|
Beamed posted:I was tentatively optimistic about Imperator until the recent dev stream where they had a bunch of house rules in a, uh, dev stream, and then some of the streamers who received builds of the game described it as a "very early" build of the game, even though it's 2 weeks out from release. Well, the dev clash streams started more than 8 weeks ago on whatever the latest stable internal build was, I doubt it's been possible to incorporate all changes made since then into the build they're using the dev clash. So in that case it's very likely the build they're using for the dev clash is in fact a very early build of the game as they're saying. e: oh misread. Never mind I'll let my shame stand. Sheng-Ji Yang posted:im watching a gameplay stream of the imperator rome and it just looks like a straight up remake of EU: Rome, which was a terrible boring game. why are they doing this. what are the actual differences? The changes have essentially been documented in the dev diaries, so you could read those. The game is heavily influenced by and builds on what they had had for EU:Rome, which I'll agree with you was a bad game, but a bad game with some very good ideas that were hampered by the rest of the game not just being very interesting, one of the worst parts of EU:Rome was just how empty it was and how little happened. Wiz's Reign of the Ancients mod actually tried to tackle this with filling in much of the empty map with factions and expanding what you could do as a tribal and a monarchy (I think he also tried to make character traits more important IIRC), among other things, which made the game much more interesting, by most accounts Imperator: Rome appears to have taken the same lessons as that mod about what made EU:Rome bad. It was never a secret that this was another attempt at doing what they tried with EU:Rome, though this fact seems to have gone over many peoples' heads (I guess because alot of people aren't really familiar with that game). And the reasons why they abandoned the name EU:Rome should be pretty obvious, the original EU:Rome was pretty distinct from EU as well actually, though it shared more direct features with it than Imperator now does. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 08:47 on Apr 13, 2019 |
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 08:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 23:53 |
|
|
Guys if you don't like grand strategy games that are hilariously broken on release, what are you even doing in this thread? Yes Imperator looks like a mishmash of eu4 and ck2 (which a lot of people clamored for, myself included) in a new old time period they already explored many years ago, and it will probably be buggy and wonky for a few months. That is absolutely expected, I mean basically every eu4 dlc was buggy and wonky on release, Stellaris too, and every paradox game needs a few rounds of patching to truly shine, that's no secret What is great is that Paradox, contrary to many other devs/publishers, do care and will fix their poo poo eventually. Of course if you're not interested in the game's premise that's fine, I don't care at all for hearts of iron but hey if people want that, more power to them 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 08:57
|
|
|
There's some Youtube LPs which have come out recently which make the game look significantly better than the dev clash due to showing off all the small details which get lost when you're not playing the game yourself. In terms of "stuff to do while you're not at war" Imperator seems to be a huge improvement on EU4.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 09:06
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Guys if you don't like grand strategy games that are hilariously broken on release, what are you even doing in this thread? I remember EU4 and CK2 actually being pretty drat good on release and not overly buggy, in that I don't really remember any bugs that made them unplayable or boring (EU4 was kind of a shock really, in that it was a Paradox game that was actually comprehensible just jumping into it at release, the biggest contrast there has to be the first Victoria, which I almost literally tortured myself for hours playing before I understood what the gently caress was supposed to be going on) . Though that might be colored through a lense of experience with previous Paradox games, and also expectations are different now because we are used to EU4 and CK2 being so much more fleshed out than what they were at release. Newer releases thus often end up seeming barebones, probably partly because the patch and DLC strategy we've gotten used were developed after the initital release of those games, whereas newer games now are properly developed whilst being alot more conscious of this approach. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 09:09 on Apr 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 09:06
|
|
|
Do we know how many different factions and government types will be playable on release?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 10:15
|
|
|
Chalks posted:Do we know how many different factions and government types will be playable on release? I think all of them. But I also think we only have three government types on release, republics, monarchies and tribes (which, if I understood it right, can kind of incorporate some of the features of either republics or monarchies before they fully transition). Oh, and also theocracies I think, though I think that's mostly a variation on monarchy. Pretty likely that future DLCs will expand on the existing ones, probably adding nation specific variants of monarchies and republics (immersion packs or whatever they call them for EU4), and maybe adding new types of government. Steppe nomads feel like an obvious one that's missing, especially since the steppes are looking a bit too empty and there doesn't seem to be anything stopping you from just straight up colonizng them if you want to (the thing stopping you would be a bunch of Scytho-Sarmatian nomads). e: Another likely expansion, though not necessarily government related would be something to do with China. Maybe implemented similarly to CK2. The Han Empire after all does coinicde with the middle and late period of the timeframe covered by the game. Now the Han weren't as expansionistic in Central Asia as the Tang (present at the earliest CK2 start dates), but they still had interaction with the easternmost areas of the map, notably the "Yuezhi" (likely Tocharian speakers) who established themselves in what had been the Greco-Bactrian kingdom after it was destroyed by the Saka. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Apr 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 10:23
|
|
|
Rome also doesn't have dual consuls, so that's a fairly obvious choice for a DLC somewhere down the line. I don't know if they've talked about the DLC approach for Rome at all yet. Now they've got a game where the base systems are in place but there's not really unique mechanics for specific regions or nations, so making DLC that adds those unique features seems like the obvious approach that would avoid the problem EU4 has where game-wide systems are gated behind different DLCs, so they can't really be designed to interact with one another very much. But I don't know how that works financially, whether flavour packs only is a viable DLC model or whether they need to bundle in game-wide systems to give people more of a reason to buy it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 13:06
|
|
|
Beamed posted:some of the streamers who received builds of the game described it as a "very early" build of the game, even though it's 2 weeks out from release. I'm pretty sure that's just an overly cautious disclaimer, I wouldn't read too much into it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 13:37
|
|
|
Red Bones posted:Rome also doesn't have dual consuls, so that's a fairly obvious choice for a DLC somewhere down the line. I don't know if they've talked about the DLC approach for Rome at all yet. Now they've got a game where the base systems are in place but there's not really unique mechanics for specific regions or nations, so making DLC that adds those unique features seems like the obvious approach that would avoid the problem EU4 has where game-wide systems are gated behind different DLCs, so they can't really be designed to interact with one another very much. But I don't know how that works financially, whether flavour packs only is a viable DLC model or whether they need to bundle in game-wide systems to give people more of a reason to buy it. They said that they're not doing any kind of multiple rulers system unless they can find a way to make it fun to interact with and also without it making your ruler's stats / traits significantly less important (which is also why they have ahistorically long terms for republics) Magissima posted:I'm pretty sure that's just an overly cautious disclaimer, I wouldn't read too much into it. FWIW they did actually give streamers an old build which lacks a bunch of bugfixes and balance improvements which have already been shown on Paradox internal streams. And there's other priority improvements which they are already planning for an early patch (not day 1 but probably week 1 or week 2 I guess) such as fixing the whole late game mercenary spam issue (possibly by reducing the crazy amount of mercenaries on the map?)
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 14:26
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:I remember EU4 and CK2 actually being pretty drat good on release and not overly buggy, in that I don't really remember any bugs that made them unplayable or boring (EU4 was kind of a shock really, in that it was a Paradox game that was actually comprehensible just jumping into it at release, the biggest contrast there has to be the first Victoria, which I almost literally tortured myself for hours playing before I understood what the gently caress was supposed to be going on) . Though that might be colored through a lense of experience with previous Paradox games, and also expectations are different now because we are used to EU4 and CK2 being so much more fleshed out than what they were at release. Newer releases thus often end up seeming barebones, probably partly because the patch and DLC strategy we've gotten used were developed after the initital release of those games, whereas newer games now are properly developed whilst being alot more conscious of this approach. I remember the massive (or it seemed massive when I was 13) word document from the paradox forums walking you step-by-step through playing Brazil in the original Vicky. It's strange to remember a time when there wasn't even Ricky, just the hot base game mess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 14:57
|
|
|
i'm excited for imperator. that's my hot take.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 15:00
|
|
|
I saw a stream where they had a bunch of people who haven’t played paradox titles before play. They did the best they could but for demoing your game it was a weird choice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 15:09
|
|
|
aardvaard posted:i'm excited for imperator. that's my hot take. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
It feels like this belongs here and I dunno why it hasn't been posted yet:
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 17:32
|
|
|
I wonder how different pre-feudal monarchies are going to seem. I also like the idea of playing a democracy with a modeled-out senate, although it may be clunky. On the face of it, it just seems more meaningful than just a political pie chart. I don't like watching videos of Paradox games though, so it'll be a while before I really see.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 17:33
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Guys if you don't like grand strategy games that are hilariously broken on release, what are you even doing in this thread? Hoi4 was very good and I didn't grow sick of it until after about 100 hours of play time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 17:35
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Guys if you don't like grand strategy games that are hilariously broken on release, what are you even doing in this thread? This hasn't been true for awhile. Paradox releases of the full games since CK2 have been Pretty Good, even though I don't like HoI4.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
Stellaris launch was pretty rocky.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 18:00
|
|
|
I give Stellaris' release a lot of slack because of how different a game it was than anything Paradox tried before, tbh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
Drone posted:Stellaris launch was pretty rocky. I dunno I remember it being pretty problem free in terms of the game running. I mean it was pretty empty compared to now, but I don't recall any tech issues.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 18:03
|
|
|
Modern Paradox games are about waiting for that sweet spot, after a few patches' worth of bug fixes and extra content, and before the DLC train really gets into full swing. Should be 1-2 years from now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
Beamed posted:I give Stellaris' release a lot of slack because of how different a game it was than anything Paradox tried before, tbh. The biggest problem is that they had game elements which only existed so they could tick "space 4x game needs this" boxes off a checklist and forgot to make the actual Paradox GSG that the midgame was supposed to turn into. CharlestheHammer posted:I saw a stream where they had a bunch of people who haven’t played paradox titles before play. The one they did yesterday? The guy as Epirus getting annexed by the AI in his first war was hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 18:46
|
|
|
I think a Stellaris 2 could actually really benefit from a set map and set of species and empires. The species creation is fun as hell but it ends up meaning so little that being France vs Ming in EU ends up feeling more meaningful. Just whip up a dumb pastiche sci-fi map with some plucky mid-tier humans on Earth kicking around and go for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
I have consulted the bird entrails. Game will be good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
Inventions are actually pretty neat, they're basically unlockable tech based permanent modifiers which you 'buy' like ideas in EU4 but there's no limit to how many you can have (unless you buy them all, I guess). Some of them are boring and weak but there are both powerful and interesting ones in there, and even 5% tax income is exciting when you've had it running for the entire game. It makes every tech level potentially exciting when it pops; though unlike in one of the early dev diaries, they unlocked in a fixed pattern and are not randomised at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 18:55
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I think a Stellaris 2 could actually really benefit from a set map and set of species and empires. The species creation is fun as hell but it ends up meaning so little that being France vs Ming in EU ends up feeling more meaningful. If you want to see this play out before Stellaris 2, try the Star Trek: a new hope mod. With species you know and events from the TV show it's about 10x as immersive as base Stellaris. Also ships and techs are interesting, it's amazing how a few modders managed that too. You just need a beefy PC to run it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Inventions are actually pretty neat, they're basically unlockable tech based permanent modifiers which you 'buy' like ideas in EU4 but there's no limit to how many you can have (unless you buy them all, I guess). Some of them are boring and weak but there are both powerful and interesting ones in there, and even 5% tax income is exciting when you've had it running for the entire game. It makes every tech level potentially exciting when it pops; though unlike in one of the early dev diaries, they unlocked in a fixed pattern and are not randomised at all. I liked how some bonuses/choices seem to repeat constantly, and they're either big like military traditions, medium-weight and more "samey" like omens, and small and varied like inventions. Plus the promoting pops and moving them around seem like a fun minigame too. Plenty of way of interacting with provinces, people and a sort of council (Senate, clan chiefs, whatever) means there should be plenty to do between wars... Hopefully we also get a lot of events  Beamed posted:This hasn't been true for awhile. Paradox releases of the full games since CK2 have been Pretty Good, even though I don't like HoI4. I meant more specifically dlc, the last few ones for eu4 were ... rather creative. The "exploit" where Siberian frontiers cost zero and you could go for an ideas guy and for Odin! run in North or South America and fill it all within a century? Best fun I have had with the game lately  Plus Stellaris. Yeah it worked, but a couple major patches made it good 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
im excited for imperator and while it may not be perfect on release I trust paradox to make the good games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
They are streaming the players who have no idea what they are doing thing again and it’s interesting to say the least. They have no idea how peace mechanics work and there is no one there to give them any help.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Guys if you don't like grand strategy games that are hilariously broken on release, what are you even doing in this thread? I'm not worried about that, I'm worried that the game appears to be an almost total remake of the original EU: Rome down to almost every feature, which was a pretty bad boring game. I was hoping they were taking the opportunity to totally redo a classical era game after the failure of their first, I don't understand why they would just make a direct sequel. Sheng-Ji Yang fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Apr 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 20:30
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:I'm not worried about that, I'm worried that the game appears to be an almost total remake of the original EU: Rome down to almost every feature, which was a pretty bad boring game. Rome was bad because the map was loving awful, and the other major complaints are basically that the governor and trade systems got annoyingly spammy as soon as you had a decent number of provinces. Other than that it was better than EU3; I'd be curious to know what else you didn't like about it (the map problem really did doom the game from day 1 though since it fucks up the gameplay so hard in so many ways). Imperator is literally EU: Rome 2 with a different name for marketing reasons, it's similar in some ways, but it's more different from EU: Rome than EU4 was from EU3 and I'm guessing that they realised that the map was a problem since it's about a million times better now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
I know very little about I:R and haven't followed its development really at all, so my only exposure to it so far has been the multiplayer game that's been livestreamed this weekend. Is it just me or did they sorta take some inspiration from March of the Eagles with the whole "each province has a capital city that has strategic importance" angle? Also: paradox march of the eagles 2 when
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
Are the military tradition trees starting to feel more meaningful now that people are getting their hands on things and they're not just contextless numbers?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 20:49
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Are the military tradition trees starting to feel more meaningful now that people are getting their hands on things and they're not just contextless numbers? Since both the Greek and Italic trees have a very heavy infantry focused branch, most of the major players in the dev clash have these ideas, and massing heavy infantry seems like generally a solid strategy even ignoring unit-specific bonuses, I'm guessing that it's not really doing much other than encouraging the already existing focus on heavy infantry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
I was watching Shenryyr play the dev game thing and the only thing I said the whole time was "Imperator: Civil War Simulator". He looked at chat and said "I agree, Chomp" and then when the devs were talking to the players at the end he said to them "I think you misnamed your game. It should be 'Imperator: Civil War Simulator' " and there was an awkward silence. lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
I'm a big fan of Paradox; however, it's pretty funny for people to say that it's a good thing that Paradox releases features that are buggy and later on fixes them/expands them with DLC. This isn't a positive for Paradox, it's the bare minimum.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:32
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:I'm a big fan of Paradox; however, it's pretty funny for people to say that it's a good thing that Paradox releases features that are buggy and later on fixes them/expands them with DLC. This isn't a positive for Paradox, it's the bare minimum. Well, is better than most, unfortunately that's the reality
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:46
|
|
|
I hired a company to build my house, they came highly recommended as my friends also got them to build their houses and the company stayed to finish the job and kept trying to fix all their mistakes for over 5 years. A lesser builder would have just walked away from the half-finished house so these guys are fantastic. I didn't really need to keep paying them even, technically, but they kept talking me into adding more upgrades to the project which helped fund their fixes. Like to fix the hosed up wiring they installed they sold me on some skylights. When the skylights leaked and the electrical wasn't quite fixed they sold me on new landscaping and trees which unfortunately due to some bad planning ended up casting shadows on the solar system they sold me to finance the fixes for the bad pipes. As long as I keep buying these upgrades, the original deficiencies in the house will be fixed for free.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:50
|
|
|
In contrast, I bought a house from a reputable, large-scale firm. They ended up nickel-and-diming me for every little light fixture and water faucet, but in the end I must say - it was all worth it for the sense of pride and accomplishment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 23:53 |
|
|
I squat in a house until it becomes mine
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 00:58
|
|
