Imperator - Development Diary - 13th of May 2019
- Thread starter Johan
- 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.
How is this a good trade-off? I'm honestly confused. Losing 5 pops is bad, losing centralization is also bad? As far as I've figured out, higher centralization only gives the clan chiefs fewer retinues, which is a good thing, considering they're really hard and resource demanding to keep loyal? Would love some info on why a tribe would want low centralization.
Wasn't the first triumvirate more like an alliance between powerful people and not a government?
Lower centralization allows you to become a migratorial tribe, which allows you to migrate with your nation.
If you're going to keep adding features that require mana points, can you make it more so that the player can influence the amount of mana they get? Depending on each person's play style, there's usually 1 or 2 mana categories that never have enough. And having a weak ruler absolutely kills you for the next 50 years in terms of being able to do anything.
For example, they could design a system where a republican nation gets two rulers and you get mana from the best stats between them, or one in which you can compensate for your heir’s bad stat in a monarchy by marrying them to a spouse who is good at that.
The Co-Consul feature particularly pleases me, as it enhances historic accuracy. Thank you.
They didn't say it would be difficult, but that they didn't think of a fun way to implement them. Now they did think of a way so they added them.
Is it possible for you to add more keybindings, for example to de-select units when multiple units are selected and opening the macro builder like it is in EU4?
I still dont think it adds anything to the game other than a massive buff to rome. But since Monarchies get the same buff through consorts, well, it aadds nothing to the game other than flavour.
If you click on the hand symbol next to the diplomatic option you'll see why the different factions are voting as they are, and being friend with a faction leader makes 25% more of the factions senate members vote with you.
Will Dual-Rulers also available for Stratocratic Monarchy (Spartan Diarchy) and Oligarchic Republic (Carthage Suffete's) , eventually?
I want to mention some historical innacuracies I've seen in the game. These are all in relation to religion.
First, Rome and the rest of Italy are considered Hellenistic. I'm very sure this is wrong, though Roman religion was similar to the Hellenic one, but also very different. First off a lot of gods were more warlike, including Jupiter/Zeus, Bellona/Athena, and Aphrodite/Venus, just to name a few. This was across the entire pantheon, and Mars was a lot less of a comic book villain than Ares. The warlikenes wasn't the only difference either, PLuto not only being the god of the underworld, but precious metals, gemstones, and mining. The main exceptions to this rule seem to be Hermes and Apollo, but that's because of another thing wrong with religion.
Rome very often absorbed other religions. Most notably with Greece, but this also happened with many gallic and germanic religions too. This isn't represented in game, and I believe it should be, as its a large part of how Rome grew so large and how Rome conquered new territory.
Final thing, the generalisation of "Druidic". I understand there are many different religions that can fit under this term, and that it would be too complex to document them all in the game, but still, this is so generic it groups together hugely different religions from Gaul, Britain, Northern Italy, and Illyria. Though all focus on druids as their spiritual leaders, they all worshipped vastly different pantheons, and it is a huge misnomer to label them all ast the same thing.
These are pretty vast oversights for one of the main mechanics of the game. I hope you devs can look at this and revise this, because such historical innaccuracy is unusual for you, and I know that is something you strive to put into your games.
First, Rome and the rest of Italy are considered Hellenistic. I'm very sure this is wrong, though Roman religion was similar to the Hellenic one, but also very different. First off a lot of gods were more warlike, including Jupiter/Zeus, Bellona/Athena, and Aphrodite/Venus, just to name a few. This was across the entire pantheon, and Mars was a lot less of a comic book villain than Ares. The warlikenes wasn't the only difference either, PLuto not only being the god of the underworld, but precious metals, gemstones, and mining. The main exceptions to this rule seem to be Hermes and Apollo, but that's because of another thing wrong with religion.
Rome very often absorbed other religions. Most notably with Greece, but this also happened with many gallic and germanic religions too. This isn't represented in game, and I believe it should be, as its a large part of how Rome grew so large and how Rome conquered new territory.
Final thing, the generalisation of "Druidic". I understand there are many different religions that can fit under this term, and that it would be too complex to document them all in the game, but still, this is so generic it groups together hugely different religions from Gaul, Britain, Northern Italy, and Illyria. Though all focus on druids as their spiritual leaders, they all worshipped vastly different pantheons, and it is a huge misnomer to label them all ast the same thing.
These are pretty vast oversights for one of the main mechanics of the game. I hope you devs can look at this and revise this, because such historical innaccuracy is unusual for you, and I know that is something you strive to put into your games.
I'm surprised in a positive way by this DD. It looks far better than I expected.
Maybe the negative reviews are doing their job? It seems that the Devs took a lesson...
Maybe the negative reviews are doing their job? It seems that the Devs took a lesson...
Check out the screenshot of Carthage under Power Base & Civil Wars, seems like Suffete and Co-Suffete are already in. Is listed in the power base tool tip.
Not really, this is what Paradox always does. The listen to feedback and implement what they think would add to the game. I'm not really surprised and neither should anyone else that Paradox listened to the community, because they typically do. There was no lesson to give.
Your knowledge is a bit off. The triumvirate consisted of Pompey and Crassus, who were indeed co-consuls, with Julius Caeser who was a General/Goveneror/Proconsul. However, Crassus was killed during the Battle of Carrhae, following his multiple tactical errors. When Crassus died, it essentially put Caeser and Pompey against each other, because there was no third person to balance out the power scales. Caesar planned on running for Consul 'in absentia' because he was an active General and Governor, who could not enter the city and run for Consul. Since he was a Governor, he had legal immunity and did not want to relinquish it since he could be prosecuted for crimes he had committed. A law was passed allowing Caeser to run in absentia, but the Senate was rather upset about it. The conservative faction found some vagueness in a law, and claimed that Caeser's command expired earlier than it was supposed to. The Senate then demanded Caeser step down, Caeser said no. Eventually, the Senate passed a bill making the Consuls in absolute power, and they both relinquished power to Pompey. When Caeser learned of this, he marched over the Rubicon with his legion (considered an act of war). Eventually, Caeser defeats Pompey, and he himself is appointed dictator.
Funnily enough, the Senate preempts any request he might have had in this case and just gives him it under the questionable logic that they could figure something out by the time his term was up...
These features are a long way in the making. If anything the negative reviewers were a little quick to condemn everything and anything. Some of them should really apologize. But of course nobody will ever do.
