CKII type map can handle several cities in the same province with different owners.
-
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.
- Status
CKII type map can handle several cities in the same province with different owners.
Hey! There's an idea!
+1
Did you get this idea from some of the mods for Rome:Total War?
Olaus Petrus said:
Hm, well, this could work, but honestly I'd like EU:Rome to have its own style, and none of the complications coming with multi-holding provinces.
I like what Cliges mentioned above. The only drawback is that an early-stage can't evolve into a middle- or late-stage one without having a huuuuuge map from the get-go (this will drastically reduce the number of interested customers).
Hey! There's an idea!
+1
Did you get this idea from some of the mods for Rome:Total War?
Hm, well, this could work, but honestly I'd like EU:Rome to have its own style, and none of the complications coming with multi-holding provinces.
I like what Cliges mentioned above. The only drawback is that an early-stage can't evolve into a middle- or late-stage one without having a huuuuuge map from the get-go (this will drastically reduce the number of interested customers).
Actually, I never played the TW games outside of a few sessions with the demos. I guess the idea game from HoI II with its mini-scenarios which limited the choice of country and the section of the map combined with the different sections of the campaigns from the Age of Empires games which had several different scenarios within a campaign.
Of course for Rome, we would be going with different maps for different times, rather than just a piece of the "regular map" like how HoI II worked. Maybe even make them as DLCs Also, there would undoubtedly be the Grand Campaign which would use a big map and play out more or less in the same basic way as Rome I already does. It's an idea, at least.
But yes, the down side is that a game scenario might only be able to extend for so long under such circumstances.
Hey! There's an idea!
+1
Did you get this idea from some of the mods for Rome:Total War?
Hm, well, this could work, but honestly I'd like EU:Rome to have its own style, and none of the complications coming with multi-holding provinces.
I like what Cliges mentioned above. The only drawback is that an early-stage can't evolve into a middle- or late-stage one without having a huuuuuge map from the get-go (this will drastically reduce the number of interested customers).
My issue with different maps for different start dates is that since EUI I have almost exclusively played grand campaigns (I play occasional shorter campaigns only when some country isn't available at first start date or when some historical scenario is particularly interesting) and lack of grand campaign from the earliest start date to final date would be an issue which would affect to my buying decision.
IMO multi-holding system works fine and would work better than huge amount of provinces. In any case I think that original EU: Rome had too few provinces (even EUIII's Europe had more provinces and that game covered the entire world). Even without multi-holdings province number should be closer to CKII than first Rome.
Well, no matter what, there could be a grand campaign. I don't see what it would hurt to have a part of the game on a different map that plays prior to the GC start, especially if it accommodates the game better.
It wouldn't really be a grand campaign if you couldn't play it from first start date to last. Different maps could work only if you could move your exact borders, leaders and armies from one map to next once you have grown bigger. But playing separate independent scenarios would be disappointing thing to do in grand strategy game, if there wouldn't be continuity between the maps.
A rise of rome - conquest of italia game would be cool. Rome used to be an etruscan kingdom c. 570-501BC (that's one option). The main problem is do we want a europa universalis style empire building game where you play as the country or a CK2 style game where you play as the head of a roman patrician family where Rome is the main focus of the game and initially (minus any future DLCs and expansions) also the only country you can play as. So the idea is: Don't play as a country but as a family competing for power and political office within a country. If you get elected to the highest office you control the republic and determine foreign policy, make war and peace, negotiate, research techs, keep the plebs under control through bread and circuses etc. Also split money into state money and family money. Eg, if you spend state money on giving free bread to the poor to reduce riot risk the conservative factions might hate you (just like modern US republicans eh? lol) but if you spend your own family money no problem and the poor might actually like your family more for it. I;ve been thinking about making a game like this ever since Pax Romana was released.
Last edited:
I really hope Rome II will cling to EUR's hybrid game style. Improving it, of course.
The hybrid idea seems confusing. I'm all for a mix of empire building and interactive characters but from what I've seen of Rome it lacks focus. The game is just not interesting when you control a bunch of 40-50 beige colored romans. If you controlled a roman noble family and guided it through the ups and downs of the roman political system through bribery corruption and manipulation of the mob that would be awesome. Gaining control of the republic for 1 year (your consulship term) would be the aim of all this intrigue and political scheming.
It does lack focus in EUR, agreed. But i still believe that is better than being forced to choose between five families like in the Republic dlc for CK2. Consuls in ancient Rome came from a large number of families, patrician and plebeian.
Who said it had to be a choice of five families. That is CK2. If Rome is the only focus there could be 150!
Who said it had to be a choice of five families. That is CK2. If Rome is the only focus there could be 150!
And then imagine the laws!!!!!!
Anybody who's read "Masters of Rome" by Colleen McCullough will know what I mean.
Laws to distribute public land among veterans, laws to change the composition of juries (knights, senators, classes, etc.), laws about how many days it should be for other laws to take affect, laws to change the voting system, laws to increase taxes from 1% to 2%, laws to temporarily take cash from temples for a promissory note, laws to...oh my gooooooood!
What I'd like to see though, constructively speaking, is being able to choose a spouse for yourself and your family (you will play as paterfamilias, naturally, in Rome). You set/accept a dowry, AI assesses the political ramifications, the lineage and honor of your gens, relations between the paterfamiliaes, etc. I'd like that.
Last edited:
The only problem with this is I don't think consuls were elected from the same family often enough for a player to have control more than maybe once or twice every ten years, with the exception of particularly great men who spurned tradition and got themselves re-elected consecutively. I can't recall any before Marius(?) in the Late Republic. A purely family based game would end up too much politics and intrigue and not enough actual state-building. At least in CK2's The Republic you took control until your character died. I think there's a place for such a game, but it isn't a Paradox Grand Strategy game.
Personally I think that you should be able to play as state like in original EU:Rome or alternatively as political faction. Playing as a ruling dynasty works in monarchies like in Macedon or Egypt, but in case of republics I think that it would be more appropriate to play as a political party, although I admit that you would have to invent rather generic names for these factions, but who wouldn't want to play as Roman Populists?
If we had 200-300 families that had the power to join/leave political factions like the populists or the military, civic, religious or economic parties would that be awesome or what?
Highly disagree: I think playing a Republican dynasty would be even more interesting than a monarchical, especially in Roman Republic. Conflict between Patrician, Equestrian and Plebian families... Latin or foreign family... gaining power in Senate to take care laws beneficial to you get passed (thus allying with other families, political factions and political movements) and in the end overthrowing the Republic, instituting Dictatorship and holding power long enough to finally form a Monarchy with you in power, after which you fight to institute absolute rule of your dynasty.
While I could enjoy political game with certain dynasty, I just don't see how it could be practically implemented in Europa Universalis: Rome 2. Unless amount of Roman families is reduced to 3-5 then being control of just one family would mean that you'll have to let the AI handle most of the Republic and there would be long periods of time when you have no control at all outside the City and your own villa. That would be especially problematic in MP game where King of Macedon (Player A) has allied himself with Chieftain of the Gauls (Player B) and they declare war against Rome. Meanwhile head of the patrician family of the Junii (Player C), whose family is in opposition, farms his personal lands and during the third year of the war senate gives one legion at his cousin's command. Yep, lot's of fun.
Last edited:
I see no problems wit there being 200-300 dynasties in the roman republic. remember CK2 has hundreds of dynasties. Just because families in Rome 2 would all get concentrated into one city (Rome) doesn't not mean it is impossible, quite the contrary. Not like the other nations like Macedon or Seleucid would have hundreds of families, they would only have 1 dynasty - the ruling dynasty. Playing a monarchy would be more or less like EU where you have full control.
- Status