Quote Originally Posted by Foot
I agree with Thaatu. I don't think how you are playing should be termed historically, rather it is more like "playing as if it was history". If you have a valid reason for entering into a war with gaul or Pontos then you shouldn't wait for an arbitrary reform date to do so. Just load up your armies with Polybian Principes, as the later polybian armies were prone to do as I understand, and take the fight to them. Role-playing is far more fun than following history, imo.

Foot
I certainly agree with you, but sticking to the historical boundaries of "polybian-troop-rome" has until now helped me to restrain myself from conquering half the known world and killing of enemy factions. I have never before advanced this slowly, but I can guarantee you, that the game is a lot more interesting if you give the AI the time to really build their towns and empires. As soon as I have marian legions, I will not stop for a history lesson again... Death to the weak, mash, mash!!! (quoted from dork tower magazine).
I would think it would be great, if one could start at different times (for example, about 220 b.c. (Hannibal), 115 b.c. Jugurtha of Numidia, and Mithridates of Pontos, 60 b.c. (Caesar / Gaul). That would also give you some quite interesting options with other nations - ever thought about Caesar laying down his sword in front of Vercingetorix at the gates of rome? ) Probably this would be possible by using the "provincial campaign" option?
But most likely I will follow your advice concerning the Principes, if everything else fails. Thanks a lot.