I would prefer this too. I've always read/thought about that time period using BC.
Guess the start date
- Thread starter Mattzo12
- Start date
-
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 would prefer this too. I've always read/thought about that time period using BC.
I have always wanted a game set after the ministry of Christ, it would be very entertain for seeing the different religions, faiths, and cults bicker and expand and contract and would give the human player a lot to do and observe.
But that is not this game, and that's okay
But that is not this game, and that's okay
Kind of immersion-breaking though. I mean, the roman calender won't make much sense either if you are playing as literarly any other faction, but it is better than a calender that won't even be invented for hundreds of years that basically is a countdown to an event that hasn't happened yet and that no one is anticipating. I'm glad that they went for an alternative calendar.
My mistake.
I would have actually prefered the "normal" calender due to me being used with it and thus knowing roughly where I am on the timeline. But to each their own.
The death of Alexander to the suicide of Nero would be good for the base game imo. Generals proclaiming themselves Emperor, or being proclaimed Emperor by their legions/pops whether they like it or not could be the first expansion.
Alexander’s empire being carved up could be an event system that changes based on character relationships/who is alive or dead. I’d like to play as Macedonia with an Alexander IV who survives for example.
Alexander’s empire being carved up could be an event system that changes based on character relationships/who is alive or dead. I’d like to play as Macedonia with an Alexander IV who survives for example.
This is a much better start date.
In EU:Rome it always felt like there were 5 tigers in the cage and everyone else was screwed.
Now we can have more choices as well as more viability to play small states.
In EU:Rome it always felt like there were 5 tigers in the cage and everyone else was screwed.
Now we can have more choices as well as more viability to play small states.
From what I can find the best alternative would be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seleucid_era, but given how unknown that concept is (many history buffs recognice AUC somewhat well).
It is quite likely they won't have alternative start dates, or expand the timeline, given how dissatisfied they've been with those aspects of EUIV and CKII.
That's very sad to hear. I had really hoped that we'd get more years into this game later on that just Middle-Late Republican Rome but I suppose nothing can be entirely made of gold.
EDITED: But maybe we'll get a mod that extends the time frame significantly as I hope it won't be hard coded.
Last edited:
No easy answer on the date thing. AVC was neither used by the Romans or makes sense for anyone else. But BC/AD obviously has the whole lack of Christ thing going on.
Personally, I'd prefer BC/AD. It's what I think in and allows me to put things into context. Otherwise I'm just constantly converting things into BC anyway.
Now, end date please?
Personally, I'd prefer BC/AD. It's what I think in and allows me to put things into context. Otherwise I'm just constantly converting things into BC anyway.
Now, end date please?
Clausewitz doesn't seem to like negative dates for some reason.No easy answer on the date thing. AVC was neither used by the Romans or makes sense for anyone else. But BC/AD obviously has the whole lack of Christ thing going on.
Personally, I'd prefer BC/AD. It's what I think in and allows me to put things into context. Otherwise I'm just constantly converting things into BC anyway.
Now, end date please?
Plus getting it to count 1 BCE, 1 CE (or -1 CE, 1CE) rather than 1 BCE, 0 BCE/CE, 1 CE (or -1 CE, 0 CE, 1 CE) is likely to nake the computer's brain hurt...
Why we cannot just have the simple BC & AD instead of this confusing AVC system I have no idea. Paradox, are you going to give us the option of using BC/AD instead.
Because it isn't simple.
Crossing the BEC / CE changeover causes a problem because there is no year zero.
Having part of your game count down years, and then start counting up is not *simple* either.
You're also using a dating system that is completely unrelated to the cultural setup. It may not even be a valid or lasting system in game if you can lock Christianity down before it gets started, and wipe it out.
It's not even *that* accurate, considering that Herod is meant to have died in 4 BCE...
the engine isnt good with negative numbers then switching to positive .
thats how imperium universalis devs explained it at least and this why they have also used the AVC
With AVC you can easily expand the game ending without having drama with the engine
about the ending date i think it will reach the 4th century ad at least . they have mentioned the waves of barbarians migrants invading your whealtiest provinces so i presume they meant the late antiquity and the migratory invasions + the huns .
also i dont think the ending date is important especially that last pdx games are sandboxes and dont end like the previous eu4 and ck2 .
hoi4 is about ww2 only but you still can play indefinetly.
also like the mongols in ck2 i think that the migratory invasions + the huns would be a perfect late game challenge .
also i dont think the ending date is important especially that last pdx games are sandboxes and dont end like the previous eu4 and ck2 .
hoi4 is about ww2 only but you still can play indefinetly.
also like the mongols in ck2 i think that the migratory invasions + the huns would be a perfect late game challenge .