Roman Civil War

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Even though the Roman Civil War is out of EB due to practice and principle I believe they, if implemented, would add a lot of challenge to the Romani player. Often by the Marian Reform you can field tons of armies and have probably conquered half of the known world in the process, so the presence of a big hostile force inside your own borders should increase the Roman challenge well within the boundaries of historicity.

The rationale is: given the fact that the commander of a legion often paid for it, not the state, the Marian legionaries had their loyalty shift gradually from the Republic to their paymasters, usually a wealthy man with enough influence and good lobby among settled veterans and the major political factions.

I was thinking that instead of the hassle of adding "Roman rebels" as a faction, there could be instead a scripted spawn of random and big eleutheroi stacks to the SPQR faction, representing a potentially rebellious commander. It should be decided based on the loyalty and other traits of your generals, as well as other factors, some completely random; what exactly they could be, I'm still thinking of.

So we get those big eleutheroi legions, often commanded by family members, and then as the Roman player we must decide on what action to take, often taking their extermination as top priority. Rebellion, after all, can be worse than external wars.

The Augustan Reforms could be tied to rebellions, too, since overthrowing the Republic would be far bloody and would collide with many interests.

[Megas Methuselah]

Shouldn't this be in the EB 2 forum? IIRC, there aren't going to be any significant changes made to EB 1....

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Well this could be implemented both in EB I and II theoretically .

[Pontius Pilate]

well the Romans weren't the only ones with civil wars. Alot of other factions had civil wars and rebellions and to give only the Romans civil wars would be unfair to the other nations and would make the game too Roman centered.

[Atilius]

So we get those big eleutheroi legions, often commanded by family members, ...

One problem with this is that spawned eleutheroi armies will often do absolutely nothing for years on end. So instead of a civil war you have a great big... civil disobedience campaign. You'd also want a good number of settlements to revolt against the player, but there's no good way to make that happen.

It appears that we may have more success triggering civil wars looks in EB2, but we won't look into that seriously for quite a while yet.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Rebels in all my games, depending on the difficulty, tend to be very aggressive if their odds are favourable. And generally because my cities are lightly garrisoned, a big stack of rebels that spawns in a turn will be besieging it on the next, even if they are not relatively close. A scripted eleutheroi army with a large size will most certainly become aggressive and try to take the player towns, that is if he plays on the recommended levels; would be moot to have any "civil war" if he chooses M/M instead of H/M, when rebels actually do something and are stronger.

On the question of universality, this could be a good generic model for representing civil wars scripted for all factions.

The implementation of a Civil War for the Romans particularly is a very interesting prospect: not only it adds a lot of challenge to the late Romani player, but it is also historically plausible given the context of the Marian Reform and its full political effects, as well as the disintegration of a late Romani Republic, paving the way to the Augustan Reforms being implemented by the right characters on the right violent circumstances.

And BTW, if you read Rubicon, by Tom Holland, you will almost certainly wish that you could recreate these epic fights within the realism and gameplay opportunities that the EB platform offers :D.

[desert]

I think I heard somewhere that FMs in MT2W can betray you of their own accord. Is this true?

[Megas Methuselah]

Yes, it is true. On my life, it is true. My kingdom for the one who accepts this truth! By my mother's grave, I swear it is true! Dear Gods, it's the truth! Zeus, hear me! It is true!

EDIT: Did I answer your question?

[Atilius]

A scripted eleutheroi army with a large size will most certainly become aggressive and try to take the player towns, that is if he plays on the recommended levels; would be moot to have any "civil war" if he chooses M/M instead of H/M, when rebels actually do something and are stronger.

I have spent countless hours experimenting with huge spawned eleutheroi armies in EB. They are ridiculously passive regardless of battle odds or difficulty level; I usually used VH. Even when spawned near lightly garrisoned settlements with no defenses, they would attack it only 5-10% of the time - this is in literally hundreds of trials.

And BTW, if you read Rubicon, by Tom Holland, ...

The guy writes like he's hyperventilating.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

I have spent countless hours experimenting with huge spawned eleutheroi armies in EB. They are ridiculously passive regardless of battle odds or difficulty level; I usually used VH. Even when spawned near lightly garrisoned settlements with no defenses, they would attack it only 5-10% of the time - this is in literally hundreds of trials.

Well, here I beg to differ. Eleutheroi are often a constant problem in my campaigns, and I so far the "passive" model only applies to a minority. If you play a barbarian faction especially they tend to spawn a lot and they will besiege towns with 100% certainty if their odds are good enough and they are in the same province. Even if they don't, the threat of a massive eleutheroi stack devastating the territory, cutting trade and ambushing passing armies is not remotely neglectable.

Funny thing is that I thought EB turned Eleutheroi stacks into aggressive folks. They are far more aggressive than in vanilla, for sure. There is also good ol' Satres, and he is very active in defending his territory, so IMO it is one big reason why it should be possible to implement them.

BTW I play on H/M, since I read that VH is possibly bugged.

The guy writes like he's hyperventilating.

That's where the emotion of reading is .

[Atilius]

... Eleutheroi are often a constant problem in my campaigns, and I so far the "passive" model only applies to a minority. If you play a barbarian faction especially they tend to spawn a lot and they will besiege towns with 100% certainty if their odds are good enough and they are in the same province.

Eleutheroi spawned by script behave much differently than the eleutheroi rebels and brigands which appear periodically - there is no comparison.

Funny thing is that I thought EB turned Eleutheroi stacks into aggressive folks. They are far more aggressive than in vanilla, for sure. There is also good ol' Satres, and he is very active in defending his territory, ...

Satres is defending eleutheroi territory. For some reason, eleutheroi stacks will defend their own territory agressively, but spawn them in a province they don't control and they do almost nothing. Even back when Moskon was spawned outside of Numantia (at a younger age) and bedeviled the Lusotannan for 10 years or so before dying, I never saw him actually capture a town.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

As for the Eleutheroi behaviour, I am really not familiar enough with the M2TW engine to comment about it. But about RTW EB strangely I still must disagree: in every campaign of mine randomly spawned eleutheroi stacks often attack if the odds are on their favour. I am often attacked because I tend to keep my towns lightly garrisoned and any small stack of brigands that spawns will besiege it, so we are really into two different worlds here. Not that I've never seen completely passive eleutheroi behaviour, but on a fair share of times with the appropriate conditions and at least Hard difficulty the brigands are aggressive and poise a constant danger. I'm sure that others would agree with me on a fairly consistent basis and on their own experiences; if not, there is always the tightly scripted "Satres" option tied with certain Marian and Augustan Reforms effect at least.

Anyway I think the point is done and discussed. It would be really a welcome feature if they implemented Civil strife on a certain basis in EB, and for the Romani it would be more than a matter of just steamrolling the world as they already do if the player doesn't place constraints on himself.

[Atilius]

But about RTW EB strangely I still must disagree...

How can you disagree? I doubt you've ever seen it happen: it's only done once in RTW EB, and very few people ever encounter the circumstances under which it occurs. Even then we have to give it lots of help. If it actually worked, we'd use it for a lot of things.

Perhaps I could have expressed myself better, so let me try again:

Eleutheroi armies spawned by script in non-eleutheroi territory are very passive, regardless of odds or difficulty level. Their behavior is very different from that of normally occurring rebels or brigands or even eleutheroi armies spawned by script on eleutheroi-held territory.

That makes spawning eleutheroi armies by script useless for simulating a civil war, because the eleutheroi would have to be placed in player-held regions.

[Leão magno]

Believe MTW2 Kingdons is a much better engine for this...

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

EB Roman history differs from real Roman history in a number of ways.

In EB, there is no Roman civil war.

But in EB, Rome eventually has to fight a huge war against a mighty Ptolemaic Empire in order to gain Egypt. (Or a mighty Seleucid Empire, depending on how things go.)

This did not happen historically, since the Ptolemies basically destroyed themselves as a major power through internal struggles before Rome ever got there - so Egypt was an easy conquest for Rome. The Seleucids also destroyed themselves in dynastic power struggles.

So it balances out. We could say that the EB Rome can't afford a civil war because she has to fight stronger external enemies than the real Rome had to.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Eleutheroi armies spawned by script in non-eleutheroi territory are very passive, regardless of odds or difficulty level. Their behavior is very different from that of normally occurring rebels or brigands or even eleutheroi armies spawned by script on eleutheroi-held territory.

That makes spawning eleutheroi armies by script useless for simulating a civil war, because the eleutheroi would have to be placed in player-held regions.

Sorry but I still beg to differ . Another clear example is the "Caledonian Invasion": regardless of the circumstances, Camulosadae will always be attacked by a scripted Eleutheroi army in the early Casse game. Non-scripted Eleutheroi bands still attack me at favourable odds for them and act aggressively if i play on Hard, so there is nothing conclusive for now because our experiences are very different .

Anyhow, if the problem is still specifically about spawning scripted guys on non-eleutheroi lands, an easy workaround would be to spawn them on eleutheroi territory then move them to Roman lands. My two cents.

[Atilius]

Another clear example is the "Caledonian Invasion": regardless of the circumstances, Camulosadae will always be attacked by a scripted Eleutheroi army in the early Casse game.

There is absolutely no such thing as a scripted Caledonian invasion. Where on earth did you get that idea? Try showing me where that's done in EBBS.

Non-scripted Eleutheroi bands still attack me at favourable odds for them and act aggressively if i play on Hard

That is completely irrelevant to the problem of eleutheroi armies spawned by script. I'm getting the impression that you have no idea what an army spawned by script is.

Anyhow, if the problem is still specifically about spawning scripted guys on non-eleutheroi lands, an easy workaround would be to spawn them on eleutheroi territory then move them to Roman lands. My two cents.

If you took the time you've spent arguing with me and actually tried that, you'd discover it doesn't work either.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

There is absolutely no such thing as a scripted Caledonian invasion. Where on earth did you get that idea? Try showing me where that's done in EBBS.

What? So what's that family member led Eleutheroi army in Britain doing when they are attacking your city in the same period with the same armies ?

All rebels are aggressive, that's all I can tell .

[Mediolanicus]

You clearly don't know what scripted armies are...

That army is there from the beginning.

Scripted armies like the Yuezhi invasion and the Casse invasion are passive.

Normal eleutheroi armies (spawned from the beginning or during the game by the game itself) can be agressive.

[Smeel]

Hmm, How difficult is it to let us say Baktria be able to Use Roman MICs? I mean like Baktria and Macedon share Mics, like that awesome AAR one of the EB members is writing. Then you could gift away all provinces you want to rebel, and voila, Civil war, with roman units :D. And would this be save-game compatible?

[Maion Maroneios]

Yeah, that's about the only way to simulate a good civil war with the limitations of the RTW engine. Oh, that the AAR is MarcusAureliusAntinius' one by the way

Maion

[Smeel]

Yes, that's the one! Still, no one who know how hard it would be to mod?

[theoldbelgian]

Yes, that's the one! Still, no one who know how hard it would be to mod?

well to start you have to remove a faction, then at some point you should have the faction emerge
and then you should gift the regions you want to that faction

[johnhughthom]

You can stop that army from attacking Camulosadae in the early game, don't build roads.

[Smeel]

Actually I was thinking about to enable Bactria to use Roman Mics, and let them live their life until I want a civil war. That way yo udon't have to delete anything or upset game balance :P

[Celtic_Punk]

well the Romans weren't the only ones with civil wars. Alot of other factions had civil wars and rebellions and to give only the Romans civil wars would be unfair to the other nations and would make the game too Roman centered.

Too roman centred?! you are the one bitching about the removal of Augustan troops.

I think that a few of the major rebellions in the factions represented in the game should be scripted by a few "rebel" armies inside your own borders. It would add a nice and (maybe not)welcome(at the time) challenge to the game.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Too roman centred?! you are the one bitching about the removal of Augustan troops.

Wow, wow, wow. All people can change their opinions, and they should as a matter of fact. We are constantly learning more and more new things, and therefore we must change our points of view accordingly. At first, I voted that the Augustan reforms should not be removed, but now I heartily endorse the removal of them. Almost no one gets to the reforms, they are too late to make much difference and EB is in desperate need of extra unit slots, not to mention that the Romani already have the most units of any faction. In light of such logical arguments, there should be no surprise that an intelligent person might change their opinion. Most Romanophiles experience strong feelings when finding out that the Augustan reforms will be scrapped, and hastily vote, but as they play more EB and spend more time on the forums, they become more moderate. I went down that road, and so did many other people, I am certain of it.

[Juggernaut]

Wow, wow, wow. All people can change their opinions, and they should as a matter of fact. We are constantly learning more and more new things, and therefore we must change our points of view accordingly. At first, I voted that the Augustan reforms should not be removed, but now I heartily endorse the removal of them. Almost no one gets to the reforms, they are too late to make much difference and EB is in desperate need of extra unit slots, not to mention that the Romani already have the most units of any faction. In light of such logical arguments, there should be no surprise that an intelligent person might change their opinion. Most Romanophiles experience strong feelings when finding out that the Augustan reforms will be scrapped, and hastily vote, but as they play more EB and spend more time on the forums, they become more moderate. I went down that road, and so did many other people, I am certain of it.

Besides, even if the Augustan reforms are gone in EB II, someone will make a mod for it anyway(even if that means scrapping some "unimportant" units")

[Aemilius Paulus]

Besides, even if the Augustan reforms are gone in EB II, someone will make a mod for it anyway(even if that means scrapping some "unimportant" units")

Absolutely.

[Pontius Pilate]

Too roman centred?! you are the one bitching about the removal of Augustan troops.

relax dude. no need to get hostile. I was just saying that the Romans weren't the only ones with civil wars.

Wow, wow, wow. All people can change their opinions, and they should as a matter of fact. We are constantly learning more and more new things, and therefore we must change our points of view accordingly. At first, I voted that the Augustan reforms should not be removed, but now I heartily endorse the removal of them. Almost no one gets to the reforms, they are too late to make much difference and EB is in desperate need of extra unit slots, not to mention that the Romani already have the most units of any faction. In light of such logical arguments, there should be no surprise that an intelligent person might change their opinion. Most Romanophiles experience strong feelings when finding out that the Augustan reforms will be scrapped, and hastily vote, but as they play more EB and spend more time on the forums, they become more moderate. I went down that road, and so did many other people, I am certain of it.

that's exactly how I feel.