I agree with that
For example, I've played Rome and Carthage
I actually did the same thing in both campaign, beat the my antagonist and invade Mediterranean coast, just the other way around
- 3
- 1
Weekly unoriginal comparison with EU4
- Thread starter Ffc
- 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.
For example, I've played Rome and Carthage
I actually did the same thing in both campaign, beat the my antagonist and invade Mediterranean coast, just the other way around
China expansion in 2022?
May include Japan as well:
It is generally considered that modern Japanese culture began with the mingling of the Jōmon civilization with the arrival of Korean and Chinese refugees from the aggression taking place during the Qin and Han dynasties (221 BCE–9 CE). In 250 BCE the Yamato state unified Japan and involved itself extensively in the activities of Korea and China; there was constant cross‐immigration and settlement between these areas. This settlement and interaction, however, was drastically reduced around the time of the Tang dynasty in China, which saw Japan retreat from international affairs.
May include Japan as well:
It is generally considered that modern Japanese culture began with the mingling of the Jōmon civilization with the arrival of Korean and Chinese refugees from the aggression taking place during the Qin and Han dynasties (221 BCE–9 CE). In 250 BCE the Yamato state unified Japan and involved itself extensively in the activities of Korea and China; there was constant cross‐immigration and settlement between these areas. This settlement and interaction, however, was drastically reduced around the time of the Tang dynasty in China, which saw Japan retreat from international affairs.
- 2
- 2
- 1
It would be a lot of work to have some unique Chinese government and mechanics, I think that developing tribes and in particular nomadic and their migration is more important
Or even a unique government for Indian countries
- 12
At the time, China was doing a bit of uniting and civil war - much like the Diadochi - and the more unique aspects of their government weren't yet in place. And that aside, the current mechanics of the game could passably handle China WAY better than say CK, which is really quite bad at coping with any state suffixed "Empire". I'm usually not part of the "China DLC when" crowd, but in I:R, it's actually something I'd like to see. It's an interesting, dynamic period in Chinese history and you could have some interesting alt-hist scenarios crop up, plus, it would give my One True Love Persia more to do.
- 8
- 2
No discussion about that.
2021 tribes and migration and trade and other things.
2022 geographic expansion
Chinese government should be a special form of EMPIRE. And the
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
Yeah I could see thatAt the time, China was doing a bit of uniting and civil war - much like the Diadochi - and the more unique aspects of their government weren't yet in place. And that aside, the current mechanics of the game could passably handle China WAY better than say CK, which is really quite bad at coping with any state suffixed "Empire". I'm usually not part of the "China DLC when" crowd, but in I:R, it's actually something I'd like to see. It's an interesting, dynamic period in Chinese history and you could have some interesting alt-hist scenarios crop up, plus, it would give my One True Love Persia more to do.
- 1
Events can have multiple-choice outcomes, and their chances to occur can be tied to a wide array of circumstances.
Event outcomes apply modifiers or other effects that impact / are used by various mechanics in the game.
I don't mind the events per se. What I mean is, If I look at the outcome options for a lot of events, and spend a few seconds crunching numbers to gauge their gameplay impact, it appears as though the content designer or whoever designed or changed the event did not do so informed by any - in my view - sufficiently nuanced consideration of how balanced or relevant the outcomes are with respect to affected game mechanics.
... A player might just glance at the outcomes of any given event and assume they are of some relevance. Sometimes they are,
but at least as often they are not.
... and I’m not talking about something that requires in-depth programming to change here, mostly it's a matter of simple scripting.
... look at the modding community for imperator and other paradox games. Look at what can be done with event scripting to drive gameplay. Then look back at some of the events in Imperator with a critical eye.
Events are only a boring necessary evil if they are designed as such, or tolerated as such.
.. I don't mind reading a good event out loud on stream many times if it involves characters that I’ve been compelled to care about and present choices that produce interesting outcomes.
... but as is, the game is giving me popups to decide between +5 global stability or a happiness bonus in one territory for one year
.. popups suggesting there is a food shortage in a province where food stocks will remain at their brim even after that -33% food production debuff.
The list goes on.
I just want a tighter design, of event outcomes as well as of various mechanics like powerbase, senatorial influence and food.
(I also want to see diplomacy and trade flesh out, but that's a separate point)
Last edited:
- 7
I think Empire should be a fourth type of government overall - not just for Roman and a hypothetical future Chinese one - focused on administrating broad swathes of land. You could further subdivide into categories like Martial (Rome), Administrative (Persia, China) and Theocratic Empires to ensure that Empire isn't a monolithic thing, much like you have different Republics, Tribes and Monarchies now, with laws governing different types of succession and recruitment of administrators. Different regions - or rather, integrated cultures - should also unlock new techs which allowed different laws differentiating regional governance. So if a Persian Empire got a bunch of Han slaves and integrated them, they could unlock techs allowing for the "Examination" Administration Law, for example. Anyways, I should probably refine this train of thought and make a suggestion thread instead of going on about it here.
- 3
- 2
- 1
I think this "most factions feel the same" feeling is still the case, because the updates are just focusing on mechanics, which are for all factions the same and while we received a couple of faction DLCs, they only adress the greek world (plus Rome and Carthage, but their missions are pretty generic conquer missions).
1. Imo it would already help, if the three main government types receive more love (especially tribes and to some extent monarchies, republics need some more refinements - and some further content would be of course also nice). Some more differences between the subtypes would help even more.
2. Next we need some flavour packs = the mission packs need some more flavour for the culture group it focuses on like the flavour pack from CK III, where you get some unique content for the vikings by adding and changing stuff to/from existing features - this becomes in I:R more and more a thing, because we get more and more deep and interesting features, which should vary in smaller parts.
3. More diverse events, character portraits, character backgrounds and maybe even UI looks for the culture groups. Maybe these should be seperate small DLCs, so only people have to buy them, who enjoy this stuff like me. Currently all barbarians or greeks or eastern factions or indians, etc. doesn't have a lot of diverse looks within them and you often see the same clothes, hairstyles and even facial types (there are minor differences between every face, but they still look pretty similar).
4. Buildings based on government types and/or culture groups for more diversity in city and settlement management. But before that, we first need an enhanced version of the current building system (there are already a lot of threads about that)
About the overall game: Things like trade, diplomacy, subjects, internal politics, naval gameplay, etc. hopefully get an update aswell, because these things still aren't in the best shape, which is the case for EU IV. If they receive updates, they will exceed EU IV and I:R finally will be the better game overall. So EU IV has the advantage of already having so much updates, but I:R has the greater potential, but potential needs to be used.
But as long as Paradox supports I:R, I'm optimistic that the devs will make the best out of I:R
1. Imo it would already help, if the three main government types receive more love (especially tribes and to some extent monarchies, republics need some more refinements - and some further content would be of course also nice). Some more differences between the subtypes would help even more.
2. Next we need some flavour packs = the mission packs need some more flavour for the culture group it focuses on like the flavour pack from CK III, where you get some unique content for the vikings by adding and changing stuff to/from existing features - this becomes in I:R more and more a thing, because we get more and more deep and interesting features, which should vary in smaller parts.
3. More diverse events, character portraits, character backgrounds and maybe even UI looks for the culture groups. Maybe these should be seperate small DLCs, so only people have to buy them, who enjoy this stuff like me. Currently all barbarians or greeks or eastern factions or indians, etc. doesn't have a lot of diverse looks within them and you often see the same clothes, hairstyles and even facial types (there are minor differences between every face, but they still look pretty similar).
4. Buildings based on government types and/or culture groups for more diversity in city and settlement management. But before that, we first need an enhanced version of the current building system (there are already a lot of threads about that)
About the overall game: Things like trade, diplomacy, subjects, internal politics, naval gameplay, etc. hopefully get an update aswell, because these things still aren't in the best shape, which is the case for EU IV. If they receive updates, they will exceed EU IV and I:R finally will be the better game overall. So EU IV has the advantage of already having so much updates, but I:R has the greater potential, but potential needs to be used.
But as long as Paradox supports I:R, I'm optimistic that the devs will make the best out of I:R
- 6
- 1
It isn't. Imperator's isn't either, but EU4 trade is absolutely garbage for one main reason: It ain't trade. Trade was mutually beneficial, in EU4, trade is only theft. There is no mutual benefit to upstream nations when it comes to trading with nations downstream. It is specifically and singularly all about taking as much wealth as possible and pulling it to yourself. That is not a good trade system.
- 12
- 3
- 2
- 1
Exactly, trade is number one on my list of things that need to be completely redesigned in EU5.
The worst part is that the trade system in EU is fundamentally eurocentric. It works if you're a European colonialiser playing a fairly historical game. But good luck if you're China or Japan. Disregarding gamey strategies like rushing the cape, you'll never be able to make money of trade. The gods of Paradox have decided that wealth can only flow from Asia to Europe, never the other way around, so you're shit out of luck.
- 3
- 2
It’s Europa Universalis though, not Asia Universalis or so. Former characterises European colonialiam and expansion to the New World, both hiatorically happened, latter will either remain fiction or become reality of the 21st cebtury with Chinese takeover as world dominating power.
- 1
Alright, so we should probably reflect the fact that all the European silver went east due to trade, to the point where it caused a shortage of bullion? Because right now, in EU4, that isn't represented at all save for a minor event - west benefits from trade, east does not. This is not how it worked until the very late game, and beginnings of the High Imperialsm.
This was incidentally also a problem in Rome - the silver drain was commented on by contemporaries.
- 4
- 3
- 1
Then how come that 50% of patches so far have been focused on areas outside Europe (by my count 12 patches for EU, 12 for non-EU and 6 without focus)?
The reality is that EU stopped being only about Europe a loooong time ago - it's just that the trade system hasn't caught up yet.
Last edited:
- 1
Well if it's the only problem for you, I propose to have moving nodes so streams could go in one direction or another depending on several thing (trade hability? Pops asking for particular goods?)
Of course it would need some rewamp, I just like the general idea
I mean, it's not the only problem. As Lambert pointed out, the whole system of trade being one-sided is strange.
But also the change you're proposing ends up being a lot more complex mathematically then it sounds when you're describing it in words like this. That's the reason why trade in EU is one way to begin with.
No, both for EU5 and for the trade update that Imperator will hopefully get eventually, PDS needs to throw out the EU4 system entirely and come up with a new, completely different solution.
- 1
This is a problem, though I’m glad to see that their goal failed if you take a look at the poorly copied mechanics from European heartland such as HRE or rereligious conflicts. I tried the Shogunate as well as the Ming mini-game once but got so easily bored that after that even a France campaign was really fun to me. EU4 is just not Sengoku, Civ6 or whatever, and I’m happy to keep it this way.
I just wait to see a great brand new system
But to be honest, I really like EU4 one even if there are some problems, at least I find it fun to interact with, that's not the case with Imperator one
The thing is that they want to make a non-Eurocentric game from the framework of a Eurocentric game. I'm not sure you can expect totally satisfying results from that. (Australian Aborigenes and Maoris embracing colonialism after everybody else, what is that supposed to represent?)
I understand that feeling. The most diverse part of the map is Europe because of the many small tribals. MENA, Persia and India are dominated by large states (Carthage, Egypt, Antigonids, Seleucids, Maurya, Bactria, Armenia). It may be helpful for more subject nations to be added to these regions of the game. Such as Pergamon and Persis under the Seleucids.