A new currency design

[Rabid]

I don't know if the saying with children and bathtubs is the same in English, but I'm a bit skeptical about this radical change, especially if nothing else is added in place of monarch points.

I think that the mana model is / was fine but it's also very obviously something that could be improved on. Mana was far more integrally tied into the gameplay in EU4 than it is in I:R, none of the really major parts of the gameplay actually depend on use of mana and I think that's one of the reasons why some people felt like it was a little out of place. For the most part, mana feels like something which stops you from doing what you want instead of something which you choose to invest in various ways.

 

[rivtaldm]

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.

So there is no longer a strategic tradeoff of giving up progress towards military tradition in order to hire mercenaries? I think that detracts from both balance and gameplay; military power was the ONE mana that was sensibly designed and utilized and you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater in my opinion. I could do without the other uses for military power being involved, but there is definite need for a tradeoff between hiring mercenaries and gaining more military traditions or it will just feed into making already strong and wealthy nations even stronger.

 

[Telenil]

I was fine with powers but I'm curious to see how the game will turn out without them. It will probably give Imperator a more distinct identity, instead of an "EU in Antiquity".

What would ruler stats do in that case though? Global modifiers, as in CK2?

 

[Denkt]

Ruler stats should make actions easier to do. Like good is things such as less warscore cost while bad stuff is things such as more tax income because it dont influence the player actions directly.

Ruler should influence the actions of the player, not give forgettable passive bonuses.

Material ruler should encourage conquest, civic ruler should encourage development and so on.

 

[Siegfriedfr]

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.

I want to congratulate you on the ability to totally revamp the current system.

Don't forget that the AI currently cannot handle its manpower.

 

[MasterPaw]

I think that the mana model is / was fine but it's also very obviously something that could be improved on. Mana was far more integrally tied into the gameplay in EU4 than it is in I:R, none of the really major parts of the gameplay actually depend on use of mana and I think that's one of the reasons why some people felt like it was a little out of place. For the most part, mana feels like something which stops you from doing what you want instead of something which you choose to invest in various ways.

I agree, I'm okay with mana but i'm also ok with removing it because it didn't feel really justified here contrary to EU4. Mana is a way to represent skills in government but because it was not used that much or for logical things changing it could be better.

And about Ruler stats, there are plenty ways of doing it but for example:
- martial : increased military tradition speed/ manpower recovey (this one is maybe better for charisma). Also a bit like mentioned above gaining more warscore in wars.
- charisma : loyalty boost / manpower recovery , diplomatic reputation, easier support from parties in republics/more legitime in monarchies
- finesse : stability recovery boost (could also be in zeal), economy boost, corruption reduction
- zeal : omen power, less unrest, less tyranny (you can justify it because you have support of the gods)
They could all have some minor impact in their respective tech fields.

 

[cristofolmc]

So there is no longer a strategic tradeoff of giving up progress towards military tradition in order to hire mercenaries? I think that detracts from both balance and gameplay; military power was the ONE mana that was sensibly designed and utilized and you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater in my opinion. I could do without the other uses for military power being involved, but there is definite need for a tradeoff between hiring mercenaries and gaining more military traditions or it will just feed into making already strong and wealthy nations even stronger.

Maybe introduce a law or something that forces you to choose between easier access to mercenaries, or get traditions sooner in less than 20 years.

 

[SOSHaruhi101]

Good job I hope IRs reviews can recover from these changes

 

[Shebaloso]

"Echochamber", they said. "Circlejerking", the said.

Congratulations both to us, who persevered with our criticism, and to the developers, who heard what we had to say.

 

[Denkt]

• Material ruler should encourage conquest so less warscore needed, less AE gained from conquest
• Civic ruler should encourage development so cheaper development and cheaper buildings
• Charismatic ruler should encourage diplomacy so cheaper and better improve relationship and easier to make trade routes
• Zeal ruler should encourage unity so cheaper to move, promote, convert and assimilate pops and cheaper to change governor policy

Stuff such as +% omen Power, tax income is pretty forgettable so they should not be the main difference between stats, you can add them in if you want but the important thing is the ruler influence what you do, not just a bunch of bonuses that require no action or strategy behind it.

If the actions compete for the same resources such as gold and monarch Point you would likely go the way that is more efficient with your ruler so a good material ruler will likely see alot of warfare while a Civic ruler may mostly stay at Peace if possible and if you heir do other stuff better you may want to plan ahead and do them when you heir is the ruler.

 

[Atour Bet Khaya]

Heroic.

 

[mak-k]

Money is a problem in the game only as long as the HOI4 system is not used - that is, you can not stupidly hire 1,200,000 army even with free people. Since there is a record already hired. And when there is enough money but you cannot hire an army other than mercenaries because of the limit already used, the problem of extra money disappears immediately.

 

[master_kong]

Wow that was fast! It seems a great start.

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.

I understand that. But you should do something about that in the near future too.

 

[master_kong]

Eu4 military tradition mechanic is really nice. I think this game can benefit from that with some adjustments.

 

[Denkt]

Eu4 military tradition mechanic is really nice. I think this game can benefit from that with some adjustments.

My suggestion was using EUIV military tradition with the ability to spend alot of it to acquire a Imperator: Rome tradition.

 

[master_kong]

My suggestion was using EUIV military tradition with the ability to spend alot of it to acquire a Imperator: Rome tradition.

Yeah that would be nice.

 

[Mr 32]

This is fantastic news! Really thankful you're willing to listen to the community and let this game reach his full potential. I don't mind waiting, just get it right.

 

[dpac]

Great news!

 

[Arumba]

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..

Well done Johan, I can't express how impressed I am by your response to the feedback you've received. This will be the best game you've ever made, for certain, if you can keep that willingness to adapt to feedback. Thank you!

 

[Kanem Bornu]

Very excited for this change. I think this will really help build on some of the potential unique characteristics of Imperator.