Rome II

[Leon_Aditzu]

China and rest of Eurasia should be în Rome2 from the start. We do not need to repeat the known chinese story of Crusader Kings2 or Rome1 Issue with Seleucid and Parthia.
In Rome border nations like Parthia where unplayable because of the map issue

 

[nizarus]

I was thinking of more intrigue in this new game. A dynasty builder game like Crusader Kings. Even in republics, there were great families. It will be great. A dynasty of Roman or carthagenian senators or generals or a royal dynasty in the east. Tribal as well as nomadic chieftain dynasties. More internal politics. Marriages, adoptions and divorces or repudiations are not just events. Friendship and rivalry also matter.

 

[nizarus]

Like CK but power is not about land. I mean it is not the feudal world. It is about occupying key posts in the government. Prestige to the family is got through achievements.

 

[NoodleNaught]

Instead of calling it "Rome II" and clumsily including a New World with no point to it, why not brand it differently, for example simply "Antiquity", to denote the time frame and then give players three (or more, or less) basic choices for a map setup when starting a new game?
You would be able to choose between the world 1. as seen by the Romans and everyone they directly interacted with, 2. as seen by the Chinese and everyone they directly interacted with, 3. as seen by pre-Columbian American cultures and everyone they interacted with. Perhaps add others, so that the game ends up depicting what was going on in the world during the time that we call antiquity, but giving us only a limited outlook depending on which setup we go with. That would be sensible, IMO.
Building the game around Rome and making it global would probably not work very well.

Excepting you still arrive back to the issue, that without a inordinate amount of development each would be lacking of much depth. If they were released as separate games, or standalone expansions (So mechanics that apply to all can updated the same), that might be feasible.

 

[Thrownman]

There's enough digging around they're going to have to do for scarcely documented ancient civilizations in Europe and you want them to try to create a believable America?

 

[Imperator1993]

When we get Rome II (which we will P-dox can't ignore us forever...) it should take the ideas of this game called Pax Romana, which had a brilliant setup but it was broken and buggy.

 

[Czert]

i hope they will make rome 2 soon.

 

[phantomrider]

While I would really like to see a Rome II game I am about at the point of giving up hope. I think that trying to broaden the scope to "world wide" by including China/Japan, Africa?? other than the areas bordering on the Med? and the Americas makes the situation even more "hopeless" because you now have to simulate the politics, military and economic nature of these areas which were not identical to the Roman environment and its fringe areas on Gaul, Germany, spain and parts east of Persia. The technology just wasn't there to maintain communications or trade between the Mediterranean world and the these areas so they had very little effect on each other.

 

[Nimic]

I would buy the shit out of Rome 2. Please Paradox.

Do it for an old fan.

 

[Alexoren]

For India and China it would be a bit of a stretch, but plausible. There are records of contact between Imperial China and the Roman Empire, but it was incredibly limited with Persia being smack dab in between. Emissaries and trade did get through, however.

As for the New World? I would love to see someone attempt to take a Roman ship across the Atlantic. They were built for Mediterranean waters not for the open ocean. During European Imperialism there was a huge problem with ships going down on their way across and they were much more advanced than what the Romans had.

and with the Chinese in the new world, the claim is that Zheng He reached North America before Columbus. Zheng He was from the Ming Dynasty and would have done it around the late 1300s to 1400s. Much earlier than Columbus, but still more probable than before the common era.

 

[Fawr]

I was thinking of more intrigue in this new game. A dynasty builder game like Crusader Kings. Even in republics, there were great families. It will be great. A dynasty of Roman or carthagenian senators or generals or a royal dynasty in the east. Tribal as well as nomadic chieftain dynasties. More internal politics. Marriages, adoptions and divorces or repudiations are not just events. Friendship and rivalry also matter.

I think that the strength of the Paradox games it that they are different enough from each other. HOI plays very differently to Vicky or CK. Making another game in a different time period but having it character based like CK2 wouldn't be different enough to get much gametime (and any time it did get would be instead of playing Ck2).

 

[Czert]

China and rest of Eurasia should be în Rome2 from the start. We do not need to repeat the known chinese story of Crusader Kings2 or Rome1 Issue with Seleucid and Parthia.
In Rome border nations like Parthia where unplayable because of the map issue

i fully suport to hve complete asia minor in game, but cant see any reason for china.

 

[Pellettration]

Keep it simple map wise and concentrate on the intrigue and complexity that you get from CK2. Asia Minor needs to be in there but no need for China, that seems like trying to mold two games into one.

 

[Leon_Aditzu]

Asia Minor needs to be in there but no need for China, that seems like trying to mold two games into one.

Actually, having more games in to one, it is the advantage of EU,HOI,Victoria series în comparison to Ck, Rome, Sengoku. Including all Eurasia from the start it would be engine wise, in order to avoid technical problems of a later map expansion, like în Ck2. Even China and the rest of Eurasia will be poorly represented in the vanilla versiune.

 

[Pellettration]

Even China and the rest of Eurasia will be poorly represented in the vanilla versiune.

Yeah that is true, the games do expand as DLC is released. My only issue is how China would fit into the Rome world.

 

[Leon_Aditzu]

Yeah that is true, the games do expand as DLC is released. My only issue is how China would fit into the Rome world.

It would fit if the game will be more than a game about only Rome, but a game about Antiquity. Building the engine capable to sustain the entire map from the start, in order to avoid later addition of Areas, which will mess the engine. CK2 is the main example.

 

[Pellettration]

It would fit if the game will be more than a game about only Rome, but a game about Antiquity. Building the engine capable to sustain the entire map from the start, in to avoid later addition of Areas, which will mess the engine. CK2 is the main exemple.

Fair point. A game covering that whole time period on a larger sized map would be of more substance than simply a Rome game. Be very interesting deciding which time periods you would start and finish on.

 

[Leon_Aditzu]

I think the game earliest period(main game or DLC) should be the beginning of the Reign of Cyrus the Great (559 BC) because all main powers will have limited power: Rome is a city state in the battle for Italic peninsula, equilibrium in Greece, Carthage is at the beginning of its colonial empire, Middle East struggle for dominance between, Persia, Media, Lydia, Babylon, Egypt, Spring and Autumn Period in China, many nations in India, hundreds of barbarian nations in the rest of Eurasia. Other starting period should be Phillip the second reign (359 BC), Death of Alexander (323 BC) and of course the Rome 1 start: Pyrrhic war.
The end of the game should be the fall of Western Roman Empire or at least Constantin reign.
Dark Age period should be covered by other game that will mix both Rome2 and CK2 features in a evolution of features, Roman Empire having the role of declining power similar to Byzantium/Abbasid in CK2, HRE/Ming/Venice(and so on) in EU4, Ottoman Empire,Qing and France(Victoria2), Britain and France (HoI4)

 

[NoodleNaught]

Avoiding map expansions in DLC, and including everything at the start would definitely be best. Just do Roman world first in detail (I.E. without just generalized governments etc...). Then DLC India, Then East Asia, Then Northern Areas/ Steppes (basically nomadic/tribal areas). (Would be interesting to see a early Japan in one of those as well).

 

[GundamMerc]

Avoiding map expansions in DLC, and including everything at the start would definitely be best. Just do Roman world first in detail (I.E. without just generalized governments etc...). Then DLC India, Then East Asia, Then Northern Areas/ Steppes (basically nomadic/tribal areas). (Would be interesting to see a early Japan in one of those as well).

Really tired of China being ignored when it was a far larger and more technologically advanced society at the time Rome was merely a City-State