Exilian
Game Design and Project Resources: The Workshops Quarter => Rome - Total Realism => Mods, Maps & Game Add-Ons - The Bazaar => RTR 0.5 Imperial Campaign => Topic started by: ahowl11 on February 09, 2014, 06:54:28 AM
-
Okay. I want Alavaria to be in control of this part of the mod, since I know nothing about this side of modding. I trust his knowledge and skills. So he will be in charge of implementing all of the economics into the game.
Basically this is what I would like to see for this mod is something similar to ExRM and also maybe look into that mini mod. I want the campaign to be fun but also not so easy that you can have an empire after 20 turns. I don't know, let's just all brainstorm and put all of our ideas into one. This will require a lot of research and a lot of testing.
-
I'll leave this here, from the other thread:
I can't remember which mod it was but they had a system set up where building trade and tax oriented buildings like docks, markets, and forums would give you income (with things like markets giving a negative health bonus due to those places being meeting areas where disease could easily spread) but building government projects like barracks, roads, sewers, bathhouses, theaters etc. would give you negative income "bonuses" to represent the cost of running and maintenance so you would have to balance out your buildings and couldn't just click spam the list or you could very well drive your city into negative income. You would have to build your city up economically first before you could build it up militarily, like it should be. It would also require you have a few cities devoted to purely economic purposes if you wanted to have some cities dedicated to building the best troops.
-
Thanks Sigma, I like that idea.
-
Yeah, actually interestingly enough, I've been playing it on and off and, well as it is currently that doesn't happen. I have a fairly good idea why, so it shouldn't be an issue for us.
Can some people who have played for a bit please post an image of your Financials tab? I want to see what the composition of income looks like (it shows Taxes, Farming, Mining, Trade etc). All beta testers who've played for a decent number of turns, thanks :)
Gotta do some math. Oh, and tell me if the current state of your faction allows it to afford "tons" of soldiers that seems disproportionate.
-
I also think we should take into account units utilized. I think a financial penalty should be given if units like principe's and legionnaires are used since they are better equipped and have better training, thus would require more finances to maintain. However, I feel a less severe financial penalty should be given if units that were historically easier to fund and equip are utilized such as a Thureophoroi or Auxilia as both units were much less of a burden Financially and easier to maintain. Also it would allow for more traits such as "Master Tactician" or "Wins with Little" a trait that can be given to a general who has won multiple battles using less than superior armies and can provide bonus to low tier troops. Just my suggestion
-
That's a very good idea, I wonder how it could be implemented?
-
I also think we should take into account units utilized. I think a financial penalty should be given if units like principe's and legionnaires are used since they are better equipped and have better training, thus would require more finances to maintain. However, I feel a less severe financial penalty should be given if units that were historically easier to fund and equip are utilized such as a Thureophoroi or Auxilia as both units were much less of a burden Financially and easier to maintain.
So, you mean the unit upkeep, unit recruitment cost, or something else, by "finances to maintain"
Also it would allow for more traits such as "Master Tactician" or "Wins with Little" a trait that can be given to a general who has won multiple battles using less than superior armies and can provide bonus to low tier troops. Just my suggestion
I don't think you can get around the way RTW evaluates army strength... can you?
-
unit upkeep and unit recruitment cost, their equipment was pretty expensive and the fact that legionaries were professional troops meant the state had to pay for their training, manufacturing and maintenance of their equipment, supplies, as well as their pay. I'm thinking that not only did it cost a pretty penny to recruit, train and equip the troops it also cost a pretty penny to maintain them long term.
As for the traits, it was just something I threw out, I have no idea how the trait scripting works :P
-
Are you thinking of adding different types of government you can install whenever you capture a new region?
-
Yes, we are :)
-
Fantastic. That's a must have, imo. How are you planing on doing it?
-
We don't know yet ha, it will be implemented later on
-
Building trees, most likely? And the ability to make advanced military buildings or such depends on which path you take of the branching tree.
-
It's very difficult to make building trees branch in RTW, unfortunately.
The obvious exception is temples, whereby you can only build one of each type per settlement. So if you want to make government typed buildings a reality, make the government buildings the "temples" and the temples regular buildings, would be my first thought (because after all there's no real reason why a settlement should only have one type of temple).
-
It's very difficult to make building trees branch in RTW, unfortunately.
The obvious exception is temples, whereby you can only build one of each type per settlement. So if you want to make government typed buildings a reality, make the government buildings the "temples" and the temples regular buildings, would be my first thought (because after all there's no real reason why a settlement should only have one type of temple).
I believe that's how most mods handle that matter.
-
I got a renowned German historical atlas recently for signing up on the Scientific Book society WBG (it's worth 60 €, but I got it for free) and it also has an economical map of the Eastern Mediterrenean and Near East in the 3rd century BC. Maybe if we play to implement different resources like the newer TW games or RTR VII we could need that. Perhaps a similar map can also be found for the rest of the map.
It shows the distribution of natural resources, trade centres, important trade routes and manufacturing centres.
-
Seems like it would be a great resource! I wish I had better ideas for the economy. I am more geared towards military and culture.
-
Yeah, we could rescale costs up: 3x
And then add a bonus of: +100% Income tax bonus to settlements to start.
Your "capital" can be given a larger bonus. Very important for some factions, if they are AI held, it can help small factions).
Then switch buildings to give +% Income tax bonus for the economic ones, and the happiness/mulitary buildings will give you -%income tax bonus.
You can use mines (for gold/silver at least) but a more general mine building might as well just give you +% income tax bonus. I would target a payoff time of maybe 15-20 turns for the early structures, but longer for the more expensive ones. +% tax bonus may be stronger in settlements with more population; at the same time, having a penalty hurts more, and you need more happiness buildings for a larger settlement :balrog:
Trait/Ancillary wise, having governors gain traits/ancillaries that increase tax income would be a nice reason to encourage governors. Note that if these are powerful, nerfing the capital bonus will be necessary.
Farming Levels, Public Health are annoying bonuses, FYI. Probably change them for straight happiness/population growth bonuses. You can have population control buildings that work on that. Law is a relatively nice bonus (reduces corruption) so it should have higher costs if you want them.
As a bonus, if the bonuses are mostly Happiness instead of Health/Law, you can pretty safely use -Happiness on buildings you want to be extra painful...
-----
You can't repurpose the mining/farming trees (and are restricted by # of building trees you can have) so they make natural "mining resource" and "farming the resource" buildings. ;D
The market tree could be used for "tradeable resource" bonuses like furs etc etc.
You could also make available "industry" building trees for industries you like, dependent on having the resource and appropriate extraction built. Eg: Gold/silver smiths, which require some level of mines in settlement with gold/silver. Or wineries, requiring farms to some level.
Note that mining tree buildings CAN use tax income bonus, but can only give mining income bonus for gold/silver (you can make it buildable everywhere I think).
-
Since buildings are my second area of interest after traits & ancillaries, here are some things that I haven't seen mentioned yet:
1) The temples need to be streamlined, so that all factions use the same temple types. That will allow the AI to upgrade the temples it captures, and free valuable building trees for future use.
2) One idea I had to prevent all cities being exact clones of eachother is to increase construction times of buildings depending on the settlement. Important cities of the ancient world would then be able to build much faster, becoming more easily distinguishable from "ordinary" settlements. And even the ordinary ones could have different construction speeds and costs, and start out more or less developed. Ask Aradan from Fourth Age: Total War for more info about this, I don't know of any other mod that uses this mechanic.
Oh, and it would also mean that the mausoleum of Hallikarnassos needs to be scrapped. But the seven wonders as they are now aren't exactly in line with "realism" anyway.
3) Are there plans to include the BI buildings for barbarians? This is no suggestion, just a question, because these buildings suck ass on so many levels.
-
1. Seems like a good idea to me.
2. Interesting, it might be worth a shot
3. Well a few buildings yes but not all
We probably will scrap the wonders, but it would be cool to still have them on the map.
For this mod the only thing that I care is that we don't add hundreds of thousands of buildings to the mod like RS2 and EB. Too much waters down the game and for me makes it extremely boring. I'd rather utilize the current building tree and maybe add a few necessary buildings.
-
How about I use the weekend to get the temple issue sorted? I could make it so that every faction can build exactly four temples, and can upgrade every temple it captures. I'd also use that opportunity to tweak some bonuses.
-
But they would still bear the names of different gods and goddesses?
-
No, I guess that would not be possible. It would just be some generic temple for all factions called:"War temple" or "Economic temple". Personally, I know that it helps the AI, but I don't like it. Furthermore, it's not like the AI has any money problem if we don't want it to...
-
Mmh I gotta agree with Bercor here if that's the case, I'm afraid. How would these buildings look? A mixture of Gallo- Germanic, Phoenician and Graeco- Roman architecture?
-
No, I guess that would not be possible. It would just be some generic temple for all factions called:"War temple" or "Economic temple".
Nope, building descriptions (and names) can be fully customized for every faction. I don't know if I can include them all over one weekend, so we might end up with some "Temple of War/Law/Fertility/Whatever" placeholders for a while, but my lineup for now looks like this:
Rome: Jupiter - Mars - Merkur - Venus
Greeks: Zeus - Ares - Hermes - Aphrodite
Ptolemies: Serapis - Herakles - Ptah - Isis
Celts: Taranis - Toutatis - Lugus - Damona
Iberians: Ataecina - the Lares - Bandua - Endovellicus
Germans: Tyr - Woden - Frigg - Freya
Dacia: Zalmoxis - Kotys - Bendis - Derzelas
Carthage: Baal-Hammon - Tanit - Baal-Melqart - Eshmun
Numidia: the Kings - Gurzil - T'Neith - Heaven and Earth
Armenia: Hayk - Vahagn - Anahit - Aramazd
Parthia: Ahura Mazda - Verethragna - the Six Spirits - Mithra
Illyria: Ou - Korrotos - the Twin Snakes - Genesus
Sarmatia: Ma - Agin - Goitosir - Tara
-
Oh, excellent. ;D
In that case go ahead.
-
Yes, you may proceed with the temples :)
-
Done. Finally.
Now how exactly do I give you those files? They're too large for attachments, and it seems I can't send them per E-mail either.
Other than that, there are some other minor changes:
- removed all units recruited from temples (Arcani, gladiators etc.) with the exception of Fanatics for Gaul and the Sacred Band for Carthage
- Decere and Corvus Quinquireme are now recruitable from Roman dockyards
- nerfed overall temple bonuses
-
Just go here:
http://exilian.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=2968.new#new
-
Economy- we should make some considerations here. Those of you who have played RTR VII will know that it uses a different financial scale than most mods. On Vanilla you pay like 600 for your legionaries (and 250 upkeep), your city has a wealthiness of 2500 and a port costs 1500 denarii. On RTR VII, both income and prices are much higher to allow for more flexibilty and expansive details. For example, now you pay something like 9000 for a legionary cohort, 1500 upkeep, and your average city gives 5000 income (obviously overall it is harder and you get less money). Now we could even make this more realistic the following way:
Have, for examle, at the start of the game, the richest and the poorest city compared. Let's say Alexandria is the richest settlement and Lupfurdum or something in Germania the poorest. It would be like this (if the towns were in):
Vanilla: Lupfurdum: 100 income, Alexandria: 2800 income
RTR VII: Lupfurdum: 1000 income, Alexandria 18 000 income
Now to make the differences even more clear, we could do something like this:
RTR Project: Lupfurdum: 50 income, Alexandria 10 000 income
To achieve balance we would adjust the unit prices:
German warband- 100 denarii
Ptolemaic Hypaspists- 15 000 denarii
This would also be realistic, since the German warband would barely need more than leggings, trousers and a wooden spear and their military training is their every-day life. Meanwhile, the Hypaspists are handpicked from the young Macedonian elite, have received a decent education and years of military training, not to mention their expansive equipment and the need to produce enough replacement weapons and armour for such a professional unit.
What does this mean: It means, most of all, that the Barbarians would make a huge jump forward in their economy if they capture a ''civilized'' town, while conquering Britannia or Germania for a faction like Rome is, like in history, unattractive. Of course one should be able to alter the income, especially by building mines also in the Barbarian areas. Furthermore the regions should grow richer the nearer they are to the Mediterrenean core regions- that way there wouldn't be such a big shock immeditaly if the Illyrians or Celts capture Greek cities. Just an example off my head like it could look (keep in mind I always mean at the start of the campaign):
Lupfurdum: 50 income
Lugdunum: 200 income
Noreia (mines): 500 income
Seuthopolis (Thrace): 1000 income
Thermon (Aitolia): 2500 income
Athens: 5000 income
Alexandria: 10 000 income
What this would need more than anything else would be extensive testing. But maybe it goes to far anyway, just tell me what you think.
-
I think that's an amazing idea, Mausolos.
-
Thanks :) We need someone who knows if this can be implemented, though. Same with my idea for the governor traits- I'm a creative mind, but I need other people to realise my ideas ;D
-
I'm pretty sure both ideas can be made, especially the governor's traits idea, since RTW uses the same trait system as MTW2.
-
Well, this is pretty much the way we're headed already, right? Since the more civilized areas of the map have much more settlements, and every one of them can be developed much further, we need some trick for barbarians to stay competitive. Cutting their expenditures is the most logical way to do this.
And as for barbarians eyeing the riches of civilization... there is no need for them to even hold civilized settlements. With my traits, I can make it so that they recieve some hideous amounts of cash whenever they raze a well-populated city. We could basically create a role-playing experience for the barbarian player where he comes back every two decades or so to "milk" those decadent idiots...
-
Yes that's probably right and I think overall it will improve the realism and immersion.
Using traits to give more sense to looting sounds like a very good idea, thus plundering would really enrichen you as a Barbarian faction and present a viable option. The only question would be, if the AI can handle it.
-
I like all of these ideas guys, original :)
-
Well, this is pretty much the way we're headed already, right? Since the more civilized areas of the map have much more settlements, and every one of them can be developed much further, we need some trick for barbarians to stay competitive. Cutting their expenditures is the most logical way to do this.
And as for barbarians eyeing the riches of civilization... there is no need for them to even hold civilized settlements. With my traits, I can make it so that they recieve some hideous amounts of cash whenever they raze a well-populated city. We could basically create a role-playing experience for the barbarian player where he comes back every two decades or so to "milk" those decadent idiots...
Hmm, this sounds like a recipe for a hilarious barbarian faction breaking out and just blitzing across the map like a train on steroids, killing off AIs along the way, or basically crippling them, which means when you hit the end of the map there's only going to be a few lame AI factions left.
Please note that if the barbarians are supposed to have cheaper buildings, any shared buildings will have to be made into separate ones, and you would be stuck in the case of farms, government building, mines, roads, ports which cannot be made into two separate trees.
-
Your last point indeed seems to be a problem. It's not possible to give a certain faction a certain bonus, like on STW2 or R2?
-
Hmm, this sounds like a recipe for a hilarious barbarian faction breaking out and just blitzing across the map like a train on steroids, killing off AIs along the way, or basically crippling them, which means when you hit the end of the map there's only going to be a few lame AI factions left.
Please note that if the barbarians are supposed to have cheaper buildings, any shared buildings will have to be made into separate ones, and you would be stuck in the case of farms, government building, mines, roads, ports which cannot be made into two separate trees.
Well, like I said, we need something to make barbarians the constant danger they historically were. The only time I have ever seen a barbarian faction achieve anything of note was with EB's Lusotannans. It has always rubbed me the wrong way that these factions' only purpose seems to be being conquered.
The details are of course subject to balancing. But I would certainly love an opportunity to conduct raids like barbarians historically did: the Celts in Italy and Greece, the Germans in Gaul and Italy...
As for the building costs, that is no problem at all. Construction discounts are a normal bonus for buildings, even if they don't show up in the building info.
-
Comrades PLease! See the table "the illusion from nomadism to urbanization" and write your opinion.
http://exilian.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=2938.50 (http://exilian.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=2938.50)
-
(http://fotohost.kz/images/2014/03/07/JEqZj.jpg)
Yeah, let's discuss this. How can we simulate this? Especially for Parthia as they need to start off as nomadic
-
Can someone explain the daft German what this means and how it is supposed to work? :P How is this a transition from nomadic to urban culture?
-
The sharp Portuguese doesn't understand it either... :-[
-
Nomadism is an illusion! There's not a building but simply actions.
-
Oh I see, so something like EB?
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think xeofox's proposal is to have actions being built rather than actual buildings in most cases.
So the only things you'd physically build would be the sanctuary set and expanding the campsite, and then eventually at a fairly high level making a mud brick wall. These buildings would also ideally have no effect for non-nomads and if possible could be Area of Recruitment as the only buildable things there - so it would be almost pointless or at least not particularly useful for anyone else to capture the settlement, except to keep it out of someone else's hands (and even then you'd need to import all your garrison troops).
As such "find a winter camp" might replace building a governor's villa, etc etc. You'd find a blacksmith rather than building a blacksmith's shop, and so on. As xeofox points out this gives the illusion of representing the real features of nomadic life whilst fitting within the RTW system.
I think this makes a lot of sense. :)
(PS xeofox; in your description I've assumed by "parking place" you mean a camping site.)
-
That does make sense, interesting :)
-
These buildings would also ideally have no effect for non-nomads and if possible could be Area of Recruitment as the only buildable things there - so it would be almost pointless or at least not particularly useful for anyone else to capture the settlement, except to keep it out of someone else's hands (and even then you'd need to import all your garrison troops).
This might be hard. Because you'd be adding more conditionals to prevent roman buildings from being build there (remember, you already prevent other factions from building roman buildings) and the more conditionals you add makes things very troublesome (there's actually a limit, I think two?)
You can make massive tax & trade penalties (again, assuming we've rescaled things) so that the settlements are really terrible to hold.