Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 156

Thread: Questions! Questions that need answering!

  1. #1

    Default Questions! Questions that need answering!

    I am in the midst of a Gray Wave of Death campaign but I wanted to know a couple of things before abandoning that campaign to switch to the new update.

    1. What is the status of ranges units? I heard they got nerfed, a bit concerning considering how weak they already seemed to be.

    2. What is the state of Carthage? This is the campaign I want to try next and I want to know if meaningful changes were made to them. It seems like some indirect changes must be made by virtue of the changes to Spain, but what about Carthage specifically?

    3. Any major overarching mechanical changes? For example it seems movement range has been significantly increased (a welcome relief!). Are there any other major changes like this?

    Thanks to anyone who takes the time to help a brother out!

  2. #2

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    1. What is the status of ranges units? I heard they got nerfed, a bit concerning considering how weak they already seemed to be.

    Slingers are literally unusable now. Their arc has been lowered to the point where you CANNOT have them deployed behind your frontlines and shoot over them - they'll just inflict grievous friendly fire casualties on their comrades. You can't maneuver them around the enemy and shoot them from behind either - slingers' shot spread have been widened as well, making the projectiles wildly inaccurate. The ONLY way to properly use them is to deploy them in front of your lines - they'll have no time to fire if the enemy is advancing, and will get shredded before firing back if you're advancing.

    Some skirmisher cavalry have their ammo drastically increased. It's only the "famous" units though like Numidian Cavalry and Celtic Mercenary Cavalry.

    You'll notice that missile attack values have been lowered across the board. This is not an overall nerf because the game engine's "lethality" value for missiles was bumped up. Overall nothing truly changed in terms of missile lethality.


    2. What is the state of Carthage? This is the campaign I want to try next and I want to know if meaningful changes were made to them. It seems like some indirect changes must be made by virtue of the changes to Spain, but what about Carthage specifically?

    Carthage now has the Libyan Garrison script where the Libyan recruitment pools of Atig, Adrumet, and Carthage itself will be periodically drained. This is to simulate the Carthaginians constantly having to force Libyan soldiers to oppress their own people.

    Lilybauem begins the game with half its infrastructure damaged. This is to simulate the aftermath of Pyrrhus turning Sicily into a ravaged warzone just to bolster his warlord resume. You have to repair it.

    This may not be guaranteed nor scripted, but one of the Syrakousian stacks seems to always besiege Lilybauem by turn 3, even if you had one of your armies besiege Syrakousai by turn 2.

    The maniacal campaign AI of 2.35a is MUCH more likely to attack you no matter what. Historical alliances, strategic situations, and even common sense goes out the window. The Carthaginian campaign suffers the most from this change - the Numidian stack near your heartlands is practically guaranteed to besiege one of those core settlements on turn 1.

    No longer are Barcid characters rarer than purple dye. In 2.35a slews of pro-Barcid characters clamor to marry into your family. Hanno, your starting Barcid character (and only Barcid character for the majority of players' pre-2.35a campaigns) is also more likely to brainwash his children into Barcid dogma. Young men are also more likely to unexpectedly (but fortunately!) join the Barcid faction upon turning 16. Basically, in order to achieve the Barcid reforms you no longer have to either create alternate timelines to get Hanno to survive to age 73, or get extremely lucky and snag a Barcid suitor. You can rest easy now.

    This is an indirect change, but the gargantuan naval movement buff seriously benefits a naval empire like Carthage. You can ship armies, governors, and agents to all corners fo the Mediterranean in literally 1 turn .


    3. Any major overarching mechanical changes? For example it seems movement range has been significantly increased (a welcome relief!). Are there any other major changes like this?

    The aforementioned Game of Thrones-esque campaign AI is probably going to annoy a lot of players. Previously the AI would actually take your faction's reputation and relations into account, and diplomacy even on Hard Campaign mode is functional. You could leave your borders lightly defended against factions that you've built up good relations with. Not anymore. The AI now operates by one simple rule: is this settlement lightly guarded? If so, attack. If not, attack later. In the case of an attack, the AI then assumes the player is as stupid as it is and operates by another simple rule: if the attack is successful, declare peace. Then attack again the next turn. If the attack fails, sue to peace. Then attack a few turns later after another attack team is assembled. Diplomacy no longer works and violence and force are the law of the land. The most concrete evidence of this change is that playing as Hayastan, paying tribute to the Seleukids no longer guarantees non-aggression. The grey beast will devour you at a whim even if you shell over 3000 mnai every year. Or it won't. But would you really rest at ease knowing how sociopathic the campaign is now?

    Cavalry unit numbers now follow an intricate system where how numerous a unit is (70 men or 80 men or even 100) is based on the unit's eliteness and the unit's culture's reputation for fielding large cavalry units. Here are some examples: Xystophoroi have only 70 (!) men. The Hellenes never fielded large quantities of pure Hellenistic cavalry, with elite cavalry being even rarer. They're battle-winning and famous, but still. Meanwhile, Sakan Noble Cavalry retain their 100 men count. Being a nomadic people, the Sakans can mobilize every battle-capable man and even woman. Even their elites are numerous on the field of battle. This system IMO accurately represents how much differently cavalry is valued across different cultures.

    The random M2TW rebel spawn is now gone, replaced by a scripted rebel spawn. These rebel spawns are overall a little less frequent than bandit spawns, but MUCH more deadly and capable of stealing a lightly defended region. Fortunately, the script doesn't activate until turn 50, which is more than enough time for you to conquer a stable empire capable of future expansion and dealing with internal rebellions.

    East colony recruitment has been overhauled. Whereas previously entire groups of regions have identical recruitment pools, 2.35a granulizes them into smaller, more unique pools each tailored to the region. The change is so drastic you'll have to read export_descr_buildings.txt yourself. Settle down, it's going to be a long but exciting read.

    Male characters upon marrying can gain a trait signifying how wealthy or powerful their wives are. The trait itself can range from Impoverished Noble Family to Powerful Noble Family, and offer small bonuses like bribe resistance or influence. The trait's real effect though is ostensibly affecting the chances of that character attaining faction-specific offices. I haven't been monitoring this relationship, but it's a nice mechanic in theory, if not under the player's control (the wife's connections trait is randomly generated). On a related note the two Gallic factions (Aedui and Arverni) now have a political office system almost as complex as that of Rome and Carthage. Playing as them would be a good chance to see just how far your wives can get you in the political game.

    The campaign script has been expanded to include more historical and immersive events. Some of them are:

    - turning Anatolia into even more of a headache to manage through the Pisidian Raids and Galatian Shakedown. For the former, a Hellenistic faction controlling Phrygia and Pamphylia will be subject to spawned Pisidian rebel armies ON TOP of the existing new rebellions script (and the Galatian Independence script which itself supplements the rebellions script in Galatia). For the latter, every faction that historically had an interest in Anatolia will now be extorted by the Galatians should they control a region in Anatolia bordering Galatia. If they bow down to the threats, they pay a hefty tribute. If they refuse, a medium Galatian army is spawned, and an invisible counter is incremented. You can either negotiate with these Galatian thugs indefinitely, or aggravate them enough for a final invasion of your Anatolian province where upon defeating the invasion the Galatians will finally respect... that one province. You'll have to go through this with EVERY region bordering Galatia. Anatolia is wealthy, but is it really worth the trouble?

    - Ethiopian Raids. Playing as the Ptolemies, Seleucids, or Nabatu (but not the Saba!), controlling the two bottommost Egyptian provinces will cause regular raids from hostile Ethiopians to the south.

    - Nabatu trade monopoly. If the Nabatu player controls Petra, Dedan, Bostra, and Tadmur, and Mauryab is still under the control of the Saba, then the player is awarded with 1,000 mnai every winter to simulate their monopoly over the Red Sea trade. Don't worry if the 1,000 mnai seems to small, I am currently complaining to the EBII team until they raise it to something more reasonable like 1,000,000 mnai

    - Epeiros and Makedonia's governments are no longer nearly identical! Epeiros and Makedonia both start out with poor government options but with reform objectives in place. Epeiros can either conquer all of Sicily and hold Ambrakia, Pella, and Sparta to solidify Aiakides kingship and unlock Centralization governments... or all the starting Aiakides (Pyrrhos, Ptolemaios, Helenos, and Alexandros) can die of "natural" causes, Sicily can be lost or never acquired in the first place, and the Epeirotes unite Epidamnos, Ambrakia, and Thermon in order to lay the groundwork for a Federalized government. It's your choice but historically the Epeirotes established some sort of federalized league after Pyrrhos's dynasty died and his kingdom fell into irrelevance. Makedonia meanwhile has the fun task of trying to reestablish Alexander's empire. First, they must of course complete the Kingship Reforms and (optionally) stop the barbarian raids and pretender invasion. Then, they must control Pella, Ipsos, and Antiochea in order to achieve the Imperial Reforms, which unlocks the Supervised Hellenic and Native Administrations as well as the new Satrapeia government. That is the reward for partially restoring Antigonus One-Eye'd kingdom. Finally, should the Makedonians conquer Babylonia as well, they are awarded with an instant Dynastic Administration in Babylon! The dynastic administration will help create a base of operations in Persia to finish what Alexander had started.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    I'm assuming you're deep into a Seleucid campaign, so I'll recommend this: blitz all of Hellas ASAP and develop them all into having level 3 poleis. There are 3 huge benefits:

    1. Near-unlimited colony points. Suddenly you can flood the Persian Empire with Hellenistic colonists which grant you cultural stabilization and professional troops.

    2. The Spartan Agoge. Your most promising children can gain massive influence and confidence provided they are at least Vigorous. The influence will help with cultural imperialism and the confidence means any one of the Agoge graduates can lead armies effectively against the many enemies of the Seleucids.

    3. Makedonia tourist trap. Seleucid and Bactrian characters have a good chance of developing "Pothos" at some point in their lives. You've probably already seen it and read the description (and consequences!). Now, you can finally cure these Makedonians of their homesickness! Ship them from your frontier regions to Makedonia and have them stay there until they've gained the "Visited Makedonia" trait.

  4. #4
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    5,733

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Ad. slingers - this is very intersting, @Shoebopp. It means that devs decided to come back to the original (I'm not sure of which TW game, though ;-) idea that it is something that the difference between slingers and archers is indeed the ability to shoot over other units.
    I don't think moving slingers (or javelinmen, or archers) behind the enemy back was employed historically. The morale would prompt them rout earlier. High discipline is required to make such a brave move.
    Now the problem is the rate of fire. If it's like you say - no time to shoot, then they're useless.

    Anyway, in my experience the slingers are very effective against the steppe horse archers. Asanai are better than, e.g., Komatai Toxotai.
    Last edited by Jurand of Cracow; August 04, 2021 at 04:55 AM.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    First of all thank you a ton for this exhaustive list.

    I got to say while some of the changes seem a welcome relief, it seems there might be more bad than good.

    It sounds like some really nice addition were made to specific factions. For example all of the changes to Carthage sound positive/historically reasonable and distinguishing Epirus/Makedonia is great. I also read that they made some welcome additions to India/Spain. That is all great.

    The other changes you mentioned worry me.

    For one I have zero interest in playing against a sociopathic AI that denies all sense of reason and constantly attacks, surrenders, and attacks again over and over again. Furthermore, the Galatian rebellions sound kind of ridiculous? How many rebellions/with how much strength would I need to put down in total? The way you made is sounds seems pretty historically inaccurate.

    Can you explain the rebels in a little bit more depth? I like the idea of them spawning less but if they are still spawning in happy regions with a much bigger threat I'm not sure I care for the change. If, however, they simply spawn less frequent but more dangerous threats in unhappy regions I can get behind it. Furthermore, is there any control over which regions are more likely to spawn rebels relative to others? I am currently going through the History of Rome podcast, and while wars are very common, they really aren't that common if that makes sense. It was about a 200 year difference between putting down the Samnites and the fighting them again in the Social War, effectively 400 turns in EB2. I'm not terribly intrigued by death stacks forming in stabilized regions, particularly when you consider how difficult public order is to come by. Finally got Mega to yellow after decades of effort? Let's reward you with a death stacks! This is not enjoyable or historically accurate.



    Minor quibbles:

    Is there a way to stop the Ethiopian raids? I like the idea but not the idea of never being able to stop them.

    I basically never use slingers but wishing to play a Carthage campaign its disappointing to know my Balearic slingers will be useless.


    RE: Seleucids

    As far as my campaign I have basically "won" the campaign for all intents and purposes. Parthia and Baktria are alive but I have captured their chief provinces. I am in the process of Hellenizing India and I have conquered Egypt down to Axum. I most recently conquered the entire southern coast of Anatolia. I have gotten myself in a bit of a rut in terms of needing large garrisons to keep my massive swathe of territory occupied which reduces my ability to expand. I have one offensive army in Anatolia and I am in the process of gathering two in the east that should be able to put down Parthia for good (I have made peace with Baktria currently but will turn on them once Parthia is removed). That being said your strategy of rushing Greece is interesting to me. I actually took the opposite approach. I abandoned Anatolia and some of my northeastern territory for coin and goodwill. I then zerged Egypt. From there I expanded east conquering Parthia/Baktria/Taxila which led to my current empire (I didn't want the war but I also had to take Petra and eliminate Nabatu in a brief but fairly large war).

    As far as public order goes, you seem fairly versed with the game mechanics, what are your suggestions for maintaining public order in new provinces? Do you occupy or do you loot? Colonized as quickly as possible or allied goverment first and then colonize when your client ruler dies? Do you place a big premium on high influence governors or will that only get you so far? I have a big empire so I'm not saying its impossible but sometimes I feel as if unrest is very opaque and I have a hard time figuring out how to stop it. Should I keep cities smaller if I want to maintain public order for example or does that not really play a role?

  6. #6

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shlazaor View Post
    Can you explain the rebels in a little bit more depth? I like the idea of them spawning less but if they are still spawning in happy regions with a much bigger threat I'm not sure I care for the change. If, however, they simply spawn less frequent but more dangerous threats in unhappy regions I can get behind it. Furthermore, is there any control over which regions are more likely to spawn rebels relative to others? I am currently going through the History of Rome podcast, and while wars are very common, they really aren't that common if that makes sense. It was about a 200 year difference between putting down the Samnites and the fighting them again in the Social War, effectively 400 turns in EB2. I'm not terribly intrigued by death stacks forming in stabilized regions, particularly when you consider how difficult public order is to come by. Finally got Mega to yellow after decades of effort? Let's reward you with a death stacks! This is not enjoyable or historically accurate.
    Every region, irrespective of it's happiness, with the exception of your starting capital, has a chance of a revolt (which is low and has a "cooldown" so it can't happen turn after turn). This script replaces the "bandit spawn" that was hardcoded. There are a small subset of "Troublesome Regions" where they happen more often, but they happen everywhere.

    The spawns are not big, they are either 5 units or less frequently 8 units. What makes them threatening is that they are proper compositions led by a named character, not 3 units of Akontistai or the like. If you don't properly garrison regions they appear in, they may attack your settlements. There are no "safe" interior regions any more.
    Last edited by QuintusSertorius; August 04, 2021 at 02:45 PM.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shoebopp View Post
    - turning Anatolia into even more of a headache to manage through the Pisidian Raids and Galatian Shakedown. For the former, a Hellenistic faction controlling Phrygia and Pamphylia will be subject to spawned Pisidian rebel armies ON TOP of the existing new rebellions script (and the Galatian Independence script which itself supplements the rebellions script in Galatia). For the latter, every faction that historically had an interest in Anatolia will now be extorted by the Galatians should they control a region in Anatolia bordering Galatia. If they bow down to the threats, they pay a hefty tribute. If they refuse, a medium Galatian army is spawned, and an invisible counter is incremented. You can either negotiate with these Galatian thugs indefinitely, or aggravate them enough for a final invasion of your Anatolian province where upon defeating the invasion the Galatians will finally respect... that one province. You'll have to go through this with EVERY region bordering Galatia. Anatolia is wealthy, but is it really worth the trouble?.
    There is also always the proven method of conquering Galatia. After a while, the rebellions stop.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Aneuth View Post
    There is also always the proven method of conquering Galatia. After a while, the rebellions stop.
    In that case I think the mechanism is great. They were an historically violent people and reflecting the danger of that region, along with a solution to fix it, is great!

    I canít say I care for the new system, though, I suppose I might not fully comprehend the old one. If I could through all the effort to keep a province happy, and game randomly telling me to go screw myself despite my in-game efforts, I find that pretty damn obnoxious.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    One more thing - were more descriptions/unique buildings added to the game? One of the things I love about the game is reading the regional/unique building descriptions.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shlazaor View Post
    I can’t say I care for the new system, though, I suppose I might not fully comprehend the old one. If I could through all the effort to keep a province happy, and game randomly telling me to go screw myself despite my in-game efforts, I find that pretty damn obnoxious.
    There were no "happy provinces" in reality, that's the point. There were always simmering tensions that could blow up at any time, along with cross-border raiding by nearby nomads, tribes and highlanders.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    I for one always employ trusted good quality mercenary cavalry, always garrison all my border regions, and I always ever ditch slingers for Euzonoi/Peltenai who are great skirmishers. Skirmishers >>>>> Archers and Slingers. I always seek to maneuver and have them pelt the enemy at their backs, for a deadly effect.
    "Romans not only easily conquered those who fought by cutting, but mocked them too. For the cut, even delivered with force, frequently does not kill, when the vital parts are protected by equipment and bone. On the contrary, a point brought to bear is fatal at two inches; for it is necessary that whatever vital parts it penetrates, it is immersed. Next, when a cut is delivered, the right arm and flank are exposed. However, the point is delivered with the cover of the body and wounds the enemy before he sees it."

    - Flavius Vegetius Renatus (in Epitoma Rei Militari, ca. 390)

  12. #12

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    There were no "happy provinces" in reality, that's the point. There were always simmering tensions that could blow up at any time, along with cross-border raiding by nearby nomads, tribes and highlanders.
    I guess my opinion would be based on the frequency of the rebellion then. After the Romans defeated the Samnites it took 200 years for them to try their luck again in the Social War. After Sulla put them down they were essentially finished. I don't really see why a full fledged rebellion should randomly occur, and without warning, in a happy capital province just because.

    Unlike the Galatian script that doesn't seem to be fun mechanically or make sense in terms of historicity.

    With the Galatians there is a clear cause and effect. A specific region, which causes a specific reaction based on player choices, and can be solved through the players actions. There is also historical support based on the actions of the Galatians over the centuries. Player agency combines with history to create an interesting mechanic.

    That stands in sharp contrast to this script where the player has zero agency and doesn't really have any basis in history outside of "well rebellions happened".

    Just my take though.
    Last edited by Shlazaor; August 04, 2021 at 06:51 PM.

  13. #13
    Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AEnima City, USA
    Posts
    1,616

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Re: Carthage, you may be interested in this submod that rather substantially adds to the faction's gameplay. At least when update is released

  14. #14

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooz View Post
    Re: Carthage, you may be interested in this submod that rather substantially adds to the faction's gameplay. At least when update is released
    I'll check it out thanks!

  15. #15

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shlazaor View Post
    One more thing - were more descriptions/unique buildings added to the game? One of the things I love about the game is reading the regional/unique building descriptions.
    Many more regions now have "unique" buildings besides the "region" building! Unlike EBI however, these buildings are indestructible now. So you can't just destroy a precious cultural monument just for some cold hard cash.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    As for your question about factional vs allied government for long-term stabilization, all arguments boil down to cultural conversion. The EBII manual recommends installing an allied government for short term stabilization and factional governments for long term integration. Allied governments provide a hefty happiness or law bonus depending on if it's an Oligarchy or Democracy, and the client ruler has a special Client Ruler trait that provides generous bonuses. Furthermore, keeping him in a settlement with an allied government will grant him "Happy People" all the way up to "Extremely Happy People". Less unrest is always welcome! HOWEVER, allied governments are terrible for long-term integration at worst and less effective at best. In the short term, all allied governments convert to a special "Eleutheroi" culture up to 20% and 30% for levels one and two. This conversion may actually eat away at your factional culture until Eleutheroi culture caps off. In the long term, while client rulers generally have higher influence than younger family member characters, they confidently have much less influence than developed family members that can freely move around doing things like partaking in the Spartan Agoge, camping in settlements with level 3 schools, winning battles and become legendary conquerers, and climbing your faction's political ladder. There's also the elephant in the room in the fact that an allied government does not convert to your faction's culture like roughly half of all factional governments do, nor does it allow the construction of any colony-type buildings all of which convert to a certain culture. The presence of any colony at all is more effective at converting culture than a 10-influence governor. Thus, while setting up a client ruler and upgrading to one of the two allied government types is much faster and necessary in cases where public order is dangerously low, you want to transition to a factional government ASAP to kick off the cultural conversion process. In fact, ALWAYS build factional governments whenever possible, and in cases where you'd be tempted to resort to an allied government, prepare accordingly before conquest by yanking an effective governor from elsewhere and plopping him in the newly conquered settlement. This strategy is literally the only way of integrating certain settlements in certain campaigns, namely Liguria during the early Roman campaign.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shlazaor View Post
    I guess my opinion would be based on the frequency of the rebellion then. After the Romans defeated the Samnites it took 200 years for them to try their luck again in the Social War. After Sulla put them down they were essentially finished. I don't really see why a full fledged rebellion should randomly occur, and without warning, in a happy capital province just because.

    Unlike the Galatian script that doesn't seem to be fun mechanically or make sense in terms of historicity.

    With the Galatians there is a clear cause and effect. A specific region, which causes a specific reaction based on player choices, and can be solved through the players actions. There is also historical support based on the actions of the Galatians over the centuries. Player agency combines with history to create an interesting mechanic.

    That stands in sharp contrast to this script where the player has zero agency and doesn't really have any basis in history outside of "well rebellions happened".

    Just my take though.
    Just saying; the Social War can't really be considered the "Independence" kind of rebellion. It was about Italians wanting Roman citizenship(If anything they wanted to be Romans rather than drive them off). They were fighting for their rights, not for their independence. The Samnites did ally themselves with Phyrrus and Hannibal though, and they were thoroughly punished for those "treasons" against Rome. That's when they were actually fighting for their independence, not during the Social War.

  18. #18

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shoebopp View Post
    Many more regions now have "unique" buildings besides the "region" building! Unlike EBI however, these buildings are indestructible now. So you can't just destroy a precious cultural monument just for some cold hard cash.
    I appreciate the reply but I was already aware of the unique buildings existing in EB2. I was more curious if the most recent update to EB2 included even more unique buildings and more fleshed out regional descriptions than existed in the previous version. Even though the uniques are fairly meaningless outside a small public order/tg bump in the given province I find them fun to collect and the regional descriptions are always a blast to read.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Cleitus the Pink View Post
    Just saying; the Social War can't really be considered the "Independence" kind of rebellion. It was about Italians wanting Roman citizenship(If anything they wanted to be Romans rather than drive them off). They were fighting for their rights, not for their independence. The Samnites did ally themselves with Phyrrus and Hannibal though, and they were thoroughly punished for those "treasons" against Rome. That's when they were actually fighting for their independence, not during the Social War.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleitus the Pink View Post
    Just saying; the Social War can't really be considered the "Independence" kind of rebellion. It was about Italians wanting Roman citizenship(If anything they wanted to be Romans rather than drive them off). They were fighting for their rights, not for their independence. The Samnites did ally themselves with Phyrrus and Hannibal though, and they were thoroughly punished for those "treasons" against Rome. That's when they were actually fighting for their independence, not during the Social War.
    While everything you said is correct, at best I'm not sure it matters, and at worst it simply supports my point. Rebellions didn't just occur to occur. If provinces were happy revolts did not occur. For example slaves were treated as trash during the time of the Servile Wars largely because Italy was flush with them and they simply lacked value due to their numbers. That meant not only was their strong motivation for rebellion but there were a lot of slaves available to participate in the rebellion. When the slave population died down it not only meant fewer slaves for revolt but that they also tended to be treated better as a whole because they weren't seem as being as easily replaced. That made the risk of rebellion more keen for slaves. As such massive slave rebellions stopped occurring. Cause and effect. My beef with the system is that there is no cause and effect. It's a random screw you anywhere on the map where players have no agency.

    I've never taken issue with EB2 difficulty but there is nothing historically justified about a total lack of agency. Again, it's my 2cents. It's not like that's worth much. Modders are gonna do as they please.
    Last edited by Shlazaor; August 05, 2021 at 05:22 PM.

  20. #20

    Default Re: Questions! Questions that need answering!

    Quote Originally Posted by Shoebopp View Post
    As for your question about factional vs allied government for long-term stabilization, all arguments boil down to cultural conversion. The EBII manual recommends installing an allied government for short term stabilization and factional governments for long term integration. Allied governments provide a hefty happiness or law bonus depending on if it's an Oligarchy or Democracy, and the client ruler has a special Client Ruler trait that provides generous bonuses. Furthermore, keeping him in a settlement with an allied government will grant him "Happy People" all the way up to "Extremely Happy People". Less unrest is always welcome! HOWEVER, allied governments are terrible for long-term integration at worst and less effective at best. In the short term, all allied governments convert to a special "Eleutheroi" culture up to 20% and 30% for levels one and two. This conversion may actually eat away at your factional culture until Eleutheroi culture caps off. In the long term, while client rulers generally have higher influence than younger family member characters, they confidently have much less influence than developed family members that can freely move around doing things like partaking in the Spartan Agoge, camping in settlements with level 3 schools, winning battles and become legendary conquerers, and climbing your faction's political ladder. There's also the elephant in the room in the fact that an allied government does not convert to your faction's culture like roughly half of all factional governments do, nor does it allow the construction of any colony-type buildings all of which convert to a certain culture. The presence of any colony at all is more effective at converting culture than a 10-influence governor. Thus, while setting up a client ruler and upgrading to one of the two allied government types is much faster and necessary in cases where public order is dangerously low, you want to transition to a factional government ASAP to kick off the cultural conversion process. In fact, ALWAYS build factional governments whenever possible, and in cases where you'd be tempted to resort to an allied government, prepare accordingly before conquest by yanking an effective governor from elsewhere and plopping him in the newly conquered settlement. This strategy is literally the only way of integrating certain settlements in certain campaigns, namely Liguria during the early Roman campaign.
    Thanks for the explanation! Sounds like kickstarting the integration process is always preferable in an ideal circumstance but not always possible in any given circumstance. To clarify, and you mentioned this before in another thread I believe, the culture is what leads to the decline of the pitchforks? Can that reduce base unrest eventually or not? Furthermore, are you aware of what the thresholds are ie what % of culture leads to what % decrease in unrest? Thanks for taking the time to explain some of this stuff. The mechanics are interesting but definitely a bit opaque in terms of the details.

Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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