Imperator - Development Diary 11th of February 2019

[Mike6979]

Kukumarro, Judea was not part of the Roman Empire, it was a client state with a puppet king. The people of the state, in game terms, overthrew their puppet ruler, appointed a regent, and attacked Rome.

Question for devs, How will leagues be shown in game? The Achaean league and Aetolian league or a revived Athenian league seem like they do not fit into these frameworks?

 

[vicbus]

Yes it take time to integrate a subject.

​

I undertand it takes time. I'm asking if it takes more time to integrate larger countries and if population and/or territory is taken into account to determine how long it takes.

 

[ac566]

Civil Wars break out if 33% of the armed forces of your country is in the hands of disloyal Generals OR if 33% of your population resides in disloyal provinces. A Civil War breaks your country in two parts, locked in war until one capitulates.

Does this mean if I have a disloyal general with 20% of the armed forces loyal to him and another general with 13%, that there will only be 1 rebellion? If so, I'd like to argue for splitting the country into multiple states all at war with each other, like what was historically likely to happen. There could be a threshold for the minimum amount of troops before a general could independently be in the war. Also rather than a timer I think it'd be nice for the war timer to be set with mtth based on the likelihood, that way you have a chance for a more powerful revolt.

 

[stryder593]

Does this mean that rebellions and civil wars break out as soon as (Or a set time after) these values are reached, and only then or can they happen at higher values too? How is the strength of these uprisinigs calculated; for Civil Wars is it simply a matter of the troops of the disloyal general turning against you? In other words, how strong can they be?

On the live stream I watched, it showed a ticker in months until the civil war spawned.

 

[DominusNovus]

@Trin Tragula

If Feudatories must be of the same cultural group, how is Southern Italy handled for Rome? Many became Socii, even though they were Greek, rather than Italian.

Also, what happens to a Vassal Tribe that civilizes?

 

[Riekopo]

Why do all the characters have the same face?

 

[sortulv]

Also, what happens to a Vassal Tribe that civilizes?

From the DD:

Requirements:
Most subject types have requirements that the overlord and the future subject need to fulfill in order for the relationship to be possible. These requirements are only checked on creation, but when they are no longer true (if a subject of a type that is required to be under a certain size should outgrow that size for instance), the relationship will be harder to maintain. Friction will start to manifest in the form of regular events between the two.

I assume that this means that you'll start getting friction events...

 

[Trin Tragula]

In the case of tribal vassals no longer being tribal the relationship will in fact be transformed into a tributary one immediately

 

[Andrzej2]

"Rebellions break out if 20% of your population resides in disloyal foreign culture provinces. "

This doesn't feel very historical. This makes it that small nations can not rebel on their own against a big empire, only in synchrony with other cultures all revolting at the same time. Take the Jewish revolts against the romans for instance, they didn't happen in synchrony with other revolts.

Wouldn't it make more sense to have some kind of meter for the organization of a revolt associated to each unhappy culture, and give them a chance to spontaneously revolt if above a threshold of organization (with more and better equipped troops the higher the organization) with a higher chance due to external problems the overlord could have like civil war or being at war with a comparetively powerful nation (now it's the time to strike!)) and lower chance due to military presence in the area.

I guess according to new casual friednly policy of paradox everything should be clear, simple and predictable. That's why we have exact numbers stated and even after reaching them we have yet another countdown bar towards war.

They call it good for players who won't be exposed to "unfair" randomness but for me it's boring. Eu4 system that gives us plenty time to prepare and tells us when exacly revolt will fire is the worst of all and it's sad that Imperator goes even further in that direction.


I agree that general or province if angry enough should be able to rebel even when overall disloyalty is below those 20% and 33%. It would make things more lively. Of course still important factor for starting rebellion/civil war should be their chances of victory.


I also don't like the fact that there is a clear division that only foreign culture can rebel for independence. According to this Alexander's Empire would never split up becouse diadochis would choose civil war only not separation.

Ambitious characters, even when they are of ruling culture, should be able to seek creation of their own kingdom. Maybe seeking independence should be allowed only for characters with ambitious/greedy trait. So it won't be too common but still possible for certain power hungry individuals.

 

[Wagonlitz]

I guess according to new casual friednly policy of paradox everything should be clear, simple and predictable. That's why we have exact numbers stated and even after reaching them we have yet another countdown bar towards war.

They call it good for players who won't be exposed to "unfair" randomness but for me it's boring. Eu4 system that gives us plenty time to prepare and tells us when exacly revolt will fire is the worst of all and it's sad that Imperator goes even further in that direction.


I agree that general or province if angry enough should be able to rebel even when overall disloyalty is below those 20% and 33%. It would make things more lively. Of course still important factor for starting rebellion/civil war should be their chances of victory.


I also don't like the fact that there is a clear division that only foreign culture can rebel for independence. According to this Alexander's Empire would never split up becouse diadochis would choose civil war only not separation.

Ambitious characters, even when they are of ruling culture, should be able to seek creation of their own kingdom. Maybe seeking independence should be allowed only for characters with ambitious/greedy trait. So it won't be too common but still possible for certain power hungry individuals.

I couldn't agree more. Predictability gets boring fast.

 

[DominusNovus]

In the case of tribal vassals no longer being tribal the relationship will in fact be transformed into a tributary one immediately

Thanks. I don’t suppose there’s any way to diplomatically establish a different typw of subject relationship, other than letting the current one end and establishing a new one?

Also, any info on Greek Feudatories for the Romans? Maybe Rome has a tradition that allows them some more flexibility in this regard?

That said, I’m thinking a very valid strategy for Rome is to cut every Italic state down to one city in Italy, turn them into feudatories, and then feed them foreign culture territory.

Also, another question: several of these subject types don’t use diplomatic slots. Are they completely free in that regard (like EU4 colonial nations) or do they use one join slot (like EU4 trade leagues)?

Edit: Just to add a citation that not all socii were Italic:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socii_navales

 

[Tus3]

As Satrapies require the Persian Ideas, does that mean that the Seleucids can't have Satrapies?

The restriction is on the subject, not the overlord

But then the Parthians or someother new big Persian empire can't create satrapies in India or the Levant.
Or are they supposed to first conquer the place and then release them as satrapies?

 

[Gwayne]

Man, you talk to the wrong guy. @Paland0 has given bucketloads of proof for his position.

There was no reference in the statement in the post ;-)

Also as said, the proof is hard to get from that timeframe. But I am sure that if the information is correct Paradox will look at it.

 

[Gwayne]

Look at my signature. I've posted archeological material quite some time ago.

Interesting and thank you.

 

[Velemera Teraco]

Looking Very Cool!

 

[zhangjunOrigins]

Looks great.

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

@Trin Tragula

If Feudatories must be of the same cultural group, how is Southern Italy handled for Rome? Many became Socii, even though they were Greek, rather than Italian.

Also, what happens to a Vassal Tribe that civilizes?

Hmm, I wonder if this is why Naples is owned territory rather than feudatory? Oh and there were non-Italian "feudatories" outside Italy too, like Rhodes.

 

[Phasma]

Can tributaries who have the same "protector" declare war on each-other?

For exemple, Judea declares war on Samaria: Is it possible and if yes, will Phrygia protect Samaria against it's other tributary?