies.

[Victor1234]

Couldn't see anything wrong with the code in the EDB. It starts with depleted recruitment and most of the infantry available are Roman (representing Romanised Italics). There should be Etruscans and Umbro-Picenians.

Attachment 365128

I see from your screenshot that I should've been more specific. I meant during the Polybian reform era, every other socii italici province produces 1 unit of pedites extraordinari and 2 units of cohors sociorum (in addition to regional infantry). Ariminum does not. It only produces 1 unit of pedites extraordinari, but no cohors sociorum. This seems like a bug and I can share a screenshot if you like.


Probably a good time to clarify that my previous feedback around the Roman vs allied balance was referring to the Polybian era as well, and the slow pool regeneration of the cohors sociorum unit specifically (pedites extraordinari comes slowly too, but then being elite, it made sense that there shouldn't be as many of them).

[QuintusSertorius]

I see from your screenshot that I should've been more specific. I meant during the Polybian reform era, every other socii italici province produces 1 unit of pedites extraordinari and 2 units of cohors sociorum (in addition to regional infantry). Ariminum does not. It only produces 1 unit of pedites extraordinari, but no cohors sociorum. This seems like a bug and I can share a screenshot if you like.


Probably a good time to clarify that my previous feedback around the Roman vs allied balance was referring to the Polybian era as well, and the slow pool regeneration of the cohors sociorum unit specifically (pedites extraordinari comes slowly too, but then being elite, it made sense that there shouldn't be as many of them).

There's no error, the Cohors Sociorum don't come from Ariminium, they replace the Samnites in central and southern Italia. This is the pool:

;;; POLYBIAN ERA - CENTRAL ITALIA
recruit_pool "roman cavalry equites polybian"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "roman cavalry equites polybian"  0  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 80 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "roman cavalry equites polybian"  0  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 65 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j and not hidden_resource hr_h
recruit_pool "italic infantry etruscan"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "italic infantry umbro picenian"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "italic infantry umbro picenian"  0  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 80 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "roman infantry velites"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and hidden_resource italy and not hidden_resource greek1 and not hidden_resource greek2
recruit_pool "roman infantry velites"  0  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 80 and hidden_resource italy and not hidden_resource greek1 and not hidden_resource greek2
recruit_pool "roman infantry leves"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 65 and hidden_resource italy and not hidden_resource greek1 and not hidden_resource greek2

What's happening is that the rel_g is high enough to knock out the 65% and probably 80% lines, leaving a point of cavalry, one of Etruscans, one of Umbro-Picenians and one of Velites.

[Victor1234]

There's no error, the Cohors Sociorum don't come from Ariminium, they replace the Samnites in central and southern Italia. This is the pool:

;;; POLYBIAN ERA - CENTRAL ITALIA
recruit_pool "roman cavalry equites polybian"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "roman cavalry equites polybian"  0  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 80 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "roman cavalry equites polybian"  0  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 65 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j and not hidden_resource hr_h
recruit_pool "italic infantry etruscan"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "italic infantry umbro picenian"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "italic infantry umbro picenian"  0  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 80 and hidden_resource italy and hidden_resource hr_d and not hidden_resource hr_j
recruit_pool "roman infantry velites"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and hidden_resource italy and not hidden_resource greek1 and not hidden_resource greek2
recruit_pool "roman infantry velites"  0  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 80 and hidden_resource italy and not hidden_resource greek1 and not hidden_resource greek2
recruit_pool "roman infantry leves"  1  0.04  1  0  requires factions { f_rome, } and event_counter ecPolybianEra 1 and not region_religion rel_g 65 and hidden_resource italy and not hidden_resource greek1 and not hidden_resource greek2

What's happening is that the rel_g is high enough to knock out the 65% and probably 80% lines, leaving a point of cavalry, one of Etruscans, one of Umbro-Picenians and one of Velites.

I understand it's being left out of Ariminium delibrately, but I'm still not sure why. The Cohors Sociorum (Polybian Allied Infantry Maniple) should come from Ariminium too, based on it representing all of the Italian allied infantry. The name and the description imply it (granted, about halfway through it does switch to talking about how respected the Samnites were but the first half clearly meant everybody). They are also recruitable in every Italian settlement outside of Rome in equal amounts, except Ariminium.

I think if it's what it says on the tin and it's supposed to represent all allied infantry, then add the 2 units to Ariminium, but if they are only supposed to replace Samnites, then change the name and description away from generic Italians, and reduce their recruitment pool outside of Samnium. Why can I recruit 2 units of Samnite infantry in Arretium (Etruria), exactly as many as in the central Samnite highlands, if they weren't intended to represent all Italian allied infantry?

[bordinis]

Confirmed. CAI replenishes and reinforces units. Not only it is doing that it also garrisons it s most outher settlements with full stacks and keeps it there leaving it s settlements which are in the middle of it s empire almost empty. Acts like a player would. Never seen anything like this before and all AI factions do that. I have seleucid armies in the North in 6 5 7 8 rank fully reinforced I have Kelts fully reinforced with a stack full of veterans, carthaginian armies fully reinforced in various silver ranks attacking Rome. Oh my oh my and the only thing needed to change was to change movement points.. No coding no sweat, just change movement value, and all these mods all these years talked stupid that AI cannot reinforce.

[QuintusSertorius]

It's not just movement, z3n rewrote the CAI for R3.

[Dooz]

Yeah, I've been running some long campaign sims (one with 250 movement, two with 500) and the AI has been wonderful to behold. Kudos to z3n!

[Pooploop]

I'm seriously considering tweaking movement a bit to match a more historical pace for armies, fleets, agents, and envoys. Somewhere around an action point value that will "simulate" infantry moving at 7.5 km (an average between the snail's pace of 5 km in bad terrain and a brisk pace of 10 km on adequate pathways) a day, fleets at 10km (should be faster than this, but ancient fleets constantly stopped to resupply at ports and preferred to hug the coast right?), and agents and envoys at 15km (a small mounted party covers more distance). This will probably put values at 350-400 points. Is this going to be detrimental to R3 in particular considering so much has been reworked? Must I stick to the 250-ish action point value in respect to z3n's modifications?

[Jurand of Cracow]

I'm seriously considering tweaking movement a bit to match a more historical pace for armies, fleets, agents, and envoys. Somewhere around an action point value that will "simulate" infantry moving at 7.5 km (an average between the snail's pace of 5 km in bad terrain and a brisk pace of 10 km on adequate pathways) a day, fleets at 10km (should be faster than this, but ancient fleets constantly stopped to resupply at ports and preferred to hug the coast right?), and agents and envoys at 15km (a small mounted party covers more distance). This will probably put values at 350-400 points. Is this going to be detrimental to R3 in particular considering so much has been reworked? Must I stick to the 250-ish action point value in respect to z3n's modifications?

You may find this discussion useful.

[Hellenikon]

In the 2.35 main thread (which is closed, can't post this there), the link to the 2008 SP1 leads to a x86 version of it.


5a) For 64 bit Operating Systems:
Install Microsoft Visual C++ 2005 SP1 Redistributable Package (x64) first
Then install Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 SP1 Redistributable Package (x64) second

The second link, if you download the file, it's called x86. Is this intended? This doesn't seem like the x64 bits version, even if the description on the website says it is.

Here are two x64 versions from the microsoft website, and the file clearly is named x64, the third one from the list you can download.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/down....aspx?id=11895
https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/down....aspx?id=26368

I'm not sure what the difference is between ATL and MFC. Could someone more computer savy shed some ligth on this?

[z3n]

Get the x86, because the program is 32bit which relies on x86. Really I'd just go off the instructions, they're probably correct.

[Hellenikon]

Get the x86, because the program is 32bit which relies on x86. Really I'd just go off the instructions, they're probably correct.

You're right, it makes sense that this application should use 32 bit libraries. However the instructions seem to give different links based on your operative system, and not on the game itself.

I'm getting x86 and x64 of both c++ redistributables. Thank you for the help.

[QuintusSertorius]

I understand it's being left out of Ariminium delibrately, but I'm still not sure why. The Cohors Sociorum (Polybian Allied Infantry Maniple) should come from Ariminium too, based on it representing all of the Italian allied infantry. The name and the description imply it (granted, about halfway through it does switch to talking about how respected the Samnites were but the first half clearly meant everybody). They are also recruitable in every Italian settlement outside of Rome in equal amounts, except Ariminium.

I think if it's what it says on the tin and it's supposed to represent all allied infantry, then add the 2 units to Ariminium, but if they are only supposed to replace Samnites, then change the name and description away from generic Italians, and reduce their recruitment pool outside of Samnium. Why can I recruit 2 units of Samnite infantry in Arretium (Etruria), exactly as many as in the central Samnite highlands, if they weren't intended to represent all Italian allied infantry?

They're not available in Etruria either. Those two northern provinces have different pools to Campania and Daunia.

The pools are constructed with a fixed budget, you can't add something without removing something else. Those two northern provinces get Etruscans and Umbro-Picenians, instead of Cohors Sociorum.

[Victor1234]

They're not available in Etruria either. Those two northern provinces have different pools to Campania and Daunia.

The pools are constructed with a fixed budget, you can't add something without removing something else. Those two northern provinces get Etruscans and Umbro-Picenians, instead of Cohors Sociorum.

My mistake, it seems it's the pedites extraordinari that are available everywhere, including Etruria. I had assumed the cohors sociorum to be the spearman equivalent, that should also be available everywhere but weren't. Their translated name and description really do make them sound equivalent to the pedites. The Samnites don't even get mentioned until the last half paragraph and not at all in the name.

Reading through the code, it seems like recruitment pools are based on a regional level rather than city/province level, right?

This would explain why the cohors sociorum are available in equal amounts in the south (Rhegion and Tarentum), outside of the historical Samnite core area.

[QuintusSertorius]

My mistake, it seems it's the pedites extraordinari that are available everywhere, including Etruria. I had assumed the cohors sociorum to be the spearman equivalent, that should also be available everywhere but weren't. Their translated name and description really do make them sound equivalent to the pedites. The Samnites don't even get mentioned until the last half paragraph and not at all in the name.

Reading through the code, it seems like recruitment pools are based on a regional level rather than city/province level, right?

This would explain why the cohors sociorum are available in equal amounts in the south (Rhegion and Tarentum), outside of the historical Samnite core area.

They're not equivalents at all. The Pedites Extraordinarii are an elite that comes from all Italian regions. The Cohors Sociorum are a regular unit that replace the Samnites. Note the "Samnite" unit isn't just the Samnites specifically, but represents other Oscan-speaking peoples too, which is why they're available in the south (and I think Messana, if I'm remembering correctly).

All recruitment is regional, with only a few exceptions for when there's a transplanted body of men.

[bordinis]

I am getting this message over and over again after 160 bc. " Saka Rauka on the move". I got one message about Aursa letting new comers by their lands ( once ) and afterwards every single turn I get that message " Saka Rauka on the move ). In the far right corner there near Saka Rauka settlement spawned four sakan force stacks and they are standing in place doing nothing just besides not garrisoned settlement ( Altaic ) stacks.

158 bc ( turn 457 ) I got a message ( twice at the same turn ) " Alan raiders on the move " saying that they will have to fight me ( playing as Sarmatians ) but no rebel stacks spawned in my territory or elsewhere so will report after some turns again. The message "Saka Rauka on the move" is still going every turn.

156 bc ( turn 465 ) got a message : Alan raiders on the move" no stacks of any kind spawned, checked all the corners on the map. Still getting a message " Saka Rauka on the move" every turn. Those four stacks of Sakan rebels still standing there not moving much, Sakan AI recruiting troops in nearby settlements and sent one stack of it s 8 stacks to far right corner maybe to fight them? Will report more.

155 bc ( turn 469 ) got a message : Alan raiders on the move" nothing happened again. Still getting the Saka message and Saka AI is in a standoff with mentioned 4 rebel sakan stacks.

153 bc ( turn 477 ) got a message " Alan raiders" nothing spawned. The mentioned 4 rebel stacks still standing in place doing nothing. Still getting every turn the Saka message.

[QuintusSertorius]

I am getting this message over and over again after 160 bc. " Saka Rauka on the move". I got one message about Aursa letting new comers by their lands ( once ) and afterwards every single turn I get that message " Saka Rauka on the move ). In the far right corner there near Saka Rauka settlement spawned four sakan force stacks and they are standing in place doing nothing just besides not garrisoned settlement ( Altaic ) stacks.

You are playing R3.5, right?

The control part of that script is outside the loop that spawns the stacks. The stacks will only spawn once, but the message will keep coming. There should be four Sakan stacks in Baktriane.

Who holds Baktriane in your game?

158 bc ( turn 457 ) I got a message ( twice at the same turn ) " Alan raiders on the move " saying that they will have to fight me ( playing as Sarmatians ) but no rebel stacks spawned in my territory or elsewhere so will report after some turns again. The message "Saka Rauka on the move" is still going every turn.

156 bc ( turn 465 ) got a message : Alan raiders on the move" no stacks of any kind spawned, checked all the corners on the map. Still getting a message " Saka Rauka on the move" every turn. Those four stacks of Sakan rebels still standing there not moving much, Sakan AI recruiting troops in nearby settlements and sent one stack of it s 8 stacks to far right corner maybe to fight them? Will report more.

155 bc ( turn 469 ) got a message : Alan raiders on the move" nothing happened again. Still getting the Saka message and Saka AI is in a standoff with mentioned 4 rebel sakan stacks.

153 bc ( turn 477 ) got a message " Alan raiders" nothing spawned. The mentioned 4 rebel stacks still standing in place doing nothing. Still getting every turn the Saka message.

Alan raids randomly appear in Maiotis, Varustana, Khsiragatai Ubastra, Mazsakatai Ubastra, Kangha and Sakanu Khsarae, 10% chance each spring. When enough raids have happened, an Alan invasion is triggered.

[bordinis]

I am playing R3 not R3,5.. When those 4 stacks spawned Saka Rauka was controling the Baktriane, now after turns later Maurian Indians in control of it. So my older version explains Why I am getting what I am getting haha. Sorry.