Imperator: Rome Developer Diary - 9th of November 2020

[HighChanceOfRai]

If I:R makes 1 POP = 20,000 soldiers, then it can be something like every 20,000 soldiers die one POP dies. The same reasoning as VIC games.

Where are you getting that ration from? In the first screenshot they raise only 37k but the Rome they show would have hundreds of pops.

The point I'm getting at is that when you lose a soldier pop, which don't contribute to your economy all that much, its annoying but not the end of the world. Here you would lose pops that provide far more important things and you'd be fucked like. I like that there is pop-related danger now, but I also like the fact that pops being wiped isn't a sure thing.

 

[Todie]

We are not, and will never, be adding individual pop modifiers to the game

In practice. pop death is a rare occurrence. Stackwipes themselves are rare, and only a proportion of units destroyed will result in a pop death. At the moment, it happens too rarely - I'd advise caution before jumping to conclusions.

have you considered adding modifiers to growth to simulate the effect of population lost in combat?

Direct pop death compared to growth debuffs was discussed here recently:

Will military losses kill our pops in 2.0?

Interesting that you mention this. Let's just say that with recruitment systems being integrated more heavily with the simulation, there are going to be consequences to full-scale war beyond mere fiscal losses. The hype is on!!

forum.paradoxplaza.com

... to me it seems like a good clear cut option that would yield equivalent but less binary outcomes. though, direct pop kills can target the correct pop - with respect to culture and pop type...

 

[IsaacCAT]

Where are you getting that ration from? In the first screenshot they raise only 37k but the Rome they show would have hundreds of pops.

The point I'm getting at is that when you lose a soldier pop, which don't contribute to your economy all that much, its annoying but not the end of the world. Here you would lose pops that provide far more important things and you'd be fucked like. I like that there is pop-related danger now, but I also like the fact that pops being wiped isn't a sure thing.

From here:

For what we see in the picture, reduction of local Manpower -684 for a levy of 13.5 thousand citizens (heavy infantry), 7 thousand freeman (infantry) and 3.5 thousand nobles (light cavalry).

If manpower is still calculated from freeman mostly, if 7 thousand levied = -684 manpower reduction, with 1 freeman POP = 1,000 manpower in the current game, implies 7 thousand freeman levies = 0.6 POPS. Quite less than I guessed. 1 cohorts = 0.05 POP and I guessed 1 cohort = 0.3 POP.

EDITED2: math mistake, the number before editing was wrong, please someone with a clear mind to double check the numbers.

EDITED: it seems they do not reduce trade routes from levies of citizens and nobles, how odd is that? Women and other non able men are on charge of the business while the boss is waging war. Ok.

NOTE: assuming manpower works the same as now.

Another consideration, if levies cannot choose their units, ROME will have a double edge with more POPS and better units than tribes or other cultures. I would like to see how the game balances this in 2.0.

I am all for powerful nations, but also to have a way to counteract them. Maybe with gates and ambushes. Guerrilla warfare!

 

[Hemothep]

1 POP contains more than soldiers. The ratio of soldiers/POP is unknown, but I calculated is more or less 5%. That means that only 5% of a POP are soldiers.

This means that is very hard for a 95% of a POP to disappear even if all soldiers of that POP die in a battle.

Wars are already costly in numbers of POPS when sacking cities and looting settlements. Only in tribes or cultures with high ratio of soldiers/POPs, it will be justified to eliminate POPS after all soldiers from a POP die.

I disagree. POPs don't die nearly enough from war. War, famine and desease are the three factors that kept population growth in check in this era. In the current state of the game it's realy hard not to have a lot of starving pops, because pop growth is mainly limited by the food supply. I don't know about your experience, but if my only question in late game is "Where do I put my armies, so no one starves?" even though I have been at war for half the games time, then warfare is not deadly enough.

 

[HighChanceOfRai]

1 POP contains more than soldiers. The ratio of soldiers/POP is unknown, but I calculated is more or less 5%. That means that only 5% of a POP are soldiers.

This means that is very hard for a 95% of a POP to disappear even if all soldiers of that POP die in a battle.

Wars are already costly in numbers of POPS when sacking cities and looting settlements. Only in tribes or cultures with high ratio of soldiers/POPs, it will be justified to eliminate POPS after all soldiers from a POP die.

I think the whole point of levies though is that it is everyone, all the amateur soldiers who's day job is a bricklayer or a baker or whatever, is joining the defense of the city. Like, the percentage of dedicated, professional soldiers in a pop is 0%, unless you have these new legions. That'll probably be their main benefit, the fact that the pops will stay productive even during wartime

 

[IsaacCAT]

Far more important than POPs killed by cohorts lost in battle, is manpower!

Manpower shall be limited by number of POPS in the new system.

I disagree. POPs don't die nearly enough from war. War, famine and desease are the three factors that kept population growth in check in this era. In the current state of the game it's realy hard not to have a lot of starving pops, because pop growth is mainly limited by the food supply. I don't know about your experience, but if my only question in late game is "Where do I put my armies, so no one starves?" even though I have been at war for half the games time, then warfare is not deadly enough.

Of course, but that is a different story.

Famine, diseases, natural disasters, etc.. shall be introduced to kill more pops. Completely agree with you.

 

[IsaacCAT]

I think the whole point of levies though is that it is everyone, all the amateur soldiers who's day job is a bricklayer or a baker or whatever, is joining the defense of the city. Like, the percentage of dedicated, professional soldiers in a pop is 0%, unless you have these new legions. That'll probably be their main benefit, the fact that the pops will stay productive even during wartime

They said all able-bodied men. Not women, old-men, children, or maimed. POPS are not professions in this game.

Since all able-bodied men from that pop are now part of your armed forces, any pop that is part of the levy will stop contributing to the economy, until the levy is disbanded.

 

[Phi]

Pops die in VIC1 and VIC2 alongside with dying armies and the games arent broken because of that.

I do not consider VIC1 or VIC2 broken because of that, but I consider wars with high causalities a bit unrealistic due to it. For most of history, countries could regain their complete manpower in about 20 years. In VIC1 or VIC2, not so much.

 

[dav77-b]

Suggestion: Make Pop growth much faster if the food supply is sufficient. And 0 if an only low surplus exists. Limit food production across the board.
This allows that a region can recover from war, but prevents super growth.

 

[IsaacCAT]

I smell blood in the Forum, you want POPS killed by battles, alright! but It makes sense if we are in a warrior culture were most of the POP is levied as soldiers. Do not erase a whole POP because one generation of able-men are killed.

On the other hand, it is far more important IMHO that manpower shall be limited by number of POPS.

 

[Vangi123]

If the governor is the leader of the levies raised in his region, will it behave as the currently implemented assign army to region option for armies? As levies won't be restricted to staying in that region, will the governor being far away from his assigned provinces affect the provinces' loyalty/tax/trade negatively?

Will you be able to raise levies from territories owned by your client states? If yes, who will lead them?

Sorry if this is repeating previous questions.

 

[Martocticvs]

I'm sure the pop death thing could be handled easily by having a pop-death probability that is used during a stackwipe for each levy unit. Eg. for a tribal nation, 20% chance of a pop death occurring. For a republic or monarchy, 12%. That would simulate the greater involvement of tribal populations.

 

[HighChanceOfRai]

Far more important than POPs killed by cohorts lost in battle, is manpower!

Manpower shall be limited by number of POPS in the new system.

Of course, but that is a different story.

Famine, diseases, natural disasters, etc.. shall be introduced to kill more pops. Completely agree with you.

I think it's premature to make any pronouncements about manpower, I'd imagine it will change quite a bit to integrate with this new system

They said all able-bodied men. Not women, old-men, children, or maimed. POPS are not professions in this game.

I know, that's what I'm saying. The levy associated with a pop represents all the men in that pop, regardless of what they do as their day job.
No one cares about the women or the old men or the children or the maimed, they don't contribute at any stage, same as it was in vicky 2.

 

[Searry]

I really hope losing battles will have an impact on POPs dying etc. This is a step in the right direction, now to hope for a complete trade revamp.

 

[IsaacCAT]

I'm sure the pop death thing could be handled easily by having a pop-death probability that is used during a stackwipe for each levy unit. Eg. for a tribal nation, 20% chance of a pop death occurring. For a republic or monarchy, 12%. That would simulate the greater involvement of tribal populations.

Of course, this shall be side by side with manpower based on number of POPS!

A tribe will risk loosing its meagre population on battles but they have a bonus on their manpower numbers as they can levy a lot more cohorts from a POP than republics or monarchies.

As it is now, manpower is the monthly product of tribesmen, freemen and citizens. This should not be anymore. Manpower shall be the (whatever laws, culture, government, policies) ratio cohort/pop X number of pops.

 

[IsaacCAT]

I think it's premature to make any pronouncements about manpower, I'd imagine it will change quite a bit to integrate with this new system



I know, that's what I'm saying. The levy associated with a pop represents all the men in that pop, regardless of what they do as their day job.
No one cares about the women or the old men or the children or the maimed, they don't contribute at any stage, same as it was in vicky 2.

You are right on the manpower issue. I am overreacting.

On the other hand, I do care about women, old men and children. Taking into account the demographics of the time, a POP without able men can survive one generation with children and women.

They cannot survive famine, a fire, a brutal looting, an earthquake, a mortal disease, etc... those are the main dead cause for whole POPs IMHO.

 

[brty941]

Any chance of a Horse Archer model for the Scythians? I know its probably a lot more work then new Infantry but looking at it in terms of iconic units (the Roman Legionaire, the Velites, etc) wouldn't it make a perfect levee unit model for t hem?

I think the big problem is animating a fight scene between cavalry and infantry for example - like infantry do currently

 

[Kapitalisti]

So if I understood the screenshots correctly, Rome doesn't start with a standing army? Which is good and historically correct. But do some empires start with them? I'm no expert on them but I'd imagine the diadochis would have at least a relatively small professional core to their military.

 

[Álvaro Núñez de Lara]

It would be cool to do something with countries like sparta or Macedon which used levies but these were veteran of other wars. This was thebcase with the roman legions as well. They were landowners and citizens that were called to arms in levies but had fought in previous wars and were very experience.

I hope levies keep experience and keep it for very long when they are not rised, so if you call them again in 5 years it doesnt feel likenits an unprofesional unexpirienced new levy, but a professional veteran one.

Some countries could have a slower decay modifier (sparta).

 

[Pilbur]

So if I understood the screenshots correctly, Rome doesn't start with a standing army? Which is good and historically correct. But do some empires start with them? I'm no expert on them but I'd imagine the diadochis would have at least a relatively small professional core to their military.

I think that Diadochi will have starting“professional armies”. In one screenshot showing the Seleucids there is a ledger listing both a “Levy of Persis” and a “Army of Babylon”. I guess the latter in the professional core of the King’s soldier.Something similar is also present in the Antigonids screenshot.