Game is a bit too easy after 2.0

[stratigo]

First time player, playing rome on very hard. I united the Italian peninsula and integrated all people. All parties like me 100%.
No disloyal people that I couldn't bribe to loyalty.... am I missing something?
. I am sitting on cash and don't even feel the need to spend it on buildings since I have 40000 levies and 10000 legions and 18+ money per month.


I don't even bother checking cultures and buildings. I am hoping that I will implode at some point. But so far.... very boring

Rome's super easy mode, yes. You can't compensate it with making the game very hard. Playing Rome will always be easy

 

[Lars_Schneller]

They really need to fix the AI. Having great mechanics doesn't matter much if gameplay is still boring for all the different reasons.

 

[schnupfi]

Rome's super easy mode, yes. You can't compensate it with making the game very hard. Playing Rome will always be easy

I know rome should be the easiest. But virtually no challenge at all on very hard? Hmmm...

 

[stratigo]

I know rome should be the easiest. But virtually no challenge at all on very hard? Hmmm...

You get a whole pants load of bonuses to your military. Like, a lot

 

[Decius]

This is mostly true, the player is always going to be able to defeat the AI in the end. But as ever, it doesn't seem they can get AI forts right. They should just force the AI to have a free low level fort in the province captial, that doesn't ytake up a building slot but allows the AI to defend itself a bit. That would prevent the AI just deleting all their forts all the time.

Something has to be done about the very low AI fort number, but please not an free fort per province capital. It would make the system obviously very arbitrary and artificial, if you have in every province a fort.

 

[Rabid]

Forts should have lower maintenance all round, forts are generally more necessary in Imperator than they are in EU and the cost should really reflect the number of forts you realistically need to protect yourself. The provincial fort limit makes it harder to go really crazy with forts.

Then make the AI more willing to retain / build forts. It's tough to get the AI to evaluate properly whether or not forts are useful but at the very least they should be extremely keen to fortify regions with multiple cities close together, border regions with a threatening neighbour, most major cities (especially ports) and wealthy regions which are near to areas that can produce barbarians.

 

[Andrzej2]

Forts should have lower maintenance all round

I like current maintenace of forts. Finally I have to think where to build them and delete ones that are not completly necessary.

 

[Akbar The Great]

I like current maintenace of forts. Finally I have to think where to build them and delete ones that are not completly necessary.

Player forts aren't the problem it's the AI that as usual cannot handle forts. It's time to "force" AI forts in province capitals, at least.

 

[Spike05]

I like current maintenace of forts. Finally I have to think where to build them and delete ones that are not completly necessary.

I like the fact that I have to think about forts now... I don't like that that thinking usually becomes "delete every fort that is not in immediate threat of being attacked to save money, also make it a level 1 fort unless strictly necessary"

that's quite linear after a while and I was strategizing more before, trying to not allow enemy armies to walkthrough by constantly checking the fort map mode, making level 3 or 4 forts where necessary etc.

With the actual fort limit, it's a no brainer. Just tear down everything and make forts only on borders and on the capital for safe measure. Also on border make level 1 forts to save money.

I think bringing the base fort limit to 6 or even 7 will spice up things a bit, particularily for the A.I.

 

[schnupfi]

I think the notion just because you are playing rome the game should be super easy is not right. It will forever be the most played faction of the game and making the gameplay mechanics completely irrelevant for rome is not a good thing. I think it is possible to make rome challenging to manage as well.
The decadency mechanic in field of glory empires for example showed a way how to handle it (not saying rome would need this mechanic). Rome should be a good fun to play and there should nbe a challenge to hold it together imo.

 

[BarbarianHunter]

I don't think the Imperial Challange CB should be limited to specific countries. It would defeat the point. However: The AI realy needs to build some forts. I just roflstomp rome at the moment, not because I'm that much stronger then them (I actually take quite some heavy losses), but because I can instaannex everything. A few defensive lines would make it 10x more difficult. The same is true for a aggressive use of navy in a defensive war. They could easily throw some 1k LC stacks at my coast line, but they just don't.

I haven't used the Imperial CB as yet so can't offer an opinion other than your description sounds consistent with other posts.

Perhaps we should lobby for more start-up settings with many options such as are found in Stellaris? One such setting should deal with AI forts. AI discount, propensity to build and provincial cap limit.

 

[Hendreforgan]

Hi all,

First of all, I want to say that I’m loving this game and I don’t want to bash it in any way but just to share my opinion on it.
. . . the game got significantly easier past 2.0 and I’m lacking to find any reason to play any longer than the initial 30-50 years as there’s practically no challenge after that point.

Question : Given the versions of this game have been an evolution then have not those of us who have been playing I:R during these versions simply not become much more experienced? Would that not "feel" as if being comfortable with something makes it feel "easier"?

 

[schnupfi]

Question : Given the versions of this game have been an evolution then have not those of us who have been playing I:R during these versions simply not become much more experienced? Would that not "feel" as if being comfortable with something makes it feel "easier"?

I played the first time. It is super easy and I am no genius.

 

[Emre Yigit]

Long term completely inept player here. I like the current setup.

 

[Baldamundo]

Same here, i played Athens, Emporion, and Byzantion in hard.

I found it really easy to blob out and be strong enough to take on major powers toe to toe. In 1.5 I had to restart a couple of times and save scummed. But this was not needed in 2.0. It was just one straight forward game.

What was your strategy with Athens? I got the absolute shit kicked out of me as soon as Rome decided to cross the Adriatic when I tried, but it was my first game on 2.0 and I didn't really know what I was doing

I know rome should be the easiest. But virtually no challenge at all on very hard? Hmmm...

Basic trouble with Rome is that people want AI Rome to be an absolute beast, capable of completing its historical conquests and providing a real challenge to the player when you're playing as somebody else. Obviously it's hard to balance that such that Rome isn't totally OP when controlled by the player. I guess they could give exclusive bonuses to AI Rome, but idk if that's been explored

Forts should have lower maintenance all round, forts are generally more necessary in Imperator than they are in EU and the cost should really reflect the number of forts you realistically need to protect yourself. The provincial fort limit makes it harder to go really crazy with forts.

Then make the AI more willing to retain / build forts. It's tough to get the AI to evaluate properly whether or not forts are useful but at the very least they should be extremely keen to fortify regions with multiple cities close together, border regions with a threatening neighbour, most major cities (especially ports) and wealthy regions which are near to areas that can produce barbarians.

This seems absolutely on the money to me

 

[Akbar The Great]

There's no doubt the AI needs to be forced to build/retain forts, because it cannot handle the decision making on its own.

 

[Slavicist]

If the game is too easy for you, make it more challenging for yourself.

Play as Antigonus and make no concession, fighting the Seleucids, Ptolemaids, Lysimachus, Macedon and their allies all at the same time.

Or play as Seleucus and fight Maurya and Antigonus at the same time.

 

[Olix]

I managed to pull off my first world conquest on 2.0.1. Granted it was on very easy difficulty, but world conquests are extremely tedious and boring after a certain point in my experience with games by Paradox.

The game might be easier for you guys but not everyone is a powergamer that can conquer the world as Samaria on very hard, blindfolded.

I also completed my first WC in 2.0.1 - as Rome with about 50 years remaining. WC is much less tedious to do in Imperator Rome compared to other Paradox titles due to the ability to automate armies - by the mid game my economy was enough to buy 100 mercenaries, put them all on 'automated', and declare war on everyone at once!

While I'm glad I did it (I wanted the achievement) I'm glad to have it completed. Playing in such a 'gamey' way is immersion breaking for me. I prefer a mix of fluff/roleplaying and game--ness in my Paradox campaigns. Rome dispatching governors to Tibet (and placating India in 2 years by 'integrating' the relevant culture) is quite silly.

 

[Decius]

If the game is too easy for you, make it more challenging for yourself.

Play as Antigonus and make no concession, fighting the Seleucids, Ptolemaids, Lysimachus, Macedon and their allies all at the same time.

Or play as Seleucus and fight Maurya and Antigonus at the same time.

That would make the game challenging indeed, but I would prefer, if the game is challenging without needing to play like an idiot. Don't get me wrong, nobody is an idiot, if he/she plays in a way to make their game artificially more difficult, but the game shouldn't follow a concept, where I have to intentionally play bad or extraordinary aggressive to have a challenge. Imo the AI really need improvements to not be a pushover. The enemies should provide a challenge, because they play smart (for an AI), but they definitely don't. If that would be case, we could also lower or remove some AI buffs. I know it's difficult to create a good AI and some buffs or substitutes are always needed for the AI. I don't blame the devs for not already having a good AI, but I hope it can be improved in the future.