• 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.

Imperator: Rome Dev Diary - 2nd of March

Hello there!

I have the pleasure of bringing you this week’s Dev Diary, and will try to make the most of it. Today we are going to take a look at two other missions sets we are bringing for the upcoming content pack - Sparta and Athens. I want to stress that what you see here is still work in progress, so things might change before they go live.

For our start date, Sparta and Athens’ glory days are long over, with Sparta losing their allies and subjects after the battle at Leuktra in 371BCE, and Athens losing theirs after their loss in the Peloponnesian War (though they had another smaller league later on).

Sparta
We will be starting with Sparta, who have lost their Messenian lands to the freed Helots, and parts of Cynuria to the Argives in the east. Their missions will be focused on taking control of the Peloponnese, building up that land, and potentially taking a stab at Athens, Thebes, and Macedon.

upload_2020-3-2_13-15-5.png

Sparta’s starting position in the Archimedes Update.

Sparta Mission 1 - Spartan Restoration
The first mission is focused on Laconia itself, the old heartland of Spartan power and influence in the Peloponnese. After the Thebans invaded and shattered the Peloponnesian League, Sparta was left in a weakened position in-between the Arcadians to the north, Messenians to the west, and Argives to the north-east.

upload_2020-3-2_13-15-35.png


The path on the right-hand side let’s you focus on improving your starting land, whereas the left-hand side is focused on retaking the lands of Messenia. If you are to take the lands of Messenia before you start the mission, the mission will instead focus on developing your western holdings as well. As a stand-alone task, you have the possibility of trying to convince the Skiritai (a small rural tribe at the border between Arcadia and Laconia) to rejoin your side, and permanently improve your Light Infantry troops.

upload_2020-3-2_13-15-16.png


Another thing of note in this mission is the task to unlock the deity ‘Artemis Orthia’, on the right hand side. She was historically an important deity in Sparta, and her sanctuary was rebuilt in the 3rd century BCE.

upload_2020-3-2_13-15-24.png


Sparta Mission 2 - Protector of the Peloponnesus
The second mission for Sparta will focus on taking your conquests and efforts beyond Lacedaemonian lands, to the rest of the Peloponnese. You have the Arcadians who have gathered in a defensive league to the north, the ancient rival in Argos, and the Eleans and Achaeans to the far north and north-west.

upload_2020-3-2_13-15-47.png


As you can see, we have an optional far-left path that focuses on the Eleans, whereas the rest focuses on the rest of the Peloponnese. The missions focuses on taking Arcadian, Argive, and Achaean lands, and gives you optional tasks if you want to improve these lands afterwards. Similarly to the first mission, you will get alternate development focused tasks here, if you already own some of the land when you start the mission.

To show some examples from the optional tasks:

upload_2020-3-2_13-16-3.png


upload_2020-3-2_13-16-9.png


Sparta Mission 3 - The Second Peloponnesian League
The third mission for Sparta also focuses on the Peloponnese, similar to the second mission, but this time we are prioritizing development and taking control of whatever subjects you may have in the area.

upload_2020-3-2_13-16-18.png


At first you have a small optional route, where you will be able to liberate parts of Greece still owned by foreign Diadochi. Then later on you have an optional route where you can focus on expanding the largest cities in the Peloponnese.

upload_2020-3-2_13-16-27.png


The main task will focus on rebuilding the Peloponnesian League, and restoring Sparta to her former glory. At the end of it, you will get some nice permanent bonuses, in addition to a name and flag change.

upload_2020-3-2_13-16-36.png

New flag for Peloponnesian League. Garnet red intensifies.

Sparta Mission 4 - Ancient Rivals
The final mission for the Spartan will focus on moving beyond the borders of the Peloponnese, to Athens, Thebes/Boeotia, and Macedon.

upload_2020-3-2_13-17-5.png


The right-hand path focuses on Macedon, the middle on Athens, and the left-hand side on Thebes/Boeotia. Every path focuses on taking the main cities (see Athens, Thebes, Pella/Thessalonike), and then developing and taking advantage of them. At the end of the Athenian path, we have an optional task for introducing a new Athenian deity (and an effect from an Athenian mission task) in Sparta as well.

upload_2020-3-2_13-17-11.png


Athens
Athens will be focused on breaking free from their Antigonid overlord, developing Attica, and restoring the Delian League once more. At our start date, Demetrius is invading Greece and wrestling control of the city-states from Macedon, and though he was originally accepted by the people of Athens, his treatment of their city quickly soured his relationship with the citizens.

upload_2020-3-2_13-16-52.png

Athens’ starting position in the Archimedes Update.

Athens Mission 1 - Athens in Chains
The first mission for Athens will be focused on wresting control of the nation from its foreign overlord in Syria, or accepting their domination for some nice bonuses.

upload_2020-3-2_13-17-33.png


As we can see here, the mission is split into two routes, one loyalist and one independence-seeking path. In the mission you have one great family in the nation that promotes each of the paths, and you will interact fairly heavily with them to finally get to the end of the route. The winning family will eventually banish their rivals, and either lead Athens to freedom, or to oligarchy.

upload_2020-3-2_13-20-0.png


Athens Mission 2 - Restoring Attica
As one of the richer regions in Greece, Attica was the home of several rich silver mines, as well as a large population and several cities under Athenian influence. The second mission for Athens focuses on expanding upon your local powerbase, before you look outwards at new potential conquests.

upload_2020-3-2_13-20-6.png


At the top we have tasks focused on the basic infrastructure, like owning all of Attica, building up Athens, and an optional task to expand upon the silver mines. For the second half of the mission, you will have two paths focused on the Mysteries in Eleusis and the Academy of Athens, giving different kinds of bonuses (among them the character bonus you saw earlier in the Sparta mission as well).

upload_2020-3-2_13-20-11.png


Athens Mission 3 - Democracy in Athens
The third mission for Athens is focused upon the local democracy of Athens itself, an institution famous long after its fall.

upload_2020-3-2_13-20-17.png


This mission is split into two different options. On the right-hand side you can choose to abandon democracy and become a new tyrant of the republic (a bit like Lachares did in the early 3rd century BCE). Whereas on the left-hand side you can hold on to your ancient ideals and focus your efforts on improving the democratic institutions of the city-state, to get some permanent boni to the republic-related actions in the game.

upload_2020-3-2_13-20-25.png


upload_2020-3-2_13-20-29.png


Athens Mission 4 - Restoring the Delian League
The fourth mission for Athens focuses on restoring the Delian League to its former glory, taking the place of the current decision that already exists in the game.

upload_2020-3-2_13-21-18.png


In the mission you have two paths, one focused on the Aegean Islands, and one focused on the more distant city-states that used to be part of the ancient league. For most of the conquest tasks you will have an optional development focused follow-up task (e.g ‘By the Strymon River’ which gives you the task of taking Amphipolis, and then ‘Amphipolian Goods’ which has you expand upon the local mines). These will vary somewhat based on who owns it (you or a subject), and if it is a city or a settlement.

upload_2020-3-2_13-21-14.png


When you finish the mission, you will get a new name and flag (similar to the end of the third Spartan mission), as you triumphantly restore the Delian League.

upload_2020-3-2_13-16-41.png

I wanted to stick to the original flag for Athens, and just make it a tad more fancy looking.

Hopefully you found this little glance at the new missions for Athens and Sparta interesting, and we’ll have more to show you next week!
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
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.
Sorry if our suggestions may seem like orders or that it seems that we do not appreciate your work, in fact, we admire it, and we support you, Imperator has improved a lot, we do not doubt the professionalism of the development team, we just emphasize that a mission tree should be as a guide that rewards you, if you achieve the objectives, but not the basis that tell a story when that should be the player and the mechanics of the game. Again, sorry if we may look rude.
 
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.
First, thank you for replying to us, we appreciate any feedback coming from you or anyone in the dev team :)

I think we can all agree that the vast majority of us here do not want to see Imperator fail (there is nothing I like more one day to post a steam chart showing Imperator rise over EUIV one day). And we definitely do not to create an atmosphere where Developers like urself and your team have to work longer hours to make better games in an already hard environment I’m sure for u guys. And we are well aware of the finite time.

I can’t speak for everyone, but I am just abit concerned that the same mistakes pre-launch for Imperator are being repeated again for 1.4, hence we writing the previous posts. Again, I’m sure quite a majority of us here quite like missions, I love the Rome missions! But the problem is we feel is that it is not being backed up with unique mechanics, so the same problems pre-launch (bland countries) as well as in other games (EUIV Golden Century) are being repeated. Although Golden Century in theory was actually not too bad of a DLC, it didnt resolve the fundamental issues behind EUIV at the time, hence the backlash. We desperately do not want this to happen again.

Spartan diarchy, Rome Crusus Honorum & Athenian Democracy has been mentioned, but the leagues as well: it feels like a skin of an empire or kingdom rather than a league. I really did hope there was a way for a Stellaris Federation, or even HRE style mechanics could have been done instead, but as best as I understand it, it’s map painting again which can be done already.

I’m hoping for unique mechanics so I feel excited playing the many countries in Imperator which u and your team worked so hard to research and give to us. Atm, it doesn’t feel like Sparta, it doesn’t feel like Athens. It feels like a regular old monarch, and a regular old republic has supplanted the countries we know and love. It’s concerning for us because frankly, I love this game and I want it to be the best, that no game ever was :cool:

We appreciate the effort that u and everyone in the imperator team go through (I’m sure it’s very hard for u), but we are just getting rather concerned. Imperator has a rather rough launch, but Johan and u guys brilliantly managed to save it from the brink with 1.2 and to a big extent 1.3. We just don’t want 1.4 to end up like 1.0 :)
 
Last edited:
Let me explain a brief anecdote.

Every time I went to my cousin's house he showed me his games of ck2, eu4 and stellaris and told me, buy them, these games are very good but I did not decide.

I started watching videos and information on the wiki about these games but I was missing something to buy them.

But one day I started listening to imperator and decided to take an interest in this game, read the developer diaries and thought, finally a game focused on my favorite time that is worthwhile. I'm going to buy it and enjoy it.

Since imperator came out I have been supporting him and will continue to do so, because I believe in this project, I think it can be a legendary game.

I try to make constructive criticisms and provide good suggestions and I love to read the great ideas of the people, we all want this game to be the best and maybe it is true that sometimes the emotion beats us and we say some word badly spoken or very aggressive but it is because we don't want it to happen again as in the launch, we don't want this to be a minor game, we want it to be a before and after. At least in my case I think so.

I believe in you and in your work, I know that you will be able to make this game something unique and it seems good to me that this game is not a fan service and that you have personality, something that I applaud but do not overlook very good ideas that this community brings . You can find good ideas without losing the personality that help to improve this game to the fullest.

I am sorry if in any of my comments I have sounded very aggressive or I have not respected your work, it was not the intention.

Greetings from Spain
 
That's how criticisms are. When you agree with something, you just click the Agree button. And then for those who have clicked the Disagree button, these people deserve a place to tell the reasons of the disagreement.

That's why you will always see agreements reflected on the votes, while criticisms reflected on the replies. That's just what the Internet is. There's no need to feel bad about it.

As for the criticisms for this game being voiced over and over. It'd be hard for players to pause the repetitive suggestions since there isn't enough word replied to these individual suggestions, as if they are not going to be addressed while in parallel, new contents being pushed.

Mission Trees not as good as good old Events is another issue. But then, we have a lot of issues for this game.

Why do we have so many issues? Because Imperator Rome, as of now, is defined as "a game born from overhauls". So old features directly copied from other titles, particularly from EU4 despite being 2000 years apart in their corresponding timelines, should really be replaced with something "with heart", that have uniqueness just for Imperator Rome instead of being the same thing with different names, descriptions and pictures.
 
The issue with mission trees are that they don't feel like achivements, destroying Carthage right now don't feel like an achievement because of how easy it is and the mission themself are just press a button to get a reward, which itself is quite boring. Missions hardly feel like mission right now, they feel like buttons and the game don't have anything that could be called Epic right now, hardly anything memorable.

Many missions are probably not even Worth doing right now, like founding 3 useless cities in the same province.
 
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.

Totally makes sense! Does this mean that you view/viewed the religious system as the most pressing feature to be addressed in Imperator currently?
 
Totally makes sense! Does this mean that you view/viewed the religious system as the most pressing feature to be addressed in Imperator currently?
It could also mean they have a good solution for it, while other system is maybe something they want to wait to they have good ideas for them.
 
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.

Just by this post only there is a tremendous amount of respect and veneration. Whatever the game flaws may had been at launch they have owned it, accepted it and actively tried to improve the product. I have never seen a game change so drastically its game mechanics post launch. This type of retrospective and blatant honesty is not the norm in the games industry.

It is also quite rare for devs to keep open channels of communication like that and address feedback in such a direct way, so kudos for them. Thumbs up and imaginary beers to all of you. Working in the games industry can be brutal. I hope when you open your pc in the morning with black coffee in hand, before you read your emails and run towards the daily stand-up or to one of the countless meetings where you have to make compromises in your vision, tough decisions about the project and try to make do with what you have to meet milestone deadlines, I really hope a community person informs you about this post and you just read this, and know I am supporting you (and I am sure I am one of the many) and admire your efforts.

I hope this puts a smile in your face before all the daily shenanigans start :). To become that tiny thing that will make juuuuust a bit easier for the entire team to grind through the day.Thumbs up and mental high fives to the entire team. The passion is there and it is pretty clear that the love for history is present.
 
Good to see these nations getting some love, However, I don't like that my name "Sparta" would change to "Peloponnesian League" A league should be a league, not a country. I already had this problem when you get all of Greece under your control and you can form "Pan-Hellenic League" and I'm more or less forced to form it otherwise I lose out on some permanent buffs, ruining my Spartan name. It would be fun to actually have a league system, a league could be somewhat similar to how a trade league in eu4 works.
 
[QUOTE = "Snow Crystal, publicación: 26313128, miembro: 1280952"]
index.php
[/ QUOTE]

This has gone unnoticed and I find it curious. I see that Athenian democracy will be the maximum version of the republics. Something that is very good. Will there be any way to get this government with someone other than Athens?
 
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.

Im not alone in being a whole lot more excited about overhaul of gameplay systems like religion, holdings and loyalty than i am for mission trees.

To an extent we grew used to that high pace of deep redesign during the develoment of 1.3 livy and especially the amazing reinventions that went into 1.2 cicero over the summer.

I think, these recent critical comments has something to do with impatience. Its difficult to manage expectations without a release date or something to go on. Your hands may be tied from giving us that yet, but still.

To look forward: maybe it would be good and possible to use missions and other content to frame examples of the latest changes in overall game mechanics:

how do the mission objectives like ”picking a side” play out in 1.4 as compared to 1.3 given the changes to how loyalty works? Do holdings play a part in any of the family-related mission branches? How does that end up looking on the new holdings map mode? Are there maybe some missions that center on relics that you could showcase?
 
Maybe you could implement missions not only for nations but for families too ... I thnik this would make interesting character gameplay and interactions .

About the missions as is , I agree that sometimes the objectives are not the best... Building multiple cities or forts or temples is something that the player must decide . But it certainly gives a flavor in your game . For example Rome has many choices ( through missions) for expansion. IMO missions is ok for now , except the part of some silly objectives.
 
About the missions as is , I agree that sometimes the objectives are not the best... Building multiple cities or forts or temples is something that the player must decide . But it certainly gives a flavor in your game . For example Rome has many choices ( through missions) for expansion. IMO missions is ok for now , except the part of some silly objectives.

Right now I have written some ideas to make generic missions more interesting, I think that some idea might come out of here.:)

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/generic-missions.1348414/
 
I can image how it must feel as a dev to get bombarded with suggestions daily. I have never played a PDS game before this, only Rome total war 1 and 2 as nearest comparison. For me, this game is not bland, the ai (all things considered) is very good. 90% of the time it makes good decisions.
The game is very complex, took a long time to learn it. I also have a big wishlist like most here ppl but its all good.

The missions haven't really been interesting to me so far. Doesn't feel like Im getting good return for the investment. However these shown here actually seem interesting, I'm little impressed.

I only feel that information I look at often is to many clicks away. Even a simple thing as total pop in country or province. Even after this many hours I pause to think for a sec how to find it (do I have dementia?). There is other examples, but I'm not gonna write it, u prob know already.

Im terrified when I see my capital has +1 on all food goods and the pops don't get enough food. The nightmare starts when when I produce +2 on a food good which i desperately need, and the ai harass starts. #me2.

Conclusion. Very good game. You are the only developer which make the game better every time a new patch comes, honestly, I have full confidence. Game need better quality of life (some things desperately). Other content stuff? I can wait for that, no problem, I'm having a blast as is. Look at the 1.3 ui mod, alot of good ui stuff there (PROVICE VIEW, MARK CHARACTER! <3).
Don't get your moral down from all the comments. The game is great overall, period.
 
Dont worry devs! I love every addition to the game, minor or major. Missions are fine. better then without any for sure.
i love this game and see great potential in its future. keep up the work! (especially the graphical culture change excites me!:D)
even though i do have some suggestions, if you dont mind. this are just things i noticed form playing the game like 600+ hours. keep in mind that this are only my thoughts.

1. the only thing I am concered about in the archimedes update is the way you can block trade goods. it is really needed but in this case you should listen to the community and add the possibility to block export on a provincial level.

2. i know ther will be a update later this year to improve military but anyway i try to communicate it here. I have noticed that the units could need some more differentiation. (example: heavy infantry carries swords instead of the doru. maybe right for romans, but surely not for greeks). and there should be model for cavalry heavy armies too, like it is in euIV, so you can see before checking the composition.
further more unit types should differ way more in terms of culture. (barabarians should not be able to import elephants from africa and run over gaul with them, as far as i know training elephants was not an easy task and a gaulish tribe would not be able to use an elephant, without their trainers). same goes for other units.
Also a big point for me are military traditions. it is way to similar. like from iberia to britain to dacia all "barbarians" have the same traditions. there should be at least 1 different tree for every distinct region. germans did not fight like gauls. (also what is up with persian traditions in bactria and greek tradition in parthia?)
And my final point concerning military. Please improve the AI. They send litte forces all over the place wich is a real pain, considering that 1k man can sack a settlement even if there is a fort nearby. so your people get caputered or killed. then it gets freeded again, then the enemy caputeres it again, then more people die and finally the settlement is decolonized. not a good mechanic. maybe make it so that you can not capture or kill people in settlements protected by a nearby fort. also the AI should be way better with army composition. most of the time they have just everything in the army they can muster. I would like to see that when fighting scythians they field horse heavy armies. (wich would make the choosen tactics in your army more importent, if the Ai does not change it every single battle) the way it is right now every player made army is 1000times better then the ones the AI creates.
also i have noticed that the placement of troops in battle is kind of bugged if there is more then 1 allied army in the battle. sometimes the donkeys take the frontline even when there is much else to place, or cavalry wich is assigned to go to the flanks does not do so etc.

3. my third point of thoughts is about trade and resources. besides what i have mentioned in 1.
first i have to say that i really enjoy the last introduced food mechanics. it is really great!
here i have just minor suggestions.
the first one is that some placement of resources is strange even though i am not sure how to fix it. for example you find most of the grain in farmland terrain wich makes sense but on the other hand farmland is where you preferably found a new city which would change the resource to something non food. maybe make it so that you can transform "suited" terrain to produce grain. maybe even add the general option to transform plains into farmland, since farmland is human made. for example in germania there is not 1 farmland territory. you play as a germanic tribe through all of the game you found a great capital wich aquires a lot of population (you even have streats and academies :D) but till the end of the game there is no farmland to be found in germania. i guess the people just live from the froots of forests
second thought on trade and resources. maybe also add the possibility to embargo nations. so you can say as egypt: "no more food for rome!". its not ment as a generall embargo just the possibility on your own nations level to forbidd trade witch certain nations.

4. this one is the most intense one i fear. its about technology, the one thing in the game i really dislike, even though it has improved a bit. i dont even know how to put it.
it is really ridiculous, that technology is almost exclusive to "civilized" nations. i know you can have tech as tribe but it takes a long time founding cities and to do all shit just to have tech lvl4 at the end of the game. and yes it makes sense that tribes are not as "advanced" as rome or the greeks were at the time. but that doesnt mean they could not defeat them. but it imperator it almost certainly does. the bonus you get from tech on military can decide everything. as i said i am in this point not sure how to solve this. maybe give tech advantage to "barbarians" who trade or neighbour with more tech advanced civs (or even from sacking and conquering civilized territory). or get rid of this to simplistic tech system. maybe go the way euIV did and implement some kind of institution wich spreads newly discovered things around its origin and later further. I really dont know, but the tech system is the most game breaking thing if you ask me, especially for barbarians, but also for others. as glorious carthage you have to spam academies and libraries almost everywhere just to get a good research, wich leaves almost no place for other buildings. every city gets a library and academy!
sometimes i think you can get ride of tech all in one and replace it with a more dynamic system. but i really have no great idea

5. a minor suggestion. maybe add a regional capital. the idea is that if you control most of the region you can proclaim a capital for that region. like say tarentum becomes capital of roman magna graecia, with bonuses and most important the seat of the gouvenor. maybe even have the gouvenor muster a small contigent (wich you can not control and its number is determend by the gouvernor skill, his money and the general richness of the region) wich stays in the capital and tries to get rid of rebels, barbarians or enemies in its region.

Sorry guys, thats what i can get out of my head. I hope you didnt mind my english. I love this Game and I am looking forward for everything you have planned! Archimedes looks fantastic! :)
 
Last edited:
Dont worry devs! I love every addition to the game, minor or major. Missions are fine. better then without any for sure.
i love this game and see great potential in its future. keep up the work! (especially the graphical culture change excites me!:D)
even though i do have some suggestions, if you dont mind. this are just things i noticed form playing the game like 600+ hours. keep in mind that this are only my thoughts.

1. the only thing I am concered about in the archimedes update is the way you can block trade goods. it is really, needed but in this case you should listen to the community and add the possibility to block export on a provincial level.
2. i know ther will be a update later this year to improve military but anyway i try to communicate it here. I have noticed that the units could need some more differentiation. (example: heavy infantry carries swords instead of the doru. maybe right for romans, but surely not for greeks). and there should be model for cavalry heavy armies too, like it is in euIV, so you can see before checking the composition. further more unit types should differ way more in terms of culture. (barabarians should not be able to import elephants from africa and run over gaul with them, as far as i know training elephants was not an easy task and a gaulish tribe would not be able to use an elephant, without their trainers). same goes for other units.
Also a big point for me are military traditions. it is way to similar. like from iberia to britain to dacia all "barbarians" have the same traditions. there should be at least 1 different tree for every distinct region. germans did not fight like gauls. (also what is up with persian traditions in bactria and greek tradition in parthia?)
And my final point concerning military. Please improve the AI. They send litte forces all over the place wich is a real pain, considering that 1k man can sack a settlement even if there is a fort nearby. so your people get caputered or killed.then it gets freeded again then the enemy caputeres it again then more people die and finally the settlement is decolonized. not a good mechanic. maybe make it so that you can not capture or kill people in settlements protected by a nearby fort. also the AI should be way better with army composition. most of the time they have just everything in the army they can muster. I would like to see that when fighting scythians they field horse heavy armies. (wich would make the choosen tactics in your army more importent, if the Ai does not change it every single battle) the way it is right now every player made army is 1000times better then the ones the AI creates. also i have noticed that the placement of troops in battle is kind of bugged if there are more then 1 allied army in the battle. sometimes the donkeys take the frontline even when there is much else to place, or cavalry wich is assigned to go to the flanks does not do so etc.
3. my third point of thoughts is about trade and resources. besides what i have mentioned in 1.
thirst i have to say that i really enjoy the last introduced food mechanics. it is really great!
here i have just minor suggestions. the first one is that some placement of resources is strange even though i am not sure how to fix it. for example you find most of the grain in farmland terrain wich makes sense but on the other hand farmland is where you preferably found a new city which would change the resource to something non food. maybe make it so that you can transform "suited" terrain to produce grain. maybe even add the general option to transform plains into farmland, since farmland is human made. for example in germania there is not 1 farmland territory. you play as a germanic tribe through all of the game you found a great capital wich aquires a lot of population (you even have streats and academies :D) but till the end of the game there is no farmland to be found in germania. i guess the people just live from the froots of forests
second thought on trade and resources. maybe add also the possibility to embargo nations. so you can say as egypt: "no more food for rome!". its not ment as a generall embargo just the possibility on your own nations level to forbidd trade witch certain nations.
4. this one is the most intense one i fear. its about technology, the one thing in the game i really dislike. even though it has improved a bit. i dont even know how to put it.
it is really ridiculous, that technology is almost exclusive to "civilized" nations. i know you can have tech as tribe but it takes a long time founding cities and to do all shit just to have tech lvl4 at the end of the game. and yes it makes sense that tribe are not as "advanced" as rome or the greeks where at the time. but that doesnt mean they could not defeat them. but it imperator it almost certainly does. the bonus you get from tech on military can decide everything. as i said iam in this point not sure how to solve this. maybe give tech advantage to "barbarians" who trade or neighbor with more tech advanced civs (or even from sacking and conquering civilized territory). or get rid of this to simplistic tech system. maybe go the way euIV did and implement some kind of institution wich spreads newly discovered things around its origin and later further. I really dont know, but the tech system is the most game breaking thing if you ask me, especially for barbarians, but also for others. as glorious carthage you have to spam academies and libraries almost everywhere just to get a good research, wich leaves almost no place for other buildings. every city gets a library and academy!
sometimes i think you can get ride of tech all in one and replace it with a more dynamic system. but i really have no great idea
5. a minor suggestion. maybe add a regional capital. the idea is that if you control most of the region you can proclaim a capital for that region. like say tarentum becomes capital of roman magna graecia, with bonuses and most important the seat of the gouvenor. maybe even have the gouvenor muster a small contigent (wich you can not control and its number is determend by the gouvernor skill, his money and the general richness of the region) wich stays in the capital and tries to get rid of rebels, barbarians or enemies in its region.

Sorry guys, thats what i can get out of my head. I hope you didnt mind my english. I love this Game and I am looking forward for everything you have planned! Archimedes looks fantastic! :)

Just wanted to say to read your text it would be really helpful to use paragraphs because due to the length of your text it makes it very stressful to read it :)