|
corn in the bible posted:please make EU mesopotamia
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:15 |
|
|
Rome's democratic political system was a pretty interesting experiment, where internal politics would restrict your foreign policy decisions and you needed to actively juggle the Senate in order to push through your agenda, or else groom a charismatic, unifying superleader who can push through whatever you want except oops, he's gone and made himself dictator now that he enjoys widespread popular support. I vaguely recall it being kinda frustrating at times to actually play with, though, with a fair lot of micromanagement involved in juggling factions and I'm not sure if faction influence was ever very well balanced, being hard to reduce the influence of certain factions once you've laid down the foundations for their rise without tearing down half the empire. Not to mention of course how you'd tear your hair out if for whatever reason the Senate resolutely refused to accept a favorable peace treaty in a war you have no chance of winning. Man, I kinda want to fire up EU:Rome now just to see how it compares to my extremely hazy memories of it. Cantorsdust posted:I think something overlooked in Rome was that it made the province resource and trading system mean something mechanically, which is something that CK2 completely lacks and EU4 mostly lacks (aside from the resource monopoly bonuses, which you don't really plan for). Rome had strategic resources in each province, some required to make army units, some improved building, navy, etc. It gave you a reason to trade and conquer that you don't see again until Victoria. I'd like to see that system return again. The idea of trading strategic resources with very tangible benefits is worth keeping, but holy poo poo was trade a micromanagement nightmare in Rome 1.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
I wanna be babylon
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
If the game was going to be based on a Roman family, I feel there should probably be some kind of tag-switching mechanism built into the game. The lifetime of a gens was much shorter than that of the empire, especially for any gens that rose to become the imperial family. Almost every dynasty flamed out in a civil war, and the game should encourage that to happen to maintain a historical feel. It would feel stupid and overly-gamey if the player could easily keep the same dynasty going from 31 BC to 475. At the same time, I'd want to play a campaign that covered the sweep of Roman history, so I'd want to jump back in as a different family. Players would probably want to keep playing as the emperor, but one problem that might come from that is they wouldn't be motivated to commit to fighting a civil war, since nothing destabilized the empire as much as a selfishly motivated patrician devoting the state's resources to their own personal interests. The tag switching should move players to start again as a less-powerful family climbing to the top under the new administration, basically.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Flip Yr Wig posted:If the game was going to be based on a Roman family, I feel there should probably be some kind of tag-switching mechanism built into the game. The lifetime of a gens was much shorter than that of the empire, especially for any gens that rose to become the imperial family. Almost every dynasty flamed out in a civil war, and the game should encourage that to happen to maintain a historical feel. It would feel stupid and overly-gamey if the player could easily keep the same dynasty going from 31 BC to 475. At the same time, I'd want to play a campaign that covered the sweep of Roman history, so I'd want to jump back in as a different family. Players would probably want to keep playing as the emperor, but one problem that might come from that is they wouldn't be motivated to commit to fighting a civil war, since nothing destabilized the empire as much as a selfishly motivated patrician devoting the state's resources to their own personal interests. Alternatively, when a civil war happens the troops loyal to the emperor and the troops loyal to the usurper both break off from the empire proper to fight it out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
Flip Yr Wig posted:If the gam e was going to be based on a Roman family, I feel there should probably be some kind of tag-switching mechanism built into the game. The lifetime of a gens was much shorter than that of the empire, especially for any gens that rose to become the imperial family. Almost every dynasty flamed out in a civil war, and the game should encourage that to happen to maintain a historical feel. It would feel stupid and overly-gamey if the player could easily keep the same dynasty going from 31 BC to 475. At the same time, I'd want to play a campaign that covered the sweep of Roman history, so I'd want to jump back in as a different family. Players would probably want to keep playing as the emperor, but one problem that might come from that is they wouldn't be motivated to commit to fighting a civil war, since nothing destabilized the empire as much as a selfishly motivated patrician devoting the state's resources to their own personal interests. I think you could do something with a point-buy system, where the success of your family dynasty until its fall will give you a certain amount of score based on certain things, and then you can 'purchase' your next family, with a more powerful dynasty costing more. Or you could choose to start with a weaker family and spend the remaining points on certain bonuses or traits. If balanced correctly, it would encourage you to fight civil wars to the bitter end in order to strengthen the next family.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
Gully Foyle posted:I think you could do something with a point-buy system, where the success of your family dynasty until its fall will give you a certain amount of score based on certain things, and then you can 'purchase' your next family, with a more powerful dynasty costing more. Or you could choose to start with a weaker family and spend the remaining points on certain bonuses or traits. If balanced correctly, it would encourage you to fight civil wars to the bitter end in order to strengthen the next family. Regardless of which game it's in I personally really, really like the idea of game mechanics not just allowing but encouraging you to lose gloriously. It's something to break up the otherwise uninterrupted and snowballing rise to power that usually shows up in strategy games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
Drone posted:I was digging through my storage room the other day and came across a promotional bag with the Runemaster logo that I got as swag at Gamescom 2014. Since Paradox is now a publicly-traded company, I imagine there will be some pressure on them in the next couple years to grow out of the historical strategy genre again. Stellaris is a step in that direction away from the core franchises of historical games... is there any indication that they'll try their hand at an internally-developed RPG again at some point? Or does publishing Obsidian RPG's fulfill that well enough?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Regardless of which game it's in I personally really, really like the idea of game mechanics not just allowing but encouraging you to lose gloriously. It's something to break up the otherwise uninterrupted and snowballing rise to power that usually shows up in strategy games. Yeah I remember there being some pretty bad but interesting looking game I saw on the LP forum once where you play as one of a selection of empires in various time periods and you won by essentially getting hosed over slightly less badly than in actual history. I get the impression that it was an adaptation of a weird board game but my memories are extremely hazy on this in general, I just liked the idea of "success by not losing so hard".
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Yeah I remember there being some pretty bad but interesting looking game I saw on the LP forum once where you play as one of a selection of empires in various time periods and you won by essentially getting hosed over slightly less badly than in actual history. This wasn't Great Invasions by any chance, was it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Trying to get the Scandinavia United cheevo (cause I'm a sucker for those) and Britain immediately declares its intentions to intervene. And then it DOWs me. I had to go Fascist to create a faction. World War 2 really started in Feb 1937.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:This wasn't Great Invasions by any chance, was it? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:I'm thinking robots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:I'm thinking robots. how on earth did you get that title, anyways
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
Oh! Oh! Is it time for this story again? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Arrhythmia posted:how on earth did you get that title, anyways My wife has walked by many times when I'm browsing SA, but his avatar/red text is the only one that made her stop and ask WTF?!
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Well, so what is it then?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
fuuuuuckkkk that avs from way back when cyoa were a big thing in GBS wernt they? i remember robosexuality being the IM GAY of those threads
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:fuuuuuckkkk that avs from way back when cyoa were a big thing in GBS wernt they? i remember robosexuality being the IM GAY of those threads Yeah, that was from the second Your Life Sucks thread. You had a robot for a neighbor, and many posters made it their main goal to sex that robot. I sure wish I could find those old threads--I searched a while ago and could never find them. Your Life Sucks and the first god thread by Diogenes with Denziroh and friends. edit: But most of the robot avs specifically mentioned robo-loving, so I'm not sure if that robot line is from YLS.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Hey I don't know if there's a seperate HoI4 thread, but could some smart modder please make a mod to replace Hitler with Taylor Swift and post it to steam? Thank you in advance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:Hey I don't know if there's a seperate HoI4 thread... Maybe try checking the OP? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
dublish posted:Maybe try checking the OP? Sorry I should have said I don't care if there's a separate thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:Sorry I should have said I don't care if there's a separate thread. Jesus, I think I cut myself on this post.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 14:24
|
|
|
IT's ok all, I solved the problem. Your welcome. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=701675708
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:IT's ok all, I solved the problem. Your welcome. And here's the period-specific soundtrack you can use for it. Just edit in some phonograph fuzz over it and bam, authentic WW2 era ambiance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcrEgbKhKgI
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
Drone posted:And here's the period-specific soundtrack you can use for it. Just edit in some phonograph fuzz over it and bam, authentic WW2 era ambiance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcrEgbKhKgI A goal for next weekend. Thanks 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
Well since PDS has released a new version of all their games and a new IP lately that means they have no choice but to work on EU:Rome and Vicky now. No choice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
YouTuber posted:Well since PDS has released a new version of all their games and a new IP lately that means they have no choice but to work on EU:Rome and Vicky now. No choice. It's time for Sengoku's first expansion
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
YouTuber posted:Well since PDS has released a new version of all their games and a new IP lately that means they have no choice but to work on EU:Rome and Vicky now. No choice. My suspicion is that V3 is in the works. I'd rather it was R2, but. V  V
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
Even if Runemaster didn't pan out, I still would like a PDS-style random-events driven RPG. I think it'd be a pretty radical departure from their norm and I'd like to see what they could do with it. CK2 is already almost an RPG, and I love the idea of taking their historical grand strategy game "emergent narrative" style and putting it into RPG form.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:My suspicion is that V3 is in the works.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Patricians have built a cement factroy
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Patricians build a latifnuda
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
The plebs have risen up against the king.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Genocide Mod that lets you get rid of Carthaghinean pops
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
The Populism Agenda We want, no, we NEED a free society, where no one is considered to be superior, no one is left behind and where mankind is free from oppression and scarcity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
I too have the Communist popup in Victoria memorized or maybe it's Socialist I forget
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Whatever happens, we have got the gladius and they have not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:edit: But most of the robot avs specifically mentioned robo-loving, so I'm not sure if that robot line is from YLS. Strudel Man fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Jun 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:15 |
|
|
Wiz is continuing to work on "Victoria's Secret" and I'm starting to get worried.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 17:58
|
|
