|
Pretty sure there's still no in-game chat, which is a big 
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2021 05:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:08 |
|
|
Love to lose all my hard-won senate support because I have to veto their suicidal war dec on Rome 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2021 09:52
|
|
|
trapped mouse posted:
How the gently caress did they make the UX worse? The OP title is still correct 2 years later!
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2021 10:25
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:Love to lose all my hard-won senate support because I have to veto their suicidal war dec on Rome This at least feels historically accurate
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2021 10:37
|
|
|
are there any strategies for dealing with the desync MP issue? does it get worse with more players?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2021 10:45
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Also the comment about potentially not realising that there's cultural inventions applies mostly if you play a culture which doesn't get any. I think only Indians, Greeks, Italics and Gauls / Pannonians get them at the moment. Sucks to be Persian or Arabic I guess. So hey guess what, script says you should also be able to access these if you have integrated a culture of the appropriate group. Can anyone confirm that this actually works? e: It does! Entirely without fanfare! And, wow, some of these Italic inventions are super pointless. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 12:34 on Mar 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2021 12:15
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:So hey guess what, script says you should also be able to access these if you have integrated a culture of the appropriate group. Yeah this really confused me as after I integrated some cultures I felt like my tech tree changed but couldn't put my finger on how. And after I unintegrated cultures I felt like I was missing techs I was working towards. I really like the new tech tree but they really need to highlight changes or show what's different when you change cultures or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2021 15:01
|
|
|
The really really weird thing is that if you check the files it sounds like you're supposed to get a tooltip explaining that whatever tech is accessible only because of your culture but that doesn't actually happen in game
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2021 15:17
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:The really really weird thing is that if you check the files it sounds like you're supposed to get a tooltip explaining that whatever tech is accessible only because of your culture but that doesn't actually happen in game So, see, in basically every other context paradox uses the context, the allow = { } block determines if you can activate the thing, and what conditions show in the tooltip, and the potential = { } block determines whether you can see it. There are potential = { } blocks here, but the allow = { } blocks are also determining visibility. And do not show the tooltip... It may be a bug or it may be intentional, but it's definitely inconsistent. I'll file a bug report later. e: Something which is not yet clear to me is whether, after you've bought an invention, it'll disappear if you unintegrate the culture... KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Mar 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2021 15:31
|
|
|
So what should I be building? I kind of want to build granaries everywhere for more pop growth. It feels kind of weird that there's no limit on how many you can build though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 08:26
|
|
|
Granaries are pretty weak, you just can't make enough growth from surplus food that it's worth the investment; it caps out at 0.2%/month, which is slightly less than 1 new pop every 40 years. Pop growth as a whole got heavily nerfed in 2.0 since the overall rate of pop growth was a bit absurd, but they should probably consider increasing the value of excess food again somehow. By far the most cost effective buildings you can make in most of your cities are the unlockable ones as they all give a large boost to civ value and either happiness or pop output. After that you can kind of build what you like but the return you get on most buildings is quite low unless you're building in a city with high civ value and a large population - the overall level of output increases multiplicatively with both of these values.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 09:21
|
|
|
I'm trying to reform my tribe to a republic but have been stuck on the last step for ages. I need a ruler with 80 popularity and keep getting ones with about 40. Is there anyway to ensure a popular ruler? Most events I get only add a few points.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 09:24
|
|
|
Cobra Lionfist posted:I'm trying to reform my tribe to a republic but have been stuck on the last step for ages. I need a ruler with 80 popularity and keep getting ones with about 40. Is there anyway to ensure a popular ruler? Most events I get only add a few points. You can try swapping out one of your ideas for the Religious one that gives your ruler +.33 popularity a month. You'll lose your government bonuses by having mismatched idea slots but it's probably worth it if you're that close to reforming out of it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 09:58
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:So what should I be building? I kind of want to build granaries everywhere for more pop growth. It feels kind of weird that there's no limit on how many you can build though. In decreasing order of priority Cities: Theatres, Temples, Courts of Law, Foundries, Academies, maybe Forums if you really want the civ cap, Libraries or Markets. And enough Aqueducts to get the pop cap over 80, but only in provincial capitals. You could also try x3 Mills/no other ratio boosters/Foundries/Aqueducts on high value trade goods, but unless it's something like gems I don't think it's worth it. Settlements: Mines, Farms, Barracks or nothing depending on how valuable the trade good is/whether you need soldiers or money more. The output/civ bonus on Slave Estates is worth 0.00525g per month per slave, by the way. 0.063 per year. At 200g, that's 3175 slave years to break even. A plains settlement with max population will have about 14 slaves in it. You can stack build cost reduction pretty high, of course, but buildings are really only worth it for soldiers and research, you're not going to get anywhere trying to spend money to make money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 17:00
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:And enough Aqueducts to get the pop cap over 80, but only in provincial capitals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 17:37
|
|
|
This game is still unplayable imo. The main problem for me is that IDK wtf this game wants me to do. As Rome I want to make a huge empire, ok. So why then do I give a poo poo about the internal politics of the country that ultimately is all about keeping populares out of consul. Why is there a shitload of populares at all times? Even if I only employ the other factions their kids become populares. I use some influence and money to reinforce other faction support still populares support is spiking, not to mention anyone worth a poo poo is populares so im literally eating from the floor by not employing them. What makes a character become a populare? Why the gently caress would I grant a character holdings? What benefit is that? Why would I make someone a tribal vassal if it takes 20 years to get their opinion high enough to vassalize and then another 20 years to integrate, when I could just go for land grabs and have AE down in 5 years? Honestly this game just feels like it has no idea what it wants to be. The UI looks better, I want to like this game but jesus it just feels stupid. SnoochtotheNooch fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Mar 6, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 17:54
|
|
|
Pyromancer posted:Metropolises don't downgrade, if you upgrade one city, move the capital and then upgrade the new capital you'll have two in the province. ...yeah, sure. I don't have the energy in me to min max that much, to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 18:30
|
|
|
SnoochtotheNooch posted:Why the gently caress would I grant a character holdings? What benefit is that? Why would I make someone a tribal vassal if it takes 20 years to get their opinion high enough to vassalize and then another 20 years to integrate, when I could just go for land grabs and have AE down in 5 years? Honestly this game just feels like it has no idea what it wants to be. It seems you want a strategy game with interesting choices and challenge, not a roleplaying world simulator that allows you to play tall and see how your decisions result in ripples and indirectly change a variety of numbers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 20:50
|
|
|
I'm much more thoroughly enjoying imperator this time around, but holy gently caress that roman steam roller. I played maybe 25 hours back on release and put it down for a while, so on returning now I started a Rome game. I did pretty well I thought, by 490 I was in cisalpine gaul, had corsica, all of italy and a toehold on Sicily (so ahead of irl rome). I figured that was enough to figure the new mechanics (which I like quite a bit), so I fired up a new, more interesting game. Started as Gortyna and formed Crete, have made some inroads into Asia and Laconia, and am ready to face the Antigonids. I decided at that point to zoom out and seen that Rome is screaming away faster than even I was (and I thought I was playing fast on both my rome and Crete games). Rome already, by 488, has all of Italy, cisalpine gaul, Sicily, corsica and sardinia, epirus, and is busy conquering all of north Africa from Carthage. I'd say they're approximately at the second carthaginian war, but about 50 years early (about 50 years early in Greece too). I figured I'd have a bit more time to get on a firm footing to face rome in Greece before they showed up but they've already wiped out epirus and taken all their land. Is this peoples typical experience with the pace of Rome? I definitely agree that they should basically inevitably expand in their historical fashion, but this pace seems ridiculous. In a game that only lasts 277 years, being 50 years ahead on history seems like they may be a bit more buffed than necessary. Tbf I haven't come in contact with them yet so I may be able to stand up against them when it comes time, but I'm just seeing the pace and feeling disheartened about playing so "close" to them
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 21:04
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:It seems you want a strategy game with interesting choices and challenge, not a roleplaying world simulator that allows you to play tall and see how your decisions result in ripples and indirectly change a variety of numbers. either one of these would be better than imperator right now
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 21:07
|
|
|
Beamed posted:either one of these would be better than imperator right now I'm a little sad that they've dropped the initial intention to make a complex but robust strategy game a la EU4. Cause we don't have enough EU4-style game but a lot of those simulationist sandboxes. But at the moment I:R looks to me like a decent simulation sandbox, even if it's not yet there and even if the current version of the game feels less polished than what they released 2 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 21:15
|
|
|
SnoochtotheNooch posted:Why the gently caress would I grant a character holdings? What benefit is that? Why would I make someone a tribal vassal if it takes 20 years to get their opinion high enough to vassalize and then another 20 years to integrate, when I could just go for land grabs and have AE down in 5 years? Honestly this game just feels like it has no idea what it wants to be. Ignoring the comments about Rome since I don't play republics, but holdings are a way to give characters more income which you can then potentially use to do useful things if they are or become ruler, or you use them to give a temporary loyalty buff to someone like you do with bribes etc. Tribal vassals are supposed to be a way of having soft ownership over garbage marginal territory that you can't be bothered to control yourself, they barely give you any benefit but it stops anyone else from messing them. If you want to hold the territory directly then just conquer it. Though I agree that it's generally too difficult to diplomatically create subjects of any sort other then feudatories
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 21:19
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Tribal vassals are supposed to be a way of having soft ownership over garbage marginal territory that you can't be bothered to control yourself, they barely give you any benefit but it stops anyone else from messing them. If you want to hold the territory directly then just conquer it. It doesn't help that your diplomatic relations limit maxes out at like, two or three before laws and techs. It's not really a strategy you can pursue to any great extent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 21:32
|
|
|
Oh cool, we're back to the old EU way of things where countries can form alliances and call those allies into war AFTER I've already declared war on them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 22:20
|
|
|
I think religious conversion is bugged, I'm getting a -25% "non integrated culture" penalty even though the culture has been integrated for decades.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2021 23:02
|
|
|
I like CK3 and love EU4, but hate Stellaris. Will I like this game?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 02:13
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:It doesn't help that your diplomatic relations limit maxes out at like, two or three before laws and techs. It's not really a strategy you can pursue to any great extent. Tribal vassals dont take a diplo slot
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 02:24
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:It seems you want a strategy game with interesting choices and challenge, not a roleplaying world simulator that allows you to play tall and see how your decisions result in ripples and indirectly change a variety of numbers. I think you're really exaggerating and Imperator with Marius is still pretty clearly an EU style empire builder, but I know you have a whole personal complex about the perceived difference between 'simulationist' mechanics and 'strategic' ones so you do you
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 02:40
|
|
|
Buschmaki posted:Tribal vassals dont take a diplo slot ! Objection withdrawn!
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 02:42
|
|
|
Dorkopotamis posted:I like CK3 and love EU4, but hate Stellaris. I’m pretty much the same as you and I like imperator. It’s not perfect but I still have like 500 hours in it already
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 03:34
|
|
|
I like Imperator a lot even if 2.0 is quite rough around the edges. It's honestly some of the most fun I have playing any Paradox game right now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 03:54
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:I think you're really exaggerating and Imperator with Marius is still pretty clearly an EU style empire builder, but I know you have a whole personal complex about the perceived difference between 'simulationist' mechanics and 'strategic' ones so you do you Maybe it's you who are unusual for not having this complex. From what I see a lot of people who like I:R now argue that it's like Vicky now, they use code phrases like "you can play tall" and "there's something to do in peace time".
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 07:21
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:Maybe it's you who are unusual for not having this complex. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 07:24
|
|
|
Dorkopotamis posted:I like CK3 and love EU4, but hate Stellaris. I honestly doubt it. I've never played vicky but if its like I:R I prob wouldnt be impressed. I have thousands of hours in EU4, CK2, CK3. Youll look for similar strategies in rome and youll notice that for most part theres no point to follow those strategies. Managing a council is not really a thing. Characters seem more like Barbie and Ken dolls that you can goof around with like an adult manchild rather than having strategic importance, or interesting gameplay. AFAICT You just need to blob as fast as you can and be faster than any other blob. Theres some mechanics that float around that seem important like integration, and stability but again, I ignored them and did fine as rome. I will say the way theyve redesigned the military is a potentially really good idea. Having a supply train is a potentially interesting mechanic and adds some ~~realism~~. Also more ~~realism~~ is that your troops are pulled from the province population rather than just a standing army.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 12:55
|
|
|
ahhh the desync issue is so annoying. I should have listened to you guys. We had fun for a few hours but in the end it got too frustrating. It sucks because we used to play loads of EU4 multiplayer and it was really stable. I do think this is a really good game now though. The way the systems tie together can be very interesting. I realised that you can build loads of one-ship fleets and put a character in command of each one and it's an easy way to get every family to "grateful" level. It's a bit gamey but it's also funny to imagine all these incompetent young nobles being given a ship to keep them distracted.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 18:28
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:Maybe it's you who are unusual for not having this complex. slowly spiralling into madness, delusions of Vicky fans coming after me as I turn and toss, restlessly
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 18:49
|
|
|
SnoochtotheNooch posted:I honestly doubt it. I've never played vicky but if its like I:R I prob wouldnt be impressed. Ah so it’s like CK3 now
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 20:24
|
|
|
SnoochtotheNooch posted:AFAICT You just need to blob as fast as you can and be faster than any other blob. this is every paradox game
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 22:39
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:this is every paradox game once you start to realize this, Paradox games stop being very fun, imho. The window dressing is enough for some (Vicky 2 is a common example here, but also sort of CK2) that they're still fun for awhile, but the core gameplay loop is just "figure out what buttons you push to blob faster", and.. that gets samey.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 22:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:08 |
|
|
Beamed posted:once you start to realize this, Paradox games stop being very fun, imho. The window dressing is enough for some (Vicky 2 is a common example here, but also sort of CK2) that they're still fun for awhile, but the core gameplay loop is just "figure out what buttons you push to blob faster", and.. that gets samey. I play CK2 and Vicky2 as simulation and story telling games, not just to paint the map. If paradox ever makes a game that is actually meant to be played this way i think it will have more success than any of their strategy games.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2021 22:57
|
|