Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Icon3 Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    Quote Originally Posted by Cohors_Evocata View Post
    *sigh*, TWC really seems to hate me posting here nowadays. Editing this post to make some more sense now...

    EDIT: OK, so the EB II team really needs some feedback on how difficult the various factions are. I had planned to rework the intro screen to something like this before I went AWOL (I hence don't know if this made it into the mod):
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    What we need is info on both the initial campaign difficulty and the overall difficulty, as well as a breakdown of what makes the faction easy or difficult exactly. There's definitely some data to use in this thread already, but it's several iterations of EB II old by now.
    As it currently stands, the faction difficulties on the campaign menu for EB2 are quite outdated, iirc, there have already been a trend or two attempting to address this issue but none have come to fruition as of now.

    My proposal is as follows:

    • Consolidation of the faction difficulty reviews.
    • Splitting the faction difficulty into several sections:

    - Starting strategic situation (Some factions may be strong overall but getting to that point will not always be smooth sailing...)
    - Late Strategic situation (Will take geography, finances, possible reforms and late game army compositions into consideration (Most weight will be given to factional armies post turn 200 with exceptions (looking at you Rome)))
    - Faction Mechanics/Reforms (Some factions may have trait lines, administrations or role playing elements that takes some understanding to fully exploit the benefits of such as Rome's Cursus Honorum)
    - Factional/regional Army compositions (This will be evaluated on a different scale: Weak, Moderate, Strong), most of these ratings will be made relative to your neighbors' compositions and some bearing will be given to future far-flung adversaries.
    -Overall Difficulty

    The proposed difficulty scale is as follows unless stated otherwise: Easy, Moderate, Challenging, Very Challenging.

    Of course most of these ratings are subjective and a more precise criteria will be generated at a later date pending approval.

    Possible actions:
    • Additional community participation in the faction difficulty reviews/ EB Gameplay guides (And more community input regarding faction difficulties, no matter how big or small to make consolidation easier, I will also put appeals for factions in dire need of reviews if approved).


    Any and all well-intentioned input is welcome.
    Last edited by realm56; May 01, 2021 at 11:04 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    Shoot me a PM over on the Org if this gets rolling and you need some proofreading done on the resulting text.
    . .

  3. #3

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    The faction difficulty ratings in EBII look quite outdated for the most part and I want to address that as I have stated previously.


    How will this overhaul be structured?

    The difficulty will be split into several parts, each with specific judging criteria along with a final overall difficulty that takes all of these parts into account. Each part will be weighed differently in order to render judgement on the overall campaign difficulty. Note that the overhaul will be made with Hard/Medium difficulty in mind and is intended to be a supplement to the official guide.


    Starting strategic situation:


    • The strength of your administration, military and economy at campaign start relative to your neighbors and the work needed to ensure a stable income with a strong main army with money left over to build infrastructure.
    • Scripted events such as rebels, relief armies, generation/removal of funds etc....
    • Immediate geography and resource potential.


    Weight in overall difficulty: 40%


    Late strategic situation:


    • Late game army compositions and their strength relative to your enemies.
    • Potential to access additional military and civil options with reforms .
    • Scripted events (Such as nomadic invasions...)



    Weight in overall difficulty: 20%


    Faction mechanics:


    • Potential long term benefits for Family members and the faction at large.
    • Possible constraints on player actions.
    • Necessity for micromanagement.


    Weight in overall difficulty: 15%


    Army composition:


    • Bodyguards (The general and his retinue, it should ideally be maneuverable, potent in attack and steadfast in defense).
    • Cavalry (Mounted units should be able to hit the enemy where they are unprepared and readily respond to their counterparts in the enemy army)
    • Infantry (Infantry units should be able to hold the line and grind the enemy to paste in protracted melee, credit to be given to fast, hard hitting light/medium infantry as well as solid heavy infantry)
    • Skirmishers (Skirmishers must be able to harass the enemy and deal good damage from range, being able to hold if intercepted or deal reasonable damage in CQC will be considered as a bonus.)
    • Ability of roster to scale with time.


    Weight in overall difficulty: 25%


    Overall difficulty:

    Will be judged with a short paragraph with all criteria considered appropriately based on their weight on the overall judgement. A scale will be used to assess this difficulty as follows:


    • Easy
    • Moderate
    • Hard
    • Very Hard
    • Legendary





    Closing statements

    If any of you want to make contributions to this trend, please use the criteria specified.

    I am in particular need of difficulty assessments for the following factions:


    • Aedui
    • Arverni
    • Pritanoi
    • Getai
    • Lusotannan
    • Sab'yn
    • Sauromatae
    • Sweboz
    • Boii
    • Massylia
    • Arevaci
    • Lugiones
    • Taksashila





    Last edited by realm56; June 10, 2021 at 09:36 AM.

  4. #4
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    5,385

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    I keep my fingers crossed for this initiative but I thought there's already a project to update the ratings? Is there no follow-up of the series of the reports?

  5. #5

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    Quote Originally Posted by Jurand of Cracow View Post
    I keep my fingers crossed for this initiative but I thought there's already a project to update the ratings? Is there no follow-up of the series of the reports?
    Yes, there have been updates to the current reports, but what I intend to do is to consolidate all of them and combine them with input from the devs regarding the new changes that are coming to version 2.4 (Some of the older reports are quite frankly no longer applicable with all the changes that have arrived and/or have yet to come... and some factions have no reports put up from what I have seen). The consolidated reports with their various different styles would then all be combined into a short summary using the criteria I have just established.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cohors_Evocata View Post
    *sigh*, TWC really seems to hate me posting here nowadays. Editing this post to make some more sense now...

    EDIT: OK, so the EB II team really needs some feedback on how difficult the various factions are. I had planned to rework the intro screen to something like this before I went AWOL (I hence don't know if this made it into the mod):
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    What we need is info on both the initial campaign difficulty and the overall difficulty, as well as a breakdown of what makes the faction easy or difficult exactly. There's definitely some data to use in this thread already, but it's several iterations of EB II old by now.
    As for the project you mentioned, that project now appears very dead, thus I have taken up the important but laborious work of making sure that the faction difficulties are up to date in time for version 2.4.
    Last edited by realm56; June 08, 2021 at 11:19 PM.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    Here is an example of my proposal at work:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Hayasdan

    Starting strategic situation:

    Hayasdan starts in a safe position with two very defensible settlements in the form of the decently developed but wealthy capital of Armavir and the newly founded but strategically vital Shamushat. Both her starting settlements are safely nestled in the Caucasus away from the conflict zones of Syria and Anatolia. Her starting military is sufficient for the initial consolidation of the surrounding lands ruled by petty kings. The Caucasus has the potential to be wealthy with Armavir at its centre. Unfortunately, on both counts, these potential strengths are constrained by vassalage to the Seleucids in exchange for semi-autonomy in her affairs although this was not always a given due to her relative isolation from the Seleucid heartlands of Syria and Mesopotamia. To compound this insult, the Seleucids and to a lesser extent, the Sauromatae through money and strategic marriages respectively have granted the surrounding petty kingdoms mutual protection from aggression by Hayasdan. Therefore, patience is advised until an opportunity arises to throw off Seleucid vassalage and attack when the gaze of the Sauromatae lie elsewhere.


    Late strategic situation:

    With her sovereignty now without question, Hayastan has the option of further expansion into the Seleucid heartlands to cement her status as in imperial power. This will inevitably put her into contact with Hellenistic culture which she can co-opt for her own purposes although not to the same extent as neighbouring Pontos. However, with her newfound status and wealth comes new enemies. The Ptolemies and the Nabateans will resent Hayasdan’s expansion into Syria and will bitterly contest her influence in the area. Pontos will also become increasingly threatened by her dominion, thus a careful watch should be maintained to gauge her intentions. The Seleucids, undoubtably diminished by Hayasdan’s imperial rule will also plot unceasingly to seize back her lost possessions from her newly acquired empire. Maintenance of an Achaemenid style administration will bring many benefits to Hayasdan although secondary administrative hubs may have to be established to check the power of her satraps. Stay the course and Hayasdan may yet enjoy a new golden age.


    Faction Mechanics:

    • Seleucid vassalage
    • Imperial Hayasdan


    Army composition:

    Hayasdan’s roster consists of various tribal levies with a good array of cavalry that should serve her well as she seeks to maintain her sovereignty in the face of aggression from the surrounding kingdoms and petty chiefs. Should she gain influence in her immediate periphery, additional Caucasian and Persian regionals can be levied to serve in her military. Should she gain true autonomy and expand her dominion ever further, well trained, and equipped retinues will be made available to her along with a plethora of foreign peoples willing to bask in her newfound power and defend it with zeal.

    The riders who accompany the Arkhy and his trusted aides are drawn from the Nakharar and Azat nobles and are all covered from top to bottom in the finest scale and plate armour available, armed with barge pole and mace. They deploy themselves in battle atop the finest steeds, armoured in the same manner. They fight in the manner of the Cataphract which is a relatively new introduction to these lands, a product of steppe warfare that Hayasdan has taken for her own. They will often be the last to fall in battle.

    The horsemen that serve Hayasdan are all seasoned riders despite her mountainous terrain. Javelin and bow armed cavalry gallop out to harass her foes from afar whilst stout medium cavalrymen follow them, never far behind. None should ignore the much vaulted and healthily feared Cataphract, covered from head to toe in finely made armour and armed with the much-feared barge pole which can impale any enemy and leave them to be crushed under the combined weight of their baneful hooves, their sheer bulk and their heavy armour. As her dominion expands, Hayasdan can gain access to even more exotic mounted options to bolster her already solid cavalry roster.

    The infantrymen who fight for the Arkhy consist of lightly armoured levies and warriors who fight in the manner of the Persian Sparabara although more seasoned tribal warriors from Kartli, Egrisi and other locales can be co-opted to bolster the front line. Galatanised units can also be recruited to comprise a functional but unexceptional infantry core. As Hayasdan’s dominion expands, Hellenes, Persians and other foreigners can be recruited to fight for her. Finally, the Gund, masters of the spear, shield and bow can be drawn from the sons of the lesser nobility to reliably serve as much needed professional troops.

    The missile troops that Hayasdan recruits to fight in her name can be relied upon to provide adequate supporting fire although their poor armour and discipline will leave them vulnerable to being intercepted and broken by faster or better-armed opposition should they get too close.


    Overall difficulty:

    Hayasdan’s sheltered starting position, utilitarian roster and the relative simplicity of her reforms and mechanics make her campaign a solid first pick for a player just starting to explore Europa Barbarorum II.

    Rating: Easy


    I will refine this example and other assessments as the changes for 2.4 trickle in.
    Last edited by realm56; June 10, 2021 at 09:00 AM.
    To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
    - Sun Tzu



  7. #7

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    Project update:

    Assessments for 10 factions including this one have currently been completed and I am reaching a point where I will soon have to proceed at a dead man's pace because there are little to no assessments on this trend or the sticky trend for faction difficulty .


    Thus I once again reiterate my appeal:

    Please add feedback for factions on either trend, however minor they may be!

    I really need feedback for the following in particular:


    • Aruernoi
    • ​Aedui
    • Arevaci
    • Boii
    • Lougiones
    • Lusotannan
    • Massylia
    • Sauromatae
    • Sweboz
    • Taksashila


    Pretty please ?



    Last edited by realm56; June 18, 2021 at 01:56 AM.
    To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
    - Sun Tzu



  8. #8
    Miles
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Pretoria, South Africa
    Posts
    395

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    Question: how do you want replies to be written? Specifically, do you want them written in the historical, role-playing direction you took with Hayasdan, or do you just want a general breakdown of the faction with economic numbers, effective units listed by name, building priorities, expansion strategies, etc. ?

    Personally I have terribly narrow faction preferences in EB as I basically only ever play as Hayasdan or Pontos, over and over. I was going to do one for Hayasdan before yours, but I was planning to phrase it more from an in-game perspective, mentioning certain stand-out units to prioritize for armies and which cities to expand to and governments to build in order to get those units. But yours went in a very different direction that was more detached from gameplay. I've been thinking about branching out and trying Taksashila due to their seemingly comfortable end-of-map start.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    Quote Originally Posted by Artannis Wolfrunner View Post
    Question: how do you want replies to be written? Specifically, do you want them written in the historical, role-playing direction you took with Hayasdan, or do you just want a general breakdown of the faction with economic numbers, effective units listed by name, building priorities, expansion strategies, etc. ?

    Personally I have terribly narrow faction preferences in EB as I basically only ever play as Hayasdan or Pontos, over and over. I was going to do one for Hayasdan before yours, but I was planning to phrase it more from an in-game perspective, mentioning certain stand-out units to prioritize for armies and which cities to expand to and governments to build in order to get those units. But yours went in a very different direction that was more detached from gameplay. I've been thinking about branching out and trying Taksashila due to their seemingly comfortable end-of-map start.
    General breakdowns are fine for now, I'll add the historical flavor at a later date using the input I recieve here, as a matter of fact, I'm gathering material for Taksashila right now (ie. Getting my behind handed to me and/or recovering 30k debt, praying to high heaven that no more rebels pop up to ruin my day....).

    EDIT: I have made it through the maelstrom and am secure at home, all I need is the late game and I should soon have enough material to start writing their assessment (I'll put one up on the pinned difficulty trend given their relative absence from said trend). You can ignore the criteria if you do not want to follow it to the letter, I'll judge what is put up on their own merits and amend accordingly.
    Last edited by realm56; June 20, 2021 at 11:01 PM.
    To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
    - Sun Tzu



  10. #10

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    The only faction I've played in 2.35A so far are Ptolemaioi. I could write it up if you want...

  11. #11

    Default Re: Faction difficulty rating overhaul

    Quote Originally Posted by Sar1n View Post
    The only faction I've played in 2.35A so far are Ptolemaioi. I could write it up if you want...
    That's fine, other perspectives other than my own or what is already posted are always welcome .
    To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
    - Sun Tzu



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •