Could not have put it better in a million years. I know many people have said it here but damn man, great post. Post it to Reddit, so I can give it gold lol.
- 1
-
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.
Could not have put it better in a million years. I know many people have said it here but damn man, great post. Post it to Reddit, so I can give it gold lol.
Oh, my bad. Then I think an aspect of the game on which you should work a little bit is perhaps the occurence frequency of events, because right now, I've played the game and I've seen a lot of let's play and talked with a lot of people about this and it seems that there are always the same 7-8 events that repeat themselves constantly for every people I talked to/watched play, and are the same for every country/culture. So you have like 10 events that everyone see constantly and 1000 others that are so well hidden that almost nobody ever see them.
Here again, I'll compare I : P to CK2 with no DLCs (yes, I know you must be tired to see I : P - CK2 comparaisons all the time but a lot of players -me included- consider CKII as you magnus opum so far, so the comparaison comes quite naturally), which is a heavily events-based game : you can play for hours and hours without seeing the same event twice (of course, there are some events that repeat themselves more than others, like when you're educating a child). You can even play the entire game without declaring war to anyone, and it will still be entertaining.
It would be nice if we'd be able to play a mercantile city-state in I : P for the entire game, and still have a lot of fun because of events and trades mechanics.
Last edited:
- 1
I'm happy to hear that it could be done and hope you'll consider adding those governor policies, or policies to that effect, at some point in the future.
Because... on this forum virtually anything can get disagrees, lol.
- 1
I'm confused. HoI4 game rules allow you set paths that the AI can take, if guarantees can be done, and several other paramaters in the game. The balance sliders are not the game rules, are part of them.
- 1
- Dec 14, 1999
- 22.085
- 263.937
Apart from the fact that Aragon is like a potential major power and Saxony is a small duchy within the HRE? A lot.
As Aragon you can decide, what you want to do. You are strong enough to ensure healthy alliances with the rivals of your enemies to bring them to your knees. Especially if you get the Iberian Wedding and become a major player in the blink of an eye. After that, you can do, what you want. Conquer France? Italy? Or invade the Balkan to play with the Ottomans? You could also abandon Europa and go for colonization/Africa.
An Saxony, well, first, you have to play within the rules of the HRE so you don't get eliminated by a coalition. You can ease that by vassalizing other small members through war and build up a small power base that way until you're big enough to challenge the emperor head on or become the emperor yourself. You could also culture shift and do a Saxon-Prussian game if you want. Later you have the Thirty Years War equivalent etc..
And on top of that both nations have their own flavour events. Sure.both nations are Catholic at the start of the game, but the circumstances are very different for them.
I think you meant Tartessia, not Tartessos? Well, both are... the same. Barbarian nations with the same rules and same playstyle. You either play gamey with one province only until you have reformed to avoid CWs completely, play the normal barbarian game or bring down the centrilization so much that you can migrate. As Tartessia you have Carthage as a potential doom, but that's it. Everything else is mostly the same apart from the names (religion for example).
Barbarians in I:R remind me a lot of natives in America in EUIV. Just without the DLC-features and reworks for some mechanics (technology, westernization), that found their way into the game.
This actually puts my own confusion into perspective, namely that I think the outcriers are out of their damn minds. I always play PDX majors last and a lot of the whining seems to revolve around Rome. To me imperator is about taking a tiny realm barely anyone remembers- Himjar, Aksum, Etruria- and burning their name into history.
In that sense the game is amazing. It's not about scripted events, it's about a world dynamic that shows you the situation, not tells. As Etruria you have your back to the wall of the alpine tribes against Rome and their vassal swarm. As Aksum your only option is to punch to the red sea and build power up its coasts. I *feel* the pressure and desperation. Compare this to Rome and it's kind of like HOI4 Germany, ok would you like get another pat on the back for roflstomping another Italian minor? You're Rome, go Rome it up.
I feel his frustration is what I'm saying here. Absolutely astounding game, more of this plz and eff the haters
In that sense the game is amazing. It's not about scripted events, it's about a world dynamic that shows you the situation, not tells. As Etruria you have your back to the wall of the alpine tribes against Rome and their vassal swarm. As Aksum your only option is to punch to the red sea and build power up its coasts. I *feel* the pressure and desperation. Compare this to Rome and it's kind of like HOI4 Germany, ok would you like get another pat on the back for roflstomping another Italian minor? You're Rome, go Rome it up.
I feel his frustration is what I'm saying here. Absolutely astounding game, more of this plz and eff the haters
Thanks for trying your best to make this the game we all want it to be, your work is appreciated as always.
Thank you for the extremely regular updates since launch, regardless of what people think of the game I don't think anyone can deny that a lot of work is being put into improving it. I'm really enjoying the game a lot even though there are a couple of rough edges...
The main problem is having starvation because your capitol is suddenly gaining a mountain of slave pops and then needing to go through a click-fest to move your (newfound) people somewhere more useful. Perhaps being able to specify cities where you want to receive slaves rather than them automatically going to your capitol?
The abstracted currencies would be less of an issue if there were more consequential decisions to be made about all of them. I have found that oratory and civic power I am regularly weighing up what I want to use them to accomplish. But for military in particular (but also somewhat for religious power) I don't have to think about it, I'm just waiting for my next tradition. I'd like to see some more uses for the military power, either new or shifted from other currencies... Maybe you could have mercenary cost scale significantly with distance to capitol so that big empires would have to weigh up a significant delay to traditions against getting a mercenary company on their front lines. Could bribing commanders be done with military power instead?
The main problem is having starvation because your capitol is suddenly gaining a mountain of slave pops and then needing to go through a click-fest to move your (newfound) people somewhere more useful. Perhaps being able to specify cities where you want to receive slaves rather than them automatically going to your capitol?
The abstracted currencies would be less of an issue if there were more consequential decisions to be made about all of them. I have found that oratory and civic power I am regularly weighing up what I want to use them to accomplish. But for military in particular (but also somewhat for religious power) I don't have to think about it, I'm just waiting for my next tradition. I'd like to see some more uses for the military power, either new or shifted from other currencies... Maybe you could have mercenary cost scale significantly with distance to capitol so that big empires would have to weigh up a significant delay to traditions against getting a mercenary company on their front lines. Could bribing commanders be done with military power instead?
- 1
hey dont forget about us Multiplayers and roleplayers (i m MP, not RP)
Thank you Johan for that update! It is very good to hear from you and see that you are reading the feedback yourself. Don't mind the haters this game is fun even though I agree it is kind of shallow. One point you haven't adressed which I was missing is internal progression. To this day I believe the conclave DLC of ck2 was the best (with Holy Fury) ever made. It gave you things to do internally while you were not expanding. Because this is what I feel lacks in the game the most: There is very little to do between wars.
I would LOVE to see mechanics like these in imperator: rome. For example give us progression of laws (a bit like crown authority in ck2) and maybe more meaningful character interactions.
So to sum up things worth considering going from most to least important
- Stuff to do between wars
- Surprsingly my favourite thing to do is building roads. I believe every 'culture group' should have 1-3 unique abilites to give to their troops such that troops are more than just stacks you throw at your enemy. If you have a standing army might aswell use it, right?
- Mana spending is weird. I like mana but I feel like it needs proper balancing. I have thousands of oratory or sun mana but 0 leaf mana. (How about we make Inventions cost all mana types and not just green mana? Like a military invention would cost 50 military mana and 50 green mana instead of 100 green mana 0 military?)
- I'd rework how technology/research work. As it is right now I can almost always completely ignore it, put some random dude into it and I will be fine. There is no decision makeing like in Eu4.
- More unique 'ideas' to smaller tribe groups such that they feel distinct to each other (but this one you've mentioned already so thanks for that)
- Make it possible to move big chunks of pops across the map without having to micro manage single pops 10x to move them from point A to point B.
- Give us more diplo annex options
- Finally....I like the idea of personal rivals but as of right now they don't seem to have a real purpose. Maybe they game could borrow from Eu4 in that sense that you could see the rivals of any nation and as such use the 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend' rule which is great.
Last edited:
Yes it is fun going from small to big. But it should be fun to play when you get big.
Ah, that's quite problematic since religion was incredibly important at that time.
- 1
With regards to the AI, I've found it absolutely fine, with the big exception of ships, it just doesn't know how to deal with them. Carthage is basically a non threat if you play in Iberia.
Thanks for keeping up the communication, I'm enjoying the game currently, but this is probably the best base for an exceptional game that Paradox have ever released (Stellaris needed big reworks). Keep up the good work.
Rome the First was already a barebones game. I don't think there is any nostalgia with that game and 99% of the Imperator players not played it anyway. Imperator is barebones compared with EU4, the game you should be comparing it with, the same series EUROPA UNIVERSALIS: Rome should be compared.
- 1
For bribing, instead of using the diplo, couldn't each character favour one of the 4 'educations' and the corresponding education point be used?
shouldnt bribes cost money as well
as seleucidids i have 100k money (treasury max is 100k) and i dont know what to do with it , it sucks