Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Imperator: Rome Development Diary - 27th of January 2020

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.
Imperator: Rome 9058 Bug Reports 3699 Suggestions 2399 User Mods 678 Tech Support 516 Multiplayer 56 After Action Report (AAR)
Show only dev responses
Basileus2 said:
First!

Cool stuff. The changes to loyalty should definitely make interaction with characters more meaningful.

Also, know this isn't a suggestion thread, but here's an idea - when a character dies, can you make the portrait take on a monochrome marble texture? That way it'll look like the bust of a dead character.
Click to expand...

The Romans famously had death masks... food for thought.
 
aantia said:
The Romans famously had death masks... food for thought.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I had considered that, but felt that it might be a bit too focussed on Roman culture and wouldn't fit for the others. Busts wouldn't fit for the barbarian tribes either, but are 'acceptable' in my eyes as a generic solution since its reflective of the era, i.e. is one of the things people think of when they think 'Classical Age'.

However...if we are to go down the road of culture specific dead character portraits, you could definitely do death masks for Romans, busts for Greeks, Babylonian / Assyrian / Iranian wall reliefs for the Middle Eastern and Iranian cultures, maybe some kind of golden shield image of the dead character with lots of swirls for Gauls, runestones or wooden totems for Germanics, etc.
 
Basileus2 said:
Yeah, I had considered that, but felt that it might be a bit too focussed on Roman culture and wouldn't fit for the others. Busts wouldn't fit for the barbarian tribes either, but are 'acceptable' in my eyes as a generic solution since its reflective of the era, i.e. is one of the things people think of when they think 'Classical Age'.

However...if we are to go down the road of culture specific dead character portraits, you could definitely do death masks for Romans, busts for Greeks, Babylonian / Assyrian / Iranian wall reliefs for the Middle Eastern and Iranian cultures, maybe some kind of golden shield image of the dead character with lots of swirls for Gauls, runestones or wooden totems for Germanics, etc.
Click to expand...

Propably too much work, and too much area for every kind of complaints...
 
I appreciate this trend toward breaking up the empires into their more true and decentralized forms. These empires weren't some uniform and centrally administered monolith, they were in fact loose federations of client states and tributaries ruled by local nobles and nominally loyal to a common overlord. Most of these client states were watching for the slightest sign of weakness in their overlord so they could stop sending their regular tributes and quietly slide into de facto independence. The Satraps in Mesopotamia and Persia were notorious for this and "empires" in the region would in practice dissolve and reform in a very fluid way based on how powerful the current overlord was in any given year even though nominally they had all sworn fealty. Persian emperors for millennia spent most of their waking hours fretting about subject loyalties and playing Satrap whack-a-mole year after year.
 
Could the suggested loyalty system be used to designate the target loyalty of a character, but that it takes some time for them to get from their "Current" loyalty to their "Target" loyalty? Seems a bit odd otherwise for a modifier to immediately change how loyal someone is. Unless it's a bribe of course: I'm Imperator Shephard and this is my favourite Consul of Rome...
 
Maclardal said:
Could the suggested loyalty system be used to designate the target loyalty of a character, but that it takes some time for them to get from their "Current" loyalty to their "Target" loyalty? Seems a bit odd otherwise for a modifier to immediately change how loyal someone is. Unless it's a bribe of course: I'm Imperator Shephard and this is my favourite Consul of Rome...
Click to expand...

i would assume the answer is yes - for something like stipends for example, i might expect that to give say +2 loyalty per year up to max +20 (and then fading back down after a duration?)
 
Will there be a fix for the removal of forts? The minus when opening the region doesn’t react and it is costing a lot on the budget.. if anyone knows a solution, I’m interested:)
 
Marvcus said:
Will there be a fix for the removal of forts? The minus when opening the region doesn’t react and it is costing a lot on the budget.. if anyone knows a solution, I’m interested:)
Click to expand...

I think its pretty unclear what you mean - you are failing to demolish your forts? i have never heard of this issue before.
 
Marvcus said:
Yes, I cannot demolish fort with the livy version.
Click to expand...

you are probably misreadibg the UI or something.

to demolish a building you need to first click the build button on your territory UI, to openthe build tab. Then you can click x or - on what you want to demolish.
 
Todie said:
you are probably misreadibg the UI or something.

to demolish a building you need to first click the build button on your territory UI, to openthe build tab. Then you can click x or - on what you want to demolish.
Click to expand...
yes I am trying to do that, but the x has no effect and the - is not followed with any action..
 
Marvcus said:
yes I am trying to do that, but the x has no effect and the - is not followed with any action..
Click to expand...

If i had to guess, you’re trying to do it in a disloyal province or in your capital (where 1 fort level is free)

edit: judging by screen in PM it looks like a modded UI, so likely a mod issue
 
Last edited:
Todie said:
If i had to guess, you’re trying to do it in a disloyal province or in your capital (where 1 fort level is free)
Click to expand...
actually no - I am trying to remove a fort in Campania - all residents are satisfied, I can see city building = 1 due to the fort, then below it, there is the - and + but it doesn't react. I have 408 in treasury, so sufficient to proceed with any fees cost... no idea why I cannot remove it.
 
tpapp157 said:
I appreciate this trend toward breaking up the empires into their more true and decentralized forms. These empires weren't some uniform and centrally administered monolith, they were in fact loose federations of client states and tributaries ruled by local nobles and nominally loyal to a common overlord. Most of these client states were watching for the slightest sign of weakness in their overlord so they could stop sending their regular tributes and quietly slide into de facto independence. The Satraps in Mesopotamia and Persia were notorious for this and "empires" in the region would in practice dissolve and reform in a very fluid way based on how powerful the current overlord was in any given year even though nominally they had all sworn fealty. Persian emperors for millennia spent most of their waking hours fretting about subject loyalties and playing Satrap whack-a-mole year after year.
Click to expand...

This is extremely accurate. Eastern "empires" (Phrygia and Seleukids specially) should have a strong dominant center and a massive network of tributaries instead of being mega blobs. In this regard Rome was historically the game changer (even defining what we now loosely define as an Empire).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back