I think most of the "VICTORIA III CONFIRMED" stuff is just a joke. It's definitely a joke when I do it. It's like with Half Life 3.
Half Life 3 confirmed
I think most of the "VICTORIA III CONFIRMED" stuff is just a joke. It's definitely a joke when I do it. It's like with Half Life 3.
nothing suspicious, just mod review... if there was previously tradition of including mod ideas in core game DLCs such review could be suspicious, but without something like that...a rereveiw of a rome mod just 2days before the announcment doesnt look souspicious to you ?
a rereveiw of a rome mod just 2days before the announcment doesnt look souspicious to you ?
you guys spamed vic and modern days "confirmed" meme for things more ridicule than this and none related at all with vic but when there is indeed a real tease or something that is directly related to the rival of vic it is not a "rome confirmed" for you right ?
Mods like these shows Rome 2 would fit better as a dlc to eu4.
Red Alert will be fine too.and their they come all of them in a row . the swarm of hoi4 protrait guys and suporters of the cold war . the main opposition to anything that start with R
lol
and their they come all of them in a row . the swarm of hoi4 protrait guys and suporters of the cold war . the main opposition to anything that start with R
lol
Stopt teasing us this much... please...
Is it clear that by tomorrow we can confirm whether the new title is VIC III or Paradox ROMA? certainly????
The evidence for a Roman setting here would be that Rome itself was pretty tolerant towards (read: absorbed) non-monotheistic religions - and Roman religion's relationship to the state was relatively subservient.
Also important to note that the imperial cult was central to Roman authority in its expansion. Going by this fact I guess it would have to either focus on the Republic or not be about Rome at all.Religion was supremely important to the romans. At all times it was just important to Romans as it would be to any medieval christian society. Religion wasn't subservient to the state. There was no seperation like that. Religion and the state were one. The jobs roman officials did had religious connotations.
Religion had a great deal of internal significance in Roman society to be sure, but in a grand strategy game you are usually dealing with the external significance of religion: leading holy wars, managing relations with the Pope, keeping up appearances with other states that follow your faith, defending against other religions' holy wars, converting provinces. And that side of religion I don't think really existed in the classical west until Christianity comes on the scene. The Romans might have expected their subjects to take part in their state religion, but this was not because they regarded those who didn't worship the Roman gods as infidels or heathens on an ideological level, and they certainly didn't extend their expectations of conformity to those outside the empire.Religion was supremely important to the romans. At all times it was just important to Romans as it would be to any medieval christian society. Religion wasn't subservient to the state. There was no seperation like that. Religion and the state were one. The jobs roman officials did had religious connotations.
Two important things to note: the imperial cult of Rome and Christianity in later Rome. Christians and Jews were persecuted in Rome because due to their monotheistic nature, they didn't worship the emperor as a divine being, which undermined the authority of the emperor and the Roman Empire as a whole. Later, once Christianity did take root, various emperors placated Christians to get them on their side during power struggles (see: Constantine). Religion, especially the Roman pantheon in relation to Christianity, was of vital importance in various key moments in Roman history and selling religion as "not very important" in a game about that is missing the mark by a lot.Religion had a great deal of internal significance in Roman society to be sure, but in a grand strategy game you are usually dealing with the external significance of religion: leading holy wars, managing relations with the Pope, keeping up appearances with other states that follow your faith, defending against other religions' holy wars, converting provinces. And that side of religion I don't think really existed in the classical west until Christianity comes on the scene. The Romans might have expected their subjects to take part in their state religion, but this was not because they regarded those who didn't worship the Roman gods as infidels or heathens on an ideological level, and they certainly didn't extend their expectations of conformity to those outside the empire.
Two important things to note: the imperial cult of Rome and Christianity in later Rome. Christians and Jews were persecuted in Rome because due to their monotheistic nature, they didn't worship the emperor as a divine being, which undermined the authority of the emperor and the Roman Empire as a whole. Later, once Christianity did take root, various emperors placated Christians to get them on their side during power struggles (see: Constantine). Religion, especially the Roman pantheon in relation to Christianity, was of vital importance in various key moments in Roman history and selling religion as "not very important" in a game about that is missing the mark by a lot.
You're right I did misquote that, but regardless, saying it is "not the most important aspect" and then turning around and saying "it's only the third most important aspect", reeks of dishonesty and semantics. I feel like it is meant to steer us away from (imperial) Rome.But the hint didn't say "not very important"...
if its a modern days game i think religion wont work at all in most of the world except in middle east but situation there is more complex to be too unimportant