How do YOU usually roleplay when playing Roma Surrectum?

[Hohenstaufen234]

Hi!

I wonder how people usually roleplay their game when their are playing RS as any faction, doesn´t necessary have to be Rome.
Do you blitz in RP?
Do you take settlements historically when playing (Rome for example)

And one thing, i have always wondered what this in the wiki means
"Non-adoptable characters capable of forming new family trees"

[reaper101]

Hm.
Typically I follow basic rules:
War and raiding is fairly acceptable, and enemy towns belonging to such a faction are usually just occupied, with enslavement happening only if the war has been particularly brutal.
If a faction is an ally and betrays me, there is no mercy allowed. Every settlement belonging to them gets exterminated instantly, and I'll prosecute the war against said faction as much as possible.
Roman battle tactics are followed fairly closely. If a barbarian faction and fighting the Romans, I'll work to emulate them if I lose a battle to them by training Romanesque troops and deploying them in similar fashion.
Roman legions are built along historical lines, though I don't treat the Allied Polybian cohorts as full legions and tend to break them up more easily than I do Consular ones.
I still try to get allies if possible, seek peace if I can.
And lastly:
Pragmatism, pragmatism, pragmatism.

[Saul Tyre]

Quote: "crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women"

[Larkin]

Whatever comes naturally! The mod does a wonderful job of immersing me no matter who I play. I like to play defensive campaigns focused on internal development and diplomacy with warfare only when I am attacked, or against rebels, when playing the Greeks, who were my first love. I like to get invested in the characters of my generals - the traits etc they gain I use to really paint a picture of their personalities in my head, and if I am really committed I will take actions based on those traits - so a hot headed, impulsive general I might have rush out with an inexperienced army to meet an attacking force rather than wait for reinforcements.

One of my favourite things I did in a 2.6 Greek campaign was to have a bunch of armies raised from different city states, led by generals from those states, and imagined them competing between each other to be the most successful as I campaigned in Gaul and Iberia. Sending them across the Med, fighting, conquering, and then sailing back to retrain - always of course having to go home to their respective cities to retrain the unique units. The way the Spartan, Athenian, Achaean, Bithynian etc generals all developed - and the style/composition of each army was different too - made for a really immersive and fun campaign. Then I would 'reward' the most successful general with the honour of leading a new campaign somewhere else, based on a logical choice for that city state. I spent a lot of time tallying up kills and deaths to really see who was the most effective! It was genuinely sad when one bit off more than he could chew and was killed in battle (I would also do things like have the more bloody generals getting more recklessly involved personally, one of the more philosophical generals basically never engaging his bodyguard in combat, etc) and I could imagine the other generals, having not heard the news, getting back to Greece, meeting together to brag and tell stories, and wondering why one of them did not come back with his army... and then it was even more sad when they started to die of old age, but of course, they had sons (for the most part) that were available for the next generation of campaigning!

[Carthago_Nova]

The main aim of mine is to immerse as entirely as it possible.

The Legions.

I always try to recruit them accordind to historical reality. Each of my legions consists of about 6000 soldiers. 4 thousand of legionaries and 2-3 of auxilary forces who always enter the battle first. I always recrut only one first cohort with Aquila which is extremelly important. Because if it's lost I disband my legion for a very long period of time or even forever. I had to disband my favorite Leio VIII Avgusta lately. They lost their Aquila during battle with Boii, 6 thousand army (2 full stacks) was completely annihilated in forest carnage by 4.5 thousand of barbarians. It was a shame.

The Battle.

I always use classic roman line formation (no chess board). At first I use axillary forces and only then the legion himself.
And the main rule - no battle interface at all. Only my eyes and restricted camera.

The Expansion.

I never invade other nations without Casus Belli. Unfortunaly there is no sush a mechanics in the game so I make it my head. And always try to help my allies in war despite of they are chaotic as hell and can stab me in any moment. But to my delight I have a real ally in my curent campaign. The alliance with Belgae was made at the very begining and they didn't betray me so far despite of we have very long common boundary.

And of course no Blitzkrieg. I don't like to annihilate countries. Preferable variant is to make peace on favorable terms. One should protect soldier's life.

Whatever comes naturally! The mod does a wonderful job of immersing me no matter who I play. I like to play defensive campaigns focused on internal development and diplomacy with warfare only when I am attacked, or against rebels, when playing the Greeks, who were my first love. I like to get invested in the characters of my generals - the traits etc they gain I use to really paint a picture of their personalities in my head, and if I am really committed I will take actions based on those traits - so a hot headed, impulsive general I might have rush out with an inexperienced army to meet an attacking force rather than wait for reinforcements.

One of my favourite things I did in a 2.6 Greek campaign was to have a bunch of armies raised from different city states, led by generals from those states, and imagined them competing between each other to be the most successful as I campaigned in Gaul and Iberia. Sending them across the Med, fighting, conquering, and then sailing back to retrain - always of course having to go home to their respective cities to retrain the unique units. The way the Spartan, Athenian, Achaean, Bithynian etc generals all developed - and the style/composition of each army was different too - made for a really immersive and fun campaign. Then I would 'reward' the most successful general with the honour of leading a new campaign somewhere else, based on a logical choice for that city state. I spent a lot of time tallying up kills and deaths to really see who was the most effective! It was genuinely sad when one bit off more than he could chew and was killed in battle (I would also do things like have the more bloody generals getting more recklessly involved personally, one of the more philosophical generals basically never engaging his bodyguard in combat, etc) and I could imagine the other generals, having not heard the news, getting back to Greece, meeting together to brag and tell stories, and wondering why one of them did not come back with his army... and then it was even more sad when they started to die of old age, but of course, they had sons (for the most part) that were available for the next generation of campaigning!

Great! You've inspired me to play with such a way. I usually don't pay due attention to most of my generals.

[Mamlaz]

When I roleplay, I usually stack up a chosen general with an army as well as a background stack led by his sons that I use for replacing losses, then I go around conquering just with him while everyone else stays in Italy.

This goes on until he dies and then his son takes over.