Imperator: Rome Dev Diary - 2nd of March

[DukeOfValois1]

By the Twelve of Olympos, will the people making this game ever learn? Mission trees are not what we need. Depth and Variety are what is sorely needed in this barebones ass game. Mission trees provide good skeleton, but you seriously cannot expect us to keep paying for this nonsense, right?

Speaking specifically to both nations covered in this DD.

Athens plays as any other republic, and Sparta as any other kingdom. Yet both are noted for their unique constitutions in world history. Sparta's Diarchy...and with time, reestablising the democracy of Pericles in Athens should be unique mechanics to define them.

But no. MIsSoN tReEs!

 

[Denkt]

Athens plays as any other republic, and Sparta as any other kingdom. Yet both are noted for their unique constitutions in world history. Sparta's Diarchy...and with time, reestablising the democracy of Pericles in Athens should be unique mechanics to define them.

Yes it seems like a missed opportunity, it seems like they are spending all their programing and design assets on the religious update since that basically apply to everyone while letting a few content creators do the new mission trees.

 

[Denkt]

If by missed opportunity, you mean they're bucketing out water of a ship with a hole in the bottom, sure.

It reminds me about the navy, Imperator: Rome had only 1 ship type at launch, 1 patch later they added 5 new types and changed the naval combat system, but they did really not add more purposes to the navy, it is still about fight enemy navy and transport troops in a time period in which nations like Carthage had large navies to Control trade something which is not represented at all now and neither is navy's role in supplying armies.

It is basically the same thing as adding 10 new governments but they are just the exact same republics, monarchies and tribes we already know.

It may add to immersion to have more ship types but the fact that some of the most important aspect of navy is lacking is not good for immersion at all.

 

[Limbojack]

Don't get me wrong, but the focus on mission trees worries me greatly. The new mission trees look cool and everything, but I fear they won't be enough to bring anyone back to the game (it's not for me and the people I play with, at least). I also fear that the amount of time and energy spent on developing them delays much more necessary changes. I mean, I can only speak for myself and the little MP group I often play with, but we are pretty united in our concern that with CK3 being released this year, together with games such as Total War Troy, The Settlers 10 and Mount & Blade Bannerlord etc., the likelihood of us returning to Imperator Rome greatly depends on the state of the game before those titles get released, and as of right now, it doesn't look promising.

Again, we're only 10-15 people usually, and we could be completely off compared to the rest of the games player base, but based on the forum posts here I don't think we are.

 

[Denkt]

I think the issue with Imperator: Rome is that while it do have quite alot of content it is simply not making good use of it, like characters could be a big deal but right now they are pretty boring. A commander in Imperator: Rome have only to care about martial and some traits, they have 4 attributes, why not use them all, I mean it make sense that charisma raise Soldiers morale and finess make armies move quicker. Compare to EUIV whose commander have 4 attributes and traits and I say EUIV have better commanders than the game that have characters as commander which is just ridiculous, but that is how it is right now and don't ask me why.

Compare how boring the offices are in Imperator: Rome compared to CK2 council in which each councilor can peform 4 action each, why not have that in Imperator: Rome as well? Also the commanders in CK2 is simply much more interesting than Imperator: Rome ones which feel like they lifted straight from EU: Rome. Yes Imperator: Rome have some interesting stuff like loyalty and loyal cohorts but these system need more work and loyalty will be changed.

Even if characters in Imperator: Rome are in a bad state right now compared to their potential it is still a strength of the game compared to the other paradox games that don't even have them. Now stuff like diplomacy, not so much.

 

[Limbojack]

I think the issue with Imperator: Rome is that while it do have quite alot of content it is simply not making good use of it

This sums it up perfectly. The trade system is OK, but not good/great. The economy is OK, but not good/great. Warfare is OK, but not good/great. Diplomacy is OK, but not good/great. The population mechanics are OK, but not good/great. The city management is OK, but not good/great. The character aspect is OK, but not good/great.

The entire game is OK, but it has the potential to be great.

 

[Denkt]

Yes it "works", but it have not made me play beyond like 550 Before the game is boring and too easy. The game have no dynamic stuff at all, in CK2 with its character you can have bad times, in Imperator: Rome you simply get stronger and stronger, not even a coallition system exist to keep you in some Control and the rebellion and civil war stuff is generally too easy to avoid and there is no reason to have a civil war and rebellion can sometimes be exploited to avoid AE by making subjects revolt.

Atleast CK3 which you play as a character will have some sort of dynamic system which can set you back all way to what you where at the start and that is the stuff I kinda like, especially once powerful enough that you know there is nothing left in the game other than boring grind which is also one of the worst seen in a paradox game.

 

[Axis89]

A lot of the problem too is that Imperator kinda hides it's features, and when you discover them they are convoluted in horrible UI, and presented incredibly dull.
Often it get's messy and hard to keep track at a glance etc.

One example of something very simple(This one isnt a hidden feature though), in Imperator you can have Triumphs. Well instead of a niiiiice event painting, event mechanic tied to the character and maybe some other effects to make that triumph feel like a celebration, Imperator Rome just tells you "You now have clicked the Triumph button, +xx% boost to x etc".
Missed opportunity.

EDIT: I mean, the game is like a math sheet, but the time period made stories like the Iliad, Odysseus, and believed in Herakles the adventurer, inspired stories of Caesar, Cleopatra and Marcus Antonius.
Leonidas and the three hundred. Perseus and Medusa. Alexander the Great. The most ancient of them all, Egypt and their gods. Aeneid by Virgil.

This game need to study Homer and how he managed to tell a story, because that's presentation!

 

[Denkt]

A lot of the problem too is that Imperator kinda hides it's features, and when you discover them they are convoluted in horrible UI, and presented incredibly dull.
Often it get's messy and hard to keep track at a glance etc.

One example of something very simple(This one isnt a hidden feature though), in Imperator you can have Triumphs. Well instead of a niiiiice event painting, event mechanic tied to the character and maybe some other effects to make that triumph feel like a celebration, Imperator Rome just tells you "You now have clicked the Triumph button, +xx% boost to x etc".
Missed opportunity.

Also character as far as I can tell never ask/demand a triumph, sometimes they demand a job but thats about it. And the triumph itself have zero flavor, no events, no killing of prisoners/human sacrifices. Also there is no way to see which characters have had a triumph, something the Romans would record.

And about the same can be said about all character interactions, characters don't even care if you smear their reputation. they hardly care about anything and then they do it is a hit to loyalty which itself is just a binary system, either super loyal or completely disloyal. They could very well have spent more time with each interaction instead of going for quantity and acting like it is still 2008 since it feel straight up copy from EU: Rome and maybe it is.

Argubly every single thing in Imperator: Rome is like this in some way or Another, very lacking in flavor, lacking in originality (except maybe food and cities, maybe there is more) and often lacking in content, which is very obvious with stuff like diplomacy and subjects. Imperator: Rome tried to be several games at ones but failed at capturing the good things about any of them and left is a Product in need of a complete redesign.

The question is if spending a year or two on remaking the game is actually a Worthwhile thing?

 

[Mrbrkill]

Phrygia is in Greece because they were in the process of conquering it at the start, defeating both Macedon and Egypt. They continued to do so with great success until Demetrius retreated to deal with the invasion of Anatolia.

Their recent invasion is also why Greece is not all subjects under macedon for that matter

Is there any plans to make this more clear in the Magnia Grecia update? The game starts in the middle of a brief ceasefire in a major war which ends in the destruction of the Antigonids in Phygria. This conflict polarized the greek citystates and was key turning point for the eastern Mediterranean. Is this last conflict going to be better represented and constantly actually happen going forward? After the conflict, will the anti Antigonid alliance dissolve and feud among themselves?

 

[Will Steel]

I would've preferred it more if Athens and Sparta got actual proper mechanics, like a stratocratic diarchy with two kings (Agiads and Eurypontids) for Sparta. Or you know, a proper democratic Boule-ruled republic government type for Athens to replace the generic so called ""republic"" it has since release...instead of just more mission trees.

- We could've used a proper diplomacy system, to replace the barebones one the game has right now.
- We could've used a system for city-state leagues that Athens and Sparta were actually known for, rather than mission-based name changes. Even Stellaris has federations.
- There could've been a focus on better character interactions, or a rework of civil wars the weird family system. Especially since Athens war known for repeated coups in this era.
- We could've used the wonderful, flexible vassalage system EU4 has.
- We could've used better character portraits, with helmets and crowns and more than just one type of armour.
- As others said, we could've gotten actual interactive triumphs and replacement of "click to instantly gain/remove rival" buttons.
- We could've used a proper ledger instead of the joke we have right now, or a rework of the macrobuilder.
- There is a host of features that are not present in the game that could've been the focus of these "small but frequent patches" (still taking as long as previous patches).

bUt BuT LooK! tHe MisSioN tReeS!

This is the issue I have with mission trees. They are a great idea, but then most if not all the development time gets devoted to mission trees instead of other actual features. Not to mention they are one-time only, rarely about anything other than expanding somewhere, and the rewards are mostly just modifiers or claims or temporary buffs. That's not very enjoyable.

And then Paradox wonders why player numbers are rising so slowly compared to other games. Players want features, and all they get are quest lines after quest lines, even if they are very well-made quest lines.

Honestly, in my opinion features should come first, mission trees later. The game is missing features and depth, not flavour or questlines. Mission trees would've been a great addition to build upon a game with already solid features, like EU4 did.

 

[Iosue Yu]

Let's make a quick comparison to EU4, or should I say, trying to fit the HRE history into the style of mechanics of Imperator Rome...

So if you want to reform the HRE, the only way is to militarily conquer all the HRE land. And you can only do so with Austria and no one else.

You begin with Missions Trees with some potential targets. You get free claims on Bohemia and you get the Mission Branch to make Hungary your lapdog for free. Another Mission Branch to destroy Venice since they refused to join the HRE or some stuff.

And you get free claims and some modifiers and some building requests you need to fulfill. You get rewarded with some modifiers.

And you still need to militarily conquer Bohemia. And then after destroying them, you get free claims on Saxony and Brandenburg. So the Mission Tree continues with the same thing. Build some stuff at a specific number, wait for a few months and choosing some government reform paths and so on...

Eventually you still need to destroy Saxony and Brandenburg militarily.

And after you have got most of the land. Hurrah, you finish the mission by clicking the last mission rectangle. Your country is now officially Holy Roman Empire instead of Austria.

That's what EU4 would have become if they had been treated the same way to how Delian League has been represented. Forming a League requires you to militarily conquer all of the land from your former allies. And you form a "League" as a solid country.

 

[EricMN93]

The missions of the delos league and the Peloponnesian league should be diplomatic missions. Something like the Roman mission of the Italian Congress. There should be an optional branch that would allow us to conquer our allies and create the Athenian empire or the Spartan empire.

The imperator mission system is very good but it cannot be left as something military and development is already there. Add diplomatic missions, economic, high growth, missions that allow us to feel the different styles of play.

And don't be "afraid" to create unique government systems, this era is unique for things like this. I think that Sparta and Athens deserve unique systems. I can understand that it is more complicated to create the Athenian democracy but the double rulers already exist in the game, I am sure it can be copied and improved to recreate the Spartan system.

 

[Selzro]

Seeing missions for Athens and Sparta was a pleasant surprise. Seeing a further reworking of the map in Greece even more so. No longer will Macedon attack Epidauros early in the game and no longer will Argos wallow as a OPM.

 

[Surt]

So "Helots once more" enslaves all pops there?

 

[dakapes]

Missions for Athens and Sparta sounds good , it is something useful.

To be honest , if it was up to me , instead for these 2 I would choose Aitolia or Achaea or Epirus . I think their role back then , was more important . But Sparta - Athens is ok for me ....

 

[MohawkWolfo98]

By the Twelve of Olympos, will the people making this game ever learn? Mission trees are not what we need. Depth and Variety are what is sorely needed in this barebones ass game. Mission trees provide good skeleton, but you seriously cannot expect us to keep paying for this nonsense, right?

Speaking specifically to both nations covered in this DD.

Athens plays as any other republic, and Sparta as any other kingdom. Yet both are noted for their unique constitutions in world history. Sparta's Diarchy...and with time, reestablising the democracy of Pericles in Athens should be unique mechanics to define them.

But no. MIsSoN tReEs!

I think the most concerning is whether paradox understands or even is aware of our concerns. It’s all well posting about it, but there is no point if no one understands where the majority feels (ie more depth and not just Mission trees)

EDIT: Ie what possible actions devs can you do to help alleviate our worries?

 

[Denkt]

Will Imperator: Rome get some of the quality of Life features seen in CK3, it is hard to actually Believe that Imperator: Rome and CK3 is made by the same developer when the quality of stuff seems so much better in CK3.

Maybe it make sense since CK3 started its development Before Imperator: Rome and is still in development.

 

[tribunus_plebis]

A lot of the problem too is that Imperator kinda hides it's features, and when you discover them they are convoluted in horrible UI, and presented incredibly dull.
Often it get's messy and hard to keep track at a glance etc.

One example of something very simple(This one isnt a hidden feature though), in Imperator you can have Triumphs. Well instead of a niiiiice event painting, event mechanic tied to the character and maybe some other effects to make that triumph feel like a celebration, Imperator Rome just tells you "You now have clicked the Triumph button, +xx% boost to x etc".
Missed opportunity.

I agree on this... first time I held a Triumph I expected an event pop-up with the artwork of the Triumph you get on the loading screen (which is awesome) and some yada-yada story and some Slave bonus surplus or something, but no... just loosing money and stability, not cool.

After a year on Imperator, I've come to the sad conclusion that almost everything I wanted in this game was/has been developed in the EU4 "Imperium Universalis" Mod which surpases Imperator Rome in almost every aspect (except graphics). I still want to keep faith in this game though, and I'll keep supporting it, but there's a ton of lessons to be learned by pds on the whole development.

 

[Arheo]

It's hard seeing a lot of comments to the effect that 'you should be doing X and not Y', and not feel compelled to answer. I do appreciate the various and often long lists of features that individuals consider to be in need of change or development, but the reality of game development is that resources and time are not infinite.

To look at it as objectively as possible, the dev team could have spent a significant quantity of time working on -all- the features that are oft requested, but then we'd end up with all that work spread over N focuses, with very little improvement in each. We did not do this. My aim with 1.4 is to create a religious system that is fun, engaging, and stands the test of time in terms of depth and complexity. Whether you feel that depth is there, is of course subjective; though I would suggest that seeing 'bitesize' chunks of the whole in dev diaries is not a perfect way to assess an update as a whole.

The other reality, and one which is very often misunderstood, is that 'developer' is not a profession. We have a wonderful and talented group of individuals who excel at their chosen disciplines. Just as I wouldn't ask an artist or content designer to code a new trade system, I would not expect to come into work one day and produce a stunning render of a Carthaginian city (trust me, nobody wants this).

Mission trees are ways to tell a different story, depending on who and how you choose to play. They achieve this admirably in my opinion, but as with all things we create, they are part of the whole.