Aeterna Civitas III

[Fairline]

Here's my initial notes and observations on AE Drew. I've played up to the 250's, so there's plenty more to come.

Firstly, it's a splendid scenario. It's always great to play a scenario where your civ starts small and you develop a vast empire; this one has that feel coupled with plenty of nice historical touches in terms of the events. By and large the gameplay mechanics are excellent. Liking the high unit moves, generation of plenty of units by building a legion, and the AI seems to be tough and a real threat. I've lost cities to counterattacking Celts and Epirote forces which was a paradoxically nice surprise given that most scenarios allow the player to steamroller the opposing civs relatively easily. I'm way behind schedule compared with the real expansion of the Roman Empire. I don't see that as a problem, but rather a challenge to play again with a better strategy for expansion.

There are a few issues I've noted down during play:

- The trade advisor does not work
- Some cities, including Rome are missing their usual traded goods supply/demand info
- The slinger unit generated after capturing a city is too tough; I've lost Hastati to them, and they're impervious to cavalry attacks. The latter are fairly useless attacking conventional units, which is as it should be for cavalry verses organised heavy infantry, but they would be rendered of some use if they were able to mop up fleeing civilians. I've halved the slinger att/def stats in my play-through.
- geeky historical stuff: Hypaspists were replaced in Successor armies by Argyraspides. Gaul warrior should be Gallic warrior
- The AI has been mis-using Pyrrus' elephants as invincible city defenders, which is most annoying! Please consider either changing their role in rules or de-buffing their defence stats.
- The fortress unit is too week: It's annoying to spend a huge number of turns or disbanded slaves to build one only to have it immediately destroyed by the first half-naked Celtic chappie who toddles up and attacks. Don't mind losing them to a concerted attack by several units, but it shouldn't be one-shotted by a single unit.

Overall excellent job; I'm really enjoying the scenario, and I'll report back as my game progresses.

 

[McMonkey]

Fairline,

I really glad you are enjoying the scenario and I'm very delighted to hear that it is a challenge! I had to replay scenarios like Frederick the Great and Dainichi Sekai Taisen several times using modified strategies to win, and that just made the game more intriguing and made me more determined to gain victory!

I agree with your critique and I have noted most of the same points and modified the stats as I go along to try and get the balance right. One thing I definitely plan to change is the amount of event generated Merchants as the revenue they generate is way too high for them to appear every turn. Their appearance will be randomized and pirate activity increased to make the huge payoff deliveries more risky.

Feel free to alter the stats as you see fit, this is a playtest after all. I agree that the Asian Elephants are too hard to kill. I think I was overcompensating for the AI which does a pretty good job at times, better than I expected. I will slightly decrease the Slingers defence and try and make the Equites a little more potent.

Suggestions on unit name changes are welcome. It isn't too much work to change them.

One thing I have noticed is that Roman expansion is fuelled by success. This is due to the Slaves events. Without slaves it is harder to build new Legions and without new Legions it is difficult to sustain offensives as attrition is high. This seems pretty historically accurate to me and works well for the gameplay balance. That is one reason I want to tame the trade side. In my test I have been disbanding about half the merchants outside of cities to replicate the new, reduced Merchant numbers, events I plan to introduce.

I'm hoping that when Rome expands and had more Merchant producing cities the game will balance itself by giving the Romans more enemies to face. For example, when Rome is in Greece, Anatolia, Iberia etc... they will have to face more enemies and the attrition will stay high, meaning Rome has to keep on triumphing in battle to feed the Legions! I don't want the game to get to a tipping point where victory is guaranteed and it is just a massive mopping up operation. I want the player to feel challenged right the way through and inspired to take on new enemies. Fighting in Italy and Sicily has been tough, but the number of enemies is manageable. Once there are long frontiers to protect I think things will get tougher, especially in Gaul and along the Rhine and Danube.

 

[McMonkey]

Regarding the trade advisor. I think you need the Market Trade technology (Trade) before the commodities are displayed and the advisor is available. Originally Merchants were buildable (why isn't buildable a real word?) with this tech so it made sense. I may swap this around so that it is available from the start. There are spare tech left to allow this.

I think I can also free up some event space by ditching the random unit creation events for the units the AI likes to produce. Checking the save it seems like the Celts love to build Cavalry, so no need to have an event to produce more!

 

[Squonk]

OK. I can play civ2 now. How can I download the game to "playtest" it?

 

[McMonkey]

Squonk,

I have three playtesters already, and in today's Civ2 world that is a hefty chunk of ACIII's available audience. If I release it to too many people now, by the time it is finished there will be few left to play it! Would you be happy to wait a few weeks more for the finished version. I really hope that after these final changes it will be worth waiting for! I have a week off work next week so I should be able to get a lot more work done.

Thanks for your enthusiasm!

 

[AGRICOLA]

(Editor's note: The following are selected excerpts from Julius Horatio AGRICOLA's monumental autobiography, "Son of Mars, Grandson of Jupiter", universally derided as the most self-serving and egocentric trash ever written by a moronic savant with unusual talent for getting others killed.)


I agreed most reluctantly to take over control of the Roman armed forces in 281 BC. I did this only after commissioning the soothsayer Readme to do a thorough study of chicken entrails on my behalf. I subsequently led my army through a series of brilliant campaigns, marked by overwhelming victories, to conquer Italy during the following 8 turns.

I knew that Turn 9 was going to be critical for my Romans. I had finally captured Rhegium to complete the conquest of Italy and then turned my attention to defending Rome's northern marches along the Tarquinii – Clusium – Ancona line. I correctly anticipated that they would be easy to defend against the disorganized hordes of howling barbs from Gaul.

I also received intelligence from Roman Merchants who, while delivering their goods to Panormus on the northern coast of Sicily, observed at least 13 Carthaginian Phalanxes massed around the city. I simultaneously got an order from the Senate that "Carthage threatens to seize Messana and control the straits. Your objective is to force the Carthaginians out our Sicily forever!" I replied most respectfully that they should stick to talking and leave the strategizing to me! I considered that to attack strong enemy forces on the difficult terrain of Sicily would be suicidal. I also knew only too well that Rome had only 2 Transport Ships, not nearly enough for any but the most minor amphibious operation.

I immediately ordered a crash program of technological development so that by Turn 11 Roman shipwrights had the knowledge needed to build seaworthy Transport Ships. I ordered the immediate rush building of 8 such vessels and began organizing and assembling the ground units. I was the first to board when 6 Transports embarked a force that included 11 Principes, 2 Latin Warriors, 6 Triarii, 10 Velites, 2 Merchants, 1 Fort, 3 New Legions and the supreme commander - myself. I insisted that the admiral set sail immediately and join up with the escorting Trireme already at sea off Tarquinii.

I transferred to the Trireme as it led the convoy, checking the sea for enemy vessels. I ordered an immediate attack when the lookouts spotted a fully loaded transport en-route to Sicily; the transport and all aboard soon disappeared under the waves. I had the fleet drop anchor when it reached its destination so that the Merchants could land first – there is really no point in trying to sell goods in a city after it had been sacked. I next ordered the Velites ashore to scout the area. I felt that my strategy of bypassing Sicily was fully vindicated when they reported that they found only scattered enemy unit near the city. I then led the first attack and quickly breached the city wall and destroyed a defending phalanx. I next landed most of the Principes and had them successfully attack a second phalanx, 2 cavalry units as well as 8 triremes and 2 huge quinqueremes, all trapped like molting ducks in the harbor.

I triumphantly entered Carthage just as the rest of the Roman Transports were arriving in port. I ordered two of the New Legions to the nearby Training Camp for reorganization into Legions. I next sent the excellent Numidian cavalry to kill all Slingers as well as sundry other enemy units around the city. I issued orders for one of the African Legions to march NW to Utica while the other moved S to Hadrumetum. I correctly anticipated that both cities would be lightly defended and easily captured. I was pleased to send a total of 11 Slaves to Rome after the fighting, enough to immediately RB 3 New Legions.



Editor's Note: At the end of Turn 13 (257 BC) Consul AGRICOLA summarizes his experience as generalissimo of Roman forces thusly: " I have found that, so far, this job has been interesting, action-packed, and not terribly difficult".


Okay, enough bombast, braggadocio and bull***t.


- Overall this is a very good scen with balanced units, potentially very dangerous enemies and unit movements appropriate for the size of map.

- I entirely agree with fairline that the Fort is a useless unit. I encountered Forts in both Utica and Hadrumetum. Vet Principes easily destroyed both. Forts tend to be non-vet in areas where there has been no previous fighting and are easy prey for attackers. Furthermore, I RB'd Forts in Venusia and Canusium during Turn 1. The one in Venusia helped to defeat the Macedonians but there was no way to get rid of it once the fighting had moved on. So, Venusia is stuck with a now useless unit that uses up a very scarce support shield.

- Would you consider removing the pollution icon in the ICONS file. It is not needed for this scen and clutters up the city screen for some large cities.

- Whenever a ship in port is attacked, the following message pops up:
"A new Legion is raised to protect the citizens of Rome from the barbarous peoples who live outside Rome's borders."
Nothing actually happens. The message is meaningless and should be removed from the GAME file.

- Is there any truth in the persistent rumor that the Romans will have to use bribery to obtain Velite-type units after the Marian Reforms tech is discovered?

- Amphitheatre


@Drew: Expect a message from my trusted agent - code name E-mail.


@All: Can one do overstrike text at CFC like one can at Poly?

 

[McMonkey]

Agri,

It looks like you have found my scenarios Achilles Heel. I'm working on ways to block off this coup de main approach.

Forts will be improved. I still need to find a way to prevent them being transported by ship. This is mostly to stop the AI grouping them in one city, especially if their stats are increased. I will also make them disband-able.

Thanks for solving the "New Legion" message bug. I thought this was a quirk with the events. I hadn't even thought about it being in the GAME file!

The rumour about having to bribe units is true as the post Marian Legions won't have them included. If I had more event space I would include them as part of the Legion, but I don't have the space unfortunately.

I have sent a reply to your e-mails and all the issues made here, and via e-mail have been added to my TO DO list. Hopefully by the end of this week I will have finished my own playtest, made all the alterations needed and be able to send you playtesters an updated set of files to look over.

 

[Prof. Garfield]

Forts will be improved. I still need to find a way to prevent them being transported by ship.

Have you considered making them air units? This might create some other difficulties, but they couldn't then be moved by ship.

 

[McMonkey]

Thanks Prof. Thats exactly what I have done and so far I have encountered no problems. I had to increase their stats anyway and even more so to compensate for the "fighters caught on the ground" effect.

I have nearly finished making all the other alterations and I'm going to start a new playtest to check the new balance. As soon as I have established if they all work I will send the playtesters the updated files.

 

[Fairline]

Ignore Julius Horatio Agricola's nonsense talk of this scenario being too easy - us mere mortals are finding the AI an uncharacteristically tough proposition

Can I make a plea for an increase to the triarii (and by extension the cohort) defence stats? I've just had a stack of 6 or 7 triarii + my precious remaining balista slaughtered by a handful of Carthaginians immediately upon landing in Sicily.

 

[McMonkey]

Fairline
I have found my own playtest tough. The Pyrrhic invasion was weathered at great cost in Roman lives, and the invasion of Sicily was a close run thing. My expedition to sort out the Illyrians was a disaster!

I have made some changes for the new version I started play testing today. Some changes make it harder, others easier. I will continue to tweak the unit stats as I go along. Feel free to make any changes you see fit and let me know what they were so we can compare notes.

 

[McMonkey]

Just a little status update. I struggled a little to get back into play-testing at the start of this week, mostly as I was distracted by my football team Everton's new manager saga. Now that is resolved I'm feeling a lot more relaxed and I have been able to crack on with the new test. So far everything is working perfectly. I have not come up with any additions for my TO DO list. The stats seem to be working great. The game-play is difficult but not impossible. The massively reduced Merchant creation makes the aquisition of Slaves the main factor in expanding the Legions and this seems to be balanced just right. I'm hoping to have the final play-test files out by the end of the weekend.

 

[McMonkey]

Odd phenomenon! I just activated the New Legion event in Rome and the units were there, but they were not displayed in the city screen! I tried it several times and the same kept happening. It's not a major problem as they can be moved out of the city, but why might this happen? It is a bit like when you create a foreign unit on another Civs city square using the cheat menu. You can't see the unit is there, but if it is active you can move it out of the city. This is the first time this has happened.

 

[McMonkey]

The next Legion I built in Rome showed up an normal. How peculiar!

 

[McMonkey]

Right then. My play-test was going perfectly up until the Illyrian wars. The problem I have is that there are just too many Germanic troops in the Balkans and they destroy any army I try and sent there. I want this campaign to happen as it is an essential part of the history of the Roman Empire and leads on to Rome's wars in Greece. I'm going to look at ways to make this campaign achievable. Perhaps an event giving Rome a load of units upon the capture of the city so they can hold out. I'd still prefer to find the game is too difficult and then find ways to aid the players progress than I would to find it is too easy!

Another issue I have found is the Second Punic War events, especially the first lot that give Carthage troops in the north of Italy which is still under Celtic control. This is easier to remedy.

The reason for posting this is to let my play-testers know that it might be a little while longer before I can get the updated files to you!

EDIT:
The Second Punic War events are proving a little problematic. The invasion of Italy seems to work as I intended (except for the first batches co-ordinates). Unfortunately the Roman Invasion of Spain goes wrong as the Carthaginians immediately kill all of the New Legions, which in turn triggers the African Legion events (these legions were intended to attack the Spanish Training camp!). I have a few ideas for work arounds to fix this issue. Does anyone know if event generated land units can be created on sea squares? Or could I make the new Legion unit an aircraft so that it cannot be destroyed by enemy land troops? No panic, I'm sure these issues can be sorted out.

This just goes to show the value of play-testing, as it is extremely difficult to anticipate all of these eventualities!

 

[McMonkey]

Right then! I have fixed all the issues and made some other improvements:

Indemnities have been greatly increased from the hundreds to the thousands.

Now instead of the Germanics getting units for the Illyrian Wars the Romans get Transport Ships, then Three Veteran Forts when Rhizon is captured to help them get a foothold, and finally a bunch of Hastati in Rhizon to help with the attack on Pharos.

I changed the Illyrian Pirate ships from Germanic to Barbarian control so that they didn't end up stacked up in the Illyrian Ports, thereby making them even tougher to capture.

The first lot of events for the Second Punic War have been altered so they appear below the Appenines. This has been tested and it does really f**k the Romans up, just as I hoped However, it is possible to recover!

The New Legion units are now of the air domain and will be event created on mountains (no stackable / airfield) for the Spanish and North African events. This way they cannot be destroyed and they will not set off the wrong events in the wrong places!

There are a host of other minor changes that will improve the game-play.

As there are no flags switched on or off yet I have delevented the 231 AD save and gone back to there to test the new events in my real game. This isn't so bad as I was not that far in advance, and I had hit a brick wall with the Illyrian Wars anyway!

If anyone wants the altered files give me a shout. For now I'm going to crack on with the play testing

 

[McMonkey]

Now I have freed up a bit more event space I'm thinking about a penalty for not taking Rhizon and Pharos in the Illyrian Wars. The date of the Second Punic War is common knowledge for anyone with an interest in ancient history and I figure that a pragmatic player will hold back their Legions to face the Punic menace coming to visit Italy, rather than send them off on a risky adventure to fight pesky pirates. The treat to Rome's trade routes is not enough of an incentive to warrant an expedition across the Adriatic at such a vital time.

My solution to this is to employ a bit of alternative history. Is it implausible that Hannibal might have recruited the Illyrians to join his armies in southern Italy if they were still independent from Rome at the time of the First Punic War? Having to fight a horde of Illyrians in addition to the Carthaginians rampaging through Italy would be a most unwelcome blow!

An alternative sanction for Rome's failure to control the Adriatic could be Hannibal allying with the Macedonians, as they did historically during the Second Punic War, and the Macedonian's sending a large force to reclaim Magna Graecia. Or a combination of both!

As it stands I think the Romans can just about hold and then repel the Hannibal. With a huge Macedonian / Illyrian allied horde the task is much, much harder. This should provide the Roman's with the proper incentive to take control of the Adriatic when prompted. What do you guys think?

 

[AGRICOLA]

I think that I have now played enough to have a little bit of perspective on the scen.

I. A not-so-funny thing happened on my way to the Forum. In 243 BC (Turn 20) I landed in Sicily and captured the last two Carthaginian cities. In other words, the Romans had fought the First Punic War as a fight to the death with their archenemy. I was feeling pretty good that 12 turns after invading Carthage, a mortal threat to Rome was finally about to be removed and there would be no further fighting with the Carthaginians. However, as the last city fell, there was neither the happy message that "Carthaginian civilization destroyed by Romans" nor did the bloody Carthaginian units all over Sicily disappear into the woodwork like good little cockroaches.

After muttering a few choice Anglo-Saxon words that I did not learn at my mother's knee, I investigated and found that the Training Camps have role 5 - settle?????? The scen would have us believe that, in a Roman province with active Roman spies and soldiers, the Carthaginians will be able to secretly organise and train armies for their second and third Roman wars 25 and 100 years later. IMHO, that is more than unlikely. Very simply, AGRICOLA Africanus beat Scipio Africanus to the punch.

I was expecting to lose the two Carthaginian Training Camps near Carthage and had no problem with that. By turn 20, the Romans had 54 Transport Ships, more than enough to simultaneously explore the Atlantic coasts of Iberia, Gaul, Britannia and Germania; launch Operation Blue Nile in a couple of turns; ensure that all merchants are shipped to Rome, rehomed and delivered to Syracuse on the same turn they are spawned; and efficiently transport units from one end of the empire to the other.

I'm going to change the role of Training Camps to 2 (defend). When one cuts off a snake's head, the snake is dead and should stay dead. The idea of resurrection was 200+ years down the line.



II.

Posted by McMonkey:
One thing I definitely plan to change is the amount of event generated Merchants as the revenue they generate is way too high for them to appear every turn. Their appearance will be randomised and pirate activity increased to make the huge payoff deliveries more risky.

The result of this change will be to slow the game to a crawl. From my game, there are only a few cities – Rome, Carthage and Carthago Nova - which produce a significant number of shields to build improvements or units. Most inland cities are generally small. They cannot build any useful units and require 10 – 25 turns to build even the most basic improvement. Small coastal cities are different in that they can build Transport Ships, a very useful unit.

All cities need gold for RB in order that they complete any building in a reasonable length of time, like 2-6 years. Merchants are the only way to produce the gold needed for rush building. If you reduce their number, the game will simply slow down to 170 turns of watching paint dry.

In addition, Rome starts the scen with no techs. The first useful tech, Transport Ships, was discovered on Turn 11 and the next one, Later Republic, on Turn 22. Rome will switch to the new form of government at some point between Turns 23 and 26. That is hardly fast science progress, especially as 4 Merchants/Turn are just about not enough to discover a tech per turn.

Furthermore, pirates, just like the Carthaginian Triremes, will not slow down deliveries if the delivery system is set up properly.


III. Envoys are grossly overpriced for the little they can do. For the same price, one can obtain a highly useful Transport Ship. A peek inside an enemy city is simply not worth 50 shields. If you reduce the cost to 5 shields or even as many as 10, players might consider building them.



IV. THE GOOD
I was positive that I had recently seen overstrike somewhere in a post at CFC. I finally found it in one of Dadais' posts on his Last Days Of Empire thread.


V. THE BAD (see PICTURE 1)
IMHO, part of the duties of a playtester is to toggle all switches, deliberately set up whatif situations and look in all the dusty/forgotten corners and back alleys of the scen. Occasionally, one does trip across the unexpected – in this instance while testing consul AGRICOLA's early retirement prospects.

By turn 14, overwhelming victory was no longer possible. In this instance, it was my fault that Padana was razed on Turn 7 when the Romans captured it. I had neglected to check for City Walls after the city had previously been taken by the Barbs.

Digging a bit deeper, I found two size 1 cities held by the Ptolemids that might very well be size 1 by Turn 28-30 when I expect the Romans to be in a position to attack.

My suggestion would be to cut players some slack by keeping the thresholds the same but adding the OBJECTIVE tag to ~10 Germanic cities to allow for Barb activity and player errors in checking for City Walls. IMHO, the checking for City Walls seems a bit of a make-work project.



VI. THE HILARIOUS (see PICTURE 2)

 

[McMonkey]

Agri,

Thanks for the feedback!

I. When you say you conquered the last Carthaginian city, does this include the ones in Spain?

I think that if the Carthaginians still held Iberia then the Second Punic War events would still be valid. In the updated version Carthage should, hopefully be a lot harder to capture at such an early date. From my own play test I can confidently say that I would be unable to take out all of the Carthaginian cities this early, I'm not even close!

After the Second Punic War the only other Carthaginian events are the Third Punic War, and there is a flag to prevent this from happening if Carthage is already under Roman control by that time.

In my opinion there is not a problem, especially when the updated scenario is considered, but I'm willing to listen.

II. My current play-test shows to me that the reduced number of Merchants forces the player to rely on Slaves from conquest for expansion. I have got up to 221 BC and there has not been a dull turn yet. I think the fact that there were so many Merchants in the version you play-tested is a contributing factor in your rapid victory over Carthage. Reducing the number has made the scenario much more challenging!

It was my intention to create an empire builder scenario which would be guided along historical lines by the events. I didn't want to make a scenario where the Romans just go into overdrive and conquer the map in a fraction of time it too historically!

III. I disagree about Envoys. I find the knowledge they buy very valuable indeed when planning to assault a key city. I would not use them in every attack, hence their high cost, but when it is vital to know what you are up against 50 shields is a price worth paying!

IV. Glad you found the overstrike!

V. Checking for city walls is vital if you want to gain a decisive victory! Using CivCity is pretty quick and easy. Save, launch CivCity, find the city in question, tick City Walls, save city and then reload the game and continue playing.

I have not seen any cities come close to destruction in my play-test. Which two AI Ptolemid cities were size 1? I just checked my 221 BC save and all the Ptolemid cities are a healthy size. In the versions I have been playing the AI nations don't fight one another, unless instructed to via events. Is this the same in the version you are playing?

I guess I could add a couple of Germanic heartland cities as objectives to give the player a little leeway!

VI. Mad or bad

Thanks for this report. Its good to see thinks through a different set of eyes! I definitely need to play all the way through before I can come to any conclusions about this scenario. For instance, I was shocked by how difficult it was to take and hold Rhizon. There will, no doubt, be other issues like this that need addressing as I work my way through, but so far in my latest test I am more than happy with what I have seen. It may take another week or two to play all the way through, but I would much prefer to release a finished (thoroughly tested) end product, than have to keep releasing mini updates to fix problems that crop up. Hopefully it will be worth the wait!

 

[McMonkey]

V. I have just had an idea to prevent any oversight of Cities without walls. If I add something to the un-walled city graphics that will stand out like a sort thumb (large red flag / flames etc...)!

EDIT:

Would this help?