The Will of the Senate - out of character thread

[econ21]

I've just noticed Illyria was not on our "blacklist". I would have included it, had I remembered it. But maybe we just leave it off? It's down to two settlements, AFAIK, and won't last anyway.

We don't all have to actively work towards taking down the blacklist (although some of us may ) but I think it is a reasonable goal for the campaign that we become the dominant power, which we entail defeating those targeted factions at some stage. I am open to letting some become Protectorates instead of being wiped out. Seleucia, in particular, has vast lands and having to conquer them all means going further than Rome actually did.

Maybe I should have another look at EBs victory conditions for Rome. I seem to recall they were similarly epic and ambitious.

[Mount Suribachi]

think it is a reasonable goal for the campaign that we become the dominant power

Like I said, that will happen anyway. The AI will not be able resist attacking us, and so we will wipe out each faction as they do so. Kinda like how Rome acquired much of her Empire

Seleucia, in particular, has vast lands and having to conquer them all means going further than Rome actually did.

I have no problem whatsoever with building an "un-historical" Roman Empire. The Empire took the size and shape it did due to a series of specific events - wars, births, deaths, elections etc etc. We have already deviated from the timeline that produced those events. I would rather we played the game on its own terms - our actions such be dictated by the strategic & tactical situation combined with role-playing the Senators we produce, all under-pinned by traditional Roman values.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Like I said, that will happen anyway. The AI will not be able resist attacking us, and so we will wipe out each faction as they do so. Kinda like how Rome acquired much of her Empire

Agreed. Your argument here and in the PM makes sense.

BTW, I got your reply, but I decided to respond here because my inbox is going to overflow in the next couple of days.

[Mount Suribachi]

lol I can imagine. I never really had more than a handful of PMs in my inbox, so the 12 max limit never concerned me. Now they're flying thick and fast I'm grateful for my Senior Membership and 75 PM limit!

[econ21]

Just a note: I'm having nasty internet connection problems. I'll try to post the motions poll now but I may get kicked out before I do.

[TinCow]

Bio for Oppius Vitruvius (Wishazu) has been posted. I considered posting mid-term pictures of everyone, but we're already going to be racking up a lot of mugshots even only doing them at election times. I would prefer to keep all mugshots up for each person so that we can see how the avatars have developed over the years. When they start dying off I will probably move them to a Memorial thread or something like that, so that they don't clutter up the Library, but are still accessible if people want to look back on old characters. Thoughts?

[GeneralHankerchief]

That memorial idea sounds great, TinCow.

Having an exponential number of characters as the game goes on, not to mention having them updated every few years, just calls for some kind of regulation. The memorial is a perfect solution.

[Wishazu]

Cheers Tincow, It appears I have now moved on from tactless to discourteous, lovely :)

[TinCow]

I'm not sure what the modifier for tactless is, but discourteous showed -2. Are you getting better or worse?

[Avicenna]

Discourteous is starting on the "no going back" line, which is never good.

TinCow: the memorial sounds great!

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

I'm in favour of updates of the mugshots every five years. It will be great to see the ageing/advancement process. The memorial is an excellent idea. Wishazu, there's no going back now :) By the way, I do not believe this trait is determined by success at negotiations, but is a random trait, like hooting. I might be wrong. If we ever need to provoke a nation to war with us, we have just the man fior the job

[Wishazu]

Its fine by me :)

[YAKOBU]

Hi everyone

Apologies but I again missed voting on the recent motions. I'm not sure why but I thought I had until Friday after having a quick glance at work. Luckily I wanted to vote Yes to all the motions so it wouldn't have changed anything . I am currently trying to complete year-end at work with my appraisal lined up for next week as well as interviewing candidates for 2 positions. I sorely need them filling as there is too much work for my team at the moment. I stayed at work until 7.30pm tonight and then continued at home until 11.15pm .

I have also taken the drastic step of taking my RTW to work and locking it in a cupboard to stop me playing it until year-end is finished . I am getting serious withdrawal symptoms and need to pop onto the org now and again to get a small fix .

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

Good luck with the appraisal next week, YAKOBU.
I know how it feels, already overworked two nights this week till 22:30, deadlines coming up on the 20th (which means everything should be finished by monday which has about as much chance of happening as a snowstorm in hell) and I was smart enough to get myself elected first consul

[econ21]

Ignoramus has raised the issue of naming our legions again . I think it would add flavour to the First Consul reports etc if we do this.

Under Marcus Camillus's mod, legions are designated as new ancillaires and typically arise when a general rises to Legate. I think we are up to about Legio IV now, aren't we DDW?

Ignoramus and I were wondering about a two part designation. The first would be regional. The second part would be honorific. Ignoramous had the idea of naming them after notable First Consuls who raised them. TinCow advocated naming one after a battle victory. Both ideas should good. So you could have Legio I Italia Victrix or Legio I Italia Quintia.

I propose the First Consuls give the legions appropriate regional names on an ad hoc basis - they might want to consult with any historical or Latin buffs we have in order to do this.

So far, I am wondering about:

Legio I - Italia (for Latium)
Legio II - Sabina (for other Italy)
Legio III - Sicilia (was that the Latin for Sicily?)
Legio IV - Gallica

What we call the 5th may depend on where we expand into next.

More names and links to names are given in my earlier post on this subject:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...&postcount=261

For the honorifics do we also want to leave those to the First Consul or have them proposed in Senate motions? For personal reasons, Ignoramus requests that he be allowed to name the 10th legion.

We also wondered about naming forts, and in particular assigning them to legions. Thus the fort between Roma and Capua could be Fort Legio I Italia and be the home barracks of the legion. These forts could always be moved, if the Legion moves, but could still keep the name.

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

We currently have three Roman Legion banners and one Consular Army banner. I don't have time to check out Marcellus's mod details right now, but I guess a fourth will arrive soon as it depends on available legates and number of troops if I recall correctly.
I personally like a combination of both ideas. So that would give you Legio I - Italia 'Victrix'.

[econ21]

Yes, Legion IV will arrive with the next Legate. IIRC, that will probably be TinCow's avatar. So if he does not currently have the "Legio I" ancillary and is going to keep his troops for a while, you could hold on and call Legio IV "Gallica Victrix".

What do people think - do we leave naming to the First Consuls? Or have Senate motions for honorifics?

[Braden]

I think it’s a great idea, don’t know how we’ll track it – my assumption is that it’s not something you can do in the game, or can you edit .txt files to produce this??

On the full matter I think that you should give a guideline out of character that the first consuls can name the Legions using both or either methods but that they stick! We can’t have consuls changing names to and fro.

My personal favourite is the uses of the honorific as DDW suggests.

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

Not sure if this was clear, but TinCow is currently in possesion of the legion I standard and legion I troops. So I think Legio I - Italia 'Victrix' is what you mean ? Or do you mean he gets to keep the legion I standard and I wait untill the legion IV standard is released to Lucius ?
Anyway, it does not really matter to me who decides. We can let the first consul pick the name and let the senate vote if they can keep it for instance. By the way. I would like to reserve 'Rapax' for whichever legion I end up with :) If it bleeds, we can kill it :)

[Avicenna]

Hmm, let's see.

Regional is definitely a tick. Macedonica, Scythia, Italia, Gallica, Hispana, the list goes on.

For the victories, there was historically a Legio XII Victrix. Legio IX Triumphalis, another legion which is kind of named after victory, another one levied by Caesar. Even better, Legio XX Valeria Victrix: valourous AND victorious.

Essentially, whatever we want. Themed legions, perhaps? There was a legion named Legio VI Ferrata, led by Pompey, meaning 'ironclad'. I'm not sure if this has a particular reason for the name, but we could give it extra armour to make it do so, for example. There was a Legio VI Gemina, NOT the same as Pompey's other Legio VI. This one meant 'twin', because it was formed from the remnants of two legions. Another interesting name is Legio X Equestris. Meaning, knights. We could do this, and have extra cavalry in this legion, for example. Legio I Macriana Liberatrix from the empire, the liberator of Macer, a governor. Legio XXX Classica or Legio X Fretensis, the former as our overseas 'naval' legion, the latter as the legion of the sea-straits, to protect the republic from naval invasion.

Defender legions, Legio I Adiutrix, the helper legion, and Legio II Adiutrix Pia Fidelis, the helpful, faithful and loyal legion.

There were legions named after Emperors, eg. Legio XII Certa Constans. Legions named after deities, Legio X Veneria, after Venus, or Legio XV Apollinaris, a legion devoted to Apollo.

There are also completely irrelevant names, such as Legio XII Fulminata, wielders of the thunderbolt.

Also, do not forget that Legions do have name changes quite frequently.

I propose naming the victorious legion Legio (is it IV?) Verginia Fortis, the brave, standfast legion of Verginius.

[econ21]

Not sure if this was clear, but TinCow is currently in possesion of the legion I standard and legion I troops.

Um, OK, but I thought that was against the house rules, seeing as he is just a Tribune? Where we have legates, the legion ancillaries should be reserved for them. (Ditto the Roman field armies for Praetors and the Consular armies for the two Consuls). In exceptional circumstances, we might deviate from that, but for role-playing, we should try to stick to it.

But anyway, for the three legions we currently have, how about:

Legio I Italia Victrix: recruited in Latium; won a great victory under TinCow
Legio II Sicilia Quintia: took part in the conquest of Sicily under First Consul Quintus
Legio III Gallica Aemilia: took part in the conquest of Cisalpine Gaul under First Consul Aemilius

Naming the legions after any notable First Consuls that raised them was Ignoramus's idea. If they get into some great scrapes like Legio I we can always change the honorific for something more dramatic.

IIRC, we can around 1 legion ancillaries/3 settlements, so we should get plenty of opportunities to try out some of Tiberius's names.

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

I agree with you, but seeing as I was sending practically all the troops I had with Augustus, and his 8 years of military service, combined with the real threat in our west, it seemed fair to give him a temporary command (I even borrowed him my priest of Jupiter, and of course the chirurgon (drat, how do you spell that ?)). It felt a bit silly hanging on to the standard with my miniscule force while the legion proper marched off with Augustus. Still, I agree that legion banners should be reserved for legates and so on. He will have to hand over the banner back to me within a year.

My suggestions :
Legio I Italia Victrix: recruited in Latium; won a great victory under TinCow
Legio II Sabina Quintia: took part in the conquest of Sicily under First Consul Quintus
Legio III Sicilia Aemilia: took part in the conquest of Cartheginian Islands (and will see more action soon, porbably in Narbonensis) under First Consul Aemilius
Legio IV Gallica [insert next consul here] [insert conquest/other here].

This seems more logical considering their history. The third legion was only formed after Sicilia was conquered.
Furthermore I suggest the Legio II Sabina to recruit some Sabine mercenaries (they're very good troops by the way) and the Legio IV Gallica use Gaul mercenaries as AoR units untill we can train them ourselves.

[Craterus]

The issue has passed in the in-character thread, but I can't get my head around this. How is Massila easier defended than staying behind the Alps? I see two advantages to leaving it how it is:

1. Irrelevant and incorrect

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It's a neutral (rebel) "buffer zone" between ourselves and the Gauls.

2. There's a HUGE mountain range to separate us from the Gauls. I can't quite understand how a river (this was the argument, correct?) beats a mountain range in terms of natural defenses.

EDIT: A re-read of the Consul reports and the map shows that the Gauls have taken Massilia, but I still do not see how it is easier defended.

[econ21]

My suggestions :
Legio I Italia Victrix: recruited in Latium; won a great victory under TinCow
Legio II Sabina Quintia: took part in the conquest of Sicily under First Consul Quintus
Legio III Sicilia Aemilia: took part in the conquest of Cartheginian Islands (and will see more action soon, porbably in Narbonensis) under First Consul Aemilius
Legio IV Gallica [insert next consul here] [insert conquest/other here].

This seems more logical considering their history. The third legion was only formed after Sicilia was conquered.
Furthermore I suggest the Legio II Sabina to recruit some Sabine mercenaries (they're very good troops by the way) and the Legio IV Gallica use Gaul mercenaries as AoR units untill we can train them ourselves.

I agree with all of that. Is everyone else happy with it?

Craterus, I share your puzzlement but that is exactly the kind of stuff we debate in the in-character thread. Whether we stop at Massilia is probably going to be a key issue for the next First Consul and we will probably have candidates with different views on the matter. The whole point of the PBM is to have the Senate collectively thrash out such issues of strategic direction.

[Craterus]

I don't understand why people are so sure that Massilia is an obvious move and will put us in a great strategic position (and apparently easier to defend than our current position).

Am I just being stupid, but I don't understand what's so great about Massilia?

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

Hiya Craterus,
Actually, the Gauls have not taken Massilia yet. They are too busy attacking us :)
By the way, how did you do the spoiler thing ? I wanted to use that in my reports, but I couldn't figure it out.
There no place easier to defend than a bridge, that's why we want Massilia. Numbers don't matter when defending a brdige, just morale, and the Roman morale is pretty damn good :)

[Avicenna]

Nononono!

The Legions would either be named after the place, or something else. They are NEVER NEVER NEVER both, such as Italia Victrix.

[Craterus]

Hiya Craterus,
Actually, the Gauls have not taken Massilia yet. They are too busy attacking us :)
By the way, how did you do the spoiler thing ? I wanted to use that in my reports, but I couldn't figure it out.
There no place easier to defend than a bridge, that's why we want Massilia. Numbers don't matter when defending a brdige, just morale, and the Roman morale is pretty damn good :)

I can accept that, for a human, bridge battles (especially with Romans) are very easy. Ah whatever, I'm not too bothered. I'm sure we can manage it.

I guess my problem is that the Alps are just too damn easy to cross.

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

Tiberius seems to be correct, altough the Romans had no real standard for nameing legions. Example :

Legio XXX Ulpia Victrix (Victorious Ulpian legion) Ulpian = gens (family name of Emperor).
Legio XX Valeria Victrix (Valorous and Victorious)
Legio XV Apollinaris (devoted to the god Apollo)
Legio XI Claudia Pia Fidelis (faithful and loyal Claudian legion)
Legio II Traiana Fortis (Trajan strong legion)
Legio I Macriana liberatrix (liberator of Macer)

None of these conforms to the same naming scheme. Basically the Romans named legions as they damn well pleased at the time or renamed them in case of a special event. So I suggest we do as we please in naming legions, but do set a convention for naming standards, so the first consul has a template to do as he pleases in naming a new legion. The senate will always have to approve the name changes at the next senate meeting.

[shifty157]

Massilia is a veritable fortress. It is perhaps the most well defended settlement in the game. There is only a single entrance into Massilia by land and that is over a single bridge. Very conveniantly, this bridge also overlooks the entrance to the weatern mountain pass. This means that if any army wanted to go through the western mountain pass (the only mountain pass that the gauls have access to) they would first have to get by any army stationed on that bridge.

This means that even if they didnt want to, the gauls would have to fight a bridge battle on the offensive and ourselves on the defensive to get passed us. It means that northern italy will never have to worry about Gauls gettig passed the alps. Its basically a fool proof defense system that would be nearly impossible to break. Such an opportunity just cant be passed up as i doubt there is another settlement in the game that rivals Massilia in its defensive capabilities.