Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Imperator - Development Diary - 25th of February 2019

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Imperator: Rome 9049 Bug Reports 3692 Suggestions 2399 User Mods 675 Tech Support 516 Multiplayer 56 After Action Report (AAR)
Show only dev responses
TheDungen said:
I am so tired of this argument. What's the point of calling it historical if everythign that happens is just random. The point is to try to make subtle changes to history and how those over time affects the outcome. What if Carthage beats rome is an intresting enough scenaro without the danes becoming the dominant people of Sweden.

Real history is a complex sequence of events and forgive me for wanting to step into them and make a change at a later date and wanting the world to behave somewhat consistently up until that point. Take Rome for an example, what if the Gracchi had suceeded is a great alternate history, but the Gracchi wont even exist since they were not nobiles at the start of imperator.
Click to expand...

This just sounds like you want historical bookmarks, and that you simply find some counterfactuals more interesting than others. I don't feel that "Carthage defeating Rome" is any more likely than "the danes dominating Scandinavia", particularly considering how little we know about that time period in Scandinavia. I also don't believe that a counterfactual being more likely makes it more fun or engaging - quite the opposite.

I don't want to be able to predict what's going to happen every time I start a campaign, with the only variable being the role I choose to play. A game that proceeds along largely historical lines when human players aren't present is a dull game. Perhaps this just means that Paradox should bring back the historical bookmarks they had in CKII, but it certainly doesn't mean that they should start arbitrarily forcing AI down certain paths.

In any case, if what you want is closer to Victoria II then you're not explaining your point very well, because Victoria II has - in my experience - been a weird counterfactual machine.
 
Last edited:
I like the fact that families are not represented by a tree, but rather by a list of characters.

IMO, it's very accurate since families in Antiquity were not a collection of a few individuals related by blood as it is today, but more a political entity.

It is especially true in Rome, where the families, or gens, could be composed of dozens, sometimes hundreds of individuals (like the Julii, the Metelli, or the Claudii...), that were very loosely related, but all shared an alleged common ancestor (sometimes so far back in time that he could actually be semi-legendary).

This is why the use of the cognomen became very important in the later times of Rome, to actually differentiate between sub-entities within the gentes that would be more like current day families.
 
Last edited:
Trin Tragula said:
More people. A larger pool of characters to use for positions as generals, admirals, governors, ministers, etc.
Click to expand...
That's a pity. Historically local rulers and notables were kept in place, not as a pool of talents, but because they held power in newly conquered territories and would help administrate them - at the cost of limiting centralized control. I wish we could see similar trade offs here.
 
lemmox said:
This just sounds like you want historical bookmarks, and that you simply find some counterfactuals more interesting than others. I don't feel that "Carthage defeating Rome" is any more likely than "the danes dominating Scandinavia", particularly considering how little we know about that time period in Scandinavia. I also don't believe that a counterfactual being more likely makes it more fun or engaging - quite the opposite.

I don't want to be able to predict what's going to happen every time I start a campaign, with the only variable being the role I choose to play. A game that proceeds along largely historical lines when human players aren't present is a dull game. Perhaps this just means that Paradox should bring back the historical bookmarks they had in CKII, but it certainly doesn't mean that they should start arbitrarily forcing AI down certain paths.

In any case, if what you want is closer to Victoria II then you're not explaining your point very well, because Victoria II has - in my experience - been a weird counterfactual machine.
Click to expand...
While I would not dislike more bookmarks my point is I want history to proceed along it's path until affected by a system I have disturbed. That is it will change over time as rings spread outwards from the changes I make but it's not random from the get go.

And I fully understand not everyone wants this but I very much do, thus making it an option is more along the lines of what I am suggesting.

WomboCombo said:
It's called historical because it takes place at a point in history. It's not a history simulator. It's still a video game before it would ever be a historically accurate "what if" simulator.
Click to expand...
I would argue that without history acting as boundary conditions on the sandbox it is not historical as much as a blob game with a history inspired paint job. About as Historical as somone who painted some ancient kings on their van.

Or the movie 300, it is clearly inspired by an event in history but no one would call it a historical movie.
 
Last edited:
Personnaly,i think the game should have game rule menu as CK2 and HOI4 has,with many options the player doesn't like can disable.Personnaly,i'm not really a fan of the civil war mechanic.So if there is an option to keep playing as the resulting nation instead of an hard game over,i really appreciate it.However,since it make the game easier,the option should disable achievements.But since Johan is against this type of feature,we will never see it sadly.If Doomdark and Podcat have do that for CK2 and HOI4,why you won't make it for your other games?
I don't understand that,personnaly.
Edit:My post is a response to The Dungen post,i don't want to hijack the thread.
Cordially.
 
Last edited:
Interesting DD and visually the game looks great but practically it seems in all likelihood all conquered foreign families will be much better off being exiled or killed with the exception of any genius commanders. It seems like there will be no hard choices there which is a shame.
 
Do adopted families, refugees, etc of conquered powers provide you with a cb for their old lands? Perhaps allowing you to restore their state as a vessel or some such?
 
CyberianK said:
Would be interesting to know if a Civil War happens and you win it if you can also get rid of the families who started the Civil War.

Might be a good way to occasionally streamline your Empire. Insult some and fight a CW like when you can't expand because AE has to tick down and such. Get rid of the weeds occasionally.
Click to expand...
That's literally what Groogy did during the Dev Clash, tricked out the Civil War to get rid of all disloyal characters.
 
Es57 said:
This is why the use of the cognomen became very important in the later times of Rome, to actually differentiate between sub-entities within the gentes that would be more like current day families.
Click to expand...

In the game it is very possible for families to have members that are not directly related to eachother. They will however inherit their cognomen from their father (though not all families may have one, it will only be inherited once earned), this means that what you describe can happen naturally. :)
 
Dark Hobbit said:
That's literally what Groogy did during the Dev Clash, tricked out the Civil War to get rid of all disloyal characters.
Click to expand...

AFAIK we will generate a minimum set of characters if you run out of characters; otherwise you'd be quite handicapped if everyone died and noone had any surviving children.

And doing a Civil War to get rid of disloyal characters is a 6D-chess move that isn't very... practical :p:D
 
Numahr said:
That's a pity. Historically local rulers and notables were kept in place, not as a pool of talents, but because they held power in newly conquered territories and would help administrate them - at the cost of limiting centralized control. I wish we could see similar trade offs here.
Click to expand...

We already know from the DDs that pops that are administrated by same culture and religion governors will be happier, so it's kind of simulated. Does seem to be a bit easy right now to just assimilate everyone however.
 
Kaampper said:
The one thing they are most known for, apart from cooking diner , is having children, which is what they will do in this game.
They are very usefull for that, more prominent at it then most men even.
Click to expand...
Actually you can see in the dev Clash that several countries, most noticable Carthage use women for roles such as generals.

devoncop said:
Interesting DD and visually the game looks great but practically it seems in all likelihood all conquered foreign families will be much better off being exiled or killed with the exception of any genius commanders. It seems like there will be no hard choices there which is a shame.
Click to expand...
Pops rather want to be ruled by a govenour who share their religion and Culture so that is a reason to recruit foreign families and families without Money may not matter at all or not much so you could probably scorn useless families without any major risks. More families basically directly translate to more characters and more characters directly translate to more capable people.​
 
I feel like Scandinavia really needs a few more provinces around it's Northern areas just so someone who wants to play in the area has a little more space to settle and grow into. A few of these map edge areas have very few expansion options purely by virtue of being on the edge of an arbitrary map.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back