Can generals rebel?

**Zarax** · 01-25-2007, 18:29

Coding wise is not as problematic as it might seem, the main problem is that introducing rebels would make a bloodbath as every rebel faction is one less playable slot available and I don't even wanna start thinking about the threads that it would create...

**GodEmperorLeto** · 01-25-2007, 20:07

I just mean having a general defect to the Eleutheroi, basically.

**Ludens** · 01-25-2007, 22:19

Originally Posted by GodEmperorLeto

I just mean having a general defect to the Eleutheroi, basically.

That would require setting the Eleutheroi as shadow faction, which causes a crash when the faction is destroyed.

**MarcusAureliusAntoninus** · 01-25-2007, 22:50

Originally Posted by Ludens

That would require setting the Eleutheroi as shadow faction, which causes a crash when the faction is destroyed.

The Eleutheroi or the faction that defects to the Eleutheroi? Because it is impossible to destroy the Eleutheroi as of the current setup.

**Xtiaan72** · 01-25-2007, 22:53

The Eleutheroi or the faction that defects to the Eleutheroi? Because it is impossible to destroy the Eleutheroi as of the current setup.

The optimate generals are the ones that should defect. Interesting idea because it wouldn't require getting rid of an existing faction at all.

**Ludens** · 01-25-2007, 23:09

Originally Posted by MarcusAureliusAntoninus

The Eleutheroi or the faction that defects to the Eleutheroi? Because it is impossible to destroy the Eleutheroi as of the current setup.

Not the Eleutheroi but the faction the Eleurtheroi are set as shadow-faction of.

**MarcusAureliusAntoninus** · 01-25-2007, 23:10

Originally Posted by Ludens

Not the Eleutheroi but the faction the Eleurtheroi are set as shadow-faction of.

That's what I thought/was afraid of.

**GodEmperorLeto** · 01-26-2007, 01:08

No, no, no, guys. No Eleutheroi as shadow-faction.

What I am saying is that, through traits and some coding, you can cause generals to defect to the Eleutheroi. The idea is that the player's faction is divided by civil war, and is in charge of the "legitimate" faction. Since history is written by the victors, that's fine by me. And it could allow gargantuan empires to spin apart by centripetal force.

Basically, when it happens, you get a message, like, "GENERAL REBELS! This general has raised his standard against your legitimate rule! Blah, blah, blah." It would make sense if a populares general revolted because an optimate is the head of the Romani, or if a king dies, and the heir's brother revolts in order to challenge him. Just make him Eleutheroi and let the player deal with him. If the Eleutheroi wins, well, the game's over anyway. If the player reconquers the rebel's territory, horray. If the game continues but that stuff is never regained, well... Dynasties have divided, both claiming legitimacy over the throne, and never reunited themselves.

**Xtiaan72** · 01-25-2007, 20:13

I'm glad some of you like the idea. I assumed when I brought it up there would be technical issues. It just seemed like a logical extension of the new trait system. Obviously the idea was geared to the Romani. I am encouraged that there are ways to implement it in the code but some of you have given solid reasons why it would be difficult to implement.

CONS-

1) If I'm understanding this right at least one faction would have to be elimanated to enable a rebel Roman faction. Since one of EB's main functions is to flesh out tons of cool factions, this in it self would turn some people off.

2) The coding to make it happen would be a gargantuan task. That's the biggest road block right there.

3) Shadow factions as playable would end the game when the original faction was eliminated. There is probably a work around on this one as there is no reason why the player couldn't be the original faction when the event happened.

4) People who don't have BI would not be able to play this version
---------------------------

PROS-

1) The ability to role-play a character that has ambitions of empire. With the new trait system this could be handled in a much better way than Vanilla with conditions that make it challenging and the payoff worth-while. It also gives the existing Roman political faction traits real function and a valid reason to
make use of the loyalty trait.

2) An epic, compelling end game. You get to be Emperor! And start a real line of succession. It would also add spice to campaigns for other factions. "Now is the time to strike, the Romans are in turmoil."

---------------------------------------

I also love EB as is. It's just an idea to keep people playing and prolong the shelf life of a game we all love. If it had enough support it would probably be best to implement it as an optional mini-mod for EB or to put it on the table as a valid idea for EB2 in the future.

**Zarax** · 01-26-2007, 12:17

Originally Posted by Xtiaan72

4) People who don't have BI would not be able to play this version

You can have rebels without BI, XGM already does that...

There might be only one way to implement this into BI, even though it requires some extra work and a slight degree of unrealism (the acceptability of which is upon the EB team)...

A few factions could have another normally playable faction shadow them (I'm guessing arche seleukeia - ptolemaics or arche seleukeia - parthia and aedui - averni as examples) and then they could have a provincial campaign where they would play with loyalty settings on...

PROS:

- You can give loyalty to some factions

- As it would be optional it wouldn't change the main campaign setup

CONS:

- Might not be very historical in some istances (it could be for the two gallic factions but others are not so clearly shaped)

- Requires a separate provincial campaign for each faction with loyalty

- Might require some extra options in the installer, meaning that you might have to reinstall to get different campaigns

- Requires quite a bit of work on traits