Too many Rebels

[The Hun]

They show up all the time, far too frequently. I don't think they should be so numerous or at least if they are then trade should be less affected. I have watchtowers dotted around and units on bridge patrol but it seems they just keep on springing up

[Oaty]

They should be less frequent but much more powerful

[sapi]

Agreed - they cause unrest which is annoying

[Despot of the English]

Do brigands actually do anything? In my current game there are two or three "armies" (probably no more than 100 or 200 men in each one) of them just standing around doing nothing. Unless they affect trade and if this is the case I would like some notification. I have Gauls and Macedonians attacking me all the time so tiny bands of brigands don't concern me at the moment.

[Sleepy]

Do brigands actually do anything?

They affect trade. Especially if they sit on a road. Look at the wagons or rather the lack of them. They also cause unrest in towns and cities.

[The Hun]

Sleepy is right, they raid your trade caravans and have a serious affect on your townspeople. This is quite historical, bandits and brigands were always a threat along trade routs but it is more than annoying the rate with which they appear. You slaughter one bunch, turn around and oh look, another rebel army. I have frontier armies guarding my borders and river crossings and this still does not seem to prevent their constant regeneration. This reminds me of MTW on very hard setting, where frustration factor was added just to make it seem hard. I started this campaign on hard so I could learn the new additions first before attempting a more challenging campaign with a bit more knowledge

[Despot of the English]

Thank you for the information . Having several small armies liberally dotted about to deal with potential brigands sounds like a good idea.

[Tyrac]

Small cavalry armies are the way to deal with the rebels. Cav moves farther on the strategic map and if you have good roads up you only need a few of them to cover vast amounts of land.

I for one am ALMOST thankful for the brigands..... I am playing my first campaign and I set it for max difficulty at both levels. I would be in alot of trouble if my generals could not hone their skills against the brigands before they took command of full legions on the frontiers.

[Noong]

Brigands are great for getting your assassins to 10 "stars". I train my agents on them in my homelands, then turn them loose on the enemy.

[Bigwig]

I have about 5 police armies constantly running between rebel army to rebel army on my campaign map yet this is still not enough to curb them. I am serious when I say that about 4 rebel armies pop up every other turn - it's a huge pain in the ass. I second the suggestion to make them less frequent but more powerful, it's just not fun having to spend 50% of my turn time rushing armies across my territories to autoresolve against stacks of 2 barbarian peasants.

[Mr. taxi]

You could also let a diplomat run around in your provinces and bribe them. 0nly costs a few 100 bucks and if your economy is good that doesn't really matter.

I am thankfull for the loeads of rebels. Makes upgrading my generals a bit easier.
Just use archers. Let them fire a whole lot of arrows and follow up with a cavelary charge. Easiest experience you can get.

And like noong said. Assasins can get experience. So can spies and diplomats.

[bigredlemon]

I've noticed that brigands show up on the edges of my territory a lot but almost NEVER in the middle. If they do show up, I always totally crush them. I bring lots of calvary, and there are ZERO survivors.

[Midnight]

Rebels are an odd occurance, but one I'm grateful for. If nothing else, it keeps you on your toes, as even the smallest 'brigand band' can do horrible things to trade. They also help to bulk out early-game armies when your economy has just got going and you have a diplomat or so spare; and, as has been mentioned, they provide easy experience for a number of units.

[The Hun]

I love that sig