Roma Surrectum III, The Roman Empire

[dvk901]

For reasons that have a lot to do, admittedly, with ease and interest, I've decided I want to do a Mod in BI named as above, and starting with the Civil war after Caesar's death between Octavian and Antony. There are a TON of opportunities here, from the revolt of the Cantabarians to the wars with Parthia that can make this idea both fun and unique...and the good thing is that Roma Surrectum I & II will fit seemlessly into this picture...with the exception that the 13 'Early' Legions might need an 'Imperial' skin. Other than that, the Greeks disappear...openning many unit slots for Indian and Nabatean units we may be able to find\beg\borrow.

Having done even just a preliminary study of the period, there was so much going on at this time that I don't think there's any way the Campaign would just be 'over' if you defeated Antony. There were so many rebellions, wars and goings-on that I think a 150-200 yr campaign to hold the Empire together and maybe expand would be a lot of fun.

Here are some options for factions Cherryfunk and I have been tossing around. Please give it some thought and input, because I need to know what factions before I can start transferring things, names, etc.

== ROME ==
1. Rome (Octavian)
2. Roman rebels (Brutus/Republicans)?
-FreePeople=(Sextus Pompeius)?

== BRITAIN ==
3. Britons
4. Belgae (Preferring naval invasions)

== AFRICA ==
5. Mauretania
6. Kingdom of Egypt, Roman rebels, Rome (Antony)

== IBERIA ==
7. Cantabrians (emergent faction)..2-regions, very powerful

== GERMANIA ==
8. Marcomanni
9. Suebi (who were raiding Gaul)
10. Goths ???

== MIDDLE EAST ==
11. Nabateans
-. Free Peoples= Israelites

== ASIA MINOR ==
12. Pontus
13. Armenia
14. Possibly Cappodocia

== ASIA ==
15. Parthia

== STEPPES ==
16. Bosporans
17. Slavs
18. Scythia (really should be an identifiable faction, Rome was fighting them well into the 5th century.
19. Could be Roxolani or Alans, or both excluding Cappodocia. Would be nice not to mimic BI too much, however, and have new ones.

This idea was originally Tyr's, so I'm not taking any credit for it.

[tone]

Dare I say it?
Should you be considering using M2TW as the base?

[cherryfunk]

That thought had crossed my mind as well, but can we port over all the work done on the units so far, especially the legions? If that would have to be recreated... wow. Lots of work.

[dvk901]

The problem with that is two-fold...ignorance (mine) and the time period. I've already read that all the buildings would be wrong, and I don't think any of us could fix that. (No Modeler...that's tough stuff) And I know nothing about MTW2. I have it sitting next to me in the box..unopened. No time to even look at it.

Man, even BI is going to challenge my brain!

[tone]

I have it sitting next to me in the box..unopened. No time to even look at it.

Same here LOL

[Tyr]

This idea was originally Tyr's, so I'm not taking any credit for it.

dvk will be aware, but just for the record for those who don't, I did eventually come to the opinion that a Roman Empire mod idea set in the above mentioned time frame was not the best idea to get the most potential out of Roma Surrectum; and suggested this instead:

Additional Roma Surrectum Campaign

Only a day ago I posted concerning the new additional campaign, concerning a 34BC start date. But I have been thinking, and have begun to lose enthusiasm for the idea; and suggest a change in start date for the planned campaign.

First I should explain my reasons for going off my previous idea:

Realism: I know, I even stated it did not other me. But the more I think about it, the more I see the glaring flaws. This had not so much to do with the idea itself, as with the RTW engine. The Antony & Cleopatra faction will just not do what is expected. I can just see it now, the said faction conquering most of the map, defeating the Romans, or more probably; allying with the Romans and sticking around for a long time. Even if they do crumble, it wouldn’t be as in real life, with all of Antony’s holdings being taken by Augustus; but more likely the Parthians would push them off the map and inherit their empire, making it difficult for the Roman AI to expand in to its historic locations of Asia.

The Factions: You know I’m no fan of the Ice Torque map – in my opinion it doesn’t suit the needs of Roma Surrectum, let alone this idea. On Ice Tourque’s map the only factions would be Antony, Rome, Celts, Germans, Sarmatians and Parthians.

Appeal: I think this idea is of limited appeal. Look how few factions there are, most will play Antony & Cleopatra a few times then leave this campaign alone. Making more Celtic and Germanic Tribes will only mean there is more ‘clone’ factions. And I can see the Parthians and Romans having things to easy and dominating the map.

Time & Development: If the above problem was to be dealt with by sticking with Mundus Magnus, think how long it would take; especially as the work rests on one person. The idea of a new campaign was not to create a new mod, but to offer a way to diving in at a later date so as to experience the new legions in all there glory.



The new start date I propose is 80BC, inspired after I watched the Spartacus DVD. After reading the following you should see why I believe 80BC to be a good start date.

80BC – Timeline of Events

• 80BC Sulla resigned dictatorship, restoring the Senate.
• 83 - 72BC Rebellion of Quintus Sertorius in Iberia.
• 75BC - 65BC Third Mithridatic War
• 73BC Rebellion of Spartacus
• 62BC Catiline Conspiracy
• 49BC – 45BC, Winter Julius Caesar crosses the Rubicon, start of Caesar’s Civil War
• 44BC – 42BC ‘Liberators’ Civil War (Between the Third Triumvirate and Caesars Assassins, the former holding the Western provinces, the latter holding the Eastern Provinces)
• 44BC – 36BC Sicilian Revolt; by Sextus Pompey, Pompey the Great’s son. Managed to hold all of Sicily, cut Grain supplies to Rome. Rome even agreed a peace deal.
• 32BC – 30BC Final Civil War of the Republic: Mark Antony against Augustus (I think you already know something about this one!!)

Roman Empire at this time (N.B. most provinces in Spain at this time were in rebellion):



Faction List
1. Gauls
2. Germans
3. Britons
4. Iberians
5. Getai
6. Maurentania/Numidia
7. Sarmatians
8. Parthia
9. Pontus
10. Armenia
11. Ptolemaic Egypt
12. Seleucia
13. Crete
14. Kush
15. Roman Empire
16. Roman Rebels
17. Spartacus (Emergent)
18. Hispania (Romano – Iberian faction, representing rebellion of Quintus Sertorius. Just a proto-type name)
19. And of course, the Free People.

I think most will agree that the faction list is more varied. Before I go on I think the list needs to be ‘justified’

• Britons: For this era inclusion is no longer unrealistic, Caesar invaded twice. Will make the conquest of Britain harder.
• Seleucia: Yes, still around. Only with Antioch and a few minor Syrian cities under there control, but still around.
• Crete: Your probably thinking pointless Greek state, but it did put up a fight against the Romans; from wikipedia:
And I wanted a Greek City State left!
• Roman Rebels: as you can see from the timeline, this is a period instability; and it will just generally add depth to the game.
• Kush: Another unique faction for Roma Surrectum!! On a side note this is the only listed faction that wont work on the Ice Torque map, and the only one that units will be need to be found for.
• Hispania: Quintus Sertorius was compared to Hannibal, and popular among the Iberian tribes; he aimed to create a new state in Hispania modelled on Rome (even establishing a Senate). Very good commander, defeated Pompey, rebellion only really ended because of his assassination. Offers same sort of twist as Mark Antony and Cleopatra faction, yet it is more realistic as the faction is confined to a smaller area; and historically; he defeated the Romans many times, even against the odds, and wasn’t defeated in 2 years like Mark Antony.
• Spartacus: “What, some uppety Thracian gladiator? What a waste of a faction slot!!” I here you yell (Either that or “No – I am Spartacus!”). Yet he was more than that. He was on the brink of escaping to Gaul (but decided to turn back), had plans to meet with the Roman rebellion lead by Quintus in Spain, was in contact with Mithradates of Pontus, and defeated 9 (!!!!!!) Roman legions and an additional Roman militia army to boot. It is said that at one point, 120,000 slaves had joined him. He was also planning to nip over to Sicily for more plunder – this is important because the first 2 Servile wars had been based in Sicily and they had happened in the last 70 years; and a lot of manpower and resources would have been his had he managed it.


You can see there are only 19 factions. That leaves room for 1 more. I have several ideas for the faction, but won’t say them yet because they could be difficult to put in, but if they could be done they would be very good. Also, a major problem to overcome for a late roman republic era campaign is that Rome may be overpowered, be easy to play and simply dominate the map. Here, Quintus in Hispania, Spartacus and the Roman Rebels will all serve to keep check on the Romans.

Faction Placement:


Well, what do you think? Even if you feel this idea is horrendous, I still think consideration should be given to changing the start date of the campaign. Other than this suggestion…hmm…maybe 49BC, start of Caesars civil war?

Needless to say, you have my support dvk whatever decision you make – I only wish I could help you other than making suggestions and beta-testing.

_________________________________________________________________

It was eventually found out that the exact same idea was already being implemented by another mod team, so this was abandoned. However, I still hold this as the best idea for a post-marian late republic era campaign. (Though the faction list I had proposed needs changing).

[dvk901]

I didn't forget this suggestion, it's just that I liked your original one better. And I don't think you should abandon it so easily, either for RTW limitations sake, or, because someone else was going to do it. Because......we can do it BETTER. But I think so things have to be put into perspective.

When you first proposed the idea of an 'Antony and Cleopatra' campaign, it just hit a 'sweet spot' in me. For one thing, it's one of the most well known events in Roman history, and one of the most well known events in history period. Plays, books, movies...you name it...it was\is a celebrated story.

Furthermore, if and when one of our competitors put this kind of thing into motion or real form...let me tell you what they will do. They will script it. They will limit it. They will have to make it short. They will define and quantify it because it is a historical event, and in doing so, will relegate it to a minor campaign you can play for 10 ten years or something...all to make it seem historically correct. Thus, it will draw little interest. I would not be interested, in fact, because the parameters you must follow to be strictly historical about an event are the anti-thesis of what you want to do with a good challenging game. YOU WANT TO WIN! You don't want to lose because Antony dies, and you don't want to lose because the deck is stacked against you (or the script written against you).

My best example of what I don't like about this is BI itself. I tried playing as the Western Empire....but before I could even make any moves...I was toast. The setup is made to 'look like history, and act like history'..so by and large you lose. Even the Eastern Empire....I tried to make peace with the Vandals...they agreed and then surrounded and attacked Constantinople with FIVE full stacks. I'm sorry....if you're going to try and mirror history, then make it so the Vandals CAN'T attack the Eastern Empire, because they didn't.

What I'm saying is a repeat of saying it before (sorry), but this is a game, so you have game parameters you MUST follow, and historical ones you TRY to follow....not the other way around.

This being said, as others have pointed out to me, Antony was a 'lost battle' away from ruling the Empire himself. What if......? The whole game is a what if? What if Gaul defeated Rome? What if Carthage had prevailed? You play them to create your own personal what if's...and it's fun!

So I liked your original idea because it offers a ton of 'what if's'. And this whole time was rife with rebellion, civil war, and outside interferrence. Nations trying to undermine Rome and take advantage of their internal disorder.

But what really makes this mod the most unique one to handle a civil war like this is the fact that now, you can fight your battles with the Legions that actually fought them! In Spain, you can fight the Cantabarians with the Legions that were there! And in Eygpt or elsewhere, fight the battles where Legion fought against Legion...man, the most spectacular civil war RTW has ever seen! Tyr, there will be NOTHING like it! I don't care what anyone else does.

As far as the timeline, and whether Antony lives or dies, or whether he or his heirs have an Empire that lasts a hundred years and loses, or wins.....who cares? You as the player are going to be able to sit down and play history, make history, redefine it in your own way, with the original major players.

But I don't see this as just an 'Antony and Cleopatra' mod. This was one of the most turbulent and important times in Rome's history. Cantabarian wars, Marcomonni wars, wars with the Britons, the Dacians, the Illyrians, the Pannonians, the Parthians, Thrace and the Sarmatians. I personally envision it as one of the hardest 'Roman player' mods ever...but you'll dang well fight it with the Legions of Rome!

Another thing that happens here, is that a whole Greek section of units gets dumped. BI has no Greek culture anyway. But now, your Nabateans become far more enticing and possible, and perhaps an 'emergent' Judaean revolt in 70AD that destroyed at least one Legion I can think of....and all the units that could make them cool to play\fight against.

We could also emphasize, in selling the point that this isn't just all about Antony, that the Romans went to war with the Parthians because they wished to 'claim the inheritance of Alexander', whom they idolized, 'because they felt it belonged to them.'

Anyway, really, I'm not a salesman...but I am trying to sell your own idea back to you.

[cherryfunk]

Tyr, you make a compelling case for 80BC as a start date -- it was one of the key periods of Roman history, and including Mithridates and Spartacus, two of Rome's greatest enemies, would be extremely cool.

But I think you make a mistake when you say that the Antony/Octavian period would have 'little appeal' -- on the contrary, I think the appeal would be through the roof; it's not an accident that the period has been recreated over and over in film and literature. But even more, from a RTW gamer's point of view, the period enables a REAL Roman civil war -- an empire-wide conflict, with the legions battling each other from Spain to Egypt. The 'civil war' depicted in vanilla RTW is a pale shadow of what this mod would create. And once the player has managed to conquer his enemies, then he must try and duplicate Augustus' consolidations, and restore the empire's borders, then expand them...

I get excited just thinking about it. So I agree with dvk that Antony vs. Octavian would get more people excited about RSIII than an 80BC mod would -- although, it seems to me that it might be possible to create the 80BC mod as a provincial campaign, so that both could be implemented...

[tone]

I love the idea of an 80BC start. I'd love to see it start with total mayhem in terms of battles! A bit like the start of Fellowship of the Ring with this huge battle - that is if it's historical - so that as soon as you start there's a big army or two you've got to fight whichever faction you play.

[dvk901]

Well then, perhaps with emergence, we'll have to consider both.

[cherryfunk]

I love the idea of an 80BC start. I'd love to see it start with total mayhem in terms of battles!

I've been thinking about this the past couple days and trying to figure out why the Octavian period appeals more to me. Here are a few thoughts about it:

-- Tone and Tyr, you both like 80BC because BANG! you have a huge threat to Rome (Spartacus) right at the start - but how does this differ from having Phyrrus in Italy? It seems to me that we already have this big bang start in Italy. In fact Rome, Eprius, Syracuse and Carthage all start right in the middle of a giant mess that can only be cleaned up with sword and fire -- there's four factions all at each other from the starting gun.

-- Now, I love the Spartacus story as much as anyone (if you haven't read the novel, do so, it's amazing); but I don't see how we could realistically make a 'Spartacan' faction. They were a large group of ex-slaves, with their own army, and yes they captured some cities, but they were never a 'people' in any sense of the word, and their only objective was to get OUT of Italy and then disperse to their homes. I don't see how you can argue that they deserve their own faction.

-- It's VERY difficult, using the RTW engine, to recreate the authority that Rome had from 80BC through the time of the first Triumvirate. Many of the nations on Rome's periphary were in essense subject-nations -- they did what Rome said, in return for relative autonomy. But if Rome wanted to march through their lands, or use their people to levy new legions, they did. How do you recreate this? At the time of the Civil War, this is simplified because we just make those regions part of the Empire (which they had essentially become by then).

-- Crete: Tyr, you say you want it as a faction because you want a Greek nation. Well, what was Crete, exactly? It was the base of the Mediterrean pirates, which Pompey utterly destroyed in six months campaigning. Crete did repel the first Roman invasion, but that's the extent of its glory. It certainly wasn't an expansionist nation-state. It would be suitable for a Free Peoples region, perhaps with strong naval forces, but a playable faction? Not if you want to keep any semblence of historical reality... (see this link for more: http://www.unrv.com/provinces/crete.php )

-- But I think the ultimate reason, for me, comes down to this: the civil war. Antony was attempting to revise the Roman state, to blend it with the East, and create a new Roman/Ptolemite dynasty. Had he succeeded, he would have altered history forever -- who knows, he might have gone on to become a new Alexander. And Octavian, I think we tend to underestimate what he did once Antony had been dealt with -- he fought campaign after campaign on Rome's borders, solidified the Empire, created an administration that would then rule the entire mediterrean region for the next 400 years. But the thought of a civil war spanning from Spain to Syria, with legion against legion, two powerful Roman leaders deciding the future of the known world -- 80BC just doesn't offer that. And that's what I want to play...

None of which is to say that 80BC wouldn't make a great mod itself -- it would. But couldn't it be created as a provincial campaign? I think the factions would match up pretty closely, I don't see why we couldn't have Antony/Octavian as the main mod, and 80BC as a sub-campaign...

[Tyr]

Black - Cherryfunk
Red - Me


I've been thinking about this the past couple days and trying to figure out why the Octavian period appeals more to me. Here are a few thoughts about it:

-- Tone and Tyr, you both like 80BC because BANG! you have a huge threat to Rome (Spartacus) right at the start - but how does this differ from having Phyrrus in Italy? It seems to me that we already have this big bang start in Italy. In fact Rome, Eprius, Syracuse and Carthage all start right in the middle of a giant mess that can only be cleaned up with sword and fire -- there's four factions all at each other from the starting gun.

Well, actually I chose 80BC because it was the year after Sulla resigned the dictatorship. The Third Servile War actually began in 73BC, so you would have an even better effect than having a threat at the start - for that had already been offered by Quintus in Spain and Mithridates in Asia. And when the Roman faction is so large (in either concept) you have to have such limitations if you dont want mass Roman Expansion - which would be even more unrealistic in an Octavian era mod than it would be for one starting in 80BC.

-- Now, I love the Spartacus story as much as anyone (if you haven't read the novel, do so, it's amazing); but I don't see how we could realistically make a 'Spartacan' faction. They were a large group of ex-slaves, with their own army, and yes they captured some cities, but they were never a 'people' in any sense of the word, and their only objective was to get OUT of Italy and then disperse to their homes. I don't see how you can argue that they deserve their own faction.

I can argue it because it would add a huge amount of depth to the Roman campaign, so far unseen in any mod. I can argue it because Quintus in Spain was actualy in contact with the rebelling slaves. I can argue it because they defeated 9 roman legions. I can argue it because when they did have the chance to escape Italy, (and some actually did) they turned South to cross to Sicily instead.

I would not intend the Spartacus faction to be playable (they are emergent after all), except prehaps in a provincial campaign that focuses soley on the Western Meditteranean, starts in 73BC and involves the player taking control of Spartacus in a bid to escape to Spain. If for some reason, this is not enough to justify a faction slot (which is more justification than some current RS factions have), it could always done be via scripts and rebels. But this would be more complicated and hardly the same effect.



-- It's VERY difficult, using the RTW engine, to recreate the authority that Rome had from 80BC through the time of the first Triumvirate. Many of the nations on Rome's periphary were in essense subject-nations -- they did what Rome said, in return for relative autonomy. But if Rome wanted to march through their lands, or use their people to levy new legions, they did. How do you recreate this? At the time of the Civil War, this is simplified because we just make those regions part of the Empire (which they had essentially become by then).

No, you just make them Allied at the beginning (like we are doing with Parthia, Pergamum, Armenia, Pontus and Baktria with the Selecuids in RS), and the only one I can actually think of the top of my head is Mauretania.

And suggest an actuall start date for the Octavian idea...then you will see which is more hard to depict accurately.

-- Crete: Tyr, you say you want it as a faction because you want a Greek nation. Well, what was Crete, exactly? It was the base of the Mediterrean pirates, which Pompey utterly destroyed in six months campaigning. Crete did repel the first Roman invasion, but that's the extent of its glory. It certainly wasn't an expansionist nation-state. It would be suitable for a Free Peoples region, perhaps with strong naval forces, but a playable faction? Not if you want to keep any semblence of historical reality... (see this link for more: http://www.unrv.com/provinces/crete.php )

1. Yes, I agree, I did actually say in the post above that some factions would need to be changed, and I was refering to Crete as well as the Seleucids. the above from which you have got my suggestion on Crete was just a rough proposition. Baktria/Indo-Greek Kingdom can offer my wanted greek presence.

2.But on a side note, your exact arguments concerning "It certainly wasn't an expansionist nation-state" and "It would be suitable for a Free Peoples region" could be applied to the Bosporan Kingdom and Syracuse.And not only did Crete repel a Roman attack, but then lasted 3 years against the Romans.

-- But I think the ultimate reason, for me, comes down to this: the civil war. Antony was attempting to revise the Roman state, to blend it with the East, and create a new Roman/Ptolemite dynasty. Had he succeeded, he would have altered history forever -- who knows, he might have gone on to become a new Alexander.

Please, he wan't trying to revise the Roman State, he was trying to make himself ruler of it. A new Alexander? judging by his campaign against Parthia, I think nothing could be further from the truth.

"Had he succeeded, he would have altered history forever ", a pointless argument - if Mithradates, Spartacus, or Quintus had succeeded they would have changed history for ever.

The fact is they didnt; but Mithradates, Spartacus, and Quintus came far closer than Mark Antony - I'll repeat, Spartacus defeated 9 legions, Quintus was undefeated by the Romans, and there were three Mithradatic wars before Pontus was subdued (the last ending in 65BC) and even then Mithridates became king of the Bosporan Kingdom and was only eventually toppled by the betrayal of his own sons. What did Antony offer? A pitiful naval and land engagement, mutinous legions, a failed Parthian camapign, ONE year of war....to think you mentioned keeping "any semblence of historical reality"

And Octavian, I think we tend to underestimate what he did once Antony had been dealt with -- he fought campaign after campaign on Rome's borders, solidified the Empire, created an administration that would then rule the entire mediterrean region for the next 400 years.

He wouldnt have had an Empire to secure if it wasn't for the likes of Crassus, Pompey, and Ceasar who faced some of the greatest threats that Rome had ever faced.


But the thought of a civil war spanning from Spain to Syria, with legion against legion, two powerful Roman leaders deciding the future of the known world -- 80BC just doesn't offer that. And that's what I want to play...

Again 80BC - Quintus in Spain, you can have Legion V Legion strife (and some of the slaves under Spartacus equipped themsleves in Roman fashion), as well as Roman Loyalty, which wouldn't fit in to the Octavian concept (You have yourself mentioned how Octavian 'solidified' the Empire). And the Octavian period doesn't offer a civil war from Syria to Spain.

None of which is to say that 80BC wouldn't make a great mod itself -- it would. But couldn't it be created as a provincial campaign? I think the factions would match up pretty closely, I don't see why we couldn't have Antony/Octavian as the main mod, and 80BC as a sub-campaign...

Because it would only make sense that the one that starts earlier, and isn't an insult to history (and gameplay) was the main campaign; while the idea that is based on one single year of history is relegated to a provincial campaign.


------------------

dvk, the ultimate decision is down to you; so I adress this to you. An Octavian Era mod offers a great experiance for the Roman or 'Mark Antony' Player.

An 80BC mod offers an even better experiance, with various wars on different fronts with varied opponents - including a Legion using faction. On top of that you have other factions that are interesting to play, Parthia, Pontus, Spartacus, Quintus, Armenia, the Gauls, Egypt. What faction will be truly worthwile to play in the Octavian Era mod? Rome and Egypt that is it. People will play each faction once and that is it, a nice little experiance they will soon forget. I'd almost be concerned about devoting a provincial campaign to this concept (which I utterly regret proposing) never mind a whole mod.

[Tyr]

Alas, behold the main, nay – the only - argument against my 80BC idea:
http://forums.totalrealism.net/showthread.php?t=2047

So soon, so soon….. I thought it was still far away


But don’t think you’re safe in Antony&Octavian :

TST

Planned release (TBD)

43bc -14ad

Second Triumvirate: Will have a larger and more epic starting point for Roman versus Roman warfare. The senate will not be a faction and all Roman factions will start the game balanced and at war with one another.

Anthony – Octavian – Lepidus

[removeduser_426582376423734]

MAN, you make me hate uninstalling BI. Guess I'll have to dig it out, you guys are great - this is the best idea of all mods.

[cherryfunk]

this is the best idea of all mods.

Which one? 80BC or Antony/Octavian?

[removeduser_426582376423734]

Antony and Octavian, its not been done before I believe.

[Tyr]

Antony and Octavian, its not been done before I believe.

Outnumbered even more...

[Jimexander the Mighty]

Good choice!

Agreed, I like the Anthony vs Octavian idea alot. I like the idea of a huge power struggle for Rome and a large chunk of the world.

Outnumbered even more...

Outnumbered by one more now, sorry

[cherryfunk]

Antony and Octavian

Good choice!

[dvk901]

But where are the Legions?
Ahhh...they're in Roma Surrectum!

Thank you Shyam Popat...