I can't really add anything to this. Before they were big, I think it was justified but not anymore. Not at all.
Imperator - Development Diary #14 - 27th of August 2018
- 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.
Imo one consul is alright, i wouldnt want to play some Ancient Rome Dating Simulator for an hour every time i want to click the "declare war" button.
It hurts a lot to see the Tribunis Plebis being named by the Consul. The plebian's counterpower to the consul is named by the consul, really?
Well, as far as I remember a lot of those office were named by the senate or a vote. Not by a dictator, sorry, a consul.
Well, as far as I remember a lot of those office were named by the senate or a vote. Not by a dictator, sorry, a consul.
This is a bit bland but every PDX game was 'bland' at launch, but still fun. Now Imperator looks bland because we're used to the monstrosities that are CK2 and EU4. I will probably be buying the game on release and will wait for the first DLC before passing real judgement on whether or not to keep playing. If the DLCs suck, then I'll really get disillusioned with the game.
Clearly since I'm being reasonable and not complaining about how ridiculously important two consuls are over functional UI, balanced content and good graphics and fleshed out base mechanics, I'm a Paradox fanboy
Clearly since I'm being reasonable and not complaining about how ridiculously important two consuls are over functional UI, balanced content and good graphics and fleshed out base mechanics, I'm a Paradox fanboy
I don't know guys; this single design decision might just ruin this classical antiquity strategy game.
Better go back into aether and wait for another game that can appeal to my immersion-based desires.
Just let me know when that game is released
All humor aside, for me personally having two consuls would be fun to manage and an interesting mechanic to have to take into account when playing as Rome or in dealing with Rome. But it being not in the baseline game is not something I will be too worried about.
Paradox games as a whole get better over time. Take Victoria 2 at lunch for example; it was the later two expansions that added what people love so much about the game.
A yellow Prussia was honestly pretty game breaking.
So I can imagine there will be a DLC that the devs as a whole can focus their energy on (As opposed to creating an entire game with every possible feature and desire accounted for) and give you romanophiles that nice does of realism in your video game.
Personally I am inclined to see more of Egypt and that sweet sweet Nlie.
Its kinda like the 1920s for me.
Look do continue with the suggestions! Passion is great when it comes to designing a project.
Just do remember that the developers (Those guys actually taking the time to make these games) are probably passionate too and I guarantee they do have plans to expand the individual aspects of this game that need depth.
*Cough Cough* Navy Warfare *Cough Cough*
Of course I might just be a giant fan boy and therefore my opinion entirely invalid, but I can live with that
Better go back into aether and wait for another game that can appeal to my immersion-based desires.
Just let me know when that game is released
All humor aside, for me personally having two consuls would be fun to manage and an interesting mechanic to have to take into account when playing as Rome or in dealing with Rome. But it being not in the baseline game is not something I will be too worried about.
Paradox games as a whole get better over time. Take Victoria 2 at lunch for example; it was the later two expansions that added what people love so much about the game.
A yellow Prussia was honestly pretty game breaking.
So I can imagine there will be a DLC that the devs as a whole can focus their energy on (As opposed to creating an entire game with every possible feature and desire accounted for) and give you romanophiles that nice does of realism in your video game.
Personally I am inclined to see more of Egypt and that sweet sweet Nlie.
Its kinda like the 1920s for me.
Look do continue with the suggestions! Passion is great when it comes to designing a project.
Just do remember that the developers (Those guys actually taking the time to make these games) are probably passionate too and I guarantee they do have plans to expand the individual aspects of this game that need depth.
*Cough Cough* Navy Warfare *Cough Cough*
Of course I might just be a giant fan boy and therefore my opinion entirely invalid, but I can live with that
EU: Rome's offices were also "appointments for life", but a year or two into their tenure other people would ask you for their offices. Your choices were: accept and probably not have an ideal office holder, reject the proposal creating discontent and support for populists, preventively rotate offices every now and then, so nobody is holding them for too long and you get to choose. If it's anything like it I think it's an ok system, even if there aren't periodic elections for each office.
Please forgive my ignorance
But could someone explain why people want 2 consuls instead of 1? e.g. What gameplay would we be missing out on?
Thanks
But could someone explain why people want 2 consuls instead of 1? e.g. What gameplay would we be missing out on?
Thanks
'Immersion'. That's literally all of what they're complaining about. And then when EU4 released immersion packs, they complained about those too.
Moral of the story: Paradox fans will always find something to complain about.
As soon as I read it, I thought something very much like this.
Here is what I think would be a great way to include two consuls without radically changing everything:
The consul on top is still named the same, the "candidate" has their name changed to consul as well. The one on top has a fasces symbol beside his name or portrait. The consul without the fasces will receive it in 5 years, unless he meets with some tragedy or something...
And I agree with you that the second consul should have some heavy influence. They could probably achieve this by having legislation that he agrees or disagrees with having either positive or negative percentage modifiers added to votes on the legislation, to model his influence in a way.
As for the five year service times, I actually agree with their decision on this. One month holding fasces is too short and will feel gamey and strange. Even one year is too short. With five years you can't just "wait it out a month" to work with your best/favored consul.
OK, so DLC #3 will be named Cursus Honorum and will add a special government for Rome with an extra Consul and elaborate rules for advancing through the offices.
I would totally buy that!
I would totally buy that!
Completely ruins immersion. Cause, you see, I must admit, I'm very bad at history. I literally remember just one thing from school about the Roman Republic. One thing. That one thing is that Rome had two Consuls. So by having one the game disagrees with literally 100% of my knowledge on the subject.
Oh yes. Shame on us for expecting a full game in exchange of a full game price, and not a skeleton serving as a basis for dozens of DLCs like what we've seen with HOI4 and Stellaris. Clearly we have no reason to be worried.
I'm indifferent to the contents of this DD but with everyone I read I have a feeling that the brevity and the way the diary is written saps a little more of my enthusiasm for this game.
I'm not gonna complain about the dual Consulship like everybody else (but I do agree with them). What I am the most displeased with, is that this one Consul sits in office for 5 years, when in EU Rome I, it was only for 1 year. (And it's also historicly correct) (EU: Rome I: And you still had two little people in Consulship... many things required to be an ex-consul to work, like leading an army) I would understand upping it to 2 years, maybe stretching it to 3 years. But 5 years is just weird... Why not have an ordinary republic for 4 years instead?....
I don't want much less historical accuracy for a little more "fun".
Make the historical things fun in the first place. I want to play fun "historical" games by Paradox.
I don't want much less historical accuracy for a little more "fun".
Make the historical things fun in the first place. I want to play fun "historical" games by Paradox.
Last edited:
I am disappointed to see that the two Counsel System (Something that distinguished Rome from other states and contributed to their success) has been discarded. I am fine with extending the terms to 5 years, as 1 year would be a bit too short and as Johan said, it would make the characters feel pointless, but having only one counsel feels lazy and is a massive oversimplification that removes what made Rome special. I am also disappointed with the fact that the position of Dictator appears to have been left out. I am very concern what this will mean for the other notable dual Monarch state, Sparta. In short, after reading this, it feels like this will only be fleshed out through the numerous DLC that is sure to come out, a prospect I am not looking forward to, because if they have to simplify Rome of all nations in the base game, what will this mean for other lesser nations?
Considering that Rome 2 Total War has recently implemented both a dual counsel system and a dictator system in the Rise of the Republic campaign (As well as having a better representation of the cursus honorum in my opinion), I see no reason to endorse this simplification if a total war game does it better.
Considering that Rome 2 Total War has recently implemented both a dual counsel system and a dictator system in the Rise of the Republic campaign (As well as having a better representation of the cursus honorum in my opinion), I see no reason to endorse this simplification if a total war game does it better.
Oh... the systems seems so streamlined that much nuance and flexibility is actually lost. Of course, it's still early days and the developers still have good time to have a re-think. Especially the appointment of officials in the Roman Republic to serve for life is a really blunt solution.
One question about the details, though: will the laws enacted be named dynamically according to the official responsible for them (either the consul or more properly the official to whose category it belongs), instead of being statically known under the names they had in 'real history'? If so, I sure hope that the developers know how to name the laws through the adjectival (feminine-form) construction of the presiding official's nomen gentilicium (and in cases of similarly named laws, also the cognomen).
And who on earth is vulnerarius? What office of the Roman state does that simulate? Source references please.
One question about the details, though: will the laws enacted be named dynamically according to the official responsible for them (either the consul or more properly the official to whose category it belongs), instead of being statically known under the names they had in 'real history'? If so, I sure hope that the developers know how to name the laws through the adjectival (feminine-form) construction of the presiding official's nomen gentilicium (and in cases of similarly named laws, also the cognomen).
And who on earth is vulnerarius? What office of the Roman state does that simulate? Source references please.
Last edited: