Leader idea

[soibean]

I saw this posted in the Res Getai forum by naja so all credit is due to him if possible but...
Is it possible to have your faction leader affect all provinces? Say he's an Augustus, all provinces benefited under his rule, but if he's a Caligula and he hurt the treasury by his mindless spending then every place will take an income plunge and experience more corruption. As Naja said, this will make the succession game more realistic.
Dont know if its possible though

[GodEmperorLeto]

I don't know if it's impossible, but I honestly think the design team will see it as beyond the scope of the game. The bulk of the game takes place during the Republican period, timelines that are illuminated by historians like H.H. Scullard, Theodor Mommsen, and Ronald Syme. Even though you won't be playing it out, imagine a backdrop of political machinations, maneuvering, power brokering, treachery, assassinations, and all other sorts of complicated little twists and turns that are driving Roman expansion. By the time guys like Augustus start carrying out empire-wide programs, the game is two or three decades away from ending.

It'd be interesting if you could have leaders in the Augustan style. I'm just not certain how you could pull it off without effectively scripting the century's worth of civil wars from Sulla all the way down to Actium. The principate was, according to guys like Scullard, Syme, and Mommsen, a result of the venality and decay of Roman politics that generated the rampant civil strife.

[MSB]

I saw this posted in the Res Getai forum by naja so all credit is due to him if possible but...
Is it possible to have your faction leader affect all provinces? Say he's an Augustus, all provinces benefited under his rule, but if he's a Caligula and he hurt the treasury by his mindless spending then every place will take an income plunge and experience more corruption. As Naja said, this will make the succession game more realistic.
Dont know if its possible though
Now thats a good idea!

[eadingas]

Well, IMO this is something that can be only rendered by your gamestyle. Remember that in RTW, effectively YOU are the leader of your people. If you decide to overexpand or overspend, the burden of these decisions is on you, not the pawn of the faction leader you direct. If you get your faction leader to be Caligula, but still play your game rationally, then would your faction leader affect the entire nation as he would historically? Or if you got Augustus, and still decided to send all your troops for a slaughter and spend all your money on worthless toys, would traits of your leader affect this on a nation-wide scale? You can roleplay this based on the traits your faction leader receives, but ultimately, the decision of whether he's a good or bad leader is only yours...

[soibean]

true, but even still
moving the focus away from rome and the republic
If you are Armenia and you have an excellent king... he has good traits and isn't corrupt etc etc. The kingdom benefits. But then his son comes into power, he's a pervert, corrupt, likes to gamble, extravogent etc. Then it hurts the other provinces because he is constantlyl taking from their income and using it for his own selfish desires.
I wasnt looking at the faction leader as a tool for your use for expansions, but rather as a person whose traits play a bigger role in the game.
I used augustus and caligula as examples to show the two extremes, generally your leader should fall into the middle but even so...