Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Who wants Rome 2?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Show only dev responses
Ural said:
Two (2) consuls. Cursus honorum implemented. Latin localisation.
But mostly, Latin localisation.

i am willing to pay for it. :)
Click to expand...
Being able to have two rulers would really add a lot of things. You could even have kingdoms with two rulers, as happened multiple times in history (Sparta was a diarchy, the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kings often shared rulership with their heirs, etc.). The biggest problem is the speed at which you'd burn through characters in republics, meaning the game would require many more characters to be generated, and savegame file sizes would shoot through the roof.

That said, CK2 deals with it through various performance improvements (multi-threading, in particular), so it's not infeasible for a theoretical EUR2 to do the same.
 
I'd prefer a dark ages game as that period of history hasn't received any attention, but if it's too difficult for Paradox to make (I doubt it, they are tallented people) then my second preference would be Rome 2.
 
I would fund this.
 
the_rise_of_the_roman_republic__c__510___300_bc__by_hms_endeavour-d5dxlaj.jpg
 
I want it
 
I think the problem of this game is it´s name. ,,Europa universalis: Rome,, sounds like Rome is some kind of expansion to EU III. Finding a good name for a product is sometimes neglected but definitely important aspect of marketing success. Why EU: Rome 2 ? Why not ,,ROMA UNIVERSALIS ?,, Clear and simple, I guess.
 
Slavkov said:
I think the problem of this game is it´s name. ,,Europa universalis: Rome,, sounds like Rome is some kind of expansion to EU III. Finding a good name for a product is sometimes neglected but definitely important aspect of marketing success. Why EU: Rome 2 ? Why not ,,ROMA UNIVERSALIS ?,, Clear and simple, I guess.
Click to expand...
If they decided on a name change it would probably just be Rome 2, maybe with "A Europa Universalis Game" or something as a subtitle.
 
I would love to see Rome 2.

It seems like the next logical step for Paradox.

Sadly, if it does come out, it'll have the Steam demandment but if there was ever a game that caused me to overlook that...

Anyway, until then, I'll be playing Alea Jacta Est and soon At the Gates (Alpha version) to tide me over.
 
i would like too, but this time with :
real historical of tribes strengh, when i try to play Arvern celtic tribe i don't pass the first level of tech i'm already in war with rome in the early 500 BC ^^ .. and outnumbered meanwhile in history in was the contrary, celtic tribes where more advanced and more numbered, they also make some a little commercial change with roman and greek that's why they exchange some religious culture each other.
-the very know pillum is a celtic invention, roman stole a lot of idea from their travel. why some tribes are so dumb ?
-a all world possible exploration, remember vikings went to america long before colomb, but also some celtic tribes, for example Kukulkan in the Inca is a possible reference of some people who came from the see then goes a little war and then they worked together (contrary of colomb and more advanced civ invasion theory..) the name of the possible tribe leader is Cuchulaiin form Irish land.
-roman where invaded and plunged several times buy "barbarians", where it is ?? some tribes go to rome but do nothing more, lol. I don't remember the date but in approx 300 BC a huge number of celtic tribes went to rome because they eard roman had captured the sol, they rushed to rome and decimated all troops because they were very religious, they outnumbered romans but when they get to rome they discovered the acropol roof made of gold and realise they had come for nothing and they went back.
-with more historical aims like this one for example or like we can found in the latest EU3 (invade that country...)
-when sending troops on barbarian territory it says max reinforce = 3 but nothing come to reinforce your troops.
-date time (??) incresing instead of decreasing 502,503 BC instead of 502,501 BC
-the next devs should read more books, not only the roman version...
-more advanced AI, for example some neighbour tribes choose the idea of strong cavalry when they don't got horses and no trade on it...
some allie stay home when your land is attacked, they prefere go conquer enemy land (??),
a more EU spirit were playing a minor country is not so hard because at the end if you want to play long you have no choice but to choose roman or other big civ.(great...)

shortly the first one was a big fail, I really hope they can do better but i'm not sure. A big deception for me as you can see
editor should stop encourage fascination games, rome civ was not fascinating and it still not for me
 
Titus_1 said:
i would like too, but this time with :
real historical of tribes strengh, when i try to play Arvern celtic tribe i don't pass the first level of tech i'm already in war with rome in the early 500 BC ^^ .. and outnumbered meanwhile in history in was the contrary, celtic tribes where more advanced and more numbered, they also make some a little commercial change with roman and greek that's why they exchange some religious culture each other.
-the very know pillum is a celtic invention, roman stole a lot of idea from their travel. why some tribes are so dumb ?
-a all world possible exploration, remember vikings went to america long before colomb, but also some celtic tribes, for example Kukulkan in the Inca is a possible reference of some people who came from the see then goes a little war and then they worked together (contrary of colomb and more advanced civ invasion theory..) the name of the possible tribe leader is Cuchulaiin form Irish land.
-roman where invaded and plunged several times buy "barbarians", where it is ?? some tribes go to rome but do nothing more, lol. I don't remember the date but in approx 300 BC a huge number of celtic tribes went to rome because they eard roman had captured the sol, they rushed to rome and decimated all troops because they were very religious, they outnumbered romans but when they get to rome they discovered the acropol roof made of gold and realise they had come for nothing and they went back.
-with more historical aims like this one for example or like we can found in the latest EU3 (invade that country...)
-when sending troops on barbarian territory it says max reinforce = 3 but nothing come to reinforce your troops.
-date time (??) incresing instead of decreasing 502,503 BC instead of 502,501 BC
-the next devs should read more books, not only the roman version...
-more advanced AI, for example some neighbour tribes choose the idea of strong cavalry when they don't got horses and no trade on it...
some allie stay home when your land is attacked, they prefere go conquer enemy land (??),
a more EU spirit were playing a minor country is not so hard because at the end if you want to play long you have no choice but to choose roman or other big civ.(great...)

shortly the first one was a big fail, I really hope they can do better but i'm not sure. A big deception for me as you can see
editor should stop encourage fascination games, rome civ was not fascinating and it still not for me
Click to expand...

Could you name your sources? I have read Livy's description of the sack of Rome (ca. 390 BC) by Senones, but it doesn't resemble the story which you gave. Around 300 BC Gauls were already losing in Italy and while they still fought against the Romans they were crushed couple of decades later.

And seriously, Irish rulers of the Inca Empire. What the heck. And isn't Kukulkan a Mayan god (feathered serpent) rather than Inca tribe?
 
Last edited:
Olaus Petrus said:
Could you name your sources? I have read Livy's description of the sack of Rome (ca. 390 BC) by Senones, but it doesn't resemble the story which you gave. Around 300 BC Gauls were already losing in Italy and while they still fought against the Romans they were crushed couple of decades later.

And seriously, Irish rulers of the Inca Empire. What the heck. And isn't Kukulkan a Mayan god (feathered serpent) rather than Inca tribe?
Click to expand...

387 BC exactly but i'm not sure it was that date because rome was sacked several times it's why romans always wanted to invade that countries to pacify them but they didn't succeed until war of gaule with Cesar (58 to 51 BC ^^), pretty long time isn't it ?
what about gaulic ciscalpine invaded in 121 BC, in the game they invade it in -490 XD, too strong that roman lol

Livy is a Roman eye of history, as war of gaule by cesar is a roman view of what happened at this times but nowadays we know much more about the other cultures since year 2000 (approx...) were celtic mood came back i don't know why, they even tried to reestablish halloween festivity in countries that had forget it.
the problem is that there is to few clues of tribes living in northern europe, archeologist only found ancient lords tombs with lots of presents like in egyptian ways.
It wasn't in celtic ways to write things about because druidisme thought to write was a instable power in the sense you can write anything but they were able to, their education was essentialy oral, they have teaching class in their village but they never wanted to leave something by writing, they prefered to communicate historical fact by stories because they were found of mistyc histories and they were also polyteiste.
what about the well know D&D stories, where they wame from ? read more about celtic civ. now they have DRM on things that were told very long before they would never be thinking about making such games.
a lot of actual events came from the fact that were gaule were pacified in pax romana after the war of gaul by Cesar, they adapt local stories to convert people. but people can't negate some actual festivities comes at the same time as celtic paian festivities.

for my sources if you can read french yes, but i'm not sure you would, but if you're really insterested in making your own oppinion i could send you some serious books.
meanwhile I know what i say nothing to prove to unknown. read more books.

yes kukulkan is a mayan god but were his history went from ? there is strange similarity beetween era of kukulkan period and celtics possible travel to america, read more about kukulkan, serpent were also the emblem seen in drakars which have been used for long times by nordic civs and then invaded countries.
I'm not here to pass a master of history and I didn't say My date was exact but I wasn't that far.

to return to the game fails, we start in -500 (approx...) but rome wasn't that developped at this age, it was rather a pity country.
they should rename the game as "rome" and not universalis as well known encyclopedia as it is not that right.
the game was made in 2008 that's why i'm surprised to find so much errors in cultures and dates.
 
Titus_1 said:
387 BC exactly but i'm not sure it was that date because rome was sacked several times it's why romans always wanted to invade that countries to pacify them but they didn't succeed until war of gaule with Cesar (58 to 51 BC ^^), pretty long time isn't it ?
what about gaulic ciscalpine invaded in 121 BC, in the game they invade it in -490 XD, too strong that roman lol

Livy is a Roman eye of history, as war of gaule by cesar is a roman view of what happened at this times but nowadays we know much more about the other cultures since year 2000 (approx...) were celtic mood came back i don't know why, they even tried to reestablish halloween festivity in countries that had forget it.
the problem is that there is to few clues of tribes living in northern europe, archeologist only found ancient lords tombs with lots of presents like in egyptian ways.
It wasn't in celtic ways to write things about because druidisme thought to write was a instable power in the sense you can write anything but they were able to, their education was essentialy oral, they have teaching class in their village but they never wanted to leave something by writing, they prefered to communicate historical fact by stories because they were found of mistyc histories and they were also polyteiste.
what about the well know D&D stories, where they wame from ? read more about celtic civ. now they have DRM on things that were told very long before they would never be thinking about making such games.
a lot of actual events came from the fact that were gaule were pacified in pax romana after the war of gaul by Cesar, they adapt local stories to convert people. but people can't negate some actual festivities comes at the same time as celtic paian festivities.

for my sources if you can read french yes, but i'm not sure you would, but if you're really insterested in making your own oppinion i could send you some serious books.
meanwhile I know what i say nothing to prove to unknown. read more books.

yes kukulkan is a mayan god but were his history went from ? there is strange similarity beetween era of kukulkan period and celtics possible travel to america, read more about kukulkan, serpent were also the emblem seen in drakars which have been used for long times by nordic civs and then invaded countries.
I'm not here to pass a master of history and I didn't say My date was exact but I wasn't that far.

to return to the game fails, we start in -500 (approx...) but rome wasn't that developped at this age, it was rather a pity country.
they should rename the game as "rome" and not universalis as well known encyclopedia as it is not that right.
the game was made in 2008 that's why i'm surprised to find so much errors in cultures and dates.
Click to expand...

It's impossible to say the exact year of the sack of Rome. 390 BC is traditional year, 387 BC is modern estimation. It was a big deal for Romans because it was unusual event that Gauls invaded the city of Rome itself. Other invasions to Roman territory didn't reach the city itself. We have to rely on Roman and Greek written sources about the Celts, because while they are biased there are no other written sources. I was earlier referring to Gallia Cisalpina when I said that power of Gauls was waning in Italy. After Gauls lost in Third Samnite War Rome established itself as the ruling power of Italy and after that they conquered Gallia Cisalpina piece by piece.

And while I have heard about theories that medieval Celts (Saint Brendan and later Madoc) sailed to North America, there is no real hard evidence to support these theories. In any case these claimed expeditions happened many centuries later than what's the game's focus. I would also like to point out that Cú Chulainn means Culann's Hound (He is actually one of my favourite heroes from Irish mythology) and Kukulkan means feathered serpent. Two names have different etymology. Snake and dragon are universal symbols and almost every culture has such symbols, it doesn't mean that traditions are connected.

I asked you to give sources, because what you claimed was in conflict about what I have read about the Roman and Celtic history (both ancient histories and modern academic works) and you asked that these things should be included to game. If you want to name French sources then go ahead, I have read few books in French before, so it's not a problem. Personally I believe that game should be based to actual history and not to unproven theories. However I agree that Gallic tribes in Europa Universalis: Rome fall too early and easily to Romans. I think that the biggest issue is that Roman AI takes conquering the weaker Gallic tribes as their first priority instead of focusing on taking Carthage, Greece and Hispania.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back