View Full Version : WotS The Will of the Senate - out of character thread
Craterus
05-30-2006, 00:21
Let me get this straight. Upper house members don't do any of the campaign itself but decide the fate of things.
Lower house members play the campaign.
I'll play as upper house for now, as it sounds like you're a bit full with Lower House members?
I have updated the Library to the best of my ability. I think I've gotten all of the pertinent info in there regarding the mature faction members, however I'm not sure if I've listed the right aliases (AKA) for all of them. If someone could check that for me, I would be grateful. I also removed the motions that have been accomplished or are obsolete and added maps of the current extent of Roman power, in the thumbnail format. Let me know if other stuff is needed.
Death the destroyer of worlds
05-30-2006, 00:34
Excellent work TinCow, much obliged.
Thanks TinCow - my second post up sets out how the rules imply the characters should be reallocated; I'ved edited your AKAs. If anything looks wrong or incomplete, let me know.
Hopefully we should have reached the point where we don't need to reassign generals and newly spawned ones can start going to Upper House members.
EDIT: I've updated the First Consul report to include some screenshots of battle etc.
Can I get a clarification on who is playing Publius Pansa and Decius Laevinus? The main thread lists Glaucus as Decius and no one as Publius, but Glaucus was mentioned as Publius in a post elsewhere. For now I will keep Glaucus as Publius and Decius blank.
Who have we got as Consul candidates so far? I haven't seen many people putting their names forward....:embarassed:
Can I get a clarification on who is playing Publius Pansa and Decius Laevinus? The main thread lists Glaucus as Decius and no one as Publius, but Glaucus was mentioned as Publius in a post elsewhere. For now I will keep Glaucus as Publius and Decius blank.
Sorry, TinCow - is post #284 (wow, so many) not clear?
I've tried to re-do the table in the Senate deliberations thread to be up to date.
Publius Pansa => Glaucus
Decius Laevinus => Tiberius
Amulius Coruncanius => Mount Suribachi
Marcus Laevinus => Dutch_guy
Manius Amelius => Destroyer of Hope
I know it's confusing the heck out of me, but hopefully that's it and I won't have to re-assign any more avatars for a while - new avatars will just go to the Upper House.
Just an out of character note on the direction of this campaign - it's been said that I'm pushing the PBM into the direction of a "blitz" campaign, which is uninteresting. I confess there's an element of truth in this, although I did not plan to take Carthage until I found they held Messana (do they start with Messana?) I have ended up blitzing, although it was interesting - at least for me.
Inevitably, we will vote for candidates and motions for a variety of reasons. For the good of the Republic. For other role-playing reasons. Or because we as players want to see the game to play out in a certain way. That's fine and I don't mean to bulldoze the campaign in any particular direction. I've certainly been playing Quintus as a bulldozing conqueror, although I am not sure which of the three kinds of reason explain that (may be all three).
But I would like to make a few observations on gameplay, based on my experience with RTR. Basically, it can be really easy as Romans. They have some really nice units and a fairly "safe" starting position. Our rules try to constrain them in various historical ways - especially the historical armies. The most boring TW game I've ever played was a "win at all costs" RTR game as Romans. A full stack of principes and funditores kills everything effortlessly.
Conversely the most fun (solo) TW game I've ever played was also a RTR game as Romans, one in which I ended up at war with almost everyone (Carthage, Greece, Gaul, Macedon, Spain, Numidia, Seleucia, Germany) simultaneously and although I got to 50 provinces, I never really knocked out any of them. My armies were spread out, under-strength, battling all over the place, far far from home. The no-retraining and no extermination rules really make fighting far from home tough. The VH campaign difficulty means the AI can keep throwing full stacks at you. Similarly, in this campaign, it was really fun to try to take Sicily very quickly on a shoestring (apologies for Shifty157 for having to use him to control Syracuse). I had to make some careful strategic choices, as I knew our position was precarious and we were potentially over-extended.
Anyway just a few thoughts - players are free to try to push this campaign in any direction they want. One of the nice things about playing Roma is that they have such potential, you can do lots of adventurous things (anyone want to sail to Britain?). There's really only one rule - that we try to make it fun.
Simon, from a personal standpoint I think that it would be unfair to say you’re pushing this campaign in any one direction – you only have direct control whilst you’re character is Consul, after that it’s up to the next player and the Senate.
Sure you may appear aggressive, in fact, you’ve played a more aggressive game than you actually described in character as Quintus.
What I think is very important is that each successive Consul stamps their own In Character personality on the game. I can see why you are, IC, declaring the need to expand – it keeps the Roma armies small and the game more interesting.
I say, as long as you can justify it to my character, in character, then I’ll act in character to it – Out of Character intent or feelings don’t come into it.
The downside to the campaign is the weighted voting system due to influence scores but this will even out as more characters are spawned and the influence is spread out to more characters during the course of the game. This is the only thing that I think people could use to accuse you of pushing the game along – as Consul/Ex-Consul you nearly have a “casting” vote.
... as Consul/Ex-Consul you nearly have a “casting” vote.
Yes, I'm aware of that. I think I have 6/36 of the votes at the moment. It may be actually fairly historical - think of Deng Xiaoping or any other "retired" leader. But I'll try to abstain a lot! I don't believe in tying the First Consul's hands much anyway.
Ignoramus has proposed giving names to our legions. Here are the names that LestaT on the RTR forums has listed for his Imperator mod:
01. Legio I Italica - Italy
02. Legio II Augusta - Punic
03. Legio III Gallica - Gaul
04. Legio IV Skythia - Illyria
05. Legio V Makedonica - Macedonia
06. Legio VI Ferrata - Greek
07. Legio VII Alaudae - Gaul
08. Legio VIII Gemina - Germania
09. Legio IX Hispana - Iberia
10. Legio X Primigenia - recruited only in Rome
11. Legio XI Cyrenaica - Egypt
12. Legio XII Fulminata - recruited only in region of Umbria
13. Legio XIII Fretensis - Egypt & Syria
14. Legio XIV Parthica - Persia
15. Legio XV Apollinaris - Galatia
16. Legio XVI Triana Fortis - East (Arab & Hill)
17. Legio XVII Claudia Pia Fidelis - East (Arab & Persia)
18. Legio XVIII Macriana Liberatrix - Iberia & Dacia
19. Legio XIX Minervia - Germania & Numidia
20. Legio XX Valeria Victrix - Dacia & Scythia
21. Legio XXI Rapax - Nothern Italy
22. Legio XXII Deiotariana - Galatia
They are for post-Marian legions, but might give us some inspiration.
There are more names listed here:
http://www.davros.org/romans/legions.html
and here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_legions
I think to make life easy, we should only name legions that have a legion ancillary. Currently, we have Legio I and Legio II ancillaries. Legio I Italica seems like a no-brainer. For Legio II, we might go for Legio II Sabina, as in wikipedia, as that will also have been recruited in Italy. When we get a Legio III, then Gallica might be appropriate if we enter Gaul.
The Consular ancillary supposed to have two legions (and the field army ancillaries we'll eventually get will also include legions) but I think we should leave them nameless for convenience, otherwise we'll lose track.
NB: For the purposes of forming historical armies, I'm treating 1 velite+1principes+1hastati+1general as the core of a legion (to be supplemented by one or more of triarii, cavalry and funditores). But legions should typically be accompanied by equal sized alae of allied troops, making up a half stack army.
Mount Suribachi
05-30-2006, 18:25
Sorry, TinCow - is post #284 (wow, so many) not clear?
I've tried to re-do the table in the Senate deliberations thread to be up to date.
Publius Pansa => Glaucus
Decius Laevinus => Tiberius
Amulius Coruncanius => Mount Suribachi
Marcus Laevinus => Dutch_guy
Manius Amelius => Destroyer of Hope
I know it's confusing the heck out of me, but hopefully that's it and I won't have to re-assign any more avatars for a while - new avatars will just go to the Upper House.
I was going to ask to stay as Manius Amelius, but I'm in the middle of something of a chain, so Amulius Coruncanius I guess I am. I'll try and d'load the save game tonight or tomorrow morning and check him out :2thumbsup:
Regarding blitzing, I'm glad you brought it up Simon. I've been around enough PBEMs with you to know that you're not a glory seeker who tries to conquer the whole map during his "reign", but I was a little concerned as to how this has started out, with so many of our Senators pushing for an agressive, expansionist approach. Given that we are trying to role-play a realistic game as Rome, this hawkish approach contrasts with the traditional Republican Roman tradition of conservatism and suspicion of foreign adventures and wars. I've tried to role-play this in the IC thread, and have constantly voted against conquest and war over anyone apart from the Greeks. I guess that unlike real Roman Senators we don't have vast personal fortunes to protect which makes us much more keen to go to war! :laugh4:
Mount Suribachi
05-30-2006, 23:19
no no no!! I've already started machinating as Amulius!! Amulius is just fine, honestly.
Mount Suribachi
05-30-2006, 23:34
(5) Install the parthia/bactria landblock + africa landblock:
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/i...e=post&id=5621
Install this in \Data\world\maps\base
Simon, this link leads to an error message for me "topic may have been moved or deleted"
Mount Suribachi
05-31-2006, 00:10
*waves bye to his old avatar* ~:(
Man, I remember I was so excited when I got to 600 posts and I could choose my own avatar. Me and Mr.Bishop have had some great times at the Org....
Death the destroyer of worlds
05-31-2006, 00:33
The landblock has been moved to :
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=20466
Good luck with Amulius :)
Edit : This is an updated version of the map, but that should not matter. Otherwise I've still got the old one.
Craterus
05-31-2006, 03:32
Anywhere else I can get that Metropolis and Naval mod from? :sad:
I've e-mailed the exe to you but it may be too big for hotmail.
What was your problem with rapidshare, Craterus? Sometimes you have to wait awhile and it looks like nothings happening. But if you use a router like me with a dynamic ISP you may be in trouble. I had to join the Premium service - it cost a few euros, but then everything was fine.
Mount Suribachi
05-31-2006, 11:08
The landblock has been moved to :
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=20466
Good luck with Amulius :)
Edit : This is an updated version of the map, but that should not matter. Otherwise I've still got the old one.
Thanks DDW
Simon, could you update post2 with this link?
Simon, could you update post2 with this link?
I updated it last night. ~:cool:
On another matter - it looks like we will soon hire a second diplomat. Does any member of the Upper House want to claim him as their avatar? It will suit someone who has no intention of moving down to the Lower House.
mediobogdum
05-31-2006, 12:59
This is a really good idea. I would like to join if possible. Any openings?
This is a really good idea. I would like to join if possible. Any openings?
No problem, you are welcome! Have a look at post #2 in this thread and let us know if you want to join the upper or lower Senate.
Simon, am willing to take that diplomat role.....you know how diplomatic I can be :dizzy2:
..and have no intention to move to lower house as you know.
Me please :jumping:
:charge:
Oops too late, can I have the next one?
P.S. That's what I get leaving a thread open for an hour at work before replying!! ~:mecry:
Come on, you should have spotted this one....you're only down the road from me!
mediobogdum
05-31-2006, 15:04
No problem, you are welcome! Have a look at post #2 in this thread and let us know if you want to join the upper or lower Senate.
Thank You. I have read the pertinent posts. I would like to be in the Upper Senate for now. I haven't had RTR installed since before it was ported to 1.5. I would like to get familiar with it again.
I'm psyched. This is a capital idea.
Avicenna
05-31-2006, 15:58
That's the avatar for Decius Laevinius in my RTR Gold version and now I'm getting confused :confused:
I guess I'll have to have a name change now...
[back to horse archery practice with Mongolians spying on Europe a few centuries early]
Simon, I will be attempting to get these mods installed either before or over the weekend. This wont mean I can join you guys physically playing as my PC just isn’t up to the task until I upgrade it later this month, however, if I can perform a good install and get the game/Mod to run at a lower level (normal size units for example) then it’ll save time after I’ve upgraded, and I’ve had a good chance to get to know the basics of the mod.
@ Braden
Yes but you are moving soon, hope it wasn't something I said :oops:
~:cheers:
:charge:
Craterus: I've e-mailed you the MN.exe. If you don't get it in a day or two, then it may be too big for hotmail. There's light at the end of the tunnel, though, as Macedonn on the RTR forums has said he will find another host for the next version of the mod.
Craterus
05-31-2006, 19:15
Great. Thanks Simon.
On a side note, I hope neither FLYdude nor DDW are insulted by my 'treason' speech. I'm just trying to play a Roman Senator and I consider passionate, pointed words and a bit of mudslinging to be quite proper in this forum, pardon the pun. All in all, I'm having a riot with this thing. Best PBM ever... and we have barely done anything yet!
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-01-2006, 00:18
No worries, mate, I was just acting 'in character' :)
I had a lot of fun writing my last speech. Perhaps I overdid it a little :)
If people want some help getting into character while playing as Romans, there is a very nice thread by Candlearius on the RTR forums, based around pretty much the same kind of mod as we are using:
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=20440
The first post links to a 20 page pdf that puts things together nicely.
DDW, regarding the crash when fighting at Rhegium, it is happening to me as well. Any attempt to fight there does a CTD, though autoresolve works fine.
Ignoramus
06-01-2006, 05:03
A sad day. I changed my avatar ~:(.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-01-2006, 10:25
DDW, regarding the crash when fighting at Rhegium, it is happening to me as well. Any attempt to fight there does a CTD, though autoresolve works fine.
The problem was/is related to Update 2 of the M&N mod. It seems to have to do something with the street lightning of Rhegium, strangely enough. There is an ongoing discussion on this problem here :
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=20521
Edit : Ignoramus, I am looking very hard, but I do not see a change in your avatar. Or was someone else senator Sextus Antio before ?
Off-topic - there is a late Seleucid PBM (1.5 vanilla) that needs another player:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=60305&page=5
It is quite a big commitment - I think there will be lots of battles etc. But I think the player should be able to take Rome and end the campaign. It may suit frustrated would-be First Consuls, although they probably want to wait for Friday to know for sure.
Post in the thread if you want to take it on.
I've played around with the savegame to explore the naval building aspect of the game. So far as I can make out, we have to demolish "Naval architecture II (Greek)" in Syracuse and build "Naval Architecture I (Roman)" to get better ships. However, the best we will get is Corvus Quiquiremes (the naval pdf lists 6 ships that are better). And it seems that we will never get the chance to build Naval Architecture II for some reason. Building auxiliary I and II is irrelevant to what ships we can get. That's one thing I hate about mods - the lack of documentation (and design decisions that are not explained). If anyone knows more, please let us know.
One worrying thing - the game crashed during a Gaulish turn around 20+ turns in. (Ironically, the last thing they did was near Rhegium. I'll investigate the fix for the Rhegium bug we had). That's the other thing I hate about mods. Future first consuls should save at the end of every turn. Then we can hope to find workarounds if CTDs occur. I'd hate to get so many people involved and find the campaign stalls due to a fatal bug.
EDIT: attention TinCow especially this second crash also seems to be due to the Rhegium bug. You can avoid it by downloading the file "roman_town.txt" in the PBM uploader and putting it in your data/settlement_plans folder. Post #2 has been amended accordingly.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-01-2006, 22:39
One worrying thing - the game crashed during a Gaulish turn around 20+ turns in. (Ironically, the last thing they did was near Rhegium. I'll investigate the fix for the Rhegium bug we had).
I just have to know, how did the Gauls ever end up near Rhegium ???
It is good to know there is a fix now !
I just have to know, how did the Gauls ever end up near Rhegium ???
This is what happens if you start a war with Gaul and then just click "end turn" twenty times:
https://img319.imageshack.us/img319/9126/yikes4cf.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
Yikes!
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-01-2006, 23:31
That's nasty :laugh4:
I looked into the naval thing and it seems only Macedon and Ptolemy are able to build naval III and the monster ships. I'm not so sure about this, as I saw the Greeks sailing around with them, but they might have started with them. The good news is that Carthage is supposed not to be able to build naval architecture, but they start with naval tradition warports, which gives them access to Superior Quadriremes at most if I read this correctly, while the Romans should eventually be able to build the stronger Corvus Quiquiremes.
More good news : The cavalry rebalancing EDU is approaching its finish. Then cavalry will become much more effective for both sides. It's being held up because now it seems the war elephants are the equivalent of M1A1 abrams tanks. By the way, you have been mighty active on the RTR forums, Econ21, good to see you hanging around.
Alternative way of getting around CTDs caused by the AI : When a CTD occurs during AI movement, it is possible to see which faction is causing it. Then you can restart and end the turn again, and press escape the moment that faction starts its turn. If you then save and reload the game you might pass the critical faction without mishap. I have not experimented with this, but it is good to know in case we get stuck somewhere.
Lastly, should someone be wondering whether we need the 'Fix for Aleria port', don't bother as it was included in the last version of M&N mod already.
...The cavalry rebalancing EDU is approaching its finish. Then cavalry will become much more effective for both sides.
Thanks for the heads-up. Digging around the RTR forums, the latest version of the EDU for MN seems to be this one: Shos's EDU file, produced 29th May, available from:
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=18729&st=180#
The main change is to increase cavalry charge bonuses by about 50%.
DDW, do you agree the next First Consul should use this file? I've already put the reference in post #2.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-02-2006, 11:27
DDW, do you agree the next First Consul should use this file? I've already put the reference in post #2.
There is an official section for this mod on :
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=20472
However, that file is is Sanky's dated 26-5, so I think using Sho's is better for the moment, as it is dated 29-5. The upcoming first consul is warned however, that elephants will probably become MUCH more powerful, so you better watch yourself in Afrika, Tiberius :) For clarity, this is a 'beta' of the upcoming final cavalry rebalancing, so there might be some wierd occurences. It should work for people with BI and without it. We can wait for the 'final' version or try this beta. I say let's keep using the beta optional for the moment. I will probably use it, should, heaven forbid, I actually win this election :).
OK, thanks for the info. Digging into the stats a little, I must say I can't agree with what the mod has done to cavalry (nerfing their attack). I've just made a post about this in the rebalancing thread in the RTR PE forum. Still, as an infantry heavy faction, it probably is not an issue with us. Just don't use your cavalry unless you really have to.
Elephants are monsters - Pyrrhus's caught a unit of my hastati and killed about 60 in a few seconds. They die real quick to velites though.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-02-2006, 12:33
Elephants are monsters - Pyrrhus's caught a unit of my hastati and killed about 60 in a few seconds. They die real quick to velites though.
At the moment a seleucid war elephant will kill around 120 hoplites at the moment of impact when charging head on. Oh, and they are so welarmoured they are practically unkillable. Let's just say that if we were playing as Parthia I would not have recommened using this beta just yet :)
econ21 (keep wanting to use your real name), looking at the motions currently open to vote, I wonder if it would be a good idea to negate Influence for tabling motions as all but one of them have been put down without a seconder.
Whilst I’ve got no major issue with it, it does take some of the RP out of the Senate proceedings……for example I’ve only been approached once for a request to support a motion and I think this is one of the advantages of this game. The back-door dealings via private email or PM….
This won’t really address itself as play goes on but will just get worse – I envisage a time when just about every Senator will be able to table their own Motions. I’m sure that its not something that would appeal to you.
Influence I think is still workable when voting on the motions and elections but not for tabling them.
Also, DDW – your motions #7 & #9 appear to be identical.
P.S. - Next character. You offered out the next diplomatic position and I was first to put my name down for the Avatar. However, are we using Spys as well as Avatars? I don't see major issue with this if we are and if so, am happy to take a Spy Avatar in place of a Diplomat.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-02-2006, 15:31
I agree with your line of reasoning Braden and I'll second that. I also propose a maximum of 5 votes (total) for every senator. This will allow our massively influential praetors and consuls to vote on every issue without laying down the law so to speak.
I feel I should mention that almost all of the motions have been seconded by another senator.
I am aware that the motions are similar, but they are seperate propositions.
It is just that if you vote for 7, you will vote for 9. But you might disagree with 7, but not with 9. Hence two seperate motions.
I wish you luck on your career choice, spying is a hazardous profession :)
Interesting, Braden - I was just thinking the same thing about seconding motions. OK, all motions must have a named Senator second them. I was even thinking about requiring two seconders - Senate debates seem so fractured, it would be good to encourage a little more coherence and collectivism. What do people think?
I don't want to cap influence - it maxs out at 6 votes per player total (10 influence is the highest it goes), so cutting it down to 5 seems not so important. A little self-restraint is probably more effective. We've only played 5 years. When we have more Upper House avatars and people have had more time to get influence, I think it will be less noticable. And I personally think men like Quintus should have great influence. :saint:
If it is ok with people, Braden can be our first existing spy (currently in Sicily). Let's say you are a kind of "spymaster" who is tasked with various missions. YAKOBU can be the next diplomat we hire. If any Upper House member wants to be the second spy I just hired in Roma, shout out. It would be good if the people controlling this avatars give suggestions about their deployment to the First Consul. Players probably focus on the armies and may neglect agents.
Mount Suribachi
06-02-2006, 18:29
At the moment a seleucid war elephant will kill around 120 hoplites at the moment of impact when charging head on. Oh, and they are so welarmoured they are practically unkillable. Let's just say that if we were playing as Parthia I would not have recommened using this beta just yet :)
Thats just ridiculous. I thought RTR was meant to be doing away with uber-units? :inquisitive:
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-02-2006, 18:49
Yes, and they will. The thing is that all cavalry were much too weak and so they increased their carge bonus in the latest EDU. But elephants are very strong and they are also counted as cavalry and so their charge became immensely powerful. This will be fixed in the final EDU. Modding is easy. Getting the balance just right is incredibly difficult.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-02-2006, 18:51
remove double post.
Tricky Lady
06-02-2006, 18:59
Interesting, Braden - I was just thinking the same thing about seconding motions. OK, all motions must have a named Senator second them. I was even thinking about requiring two seconders - Senate debates seem so fractured, it would be good to encourage a little more coherence and collectivism. What do people think?
I think this is a good idea. So that's a "yes" from me :smiley:
If it is ok with people, Braden can be our first existing spy (currently in Sicily). Let's say you are a kind of "spymaster" who is tasked with various missions. YAKOBU can be the next diplomat we hire. If any Upper House member wants to be the second spy I just hired in Roma, shout out. It would be good if the people controlling this avatars give suggestions about their deployment to the First Consul. Players probably focus on the armies and may neglect agents.
: shout :
Well, I was thinking that perhaps for a long-time-not-playing-RTW player like me, it'd be more appropriate if I could control a less important character, such as, why not, a spy.
It's just that maybe someone more experienced wants to use the Titus avatar and run for consul?
Anyway, perhaps I should try & play a few turns in RTR and vanilla RTW to get into the game again. My last campaign dates from December 2005 if memory serves.
Tricky_Lady - I don't see any need for you to give up your avatar. All Lower House members have a general already, except DoH whose avatar will mature in just a season or two. Why don't you install this mod and have a look? It's rather different from the usual RTW, particularly if you have not played RTR before. But if you are set on dropping Titus Vatinus post again and the deed will be done. The second spy is Quintis Classicianus, aged 28.
Also, just a note to say that the MN mod has been revised, with the culprit of the Rhegium bug taken out, the latest EDU in and (attention Craterus) available to download from something other than rapidshare. I've ammended post #2 accordingly.
EDIT: BTW, Braden, you know have been assigned the spy Decius Curtius. I am sure TinCow will post his mugshot in the library in due course. Decius is currently in Sicily, but personally, I would agitate for him to be sent to Cisalpine Gaul. While there is already a spy in Roma, having two spies in the region would not be excessive - one to watch the road west to transalpine Gaul, the other to scout around our invading army. Some very interesting things are probably happening in Illyria (at war with Greece) that we might want to know about too.
Craterus
06-02-2006, 20:35
Message received. :thumbsup:
GeneralHankerchief
06-02-2006, 20:47
If Tricky Lady keeps her current avatar then I'll be the second spy (Quintus Classicianus).
Tricky Lady
06-02-2006, 21:15
I'll keep the Titus Vatinus character. If really necessary I can play a battle, but pls don't rely too heavily on me to win difficult battles :tongue2:
Mount Suribachi
06-02-2006, 21:15
This EDU thingy, can you just patch it onto your current game and carry on? Don't have to reinstall from scratch or owt?
This EDU thingy, can you just patch it onto your current game and carry on? Don't have to reinstall from scratch or owt?
Yes, I believe you can just add it on. I guess it is mainly accessed during battles.
By contrast I understand some other files - e.g. the descr_strat file we altered to give Quintus et al their starting Roman leadership traits - are only accessed at the beginning of a campaign, so we are stuck with them.
As a side note to anyone taking a Spy over a Diplomat... Spies don't accumulate influence, but Diplomats do.
GeneralHankerchief
06-02-2006, 23:51
Perhaps stealthiness could be our version of influence?
Perhaps stealthiness could be our version of influence?
I'm wondering about giving spies (& assassins) bonus votes equal to (subterfuge/5), rounded up, compared to (influence/2) for others. I can see how subterfuge might give you some political leverage, but I would not want an spy, however good, to rival an ex-Consul who is a conqueror etc. I suspect Upper House senators won't accumulate that much influence anyway, so it should balance out.
On another matter, I don't use spies much, but I know it can be a risky business if they are used aggressively (the kind of thing that gives subterfuge). Maybe people controlling spies should give some instruction to the First Consul (via PM) about how aggressive or not they want their spies to be.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-03-2006, 01:37
I like GeneralHankerchief and econ21's ideas. I'll second them. Spies tend to live a long time, but assassins tend to die really fast however. We might say we will not make the assasination attempt if we have less than 50 % chance of success or something like that. Then there is the real possibility of getting assasinated. In my last campaign I lost four generals to that, two of which were my very best. Especially Anatolia (Turkey) can be really nasty as it is a sort of crossroads. I remember a shot where my general was in a city with 10 (!) assassins around it. That didn't end well. I advise sending spies with capable generals. That helps to keep the number of assassinations down.
...assassins tend to die really fast however. We might say we will not make the assasination attempt if we have less than 50 % chance of success or something like that. Then there is the real possibility of getting assasinated.
I never used assassins until one campaign, a Macedonian assassin started systematically taking down all my generals in the region. I asked around and the advice was that recruiting my newbie assassins to kill their elite assassin were my best counter. It worked. Assassins, strangely, are the easiest target for other assassins.[1]
Ever since, I've used "double-teams" of spies (to find the enemy assassins) and assassins (to nail them). You can get very high subterfuge assassins that way. In the recent WRE PBM, TinCow used them very effectively to decapitate the Slav horde. Personally, I'd rather players did not take assassins as avatars (spies are fine), as sometimes - as TinCow showed - it can be best to take risks with them.
[1]Also, I might be imagining it, but I think if you end your turn with your assassin in one of your settlements he is immune from enemy assassination - is that right? I've never had one assassinated anyway.
I am assigning General Valerius Paullus to YAKOBU.
If anyone wants our second diplomat, Oppius Vitruvius, to be their avatar, let me know.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-03-2006, 12:15
Also, I might be imagining it, but I think if you end your turn with your assassin in one of your settlements he is immune from enemy assassination - is that right? I've never had one assassinated anyway.
You are probably correct. The AI does not target assassins. I was referring to generals.
Also, it would be handy for the first consul if there were links to PM the senators in the senate membership list. I suspect this is possible, but perhaps there is another way to make a 'quick reference list'. I sometimes have to look for quite some time to find someone's post so I can PM him. Any suggestions ?
Also, it would be handy for the first consul if there were links to PM the senators in the senate membership list. I suspect this is possible, but perhaps there is another way to make a 'quick reference list'. I sometimes have to look for quite some time to find someone's post so I can PM him. Any suggestions ?
I'd like to keep the beginning of the Senate deliberations thread our master list of players. I could add links to either the member's profile or to directly PM them. I think I will go with the profile, it is then just another click on that profile to PM them.
edit: done it; let me know if any links are wrong/broken etc.
edit: Can I remind everyone to zip their savegames before uploading to the Org Uploader. IIRC, it means they take about 1/4 of the space. The nature of this campaign means that we will probably being using the uploader a lot and I don't want to hit a hard space constraint. DDW and future First Consuls, please can you remind players of that when you assign them to fight battles?
shifty157
06-03-2006, 14:15
Sorry. That was my fault. I was in a hurry and i forgot to.
you can zip a save game using winrar right?
you can zip a save game using winrar right?
Yes, a compressed file in *.zip or *.rar format should be fine. I believe you can get the appropriate programs to compress and uncompress them free on the web, so everyone should be able to handle them.
Dutch_guy
06-03-2006, 18:10
DDW, may I ask how you are using my avatar - Marcus Laevinus ?.
Would be good to know for my future posts in the Senate Deliberations thread !
:balloon2:
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-03-2006, 18:28
Marcus Laevinus is only 10 years old at the moment :)
There are two new active charcters which are unassigned at the moment, our new diplomat Oppius Vintruvius and my son Manius Aemilius. You could apply for a transfer. My son might be 'hooting', but he is from a noble family :)
shifty157
06-03-2006, 21:26
What exactly does having the 'hooting' trait do? It sounds rather hilarious. I cant get the picture out of my head of a guy in a toga perched up in some rafters and hooting like an owl at anyone who walks by below him.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-03-2006, 22:00
Wisdom wears many guises, but hooting in the manner of a starving owl may not be one of them. -1 Influence, -1 Command, -1 Management.
I am not sure, but I think if you have hooting you have a chance of going stark raving mad. I once had a Pontus campaign where due to a set of unhappy accidents, all I had left was a totally insane family. Oh, it was the bomb ! The battlefield speeches ! I absolutely loved it, but I got annihalated.
shifty157
06-03-2006, 22:26
Thats amazing. Ive never had that happen to me before though it would be cool.
Right! Thanks econ21 - will adjust my profile to show the new name and will start using it in Senate.
Influence - I don't agree with "capping" as it takes away the historical edge to proceedings (powerful families), but I'm glad you agree with my feelings about Motions.
I hope to see more PM's and emails flying about as Senators try to offer up various "things" to gain votes - which also leads to the use of secondary Avatars such as Spies. It is far easier to offer easy missions to a spy for example so he gains skills (and, I like the idea put forward, influence).
Obviously, those soft missions can be offered by people wanting votes etc (evil ain't I?).
Likewise with nice governor positions or army positions but we need to expand the Avatars to get as many people as possible more actively involved.
GeneralHankerchief
06-03-2006, 22:58
Would you mind showing me a mugshot of my character too? I don't look as sneaky with the avatar of a Carthaginian general who looks high, somehow.
Yeah, need a mug shot myself from TinCow but no major rush - just picked the Rogue Avatar that looked most like me........scary innit?
I'll get the shots up, just gotta scroll back up and figure out who you are!
[Edit:] Done, bios are up.
On a side note, what's the rule on editing down the spawn rate of brigands/pirates? Also, what file is it in for RTR?
I think the bandit spawn rate is descr_strat.txt, but apparently that is only read at the start of the campaign so players don't need to worry about it. I modded both bandits and pirates spawn to 50. We saw only one bandit stack in my 20 turns.
DDW, I think the only unassigned avatar is the second diplomat. Manius Aemilius was assigned some time back to Destroyer of Hope, who is a Lower House member.
DDW, I think the only unassigned avatar is the second diplomat. Manius Aemilius was assigned some time back to Destroyer of Hope, who is a Lower House member.
There are also 3 unassigned underage males:
Marcellus Aemilius - Age 4
Servius Aemilius - Age 1
Galerius Vatinius - Age 1
And 5 underage females (Aged 0, 2, 3, 4 & 7) who will marry eventually.
My instinct is not to assign the under-age characters yet - they are very young, so we may get some adult generals before then and I'd rather not be re-assigning. But I'm open to persuasion.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-04-2006, 00:44
There has been a lot of discussion about the spawn rate and the consensus was that changing the values does not matter. However, the lack of rebels so far has been suprising. Then again, the sea seems to be teeming with pirates.
Welcome to the family, Destroyer of Hope :) Just a sneak peek. Manius may be a little strange, but he is getting guite a lot of influence.
I agree with only assigning them after they come of age. Things get too confusing. One more turn to.
There has been a lot of discussion about the spawn rate and the consensus was that changing the values does not matter.
Curious why the feature would not work as advertised. In my experience, it does work. Modding down bandit spawn is the main reason I prefer 1.5 over 1.2. In RTR Gold and EB, I spend all my time battling rebels. They are never a real issue in my 1.5 games.
One presentational point for DDW and future First Consuls, if you are posting screenshots in threads - which is very much encouraged - please save them as jpg after reducing them to 75% in size, that way the post formatting will work and we will be able to read a whole line on our screen without scrolling. Cheers.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-04-2006, 17:37
Ah yes, I have a 19'' monitor so I do not have this problem. I am willing to update the links with reformatted pictures if this is desired, but the texts become unreadable if reduced to 75 % size.
Do you wish me to do so, econ21 ? Alternatively, I could post thumbnail links to full size pictures.
GeneralHankerchief
06-04-2006, 17:42
Gah, please no thumbnails. You have no idea how annoying they are for me.
It's like opening a book displayed with glorious pictures, but they say to go pick up another book to see the picture at full-size.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-04-2006, 21:54
Perhaps we should change the african+asian landblock with this :
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=20850
It also includes a port fix for Isca and Cyrene, which have the same problem as Aleria had (i.e. no landings or trade routes possible due to cliffs, as I found out to my dismay winter 273 BC). The latest M&N mod version includes a fix for Aleria, but not for Isca and Cyrene.
I will try it out and see what happens. In theory this is all savegame compatible. All you have to is to remove the map.rwm files again and reload.
Yes, text is a problem is we reduce to 75% size but the screenies are mainly visual. I think we should stick with that - unfortunately I doubt most of us have 19inch screens.
On the landblock, I'll leave it to your discretion. Let us know how it turns out.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-04-2006, 22:23
I have tested the replacement for the africa+asia landblock and it works perfectly. My recommendation is that we implement the change. I will replace my pictures with reduced size ones.
EDIT : Pictures replaced.
Ok, I did my battle and uploaded the save game in RAR form. If I did it wrong tell me, but I think you should be able to download and play from after my battle.
Might I request a subforum again? With the addition of all these "MP Campaign" threads, it's getting hard to find things.
GeneralHankerchief
06-05-2006, 01:52
I think if we get a subforum the MP campaign should get one too.
And then the Throne Room is back to its lonely old self.
Well, it doesn't have to be permanent... just someplace to keep all these threads organized. When the game ends, the threads can be moved back in here and the subforum can be deleted.
Might I request a subforum again? With the addition of all these "MP Campaign" threads, it's getting hard to find things.
Can't we all just get along? ~:grouphug: The current burst of activity is rather refreshing. Can I remind people how it was a year ago:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=52163
Which threads are you concerned about, TinCow? This thread and the deliberations one should keep fairly high up the page due to the volume of posts.
I've unstickied some of the older sticky's in this forum. That creates some room, so I could sticky some of the threads for this campaign. The library and the First Consul reports are the two other permanent threads for this campaign and so would be candidates. But at the rate we're going - updating every 10 turns, they should also get a reasonable rate of posts. Would you like these stickied?
The poll threads will only be open for a day or so. We could create links to those poll threads in the library or the deliberations thread if required, but I see them as rather ephemeral and don't really see the need.
Is it too late to join this?
if not, what exactly do i need to play? I have RTR 6.3 gold installed to rtw 1.2
Is it too late to join this?
if not, what exactly do i need to play? I have RTR 6.3 gold installed to rtw 1.2
No, it's not too late. Welcome!
Please read post #2 in this thread. That will tell you all the gory details.
What you have to do at this stage is decide if you want to sit in the Lower House (which means you may be asked to fight battles and can run for First Consul - ie be the player for 20 turns); or just sit in the Upper House (which means you will just debate and vote etc.). If you want to do the former, you'll need to do a new install of RTR - we are using the Platinum version with the Metropolis and Naval mod. It's all detailed in post #2.
Please post here with your decision.
TinCow/econ21,
We’ve got one Diplomat down on the lists in the Library (Sextus Antio) – I thought we had two?? If I’m wrong apologies.
Myrddraal
06-05-2006, 10:59
Might I request a subforum again? With the addition of all these "MP Campaign" threads, it's getting hard to find things.
Though there has been a flurry of activity in the MP threads, this is simply because of the initial diplomatic talks. This is where the world has arranged itself into a series of alliances. Now that these alliances are fairly well established, you'll find the activity in these threads will die down for a while whilst play continues.
We’ve got one Diplomat down on the lists in the Library (Sextus Antio) – I thought we had two??
Yes, I think we have two but no one has yet claimed the other one. Until they do, he does not really need to go in the Senate library (which is for people to track the progress of their avatars). If someone does want to claim him, shout out.
Yes, I think we have two but no one has yet claimed the other one. Until they do, he does not really need to go in the Senate library (which is for people to track the progress of their avatars). If someone does want to claim him, shout out.
Ahhh! I see. Don't mind me....just "plotting" :skull:
No, it's not too late. Welcome!
Please read post #2 in this thread. That will tell you all the gory details.
What you have to do at this stage is decide if you want to sit in the Lower House (which means you may be asked to fight battles and can run for First Consul - ie be the player for 20 turns); or just sit in the Upper House (which means you will just debate and vote etc.). If you want to do the former, you'll need to do a new install of RTR - we are using the Platinum version with the Metropolis and Naval mod. It's all detailed in post #2.
Please post here with your decision.
I think for now I will be happy to sit in the Upper house as i dont really want to reinstall anything at this time. Thanks for welcoming me. I take it I have to wait to be assigned an avatar and then i just join in with the deliberations thread?
P.S Is it possible to change from the upper house to the lower house at a later stage?
Which threads are you concerned about, TinCow? This thread and the deliberations one should keep fairly high up the page due to the volume of posts.
Eh, just ignore me. I'm being too anal.
Avicenna
06-05-2006, 12:15
Eh, just ignore me. I'm being too anal.
:shocked:
Wishazu,
You don't have to wait for an Avatar to come available "in game" to play in the Upper House....only if you intend to take part in the active game in the lower house.
Once you have an Avatar, it is possible for you to go from Upper to Lower house and put yourself forward as Consul (active player) in elections.
I've chosen a Spy Avatar for my Upper house role as I know I will not be able to take an active part in this game....potentially ever. It's all pending Computer upgrading etc so I've chosen an Avatar that is "in game" but I don't control........
.......however, I can still influence the Avatars role "in game" via my Senate speeches. :2thumbsup:
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-05-2006, 12:35
Wishazu, you can change from upper to lower house at a later date. If you intend to stay in upper house for some time I advise you to take on the avatar of our unassigned diplomat Oppius Vintruvius.
Considering the rules about ancilliaries :
(2) Chirurgeons and turncoats can be freely assigned by First Consuls.
(3) Priests can be removed from a character if that character is to stay in a settlement with the relevant temple.
It would greatly simplify the first consuls task if these are just merged into :
(2) Chirurgeons, priests and turncoats can be freely assigned by First Consuls.
All in favour ?
I am trying to follow Myrddraal's multiplayer campaign (information overload :sweatdrop:). It looks extremely interesting so far. I have no idea how this will turn out.
Avicenna
06-05-2006, 13:02
Ah, but this statement:
(3) Priests can be removed from a character if that character is to stay in a settlement with the relevant temple.
most certainly does NOT agree with this statement:
(2) Chirurgeons, priests and turncoats can be freely assigned by First Consuls.
Perhaps Mars priests can be assigned to generals, but other (governors') priests should be obtained by the general being assigned to that particular province.
DDW -
I sort of support that idea. It certainly smooths things out and makes it less complex for the active player as Consul...
...but....
Do the active players actually want it to be less complex? Some players relish the greater complexity. :inquisitive:
Also, whilst this is likely to considerbly lengthen a players Consul time in Real Life, I'm considering the Role Play implications. If I was an active player I would want to be "negotiated" with if someone wanted to remove one of my Retinue. Granted the Consul has absolute power in-game, and I think I'll support your revision of the rules and leave it to teh players involved to decide if they want to just:
1) Play as Consul and move Retinues about as they see fit
or,
2) PM the player before hand and offer them something in return....:help:
....there's always that option open as the player sees fit then.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-05-2006, 13:12
most certainly does NOT agree with this statement
My dear Tiberius,
I never said that it did. I said it would simplify things for the first consul, as it will. Let me explain the issue in more detail.
As all the generals need to be almost constantly in the field to increase their military service and keep their ranks, it is not possible to put them in cities for a prolonged time. When I do assign a governor, I want to be able to give him a priest of mercurius and be done with it. The same for when I send a generals into battle, I want to outfit him with battle priests and be done with it.
The micromanaging of these little things is already a bother, imagine how horrible it becomes when we have 40+ avatars running around. I suggest using avatars assigned to upper house members to 'breed' the necessary priest ancilliaries. This would simplify things greatly and we would soon have enough priests for everyone.
Edit : Braden, I see your point, but I do not consider Chirurgeons, priests and turncoats to have great roleplay value, in contrast to an exotic slave, veteran centurion or a drunken uncle for example.
The current rules over ancillaries are a bit of a bother, but I don't think they are excessive. Some cities should have regular governors - Roma, big cities, etc - and these governors can regularly "farm" the priests of the temples there. The current rule says it's ok to take a priest off such a governor, provided the governor is going to stay there and so have a chance to pick up a new priest to replace the one they've lost. I suspect it's only really worth making an effort over in the case generals with armies (who should number only 3-4 at the moment - our 3 legates and the Consul) to give them priests of Mars and Jupiter (which raise their command).
Personally, I don't think the First Consul PMing people over ancillary trades is going to work at all. Now that really is a lot of bother. I'm finding Senators are hard bargainers and anyway the First Consul actually has nothing much to bargain with (he can't easily take other people's ancillaries to swop with yours). I think most PBMers probably want to play out their 20 turns as First Consuls fairly promptly - over a weekend or at most two. It's ok to have to interrupt things to give other players a chance to fight battles. That's fun. But horse trading over ancillaries is not something most First Consuls are going to want to delay their reign for.
Yup – got to admit that my idea, if not already, will certainly be utterly “unworkable” when the number of Avatars increases.
D'oh! D'oh! D'oh! :wall:
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-05-2006, 13:50
I did not intend the first consul to PM with players over ancilliary trades. I suggest that during the senate sessions between first consuls, when the avatar gallery is updated, the senators themselves may negotiate deals among themselves. They could then notify the future first consul of any exchanges they would like him to make.
As cavalry is beyond our budget at the moment, most of the tribunes are used for such a purpose. Still, we could use the upper house avatars (like Tricky_lady) and unassigned ones to transport priests to the front lines from the cities. Problematically, I do not see many lower house avatars volunteering for governorship duties, so we will have to breed them off the students. This will require more building of temples in Rome and Syracuse. Still, this is workable. I can't say I'm enthusiastic, but I will go along with the present rules if there are no other 'dissenters'. :laugh4:
Another problem is that I need to assign cavalry to the 'transport' avatars to keep them moving fast while increasing their active military service. This is rather expensive.
I did not intend the first consul to PM with players over ancilliary trades.
I never meant to imply you intended that, DDW. Rather it was what most of us thought before we started the game.
I suggest that during the senate sessions between first consuls, when the avatar gallery is updated, the senators themselves may negotiate deals among themselves. They could then notify the future first consul of any exchanges they would like him to make.
Neat idea :2thumbsup: - people are free to do that under the current rules.
Another problem is that I need to assign cavalry to the 'transport' avatars to keep them moving fast while increasing their active military service. This is rather expensive.
I don't understand this point. Why does assigning cavalry to them make a transport avatar faster?
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-05-2006, 15:29
I don't understand this point. Why does assigning cavalry to them make a transport avatar faster?
A transport avatar generally goes back to fetch more troops emptyhanded. If I do not assign them a cavalry unit they will lose their tribune ranking and their military experience will stop increasing. I assign them a non-cavalry unit they will travel very slowly.
If I do not assign them a cavalry unit they will lose their tribune ranking and their military experience will stop increasing.
Are you sure of that? Marcus Camillus's notes say:
"Characters do not need to be in command of any troops to advance to the military rank of Tribune."
I thought as long as we keep them out of settlements, they will keep getting experience. I know higher ranks need Roman infantry in their stacks as well as not to be in settlements.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-05-2006, 16:14
Ah, I see. :oops:
Well, I'd better send the cavalry northwards tout suite then. :embarassed:
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-05-2006, 20:51
For my amusement I've looked further into the Hooting trait of my 'son' Destroyer of Hope.
It is possible to lose this by chance, but it is also possible that it will get worse to Hiding_From_the_World or even Unhinged_Loon. There's no losing the trait when you get to Hiding_From_the_World. (This is part of the Insane trait enum, there are also TouchedByTheGods, Deranged, ReligiousMania and PathologicalLiar enums to name but a few).
It is also possible that our new diplomat will lose his Tactless triat, but if it gets worse to Discourteous there's no going back.
I would like to take the Avatar of the unassigned Diplomat if it is still available. However after looking at the vast amounts of information, threads etc. for this campaign im worried i may have over reached myself lol. Alot of it seems to be going straight over my head. If someone could please send me a PM explaining what i must do etc.
Is there a pecking order when it comes to making posts in the deliberations thread?
Well here's hoping for Unhinged_loon then....come on, we can't be Romans without at least one utter nutter.....
....can we?? :dizzy2:
Mount Suribachi
06-05-2006, 21:46
Is there a pecking order when it comes to making posts in the deliberations thread?
Not at all, get stuck in mate :2thumbsup:
If someone could please send me a PM explaining what i must do etc.
OK, I'll assign you the diplomat, Oppius Vintruvius. TinCow will post a screenshot of him in the Senate library thread, if he's not already there.
Optionally, you might want to PM the First consul, DDW, to find out where your diplomat is and what he is planning to do with him in the next 10 turns. It's ultimately up to DDW, but I am sure he would welcome any suggestions from you.
But the core role you have as a Senator will be deciding the direction of the campaign. You do that by pontificating in the Senate deliberations thread, proposing motions and voting on them. Tomorrow at 6pm, I'll post a poll thread where you can vote yes or no to some motions regarding the last 10 turns of DDW's reign. The poll will be open for 24 hours, then we'll let him get on with it and he'll come back in a few days with a closing First Consul report.
After that, we'll go back to the Senate deliberations thread, have 2 days for tabling fresh motions for the next 10 turns and people will offer themselves up for election as the next player (First Consul). You can vote again and so on.
It only gets really complex if you want to step into the Lower House, where you will be expected to install the mod, play any battles your general gets into and at some point run for First Consul (ie play for 20 turns). Even then, it's not really much more daunting than playing a mod on your own.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-05-2006, 22:04
Hi Wishazu,
It's quite simple really. One player plays the game for 5 years (with the mods thats 20 turns as the year is divided in 4 seasons). He is the 'first consul'. Every 20 turns we elect a new one. A debate will be started on the 'in character' thread and people can give themselves up as a candidate. After several days of debate we start a new 'election' thread were you can vote for your candidate. Senators can also propose motions during debates and these can also be voted upon. If you check the last two pages of the in-character thread you can see examples of motions being proposed. Tomorrow evening the debate closes and there will be a day of voting. Then the first consul (who happens to be me at the moment) can play on. What's currently going on is the intermediate debate, which takes place 10 turns into a first consuls reign.
Okay, it's not that simple :laugh4:, but I'd advise you to read the first posts of the in- and the out- of character thread where all the current rules and regulations are updated continuously. In the senate library you can see the maps and avatars and so on.
Any questions, just ask.
EDIT : I may be a fast poster, but not as fast as econ21 :)
You can find out what your avatar, the diplomat Oppius Vintruvius, has been up to by reading the first consul reports thread. He is currently not present in the senate library, but that will happen soon. At the moment he's just left Iberia and is marching towards Massilia, as I want to know for sure if it is still in rebel hands or is the Gauls own it by now. Then you are basically a 'loose cannon' as all the necessary trade agreements and map exchanges have been made. I will probably try to make new alliances with you and explore. any suggestions for your character are always welcome.
Myrddraal
06-05-2006, 23:15
Sorry to post off topic, this if for your info, not discussion really.
I am trying to follow Myrddraal's multiplayer campaign (information overload :sweatdrop:). It looks extremely interesting so far. I have no idea how this will turn out.
In summary, the world has divided into three major alliances:
The Compact of Europa:
Britannia
Gaul
Germania
Macedon
Spain
The Order of the Eagle
House of Julii
House of Scipii
Carthage
Greek Cities
Egypt
The Pan Persian League
Pontus
Parthia
Seleucia
The Compact and the Pan Persian League have an alliance to fight and trade together till the Order of the Eagle is trampled. The Order of the Eagle are defiant.
It's turning out to be an interesting game, and we haven't even started the actual play :grin:
This really is a very brief summary, there has been so much diplomatic dealing to get to this stage it's unbelievable really.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-06-2006, 00:09
Thanks for the heads up, that explains a lot. I will continue to follow this with much interest. [off topic discussion closed]
well ive taken a look at my Avatar, he`s young and tactless. Great :)
...tactless
Yes, I suspect there is a personal cost to making diplomatic initiatives that fail. Could be one reason to try to persuade the First Consul (and the fool Senate) not to send you off on some hopeless errand.
Yes, I suspect there is a personal cost to making diplomatic initiatives that fail. Could be one reason to try to persuade the First Consul (and the fool Senate) not to send you off on some hopeless errand.
Hey, at least he's not being used as expendable cavalry!
would it be possible to attach all Consulate candidates manifesto`s to the thread in which we are required to vote? I believe this will help to make things easier for all involved.
would it be possible to attach all Consulate candidates manifesto`s to the thread in which we are required to vote? I believe this will help to make things easier for all involved.
I put the candidate manifestos in the Vestibule (first post) of the Senate Library during election times. However, in order to keep the thread somewhat readable, I delete them after the election has occurred. Since we are not in the middle of an election now, none are posted.
Ignoramus
06-06-2006, 04:02
May I ask to be go somewhere from Parthia? I am still the Republic's best diplomat, and unlike Oppius Vintruvius. I am not tactless in my speech. I am insulted that a tactless diplomat would be preferred to an eloquent diplomat who has secured foreign hostages.
Avicenna
06-06-2006, 07:48
For my amusement I've looked further into the Hooting trait of my 'son' Destroyer of Hope.
It is possible to lose this by chance, but it is also possible that it will get worse to Hiding_From_the_World or even Unhinged_Loon. There's no losing the trait when you get to Hiding_From_the_World. (This is part of the Insane trait enum, there are also TouchedByTheGods, Deranged, ReligiousMania and PathologicalLiar enums to name but a few).
It is also possible that our new diplomat will lose his Tactless triat, but if it gets worse to Discourteous there's no going back.
In my 2 RTR campaigns, both times my current character has gotten 'hooting' and once he got 'hiding from the world'. :juggle2:
That should explain why I was reluctant to take him :sad:
Back to hiding in an amphora vase for now.
:hide:
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-06-2006, 09:15
Hi Ingoramus,
Once you've spoken with the egyptians I'm sending you back to talk to the Thracians. Then you will be close to where the action is once again.
Ignoramus
06-06-2006, 09:30
My thanks, I am grateful for my return to civilization.
Hello everyone, im playing as the Julli faction on the PBEM starting in this forum, i would like to forward an invitation to any members whilling to share their wisdom and knowledge, to post on the Rome Republic alliance subforum.
Comments and constructive critiscism will be must aprecciated.
RickFGS
May I ask to be go somewhere from Parthia? I am still the Republic's best diplomat, and unlike Oppius Vintruvius. I am not tactless in my speech. I am insulted that a tactless diplomat would be preferred to an eloquent diplomat who has secured foreign hostages.
I am insulted! try dealing with the stubborn greeks and see where it gets you, lol
“Black List” – I think that some thing can be changed in the way its put forward so that you can give it some In Character validity:
Firstly, we could change the name from “Black List” to perhaps something like “Target Provinces/Dynasties”, and you can validate this by saying you have weighed up the economic advantages of the regions these Dynasties control and have found they have great potential if they were “absorbed into the Republic”.
You can further validate it by noting the civilisating (ok, not a word but you know what I mean) influence of the Republic on the peoples under the “barbaric yoke” of those factions etc etc. I’m sure you can spool out some rhetoric.
We have to come up with some arguments against the Republic being insular, which will be difficult as the Republic was traditionally insular.
We certainly need to streamline the acceptance or otherwise of alliance requests, validating it In Character is a bit harder but as long as the players are aware Out of Character of the real reason behind this list then I think we won’t have an issue.
I would also suggest that a full list of ALL the in-game “known” factions be made and the Senate can vote who we consider “worthy” of alliance.
Avicenna
06-06-2006, 16:35
So we should all become xenophobic expansion-driven greedy ambitious senators?
Great, that sounds reasonably Roman to me really.
Mount Suribachi
06-06-2006, 16:50
We have to come up with some arguments against the Republic being insular, which will be difficult as the Republic was traditionally insular.
Given the dumb RTW strategic AI, and the fact we've got about 1000 turns to go, I'm sure they'll attack us sooner or later anyway, therefore removing the need to blacklist them.
So I say make merry with the alliances. We don't need to bother engineering wars of conquest, the AI will give them to us.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-06-2006, 16:55
I agree. I prefer simplicity. How about : Diplomacy is free for the first consul unless expressively forbidden by the senate ? So no alliance with Gaul (yet) or Carthage (yet), but the rest is fair game ? Or no alliances with our enemies, only protectorate will be accepted and alliances with everyone else ?
I've just noticed Illyria was not on our "blacklist". I would have included it, had I remembered it. But maybe we just leave it off? It's down to two settlements, AFAIK, and won't last anyway.
We don't all have to actively work towards taking down the blacklist (although some of us may ~;) ) but I think it is a reasonable goal for the campaign that we become the dominant power, which we entail defeating those targeted factions at some stage. I am open to letting some become Protectorates instead of being wiped out. Seleucia, in particular, has vast lands and having to conquer them all means going further than Rome actually did.
Maybe I should have another look at EBs victory conditions for Rome. I seem to recall they were similarly epic and ambitious.
Mount Suribachi
06-06-2006, 18:58
think it is a reasonable goal for the campaign that we become the dominant power
Like I said, that will happen anyway. The AI will not be able resist attacking us, and so we will wipe out each faction as they do so. Kinda like how Rome acquired much of her Empire
Seleucia, in particular, has vast lands and having to conquer them all means going further than Rome actually did.
I have no problem whatsoever with building an "un-historical" Roman Empire. The Empire took the size and shape it did due to a series of specific events - wars, births, deaths, elections etc etc. We have already deviated from the timeline that produced those events. I would rather we played the game on its own terms - our actions such be dictated by the strategic & tactical situation combined with role-playing the Senators we produce, all under-pinned by traditional Roman values.
GeneralHankerchief
06-06-2006, 20:34
Like I said, that will happen anyway. The AI will not be able resist attacking us, and so we will wipe out each faction as they do so. Kinda like how Rome acquired much of her Empire
Agreed. Your argument here and in the PM makes sense.
BTW, I got your reply, but I decided to respond here because my inbox is going to overflow in the next couple of days.
Mount Suribachi
06-06-2006, 21:49
lol I can imagine. I never really had more than a handful of PMs in my inbox, so the 12 max limit never concerned me. Now they're flying thick and fast I'm grateful for my Senior Membership and 75 PM limit! :rtwyes:
Just a note: I'm having nasty internet connection problems. I'll try to post the motions poll now but I may get kicked out before I do.
Bio for Oppius Vitruvius (Wishazu) has been posted. I considered posting mid-term pictures of everyone, but we're already going to be racking up a lot of mugshots even only doing them at election times. I would prefer to keep all mugshots up for each person so that we can see how the avatars have developed over the years. When they start dying off I will probably move them to a Memorial thread or something like that, so that they don't clutter up the Library, but are still accessible if people want to look back on old characters. Thoughts?
GeneralHankerchief
06-07-2006, 01:21
That memorial idea sounds great, TinCow.
Having an exponential number of characters as the game goes on, not to mention having them updated every few years, just calls for some kind of regulation. The memorial is a perfect solution.
Cheers Tincow, It appears I have now moved on from tactless to discourteous, lovely :)
I'm not sure what the modifier for tactless is, but discourteous showed -2. Are you getting better or worse?
Avicenna
06-07-2006, 07:54
Discourteous is starting on the "no going back" line, which is never good.
TinCow: the memorial sounds great!
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-07-2006, 08:47
I'm in favour of updates of the mugshots every five years. It will be great to see the ageing/advancement process. The memorial is an excellent idea. Wishazu, there's no going back now :) By the way, I do not believe this trait is determined by success at negotiations, but is a random trait, like hooting. I might be wrong. If we ever need to provoke a nation to war with us, we have just the man fior the job :laugh4: :2thumbsup:
~;) Hi everyone ~:wave:
Apologies but I again missed voting on the recent motions. I'm not sure why but I thought I had until Friday after having a quick glance at work. Luckily I wanted to vote Yes to all the motions so it wouldn't have changed anything ~;). I am currently trying to complete year-end at work with my appraisal lined up for next week as well as interviewing candidates for 2 positions. I sorely need them filling as there is too much work for my team at the moment. I stayed at work until 7.30pm tonight and then continued at home until 11.15pm :help: .
I have also taken the drastic step of taking my RTW to work and locking it in a cupboard to stop me playing it until year-end is finished ~:eek:. I am getting serious withdrawal symptoms and need to pop onto the org now and again to get a small fix :nurse:.
:charge:
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-08-2006, 00:17
Good luck with the appraisal next week, YAKOBU.
I know how it feels, already overworked two nights this week till 22:30, deadlines coming up on the 20th :sweatdrop: (which means everything should be finished by monday which has about as much chance of happening as a snowstorm in hell) and I was smart enough to get myself elected first consul :2thumbsup: :laugh4:
Ignoramus has raised the issue of naming our legions again . I think it would add flavour to the First Consul reports etc if we do this.
Under Marcus Camillus's mod, legions are designated as new ancillaires and typically arise when a general rises to Legate. I think we are up to about Legio IV now, aren't we DDW?
Ignoramus and I were wondering about a two part designation. The first would be regional. The second part would be honorific. Ignoramous had the idea of naming them after notable First Consuls who raised them. TinCow advocated naming one after a battle victory. Both ideas should good. So you could have Legio I Italia Victrix or Legio I Italia Quintia.
I propose the First Consuls give the legions appropriate regional names on an ad hoc basis - they might want to consult with any historical or Latin buffs we have in order to do this.
So far, I am wondering about:
Legio I - Italia (for Latium)
Legio II - Sabina (for other Italy)
Legio III - Sicilia (was that the Latin for Sicily?)
Legio IV - Gallica
What we call the 5th may depend on where we expand into next.
More names and links to names are given in my earlier post on this subject:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1155145&postcount=261
For the honorifics do we also want to leave those to the First Consul or have them proposed in Senate motions? For personal reasons, Ignoramus requests that he be allowed to name the 10th legion.
We also wondered about naming forts, and in particular assigning them to legions. Thus the fort between Roma and Capua could be Fort Legio I Italia and be the home barracks of the legion. These forts could always be moved, if the Legion moves, but could still keep the name.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-08-2006, 13:31
We currently have three Roman Legion banners and one Consular Army banner. I don't have time to check out Marcellus's mod details right now, but I guess a fourth will arrive soon as it depends on available legates and number of troops if I recall correctly.
I personally like a combination of both ideas. So that would give you Legio I - Italia 'Victrix'.
Yes, Legion IV will arrive with the next Legate. IIRC, that will probably be TinCow's avatar. So if he does not currently have the "Legio I" ancillary and is going to keep his troops for a while, you could hold on and call Legio IV "Gallica Victrix".
What do people think - do we leave naming to the First Consuls? Or have Senate motions for honorifics?
I think it’s a great idea, don’t know how we’ll track it – my assumption is that it’s not something you can do in the game, or can you edit .txt files to produce this??
On the full matter I think that you should give a guideline out of character that the first consuls can name the Legions using both or either methods but that they stick! We can’t have consuls changing names to and fro.
My personal favourite is the uses of the honorific as DDW suggests.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-08-2006, 14:31
Not sure if this was clear, but TinCow is currently in possesion of the legion I standard and legion I troops. So I think Legio I - Italia 'Victrix' is what you mean ? Or do you mean he gets to keep the legion I standard and I wait untill the legion IV standard is released to Lucius ?
Anyway, it does not really matter to me who decides. We can let the first consul pick the name and let the senate vote if they can keep it for instance. By the way. I would like to reserve 'Rapax' for whichever legion I end up with :) If it bleeds, we can kill it :)
Avicenna
06-08-2006, 15:20
Hmm, let's see.
Regional is definitely a tick. Macedonica, Scythia, Italia, Gallica, Hispana, the list goes on.
For the victories, there was historically a Legio XII Victrix. Legio IX Triumphalis, another legion which is kind of named after victory, another one levied by Caesar. Even better, Legio XX Valeria Victrix: valourous AND victorious.
Essentially, whatever we want. Themed legions, perhaps? There was a legion named Legio VI Ferrata, led by Pompey, meaning 'ironclad'. I'm not sure if this has a particular reason for the name, but we could give it extra armour to make it do so, for example. There was a Legio VI Gemina, NOT the same as Pompey's other Legio VI. This one meant 'twin', because it was formed from the remnants of two legions. Another interesting name is Legio X Equestris. Meaning, knights. We could do this, and have extra cavalry in this legion, for example. Legio I Macriana Liberatrix from the empire, the liberator of Macer, a governor. Legio XXX Classica or Legio X Fretensis, the former as our overseas 'naval' legion, the latter as the legion of the sea-straits, to protect the republic from naval invasion.
Defender legions, Legio I Adiutrix, the helper legion, and Legio II Adiutrix Pia Fidelis, the helpful, faithful and loyal legion.
There were legions named after Emperors, eg. Legio XII Certa Constans. Legions named after deities, Legio X Veneria, after Venus, or Legio XV Apollinaris, a legion devoted to Apollo.
There are also completely irrelevant names, such as Legio XII Fulminata, wielders of the thunderbolt.
Also, do not forget that Legions do have name changes quite frequently.
I propose naming the victorious legion Legio (is it IV?) Verginia Fortis, the brave, standfast legion of Verginius.
Not sure if this was clear, but TinCow is currently in possesion of the legion I standard and legion I troops.
Um, OK, but I thought that was against the house rules, seeing as he is just a Tribune? Where we have legates, the legion ancillaries should be reserved for them. (Ditto the Roman field armies for Praetors and the Consular armies for the two Consuls). In exceptional circumstances, we might deviate from that, but for role-playing, we should try to stick to it.
But anyway, for the three legions we currently have, how about:
Legio I Italia Victrix: recruited in Latium; won a great victory under TinCow
Legio II Sicilia Quintia: took part in the conquest of Sicily under First Consul Quintus
Legio III Gallica Aemilia: took part in the conquest of Cisalpine Gaul under First Consul Aemilius
Naming the legions after any notable First Consuls that raised them was Ignoramus's idea. If they get into some great scrapes like Legio I we can always change the honorific for something more dramatic.
IIRC, we can around 1 legion ancillaries/3 settlements, so we should get plenty of opportunities to try out some of Tiberius's names.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-08-2006, 17:27
I agree with you, but seeing as I was sending practically all the troops I had with Augustus, and his 8 years of military service, combined with the real threat in our west, it seemed fair to give him a temporary command (I even borrowed him my priest of Jupiter, and of course the chirurgon (drat, how do you spell that ?)). It felt a bit silly hanging on to the standard with my miniscule force while the legion proper marched off with Augustus. Still, I agree that legion banners should be reserved for legates and so on. He will have to hand over the banner back to me within a year.
My suggestions :
Legio I Italia Victrix: recruited in Latium; won a great victory under TinCow
Legio II Sabina Quintia: took part in the conquest of Sicily under First Consul Quintus
Legio III Sicilia Aemilia: took part in the conquest of Cartheginian Islands (and will see more action soon, porbably in Narbonensis) under First Consul Aemilius
Legio IV Gallica [insert conquest/other here].
This seems more logical considering their history. The third legion was only formed [I]after Sicilia was conquered.
Furthermore I suggest the Legio II Sabina to recruit some Sabine mercenaries (they're very good troops by the way) and the Legio IV Gallica use Gaul mercenaries as AoR units untill we can train them ourselves.
Craterus
06-08-2006, 17:36
The issue has passed in the in-character thread, but I can't get my head around this. How is Massila easier defended than staying behind the Alps? I see two advantages to leaving it how it is:
1. Irrelevant and incorrect It's a neutral (rebel) "buffer zone" between ourselves and the Gauls.
2. There's a HUGE mountain range to separate us from the Gauls. I can't quite understand how a river (this was the argument, correct?) beats a mountain range in terms of natural defenses.
EDIT: A re-read of the Consul reports and the map shows that the Gauls have taken Massilia, but I still do not see how it is easier defended.
My suggestions :
Legio I Italia Victrix: recruited in Latium; won a great victory under TinCow
Legio II Sabina Quintia: took part in the conquest of Sicily under First Consul Quintus
Legio III Sicilia Aemilia: took part in the conquest of Cartheginian Islands (and will see more action soon, porbably in Narbonensis) under First Consul Aemilius
Legio IV Gallica [insert conquest/other here].
This seems more logical considering their history. The third legion was only formed [I]after Sicilia was conquered.
Furthermore I suggest the Legio II Sabina to recruit some Sabine mercenaries (they're very good troops by the way) and the Legio IV Gallica use Gaul mercenaries as AoR units untill we can train them ourselves.
I agree with all of that. :2thumbsup: Is everyone else happy with it?
Craterus, I share your puzzlement but that is exactly the kind of stuff we debate in the in-character thread. Whether we stop at Massilia is probably going to be a key issue for the next First Consul and we will probably have candidates with different views on the matter. The whole point of the PBM is to have the Senate collectively thrash out such issues of strategic direction.
Craterus
06-08-2006, 17:55
I don't understand why people are so sure that Massilia is an obvious move and will put us in a great strategic position (and apparently easier to defend than our current position).
Am I just being stupid, but I don't understand what's so great about Massilia?
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-08-2006, 18:03
Hiya Craterus,
Actually, the Gauls have not taken Massilia yet. They are too busy attacking us :)
By the way, how did you do the spoiler thing ? I wanted to use that in my reports, but I couldn't figure it out.
There no place easier to defend than a bridge, that's why we want Massilia. Numbers don't matter when defending a brdige, just morale, and the Roman morale is pretty damn good :)
Avicenna
06-08-2006, 18:04
Nononono!
The Legions would either be named after the place, or something else. They are NEVER NEVER NEVER both, such as Italia Victrix.
Craterus
06-08-2006, 18:18
Hiya Craterus,
Actually, the Gauls have not taken Massilia yet. They are too busy attacking us :)
By the way, how did you do the spoiler thing ? I wanted to use that in my reports, but I couldn't figure it out.
There no place easier to defend than a bridge, that's why we want Massilia. Numbers don't matter when defending a brdige, just morale, and the Roman morale is pretty damn good :)
I can accept that, for a human, bridge battles (especially with Romans) are very easy. Ah whatever, I'm not too bothered. I'm sure we can manage it.
I guess my problem is that the Alps are just too damn easy to cross.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-08-2006, 18:23
Tiberius seems to be correct, altough the Romans had no real standard for nameing legions. Example :
Legio XXX Ulpia Victrix (Victorious Ulpian legion) Ulpian = gens (family name of Emperor).
Legio XX Valeria Victrix (Valorous and Victorious)
Legio XV Apollinaris (devoted to the god Apollo)
Legio XI Claudia Pia Fidelis (faithful and loyal Claudian legion)
Legio II Traiana Fortis (Trajan strong legion)
Legio I Macriana liberatrix (liberator of Macer)
None of these conforms to the same naming scheme. Basically the Romans named legions as they damn well pleased at the time or renamed them in case of a special event. So I suggest we do as we please in naming legions, but do set a convention for naming standards, so the first consul has a template to do as he pleases in naming a new legion. The senate will always have to approve the name changes at the next senate meeting.
shifty157
06-08-2006, 18:23
Massilia is a veritable fortress. It is perhaps the most well defended settlement in the game. There is only a single entrance into Massilia by land and that is over a single bridge. Very conveniantly, this bridge also overlooks the entrance to the weatern mountain pass. This means that if any army wanted to go through the western mountain pass (the only mountain pass that the gauls have access to) they would first have to get by any army stationed on that bridge.
This means that even if they didnt want to, the gauls would have to fight a bridge battle on the offensive and ourselves on the defensive to get passed us. It means that northern italy will never have to worry about Gauls gettig passed the alps. Its basically a fool proof defense system that would be nearly impossible to break. Such an opportunity just cant be passed up as i doubt there is another settlement in the game that rivals Massilia in its defensive capabilities.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-08-2006, 22:50
FYI : Renamed all references to our legions to the beginning of my reign. Very very minor edition to the unfinished final report. Corrected some errors. By the way, to forestall any discussion on body counts, I use the casualties in the battles for score. Thus not the 'corrected' amounts after the chirurgeons perform their miracles. I can't be bothered to do the math :laugh4: I do math all day long already.
I'm glad we're naming legions like this. However, I have a question. How are we going to keep track of which legion is which? Given the importance of the 'legion' ancillary for trait advancement, it doesn't seem practical to use that. Legion generals simply won't be able to spend all their time with one force, they will move around and their banner ancillaries will have to go with them. In addition, eventually some legions will be led by captains. I guess we'll have to just leave it up to the First Consul to keep track and pass on the info at the end of the reign?
As for Massilia, I had actually thought of it a bit differently... in order to block the pass to Cisalpine Gaul, you have to station a force inside the pass itself. If you do not own Massilia, your line of sight is heavily limited by the mountains, which also make a tower useless. If you want to know when the enemy is coming, you must keep a spy in the area at all times. If you hold Massilia, you can hold either the bridge or use a fort (my preference since the AI can't handle bridge/ford battles) and in addition you get a decent line of sight, plus you can build a tower out there for permanent extra range. Leaving a fort there isn't a big deal if you plan on fighting a field battle anyway. You simply sally and play it like a normal fight.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-08-2006, 23:22
The legions are still numbered, I, II, etc, so this should not be a problem. If a commander wants to leave his legion, he should be expected to 'turn over command', i.e. passing on the 'legion ancillary' to the new commander. Marcellus thought it out pretty well. The number of avaliable legions increase with the amount of territory you hold, up to a maximum of 40. I suspect the number of available avatars will increase at almost the same rate as our expansion, and thus the amount of legion banners available. I think that will work out.
I personally dislike placing forts to block strategic passes and bridges and so on, as the AI can't handle it and will go around, instead of attacking the fort, even if it means crossing the half of europe. A bit cheesy. I do use forts, but I place them so that the AI can still move around them. A fort inside the pass, or just at the end, would block the AI's movement completely and it wouldn't see a 'path' to get to us and just give up and go home.
So just leave the blocking army in the field? I can live with that. I would actually like to see a new rule saying that we cannot permanently garrison a bridge. It's just too easy to win that way and our campaign shouldn't be totally free of possible crisis. Just look at how excited people got when they thought I would die! I almost felt bad winning. :laugh4:
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-08-2006, 23:47
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Sure scared me ! I was terrified you'd be in a totally hopeless position or unwinnable situation or something, but after playing it I thought, lets create a riot on the senate floor :2thumbsup:
I loved it ! Everyone got worked up !
If you just stand at a brdige end, the AI will still attack. I can live with the massacres, as we just don't have the infrastructure to support an army at Massilia if it keep losing 2 units a turn. And the AI gets 10K each turn for free, so it can keep up the pressure. I guess Lucco just bought an army after his first one was destroyed. In my campaign as Rome, Carthage and Greece just drop a general in Italy. That general just buys all the mercenaries in Italy and voila, instant army behind my lines. Nasty. They did it several times to me already. That's why I'm so serious about the garrisons and legions stationed everywhere. The AI is making me a bit paranoid.
I'm glad we're naming legions like this. However, I have a question. How are we going to keep track of which legion is which? Given the importance of the 'legion' ancillary for trait advancement, it doesn't seem practical to use that. Legion generals simply won't be able to spend all their time with one force, they will move around and their banner ancillaries will have to go with them. In addition, eventually some legions will be led by captains. I guess we'll have to just leave it up to the First Consul to keep track and pass on the info at the end of the reign?
The intention was to track it by ancillary. I'll keep a record of the Legion names in my post on our military forces in the Senate library.
I'm not sure the legion ancillaries do play a role in for trait advancement. I thought what is important is years of field experience, having the pre-requisite rank (former Tribune to be Legate etc) and being with Roman infantry. The ancillaries were intended to be transferable, the notes say that. Let's keep an eye out for what happens when one of our legates becomes - or should become - a praetor. They should get a new ancillary - Roman Field Army I - so I doubt they need to already have a legion ancillary. Eventually the legions may become secondary to the Field Armies, but at least the names will give the Legates something characterful as compensation.
Generally speaking, I'd like to match up the new Roman ancillaries and leadership traits as intended (legion ancillaries reserved for Legates etc). It operationalises the ideas we had for age-related role-playing at the beginning of the campaign. I don't think it should be so necessary to split up Legates and their legions. If you've toiled for 40 turns as a Tribune to get the requisite experience, it seems unfair to take your baby away from you until you make Praetor. It's not so important now when we don't have that many avatars and we are just starting out. But it could enhance the role-playing aspects. Looking forward to working my way up as a callow 16 year old certainly seems like a different experience from playing Quintus.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-09-2006, 09:24
Econ21, if you never gave a legion ancillary to shifty157 (Publius Laevinius) it seems that only the 10 years of military service and former tribune trait are required. Then the avatar will be able to get the legate trait. There was some confusion, as it said in the rules that 'tribune must have been in command of a roman legion'. Then again, it might imply that the tribune must have been in command of a army of legion size. I am also unsure if a roman legion banner ancillary must be available at that moment for assignment
To be honest, I can't recall what happened with shifty157. I know I gave his FLYdude's legion for a bit, but I would not have swopped the legion ancillary if shifty157 were not already a legate, as that would be against our house rules. I think one or other of them spawned the legion II ancillary, probably without having much of a stack at all. I was pleasantly surprised by that.
I do know Quintus went from former Consul to Consul at the end of the first turn and without any Roman leadership ancillary. So I infer you don't need to have a pre-existing Roman leadership ancillary to advance a Roman leadership trait. Indeed, such an ancillary might even prevent you advancement (e.g. because a Roman Field Army ancillary will have to occupy the Legion ancillary slot).
Marcus Camillus is back from his trip and said he will be passing through here over the weekend. He may clear up some of this, but right now things seem to be working very nicely for us. All our starting characters are either Legates or Consuls, which is as should be given their experience and starting traits.
EDIT: I've put the legion names in the Senate library thread:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1147642&postcount=3
Later I will add little illustrative screenshots of what the formations looked like at key moments (the Consular army in the battle for Sicily; Legion I when ambushed in Cisalpine Gaul etc).
Mount Suribachi
06-09-2006, 10:01
Regarding forts and their "cheesyness" or not, personally, I find the thought of combating and pwning a stack of Gauls every other turn rather tedious. If a fort to the north of Masslia stops the AI from launching pointless attack after pointless attack on us, I'm all for it.
Regarding forts and their "cheesyness" or not, personally, I find the thought of combating and pwning a stack of Gauls every other turn rather tedious. If a fort to the north of Masslia stops the AI from launching pointless attack after pointless attack on us, I'm all for it.
I agree - if the Senate does want to halt expansion into Gaul, then forts would seem to be the best way to do it. Rather like how TinCpw established a system of border forts in the recent WRE PBM. It will allow Gaul to flourish withoutbeing bled to death (if that's what people want) and free everyone from repetitive fights. One thing I dislike about BI is the way you beat hordes by holding bridges and wearing down their armies. Massilia may be ideal for that, but it's not a strategy I personally would much enjoy executing.
Avicenna
06-09-2006, 16:49
How were the border fort systems established? I've tried, but it's futile. The 'frozen river' sections are impossible to fortify, which is quite a pain, allowing the hordes in. The Sarmies, Goths and Franks have all entered via rivers, and the Huns destroyed trying to cross one.
Anyhow, Legion names! Apart from Traianus Fortis, the Legions weren't named after a person and anything else at all. It's one or the other. Also, if you want a regional name, the Legion is named after the place it was levied from, not, as you think, where they have had much action or even conquered territory.
So, bearing this in mind, I propose naming Legion I:
- Legio I Italica (or even Roma!)
- Renaming it after to victory to any number of different names:
+ Legio I Verginia Fortis
+ Legio I Victrix
+ Legio I Valeria Victrix
+ Legio I Triumphalis
+ Legio I Pia Fidelis (none routing against 1k+ Gauls is pretty faithful)
Legion II, I think, seeing how successful they are in night battles, should be named:
- Legio II Italica or Legio II Sabina originally
- Success after success calls for a renaming:
+ Legio II Fretensis (fighting around sea straits?)
+ Legio II Noctis (of the night)
+ Legio II Liberatrix (liberators)
+ Legio II Sicilia Liberatrix (liberators of Sicily, though I'm unsure if it's Sicilia or Sicilium or something else)
- Legio III Italica, Sabina, Roma?
- Renaming after a bit of island action sounds great:
+ Legio III Fratres (brothers, of Legio II during Sicily's liberation)
+ Legio III Classica (naval legion, scurrying around in boats)
+ Any of the Legio I names I guess, of brave, triumphant, victorious etc
- Legio IV Italica again, or some other name. Perhaps just vary it a little? Samnium, Etrusca, or any other Italian regions.
- Legio IV Barbarorum (due to the fact that they have barbarian scum in their ranks)
- Renamed? Nah, they don't seem to have achieved much that's major yet.
Anyway, that's all I can think of right now.
How were the border fort systems established? I've tried, but it's futile. The 'frozen river' sections are impossible to fortify, which is quite a pain, allowing the hordes in. The Sarmies, Goths and Franks have all entered via rivers, and the Huns destroyed trying to cross one.
I don't know what the "frozen river" you're talking about is, but this was the border fort system:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1136229&postcount=110
It was essentially a method to secure a very long border with minimal forces. It worked pretty well and was somewhat historical as well. Briefly, forts are built at all chokepoints into a region. The forts are manned by a single unit and are only meant to delay the enemy. A full sized legion is then stationed within quick march time (ideally 1 turn) of all the forts in an area and instantly moves to engage any force that besieges a border fort.
Avicenna
06-09-2006, 17:15
I've done all that, but I didn't know where to put the Italian one.
About the rivers: In the Sirmium-Carnuntum area's forts, I can't build a fort in one region. It says I can't construct a fort there. Ditto in France, there's another area where it seems that my generals are forbidden to construct forts, no idea why.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-09-2006, 19:28
I would just like to applaud Tiberius enthousiasm and feeling in the matter of the naming of legions. I am not necessarily agreeing with his points, mind you. What are other people thinking about is subject ?
Meanhwile, I will hold on to the names we've chosen at the moment, as renamingis a pain.
I would just like to applaud Tiberius enthousiasm and feeling in the matter of the naming of legions. I am not necessarily agreeing with his points, mind you. What are other people thinking about is subject ?
Meanhwile, I will hold on to the names we've chosen at the moment, as renamingis a pain.
Let's keep to what we've agree for now and put it to a vote in the next Senate session. If he likes, Tiberius - or anyone - can propose motions for alternative names. Naming can be a First Consul's perogative but needs ratification.
BTW, Tiberius, we understand regional names designated where a legion was levied from but right now AFAIK we can only recruit Romans in our three starting provinces. It would be a little dull to have 3 Legio Italias, but I still like regional names. I have little doubt we will start recruiting in the conquered territories eventually so I am happy to overlook the sequencing issue. Remember, because we can't retrain to make up losses, replacement units to merge with our old ones are going to have to come from some where.
Also, it may be incorrect for Romans to have two names - region and honorific - but I think many military units in other armies (British regiments for example) have both a formal region name and a parallel "nickname" of sorts. It just seems fun.
I say for now that which ever Consul raises the legion gets to name it however he wants if the Senate does not otherwise specify a name for it. In addition, the Senate can obviously rename a legion at will through a motion.
Avicenna
06-09-2006, 21:59
Different regions of Italia, and like I said, special deeds are commemorated, for example Legio III Classicanus due to their running about in ships a lot, being a naval legion if you like. Also, could we change retraining rules? eg, if the said settlement is not recruiting ANY units that turn, it can retrain the equivalent of ONE unit tops. eg, if you have two units on normal size with 20 units of hastasi each, both can be retrained.
The reason for prohibiting retraining is not so much constraints on how many men could be trained - which your proposal addresses - but because when you retrain units the replacements get the same experience as the survivors in the unit. That doesn't sound quite right. And it also tends to mean the humans severely outclass the AI over time, as our units live and can be retrained but their's are wiped out[1]. Of course, we will outclass them anyway but with RTRs auxilia system, we often have limited armies and so attrition is non-negligible.
Manually replenishing units is a bit of micromanagement but it can add fun - e.g. when your supply of replacements has to march through hostile territory.
[1]Plus someone said the AI never retrains (not sure that's true).
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-09-2006, 23:54
[1]Plus someone said the AI never retrains (not sure that's true).
It's true. I am against retraining.
Ignoramus
06-10-2006, 00:23
The legions weren't named unit the imperial period. Before then they were just Legion 1, 2, 3 etc. I think we ought to name them after characters and regions.
Holy crap, I just took at look at econ21's pending battle... he has to go on the offensive against a significant force of pretty decent Carthaginians.
3.5 Scutarii Falcata
5 Liby-Phoenician Spearmen
3 Caetrati Cavalry Auxilia
1.5 Scutarii Spearmen
1 Mercenary Hoplite
1 Italian Spearmen
plus a whole bunch of skirmisher units. That's a ton of spears and a lot of heavy infantry to take on with a single legion! If he doesn't withdraw, I fear I may be starting the Memorial sooner than I expected!
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-10-2006, 00:38
Yeah, we're not talking barbarians now. At least there aren't any elephants :)
Just to check it out, I went into the battle... the Punic force is on top of a VERY steep mountain. My choice would be to withdraw and let them hit us in a defensive battle.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-10-2006, 01:01
I jus tried it and won, but I lost ca. 350 men AND Quintus :oops:
The best thing in IMO is to meet them in the cusp between you and the hill. Try to draw half their men to your right and occupy them with the cavalry. Keep a small line. When they attacked the line (fighting uphill) I swept around them with all my swordsmen on my left and then they charged the enemy frontline from the side charging downhill. It went pretty well actually. Shame about Quintus :)
Very impressive post. Well done. But I dont think it should be here in the consular reports thread because . . . well . . . its not a consular report.
Just a word on the First Consul Reports thread - I envisage that as our "after-action report" thread, so I think it is ok for Lower House members to post battle reports in it, provided they are in character. They fit very well with the rest of the thread, which is reporting what is going on in the First Consul's reign. I did the report as a personal letter, but in future they could just be a report from the general to the First Consul, which is relayed to the Senate.
I thought about posting my battle report in the Senate library, but that is turning out to be very much focussed on our characters, which is fine, and so it would not fit so well there. A battle report is not a reference material per se.
Another alternative is to put them in the Senate deliberations thread like TinCow did, but to be honest, I think that thread is more ephemeral and the report would just get lost. I could move TinCow's battle report to the First Consul Reports thread but he wrote it so nicely in character for the Senate that I think it is fine to stay where it is.
[EDIT]: At the end of the battle, we were offered this character for adoption:
https://img145.imageshack.us/img145/5734/marcuscamillus2ak.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
Marcus Camillus has said he will pass by this weekend, so I am inclined to assign him this character if he wants him. Marcus created the 4 turns per year mod we are using, and the Roman leadership traits/ancillaries. He will join the Upper House, but I hope he will step down the Lower House in due course.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-10-2006, 13:21
I Marcus Camillus is not a true roman, then who is ? I second this proposal.
I agree with the battle reports in the first consul thread, but I would prefer it if people only did that if they had a 'climatic' battle, like Augustus's his ambush or this latest battle by Quintus. Otherwise the thread will become a 'battle' report thread, which is not what we want I think. Shifty157 is now attacking Massilia by the way (271 BC spring).
Avicenna
06-10-2006, 13:47
Wow, that's a real future benefit, for sure! This character has loads of potential. How on earth did you get a 3 management and influence person via adoption?!
By the way, Decius Laevinius and his ugly mug should be added to the library.
I agree with the battle reports in the first consul thread, but I would prefer it if people only did that if they had a 'climatic' battle, like Augustus's his ambush or this latest battle by Quintus. Otherwise the thread will become a 'battle' report thread, which is not what we want I think.
Good point, I agree. IIRC, I offered FLYdude the chance to post his battle reports in the First Consul reports thread but he didn't, I guess because they were not climatic enough.
shifty157
06-10-2006, 14:35
How many generals do we have? It just seems like we have quite a few considering that the game tries to keep a set ratio between generals and provinces.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-10-2006, 14:46
On second tought I suggest the creation of a
'the will of the senate - Dramatic battles' thread
and I suggest moving both econ21's battle report and augustus's ambush report to there, along with future dramatic battle reports. I further suggest that it is up to the first consul to decide if a battle is dramatic and he should notify the senate as soon as possible if one occurs. I will adjust/insert links in the report accordingly.
I also advise generals who fight a battle that they are (very) welcome to send links to images of their non-dramatic battles and descriptions of their battles. I will then insert these into the report as well. I'm losing the thread of the unfolding story of our campaign at the moment.
Your toughts ?
Silver Rusher
06-10-2006, 14:52
I got the 450th post and I'm not even a member.
Mount Suribachi
06-10-2006, 15:06
451st actually ~;)
Another alternative is to put them in the Senate deliberations thread like TinCow did, but to be honest, I think that thread is more ephemeral and the report would just get lost. I could move TinCow's battle report to the First Consul Reports thread but he wrote it so nicely in character for the Senate that I think it is fine to stay where it is.
Sorry about that. The battle had been announced in-character in the Senate and there was so much discussion about it I felt I had to respond to it in the Senate as well. I intentionally cropped those pictures way down and only did a few to keep it from cluttering the thread. Please do move it if you feel you want to make another storage area for them though.
By the way, Decius Laevinius and his ugly mug should be added to the library.
Both he and Luca Mamilius have been added. How does it feel being bald and 'flexible' at age 16? :laugh4: I imagine you can get some good RP out of those traits.
It seems that Verginus was the one who adopted Luca Mamilius so I am going to edit my ambush battle report to indicate that he saved my life in that battle. That would give a compelling reason for his adoption.
Marcus Camillus
06-10-2006, 15:51
[EDIT]: At the end of the battle, we were offered this character for adoption:
https://img145.imageshack.us/img145/5734/marcuscamillus2ak.jpg (https://imageshack.us)
Marcus Camillus has said he will pass by this weekend, so I am inclined to assign him this character if he wants him. Marcus created the 4 turns per year mod we are using, and the Roman leadership traits/ancillaries. He will join the Upper House, but I hope he will step down the Lower House in due course.
I would be honored to assume control of this character. I'll finish reading through all the posts I have missed while on vacation and get up to date on events.
Luca Mamilius is quite a good character, and only 25. A good age for a new character and fits quite well his 4 years of military experience as a Tribune.
On second tought I suggest the creation of a
'the will of the senate - Dramatic battles' thread
and I suggest moving both econ21's battle report and augustus's ambush report to there, along with future dramatic battle reports. I further suggest that it is up to the first consul to decide if a battle is dramatic and he should notify the senate as soon as possible if one occurs. I will adjust/insert links in the report accordingly.
I also advise generals who fight a battle that they are (very) welcome to send links to images of their non-dramatic battles and descriptions of their battles. I will then insert these into the report as well. I'm losing the thread of the unfolding story of our campaign at the moment.
Your toughts ?
I like the idea. Further, perhaps the first post in such a thread could be used as a record of all the battles. Just name of the commander, place of battle, opponent, number of troops deployed, kills, casualties, outcome. In some sort of a list. I don't think it would be very difficult for the Consul to keep such a list during his term, then pass it to whoever is responsible for updating the record at the end of the term. The subsequent posts would then contain the reports of dramatic battles.
I like the idea. Further, perhaps the first post in such a thread could be used as a record of all the battles. Just name of the commander, place of battle, opponent, number of troops deployed, kills, casualties, outcome.
Good ideas. I'll try to work something up for my reign. DDW - have you kept the above bare bone details of battles on your watch?
And a big hello to our newest general, Luca Mamilius aka Marcus Camillus. ~:wave: Keep in mind the stepping down into the Lower House idea. The main implication is that the First Consul may give you a command and ask you to fight a battle or too. You don't have to wait until you want to stand for First Consul before you step down - you just have to have the mod installed and be ready to play out a battle within 48 hours. If you stay in the Upper House, the First Consul is more likely to make you a second general in a stack or a governor, as if you lead troops and get into a battle, it will have to be autoresolved. :scared:
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-10-2006, 17:38
Good ideas. I'll try to work something up for my reign. DDW - have you kept the above bare bone details of battles on your watch?
Yes, I have. I will compile a list and send it to you/post it somewhere. Marcus, if you find the time to read the (endless) amount of posts in this thread, you will notice some questions about your most excellent mod. I would be obliged if you could answer them.
Avicenna
06-10-2006, 20:22
How does it feel being bald and 'flexible' at age 16? :laugh4: I imagine you can get some good RP out of those traits.
It seems that Verginus was the one who adopted Luca Mamilius so I am going to edit my ambush battle report to indicate that he saved my life in that battle. That would give a compelling reason for his adoption.
SHut it about the hair :furious3:
Don't forget, I'm still your brother in law and as such you should respect the.. running family trait of.. more visible scalps. Keep it up and you'll get disowned, you will!
I'm liking the 'calm' and 'gladiatorial fan' though. Does draughtsman mean some kind of architectual fan, who likes building buildings?
I'm liking the 'calm' and 'gladiatorial fan' though. Does draughtsman mean some kind of architectual fan, who likes building buildings?
Draughtsman - "This man's interest in architecture stands him in good stead when construction work is needed." 10% construction discount, -1 squalor
Flexible - "This man is regarded as morally flexible. Somehow, doing the 'right thing' does not come naturally to him." 20% decrease to bribe, -1 to law
Gladiatorial Fan - "This man's fondness for the Games makes him a popular figure among the plebs." -1 unrest
Calm - "This man seldom allows emotion to influence his decisions or his pursuit of duty." +1 influence, +1 management
Gourmet of Life - "This man appreciates the better things in life." -1 management, 10% decrease to bribe
All in all, that sounds like the perfect Tribune of the Plebs!
TinCow - any chance you could edit the size of a couple of your screenshots in the Senate deliberations thread? I can then copy them and stick them into the battle reports thread; at the moment, they are putting the layout of the thread out of whack. I don't know how you do your screenshots, but I use Irfranview to reduce them to 75% size as per Ludens's recommendation before saving them as jpg.
TinCow - any chance you could edit the size of a couple of your screenshots in the Senate deliberations thread? I can then copy them and stick them into the battle reports thread; at the moment, they are putting the layout of the thread out of whack. I don't know how you do your screenshots, but I use Irfranview to reduce them to 75% size as per Ludens's recommendation before saving them as jpg.
The ones from my ambush? I thought I cropped those enough; they look pretty small to me. How low a resolution do you people run? Let me know what the max resolution size you want is, since 75% of my game res may still be too high if those crops are too large.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-10-2006, 22:08
Wikipedia : Technical drawing, also known as drafting or draughting, is the technique of creating accurate representations of objects for architecture and engineering drawings. A skilled practitioner of the art is known as a draftsman or draftsperson (or draughtsman, draughtsperson in the UK).
That's funny, I thought it was something to do with drinking alcohol or brewing beer or something. But then, that's what I'm usually thinking about ~:cheers:
By the way, if you're morals are low, you should throw some parties with my extravagant son Manlius :laugh4:
The ones from my ambush? I thought I cropped those enough; they look pretty small to me. How low a resolution do you people run? Let me know what the max resolution size you want is, since 75% of my game res may still be too high if those crops are too large.
Sorry, I'm useless about technical stuff. DDW told me the page formatting depends partly on the size of your screen - I have a 17in screen and display it at 1024x768. I don't know if that's what you were asking.
But the two screenshots that push the page formatting out of line are the 2nd and 3rd. If you could make them the size of the 1st, there should be no problem. Cheers.
Sorry, I'm useless about technical stuff. DDW told me the page formatting depends partly on the size of your screen - I have a 17in screen and display it at 1024x768. I don't know if that's what you were asking.
But the two screenshots that push the page formatting out of line are the 2nd and 3rd. If you could make them the size of the 1st, there should be no problem. Cheers.
Sizing pics to fit 1024x768 is prefectly reasonable, since I believe that is the norm for most PCs these days. I personally run my desktop at 1600x1200 and RTW at 1024x768. I'd like to pump it up even higher, but I don't think I'll be getting a 21" until later this year.
Take a look now and let me know if they fit. If they do fit, how much extra room is there? The resizes are at 600 pixel width and it would be good to know the max I can go to without distorting the thread.
Thanks - the screenshots are fine now. :2thumbsup: The first and the last are about as big as they can go without changing the page layout. One other point - do you really like the green arrows? I tend to agree with Froggy's guide, "green arrows must die!". I've also experimented with the minimal UI. I can't tell if you use it, but comparing my two battle reports - before and after I discovered it, I think it gives better screenshots.
On another topic - I've expanded the discussion of RTR combat and stats etc in the Senate library. It may interest newcomers to the mod - old timers may want to post any additional insights or disagreements in this thread, then I will integrate them over time.
I disabled green arrows shortly after that battle. I made a second install for RTR and had forgotten to turn them off.
In re: RTR combat, I disagree somewhat with your statements about Triarii. I know it isn't apparent in the stats, but there's something else to Triarii that makes them superior on the defensive to Principes. I often keep units taking the brunt of the attack on hold position and then flank with other units. I have found that Triarii hold a line far better than Principes and take far fewer casualties. Perhaps it is the spears keeping the enemy at bay, I'm not sure. Regardless, Triarii are like a mobile wall. Even when only 3 deep they can hold a line for nearly an entire battle without losing too many men. Even Principes will suffer casualties in such a situation. In fact, I've only ever seen one unit beat Triarii when used this way, Baesternai (sp?) Infantry. Those things carved through my Principes at an unbelievable speed and Triarii lost via attrition. You don't want to know what happened to the Italian Infantry I sent after them.
OK - that's good to know. I'll cut the offending line. I was largely talking off the stats. I confess I have not encountered basternae in RTR.
I also find triari disappointing in vanilla RTW. I don't think I am patient enough to use spears properly in RTW.
By constrast, triari in EB are gods (so good, Davy called them the "I win button"). They are about the only thing that can stand up to gestatae (basternae on amphetamines).
shifty157
06-11-2006, 01:23
Can units swim across rivers in RTW v1.5 or is that only in BI?
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-11-2006, 01:31
There is one wading crossing at Massilia, directly in front of you as you enter the battle. I only have RTW 1.5, so it should work.
EDIT : Swimming only works in BI, along with shield wall and some other special abilities. Haven't looked into it further as I don't own BI. BUT, units can wade at a river crossing.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-11-2006, 02:37
Some notes :
For those not in the know :
Edit your preferences.txt in the main and the prefences directory of your RTW install.
Set DISABLE_ARROW_MARKERS:TRUE for no more green arrows (units will glow slighly instead).
Set SHOW_BANNERS:FALSE for no more banners on the battefield.
Set UNLIMITED_MEN_ON_BATTLEFIELD:TRUE if you have a computer personally send to you by your diety of choice. (That's a no for almost everyone)
Set MINIMAL_UI:TRUE for the minimal interface. (Not a big fan myself).
On combat :
Spearman good against cavalry
Swordsmen good against spearmen
Cavalry good against swordsmen
After our last update cavalry has become a lot better again, so you can drop the line 'and fragile' in your first comment IMO.
Charging shaken-wavering-routing units is generally the wisest course. Otherwise never charge a unit in the front, and always retreat after the charge peters out. Regroup some distance away and charge again. Do not use the wedge formation as it is buggy. Your cavalry will panick almost at the instant your charge hits the enemy. Depth in a cavalry formation is the key for a succesfull charge.
Skirmishers have incredible morale, like nazi SS stormtroopers or something. This is my only big beef with RTR:PE. I hope this gets fixed soon.
Slingers are NOT just as good IMO. They tend to fire in a straight line and so have to be exposed in the front or they will slaughter your own men with 'friendly fire'. They also do not have the option to fire 'flammable' missiles (which are a good morale killer BTW). Give me cretan archers any day :) They are also very ineffective against units that are armoured, i.e. almost any non-barbarian infantry unit. Use them against barbarians and skirmishers and, very carefully, against cavalry.
On fire at will, be extremely careful, or you will kill more of your own troops than the enemy. I usually take units off fire at will once the infantry is in a general melee. It also prevents skirmishers from throwing 80 spears at a single soldier. Almost all the german units are armed with throwing spears, making them quite dangerous.
All the spearmen units have the 'phalanx' ability, meaning that they are really strong defensively if put on guard. I always try to let the enemy charge my spear-armed units on guard. Flank them with swordsmen off guard and hit them in the back with cavalry. When attacking with spearmen units take them off guard mode for best effects.
Basternae are really nasty and have 2 HP AND an incredibly powerful attack. They can chop up anything. The only unit which beats them is Hypaspitai with an incredible 3 HP AND excellent defense/attack.
Hypaspitai spearmen are horrible, but Hypaspitai Swordsmen are truly awesome. Unfortunately the AI tends to build them in large quantities, while they historically were rare, being the elite of the elite. They come in half-normal size units.
Both these units are supreme when it comes to storming heavily defended walls. Nothing can stand against them.
One thing I don't understand about this mod, DDW, is what has happened to the phalanx formation? You say all spearmen have it - do you mean they have some bonuses (short_pike)? I don't see a phalanx button on my Italian spearmen. Is there a phalanx button even for pikemen? Hoplites etc never seem to use that slow old formation from vanilla RTW.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-11-2006, 03:47
It´s a bit wierd, I´ll grant you that. Basically the easiest way to workaround the new bugs in RTW 1.5 was to give all spearmen units the phalanx ability. There is no button, they have it automatically on guard mode. Historically hoplites didn´t walk, but charged running.
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=20852
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=20524
http://forums.rometotalrealism.org/index.php?showtopic=20098
To summarize, a spearmen unit with "short_pike" and "light_spear" can hold its line in organized pikeman formation with "guard mode" on.
Thanks, DDW, I will have to read those reports but it sounds interesting. In practice, does it mean that AI spears start deployed with "guard mode" on and so are phalanxes that can run? Yikes. I will have to strengthen my recommendation in the Senate library that they be flanked.
BTW, hasn't this campaign suddenly got really challenging? It is just like the other superb RTR Roman campaign I mentioned before where I ended up at war with almost everyone. With VH difficulty, factions that are weak in vanilla - Gauls and Carthage - can spam out full stacks of troops. With the RTR stats, these troops can still kill a lot of Romans. And with the campaign house rules, it's a struggle to make up our losses. Great fun! :2thumbsup:
EDIT: just seen Shifty157's battle report. Outstanding victory! Looking at the forces ranged against us, I think it was the best victory of the campaign so far. :bow: But I can't find the post-battle savegame - have you uploaded it yet? Also, can you reduce your screenshots by 75% so that the page formatting is maintained? Cheers.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-11-2006, 12:25
I am not quite sure about what the AI does. If its takes its spearmen (hoplites, not REAL phalanxes who have 'long spear' or 'sarissa') of guard mode they will lose the 'phalanx' ability. If the Thracians join in, we will be in serious trouble. Luckily, they have their hands full with Macedon at the moment. With the naval invasions and M&N mod Carthage is very dangerous. You see why I reinforced legions all over the place.
Avicenna
06-11-2006, 15:58
Gah, the Achaeans are the father of the phalanx! Macedonian imitator :furious3:
So, does this mean that we should focus on the Carthaginian threat for now? No use in delaying an invasion, it will just make them stronger. We must act quickly while in character and come to a decision about who to invade.
Zalmoxis
06-12-2006, 05:57
Hi, I'd like to join this campaign as a member of the Upper House, if that's possible.
Ignoramus
06-12-2006, 06:02
Certainly, I think there is a spare avatar, even if there isn't it doesn't matter. When econ21 come on, he'll sort you out.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-12-2006, 08:45
We have a whole bunch of avatars. Three spies, an assassin and several general characters. I'll update the first consul reports tonight and then you can make a better selection (at work).
SwordsMaster
06-12-2006, 09:24
Actually, seeing as I'm in the upper house anyway, could I get a diplomat when one goes spare?
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-12-2006, 09:25
We have no spare diplomats, but several spies and one assassin.
SwordsMaster
06-12-2006, 09:36
We have no spare diplomats, but several spies and one assassin.
It's cool. No rush.
It's cool. No rush.
If you're patient, you can have a full family member. There are currently 5 unassigned underage males, oldest age 9, and 6 unmarried underage females, oldest age 9 as well. After this round matures, I think we will be able to give everyone a family member for the rest of the game.
edit:
I stand corrected, it looks like there's are two unassigned ones available now. They must have been recently adopted.
The current Consulship is almost done. I'll wait to post their bios until it is officially finished, at which point I will be adding a full update for everyone, along with a new overview of the world situation.
DDW, can I ask why you seem to like putting a lot of cities on automanage? Have you found that to be more efficient for some reason?
SwordsMaster
06-12-2006, 12:03
If you're patient, you can have a full family member. There are currently 5 unassigned underage males, oldest age 9, and 6 unmarried underage females, oldest age 9 as well. After this round matures, I think we will be able to give everyone a family member for the rest of the game.
edit:
I stand corrected, it looks like there's an unassigned one available now by the name of Gaius Rutilius
I don't mind waiting, its just that I thought that as I won't be playing any games anyway, someone who will, might have a better use for a full family member.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-12-2006, 12:20
DDW, can I ask why you seem to like putting a lot of cities on automanage? Have you found that to be more efficient for some reason?
I can't turn it off. It seems to have been a selection by econ21 for this campaign. Also, I have been moving generals in and out of cities to govern for a bit, but only for a single turn, or they will stop gaining military service and lose their rank. This a a bit of a hassle, but now we are getting quite a lot of characters who can function as fulltime governors if necessary.
You still have a battle to fight by the way, crushing some rebel scum. I hope tomorrow or perhaps the day after that. On more turn and you are a legate and hopefully get the legion IV banner.
I can't turn it off. It seems to have been a selection by econ21 for this campaign.
I don't think so - none of my settlements were ever automanaged and I turned off Aleria last night (I just set the taxes to lower or unchecked something). Try fiddling around and if you still can't turn it off, let me know and I'll check further.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-12-2006, 12:47
I don't think so - none of my settlements were ever automanaged and I turned off Aleria last night (I just set the taxes to lower or unchecked something). Try fiddling around and if you still can't turn it off, let me know and I'll check further.
It's a bit wierd. Sometimes I can 'manage' an ungoverned game and sometimes I can't (for the same city). I believe that when I end my turn all my ungoverned cities are reset to automanaged anyway, so I click around untill all my ungoverned settlements are reset to automanaged.
By they way, when you're finished, econ21, could you notify me when you upload the savegame ? I don't have to make a move now, so shifty157 can continue play immediately. No pressure :)
It's a bit wierd. Sometimes I can 'manage' an ungoverned game and sometimes I can't (for the same city).
I believe it is probably just a preference that you can alter any time during the game - go to options or something and tick the box for "manage all settlements" or something.
Avicenna
06-12-2006, 14:12
You can change it at preferences, select TRUE for Micromanage_all_settlements.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-12-2006, 14:20
Thanks, I'll do that when I'm reelected in ten years :)
Just to clarify where we are with the game, DDW - I understand I have a battle to fight. Is Shifty157 then to attack someone or do you just expect he will be attacked if I press "end turn"?
But basically, are you saying that you have done everything you want to do with your last turn?
If that is the case, I suggest we open a Senate session now and begin the process of electing a new First Consul. I will do my battle tonight then shifty157 can take the savegame. But I think people know enough about the situation to start debating about the next 5 years.
We can debate for two days (Tu/Wed); have election closing 6pm on Thursday; so the new First Consul will have late Th and the weekend to play.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-12-2006, 15:13
My term won't be officially over until the start of summer 270 BC. I am not finished with this turn spring 270 yet. After Shifty157 has done his battle I will do some management, start the next turn and upload my final save. I expect we will be finished by wednesday. I have no issues with starting the election process now, just so it is understood that the my term has not finished yet.
EDIT : After econ21 has done his battle I expect shifty157 to lauch an attack. Then I tidy up and end the turn.
OK, I've jumped the gun, sorry, but hopefully starting the Senate session off now will not prejudice things. Lower House members can download the latest save and see roughly where we are. Upper House members can query anything not obvious from the reports so far. Let's try to pick up some momentum.
We have two decent recently adopted generals that would make good avatars for any Upper House member thinking of stepping down into the Lower House (screenies in the First Consul reports). Does anyone want them? I'll leave two days for people to express interest here and then allocate them according to the usual criterion (Lower House 1st, then by seniority). Remember - Lower House members have to have installed the mod and be ready to fight the odd battle at 48 hours notice (although no doubt you could arrange with the First Consul that he will not put you in harm's way if you are out of town or something).
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-12-2006, 20:27
Calling Shifty157 :)
Your private message box is full, so I send you an email instead.
Cheerio,
Lodewijk (DDW)
Regarding the no extermination rule. We have previously agreed that all game rules can be modified by a Senate vote. Since extermination is a specific part of my campaign platform, I have proposed a motion to alter the rule temporarily. I have tried to restrict it as much as possible so as to allow my proposed actions without removing the restriction in general. In addition, I know that knocking down their economic and troop production buildings will pretty much cripple them for the rest of the game. As such, I didn't request the ability to destroy anything other than their religious buildings, which have no significant impact on their military or economy anyway.
Just clarifying for anyone who thinks I'm trying to violate game rules.
Death the destroyer of worlds
06-12-2006, 23:38
In addition, I know that knocking down their economic and troop production buildings will pretty much cripple them for the rest of the game.
Errr...wasn't that the whole idea ? :laugh4:
Regarding the no extermination rule. We have previously agreed that all game rules can be modified by a Senate vote.
Yes, by a 2/3 majority.
Personally, I don't like extermination in RTW as it can be too easy a way to get you out of a cash flow crisis and did not happen often (Carthage and Corinth are the two cases I've heard cited for the Romans).
But let's see what happens. If the motion fails, enslavement could be used instead when raiding settlements you don't intend to hold.
Yes, by a 2/3 majority.
Personally, I don't like extermination in RTW as it can be too easy a way to get you out of a cash flow crisis and did not happen often (Carthage and Corinth are the two cases I've heard cited for the Romans).
But let's see what happens. If the motion fails, enslavement could be used instead when raiding settlements you don't intend to hold.
True, but Rome would very happily have looted everything that wasn't nailed down. In RTR that would include knocking down every single destructable building to get anything valuable out of it. This would certainly provide sufficient income without extermination, but would cripple the faction far more than a little population control.
I'm not sure about the population control being little. Remember we are playing a mod that caps the populations of most settlements. And small settlements can take ages to grow.
Another factor is that we are playing VH which means the AI can pump out lots of troops, potentially depleting its settlement. I've never played this mod outside of this PBM, but I know that when I played EB, the Gauls - and other AI factions - often ended up with tiny settlements. This was because the AI just conscripted everyone (they got very large top ups of gold). I did not do any raiding or population controls - it was just like a zombie movie; they consumed themselves.
But let's see what the Senate decides.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.