Imperator - Development Diary #7 - 9th of July 2018

  • 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.
Those are, in fact, most probably neutral nouns: Citizens, Freemen, Tribesmen and Slaves are inclusive words which potentially all include hermaphroditic men, women and wers. That is why they aren't called "Female Citizens", "Hermaphroditic Freemen" or "Male Tribesmen".
That was literally not my point at all and I find it funny how you removed all the actual points I was making. Freemen should get a male icon because it primarily represents the population from which Manpower/soldiers are taken and women didn't do a whole lot of soldiering. Citizen should have a male icon because many nations from the period either barred or heavily restricted citizenry for it's women and slaves should get a male icon because it presumably represent slaves doing mostly hard-labour.

I was making a point about the icons and not the naming.

Ah, yes... I understand it better. Icons might perhaps had ideally represented families?
Might be a better idea if women were used in a population growth icon seeing how creating the next generation was considered their most important duty in most cultures.
 
I was making a point about the icons and not the naming.
Yep. I didn't get it, sorry. It wasn't clear, beside in the very last significant sentence, that for whatever reason I didn't took enough account.

Still, being for icons or for labels, your arguing follow the idea that women shouldn't be represented, rather than the idea that women are represented by Citizens, Freemen, Tribesmen and Slaves, regardless of their icon... So I feel that my point stand.

Might be a better idea if women were used in a population growth icon seeing how creating the next generation was considered their most important duty in most cultures.

Is there such a population growth concept in Rome? Would it need an icon? Anyway, what you suggest might be a funny idea for species reproducing by parthenogenesis, in Stellaris for example. It would however be a worse idea for Rome whose main species reproduce sexually and whose societies granted a significant importance to both wermen and women in order to raise and educate (what I presume you mean, by "create") the next generation. Pedants and pederasts were quite commonly wers.

And, albeit I disagree with the cliché you suggest, which is way too much exaggerated (Spartan women main duty was indeed to give birth to warriors, and paradoxically they were quite more free than most other Hellenic women, but it isn't the case of all women, honouring gods was deemed a more important duty for Roman women than "creating" next generations), I can agree with its corollary: in many cultures, women had more important duty than "creating the next generation". Which is enough to understand why it would be, in my opinion, erroneous to do as you suggest.
 
Last edited:
Yep. I didn't get it. Still, being for icons or for labels, your arguing weren't much convincing
Well you could, I dunno, give actual arguments explaining how I'm wrong.


Is there such a population growth concept in Rome?
Yes, of course, as shown in multiple dev diaries and as can be expected from this pop-system. I mean just imagine if it was non-existent, the world would be basically static/degenerating over time.
Would it need an icon?
Maybe if it's, outside your pop tooltip, also in a ledger or interface it could be useful.

Anyway, what you suggest might be a funny idea for species reproducing by parthenogenesis, in Stellaris for example. It would however be a worse idea for Rome whose main species reproduce sexually and whose societies granted a significant importance to both wermen and women in order to raise and educate the next (what you call "create") generation.
Women in Athens were basically confined to the house, Spartan women enjoyed more rights but were most prominently valued for being the mothers of Spartan men. The status of Roman women was highly dependent on the time-period though they too were particularly valued and had their prominence based on the Roman men they were the daughter, wife and most importantly, the mother of. Fertility/Marriage/Childbirth was also most often associated with women, such as in religion with Isis, Hera/Juno, Frigg/Freya being godesses associated with these fields so considering all this it's not really that weird to associate women with population growth.

Pedants and pederasts were quite commonly wers.
m'kay

Just a hint; you should probably start proofreading your posts because your grammar and spelling is absolutely horrendous.
 
Well you could, I dunno, give actual arguments explaining how I'm wrong.
You argue that, because women would uncommonly or rarely have civic rights, fight or produce, they should be not represented among citizens, freemen, tribesmen and slaves. The bias is that you mix up "uncommon" or "rarely" with "never". The last one justify that they should be not represented, the two formers (which actually constitute, the correct case, as you agreed in your posts) do not, and only justify that they are all represented by one neutral archetype which do not take account about sex.

Yes, of course, as shown in multiple dev diaries and as can be expected from this pop-system. I mean just imagine if it was non-existent, the world would be basically static/degenerating over time.

Maybe if it's, outside your pop tooltip, also in a ledger or interface it could be useful.

Okay, maybe... maybe not. I do not know what would be useful, as I do not have yet the big picture.

Women in Athens were basically confined to the house, Spartan women enjoyed more rights but were most prominently valued for being the mothers of Spartan men. The status of Roman women was highly dependent on the time-period though they too were particularly valued and had their prominence based on the Roman men they were the daughter, wife and most importantly, the mother of. Fertility/Marriage/Childbirth was also most often associated with women, such as in religion with Isis, Hera/Juno, Frigg/Freya being godesses associated with these fields so considering all this it's not really that weird to associate women with population growth.

You didn't just associated women with population growth (something for which, women need wers), you stated that in most cultures, women's most important duty was to "create" generations. I think that you get how those two sentences are different.

As I've said, the paradox is that Spartan women, who, as you said, enjoyed more rights than most other Hellenic women, were those who specifically could had been said whose main duty would had been to give birth to Spartan warriors. The main duty of Roman women was to honour Gods rather than to give birth. Athenian women, who weren't citizens but who were civilians, had as a very important duty to honour gods and to participate to festivals.

m'kay

Just a hint; you should probably start proofreading your posts because your grammar and spelling is absolutely horrendous.

Albeit I have no doubt that my grammar and spelling might be problematic in most cases, in this context it isn't, as far as I can tell.

I presume that you might perhaps mistake your ignorance on some of the words I've used with "grammar and spelling" mistakes... Just in case: pedants (children's educators) and pederasts (children's erastes) were commonly wers (male men): male men significantly contributed to raise and educate "the next generation".
 
Last edited:
You argue that, because women would uncommonly or rarely have civic rights, fight or produce, they should be not represented among citizens, freemen, tribesmen and slaves. The bias is that you mix up "uncommon" or "rarely" with "never".
I never said that women weren't at all accounted for when talking about pops but the thing is that when you're talking about what the pops in-game actually produce (manpower, research, taxed income) that this in particular was done by nearly exclusively the male part of those populations. Thus it makes sense to use male icons instead of female ones. The fact that there were for example a handful of female merchants, soldiers and scholars in antiquity doesn't disprove that.

The main duty of Roman women was to honour Gods rather than to give birth.
This is quite blatantly false and only applies to an(relatively) extremely small amount of women who served as Vestal Virgins and priestesses. Even domestic rituals were most often performed by the male head of the family. The participation the average Roman/Athenian woman had with religious rituals/festivals was only a minor part of their life.

Low blow. I'm not getting dragged into this debate but I'd love if it stayed about facts, rather than people's grammar or spelling.
I didn't say it to mock or one up him, large portions of his posts are legtimately confusing to read because of the consistently awkward grammar he uses. Proof-reading might help him catch those mistakes.
 
Okay, I then do not disagree with your first point as you present it now, albeit it stay a third possibility that you haven't addressed: to have "family" icons. If all are accounted for when talking about POPs, why male icons would be better than family icons? (Especially since the units represented by POPs are clearly large groups of many individuals).

About the second point, the sole existence of Vestals, who were forbidden to give birth to children, show the order of priorities of the Roman society. Especially when the matrimonial role of women is also justified by the duty to honour gods.
Add to that, that Vestal priestess weren't the sole priestesses nor priestness the sole religious duty that could be assumed by women. About private cults, there was some cults who were specific to woman. See this somewhat well documented chapter for more information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_ancient_Rome#Religious_life

You are more than welcome to proof-ride my posts when you judge it useful. Please just do.
 
Last edited:
Okay, I then do not disagree with your first point as you present it now, albeit it stay a third possibility that you haven't addressed: to have "family" icons. If all are accounted for when talking about POPs, why male icons would be better than family icons? (Especially since the units represented by POPs are clearly large groups of many individuals).

About the second point, the sole existence of Vestals, who were forbidden to give birth to children, show the order of priorities of the Roman society. Especially when the matrimonial role of women is also justified by the duty to honour gods.
Add to that, that Vestal priestess weren't the sole priestesses nor priestness the sole religious duty that could be assumed by women. About private cults, there was some cults who were specific to woman. See this somewhat well documented chapter for more information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_ancient_Rome#Religious_life

You are more than welcome to proof-ride my posts when you judge it useful. Please just do.
Your own source literally says:
Their vow of chastity freed them of the traditional obligation to marry and rear children
Confirming my exact point. We're also talking about 4-6 women which is a number that's extraordinary low when your talking about a country that at one point had rougly 60 million inhabitants. There were, like you said and I previously mentioned, other priestesses but we're talking about a very marginal percentage of the population here and these priestesses did often marry and have children, as the Wikipedia page also mentions. Even vestals often married and occassionally even had children after they completed their term.
 
I like the traits mechanic but I hope You avoid the trait spaming in some characters that We saw in EU:Rome.
Prominence and popularity are very similar, I would replace prominence by Influence.
 
Are some traits genetic? Are we still all going to be playing at eugenics like in CKII?
 
Wait... Are those mysterious color coded button all showing Roman gods? I see Janus, Mercury and Vesta for sure.
 
Wait... Are those mysterious color coded button all showing Roman gods? I see Janus, Mercury and Vesta for sure.

Jupiter, Minerva, Mars, Vulcan, Vesta, Juno, Mercury, Janus, Venus is what I'm going with. I hope we'll get more insight in them soon! Especially the tech menu is one I'd like to see, and the population menu too.
 
Jupiter, Minerva, Mars, Vulcan, Vesta, Juno, Mercury, Janus, Venus is what I'm going with. I hope we'll get more insight in them soon! Especially the tech menu is one I'd like to see, and the population menu too.
What general area of the game of the game do you think that each will cover? But this is new thread material so I will open one in the Imperator sub forum.
 
Love this. I even like the color scheme which gives you a sense at a glance of whether the character is trending favorably or unfavorably.
 
Martial represents a character's ability to fight and lead troops. Characters with high martial skills make excellent generals.
I hope the so called barbarians, and other people, with a king or similar who goes to war require that their leader also leads the men in war.

It seems that in CK2 people who play the game prefer to have their king staying out of fighting because they don't want him to die too early even though he has good fighting qualities. A leader of the barbarians should stand in the first row of fighters and prove himselft to be a man. I hope that is true in IR.

The Roman senator who was leading the country didn't always do that of course but had generals fighting for him and the Roman people.
 
Oh so sweet! I want this game so much. Ya know I have been praying to God-King Johan for years to have a new game about Rome. >
Constantly praying in all these threads that I want paradox to make it soon and before everything else. So my prayers are finally heard!
I actually was in ROME last year, and i thought so much about how that game could be. And in the dev diarles is looks even better than that
:)