About Rome as a Faction Choice

[Kenny Works]

I'm playing RS II 2.5. I just started a campaign, going on twenty years in. I don't have a lot of experience playing RS II, I played with one campaign before 2.5 and then got interrupted and never got back to it. However, I have a lot of experience with other TW titles such as MTW, ETW, NTW and RTW, RTR, etc. One thing I didn't like about the original RSII was Rome was way too easy once you figured out the economy. There was a point when you just couldn't spend the money unless you just spawned armies.

And now it's a little different. I get why it was tweaked and I like it, but maybe tweaked too much? The cost of units is now so high that I can't even raise more than two or three armies. I'm faced with a choice of building up my economy or building up my armies. But if I don't build up my armies, then I can't follow even a semi-historic pattern of growth for Rome. It seems I basically need to sit tight and wait until my economy is grown - about 40 years - before I can invade Spain.

Is that how other's see it?

[DogSoldierSPQR]

From my personal experience of Roma Surrectum 2.5, you get the most money from the upgraded buildings, and trust me, after a certain point, you get way more than you can spend.
Follow my lead. Capture the entire Italian peninsula all the way up to the Alps, all of sicily, two islands to the left and nothing else. These are all the cities you would ever need. As long as you upgrade them well, you will start spewing out money.

RS2.5 is quite tricky at the start, with the rebellion an all, massive chunks of soldiers you're given and with Hannibal being a naughty boy as well. Once you deal with them, you have to just think about self-preservation. Don't set your eyes on anywhere except for those places I just told you. Build these up and you'll be unbeatable.

Remember, those few settlements under the Alps which originally belonged to the Boii are very under-developed so will take a very LONG time to build up. Just focus on building up the main Italian peninsula which will give you good income faster.

Hope I didn't drag on with this

[Darth Bane1]

Want to add: trade, trade, trade, trade and again trade. This gives you a lot of income when you are growing. So built roads and ports everytime and to the highest level. I remember a campaign were I had over 250.000 Denarii getting through trade.

[Kenny Works]

From my personal experience of Roma Surrectum 2.5, you get the most money from the upgraded buildings, and trust me, after a certain point, you get way more than you can spend.
Follow my lead. Capture the entire Italian peninsula all the way up to the Alps, all of sicily, two islands to the left and nothing else. These are all the cities you would ever need. As long as you upgrade them well, you will start spewing out money.

RS2.5 is quite tricky at the start, with the rebellion an all, massive chunks of soldiers you're given and with Hannibal being a naughty boy as well. Once you deal with them, you have to just think about self-preservation. Don't set your eyes on anywhere except for those places I just told you. Build these up and you'll be unbeatable.

Remember, those few settlements under the Alps which originally belonged to the Boii are very under-developed so will take a very LONG time to build up. Just focus on building up the main Italian peninsula which will give you good income faster.

Hope I didn't drag on with this

No, you actually gave me a lot to look forward to.

Yeah, my biggest question was how to I keep my empire growing with only 2-3 armies. They can't be everywhere at once. But I'll keep to myself and build for a bit - maybe 10-20 years and see how that goes.

Want to add: trade, trade, trade, trade and again trade. This gives you a lot of income when you are growing. So built roads and ports everytime and to the highest level. I remember a campaign were I had over 250.000 Denarii getting through trade.

So let me ask about this. There are two types of trade buildings: The first that simply adds a tax increase (10-20% increase in taxes for importing stuff - olive oil, whatever); and the second that simply says "provides increase in tradeable goods." It doesn't tell me what those goods are or how they work. And the ports are expensive so I've been avoiding them. Which one are you talking about? I've been building the first.

And should I still send my diplomat around? You know, like in the original RTW, to build trade agreements? Bottom line: the Rome is tweaked now, trying to charge into Spain, like Scipio did, just isn't going to work?

Added:

Okay, another question. What role does the faction leader play in all this? In the previous version, if your economy sucked, you selected a good leader as heir and killed your faction leader. Understand that doesn't work any more. I have a number of leaders with "minor recession." How do I get a good economy?

[Darth Bane1]

So let me ask about this. There are two types of trade buildings: The first that simply adds a tax increase (10-20% increase in taxes for importing stuff - olive oil, whatever); and the second that simply says "provides increase in tradeable goods." It doesn't tell me what those goods are or how they work. And the ports are expensive so I've been avoiding them. Which one are you talking about? I've been building the first.

And should I still send my diplomat around? You know, like in the original RTW, to build trade agreements? Bottom line: the Rome is tweaked now, trying to charge into Spain, like Scipio did, just isn't going to work?

Added:

Okay, another question. What role does the faction leader play in all this? In the previous version, if your economy sucked, you selected a good leader as heir and killed your faction leader. Understand that doesn't work any more. I have a number of leaders with "minor recession." How do I get a good economy?

"Increase of tradeable goods" means the resources of the province, when there are some. That's trade bonus. You should built up your ports. Bigger ports allow more trade and you get better ships then those Biremes. That's why they are very important in my opinion. Without building them out, you won't get much income through trade because their is not much going in/out.

You can make diplomatic things with other factions, but they won't keep them long. So it's not really necessary... Trade is the only thing I ask the AI. And maybe map information, but with forced diplomacy... You can invade Spain. But the problem is with which armies. The republican units can only be recruited in Italy. This will change when you build the building row for them. Out of Italy you are only able to get the confederation units. Either use them more or built up a true roman army. Your decision.

To the last question, just keep those in cities with acadamies. Leave them some turns there and in most cases this trait chances into the better one. It's just a question of time and what level of acadamy you have. So there are also very important. Without them your generals and governours don't learn and aren't getting good in anything... And then your economy will suck more...

[z28man]

What I always do when I build a new building is also open the settlement details window and look and see what benefits it's actually going to give you. It makes it easy to see where you will gain and lose what from what buildings. My First Roman campaign was my first RS2 campaign and I just started a week ago. I also just discovered mods lol I ended up going to war with the Macedonians pretty quick and though it's been tough, it's very rewarding because those Greece cities bring in good money. The only problem is the Greek city states will eventually choose Macedon over you so be ready in southern Italy to get rid of them. I myself didn't expand too far north yet. I did get rid of Carthage and eventually Bolii and took the top of Italy. I also used my army in the west and ventured a bit north and took that rebel settlement. Gaul didn't come after me for quite a while so I wouldn't mess with them, just be ready. Also gotta watch your islands as Carthage will land ships and bring troops.

[Sextus Fabius Maximus]

Yea pretty much what everyone here has said is true. You either choose to be very aggressive and ridiculously cost-effective early or you bunker up in Italy and prepare for the long haul.

[Kenny Works]

What I always do when I build a new building is also open the settlement details window and look and see what benefits it's actually going to give you. It makes it easy to see where you will gain and lose what from what buildings. My First Roman campaign was my first RS2 campaign and I just started a week ago. I also just discovered mods lol I ended up going to war with the Macedonians pretty quick and though it's been tough, it's very rewarding because those Greece cities bring in good money. The only problem is the Greek city states will eventually choose Macedon over you so be ready in southern Italy to get rid of them. I myself didn't expand too far north yet. I did get rid of Carthage and eventually Bolii and took the top of Italy. I also used my army in the west and ventured a bit north and took that rebel settlement. Gaul didn't come after me for quite a while so I wouldn't mess with them, just be ready. Also gotta watch your islands as Carthage will land ships and bring troops.

And not just troops - AFVs! (In the form of elephants.)

Yes, there's no way I can do what Scipio did unless I start tearing buildings down. The problem is I'm thinking if I don't build any buildings my govs and leaders will get negative traits. And yeah I'm looking at the buildings to get the best tax advantage. Now that I auto-resolved and took Syracuse, I'm making 50-60k per turn, net, but the buildings and units are so expensive now that I have to slow down and focus on building first.

[z28man]

don't be too afraid to take buildings down as you get the money back from them, even the ones from other factions. Unless it's something that makes your town super unhappy or you're going to upgrade it soon, I'd take it down, get the money and rebuild

[tungri_centurio]

dont forget to build the tempels for trade and tax to its max,they provide good income, also temple of jupiter to its max
acadamies are good against corruption and give good traits, and the regions with2 mines i give that the priority.
i always expand to massilia also,it always is a money maker in my campaigns,in my last roman campaign i holded dyrrachium and taken salona and segestica to, that are rich regions aswell.after that expantion you can defend and build out your citys.

[Kenny Works]

Thanks to everyone for the help. I don't have a lot of time to play RSII and when I do I seem to forget what I already know.

Rep given.

[Larkin]

That choice is the one which adds strategic depth - if you spend too much on economic development and get surprised by an enemy, you might not have enough troops. If you have too many troops, you might run out of money.

Risking the economy growth is worth it though. My developed Greece (as in, the land that makes up Greece and Macedon today) had every city bringing in at least 15k a turn, with Athens and Sparta at 35k+. Overall I was bringing in over a million in tax and half a million in trade - I think that's enough money for your purposes

[Kenny Works]

That choice is the one which adds strategic depth - if you spend too much on economic development and get surprised by an enemy, you might not have enough troops. If you have too many troops, you might run out of money.

Risking the economy growth is worth it though. My developed Greece (as in, the land that makes up Greece and Macedon today) had every city bringing in at least 15k a turn, with Athens and Sparta at 35k+. Overall I was bringing in over a million in tax and half a million in trade - I think that's enough money for your purposes

Yes, it would be - if I could get it to work!!

The problem is no matter what I do, I can't fix my leaders. I'm 29 turns into the game. I've reconquered all of Italy, all of Sicily, the two islands to the west of Rome, and Seloma (the Greek city across from Cannae). I have three armies/legions.

One legion is protecting Sardinia from an impending attack from Carthage.

One legion is trying to hold Seloma against a series of Macedonian assaults.

One legion is darting back and fourth.

My leader is average. My first leader was average, too.

Many of my governors have the "minor recession trait" but I can't afford to replace them. My semi-annual income is slowly dropping. It was 64000; now it's at 58,000. And it takes every denarii of that to build in the cities I do own!! My production is in the toilet (what does that represent - on the chart). In the last eight turns I've followed everyone's advice and built up my ports, my forums, anything that increases trade and so on. And my income is still dropping . . . (It went up when I took Syracues).

Right now, I'm considering letting Macedonia have the Greek city and just walking away. I'm going to go broke trying to fight both Carthage and Macedonia.

Tell me what I'm doing wrong?

[Kenny Works]

n/m ... double post.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

........Tell me what I'm doing wrong?

You're not doing anything wrong if you want to maximise your army - for otherwise you will be constrained by the numbers of troops available as you have to actively manage your Economy (and your characters). The people must be happy to want to grow, so you have to build as many happiness and law buildings as well as revenue generating ones. Your FL's economic traits depend on how you manage your economy overall and the individual Governors on him and how they themselves are doing.

M2CW

Content people grow in numbers - and it's the growth that produces more taxes (let alone Trade) in the end, not just the buildings you build. This is very like a 'real' economy. You also need to actively manage your characters, moving them around to best advantage and shifting and managing their Retinue/Ancillaries. One benefit of this is that I have never had to Exterminate a captured settlement - so population rises. If you want Tax revenue then you need people to tax.

There is a downside to all this - it takes time; I would be quite prepared to have a Roman campaign last a year at about 10hrs per week. Checking everything (as part of testing anyway) and doing detail management, plus at least 2 battles every turn can take up to 2 hours (occasionally longer). The detail is there for those that want it.

It can certainly be ignored or toned down - and those who want a faster game will auto-resolve and worry less about the economy and more about taking settlements faster - which can also be done. Trying to stay in the middle will result in a middle sort of game. RSII allows it all.

As an aside - I think the game is comfortably designed for Large and not Huge units - it's a middle ground where recruitment affects population in a balanced way. If you want an economy, then 1turn is also better - but then 0turn is for those who want more battles, not economic play - especially as it's not at all realistic in a standing army simulation.

For me, certainly, I have found a limit on armies that slows my 'break-out' from Italy and I normally 'wait' until the first reforms (Akragas) before doing so, so I can manage the change - and that's around 40yrs. You are also not really likely to be able to accomplish a 'historical expansion' - for much of the early expansion was accomplished diplomatically and by invitation (particularly to the East) - let alone that the 'Total War AI' isn't briefed on allowing that!

[Kenny Works]

You're not doing anything wrong if you want to maximise your army ...

Let's talk about this a minute, because there's something I'm still not understanding. What I do understand is:

I'm not trying to maximize my army. In fact, I'm kind of middle - neither maximizing my army or my economy.

I really can't do a historic campaign because I simply won't be able to raise 6 legions to take to Spain (at least until I get a better understanding of the game) on the time-table of history.

I don't mind spending time doing this. About a year ago, I read a guide - I think it was written by a girl - and, wow, it really changed how I looked at RTW. Suddenly there was a depth to the game that I never realized was there. I wouldn't mind spending hours and hours - or even months on a campaign, if I had some context by which I could drive decisions.

For example, I still don't understand how leaders become "better than average". I'm building constantly - a range of buidings from happiness buildings to economy buildings to military buildings. By I still have average leaders. Understanding what improves leaders is probably the last thing holding me back.

Also, are the percentages on the building information cards correct? I build a trade building that gives me a 10% tax increase, but the numbers don't seem to quite add up.

Thanks (and + rep).

Edit: Oh, and last night I went back to an earlier save and did a restart at about 10 years into the game. This time I cut back on every single unit I could except two legions. Then I dumped everything into my economy - every single golden denarii. Every one. This did seem to move the economy a bit, but it did nothing to improve my leaders.

[thebull0425]

You get reforms in 40 turns? Are you building the pop increase buildings then. I'm about 70+ years in and I don't have them although I turtle Akragas so it doesn't grow too fast.

[FeralBlueBird]

For example, I still don't understand how leaders become "better than average". I'm building constantly - a range of buidings from happiness buildings to economy buildings to military buildings. By I still have average leaders. Understanding what improves leaders is probably the last thing holding me back.

A range of buildings provide your governors with ancillaries after they spend some time in a certain post. Experiment with the academy tree, high level temples and even the hospital building tree. I think these only affect governor characters, but ancillaries can be traded. Some will provide management and influence bonuses, while others will directly improve the Law rating of a governor or his command rating.

Cheers!

[Kenny Works]

Okay, I think I figured this out (at least in part):

Last night I started a new game, playing as Rome, playing hard and hard. I fought my way through the early game until Carthage was out of Italy and I had control of Italy, the two islands to the west, and Sicily (expect for Syracuse). Then I got rid of every single unit except 1 legion. That legion went everywhere, fought everyone who attacked Rome, while the rest of my money was poured into building, building, building.

My first leader was "un-inspired." Oh well, I'll take the eggs with the ham, as they say in Arkansas. But after about ten years, I selected a new heir, who had some negative traits, but had "honest" and "hard worker". Now all I had to do was wait for my leader to die. Meanwhile I continued to build, focusing on happiness buildings (temples, etc.), ports, forums, roads, and any building that added an increase to taxes. Meanwhile, the elder Scipio was grabbing honor after honor with his single army (mostly against Carthage).

Along the way, Greece decide to betray me and I took Syracuse. By now, the elder Scipio was dead and his son was leading the army.

15 years (30 game turns) into the game, I had buildings stocked up in every city. My one legion had twin silver chevrons of experience. I'd fought Carthage, the Greek Cities, Rebels to the north - but except for Syracuse, had not expanded. My building stocks included big ticket items like mines and ports that cost a lot of gold and take awhile to build.

When I got to over 200k in gold, I started slowly building more legions. I'm now on about my 64th turn. I have five Roman legions and will soon raise a sixth. Scipio has taken his army of four legions to Spain, landing at New Carthage. The Spanish (Gallics?) had already taken New Carthage and so I took the city with little resistance. The next turn I bought peace with the Spanish. Scipio is marching his armies to take the last Carthage city in Spain. Afterwards, he'll take two legions to North Africa. Carthago delenda est.

At this point, my Roman armies seem invincible. Maybe because no other faction has the number of armies I do? When I landed in Spain, I thought I'd have a tough fight, but I've not fought a full stack yet.

My current faction leader a 40-ish "good leader" with two sons. Hopefully one will follow in his father's footsteps.

[z28man]

Okay, I think I figured this out (at least in part):

Last night I started a new game, playing as Rome, playing hard and hard. I fought my way through the early game until Carthage was out of Italy and I had control of Italy, the two islands to the west, and Sicily (expect for Syracuse). Then I got rid of every single unit except 1 legion. That legion went everywhere, fought everyone who attacked Rome, while the rest of my money was poured into building, building, building.

My first leader was "un-inspired." Oh well, I'll take the eggs with the ham, as they say in Arkansas. But after about ten years, I selected a new heir, who had some negative traits, but had "honest" and "hard worker". Now all I had to do was wait for my leader to die. Meanwhile I continued to build, focusing on happiness buildings (temples, etc.), ports, forums, roads, and any building that added an increase to taxes. Meanwhile, the elder Scipio was grabbing honor after honor with his single army (mostly against Carthage).

Along the way, Greece decide to betray me and I took Syracuse. By now, the elder Scipio was dead and his son was leading the army.

15 years (30 game turns) into the game, I had buildings stocked up in every city. My one legion had twin silver chevrons of experience. I'd fought Carthage, the Greek Cities, Rebels to the north - but except for Syracuse, had not expanded. My building stocks included big ticket items like mines and ports that cost a lot of gold and take awhile to build.

When I got to over 200k in gold, I started slowly building more legions. I'm now on about my 64th turn. I have five Roman legions and will soon raise a sixth. Scipio has taken his army of four legions to Spain, landing at New Carthage. The Spanish (Gallics?) had already taken New Carthage and so I took the city with little resistance. The next turn I bought peace with the Spanish. Scipio is marching his armies to take the last Carthage city in Spain. Afterwards, he'll take two legions to North Africa. Carthago delenda est.

At this point, my Roman armies seem invincible. Maybe because no other faction has the number of armies I do? When I landed in Spain, I thought I'd have a tough fight, but I've not fought a full stack yet.

My current faction leader a 40-ish "good leader" with two sons. Hopefully one will follow in his father's footsteps.

Hmmm sounds good, I may try this strategy when/if ^_^ 2.6 is released and we must start over. I expanded into greece first and I didn't get rid of all my units. In fact now I have a few legions in cities just to keep them happy lol. I'm making about 50k or so a turn but it sounds like you got there quicker. Did you have to defend much to the north? How far north ddi you expand? all the way to the alps? What about your starting settlement in greece and northern spain, what did you do with those? I'm very interested because I love playing campaigns differently and I don't want to go the exact same road in 2.6 as I have in 2.5