|
Thanks all for the extensive advice! After reading all your posts, talking to people on a few Discord channels and watching some beginners guides I decided to go with CK3. Just managed to conquer all of Ireland and have started my expansion into Scotland. So far I'm having a lot of fun even though I have no idea what I'm doing beyond fabricating claims and declaring war over and over.
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 21:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:my understanding is that AI control means that this part isn't actually true of HOI4 and for that experience you want to go with HOI3, which is the better game what did op do to you to deserve this, my god
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 22:54
|
|
|
hoi3 was my first paradox game like five hours later i was playing eu3 instead
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 00:47
|
|
|
i booted up hoi3 for laughs a few weeks ago and after five minutes was questioning how the gently caress it even got released
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 00:48
|
|
|
retpocileh posted:Thanks all for the extensive advice! After reading all your posts, talking to people on a few Discord channels and watching some beginners guides I decided to go with CK3. Just managed to conquer all of Ireland and have started my expansion into Scotland. So far I'm having a lot of fun even though I have no idea what I'm doing beyond fabricating claims and declaring war over and over. CK3 benefits a lot from being built on the bones of CK2, with a much smoother polish. it means it was kinda old hat to everyone who'd played 3000 hours of CK2 but it's the cleanest and friendliest game paradox has released yet which i realize is a weird thing to say about their incest simulator game
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 00:55
|
|
|
Incest is very popular with the general public. Its on trend
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 00:57
|
|
|
CK3 Is also very good as a voyeurism simulator once you get used to marking characters, reading the family tree UI, and using espionage it's a jack off all pervs
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 00:58
|
|
|
My choice for favourite bit of HOI3 is between the Normandy 1944 scenario where the allied armies immediately fall out of supply and crumble because no techs were unlocked, and the fact that the dynamic weather system would plunge the world into a permament ice age after the first winter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 01:01
|
|
|
I played CK2 a good bit, and at no point was it advantageous to me to commit incest. I think maybe you other guys might've had your subconscious guiding you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 01:53
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:I played CK2 a good bit, and at no point was it advantageous to me to commit incest. i am speaking to its reputation, not to my own tendencies, which generally involve avoiding incest in favor of searching for genius peasants
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 02:16
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:and at no point was it advantageous to me to commit incest. Thread title please. Also I see someone never chose the Divine Blood religious reformation tenet  (I always created a matriarchal Viking faith as a merchant republic just for absolute chaos.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 02:19
|
|
|
Been a while and I mostly played republics, but IIRC it was never that hard to find some lowborn courtier with the genius or quick trait to marry into your family, so you didn't really need incest for your superhuman breeding program
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 12:32
|
|
|
bump. i asked ths before but i'm a big fuckin rome-head and i'm just checkin on imperator, is it any good yet? if its not, does this invictus mod make it any better
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 20:50
|
|
|
It wasn't updated for 1.5 years. A lot of people liked the updated version. Invictus mod is about minor additions here and there plus flavor, it's safe to say it will not change how you feel about Imperator.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 20:56
|
|
|
Fungah! posted:bump. i asked ths before but i'm a big fuckin rome-head and i'm just checkin on imperator, is it any good yet? if its not, does this invictus mod make it any better The last big update finally gave it good systems. Unfortunately they then ditched it soon after so there have been no updates since then. The invictus mod adds things, but if you don't like I:R now the mod won't fix that
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 20:59
|
|
|
ok ty, guess its time to give it a shot
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2022 21:00
|
|
|
Yeah Imperator's dev cycle is closed so it's as finished as it will ever be. On one hand it's been left at a decent place, on the other it is definitely a game that has tons of potential for expansion and it's a shame it's been taken off the table.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 01:40
|
|
|
I feel privileged to be one of the few people who enjoyed playing Imperator for a brief window
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 09:39
|
|
|
I enjoyed a random multiplayer game of imperator but I think it was more seeing someone make crimea the city of the worlds desire than anything else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
Fungah! posted:bump. i asked ths before but i'm a big fuckin rome-head and i'm just checkin on imperator, is it any good yet? if its not, does this invictus mod make it any better If you haven't played it yet then field of glory:empires + field of glory 2 (so that you can play out battles manually in a turn-based engine used for e.g. pike&shot) is a better game for about the same price as imperator and expansions. There's a bundle of the two on Steam. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 18:13 on Nov 8, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2022 18:10
|
|
|
Why did Imperator flop so hard?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 20:20
|
|
|
Grevlek posted:Why did Imperator flop so hard? There's just no way to be sure, but hopefully it'll be given a new chance someday.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 20:30
|
|
|
Grevlek posted:Why did Imperator flop so hard? didn't know what it wanted to be, didn't appeal to any group of paradox fans in particular, didn't have any cachet of previously successful games.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 20:36
|
|
|
It had characters, but they were less interesting than the characters of Crusader Kings. It had warfare, but it was less interesting than HoI. The economy, trade, and pop system were fine, but it wasn't Victoria 3 so I don't think the Vicky people cared. Plus, most people care less about that era of history than you would think, especially once you get outside of Rome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 20:46
|
|
|
It has a much more coherent feel at the end, but still, when the first year+ of a full price game takes that.. rip Also, even if you're interested in the period- two problems: 1. Huge swathes of the map are really hard to portray in a paradox game. I love ancient Gaul but that's like researching CK Charlemagne start times ten. 2. Barely anyone to oppose Rome. 3. The "why does the USA colonize the prairie provinces but leave Mexico in California" feel currently in V3. But moreso. Rome will blob out to unstoppability every game... by steamroling northern Europe while Carthage and the greeks slapfight. The only AI that can challenge them is the Antigonids. You know the massive blob containing the largest part of Alexanders empire that historically collapses like ten years into the game? It feels like if Vicky started in 1814, Napoléon always won the hundred days, and the USA stayed on the east coast but conquered Africa. Every game. If you like the Victorian Era as a setting it just gets old. Same deal, may as well change the names and make it a fantasy game. Rome might stick if the current Invicta release state was expansion one in late 2019. But it lost too much goodwill. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Nov 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 21:05
|
|
|
Yeah it's a patchwork of successful mechanics from other games that result in anything in the end that feels like it has a soul. Rome blobs effortlessly, the game doesn't generate interesting stories as a result. Sad because by all accounts (including posts here) Johan was really bummed out it didn't come together.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 21:11
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:It had characters, but they were less interesting than the characters of Crusader Kings. It had warfare, but it was less interesting than HoI. The economy, trade, and pop system were fine, but it wasn't Victoria 3 so I don't think the Vicky people cared. Plus, most people care less about that era of history than you would think, especially once you get outside of Rome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 21:41
|
|
|
I think one of the big problems with I:R on release was that it was, mechanically, very close to EU4. So unlike the other Paradox games that are all kind of filling their own niches, I:R was in the awkward position of offering a slightly updated version of EU4's gameplay, without the decade of content updates EU4 has to make lots of tags and regions feel more unique. The improved mechanics weren't enough to make up for the lack of content, and so people who enjoyed that kind of gameplay (unit micro, conquest focused, etc) just went back to EU4. It's not exactly an issue that Paradox games tend to launch with the systems fleshed out but without a lot of unique content or mechanics for individual tags or regions, it's kind of unavoidable that they prioritise some things over others when they have limited time and budgets. But the consequence is that the games have to offer something meaningfully different from one another mechanically, and I:R didn't really do that. It was just, EU4 gameplay on a not-very-fleshed-out classical era map. I think by the time they stopped supporting it, it had become more like its own game, and I actually really like a lot of the changes they made to it, so it's sad (but understandable) to see that they dropped support for it. I hope whatever tentative stage EU5 is at in development, they can lift some of the good ideas from I:R and integrate them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 22:02
|
|
|
True. I too think that I:R feels like a fresh take on EU4 but EU4 is so big I don't think I'll ever get tired of it playing a campaign every few months or so. And EU4 has a benefit of playable nations being foundations for modern countries. Unless you're really into the period of I:R there aren't that many interesting countries to play as. Rome, Carthage, Egypt, a few Greek countries, Armenia... Most of other playable countries are probably something you don't know much about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 22:18
|
|
|
An Ancient Rome Paradox game should start in like 198 or 260 or 395 and treat Rome like Ming in EU4, maybe even starting as an exploding Ming where it's not a unified state and instead it's already a fragmented, exploding mess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:Plus, most people care less about that era of history than you would think, especially once you get outside of Rome. I don't think this is true really, Rome 2 has very consistently been top of the Steam charts for historical Total War games. I'd definitely wager it's a more popular period than the early modern on the whole, especially once you discount the few popular things like pirates that aren't particularly represented anyway in EU4. I'm definitely of the opinion (/agreement with what I've gathered is a loose consensus) that Paradox really didn't leverage the period to their advantage though. Game systems that don't meaningfully represent what people actually want out of the time, a focus on depicting literally every tribe mentioned in any ancient text ever rather than having fewer but more fleshed out ones (there was almost no regional flavor at all on launch), and then yeah also probably the wrong start date on top of that. I really do hope they'll take some of the lessons about what flopped with Imperator and come back to the period, even if it takes another decade. It has a lot to offer, the makeup of societies in the ancient world is so different to anything that came later too that it should really be able to carry a distinct Paradox game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 22:47
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I don't think this is true really, Rome 2 has very consistently been top of the Steam charts for historical Total War games. I'd definitely wager it's a more popular period than the early modern on the whole, especially once you discount the few popular things like pirates that aren't particularly represented anyway in EU4. I think this is the big challenge, having thought about it a bit more. Brett Devereaux has argued that EU4/CK3/Vick3 are good at modelling their respective types of states, but they're not really good at modelling conflicts/interactions between them. None of those systems can do a very good job of modelling e.g. the Goth and Hun invasions of the 5th century which is a conflict between a territorial state and non-territorial or semi-territorial polities. What's really cool about the period is the odd conflicts between different groups of people who understand the role of The State in different ways, and who interact with the territory that they inhabit in different ways. If it all gets flattened out to different flavours of territoriality - settlement - development - progress and The Goths become a bunch of rebel armies, or the Huns become a migratory tribe with tributary states and vassals, or the territories beyond the Rhine and Danube become a bunch of one-province minors, something important is lost and you might as well just fire up EU4.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 23:10
|
|
|
Grevlek posted:Why did Imperator flop so hard? It was weird uncooked EU4 with romans at launch and appropiately badly received, but that didn't stop me from playing the tribe that lived in my area and kicking Rome and Carthage out of Iberia. Nowadays, with the updates it received, it's for me the most gripping Paradox game. It's simple to enjoy but there are so many layers of complexity(pops, religion, culture, empire building, levies...) and interesting ideas that it's a shame it got abandoned. It also has a great endboss pressure, as you know that Rome or the largest Hellenistic Successor is going to come knocking sooner or later. It's also the correct start date, as Phyrros of Epirus is just a young lad with plenty of time to do his crazy things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
I:R ended up having some interesting empire-building systems in there, with pop management and such, but the short timeframe and setting meant it was a game where blobbing was mandatory. Slowly consolidating your empire and growing it over time was not an option; trying to go that route would either lead to you being conquered by Rome (who was the best at blobbing) or hitting the end of the game before very much happened at all. e: Anyway it was doomed because wiz was too busy working on Vicky 3 to do a giant lets play of it
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2022 00:05
|
|
|
I think most of the complaints sum up to there not being enough fans of the era for that alone to give the game a running start, and then the game not having enough unique flavor to build up a fanbase outside of specific fans of the period (or even not reaching enough critical mass for the flavor to catch on if there was one).
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2022 00:32
|
|
|
Maybe I was just too epic of a gamer but I always felt that Rome was way too stable when I played Imperator. Yeah there'd be the odd civil conflict but the real Legions probably spent more time fighting each other than they did Germans and it didn't really come across in the game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2022 01:12
|
|
|
Imperator’s problem on release was that it was basically an updated EU:Rome with no introspection on why EU:Rome sucked, and little to no flavor for the vast majority of the nations. It then proceeded to shuffle the deck chairs around for a few patches, ultimately fixing very few structural issues with the game and burning any good will that remained toward it. In the final days, the new team managed to make it quite good by reworking a lot of the core systems, but by then it was far too late and everyone had stopped caring. DaysBefore posted:Maybe I was just too epic of a gamer but I always felt that Rome was way too stable when I played Imperator. Yeah there'd be the odd civil conflict but the real Legions probably spent more time fighting each other than they did Germans and it didn't really come across in the game. I never played as Rome myself, but in the current version, AI Rome will usually break out into at least one apocalyptic civil war lasting several years. It’s pretty fascinating to watch.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2022 02:27
|
|
|
DaysBefore posted:Maybe I was just too epic of a gamer but I always felt that Rome was way too stable when I played Imperator. Yeah there'd be the odd civil conflict but the real Legions probably spent more time fighting each other than they did Germans and it didn't really come across in the game. The entire notion of Rome being struck by constant rebellion is very anachronistic for the time period depicted in game. Those only really start at the end of the game as the Republic starts to decline and Caesar's dictatorship changes it. Honestly the entire loyalty mechanic is wrong for the game, it's the not era of one singular general just deciding to change the state. One of many reasons why the game didn't fit if you're a fan of the period.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2022 07:38
|
|
|
I still think it'd be cool to see a Paradox game that goes all into the naval gameplay as a way to differentiate itself. Either some fictional Earthsea-esque setting, or like, Caribbean pirates, or classical maritime South East Asia, something like that. Buy the One Piece license.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2022 07:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
My opinion is that Imperator isn't balanced enough - there's just not enough viable starts/conflicts on the start date to give variety of outcomes and different campaigns for the player. Look at EU4, even in Europe you've got England/France/Castille/Aragon/Portugal/Burgandy/Milan/Venice/Austria/Ottomans/Moscowy/Poland/Sweden/Brandenburg off the top of my head as interesting starts which play somewhere different to each other. And all of those countries will get into conflicts with a few others in different ways and have different directions of expansion which are viable. In imperator, you've got... Rome/Carthage/Macedonia/Epirus/Egypt/Antagonids? And the last is a giant Ming-sized blob with no challenge at all, and the others are about a war or two from domiance. Depending on your start, it's either nearly impossible or fairly easy to get to the same state it takes 200 years in EU4, where you are the strongest state with no meaningful challengers. And that leads to a bad game, no matter how interesting the mechanics were.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2022 10:32
|
|
