• 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.

ESKEHL

Second Lieutenant
72 Badges
Oct 23, 2015
139
419
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Magicka 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Darkest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
This basically a bit of rant really, and with a lack of forum I thought the forum I usually write on, might be a good start.

Populares vs optimates
In Imperator, you have the populares and the optimates. This is quite interesting given that this division in the senate are more of thing around the Gracchi brothers and the social war around the turn of the century around 100 BC, not right before Rome started growing on italian peninsula in the late 4th century BC. Of course you also have families which is perhaps a bit more accurate given that Rome was a aristocratic republic.

The cursus honorum
In Total War: Rome II you mainly have families as the political entities, throughout the game which is a bit odd. But you also have a cursus honorum, which I also see people even talking about in this forum in regards to imperator as it´s was a standrad operating procedure of the republic that you had to walse through every political office before coming consul. It´s more of a stat buff thing in the game btw. That Rome II has this sort of thing in at the starting point in 272 BC is strange given that this is something Rome's first dictator for life, Lucius Cornelius Sulla implemented 82-80 BC in order to create restraints for the likes of Pompey and Crassus. Also, these offices were appointed by elections to, so basically having a term for life in an office and only consuls are elected, as in Imperator i VERY strange.

Nobiles, Patrici, Equites etc
Some modders (Divide et Impera) have taken the liberty of replacing families in Rome II with it´s cast system, which also is sort of strange. I haven´t read this much about how these classes interacted in politics, but it´s not what is lifted in the literature. There the talk is mainly of peoples assemblies, the senate etc interacts.

People's assemblies anyone?
What most games miss out on, is that the transfer to senatorial control of the republic, and later on to strong man rule happened gradually. From the beginning, after the ousting of the king, the formal role of the senate was basically consult the consuls. But legislative powers resided in peoples assemblies, very much closely related to those of the greek politea or democracies.. This would have been the case in 304 BC as well as in 272 BC.
 
  • 8
  • 4Like
  • 3
Reactions:
I always felt like Rome was very bad implemented in Imperator. To me, it never felt like I was really playing as Rome because none of the internal politics made sense in a roman context. I would have loved it to have it's unique mechanics given that it's supposed to be the center piece of the whole game.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I'm glad you mentioned Cursus Honorum (at least as a formal entity). People treating Republican Rome as if it had a stable structure for more than a generation or two at a time always bugs me.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Couldn't agree more. But I guess it would take a lot of work to do right when you also have a bunch of other 'Nations' to worry about not being boring.
But I have to say Rome 2 is a joke compared to even Rome 1's senate meachanics(612 hours in Rome 2 btw). Imperator is a way better representation even if being somewhat abstract.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I always felt like Rome was very bad implemented in Imperator. To me, it never felt like I was really playing as Rome because none of the internal politics made sense in a roman context. I would have loved it to have it's unique mechanics given that it's supposed to be the center piece of the whole game.

I would say that given the complexity of PDX-games, I think that is still fairly well implemented in comparison to TW: Rome II and Rome: Total War (haven´t really played other Rome strategy games). But you could make the constitutional part more important, and make missions being something that the politics have to agree upon, otherwise it´s more entertaining characters without purpose.

If you have an example of games that does this better, please share :)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
These "oddities" are probably because a game has to cover a longer period of history and the Roman republic/empire was an eternally churning clusterf... that defies rational thought. Sure you were supposed to have clear offices and advancement routes and all that jazz but in reality it was a civil war or a dictator every few decades. Not to mention the institutional corruption.

You're basing your "how it was" image of it on Roman ideas on "how it should be at the moment".
 
Couldn't agree more. But I guess it would take a lot of work to do right when you also have a bunch of other 'Nations' to worry about not being boring.
But I have to say Rome 2 is a joke compared to even Rome 1's senate meachanics(612 hours in Rome 2 btw). Imperator is a way better representation even if being somewhat abstract.
Yeah, I think that Imperator does a fairly good job, given that it has families, as well as political parties. They could implement it better into the other mechanics though, but it´s still leaps and bounds better than other Rome grand strategy games
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I would say that given the complexity of PDX-games, I think that is still fairly well implemented in comparison to TW: Rome II and Rome: Total War (haven´t really played other Rome strategy games). But you could make the constitutional part more important, and make missions being something that the politics have to agree upon, otherwise it´s more entertaining characters without purpose.

If you have an example of games that does this better, please share :)
I agree, there probably isn't a game that portrays Rome better than Imperator, although comparing it with Rome II is not saying much either because that game does not even try to simulate the roman internal politics at the level Imperator does. That being said, Imperator still disappointed me. I have yet to try Field of Glory Empires, maybe it surprises me.

My main problem with how Rome feels in Imperator would be the lack of pressure from the Senate, specially in the Republican Era. I have done 4 playthroughs (Very Hard difficulty) as Rome and I think I never had less than 70 support, even if I ignored the Senate or got one of those "problematic consul elected" events. Characters and parties could be expanded a lot more to give that sense of being in a Republic, where you have to fight others to do things as you want. Maybe a faction system like in CK2, where characters associate to force you attend to their demands would be interesting to put more pressure on the player.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I agree, there probably isn't a game that portrays Rome better than Imperator, although comparing it with Rome II is not saying much either because that game does not even try to simulate the roman internal politics at the level Imperator does. That being said, Imperator still disappointed me. I have yet to try Field of Glory Empires, maybe it surprises me.

My main problem with how Rome feels in Imperator would be the lack of pressure from the Senate, specially in the Republican Era. I have done 4 playthroughs (Very Hard difficulty) as Rome and I think I never had less than 70 support, even if I ignored the Senate or got one of those "problematic consul elected" events. Characters and parties could be expanded a lot more to give that sense of being in a Republic, where you have to fight others to do things as you want. Maybe a faction system like in CK2, where characters associate to force you attend to their demands would be interesting to put more pressure on the player.
Try to favour one party above the others, you will see how unstable is the Senate.

The low point equilibrium at 70 is due to players giving equal share to all parties and there are no incentives for players to have big swings in political power because there are no rewards to favour one party style.

If you actively Role Play, you will enjoy party bickering.

This week I want to submit a suggestion to make national ideas advance as you follow a certain playstyle. If you keep balancing, your national ideas will not advance and you will be mediocre.
 
Try to favour one party above the others, you will see how unstable is the Senate.

The low point equilibrium at 70 is due to players giving equal share to all parties and there are incentives for players to have big swings in political power because there are no rewards to favour one party style.

If you actively Role Play, you will enjoy party bickering.

This week I want to submit a suggestion to make national ideas advance as you follow a certain playstyle. If you keep balancing, your national ideas will not advance and you will be mediocre.
I actually role play everytime and only favour the party my consul belongs to, that's what frustrates me the most...

I really like your suggestion!
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I actually role play everytime and only favour the party my consul belongs to, that's what frustrates me the most...

I really like your suggestion!
Then, you are changing your playstyle for every consul, thus balancing the political game.

I am talking about playing to control the majority of the senate by one party. You may have consuls from other parties, then the struggle begins.

And your needs may not match that party every time, but you have to stick with it because they control the majority of the Senate and you need their 100% approval to have a qualified majority to approve your decisions.

I will let you know when I submit the suggestion, thank you.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
In my new Game with Rome that can be see in this thread, I didn't take to much pictures, next time something happens I will take picture and I will try to cover it more. So maybe help you guys.

But coming back to this Game, you gonna see that I have a Low approval, this was a problem of my previous Civil Wars and Rebellions. There was a Guy I don't remember his name, but I think he still alive and I will picture him on my thread when I have a time. My role problem start with him and his party. He decide become consul(or some important cargo) I don't remember. I frustrated his plans many times(he is crazy really :p, hehehe), and I tried to became friend with him and things never end well( he escaped prison with his political influence). Between those time I had a stability of 8% -15% because I have decided to expand fast and some bad decisions pop up late in the game.

That wasn't my first Civil War, I think was the third on this game. My main problem was with provincial Loyalty, maybe my choices on tech tree had impact on this and affect the parties.

As appointed there on this thread most of my games I had to appease the parties. And the Republic time was full of political problem,corruption, crimes,sabotages and etc.

Edit: "and this thing happens a lot in my game."
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
In my new Game with Rome that can be see in this thread, I didn't take to much pictures, next time something happens I will take picture and I will try to cover it more. So maybe help you guys.

But coming back to this Game, you gonna see that I have a Low approval, this was a problem of my previous Civil Wars and Rebellions. There was a Guys I don't remember his name, but I think he still alive and I will picture him on my thread when I have a time. My role problem start with him and their party. He decide become consul(or some important cargo) I don't remember. I frustrated his plans many times(he is crazy really :p, hehehe), and tried to become friend and things never end well( he escaped prison with his political influence). Between those time I had a stability of 8% -15% because I have decided to expand fast and some bad decisions pop up late in the game.

That wasn't my first Civil War, I think was the third on this game. My main problem was with provincial Loyalty, maybe my choices on tech tree had impact on this and affect the parties.

As appointed there on this thread most of my games I had to appease the parties. And the Republic time was full of political problem,corruption, crimes,sabotages and etc.
This is pure role playing.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Yeah @IsaacCAT that Roman Guy started a battle with his party in the senate, started a Civil War, Escaped Prison and I still suspect that he is the one behind the rebellion plots.
But my Marian Reform came very fast in this game by a Senate decision I think, not by tech tree invention.
 
  • 1Love
Reactions:
But legislative powers resided in peoples assemblies, very much closely related to those of the greek politea or democracies.. This would have been the case in 304 BC as well as in 272 BC.
No one ever remembers the existence of the assembly in any game about Rome. Where are my tribunes?!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Ignorance and sometimes the need to keep things simple, I guess.
I'd say devs working on the economy and politics of these kind of games aimed to an adult audience really need to be history nerds.

Victoria 2 was probably the most complex paradox game so far but it was also irremediably broken (and wrong on many premises), they would have needed a small team of people who know a thing or two about economics and 19th century history working full time to fix the system.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Ignorance and sometimes the need to keep things simple, I guess.
I'd say devs working on the economy and politics of these kind of games aimed to an adult audience really need to be history nerds.

Victoria 2 was probably the most complex paradox game so far but it was also irremediably broken (and wrong on many premises), they would have needed a small team of people who know a thing or two about economics and 19th century history working full time to fix the system.
That would be a perfect game. One can only dream.
 
  • 1
Reactions: