Insecure Rebels?

[R3dD0g]

In v1.1 the Rebels and Brigands seemed to wander around the map to their heart's content.

In v1.2 I'm finding most R & B camped out next to my Watchtowers. I don't know if this is a deliberate attempt to disrupt my commerce (my towers are mostly on my roads between major cities, and I don't even know if their presence IS disrupting my commerce) or if it's just that they're lost and gravitate toward the closest 'weak' enemy object.

Has anybody noticed this or am I full of beans?

[Bob the Insane]

Do you also notice that you lose control of your watch tower as well while the enemy is camped there...

[R3dD0g]

Do you also notice that you lose control of your watch tower as well while the enemy is camped there...Sometimes.

Currently campaigning as Seleucids and early on I kept losing control of the towers between Hatra - Seleucia - Susa. Whenever the rebels would camp there.

But, now I'm not losing control of the towers. And I can't tell for sure whether they're disrupting my road trade. I've been sending out the local governors with a handful of units to clear out the rebels - it's good practice for the layabouts.

[Count Belisarius]

I've been sending out the local governors with a handful of units to clear out the rebels - it's good practice for the layabouts.

EXACTLY!!! The rebels' increased activity is one of the greatest improvements in the latest patch. In addition to adding a level of difficulty, rebels popping up in the hinterlands (or sometimes right next to a city) forces you to keep your provincial governors on their toes. Winning close-run battles increases prestige, adds to the governors' retinue, and helps prevent generals from becoming fat, lazy, drunk, and ineffective. I like how the rebels no longer sit and wait like cattle for the slaughter. If anything, I wish the rebels were MORE active, conducting sieges against weakly-garrisoned cities, etc. I also hope that Spartacus's rebellion is was a game event in the expansion, or maybe a campaign.

[katank]

Rebels are definitely more challenging. Bribing is now usually too expensive for my tastes so you have to fight them. However, in the late game, it just becomes a bit tedious.

You can loook at the roads near the rebels. If there is something that looks like a little wooden block, it means they are blockading your road. Otherwise, there aren't disrupting trade but after a few turns would cause devastation which still lowers income.

Best to take care of them.

[Mikeus Caesar]

What could the rebels be insecure about? Their sexuality? Their virginity?

[R3dD0g]

What could the rebels be insecure about? Their sexuality? Their virginity?
The title was meant to indicate that the Rebels where hanging out near the towers. And intended to humorously suggest that they weren't secure enough to venture about the countryside, instead seeking the supposed safety of my own towers.

[Mikeus Caesar]

There's nothing safe about the towers though.....although i suppose it does have a tactical advantage for them, as it stops you seeing their troop movements.

[Count Belisarius]

I read somewhere that building and manning forts instead of towers was supposed to suppress rebel activity in the area around the forts. It would be expensive (both in sunk costs and in unit maintenance), but might be worth it to be free of the hassle long-term. Makes sense, but is there any truth to this?

Also, is there any evidence that a large garrison in the province city suppresses rebel activity?

[Mikeus Caesar]

Nope. No evidence that having a large garrison in the city will supress rebels. In fact, that is entirely untrue. On my games, i try to have as many men in a city as possible, to keep public order high, but rebels still pop up in the province.

[Oaty]

I read somewhere that building and manning forts instead of towers was supposed to suppress rebel activity in the area around the forts. It would be expensive (both in sunk costs and in unit maintenance), but might be worth it to be free of the hassle long-term. Makes sense, but is there any truth to this?

Also, is there any evidence that a large garrison in the province city suppresses rebel activity?


Well your advisor in the prologue says forts do help suppress rebel occurrances.

And before someone asks what the prologue is, it is the campaign unlocker that everyone played for 2 seconds, the went onto there campaign.

Anyways I did the prologue twice, the second time after being through a few campaigns. The second time all the info sank in as I actually understood what wa being said.

[Darius]

Well it looks like I may be building a lot of forts that shall be garrisoned by a diplomat/spy.

To be honest I've actually found that some of these smaller rebel battles vs my "police units" are sometimes quite fun. Especially when theyre a big mess of the buggers and I have to get all tactical and use every terrain advantage I can imagine. Of course if I dont feel like fighting all that much, I just bring in a couple archer/slingers/skirmishers that I with to "train" by positioning them behind their shields and slaughtering them. It's not uncommon for me to have a single unupgraded slinger unit gain upwards to 400 kills and two experience chevrons in one go.

[Spartacus]

I Hate the rebels in RTW they are weak, They are not aggresive and they never attempt to seige your city it's ludricous. PLus I feel there are not enough rebels around

[Mikeus Caesar]

Not enough rebels around!? There's far too many bloody rebels!!

[brutii_warrior]

i love having rebels around, they are weak enough that all they do is boust your moral.

i want more rebels to wander the game. they are good for preping a new general to lead a powerful crusade.
:charge: ~:eek:
:duel: :duel: