• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Hi, and welcome to another dev diary for Imperator: Rome!


As one of the major features in the 1.3 Livy update, we wanted to address objective and direction.


We had discussed the possibility of a mission system well before release, but had not been happy with any of the designs that we considered. There were several key points that we felt (for legitimate reasons), hadn’t really been covered by similar systems in our sister-titles, and we felt strongly that I:R should have it’s own, unique system.


Firstly, we wanted to ensure that any iteration of a mission system avoided rail-roading the player into playing the game in the same way each time (with any given nation), and secondly, that the player did not only complete tasks, but that the tasks and missions would drive story, both for the intended target, and within the local region.


What we came up with, was a system in which we would write mission ‘blocks’, if you will, which covered compact geographic areas or distinct subject matter, and of which the player had an array to choose from. For example, Rome may be presented with the initial choice to focus on uniting Italia, or instead choosing a mission to develop the land they already own, or turn to the south and deal with Magna Graecia.

q2CSmDBiix9rYyqQwgg4wgMMLW0fKhBy9-iFLRZ60Nkg7IXINxE3eMN5YKfYgwINu5BarzMnjtJtp-pSPirBc7AP_wKXafEDvxYM2JBMw_JA2dw9emjiuA2D3OfLJfleWCJs4Cvt




Each of these mission blocks will be self-contained, and are intended to tell a bit of a story alongside the expected mission fare. Missions will appear as dynamically generated flow-trees, and contain a variety of tasks including timed tasks akin to focus trees, and objectives requiring conditions to be fulfilled.


With the relative power of the scripting tools available to us, we’ve been able to create a series of highly procedural missions with varying objectives and task branches, which will react to the situation in which a nation finds itself, and which should maintain a basic feeling of individuality each time they are selected. This idea of ‘generic’ missions, if you will, is an inevitability while the mission system is in its infancy, but should provide enough variety as to prevent every nation from feeling directly comparable.


sTeoXfT-WBKi16KUlwxFjgqucIqBLXjImsW6rtU9ahel-npEe5oJrF1g5u-vZn4pUX8o-ICoQ7N31zljVH9gZLDCufinwI65eiWfAv1XV7GBg8MUWHlGwNWNL1mGnhiGVFMryDDl



Of course, we are working on a great set of story missions, and one of the primary focuses of these is to provide a sense of regional narrative. A mission for Rome which deals with Sicily, for example, will contain a great deal of regional involvement; for the primary antagonists as well as for nations close by, but incidental to the greater conflict. Our story missions are just that; stories intended to allow a player to pick chapters appropriate to their interests, in which to immerse themselves.



We’ll cover a bit more about our story missions in the near future, so stay tuned, and I’ll do my best to cover any questions that you have about the upcoming systems!

/Arheo
 
I think it's a good addition to the game. I like the block approach, as a way to give more "personality" to the period of certain rulers, sometimes more focused on expansion, sometimes on diplomacy, economic and/or institutional development...

I've started playing IR again last week since its release and I have to say Paradox has made a good job with 1.2. There's a lot to do in order to achieve the "uniqueness" the game should have, but... so far so good.
 
I don't get the explanation of the diary and how the 2 screens relate to eachother.

How does a non-railroaded mission tree with dynamic blocks work?

I looks nice though
 
"With the relative power of the scripting tools available to us, we’ve been able to create a series of highly procedural missions with varying objectives and task branches, which will react to the situation in which a nation finds itself, and which should maintain a basic feeling of individuality each time they are selected."
Wow! These sound like things that would be excellent to have implemented and put to great use at the game's release!
 
Finally something that might actually tempt me to come back. Imperator is still just an empty bag of mechanics (although those have been improving) and this sort of system could go a long way toward actually making it a game.

EU4s static mission trees were definitely a step in the wrong direction so I'm glad you're not simply repeating that. Keep in mind, mission rewards must be immediately beneficial upon mission completion (Many EU4 missions give bonuses that need to be saved until later for maximum benefit which is tedious). Maybe make your missions auto-complete and automatically provide the bonus.

One big omission I see here is the lack of any connection to internal politics. Missions should have internal factions/characters that support and oppose each option with appropriate impact on their loyalty when you choose a route.
 
One big omission I see here is the lack of any connection to internal politics. Missions should have internal factions/characters that support and oppose each option with appropriate impact on their loyalty when you choose a route.

Very much agreed. This seems to be something that has always been in the Devs' minds, given War Councils calling in specific characters, as do similar events etc. So hopefully that continues. It would be nice if the shape of play that determines the missions would take into account Character Offices, Prominence/Popularity, Traits; unusually powerful governors; unusually prestigious/spurned families etc etc.
 
I'm actually

Rather worried. This diary continue the tendency of previous update to make Rome into the EU4 in (space) Roman setting. But for me the selling point of Rome was the adding of CK2 elements. Now, the delition of "Mana"was actually a step back - you took away the king/chief/whatevers influence on country's performance and gave it to the player. Now we see one more step into pure EU4 direction.
We have not seen the rest of the dev diaries yet. For all we know, 1.3 might make the game more like CK2 than EU4. This is just the particular order the devs decided to release the information in.
 
Looks really good, especially the icons! Do Imperator: Rome plan to add custom UI for different culture groups like with religion in ck2? One thing I miss/dislike about Imperator: Rome is that everything is shaped after a Roman perspective, linguistically and graphically. Do you plan to add the option to have for example names in the native language? Any hints would be greatly appreciated :)
 
I’m really enjoying the idea of mission trees, however I didn’t really notice anything that sounds like a “reward.” Don’t get me wrong, flavor and storytelling is always appreciated, however having incentives or unique outcomes based on your choices make events like this feel more important. If all you get after a successful mission is a wall of text, the game would still feel rather empty.

What kind of things could we expect to see from completing these missions? Will there be any unique blocks that will only be available after completing a specific tree?
 
Looks really good, especially the icons! Do Imperator: Rome plan to add custom UI for different culture groups like with religion in ck2? One thing I miss/dislike about Imperator: Rome is that everything is shaped after a Roman perspective, linguistically and graphically. Do you plan to add the option to have for example names in the native language? Any hints would be greatly appreciated :)
Yes small things to make it feel different to play as a tribe or Rome would be nice. CK2 does that well so why not do the same for Imperator?
 
Very much agreed. This seems to be something that has always been in the Devs' minds, given War Councils calling in specific characters, as do similar events etc. So hopefully that continues. It would be nice if the shape of play that determines the missions would take into account Character Offices, Prominence/Popularity, Traits; unusually powerful governors; unusually prestigious/spurned families etc etc.
Yeah. Ideally the missions should come from internal factions/characters who stand to gain. Building a flagship, for example, isn't just a random mission. It's being championed by that Noble that owns a shipwright and he wants that fat government contract. Do you give him the contract (ship construction cost +100%, construction time +50%, he pockets the money and is really happy), do you bid the contract (he's mildly upset), or do you give the contract to the foreign nation that builds the best ships in the Mediterranean (everyone is upset, flagship gets a bunch of bonuses, improved relations with that country).
 
Looks really good, especially the icons! Do Imperator: Rome plan to add custom UI for different culture groups like with religion in ck2? One thing I miss/dislike about Imperator: Rome is that everything is shaped after a Roman perspective, linguistically and graphically. Do you plan to add the option to have for example names in the native language? Any hints would be greatly appreciated :)

Same, I don't like the fact that when you play Egypt, the entire UI looks Roman. There should be at least 4-5 types of UI aesthetic.
 
Do I understand the system right? Is this how it approximately works?

START: A situation/issue/problem is detected, a mission tree becomes available:
"You are a small tribe. A medium-sized kingdom has spent the last few years conquering your neighbors, and you feel threatened"

Branch A: Military approach
Subbranch A1: Build 30 cohorts for defense.
Subbranch A2: Build 3 fortresses on the threatened border.
Subbranch A3: Conquer 10 territories to show them your strength.
Reward A1-3: Morale bonus when fighting troops from the nation that initially threatened you.

Branch B: Diplomatic approach
B1: Form a defensive Alliance with other minor nations
Reward B1: Benefit when trying to absorb your allies into your future empire
B2: Pull some strings to incite unrest in the threatening nation
Reward B2: Chance to install a puppet ruler
B3: Bribe another nation into attacking the one that threatens you
Reward B3: A casus belli to join the war and take some of their land

Branch C: Tribal approach
C1: Migrate away to someplace safer
Reward: Benefits for migrating
 
This is the first I:R dev diary that actually satisfies me;

"Firstly, we wanted to ensure that any iteration of a mission system avoided rail-roading the player into playing the game in the same way each time (with any given nation), and secondly, that the player did not only complete tasks, but that the tasks and missions would drive story, both for the intended target, and within the local region."

I fully support this, keep up the good work!
 
Paradox would be well-advised to give the most-played nations individual mission trees, if they want to make the best impression. Nobody is going to be bitter about some minor nations in Britain sharing the same missions (for now anyway), but playing Egypt should feel different from playing Phrygia.
 
Hey Paradox! You do know that the Marble statues at the time were painted right?

Because man... that mission tree UI is really hard to look at for someone like me who has really poor vision. It's just too hard to see the details of those statues due to their monochromatic nature... in fact I can neither look for too long at them nor can I look at the borders of the windows, less I get a spliting headache.

If you guys could just paint them or something... not only would it be more historical it would also help out with it's literally painful visual monotony.

Unless you guys don't really care about such issues... which fair enough I guess...
 
Paradox would be well-advised to give the most-played nations individual mission trees, if they want to make the best impression. Nobody is going to be bitter about some minor nations in Britain sharing the same missions (for now anyway), but playing Egypt should feel different from playing Phrygia.

I think what they are going for relies on the distinction between getting a Mission block because you are Egypt and getting a mission block because you are a state with the characteristics that Egypt has.

I wouldn't be opposed to having some uniques towards the beginning for the well attested states (Rome, Carthage, Diadochi, Maurya, Parthia) as long as they don't force the game to put them back on track (or eternally failing in the attempt) even if they fall drastically off course. Maybe linking some Diadichi missions to the existence of a ruler with the appropriate bloodline; or the holding of certain territories. But not hand-holding a historical narrative throughout the game.