-
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.
I think the periode between EU:R and CK would be to long to be covered by one expansion.
I don't really care what period the expansion covers, as long as the map gets extended! (I want my lovely Baktria 
!) And with that, the ability to properly represent the Diodochi would follow . . .
!) And with that, the ability to properly represent the Diodochi would follow . . .
Let's just get Gigau (he created a very good map mod for EU3) to make one for usKubelwagen said:I don't really care what period the expansion covers, as long as the map gets extended! (I want my lovely Baktria
Or somebody else that is not busy...
This is the result when you want the game so badly, you start thinking of all the possibilities to improve it, yet you haven't seen itKeraunos said:Shouldn't we wait first for the game itself?
Yes, this waiting is making me miserable and pathetic. I desperately hope that the demo is released this week.
Grubnessul said:
Yes, more like another PI game, which is just splendid. Latifundi to the feudal states would be a good working title
there could be just one expansion covering the start of the empire, would be kinda hard to beat though if you played any nation besides Rome in the beginning, and then have another one after the split and everything with diocletian, but there would have to be another way for the barbarians to be represented at this time because of their increasing threat to Rome, THEN you could have a converter.
Or maybe a new game for the empire because the system would have to be different, and an expansion for the crisis of the third century and all that hubbub till the fall of the west, even though i cant bare to think about that time, it gives me the chills, all the stupid emperors!
then the expansion for Rome could be before Rome not after, like an Alexander the Great thingamajig.
Or maybe a new game for the empire because the system would have to be different, and an expansion for the crisis of the third century and all that hubbub till the fall of the west, even though i cant bare to think about that time, it gives me the chills, all the stupid emperors!
then the expansion for Rome could be before Rome not after, like an Alexander the Great thingamajig.
To be honest, I don't think the game needs and expansion, but a reapplication.
With what Paradox has done with Rome, I think the game's mechanics coulld be applied it to other periods and geographic locations. A feudal Japan game, using Rome's engine (particularly the civil war model and maybe a bit of CK) as a base? What about a historical game set in India? A particularly turbulent era in China's history, perhaps? How about a stand-alone Dark Ages game covering 500 AD to CK's beginning?
Personally, I don't think that a Roman Empire era expansion has a lot going for it. It seems like it would be the sort of game where you wipe out Parthia and Numidia, and then sit around exterminating barbarians and waiting for civil wars for a few decades. An expansion covering the previous century might be interesting, but I wonder what that would do to the tech tree of the game.
Of course, given some of the cool advances in game mechanics we've seen in Rome when compared to EU3, the engine upon which its based, I wouldn't be surprised if the developers have figured out some new tricks to be applied to some future project we know nothing about.
With what Paradox has done with Rome, I think the game's mechanics coulld be applied it to other periods and geographic locations. A feudal Japan game, using Rome's engine (particularly the civil war model and maybe a bit of CK) as a base? What about a historical game set in India? A particularly turbulent era in China's history, perhaps? How about a stand-alone Dark Ages game covering 500 AD to CK's beginning?
Personally, I don't think that a Roman Empire era expansion has a lot going for it. It seems like it would be the sort of game where you wipe out Parthia and Numidia, and then sit around exterminating barbarians and waiting for civil wars for a few decades. An expansion covering the previous century might be interesting, but I wonder what that would do to the tech tree of the game.
Of course, given some of the cool advances in game mechanics we've seen in Rome when compared to EU3, the engine upon which its based, I wouldn't be surprised if the developers have figured out some new tricks to be applied to some future project we know nothing about.
I agree, I would expect to see an expansion covering the Greek-Persian Wars and the rise of Macedonia instead of an Imperial Rome game.
Oh I definitely see a Dark Ages game coming. I see the Rome game, with expansions, ending roughly at 476. Then from 476 to 1066 is the new game. I have been waiting for a game with that time period; because, I really want to play as the Sassanids and reign in Zoroastrianism across the world (although I will get my chance with that in Rome as well).Grubnessul said:
they should not even cover Imperial Rome unless with one expansion, because there would be nothing to do, have a dark ages game, but have a vicky 2 before that.
2763r57651265 said:
Moral of the story, Paradox needs to spit out a new version of HOI, Vicky, EU3, CK, EUR and unnamed darkages/muslim conquest game every couple years. thats only 3 games for them to make a year, plus the patches and expansions of course. Paradox, you're operating at about 1/4th of what is demanded of you. speed it up!
