Why should I play Romans?

[Gryphon Templar]

As a big fan of alternative history, I have problems to play the romans. If I play the Carthage, Aedui or Hayastan and win the campaign, I know that the history will develop differently. If I but the Romans play, I quickly lose motivation because I only postludes the history. (In medieval 2 + mods, however, I have often rebuilt the Roman Empire with East Rome). I find it hard to describe. What motivations there would still be playing a Roman campaign?

[Bladvak]

What motivations there would still be playing a Roman campaign?

the same motivations there would be while playing any other faction: you're in control

you're in control of what happens next, the decisions that you take early on are what will define your Roman campaign.
also, most people play with house rules that they themselves designed in such a way that they know they will not get bored by the campaign (too much). one advice? spice it up, play differently. for example, you can create two stacks of Roman armies, cross the sea into Greece and then turtle there until Marian reforms; gift the Italian regions to somebody else (Aedui, Carthage, Epirus, etc).

[Duncan III]

I'm playing Romani as an introduction to EB- and house rules are key to any good campaign.

[Entropy Judge]

What motivations there would still be playing a Roman campaign?

Ensure the Roman Republic never falls. Disrupt continuity by creating a small Republic (ignore the "win conditions" and set your own standards for victory!) that never gets into the 'required expansion' mindset that led to the Empire. Create the Empire, but, again, insure that it doesn't fall by increasing the general state of the regions so that the problems that led to the Fall don't occur (at least, shouldn't occur).

[Duncan III]

Ensure the Roman Republic never falls. Disrupt continuity by creating a small Republic (ignore the "win conditions" and set your own standards for victory!) that never gets into the 'required expansion' mindset that led to the Empire. Create the Empire, but, again, insure that it doesn't fall by increasing the general state of the regions so that the problems that led to the Fall don't occur (at least, shouldn't occur).

That's my aim- to rule Rome wisely, humanely and well, to be the staunchest defender of the republic.

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

EB cannot recreate actual Roman history, because there is no such thing as civil war in EB. No Romans fighting other Romans, as in vanilla R:TW.

And in EB, the Ptolemies (and maybe the Seleucids too) are powerful rival powers, not corrupt and decadent weaklings crippled by their own civil wars. So the Romans have it tougher in EB than they did in real history.

[The_Judge]

Play it on H/H, follow the house rules and/or make your own rules (don't conquer a city if you don't have a governor for it, don't conquer a city if the last conquered city hasn't reached a population of e.g. 2000, depopulate every city you conquer to slow you down or do the opposite to cause some rebellions, don't give a city a higher form of integration as long as the city hasn't reached a certain population or hasn't been conquered since a certain number of years, never make alliances, don't bribe anyone, make sure you have enough enemies...).

[Ownager]

I hate the Romans. I mean, I loved them before I found out how ruthless, cunning and evil they were. Play as Carthage. Rome isn't worth it.

[yuezhi]

You're ruthless, cunning and evil. Those Romans would be nothing more than stock characters in Asterix if weren't for you.

[Ownager]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand. Romans are evil. Carthage for life!

[Entropy Judge]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand. Romans are evil. Carthage for life!

Define 'evil.' Explain why the Romans fall under this arbitrary distinction but other peoples wouldn't.

[Diocle]

As a big fan of alternative history, I have problems to play the romans. If I play the Carthage, Aedui or Hayastan and win the campaign, I know that the history will develop differently. If I but the Romans play, I quickly lose motivation because I only postludes the history. (In medieval 2 + mods, however, I have often rebuilt the Roman Empire with East Rome). I find it hard to describe. What motivations there would still be playing a Roman campaign?

You play in history and also simulating history it may be interesting ... anyway I agree with the OP, even if for very different reasons, 'why to play Romans in EB'?
I still haven't found an answer ...

[The Unknown General]

Just for I want to do a Romani campaign AND only conquer Italy/Sicily, with the rest of the campaign trying to hold back the barbarian hordes.

[Ownager]

Ok, maybe evil is a little overstepping. But Evil is "usually taken as the opposite of good."(Wikipedia). Don't get me wrong, I love evil factions. But Karthadastim never marched around conquering. I agree its because they weren't successful, and the Romans were. But the Romans divided and conquered so many people, crushing so many cultures, that I couldn't call them good. Sorry If I hurt you.

[Perdiccas]

besides, what did the Romans ever do for us?

the aqueduct?

what?

the aqueduct.

oh. yeah, yeah. they did give us that.

oh yeah, the sanitation, reg. remember what the city used to be like?

yeah. all right. i'll grant you the aqueduct and the sanitation are 2 things that the romans have done.

and the roads.

well, yeah, obviously the roads. i mean the roads go without saying, don't they? but apart from the sanitation, the aqueduct and the roads....

irrigation.

medicine

huh? heh?, huh....

education

ohhh.

yeah, yeah. all right. fair enough.

and the wine.

oh yes, yeah....

yeah, yeah, thats something we'd really miss, reg, if the romans left.

public baths.

and its safe to walk in the streets at night now, reg.

yeah, they certainly know how to keep order. lets face it. they're the only ones who could in a place like this.

all right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system and public health, what have the romans ever done for us?

brought peace.

oh. peace? shut up!

Ok, maybe evil is a little overstepping. But Evil is "usually taken as the opposite of good."(Wikipedia). Don't get me wrong, I love evil factions. But Karthadastim never marched around conquering. I agree its because they weren't successful, and the Romans were. But the Romans divided and conquered so many people, crushing so many cultures, that I couldn't call them good. Sorry If I hurt you.

[Entropy Judge]

Ok, maybe evil is a little overstepping. But Evil is "usually taken as the opposite of good."(Wikipedia). Don't get me wrong, I love evil factions. But Karthadastim never marched around conquering. I agree its because they weren't successful, and the Romans were. But the Romans divided and conquered so many people, crushing so many cultures, that I couldn't call them good. Sorry If I hurt you.

What is "good," then? Since you fail to provide a definition, I shall provide one - that which is "good" is that which adheres to the moral imperative, said moral imperative being the survival and success of one's own chosen group, be that group family, clan, ethnicity, nationality, or other defining term. Now that a definition of "good" has been selected, we must test the subjects - IE, Rome and Carthage. Carthage was conquered by Rome; ergo, Carthage is automatically less "good" than Rome, since Rome's success came at the expense of Carthage. Therefore, claiming that Carthage is "good" while Rome is "evil" is blatant hypocrisy and an outright falsehood, as the Carthaginian people failed to put forth the same effort WRT the survival and success of the Carthaginian state as the Romans did toward the Roman state - had they done so, Carthage would not have fallen to the Romans. Carthage is more evil than Rome.

[athanaric]

But Karthadastim never marched around conquering.

They did. For example after losing the First Punic War, they conquered territories in Iberia.
And yes the Romans destroyed a lot, but they also advanced their world a lot. The humorous example from Life of Brian reminds us that the Romans were reponsible for upgrading or building infrastructure throughout their empire on a scale previously unheard of, as well as installing the pax romana (replacing the previous state of inter-tribal warfare and interstate anarchy). The model or Roman citizenship as it developed in the Late Republic and in Imperial times was revolutionary as it enabled the inclusion of non-Roman and even non-Italian tribes outside of Italy as citizens. The Roman Empire, despite its obvious flaws, laid much of the groundwork for modern states. Few (if any) other empires can compare in their cultural impact or contribution.

[Ownager]

I'll take that in a light mood. The world would have been better if Romans didn't exist. Wine existed before Rome. The Greeks could have done all those stuff. What about the great city of Carthage? They could have done a tuning the Romans did. I'm not going against what Romans did. I'm against considering them the only people that can do it. Forget ruling for a long time. The Romans destroyed everyone who was against them. They lied and cheated their way through the great empires of the time. No wonder they were the only ones to "keep order". Please don't tell me Greeks and Carthaginians couldn't have done these things. Who damaged the library of Alexandria? The almighty, medicine making Romans? Yup. Who destroyed a city with more than 500000 inhabitants? The order keeping Romans? Yup. And all this to give us public baths which we don't use today? And roads that have existed long before Rome? Please reconsider.

[Ownager]

Oh yeah, Romans are good.
I mean they did give us aqueducts.
Yeah right, where would we get water today without aqueducts?
But they did give us sanitation.
Yeah, no wonder our cities smell so clean with roman sewers in them!
What about their roads?
Oh yeah! Every time I go to Napoli for some seafood I always take the roman express with my tank! Why use any other highway?
Irrigation is definite right? How would we grow plants?
Yup, no one watered plants before Rome.
Medicine? Education?
Yeah, I know. I always use powdered mouse brains for toothpaste!
Wine!
Wine! Because grapes weren't invented and in Dionysos was the god of Pepsi.
Public baths! Have to stay clean!
Yeah. Why use showers when you can use public baths and have slaves clean you up.
And the Romans! They kept such order! Barely 50 civil wars! And we are still at peace, thanks to the almighty Caesar!
No comment.

[Ownager]

I now accept the title of Roman Hater from Shophet Hamalcar, wisest of the wise. May Mago rest in peace.