Imperator - Development Diary - 18th of February 2019

  • 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.
It's nice but I fear the germanic tribes will simply conquer each other instead of push outward like they really did. On the balance side with south germany devoid of tribes the celts will be much less able to resist than they were. The push of the germanics into germany took most of the time frame of this game.


This. The migration feature cannot only be left for the player to abuse. It should be used by the tribes as often as possible.
 
It's nice but I fear the germanic tribes will simply conquer each other instead of push outward like they really did. On the balance side with south germany devoid of tribes the celts will be much less able to resist than they were. The push of the germanics into germany took most of the time frame of this game.

Yeah it would be nice to see some kind of pressure for tribal cultures to fragment and push outward rather than consolidate, which is the natural tendency in PDX and other strategy games. The strong usually get stronger and their neighbors fall to the blob. It would be kind of lame to play as Rome and arrive in a Gaul or Germania that is owned by 2 or 3 mega-tribes.
 
What about Kingdoms and Federations?
 
Yeah it would be nice to see some kind of pressure for tribal cultures to fragment and push outward rather than consolidate, which is the natural tendency in PDX and other strategy games. The strong usually get stronger and their neighbors fall to the blob. It would be kind of lame to play as Rome and arrive in a Gaul that is owned by 2 or 3 mega-tribes.
Tribes don't have natural aggressive expansion decay as can be seen in the devclash so they have a harder time to expand than Rome.

What about Kingdoms and Federations?
Probably only exist to make you a monarch or republic, other than migration and some tribesmen buff, why would you want to be a tribe.
 
germanywhere.PNG


It appears that some kind of "non Indo-European" culture group which includes Vasconian, Aquitanian, Nuragic etc has been added. For linguistic reasons, you might consider to remove both the Etruscan and Rhaetian cultures form the Italic culture group and insert them in this new one (they were related and non Indo-European). Of course if the choice of having both the Etruscans and the Rhaetians in the Italic group was due to gameplay balance (i.e. it's easier for the Romans to conquer Italy if the Etruscans are in their culture group because of the lessened aggressive expansion penalty) then never mind.

I feel like culture groups don't have to be strictly linguistic. After centuries of close interaction the Etruscans were a lot more like the Romans than they were like the Basques, one would think.
 
I feel like culture groups don't have to be strictly linguistic. After centuries of close interaction the Etruscans were a lot more like the Romans than they were like the Basques, one would think.

The Etruscan-Basque connection is a largely unsupported hypothesis anyway. It's not very good to connect up cultures based on what they're not. It is definitely true that Etruscans had a strong cultural connection to Greeks and Latins, and their material culture and writing system reflected a very deep cultural exchange.
 
These are not the modern Frisians. The area underwent great upheaval by around 400AD and was then resettled by Ingvaeones. I'm not sure what the link you've provided signifies, but the Frisian coast was sparely inhabited/uninhabited towards the late Roman period, providing a clear break from "Frisii" culture to "Old Frisian" culture. You can't definitively connect the Frisii to the Ingvaeones for that reason, even if it's highly likely they were connected to a neighbouring Germanic tribe.
Medieval Frisians =/= Frisii.
They just to name them Frisia, so I guess that's our point of dispute here. Tacitus mentions the Frisii and other authors mention them with Drusus's campaign (which started in 12 BC).
Those ancient authors used Ingvaeones to describe the North Sea inhabiting tribes.
 
This. The migration feature cannot only be left for the player to abuse. It should be used by the tribes as often as possible.
The whole migration mechanic may pretty much feel like an exploit, I actually wonder how they will balance it.
Pillaging seems very potent but probably very annoying to use because you need to move your army and press a button for every city.
 
The whole migration mechanic may pretty much feel like an exploit, I actually wonder how they will balance it.
What if factions (clans?) in a tribal society could just up and leave forming their own migration by taking pops from you?
 
What if factions (clans?) in a tribal society could just up and leave forming their own migration by taking pops from you?
It would nerf it a bit but it wont mean the victims of the migration tribes will be better of. Consider the pops that would migrate would likely be the pops you have conquered and if they start to take over other cities and turn these pops into migrants as well it may trigger a chain reaction which turn the whole World into migrant tribes.

Like a german tribe would still be able to take a few cities in gaul, turn them into migrants and use them to turn more cities in gaul into migrants and so on and eventually gaul would be completely empty of pops and the hord would simply turn into Italy and do the same.
 
The Etruscan-Basque connection is a largely unsupported hypothesis anyway. It's not very good to connect up cultures based on what they're not. It is definitely true that Etruscans had a strong cultural connection to Greeks and Latins, and their material culture and writing system reflected a very deep cultural exchange.
I wasn't saying that Etruscans and Basque were connected, I've just noticed that they created a large Non Indo-European culture group that includes both Basques and Sardinians/Corsicas (with whom the Etruscans had really strong material and cultural connections). For this reason I felt that, since Etruscans and Rhaetians as well are non I-E, they could be included in this group. Obviusly they can also make yet another culture group which includes Sardinians/Corsicans, Etruscans and Rhatians.
 
Migration can be initiated in any city that has at least 3 pops...
Migrating will turn up to 20 of the pops in the city into Light Infantry...
Any army that has more Migration cohorts than there are pops in its current location can settle in that location. This will turn all Migration units into Tribesmen of your culture and religion.
I am a bit confused: what happens to pops which do not belong to your primary culture and religion, when you click the migration button? I see three possible options:
  1. They stay in the province and the province remains under your control
  2. They stay and the province becomes uncolonized
  3. They are converted to light infantry as well
First option is bad, because it locks you out of the ability to move all of your tribe far away. Third option is really bad, because it effectively lets you to assimilate unlimited number of pops to your culture and religion instantly. Second option, then?
 
Questions:

1. If these "barbarian" faction are "peoples moving around" more than "states-in-places", you don't think that the classic names work better? Like "Saxons" instead of "Saxonia", a good compromise could be that they change the name from "Saxons" to "Saxonia" when they are centralized and stable if you want to use these names.

2. When I raise pops to migrate I can raise only pops of my culture? If yes, religion have a role on this? any other pop need to be converted before being part of the migrating tribe?

3. I noticed you splitted "Saxonia" in more faction that can form Saxonia at some point. Have you ever thought to do something like this for "Etruria"? Actually is described as a monolithic faction spanning from Tuscany to Corsica instead of an alliance of somewhat indipendent cities. Maybe Etruria can be described better with one of the alliance mechanics that are in the game.

A question not directly concerning this diary: I noticed in recently streams that Corsica is now without Carthaginian presence and with more Etrurian presence, why so? I'm curious about this choiche.
 
About the Burgundians :

The first mention of the Burgundians is by Plinius the Elder who spent several years in Germania in the 50s of the first century AD. He describes them as part of the Vandalias ( = Lugians) and to the west of the Vandals. Klaudios Ptolemaios also mentions them to the Vandals' west.
Toto autem mari ad Scaldim usque fluvium Germaniae accolunt gentes, haud explicabili mesnura: tam inmodica prodentium discordia est. Graeci et quidam nostri |XXV| oram Germaniae tradiderunt, Agrippa cum Raetia et Norico longitudinem DCXXXVI, latitudinem CCXLVIII, si coniectare permittitur, haut multum ora deerit Graecorum opinioni et longitudini ab Agrippa proditae. Germanorum genera quinque: Vandili, quorum pars Burgodiones, Varinnae, Charini, Gutones. alterum genus Inguaeones, quorum pars Cimbri, Teutoni ac Chaucorum gentes....


When it comes to literary depictions of their origin we have four early sources:
  • Res gestae, Ammianus Marcellinus
  • Historiae adversum paganos, Orosius
  • Passio sancti Sigismundi regis
  • Chronicon universale usque ad 741

The Res gestae is the first and mentions that the Burgundians had a connection to the Romans from which they derived their name (Ammianus Marcellinus XXVIII, 5):
9. For that ferocious nation, though from its earliest origin diminished by various disasters, yet continually revives, so that it might be considered as having been free from attacks for many ages. At last, after the emperor had considered and approved of one plan after another, it was finally determined to excite the Burgundians to attack them, the Burgundians being a warlike people, with an immense population of active youths, and therefore formidable to all their neighbours.

10. And the emperor sent repeated letters to their chiefs by some silent and trustworthy messengers, to urge them to attack the Allemanni at a certain fixed time, and promising that he likewise would cross the Rhine with the Roman legions, and attack their forces when in disorder, and seeking to escape the unexpected attack of the Burgundians.

11. The letters of the emperor were received with joy, for two reasons: first, because for many ages the Burgundians had looked upon themselves as descended from the Romans; and secondly, because they had continual quarrels with the Allemanni about their salt-pits and their borders. So they sent against them some picked battalions, which, before the Roman soldiers could be collected, advanced as far as the banks of the Rhine, and, while the emperor was engaged in the construction of some fortresses, caused the greatest alarm to our people

The next one is the Historiae adversum paganos (Hist. VII, 32):

The Burgundians, a new enemy with a new name, numbering, it is said, more than eighty thousand armed men, settled on the bank of the Rhine. In earlier times, when the interior of Germany had been subjugated by Drusus and Tiberius, the adopted sons of Caesar, the Burgundians were stationed at different frontier posts. Later they united to form a great people. They took their name from their stations, for the dwelling places at frequent intervals along the frontier are commonly called burgi. The power and destructiveness of their tribes is manifest even today from the condition of the Gallic provinces where they have now settled, their right to do so being undisputed. Nevertheless, through the providence of God they have all recently become Christians, embracing the Catholic faith and acknowledging obedience to our clergy, so that they live mild, gentle, and harmless lives, regarding the Gauls not as their subjects but in truth as their Christian brethren.

The far later Passio cites Fredegar as source; Fredegar mentions that the Langobardians originated in Scandinavia. The Scandinavian origin was, thus, only added later on to the Burgundian myth; one could speculate that it was because "being from Scandinavia was cool" among kingdoms that derived from such barbarian tribes. The Chronicon is even more recent than that so there's not so much to be found there. Those later sources cite the newer ones and adapt the history apropriate for their purpose.



Then there's Burgundarholmr which is a name first attested for the 9th century AD. It's extremely unlikely that the tradition would've been kept for so many years, especially as the mention was in a written source of Anglo-Saxon origin.
Burgundar (bṿhánt) also doesn't have a very exclusive meaning, as it just means high.


As neither archeology nor the early written sources point towards an origin from Scandinavia, I hope you'll reconsider having them there, @Trin Tragula @Arheo
Burgundians in Scandinavia is just a myth invented far later on.
 
Last edited:
It would be possible to prevent the germanic tribes from just conquering each other and forming 2 or 3 megatribes. If each tribe has a culture associated to it, when a tribes loses a province to a migration/war, they should be able to evacuate pops (some at least) of their culture as migrants (for free). Then they just have to settle them somewhere or add them to one of their provinces.

Also, there should be some link between the population of a city and the migration, as overpopulation was a usual driver for these. Maybe some kind of penalty to tribesmen happiness in cities with 30+pops, along with a discount to migration cost.

Two more questions regarding migration:
  1. When you migrate, do you take with you non-slave pops of other cultures? Because if you do, i can see a snowball when you settle to pick up free pops and then migrate again.
  2. Do barbarians work like a migration? So, will they settle and create a tag for themselves in an empty province of low population or a colonized province they occupy?
 
Please Paradox, as Northern Europe is in fact a guesswork by this time, could you add the Franks (or the Salians to be more precise) near the Frisians or anywhere else up in Europe? As we already have Anglia, Burgundia, Saxonia, Suebia, Teutonia, Langobardia, Guthonia, Dania... a simple Francia added on the map would be awesome!

Edit: I see there is a province named Salia near Frisia, but is empty like most Germany...

The Franks seem to be a later federation of tribes, a larger identity that didn't exist in earlier times. Since the Chauci and others disappear as the Franks appear, it's feasible that many of these smaller identities merged into the larger Frankish confederation.
 
Last edited: