Power to the Senate

[Ptah]

I find the largest fault with the single player campaign, is that the Senate has absolutely no power or control over any of its suboordinates - the three factions of Rome.

In reality, international diplomacy was a fine balance between potential power and justification of how such power is used. At least in the era of the Republic, popular opinion was a very powerful means of influencing the government on how things were run. The Senate was probably the most powerful element within the Roman politics, but declaring war or friendship was carefully based on both popular support and actual power of the military forces abroad.

Sending troops forth to attack enemy forces or territories without a good reason would be seen as a serious abuse of power and result in massive protests, and if a mere General under the Republic would attempt to ravage enemy lands in such manner without the sanction of the Senate he would be immediately declared the enemy of the State.

Thus, only when enough popular support amongst the people and the Senators was achieved, did warlords such as Caesar finally decide to take action to overthrow the entire Republic. Unless such support was gained, the loyalty of the troops could never be ensured. Throughout the history of the Republic, being declared the enemy of the State has dealt a crushing blow to every opponent who would oppose the Senate. Everyone who was declared so met a gruesome fate. Only Sula and Caesar ever managed to defy the declaration and survived.

In that sense, while it is not likely that we'd see any such major features included in a mere patch, I'd really like to see a Senate with enough power to suppress the three Roman factions. Frankly the whole international diplomacy bit, IMO, needs to be rewritten.

Take the case of the Scipii for instance. They start immediately attacking Syracuse and Lilybaeum for no reason. The insane blood-thirsty expansion of territories starts and spreads like wildfire, and soon all the other countries just disappear from the map. To prepare for the ultimate struggle your own faction also needs to start attacking others, and with this vicious circle just every opposition in the world disappears by BC. 100. During the campaign games over course of hundreds of years, I have ignored many orders from the Senate and not once have I been reprimanded. Popular and Senate support don't mean much of anything, and gaining important positions within the Senate is basically only worth the few traits it gives out.

I really wish to see a more "reasonable", or rather "civilized" form of diplomacy. Diplomacy that makes sense. Something like this;

* Roman factions would be forbidden to attack other territories without Senate Sanction.

* Only when a foreign diplomat arrives asking for intervention and assist, or, only when the territories of Rome are attacked, will they be allowed to retaliate and declare war. (of course, this means the AI diplomacy needs to get smarter, so they could send emmissaries to Rome to request help to intervene in their own little war..)

* Making Alliances will mean something. A foreign country that attacks a protectorate, or a friend of Rome, would be considered enemies, and war can be declared.

* And even in such case war is declared, the Senate will issue orders with a specific objective; in some cases the objective would be to stop the war and negotiate peace, not necessarily destroy the enemy wholely. In such cases Roman factions would attack the enemies and deal harsh blows on their economy, territory, and military. Ofcourse, then the enemy faction AI needs to be smart enough to judge the situation, and come out into negotiations, so they would pay a monetary fine, cease hostilities, and not attack Rome or its allies.

* In other cases, when repeated such betrayals happen, the Senate would "lose temper" and order a full scale attack on a certain enemy faction - this, would be an all-out war where the whole faction must be eliminated. The Senate will order one of the Roman factions to do the job, and ofcourse, over course of time, with good enough results, the Senate might "forgive" the enemy if they offer a good deal. (Then again, the AI also needs to be smart enough to know when they're beaten, and offer large booties).

* No faction is allowed to attack other territories without Senate sanction(although it is, possible). When illegal action is declared the Senate will warn the faction (as it currently does), and then, take immediate action if the faction does not obey. The Senate will declare the faction enemy of the State.

* Illegal action will result in loss of popular support, and that will increase unrest levels in cities, making them harder to control.

* Being declared the enemy of the state, will result in a drastic increase in unrest levels in settlements, unless both Senate/Popular support is maxed out.

* When being declared enemy of the State, the other two Factions will cease all military action abroad, and mobilize all of its military power to hit your faction.

....

If such concepts ever see daylight, Roman expansion will be under control, and give full time to other countries of the world to grow into more powerful factions, and the diplomacy part will be hugely more interesting.

[Gregoshi]

Ptah, although what you propose may be realistic, what kind of fun would it be to play a Roman faction? I can't see anyone wanting to play the Romans since their entire strategy/campaign would be dictated by the Senate...unless they want to risk the displeasure of that faction. Also, with complaints many people seem to have with the AI in other parts of the game, I can just imagine the screaming we'd be hearing in these forums with the AI Senate having even more control over the game than it already has.

I think they hit a good game play balance with the Senate as it is. The Senate nudges the campaign direction rather than forcing it and a employs a carrot/stick approach just strong enough to make the Senate's wishes a serious, but not game-breaking, consideration.

As for re-writing the international diplomacy system, it was for this game and it is far, far better than the system in MTW. Each TW game raises the bar on its game features, so perhaps later TW games will incorporate some of the features you listed.

[Oaty]

Well 1 more thing should be added when your moron ally parks an army by your city or on a bridge in your teritory, actually anywhere without military access you can smash that army without any repremands except maybe for the senate asking you to kiss and make up and call for a truce. I'm going to start doing that from now on, no matter who they are if they march on my lands w/o miltary access I'm going to attack them and when there armies are off my lands ask for a ceasefire.

[Khorak]

You're saying that the Gauls being hairy beyond all reason isn't a good enough excuse to declare war on them?

[andrewt]

If you look at the senate tab, they want you to be hostile to the Gauls, Greeks and Carthage at the beginning. Other factions will also happily attack one of the Roman factions and the Senate will want you to be hostile to those factions as well.

[Quillan]

Well said, Gregoshi. I agree totally. A lot of people seem to think this game is a perfect historical recreation; it's not, nor was it intended to be. They have had to strike a balance between historical accuracy, playability, and fun. Having to deal with the Senate to accomplish everything would be frustrating in the extreme.

Oh, and Ptah, I think you've forgotten one small detail: the Senate directs you to capture Syracuse on the first turn of the game, and if Carthage doesn't attack you first, they will direct you to capture Lilybaeum right after you capture Syracuse.

[CGS]

I don't know if this would be possible, but it would be interesting to have an option where you decide if you want Senate control or not, and what degree. It would satisfy everybody. You could be given the option at the beginning. There could also be something like a senate in other factions. For example, Carthage had one. Just my thoughts.