|
I made a poll for my dumb LP which I'm gonna advertise here: http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=5cc3d48ae4b01977b196a518 You can chose however many nations you want. But you can only vote once!
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
aardvaard posted:Shift+Ctrl+Click adds max gold. It shows you the options if you hover over the button. I missed that tooltip somehow, but also good to know. (You wouldn't believe how long I played Stellaris before leaning Shift-ctrl click tells a science ship "go do this thing right away and then go back to whatever you're doing")
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:18
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:Is it better to pick a tactic that plays to your strengths or pick one that counters the enemy? There is no such thing as a tactic that only plays to your strengths. The bonuses you see are simply bonuses to the countering ability of the tactic. Which means you should pick a tactic that counters the enemy every time. Tactics that don't counter the enemy's tactic do nothing, aside from the two-sided casualty modifier which is sometimes important if you want to win battles while preserving manpower. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 05:43 on Apr 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:40
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:There is no such thing as a tactic that only plays to your strengths. The bonuses you see are simply bonuses to the countering ability of the tactic. Which means you should pick a tactic that counters the enemy every time. Tactics that don't counter the enemy's tactic do nothing, aside from the two-sided casualty modifier which is sometimes important if you want to win battles while preserving manpower. Is that so? I noticed a very big difference between picking tactics, even when they did not counter anything. Even if they're evenly matched there's a huge difference between one that my army could use at 80% efficiency vs 10%
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:45
|
|
|
 Am I missing something here, or will they just eventually consider themselves not scorned after a certain amount of time has passed?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:54
|
|
|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:
Did you wait for the end of the month? The game recalculates a ton of poo poo each month to reduce the amount of calculations it has to do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 06:00
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Did you wait for the end of the month? The game recalculates a ton of poo poo each month to reduce the amount of calculations it has to do. Yep. I'll wait till the end of the year and see what happens. e: Nope, still scorned. They're a family that's only in my culture group and not my primary culture. Could that be messing with it? e2: That must be it. In changing all the positions to their family I caused another family to become scorned, and all I had to do was get them above 2% and they immediately became unscorned. Guess I'll just have to wait for a civil war and murder them all. WhiskeyWhiskers fucked around with this message at 06:20 on Apr 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 06:10
|
|
|
It's a little clunky, has missing features and obviously not enough work has been done polishing. But me and a friend is having a lot of fun (and some frustrations) in a MP game. I'm also getting slowly pushed out of mainland Greece by a blobbing Macedon. This game is much better at launch than Stellaris or Hoi4. Also the potential and what they can do with it down the line is insane.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 06:11
|
|
|
Gameplay is actually fairly solid so far. Except diplomacy, that needs work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 06:26
|
|
|
it feels like the UI was designed for larger monitors on 1920x1080 the diplomacy window fills most of the screen
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 06:35
|
|
|
NoNotTheMindProbe posted:So I'm 9 hours in having done a few short campaigns as Aksum, Bosphoran Kingdom and Mauritania to get a feel for the game. I'm enjoying it a lot so far, especially the military system. I actually pay attention to what unit types I use and the terrain is super critical for winning a war. My main takeaway so far is that civil wars are the central game mechanic that glues together the consequences of your internal and external decisions and provides the main pushback to the player's ever growing blob. Behaviour of capital forts will be fixed for 1.0.1 next week
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 06:56
|
|
|
Is there a way to get rid of a family? If I happen to not need them anymore is there a way I can hunting accident them?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 07:17
|
|
|
pdxjohan posted:Behaviour of capital forts will be fixed for 1.0.1 next week Gotta take the pause button sound effect off too, it's like I'm in a marching band.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 07:18
|
|
|
pdxjohan posted:Behaviour of capital forts will be fixed for 1.0.1 next week That's good news, especially since the Selecuids have about three forts at the start to cover their entire empire.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 07:19
|
|
|
Eimi posted:Is that so? I noticed a very big difference between picking tactics, even when they did not counter anything. Even if they're evenly matched there's a huge difference between one that my army could use at 80% efficiency vs 10% I'm pretty sure, yes. This may have just been dice roll variance you were seeing. From what I can tell, tactics ultimately modify combat in only two ways: casualty totals as dictated by the casualty modifier (like shock's "both sides take 10% more damage"), and the bonus for having a tactic advantage. The game does not describe any other way in which tactics affect combat. Neither does the wiki. And from my testing, this has generally held true. If tactics do affect combat in other ways, then it's being obfuscated from the player for some bizarre reason. The efficiency rating is a measure of how much of the tactic advantage bonus you receive. The efficiency bonus is dictated by the effectiveness ratings for each unit type. So if your army is on Skirmishing and it's composed of half archers (50% with skirmishing) and half light infantry (100%), that averages out to 75%. And the combat bonuses are +20% against bottleneck and cavalry skirmish, which means you'll have a total 15% bonus of... something (damage dealt I think) against those two tactics. That tactic also reduces all casualties received on both sides by 25%. From what I can tell, it does literally nothing else. The wrong-tactic penalty is always 10%, no matter what your tactic efficiency is. Which means you should always try to pick a countering tactic, even if it's only barely effective. If it does do something else, I'd like to know what and how, specifically. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 07:31 on Apr 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 07:22
|
|
|
aardvaard posted:it feels like the UI was designed for larger monitors can the ui be scaled down?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 08:08
|
|
|
Character UI things that I haven’t figured out yet: - Occasionally I get a popup telling me that due to problems in <neighboring country> there are special interactions I can do with a character. Clicking on the character portrait in the popup brings up a character window, e.g. of the general of the neighbor’s army and I can encourage disloyalty, make friends, etc. Neat, this is a good way to weave the character system into diplomacy. But if I dismiss that popup how do I get back to that character? Actually is there a way to see the characters in another country? Or do I have to do the interactions right then and there when I get the popup? - My primary heir lists me as one of their supporters. How do I support a different heir if I want to? I don’t see any UI for this in the government screen or in the character screen. I tried everything I could find to get rid of this awful stats primary heir: smeared his reputation, drove his loyalty to zero, gave his brother who is his rival command of an army. He still inherited  - I screwed up and married off one of my 18 year old heirs to a 55 year old woman who I assume is too old to produce any children. Kind of funny, but maybe a warning popup is warranted? I actually have no idea what to look for in a marriage partner. Do their stats have any effect on anything?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 08:09
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:Hmm seems kinda silly that an enemy can get military access with a 3rd party, and just hide out there during a war. While you aren't able to. This is a bizarre step backwards. In EU4, if one party in a war had military access, they all did in order to prevent this kind of scenario.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 08:11
|
|
|
aardvaard posted:it feels like the UI was designed for larger monitors I am on 2560x1440 and yeah, it sort of feels cramped, more than eu4 at 1920x1080 So it's the first game to make me think about moving to 4k  NoNotTheMindProbe posted:That's good news, especially since the Selecuids have about three forts at the start to cover their entire empire. I find myself deleting non-border forts as I go anyway, just like eu4, because they are a HUGE drain on your economy... I am sure this will come back to bite me in the rear end, but if I have to choose between having a full fort coverage on provinces that are peaceful and assimilated and actually raising armies to conquer more land, well...  Mr. Fowl posted:This is a bizarre step backwards. In EU4, if one party in a war had military access, they all did in order to prevent this kind of scenario. This time around I don't really care, killing armies might get your enemy manpower problems if you want to weaken them longer term, but you can still get a full victory and 100 warscore without having to fully annihilate the enemy... which I actually like a lot compared to eu4 and ck2 where every war is to the bitter end TorakFade fucked around with this message at 08:20 on Apr 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 08:17
|
|
|
The drat Etruscans broke their alliance with me (Epirus) and they have an ungodly army of 106 cohorts  That's behind Maurya who's got like 200+ but the next closed are Egypt/Phryg/Seluecids who have <70 each.And here I am with 40. How do they have so many?? They don't even have that much land! Also it's not all crap dudes; easily half are heavy infantry. Family Values posted:Character UI things that I haven’t figured out yet: I've been right clicking the country, then going to the leader. Usually his rivals are the troublemakers you want to encourage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 08:34
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:The drat Etruscans broke their alliance with me (Epirus) and they have an ungodly army of 106 cohorts Cohort number isn't much a factor of national size, rather just the manpower needed to field the army, and the funds required to finance it. I'm playing Rome in a very Carthaginian style, whereby my legions actually mostly exist just to safeguard the border - most forces that I send into enemy territory are mercenaries. I'm getting a healthy +30 gold per month, and frequently finding myself with too much money to do anything with. I've not even finished conquering Italy, so I'm not quite sure when the money train'll stop.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 08:40
|
|
|
In theory I really like the idea of making a few high-level decisions about an army (leader, composition, positioning, tactics) and then picking a mission and letting them go off and do their thing. This is one of the developments I'm most excited about in Imperator. There are still two army-related changes that I would love to see: 1) I think armies should always require a general 2) I think army creation should happen in one city rather than building 1k stacks in loads of cities My ideal system to raise a new army would be: pick a general, pick a city, then let the army slowly muster its forces one cohort at a time. I think it would keep the map a lot neater without all the 1k leaderless stacks wandering around. sauer kraut posted:I cannot believe they're still doing the "armies walking in place until they warp to next region" thing in 2019. C'mon man lol I didn't think of this but it is pretty weird. There must be some reason they have to do it this way?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 09:26
|
|
|
sauer kraut posted:Haven't followed this game at all and just watched a review video; I cannot believe they're still doing the "armies walking in place until they warp to next region" thing in 2019. C'mon man Huh? What would you have them do? Or what other strategy game handles it differently in 2019?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 09:49
|
|
|
Sekenr posted:Huh? What would you have them do? Or what other strategy game handles it differently in 2019? Couldn't they just move from point A to point B?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 09:52
|
|
|
If you required every army to have a (named character) general, that would get annoying when you want to drop off a stack to siege a fort while the rest of the army pursues an enemy or reinforces a fight (or, more gamey, stands one province away to minimize attrition). Maybe if you could give characters junior commands if the army was large enough, then one of them would automatically take over the smaller army when you split off some troops, and return to their junior role when you merged them back again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 09:55
|
|
|
fuf posted:Couldn't they just move from point A to point B? So your army is visually in province B, then teleports back to province A when an enemy shows up for a fight? That doesn't really seem any better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 09:58
|
|
|
Jabor posted:If you required every army to have a (named character) general, that would get annoying when you want to drop off a stack to siege a fort while the rest of the army pursues an enemy or reinforces a fight (or, more gamey, stands one province away to minimize attrition). Ah yeah, good point. (Honestly I wouldn't mind not being able to do those things, but I'm one of the weird people who doesn't really enjoy fighting wars in Paradox games, at least beyond the top-level decisions) Jabor posted:So your army is visually in province B, then teleports back to province A when an enemy shows up for a fight? That doesn't really seem any better. Ah yeah, good point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:06
|
|
|
Humz, I really want to like this game but I can't help feeling like the way it is positioned between eu4 features and ck2 features is the worst of both worlds in almost every aspect
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:17
|
|
|
The game needs more make work positions for random families to have. I have way more families that need offices than filling. Currently I'm creating navies with 1 boat each and sticking someone there. There really should be congrats you are inspector for whore houses type role I can give to someone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:23
|
|
|
14 hours in and I think I'm mostly done until 1.1 hits in June (except for goon multiplayer anyway). Game's pretty okay and has potential but there are a lot of kinks that need worked out, and someone needs to ... add more fun to it. Edit: looking at Stellaris and HOI4's DLC release schedules for DLC, it looks like we can probably realistically expect some kind of DLC around the time of PDXCon 6 months from now. HOI4 got a proper expansion after around 6 months, whereas Stellaris only got a Story Pack (with a full-sized expansion taking around a year after release). Drone fucked around with this message at 10:46 on Apr 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:26
|
|
|
cheesetriangles posted:The game needs more make work positions for random families to have. I have way more families that need offices than filling. Currently I'm creating navies with 1 boat each and sticking someone there. There really should be congrats you are inspector for whore houses type role I can give to someone. Haha, that's a good trick. The whole character system needs reworking IMO. In CK2 the most rewarding parts of the game are improving your character's traits, getting a good marriage and strong heirs. This game lacks all of that. On the other hand, the most frustrating parts about the character system are micromanaging the opinions of rear end in a top hat vassals and random unpredictable rebellions and this game has nothing but that. Every important character is an rear end in a top hat who's opinion naturally trends down over time. Every rebellion is some unpredictable mess of random provinces flipping loyalty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:39
|
|
|
Jabor posted:If you required every army to have a (named character) general, that would get annoying when you want to drop off a stack to siege a fort while the rest of the army pursues an enemy or reinforces a fight (or, more gamey, stands one province away to minimize attrition). Simple - The commander of that army chooses their sub-commander. That way, it gives you incentives not to split off stacks, and the consequence of doing so is an interesting one. fuf posted:2) I think army creation should happen in one city rather than building 1k stacks in loads of cities Yeah, it's the generals who should handle recruitment of troops. Popular generals should be better at that - giving you a reason to appoint more 'risky' generals.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:48
|
|
|
I know they said that people didn't want to deal with how many offices the Roman Republic actually had but I think if they are going to penalize us for having unemployed nobles they should just give us all those do nothing make work jobs. Inspector for monuments or whatever. The issue isn't the money they take it's the boring micro management assigning all that horse poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:50
|
|
|
cheesetriangles posted:The game needs more make work positions for random families to have. I have way more families that need offices than filling. Currently I'm creating navies with 1 boat each and sticking someone there. There really should be congrats you are inspector for whore houses type role I can give to someone. Keeper of the Swans, Master of the Horse, Court Calligrapher, or whatever the Roman era equivalent positions given to important family but mediocre people would be so nice. Drone posted:14 hours in and I think I'm mostly done until 1.1 hits in June (except for goon multiplayer anyway). I think this game has a lot of potential and hopefully gets a better or more enriching DLC cycle than Stellaris or HOI4, which are good games, but I think their development teams got pulled for making Imperator which is why they seem a little less loved.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:55
|
|
|
How's the perfomance on this compared to EU4? If I'm able to decently run EU4, will I have any trouble with Imperator?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:59
|
|
|
Old Doggy Bastard posted:I think this game has a lot of potential and hopefully gets a better or more enriching DLC cycle than Stellaris or HOI4, which are good games, but I think their development teams got pulled for making Imperator which is why they seem a little less loved. I think Paradox has like four other "projects" running in the background that haven't been officially announced (all with Roman-sounding codenames still iirc). So in addition to DLC for all four (now five) of the current-gen games, they've got that going on. Paradox got real big real fast.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 11:13
|
|
|
Is there a keyboard shortcut for pausing/unpausing the game? I was expecting spacebar to work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 11:23
|
|
|
Gort posted:Is there a keyboard shortcut for pausing/unpausing the game? I was expecting spacebar to work. Spacebar does work though? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 11:25
|
|
|
Spacebar works but sometimes you have to press it a couple of times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 11:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
Huh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 11:29
|
|