I like this! I hope they tweak the numbers a little bit, but the general concept seems strong. Hope this works out!
Imperator: Rome Developer Diary - 4th of November
- 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.
you know how to exploit this make token army or fleet with 1 cheapest ship put useless guy on it. GG you got happy family and loyal by the way.
I commend the effort to improve gameplay, but I fear that this is too unrealistic a change - there ought to be minor families, perhaps represented by a single 'Pater Familias' character (their only character). The Minor Families can then be promoted to replace the lowest prestige Great Family after a grace period of 1 - 3 years. The highest prestige or skill family member of the relegating Great Family can remain as the minor family 'Pater Familias'. Minor Family mechanics would be relatively simple - accrue enough prestige to overtake a Great Family, with no scorned mechanic. When a Minor Family promotion occurs, the rest of the family can be RNG created. When a minor family 'relegates' below a threshold of prestige, you can RNG a new minor family.
This would create a nice simulation of families rising and falling. Something like the above is doubly important in republics, where you really shouldn't be relying on only 3, 4 or 5 families. It’ll lead to things like Consul dynasties for Rome which, at that time period, is wildly ahistorical.
This would create a nice simulation of families rising and falling. Something like the above is doubly important in republics, where you really shouldn't be relying on only 3, 4 or 5 families. It’ll lead to things like Consul dynasties for Rome which, at that time period, is wildly ahistorical.
Last edited:
There’s nothing to stop a minor character from becoming consul. They compete for the position in the same way all the other characters do.
Likewise there’s nothing to stop a minor character from accruing power base and prominence, or holdings, making them able to aspire to the consul office.
Remember also that the families only expect to hold a portion of the available jobs, not all of them so at any given time you will have influential minor characters unless you’re specifically trying to give some family a lot of power to increase their gratitude (a dangerous game since power base lowers loyalty).
Will there be any way for minor to supplant Great families? Will there be a way in Republics to prevent certain minor families ways from dying off?
@Trin Tragula
will you make the Aemilii one of the great roman families? It is really odd that they are not in already and they definitly should be in case of consulships and prestige at the time. The Julii etc. could be in with events.
will you make the Aemilii one of the great roman families? It is really odd that they are not in already and they definitly should be in case of consulships and prestige at the time. The Julii etc. could be in with events.
In terms of resource managment and strategic choices new families are pretty good. But in terms of immersion and simulation it seems to be a step back.
IMO, creating personal and kinda unique stories is important in such games. Let's say we have an ex-slave, who managed to become a prominent politician and after several generations a family he founded becomes one of the most influental in the state. Or another family, that tried to rival a ruling dinasty - and failed, slowly loosing their power as a result, falling to obscurity. And lets add a third one - proud rulers of independent kingdom before, trying to adapt and serve to there new overlord just to survive after being conquered. Stuff like this was making families important for the story - and for the player. While randomly generated "minor characters" are more like placeholders with stats, having no past and no future.
Please, let us have minor families, that cannt become scorned or grateful, but can accumulate prestige and can potentialy rise not only when a country gets enough territories for a new rank. For those players who just want to manage 4 great families nothing will change, cause minor families will not require much attention. But for players who care about families not only as a resourse, but as a part of the story it will add more characters that will actually matter.
IMO, creating personal and kinda unique stories is important in such games. Let's say we have an ex-slave, who managed to become a prominent politician and after several generations a family he founded becomes one of the most influental in the state. Or another family, that tried to rival a ruling dinasty - and failed, slowly loosing their power as a result, falling to obscurity. And lets add a third one - proud rulers of independent kingdom before, trying to adapt and serve to there new overlord just to survive after being conquered. Stuff like this was making families important for the story - and for the player. While randomly generated "minor characters" are more like placeholders with stats, having no past and no future.
Please, let us have minor families, that cannt become scorned or grateful, but can accumulate prestige and can potentialy rise not only when a country gets enough territories for a new rank. For those players who just want to manage 4 great families nothing will change, cause minor families will not require much attention. But for players who care about families not only as a resourse, but as a part of the story it will add more characters that will actually matter.
I think this truly the stupdiest way to go.. Way limiting the number of families? Just focus on CK3, then... Ancient Rome is all about the great families and also the minors, by taking away the unlimited numbers of families you're taking the immersion of playing Rome, the Republic Era and the final days of those Era. The Claudii, Cornelli, Julii, Junii, Aemilli, Livii... All of them had great part in the Imperial Republican Era, a smuch most of them also held power during the Empire.
Maybe a way to prevent and keep some of the player happy, like me, put an option on settings that the game play will have "Unlimited families" or "limited families". Just like the setting s on Ck2 were, when you could turn off the Aztec Invasion, change some aspects of game. the Rules, the name it was
@Trin Tragula
Maybe a way to prevent and keep some of the player happy, like me, put an option on settings that the game play will have "Unlimited families" or "limited families". Just like the setting s on Ck2 were, when you could turn off the Aztec Invasion, change some aspects of game. the Rules, the name it was
@Trin Tragula
Last edited:
What about creating "cadet" branches of the various families? Maybe that could help to expand exisisting families to new ones?
This isn't an RPG though, it isn't about personal stories, it never was.
There's too many carahcters already that don't mean anything or matter that's why they're getting rid of them. It must be clear to people by now that IR isn't and never will be CK Rome.
[QUOTE="dannazgui, post: 26016196, member: 1208431"]I think this truly the stupdiest way to go.. Way limiting the number of families? Just focus on CK3, then... Ancient Rome is all about the great families and also the minors, by taking away the unlimited numbers of families you're taking the immersion of playing Rome, the Republic Era and the final days of those Era. The Claudii, Cornelli, Julii, Junii, Aemilli, Livii... All of them had great part in the Imperial Republican Era, a smuch most of them also held power during the Empire.
Maybe a way to prevent and keep some of the player happy, like me, put an option on settings that the game play will have "Unlimited families" or "limited families". Just like the setting s on Ck2 were, when you could turn off the Aztec Invasion, change some aspects of game. the Rules, the name it was
@Trin Tragula[/QUOTE]
You've inadvertantly hit the nail on the head there, CK3 is exactly where people who want a dynasty style RPG should be looking, not at IR. CK is custom designed for that, asking IR to become an RPG makwes as much sense as suggesting EUIV should have a space setting.
Maybe a way to prevent and keep some of the player happy, like me, put an option on settings that the game play will have "Unlimited families" or "limited families". Just like the setting s on Ck2 were, when you could turn off the Aztec Invasion, change some aspects of game. the Rules, the name it was
@Trin Tragula[/QUOTE]
You've inadvertantly hit the nail on the head there, CK3 is exactly where people who want a dynasty style RPG should be looking, not at IR. CK is custom designed for that, asking IR to become an RPG makwes as much sense as suggesting EUIV should have a space setting.
You've inadvertantly hit the nail on the head there, CK3 is exactly where people who want a dynasty style RPG should be looking, not at IR. CK is custom designed for that, asking IR to become an RPG makwes as much sense as suggesting EUIV should have a space setting.[/QUOTE]
I think he has a point. Not the Republican Governmentmodel but the Families were the core of Rome, in the case of Monarchies the Dynasty was the center. Except Egypt and Macedon, hellenistic Empire were actually what the Dynasty owned. There was no Seleucid State or whatsoever! People should realize that and accept that it was a deeply personalized world, where people mattered more than nations, especially since that it is a rather modern concept.
So in my opinion an ideal Imperator Rome would take the deep Character Interactions of CK II and combine them with elements from EUIV.
100% Agree with you. I do not understand why they went with controlling nations instead of characters. As you said, it was the kings' ability which was the deciding factor on whether a kingdom would prosper or collapse. Or in a democracy/ oligarchy, certain characters/ families battled to dominate the political sphere of the state, which doesn't really matter if the player can't control characters. At this point, people of a multitude of nationalities lived under one arche/ kingdom/ democracy which makes it even better for a character driven game, as your subjects don't really care who rules them, they just want to be ruled justly. It would be interesting to introduce a mechanic, where the happier your subjects are the more likely are they to develop loyalty to your kingdom, making territories lost, easier to capture.
I guess the reason they went with controlling a nation instead of controlling characters is because it would make playing as Rome/ Democracies tricky and much more complex. As, if you started playing as a character from a low-prestige family it would be very difficult to rise up in the social system, and you would spend a lot of time just following orders made by the senate without having much of a say.
I think this time period is the best possible setting for a character-driven game, even more so than CK2.
Last edited:
I think this should go farther on the low end. Everyone gets 3 families? Smaller tribes should get two or even one major family if you only have one province.