Reemerging Factions

[Pindar]

Has there been any note on whether MTW2 will have reemerging factions? This was a feature I liked.

[Lord Adherbal]

hopefully, that's a lot more interesting then random rebellions who are basicly braindead.

[Midnight]

I'd love to see this feature coming back - it really helped shake things up on the campaign map.

[The Wizard]

As did I. It would be wonderful to see it again.

[Leet Eriksson]

i don't particularily like the idea, but if done right it could be great. In MTW the factions re-emerged with elite units and all that jazz just a few turns after defeating them, which i don't like at all.

[Vlad Tzepes]

In MTW the factions re-emerged with elite units and all that jazz just a few turns after defeating them, which i don't like at all.

Yeah, they were like a full scale Alien Revolution, popping out from the underground with super-elite forces. Quite unrealistic, but it added an uncertainty factor to the game, which I grew up to like, in the end.

[Kralizec]

Reemergences were fun but had some issues in MTW. If asked if I wanted them back...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Yes, Please!
While the way it was implemented was sometimes annoying in MTW, it's the thing I missed the most in RTW. Factions only needed to be eliminated once and were gone forever afterwards, wich really let me down. Once I started playing MTW again I couldn't be more pleased then by having to deal with a reemerging faction.

[danfda]

As did I. It would be wonderful to see it again.

Doesn't that mean that it's not going to happen?



Yay for making cheap funnies at the expense of others!
I should be reprimanded.

[Martok]

i don't particularily like the idea, but if done right it could be great. In MTW the factions re-emerged with elite units and all that jazz just a few turns after defeating them, which i don't like at all.

I concur. Overall, I like re-emerging factions, but it really stretched my ability to suspend disbelief when a re-emergence army would field a ton of Chivalric Knights, CMAA, and Pavise Arbalesters. It would be one thing if such an army had 1-2 units of each, but 5-8?? That's going a bit far.

I don't mind if a faction re-emerges with a huge army, but it should be composed of *mostly* lower level troops (spearmen, archers, Urban militia, etc.). Elite units shouldn't make up more than around 25% of the re-emerging army IMO.

[danfda]

The big problem with re-emergences with uber-armies was that they became broke so quickly. With such a large, expensive army, the new faction (usually one province, two at most, with some exceptions) has no way to pay the massive upkeep bills. So they're bankrupt and dead within a few turns. Now there are exceptions to this, but in my experience the new faction is not able to sustain itself, and thusly collapses.

Aside from the fact that uber armies from thin air are a wee bit much to swallow.

[Midnight]

Yes, in MTW the exact mechanism was flawed, but I really missed it in RTW!

I do agree that it should be (generally) an uprising comprising mainly low-tier troops and a small number of elites. Possibly the Pope should be an exception (unless you can finally eliminate his Holiness this time around...heh.).

[Bar Kochba]

in mtw when there was a re emerging faction you could get your armies for other territorys near by and defed it easily but this is using the RTW enging so how will you defend against 10000 uber troops coming around when you only have your 500 troops in your nerby city.

[Mount Suribachi]

Re-emergences were an exciting part of MTW - however, given the "family tree" introduced in RTW its now much more difficult to produce the right conditions for a re-emergence.

It can be done if CA want, but it wouldn't be exactly the same as in MTW.

[Martok]

Re-emergences were an exciting part of MTW - however, given the "family tree" introduced in RTW its now much more difficult to produce the right conditions for a re-emergence.

It can be done if CA want, but it wouldn't be exactly the same as in MTW.

It doesn't seem like it should be that difficult. Re-emergences in MTW can only happen if there is a surviving--but underage--heir at the time his faction was destroyed. (It's the reason factions sometimes re-emerge with a "new" king who is over 60 years old.) Given that, I don't see why the same principle couldn't be applied to Medieval 2 as well.

Of course, this could all be moot, as we still have yet to hear whether or not re-emergences will even be in.

[hoetje]

re-emergences are quite a cool idea to my ears
I think they should have almost no elite troops,only lower troops but in huge numbers

[Kralizec]

It doesn't seem like it should be that difficult. Re-emergences in MTW can only happen if there is a surviving--but underage--heir at the time his faction was destroyed. (It's the reason factions sometimes re-emerge with a "new" king who is over 60 years old.) Given that, I don't see why the same principle couldn't be applied to Medieval 2 as well.

I think AI factions kept reemerging regardless of wether there was an actual underage heir- in fact I'm not sure if the AI factions track underage heirs at all or if they just spawn mature heirs out of nowhere. There's no way to know.


Since troops can't sea-warp all over the map since RTW, the need for XXL rebellions has vanished.

[Myrddraal]

Though unrealistic, it brought challenges in the late game - always a good thing.

[professorspatula]

Re-emerging factions could keep things interesting mid-late game and shake things up a bit, something lacking in RTW, although I think in the RTW campaign, the whole point was the Roman civil war would take place, so anything else would distract from that.

I remember in one MTW campaign I switched control from a 1/2 map controlling Aragon faction to the struggling Danes. The stupid AI managed to get Aragon excommunicated within 2 turns and had rebellions all over the place, losing all but a few provences. In the next 3-4 turns, 3 factions re-emerged, including the Byzantines - with 14 provences!! That's 2 of their own and 12 rebel regions in support. Now that was a proper full-scale re-emergance! I don't think I'd want to see that again though. But the idea that rebel cities and highly disloyal generals could join a re-emergance in M2TW would be great. I'm sure CA must have toyed with the idea if nothing else.

[Martok]

I think AI factions kept reemerging regardless of wether there was an actual underage heir- in fact I'm not sure if the AI factions track underage heirs at all or if they just spawn mature heirs out of nowhere. There's no way to know.

Well one ought to be able to check for underage heirs in other factions by using the "-ian" switch (although I myself haven't tried it).

Either way, however, it does make sense. I never have factions reappear after enough time has passed, which would reflect the fact that the last surviving member(s) of that faction's dynasty has perished (and thus there is no one left to lead that faction in a re-emergence).

Though unrealistic, it brought challenges in the late game - always a good thing.

True dat. It was a bit cheesy, but I didn't mind faction re-emergences nearly as much as most of the other late-game stuff that was meant to slow you down.

[Furious Mental]

I'm wondering how they will handle the Papcy in MTW 2. Can it be invaded? Will it re-emerge every few turns like before?

[hoetje]

I'm wondering how they will handle the Papcy in MTW 2. Can it be invaded? Will it re-emerge every few turns like before?

Yea,I'm wondering that too? Will you be able to take Rome,and get one of your own cardinals to be elected as pope , and thus having an alliance with all catholic factions,or will all catholic factions hate you and prepare for war?

[The Wizard]

Doesn't that mean that it's not going to happen?

Eh?

[danfda]

I was making a cheap, below the belt shot at CA, regarding a wonderful feature somehow getting "lost" during the creation of the sequel. Wrong of me, I know, but I couldn't help myself!

[Akka]

Only if the reemergence is done logically and correctly.
I was quite irritated by the non-stop rebirth of nations. It was usually safer to let a faction with one province than to eradicate it, because then it could become a new superpower once destroyed (0_o).

[professorspatula]

It would perhaps be cool/interesting if saying you can still bribe family members/generals from other factions to your side, that these bribed men could then be the instigators of their original faction's revival. They could be great generals for you, but if their loyalty declines, beware! Or maybe not.

Actually does anyone know how family members and generals will function this time around? Same as before?

[ByzantineKnight]

It would perhaps be cool/interesting if saying you can still bribe family members/generals from other factions to your side, that these bribed men could then be the instigators of their original faction's revival.

Or if they would still belong to the other faction but be under your control e.g. you have a say in what their faction does, or you can call that general to go rogue or join you (along with the full stack he has)

[JR-]

i like the feature, hope it returns.

with fewer uber elite units this time tho.

[Bob the Insane]

In MTW the factions re-emerged with elite units and all that jazz just a few turns after defeating them, which i don't like at all.

My pet theory on dealing with this in MTW was:

The troops on the map do not represent all the troops in europe, only those troops directly in the employ of the faction leaders (ruling family now?). Each province had it's own petty nobles who had retainers and troops of their own. Given this "fact" it was not to hard to abstract these nobles getting all indepence minded and raising there own armies to revolt against the King (or whatever). Further to this I viewed the Loyalty rating of a province as not so much the loyalty of the people, but of the local nobility...

Well it helped me...

Even the castles had permanent garrisons of cowardly archers who lived in the towers and would surrender at the drop of a hat if their where no royal troops around to keep and eye on things...