Well, in the ancient world "payment in kind" for an army was to be let loose on the population of a captured city. People like Alexander the Great, who is viewed as either heroic or at least exceptional in most Western accounts, features as a demonic figure in Zoastrian (theyre actually still around today in parts of Iran, along with their fire which has apparently never been let go out in at least 2,300 years...) and Biblical/Islamic texts (apparently Alexander will return to lead the armies of Satan or somesuch) due to the massacres his army meted out to the empire they conquered. Realistically, as an emperor of a large, dispersed and unwieldy empire where it might take months to relay even news of a rebellion back to the capital you rule by making rebellion as unattractive as possible. That definitly includes nailing people to crosses if theyre so passionate about the sewer system overflowing that they take up arms about it.Killing the trouble makers may be realistic, but letting a city rebel and then slaughtering everyone, trouble makers, non-trouble makers etc. 75% of the population is unrealistic. When in the Roman empire did they let every city they owned rebel, then take it back and slaughter 75% of its population? They didn't...
Either way, to play the WRE campaign realistically youd have to engineer your ultimate defeat and overrun by the rampaging barbarian hordes. If the Romans made the right choices in the late 4th century, study of the Roman Empire might be current events rather than ancient history. We have the chance to "game" a potential alternative to their decisions, however inaccurate and unrealistic the rules of the game are. And the rules are hopelessly unrealistic to begin with anyway.
Perhaps a permantly higher level of unrest in the aftermath of an extermination? The locals keeping alive the memory of some past crime against them by "the man" leading to sympathy with future rebellions. Another 10% with every extermination or something. Extermination becomes a short term solution for dealing with an irretrievable situation but it increases long term instability...Would be nice if there was some sort of penalty for killing your own people, it's simply too encouraging to pillage your own cities after you get the last level of buildings. Perhaps a mod that only allowed recruiting decent troops above a certain size -- that would even be historically accurate as it was extremely difficult to maintain large standing armies prior to the Industrial revolution due to the relatively tiny fraction of the population you could afford to have away fighting instead of working.
Mind you its long been a bug bear of mine that the distance to the captial penalty should be offset by ports/paved roads etc etc. Surely the penalty should be based on "lag" in communication rather than simple distance alone. Bah, If we started poking holes in the logic of the Public Order mechanics we'd be here for weeks.
Bookmarks