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.
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 this. It can also work for things such as romanized celts, ie romano-british and other various romano sub cultures.

Would people who identify with the political culture and state take some names from the political culture?
 
Another thing that really should be in there is engaging internal politics. In fact, that should be at the forefront of the game, since its vital for so many of the major and interesting factions of the era. Take, of course, Rome itself. It should be a struggle to maintain the various interests of the Republic: the plebs vs. the patricians, the various noble families against each other, the city of Rome vs. its allies. It seems like games set in the Roman era take it for granted that the formula is: be a Republic, expand, collapse into an Empire eventually.

Well, given that late-game is always a challenge to make engaging, this could be a continual challenge for the player that chooses to remain a Republic. Somehow expand your power without destabilizing the government to such a degree that a strongman can become the sole ruler.
 
I want to see it cover the whole of the era from early republic up to the end of the empire. I want to see the same family aspects that are in CK2 that were started in Rome but never really went anywhere. Out of all their games this one is the one I would love to see remade. I especially loved the 3d map and the lovely bright colours - best looking game out of all the Paradox games by far. Its just a shame the ping ponging battles are so bad in it.
 
Personally, I would love to see a religion system and religious mechanics that actually portray the relevant religions appropriately and aren't just copy-pasted from games meant to portray Christians and Muslims (with a dash of fantasy nonsense and stereotypes ala Rome 1).

Other than that, less EU influence and more CK influence. More character-driven gameplay, but with some more uniquely Rome mechanics to simulate not-quite-so-feudal kingdoms and republics of antiquity.
 
NoUsernamesHere said:
Personally, I would love to see a religion system and religious mechanics that actually portray the relevant religions appropriately and aren't just copy-pasted from games meant to portray Christians and Muslims (with a dash of fantasy nonsense and stereotypes ala Rome 1).
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate a bit onthis more as it has been some time since I played rome1
 
also you should be able to play a character even if landless, so that you can be involved in court intruigue and rise from general to governer or some such, or switch posts often like in a federal kingdom.
 
In my opinion it would be quite nice if the level of provinces would be reduced to city-level. So armies would march between cities and not between provinces. Would make army combat and maneuvering more flexible and exciting.
 
I think they shouldn't have a tech system. I don't really feel it's a period in history where technological advancement plays a great role. Something more like level of development, similar to Rome's civilization rating, but more developed, instead.
 
Two main things

1. That it does happen!

2. That it is a major release with expansions down the line not a Senduko or March of Eagles.
 
Well, the main question, if Rome II was to focus on families instead of states would be, how to create an interesting experience of putting ur family members into government positions and how to create mechanics which would create an interesting not oversimplified atmosphere of inner-statial competing for power.

Two things come to my mind, when thinking of this:

1. How would the candidates for offices be chosen?

2. How would the successor to an office be selected among those candidates.

I have the bad feeling, that those problems would be simply solved by bribery, resulting in the player dominating his republic each game after ten years.
 
Trunting said:
I have the bad feeling, that those problems would be simply solved by bribery, resulting in the player dominating his republic each game after ten years.
Click to expand...

You mean bribery, corruption and intrigue were NOT how people got into office?
 
The most important problem is: How would you make a dynastic system work inside of a republic, while ensuring, that the game stays playable. CKII's republic system is far too simple to be implemented on Rome and a simple bribery system to get into offices would soon see the player having taken over the republic, actually denying the possibility to play as part of a republic.
 
Expanded map: at least so it covers the north-central parts of Europe, Persia with central asia, the Arab peninsula and west and east africa, but prefferably all of Eurasia and Africa.

Expanded timeline: You should be able to play as late as the east-west Roman split and back thorugh all of Romes history and until Alexander the great, or when his father had just seized power in Macedonia.

More countries, way more countries and tribes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back