OOC Thread and Chatroom

[/Bean\]

Oh I never expected new ideas to be implemented without editting and work around. I entirely see your point with the issues surrounding gameplay wise though. For all it's accuracy, we still need to have fun playing this game. With open debate and contribution from different people, I'm sure we can make a fine work around.

[navarro951]

indeed, now if you will excuse me I must begin editing the library and history thread....(KILL ME NOW!)

[Potocello]

indeed, now if you will excuse me I must begin editing the library and history thread....(KILL ME NOW!)

have fun!

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

Wow, pretty thorough as far as rough drafts go, Mini. I second Bean's idea of a balloon to you.

I think that a lot of these rules will absolutely be impossible unless we were to have roughly 20 players, or so - to implement all of the governing positions as well as keep Tribuni in the legions since most RL players won't like the idea of sitting around Roma waiting for anciliaries.

If and when we decide on any rule changes (I still advocate that they be brought about through Charter Ammendments in the Curia, rather than *poof* they magically appear) we can RP the "neccesity" to bring about the changes has arisen, just like the Script describes how the military reforms were brought about through experience / necessity.

[/Bean\]

I agree. We would need a strong player structure to be able to carry out these reforms. Especially since so many of your ideas require players to have been Praetor.

[mini]

Of course i'm open for discussion :)
point is that you have to rise a few ranks before u get to have a say.

Der don't have to be 2 tribunes persé, you can also pick one :) same thing for praetor.

and navarro, yes, caesar was a military man.. but you forget that he DID NOT fight his wars when consul (atleast not before the civil war). Eeven after the civil war, where he was kind of a dictator but not yet officially.. there was his Co-consul, staying in Rome!

There was always one consul in Rome if the other had to fight. Which is why i chose the CoF to stay in Rome :)
But he gets to pick his first province after his term, to give an incentive to play him :) After your term is up, you can go play where you want ;p

[KipDan]

I agree with all the changes apart from the battle points and the historical armies bit. The battle points make it an extremely long time of not really doing anything in-game whilst a Tribune if serving in the legion and needing that many BP will be extremely boring and I would opt for a more governer role if they were implemented like that. Also the historical armies are cool, but even then not as historical as we are playing on Large setting and I believe them armies were made for small from some other thread?

[mini]

The sizing does not matter, as it all stays in perspective.
If you play on small, all other factions are small and vice versa.

Battle points will be hard to collect (that's the point) and you will depend on other,senior players to do you a favour and take you in their stack. As in the old days, where friends and family were favoured, or one favour could be exchanged for another. This would lead do: fractions in the senate! :P

Besides, after you've been a Tribunus Militum, you can get appointed quaestorto some city by either the CoF or a provincial governor. Which gives you somethign to do :)

[The Celtic Viking]

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait... what's going on here? I thought I was going to command the Consular Legion, yes? That's, as I've understood it, why it's talk about a new commander of Legio I anyway. But in the rules for the Consul of Finance, it specifically states that the Consul of Finance cannot lead "an imperial legion" (which, as far as I take it, is a leftover since scrolling down where the different types of armies are listed, "imperial legion" doesn't exist - which makes me suspect it actually refers to consular legions now). Have I gotten things all wrong, has there been a mistake or am I going insane here?

Please help a confused Viking out.

[mini]

are you talking about the current rules, or my new proposition rules?

[KipDan]

Responding to Mini, I mean them sizes were intented for small because they are the closest approximations you can get in EB, 1 - 100 I believe it is. If unit sizes were increased then there would be no point as the proportions are lost and more units are needed. So really keeping the Infantry, Cavalry and Missile troop restrictions is worthwhile but adding something along the lines, 'In Camillian and Polybian periods then Hastati, Principes and Triarii must be used in a legion with equal number with at least one Equite Romani.'

[The Celtic Viking]

are you talking about the current rules, or my new proposition rules?

The current rules.

While we're on the subject, there are other things I find strange. For example, why can the Consul of Legions set the tax rates? I mean, since one consul's specific responsibility is finances, it's strange that the other Consul can cut in on that and change the CoF's decisions.

Also, question: does "Cannot recruit military units." mean I cannot even add them to the training queue at the command of the CoL? Conversely, does that mean the CoL adds them to the recruitment queue himself?

If it does, then I don't see how the CoF has much say over the finance at all which I really think he should, since the CoL can just add them and that's it, even if the CoF thinks we can't afford it, or something else should be prioritized, it's still final.

I think this should be changed.

[everyone]

TCV should be referring to the current rules, and I have to disagree with the part about having the 'praetor' rank for a large number of important ranks; it would be similar to what happened earlier in the game when only 2 people (my character, then Asina, and navarro's) could become consuls so they automatically become consuls; which is why now Legati can run as consuls.

Unless perhaps the requirements for the Praetor rank be made lower, or make another rank (e.g. Dux) between one of the ranks you proposed; or the ability to get 'battle points' for participating in a battle (but only half/a fraction of the points of the commander. It might be possible, makes people have an incentive for their avatars to join legions as 2nd-in commands for reasons other than RP.

Another possible suggestion for the proposed promotion thing (if it would come into effect) would be gaining points over the time served such as governing a city as a quaestor (in mini's rank system).

My opinion now is that some/most ranks you proposed are rather hard to attain (seeing as we only have 4 legions and not the lands to support it). so I don't think we should implement them ingame yet, unless there are more chances for avatars to lead armies/gain ranks through time.


gah! TCV took the save just as I got home!

edit: TCV was faster than me again! I am becoming slow like bean from around 12 pages ago
and when the CA of removing the Princeps and Promgistrate rule was proposed, it should have came with details describing the new powers of the consul (because there are some things nobody can do if it's not clarified, like moving garrison troops etc)

edit2: TCV, while you're not ending the turn yet, could you let me take it to do some CoL stuff? unless you already ended it and are currently posting the CoF report

[mini]

actually the composition is not based on numbers.
Just the structure of an historical army reproduced..

besides, A legion as I described, should definately be big enough to face any challenge.
Also bear in mind, that in unruly, or bigger provinces, the provincial governor will have Legates with their legions to cal lreinforcements from :)

[mini]

Unless perhaps the requirements for the Praetor rank be made lower, or make another rank (e.g. Dux) between one of the ranks you proposed; or the ability to get 'battle points' for participating in a battle (but only half/a fraction of the points of the commander. It might be possible, makes people have an incentive for their avatars to join legions as 2nd-in commands for reasons other than RP.

Another possible suggestion for the proposed promotion thing (if it would come into effect) would be gaining points over the time served such as governing a city as a quaestor (in mini's rank system).

My opinion now is that some/most ranks you proposed are rather hard to attain (seeing as we only have 4 legions and not the lands to support it). so I don't think we should implement them ingame yet, unless there are more chances for avatars to lead armies/gain ranks through time.

Actually I was already under the impression that you gained points when you participated in a battle, commander or not :D

Let's consider you get 0.5 x pts that the commander himself gets. Praetor is not so unattainable.
Consider that in the repulic, a man had best serve on 6 campains at the least when a military tribune to have a decent record :)

Of course we should reward quaestors when governing a city.
2 points per turn when governing a city as quaestor = 24 pts per consuls term (12 turns, right?)

Which would mean they qualify for praetor by the next election :)

TCV should be referring to the current rules, and I have to disagree with the part about having the 'praetor' rank for a large number of important ranks; it would be similar to what happened earlier in the game when only 2 people (my character, then Asina, and navarro's) could become consuls so they automatically become consuls; which is why now Legati can run as consuls.

In the beginning it might seem hard. But it wont be long until all participants have a high rank :)
To make a distinction between players then, at that point in the game, my system of 'people in office having the power' kicks in again.

[The Celtic Viking]

Everyone, you've actually already done the CoL stuff that turn (I mean, you uploaded the bloody save ), though of course there might be new things to change. So sure, go ahead, I'll upload a new save so my CoF changes stays. Then when you're done I take it back and end the turn (and post the CoF stuff. You were lucky though, I was just about to post the save and almost didn't see your post.

This is a great inconvenience to me though, so please don't miss the 24 hours again.

[everyone]

oh, ok sorry for the inconvenience, and more if you've already ended the turn...

edit:

Actually I was already under the impression that you gained points when you participated in a battle, commander or not.

I wasn't...but, all those ranks sound rather attainable/reasonable since you stated that

[KipDan]

If you wanted historical compostition then it would be better to have 5 Hastati, 5 Principes and Triarii and modify the Triarii unit number to half that of the Hastati and the Principes. Then have 1 Equites,1 each of the Roman reserves and 1 family member. Then the senior Tribunus would gain command of an allied Legion which would consist of no Roman troops but Allies and Mercenaries recruited from Type 4 governments or ones with good Local Support barracks.

[mini]

Seriously, that would make 1 legion almost afull stack....
insane and expensive.

Basically, and simplifying speaking: only the consul of the legions gets a full stack, all the others get half a stack, and the consul of finances gets a quarter stack to clean up rebels

[SwissBarbar]

Caivs Avrelivs Cotta (bean) has been attacked by two Epeirote armies, and there's a battle for him.

Please send the save to me through a PM when you're done instead of uploading it here, and don't close any scrolls.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/local...id=199&id=4656

Battle, Battle

[KipDan]

Exactly my point mini. To keep it historical would mean spending a ridiculous amount of time and resources recruiting legions but keeping it the way it is now would be much more simpler and to be honest, from what I can see in the save game it looks perfectly fine.

[mini]

well i'm not saying we have to do it like that.

Just suggested it, for I myself like to command a legion which I know is the real thing, you know :)
It doesn't have to be exactly what I said, but I do feel the necessity for:
1) uniform legions, with exact composition. Just like in ancient Rome
2) 1 legion can only be a half a stack. It was said throughout the world that Rome could beat anything with 4 good legions :) expressing the fact they were good without using numbers. Therefore we should always fight outnumbered.
3) if we use smaller legions, we actually stimulate the cooperation between players, as the provincial governor has to request aide if he feels he cannot beat the enemy alone, and many more possibilities like that.
4) representation of Rome's allies. Rome always fielded legions which had allies supporting them. (Usually these had to do the hard work aswel, eg: die :p)

[KipDan]

Yeah, I totally agree with those points but I think to make it work it would be better if we made it so there has to be an equal number of Hastati, Principes and Triarii in a stack with at least 5 allied units.

[mini]

i fight in the original quincux formations (chequerboard) and i've foudn it easier when you have an uneven amount of troops :)

Besides, the legion composition I gave above, is actually from a manual 'how to play Romans historically' and the part about the legions is being used by a lot of players i know.

[KipDan]

Yes I know that, but it is obviously through the use of force diplomacy and this would require everyone to play historically which I know many would not want to do. Like I said, perhaps restrictions are better than actually a consice army make up. Like we already have but a bit more refined perhaps?

[mini]

like i said: It doesnt need to be the exact historical setup.

But legions should be 9-10 units max, the consular legion 15-18 units.
Legions should also be nearly the same composition

not one legion with 2 hastati, 5 principes and 1 triarii while another legion has 1 hastati, 3 principes and 4 triarii and yet another has 3 principes and 6 cavalry units, you know?

Uniformity! Rome's legions always had the exact same composition, or nearly so.

I do not demand that the composition has to be historical accurate, iI just want each legion to look exactly the same (as far as roman core troops go, the allied part varies from where the legion operates) and that legion size should be kept small (half stack)

[SwissBarbar]

I second that. As a roman-liking historical-accuracy freak I would like to see that too. It would be boring to operate with fullstacks and just conquer the world. That I can do in a singleplayer campaign too

[mini]

Exactly :)

Besides, when legions are same composition, players can swap legions more easily, as senators should not govern the same part of the world the whole game :)
Now we could switch every 12 turns :)

And as for legion size: you can conquer half the world with a roman full stack.
Therefore, for challenge's sake: predetermine the composition and units and size :)

This way, everybody has to fight with the same tools, and difference in competence of the player comes to light (which will add much flavour to the RP game :D)

I'd love to see someone with less generalling skills pull his political strings to get command of a legion, only to stuff it up :D for the sake of RP! :D

[KipDan]

And I agree with you there. I mean it would be better if there were more restrictions so you can have more variaty yet still keep the historical ssense. Such as, there must be 2 of each core Roman heavy infantry or whatever but there can be more but no more than 4 of each unit or something similar to that.

[Mooks]

I still think we should use italian ally troops.