Imperator Dev Diary 07/12/20
- Thread starter Arheo
- Start date
-
We will be taking the forums down for scheduled maintenance on Thursday, February 25th 2021 At approximately 4PM CST / Friday, February 26th 2021 Midnight UTC. This downtime is estimated to last up to 2 hours.
-
Crusader Kings III Available Now!
The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.
Basically yes, considering that curremtly late game expansion is slower than at the start (due to increasing amount of pops needing extra war score).
- 3
Has any rough timeline been announced for when to expect the Marius update? Three months? Six?
- 3
Really enjoyed most of the Dev Diary, BUT please reconsider making it possible to build ports on every coastal territory!
Maybe only cities!
Maybe only cities!
Last edited:
- 6
- 6
The warscore system scales poorly for wars between massive powers and it's a lot easier in dev terms to just add a few special case wargoals which circumvent it than to rework the entire system. Not particularly "tidy" in conceptual terms but it certainly works.
- 1
Looks like they are continuing to iterate on the province UI as well, so that is good.
I like putting port construction and upgrades at the player's control. As for geography and port size, I assume settlements are still limited to one building, so you can only go past a size 1 port in a city. That means you will probably only have one big port (or perhaps two) in a single province, which seems fine to me.
I also like the tech tree UI improvements. I do have one note here. It was not obvious at all in the first screenshot that the bar in the upper right was a search bar. Please put something here to make it more apparent what this is.
I have not done any of the unique mission trees yet (I don't have any DLC, so I only have access to the few free ones), but these trees for Thrace look cool and kudos to the designer for making this an exciting nation to try.
I like putting port construction and upgrades at the player's control. As for geography and port size, I assume settlements are still limited to one building, so you can only go past a size 1 port in a city. That means you will probably only have one big port (or perhaps two) in a single province, which seems fine to me.
I also like the tech tree UI improvements. I do have one note here. It was not obvious at all in the first screenshot that the bar in the upper right was a search bar. Please put something here to make it more apparent what this is.
I have not done any of the unique mission trees yet (I don't have any DLC, so I only have access to the few free ones), but these trees for Thrace look cool and kudos to the designer for making this an exciting nation to try.
- 3
- 1
- 1
Just my suggestions about ports:
Being able to build ports everywhere is kinda weird. it should be possible but maybe price should increase depending on terrain/water type. if the coast is shallow you could build out far until the water is deep enough but it´s way more expensive. If the coast is rocky or a cliff you would need to put in a lot more than a location with a natural habor.
I just hope ports can only be present in cities since nobody would build a huge port in a fishing village, there´s no supporting infrastructure for that. They should be destroyed when the city is razed too.
Being able to build ports everywhere is kinda weird. it should be possible but maybe price should increase depending on terrain/water type. if the coast is shallow you could build out far until the water is deep enough but it´s way more expensive. If the coast is rocky or a cliff you would need to put in a lot more than a location with a natural habor.
I just hope ports can only be present in cities since nobody would build a huge port in a fishing village, there´s no supporting infrastructure for that. They should be destroyed when the city is razed too.
- 6
- 2
Would it be possible to condense this into something like "Cost: 1000 Gold"? I feel like this looks a bit weird and unnecessarily complicated. Also, I don't think we really need two decimals here.
Other than that great dev diary! 2.0 looked great from the beginning, but every week it seems to get even better
- 7
- 4
- 1
A great developer diary ! Thank you for your hard work ! I agree with the suggestions my collegues suggested
Edit : what would you think about a land upgrade ? As you can create ports, it would make sense to me that, for your capital city, the most civilized of your ocuntry, you could remove the trees from a forest or change the plains into farmlands. I woud not touch the hills or mountains, but the idea to remove the forests or upgrade to farmlands some plains for your capital city could be interesting.
Edit : what would you think about a land upgrade ? As you can create ports, it would make sense to me that, for your capital city, the most civilized of your ocuntry, you could remove the trees from a forest or change the plains into farmlands. I woud not touch the hills or mountains, but the idea to remove the forests or upgrade to farmlands some plains for your capital city could be interesting.
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
Yes please reconsider the decision to locate ports anywhere. I think the game needs to strike a balance between player control and gameplay, and I think currently ports having set locations add to strategic planning and is more important than unrestricted player control.
Is it possible to create fleet templates? And could the fleet be entirely constructed from one Port but could take say 3-5 years to build? Making even better ports all the more important and their scarcity a real reason to control them.
I think ports having set locations could help form the basis for a solid future trade rework too, hopefully where trade routes can only be connected via ports, and overland trade is done through trade caravans to neighboring provinces. The nice looking arrows bypassing in-between nations has to go.
Delenda Est IR Trade Routes
Edit-or else make the ability to construct ports a path on the military ideas group. But only for factions that have chosen a weak infantry path.
Is it possible to create fleet templates? And could the fleet be entirely constructed from one Port but could take say 3-5 years to build? Making even better ports all the more important and their scarcity a real reason to control them.
I think ports having set locations could help form the basis for a solid future trade rework too, hopefully where trade routes can only be connected via ports, and overland trade is done through trade caravans to neighboring provinces. The nice looking arrows bypassing in-between nations has to go.
Delenda Est IR Trade Routes
Edit-or else make the ability to construct ports a path on the military ideas group. But only for factions that have chosen a weak infantry path.
Last edited:
- 3
- 2
- 1
Nice to get something else on top of "just another mission tree" (don't get me wrong - I'm fine with them getting added, but as I often play smaller "generic" tags I'm even more thrilled by general new features) Still, out of all the Diadochi mission trees it was that one which interested me most - I already played as Thrace once, had a fun game...and now I have good reasons to come back one day
For the ports...I like the idea of allowing to expand them, but I share the concerns in regard to (nearly) free placement. Sounds like an invitation to either spam them everywhere or to heavily optimize them based on the local trade good. At least some kind of bonus for choosing geographical suitable locations like other have suggested should be considered (while the base cost for not caring should be steep)
Tying bigger ship sizes to port levels is good, but hopefully we will also get a manpower need for the navy.
Still, out of all the Diadochi mission trees it was that one which interested me most - I already played as Thrace once, had a fun game...and now I have good reasons to come back one day For the ports...I like the idea of allowing to expand them, but I share the concerns in regard to (nearly) free placement. Sounds like an invitation to either spam them everywhere or to heavily optimize them based on the local trade good. At least some kind of bonus for choosing geographical suitable locations like other have suggested should be considered (while the base cost for not caring should be steep)
Tying bigger ship sizes to port levels is good, but hopefully we will also get a manpower need for the navy.
- 1
- 1
I keep getting indications that the content devs have an interest in the classical period on a personal level. At some point can we hear from @Bratyn , @AreysAK , @Snow Crystal about their classicist tendencies? Maybe a list of their favorite primary sources? And if there are any workplace exchanges in Latin or Greek?
- 1
- 1
Since the 4th War event chain fires early, would the player have time for the Thracian or Greek missions before it's time for fight Antigonos. Similarly, what happens to the navy-building in the Asian mission if the 4th war has already been resolved and Lysimachos has occupied Asia Minor?
STOP! COOKIE TIME