Imperator - Development Diary - 5th of August 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.
I know the devs have stated that slave promotion should never cause you to lose a holding or trade good surplus, but I believe it's still an issue as of the latest beta version. I wouldn't mind if slaves were simply excluded from the whole promotion/poptype-ratio mechanic. Or at least give the player tools to lock down the number of slaves in critical territories.

Thats been my proposal all alonge. Take them out of the equation.

But I dont think that that limit of losing a tradegood is a good one. Youre in fact loosing trade surpluses. Yes, you might not lose the one you have, but slaves above the number will keep promoting, making it super hard for you to get new trade surpluses, impossible in many cases.

Plus, even the current system is broken. Slaves promote and make you lose trade surpluses xD

Had forgotten about that, what's the cost for it again?
I suppose it's a way to solve the issue, but I still worry that you'll have to dedicate all of your routes to food in large provinces, which would undermine the whole system.
If I am indeed understanding this correctly, and you do have to import more and more food as population grows, I think it'd be interesting for more pops to allow more trade routes.
How many pops per route would be up to balancing though.

100 political influence. 80-90 with inventions.

I dont think that it undermines the whole system. The system is not meant for you to create endless cities of 3 million people growing unlimited. Rome stagnated at 1 million never really grew over it again. You can either devote 20 trade routs to just food (which you wont find anyway, I dont think youll find that many grain. We'll you will if youre a big empire but), or you can accept that your city wont grow rapidly for ever and take other trade goods, and wait for additional trade goods to add another nice +10 food. I personally think that many of the capital surpluses bonuses are better than a massive city of 800 pops with no bonuses at all and just grain.
 
My concern here is a "heat death of the universe" type situation where there simlpy runs out of enough food by mid-late game to support your nation/armies anymore.
A "heat death of the universe" situation would mean an equalised production of food (or equal amount of pops) everywhere on the map-from northern Scotland to the Ganges River- which I think is not likely to happen (sorry I'm being pedantic :D). If they manage to fix the problems with slaves being promoted and tossed around too easily most of the problems present in the beta (too much manpower, no taxes and too few trade goods(which could be an issue with food)) won't bother us anymore.
 
One hundred step in the right direction. Great news, however probably it will need a lot of work and balance to reach a full enjoyable equilibrium, especially I'm not conviced by the various building.

I like the graphical aspects of the provinces, I like the idea about changing the landscape. Not only cities, but latifundia or mines should show up too visually
 
Will cities be granted/held (apon vassal annexation) allegiances to certain characters/factions like holdings taking up the amount of Items they can administrate and spend their character wealth on? Or is that too ahistorical?
 
Thanks for the news :)
I'm glad to see the dev diaries coming back on a weekly base.

The food system is a really great addition to the game.
Especially combined with the settlement/city/metropolis system.
I guess this is not polished yet, but it shoud give the feeling that some territories matter more than others.

A modicum of food will be produced by all territories depending on their terrain type. Food itself will be stored on a Province level, and consumed by the pops living within the Province, based on their type.

In the beginning of the game, most Provinces will likely be able to sustain their own population, however, as the population of territories increase and more cities are founded, they will start taxing the food supply of a Province greatly.

Still this frightens me a bit.
As for now, it looks like the only way to increase the general production of food, is either to build farms in settlement, or produce some good surplus with slaves.
Will it be enough to account for the massive pop growth we see in game?
The balance is going to be difficult, and if not perfect, I fear it will end as one of these mechaniscs where:
  • early game you don't care about food at all
  • end-game it becomes super critical, so you need to put every slaves in farms, generating frustration
That's why I thought this idea of having every pop (expect citizens) producing food was both easier to balance and perhaps more interesting gameplay-wise.
 
Last edited:
My concern here is a "heat death of the universe" type situation where there simlpy runs out of enough food by mid-late game to support your nation/armies anymore.
As long as you settlements can produce more food than they consume you should not reach such situation but it could take alot of micro in order to do so.

I worry that with very large metropoli (metropolises?) You simply won't be able to import enough food for the lack of trade routes available.
Or am I misunderstanding something here?
Most food will likely be produced locally as many provinces have atleast one food resource and that may be enough if you have enough slaves.

I know the devs have stated that slave promotion should never cause you to lose a holding or trade good surplus, but I believe it's still an issue as of the latest beta version. I wouldn't mind if slaves were simply excluded from the whole promotion/poptype-ratio mechanic. Or at least give the player tools to lock down the number of slaves in critical territories.
How would the promotion system work in such case? I could see simplify pops classes into free and unfree and that free pops could also produce goods since in reality slaves was not need to produce goods which could be done with free workforce at maybe higher efficiency since a free workforce have more reason to be productive than slaves.

Plus, even the current system is broken. Slaves promote and make you lose trade surpluses xD
Yes that is the issue with representing slaves being needed to produce goods, free workers should not simply leave the fields just because they have gained their freedom. In Victoria 2 you have both slaves and free workers producing goods so I don't see why it cant be done in Imperator: Rome as well.

If anything it should be something like this:
  • Free workers: More productive but you have little control over them and they don't like working in dangerous occupations like mines and will not like overcrowded areas
  • Slaves: Less productive but you have total control about there they are and work with
Taxes should come from all pops based on a city or province wealth rating with each pop type considering holding a part of the wealth, like citizens could be considered to hold 10 times as much wealth as a freemen who could be considered to hold 10 times as much wealth as a slave which mean 1 citizens will pay the same amount of taxes as 10 freemen and 1 freeman will pay the same amount of taxes as a slave which mean if your citizens get unhappy your tax income drop considerably but if you slaves get unhappy your tax may not change much at all assuming not unhappy slaves affect province wealth rating.
 
Last edited:
Additionally, if a Province Capital falls to an enemy, they will be able to use the food supply to prevent attrition for their own troops.

This statement has me confused a little bit. So does that mean we only have to capture the provincial capital in order to use the entire food resources in the province to feed our army? Or do we have to go around capturing every single territory in order to add it to the supply to prevent attrition?

Personally I think this mechanic would work a lot better if it was the former rather than the latter.
 
This statement has me confused a little bit. So does that mean we only have to capture the provincial capital in order to use the entire food resources in the province to feed our army? Or do we have to go around capturing every single territory in order to add it to the supply to prevent attrition?

Personally I think this mechanic would work a lot better if it was the former rather than the latter.
It clearly say that it is the province capital that need to be captured in order to feed the army.
 
It clearly say that it is the province capital that need to be captured in order to feed the army.

That was my initial assumption, especially with the blog saying

Sieges, blockades, and occupation will reduce the food production of a Territory, which, in the case of Provincial Capitals, will also reduce any imported food, eventually starving a Province of its food supply.

Then I was thinking maybe it meant that you need to occupy each individual territory along with the provincial capital in order for it to contribute to your food supply. Or maybe I'm just overthinking it haha
 
...categorization of Territories ... administrative units were known as Cities. As part of the redesign here, our collective noun for these will now be Territories.
A Territory can be assigned any one of the following categories:
  • Settlement: ... sparsely populated area of land ... will only support one building, but will have their own unique set of powerful buildings, so you can specialize them accordingly.
  • City: ... large bonus to population capacity... urban centers for your empire... will be able to support all the buildings... penalty to trade good production...
  • Metropolis: ... large number of pops... will improve living conditions for certain pop classes.

I like the diversification of territories towards resource production or urban development.
Cities may produce manufactures.
I think that the metropolis category is unnecessary (and wrong, a metropolis was the founder entity of a colony)
 
My concern here is a "heat death of the universe" type situation where there simlpy runs out of enough food by mid-late game to support your nation/armies anymore.

I dont get this, how would your nation grow to the point of starvation when growth is linked to food-exess ?

I can perhaps see a nation ravaged by war end up in a bad cycle of unrest and famine, where the food shortage constrains your from stompibg out the unrest and defend borders & vs bsrbarians / rebellions ... but if this happens, pops will die and migrate far away until the land can once again sustain its people.

... its interesting to consider acess to food as a new constraint on warfare alongside fold and manpower, especially on war-torn borderlands. Perhaps saturating provinces with many big armies for extended periods will cause starvation that creates lasting trouble with unrest / province loyalty .... such that you may want to limit your drain on that food even if you arnt worried about attrition.

Btw. Immagine full width heavy cav in defensive provice when you have plenty of food stored. The dorthraki in an open field, Ned.


Still this frightens me a bit.
As for now, it looks like the only way to increase the general production of food, is either to build farms in settlement, or produce some good surplus with slaves.
Will it be enough to account for the massive pop growth we see in game?
The balance is going to be difficult, and if not perfect, I fear it will end as one of these mechaniscs where:
  • early game you don't care about food at all
  • end-game it becomes super critical, so you need to put every slaves in farms, generating frustration

Dont forget food imports. Maybe these can be rebalanced in some way compared to local production, as it seems youl be able to peoduce with 10 or less slaves in farm settlements.

I highly doubt youll disregard food earlygame, gicen its interaction with supply/attrition and defensivness.

If you have are defending and have food, you can disregard supply to outmatch enemy width with confidence, and you can bidr your time behind your fort(s) for however long your food supply will last, with extra defensivness (=siege time) for each extra year of food storage.

Late in the game i think you will be able to disregard the food mechanic in many places and many wars. If youve got enough manpower, you can take the attrition and you can handle some brief starvation in fringe provinces.

... regarding dense central urbanized provinces late in the game, their food acess should be able to balance itself out without intervention through migration. It shouldnt be any worse than it is with pop cap currently. The food storage will serve as a grace period.

If it is any issue, adding migration-atraction modifiers onto negatice food income or less-than-a-year stored should easily fix it.
 
  • City: Cities have a large bonus to population capacity, and will act as focal urban centers for your empire. Cities will be able to support all the buildings you’ve grown accustomed to in the Cicero beta thus far, but will feel a lot more unique as a result of their scarcity. Cities will also have a penalty to trade good production - they will tend to consume, rather than create, resources.
What do u mean by cities have a penalty to trade good production? I don’t understand. I thought they will always produce 1 extra trade good that was selected in the province? Does that mean that each pop now has an upkeep on the trade goods?

It’s rather confusing for me haha, unsure what this whole trade production is about.
 
Good to read it.
But are there any plans to reduce the micromanagement. It is a bit annoying to build in every subunit
 
Good to read it.
But are there any plans to reduce the micromanagement. It is a bit annoying to build in every subunit
Yes better tools to deal with the micro would be nice and more stuff to make you care about cities and other things would be nice.