What should be the most difficult aspect of playing this game?

[Diocle]

Just a note: there are few RTW Mods actually doing something about rebellions, one of them, the most famous, is Roma Surrectum, where Big Rebellion (now toned down) is one of the most atrocious and glorious experiences in gaming history, then, there is Rome Total Realism, where you can find an interesting (cruel) feature which turns your most successful generals into traitors, but in this case, the traitor general isn't anymore under your control.

For a long time I've thought that using the loyalty system and the shadow factions of BI together with the Senate mechanics of RTW, it might have been be possible getting close to a simplified but interesting depiction of the Imperial Civil Wars. Now I'm almost certain that it's impossible, but, until somebody forbids dreamig, I'll go on with my dreams!

Returning to the most difficult aspect of playing: I think that too many enemies stacks, more than increasing the challenge, they increase the boredom, but I well know being alone on this subject.
Then about the difficulty of maintaining the army, I would agree that it was a very important aspect of Late Antiquity, but I think that this difficulty comes after the political crisis, not before it. I mean that the financial problems the Romans had to face during the III and IV centuries, came after the begin of the political crisis, i.e., without the political crisis of the Severian dinsaty (even though I think it's the Reign of Commodus the actual turning point), the Roman Emperors would have been able to maintain their armies as it happened before. So for me the Revolts are a more relevant factor, than the upkeep of the army.

[Riothamus]

In the VGR 463AD campaign from the rebellion Aegidius, the Roman faction in Soissons is created but unfortunately it's not a revolt that leads up to in the game for it is a faction to choose from at the start. It would be interesting to play a game with Constantine the Great, Aetius or Boniface before and when they revolted as a Roman faction within the Roman faction. Then to choose either to become it or suppress it while the other factions are licking their chops. Lots of mind altering things to think about of what ifs by these historically significant rebellions that shaped or weakened the Roman Empire.

[demagogos nicator]

Just a note: there are few RTW Mods actually doing something about rebellions, one of them, the most famous, is Roma Surrectum, where Big Rebellion (now toned down) is one of the most atrocious and glorious experiences in gaming history, then, there is Rome Total Realism, where you can find an interesting (cruel) feature which turns your most successful generals into traitors, but in this case, the traitor general isn't anymore under your control.

Which version of Rome Total Realism has this feature? I have played a lot most recent versions of the mod and have not noticed anytihng like that.

Returning to the most difficult aspect of playing: I think that too many enemies stacks, more than increasing the challenge, they increase the boredom, but I well know being alone on this subject.

I must agree in this point. I preffer fewer stacks and decisive battles. On of my best RTW experience was taking southern Italy (aproximatelly 15 regions) as Rome from Pyrrhos in RTR VII. It took me just four decisive (2 of them I have lost) and two smaller battles during the course of 10 years (40) turns to conquere the region but each of these battles really counted and even now two years later I can describe the details of each of the battles. In the same time I was fighting etruscan rebels in the north and moving my FM trough their cursus honorum so I was not borred at all.

In regard to the rebelions. What I like about the system being work by the Fourth Age Total War is that the civil war mechanic is going to be relevant for every manish factin in the mod not only for selected few which gets the shadowing faction like in vanila BI. In my opinion rebelions should not be exclusivelly Roman concern.

[Gäiten]

The civil war aspect with rebel "Homeland" factions could be done if you reserve some of the faction slots for these rebels, I believe.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

It would be interesting to play a game with Constantine the Great, Aetius or Boniface before and when they revolted as a Roman faction within the Roman faction.

I was messing with this in IBUR and can't find a historically accurate way to implement it without starting with the revolt having already begun, and Boniface being a separate faction. It wasn't exactly a revolt either because neither of them wanted to become Emperor, it was a literal battle between the Junior and Senior Comites et Magistri Utriique Militiarum, for the Senior command.

It would be possible in Medieval 2, I think, though.

[Diocle]

In my opinion the best solution is still using the mechanics of RTW with the Senate asking for the suicide of your faction leader and then opening the civil war.

For me it's still the best civil war's mechanic of the whole TW series. With little changes, it should be possible adapting it to the late antiquity, in place of the Senate you put the Imperial Court and your faction leader is the revolting character, anyway, being mentally retarded about programming, I don't know if it's possible using this RTW mechanism on the engine of Barbarian Invasion.

In Med2 I don't remember about any civil war mechanics, but they are ages I don't play Med2.

[Sigma]

A bit of a necro bump but this was a hard one to vote on, I was divided between maintaining an army and revolts happening from within, both of which were big issues in the later Roman Empire and other countries. One thing I've notice in RTW mods is how easy it is to create a Barbarian super faction once you get a barbarian faction into a good position. This is unusual for me because most of the Barbarians were tribal federations and tribal kingdoms at the time, really the larger your country gets the harder it should be to maintain stability. As others in the thread have said, the civil-war mechanics in RS II and the general betrayal in RTR are good options.

For the IB mods it would be interesting if rebellions could maybe be tied to the culture of family members. Like a Roman general with close Frankish ancestory and leading an army with a stack of Germanic units in a war against the Franks should have a high chance of defecting back to the Franks. No idea if that is possible though.

[Johnadiw26]

A bit of a necro bump but this was a hard one to vote on, I was divided between maintaining an army and revolts happening from within, both of which were big issues in the later Roman Empire and other countries. One thing I've notice in RTW mods is how easy it is to create a Barbarian super faction once you get a barbarian faction into a good position. This is unusual for me because most of the Barbarians were tribal federations and tribal kingdoms at the time, really the larger your country gets the harder it should be to maintain stability. As others in the thread have said, the civil-war mechanics in RS II and the general betrayal in RTR are good options.

For the IB mods it would be interesting if rebellions could maybe be tied to the culture of family members. Like a Roman general with close Frankish ancestory and leading an army with a stack of Germanic units in a war against the Franks should have a high chance of defecting back to the Franks. No idea if that is possible though.

This is sound a good idea

Sent from my Smartfren Andromax AD688G using Tapatalk

[BroskiDerpman]

For a late era mod like IBFD then I'd say everything since literally everything is deteriorating (Incompetence, war, etc) and within decades the WRE doesn't even exist anymore. A good player would be able to salvage the situation however it should be tough due to how in real life the WRE collapsed.

For other factions including ERE and Sassanids the situation depends but I think culture and certain settlements should play a role in influencing expansion choice, etc.

[JC_CESAR]

I can't really take a choice since from my point of view some of those choice are closely relative (in my opinion), i.e not finding enougth natural ressource (food etc) equal less revenue from trade and/or maintaining my various army wich lead to men deserting and/or being less effective in battle wich lead to figthing a battle wich in turn if you loose too many batlle migth lead to a revolts within. Sooo i wil go for other .

[Riothamus]

I can't really take a choice since from my point of view some of those choice are closely relative (in my opinion), i.e not finding enougth natural ressource (food etc) equal less revenue from trade and/or maintaining my various army wich lead to men deserting and/or being less effective in battle wich lead to figthing a battle wich in turn if you loose too many batlle migth lead to a revolts within. Sooo i wil go for other .

Interesting.. Ty JC