1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Imperator: Rome (Paradox's Next Grand Strategy Title)

Discussion in 'PC Games' started by Random Guy Esq., May 19, 2018.

  1. No1newts

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 24, 2009

    Posts: 19,297

    Location: North East

    It felt short: possibly because it was my first play to finish I wasn't sure how long I had left and it just leapt up on me.

    Trying another run through as Rome this time and going much more aggressive now I know the time frame. Get a better feel for things this time round knowing my limits, as a contrast I've taken the entirety of Italy about 42 years faster than my first run through :D
     
  2. Panos

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Nov 22, 2009

    Posts: 9,791

    Location: Under the hot sun.

    There are so many mechanics moving around, that the moment we start delving into our own country afairs (1.1 patch), the game would feel too long.
    How many times you played EU4 and you were absolutely sick and tired of the game by 1660s?
     
  3. No1newts

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 24, 2009

    Posts: 19,297

    Location: North East

    Honestly, never, actually once with a France game where for about the last 50 years it was a tense alliance net and no one could touch no one without the while continent melting down.

    I'm not complaining per se, it was the fact I didn't know it would end and it caught me on the hop, after this next play through I'll have a better feel for it.
     
  4. Andr3w

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 6, 2004

    Posts: 19,143

    Location: England

    I'm enjoying the game but I do feel like it needs a few patches/DLC to make it feel complete.

    I want to go back to EU4 and have a few games but i'll end up wayyyyyyyyyyy more confused trying to play 2 Paradox games.
     
  5. TheMightyTen

    Soldato

    Joined: Feb 4, 2003

    Posts: 5,936

    Location: Birmingham

    In an interesting game at the moment (2nd play through) with Macedon, early doors jumped across to Italy and took the heel, toe and a third of the way up the boot whilst Rome was at war in the North and quickly forced Rome to limit it's expansion. In the meantime I hadn't noticed Phrygia was on a bit of charge against the Greek islands, Thrace and Sparta as I needed to expand that way myself I took a risk on trying a limited war against Phrygia to see if I could nick the Greek possessions and negotiate to peace. The war went far better than expected as I ended up with a foothold in Anatolia on top of the Greek territories and then within a few years Phrygia just imploded and where it once was is now 5 or 6 different states all warring with each other :D
     
  6. JeditOjanen

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 7, 2011

    Posts: 4,109

    Reminder that on launch CK2 only lasted just over a century more than Imperator: 1066 to 1453. There's room for expansion, and I'd be very surprised if a game named for Imperial Rome didn't move forward into that period. If it eventually lasts until the Sack then that will be over 700 years.

    Slightly off topic, but CK2 is getting a new start date some time in the 10th century.
     
  7. No1newts

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 24, 2009

    Posts: 19,297

    Location: North East

    I'm playing as Sparta at the moment, formed the bigger nation but after a good start struggling a little as I'm now boxed in by Egypt south, Macedon north, Rome West and Phyrgia east so it's slowing down a lot.

    Not a huge fan on the alliance rules, you can only ally with other similar sized powers limits you a lot especially of you don't start as a huge nation.
     
  8. Darujhistan

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 28, 2011

    Posts: 3,569

    Big changes on the way, in particular to the mana system, which will be completely removed. I've got about 50 hours in and i've stopped playing until 1.1. I've got to the point where the lack of depth and the various issues have caught up with me, I've enjoyed it to this point, but I need more reasons to play and I know I'll just start new campaigns when 1.1 hits anyway. The base of a really good game is there but it improvents are needed.

    Johan's post below.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
  9. Darujhistan

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 28, 2011

    Posts: 3,569

    Hi everyone, lets continue talking about currencies and how to balance games, and Imperator in particular.

    So the design we’ve been working on right now have been to remove the four types of monarch power from the game, and replace their costs with other impacts, and also introduce a new currency which we call Political Influence.

    Political Influence is gained by how loyal your characters in your government is, so that if all 8 are 100% loyal, you gain a maximum amount, and if all are at 0% loyal, you gain nothing. Then of course there are other aspects that impact how much influence you get. If your Co-Ruler is disloyal, or you are in a deficit you will get far less.

    This will make it not just an easy choice of who to pick for a government position, by just picking whoever had the highest ability in the relevant field, but you also have to consider how loyal there are, so you can do certain actions.

    Now of course, not everything has been changed from using monarch power, but only a few actions will be changed to use political influence, but the rest will be using tyranny, stability, aggressive expansion, gold, manpower or war-exhaustion.

    Some examples of price changes includes the following.
    • Getting an Invention will cost 4 months of income.
    • Enacting a Law costs some political influence, but also reduces stability by 25.
    • Fabricating a Claim costs some upfront Aggressive Expansion
    • Endorsing a Party is merely a small hit on stability and tyranny.
    Military Traditions would work entirely differently, in that you would unlock a new slot every 20 years. We talked about tying it to tech, but that would put us in the same situation as ideas were in EU4, that it would hurt barbarians way too much. The 20 year value may change as we keep testing the game though.

    Now while we have talked about some aspects being moved to being a nudge over time like stability and legitimacy, some aspects like promotion, assimilation and conversion of pops will still be instant as of now. It simply is not feasible to rework that and still have a patch out in a reasonable timeframe.

    Cheers everyone, and tomorrow I’ll go deep into more flavor and fun in a new development diary..



    Insta-convert is nonsense and should be done away with, soudsn like it will be in time.
     
  10. No1newts

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 24, 2009

    Posts: 19,297

    Location: North East

    I mean these are pretty fundamental changes, seems like they think they've messed up the design and are now reversing it, this isn't a tweak but a redesign of the game fundamentals. Bold to fix it so fast but I can see it being changed a lot again in the coming month.

    I'm definitely jumping back to EU4 for now and give this a year to sort itself out. Love the era and the idea but it needs to find it's feet a little more IMO.
     
  11. Darujhistan

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 28, 2011

    Posts: 3,569


    Yeah, fundamental.

    It sounds like Johan's had to do a 180 in the last couple of days, people just won't accept mana and clicking over real mechanics and strategy. I think they thought they could produce a simplistic multi-player focused map-painter and people would be fine with it. It's a lot like EU:Rome apparently, but that was a decade ago and there's been a lot of Paradox games released since then and people want new games to have features from the 'classics'.

    It's bombed on Steam despite good sales, they need to improve it fast before people move on, they need to get it right over the next year with patches and improvements, they should forget DLC for a long while. It doesn't help that TWTK is smashing it out of the park by all accounts.