I:R team started developing Overlord back in 2020, when is coming to Imperator?

[IsaacCAT]

In DD of 18 May 2020 we were told that the Imperator Team was developing a subject progression system of evolving relationships between overlord and subject that was announced in the first overview of Menander 1.5. https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/imperator-rome-developer-diary-18-may-2020.1391599/

However, it seems Stellaris will have it first with Overlod https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...laris-dev-diary-247-new-ways-to-rule.1516799/ and I think is a great addition.

When can we expect all of this ported to I:R as well?

Thank you,

 

[TinWiz]

I like your presumption. However, I suspect they took that idea to Stellaris and it seems increasingly obvious (if it wasn't already) that PDS has no plans to support or further develop I:R.

Although the silence is strange and unfriendly to customers.

 

[IsaacCAT]

I believe the implementation could be ported over I:R once it is developed for less cost.

As a customer of PDX I own more than one game and It makes sense to port what is good from one game to the others to improve the PDX customer experience all around.

EDITED: In fairness this overlord thing was already developed in CK saga. But I am not a connoisseur of that franchise to be able to confirm.

 

[Ferrous Will]

I believe the implementation could be ported over I:R once it is developed for less cost.

As a customer of PDX I own more than one game and It makes sense to port what is good from one game to the others to improve the PDX customer experience all around.

EDITED: In fairness this overlord thing was already developed in CK saga. But I am not a connoisseur of that franchise to be able to confirm.

As a connoisseur of CK3 i can tell you a not insignificant chunk of inspirations of overlord are indeed from ck3.

Which honestly is a smart thing to do, as you have mentioned, each of the mainline pdox games has its own specializations, so when one franchise needs a pick-me-up in one of its mechanics that wasn't its own focus, they can just walk next door and borrow some top tier stuff.

Victoria needed better logistics systems, so they went to hoi4 and said, yeah we could use them convoys and shipping lanes

Stellaris needed better vassalage systems, so they went to ck3 and said, yeah we could use them contracts and vassal types

Now to be fair, its not like its a 1 to 1 copy. and every adaptation requires some work for a borrowed system to fit into the new game, my intent is not to portrait paradox as lazy, quite the contrary, they are deliberately not reinventing the wheel, and that's just smart in general.

------

Having said all this I must confess... I don't think I:R is gonna get anything. At least. not in the near future, let's say not in the next year, but by then they probably would just make an I:R 2 instead of coming back to I:R 1, if, if they really wanted to come back to I:R.

 

[IsaacCAT]

As a connoisseur of CK3 i can tell you a not insignificant chunk of inspirations of overlord are indeed from ck3.

Which honestly is a smart thing to do, as you have mentioned, each of the mainline pdox games has its own specializations, so when one franchise needs a pick-me-up in one of its mechanics that wasn't its own focus, they can just walk next door and borrow some top tier stuff.

Victoria needed better logistics systems, so they went to hoi4 and said, yeah we could use them convoys and shipping lanes

Stellaris needed better vassalage systems, so they went to ck3 and said, yeah we could use them contracts and vassal types

Now to be fair, its not like its a 1 to 1 copy. and every adaptation requires some work for a borrowed system to fit into the new game, my intent is not to portrait paradox as lazy, quite the contrary, they are deliberately not reinventing the wheel, and that's just smart in general.

------

Having said all this I must confess... I don't think I:R is gonna get anything. At least. not in the near future, let's say not in the next year, but by then they probably would just make an I:R 2 instead of coming back to I:R 1, if, if they really wanted to come back to I:R.

As I thought, CK contracts are a good gameplay that can be ported from a feudal to a galactic system.

In Imperator we already have vassals loyalty and I can see that instead of contracts, the interaction is played through ruler characters.

This makes the game less static as rulers will change often in Republics and eventually in Monarchies and Tribes, affecting the overlord/vassal relation.

Developing your ruler character relation with the other ruler, you can influence the loyalty of the vassal, something that Stellaris does different.

On the chances of Imperator getting anything, I like to think that PDX universe is like an ecosystem. Players stick to the ecosystem by buying many games even if they do not play them, because they know that are part of the same ecosystem and someday they will have the time to learn and enjoy them.

I for one bought I:R on this premise and did not played until 1.5 but I was playing another PDS game meanwhile.

What I mean is that PDX experience is not one game, but something more that you find in all their games that makes people buy everything they do. If they lose that something else, people will not buy everything PDX and they will lose player engagement.

 

[Chaostrian]

Having said all this I must confess... I don't think I:R is gonna get anything. At least. not in the near future, let's say not in the next year, but by then they probably would just make an I:R 2 instead of coming back to I:R 1, if, if they really wanted to come back to I:R.

I'm still optimistic about that they will come back to it


And when they come back to the game, I don't think they're going to develop a second part of it, they're going to develop the current game

why should they develop a new game that is exactly the same in terms of structure, map and mechanics?

that would be a real waste of money and beyond that nobody is happy to have 2 games with the same name in the steam library where there is a 2 after a name but both games are the same

the only thing I:R was missing was 2.0 marketing, you didn't notice anything about the release of the update, only within the community, which isn't particularly big

just wait and see maybe nothing will come to the game this year but they never really said that 2022 would come, they just said that 2021 definitely nothing will come ^^

 

[Ferrous Will]

why should they develop a new game that is exactly the same in terms of structure, map and mechanics?

To have a better pop mechanic, for example.

 

[Ferrous Will]

yea those are changes that can be changed in the current game too

you think so? If they wanted to steal a few things from vic3, you are confident they can replicate that without an engine update?

 

[IsaacCAT]

why should they steal something from vic3? I:R got his own pop system and it worked and when they want to expand the popsystem they dont need an engine update

We do not know yet how Vic3 will play, but is always worth it to be able to port good things from other games.

The limitation is the engine and the code. Being the same engine and if the code is not spaghetti, I have faith that I:R could benefit from whatever Vic3 makes good and is worth porting to the world of 230 BCE.

 

[Ferrous Will]

We do not know yet how Vic3 will play, but is always worth it to be able to port good things from other games.

The limitation is the engine and the code. Being the same engine and if the code is not spaghetti, I have faith that I:R could benefit from whatever Vic3 makes good and is worth porting to the world of 230 BCE.

can't make this point any better myself

 

[Jayavarman]

Do it.

 

[Cagallo]

Came here to support the motion

 

[Saladin87]

We want IR development resumed, we need it in fact. Come on PDX, give us some good news already!