Would it have been better to base the game as a game about the early CE and late BCE rather than just on rome? Wouldent they be able to do much more with the game if they had?
-
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.
It would be different, but I don't know about 'better'. The Hellenistic period depicted by the game is actually full of interesting events, unfortunately the game just struggles to represent them completely. Setting the game in the early principate would just move the problem to a new era rather than fix anything.
I agree with Cheexsta. I find the period depicted a sound choice. Interestingly enough, it's the same timeframe covered by the classic Avalon Hill Republic of Rome boardgame. It's one of my favourite historical periods and it has a lot of potential to create a unique game experience.
Yes, there is definately nothing wrong with the time period, if it started any later it would be far too one-sided in favor of Rome, if it started any earlier than you would always have trouble modelling the sudden rise and fall of Macedonia under Alexander the Great.
But my gripe with the game is that it ends so early. Why does it need to end with Jesus? I think a more sensible end date would be the fall of the Western Roman Empire, i.e. around 500 AD. It could be set up so that once you get past around 300 AD, more and more barbarians could start descending down on Europe and you will have to focus all your energies on defending yourself rather than attacking your neighbours. Also the game could include the plagues and earthquakes that rocked the Roman World in Late Antiquity.
But my gripe with the game is that it ends so early. Why does it need to end with Jesus? I think a more sensible end date would be the fall of the Western Roman Empire, i.e. around 500 AD. It could be set up so that once you get past around 300 AD, more and more barbarians could start descending down on Europe and you will have to focus all your energies on defending yourself rather than attacking your neighbours. Also the game could include the plagues and earthquakes that rocked the Roman World in Late Antiquity.
I don't know, it might be a bit much to ask for the devs to include the later empire as well. I do think the end date should become softcoded, though.
You're talking about adding 500 more years to the game. That's enough for an entirely new game. Maybe enough for two new games. Long before you reach that date a human player will either have conquered every farthest corner of the map and converted it to Roman, or else destroyed Rome so it no longer exists.
Any simulation dealing with the Pax Romana needs its own focus and mechanics different from EVRVV.
I would agree. I think in such a game you don't play as Rome or any other nations (as in EU, HoI or Victoria), but rather as a dynasty within the Roman Empire (as in CK). Become governor, fight invading barbarians in the border legions, deal with rivals and perhaps fight your way through the preatorian guard to become Caesar yourself!