I would suspect regional capitals are quite flexible. If not you would have the issue that would happen if multiple nations control cities in one province, to solve that issue every nation with cities in that region would need a regional capital in that region. I suspect the regional capital may automatically be the biggest city or simply the one you choose it to be.
Imperator - Development Diary #8 - 16th of July 2018
- Thread starter Johan
- 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.
You're referring to a general trend across the entire Mediterranean region / Roman Empire roughly from the start of the Iron Age through to the end of the Roman Empire. This game covers a roughly 250 - 300 year period within that time. My impression from the post I was commenting on was that the poster was thinking of localised resource exhaustion, e.g. a province that is a source of a type of metal ceasing to be a source.
But exactly this would happen? Deforest a province so much that the wood resource disappears?
Show me some evidence, an instance of a specific province where this happened in the period between the battle of Issos and that absorbtion of Egypt into the Roman Empire ?
I'm not saying that there was no general impact, or that certain industries didn't consume significant amounts of wood locally. A local industry near me in Cheshire in the Roman period was salt making. Water from salt springs was heated in pens to book off the water and leave salt. There was also mining and smelting of lead and other metals in North Wales and tile manufacturing. These would have been dirty industries consuming significant amounts of wood and charcoal, but there's no evidence for these industries having a regional rather than a local impact.
Wood is a renewable resource and if industry was to be sustained long term then systems would be developed to allow some areas to recover while others were exploited. Similar to systems used in the medieval period.
I'm not saying that there was no general impact, or that certain industries didn't consume significant amounts of wood locally. A local industry near me in Cheshire in the Roman period was salt making. Water from salt springs was heated in pens to book off the water and leave salt. There was also mining and smelting of lead and other metals in North Wales and tile manufacturing. These would have been dirty industries consuming significant amounts of wood and charcoal, but there's no evidence for these industries having a regional rather than a local impact.
Wood is a renewable resource and if industry was to be sustained long term then systems would be developed to allow some areas to recover while others were exploited. Similar to systems used in the medieval period.
Firstly, there is indirect evidence of mineral seams running out, as a number of Roman era mines were known to have processed the slag piles of earlier, Greek era mines because the more advanced smelting processes they were using were capable of getting metal from the "depleted" slag left by earlier miners. It seems unlikely that they would have done this if ore of the higher quality previously processed was still available. How you might treat this in the game is a whole 'nother question...
For deforestation, it was generally, as far as we can tell, agriculture rather than "industry" that removed the woodland from a region. This seems more like a side effect of population growth than anything else; the agriculture in question was generally subsistence bread grain production, rather than cash crops for export/processing (the "industry" of the time). Crafts that used wood (or charcoal) for fuel generally, as you mentioned, used sustainable techniques of cultivation, such as coppicing. So, again, it happened, but how you might treat it in the game (and why you might think it a good idea to include it) seems a bit unclear.
I wonder if the traditional pdx trade elements would still be there, and what roles would them have:
Trade range : will trade routes be limited to trade ranges like in EU? not implied so in the DD, but wouldn't it be very weird if as an inland little Germanic tribe I can trade with Tibet？I hope there will be a trade range mechanic tied to inventions&ideas in this game.
Embargo : according to DD you have to negotiate trade access, so no trade access= embargo. But it seems embargo would have much less effect on the target than in other pdx games since they would just turn to trade with others.
Blockade : The DD only mentioned one circumstance in which a route will be cancelled: when two trade partners go to war. Now what would a naval blockade do to naval trade routes? Logically the trade route should be rendered ineffective(not producing income) by a full blockade, and the other trade partner should be considering nullify it, but we dont know if that's the case in I:R since the DD made no mention of it.
Piracy & Privateering : Piracy is a big problem in IR timeframe Mediterranean, so I hope Devs wont overlook it. But how should piracy affect trade under this system? I would suggest -X% trade route income due to X% piracy efficiency. It would be also quite interesting if one can send privateers to rob trade income from your rivals, through few records of state-sponsored piracy existed in this era. But since the DD made no mention on piracy and how that would affect trading, this is just my speculation.
Trade range : will trade routes be limited to trade ranges like in EU? not implied so in the DD, but wouldn't it be very weird if as an inland little Germanic tribe I can trade with Tibet？I hope there will be a trade range mechanic tied to inventions&ideas in this game.
Embargo : according to DD you have to negotiate trade access, so no trade access= embargo. But it seems embargo would have much less effect on the target than in other pdx games since they would just turn to trade with others.
Blockade : The DD only mentioned one circumstance in which a route will be cancelled: when two trade partners go to war. Now what would a naval blockade do to naval trade routes? Logically the trade route should be rendered ineffective(not producing income) by a full blockade, and the other trade partner should be considering nullify it, but we dont know if that's the case in I:R since the DD made no mention of it.
Piracy & Privateering : Piracy is a big problem in IR timeframe Mediterranean, so I hope Devs wont overlook it. But how should piracy affect trade under this system? I would suggest -X% trade route income due to X% piracy efficiency. It would be also quite interesting if one can send privateers to rob trade income from your rivals, through few records of state-sponsored piracy existed in this era. But since the DD made no mention on piracy and how that would affect trading, this is just my speculation.
Genuine question, are there any records of naval blockades during this time period? It sounds anachronistic but I'm far from an expert so I could be wrong
Negotiating trade access good; specific single 'product/resource' for single 'product/resource' province to province exchange (as in EU: Rome) not so good.
Sextus Pompey took over Roman Republic's fleet during the civil war in the aftermath of Caesar's death.
He was a major pain in the butt for the Second Triumvirate. He blocked much of the shipping going in and out of Italy, and nearly caused a major food shortage in Rome. It was at that point where rivals Octavius and Antony teamed up to defeat him.
That is just one example. I am sure there are many more, particularly in the Punic Wars where navies played a big role.
Yes, though my impession is that while blockades of specific ports (naval siege) was done, a 'regional' blockade would be impractical. The game will use smaller 'area tiles'.
I assume that, like in EU:Rome, you will be importing a trade good in exchange for exporting another one. You will be simulating a barter economy. What about if you simulate a more realistic gold currency based economy?
The Micromanagement Hell is lurking...
The Micromanagement Hell is lurking...
You have no idea how much that did it for me.I present to you, the perfect Imperator: Rome game
Features:
-Completely realistic!
-No mystical "spirit of the nation" nonsense that can affect things that realistically should happen on their own
-No stupid tech system, technologies were fluid and happened on their own over time
-Covers the entire period from the founding of Rome to the middle of EU4
-Traders trade where they wish
-Every kind of pop represented, down to the individual level, and they grow on their own! You can't just click a magic button to get instant results like it was a casual game
-In fact, there are not any magic buttons at all. Again, yay realism! Down with instant gratification culture!
-Anti-blobbing mechanism! Look how that gigantic Rome blob was broken down by internal mechanisms. It should never be possible to hold an empire that large together
No mention of pirates stealing trade goods that seafaring and non-seafaring states have to deal with?
Dumb question,
What is Civic power in EU4 terms? IE Admin, Diplo, Mil. It is replacing one or it the system totally different?
What is Civic power in EU4 terms? IE Admin, Diplo, Mil. It is replacing one or it the system totally different?
I would say it is admin power and oratory is diplo power. You gain admin power from the characters finess which is basically their ability to manage stuff while oratory power is gained from charisma which is the ability to influence others.
However as Imperterator: Rome is it own game you should not see the points the same way as you see EUIV points. They are gained in different ways and spent on different things.
However as Imperterator: Rome is it own game you should not see the points the same way as you see EUIV points. They are gained in different ways and spent on different things.