Only Rome and Carthage have Internal Factions?

[weirdoascensor]

At the recent Let's Play - Total War: ROME II Campaign , When Dom opened the Select a Faction menu, he browsed through "Rome" and "Carthage"...both have Internal Factions...

However, the other selections are simply "Successor Kingdoms";"Germanic Tribes";"Eastern Dynasties"...

Is this means that Other Factions simply does not have Internal Factions? So lets say Epirus is just a "Greek State" who shared 2 Greek traits with Athens and Sparta, consequently do not have Internal Politics?

It is stated that Brittanic Celts, Gauls, and Germanic Tribes can form an unified Confederacy...do only then that they have Internal Factions? Even Suebi itself for instance is a Confederation of Tribes! and how would it play out?

Not to mention "Successor Kingdoms"...

[omzdog]

I think its .
If you want to look at a game with almost flawless internal politics system google Europa universalis: Rome by Paradox Interactive.

There you have an actual Senate that produces edicts and is composed of the general political factions i.e. military, merchant/economy, plebeian/workers, elitist/patrician. All swaying on votes and vying for dominance of the Senate body by either imposing will or swaying public opinion. Each with a faction head (not unlike modern politics) who are the prime targets of assassinations. Among this, you have personal political alliances that allow individual figures to rise and fall in the arena. The official posts (Questor, Aedlie, Praetor etc) are filled with elections judged by their political affiliations, personal finance, and faction popularity. And the game even features a system of checks and balances (although quite basic). So you see appointments being blocked and edicts overruled while factions usually have to consolidate into large alliances just to push agendas.

I honestly believe TW can do this. Get rid of the flashy campaign GUI, forgo the 1 state 1 mind mentality, and implement actual politics. An internal decision making machine that could decide who to conquer and whether to subjugate or lay waste to their city or where to divert state investments or how to put down a revolt and position legions. Leaving the player to coordinate regional operations on how to position scouts, prepare for pitched battles and sieges, or build local military infrastructure as a sort of spiritual permanent consul.

Its too bad the Paradox team stopped production on their Rome. It had plenty of bugs, but the gameplay was impressively simple for the complex mechanics.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

So ya, you have a point weirdoascensor but I think it could go further.
I mean to call what they've shown us as internal politics is a bit of a joke.

[weirdoascensor]

Questions and Answer

2. Ruling Factions: Recently, we have learned that Rome and Carthage have three ruling families that players can choose from. Each family will have common traits that it shares with the other two families while having traits unique to itself. Al confirmed that only Rome and Carthage will have different ruling families. Other factions will utilize a single "family" or "tribe" to rule the faction. They will have options that are not available to Rome or Carthage. One of the possible diplomatic options that Al mentioned was that barbarian tribes will have the ability to form confederations with other barbaric tribes.

Ouch.
...Okay...no Internal Factions...but this does not Rule Out Internal Politics...looks like there is some unique Diplomatic or Edicts that only works inside Tribal Confederacies or Polis Leagues...

Thats for Greek Leagues and Tribal Confederacies...how about Successor Kingdoms and Eastern Dynasties? should each of them have its own Internal Politics such as Greek-Native dynamics represented by Edict Effects or Heir Intrigues through simple Loyalty Mechanics?

[hrissker]

If you dont like it, dont buy it. But please dont slam the game with insults on a forum dedicated to it, especially if the game isnt out

If you want better politics, then assemble a mod team, when the game comes out, mod it your way

[weirdoascensor]

If you dont like it, dont buy it. But please dont slam the game with insults on a forum dedicated to it, especially if the game isnt out

May I ask what words feels offends you, dear Sir?
...I'm asking politely in a Inquisitive tone, wondering for answers, sneak-peeks or "What should be" from more knowledgeable members of this forum...

Seems that you are not one of them.

[weirdoascensor]

Well, If you want to ask about Modding Possibilities about Internal Politics with your statement, according to My Opinion, my thoughts about it:

Effects are well understood from Previous TW Games...so Edicts, Family Bonuses and any system from that in R2TW will be pose any serious difficulties...but Internal Factions are an entirely new feature of R2TW...It will have to be analyzed first when the game are released to know whether it is possible to transplant that system from Rome and Carthage only to other Factions.

[Captain Arrrgh!]

Insult removed.

[omzdog]

If you want better politics, then get off your ass (figuratively) and assemble a mod team, when the game comes out, mod it your way

Not possible when CA hard codes so much of the engine now is it?

[Boicote]

I hope that all factions may face civil wars, no matter if they have only one or three ruling families.

[xjlxking]

There will always be internal politics for every factions but in different ways. You have generals who want to be kings, who will revolt if they get too much power. You have chief tribesmen from other tribes who will rebel in confederation

[jamreal18]

Actually, i want rome to be the only faction who has internal factions like rome 1.
I want carthage to be treated just like other factions.

[Sir Robin]

I've been hoping for a game that has the political and dynastic depth of EU and CK, with the graphical and tactical goodies of TW. Creative still has a long way to go but at least having families for Rome and Carthage is a step in the right direction.

[spartan_warrior]

All factions have internal politics, its just only Carthage and Rome which have three selectable political families. With the other factions you play as the ruling dynasty and have to deal with noble or tribal council type opposition.

[Spartacus041]

I don't think TW was ever meant to be a game that complex when it comes to politics. I like that they put a bit more effort into it. I'm a bit disappointed that other factions don't have internal politics. I guess we'll see if these aspects are moddable?

[Knight of Heaven]

We dont know how this mechanics work yet for me to feel disapointed or anything at all for that matter.

[Scythion]

Does it mean that CA think the other factions are less important? Or they simply had no better idea how to rank them?

[omzdog]

Still think its .
For a game that fashions itself 'Rome' and makes any attempt to go in depth with the history and even has this new second attempt at it.
I think its .

[Markas]

Got to love it when people compare the system with one for an EU game. I have to wonder if there are people over at the Paradox forums whining about the lack of Real Time tactical battles. I somehow doubt it.

[Ahiga]

From Aristotle:

The Carthaginians are also considered to have an excellent form of government, which differs from that of any other state in several respects, though it is in some very like the Spartan. Indeed, all three states---the Spartan, the Cretan, and the Carthaginian---nearly resemble one another, and are very different from any others.

. Presumably not knowing of the Romans at that time, as the Carthaginian system and Roman systems are almost mirror opposites in general layout (consul to shofet, an aristocratic-dominated senate and then the masses with some limited means of influence/say). And aside of Sparta and Crete noted by Aristotle I can't really think of any other factions with similar political systems where the families dynamic really works. The perpetual whiners would probably be complaining if the Ptolemies had a three family function or three political group function (How it's unrealistic for egyptians to be ruling in the ptolemies or for the Seleucid empire to be ruled by the Pergamene house).

While I would be disappointed if there's no prospect of a civil war I doubt we're going to see absolutely nothing for the other factions. It might be that they have to worry about different segments of society (Hellenes vs Egyptians or Orientals for the Ptolemies/Seleucids) or the confederacy function introduces the need to keep your confederates happy or they will rebel.

And since the Arverni are the Arverni, not say "the Gauls", it'd be difficult to determine sub-groups for them or the Iceni or the Sweboz. Not impossible, but not direct. It would make sense if you were to form a confederacy of "The Gauls" that then you would have the three-family dynamic simulated between the Arverni and two other gallic powers.

[hrissker]

ut May I ask what words feels offends you, dear Sir?
...I'm asking politely in a Inquisitive tone, wondering for answers, sneak-peeks or "What should be" from more knowledgeable members of this forum...

Seems that you are not one of them. quote

I wasnt talking to you, the other individual posted that he thinks the game is , so please refrain from calling someone unknowledgeable before you know who their talking to, as I stated that I didnt like that an insult to it was thrown out, which you didn't do....