whew...lots of good stuff.
I should link somewhere to my "mini-mod projects" - as a lot of this is stuff - or similar to stuff-
I'm either working on ;" to do" or considering. SO some of our tastes aren't as dis-similar as it first appeared.
( would you like that link? )
On a more general issue; I'm going to point at a discussion I'm having with 642 "Free LC" as I'm calling it - I'm just trying to not shoot on too many tangents- but, in pervious modding stuff ( not solo ) we had people who changed maps- I've not dealt with 3ds since college:
so what to me looked like a *minor* change ( i wanted to split Frisia N/S so the Saxons had a sea tradition ( the real viking fore fathers -rather than in Vanilla, the franks ) -
now debates aside; the point is, I thought i'd do that to *avoid* swicthing their start positions- but see; if you're not ready to re-learn 3ds max or blender, it's not so simple is it... ?LOL
- I'm using that as an example

Before responding to any of the other *specific* points;
let me if you will; do one of my "dreaded 'same page?' checks " -i.e., "does this sound about fair to you" ?
As I see it, ideally this era is more interestingly about CHANGE (and chaos- and the result of WRE being in chaos for so long ) - and that *I* find that more interesting than the near-mythology of the vanilla ATW campaign.
... In that interest, my "ideal" would have been to show how, the Huns *change* and become a settled people - a true ( if short-lived ) empire based in Pannonia-
however even if that could be coded/scripted , it seems more nightmare than it's worth.

SO: as a "compromise" - and alot of your points are along this line, I feel-
we ask- is it "good enough" to - in effect- be playing the Huns ( or enable the AI to play the Huns this way, not needing cheats and magic ) -- as almost like the Belisarius campaign-
we're the armies; our vassal states are - more or less- 'representing' the settled subjects/peoples.
( " hey: Bleda's widow- we need you to govern this, I'm busy conquering " )

I'm asking if that sounds about right, as , again, it's kind of the model Im adopting to
( last time I modded, even with pages of references showing the huns DID settle, people were too attached to the "trope" to want to hear it ) -
I see this as a less "invasive" goal; and while i like the *idea* we see the huns change;
I don't think just the tech tree is going to *really* give us that feel.
Rather than fight that to little benefit ( yes there were settled huns mods made after i quit ATW)
I think doing it this way keeps the *spirit* withotu indulging in the extreme mythology.

( and yeah, I've whole threads on the ostro/Greuth issue - i suspect we will agree most "peoples" we've heard of- by time we hear of them- are tribal confederations where their original ethnicity is questionable at best, and much less meaningful than what they are now- culturally - not the leats being the Huns).

And to think I started by just modding" ok I'm replacing all these pike units, I think CA mis-took what Caesar meant when he said "phalanx" --LOL )
- anyway- before i get into responding to the specifics, i thought a "same page? " check was in order.
SO much of what you had to fix i think was because the then-new team at CA was...new- and under a LOT of pressure to get *product* out-
( you see the DLC's seem to be very well crafted by compariosn? imo )
- and that so many design decisions are *consequent* of a new team that has different interest / focus than the last. ( and doesit not show in many mechanics from rome2 to ATW?)
I tend to say my *opinion* - which is "grumble" - but really, it's not "good" or "bad" - it's just design choices- and matter of taste.
Luckily, most is moddable -
and why I'm asking- and the impression I'm getting- is sounds like you share myinterest in the period over the (what i call ) "romance mode" of the vanilla main campaign.

ps, when u get a chance to read that "novella"- ignore *this* but I'm glancing back over the point-by-points.
Yeah, aside from the mechanics issues, ( i'd like to compare what you fixed: rome2 to atw by comparison to see how diff the two-mostly different teams did - like me you've seen the old empire and shogun units/agents still hiding in the DB )...
I see you Do seem to question alot of the design decisions, as well: I sometimes wonder if communications broke down between the researchers, encyclopedia writers,etc- and the rest of the team LOL

final for now ps:
"From my tests the loss of Libya and Egypt usually means the quick downfall of ERE for some reason."
losing Egypt ( amongst other things ) actually caused a "dark age" for ERE irl... very close to the the han empire's "three kingdoms" level of chaos...( different reason for famine but ... )
(edit: may i video link ?- nice summary/overview )

losing 'Carthage' to the Vandals was... critical.
the game doesn't imo represent this- but- those were the breadbaskets.
absolutely critical - why it's hurting them that hard in game, i'm not sure- i don't recall either being that valuable in-game- perhaps it's the start of domino effect?
sorry- i should not do any more of this - will delete this and replace it later- just couldn't help it.

For the AI behaviours there are tables that override the random personality traits: cai_personality_group_overrides. This can help to make some factions more aggressive or defensive. For example I plan to make the Geats more defensive/cautious to avoid their extreme expansion which only happens because they take advantage of in-game limitations. The trait "expansive" is helpful when you want to make a faction capture settlements rather than sack and leave.

Some other diplomatic tweaks i forgot: Vandals at peace with Alamans (I have this in my mod already tbh, the early Vandal death is so disappointing I consider it a bug), Ebdani having trade with WRE (celtic borders were mostly unchanged from 400-600 AD if I am not mistaken. There were some small migrations to Europe (Bretagne) and Spain but there was no celtic empires in Italy!!)

I have a whole pack of A4 sheets full of notes, I will take a look and post more stuff.

History fixes:The large factions have a precarious balance. If you remove a burden, add another. Otherwise, they game will be too easy for humans or AI. I was going to let the Visis go on their Roman tour, but left them. If you really want a faction on another part of the map, change the rebellion armies and be sure the rebellion mechanics aren't nerfed.

ERE: I think they need the Garas, Visis and Sass as their counterweights. Egypt is not hard too hard defend. In my mod, I made them trade allies with Ethiopians those two factions either help Egypt or attack the Arabs or Garas. Egypt's food is not important as in history because that's how the game was built. It becomes important only if you create a reduced food campaign which 99% of the players will reject.

Any army group that no longer targets ERE will target WRE. WRE is needed for trade, etc and as a target for 40-odd enemies. I wouldn't add more than one or more factions to their enemy list early on.

Originally posted by Athanasios95gr:

I have a whole pack of A4 sheets full of notes, I will take a look and post more stuff.

I had so many ( and notepads ) - which the cats think are a bed, and get mixed with my reference books on bed behind me; that apparently I thought they're a bed, too-
that I started tucking them away in notepad & online...
But, sure, bring 'em on.

as to the AI, I didn't make it to *that* class, but, lol - i do watch a series by an AI 'enthusiast'-
he has a whole mini-series on TW:
in short, he's firmly with many of our anecdotal experiences that TW's AI hasn't been able to keep up with the features they added since - i forget his conclusion; i'd say first two games-
it never handled the positional vs province maps well; for example-
horde mechanics ( cough) and TW:WH's attrition-suicides were just extensions of that issue -
( cough, stellaris, cough cough) -
anyway a conclusion he made I thought was worth mentioning is the best-scored of the TW games, and one many call their favorite; is the one where the AI is... least "lost" -
but he went into*why* the AI 'seems' so much more competent in it: Shogun2.
and i strongly suspect that's a strong part of why so many people tell me that's the one they replay.

me? ...I'm not trying to darth-mod the AI, but- I'd like it to not suicide quite so much
( or, as mentioned elsewhere, need that amount of 'chaos horde spawns' or 'magic' to be a credible threat )
on the "bad business model" (link) issue;
and your " For the AI behaviours there are tables that override the random personality traits: cai_personality_group_overrides." ...
Hmmn, good point- tho' I'm not ready to dive in yet; the one I had my eye on is #2 & #6 above,
and avoidng the 'burn it all down' trait (bad business model above ).
Not to it yet; BUT - yes, the kind of things you mention above are *just* what Ill have to look at AI wise- comparing rome2 tables was going to be my first 'trail' on just *starting* to get the AI to use the removed feature ( same issue dresden's mod had )
..pfft - this was supposed to be a 'short' response....
-ping me if yo'd like me to dig up the AI fellows' videos

The Attila AI is just fine for what it needs to do. Shogun AI has some advantages (simplicity) but this game is vast and complex and the AI hangs in. I chose Attila over Rome2 because of the options to mod AI. There have been only a few modders who have bothered to extensively mod campaign AI. I started to:
https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1529792592
https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1526012774

My Aggressive AI features a large discussion area where you can post findings.

also-
specific question relating to "same page check"
- as one who's fixed bugs in both rome 2 *and* atw;
you have a specific experience / perspective many don't on how the changing teams designed-
iirc, the "new "team did - under much less time pressure?-
the rome2 DLC "Empire Divided" - from your POV, how'd that do ( if you played it )?
I didn't - but i think it helps compare/contrast design philosphy ?

I was not impressed with Belisarius. It uses troops, buildings and fragments from Attila for the most part and very little is new except for the massive startpos overhaul. The CHA campaign is a wonder that inspired MK.

Empire Divided is interesting, with tons of new stuff, buildings, mechanics, events (especially the events) but the overall quality of models and faction design is average. Believe it or not I asked for a refund the first time. After a few months I bought it again, kept it and had quite some fun, especially now that I fixed many of its bugs. Are you thinking about getting it?

Originally posted by littleShepherd:

The Attila AI is just fine for what it needs to do.

I completely and absolutely disagree with you there.
( perhaps we don't need/ wnat the same things out of it )

Shogun AI has some advantages (simplicity)

"but he went into*why* the AI 'seems' so much more competent in it: Shogun2 "

I disgaree- I don't think the ATW AI "hangs in" I consider it a SUICIDAL WINDOW LICKER- but again, we may differ on what we want to see-
i mostly see it suicide like a wh army chasing a 2-unit chaos horde thru the wastes.

I don't consider ATW particularly vast ( i didn't region count i admit ) or complex... they removed features & they simplified combat -purposefully- and unit "roles" even moreso than rome2 - a trend that continues with most games by that crew ( arena, etc ) - BUT this may be good for both the AI and new audiences.
I don't see it as a particularly complex game, just one they put features in the AI can't handle-
which has been an oft-mentioned issue with TW games.
If you disagree on that last; that's fine- me; I'm siding with old "sensai" s and the AI professional ;)

...whereas on ATW:
"I chose Attila over Rome2 because of the options to mod AI. There have been only a few modders who have bothered to extensively mod campaign AI."
uh... Do you mean..recently? Before CA scared off so many ( and youtubers) ?
- Have you played Ultimate General series? used pfm?
edit: I think I took that wrong and you meant *specifically* ATW Ai,
but i can't knock what you wanted to mod, or what game you chose, or this next, for sure:

I started to:
h ttps:/steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1529792592
h ttps:/steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1526012774
My Aggressive AI features a large discussion area where you can post findings.

I won't have much to post or add, AI was never 'my' problem ; and when i was solo-ing; my philosophy was: make stuff the AI would use anyway-
BUT: removal of features from rome2- and the AI to support them- changes that.

so- i wont have much to add- new territory for me- but i may very well hop over there to learn
if almost no one's been doing big AI overhauls for this, best to look at who has.

Originally posted by Athanasios95gr:

Empire Divided is interesting, with tons of new stuff, buildings, mechanics, events (especially the events) but the overall quality of models and faction design is average. Believe it or not I asked for a refund the first time. After a few months I bought it again, kept it and had quite some fun, especially now that I fixed many of its bugs. Are you thinking about getting it?

whoah- i type so slow we now have a multi-tangent; I take most the blame.
originally, i was so PISSED at Ca, i never even considered it ; lol-
but it's been recommended maybe one day.

But i really asked because / in the context of: "comparing the game design philosophies"
getting the PoV on it from someone who bug-fixed games by *both* crews -
calling both "CA" - is tricky- it's hardly the same 'band' - I'd have to look up how many changed to be sure, but that's how i remember it ( offhand memory is risky! )
- but i find it interetsing they go back and make a DLC after they've learned from ATW and TW:WH -
so that's why i asked, specifically. ( i was surprised how popular rome2 remained- for a long time i thought only jerks like me had liked it :) )

Originally posted by littleShepherd:

I was not impressed with Belisarius. It uses troops, buildings and fragments from Attila for the most part and very little is new except for the massive startpos overhaul. The CHA campaign is a wonder that inspired MK.

sorry, my slow-ass typing i didn t see this :
I enjoyed LAstRoman- but- yes, i agree- and after the first playthrough ( i rarely finsih games- " oh this is done" ) felt no need to try again. Can't disagree with ya, i just enjoyed it *anyway*
CHA campaign- tho i'd like to play it further than I did ( to franks fracturing ) - I quite enjoyed,
i often use it in discussions as " when a new team ISNT under time pressure to push out 3 projects" when i'm trying to be more "fair" and less salty.
I dug it, and not just because of it's specific mechanics significance to my old stuff - which was a bit of a " see? told you so " moment-
but- yeah I really enjoyed it, *despite* that I felt it lacks that "anyone can come out on top here"
which TO ME is what makes the best settings for these types of games.
Not sure why that came up... and what is MK? missed a reference/

I completely disagree with you on AI for Attila. The are more AI build options than any Total War series before 3kingdoms. There is really very little for Shogun AI to do. Attila AI is so complicated though that no one bothers to test it. You can't trust authors that are preaching to their choir. If you accept people like that, then you should be playing Shogun or 3K. I've been modding this game since 2016 and have had remarkable different AI experiences depending on how I set it up. The problem is that there are too many overlapping fields and too many fields that seem to be left over from Shogun but no longer in use. If you like the period or Medieval, take some time to study it.

Originally posted by littleShepherd:

I completely disagree with you on AI for Attila.

I think we already agrred on that, which is fine-
and as I said, i'm siding with the ones I mentioned. If you think Attila ai does "fine" - that's fine with me.
as to:
" You can't trust authors that are preaching to their choir" ...?
right I'll trust random new modder , but i have doubts about the AI professional - that makes semse .
Perhaps you should view his work before you judge it?
You just partook in a form of defensive cognitive dissoance referred to as an "ad hominem attack" aginst an AI professinal?.. and why?
If you deny that TW's Ai has been NOTED across the industry as having the problem he noted-
then you have chosen to be ignore-ant - despite that you said largely the same thing
It sounds like you're suffering from new-to-it itis; and "cognitive dissonance "arising from being... perhaps a fanboi?
If it's tahatwwidesly noted, maybe they're right?

I think aside from that:
where I don't need you to agree:
I se ATw as a rush-job mess of bad design decisions, bugged use of an engine a new crew wasn't used to; and a worse use of a setting.
I also know how mcuh ♥♥♥♥ they were in at the time for it, for arena- their other master-mind, and pissing off most of the big modders and youtubers; aside from a large chunk of the actual fanbase.
A bunch of stumbles... and they recovered, good for them, but it was a rough period.
If you think Attila is well-designed or ell-balanced, or has a good AI; or the combat isn't simplified, that's fine.
"The are more AI build options than any Total War series before 3kingdoms"
yes, which agrees with myself and the general consenus that TW tends to make features their Ai can't handle.

. I've been modding this game since 2016 and have had remarkable different AI experiences depending on how I set it up. The problem is that there are too many overlapping fields and too many fields that seem to be left over from Shogun but no longer in use. If you like the period or Medieval, take some time to study it.

right- you STARED after i quit... you're so NEW to it you don't realize you're using the tools of the people I spoke of- who had left by then (because CA was being..♥♥♥♥♥. Look up the old PFM on total war center, who provided that? what game are they making now?
ohhh that's what i meant
You're too new to have seen that all go down- and I doubt you were in game design college studying when it did...
Read what you yourself typed...
read your own words...
but know you left out, I can still find parts of EMPIRE total war in the data base files, much less shogun2.
SEEN any "light infantry behavior" lately?

Anyway- the whole thing you typed, goes with the over-all point:

and with the discussion you hopped on-
about how the new team had to deal with an old, crocthety engine- and made many
many mistakes that the mod this page is on; had to adddress.
almosy like a new team had to work under pressure using tools they didn't know!

Other than that, I'd already made it clear I disagreed with you on Tw's ai being ...anything but a trashfire;
AND made it clear I wasn't interested in what someone so new to modding they're not familiar with darth-mod thinks about modding AI?
maybe that was unclear.
WHat I'm unclear on is- why you modded the AI if you think it's ..not a trsahfire.
I'm unclear, but not curious.

I realize this is a public forum, on your buddies mod's discussion thread-
but- like you hoppin into to interrupt about charlemagne and last roman-
who asked you