Printable View
Rebellions have always been a problem through history but I think never more so than the era that EB represents. I know they're not quite so well represented in Medieval 2, if a king has low authority then captain-led armies would go grey but that's all. Is EB2 doing anything with the capabilities of the rebellion system coupled with scripting? From what I read on DotS forum they're doing some wonderful things with it.
i quite agree, a good succession script is one of the most direly lacking features in most (all?) med2 modsQuote:
Originally Posted by I_damian
after all, if there has been one god damn reason for empires breaking up throughout history it has been fighting among heirs!
i'm really looking forward to broken crescent 3 in that regard, they have released a very promising preview :book2:
Yeah... in the era of EB there weren't so many rebellions for the Roman Republic, not compared to other states ruled by a monarchy, which is pretty much every other state on the map except Carthage. Surely it has to be included in some way.Quote:
Originally Posted by fightermedic
Are you kidding? Rome had its fair share of quite bloody rebellions. Just think about the Social Wars, the endless Samnite insurrections, not to mention the rebellion of Spartacus.
Carthage had the Mercenary Wars which Polybius describes as one of the most brutal wars ever in history. No one's excluded on the rebellion train.
Exactly - that's the point I was making. There weren't as many in Rome compared to other states, but even Rome had tons of them, so they have to be included in some way or another.
Many of Rome's wars started out as rebellions, when the freshly subjugated checked it was really them to pay Roma's bills.
Imagine: You build an empire. You role-play it. You advance slowly. It consumes your time. You empire grows and grows... and then: three uncharismatic heirs, and your realm breaks apart. And you would actually loose the game for this... This would be fantastic, I mean, a fantastic nightmare.
Just as long as there isn't too much control... it would be nice if the Faction Leader had more meaning than being the best general.
Having a choice to keep the FL home in the capitol and thus raising tax income and speeding building programs in the core provinces vs losing loyalty of lower generals and decreasing speed of conversion of newly captured provinces- affect based on distance with Capitol magnifying the effect but only if there is both a money and time cost to changing Capitol.
If having the FL on campaign or touring the provinces generals are more likely to be loyal but at the cost of lower taxes and longer building programs. Something like a 5% change every 2 turns away or in capitol up 25% difference. Heirs born on campaign/tour more likely to inherit battle traits while heirs born in the capitol are more likely to become administrators though can inherit positive or negative traits either way.
Then can take a spoiled but somewhat politically savvy palace Heir and send him to the front lines- if he can overcome low morale of troops and win some battles he might have a chance to become a decent FL. If a provincial Heir is sent to the Capitol to study for example he is more likely to embarrass the FL, acquire vice traits, and die from political infighting/riots.
Most ideas like this could actually be partially implemented with scripting but would slow turns to a crawl and be quite complicated.
Rome, especially in the 1 century bc, was ripe with rebellions. When soldiers became more indebted to generals then Senate, there was constant rebellion. the thing most people fail to realize about the Roman Empire is that it was not really centralized. Governors had almost complete autonomy.
For the mod, perhaps FM whose selfishness leads to the treacherous trait would cause a particular province to go grey. As not all Selfish FM rise to treacherous levels, it might necessarily be constant rebellions, but it will be enough to spark occasional ones. As it stands now, treacherous individuals are only at an increased chance of getting bribed. I have only had one general successfully bribed. Perhaps another trait line like ambition. An ambitious individual who is selfish might have a percentage to go grey.
Alternatively, or additionally, if there was a way to spike unrest after certain events, it would add to realism. A bad loss in war could increase unrest dramatically.
I'm pretty sure everybody in this forum knows the ins and outs of Roman history - I was simply making an example that Rome didn't have as many as monarchies, but even Rome had lots of them - so they have to be included in one way or another.
I'd be highly surprised if the EB team can pull it off with the M2TW:K engine.
There are 2 or 3 various scripts already released that incorporate some version of rebellions. Which way EB2 goes or if they invent a new one there are definitely possibilities to have something interesting. The main problem as I see it is making a script that makes sense for all the factions though maybe with some good traits (hidden loyalty/traitor traits being the best) that might be relatively simple.
We do plan to have them in the future, although they will be for a later release.