Will Rome 2 Have Social Classes like Patricans & Plebs ?

[Rorarii]

Or will it be like all other TW games and TOTALLY LAME-OUT on lower classes?

Romes struggles between Patricians and Plebs was a major aspect of Roman history and YET I get the feeling this aspect will be total-Ignore in Rome 2

Come on CA, open your horizons, internal warfare can be just as interesting as external.

I've suggested in the past that each nation could be made of 2 factions - Ruling Class and Ruled Class, and a player could play either. This could work if designed properly but suspect might add too much complexity for the Rome 2 engine.

Another way to achieve a similar effect, is to have a new AGENT who is a leader of lower class. This AI agent is located in your capital territory and is like a diplomat. You, as the ruler of your faction, negotiate with this agent regarding aspects of your lower classes, like land redistribution (will newly conquered land be allocated to the poor?), taxation, Laws (social policies - intermarriage, power sharing etc) etc. If you and this agent have a good relationship, he might do your requests to causes riots in enemy territory or encourage your lower classes to work harder / more recruits. If there's a falling out between you and this agent, he could cause Strikes, Riots and even Arab Springs in your realm!! This new agent of lower classes will ADD to strategic play and ADD to diplomacy! 2 things player are asking for.

Hoping CA will consider this.

R

[AngryTitusPullo]

Yes.

[Rorarii]

Where does it say that? i cannot find any reference to class warfare.

R

[AngryTitusPullo]

They'll probably use the method used in ETW regarding social classes. Politics also will make a major factor. This is the only way they can do a realm divide thinggy.

[DarthShizNit]

They'll probably use the method used in ETW regarding social classes. Politics also will make a major factor. This is the only way they can do a realm divide thinggy.

Why even bother doing RD??? It makes zero sense for the period and cultures.

And to the OP...no

[Raimeken]

I don't think there should be an RD element, only within Rome, the civil war.

[Rorarii]

I think A Civil war could happen in any faction, depends on how the Ruling class treats their people. Too many revolts at the same time could lead to a Arab Spring. But of course this is sandbox mode.

R

[Rorarii]

Any thoughts CA on the Lower-class Agent or is there something else in mind? maybe a characters trait - Tribune, Leader of the Plebs? But you'd still need to negotiate with him somehow?

hmmmm ..

R

[Luther0811]

Starting to sound like Crusader kings lol.

- Wes

[Sol Invictus]

From the snippets of info so far it sounds like there will be plenty of internal political struggles within all Factions that will have to be guarded against and dealt with. Sounds like Rome will have several leading families within a unified faction but those famalies might at any time work toward more power and attempt to seize absolute power through a Civil War and the reach for the purple. It sounds like it will be much more realistic and organic compared to the artificial way it was done in the first RTW.

[Megasalexandros]

The plebs in Rome had probably more rights than the Patricians after the pre Marian civil wars.
The plebs had the right to participate in the senate or as consuls without numerical limitations, but the Patricians were only allowed to have one Consul at a time.
So this "class" warfare in Rome is quite stupid, there were different nationalities that were incorporated to the Roman republic , those different nationalities, such as latians, Ligurians etc were categorized by the old original romans to the plebs.
Those distinctions lost their meaning especially after caesar, and it is not a case of poor or rich , but of original roman and later incorporated roman.

[KarlzBalla]

Megasalexandros, I believe you mixed up patricians and plebians. Patricians are the aristocrats who wielded major political power, while plebeians are the lower class that was somewhat limited politically.

[Megasalexandros]

Megasalexandros, I believe you mixed up patricians and plebians. Patricians are the aristocrats who wielded major political power, while plebeians are the lower class that was somewhat limited politically.

I have described it before that thats not the case, thats a missconception.
If you dont believe me, watch the TTC program about the early roman empire.
After a period in the old republic that changed. for eg Pompei was a Plebian.
And yes the plebians had political rights, dont mix the servilian classes with Plebians and patricians.

[KarlzBalla]

I have described it before that thats not the case, thats a missconception.
If you dont believe me, watch the TTC program about the early roman empire.
After a period in the old republic that changed. for eg Pompei was a Plebian.
And yes the plebians had political rights, dont mix the servilian classes with Plebians and patricians.

I never said the plebeians didn't have rights, only that the patricians by far had more power when the two were compared (at least in early Rome). And you're right, close to the end of the Republic things had changed drastically with numerous laws and shifts in attitudes, including the law that said at least one consul had to be plebeian.

[Slaytaninc]

According to EB, by this period Plebians had as many political rights as Patricians. Many prominent Roman commanders during the Punic Wars were Plebians.

Was there prejudice? Absolutely. Did patricians have an easier chance at prominence? Absolutely. But there was little in the way of conflict between the two classes and they often intermarried.

"Class" conflict is pretty damn anachronistic, but what class conflict there was was divided by classes besides Plebians and Patricians. Mostly the conflict was between Citizens and Subjects (Latin allies, Greek cities, etc.).

[Rorarii]

The plebs in Rome had probably more rights than the Patricians after the pre Marian civil wars.
The plebs had the right to participate in the senate or as consuls without numerical limitations, but the Patricians were only allowed to have one Consul at a time.
So this "class" warfare in Rome is quite stupid, there were different nationalities that were incorporated to the Roman republic , those different nationalities, such as latians, Ligurians etc were categorized by the old original romans to the plebs.
Those distinctions lost their meaning especially after caesar, and it is not a case of poor or rich , but of original roman and later incorporated roman.

Hmmmm, Livy must have been full of ? i'm sorry your mega-greekness, you're right of course!

I think it depends on the starting date of R2, sounds like we might be getting a starting date closer to the 3rdPunic war rather than earlier. If that is the case then "populares" would be a better term, Leaders like Caesar who saw their power base with the commoners.

You can always tell when CA doesn't want to discuss something, they send out the hounds!

R

[The True Roman]

People ask for to much out of these games, Total war is about War . Its not about politics or diplomacy, these things are Diversions from the main focus which is the battles. The Formula is solid, if they decide to add more to the other aspects of the game thats fine but don't expect to talk out your problems with people . And for the social classes they had it in Empire, Might do the same thing in Rome but it doesn't really matter if they do or not its about he civil wars not a peasant revolts

[beckyolt]

Starting to sound like Crusader kings lol.

- Wes

CA could learn A LOT from CK.