• Crusader Kings II Expansion Subscription

    Subscribe to the CK II Expansion and enjoy unlimited access to 13 major expansions and more!


  • Paradox Midsummer Sale has arrived! Up to 75% off!

    Enjoy some sun and song this Midsummer, but when the sun goes down, the fun doesn't have to stop! Paradox has a festive sale on plenty of games to keep your summer nights going!


    June 18th - June 30th
  • Crusader Kings III Available Now!

    The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.


    Real Strategy Requires Cunning

Trmdrg

Sergeant
Feb 19, 2015
90
2
.\Mods\Ab_Urbe_Condita\DB\defines.txt
_COUNTRY_ALLIANCE_MAX_ = 3 #Positive; 5 (default)

So, if you get more countries at start in alliance (more than 3) there will be a crash or you only will not be able to create new alliance with more than 3 countries ?
You only will not be able. Сountries will refuse.
I had made this change a long time ago, because with the default 5 in my scenarios countries went for too weird unhistorical alliances. So, it is for a kind of historisity/balance. But we can bring back the number five and try to redo the balance by working with relations.

Since I have a reason to write the post, here is the new version: https://www.mediafire.com/file/o2wl6uyvohenuf6/Ab_Urbe_Condita_next.zip/file
Sorry, but still without the new technologies. It is a difficult task, I am currently working on it, doing many tests. Here is what I did in between times:

New country — Kibyra (Cibyra Magna), great city in Asia Minor. "Cibyra alone could muster 30,000 infantry and 2000 cavalry" (no source is given in the Wikipedia on this numbers). The country can be established in any scenario in the "Prygia Pacatiana" province.

New events for Pontus (Pontic rule over Armenia Minor and Colchis; mission of Aristion), Athenae (Tyrannos Aristion), Getae (Burebista, Death of Burebista), Cyrenaica (Ophellas, Ophellas' ambitions), Aegyptus (Ptolemies and Cyrenaica), Colchis (Decentralisation in Colchis), Cibyra (Formation of the Tetrapolis). New Intelligentia Artificialis (AI) events. One Provinciae event (decline of Gerrha). One Temere (random) event (Galatian youth became mercenaries).
With every new version I improve many old events, sometimes rewrite them, fix the grammar and little by little transfer the texts of the events to the \Localisation\English\events.csv for avoiding text overflow. I noticed too late that without this, the text is cut off by the game if it exceeds a certain size.

New monarchs for Getae (Basileus Burebista), Athenae (Tyrannos Aristion), Characene, Arsacidae, Armenia Minor and Cibyra.
New leaders for Seleucidae, Athenae, Galatia, Characene, Turdetani, Getae, Atropatene, Armenia Minor, Aegyptus, Pharia, Cyrenaica, Asia, Macedonia and Rebelles.

More pictures and descriptions for countries and events. More armynames, navynames, leadernames and colonynames. No more land connestion between Euboea and Boeotia. Historical additions here and there, and balancing.

The Peloponnesian War short scenario ("431 ACN — Bellum Peloponnesiacum"):
One more country from the main scenario was included — the Ilercavones. The event for Colchis. Two events about the Malian Gulf tsunami of 426 BC. Balancing. Minor addings.

Grand scenario "89 ACN — Bella Mithridatica":
Under development. Balancing. Minor addings.

And the most important — little pine tree for Tenerife, the "Nivaria" province.
 
Last edited:

Trmdrg

Sergeant
Feb 19, 2015
90
2
The new version: https://www.mediafire.com/file/vvi0duw7rgp3wh6/Ab_Urbe_Condita_v.1.5_new_tech-system.zip/file

Finally, it has the new land and naval technology systems.
No more crashes in any scenario (as far as I can see). Oh, wait, after many-many games I experienced 1 (one) crash (in the middle of the "I. 431 — 404 ACN — Bellum Peloponnesiacum").
Of course, all scenarios have been adapted to the new technologies. There is an interesting side-effect: many countries (for example, Chinese warring states) finally begin to use larger armies, as I want them to, because advanced land technologies give them less attrition.
I shall continue to correct and adjust the details of the technology system in new versions, because it it still needs more tests. It is pretty crude, a kind of a carcass, but already fine (I hope so). So, definitely, there will be new editions.
Please, tell me about any weird and inconsistent things with the new technologies, if you find any.
I have never touched Db\combat.txt, because I know nothing about CRT and that tables.

I am sorry that so many versions of the modification were so unstable. But I am glad we were able to find the cause and fix it. Thanks to everyone who helped. I really broke my head trying to find the cause of crashes.

The new content in this version as a bonus:

More monarchs for Tamna-guk. More armynames, navynames, leadernames and colonynames, pictures and descriptions. Historical additions here and there, and balancing.
Usan-guk country was deleted from the grand scenario, the tribal union first mentioned only in the 6th century AD. But it can be established if any country colonise the province of Usan and release it (or via rebellion).

The Peloponnesian War short scenario ("I. 431 — 404 ACN — Bellum Peloponnesiacum"):
New events for Athenai (Cleon and the tribute, Mytilenean revolt and the Mytilenean Debate, Brasidas' Thrakian expedition, Loss of Amfipolis, Peace of Nicias), Boiotia (Victory over Plataia, Boiotarkhes Pagondas and his tactics, Euboians made themselves part of Boiotia), Sparta (Brasidas' Thrakian expedition, Neodamodeis, Peace of Nicias), Makedonia (VPs for claims) and Korinthos (VPs for claims). One new Tykhaios (random) event. Event about the death of Sophocles. The "Violation of ekekheiria" event-system: any country which is at war with Elis country (the Olympic host) in the summer of 326, 330, 334, 338, 342 or 346 AUC gets 1 badboy point.
New leaders for Athenai: Phormio as strategos and as navarkhos, his son Asopius, Cleon, Archestratus as strategos and as navarkhos, Hagnon. One new leader for Sparta — navarkhos Hegesandridas (Agesandridas).
One country from the main scenario was included — the Contestani. So, Koinon ton Akhaion has no more provinces in Iberia. Only Wikipedia thinks that the city of Ilici (Helike, Illice, Colonia Iulia Illici Augusta) was founded by the Achaeans from Helike. And, of course, Wikipedia gives no source. Every other site that has the same information about Ilici as a colony of Achaean Helike just citate the Wikipedia.
Balancing. Minor addings.

Grand scenario "III. 89 ACN — Bella Mithridatica":
Under development. Tamna-guk included. Balancing. Minor addings.

I just thought that it would be correct to draw up a list of historical sources used to create this modification, but it would be a giant list, and I just do not remember everything.

The stupid questions rubric:
Does anybody know here, how the game chooses the general to command if the army has several generals with same rank? How the game chooses their order? My experiments show that it is not an alphabetical or ID principle.
 
Last edited:

ConjurerDragon

Generalissimus
63 Badges
Apr 19, 2005
5.255
468
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Sengoku
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Impire
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • War of the Roses
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • East India Company Collection
  • Hearts of Iron Anthology
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
...
The stupid questions rubric:
Does anybody know here, how the game chooses the general to command if the army has several generals with same rank? How the game chooses their order? My experiments show that it is not an alphabetical or ID principle.

As far as I know EU2 and FtG simply go by rank. Monarchs always trump generals even if both have the same rank.

So "category = monarch" means that this is the king or an important member of the royal family - he will always take command even if generals with better ranks or better abilities are present.

If no "monarch" is present, but only generals then the one with the better rank takes command.

When several leaders with the same rank meet who are all "general" then I have no idea. It would make sense to go with best abilities if rank is the same, but as abilities do not count for anything when a higher rank shows up I doubt that.

However no country should have more than a handful reknowned military leaders - the majority would alwways be the generic (in FtG 2/2/2/0) leader with the lowest rank. In which country do you have the problem that several leaders of same rank appear in the same province at the same time?


e.g. Habsburg leaders

Code:
historicalleader = {
    id = { type = 6 id = 09251 }
    category = monarch
    name = "Henry IV"
    startdate = {
        day = 1
        month = october
        year = 1399
    }
    deathdate = {
        day = 20
        month = march
        year = 1413
    }
    rank = 0
    movement = 3
    fire = 3
    shock = 4
    siege = 0
    dormant = no
    remark = "Henry Boilingbroke - Vilinus 1390, Jerusalem 1392/3, Glendower rebellion 1400-15."
}
historicalleader = {
    id = { type = 6 id = 09252 }
    category = general
    name = "Warwick"
    startdate = {
        day = 17
        month = november
        year = 1403
    }
    deathdate = {
        day = 1
        month = may
        year = 1439
    }
    rank = 4
    movement = 3
    fire = 4
    shock = 4
    siege = 0
    dormant = no
    remark = "Richard de Beauchamp, earl of Warwick - Glendower rebellion 1400-15, Lollard uprisings 1413-16, Normandy 1420s."
}
 

Trmdrg

Sergeant
Feb 19, 2015
90
2
As far as I know EU2 and FtG simply go by rank. Monarchs always trump generals even if both have the same rank.

So "category = monarch" means that this is the king or an important member of the royal family - he will always take command even if generals with better ranks or better abilities are present.

If no "monarch" is present, but only generals then the one with the better rank takes command.

When several leaders with the same rank meet who are all "general" then I have no idea. It would make sense to go with best abilities if rank is the same, but as abilities do not count for anything when a higher rank shows up I doubt that.

However no country should have more than a handful reknowned military leaders - the majority would alwways be the generic (in FtG 2/2/2/0) leader with the lowest rank. In which country do you have the problem that several leaders of same rank appear in the same province at the same time?


e.g. Habsburg leaders

Code:
historicalleader = {
    id = { type = 6 id = 09251 }
    category = monarch
    name = "Henry IV"
    startdate = {
        day = 1
        month = october
        year = 1399
    }
    deathdate = {
        day = 20
        month = march
        year = 1413
    }
    rank = 0
    movement = 3
    fire = 3
    shock = 4
    siege = 0
    dormant = no
    remark = "Henry Boilingbroke - Vilinus 1390, Jerusalem 1392/3, Glendower rebellion 1400-15."
}
historicalleader = {
    id = { type = 6 id = 09252 }
    category = general
    name = "Warwick"
    startdate = {
        day = 17
        month = november
        year = 1403
    }
    deathdate = {
        day = 1
        month = may
        year = 1439
    }
    rank = 4
    movement = 3
    fire = 4
    shock = 4
    siege = 0
    dormant = no
    remark = "Richard de Beauchamp, earl of Warwick - Glendower rebellion 1400-15, Lollard uprisings 1413-16, Normandy 1420s."
}
No problems. Just curiosity.
Three Athenian strategoi led me to these thoughts. At the very beginning of the "I. 431— 404 ACN — Bellum Peloponnesiacum" in the province of Chalcidice. Archestratus, Phormio and Hagnon (Ab_Urbe_Condita\Scenarios\323\Leaders\leaders_ATH.txt). I do not even know which of them was the leader of the siege of Potidaia, but each of them was present there. During classical times, the Athenaioi loved to elect a bunch of strategoi at once to command one army or fleet.

If we give to a monarch not a zero rank, then ingame he is a general, not a monarch at all. I mean the icon and the name of his rank.

I forgot to mention in the changelogs that I gave new names to the ranks of generals and admirals.

In the game monarchs can be very annoying and nasty. For example, in the "I. 431— 404 ACN — Bellum Peloponnesiacum" Basileus Perdiccas II of Makedonia can intervene in the siege of Potidaia and steal the province from the Athenaioi, because he is a monarch-leader, and Athenian strategoi are just generals. But in reality Athenian strategoi would not give any chance to the ruler of such barbarous northern kingdom to command over the Athenaioi in the V century BC. However, I do not think that it is a sufficient reason to take away monarch title from Perdiccas II and make him a simple general. Hm. Maybe it is.
 
Last edited:

ConjurerDragon

Generalissimus
63 Badges
Apr 19, 2005
5.255
468
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Sengoku
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Impire
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • War of the Roses
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • East India Company Collection
  • Hearts of Iron Anthology
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
No problems. Just curiosity.
Three Athenian strategoi led me to these thoughts. At the very beginning of the "I. 431— 404 ACN — Bellum Peloponnesiacum" in the province of Chalcidice. Archestratus, Phormio and Hagnon (Ab_Urbe_Condita\Scenarios\323\Leaders\leaders_ATH.txt). I do not even know which of them was the leader of the siege of Potidaia, but each of them was present there. During classical times, the Athenaioi loved to elect a bunch of strategoi at once to command one army or fleet.

If we give to a monarch not a zero rank, then ingame he is a general, not a monarch at all. I mean the icon and the name of his rank.

I forgot to mention in the changelogs that I gave new names to the ranks of generals and admirals.

In the game monarchs can be very annoying and nasty. For example, in the "I. 431— 404 ACN — Bellum Peloponnesiacum" Basileus Perdiccas II of Makedonia can intervene in the siege of Potidaia and steal the province from the Athenaioi, because he is a monarch-leader, and Athenian strategoi are just generals. But in reality Athenian strategoi would not give any chance to the ruler of such barbarous northern kingdom to command over the Athenaioi in the V century BC. However, I do not think that it is a sufficient reason to take away monarch title from Perdiccas II and make him a simple general. Hm. Maybe it is.
The rank and the category are independant of each other.

That means ingame a monarch with a rank = 1 might have the same symbol like a general with rank = 1 but the monarch still ranks higher because of the category = monarch

If the problem is that Mazedonia has a king who should be a monarch-leader, and the athenians have not because you see them as a democracy - why not make Pericles a "monarch"? After all the whole time was later called the Age of Pericles in which he lead athenian politics.
 

Trmdrg

Sergeant
Feb 19, 2015
90
2
The rank and the category are independant of each other.

That means ingame a monarch with a rank = 1 might have the same symbol like a general with rank = 1 but the monarch still ranks higher because of the category = monarch

If the problem is that Mazedonia has a king who should be a monarch-leader, and the athenians have not because you see them as a democracy - why not make Pericles a "monarch"? After all the whole time was later called the Age of Pericles in which he lead athenian politics.
No problem. Just thoughts.

Pericles died in 429 BC from the plague. My short scenario about the Peloponnesian war starts in 431 BC (323 AUC). So, in this tiny timespan he only leaded two naval expeditions for plunder, avoided open battle on land and died (and still commanded the Athenian general policy). It was the very end of Pericles' career and life. And the time for the new leaders — Cleon and, later, Alcibiades and others. We definitely need an event about Pericles' death. And, maybe, Pericles as a leader for two years, but I am going to make him 0 general or 0 admiral — he was re-elected as a strategos — or do not create him at all.
He was even trialed and forced to leave the post of strategos. Although, the Athenaioi forgave Pericles and re-elected him as strategos, but anyway the first years of the Peloponnesian war represent the collapse of the Pericles' policy.
 
Last edited:

ConjurerDragon

Generalissimus
63 Badges
Apr 19, 2005
5.255
468
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Sengoku
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Impire
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • War of the Roses
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • East India Company Collection
  • Hearts of Iron Anthology
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
No problem. Just thoughts.

Pericles died in 429 BC from the plague. My short scenario about the Peloponnesian war starts in 431 BC (323 AUC). So, in this tiny timespan he only leaded two naval expeditions for plunder, avoided open battle on land and died (and still commanded the Athenian general policy). It was the very end of Pericles' career and life. And the time for the new leaders — Cleon and, later, Alcibiades and others. We definitely need an event about Pericles' death. And, maybe, Pericles as a leader for two years, but I am going to make him 0 general or 0 admiral — he was re-elected as a strategos — or do not create him at all.
He was even trialed and forced to leave the post of strategos. Although, the Athenaioi forgave Pericles and re-elected him as strategos, but anyway the first years of the Peloponnesian war represent the collapse of the Pericles' policy.

In AGCEEP Habsburg Austria has one leader that lasts only until 1422 in a game that starts 1419, so having him as a leader at the start of the game is technically no problem.
 

Trmdrg

Sergeant
Feb 19, 2015
90
2


The game does not look at the abilities, when there are several generals with same rank. You can see that on the example of three Athenian strategoi that I mentioned above: Hagnon, Phormio, Archestratus (it is ingame order). But Phormio has the best abilities. And this is not alphabetical or ID principle or their order (or reverse order, I made tests) in the leaders_ATH.txt. I cannot even imagine what guides the game in choosing the order of the generals.
 
Last edited:

ConjurerDragon

Generalissimus
63 Badges
Apr 19, 2005
5.255
468
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Sengoku
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Impire
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • War of the Roses
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • East India Company Collection
  • Hearts of Iron Anthology
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
Havard just sent me a wayback link to his old EU2 modding bible and there his page about leaders was:

Well if the problem is that Hagnon, Phormio and Archestratus are in the same province at the same time with the same rank - then change something about that.
Phormio and Archestratur could be just as well admirals instead of generals as they did command flotillas and fleets, too.

Or simply make Pericles a monarch for two years to prevent Perdiccas from stealing the siege.

Or make Hagnon, Phormio and Archestratus not the same rank. Use seniority, e.g. the english wiki mentions Phormio first in 440 BC during the Sarmian war as being in command of part of the fleet and give him a rank higher than the other two.

So you have several options. It is advised however not to have one guy appear in several instances (so if someone was a great admiral and a great general then that would require him to split into two persons which would be weird - so decide if he would be better as an admiral than a general).
 
Last edited:

Trmdrg

Sergeant
Feb 19, 2015
90
2
Havard just sent me a wayback link to his old EU2 modding bible and there his page about leaders was:

Well if the problem is that Hagnon, Phormio and Archestratus are in the same province at the same time with the same rank - then change something about that.
Phormio and Archestratur could be just as well admirals instead of generals as they did command flotillas and fleets, too.

Or simply make Pericles a monarch for two years to prevent Perdiccas from stealing the siege.

Or make Hagnon, Phormio and Archestratus not the same rank. Use seniority, e.g. the english wiki mentions Phormio first in 440 BC during the Sarmian war as being in command of part of the fleet and give him a rank higher than the other two.

So you have several options. It is advised however not to have one guy appear in several instances (so if someone was a great admiral and a great general then that would require him to split into two persons which would be weird - so decide if he would be better as an admiral than a general).
There is nothing about leaders order on that page.

I say for the third time: I have no problem with leaders. I just want to know, how the hell the game defines the order of leaders with same rank.

I have just remembered one thing. One person here suggested implementing HRE mechanics to the modification. How I see it: Emperor = Hegemon of Hellas. HRE = Greek states. This could represent the Hellenic league ("the League of Corinth") of Alexander III, Antipater, Antigonus and Demetrius. Or Sparta / Athenai as a hegemon in Hellas. The Delian league. Or Roma and her socii.
But I stopped implementing this when I realised that HRE mechanics replace the shield and flag of the country with the HRE shield and flag. I cannot imagine what shield and flag should have any (and every) Hellenic hegemon ("Holy Roman Emperor") in our modification, what picture should be on the shield. It is a pity that we cannot use the HRE mechanics without changing the shield and flag.
 
Last edited:

Trmdrg

Sergeant
Feb 19, 2015
90
2
The latest version of the "Ab Urbe Condita" (ex-"History of Rome") modification (1.5 with new techs): https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/history-of-rome.444288/post-27563988
(This is for those who do not want to scroll the page in searching for the post with the latest version).
I shall delete this post and write it again, if somebody replies in this thread. No problems.
I think we need to create a new separate page for the "Ab Urbe Condita", so that the latest version will be always in the first post of the thread.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Love
Reactions: