A plea...

**Dayve** · 06-19-2006, 16:57

Please let us recruit generals in 1.5... I hate having cities with no governors... Every city had a governor and i always end up running out of them. Please let us recruit them!

**Krusader** · 06-19-2006, 17:07

Originally Posted by Dayve

Please let us recruit generals in 1.5... I hate having cities with no governors... Every city had a governor and i always end up running out of them. Please let us recruit them!

Romans will by 99% chance be able to recruit generals...other factions though...

We are basically seeing if it would be historically & gameplay feasible to recruit generals for some factions.

**Weisthor** · 06-19-2006, 19:16

hm... sounds like a good idea ....
never thought about it ...
but Dayve is right.... i always have 30 citys and 12 generals or something like this^^ they all die too fast and don´t want to make children :)

**Geoffrey S** · 06-19-2006, 19:46

I prefer it the way it is. Keeps me shuffling governors about to where I need them most, and at least makes me think about who should go where.

**Weisthor** · 06-19-2006, 20:01

hm... yes.... that makes the game more interessting, thats true ... but its a bit unrealistic, as every city had a gouvernour .... hm....
i am undecided ^^ perhaps the EB team could do something that there are some more children born.

**Foot** · 06-19-2006, 20:27

Originally Posted by Weisthor

hm... yes.... that makes the game more interessting, thats true ... but its a bit unrealistic, as every city had a gouvernour .... hm....
i am undecided ^^ perhaps the EB team could do something that there are some more children born.

Though of course every city had a governor, not every city had a governor who was a Family Member. I don't see the problem, if you don't like having your cities controlled by the AI you can turn it off when you start a campaign.

Foot

**Ludens** · 06-19-2006, 21:25

Originally Posted by Weisthor

hm... yes.... that makes the game more interessting, thats true ... but its a bit unrealistic, as every city had a gouvernour .... hm....
i am undecided ^^ perhaps the EB team could do something that there are some more children born.

I am afraid that is not possible. The game tries to have about one family member for two or three cities. If the number exceeds that, no more suitors/adoptees are offered and no more children are born. This cannot be modded.

**Wardo** · 06-27-2006, 18:13

Oh what the hell, screw the player!

If he wants a General Army with only bodyguards let him ruin his game experience with it.

**Dayve** · 06-27-2006, 18:53

Originally Posted by Wardo

Oh what the hell, screw the player!

If he wants a General Army with only bodyguards let him ruin his game experience with it.

Exactly. If people want to use armies of generals or armies of triarii then they shouldn't be playing EB in the first place. EB is for people who appreciate historical accuracy and a good challenge. If you want armies of triarii and an easy ass game where you can conquer all of Gaul in 10 turns, then you should be playing RTR.

**Trithemius** · 06-28-2006, 06:32

Originally Posted by Dayve

... then you should be playing RTR.

Hey, that is not nice! How about you try to keep the comparisons technical and dispassionate - just for something novel?

**Dayve** · 06-28-2006, 12:23

Originally Posted by Trithemius

Hey, that is not nice! How about you try to keep the comparisons technical and dispassionate - just for something novel?

Would you like to tell me which part of what i said was unjust? The current build of RTR is immensely easy, there's no disputing that. Even on VH/M i need only conquer 2 cities and the world is pretty much mine for the taking. That said, i enjoy RTR. I've been playing 6.0 since the day it came out and it's great fun, but it's just too easy.

There are two types of people who play RTW. There are history fanatics who want to play RTW as historically accurate as a mod will ever get, (EB) and want a challenge whilst doing so, and there are people who want an easy ass game where you start off with tons of money, a large army and can conquer the entire Roman empire at its height by 240BC, and the game for these people is RTR.

stalin · 06-28-2006, 12:42

Jesus Dayve you really need to see past the it's "either black or white" bit. I don't care for the accuracy as much as for the gameplay. All I want is a challenging game that has me sweating while being fair (not having to play the battles on very hard) and comes out before the relaease of MTW2 which really ends it for me since the inherent bugs and shortcomings of it's (RTW) AI won't keep me playing if there is something just as stupid but way prettier to play with.

**Ludens** · 06-28-2006, 15:34

Originally Posted by Dayve

There are two types of people who play RTW. There are history fanatics who want to play RTW as historically accurate as a mod will ever get, (EB) and want a challenge whilst doing so, and there are people who want an easy ass game where you start off with tons of money, a large army and can conquer the entire Roman empire at its height by 240BC, and the game for these people is RTR.

If R:TR players are really as lazy as you suggest, they would still be playing vanilla at E/E. People prefer different kind of things. Some want accuracy, some want balance, some like a good challenge, and some just want to relax and be entertained. Also, not everyone has the same standards for challenge: what's fun for one is frustrating and unrealistic for another (Triarii-hordes anyone?). R:TR may not present as much as a challenge as EB does, but it still is more challenging than the basic game.

What I think Trithemius is trying to say is that you should stop using hyperboles when comparing EB to vanilla or R:TR. You may think that those phale in comparison to EB, but they have qualities of their own which you seem to deny.