|
I've literally been unable to break up Egypt, Phrygia, the Seleucids or Maurya without triggering a revolt with the console. There have been a few periods where they came perilously close due to a bad succession line up that leads to several stability hits in the space of a few years, but they would just teter back to normal and I got tired of waiting for an opening as Judea. Waiting decades to see if your schmoozing their governors and tempting them to disloyalty amount to anything and then seeing them croak with nothing to show for it feels bad man! e: if you want to be King of the Jews hope you're prepared for a few centuries of the speed set to 5
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 08:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 11:50 |
|
|
Am I understanding the available bonuses in the Greek military traditions right that I should be aiming for Heavy Infantry, Archers, and Light Cavalry? And maybe switch to Heavy Cavalry once I start giving no shits about money?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 09:04
|
|
|
Why are the different Mana types so imbalanced? It feels like Oratory does more than all three other powers combined.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 09:12
|
|
|
on the expansion and land retention thing which i seem to have accidentally spurned a long discussion on, i think historical accuracy is less important than an enjoyable game when the principle product is a videogame and not a history book. being able to leap from a few cities to almost a hundred cities just isn't fun, sorta removes a lot of challenge. yes, sometimes that happened in real history but those are the exception and not the rule. abstract it down a ton basically. tiny nations probably shouldn't be able to annex 4/5ths of macedon in one war which is why i suggested adding more CBs. only someone adjacent to macedon in scope or greater should be able to consider that. there is already a power tier system, just plug it into that imo. increasing the administrative overhead by 500% of a nation either shouldn't be something you can do or should be something really really bad to do, and culture unrest doesn't really simulate it. general suggestions to make succession less of a guarantee; 1) secondary heirs should have more demands of the true heir/be far more ambitious and cultivate a clique of generals and governmental postings. right now they exist and sorta just be your buddy. you could add a sort of party system to kingdoms where governors, postings and generals will gravitate towards specific heirs dependent on their loyalty. just give me something to manage other than dropping down a building or changing a governor policy. 2) governors should probably raise a small-medium army to defend their province which the player has little control over, and make them get unhappy and scheming on ruler death until you can appease them. make changing laws immediately on succession come with a big unrest hit too, which you get less of the longer a ruler is in power for. for example, a system where you have to give them something substantial in exchange for continued subservience and if you refuse they declare independence which grants you an immediate CB to reconquest without a truce. make this something like this work off of already existing character loyalty system but make it a chance to happen around the 50% marker. 33% is waaaay too low. mechanically im thinking a lot closer to euiv PUs than anything in ck2. people raise alexander as an issue looking to his death, but even alexander's accession was uncertain. he had a brother who was preferred heir (altho, a baby), and he had to make promises to generals and governors on inheriting. then he had to immediately march south and get the cities of southern greece on board because they suddenly decided they were no longer part of macedon. he had to strong man them, and i think strong manning should be a bigger aspect of the game. basically there needs to be a bit more inertia and a bit more internal conflict. Another Person fucked around with this message at 11:32 on Apr 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 11:23
|
|
|
On a side note, the Conan the Barbarian soundtrack makes a great accompaniment for this game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xUI8SwcAzA Or anything really, it's a great soundtrack, but especially this game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 11:42
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:On a side note, the Conan the Barbarian soundtrack makes a great accompaniment for this game. Now I'm thirsty for a Hyperboeran mod! ---- On the subject of building, I myself just build whatever I feel I need (manpower? more barracks, cash? More marketplace. Pops? Granaries). The only place I micro manage really is the capital province. I still really hope that some stats get added to the macro building or SOMETHING to at least be able to see quickly what you already have of when placing a new building and/or the capacity to see how much the city would be impacted by the new building. I kinda suspect that we don't have that right now because those variables are gonna be linked to the Ledger they're currently building... we'll see I guess. --- I've tried India as Mahisha (spelling?), and drat it's a difficult thunderdome over there. First try and took at Chola ASAP that had a meager 3k troops to start with despite being a regional power. This then made ME a regional power and every single local power around me allied and DOW about 10 years later. Should have increased relations somehow, not sure if it would have helped. Second try I decided to buy some time and wait to reinforce my frontiers properly. Everything was going well until the first war and both my allies broke the alliance even though the tooltip said they would join. ended up 1v4, so that's that. Gonna try again later, probably rush Chola but play more defensive after that (I was severely lacking in fortress). Popoto fucked around with this message at 11:59 on Apr 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 11:55
|
|
|
Another Person posted:on the expansion and land retention thing which i seem to have accidentally spurned a long discussion on, i think historical accuracy is less important than an enjoyable game when the principle product is a videogame and not a history book. being able to leap from a few cities to almost a hundred cities just isn't fun, sorta removes a lot of challenge. yes, sometimes that happened in real history but those are the exception and not the rule. abstract it down a ton basically. Actually, I think trying to leap from a few to a lot of cities is a lot of fun  . Especially since in that case you're 100% certain to get a civil war.Agree that an enjoyable game is more important than historical accuracy. That said, I've seen people complain about there being too much rebellions and civil war already. I don't agree with that myself, but there clearly must be a balance. That said, I think they should reintroduce (semi random) lucky nations to make sure the game stays challenging enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 12:00
|
|
|
wait players are actually getting civil wars???
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 12:22
|
|
|
Another Person posted:wait players are actually getting civil wars??? Ironically, it seems the smaller tribal nations are much likely to get civil wars than sprawling and/or decadent empires (due to the Clan Retinue mechanic I guess).
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 12:30
|
|
|
This game isn't bad imo. Yea its slightly more shallow than other current pdox games, but those games are old as poo poo and have like 500 patches in them now. The AI will facepalm occassionally but what loving game ever had AI that always made the obvious choice? So far my negative criticism is that the tutorial is utter trash, I love that trade was not explained at all and it is an entirely new system from other pdox games. I think something horrible happens to the AI when several nations are involved in a war where one nation wants that that another is occupying. I watched phrygia get entirely occupied for ~30 years. I think the law system in this game is stupid/uninteresting. Passed marian reforms in about 20 years as Rome. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 13:20
|
|
|
The overall stability of your country is rediculously dependent on culture and to a lesser extent religion so there are some parts of the map (like Greece and Italy, and most of the main tribal regions) where you can basically conquer whatever you like from day 1 because everyone is the same culture group and same religion. The suggestion that the amount of territory you can take in a single war should be based on power level is extremely good though, keep the system as is for major powers and then give something like a 25% increase in WS cost for everything for every tier lower. SnoochtotheNooch posted:I think the law system in this game is stupid/uninteresting. Passed marian reforms in about 20 years as Rome. Laws are literally just Oratory Power Inventions only you don't unlock them. I don't think that they're terrible, just boring. Most of them aren't even worth messing with.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 13:22
|
|
|
kinda lame you can't continue after 727
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 13:33
|
|
|
Can I get some advice on army composition? Do I want to stack my best troops or go for a mix do I want to favor heavy cav over light? ELEPHANTS?!!!?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 14:33
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:In general, specializing individual cities isn't too terribly important. It's technically optimal to have all your freemen in cities with the manpower buildings. But honestly? I always end up with loads of manpower without ever specializing or focusing on it anyway, so I don't really see the need. Citizens and tribesmen have no city-specific modifiers, as far as I know. (edit: actually, capital cities have happiness bonuses which directly affects output, so stacking your capital sounds appealing, but keep in mind that more pops = higher growth penalty. and if the growth penalties outweigh the positive modifiers, your city starts starving) Would I be correct in saying you almost never want to promote a slave? But if a pop is already a tribesman they are fine to upward promote as needed?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 16:18
|
|
|
Is the game worth making time to play? Pdox games are always fun but it seems a bit bland at the moment and I've got plenty of other things to play if it needs some time in the oven.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 16:54
|
|
|
My friend gifted me this game and I feel quite bad about it. I don't get the point of this, maybe because I didn't play EU4, but is this mostly a self playing map painter? It's worse than launch Stellaris in terms of "stuff" and it seems most of my time is fast forwarding sieges. Like the bad part of CK2 but from the start. I legitimately don't get it. Was EU4 launch this simple? Playing as the nebulous concept of Rome and individuals not mattering is so bad for this setting, I swear. Five or six hours in and not one memorable thing has happened.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
Faffel posted:My friend gifted me this game and I feel quite bad about it. I don't get the point of this, maybe because I didn't play EU4, but is this mostly a self playing map painter? It's worse than launch Stellaris in terms of "stuff" and it seems most of my time is fast forwarding sieges. Like the bad part of CK2 but from the start. I legitimately don't get it. Was EU4 launch this simple? Playing as the nebulous concept of Rome and individuals not mattering is so bad for this setting, I swear. Five or six hours in and not one memorable thing has happened. Johan thought that a self playing map painter would be good, eventually someone else will be put in charge and eventually make it not as boring but it will be still be stuck with the lowest level of Johan's design decisions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:22
|
|
|
Faffel posted:My friend gifted me this game and I feel quite bad about it. I don't get the point of this, maybe because I didn't play EU4, but is this mostly a self playing map painter? It's worse than launch Stellaris in terms of "stuff" and it seems most of my time is fast forwarding sieges. Like the bad part of CK2 but from the start. I legitimately don't get it. Was EU4 launch this simple? Playing as the nebulous concept of Rome and individuals not mattering is so bad for this setting, I swear. Five or six hours in and not one memorable thing has happened. try playing as not rome for all the emphasis in the title, rome is not the source of action in this game. its all in greece and anatolia. thats the real meat of the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:24
|
|
|
Imperator: dontplayasRome
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:26
|
|
|
I'll give it a shot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:28
|
|
|
the diplo there just has so much more going on due to the diadochi triangle of guarantees. you end up having to actually work for conquest early on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:31
|
|
|
So ck2 has its crusades and mongol invasions, eu4 has its reformations and revolutions, and stellaris has its various space apocalypses. What does imperator have?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:35
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:So ck2 has its crusades and mongol invasions, eu4 has its reformations and revolutions, and stellaris has its various space apocalypses. DLC
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
the never ending phrygian revolt
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:37
|
|
|
Another Person posted:the diplo there just has so much more going on due to the diadochi triangle of guarantees. you end up having to actually work for conquest early on. Yeah.. That was what felt oddest to me in the Rome bits I had played. You get a blob, and it has no severe internal struggles (that I encountered?). When I heard they wanted to meld CK2 and EU4 I guess I was expecting the grand strat equivalent of my council being a bunch of assholes. Like I said I'll try it out. Maybe multiplayer will shore up the lack of personality too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:So ck2 has its crusades and mongol invasions, eu4 has its reformations and revolutions, and stellaris has its various space apocalypses. One of my generals got the cognomen Africanus after taking Carthage. So maybe we'll get dynamic Caesars or something. Or gently caress it, just make China invade why not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
Why do I have several capital provinces? Why do I not have one capital province? I want to transfer provinces to families, but apparently only one province area isn't a capital...while the rest are? Why is this so poorly explained? EDIT: FFS it's to do with regions, again, not explained. Argh! Communist Bear fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Apr 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
One governor administrates an entire region (it was originally provinces but they decided it was just Too Many Governers) so that's the only province you have outside your capital region.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:One governor administrates an entire region (it was originally provinces but they decided it was just Too Many Governers) so that's the only province you have outside your capital region. Let's change the fundamentals of our game without actually changing the tooltips. Herp derp derp  :paradox:
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
Communist Bear posted:Why do I have several capital provinces? Why do I not have one capital province? yeah it doesn't make a great deal of sense until you realise there is a region mapmode i wish paradox would stick to one lexicon for their games even if the term is historically accurate to the governing principles and terminology of the time
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 17:55
|
|
|
There are some really bad and obvious translation/grammar errors and I never even considered the fact tooltips wouldn't have been updated during pre-release patching. I've never really played a launch Paradox game and maybe this is just how it should be.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:02
|
|
|
It is distressing that paradox has released another game in this state, but not as distressing as knowing that i'll still play this game for hundreds of hours and blindly buy every non-cosmetic dlc they put in front of me
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:02
|
|
|
Bohemian Nights posted:It is distressing that paradox has released another game in this state, but not as distressing as knowing that i'll still play this game for hundreds of hours and blindly buy every non-cosmetic dlc they put in front of me 
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
Bohemian Nights posted:It is distressing that paradox has released another game in this state, but not as distressing as knowing that i'll still play this game for hundreds of hours and blindly buy every non-cosmetic dlc they put in front of me Same. Same.  I think the problem is somehow, despite all this, over the last umpteen years of Paradox games, I still like them and don't mind giving the money. It's an odd experience.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:14
|
|
|
I told my friend I was going to buy Imperator 365 days or more after release because it's a Paradox game, and he couldn't keep his pants on. I'll still play it I guess. With modding I'm sure it's almost impossible to suck forever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:15
|
|
|
So today is the first day I really had time to dump some hours into this and I started out as a small clan chief on Ireland to learn the new mechanics. 10 years into the game silly Hammerstein forgot that it's around 300BC and that he lives in a tribal society....so it was a pretty bad idea to give that charming dude from a different family 8000 men to command, cause of his high military skill and good enough loyalty. The next thing that happened, was him starting a civil war to establish his own kingdom, wiping out the small loyalist armies and crucifying my sorry rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:31
|
|
|
It’s Stellaris Mk2: fun to play for a bit and a solid framework with a bunch of bugs, questionable design decisions etc. I’ve enjoyed it and will probably get a few days of play out of it before moving on until the first big DLC/patch. I’d say it’s worth the price of admission, but it’s definitely a judgement call. One thing missing is a resolution to the fight animations. Rome 2 Total War did this better: there, the (very similar) animated fights end with one side winning. That’s jarring in how it’s missing from this game, and it’s a shame because this is hands down the most gorgeous fight scenes paradox has done.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
Yeah, I dunno, this might be the most solid and compelling release day game Paradox has released for me. I liked release day Stellaris but it had a lot of problems, release day CK2 is probably second best but in the end I fell off it despite a lot of playtime, and I actually didn't like release day EU4 and avoided it for months. This though, I learned the ropes extremely quickly for a Paradox game, find the fiddling around very compelling, and definitely want to keep playing come the patches and improvements.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 19:03
|
|
|
How do you get pretenders to be loyal? I've just got loads of these morons at like 0% loyalty. Also can you steal money from characters somehow? toasterwarrior posted:Yeah, I dunno, this might be the most solid and compelling release day game Paradox has released for me. I liked release day Stellaris but it had a lot of problems, release day CK2 is probably second best but in the end I fell off it despite a lot of playtime, and I actually didn't like release day EU4 and avoided it for months. This though, I learned the ropes extremely quickly for a Paradox game, find the fiddling around very compelling, and definitely want to keep playing come the patches and improvements. It's pretty solid I think. Don't really get how the game feels empty/lifeless for some people. I'm playing Epirus frantically trying to prevent mega-Macedon and mega-Etruria from dunking on me together while I slowly build enough strength to take one of them out. It's gotta be Etruria because stupid Macedon is guaranteed by Egypt and Seleucia...
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 11:50 |
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:How do you get pretenders to be loyal? I've just got loads of these morons at like 0% loyalty. Epirus specifically has lots of extra content, most places don't have so much content.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 19:44
|
|