will there be?

[GermanWehrmacht]

i dont know if this has been asked yet but will there be a Crisis of the Third Century where the Roman empire will come close to collapse but also split the empire into two?

 

[ashbery76]

Beyond the time scale.

 

[unmerged(10971)]

No, the game doesn't even get into what we now call AD / CE. I suppose something similar could happen at some point, but as for that specific event... well, one, as I mentioned, the game doesn't go that far, and two, there will be few (if any) strictly historical events.

 

[dharper]

Honestly, I think Paradox is making the right decision not to go to BC/AD. Can you imagine all the trouble if they tried to simulate Jesus Christ? Or if they decided to leave it out?

 

[DarthJF]

I don't think Jesus would be a problem. Just an event that says "Christianity has been founded in Judea" would be all that it requires.

 

[Dspencer]

I don't think Jesus would be a problem. Just an event that says "Christianity has been founded in Judea" would be all that it requires.

Don't forget the option to destroy it before ruins everything.

 

[Jayavarman]

I am not sure setting the game to Roman years is worth the confusion.

 

[Jolt]

Don't forget the option to destroy it before ruins everything.

It'll make the game banned in the Vatican.

 

[hildoceras]

I am not sure setting the game to Roman years is worth the confusion.

surely it is a technical decision to prevent counting in reverse

 

[kierun]

I am not sure setting the game to Roman years is worth the confusion.

The really confusing thing would have been to have all the numbers in Roman.

So, now many is a LVX attrition again?...

 

[Slasher]

The really confusing thing would have been to have all the numbers in Roman.

So, now many is a LVX attrition again?...

Roman numerals are easy, I still remember the stuff from when I was like, ten or something, LVX is impossible btw if I remember corrently, LXV would be 65 though (I think)

 

[kierun]

Roman numerals are easy, I still remember the stuff from when I was like, ten or something, LVX is impossible btw if I remember corrently, LXV would be 65 though (I think)

Curse you dyslexia!

Thanks for pointing it out.

Wikipedia article on roman numerals for more information.

 

[Mohe]

Roman numerals are easy, I still remember the stuff from when I was like, ten or something, LVX is impossible btw if I remember corrently, LXV would be 65 though (I think)

Actually it is probably not impossible, it is clearly 55, I think most don't realize how sloppy people were with Roman numerals in actual practice

 

[Jolt]

55? L=50 X=10 V=5
50 plus 10 plus 5 equals 65.

 

[geek_knight]

55? L=50 X=10 V=5
50 plus 10 plus 5 equals 65.

But LVX means L+X-V= 50+10-5= 55.

 

[Hermes]

he is thinking that VX means 10-5

but there is already a perfectly fine roman numeral already for 5... its V so if you wanted to say 55 you'd say obviously say LV.
Methinks he is getting confused by the IX being 9 and thinking thats how it works.

I dont think someone who is sloppy would write 3 numerals instead of 2.