Rise and fall of the roman empire

We are a few people (so far it´s Drendor, Pinktilapia and the_monarch) who wanna start a succession game with the mod found here:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=111682


We have not yet decided how many we are gonna be so write a post in this thread if you are intrested.

Perhaps 5-6 people is appropriate?

We also need to discuss wich version to play and if we are gonna mod it some or use any houserules.

I suggest that people who are unfamiliar with the mod but still are intrested to read the rules found in the thread.
There are alot of new units and wonder/improvements and you need to know the basics to take part in this game.


Alea jacta est!


Consul Linkowicius

I like to take part in this game. I know and still play civ 3 because of this scenario/mod. Thanks again for the mod pink.

who will go first, how many turns for each player?


Recomendations:

Conquer southern italy, commision foriegn legions in southern italy.

Build up velites/ granerys and research enginering.

Game version.... 275bc easy..

I'm played this from the start but have never passed pontus. I've conquered Syria but longest i've played was til 50 AD

We should also have 6 players with good experience ....

anyways thats my input!

Count me in, sizzlechest!

Ok we are 5 people so far. I think that´s enough but I want to hear what Pink and monarch have to say as well.

We also need to start discussion of game variant, difficulty, rules and strategy.

I am IN !
I would go for the easy version, if you ask me, for it would optimize our chances of success in completing the game. I fear I am a poor Civ3 player (you will call me Commodus, you will see).

For house rules, let me start:
(1) Barbarian cities locked into ancestral forests must not be claimed in a peace treaty
(2) The same goes with Parthian/Persian cities located on Persian Hearthland terrain

More...?

For the succession game's rules, is there some standard around already? Like how many turns one player plays before sending its save, etc.

I also have a proposition, that might be a good idea or not. Do you want me to first compile the update long promised (I will do it before Friday) and start a succession game based on it? The good side: fixed little bugs and game balance issues, new features. The bad side: a serious risk for new flaws and bugs. A compromise (and yet more work for me *yuck*) would the big update for the 1 player game only, that we be further tested, and a slightly fixed BIQ for our succession game (just the few bugs that still exist in version 1.03). Which way to go folks?

Can't wait to start!

I think you'll find that you're not the worst player on board, Pink! Trust me, I know about these things. I've never even met a persian yet! (in the game, that is!)

Ah, but I never went through the Carthaginians ! (don't quick me out of the team please!)

Ha ha! We're both crap!

Is there one spot left open? I would like to join too (as I overwrote my 175AD or so file recently) but I have never played a succesion game before and I don't know how much time it would require and so on.

Well I would like to give this succession game a whorl (though it would be my first one). If someone is not able to play give me a pm and I will fill in there position.

That's 7 if I don't mistake. 3 more and we could well have two games running!

I'm back from the tedious university work and should be able to play freely. In my game (the second one that I'm bound to take to the finish I got all the way till 16AD (Egypt and Mesopotamia were the last bunch) and I'm pretty close to history, with a little advance on Germania and Dacia (Decebalus has only Tomis left for now). Anyway I kinda "cheated" (well I found my way around the rules) by dennying Pontus their Mithridates unit and Dacia their Furores Dacii, but I've seen plenty of Legio Antonii . I tell you this because you might want to make these civs stronger BEFORE they enter a war with Rome (like you did to Carthago Nova ) and make their spawning units their swan's tune. I wrote my complete "SPQR chronicles" if anyone wants to see them. I too think the hard version is quite a challenge unless you manage everything and don't use tricks like the foreign legions so I'm okay with an easy version but I vote for the new patch that needs to be tested anyway.

So. When do we start? Nobody seems to have much experience about the late part of the game, isn't it? How do we designate the number of turns? And the following order?

As for the house rules, I halfheartedly agree . I wrote on the main thread that the Roxolanii joined the Empire by a "cultural" conversion and I wrote about my intention to take 3 (three) Persian cities on Persian Heartland to permanently secure the eastern borders. All coastal German cities could easily fall to amphiboius Scipionii, (one even has a landing zone next to it) and I planned on razing the cities that are beyond the limes (like Dacia and Britannia if I can't hold on to them but I will refrain from any such "devil's work" from this game as I agree they spoil the (frustrating) fun . I suppose the free foreign legions are allowed (and historical even) right? I ussually load these "precious" units into armies for better protection and so their terraform handicap is negated. This way the army costs only as one unit, not as three.

Any other suggestions about what shouldn't be allowed?

I agree with the houserules stated by Pink.
Maybe we should forbid ROP-raping as well?

The easy biq is fine by me. Gives us a chance to play without using the "holy reload button".

hmm 7, should we try to wait for a few more ppl and start up two games?
Or maybe 7 ppl is enough already for two games?

Maybe not so much a house rule as to keep it interesting. How about limiting the number of Legios before the Marius reform to the number of cities Rome possess? Make more reliance on the auxiliary units, other than just building them more for cheap defense.

Well I am up for two games if we gather enough people.

If we get a few more people to join in we could have 2 people do 10 turns each. Seeing how Rome had 2 Consul before the 44BCE, we could delegate two different responsibilites to each Consul. Say one is in charge of the army (though each would control a single Legio Consularis) and one for domestic duties (buildings, wonders). Then other things like tax rate, ROP, war, could be discussed among the Consuls. Heh, then we could claim which one of us is Dictator for Life, to oversee the general direction in which Rome will conduct herself.

Gaias said:

Maybe not so much a house rule as to keep it interesting. How about limiting the number of Legios before the Marius reform to the number of cities Rome possess? Make more reliance on the auxiliary units, other than just building them more for cheap defense.

Well I am up for two games if we gather enough people.

If we get a few more people to join in we could have 2 people do 10 turns each. Seeing how Rome had 2 Consul before the 44BCE, we could delegate two different responsibilites to each Consul. Say one is in charge of the army (though each would control a single Legio Consularis) and one for domestic duties (buildings, wonders). Then other things like tax rate, ROP, war, could be discussed among the Consuls. Heh, then we could claim which one of us is Dictator for Life, to oversee the general direction in which Rome will conduct herself.

Click to expand...

Yeah! Let's start a democracy game based on RFRE!

I say 10 turns before sending the save should be good but 2 persons on the same save file could be a bit difficult.
House Rules : well, due to the difficulty even in the easy version of conquering everything on time, I say no rules except for the ROP-rape which kinda ruins eveything. And of course, no conquering ancestral forest city or persian heartland city.
For early strategies, we have 2 options :
1) Do it as in a history book
2) Conquer civs before they have their uber-unit meaning some civs will be left overs for the end
Plus, let's play RFRE on the newest patch

Ok - I am working on the patch. Try to be done with it tomorrow and hopefully an upload on Friday. We could then start playing Monday!

As much as I love the idea of having 2 players/consuls playing together 10 turns, I don't see how it can be practically done. One thought I had, easier to implement, is that a senate (players) vote must take place everytime Rome wishes to declare war, with a 2/3 majority required to be able to do so. We could add other major decision along this line (building wonders, contracting alliances). Also, a similar 2.3 majority vote of all players could also force the current player out, naming another one to play 5 turns (Dictator anyone?) afterwhich the previous player resumes his remaining turns of play.

House rules:
(1) Barbarian cities locked into ancestral forests must not be claimed in a peace treaty
(2) The same goes with Parthian/Persian cities located on Persian Hearthland terrain
(3) No ROP-rape allowed
(4) 2/3 majority needed for
1. Declaration of war
2. Building a wonder in a specific city
3. Naming a Dictator for 5 turns
(5) Provide basic report of each turn (support costing troops raised, conquests, diplomacy, net income, major builds, etc.)
(6) ...

I would let the Senate decides where war will be waged according to rule 4.1, we don't needed to necessarily follow history (although it should come to this practically).

I'm new to succession games but I'm not sure about the rest of you. Would it be an idea to play a mock run of a few turns each to familiarise and refine how we're going to do this?

Indeed your idea sounds more practical, and I can live with those house rules. I was wondering what we would do after dictator perpetuus is built? Maybe jocky for position, something like curring favor with other players, secret email assasination plots, or the old favorite of taking Rome by force (not that this is doable of course...). Maybe dictator for life could be chosen by those who suggested actions netted the most territory/city gain? Or something else, or not at all. Just throwing some ideas out there.

One thing we should do after dictator for life is declared, that is if we go that route, is divide a certain amount of cities to each player for control. Most likely have governors for each major province in the Roman Empire. Of course only if it is feasible to do so. Just would be fairly interesting if we set it up somewhat on the governing ways of Rome.

Well this democracy game sounds like a lot of fun. Never played one and I'm sure we can work out the mistakes if we think together, but we need a "consul" to oversee all other governors (if we chose to have any) AND to run the army, basically run the game.

However I almost never waged war on two fronts so it seems impractical to divide control of the army. One consul always stayed home, you know...

Also I don't see any other practical way of actually doing this than a Senate meeting once every 10 or 20 turns when the mandate expires for the current consul. The Senate should then analyze his rule, give a grade to him and even penalize him (maibe skip a few turns next round). The only actual responsability would be to control the army effectivelly and we all know that's very much dependant on the random factor. However if someone manages to lose an army he should have some serious punishment . Just kidding.

Btw I took Suza and Hamadan yesterday with the help of 20 velites and the 6 armies but it was quite hard. Works perfectly that Persian Heartland terrain. They had just 3 saggitarrius inside only one was veteran and the pounding took forever. Velites withdrew to deny them becoming veteran. I guess that border is secure forever . Got Sarmias in negociations too. It's quite historical if you come to think of it as Assyria WAS a Roman province for a short period of time. . Well I'm off to Armenia now.

I'll be able to start a game on Monday too, but no way sooner.