In the DD about levies the view of Tribal Levies was explained by Trin Tragula:
The result of having as many armies as Clan Chiefs in every region is a miriad of small armies that makes cumbersome to forge a strong united tribal army that can challange the established empires.
The internal strife and disunity is achieved with the Clan Chiefs loyalty, but the management of armies is not a challange but a hidrance to the player.
I suggest a tribal law that allows Clan Chiefs to have Tribal Retinues, similar to Legions, that will be limited to the family of clan chiefs as commanders and their number not limited to regions but the number of clan chiefs.
This will keep the internal strife and disunity in tribes but will allow them to be more competitive in the late game and less cumbersome for the player to manage their armies.
The player will have to gauge how much cohorts is giving to the tribal retinues with the tribal clan chief loyalty, being this the ultimate limit for tribes clan retinue size and not POPs nor money.
Tribal LeviesIn a tribal country political leadership is shared between a number of Clan Chiefs, with the rulership of the country passing between them with each succession.
In previous versions of Imperator Clan chiefs have also had 1 permanently raised Clan Retinue with a number of units under their command, increasing their Power Base as well as giving the player cheap troops.
In the Marius update, Tribal Retinues will no longer exist. Tribes will also never have access to Legions, unlike Monarchies and Republics.
When levies are raised in a Tribal Country they will attempt to converge into at least as many armies as there are Clan Chiefs, granting command of one army to each stakeholder in the Tribe. This means that for a small tribe the raised levies can result in 3 quite small armies, similar to how retinue sizes are currently quite small.
All troops that are raised in a tribe will also start out with personal loyalty to one of the clan chiefs, meaning that clan chief powerbase will spike in times of war when levies are called. After the war, when levies are disbanded they will turn into loyal veterans (similar to how loyal troops already do when disbanded in the current version of the game), increasing the power base of your clan chiefs with every war you fight, until that clan chief dies and a new chief takes their place.
Clan chiefs not leading an army (for instance if you wish to merge your tribal levies, or if their army was destroyed) when you are at war will get a sharp loyalty penalty since they are not allowed to act out their authority like they expect. Clan chiefs in command of an army on the other hand will receive a substantial loyalty increase, for as long as the war lasts. We hope the task of forging a strong, united tribal army that can challenge the established empires, despite a measure of internal strife and disunity, will be an interesting challenge for the player.
The result of having as many armies as Clan Chiefs in every region is a miriad of small armies that makes cumbersome to forge a strong united tribal army that can challange the established empires.
The internal strife and disunity is achieved with the Clan Chiefs loyalty, but the management of armies is not a challange but a hidrance to the player.
I suggest a tribal law that allows Clan Chiefs to have Tribal Retinues, similar to Legions, that will be limited to the family of clan chiefs as commanders and their number not limited to regions but the number of clan chiefs.
This will keep the internal strife and disunity in tribes but will allow them to be more competitive in the late game and less cumbersome for the player to manage their armies.
The player will have to gauge how much cohorts is giving to the tribal retinues with the tribal clan chief loyalty, being this the ultimate limit for tribes clan retinue size and not POPs nor money.
Last edited: