Matrix Games Forums

Hello all,

We have a Public Beta version for you to try in the Members Club. It includes improvements in Rome's reactions to besieged cities, fixes a couple rare crashes, plus many other bug fixes and AI improvements. You will need to have registered your game to download this. Please remember this is a beta, and constructive comments are very welcome.

Change List

V1.03 Beta – February 10, 2011

• User Interface:
  • Improved automatic deployment of units during battles.
  • General are now marked to indicate completion of their Command Phase as Admirals
    already were.
• Play Balance:
  • The Introductory level now uses a lower economic cap for overall Roman recruiting.
    This has the effect of making the game easier at this level of play. The recruiting
    pool in Latium-Campania is now somewhat less deep at this level of play as
    well.
• Improved AI Intelligence:
  • Besieging Roman Leaders will now storm when it’s advantageous to do so.
  • Roman generals will attempt to relieve besieged cities in Italy by sea under certain
    circumstances. This is only done at the higher levels of play and is based on a
    scoring system that takes a leader’s command rating, individual initiative, and the
    level of difficulty into account.
  • The AI will reinforce Rome by sea at the “Normal” level of intelligence when
    Rome is besieged. This was behavior was previously available only at the “Hard”
    level of intelligence. This behavior is somewhat less aggressive or reliable at the
    “Normal” level of difficulty, however.
  • At the higher levels of difficulty, Roman generals will try to detect the need to reinforce
    Rome’s garrison by land under certain circumstances.
  • Roman leaders are now more aggressive in trying to relieve besieged cities by
    land. Previously they weren’t taking the besieged cities’ garrisons into their calculation
    for success. This had the effect of discouraging Roman generals from planning
    to relieve.
  • Roman armies defeated during field battles in Etruria may now retreat to Rome if
    that city is not besieged.
  • The AI uses a better deployment when Africanus has the “Battle Tactics” option in
    play.
• General Improvements and corrections:
  • Fixes a rare problem that allowed a leader to get stuck in a loop and move by sea
    to and from the same province.
  • Fixes a rare crash that can occur when trying to play a battle card during a sally
    battle.
  • Roman leaders moving to take a border city by storm are now correctly assessed
    attrition if this constitutes an Extended Move.
  • Roman leaders will not take Syracusan or Numidian units out of their original
    theater. Previously the AI was allowed to take Syracusan units from Sicily - this
    violated the game’s rules.
  • Improved game logging and detection and prevention of a rare problem with “duplicate”
    Roman armies.
  • City militia are now properly counted in the Game Summary.
  • Minor fixes for saving the game when the Roman turn is paused.
  • The Carthaginian Senate now takes into account a siege of Syracuse if that city is
    friendly to Carthage. This is only relevant at the “Hard” level of difficulty.

General are now marked to indicate completion of their Command Phase as Admirals
already were.

Yay!

My pestering paid off! [8D]

So far looks stable, I haven't encountered none of the above mentioned fixed bugs. Needs more testing, of course.

I have tested the beta patch quite a bit myself and I am wondering if the game has gotten to be too hard. I didn't change any resources but I did make it a little easier at the "Hard" level for the Roman Senate to authorize an invasion of Africa. Perhaps I was just on a bad streak? But I had many brutal games at the "Hard" level.

On the other hand, I think that many of you players do a better job playing "Hannibal" than I do. [;)]

I have also experimented with the bonus for Numidians in pursuit which we discussed. I think that it helps the Carthaginians a lot, actually. If you can win battles and mount an effective pursuit, that is.

I am not sure about more brutal, but Romans do appear more aggressive. I do see them attacking Africa early on more often. It is a question though whether it helps them or me.

Great to hear about the bonus. Question: the bonus, does it help in pursuing or in defending against pursuit as well?

The bonus will apply in all pursuit situations. It may make the Romans more reluctant to pursue themselves - because the strength calculation will change for the AI. But if they do pursue you'll get the bonus.

I hadn't played the game in a little while so I think I was a bit rusty. The first two games didn't go so well, but I was able to win after that (on hard difficulty). So the game is still winnable, no worries on that front.

I think he hard level is very well balanced right now, but it might be balanced slightly differently : on that level of difficulty the ennemy avoids (or tries to avoid) pretty much all battles except the first one (even in cases of slight numerical superiority with a level 10 commander for example, see screenshot). And so the point becomes to survive (and to recruit) long enough to get to the point when we can lure ennemy forces away from Rome, and then sneak up on the city and storm it immediatly.

Ideally, if it was at all possible, and didn't distract you from other projects, I'd prefer to see the AI a little less inclined to leave Rome undefended, but on the other hand a little bit more eager to fight (because if it garrisoned the city well, but still avoided combat, then it would really become impossible to win [:D])

In this case, Africanus refused combat (after leaving Rome and being intercepted) and on the following turn attacked the city in the South without grabbing the 10 unit army in Neapolis ( though I had concentrated my troops in the field by then).


The higher tendency to invade Africa forced me to garrison Carthage better that I usually do, [s]but[/s] so it's a good thing. When things are going well for Carthage, it's not difficult to either beat back the invasion or "convince" the ennemy to get back to Italy ; and when things are going badly, well... it makes them worse, but it's not a game changer by itself. In my opinion it's a good change.

Everything else works as advertised as far as I can see, and I want to thank you again on the outstanding support you provided. I really hope the game has gotten the success it deserves, and that you will be able to work on other projects (any news on that front, incidentally ? [:D]).

To be fair, Rome's AI should not fear 30 unit-strong Carthaginian army with standard garrison. Now, when it's turn 19, I have 82 units camped in Etruria and Africanus takes his 36 units away from Rome to recover Umbria-Samnium, it's slightly a different story

I did actually manage to win the first time that happened (though barely).

But you do have a point : I tried to reproduce it, as I still have the savegame, and most of the time it doesn't go so well. So it requires quite a bit of luck to pull it off. Although I would add two things : first, more than half of this army is made of elephants and cavalry units (not very useful when storming a city) ; and second, having two or three additional units with the garrison might be enough to remove the luck fator entirely.

Raidhaennor, 15+ elephants and cavalry? Nice. And yes, assaults require a healthy mix of Spaniard, Gaul and African or Italian infantry to succeed on a regular basis. Regardless of the luck factor, your observation is correct about Rome's vulnerability. However, the sure strike against Rome (sans extra units) is possible only when you have 50+ units (I've failed a few times with 40+), which only happens after turn 15. 15+ turns for victory is better than 5-8 turns on Normal, so I am happy. In truth, I usually end up mastering an overwhelming force only by turn 18 and then I still have to lure the Romans out by exposing some of the provinces.

I hope to get the next beta patch for 1.0.3 out to you very soon. Now, I have to say that it won't do anything special about this particular problem. I am just afraid to allow the better to become the enemy of the good. So I want to get the 1.0.3 patch finalized and released first. Once 1.0.3 has been out there for a while I'll consider a patch to tighten up the AI in this area and also in some of the decisions to engage Hannibal in battle when the better Roman leaders are commanding. But I do want to finish polishing 1.0.3 so that it can become official.

As for future plans, I don't have a formal announcement yet. But my next game will focus on the Roman Empire and the late Roman Republic. There will be (at least) one grand strategy scenario and several shorter scenarios. When we have a good working title I'll make a formal announcement.

mercenarius, one does not have to read minds to figure out that your next game will include "second Hannibal"

Like I said, it shouldn't distract you from anything more important, so there's certainly no rush ; and the game is already very well balanced. I'm nitpicking at this point. [;)]

And good to hear about your future project. [:)]

edit : oups, that was meant as a reponse to mercenarius obviously, not to nalivayko

Been playing with the new beta patch. Rome, in both games, has invaded Africa on the first game turn. It certainly has paid off for them as it forced me to upgrade Africa at the expense of the other theatres. The AI is absolutely committed to Africa in my second game (currently ongoing) as it has reinforced the Africa invasion force (twice!). It had the "Numidia Revolts" card which it used to take over Numidia. I like that the AI would reinforce Africa when it had a relevant card. It's as close to thinking ahead as I've encountered in an AI.

Also, an early invasion of Africa is actually a valid "alt-history" move as I believe Rome at the time was going to do such a thing before Hannibal laid waste to the Roman armies.