Bring me back my back-stabbing generals, an idea for RTW

**Aetius the Last Roman** · 03-09-2005, 15:03

The revival of generals, hmm...

The family tree structure in RTW is supposed to stop us from having MTW style governorship.
I say, screw it!,
you should have separate trees only for governors and prospective generals, especially for factions such as Rome. They should be offered on the adoption screen or maybe their should be a pool in each city. Governors could be able to move from cities to cities but they lose admistrative effectiveness the farther they move (culture, language barriers). The governors should have a souped up version of the town guard (i.e. hastati combat effectiveness whilst a general should have proper faction guards. If academy or temples are built, they should improve the pool.

This brings back the problem of loyalty into the TW series, one we all miss, and its fun killing rebels

and keeping subjects in line!

I am not sure what exactly happens to the monarchy,

especially in Rome. Maybe they can be given special status, for example, in civil war only those of royal lineage can be recognised as a legitimate opponent in a civil war,
other upstarts and disloyal general are considered rebels. This case would of course exempt Rome, who should instead choose a faction leader and heir every four years or so.

This gives Rome the added problem of disloyalty as any rebel can be recognised as a legitimate force. However this problem is solved once a man is declared Imperator.

I hope you all have appreciate my RTW fantasy improvements as much as I have.

**Red Harvest** · 03-09-2005, 18:41

In RTW your family members can be bribed (in MTW you couldn't bribe heirs if memory serves.)

One problem in MTW was that the AI frequently had its kingdoms break up in revolt/civil war after a key loss or two (or failure of a crusade/jihad.) Ok, that is quite realistic, but it was extremely difficult for the AI to handle. On the other hand, the player could better manage and *anticipate* loyalty problems.

**Oaty** · 03-10-2005, 05:57

How about going as far as backstabbing generals on the battlefield.

I only did it once in Shogun but it sure was funny watching Takeda get smashed in between me and lord Hojo.

**The Stranger** · 03-10-2005, 10:13

yeah i want too be able to kill my allies in a battle while supposed to help them

**Aetius the Last Roman** · 03-10-2005, 12:06

Red Harvest,
I know it was a problem for the AI but it was one of the things that made MTW great and unpredictable. There is no simple streamlined state with perfect loyalty, even the Nazi's had problems (actually Hitler had lots of traitors).

**Ulfang** · 03-10-2005, 12:20

I love MTW but have to admit since playing RTW I've hardly looked back. Going back to the dates Graphics is acceptable but not being able to do sieges a la RTW just won't do! I also love the army movement style of RTW rather than moving region by region!

There's certainly a lot of good things about MTW tho that are missing from RTW that could make it a lot better :)

**Wishazu** · 03-10-2005, 21:14

i liked the whole civil war thing in mtw, kept you on your toes.

**brutii_warrior** · 03-11-2005, 03:52

oh yeah, i agree. in mtw it was pretty cool when the enemy was almost dead all of a sudden your army turns and dishes out the beat down to your ally.
i really miss that!
i also miss from shogun all the spy/assasign stuff you could do.(watching it)
i really like the idea that rtw has with sieges(that's a high light)
i also like lighting your arrows on fire!
mtw had better terrain in my opinion(battle maps)

if i could change one thing about rtw it would have to be that protectorates are a bit easier to get.
or
a lot more rebels(a sea of grey peasants)vs(green first-legionary cohort)

that'd be a sloughter fest