It's not a broken mechanic, it's a way of balancing an otherwise overpowered possibility.
Update 1.2 Cicero Beta Patch: Feedback Thread!
- Thread starter badgr
- 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.
Well, political assassinations do also have an external effect on countries in reality that are not expanding their territory though still are in centre of international attention for human rights violations.
Though it is quite awesome that you actually managed to actually assassinate someone, I couldn’t do that yet, so I went the path via trial, imprisonment and execution a few times but stopped after triggering a civil war. That’s just not worth it (besides these interactions are rather limited in their usefulness).
BTW, am I the only one or does anybody else feel that removing political influence bonus from appropriately and fully embraced national ideas castrated government types and made them more random?
Why should I pick from idea groups that I have no use for only to get some +10/+15 happiness bonus to some certain pop? Then I‘d rather pick 3 most suitable ideas from anywhere and wait till i reach tech lvl 6 or 12, or government upgrade to empire/dictatorship.
I think that the political influence bonus should be re-implemented again.
Why should I pick from idea groups that I have no use for only to get some +10/+15 happiness bonus to some certain pop? Then I‘d rather pick 3 most suitable ideas from anywhere and wait till i reach tech lvl 6 or 12, or government upgrade to empire/dictatorship.
I think that the political influence bonus should be re-implemented again.
I would like to mention a big issue with civil wars.
The mecanism is victory when a camp has total domination ( 100 % ).
The problem is in certains cases but relatively frequentely, certain part of a country are not accessible/approchable, cause requiered to have military acces with other countries, they won't give.
In this case the civil warn never end and in my game there was a chain effect, a rebellion take part of part of empire that himself went in civil war : phyrgian rebellion took part of Elolidie ( sorry in French ) that went in rebellion.
Result : more than 50 years of war because phyrgian has a coutry in Greece unreachable for revolution ( 99 % win score ).
And Elolidie revolution is lock too because phyrgian revolution has some country.
Should be some mecanic, when war is too long, the country divides into two entities.
( sorry for my English )
The mecanism is victory when a camp has total domination ( 100 % ).
The problem is in certains cases but relatively frequentely, certain part of a country are not accessible/approchable, cause requiered to have military acces with other countries, they won't give.
In this case the civil warn never end and in my game there was a chain effect, a rebellion take part of part of empire that himself went in civil war : phyrgian rebellion took part of Elolidie ( sorry in French ) that went in rebellion.
Result : more than 50 years of war because phyrgian has a coutry in Greece unreachable for revolution ( 99 % win score ).
And Elolidie revolution is lock too because phyrgian revolution has some country.
Should be some mecanic, when war is too long, the country divides into two entities.
( sorry for my English )
Very much agreed. It should give a bonus to political influence. Ever since it no longer does, I rarely match the ideas to the gov. type.
I find myself matching ideas to gov roughly half the time. I think its better this way than in 1.1.1, because the variation in combinations of ideas is so limited if the incentive to always match is too strong. Especially in first half of the game or with low tch countires, when there arnt many ideas to choose from.
As is in cicero, you can switch ideas somewhat frequently, while the usefulness of the matching bonus is highly dependant on the situation.
... if wanting to buff the matching ideas bonus, i’d rather see the unique bonuses buffed. If really wanting to add an influence boon to it again, a small multiplier would be better than a flat bonus. (A flat bonus ends up watering down the value of a loyal cabinet - very key to the game)
As is in cicero, you can switch ideas somewhat frequently, while the usefulness of the matching bonus is highly dependant on the situation.
... if wanting to buff the matching ideas bonus, i’d rather see the unique bonuses buffed. If really wanting to add an influence boon to it again, a small multiplier would be better than a flat bonus. (A flat bonus ends up watering down the value of a loyal cabinet - very key to the game)
if you make someone a Rival and then click your own character you can Plan an Assasination, in my experience it works 7/10 times.
Its around 40%-60% for me. But maybe thats just because i target people with higher power base.
For government ideas bonuses maybe have it so each matched idea gives part of the bonus. This rewards matching but not so much that it is always the best thing to do.
This popup:
is completely unnecessary. All the information is already on the previous one where user have to read it to choose yes or no. If anything, it can be added to a log.
is completely unnecessary. All the information is already on the previous one where user have to read it to choose yes or no. If anything, it can be added to a log.
This is already all customizable in your UI. Just click that cogwheel and define the settings.
Because nothing is more fun than waiting for RNGesus to give you the invention you desperately need?
There is a lot of things wrong with this popup:
First of all, every trade should have clear indication whether someone wants to sell a unit. Then player have a chance to react: get money, release a trade slot, send a gift to help with relations, etc.
When I come to this screen I don't want to see "X" because I don't have enough money - I know I don't because in the top left corner of the main screen all the time. Also - there should be an indication that player can change attitude (send gift for example) and get a good.
And it would be great if one could mark a trade good as "needed" and get a popup when it start to be aviable. It is close to impossible to get steppe horses or iron after the game starts. This should not work like this.
The last thing: trade game really need some kind of "market" that would allow You to bid for a resource, propose Your ally to switch someone else for You in that resource (or some other political action concerning switch of trade like treating someone) or offer some other deal like protection...
First of all, every trade should have clear indication whether someone wants to sell a unit. Then player have a chance to react: get money, release a trade slot, send a gift to help with relations, etc.
When I come to this screen I don't want to see "X" because I don't have enough money - I know I don't because in the top left corner of the main screen all the time. Also - there should be an indication that player can change attitude (send gift for example) and get a good.
And it would be great if one could mark a trade good as "needed" and get a popup when it start to be aviable. It is close to impossible to get steppe horses or iron after the game starts. This should not work like this.
The last thing: trade game really need some kind of "market" that would allow You to bid for a resource, propose Your ally to switch someone else for You in that resource (or some other political action concerning switch of trade like treating someone) or offer some other deal like protection...
Any kind of system to set up a reminder for when tradegood X is available for trade would go a long way i think.
Just wanted to pop in and say the game feels much more organic now -- it almost feels like my characters are alive, although it's not quite there. The game is a lot more fun, and I say this as a longtime boycotter since the 1.0 disaster. I am heartened by the changes and I look forward with what is to come.
I will say what I always say -- add more events! More flavor events. The more the better. That is what is making my nation feel alive at present, and more are needed.
I will say what I always say -- add more events! More flavor events. The more the better. That is what is making my nation feel alive at present, and more are needed.
I wish they introduced a system where you could get notifications when a trade good is available. As of now the AI knows it instantly and it feels like cheating because the player cannot be every second checking. Also the UI is painful to distinct which ones are available for purchase and which ones arent.
First time poster here, I really like the direction the game is heading in 1.2. I have some requests/comments, some of which I'm sure have been said before:
1. Can there be an army template as in EU:IV? Towards the middle/late game when I can field a ton of stacks, creating new large armies is a chore, and always adjusting primary, secondary, flanking cohorts and preferred tactic is a pain. A template like I want X heavy infantry, X light infantry, etc., with these as primary, secondary, and flanking units, along with tactic would be great. Also having detached units not changing tactics would be nice.
2. Interactions at the region level would be great, particularly when managing a larger empire. A lot of times after capturing new territory I want to blanket assimilate or convert, and having to select each individual province and repeat is tedious. I'm still all for changing policy at the province level if people want to specialize, but I find myself wanting the same policy across the region and manually selecting each province is a hassle.
3. I think there needs to be higher penalties associated with being a large empire, from wrong culture-group happiness to loyalty of generals and governors to diplomacy. Once I get higher tech levels and can easily cope with wrong culture-group happiness, I feel like the challenge is gone. Instead of it being only a step function where higher penalties kick in once you hit a new government rank, running penalties on the intensive margin would be great. Something like Penalty=k(Regions)^2, and you can adjust k depending on what facet you're penalizing.
4. Associated with 3, I think aggressive expansion should either be toned down or the threshold of serious consequences should be higher than 50. With penalties as described in 3, conquering is its own hassle now as the player has to ask, "Can I really support another region or two and the penalties associated with that?" instead of "I'll wait for AE to drop enough before I steamroll again, and repeat the process."
5. This one I know people have definitely said, but please allow a Keep Playing button after the end game, I cannot form the Roman Empire in the time horizon and it's killing me.
1. Can there be an army template as in EU:IV? Towards the middle/late game when I can field a ton of stacks, creating new large armies is a chore, and always adjusting primary, secondary, flanking cohorts and preferred tactic is a pain. A template like I want X heavy infantry, X light infantry, etc., with these as primary, secondary, and flanking units, along with tactic would be great. Also having detached units not changing tactics would be nice.
2. Interactions at the region level would be great, particularly when managing a larger empire. A lot of times after capturing new territory I want to blanket assimilate or convert, and having to select each individual province and repeat is tedious. I'm still all for changing policy at the province level if people want to specialize, but I find myself wanting the same policy across the region and manually selecting each province is a hassle.
3. I think there needs to be higher penalties associated with being a large empire, from wrong culture-group happiness to loyalty of generals and governors to diplomacy. Once I get higher tech levels and can easily cope with wrong culture-group happiness, I feel like the challenge is gone. Instead of it being only a step function where higher penalties kick in once you hit a new government rank, running penalties on the intensive margin would be great. Something like Penalty=k(Regions)^2, and you can adjust k depending on what facet you're penalizing.
4. Associated with 3, I think aggressive expansion should either be toned down or the threshold of serious consequences should be higher than 50. With penalties as described in 3, conquering is its own hassle now as the player has to ask, "Can I really support another region or two and the penalties associated with that?" instead of "I'll wait for AE to drop enough before I steamroll again, and repeat the process."
5. This one I know people have definitely said, but please allow a Keep Playing button after the end game, I cannot form the Roman Empire in the time horizon and it's killing me.
I like FoGE expansion system as it feels more natural with decadence and culture so some sort of consolidation system instead of the AE decay wait would be nicer. The current conquest system feels really wired since it is just expand as much as possible and wait for 50 AE for next expansion pulse. A better expansion system would maybe be quicker and less wait when small but slow down the larger you get since holding together what you have should become the main challenge for large empires.
The big issue with Imperator: Rome is that it don't have anything like legacy which give a reson to expand in FoGE even if expansion could be otherwise made detrimental such as Rome actually was probably losing money from many of its provinces which could be done in the game but in such case there would be no reason to expand while in FoGE each province can provide valuable legacy points.
The big issue with Imperator: Rome is that it don't have anything like legacy which give a reson to expand in FoGE even if expansion could be otherwise made detrimental such as Rome actually was probably losing money from many of its provinces which could be done in the game but in such case there would be no reason to expand while in FoGE each province can provide valuable legacy points.
