Crisis of Third Century - Why Did Rome Start This War?

[InsidiousMage]

So, I'm allies with Rome playing as Hattusa and we are currently engaged in a war with Babylon which is going fine but we are by no means dominating as Babylon has just started a strong counterattack. Then Rome declares war on Assyria or Persia, I don't remember off of the top of my head, who are in a national alliance with each other and are my neighbors but not Rome's neighbors, hence the Crisis. I manage to make peace with Babylon but I'm not doing so well against Persia and Assyria since I've lost troops against Babylon and the front with Babylon is not particularly close to Assyria and Persia. I would like to know why Rome started this war. Checking their king's personality, the only trait I can see that would start a war is Bitter but maybe he got an event and being a Hero archetype he didn't give into a demand and went to war but the notice says that "Rome declared war against..." but I have no idea. I uploaded two relevant saves and any insight would be appreciated.

 

[InsidiousMage]

UPDATE - Lost a city to Persia and then got an event chain that allowed to me make peace at the cost of another city, which I was fine with as my immediate goal was to get Persia out of the war. Losing a city also caused an event where my then current ruler, at the time a "The Great", had to step down and his son take change, which as a Hero archetype I of course went with and he has been leading the war from the front lines, grabbing a couple of titles I hadn't gotten yet (Mighty and Valiant). I'm currently making headway against Assyria and it is only a matter of time before they fall. I've gotten one city from them, finishing an ambition, and I'll take two or three more before peace since their final two cities are inside Persian territory and not worth the effort. The King of Rome who started this whole mess died, his daughter inherited, and immediately ended the national alliance, honoring the sacrifice my nation and people made for her father's arrogance. If the game lasts long enough I'll probably go to war against Rome and take a couple of cities, including the Eternal City itself, to show my appreciation for their actions.

Honestly, as frustrating as this has been, it is also a great example of why I love this game. The player is put in interesting positions, given various options and tools to deal with them, and nothing ever feels unfair or like having the rug pulled out from under you. Surrendering a city to Persia is a good example of this to me. It's not great but it does give me the opportunity to concentrate on one opponent and dominate them instead of having to spread my army too thin and maybe lose everything. That city was probably going to fall to Persia anyway so it didn't feel too bad to lose and I'll come out ahead in terms of cities once the war finishes and neither city lost of a great loss either. One of the best experiences I've had with the game yet.

 

[PiR]

maybe he got an event

iirc AI don't get events?

 

[InsidiousMage]

iirc AI don't get events?

I don't know which mechanics the AI nations interact with or don't so that was just a guess on my part because I don't see the point in declaring a war against two other nations when we are already fighting one war already.