Religious power indeed seems to be underused. Wrong POP religion doesn’t hurt as much as wrong culture. Perhaps it’s assumed that you’ll only culture convert directly when you really need to and use direct religious conversion more liberally.
Another thing might be that not having enough religious power for an omen and stability might really hurt. If you don’t get a new Military tradition or new Civic it’s not a big deal, but if you’re sitting on 0 Religious power and can’t use omen to instantly fix your economy or enhance soldiers it’s a big deal.
Oh, sorry about that, English is not my native language, obviously.
Having yearly consul elections would mean that the game would have to be much slower, granular, maybe shorter. Or you’d have to burn through 20 rulers in 10 years which would be too much.
I agree, but Paradox games are easy enough to try again every so often. I mostly bounced off EU4 at launch and did come back for at least a year. Now it’s my second most played game ever on Steam. Even so, I play a game and a half or so every few months and then move onto something else for awhile.
With Imperator, I tried an initial game and just wasn’t feeling it. If Field of Glory Empires actually comes out soon I’ll probably wait even longer to go back to I:R, but I do very much see myself coming back to this game and enjoying it way more.
Thanks for linking, that guide looks right up my alley (and it’s textual!) and quite helpful to a player like myself. I will definitely spend some time with it as I start my next game in Imperator.
I also see a more generalist guide is linked in the intro, which I may need too.
Yeah, that guide is spot-on for anyone learning the ropes. I do really like the military aspects of Imperator, it’s just the right level of detail for a game of this scale. It’s a massive step up over EU4 but it also beats the pants off of Stellaris in a few key ways.
For starters, you can intelligently counter an enemy’s composition. Not only can you see what their specific composition is (unlike Stellaris), but you can also have a pretty good idea just based off of what military Tradition they have. Going up against Barbarians, you know they’re likely going to be fielding a ton of light infantry and the like. For the Greeks, you’re going to have to tangle with some nasty heavy infantry.
Secondly, there isn’t really a “this unit is superior, just spam this unit” meta that a lot of these games suffer from. Are Heavy Infantry better than Light Infantry? In a fight they absolutely are in pretty much every way, but context matters. If I’m fighting deep into Germania, massive legions of heavy infantry are just going to melt from attrition. I prefer to build more skirmish-oriented armies of light infantry and archers for those regions. Elephants may be the 'best" but good luck fighting with them up there or marching them through the Alps (wait a minute…).
It seems like a change that would please alot of people. I’ve never really had a problem with abstract currencies. If it were me I would reduce the number from 4 to 3, so that there were more interesting tradeoffs in the spending of them.
The very first Imperator dev diary said the whole game was guided by a comment from a forum user - for better or worse that feedback is part of how PDS develop their games. I thought the monarch points were fine, but the new systems sound good too?
I don’t think PP are going away. A balance a little closer to EU4 would be well-received, though. Pretty much everything in Imperator takes Mana and there’s very little way a player can influence what they gain.
EU4 still derived from the monarch stats, but the can use a National Focus to focus on gaining one type. You could hire anywhere from +1 to +5 advisors in each category. Gaining 50 power projection gave you a bonus.
EU4 also allows you to do more outside of monarch points. You can fabricate claims and thus expand without them. You can work on diplomacy, fiddle with your trade network, establish colonies, all kinds of stuff. If you lack the MP in Imperator, you’re largely stuck.
I like the idea of abstract Mana, I think it makes for a good strategy game when deciding how to allocate a limited resource. Imperator likely pushed the needle too far, though, and some rebalancing would be good. For example, in the 1.1 update bribes cost gold from the character and not oratory power.
I didn’t mind the various currencies, so I’m not sure I’m thrilled about this change. Will replacing the four currencies with one political currency mean that a character’s stats matter less? E.g., what will the religion or oratory skills mean now?
Wait, where did you see anything about replacing the four currencies?
EDIT: Nevermind, I have catching up to do. I thought what was linked above was the design corner posted on Mana earlier, I didn’t realize Johan had made a second post.
