The Fate of the Roman Rebels II

[DimeBagHo]

On the basis of the earlier thread it looks like the choice is between keeping the Roman Rebels, or converting them to the Roman Senate.

(1) Roman Rebels: This option allows us to keep loyalty as an option for the Romans, and to keep the Roman Rebels in the main campaign. Obviously no Senate campaign, with missions etc, would be possible.

(2) Roman Senate: This option allows us to add a Senate campaign, with the Senate controlling Rome, and the Roman faction getting missions etc. The Roman rebels would be removed from the main campaign, and loyalty would be removed as an option for the Romans.

One, or more, civil war campaigns could be added with either option.

[DimeBagHo]

Dime, having the rebels renamed as senate does not mean that they cannot be used as rebels in the main campaign...

It is possible - but they would look painfully out of place.

[Zarax]

It is possible - but they would look painfully out of place.

Let me refine (this would need Roman Rebels III)

What I mean is:

- Internal name: romans_senate

Main Campaign: roman rebels in the usual place
Provincial campaign: roman senate in Rome

[DimeBagHo]

Zarax: One problem is that we can only have one name for the faction - which means that the player will either see the Roman Senate in Southern Italy and Sicily, or they will see the Roman Rebels controlling Rome. I know this might seem like a minor cosmetic detail - but it's the kind of thing that is glaringly obvious to players, expecialy players who don't know the technical reasons behind it.

Also there may also be some technical problems. Having the romans_senate as a shadowing faction and a superfaction for romans_julii probably won't work. This won't be an issue if we ditch loyalty, but then if we ditch loyalty there isn't much point in keeping the Roman Rebels in the main campaign anyway.

So it seems better to me to go one way or the other - either have Rebels, with loyalty, or a Senate with missions, but no loyalty.

[Hippias]

Roman Rebels - as previously stated I like Loyalty and ditching the rebels means we would just have the GCS with it. RR + Loyalty + Optimate/Populare Ethnic Traits and any other 'loyalty traits' that anyone comes up with would, IMHO, make for a more interesting campaign than senate missions.

[atraps]

This option allows us to keep loyalty as an option for the Romans

Wait isnt loyalty bugged? I thought there was a plan to completly remove loyalty from XGM.

Imo, I think the first option would be much more interesting (if the loyalty bug is solved) then the second option. A Roman Senate would be kinnda boring as we already got this vanilla. Now this is not the case if we can have a Senate for other factions like Carthage. Then I would not be able to vote as I would want them both.

[DimeBagHo]

Wait isnt loyalty bugged?

I can't tell anymore. I've played through a couple of campaigns with loyalty on, and I never saw the settlement capture bug, even when I was trying hard to provoke it. On the other hand I've had a couple of people say they were hit by the bug when loyalty was not activated.

[atraps]

I can't tell anymore. I've played through a couple of campaigns with loyalty on, and I never saw the settlement capture bug, even when I was trying hard to provoke it. On the other hand I've had a couple of people say they were hit by the bug when loyalty was not activated.

Thats good, loyalty will definetly add to the gameplay. But if its not loyalty then the bug is at large again.

I found a topic that may help on solving this here.

Here is Lusted's solution for his mod, TE.

One thing I have found to greatly reduce this bug(or remove it entirely as I haven't seen it reported for TE Gold) is to use the corrected_regions.tga to replace the existing descr_regions.tga and rebuilding map.rmw.

[DimeBagHo]

Thanks for the link atraps, that was very interesting. I will try out Lusted's solution.

[Knight of Judgment]

I can't tell anymore. I've played through a couple of campaigns with loyalty on, and I never saw the settlement capture bug, even when I was trying hard to provoke it. On the other hand I've had a couple of people say they were hit by the bug when loyalty was not activated.

the best choice is to assault , imo .

[Sarpedon99]

I always play with loyalty on. I think it adds greatly to game play and hope we don't lose it.

[TM Is Back]

Rebels. Always liked them, and indeed i never had problems with Loyalty.

[Zarax]

We could find an alternative name like "optimates" which could be used for both, what do you think?

BTW, loyalty is not an issue as it would be disabled from the descr_strat in the provincial campaign.

[DimeBagHo]

We could find an alternative name like "optimates" which could be used for both, what do you think?

BTW, loyalty is not an issue as it would be disabled from the descr_strat in the provincial campaign.

Unfortunately loyalty is activated in descr_sm_factions.txt, which is outside the campaign folders. If you leave out the loyalty traits in descr_strat.txt you just get a bugged campaign.

*edit* The best we could do in terms of a compromise would look something like this:

* Have the external name as Roman Rebels, and the internal name as romans_senate.
* In the Senate provincial campaign the Roman Rebels control Rome, and act as the Senate. That will look odd but at least it's just in the provincial campaign.
* If loyalty is activated then the Senate campaign is not installed.

[CaesarVincens]

Or, we could keep the Roman rebels and produce a sub-mod for those that want a Roman Senate.

I really think we about reached the most possibility available from one install, I think sub-mods are the only feasible way to do some of these ideas.

[DimeBagHo]

CaesarVincens: I'm inclined to agree. I also think we can keep the future development of XGM focused on stuff that is relatively easy to merge into any submods:

New units
-Post Marius units from the PMP project
-Regional and City Hoplites
-Regional units that will make the provincial campaigns more distinctive

New provincial campaigns
-At least one civil war campaign for the Romans

Traits and Ancillaries
-Suppanut could continue his work here

Stuff like this will be relatively easy to merge into any submods as we go. Major feature changes can be done in the submods that will benefit from them.

[Zarax]

I see lots of branching coming in the future...

[DimeBagHo]

Zarax: It sounds like CaesarVincens is keen to make a submod based around the civil wars, though I'd still like to see at least one civil war campaign in XGM proper. You might be able to combine your Senate and emergent factions ideas.

You could of course go back to your original scheme of having one Senate faction re-used in several campaigns. But I think that a Carthaginian Senate Campaign plus a Seleucid / emergent faction campaign would make for a very interesting mod.

[Zarax]

Zarax: It sounds like CaesarVincens is keen to make a submod based around the civil wars, though I'd still like to see at least one civil war campaign in XGM proper. You might be able to combine your Senate and emergent factions ideas.

You could of course go back to your original scheme of having one Senate faction re-used in several campaigns. But I think that a Carthaginian Senate Campaign plus a Seleucid / emergent faction campaign would make for a very interesting mod.

No problem DBH, I guess we'll just need a couple more branches (XGM SVN: the amazon forest coming soon to your screens!) for the senate campaigns and that should be it.

[DimeBagHo]

what kind of provincial campaigns could be done for the romans with either option out of curiosity?

The most likely options are the ones discussed here.

(1) Quintus Sertorius in Iberia; (2) Julius Caesar vs Pompey; or (3) Augustus vs Marcus Antonius.

Julius Caesar vs Pompey was the popular choice.