Civil war: only one?

**Petroniu** · September 27, 2014, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by REZA_TPORT1

civil war not challenging me but slow me down when i want to expand my Faction

Yeah, I am pretty sure that is what every emperor said whenever a major rebellion occurred.

**craziii** · September 27, 2014, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by EternalSilence

How hard can it be? seriously?

Obtain only generals from your own faction.
Check the gravitas and ambitions for your best generals. If they are to big, than eliminate them.

almost no civil war.
This civil war thing, is prob the best feature now in Rome 2.

then what is the point of having generals? they can never be high rank, or they will rebel. what is the point of the star system when it works like this? you just painstakingly raise a general to 6 stars, oh noes! he will rebel soon, lets assassinate him and lose influence in the govt on top of that.

there are better ways to make campaign map more challenging.

**The Forgotten** · September 27, 2014, 04:14 PM

I think what he meant is when they get too much ambition or influence. Stars shouldn't matter whether a general defects or not. But a successful general will have a lot of influence because he wins so many battles. Try to keep the generals in your family, and watch for the trustworthy and untrustworthy traits.

**C.Maximus** · September 28, 2014, 06:01 AM

Originally Posted by craziii

then what is the point of having generals? they can never be high rank, or they will rebel. what is the point of the star system when it works like this? you just painstakingly raise a general to 6 stars, oh noes! he will rebel soon, lets assassinate him and lose influence in the govt on top of that.

there are better ways to make campaign map more challenging.

Lol bro, what you described here sounds like real life... How many times did a "powerful general" try to take control and rebel? I could give examples but the entire IE campaign is based off some of them.... Anyways.. High level generals in TW games have ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS been a double edged sword; they are extremely powerful and useful, but at the same time, very risky to use because they could rebel at any time... Medieval 2 was full of these characters.... grow some nuts.. its common sense, you have a general who say.. defeated Egypt for you while your king fought off the Romans... Wouldnt it make sense for him to want the Egyptian lands for himself? Sure you might have a loyal General who is rank 8 and has high political sway as well as strong ambitions.... but, with how human history usually plays out, there are more power hungry than loyal... so it seems more realistic to have higher ranking generals rebel more often than lower ones... lower ones havent made it yet... they are still looking for approval, they are young...

I like the new politics system, only thing that upsets me is when an ally or client state comes in takes one of your old cities.... that is annoying, they are trying to help in their own little AI way, but in a way they are stealing land from you... bastards... guess if I was the king of Persia and a Vassal to Parthia, the moment a city rebels you swoop in and claim it saying you are doing it in defense of the Parthian empire... So I guess I cant be too mad at my vassals for doing such..

**craziii** · September 28, 2014, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by C.Maximus

Lol bro, what you described here sounds like real life... How many times did a "powerful general" try to take control and rebel? I could give examples but the entire IE campaign is based off some of them.... Anyways.. High level generals in TW games have ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS been a double edged sword; they are extremely powerful and useful, but at the same time, very risky to use because they could rebel at any time... Medieval 2 was full of these characters.... grow some nuts.. its common sense, you have a general who say.. defeated Egypt for you while your king fought off the Romans... Wouldnt it make sense for him to want the Egyptian lands for himself? Sure you might have a loyal General who is rank 8 and has high political sway as well as strong ambitions.... but, with how human history usually plays out, there are more power hungry than loyal... so it seems more realistic to have higher ranking generals rebel more often than lower ones... lower ones havent made it yet... they are still looking for approval, they are young...

I like the new politics system, only thing that upsets me is when an ally or client state comes in takes one of your old cities.... that is annoying, they are trying to help in their own little AI way, but in a way they are stealing land from you... bastards... guess if I was the king of Persia and a Vassal to Parthia, the moment a city rebels you swoop in and claim it saying you are doing it in defense of the Parthian empire... So I guess I cant be too mad at my vassals for doing such..

If I wanted a game to simulate real life, I would go play the sims. It is the same reason why I oppose realism in gaming. Besides, do you know how real life rulers deal with powerful generals? Have their entire extended family as hostages while they go on campaigns, that was how it works. If I was the ruler, I would also have a team of assassins following each powerful general, when they want to rebel no matter what, him and his inner circle would all find a dagger in the back. There would also be zero political repercussions as they would all be labeled as rebels, would also served as a warning/reminder to the rest of the generals. How is that for how real life worked?