Actually, if I'm not mistaken I think they do actually do this, which is a good thing, because the traits each campaign vary. My piece of input on that would be I still think you should tweak the range a bit and institute the same kind of results you would often see in S2, where some of the major powers were always major powers as you'd expect.
In a game called Rome 2, to have Rome or Carthage destroyed w/in the first twenty years is just plain dumb. And as S2 has shown, avoidable. I mean sure there can be rare instances where a major clan got destroyed early in S2, but by and large if I for example played Date, I knew damn well I was going to have to contend with the diplomacy intricacies of alliance choices with Takeda, Uesugi and Hojo. The same should take place in R2, having someone like Carthage wiped out early by the likes of some no name barbarian clan wrecks immersion because it simply does not remotely fit reality. Sure this is a game about writing your own history, but it has a context and if we're just to treat all of the factions the same they might as well not have names and this might as well not be called Rome 2.
Last edited by easytarget; 09-22-2013 at 16:07.
Yes. Right now the difference between bland Rebel faction and unique names for the people living in just about every city is that some of these names, I know and I expect to know them and expect them to 'stick around'.
The first time I played a campaign, I played as the Gauls and I was really annoyed when I didn't have the Romans come around to declare war at some point, even after I had expanded into Spain. Then I went to go and check what they have been up to and they had not even moved off the Italian peninsula. They didn't even have Cisalpina.
Bookmarks