.png){kind=avatar}
Also real good dd keep up the good work, really loving the direction the game has taken since launch
Imperator: Rome Developer Diary - 4th of May 2020
- 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.
I have not played IR since the early days of 1.2. This summer of culture looks good enough to actually get me to play again. I much prefer internal management over aggressive conquering and this is shaping up to give lots of things to play with. I am also primarily a Stellaris player and it is clear some of these ideas are influenced by that sibling title and this pleases me as well.
- 3
The Pop system in Imperator seems utterly confused, especially with the addition of the Noble pops and "civic rights." What is the distinction between Citizens and Freemen now that Nobles exist? What is a Citizen? In Rome, citizenship was a necessary quality of a freeman; if you were a freeman, you were a citizen, because citizenship was what legally protected your freedom (kind of). Why even have a Citizen pop now that citizenship can be represented by the "civic rights" mechanic? Also, why is it that Citizen pops don't produce manpower when, in Rome at least, only citizens were eligible for military service in the Roman legions?
What is a Tribesman? That Pop seems completely unnecessary and could just easily be gotten rid of.
The numbers are also very weird. In the pic, Nobles make up a whopping 13% of Rome's population! That's an absurdly high number for a noble class.
What is a Tribesman? That Pop seems completely unnecessary and could just easily be gotten rid of.
The numbers are also very weird. In the pic, Nobles make up a whopping 13% of Rome's population! That's an absurdly high number for a noble class.
- 9
- 5
- 3
Didn't you also have freemen without citizenship rights? I am sure it did.
- 3
- 2
- 1
Do you have any plans to again make it possible to search threads by developer replies, or else is there already a way that I'm missing? It was always an extremely useful feature for developer diaries and patches. Those threads quickly become quite long and hard to keep track of, and the relevant part for me will always be developer posts.
- 7
- 2
{
Perhaps we can get some decisions to help speed up assimilation of certain pop types? Perhaps once integrated?
To be honest though, most regions never fully Romanised - they either became kind of a half-Roman hybrid of their culture, e.g. Gallo-Roman, Romano-British, Hispano-Roman, etc. or only had their upper crust of nobility convert to Roman ways as in the east where native cultures remained thrived full scale amongst the populaces. That's why Greek remained an independent language, as did Aramaic, Syriac, Demotic etc. Eastern regions retained a lot of their religions too. Hell, even druidism in Gaul and Britain died out only slowly over the centuries, finally disappearing in the 5th / 6th century AD.
Perhaps we can get some decisions to help speed up assimilation of certain pop types? Perhaps once integrated?
To be honest though, most regions never fully Romanised - they either became kind of a half-Roman hybrid of their culture, e.g. Gallo-Roman, Romano-British, Hispano-Roman, etc. or only had their upper crust of nobility convert to Roman ways as in the east where native cultures remained thrived full scale amongst the populaces. That's why Greek remained an independent language, as did Aramaic, Syriac, Demotic etc. Eastern regions retained a lot of their religions too. Hell, even druidism in Gaul and Britain died out only slowly over the centuries, finally disappearing in the 5th / 6th century AD.
Last edited:
- 4
- 1
I love those new additions, but does that mean that we won't get hybrid cultures like Gallo-Roman or Graeco-Egyptian? Because they were hugely important important in the period and one of the arguable "ingame goals", that being realizing Alexander's dream of a Euro-Asiatic or Graeco-Persian empire directly involves them.
- 4
- 2
Oh this is a thing of beauty.
I like the idea of managing cultures inside an empire, also, commerce being key to keep nobles happy.
Will your cultural groups status impact your country's relationships with other culture empires?
I like the idea of managing cultures inside an empire, also, commerce being key to keep nobles happy.
Will your cultural groups status impact your country's relationships with other culture empires?
- 1
- 1
Agreed, I'm loving these changes, but we need the ability for some cultures to syncretise over time as well - Gallo-Roman, Hispano-Roman, Romano-British, etc. Perhaps this can have a play in the cultural integration? Something like this - 3 tiers of a conquered culture:
1. conquered culture, not integrated
2. integrated
3. syncretised
OR
3. assimilated
- 7
- 1
This is absolutely wonderful.
Please, about future culture and group changes, consider some of my suggestions about culture groups in Iberia:
And some nice maps showing Iberic peoples and cultures and how to fix them:
Please, about future culture and group changes, consider some of my suggestions about culture groups in Iberia:
And some nice maps showing Iberic peoples and cultures and how to fix them:
Last edited:
- 4
- 3
- 1
Great work! Good choice to split the culture groups, makes a lot more sense now. I was wondering due to the focus on culture if we will also receive new portrait packs?
Portraits look great now but more variation is always welcome
Portraits look great now but more variation is always welcome
- 4
.png){kind=avatar}
I'm loving the game, but could u guys add more recommended nations? or fortify some new with mission and skin, possibly some tribal nation from the north or in Spain region. And the other suggestion would be to make an update on the unit 3D model on focus on the units the troop has, like if it's mains elephants, would be a unit mounted on an elephant, and if it is mainly archers an archer unit, a heavy ... go in this cycle. Anyways great game I'm really liking it !
- 1
Kind of? A disclaimer first, I’m no expert, so take what I say with a grain of salt.
first of all, citizenship in his period is actually very complex and doesn’t fit into a binary model of “citizens” and “non-citizens.” In fact, it’s best not to think of the various struggles for citizenship in the Roman Republic as a struggle for a discrete class of citizenship, but an ongoing progression towards full citizenship by winning citizenship rights in a piecemeal fashion, a few specific rights at a time.
a Socii or a provincial subject of Rome may be a “freeman” within his local laws, but within the Roman government, he likely has no actual legal rights beyond the universal rights afforded to everybody, and thus his freedom wasn’t exactly protected by the government that he was subject to.
I think a much better pop system, though still heavily simplified, would be divided into something like: Nobles, Landholders, Proletarii (non-landholding freemen who are capable of actually exercising their freedom due to economic independence; generally skilled craftsmen), and Laborers (slaves and nominally-free dependent wage laborers), with a series of Pop attributes, such as various citizenship rights, that can be associated with each Pop or with categories of Pops, such as all Pops of a certain culture or culture group.
- 2
So I have two great concerns...
1st: Integrating cultures is too painful.
Problem: A permanent -5% happiness for each integrated culture? Ouch. And the integration itself is not free either, as you pay a stability cost while they're being integrated. And for what benefits? Say the Etruscans make up 20% of your initial population, sure seems a good idea to integrate them. Except very rapidly they become less and less relevant as you expand into new territories. As in this game expansion is and should be fast, individual cultures very quickly become irrelevant. By mid-late game, you'll have dozens of cultures you can't integrate because they're so small, making the whole system irrelevant after the early game.
Solution: Instead of having separate attitudes for each individual culture, change it to religious groups. The Romans had one attitude towards Italians, Greeks, Punics, and Celts, but discriminating between Aetolian Greeks and Laconian Greeks is way too much detail. Under this system you would still have many different cultures by the mid-late game, and the number of cultures you have to manage at any given point is always manageable. The happiness cost wouldn't be so harsh, because you would ever assimilate 3-4 cultures. Although removing the happiness cost entirely is also an option, I feel that the stability hit from the time it takes to assimilate a culture, plus dealing with assimilation events is already a fair price.
2nd: The role of Nobles.
Problem: To begin with what are pops? This was never clear since the early development of the game. I remember all discussions about what are citizens/freeman and what are they in the context of kingdoms and republics and tribes. This problem just got worse with the addition of nobles. What are citizens now? Wealthy freemen? What are freemen? Are they not citizens? Why do they contribute manpower then if only citizens fought in the Roman armies? And this is in the context of Rome only, because when you take it out it gets even worse. But my main concern is not with the semantics, I see pops as social classes anyway move on, the problem is the role of each pop and the balance between them. It is not intuitive at all that tribesmen pay more taxes than freemen, or that freemen contribute more manpower than tribesmen, or that citizens don't pay taxes but slaves do (I get that slaves are owned by citizens and slaves taxes are actually citizen taxes but you get my point). And since the main role of citizens was research, what about now with the inclusion of nobles? It seems more natural to me that nobles would produce research more than commerce, as commerce was the main activity of the burghers (represented by citizens) while nobles would own the latifundia. So again it seems counter-intuitive.
Solution: First rename the pops, especially citizens, as the concept of citizenship is now clearly tied to culture. I would go with nobles, merchants and commoners, as it is generic enough to apply to all cultures and political systems. Second make their roles more consistent: slaves=taxes, commoners=manpower, merchants=commerce, nobles=research (and political power), tribesmen=generic all-rounders.
Lastly, I really like this game and appreciate all the effort you've been doing. I hope the game attracts more players as new patches are released, and my criticisms are aimed at that.
1st: Integrating cultures is too painful.
Problem: A permanent -5% happiness for each integrated culture? Ouch. And the integration itself is not free either, as you pay a stability cost while they're being integrated. And for what benefits? Say the Etruscans make up 20% of your initial population, sure seems a good idea to integrate them. Except very rapidly they become less and less relevant as you expand into new territories. As in this game expansion is and should be fast, individual cultures very quickly become irrelevant. By mid-late game, you'll have dozens of cultures you can't integrate because they're so small, making the whole system irrelevant after the early game.
Solution: Instead of having separate attitudes for each individual culture, change it to religious groups. The Romans had one attitude towards Italians, Greeks, Punics, and Celts, but discriminating between Aetolian Greeks and Laconian Greeks is way too much detail. Under this system you would still have many different cultures by the mid-late game, and the number of cultures you have to manage at any given point is always manageable. The happiness cost wouldn't be so harsh, because you would ever assimilate 3-4 cultures. Although removing the happiness cost entirely is also an option, I feel that the stability hit from the time it takes to assimilate a culture, plus dealing with assimilation events is already a fair price.
2nd: The role of Nobles.
Problem: To begin with what are pops? This was never clear since the early development of the game. I remember all discussions about what are citizens/freeman and what are they in the context of kingdoms and republics and tribes. This problem just got worse with the addition of nobles. What are citizens now? Wealthy freemen? What are freemen? Are they not citizens? Why do they contribute manpower then if only citizens fought in the Roman armies? And this is in the context of Rome only, because when you take it out it gets even worse. But my main concern is not with the semantics, I see pops as social classes anyway move on, the problem is the role of each pop and the balance between them. It is not intuitive at all that tribesmen pay more taxes than freemen, or that freemen contribute more manpower than tribesmen, or that citizens don't pay taxes but slaves do (I get that slaves are owned by citizens and slaves taxes are actually citizen taxes but you get my point). And since the main role of citizens was research, what about now with the inclusion of nobles? It seems more natural to me that nobles would produce research more than commerce, as commerce was the main activity of the burghers (represented by citizens) while nobles would own the latifundia. So again it seems counter-intuitive.
Solution: First rename the pops, especially citizens, as the concept of citizenship is now clearly tied to culture. I would go with nobles, merchants and commoners, as it is generic enough to apply to all cultures and political systems. Second make their roles more consistent: slaves=taxes, commoners=manpower, merchants=commerce, nobles=research (and political power), tribesmen=generic all-rounders.
Lastly, I really like this game and appreciate all the effort you've been doing. I hope the game attracts more players as new patches are released, and my criticisms are aimed at that.
- 15
- 7
- 1
Please don't let that small independent window on the side be there on the release version. No more separate windows please, including the current pop window on province screen. You can take an example by Better UI mod pop window for how to do it.
While this feature is in the process of implementation we can still offer this mockup of what we want the future interface to look like.
- 3
- 2
- 2
If we integrate a culture, will cultures in their culture group convert to that one, or still to the main culture of the nation?
- 1
- 1
Dear @Trin Trangula
The changes are excellent. and it's very encouraging to see many proposals from the community (like splitting persian culture group in three) implemented.
Please add two more cultures in the Hellenic Group: Doric (in Rhodes, Kos, Knidos and Halikaranssos) and Megaran (Megara)
A question:
how quickly are nobles and citizens from non-integrated cultures demoted after conquest? Will a former capital of a large empire still have many nonintegrated nobles a century after a conquest?
The changes are excellent. and it's very encouraging to see many proposals from the community (like splitting persian culture group in three) implemented.
Please add two more cultures in the Hellenic Group: Doric (in Rhodes, Kos, Knidos and Halikaranssos) and Megaran (Megara)
A question:
how quickly are nobles and citizens from non-integrated cultures demoted after conquest? Will a former capital of a large empire still have many nonintegrated nobles a century after a conquest?
- 3