New Game?

[mercenarius]

Interesting links, thanks! I always love a good map. This is one thing which really caught my eye:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1908_Messina_earthquake

Now, I am afraid that I still haven't done the order of battle for the Diocletian scenario, but that is next on the list. I had some cleanup to do with the earthquakes and their frequency. I don't want any scenarios to start with a disproportional number of earthquakes even if they are "due" in some sense. For example, I don't want to make the destruction of Pompei a certainty for the first scenario. (Pompei isn't in the game, anyway, but everyone understands what I mean).

Here is screenshot of a tidal wave as opposed to an earthquake from testing. Really, the only difference in the end is the icon used for the notification, which is pure chrome, of course. Well, the text is a little different because this is from the 395 scenario and the state religion is now Christianity, so the message has a monotheistic phrasing.

Tidal Wave Notification.jpg (335.63 KiB) Viewed 815 times

[mercenarius]

So, I have started on the "Diocletian" scenario and here is the scenario menu:

Tetrarchy_Scenario.jpg (483.79 KiB) Viewed 749 times

I am still tweaking the order of battle for this scenario. I will try to post a screenshot or two next weekend.

[Orm]

I am still pondering on mercenary recruitment from outside the empire. To me, it seems likely that a lot of mercenaries came from the Scandinavian countries. And if that is true, then could mercenaries have came in large quantities from other areas as well.

Some time ago I heard that mercenaries from Sweden were going to Rome as early as 1 BC (or thereabouts). I suppose I need to search for some literature on the subject. Or perhaps just search the interwebs for information.

To me, this area seems to be lacking in scientific research. But what do I know.

xxxx

Thank you for the updates.

[mercenarius]

Hi Orm,

I am still pondering on mercenary recruitment from outside the empire...

That is an interesting hypothesis. I don't have much information myself on this matter. I do note that A.H.M. Jones said in his book (The Later Roman Empire) that there is no data on the status of "foreign" auxiliaries after retirement. He notes that of the Germanic officers which are attested, all of them retired in the Roman Empire rather than returning "home." Presumably most of the lower-ranking soldiers did, too.

If service in the Roman army was sufficient to attract recruiting from nearby areas, why not from areas somewhat farther away? But I don't know of any organized recruiting by the empire in such areas. Of course, I don't know that they didn't have some mechanism for that, either.

To me, this area seems to be lacking in scientific research. But what do I know.

Well, you know enough to raise an interesting question.

On another topic, I have completed the first pass for the order of battle for the Diocletian scenario. I still have to tweak the figures for the naval personnel, I think. But here they are:

Carinus: land forces = 206,368, naval forces = 19,000,
Diocletian: land forces = 125,652, naval forces = 13,000.

This puts me a little lower than Warren Treadgold's estimate, but I tend to think that in general I aim lower than he does in my view of total numbers.

Without "showing my hand" let me say that Carinus seems to have the upper hand, and that I don't believe very much that a disgruntled officer assassinated him at the crucial moment of the Battle of the Margus. As many know, the supposed motive was a previous act of adultery on the part of Carinus and the officer's wife.

[mercenarius]

I had also promised a screenshot or two, so here is one. I just realized this week that I hadn't made provision for enactments to repair or build baths and aqueducts, or to beautify cities. So, I changed the "Urbs Nova" enactment button to "Urbes" and that button now launches a submenu, which will look like this:

Urbes Menu.jpg (198.95 KiB) Viewed 655 times

[Simicro]

Hi James,

Tony here

Activities since the beginning of the year is incredible Congrats

Quick question: is this game gonna have PBEM++? I suspect not, but need to ask...

[mercenarius]

Hi Tony,

Quick question: is this game gonna have PBEM++? I suspect not, but need to ask...

The short answer is no. The longer answer is "I hope to, eventually."

Now, I had earlier stated that the game would have some kind of multiplayer. And I spent some time on that a while back. But I didn't get much success with it, and I decided that I needed to put it on the back burner.

After the game is released, I plan to first add the tactical battle system which will be a free update. Then I'll tackle the issue of adding some kind of multiplayer as an add-on. I want to do that, but I just don't know how much work it's going to be.

Activities since the beginning of the year is incredible Congrats

Thanks for your kind words!

[Simicro]

Thanks for your quick reply! Sure I can understand that you need to stabilize the game (and functionalities) first after release before considering multiplayer. Otherwise, in my understanding, there is a risk of going forth and back if some functionalities are not correctly planned for multiplayer. I hope it can be similar to Matrix/Slitherine PBEM++; that is server based (and not email, contrary to what the name implies), and managed in-game.

The context of this question/request: I got hooked to Strategic Command recently, and also to... PBEM++, so joined a french community who is now looking for its next complementary game. Needs to be turn by turn and PBEM. So I proposed Fall of Rome. All right, I'll re-propose it when the PBEM is available

[Simicro]

...but I just don't know how much work it's going to be.

I'm not a dev myself but I heard that multiplayer is... say a substantial investment.

[CSSS]

All silent since May?

[mercenarius]

I am still here, and I am working on the game full time. Right now, I am finishing the Administrative Interface and its enactments. I am also coding the related Ops Commands. For example, a player can order a new bridge to be built using an Administrative Enactment but can also use an Ops Command.

If you select a crossing point on the Strategy Map which doesn't already have a bridge there, this is what the Ops Command menu (which is shown using a Popup Menu) will offer you:

Crossing Point PopUp Menu.png (172.38 KiB) Viewed 229 times

To save space, I won't show the dialogs for the "Boat Bridge" or "Wood Bridge" items. But if you click on one of those buttons, you'll get a chance to build a bridge in one turn at that site. Because the Ops Commands are intended to provide immediate results, you cannot build a stone bridge with that method. I figure that such a project cannot be done that quickly.

If you wish to use an Administrative Enactment, you can build any kind of bridge after choosing a suitable site:

Build Bridge Menu.png (550.88 KiB) Viewed 229 times

To keep this post from getting too long, I have omitted the sequences of getting to that menu for choosing the bridge type. It's a question of "drilling down" to allow a player to select an enactment, then to find a suitable location. It's actually pretty easy, but it gets to be a bit much for a post on the Forum here.

I also did some work lately on 4K compatibility for The Fall of Rome as well as the "Victory & Glory" games. Unfortunately, the monitor that I bought had compatibility problems and I had to return it. There wasn't much to post regarding that recent work.

[CSSS]

Thank you so much! just so looking forward to this game!