Why Rome 2 shouldn't be designed so that you play as a character!

[diegosimeone]

Using CKII mechanics for Rome would be pretty silly, however, you already, for a large extent, have the hellenistic monarchies covered by the CKII mechanics. I'm not sure how you would do Athens, Sparta or Rome, since there was no central person ruling them: many people were involved in the government of those places.

I am for using characters though. A Julius Caesar type of scenario would not be possible without adding characters, since Rome wasn't at war with those Gallic tribes, but Caesar still conquered them. Another point would be civil wars and rebelling governors. I don't think just spawning a pretender or independence rebel stack would be enough to represent them. Thus we come back to using characters again.

Nobody argues against having characters. Characters are a must. What is being argued is that one must control the state and not a character/family. Just enhance the mechanics of EU:Rome.

As for the Greek states, it all depends on the start date of the game. If it's the same as EU:Rome, then mainland Greece minus Macedon could have some sort of factions like the Victoria series.

 

[Spartanlemur]

Nobody argues against having characters. Characters are a must. What is being argued is that one must control the state and not a character/family. Just enhance the mechanics of EU:Rome.

As for the Greek states, it all depends on the start date of the game. If it's the same as EU:Rome, then mainland Greece minus Macedon could have some sort of factions like the Victoria series.

But if we don't ALSO control characters (in such a way that our success is tied to our actions as characters; also such that we might see a character-based story of history emerge), then they're inconsequential and nothing but a bolted-on feature of the base game, hardly anything more than their abysmal implementation in EUIV (though I get why that was true for EUIV, as it wasn't a character-based game).

What we need is two separate sub-games which must be played to do well. We need a dynasty-based game (Add adoption to basic Byzantine CK2 family mechanics (heir selection) and you get Roman family mechanics. It really is that simple.) IN ADDITION TO a top-level nation-based game which we access through gaining power. When not in power we scheme our way into it, go on quests, plan families, secure political allies etc.

You know, Paradox can innovate. They don't just have to make the game like EU:Rome 1 or other past games.

 

[diegosimeone]

Obviously I agree and I wish that Paradox, when they make a standalone Rome series, will figure out the best combination of features + new ones they will implement to make it work. I just object to the character focus for this period of time. Surely there were politics and all that involved, but families that had strength usually remained in the background. Legacies in Rome cannot be the main factor in a game where the focus is state/empire control.

The only way to have a character focused game is to have a Rome-only(Republic period) or Greece-only(12th century BC etc) game with minor interference from foreigners. But that's a totally different game which I'm pretty sure some knowledgable modders of CK and those map miracle workers can implement. Or Paradox could be persuaded to release a CK: Greece (colonial period) or CK: Rome game to focus on characters and dynasties of the older eras just like EU: Rome was released... But it's something I won't promise to buy even if I am a huge fan of that era.

 

[Spartanlemur]

Obviously I agree and I wish that Paradox, when they make a standalone Rome series, will figure out the best combination of features + new ones they will implement to make it work. I just object to the character focus for this period of time. Surely there were politics and all that involved, but families that had strength usually remained in the background. Legacies in Rome cannot be the main factor in a game where the focus is state/empire control.

The only way to have a character focused game is to have a Rome-only(Republic period) or Greece-only(12th century BC etc) game with minor interference from foreigners. But that's a totally different game which I'm pretty sure some knowledgable modders of CK and those map miracle workers can implement. Or Paradox could be persuaded to release a CK: Greece (colonial period) or CK: Rome game to focus on characters and dynasties of the older eras just like EU: Rome was released... But it's something I won't promise to buy even if I am a huge fan of that era.

To be honest, the character people (myself included) aren't as interested in playing the Roman Republic as we are in playing the Diadochi (very much CK2-style gameplay), The Roman Empire (CK2 style succession with adoption) or Britannia (which, unlike Gaul, had hereditary monarchies with coups). Granted, it wouldn't work for Gaul or Athens, but pretty much everywhere else there wouldn't be any issues.

The Republic system where you might lose power would be unique to other forms of monarchy. In the case of the Diadochi or Roman Empire, losing your family's grip on power is game-over. For Britannia it would be hard to maintain your grip on power, so perhaps you could play successful coup leaders when such situations arise.