Hebrew Temple of Jerusalem cannot be destroyed

[Roma_Victrix]

Oy vey! The Second Temple shall stand forever, until the end of days! Or at least until the Romans show up...

https://i.imgur.com/ItgAmSE.jpg


Sorry, I had to make this meme when I saw this.

Personally I think it's a good thing that such historic monuments cannot be destroyed simply for getting more of that mnai, that loot, that cash, that dough, that sweet, sweet cheddar. Is it historically accurate, though? Or realistic?

I definitely like the fact that in 226 BC the Colossus of Rhodes receives 100% damage from the historic earthquake that brought it down and reduced it to rubble and ruins. Then again, I also like the fact that you can simply repair it (take that, oracles). Once you've spent 24,000 mnai doing so then you can once again reap the benefits of having it in your settlement.

[nvm]

I was actually surprised it was impossible to destroy despite the description. Then again, why would you do that when 10 percent law bonus is rather handy for most factions?

[athanaric]

10% law is a damn good bonus. I think the problem with destructible uniques is that you can't manually spare them when you sack a city. M2TW has this annoying mechanic that certain buildings vanish or downgrade without warning if you choose any other option than "occupy" upon conquest. And given the way the AI treats conquered settlements, you would never even get to see most unique structures if they were destructible.

[Ἀπολλόδοτος Α΄ ὁ Σωτήρ]

Oy vey! The Second Temple shall stand forever, until the end of days! Or at least until the Romans show up...

Oy gevalt! Calm down! The Second Temple will never fall to the hands of the Romaim as long as AI is in charge of the roman faction.

[alex33]

Oy gevalt! Calm down! The Second Temple will never fall to the hands of the Romaim as long as AI is in charge of the roman faction.

True! I would give rep but i can't sadly xD Stupid Medieval 2 engine. I don't think the roman ai will do anything more than invade southern gaul ever sadly

[Roma_Victrix]

I was actually surprised it was impossible to destroy despite the description. Then again, why would you do that when 10 percent law bonus is rather handy for most factions?

It is pretty crucial, you're right, but I should just be able to blow stuff up whenever I feel like it, for money! Dynamite and TNT and all that anachronistic stuff.

10% law is a damn good bonus. I think the problem with destructible uniques is that you can't manually spare them when you sack a city. M2TW has this annoying mechanic that certain buildings vanish or downgrade without warning if you choose any other option than "occupy" upon conquest. And given the way the AI treats conquered settlements, you would never even get to see most unique structures if they were destructible.

Yeah, you're right.

Oy gevalt! Calm down! The Second Temple will never fall to the hands of the Romaim as long as AI is in charge of the roman faction.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Ἀπολλόδοτος Α΄ ὁ Σωτήρ again.

True! I would give rep but i can't sadly xD Stupid Medieval 2 engine. I don't think the roman ai will do anything more than invade southern gaul ever sadly

Well, I have also seen them invade Sicily, Corsica, Sardinia, and the coasts of Iberia and North Africa, but that's about it. I can't even imagine them moving further east than Greece, but that's good for me, as I play with Western Greek factions. I rather like being able to mop the Romans up quickly before moving further into Western Europe around 200 or 180 BC or so.

[myarta]

How bad is doing something other than occupy? Are buildings that cannot be manually removed exempt from the smashing? I don't mind having to rebuild temples and markets.

My experience has been, e.g. taking Gergouia as the Romans (capital of Arverni), that the city was at 30 or 40% even with a decent city pacifier general handling it, and it revolted before I could get the client ruler buildings built and the ruler recruited and installed. So I had to re-siege it with fresh enemy units spawned by the rebellion and choose to sack it this time to keep PO from rebelling until I could get the client king set up.

What do you guys who never sack or exterminate do? Stop expanding after 20 settlements? Hope that you only get several turns of riots instead of a revolt and that you can get your CR set up in time? process_cq to speed up the CR installation? Siege every place twice and the maluses are less on the second conquest?

I'm not even talking about painting the map, but areas within historical Roman expansion. And I'm even going for CRs instead of trying to greedily Romanize immediately, but it takes IIRC 4 turns to set up (2 for precursor, 1 for CR recruiting building, 1 more for the recruitment to finish).

[nvm]

You can destroy markets and other buildings which lower public order to rebuild them later. But I personally often just end up sacking troublesome cities immediately to stop the pain. However, if you have to sack a city multiple times and still can't keep hold on it, the buildings giving public order will also go down and make it more difficulty to hold on. You can see that with Liguria. It starts with very few buildings constructed, including Public Order, and is stuck climbing to 80 percent unrest consistently {or maybe it's if you let the event spawning stacks trigger multiple times}.Since the script would just continue spawning garmies if I lost control of it again, I did not want to gamble with trying to put in a client ruler again when a FM was doing just fine with 75-80 public order and contributing to slowly Romanizing the provinces.

A lot of the times though, I just end up sacking cities to to stop revolts. It doesn't help that there's no way to see what the potential public order will be if you set the taxes to low before you decide what to do with the city, so better safe than sorry.

[Roma_Victrix]

To be honest, if I have to reconquer a city and sack it again after the first time, then I usually do the process_cq console command to get that recruited allied governor in place as quickly as possible. There's simply too much to do in the game than to worry about taking the same city over and over, pointlessly, when sacking and even exterminating it should historically have worked to quell resistance. And if a city revolts more than twice, I generally lower the population with "add_population -4000" in the console. I generally have a distaste for cheating, but within bounds of reason. In my opinion this is one of the few game mechanics that is largely unreasonable.

[myarta]

Right. Gergouia has a bit more of a distance to capital malus than Liguria plus the 'captured capital' issue. I think I tend to play like RV and would use the console to handle initial pacification when I just defeated their entire army but they keep spawning new ones ad nauseam because riots always boil over immediately. That's one nice benefit of the -100 to +100 provincial happiness in the newer TW games, where you have a bit of a buffer and it gives you more than a couple of turns to start turning things around.

I find I have to at least sack in some of the more distant places (central and western Spain), and just wanted to make sure I wasn't losing anything other than 'it will downgrade law and order buildings'. Which is fine, since that's still not as bad as the extra +30 unrest from just occupying, and I'd rather have a barely-hanging-on grip on the province than trigger the chain revolts.

Also I think Gergouia had a bigger city size which means a nastier famine unrest penalty. On turn 250ish I've had to resort to frequent games in some of Cisalpina after a 20 stack of garrison (admittedly is_peasant units) isn't enough to keep all 4 of them happy, and I don't have governors to spare for more than 1, now that they're all urbanizing nicely. Famine happiness penalties are growing faster than I'm losing cultural penalties, but it feels reasonable to me that over time as the city gets larger and more powerful it is a little harder to keep under my thumb. It's only the instant re-siegeing on initial conquest that is an engine limitation issue for me.

[nvm]

The main problem here is that regardless of how much population a city has, your public order bonus is still stuck at 80 percent max. As such, it might be a good idea to control growth of defeated cities so they don't become more trouble than they're worth. Destroy granaries if necessary - personally I only consider that gamey if that granary had been instrumental in getting the city to it's current size, as this is in fact possible without granaries. If you think a city might be trouble in the future, do not even grow it. too large. Stunt it's growth by whatever means necessary - do not construct or demolish granaries and fertility/farming temples, move your Lenient governor out of there, oppress the populace with high taxes.

Additionally, I would like to bring attention to the fact that you have stated you have "no governors to spare". Now, I understand that Cursus Honorum makes that a more complicated thing for Rome, however in my games as Areuakoi and Makedon which had lasted approximately this many turns as well, I haven't had any problems with running out of governors, in fact I've very often sat twiddling my thumbs waiting "Damn, when is that Client Ruler in Athens finally going to die so I can finally establish a PROPER government they deserve?! It was a royal mistake to ever put it there in first place!". I've been running a policy of not being overager with expansion unless I can be sure I have at least one extra FM to leave governing in a conquered city afterwards, and thus far it has helped. As Rome, while Cursus Honorum is a big help in developing your characters, it's not a necessity. I believe people that you leave governing Provinces already receive a trait that makes them better at it.

However, I've only conquered as far as Syria and Cilicia as Makedon, so maybe Gergouia counts as further than that. I'm not quite sure.

As Areuakoi I've had a few public order problems in some cities in Spain, but nothing too serious due to being artificially limited to Large Cities only anyway.

[myarta]

At the beginning there's no trouble, but at the moment (turn 267) I have 59 regions and 27 generals. I'm a little ahead of the expansion rate of the Romans (most notably Gaul) but not too excessively so. I've never had anywhere near as many generals as I have cities unless I stay small.

Yeah, normally I like to build things so I move high growth governors around to get places over the 6k hurdle, as most places can't break 6k by buildings alone. But for the moment I am a little pressed for governors, so I'm leaving some places stuck at mid to high 5000s on purpose because it keeps their public order stable, and I'll come back to developing them further later once things have calmed down enough to handle it.

I like the RP of the Cursus so I tend to run guys through them unless they're so old (69 or something) that coming back to get Consul one more time is not worth it.

Actually I'm surprised the game says I have 27 generals since I only have 13 on my sheet. Another 5 are CRs so they have to stay in place, so that's 18. Then I have 5 people past the age of education but before serious political office running around getting their military experience in (shuffling reinforcements, building watchtowers), so that's 23, and then I have 4 underage still getting education (teens and early 20s). So that explains the 27.

Current assignments:

LEGIO I Command
LEGIO II Command
Governor of Achaea (Athenai)
Governor of Macedonia (Demetrias)
Brakara pacification (recently conquered)
Turgalium pacification ("" "")
Governor of Gallia Comata (Lugdunum)
Governor of Corsica et Sardinia (Caralis)
Governor of Illyria (Dalminium)
Governor of Gallia Transalpina (Massalia)
Patavium -> 24k population supervision
-Traveling for Triumph celebration-
-Just arrived in Roma for reelection-

And the following vacant positions:
Governor of Sicilia
Governor of Cisalpina
Governor of Hispania Citerior
Governor of Hispania Ulterior

I'm mostly in a crunch because I lost a lot of upper 60s/early 70s guys from the first batch of kids/marriages and the second batch aren't quite of age yet in the Political system (Praetor+ for me).
A few more are dropping off from age, but in another 10-15 years I should gain more from this crop than I lose to age.
But there's certainly not enough to populate each settlement in a Roman Province, let alone fill all the provincial capitals (meaning 'Roman' provinces of multiple in-game 'provinces').