Quote Originally Posted by Fluvius Camillus View Post
Make loyalty and also authority a huge factor if you want to represent this. Traits like venal in EBI do little harm unless it will develop in law and trade penalties.

High Authority to could define a strong dynastic king (like Antiochos III Megas). Low could be put on weak kings.

Also the option of rising factions is there now (So Seleucid pretenders like Alexander I Balas can be represented). Has less to do with this, but rising factions can also better represent the Yuezhi hordes.

~Fluvius
I agree. Unfortunatly i don't really remember the new features of MTW2 and Kingdom, since i never played Kingdom, and troped MTW2 once i started college, since my old computer broke down and my laptop can't cope with MTW2.

I really hope that the dinastic struggles can be represented. Just like you said, I had mostly in my mind the Diadochi, since they appear to struggle from this the most. But that's also to be expected, since these empires were the largest.

Another idea IMHO, is to give generals new traits, when the empire grows too large, of them wanting a piece of the pie. Especially in the Arche, once the empire got big, there were numerous factions which became independent: Cappadocia, Baktria, Parthia....

So generals could, let's say once an empire gets around 30 provinces get a slight lowerance of loyalty. The loyal ones would remain loyal, while for those who were flirting with the idea to betray you, would get the push they needed.

Perhaps this ideas are stupid, but i think stuff like this (perhaps in a more sophisticated way, i'm sure the EB team considered some ways) is essential for portraing this era.

Also, i would suggest that such changes wouldn't apply to the Romans till the Marian reforms. Rome didn't suffer from this since the Reforms, when the army became more loyal to it's general then to the Senate.

I hope i'm not alone in my thinking, so please, debate further