|
I've been watching a lot of streams over the weekend tending towards the "min max the gently caress out of everything and try to break the game" line of thought and the general consensus seems to be that Imperator is already the best game Paradox have ever made due to the internal management actually being important and the way that tech, pops, AE and civil wars all work together to make expansion something you need to do carefully (or as one guy put it "it has the best internal management and the best external management of any Paradox game"). These are people with already 100+ hours in Imperator and who have 10s of thousands of hours of EU4 playtime. There's at least one serious AI bug which is kind of loving up the AI's ability to expand but Paradox's AI guy has already posted that they're working on it (basically the AI is way too willing to abandon sieges to go wipe small armies so it is really bad at winning wars). Looking at the game from the angle of just "is the AI actually challenging to beat" it's definitely pretty rough right now simply because of how quickly you can go from being a minor to a major power (for example you can annex the whole of Macedonia in two wars at which point you're basically a major power even if you started as a single city) and the AI simply doesn't grow very well at all, but that's the only part of the game which looks like it needs serious work.Friar John posted:Yeah, I saw the dev clash, I was just wondering if any videos showcasing the Bactria start position particularly had come out. I've definitely seen this, don't remember which stream it was on though. They start with a lot of tribal pops and very few same culture or religion pops, but they also have the interesting combination of getting Persian military traditions along with being Macedonian Hellenic. They have a solid amount of pops though they're still much smaller than the Seleucids. One of the things which I feel hasn't really been shown in great detail before now (if you watch the right streams) is how much difference there is between controlling 'good' and 'bad' territory. Good territory having 0 tribesmen, being same culture and same religion (or if you're a tribal government, the tribesmen thing is reversed, so tribesmen are good and I think citizens are bad). All of these factors make cities unhappy, unhappy cities are less productive and make provinces disloyal, and disloyal provinces will revolt. Even if you can win a revolt, having one is horrible because you're basically killing your own pops with sieges. You also need to keep a lot of attention towards your research rate, taking more territory almost always makes your research worse but depending on the makeup of the territory you're conquering it might be more or less worse (e.g. Macedon conquering the rest of Greece will be fine, Rome conquering all of Gaul and Iberia not so much). All of these things can be solved through governor policies which are, in practical terms, one of your main and most powerful forms of internal management. Governors can get rid of tribesmen, give you more slaves and freemen (in some cases, it's complicated), and perform both religious and cultural conversions but these options are all mutually exclusive. And all this poo poo together means that for the first loving time ever in history  a Paradox game actually has an organic reason to not conquer everything you can loving see. Sometimes it's actually better to just sit back and convert poo poo and promote some citizens. This is especially true outside of the very small part of the map which is non tribal (basically only Greece, central Italy and some other bits of the Mediterranean coast). So you can look at the Seleucids for example starting with some rediculous amount of pops like 6k or something if you include their vassals but at least half of those are lovely wrong culture wrong religion tribesmen. These dudes do gently caress all for you! They might actually even have 0 happiness and do literally nothing. They're just pissed off and rebellious and they will make your provinces revolt if you don't do anything about it. And even without the rebellions, the Selucids are going to punch way under their weight economically and militarily, and have really, really bad tech due to having so few citizens. Tech is very strong in Imperator, having a good tech advantage can be huge. For example as soon as you hit mil tech 1 you can take an invention which gives a 10% heavy discipline bonus, and more generally speaking the best inventions are at least as strong as ideas from EU4, and impact every aspect of your country; making your monarch point expenditure more efficient, making your units stronger and siege faster, improving your economy, improving tech speed, making your diplomatic actions more effective, etc. Although it's not quite the level of having a large tactics difference in EU4, the fact that it's also so influential on your economic output makes tech as a whole (as opposed to just mil tech in EU) a really big deal, and at the moment if you focus it it's very possible to get ahead of time on tech. Uncontrolled blobbing makes your tech suck as soon as you leave the 'civilised' parts of the map and start running into angry pops which drag your research down and need to be managed.Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:From all accounts this game is mostly EU, with a bit of CK and almost no Vicky. Any Vicky DNA you may see is almost purely superficial. The pop system is extremely basic and limited, the geopolitics are not nearly as deep, and there's no market system or any form of economy system beyond "provinces and trade routes give you money." The air should be clear before anyone gets any further misconceptions. Do not get this game expecting anything Vicky-like at all. The way you have to manage pops reminds me a lot of Victoria in some ways though in practice it's very different. Instead of promoting clergy etc. you're removing tribesmen or forcing conversions, and there's no natural pop promotion or movement, but there's some definite similaries there. I'm looking forward to get stuck into it, it's definitely less complex than Victoria but it does seem to give you some meaningful internal management to do. Turning a tribal power into an effective, civilised state with good tech output is going to be drat difficult. RabidWeasel fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Apr 22, 2019 |
#
¿
Apr 22, 2019 11:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 12:15 |
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:I’m glad they finally managed this... but it’s pretty funny that they’ve pulled it together in the Rome game of all things. I mean it actually works in as much as, you can conquer the poo poo fine and it's not like you will immediately collapse with revolts but if you're not careful you will make yourself weaker and risk a bad civil war or revolt by overexpanding. If you want to be Ceaser and conquer all of Gaul in a decade you can do that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2019 12:52
|
|
|
Family Values posted:The bones are there to have the best of both worlds, but it's going to take some DLC to build on that. I think Bosphoran Kingdom could potentially be really fun if you RP it a bit and make the entire objective of your game to just push Greek culture as far into the steppe as possible. No warring with the 'civilised' states to the south! (sea raids to steal pops to then subsequently send out to the Borderlands are acceptable) TorakFade posted:Is there anything like missions to guide you along in the game? I really liked eu4's system. Some nations get events and decisions to focus what you're doing but not really. However, having claims is much less important in general (you just use them for a CB) and most countries have a very obvious major long term formable to aim for (reforming Alexander's empire and forming Persia being the two big ones, which between them cover most states on the map between Sicily and the Indus). Rome gets a ton of events giving free claims which are kind of like missions.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2019 19:25
|
|
|
Most of them are really bad or annoying so good luck finding the ones you like
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
It's definitely Sparta, though they're way easier to play than Byzantium.Absum posted:Heraclea Pontica imo The correct answer but Byzantium fetishists are too lovely to appreciate the superior empires of the East tbh.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
It did seem like several streamers had the same issue of "everyone got really old, help" but that might be a character generation issue rather than a people not getting married problem. For example maybe the characters that populate the game at the start tend to have better stats than ones which are rolled later. But yeah you might need to force members of your ruler's dynasty (especially your heir) to get married or they'll sit around being useless.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
Old Doggy Bastard posted:I'm just sad when I asked for Manichaeism representation in the game that one of the developers schooled me by explaining that Mani wasn't born until 216 AD, a full 500 years after the start date of 304 BC. The religion system is ultra barebones, so prepare to be disappointed
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2019 00:46
|
|
|
Communist Bear posted:But how am I going to make a great general become leader then? Get elected consul and then have the senate make you into a dictator.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2019 07:39
|
|
|
fuf posted:The families almost feel closer to EU4's estates than anything in CK2 tbh. It's really not that much like development unless you're talking purely about the UI and the idea that different pop types generate different resources. Though it's probably slightly closer to EU4 development than it is to V2 pops, like you said. RabidWeasel fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Apr 24, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
Kyle Hyde posted:I dunno how MEIOU did it, but pops are tied to a growth rate and you can only spend mana to promote them. So you can promote a bunch of slaves up to citizens, but you can't add new pops with it You can move pops from city to city within the same province and slaves are very cheap to move. Also there's a military tradition which lets you pay mil points and some manpower to get pop (which seems like a pretty good deal later in the game) but not everyone has access to it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
It's me I'm the guy who's reading event files instead of opening the game. The Pyrrhus events are pretty cool and show what you can do with the new event system! The events are semi complex but basically break down as follows, simulating some historical events. They're all extremely dynamic and a massive improvement on similar event chains from EU4: Pyrrhus gets deposed and replaced as king temporarily during which time he tries to find a fellow ruler's court to live in, this can be a diadochi or some other random guy. He gains traits while this happens and eventually returns to Epirus and becomes king again. There's a ton of variance here based on how successful he is in various different ways and if you want you can ignore the whole thing by taking a stability hit and getting a lovely modifier for 10 years. Pyrrhus makes nice with Lysimachus. Or not. Pyrrhus intervenes in Italy to protect Greek city states, this gives a ton of claims on Rome and improves relations with Greek minors. Pyrrhus marries daughter of Agathocles which improves relations and leads to claims on Carthage under appropriate circumstances. RabidWeasel fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Apr 25, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
They added some formables compared to the dev diary which discussed them. There's an Indo-Greek Kingdom formable!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
I think you can have multiple tags with the same name now. The game files clearly have two distinct "Parthia" tags, the Seleucid satrapy and the later empire, and they have different tags but are named the same.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
Pylons posted:Is there any reason not to promote tribesmen if you can afford it? Related: Is there a way to easily promote tribesmen without checking every individual city? No unless you're a tribe in which case maybe, and yes, the macro builder thing has a conversion option. marxismftw posted:Very Beautiful Map - Good I turned the graphics setting to low and turned off always face north and the stutter is nearly gone, and my PC is old af. With the settings turned down this game actually has better performance for me than EU4 does. RabidWeasel fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Apr 25, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2019 18:36
|
|
|
Some pro tips for everyone: Make sure you assign your ideas! For some insane reason the game doesn't give you a popup for this and it's extremely important. Corollary: the religious idea which gives increased civilisation value is secretly loving amazing. Use the "convert gold into power" button a lot in the very early game. Unless you're a fairly major power you won't have enough gold to hire mercenaries anyway, and there's a ton of stuff you want to dump oratory and civic power into in the early game. Getting a couple of hundred more power can really speed things up. Horses are rad, they move twice as fast as regular units (heavy cav only 50% faster)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2019 20:18
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:Yeah the more I play the less sure I am about this. For me, everything is working fine in technical terms, runs well and no crashes and so forth, but there's an absolute lack of direction, and I'm baffled at the apparent absence of tutorial-style objectives in regular play, the seeming lack of almost any ambitions from AI characters, and the same for political parties. I'm Carthage and I have basically zero objectives, except for conquering a chunk of Iberia in order to enact one of my decisions. Nothing about trying to control the Med, nothing bringing me into conflict with the expanding Rome, or securing Sicily, nothing about whether and how to integrate or otherwise deal with my assorted tributaries, etc. etc.. The answer to all those questions is Johan, the same reason that the pops will forever have names that don't really make sense. The game is currently a huge blob of flavourless numbers which you strategically poke to make your numbers get bigger, I actually love this kind of gameplay but if you want a more structured game experience like EU4 is nowadays then yeah it's not going to satisfy. I'm playing the Bosporan Kingdom and I maxed population growth and converted the gently caress out of the lovely heathens and eradicated their smelly culture in every province and holy poo poo look at those numbers go up 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:So is this just the boring EU Rome game with more provinces, or is it actually worth the price? It's not really that similar in a lot of ways but it is very similar in some ways. I guess it depends what you didn't like about EU: Rome, I hated the map setup and Imperator's is completely and utterly different so it's not a problem. The game really feels like Johan went and lived in a cave by himself after EU: Rome was released and made a sequel without noticing that Paradox made any other games in the meantime. So it has some cool new / reworked stuff which is really good but it's also bafflingly short on what seem like obvious features to adapt from their other games, and the UI is shamelessly poor in places. Ms Adequate posted:tbh I normally like that too, there's a reason I put so much time into Vicky 2, but in this case it just isn't quite coming together for me. Honestly the major powers are probably going to feel a bit 'hollow' just because the AI isn't great and without coalitions etc. there isn't a great deal stopping you from throwing your weight around, so once you're big and rich enough you can play really badly and still achieve your goals. There's a really massive power difference between Carthage or Rome and some minor lovely tribes. Until the AI is good enough that it will actually come over and ruin your day, there isn't much scope for satisfying gameplay while starting out as a major power. The Greece and Near / Middle East parts of the map have the most interesting stuff going on IMO. Try something like Armenia, where you're moderately powerful but all your pops are the wrong loving culture and religion and they're all lovely rear end in a top hat tribesmen wiping their asses on sticks and then scratching themselves with the poop sticks 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
Anyone who thinks this game is worse than EU4 or Stellaris on release is a gigantic dumb butt hthDrone posted:I feel like I'm absolutely swimming in Religious power. I'm already at +3 stability and have been pumping out omens left and right. I just don't know what to spend it on. Convert pops! You're basically intended to keep omens up permanently so the excess religious power is purely for events and conversions
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2019 08:06
|
|
|
The game is not and almost certainly will not ever be an alternative for CK2 fans, it's just not supposed to do the same thing. It draws the majority of its inspiration from EU4 and the characters are a supplement to this, not the main focus.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
Zurakara posted:So I'm about to start a LP for this game and since audience participation is a tradition in EU:Rome lp's I was wondering if anyone had any preferences for a country to play as. My initial thought is Heraclea Pontica, but if my fellow goons have any bright ideas I'll roll with it. Bosporan Kingdom is really cool because you get to show off civilising pops and conversions and colonisation without actually starting as a tribal, which is a totally different kind of game. TTBF posted:If you have the Phyrrus DLC then Epirus would be a good pick. This is also a neat suggestion, the Epirus events are cool but unlike most other countries with unique events they're not OP from day 1. RabidWeasel fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Apr 26, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:I'm playing as Rome, and about 30-35 years after the start I managed to annex all of central and southern italy except the very tip of the boot (still in Syracusan hands, but they're currently in a hellwar with Carthage so they'll be easy pickings shortly, if they even survive) and a decent chunk of the north. You should always convert all your pops to same culture same religion non-tribals because they're both less likely to cause revolts and more productive; unless you're only dealing with a few stragglers in one province you probably want to do this through the governor policy function rather than doing promotions and conversions directly.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Thanks, figured as much. I still haven't properly checked out the mapmodes so I really have no idea how's the situation in the newly conquered lands There are governor policies for religious conversion and to promote pops away from being tribal as well. The latter is also useful as it speeds up civilisation gain, and civilisation is a huge buff to your non-tribal pops. Johan is going HAM on the official forums and it's glorious
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2019 23:06
|
|
so use policy to culture convert, and power to promote pops, got it. If I even have wrong religion pops I'll just insta convert them because I have religious power piled sky high, stability seem to never come down on its own and I've been at 3 since forever.
|
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
|
|
|
NoNotTheMindProbe posted:Now to spend a thousand oratory power to fix your research ratio. When you have way more slaves than everything else it actually makes sense to use the social mobility thing. It ends up being less efficient than trying to make some provinces generate purely culture and others just manpower but it saves a lot of points.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2019 15:14
|
|
|
cheesetriangles posted:Does the governor policy to increase income do anything other than make that general richer and why would I ever pick it? That policy also increaces province income slightly but it's almost always not worth doing. Rulers can lead armies, governors can't.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
Apparently the only reason you can't move capital is that Johan thought that they already implemented it and nobody else raised it as "maybe we should add this" until after feature lock. Whoops! It loving sucks because there's this sweet farmland gems city in Dacia that I'd really like to move my capital to.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2019 17:37
|
|
|
I'm not really feeling the colonisation mechanics, I think it would work better if it was tied to civilisation score and natural growth rather than culture and pop levels? If you want to just blob in the steppe the best way to do it is to just move a load of slaves between each province so it can hit 10 pops, then move a single nonslave pop into an empty province, and repeat. It feels really weird, but waiting for natural pop growth takes absolutely forever even if you push it. Even with decent growth rate and starting with part filled cities it takes a good 100 years to move the "frontier" 1 province forward. Maybe the apparent rework to pop growth in 1.1 is going to hit this as well or at least have a meaningful impact.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2019 19:22
|
|
|
Anyone want to share some cool non-obvious suggestions for playthroughs? Taulantia is fun, you're the only non-tribal state that can form Illyria and you start allied to Epirus (which has a rediculous amount of manpower). It's nice being in the general Greek cultural sphere but not getting immediately directly involved in the whole clusterfuck down there. There's probably some cool similar starts in Anatolia, unfortunately none of those guys get a formable as far as I am aware 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:The Bosporan Kingdom is an interesting little start, you can get horse archers easily and they seem to gently caress everything up. That was my first playthrough! It was a little bit easier than I was wanting, the tribes did a really bad job of putting up a fight. Sheep posted:If you don't need the manpower from freemen then it doesn't hurt to just leave them as-is. If the provinces have tribesmen in then you probably want to push their civ rating with civilisation effort, anyway, and you get the conversions for free. Semi related to lovely tribesmen; growth rate is actually rather good if you're in one of the less populated parts of the map. Popping the growth rate omen essentially gives you +1 pop in every city every ~35 years which doesn't sound like much but if you have tons of nearly empty shithole 3 or 4 pop cities it's great.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:I think making the character ambition system a bit more prominent could work best as the mission system. Strengthens the character aspect and could allow for those rolling conquests from particularly ambitious characters. I was expecting something like this too. You occasionally see characters with ambitions like "conquer <region>" so it just needs a tiny bit of tweaking for rulers to get these kinds of missions as well, add a few more other interesting ambitions for rulers, and tie ruler ambitions more directly into government with some special bonuses. Ambitions feel like one of the most "they're just there" parts of the game. They barely do anything and the game makes it pretty awkward to even see if someone has an ambition.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 07:39
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted: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... There's a few problems which I think are making people have a particularly sour experience with Imperator even though my own personal take is the same as yours; this is the best game, on release, that Paradox have ever made. But if you play as basically any of the major powers the game is stale as poo poo and has absolutely no challenge, and playing Rome is like playing France in EU4 only you have a vassal army backing you up on top of your relatively huge army. And then on other parts of the map, as soon as you get up to a mid sized regional power the same thing happens because everyone else you border is minor weak tribes and the AI is horrible at blobbing at the moment. The best possible game experience is starting as a small to medium sized power somewhere between Illyria and Central Asia, and Greece in particular has a brilliant diplomatic experience with you having to pick off bits and pieces of city states between the Diadochi all guaranteeing everything.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 20:04
|
|
|
Autism Sneaks posted:has anyone seen the AI use a tactic besides the default Shock yet? I haven't and so building my armies around Bottleneck/Phalanx has helped me dunk on Greeks I had them constantly default to whatever is the one that totally fucks shock, envelopment I think? Which made me very sad because I forgot to set tactics on some armies.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
Semi related issue: turns out some ultra grognards in the beta group convinced Paradox that people wanted to micromanage marriages for the entire royal family so if you don't manually marry up all your kids and grandkids your family consists entirely of old people. Also only the primary heir and second son of each family is allowed to have kids, if they both only have daughters then the family dies out eventually! Understandable for performance reasons but makes sense why families seem to keep getting smaller.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:I'm able to forgive a lot of stuff in this game, but one system I absolutely hate is the tactics system. It's not strategic. It's just rock papers scissors guesswork. And it's very unclear to players how it works, considering the number of people i've seen confused thinking tactics give passive bonuses that don't actually exist. It's pure RPS, and it's garbage. The AI will switch tactics willy nilly and you just have to guess and hope you're right. It's basically RNG, except it's worse than dice rolls because it makes players feel bad about choosing the wrong choice. How is this fun? Why can't tactics just give passive always-on bonuses based on unit compositions and terrain (and possibly against other compositions?), with penalties or restrictions to changing them often? That way it would at least feel rewarding for building armies and using them correctly. Instead we just have to play bullshit guessing games. I think if the UI for it was a bit better it would be more fun (it's actually really awkward to try and figure out what tactics are good in some situations) but yeah the biggest problem at the moment is that there's minimal incentive to choose a tactic that you're actually good at; instead it's specifically about trying to pick the one which avoids you giving a bonus to the enemy's tactic. Which given the fact that the army composition modifiers was a late thing added during development isn't that surprising. I agree it would definitely feel better if your tactics gave you permanent bonuses which lined up with how well they suited your army composition, which were then lost if the enemy chose the correct opposing tactic. And let's have armies default to something that they're good at and not just shock every time. mmkay posted:That's what I thought too, but then I just let them starve out. You get so many slaves in your capital anyway that you can replace any dying ones through war easily. You can do this but it's nice to move slaves out into other cities in your capital province to produce capital excess bonuses, which will suck up like 100-150 slaves depending on how many there already are in your capital province.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 07:23
|
|
|
mmkay posted:Yeah, that's what I started to do until I got a natural surplus for the capital bonus in the whole province. But then it felt like a waste to spend over a thousand of civic points to fix this: You could always build a fuckload of granaries, they also make your slaves happier. If you've hit the civilisation cap you get much less of a benefit from more marketplaces.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 07:54
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Yeah I kind of don't like that either. They're talking about the "shattered retreat function" which instantly makes you army "black flagged" and moves it back towards your territory, sounds like you're talking about ordered retreats which this change won't impact at all?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 19:26
|
|
|
Walh Hara posted:I often buy early access games, I don't mind that a game is not 100% release state if it's already fun and you know they'll keep improving it. I can understand waiting for a sales action, but if you're planning on buying it full price at the next patch (release state), why not buy already? Best case you already enjoy it, worst case you wait a few months. This is exactly why I preordered, I knew that I would want to play the game earlier than the first decent sale so I might as well get in on day 1
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 20:49
|
|
|
MegaZeroX posted:I see the game often make the distinction between wrong culture happiness and wrong cultural group happiness. Is "wrong culture" the more general one, since it covers both other Latin cultures and non-Latin cultures (if you are playing Rome)? This is what I would think, but then it makes certain things weird from a balance perspective (ie: why would you take the Lex Plautia Papiria over the Lex Aetilia Senita). It's mega confusing but wrong culture means that they're part of your culture group but not your primary culture and wrong culture group means what it sounds like.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 21:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 12:15 |
|
|
The impact of wrong culture is maybe a bit too extreme at the moment, in both senses; expanding within your culture group at a crazy speed is absolutely fine but foreign pops will be mega rebellious and have zero happiness if you rack up a fair amount of AE. Since they're planning on nerfing culture conversion rates a bit in 1.1 I hope that they look at the various happiness penalties associated with cultural differences. The Seleucids are going to be even more crippled otherwise.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2019 00:12
|
|