Re-unification – an epic, themed WRE PBM

[econ21]

OK, I see your point & maybe we are in danger of descending into masochism!

[Tricky Lady]

Yes, please let's not drive it too far as I'd lose my head before we even get started

[Zomby_Woof]

Personally, I like the idea of always giving map information to the other factions. Quite simply, the Western Roman Empire was preyed on historically and usually is in-game; if we can make that more dramatic, all the better.

Another thing I'd like to adress is the reconquering of once Roman cities. For instance, if the Celts or Saxons were to take Eburacum and completely de-Romanizes it over a course of time would it still be okay to go ahead and repossess that territory?

Lastly, are our reigns to be in-character? For instance, if we have a devout Christian emperor should we play the game as if he was actually in charge by attempting to convert the Empire soley to Christianity or if we had an emperor who had the "Fears Barbarians" trait should we make our frontier border well-defended?

Lastly, I'd like to ask about the raids against barbarians. From my understanding one is allowed to take a barbarian settlement but one cannot leave a garrison of any type in that settlement? So in theory you can send an army as deep into the frontier as you like just so long as you don't leave a garrison in any conquered territory? That seems like a good way to bring in easy revenue, even if you're not allowed to completely wipe out some of the "one-territory-non-hordeable" factions like the Alemanni or Burgundii.

Anywho, as the hoplites used to say, "You can sign me up for the back."

[econ21]

Good questions, Zomby_Woof, I'll deal with them in turn.

Personally, I like the idea of always giving map information to the other factions. Quite simply, the Western Roman Empire was preyed on historically and usually is in-game; if we can make that more dramatic, all the better.

I agree but given the responses, let's leave this to each reigning Emperor to decide.

Another thing I'd like to adress is the reconquering of once Roman cities. For instance, if the Celts or Saxons were to take Eburacum and completely de-Romanizes it over a course of time would it still be okay to go ahead and repossess that territory?

Absolutely. The aim of the game is to re-unify the Empire as a whole - if WRE starter provinces are lost, they should be targeted just as ERE starter ones.

Lastly, are our reigns to be in-character? For instance, if we have a devout Christian emperor should we play the game as if he was actually in charge by attempting to convert the Empire soley to Christianity or if we had an emperor who had the "Fears Barbarians" trait should we make our frontier border well-defended?

I think we should have artistic licence. Sometimes, I find a game writes itself in a certain way - for example, in my turn in the ERE PBM, I decided to focus the story (and action) on a group of up and coming generals, sidelining the Emperor (I think in-game I was worried he would become disloyal and cause an inexplicable civil war). TinCow suggested one idea of telling a story through the eyes of an ancillary. So, I would say try to make your reign into something with a good narrative, but it does not have to be told from the perspective of the Emperor. He could be an "Old King Log" as was Graves' Claudius.

Lastly, I'd like to ask about the raids against barbarians. From my understanding one is allowed to take a barbarian settlement but one cannot leave a garrison of any type in that settlement? So in theory you can send an army as deep into the frontier as you like just so long as you don't leave a garrison in any conquered territory? That seems like a good way to bring in easy revenue, even if you're not allowed to completely wipe out some of the "one-territory-non-hordeable" factions like the Alemanni or Burgundii.

A deep raid was another one of TinCow's story ideas - he was thinking of a general searching for an Amazonian princess or something. So if it is done for a story-based reason, fine. Personally, I would not do it to amass a war chest in the first few turns but even that could be a legitimate motive if the whole thing falls apart and we desperately need money to survive a calamity (not that I expect it with our present list of players).

Anywho, as the hoplites used to say, "You can sign me up for the back."

Good stuff. I'll add you to the list and produce a shortened list of the houserules in the morning.

[Zomby_Woof]

Absolutely. The aim of the game is to re-unify the Empire as a whole - if WRE starter provinces are lost, they should be targeted just as ERE starter ones.

Well that brings up another question. The point of this PBM is not just to finish the Western Roman Empire's campaign but to unite the starting Western and Eastern Roman Empires?

[econ21]

Well that brings up another question. The point of this PBM is not just to finish the Western Roman Empire's campaign but to unite the starting Western and Eastern Roman Empires?

Yup, to win the WRE campaign you have to hold some key provinces plus a certain number in total. In our campaign, that number should be from the WRE and ERE starting provinces. I'll make a list of those and check whether they are enough (or too much) to be recognised as a win.

[Mount Suribachi]

I've just fired up BI as the WRE to see what I'm up against and....Aye Carumba!!!

With the above house rules I'm thinking "how on Earth am I meant to sort this mess out?"

Across the empire have low loyalty provinces on the verge of revolt, mainly pagan with a Christian Emperor, no money, army wage bill is greater than my income, my Caeser has a slew of income vices, my christian governors think earning money is a sin....now, my response to this would be to disband a load of troops, burn down and abandon outlying unproductive provinces and go raid and exterminate some neighbouring settlements for a quick cash injection.

All of which I'm not allowed to do!

Seriously, with the Empire in this state, I don't know how I could turn it around, let alone start conquering the ERE and there's a very good chance that #2 on the list is going to inherit an even bigger mess than at the start of the game.

So Simon, may I suggest that you go first? The first in a PBEM game often sets the tone of the whole game, and you can imbue the whole thing with the spirit that you are trying to achieve. The Emperor is 62, so it shouldn't be too long a reign. If you could play it over the weekend and get it to me next week that would be ideal.

OTOH, you might want a leader who hasn't a clue how to turn things around (me) as Emperor of Rome. Kinda realistic eh?

Either way I have no probs with what you decide.