Turning Off Late Game Rebellions

**Roger Smith** · June 02, 2012, 06:32 PM

Hey guys, I was wondering if it's possible to stop the late game roman rebellions. I know there are a lot of people who find losing half of their empire fun because it's a challenge, but I don't really look forward to losing half of my empire. Thanks for any help.

**Smerka** · June 02, 2012, 09:27 PM

I would think it's in the background script because the first rebel is in there.

**Du Silence** · June 03, 2012, 08:10 AM

->Play_Rome->data->scripts->background_script.

Section nr 4 contains the Late roman rebellion, deleting the entire section should fix it. (remember to keep a back-up of the script somewhere) I've personally started a campaign with it after my 2 first campaigns with rome ended off in a constantly re-emerging rebellion <.<
Note that I haven't tested it throughly, but it should be alright. You'll probably still get the message about a roman rebellion coming around, but none will appear, and no generals will lose loyalty.

**Silius Saurus** · June 03, 2012, 01:09 PM

Not sure why you would want to do this; the 2nd rebellion (Roman Civil War) is great fun. After I come out of it, I usually have a hardcore elite army, topnotch generals and everything else afterward is kinda anticlimactic.

**Ybbon** · June 03, 2012, 02:13 PM

You're on your 39th post and you're already trying to nix part of the mod? Now maybe you've played a lot and not posted a lot but instead of worrying about it, play it, if you hate it, then try bypassing but play the mod first!

**Julio-Claudian** · June 03, 2012, 02:26 PM

Would I be right in saying that removing this rebellion would mean the faction leader never becomes Dictator in Perpetuum?

**chaplain118** · June 03, 2012, 02:37 PM

I thought the Dictator in Perpetuo was necessary to trigger the 2nd rebellion.

The other alternative to not triggering this rebellion would be to not load the script... but that brings with it a whole boatload of other issues.

**Primo** · June 03, 2012, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by Symbyox

Hey guys, I was wondering if it's possible to stop the late game roman rebellions. I know there are a lot of people who find losing half of their empire fun because it's a challenge, but I don't really look forward to losing half of my empire. Thanks for any help.

No one actually looks forward to loose half of his empire. But it makes for a good late campaign experience - on the contrast to the normal late campaign gameplay, which consisted out of massing the enemy down, fully knowing that no one is able to challenge you.

It is also a nice feature from a historical point of view - you play, after all, a simulation of history.

**Du Silence** · June 03, 2012, 03:01 PM

So true, I never fully finish a campaign... I've a couple of times tried to pump in 90% of my cash to whatever faction I felt would be the most challenge, never quite did the trick, it was simply slowing down my progress rather than giving them a boost

**Smerka** · June 03, 2012, 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by Luke Vader

No one actually looks forward to loose half of his empire. But it makes for a good late campaign experience - on the contrast to the normal late campaign gameplay, which consisted out of massing the enemy down, fully knowing that no one is able to challenge you.

It is also a nice feature from a historical point of view - you play, after all, a simulation of history.

not sure if serious... The is too gamey to be a simulation maybe EmpireTW. In Empire the people actually die in 1 bullet and 1 slash of the sword, where as in Rome it takes 5 slashes or arrows to kill. Now TW is going even more arcade with Napoleon and Shogun 2.

**Primo** · June 03, 2012, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by Smerka

not sure if serious... The is too gamey to be a simulation maybe EmpireTW. In Empire the people actually die in 1 bullet and 1 slash of the sword, where as in Rome it takes 5 slashes or arrows to kill. Now TW is going even more arcade with Napoleon and Shogun 2.

Well, if I would take a sword and just hit you with it - you probably wouldn't die.

Now, let's just assume a trained soldier would kill some unprotected, defenceless enemy in one hit - why do you assume he can kill an enemy trying to do the same with him in one hit?

Not sure what you always have with your arcade, but it is way more arcade if people just die.

In RTW, soldiers dodge attacks. They block them. And sometimes they get a blow, but if it isn't too serious, they stand up and fight again. If it is serious, they either die (surgery wasn't really that advanced back then), or maybe recover after the battle - but don't participate in it anymore.

What exactly is "arcade" about this?

**Smerka** · June 03, 2012, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by Luke Vader

Well, if I would take a sword and just hit you with it - you probably wouldn't die.

Now, let's just assume a trained soldier would kill some unprotected, defenceless enemy in one hit - why do you assume he can kill an enemy trying to do the same with him in one hit?

Not sure what you always have with your arcade, but it is way more arcade if people just die.

In RTW, soldiers dodge attacks. They block them. And sometimes they get a blow, but if it isn't too serious, they stand up and fight again. If it is serious, they either die (surgery wasn't really that advanced back then), or maybe recover after the battle - but don't participate in it anymore.

What exactly is "arcade" about this?

The fact there is never a 1 hit kill. So you are telling me in ancient war everyone could take several arrows and keep fight like it's nothing? 1 hit kills should be common not scarce.

**RafoutRoud** · June 03, 2012, 07:18 PM

The second rebellion is one of the best parts of the game. That and defeating the Parthians over and over again in very hard battles.

I remember having to recall my faction leader and the Flavia Felix legions from the war against Pergamon. I left tiny garrisons in asia minor and went to 70000 debt on turn one. Flavia Felix took back Greece and marched on Rome.

That said, the fight for Gaul was much tougher, as Massalia was holding the easiest way into Italy and had like 9 stacks roaming about looking for me.

**Primo** · June 04, 2012, 03:41 AM

Originally Posted by Smerka

The fact there is never a 1 hit kill. So you are telling me in ancient war everyone could take several arrows and keep fight like it's nothing? 1 hit kills should be common not scarce.

And on what do you base that? I mean, not to forget that there are 1 hit kills - ever seen a cataphract charge? Lot's of 1-hit kills.

But in normal melee kombat there aren't many 1 hit kills, most blows are dodged or blocked. Combat wasn't like the movies make it out to be.

Even arrows could be blocked - by a shield, for example; but it could also simply hit the armor and not hurt the soldier a tiny bit.

I have to repeat: Too much 1 hit kills are Arcade, are hollywood movie like.

**Smerka** · June 04, 2012, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by Luke Vader

And on what do you base that? I mean, not to forget that there are 1 hit kills - ever seen a cataphract charge? Lot's of 1-hit kills.

But in normal melee kombat there aren't many 1 hit kills, most blows are dodged or blocked. Combat wasn't like the movies make it out to be.

Even arrows could be blocked - by a shield, for example; but it could also simply hit the armor and not hurt the soldier a tiny bit.

I have to repeat: Too much 1 hit kills are Arcade, are hollywood movie like.

Weapons don't seem powerful compared to the EmpireTW but that's probably cause of gunpowder. So discount what I said.

**Nerouin** · June 05, 2012, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by Smerka

not sure if serious... The is too gamey to be a simulation maybe EmpireTW. In Empire the people actually die in 1 bullet and 1 slash of the sword, where as in Rome it takes 5 slashes or arrows to kill. Now TW is going even more arcade with Napoleon and Shogun 2.

In Empire there are heat-seeking bullets. This is no joke. Soldiers also have quasi-force fields to protect them from these overly-accurate bullets. This, too, is no joke.

Would you call this realistic?

**Smerka** · June 05, 2012, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Nerouin

In Empire there are heat-seeking bullets. This is no joke. Soldiers also have quasi-force fields to protect them from these overly-accurate bullets. This, too, is no joke.

Would you call this realistic?

I think you mistaken napoleon with empire because in empire musket battles last because of the accuracy, the same can not be said for napoleon.

**Julio-Claudian** · June 05, 2012, 02:46 PM

Making one hit kills more common than they are would mean successful armies would be all but wiped out after two or three evenly pitched battles. The way it is now, gaining a 'clear victory' after a battle on equal terms means you lose about 200 men or thereabouts. That seems as close to the reality as can be shown in the game. Losing half your army in what could be called a 'normal' battle would just be silly. Did Octavian and Antony lose half of their men at Philippi? And so on.