• 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.
I know a paradox/Clausewitz engine game for the period would be great, but here is an example of a odd playing rts(not a build/destroy rts like say AoE) based upon the era, Hegemony: Wars of Ancient Greece made by a rather small independent developer. It plays a bit simple, but has really unique supply and raiding features, and they 'inhabit' the lesser known lands of the area with scythians and thraco-dacians in the north, and the persian empire in the west, and the ideal of the game is to ultimately take the place of Philip of Macedon. That said, you can also take the scythians and conduct a nomadic invasion of Greece in sandbox mode if you get good at the game. :laugh:

Worth the look at as a non-grand strategy game, more as a tactical supply line unit combat game.
 
I know a paradox/Clausewitz engine game for the period would be great, but here is an example of a odd playing rts(not a build/destroy rts like say AoE) based upon the era, Hegemony: Wars of Ancient Greece made by a rather small independent developer. It plays a bit simple, but has really unique supply and raiding features, and they 'inhabit' the lesser known lands of the area with scythians and thraco-dacians in the north, and the persian empire in the west, and the ideal of the game is to ultimately take the place of Philip of Macedon. That said, you can also take the scythians and conduct a nomadic invasion of Greece in sandbox mode if you get good at the game. :laugh:

Worth the look at as a non-grand strategy game, more as a tactical supply line unit combat game.
Excellent game!
 
I know a paradox/Clausewitz engine game for the period would be great, but here is an example of a odd playing rts(not a build/destroy rts like say AoE) based upon the era, Hegemony: Wars of Ancient Greece made by a rather small independent developer. It plays a bit simple, but has really unique supply and raiding features, and they 'inhabit' the lesser known lands of the area with scythians and thraco-dacians in the north, and the persian empire in the west, and the ideal of the game is to ultimately take the place of Philip of Macedon. That said, you can also take the scythians and conduct a nomadic invasion of Greece in sandbox mode if you get good at the game. :laugh:

Worth the look at as a non-grand strategy game, more as a tactical supply line unit combat game.
Wow I might try that out tonight. It's not on the same level as a Paradox RTS but still looks pretty sweet.
 
Sengoku didn't have England/Britain, neither did Rome really. Also why do you need to announce that with oversized bolded font?

To be fair, those were the two largest flops Paradox have ever made, in terms of Grand Strategy.

Not to say they aren't fun.
 
I don't understand how people can call any Roman themed game not viable. There are basically two periods of history that people in general are interested in: WWII and Ancient Rome.

You missed the British Empire. You could disagree, but Hollywood has a ton of movies with redcoats in them. I'm not saying Hollywood represents the interests of the general population, but British Redcoats are seen so much in media.

To be fair, those were the two largest flops Paradox have ever made, in terms of Grand Strategy.

Not to say they aren't fun.
Well not being financially successful doesn't necessarily mean it flopped. It's a great game, with positive reviews, but was just overlooked and released at the wrong time. IMO Sengoku was a 7.5/10, although I think that they didn't do much research in Japan.
 
Last edited:
Sign me up of course. Just saw this thread :)

And here's another post I made on the subject since people have become addicted with CK2 styled games :D

Rome as a CK2 style game is not a good concept. I don't understand how you want to make this work. Rome was a big city/province. Families around Italy during Rome's prime had NOTHING to do with the rule and there's no way to implement a realistic version of Rome using this.

I've mentioned in a couple of times. If people want CK2 style games, the best time to use would be ancient Greece before the expansions of the city-states.

for example, this could be a starting point for the map:
game_2030219070.jpg


With a map that has the whole of the Mediterranean and also including Babylon, you could have an extremely fun game with Greek city-states formation as the main point, but also the race vs Phoenicians and Egyptians for the rule of the sea as another concept. Same way Europa Universalis is around Europe but also colonization. But the way Greece worked back then is much closer to the CK2 concept than anything else in history as city-states had royal marriages that went wrong, heir issues etc...
You could be have your stronghold in main Greece and colonize Italy, Croatia, France and Spain like many city-states of Greece(Phoceans, Euboeans etc) or you can choose to expand within Greece like Sparta, Macedon etc. Or you can opt to try and conquer Egypt and the Middle East, which was mostly unsuccesful for the Greeks (hence why we don't use it in our history books :D :D )
Persia could also have this character based style with the different Satraps teaming up against the Emperor, or you could play as the Emperor who would need to interact with the satraps. Egypt would be the easiest to portray as the Pharaoh pretty much rules everything but you could have some problems occuring within the Pharaoic families.
Timeline could be from 1000BC to 500BC with possible DLCs expanding around the Greco-Persian wars.

I have no idea why Paradox does not dig into the ancient times.
I am for another Rome game too but it shouldn't really have a CK2 touch in it. Should be more of a 'nation' game than a character based one. Because every other state would be useless...

In the first sentence I mostly meant that families that were situated outside Rome didn't really have much power, mostly generals did.
 
1500 BC is a little early for a Grand Campaign...it's about a thousand years before the beginning of classical Greek culture as we know it.

Yeah but classical Greece is pretty dull compared to that era. And you have a huge Persian Empire which doesn't really help the concept of a Greek based game!


Back to the timeline I suggested you have various Mesopotamian cultures that can expand or Asia Minor tribes neighoring the Greek colonies like the Hittites, you have Mitanni, Egypt, and Phoenicians.
It's the closest thing to a mix of EU and CK imo. You have family dynasties in Greece controlling several kingdoms (eg Trojan war you have Agamemnon at Mycenae and his brother Menelaos at Sparta) and you have relatively empty map with various city-states that have lots of room for expansion (since much of the land will of Greece would be colonizable), some Greeks and Phoenicians who would be ready after some centuries to colonize the rest of the Mediterranean(where Spanish and French coasts as well as western North Africa would act like the Americas, Africa and Australia on EU series) and the Asians would look to break the Greek city-states creating either a panhellenic front or various alliances with inter-Greek wars inflicted by the rich eastern kingdoms!
So the three main points of focus would be diplomacy, military* and colonization in the way I have thought of this.

And as a state you can opt to have a patron god/goddess but not easy or impossible to switch to someone else (like Athens, Knossos and Troy with Athena) or you could opt for a pantheon like Megara (who didn't really have a preference)
And within Greece you can have better relations between the tribes (eg Doric => Sparta, Macedon etc)

The point would be to have a relatively small map, like the one CK has but centered on the eastern Mediterranean, so that you would have more provinces to colonize and spread your state's ideals, or if you wish expand as a Mesopotamian tribe(eg Babylon who would already be quite big) or Egypt and conquer Greece and the whole "known world".
And it would be interesting to see how the 'Dark Ages' would be tackled. My take is that some major disasters would randomly occur for 300 years (volcanoes, earthquakes, cataclysms) so you will lose a lot of infrastructure, population and manpower but you would be compensated with enhanced technology and population growth after the 8th century BC. There wasn't an actual invasion by the Doric people onto Greece, just a cultural change that came to effect due to natural disasters most probably.

* Military units could be made of lots of different infantry units (spear units, sword units, archers, peltasts, better armor etc), various cavalry units and also warships. Warships in ancient times were very interesting and there was also some famous naval races between city-states, essentially a King's hobby to have the best ship in the region, which was stopped because they run out of trees after some time :D

Starting at 500BC is just diplomacy at first and one will most likely fail as a Greek state so it's hard to use the military.
Starting at 800BC, Assyria was too strong and you have Phoenicians already all over the mediterranean and only a handful of Greek colonies.
1100-800BC we have the so called Greek Dark Ages, but we know that the Greeks were trading with others around 900BC.
Starting after Alexander's death you have a nice scenario for big states but the minor states are just there to be consumed, same thing people complained about EU:Rome.
Starting at EU:Rome's date, you can only achieve something as Rome, Carthage, Egypt or Seleucia and maybe Macedon if you're lucky.
So if you want a Greek themed game, you have to go back. And since Paradox has had great success with EU3, CK2 and EU4, this is the perfect period to implement aspects of both games. Anywhere from 1500 to 1300 that is as a starting point. This also enables the Trojan war (somewhere around 1200BC). Which means as the Mycenae lead alliance your aim is to conquer/vassalize mainland Greece and build a huge navy to cross the Aegean and as Troy to gain as many allies on the east or even west and try to stop the Danaans from attacking before they set sail!
 
Sounds like this kind of game would be a hybrid with some Civ gameplay for some teching options.

You'd still keep the Paradox Map style, but we'd have to have an interesting economy [at least a little better than Rome's]

I'd love a game less about blobbing and more about trade and relative standing through prestige and diplomacy. Especially set in and around the Greek zone.
 
How could it be in near future, if it is ancient?

On topic: No, no, no, just no. First of all what I love about Paradox games it the choice to have English and Mongols interact when Lord Byron of London annexed Prussia and refused to pay tribute to Khan Vladimir. A game focused on ancient Greece and its neighbours would be pretty boring. Just look at EU:Rome where most of the map was useless. Then there is the fact that the Paradox engine wouldn't be able to simulate the relation of the Greek states with each other.
 
There are basically two periods of history that people in general are interested in: WWII and Ancient Rome.

I don't understand. I thought the collapse of Rome was what started WWII? What other periods in history are there?

You missed the British Empire. You could disagree, but Hollywood has a ton of movies with redcoats in them.

That's just part of WWII; the redcoats saved us from Hitler.
 
Sounds like this kind of game would be a hybrid with some Civ gameplay for some teching options.

You'd still keep the Paradox Map style, but we'd have to have an interesting economy [at least a little better than Rome's]

I'd love a game less about blobbing and more about trade and relative standing through prestige and diplomacy. Especially set in and around the Greek zone.
It wouldn't have "blobbing" per se but you could still roll around Greece curb-stomping other cities. Or if you do want to blob, play as the Persians.