In every game i've played, and what seems ever game others have played, the Seleucid Empire (SE) will basically end up owning everything from Anatolia, down to the Egyptian borders, and then the rest of the map to the east. This makes for a giant enemy to slowly wear away once you finally deal with them.
The problem with this is that it is completly unrealistic, and almost tends to dumb down the game, constantly going to war with them, winning, taking a few territories. Rinse and repeat, until you get bored and leave them alone or start a new campaign.
The reason it is completly unrealistic, is that other than under Seleucus I Nicator and then again for a short while under Antiochus III the Great (around 200 BCE), the SE was constanly losing territories, mostly to civil wars, and rebellions (i.e. Parthia, Backtria, etc..). Basically after Antiochus III the empire was almost consistenly at civil war.
The SE didn't die off from outside pressures, but almost entirely from within. But this will never happen in the game. And when Parthia does spawn they are quickly put down and dissappear too quickly.
Basically my solution would be to treat the seleucid empire differently than other countries, by having a large increase to revolt risk (10 - 20%) the further east the empire gets. Thus taking some manpower away from their conquering and expansion.
I would also have a large increase to loyatly penalties (-20% to each character). In this way civil wars are almost constant and become the biggest challenge to play.
I think those two things would add a significant when playing seleucid, and when playing as someone else add a unique element when fighting them. Timing your wars to when they are weak and capturing their territories when they can't be bother to defend or care about them.
This is way too long for a post, but just my two cents.
The problem with this is that it is completly unrealistic, and almost tends to dumb down the game, constantly going to war with them, winning, taking a few territories. Rinse and repeat, until you get bored and leave them alone or start a new campaign.
The reason it is completly unrealistic, is that other than under Seleucus I Nicator and then again for a short while under Antiochus III the Great (around 200 BCE), the SE was constanly losing territories, mostly to civil wars, and rebellions (i.e. Parthia, Backtria, etc..). Basically after Antiochus III the empire was almost consistenly at civil war.
The SE didn't die off from outside pressures, but almost entirely from within. But this will never happen in the game. And when Parthia does spawn they are quickly put down and dissappear too quickly.
Basically my solution would be to treat the seleucid empire differently than other countries, by having a large increase to revolt risk (10 - 20%) the further east the empire gets. Thus taking some manpower away from their conquering and expansion.
I would also have a large increase to loyatly penalties (-20% to each character). In this way civil wars are almost constant and become the biggest challenge to play.
I think those two things would add a significant when playing seleucid, and when playing as someone else add a unique element when fighting them. Timing your wars to when they are weak and capturing their territories when they can't be bother to defend or care about them.
This is way too long for a post, but just my two cents.
