With all those areas I hope that game timeline will be extended, just to see how the syncretic Kushan Empire is implemented. ^^
Imperator - Development Diary - 1st of April 2019
- Thread starter Trin Tragula
- 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.
When’re we going to hear something about the Thracian/Balkan/Dacian tribes and their military traditions?
Hopefully this doesn't happen anytime soon.
It's absolutely crazy for the devs to spend time expanding the map further when the game mechanics could use a lot of work. The core mechanics, aside from mostly being ripped directly out of EU 4, mostly look alright, but let's not kid ourselves: this game has a lot of room for improvement in terms of mechanics. I love Paradox games, but like all 1.0 releases this is really looking quite lacking in the depth and mechanics department.
Tibet and the Tarim basin look like other areas similar to Scandinavia that really suffer from there simply being no lands nearby to settle in, forcing you to fight to expand. That's unfortunate for tribes, since then they can't really make use the migration mechanics. Really the only reason it's like this at the moment feels like it's because these regions are on the arbitrary edge of the map, there's perfectly habitable lands in at least Sweden and the Tarim basin that we should be able to colonize if we want to.
I have no desire to see China added. I really hope you guys at Paradox don't get sucked into that nonsense. It's not Imperator China, adding in China will only distract from the core focus of the game, which is obvious.
also Chinese interaction was fairly limited in this period with the regions already in the game. you don't lose much not having them in, to be honest
Does every single unpassable province start with a Barbarian Stronghold? Can for example the mountains on Sicily spawn Barbarians?
Considering how incredibly important trade has been in the dev clash, I'd be inclined to disagree. Having a partner to trade for something like iron, steppe horses, or elephants completely changes the game. Simply having the warring states in China would mean new trade options for everyone in Nepal and the Tarim Basin. Large powers in India or Persia would be able to trade with them, and even major powers on the Eastern Mediterranean would be able to trade with them. On the other hand, if a major power forms in China, then pretty much everyone on the Eastern 2/3rds of the map would be able to trade with China.
Depending on what goods China has available to buy, the effects of silk and other unique Chinese trade goods, could lead to the game feeling completely different if you have access to that. Even if there's nothing new or special there to buy, you'd still have another full market to sell goods to that is very unlikely to become a military threat in the near future unless you're in Nepal/Tarim. It's like being able to sell weapons to Rome without having to worry about being attacked in 50-100 years by a super power.
View attachment 467867
What are those areas of lighter grey, such the corridor between Khucha and kothan in the above map?
I mean, the darker grey represents areas with no population and the lighter ones 'barbarians"?
What are those areas of lighter grey, such the corridor between Khucha and kothan in the above map?
I mean, the darker grey represents areas with no population and the lighter ones 'barbarians"?
Last edited:
My point though is that such trade wasn't at all common in this period, especially because there just wasn't contact between those powers you're mentioning. Any trade between China and Indian states in the period was entirely indirect, and they were not trading with Persia. Moreover, China did not allow the trade of silk for many many centuries, if I remember correctly, Chinese silk wasn't meant to leave the empire for long after the end date of this game. Silk would have come from India, where its cultivation was very much developed.
The idea of China being some huge trading power for the West is anachronistic in this period, at most China would trade with some of the city-states around Tibet. That doesn't at all warrant its inclusion, considering it would more likely than not distort the entire political, economic, and military balance of the map.
I don't even see a reason not to have China in at launch. Tbh I feel really disappointed every time I look at the eastern part of the map. After six years, and they're still using the CK2 map.
to have China included as i said in my post above yours would distort the game entirely. China barely interacted with countries to the west directly in this period. While there was some (minor) trade, it was pretty insulated. I don't really want to see China pushing westward and invading India in this game.
While I understand your perspective in not wanting to see China invading westward into India, I don't think that would really be a problem if they implement it similar to the way Northern Germania is 'civilized' to a point and how they left Central Germania 'un-colonized' AND if they also create vast cultural division or difference to simulate the various states of the groups in China vying for control and hegemony.
In regards to your argument of trade, the inclusion of diplomatic and trade range in Imperator negates this argument as I see it likely China would not be able to trade outside of itself until it has progressed technologically or expanded through 'colonizing' provinces. In the event of China's inclusion, I could see a major event chain for the creation or further development of the Silk road or even an additional expansion focusing on Trade with revisions and inclusions for the Silk Road. This would have to be a series of events throughout the game however to simulate this growth rather than one event where the 'road' just starts up out of nowhere and is at its peak. On a side note, it would definitely be interesting and amusing to see how the Devs would implement the silk road. Are there only certain goods that can be traded? Are there regional goods? Etc.
If anything, to combat your argument about the prospect of China invading westward towards India, I would mention the state of Ming China in EU4. 'China' in EU4 rarely grows big and expands outside of its starting position, +/- the few countries in its direct sphere of influence. This is obviously in the case of the AI as Ming is quite formidable in the hands of a human, but that argument can be made for any country.
I guess what I'm saying is, it could be implemented and I would love to see it, but it NEEDS to be done right and have balance. I'm not in the camp that it NEEDS to be in the game, but it would be a welcome addition in my book to spice up gameplay. If China is added, I would agree with others in this discussion that it does NOT need to be one of the first expansions. Rather I would expect to see it somewhere around the 2nd-3rd year anniversary, MAYBE somewhere after the 1st year anniversary at the earliest.
Maybe this post and discussion will 'light a fire' for the Devs to think about China after the release.
Zhetone, I would love to continue this discussion if you wish.
Devs, love you guys! Can't wait for the 25th.
Well, obviously we do not even have a complete Horn of Africa in CK2, not to mention so many lakes which weren't in CK2.
There's also passable but uninhabitable land, right? We saw a few locations like that in Arabia in the Dev game. Do barbarians ever spawn there?
China during the start date was no huge overpowered empire. China at the start date was devided into many small nations fighting for power. So no, there would be no OP China in this game anyway. Maurya is way more powerful than any faction in China during the start date
