Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

What do you want most from EU:Rome 2 if it happens.

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
- earlier start date (maybe a 'conversion' of the calendar as most don't seem to get it :p )
- more... just more. ie bigger map. The graphics etc will obviously be superior
- more animals. I'd love to see elephants, camels and other animals that were used for warfare other than horses. And also the chance to create chariots
- March of the Eagles style of miltary. Which essentially means: a better way of distributing our army
- more and smaller provinces and thus more states. We have info on more clans/tribes/states so it's a shame to have a gray map.
- enhanced and dynamic formable states. If a small tribe grows and now holds 10 provinces it should be able to "grow" into something else that can be either historical or random. Terms such as 'League', 'Empire', 'Kingdom' can be used.
- more military units
- more naval units
- improved trade and ability to colonise in distant regions (depending on situations obviously). An example would be Phoenicians or Greeks being able to colonise a small province near Portugal or in the British isles for example, but it shouldn't be easy.
- 'East of the Rhine' should have a few tribes and a hybrid of native American mechanics should apply so that they can migrate or grow if they are capable
- Ability to hire pirates to mess around with enemy trade routes
- To be able to split up your empire if you grow to large and have no worthy heir, WRE/ERE & Diadochi style. These new states can either be vassals, maintain alliances or be enemies that try to wipe out each other. The first has been slightly present in EU: Rome from the rebels but that's just cutting it into 2. Diadochi style is so much better.
- Events to counter the rise of Judaism and Christianity if the timeline reaches that point


P.S: those who want to play as factions or dynasties are unwelcome :D I'd appreciate more intrigues and internal issues but don't make this a character game like CK2, it doesn't make sense. It's a period of empires, not feudal disputes.
 
-good political system
-good dinastic system with family trees for monarchs like in ck2
-better genetics
-option to create new monarch like in ck2 dlc
-timeline from alexander the great to germanic invasions
-extended map at least like in ck2 with india
-good culture system with option to create new culture by mixing two different cultures
-national ideas
 
Being able to mod diplomacy at long last.
static_modifiers has things like badboy and supply limits...but for some reason I am stuck with the +0.30 for Military alliance, but +3.00 for Tributary. Let us mod those files at least.
 
In the newest CK2 patch paradox has finally proven that they can implement the need for slow colonization at the same time that the provinces are a faction/are playable. As far as I know this is the first time in any paradox game where an area can be weak without being worth conquering. If Rome 2 is made they should definitely get rid of the empty provinces in favor of some similar system.
 
The things I want the most are:

- Game date from 272 BC to 235 AD (the date when Roman Principate started collapsing)

- A Late Roman Empire themed expansion/DLC that expands the date to 476 AD, or even 565 AD. With new government form (the Dominate), new factions, and the different army system.

- The player should be allowed to choose and play a single character and his dynasty, like in CK2.

- A very well-detailed (and historically accurate) government system where player and AI character can compete for elections, use their powers when holding a post (for example as Censor you could remove rival senators from list). A REAL Cursus Honorum, and embezzling money.

- A proper Senate, with senate posts like the 'First Speaker' and such. And ability to propose laws and diplomatic maneuvers, and call voting sessions. Senate sessions can also take place via events, where players interact and might gain/lose popularity, rivals and friends. Also affecting factions.

- Ability to form factions within the senate. Or at least join the existing ones (for example those militarists in EU-Rome) and work with fellow members. Factional rivalries can eventually result in civil wars.

- A full scale court trial system. Simply imprisoning someone over a minor offence is bland gameplay. Senators should be tried in the senate and vote should decide what punishment is given (fines for minor offences, expulsion from senate from major ones, banishment from realm or even execution for treason cases).

- A really detailed character system and interaction, based on CK2 and improved from there. With a lot of skills, private funds, loyalties and such. I want HBO Rome level family politics. :p

- Lots of factions, especially barbarian ones. And the map expanded to at least the borders of India so that the Seleucid Empire can be depicted properly.

- Ability to form custom provinces. Historically, borders of Italia and many provinces changed when Augustus became emperor, and some provinces disappeared altogether. If possible, changing provinces with time as well.

- A proper army command system where you can group several legions into a consular army. Proffessional armies instead of levies for most factions.

- Ability for the AI Consul/King/Pharaoh/Emperor to appoint the player as commander of armies. Only then would the player be able to control an army, and only his own army (to control all armies, player must be the faction leader). Same goes for fleets, if player is appointed as admiral.

- Private armies that cost a lot of cash but function as an army under player's command (although not without criticism and threat from senate, who can declare you traitor if you do something wrong since private armies are illegal). Crassus built a private army during emergency times, and to an extent Caesar did it too.

- Realistic civil wars with events if possible. Roman civil wars are probably the most interesting civil wars in history, and eventually had great influence in shaping the geopolitics of Europe, Africa and Middle East. Governor rebellions as well.

- EQUAL attention given to factions other than Rome. Athens was a democracy too. Carthaginian republic was even more powerful than Rome itself...until it was defeated. Sparta was a dual kingdom. Diadochi and Armenia had their own governments. Egypt returned to the old Pharaonic system with Greek influences. Tribal lords differed from the rest of the world.

- No stupid arbitrary restrictions like those present in Victoria II. For example giving high infamy for breaking truces, instead of disabling war altogether as in that game. Please Paradox, this is necessary.

- Also, allow us to rename brigades and ships. This was another stupid arbitrary restriction put there for no apparent reason.

- Realistic battles, both land and naval. They can use their great innovations made in HoI series.

- Choosing of military system. Hellenistic factions adopted Roman-style military during their last stages. Romans themselves used Hellenistic system very early on.

- A detailed population system, somewhere close to Victoria II. The governors of provinces have control over their population. Having to balance the number of slaves (who can rebel if in high numbers), bureaucrats, traders, peasants and so on was the key job of a Roman governor or Hellenistic Satrap.

- A detailed economic system too. Aside from general import-export, you need something working like Victoria II's world market that allows relative freedom of economy within your faction, and client states and possibly allies. We need MORE resources too.

- Ability for characters to build, or purchase/sell estates. Major reason for Roman expansion historically. Estates should produce goods that can be exported, but the profit go to the dynasty.

- Shortages of resources should have an effect. Lack of grain/food might provoke riots especially in big cities. Lack of weapons and armament can result in undersupplied armies. Lack of wood might render you unable to build ships (at least large ships), lack of stones can disallow fortifications. Resource shortages should also affect popularity.

- Bigger intrigue system. Plots to seize estates, have someone be charged for a crime, have someone divorced etc.

- Private citizen system for those who wish to retire from public life. Not every Patrician was necessarily a senator. But private citizens can have better chance for handling business and trade.

- A system for adoptions. This happend way too frequently within Rome and to some extent, Hellenistic empires.

- Realistic fabrication of casus-bellis. Rome announced that Carthage had broken treaties and used this to start Second Punic War. They used it as a casus belli. First Punic war itself started with Rome breaking treaty and crossing from Italy to Sicily, with Carthage using this as casus belli to declare war.

- A system that allows us to give war targets to allies/puppets, so that they attack a chosen point instead of goofing around with their armies.

- Ability to sell provinces like in EU3/EU4. Perhaps ability to buy provinces as well.

- Hostage, kidnapping and imprisoning systems. Hostages allow you to force your terms on someone, kidnapping allows you to take hostages, and imprisonment should work similar to that of CK2.

- Multiple commanders per army. An army should be composed of many legions, so each legion can have a character.

- Court and retinue. As a senator you have your family and followers. As a Hellenistic emperor you have powerful ministers and court nobles... etc.

- More government types. Also, everyone should be able to change into any government, and this Senate should not be exclusive to Rome.

- Perhaps a later expansion pack expanding the map to India to accomodate the huge and powerful Mauryan Empire, which started collapsing by mid-game. Another expansion pack that consists of Qin and Han Dynasties. Roman trade with both India and China was important.

- Proper trade routes, that can be blocked. The Silk Road, the grain shipment from Egypt to Rome, the Amber and Tin routes north of Danube, the trade routes from Egypt to India...and so on. Blockading ports should have a real effect.

....The list could go on. Paradox has the capacity to implement these features, a lot of them are present in CK2 already in primitive/feudal form to be relevant to the timeframe. A lot of others have been tried successfuly in Victoria II and EU series. I hope they develop Rome II soon, because it can sell great if they do it presently.
 
The ability to reform Alexander's Empire if you play as Macedon. Like, kind of a hidden thing like in Victoria II, where it was hidden that you could reform the Eastern Roman Empire. Basically like that :3

OH! Also maybe some kind of advanced alliance system for tribes? Since that happened often during the Roman era.
 
- Choosing of military system. Hellenistic factions adopted Roman-style military during their last stages. Romans themselves used Hellenistic system very early on.
Click to expand...
There's already an event that allows you to choose either Roman-style military or Greek style.

All of what Will said plus an actual use for personal wealth.
 
DKM said:
There's already an event that allows you to choose either Roman-style military or Greek style.

All of what Will said plus an actual use for personal wealth.
Click to expand...

I know that, mate. But that event fires only once in the game, and what I propose is that army system should be changeable any time (with huge costs and penalties of course). After all, the Hellenistic Phalanx system worked far better against Parthians and other nomadic cavalry powers, compared to the Roman maniples. Once a player no longer has to fight Romans or Gallic-style 'barbarian' troops and borders only some horse-archer empire, he should be able to switch the system again to adapt to this new threat. :)

And yes, I agree there. If they actually make Rome II based on CK2 (with player playing one dynasty), there will be a real use for personal wealth for every character.
 
I am not sure if Rome2 will be a reality any time soon but if we are patient we may see CK2 expansions go back to roman times very soon. With Charlemagne it's already back to VIII cent. :D
 
I like the ideas, although id rather have the base game let you only play within Rome . That way the DLC would be more like the early CK2 ones in that there's less of a need to balance what's free and what's paid - the paid part would simply unlock factions. This model will also let them make each faction more unique
 
WingedLion14 said:
I like the ideas, although id rather have the base game let you only play within Rome . That way the DLC would be more like the early CK2 ones in that there's less of a need to balance what's free and what's paid - the paid part would simply unlock factions. This model will also let them make each faction more unique
Click to expand...

I beg to disagree. fighting rome is as fun if not more as expanding the republic. a risky brand strategy to say the least. look at the legions of satisfied CA customers :D
 
Allowing only Rome to be played would make this game a bigger fail than EU-Rome. Really, people get tired of DLC spam soon enough. Besides, Paradox cannot simply unlock everything away for future releases, as there'll be mods enabling those factions for free.

alvaro said:
look at the legions of satisfied CA customers :D
Click to expand...

They exist at all? I thought all the fanboys of Rome II hid their faces in shame in a corner when the game turned out to be so bad... :p
 
One thing I would like to see is a nuanced treatment of culture and religion. Allow me to explain:

Consider the various populations of the Empire, in particular, the Greeks. They started off viewing the Romans as barbarians who happened to worship a pantheon that very nicely matched up with their own and who happened to have a good system of government. Eventually, the Greeks would adopt a totally alien religion (Christianity) just ahead of the Latin Romans. Around the same time, they also considered themselves Roman. So Roman, in fact, that they continued to consider themselves such long after the last vestiges of the Empire fell to the Turks. However, they continued to look down on the Latins to one degree or another throughout the millennia.,even though they were the original Romans. The same could be said for various parts of the Hellenistic successor states, to a lesser degree, about Greek culture in place of Roman.

So, ideally, the game would be able to model for a given province, simultaneously: political culture, local culture, and religion.
Political culture would basically represent what culture the inhabitants identify with on a political level. If it aligns with their current rulers, they consider themselves part of that state, not just a conquered population. They won't necessarily try for independence, though they may agitate for more power within the state. Of course, if it doesn't...
Local culture is just that, the culture of the people, as distinct from their political identity. They might still stick their old ways, speaking their traditional language, celebrating their traditional holidays, regardless of their political cultural alignment. Or, you may have totally assimilated them, which would make it easier to integrate their political culture.
Religion, we all know what this is, nothing new really needed here.

There could also be benefits to provinces that have certain cultures. For example, say Delphi maintains a local culture of Greek and a religion of Greek Paganism; there might be some gameplay bonuses (prestige, stability, whatever the equivalent perks in the game are) for the ruler, encouraging them to maintain those, even while make sure to assimilate their political culture.

With all this, the game would be able to model different circumstances within a vast empire quite well. Depending on how you expand and where you expand, you might be able to better assimilate a political culture, or maybe the local culture. If you expand diplomatically, you might be better able to assimilate your new citizens into your political culture, while maintaining their local culture. Meanwhile, places where you expand militarily, you might have to assimilate the local culture in order to assimilate the political culture.
 
Olav III said:
A map stretched from Iberia to Bactria and Scandinavia to Arabia.
A timespan between 335 BC - 476 AD (811 years!) Basically Classical Period and Late Antiquity
Click to expand...

I actually think the timespan should start in 431 BC (start of the Peloponnesian War).

DominusNovus said:
One thing I would like to see is a nuanced treatment of culture and religion. Allow me to explain:

Consider the various populations of the Empire, in particular, the Greeks. They started off viewing the Romans as barbarians who happened to worship a pantheon that very nicely matched up with their own and who happened to have a good system of government. Eventually, the Greeks would adopt a totally alien religion (Christianity) just ahead of the Latin Romans. Around the same time, they also considered themselves Roman. So Roman, in fact, that they continued to consider themselves such long after the last vestiges of the Empire fell to the Turks. However, they continued to look down on the Latins to one degree or another throughout the millennia.,even though they were the original Romans. The same could be said for various parts of the Hellenistic successor states, to a lesser degree, about Greek culture in place of Roman.

So, ideally, the game would be able to model for a given province, simultaneously: political culture, local culture, and religion.
Political culture would basically represent what culture the inhabitants identify with on a political level. If it aligns with their current rulers, they consider themselves part of that state, not just a conquered population. They won't necessarily try for independence, though they may agitate for more power within the state. Of course, if it doesn't...
Local culture is just that, the culture of the people, as distinct from their political identity. They might still stick their old ways, speaking their traditional language, celebrating their traditional holidays, regardless of their political cultural alignment. Or, you may have totally assimilated them, which would make it easier to integrate their political culture.
Religion, we all know what this is, nothing new really needed here.

There could also be benefits to provinces that have certain cultures. For example, say Delphi maintains a local culture of Greek and a religion of Greek Paganism; there might be some gameplay bonuses (prestige, stability, whatever the equivalent perks in the game are) for the ruler, encouraging them to maintain those, even while make sure to assimilate their political culture.

With all this, the game would be able to model different circumstances within a vast empire quite well. Depending on how you expand and where you expand, you might be able to better assimilate a political culture, or maybe the local culture. If you expand diplomatically, you might be better able to assimilate your new citizens into your political culture, while maintaining their local culture. Meanwhile, places where you expand militarily, you might have to assimilate the local culture in order to assimilate the political culture.
Click to expand...

I like the idea, it's very well thought.
 
I like that this thread is active! I would like to see the Senate with CKII like aspects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back