|
Fintilgin posted:Jesus, EU Rome must have done really, really, really poorly even they're talking about a kickstarter to gauge interest. Of course, I'm inclined to think that it did poorly because it was a so-so game, and and a full-fledged Rome/Ancient Empires game that got the same love as CKII or EUIV would do tons better. I think they're really underestimating the number of people that would buy EU Rome 2. If Victoria 2 sold enough copies to justify two expansions, I can't imagine that a game about one of the most political-intriguey, empire-buildey eras of all time would be a bad bet. Perhaps they're also putting a lot of weight on the subject matter, but then I'd like to offer up CK2 as a counter-point to that: CK2 is a straight-up great strategy game, medieval setting notwithstanding, and I think that a Rome game done really well would sell really well, even for those people for whom the Ancient Age setting isn't really a draw.
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 06:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:04 |
|
|
NEED TOILET PAPER posted:So, uh, guys, in a week the Three Month Rule ends for HoD and someone can finally LP it. Is anyone up for the task? Because I'll do it if nobody else comes forward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 06:55
|
|
|
Don Gato posted:Does Steppe Wolfe count as an antiquity mod? I've had fun with it, because it's the most beautiful trainwreck I've ever seen. Steppe Wolfe is whatever you want it to be. I so hope that that team makes a Steppe Wolfe mod for EU4.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 06:56
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Perhaps they're also putting a lot of weight on the subject matter, but then I'd like to offer up CK2 as a counter-point to that: CK2 is a straight-up great strategy game, medieval setting notwithstanding, and I think that a Rome game done really well would sell really well, even for those people for whom the Ancient Age setting isn't really a draw. I'd say that the setting was a strength if anything, really. CK2 has been able to draw a larger audience, and a lot of those players like the era the game is set in. I'd say there's a large overlap between those interested in a Medieval setting and those interested in an Antiquity setting. Also I want my absurdly long mega-LP, drat it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 12:53
|
|
|
Am I the only one who has always viewed Rome as the most "popular" historical setting. Only challenger is really ww2. So if Paradox want to get more people to Grand Strategy a EU: Rome II or an "easy" Hearts of Iron would be the best ways to go.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 13:28
|
|
|
lullelulle posted:Am I the only one who has always viewed Rome as the most "popular" historical setting. Only challenger is really ww2. A game focused on the Fall of Rome, make it happen Paradox.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 14:19
|
|
|
Vicky2 mod question, is there one that simplifies the soldier pops? As in unifies total soldier pops into something like manpower? This is the only thing that really annoys me these days, I am not sure if it's because of assimilation or migration but I constantly have to replace regiments because the pop got too small. It feels like a terrible mechanic for someone who likes "symetrical" stacks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 16:28
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I think they're really underestimating the number of people that would buy EU Rome 2. If Victoria 2 sold enough copies to justify two expansions, I can't imagine that a game about one of the most political-intriguey, empire-buildey eras of all time would be a bad bet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Isn't CK2's great strength that it's a soap opera game, not a strategy game? Not that this is an argument against a Rome game, but it should perhaps explicitly not be an EU game. It would also be really funny if Paradox took great care in making characters look prettier than their CK2 counterparts, and the map/interface brighter, happier and more colorful, to really play up the grandeur of Rome. Yeah, Rome suffers a bit from the EU prefix and not really being sure what kind of game it wants to be. I'm not entirely sure what I'd want Rome 2. I have this vague idea that it should be a game based around the assumption that the player is only going to play as the Roman Republic, in a way that would almost be like managing several dynasties in CK2 simultaneously. You have to try and expand and preserve the glory of Rome, while trying to balance the political factions within the Senate looking to advance their personal power. As the player you want to try to preserve the senate because it makes the Empire governable, but this gets harder and harder as time goes on and eventually when someone declares a civil war you'll want to pick to play as the side trying to set up an imperial dynasty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
I think a new Rome game would sell like loving hotcakes nowadays. EU: Rome was admittedly not particularly great but with the increased quality of PI games since and including CK2 and all the lessons they've learned since then--not to mention the increased consumer base, since I'm pretty sure CK2 had a much wider release than most grand strategy games--a new Rome would be great and appeal to a lot of people. A little bit of EU, a little bit of Victoria, and a lot of CK2 would make a perfect Rome game. I don't know, I'm sure the guys at PI thought a lot more about this then I have, so maybe I'm just blinded by the fact that I've always been hoping they'd give Rome another shot ever since CK2 came out and was so amazing. I know I would be a guaranteed purchase, if nothing else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
WeaponGradeSadness posted:I think a new Rome game would sell like loving hotcakes nowadays. EU: Rome was admittedly not particularly great but with the increased quality of PI games since and including CK2 and all the lessons they've learned since then--not to mention the increased consumer base, since I'm pretty sure CK2 had a much wider release than most grand strategy games--a new Rome would be great and appeal to a lot of people. A little bit of EU, a little bit of Victoria, and a lot of CK2 would make a perfect Rome game. From what I remember of the stream, they basically said "Yeah, the people calling for Rome 2 sure are great..and loud. But, uh, barely any. Think about it like this: Do you think you would make a profit off of it?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
Beamed posted:From what I remember of the stream, they basically said "Yeah, the people calling for Rome 2 sure are great..and loud. But, uh, barely any. Think about it like this: Do you think you would make a profit off of it?" Well, I think they could. I'm pretty sure Ancient Rome is more popular among a general audience than the Victorian Era.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
My biggest fear is that if they decide to do Rome, they'll make a half-assed half-game out of it, such as Sengoku, MoTE or, well, the original Rome. Getting a Crusader Romans sort of thing would be mighty cool, especially since it'd lend itself well to CK-like DLC scheme, adding new mechanics and unlocking Carthage, Gallic Tribes, Diadochi dynasties and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
Yeah, Paradox has this tendency to make half-arsed games every now and then.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:My biggest fear is that if they decide to do Rome, they'll make a half-assed half-game out of it, such as Sengoku, MoTE or, well, the original Rome. Getting a Crusader Romans sort of thing would be mighty cool, especially since it'd lend itself well to CK-like DLC scheme, adding new mechanics and unlocking Carthage, Gallic Tribes, Diadochi dynasties and whatnot. Even if this was to happen, modders could turn it around and make a great game. I generally think if they ever dabbled in the period again, it wouldn't be a half arsed job.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
BillBear posted:Even if this was to happen, modders could turn it around and make a great game. Got a link to that Sengoku mod handy? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
Or the Diplomacy mod. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
WeaponGradeSadness posted:I think a new Rome game would sell like loving hotcakes nowadays. EU: Rome was admittedly not particularly great but with the increased quality of PI games since and including CK2 and all the lessons they've learned since then--not to mention the increased consumer base, since I'm pretty sure CK2 had a much wider release than most grand strategy games--a new Rome would be great and appeal to a lot of people. A little bit of EU, a little bit of Victoria, and a lot of CK2 would make a perfect Rome game. Rome would work best as yet another DLC for CK2. Or as a standalone scenario with the CK2 engine, CK2: The Rise and Fall of Rome. The CK2 interface and character driven game in my opinion is a better way of handling the pre-EU3 games. Victoria and Hearts of Iron are just too complicated, and EU is a country-centric game and doesn't work as well for something like Rome where personal interactions are the way countries are run.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
For a Fall of Rome game, they'd need to build in mechanics that actually encourage the player to let Rome fall. The player should be one of the political dynasties, using intrigue and forcing civil wars to keep your guy on the emperor's throne. Things like the Year of the 4 Emperors should be common and encouraged.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
Gorgo Primus posted:Got a link to that Sengoku mod handy? http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?658595-Sengoku-There-s-too-many-warring-states-in-Japan
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:My biggest fear is that if they decide to do Rome, they'll make a half-assed half-game out of it, such as Sengoku, MoTE or, well, the original Rome. Getting a Crusader Romans sort of thing would be mighty cool, especially since it'd lend itself well to CK-like DLC scheme, adding new mechanics and unlocking Carthage, Gallic Tribes, Diadochi dynasties and whatnot. Yeah Rome was already kinda half assed in that the game really wanted you to either play as Rome and nothing else, or quickly become a Rome-like republic/empire ASAP. It had some cool ideas, (I loved the sacrificing to the god(s) mechanic) but if you wanted to play as say a random Gaul nation, you had little to no ability to get CBs or find out what CBs you have, you will be raided by barbarians you have no hope of protecting yourself against, and if you wait too long (about 20 years) any war you declare will involve Rome (although iirc a beta patch fixed this). Wiz's mod fixed a lot of these problems but to compare it to say EUIII, the base game was underwhelming. That said, given what they said in that video that was linked earlier, it seems to me Paradox's position on it is if they do it, they don't want to half rear end it, which does give me hope even if it reduces the chances it would be made, that if it ever did happen it wouldn't be half assed. I would totally donate to a Kickstarter for it at least  .
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
Gorgo Primus posted:Got a link to that Sengoku mod handy? Let's forget that game ever existed. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:I have this vague idea that it should be a game based around the assumption that the player is only going to play as the Roman Republic, in a way that would almost be like managing several dynasties in CK2 simultaneously. Y'know, I could almost get on board with that. Make the entire game built around playing as Rome or a family in the Roman Republic. Go into plenty of detail with the government etc, and then you could unlock other factions with large (Old Gods scale) DLC/expansions, like one that unlocks and details the Diadochi like the Ptolomeys and Seleucids, one that unlocks Gauls/Britons/Germans, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?658595-Sengoku-There-s-too-many-warring-states-in-Japan That's a mod for CK2, not Sengoku. That's like saying you can make Diplomacy a great game by modding it, and then linking to MoTE with the countries changed to those circa 1912.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
According to certain folks at the Paradox forums, you're close-minded and uncreative if you don't think EU4 will be suitable for a World War One scenario.  Why don't more people just turn to Darkest Hour if they want a WWI game, rather than trying to force cumbersome mechanics into games which were clearly not made for it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
Nightblade posted:In my latest Japan game I westernised sometimes in the 1840s after annexing Dai Nam. China was their ally and I beat them up so bad they fell to reactionary rebels shortly after. All the substates became independent and..  Now do it as Korea 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 18:24
|
|
|
I always figured that the most interesting thing about the Roman Republic was the interplay between foreign policy and internal power struggles. Yeah, Caesar's conquests are pretty cool, but the thing that really makes us/the Romans care about them is the fact that they meant immense political power. That, I think, should be at the core of a Rome game, the idea that the Roman Republic doing really good is a double edged sword, if it's really a single general that's doing all the heavy lifting. It's also the opposite focus of the EU games, which are very much about internal policies serving foreign policies, instead of foreign policies serving internal goals. I also think this would really work best if everyone else were just part of the environment the Roman Republic existed in, because otherwise you would really take the focus away from the internal politics. Well, part of the environment until Rome conquers them, and they eventually become players that upset the balance of power once more.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
Nightblade posted:In my latest Japan game I westernised sometimes in the 1840s after annexing Dai Nam. China was their ally and I beat them up so bad they fell to reactionary rebels shortly after. All the substates became independent and.. How the hell did you manage to get 94% literacy after conquering China?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 18:53
|
|
|
Only full states should count towards literacy, and there's so drat many pops in China that they'll never promote.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
Nightblade posted:In my latest Japan game I westernised sometimes in the 1840s after annexing Dai Nam. China was their ally and I beat them up so bad they fell to reactionary rebels shortly after. All the substates became independent and.. The most unbelievable thing about this screenshot is that you have 0 unread newspapers in the 1890's.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
DerLeo posted:Only full states should count towards literacy, and there's so drat many pops in China that they'll never promote. Yeah, that, but I actually managed to turn quite a few of them into full states. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
Beamed posted:From what I remember of the stream, they basically said "Yeah, the people calling for Rome 2 sure are great..and loud. But, uh, barely any. Think about it like this: Do you think you would make a profit off of it?" I don't know if this is the actual case or not, but I get the impression from how they talk about that stuff that they attribute the failure of Rome to the setting. Like, "Rome sold poorly, so I guess people don't want Roman era strategy games from us." If that's what they're doing, then I couldn't disagree more. To be frank, Rome didn't sell well because it just wasn't a very good game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
If PI doesn't have any particularly enthusiastic and skilled Classicists or Antiquarians on staff, having experience from CK2 and such isn't going to really help that much. The fact that they have staff who love making a medieval intrigue simulator is a lot of why CK2 is a strong game, and those parts may not be interchangeable with making a Rome-based game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 21:13
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:I don't know if this is the actual case or not, but I get the impression from how they talk about that stuff that they attribute the failure of Rome to the setting. Like, "Rome sold poorly, so I guess people don't want Roman era strategy games from us." If that's what they're doing, then I couldn't disagree more. To be frank, Rome didn't sell well because it just wasn't a very good game. That, and the fact that it was a new IP instead of a sequel, which I think is bullshit. I think stuff like Rome and Sengoku weren't as popular and didn't do as well because they were smaller games of more limited scope done more quickly. My suspicion is that even if the first Crusader Kings had never existed and CKII had been an entirely new game (but otherwise identical) it would have done just as well or nearly as well in the long run. I loved CKI, but I'm not under any illusions that it sold zillions of copies and established a well known ip that moved truckloads of the sequel. CKII sold because it is a great game. Stuff like Rome and Sengoku... less so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
CK2 sold because it actually has a user interface. I actually cannot play EU3 because it is a nightmare trying to work out what the hell is actually going on. Also it is ugly as sin. V2 is bearable, but the economy system in it and working out why things don;t work is a nightmare. I wanted to play these games for so long and could only get started with CK2.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
Antinumeric posted:CK2 sold because it actually has a user interface. No, Vicky 2 has a nice interface. It's just a nice interface that shows you a fundamentally impenetrable spreadsheet of game mechanics. CK2 sold because the core concepts are accessible and fun. Paradox games aren't really set by time period - they're set by theme. It isn't enough to say that a game set in the classical era would be fun, you need to work out exactly what that game would be about. My view is that for the game to be really good then Paradox would have to depart from the usual sandbox design and centre everything around the unique experience of guiding the Roman Republic. But perhaps that isn't right.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 22:24
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Paradox games aren't really set by time period - they're set by theme. It isn't enough to say that a game set in the classical era would be fun, you need to work out exactly what that game would be about. My view is that for the game to be really good then Paradox would have to depart from the usual sandbox design and centre everything around the unique experience of guiding the Roman Republic. But perhaps that isn't right.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 23:19
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Paradox games aren't really set by time period - they're set by theme. It isn't enough to say that a game set in the classical era would be fun, you need to work out exactly what that game would be about. My view is that for the game to be really good then Paradox would have to depart from the usual sandbox design and centre everything around the unique experience of guiding the Roman Republic. But perhaps that isn't right. I think they could do both a Sandbox and a really good Roman Empire. Do something like CK2, where they make the base game just about the Romans, and then release DLCs that add in functionality for Carthage, Greek city states and etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 23:41
|
|
|
I think Rome 2 would succeed best as a stand-alone expansion or such to CK2. You play a family in the Republic, and its your goal to build up support in the Senate so you can be elected to offices, be granted rule over provinces, and finally become so powerful you can overthrow the Senate and rule as Emperor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 23:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:04 |
|
|
A Civil War game or DLC based on the MoTE engine would be pretty successful, I imagine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 01:03
|
|