The Will of the Senate - out of character thread III

I've posted a list of our named military formations and their current commanders here:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...42&postcount=3

We have two part naming convention for legions - first part geographic; second is an honorific. On the geography, we have tended to associate a legion with a region that was conquered just prior to the formation of the legion. I've taken the liberty of associating Legio V with Illyria and Legio VI with Greece. If anyone violently objects we can change it. Next one could be Macedon or even Thrace.

All the legions have honorifics except Legio IV Gallica - have I missed something? If not, we should keep an eye out for any notable event. Mount Suribachi probably should name it before the year is out, as the covnention has been for legions to be named by the reigning Consul and it's especially appropriate as he's commanding it right now.

I've also updated the FAQ rules to take account of constitutional ammendments and current practices etc. It does not all fully square with what we do but is close enough.

I was interested to see that the original rules did envisage governors being able to specify build queues and tax rates. For the next Consul, I would like us to try to implement this. I will keep the military formation commanders up to date and will also make a list of governors. When they come to office, the next Consul should post a list of assignments in their opening First Consul report (or in the Senate deliberations) and then update it as they go through their term by posting in the Senate deliberations thread.

A governor could be defined either de jure (the Consuls appoint him) or de facto (he's been there more than 2 seasons and so loses his military rank). I think it would be good to think a bit more about governors - perhaps especially from an economic point of view (e.g. would putting a high management skill governor in Roma bring in a lot of cash?). I get the feeling the game is reducing to Lower House players, so it might be good to try to get the Upper House players involved again.

Characters over 60 years of age should probably be withdrawn from the field and made into governors, although that can be a convention rather than a strict rule (much like the age related restrictions on the young).

I think governors shouls lobby for assignments (if they want to) and try to glorify their city by trying to get motions passed calling for building temples etc in city X. I do not think each governor should be able to specify the construction queue and tax rate of his city as :
A) There is only one good tax rate and that is high. Anything else will only give the governor bad traits.
B) It would drive the first consul completely nuts :laugh4: .

Lastly, putting a high management skill governor in Roma bring would not bring in a lot of cash, unless they had great ancilliaries that give a bonus to tax or trade, as they city has been improved enough that it can have taxes on high without ill effects. Syracuse and the Greek cities however could really benefit from some excellent governors.

I agree on the tax rates; I am not convinced on the build queues. We'll only have half a dozen active governors at best (the Lower House generals should really be out in the field raising up their experience). Maybe just Swordsmaster and Tiberius? With 10 turn reigns between Senate sessions, I don't see that it would be a big problem to let the governors set the build order (with the Consul deciding whether to authorise any building). It should be much less trouble than passing the battles around. But let's keep it open for discussion - it may well depend on whether the elected Consul will play ball or not.

I like the updated military formations econ, honored to be leading the legendary First Legion :2thumbsup: .

Y'know, I think it probably might be possible to set building ques by senators, since they usually take a bunch of turns anyway, you'll just have to set 1-3 buildings per 10 turn reign. Seems reasonable. Then again, it depends on whether or not it'll really drain the First Consul at the time, since the game has already expanded a lot and there's a lot to micromanage. In any case, I'm sure something good will be agreed upon. After all, this is the best PBEM with the best players ever!

I am not completely opposed to the idea, but it is a question of practicality. If several senators want a new Consular Palace (12.000 dinarii) I can only please one, and if the situation is pressing (as it usually is), I can't even afford one of these buildings. All I am saying is not to enforce the consul to act on the requests. Of course, bribing the first consul might help you get ahead in the queue :laugh4:

In re: naming of Legio IV Gallica, I would like to point out that the first significant action this legion saw was with Quintus in Apollonia. That was an incredibly trying time and it would be fitting that they would gain their title from it. I would suggest something along the lines of "eterna" (eternal), "fortis" (the strong) or "firma" (the solid... more accurately translates to steadfast when referring to a person or people... I think). I think the last one is the best since they fought to the last man in the final battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Death the destroyer of worlds

All I am saying is not to enforce the consul to act on the requests.

---

Absolutely - the proposal is that the governor sets the build queue order, but the First Consul must authorise any actual builds. The constraint is that if the First Consul authorises any buildings, what is built must be the first item in the governor's build queue. (Of course, the First Consul can always sack the governor...)

OK, on a related topic, I've revised the FAQ table of players. Partly I wanted to integrate it with the verbal family tree (which I've now scrapped - I don't want to have to update multiple tables). Plus I've added in the information on the named military formation commanders, plus some provisional stuff on governors gleaned from the latest savegame. It may be a little cryptic, but hopefully it will be a good way of presenting the key information people need to know. If there are any errors, let me know. Later tonight I may add command & management stats for completeness.

I would like us to try to groom generals for either military command (if they are lower house) or for governing (if they are upper house). The Lower House senators by and large are in good shape. But one or two Upper House ones seemed to have been ruined by bad vices (cough, Manius, but even the initially awesome Luca Mamilus is going downhill). I am not sure what we can do to help Upper House generals get better virtues - setting high taxes is one thing; anything else? Maybe they should fight the odd battle against rebels or something. I am really not wild about Roma being governed by a student with zero management skill (and influence). We should have some better governors (I'm going to start a campaign to rehabilitate Publius).

I'm all for your governor idea if you put it like that.

The best way to develop a good governor is to let him build build build in his settlement with taxes set on high.
Some governors were ruined as they were forced tot stay in towns to supress unrest for extended periods with taxes set to low (the party ~:joker: traits, of which Manius is such a great example) or normal (which is even worse in some respect as you go on the useless administrator path) and in which little was being built (i.e. useless builder path). So the best way to help prevent this is too work on our internal development, i.e. build santitation, trade and temples, and recruit garrisons for problematic cities. Of course, you can still be the victim of chance. The occasional battle against rebels is always good (unless you lose :laugh4: )

I myself have exchanged ancilliaries and I encourage the upper house senators to do the same and so to become better administrators or builders.

Actually, keeping Publius in Jenuensis is a good idea. It is a vital town to develop, due to the road over the Alps which needs to be paved eventually, and growth is slow. If he is there, the growth will be higher and the city will get a bigger take on any slaves taken. I would be a good idea to build a port to increase trade profits.

Just a question, when I finally do get to lead a legion against Carthage...I'm kind of picky about my army composition. Do I get to have a say in the units, or do I just have to suck it up and make due? :laugh4:

Either way is fine, wouldn't bother me in the least, having to make due with what I get could make it more interesting.

But just because I'm curious about everybody else's style now too, my ideal Praetorian army would be...

General, Velite, Hastati, Principe, Triarii, 2 Italian Skirmisher, 2 Italian Spearmen, 1 Italian Cavalry

I tend to set up formations like...
--------V
---ISP--H--ISP
-ISK----P----ISK
----G--T--IC
(errr...close to that, lol, try to make a picture later, sleep now)
Velites screen, italian spears protect the flanks, hastati and principes hold the center, italian skirmishers behind the spears to flank after the spears are engaged, triarii free to save faltering lines, general and italian cavalry free to pursue routers/flank if skirmishers fail/run down long range units/counter enemy cavalry/frontal charge in a last ditch effort to save a failing line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucjan

Just a question, when I finally do get to lead a legion against Carthage...I'm kind of picky about my army composition. Do I get to have a say in the units, or do I just have to suck it up and make due?
...

my ideal Praetorian army would be...

General, Velite, Hastati, Principe, Triarii, 2 Italian Skirmisher, 2 Italian Spearmen, 1 Italian Cavalry

---

You probably have to make do, but your ideal is close to what I've set as the standard for a historical Praetorian army so hopefully the Consuls will supply you with something close to what you want. The main difference, I guess, is that my guideline replaced one Spearman with an Italian swordsman and one Skirmisher with a funditore. However, those are nuances and your ideal strikes me as just as historical as the one I recommended. (The guideline was really trying to avoid us having excessive missiles & cavalry - which would be rather un-Roman - and also to prevent us bingeing on principes & triarii which are very Roman but rather uber in RTR). Also, I am not sure what state Sicily is in, but at some stage, we should be able to recruit peltasts and Liby-Phoenician spearmen as auxiliaries or mercenaires, who might be a colourful substitute for Italians.

We want to be careful deploying Praetorian armies against Carthage, though. They have multiple full stacks running around Africa and with 120 man spear units, a full stack of Carthies is not to be sneezed at[1]. If we are to attack Africa, I think we should send one or more Consular armies, plus some supporting Praetorian ones (I'm certainly game) but we should use the latter rather carefully. :sweatdrop:

[1]They also seem to have a lot of Berber javelinmen, so I'd strongly recommend including a slinger unit in your ideal army as a counter.

I think its in the FAQ, there is a section on how to compose an ideal Roman Legion and its set-up.

Simon, as for the governors thing - well, I'm glad I won't be Consul next! There is already a hell of a lot of micro-management for the consul, send him here, him there, build that there, send those troops there and those troops there but don't forget to pick-up those troops there but drop them off there whilst swapping that ancillary......

Regarding Sicily, we can already recruit those Libyan spearmen in the westernmost city (forget the name).

Lilybaeum, I think, is the city. I could be wrong though.

I set up my ideal army based on the game's guidelines. :2thumbsup:

If you wanted to ignore the games guidelines my ideal army would be much much different. lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mount Suribachi

Simon, as for the governors thing - well, I'm glad I won't be Consul next! There is already a hell of a lot of micro-management for the consul...

---

That's true, but it's not clear to me that giving the governors a voice will significantly increase the burden. Looking at the table in the FAQ, I think we really only have three "bona fide" governors right now - Swordsmaster in Patavium; Ignoramus in Athens; and Tiberius in Corinth. The other generals in cities are mainly Lower House generals who are (hopefully :sweatdrop:) just passing through or students etc.

I think it would be worth the hassle: the main benefit would be involving the Upper House - Swordsmaster is a stalwart who we've just killed, so I think he deserves some TLC :laugh4: ; Ignoramus already complained that the PBM was getting boring because Upper House Senators had nothing to do; and Tiberius used to be the most active Upper House Senator but has not posted recently (he could be on holiday, I guess).

There's also the issue of pensioning off the veteran Lower House members once they get to 60+. They can always switch horses to a younger member, but they will probably be too attached to their characters to want to do this (I was to Quintus). Giving them a city (or even a "country", e.g. Greece/Macedon) that they can do something with might be a way of keeping them interested.

Above all that, I think it would be good for the role-playing etc if we formalise appointments a little - so no longer commanding (or being appointed to command) Legio I would be a significant event (it should be posted in the Senate or the First Consul report as soon as it happens); ditto governorships. I think Consuls already treat Lower House generals as more than pawns - they think of the players behind them - I think beefing up governorships might do something similar for the Upper House. It would restrict the freedom of the Consuls a little, but might make the interactions among players more fun. For example:
"You sacked me?!" :furious3:
or even (like Yosser in Boys from the Blackstuff):
"Gizzus a job... go on, I know you've got one..." :wall:
etc.

While I am at it, we have a fair number of inactive players and unassigned avatars. If at the next Senate session, we agree to beef up the governor role, I might PM the inactive players and tell them there are avatars available if they want to get involved again. When they joined, they typically weren't avatars available, which probably made it a lot less involving.

Army composition will get a lot simpler after Marius. This is probably the only aspect of the game that will actually get easier to manage as time goes on.

BTW, TinCow, I love "Legio IV Gallica Firma", let's go with that unless anyone screams at us. :2thumbsup:

Legio IV has spent a lot of time staring at the Aegean waiting for the Ptolomites to attack, so I was thinking of something like vigilant or steadfast, so firma will do.

And, FWIW I've just spent the last hour (whilst little Suribachi has his afternoon nap) compiling notes on all the things that need to be done in my remaining 4 seasons, nearly a full page of A4. Thats an hour that could have been spent playing the game. Of course, I appreciate that this is all part of playing the game, but the governorships thing would be another added layer of complexity to this. For me it wouldn't be fun, but as I won't be running for Consul again anytime soon, I can be safely ignored ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by econ21

That's true, but it's not clear to me that giving the governors a voice will significantly increase the burden. Looking at the table in the FAQ, I think we really only have three "bona fide" governors right now - Swordsmaster in Patavium; Ignoramus in Athens; and Tiberius in Corinth. The other generals in cities are mainly Lower House generals who are (hopefully :sweatdrop:) just passing through or students etc.

I think it would be worth the hassle: the main benefit would be involving the Upper House - Swordsmaster is a stalwart who we've just killed, so I think he deserves some TLC :laugh4: ; Ignoramus already complained that the PBM was getting boring because Upper House Senators had nothing to do; and Tiberius used to be the most active Upper House Senator but has not posted recently (he could be on holiday, I guess).

There's also the issue of pensioning off the veteran Lower House members once they get to 60+. They can always switch horses to a younger member, but they will probably be too attached to their characters to want to do this (I was to Quintus). Giving them a city (or even a "country", e.g. Greece/Macedon) that they can do something with might be a way of keeping them interested.

Above all that, I think it would be good for the role-playing etc if we formalise appointments a little - so no longer commanding (or being appointed to command) Legio I would be a significant event (it should be posted in the Senate or the First Consul report as soon as it happens); ditto governorships. I think Consuls already treat Lower House generals as more than pawns - they think of the players behind them - I think beefing up governorships might do something similar for the Upper House. It would restrict the freedom of the Consuls a little, but might make the interactions among players more fun. For example:
"You sacked me?!" :furious3:
or even (like Yosser in Boys from the Blackstuff):
"Gizzus a job... go on, I know you've got one..." :wall:
etc.

While I am at it, we have a fair number of inactive players and unassigned avatars. If at the next Senate session, we agree to beef up the governor role, I might PM the inactive players and tell them there are avatars available if they want to get involved again. When they joined, they typically weren't avatars available, which probably made it a lot less involving.

---

*frustrated whining*

This sounds alot like my earlier proposal of putting together provincial districts for upper house senators.

With all this talk of amendments, I was wondering what about setting up family of responsibilities just like the vanilla versions three houses? Then maybe there will be more lobbying for consulship, triumvirate type of govt?

That might not work well with the lopsidedness of the mature family members from each family, might make voting for consulship very one sided... Just throwing out ideas... :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucjan

This sounds alot like my earlier proposal of putting together provincial districts for upper house senators.

---

Indeed. It's the fourth time we're discussing it (your proposal was the second; the first was right at the start of the PBM - it's actually in the rules in the FAQ). ~:grouphug:

Well guys, back from my massive LRP event and stiff as a board :embarassed: still had fun.

Anyway, suffering from a lack of net connection at home which the provider has tried to fix and failed (have failed for over a week now!) so they have to contact the phone line provider etc etc.

ALSO, I've removed my new 6200 Nvidia graphic card from the PC and re-installed the old 4200Ti. Haven't tested it yet but I will run with this IF it is stable in Rome after some tests.

I can download from work (*cough* managed to bypass security settings now *cough*) so I hope to be an active lower house member by the end of next week if I can.

Will post a definate "Lets Go" message when I've tested my PC and run some test battles of RTR:PE from the downloads I have.

I am certain I have some questions, mainly relating to exactly how I play individual battles (i.e. the proceedure when I'm on the Campaign map so I enter the battle "correctly" and save "correctly" directly afterwards) but I'll ask them when I know I can actually fight the battles.

....soon.

Braden didn't you used to have a higher postcount? Maybe I'm just seeing things. But anyway, good luck with getting your computer to work right.

I think my post count is correct.

Will set aside time tonight to start getting a working PC.

Ok, so now I've lost 2 Legions and 2 consuls.......

As the US Air Force likes to say, once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, three times is a trend.....

Wow, seems like every avatar Mount Suribachi took died heroically in this term. That's some luck, guess Lucius Aemilius will have to take back consul again.

Darn it Mount, is min-Suribachi distracting you? :inquisitive: , I know my mini-Braden does.

Anyway, now I have a reason for my Avatar to become obsessive! :laugh4:

Don’t know what age my Avatar is currently but should I not get the required items installed and working on my PC, can I request that my Avatar at least be transferred to perform Legate duties alongside a serving Tribune in the East?

Aaaaaand command is transferred back to DDW ~:)

http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/pbm/256-sum-1.zip

Can't blame the little un for this, he was asleep. I've only fought 4 or 5 battles this whole PBEM - my first 2 were the retreat & then defeat by the Macedonians with Amulius Coruncanius, then I took Maronia with Publius, then the defeat by the Seleucids. I think I might have had an easy little city battle somewhere else, but thats about it. I've just been really unlucky to get hardly any battles, and the ones I get I'm heavily outnumbered by armoured Greek Phalanxes with just a couple of units of Roman infantry!

Alternatively, I could just suck ~:p

Phalanx’s are a hard one to break when they outnumber you that’s for sure and now we have the Selucids using them AND I believe that Carthage will be fielding them also, these could be hard times indeed.

I don't believe this :laugh4:
Is there no rest for the wicked ?
I will only become active late this night, as I have no time now.

Wow, I did not see this coming. We were all gearing up to take on Carthage after the election and now the Seleucids pile on us. Still, no danger of this PBM getting boring (as some Roman games can get).

Mount, needless to say, you have free pick of the unassigned avatars. The table in the FAQ is up-to-date and you have the savegame so you can inspect those available.

Incidentally, I have found that if I fight at odds of 1:2.5 (real 1:2.5 odds, adjusting for quality, command etc.) in realism mods, it is quite likely I lose. The high morale means that numbers matter and you just get whittled down to nothing. Maronia was pretty much a repeat of Apollonia, without the added cheese.

Hmmm, I'm torn between Valerius Paullus - 49, adopted into the Aemilii, solid, upright, loyal, quietly obedient as governor of Tarentum. A good, solid Roman.

Or, Oppius Aemilius - Not like his father, something to prove, sly, feeling poorly, inferior engineer.

The first is just what the Republic needs, the latter might be more fun to role-play :pimp: