• 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.

Descartes

Lt. General
42 Badges
Oct 12, 2008
1.212
2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • 500k Club
  • Sengoku
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 200k Club
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
Magna Mundi (for EU III) has only one recommended start date: 1453. In this scenario, everything has been properly balanced, to make the following 368 years of game play as rewarding as possible. I have been thinking of doing the same thing in Imperium. It would be much easier to write province history if I didn't have to care about everything that happened between 1 and 727 AUC. Consequently, I would have more time for map modding, and be able to expand the map more quickly.

Historical phenomena taking place after the specific start date would have to be simulated by means of events. The invasion of the Gauls, for example, could be represented by a series of events triggering somewhere around 350 AUC. Temporarily, the Etruscan colonies in the Po valley would be weakened, making the expansion of the Gaulish tribes more likely. It's important, however, that these historical events don't interfere too much with the game; After all, changing history is one of the best things in Paradox games.

It's time to announce my choice. Surprisingly, perhaps, I don't think we should pick 1 AUC as the recommended start date for Imperium. Instead, I suggest 245 AUC (509 BC), when the Roman Republic was founded.

I have several reasons for picking this start date.

- The engine can't handle characters with negative birth dates (they don't die as they should). These are generated automatically if the game is loaded somewhere around 0-50 AUC, so picking a later start date is a way of avoiding the problem.
- The period before 245 AUC didn't involve much of the of turbulence usually seen in EUR, which makes games set in 1 AUC rather unrealistic. A normal player is not likely to do absolutely nothing with Rome for 250 years, in fact, he or she is most likely to have conquered the whole Italian peninsula by then.
- The Greek colonies were all founded in 245 AUC, which 1) gives the map some relevance and 2) saves us the trouble of simulating overseas colonisation.
- Most of the important events during Antiquity took place after 245 AUC, such as the Peloponnesian War, the conquests of Alexander and the Punic Wars.
- The years immediately following 245 AUC are interesting from a political point of view: Cleisthenes introduced democracy in Athens, the Romans organised their newly formed Republic and the Greeks in Asia Minor revolted against the Persians.

All in all, the player will have 485 years of solid game play from 245 to 730 AUC. Does it sound like a good idea?

Cheers!
 
Great idea Descartes, though I have one worry and also one hope!

The worry is will you be able to make a map of that detail all the way to the Indus for the Alexander campaign, if you can simulate that at all. And if you can, how do you simulate the collapse of the empire on his death into its seperate blocks.
Similar worries about moding the peloponesian wars etc - at some point you will need an EU2 style event sequence for some things.

Which bring me to my hope / suggestion. Will you be able to make a later start date playable further down the line, as I think one starting after the death of Alexander would be good aswell!

I can't wait whatever you do though :p
 
Sounds like a good and a considered choice.
I will just regret not being able to play with the Roman Kingdom and Romulus (one does not play a lot with a God in games this days) and the mythic period... But your game play arguments and so are quite good. :)
 
Personally I think it is a good idea.

It will cut the amount of history work by 1/3 and it certianly wont detract from your overall mod. If the 1AUC date is buggy I dont think you should touch it. You can also always review your decision later.
It will actually cut the amount of work by a lot more than a third, since I'm going to focus solely on this scenario. :)

Great idea Descartes, though I have one worry and also one hope!

The worry is will you be able to make a map of that detail all the way to the Indus for the Alexander campaign, if you can simulate that at all. And if you can, how do you simulate the collapse of the empire on his death into its seperate blocks.
I don't think I'll ever get that far with the map. :p Collapsing empires could be simulated by means of events.

Similar worries about moding the peloponesian wars etc - at some point you will need an EU2 style event sequence for some things.
What do you mean with an EU2 style event sequence? I've never played EU2.

Which bring me to my hope / suggestion. Will you be able to make a later start date playable further down the line, as I think one starting after the death of Alexander would be good aswell!
Maybe later on, when the 245 scenario is stable and the map has been expanded to Greece.

Sounds like a good and a considered choice.
I will just regret not being able to play with the Roman Kingdom and Romulus (one does not play a lot with a God in games this days) and the mythic period... But your game play arguments and so are quite good. :)
I'll miss Romulus the god too. I even considered to add Mars as his father. :p
 
by EU2 event sequence, I mean some event driven historical situations to encourage things to happen the way they did.

For example, and event fires for Athens to destroy relationswith spart and start forming the delian league (thats the one i htink isn't it?) so that the pelopnesian war actually happens. Also some mechanisms to stop, or make very difficult for, a player uniting greece in 20 years as one of the greek city states.
 
I think you decision is good, but it would be interesting once the map is finished to work on maybe one other earlier start date.

The only negative in this, for me, is the fact I was hoping to play as other pre-persian empire states like maybe 549 bc. I think that start date may serve the same purpose, yet wouldn't involve a massive persian blob to start the game. This persian country will have all the territory of egypt, seleucia, and anatolia and will be ridiculously powerful.

http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_550bc.jpg before the rise of achaemenid dynasty
http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_549bc.jpg persia is fairly large, lots of nation choices in asia still, good start date to base on a persian empire.
http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_540bc.jpg Lydia is gone
http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_527bc.jpg Persia is at least as powerful of Seleucia in vanilla


500 BC start: http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_500bc.jpg Persia controls northern greece, all of the east.

IMO those other dates are more interesting and lead to them not being so OP. Im a fan of 549 myself due to the fact that a persian player could have fun building the empire and other, smaller, states have more options against them. Though any of those dates would be fun yet keep persia as not being a mega empire right at the start of the game. Starting at 540 you could have Leonidas as a character (though at a very very young age). At 527 they would be probably only slightly more powerful than seleucia in the normal start date due to the expanded map. 549 is the most balanced for fun gameplay, yet fitting with all of the requirements for a start date you are looking for. Overall I think this would be the most fun.

500 BC they are just insanely overpowered and control so much territory that idk if that would be a good idea. They are like end-game grand campaign player power. It probably leads to no fun if you are playing as them at this point as well. Also the choices the player has for who to play as is greatly reduced.

I think everyone needs to take all of this into consideration. All of the defining factors for choosing this start date are settled in these earlier eras as well.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like a good idea. :)

I'm confident, that it's possible to do the necessary historical events not in a EU2-style. i.e. the Greeks in Asia Minor:
- EU2-style: an event chain, that triggers in 500 BC for Persia (and some specific Greek states), leads to some revolts and Persia wins at the end (and then it loses the triggered Peleponnesian war)
- modern Paradox style: an event chain with many choices, that triggers, if the Greeks in Asia Minor are owned by some non-greek king somewhere in 500 - 420 BC (depending on national ideas, ruler stats, decisions, laws, tyranny, badboy etc.).
 
Sounds good, and good choice on the starting date, incidentally, I played all my Imperium 2 games from this date :)
 
Definitely a good decision. I fully agree.
 
yeah sounds like a good idea. But if you already have fixed some of those bugs that are in present scenario could you perhaps just release those fixes so that we something to do while waiting for the "huge" new version.. :)
 
I tried to reply earlier, but the whole thing disappeared tragically when I forgot to submit my reply. Here we go.

by EU2 event sequence, I mean some event driven historical situations to encourage things to happen the way they did.

For example, and event fires for Athens to destroy relationswith spart and start forming the delian league (thats the one i htink isn't it?) so that the pelopnesian war actually happens. Also some mechanisms to stop, or make very difficult for, a player uniting greece in 20 years as one of the greek city states.
Well, I don't think we should have too many events of that type. The game would become too predictable, in my opinion. Still, I suppose a few generic ones (triggering for any country as long as certain prerequisites are fulfilled) wouldn't hurt.

I think you decision is good, but it would be interesting once the map is finished to work on maybe one other earlier start date.

The only negative in this, for me, is the fact I was hoping to play as other pre-persian empire states like maybe 549 bc. I think that start date may serve the same purpose, yet wouldn't involve a massive persian blob to start the game. This persian country will have all the territory of egypt, seleucia, and anatolia and will be ridiculously powerful.

http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_550bc.jpg before the rise of achaemenid dynasty
http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_549bc.jpg persia is fairly large, lots of nation choices in asia still, good start date to base on a persian empire.
http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_540bc.jpg Lydia is gone
http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_527bc.jpg Persia is at least as powerful of Seleucia in vanilla


500 BC start: http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_500bc.jpg Persia controls northern greece, all of the east.

IMO those other dates are more interesting and lead to them not being so OP. Im a fan of 549 myself due to the fact that a persian player could have fun building the empire and other, smaller, states have more options against them. Though any of those dates would be fun yet keep persia as not being a mega empire right at the start of the game. Starting at 540 you could have Leonidas as a character (though at a very very young age). At 527 they would be probably only slightly more powerful than seleucia in the normal start date due to the expanded map. 549 is the most balanced for fun gameplay, yet fitting with all of the requirements for a start date you are looking for. Overall I think this would be the most fun.

500 BC they are just insanely overpowered and control so much territory that idk if that would be a good idea. They are like end-game grand campaign player power. It probably leads to no fun if you are playing as them at this point as well. Also the choices the player has for who to play as is greatly reduced.

I think everyone needs to take all of this into consideration. All of the defining factors for choosing this start date are settled in these earlier eras as well.
I don't think Persia will be a problem, since I'm not going to represent it as a single blob. Instead, the Persian provinces will be fully functional countries, sending tribute to their masters in Persepolis. When the game starts, many of these countries will try to break away from the Persians, resulting in a war reminding of the Ionian revolt (which happened in 255 AUC, historically). With their massive army, the Persians will be able to annex many of the revolting provinces, but it will come at a high price: Infamy will shoot up.

I like it because you can actually see some of my work in the family trees then right ;-) Even though other work is "lost".
Yep. Thanks to you, we can trace the Tarquins back to Demaratus the Corinthian. :D

Sounds like a good idea. :)

I'm confident, that it's possible to do the necessary historical events not in a EU2-style. i.e. the Greeks in Asia Minor:
- EU2-style: an event chain, that triggers in 500 BC for Persia (and some specific Greek states), leads to some revolts and Persia wins at the end (and then it loses the triggered Peleponnesian war)
- modern Paradox style: an event chain with many choices, that triggers, if the Greeks in Asia Minor are owned by some non-greek king somewhere in 500 - 420 BC (depending on national ideas, ruler stats, decisions, laws, tyranny, badboy etc.).
Exactly.

Sounds good, and good choice on the starting date, incidentally, I played all my Imperium 2 games from this date :)
Good to hear. ;)

yeah sounds like a good idea. But if you already have fixed some of those bugs that are in present scenario could you perhaps just release those fixes so that we something to do while waiting for the "huge" new version.. :)
Yeah sure. I think I'll just release what I have and call it Imperium 2.0, it's impractical to call the releases first, second and third beta. :p
 
Ok, Descartes, by referring to your mod in my name-thread, you lured me over here. Now you’ve got nobody but yourself to blame. :p

I think that having one recommended starting date for a mod is a good idea. However, I think that 245 AVC/509 BC is an extremely poor choice; sorry.

From what I’ve seen, I understand that this mod’s focus is to be on Rome. Allow me to look on Roman history after 509 BC:

First of all, few, if any, hard facts for the entire 5th century and much of the 4th century are known. What is obvious, though, is that Rome didn’t start to expand outside her own immediate surrounding territory before the mid-4th century. As late as about 370 BC, Rome did not yet control the entirety of the its own province, even with your smaller provinces. The far-reaching conquests, first throughout Italy and soon beyond it, begin no sooner than the late 4th century – and that’s for a reason: Before that time, Rome did simply lack the economical base for such conquests. Once she had it, the conquests rolled along like a tidal wave; but for almost centuries following 509 BC, nothing. If historicity is a concern of this mod, I think that this economical constraint upon early Rome should not be ignored.

Then there is the matter of the Roman constitution and social structure. The time from about 500 BC to 300 BC were an epoch of great internal upheaval for Rome, the so-called Conflict of the Orders. Now much about this is legendary and should be doubted, but the fact remains that both the constitution and to a lesser degree the social order where during this time restructured. It is in fact very likely that even the office of the consuls itself was not created before about the mid-5th century, among many other constitutional changes during these centuries. The representation of the early Roman constitution in the mod is certainly no biggie, but something to be taken into consideration if the mod strives for authenticity.

If I, who is totally lacking the skills, would implement a Rome-centered mod, I would probably choose one of the following starting years:

387 AVC / 367 BC: Leges Liciniae Sextiae (allegedly!) passed. The Conflict of the Orders comes largely to an end and Rome has finally the capacity to turn her attention outward.

416 AVC / 338 BC: Rome wins the Latin War and dissolves the Latin League. It is no earlier than this that Rome is actually in full control of her own province, Latium!

428 AVC / 326 BC: Outbreak of the Second Samnite War (actually the first, as the so-called first is almost certainly merely a Roman legend).

438 AVC / 316 BC: Renewal of the Second Samnite War. The Romans had been soundly beaten by the Samnites in 321 BC at the Caudine Forks and had had to accept harsh terms. It was not before 316 BC that she was able to renew the hostilities.

450 AVC / 304 BC: End of the Second Samnite War in a Roman victory.

456 AVC / 298 BC: Outbreak of the Third Samnite War.

Of those dates, I would personally most probably go with 298 BC, as this is after the Battle of Ipsos in 301 BC. In this battle, Antigonos Monophthalmos lost his life and the dream of a re-unified empire of Alexander the Great finally came to an end. It is only after this battle and the subsequent carving up of Antigonos’ holdings that the Hellenistic realms constitute themselves. Earlier start dates than 300 BC, while entirely sensible for Rome alone, will inevitably lead to a Hellenistic world that is not anywhere near to what we are – more or less – familiar with.

If this seems already too late, and if the Hellenistic east is of any concern at all, I would recommend starting no sooner than the Partition of Triparadeisos in 321 BC, where Alexander’s successors laid the groundwork for dividing up his empire. 316 BC and the renewal of the Second Samnite War would in this case be the obvious choice for a Rome-centered campaign.

So here then are my thoughts – I hope they were not intruding. In any case, do with them what you will. :)
 
Last edited:
The problem with that one start date is that we will never see the likes of Alexander though, right?

But i really think you should do a first complete version of Imperium with that start date. When the mod is in a state where it is well balanced and "finished" in terms of giving an all around satisfying gameplay additional scenarios can always be added.