Do you want complete control of Rome...

[Durnaug]

...from game start or a similar gameplay mechanic to Rome vanilla in which you first had to deal with rivals and the Senate? Please note this doesn't necessarily mean support for separate Roman factions, just the notion of vying for control and influence within Rome aswell as fighting campaigns abroad.

The reason I ask is that I recall enjoying the "mini game" of dealing with the Senate (getting those offices), popular opinion and the rival Roman factions (although many hate that mechanic but perhaps it can be managed in a different way). If you start out with Total control perhaps the game becomes slightly shallower and also loses the suspense of the looming Civil War you know you must face.

[Berry_Punch]

In one interview they did mention, that you will have political rivals and opposition, when trying to turn Rome into an empire or preserve the republic. I welcome it. I liked the Senate, the Roman factions and the civil war in the first RTW and I welcome it back now.

[Heathen Storm]

The only thing I disliked were the 'senate missions'. Just like the missions of Rome: TW and M2TW, they were terrible.

[Berry_Punch]

I didn't mind them. They weren't that common, at least for me. But if I would get them to often, I would hate them too.

[kis12134]

I think CA will implement a nice system to represent the struggle between families.
Maybe if they make a system like if a family doesn't like you it might rebel or try to change the government type(like NTW, but better.)

[daelin4]

The RTW system was unrealistic but it was fun, to try to build up your own bloc while watching the progress of your "allies". It was also fun to teleport their armies near my own so I can have titanic battles against enemies. It was a bit annoying though to infect all their cities and kill all their generals while having them fight impossibly large armies and they still manage to churn out tons of troops. The Scipii even managed to remain in control of Carthage well after five turns of rioting.

There was also a lot of partiality issues with the Roman family system. Of all the campaigns I played, only one had another family declared outlaws by the Senate. Everytime it would be the player.

Still I do prefer Roman sub-factions operating on their own. The three Roman factions in RTW really were just presentations of Roman consuls and their own interests as they campaign overseas and legions' support lay more towards them than the state. If there is just ONE Roman faction doing everything not only takes that away but the player would have to deal with all the action by themselves. Trying to replace the three families with some over-complicated system where Rome is one faction but operates as if there were many is just unneeded and likely introduces more mechanisms (and thus more bugs) than the system it tries to replicate.

[Theseus1234]

The RTW system was unrealistic but it was fun, to try to build up your own bloc while watching the progress of your "allies". It was also fun to teleport their armies near my own so I can have titanic battles against enemies. It was a bit annoying though to infect all their cities and kill all their generals while having them fight impossibly large armies and they still manage to churn out tons of troops. The Scipii even managed to remain in control of Carthage well after five turns of rioting.

There was also a lot of partiality issues with the Roman family system. Of all the campaigns I played, only one had another family declared outlaws by the Senate. Everytime it would be the player.

Still I do prefer Roman sub-factions operating on their own. The three Roman factions in RTW really were just presentations of Roman consuls and their own interests as they campaign overseas and legions' support lay more towards them than the state. If there is just ONE Roman faction doing everything not only takes that away but the player would have to deal with all the action by themselves. Trying to replace the three families with some over-complicated system where Rome is one faction but operates as if there were many is just unneeded and likely introduces more mechanisms (and thus more bugs) than the system it tries to replicate.

The issue is that the 3 different "families" used in RTW was such an unrealistic mechanic of what you're trying to describe. It rarely worked where each family raised their own army and dictated where that army would go. Rome operated as a whole with internal factional divisions, not some sort of alliance between families. There is surely a better mechanic for simulating politics and rivalries within a faction than having each nation be represented as 3 separate factions.

[boxleitnerb]

I like the idea of gradual control, very good.

[Jester]

i really dont have any preference here. whatever works best and is most fun.

[Anna_Gein]

I just ask no realm divide system. My imagination is too much restricted on this subject to actually find a worse system.

I also hope non-Roman faction will be able to experiment civil war. There was just too many civil war in Hellenistic country to ignore it.

[Wowwars]

...from game start or a similar gameplay mechanic to Rome vanilla in which you first had to deal with rivals and the Senate? Please note this doesn't necessarily mean support for separate Roman factions, just the notion of vying for control and influence within Rome aswell as fighting campaigns abroad.

The reason I ask is that I recall enjoying the "mini game" of dealing with the Senate (getting those offices), popular opinion and the rival Roman factions (although many hate that mechanic but perhaps it can be managed in a different way). If you start out with Total control perhaps the game becomes slightly shallower and also loses the suspense of the looming Civil War you know you must face.

I loved this feature lol, but i like Rome as 1 Faction and not 3 OP ones, still i dont want to completely control every roman family, just the one i pick or start with.

[daelin4]

The issue is that the 3 different "families" used in RTW was such an unrealistic mechanic of what you're trying to describe. It rarely worked where each family raised their own army and dictated where that army would go. Rome operated as a whole with internal factional divisions, not some sort of alliance between families. There is surely a better mechanic for simulating politics and rivalries within a faction than having each nation be represented as 3 separate factions.

The families expand in the general directions where the Senate gives missions. As Brutii you will find yourself going eastwards, while Scipii goes towards North Africa, and Julii through Gaul. The AI does this, although rather scriptly. The player can always just ignore these initial missions and go for other regions, from which the Senate will start issuing missions determined by your proximity. There were internal divisions in the sense that you or the other families will gain Senate positions. The only other possible tension would have been breaking alliances and trade rights and outright war.

If there really is a better mechanic please share. So far not even CA has detailed this mystery system that so many people jumped upon and hailed as a great idea.

[Muizer]

I voted "total control", but that's not really what I mean. What I do mean is that the Romans should not be divided over multiple playable factions. I want the political struggles to take place within my faction, which quite obviously should not be a dynasty. One way to imagine this is that you have a division between the "optimates" and the "populares". All your faction members would be assigned to one or the other when they come of age. Decisions you get to make (such as construction or policy decisions) will favour one side or the other. If your decision making is unbalanced, one side will ultimately become disaffected, resulting in rioting in the streets. If nothing is done, a revolt may take place and you will get the choice to either preserve the Republic by giving in to demands or start a civil war.

[Emperor Domitianus]

Both options are interesting but dealing in Rome with opponents like the Senate would be more interesting..

[totaltotalwar]

Nobody said anything about the generals yet. I prefer Rome as one faction with a new system, but I want the power of the generals included in this system. Great generals with the support of their army can surely change the way the politics will work in the game. If you aren't able to keep his loyalty he can easily go the side of your rivals in the senate and even start a conspiracy with them to take your power! Why not?

[Durnaug]

Nobody said anything about the generals yet. I prefer Rome as one faction with a new system, but I want the power of the generals included in this system. Great generals with the support of their army can surely change the way the politics will work in the game. If you aren't able to keep his loyalty he can easily go the side of your rivals in the senate and even start a conspiracy with them to take your power! Why not?

And by Caesar's time, the generals had effective control of entire regions of the Republic's empire, e.g. in 54bc when Caesar was preparing for a British expedition he needed supplies from the Spanish provinces which were controlled by Pompey.

Dumb question but did the generals control the regions of the empire before the time of Marius, Sulla and the beginning of the end of the Republic?

[totaltotalwar]

I don't think so (I'm not sure anyway), but the advantage of a game is the possibility of making things before the period they relly happened. It's confirmed that Rome 2 will give us this possibility. I'd be great to make one of your generals become Emperor for some reason, even for a stronger Rome because of the support of the army.

[RO Citizen]

The vanilla Rome setup was foolish and very sketchy. I personally preferred the Roma Surrectum II style, with the Italian revolts and later the Civil War. And most probably that's what we're going to have in TWR2: a single Rome faction that has to deal with lots of rebels, like Samnites, Spartacus, Pompey..

[Col. Tartleton]

I want direct control of Rome, but fractured control of the "allies."

[Wowwars]

The vanilla Rome setup was foolish and very sketchy. I personally preferred the Roma Surrectum II style, with the Italian revolts and later the Civil War. And most probably that's what we're going to have in TWR2: a single Rome faction that has to deal with lots of rebels, like Samnites, Spartacus, Pompey..

Pompey a rebel?