Hah, I triggered the civil war event chain as Rome. It set the loyalty of several people to 0 and gave them 28k armies to march to random places while the civil war clock counted down.
But half of them died of old age, so I got the armies and the disloyal characters fell under the trigger level. I wonder if I that sabotaged the event chain. š
New dev diary goes into great detail on the upcoming Carthage mission tree.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/imperator-dev-diary-28-10-19.1269271/
You werenāt kidding about the amount of detail. I ended up skimming rather than reading.
This looks a terrific addition to give you something to do. Iām already getting bored with the game and a lack of stuff to do is my primary beef. I end up spending a lot of time which days click by, because I need money, manpower, political points or typically all of the above.
I think the combat is good, moderately more interesting than EU IV, but less interesting than HOI IV. The map is lovely, and the addition of characters and their families is done well. The soap opera aspect of CK2 turned me off. I think Imperator strikes a good balance between just having a rule in EU IV, or generals in HO IV and too much detail in CK2ā¦
Still I really want this game to be turned base with yearly tuns or so, it is simply take to long a speed 3 to make much progress.
Whatās wrong with speed 5?
Iām constantly hitting pause because Iām afraid I missed something. But your right I should try it more.
When I started playing Paradox games I found it really tough to just let time pass. I had to shift my point of view from trying to make decisions every turn to making decisions when opportunities became available. It helped to be a bit more relaxed, but it definitely doesnāt preclude boredom.
A few thousand hours later, still in the new player phase, I still have a hard time using max speed. Except in Stellaris, which is still slow as fuck.
See, itās opposite for some people like me. I focus on a specific objective and canāt wait to get it. I.e. I will have new tech in 15 months and will have end of truce with that specific guy in 14 months so Iād better just prepare for war. Events and opportunities on my way there irritate me. In EU4 and Imperator I can find some balance and enjoy the view, look for opportunities. But CK2 breaks my brain cause the right way to play it is to get to know all those snowflakes and be very observant about rulers changing, rebellious lords and so on and so on. Perhaps itād be better if the game would have a better notifications and visuals cause in CK2 thereās a great disconnect between the map and the real game. Even Imperator is better in that regard showing you rulers right there on the map.
Usually I hold off on playing Paradox titles for at least a year or two after release, but since this is in the microsoft game pass that I got this month for a dollar, I figure I might want to try it.
Iām generally a fan of all their titles except CK2, blasphemy I know, but it just bounces right off me and Iāve tried to get into it a number of times. Hearts of Iron, Stellaris, EU, Iām on board.
So is this the time to give it a go or should I wait a bit longer? I am one of those people where a bad first impression can kind of sour me on a game permanently which is why I hold off on playing Paradox titles for a bit. They donāt have a great track record of solid releases in my book.
If yes, some first time faction recommendations would be welcome.
Thereās never a right time for playing Paradox games, they donāt get finished. So now is as good time as any.
Tutorial with Rome is fine and allows you to continue once you beat all tutorial missions. Note that most people consider it easy so it might be a relaxing way to ease into the game.
Well, I shamelessly play the Ottomans about once a year in EUIV because I enjoy an easy exercise in map-painting now and then. Itās kind of therapeutic.
Itās super helpful in getting your bearings in the game, as the tutorial introduces a lot of the main concepts and the pace is relatively relaxed, without much in the way of overt threats from the other factions. (Itās perhaps more useful if youāre not that experienced with Paradox games, like me, but still.)
I enjoy the game as it is now, for whatever thatās worth. It doesnāt have the ridiculous amount of content that EU4 and CK2 have accumulated in their 6+ years of post-release development but it also doesnāt have big design problems that need to be reworked like Stellaris had. Migratory tribes, settled tribes, monarchies, and republics all have their own mechanics and play differently and that provides variety in addition to the asymmetrical starting situations that are a staple of Paradox games.
I guess my question is what are your main reasons for holding off a year or two on new releases? If itās to avoid critical bugs and major design problems I think youāre probably good to go now. If itās because you want all the extra content they add in that timeframe then Imperator will have more in another year or two than it does now, of course.
Pretty much to avoid critical design problems and major quality of life stuff. I guess what I was mainly wanting to know was if the game was currently undergoing some Stellaris-level of redesign where Iād have to relearn it in 6 months anyways. Sounds like the answer is that it is more stable than that, design-wise.
Theyāre planning to add missions and rework the effects of some offices. But nothing major.
Yeah, no major redesign thatās known about. 1.2 saw an overhaul of the monarch power system where they distilled it into Political Influence, but 1.3 is looking like itās focused on content as opposed to overhauls.
Well knowing EUIV is certainly helpful here! Also the map is really beautiful, itās going to be hard to look at the EU one the same way after.
Quick question - am I basically expected to always have a couple of disloyal characters and to just make sure it isnāt the important ones? Or is this something I should be mitigating entirely. Unless Iām missing something I donāt see any way to give important jobs to a lot of these people. Itās the mechanic Iām struggling with understanding the most. And the Tyranny penalties seem pretty bad, and take a long time to go away so Iām thinking I only want to use tyranny generating actions very sparingly.
Is there any way to influence tribal succession? I had my starting, now geriatric leader die at the start of a hard defensive war and got like 5 leaders in a row who were at deathās door. Five new leaders in 3 years before I got down to someone in their 60s really tanked my stability.
People with little to no power base arenāt too much of a threat, unless theyāre in large numbers. I make sure my powerful families are not Scorned even if it means promoting an incompetent to a court position or raising a small army of light infantry that they can command and feel important.
Hmmm, Iām not sure. I usually just roll with it. Iām curious now if popularity or prominence have any impact on who is going to succeed.
Iād just like to sit in at that tribal council and suggest that maybe the guy who canāt get out of his bed because heās 85 and has terminal cancer with a health score of 3 shouldnāt be the next tribal chief.