So why was this game actually bad? What specifically held it back, and will we ever see a revival?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Imperator
So why was this game actually bad? What specifically held it back, and will we ever see a revival?
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
I wanted to conquer the world with ol' 'Lex 🙁
It's just very bland, everything from african ooga boogas to rome plays the same aside very small superficial differences, so there's no real reason to replay it; Also there's very little content because the time period was dominated by rome and so there's no meaningful flavour for 80% of the map.
It's like if you asked an AI to make a paradox game, it's fine, it does everything it needs to do, but that's about it, it's a quintessential map painter which if you played any other paradox game before will probably not offer you anything new.
>Also there's very little content because the time period was dominated by rome and so there's no meaningful flavour for 80% of the map.
It just means they're fricking lazy and just rely on some kings and generals videos for their historical research.
I remember playing EB mod for Rome 1 and even some dumbfrick gallic faction had massive texts of lore and flavor to spice things up which relied on archeological and ethnographical research
>Just make up ahistorical bullshit
What's the point?
Do you want a history sandbox or a Rome simulator?
You can play a game where Rome conquers the entire world 100% of the time because that's what happened historically or you can have a game with the classical setting where Rome will sometimes fail and other powers take their place.
And
>massive texts of lore and flavor
help or prevent that how?
I mean like general flavour (conquer x, prevent y) missions would be fine(and they are already in that snorefest game) but making up history(rivalries, goals and how leader that got lucky his name is even known today liked smell of foreign farts) is moronic attitude
Just choose another time period if you don't care for both Rome and diadochi states
>acting like we don't have any evidence of ancient cultures and ways of life
please have a nice day you stupid fricking moron
>even some dumbfrick gallic faction had massive texts of lore and flavor to spice things up which relied on archeological and ethnographical research
3/4 of the shit in their barbarian faction descriptions was just made up by autists on the TW forum. However Imperator isn't much better as almost every barbarian faction starts as default as a lawless nomadic horde without property rights or coinage
>It just means they're fricking lazy and just rely on some kings and generals videos for their historical research.
We KNOW this since they use the Austro-Hungarian civil naval ensign as the flag of Austria-Hungary, a myth which originated on Wikipedia. They have zero trained historians on their staff (even Firaxis has some) and their historical research is entirely checking the fricking wikipedia. At best they look through some censuses so they know how many pops they need to give to a state.
Launch imperator was different than "fixed" imperator which was still different than current imperator.
On launch Johann went mad with mana. 4 mana types that drove everything and yet just felt worse than eu4 mana. Cookie clicker mechanics where you'd click to instantly change cultures or religions. It was just a very poorly designed game. Soon after they removed the mana but it still had problems in that it felt shallow.
But I didn't play much in this period so I can't tell you much.
Come the final fixes and it actually felt like you were running a country with actual choices to make. But the damage was done and despite it becoming one of their best games they dropped it because everyone just heard how bad it was at launch so the player numbers remained low.
Play invictus
>On launch Johann went mad with mana. 4 mana types that drove everything
I still don't understand what was going through his head. Even the paracucks on the forums were telling him they fricking hate mana, and he actively fought with them in favor of it. It's like he did out of spite or something.
>I still don't understand what was going through his head
>It's like he did out of spite or something.
Kinda. I remember an interview with him right after the disastrous premiere, when he went around the lines of "well, I guess we will have to listen to the people, since they apparently don't like the systems in the game". Like no shit! Everyone and their dog told it to him up-front for the half a year prior the premiere, and he still went with mana overflow, and it still failed, exactly as everyone expected, while he acted genuinely surprised that people are mad.
>Imperator came out five years ago
Time flies in good company
The funniest part is that I:R was literally the last of mana games, which they had to trim down, and Johan went to a semi-exile due to the failure of that game.
Vicky 3 has mana, you know
... not really?
I mean I get the sentiment, but let's check it out in detail
>Bureaucracy
It's a regular resource, on par with your budget. You get if from quite literally building and maintaining administration of your country. Even if you need it for taxes, you need bureaucrats for your policies. It's something you can (and have to) build up, and have full control over it as a player, rather than randomly generated source or an ever-growing pool.
>Influence
Esentially old diplo points, tied directly with how strong your country is. Again, something that you can build up on your own, rather than randomly generated, and everyone is tied by the exact same values and ranges of them, so it's not mana. Granted, there is a ceiling for it, but that's the point: there is a ceiling, rather than endless growth. It has also pretty marginal use (I'd say even lesser than diplo points)
>Authority
Probably the only mana-like resource in the game, but guess what? It's utterly marginal. Decrees are virtually a gimmick that serves no real option, unless you are kick-starting your industrial base, for which the right set of decrees is what you need to make it happen. Outside of that? It has no application and no real scale. I would like for it to have a higher ceiling or the decrees to be half as expensive as they are, but that's a matter of balance, rather than it being another mana pool.
In all three cases, the value is fully controllable by player, rather than RNG of an RNG character
If anything, Vicky 3 and its meta currencies are where mana should have been from the get go, either sourced from how well your country is doing or how well you are managing a fixed pool, rather than Johan's brain-damaged idea of mana being just replacement for everything
>Vicky 3 and its meta currencies are where mana should have been from the get go, either sourced from how well your country is doing or how well you are managing a fixed pool, rather than Johan's brain-damaged idea of mana being just replacement for everything
They're a much better idea than mana in general, but they seem "mana like" a lot of the time because all the things they're influencing feel so dead and lifeless.
... so not like mana at all, as mana is vital shit to operate even more vital shit.
I know we are not getting the agents from EU 1-3 back, but Vicky 3 is at least a step in the right direction with such systems: you are given a pool or a source of meta currency that is based on your performance (good) and isn't absolutely needed for everything (good), but simply useful when you can spare some (good). Mana is meanwhile absolutely needed for everything, to the point you wonder why EU4 even has money at all (and in case of release state of I:R, money was literally worthless)
I know. I was agreeing with you
When EU4 was released you used mana to construct buildings. I'm pretty sure money was just a holdover because they realized using mana to recruit would be bad, and without money, economy would have no purpose.
>The fact that third of the residual playerbase stubbornly sticks to 1.5.3 should tell you how much 2.0 "fixed" anything.
I have EU4 version locked just because I play anbennar. Imperator had a lot of mods that were abandoned because they were transferred to other games around that time. Locking your game to a specific version doesn't mean the later version is bad.
Second part was meant for
but the reply didn't take.
Did you even read the post you've replied to?
>When EU4 was released you used mana to construct buildings
wut
>I don't want I:R to be EU4 in ancient times
The real joke is that there is a total overhaul mod for EU4 to BE EU4 in ancient times.
... and it's better than Imperator
>Very defiantly and resolutely states that Rome will only have one consul and that the players have to deal with it
>Modders add two consuls, and also two spartan kings, immediately when the game comes out
>First patch introduces two consuls as well
I wonder if Johan was masking his and his team's incompetence behind bluster, or if he really was that convinced of the validity of his terrible decisions.
>or if he really was that convinced of the validity of his terrible decisions.
How is this even a question?
He was blinded by how EU4 mana worked.
I hate mana but from a gamification standpoint and after many many revisions it works as a game. EU4 on launch was also a completely different beast to EU4 today. I think people forget just how different it was.
Imperator was like launch EU4 in mana implementation. It was terrible.
Huh? I thought this what you guys wanted - an auteur game designer who follows his vision, regardless whether it makes money or not.
Johan is not an auteur and his vision is really bad. He even has to wear glasses.
>things that nobody said ever
The entire pre-release state of fandom reaction to I:R was "Johan, fricking stop". Literally everyone and their dog knew it's gonna bust, and then premiere confirmed it, where both long- and short-term fandom ignored it, and normalgays got disappointed by what a shitshow the game was.
NTA but Terra Indomite is my preferred way to play, I don't even remember why its just my recommendation. The option to actually see every single bloodline and who has it is great.
It really wasn't that good on release, speaking as someone who played and enjoyed EU:R when it wasn't constantly having crashes to desktop. It's a shame that CK3 came out so soon after Imperator that it actively hamstrung the entire modding community for a good while, with some really good mods straight up migrating to CK3 (and then realising CK3 is no CK2).
Terra indomita is literally just Invictus and fmo plus asia content. In fact I'd say it's a bit worse because it's never up to date with standalone invictus
>despite it becoming one of their best games
It never did. People who jerk off to "what could have been, Imperator bros" are genuinely moronic. That game needed a total, complete overhaul from a scratch to be anything even resembling good. Instead, they added navies (just as shallow as everything prior), made UI somehow even worse and reworked military system. Then they abandoned the game, because less than 500 people were still playing, and they needed manpower for other projects anyway.
All of which contributed to the delusion that "2.0 fixed it". It didn't. It made a tiny, reluctant step in the right direction, but the game remained as bad as it always was, and it's core is as rotten as on release. Dropping mana and stripping AI from ability to wage wars doesn't instanty elevate game to being good. It just makes it broken for different reasons. The fact that third of the residual playerbase stubbornly sticks to 1.5.3 should tell you how much 2.0 "fixed" anything.
You’re out of your mind. This is the ONLY paradox game where different government play different. A migratory tithe is compelled different from a civilized kingdom,
You’re thinking of eu4, literally
bro he asked you about Imperator but you started talking about EU4 for some reason
>So why was this game actually bad?
No, it was actually very good with enticing state and population mechanics that puts EU4 to shame.
>What specifically held it back
Entitled bandwagoners. The game was almost 1-1 of EU Rome. I didn't mind it at all.
They just wanted EUV.
>The game was almost 1-1 of EU Rome.
>I didn't mind it at all.
Then you are moronic. EU Rome was a terrible game, and it still baffles me that they've tried to remake it in such painstaking detail like the broken republican government (with separate one for Rome and only rome ) or the horrid trade system
>EU4 baby wants his nonsensical trade mechanics that gutted out supply and demand in the earlier versions
Aside from the micromanagement, trade is not a problem in the game and the government mechanics are servicible
... who are you even quoting?
Are you even aware there are OTHER trade systems than the nu-PDX ones, each of them shit, just pick your flavour between EU4, I:R and Vicky 3?
>Paradox’s sacred calf that 99% of their core audience always plays
or
>niche and nearly dead titles that only a dozen people like, including me
>”Um there are other games with an illogical fanbase, sir”
FYI, if they’re b***hing about trade, they’re almost always EU4 fanboys
>Still quoting voices in his head
Enjoy conversation with yourself, I guess
>ESL
English is too advanced. Don’t interject next time, idiot.
>If you find I:R broken shit of trade system bad, you must love EU4 broken shit of trade system and must be a rabid fanboy, because... you just must, ok?
In the inevitable Imperator: Rome 2, I'd like to see an extended timeline alternate starting date. I want to be able to start at the original date, or at around 400AD to see the Roman Empire implode, get the Huns as a mid-game disaster, see the rise of Islam as a Mongols-esque late-game disaster, and then have the game end somewhere in the very start of the early middle ages. Maybe in 747 when Charlemagne was born. Anything in between those two makes it boring because Rome is so dominant, so I'd have it where both starting dates are self-contained. No mega-campaign that lasts a thousand years. Throw in some extra flavor, new types of proto-feudal governments, new religions, better mechanics. It'd be nice.
I'm getting myself hyped for a game that might never get made.
>extended timeline
>Paradox
Lmao
You'd be lucky to see a two slightly different starting dates in any of their games
That 10 bookmark feast is long over
I just want one more bookmark, not 10.
>around 400AD to see the Roman Empire implode, get the Huns as a mid-game disaster, see the rise of Islam as a Mongols-esque late-game disaster, and then have the game end somewhere in the very start of the early middle ages. Maybe in 747 when Charlemagne was born
Something like Imperator's pop system mixed with a less memey version of CK3's culture maker could make an absolutely 10/10 dark ages paradox game
it's insane to me how they are still life supporting vic3 yet imperator 2.0 is dead
Imperator is an excellent game completely unironically
Even without Invictus
The character mechanics felt slapped on CKshit but aside from that it's a better EU Rome with amazing pop mechanics
>So why was this game actually bad?
It was a lazy low quality reskin of a shitty old game (EU:Rome), it's like asking why a shitty old jalopy car that's been rattle can painted is a shitty car?
This
Laziest release in Paradox history, and that's saying something. Literal cash grab reskin that the community vomited out immediately.
Play it with Invictus, Timeline extension and Crisis of the 3rd century
literally the only Paradox game out there that has a somewhat interesting endgame
you're going to need to scale down on snowballing though, or start as some very weak nation otherwise, you're going to be too strong for even that.
Had the game released close to its current state it would have been a great beginning.
>Best era
>Best music
>Best map
The game was abandoned because Paradox is Swedish and they are non-existent/irrelevant in Roman times
guess where the goths came from bro
Launch Imperator struggled with it's own identity a lot. The EU4 esque mana mechanics were just not popular.
People are wondering how Vic 3 is still around and, despite the mess that game had, it does have a clear identity even compared to Vic 2.
The redpill you gays aren’t ready for. The game released in a fine state, no better or worse than any nu-pdx game. The reason why it failed is because 98% of the paradox audience is full of people who know nothing about history other than pop history. In imperator they will only play rome and macedon like 2 times each and then call it a wrap and never play again.
They love eu4, vic2 and hoi4 because it’s all modern countries that they know and understand. The game would’ve immediately died right away no matter what. Normies will only be invested in ancient kino if it has soldiers fighting like total war, but for a map game? All they know is rome and Macedonia
Whereas, if you are a true history fan you’ll have like 25 runs in your head you want to do.
I half agree.
Though, part of the issue there is that most of the map consisted of barbarians. Even if you just stick to the major players the list is pretty small. I think the game needed a CK esque "Play as a character, not a country" mechanic to be more replayable.
But the barbarians aren’t a monolith. I played as the senones and conquered Italy, I played as the suebi and migrated to Spain, played as the vandals and journied to North Africa to create a pirate kingdom.
If you know the barbarian tribes and their histories they are just as diverse and exciting as Austria is to England to an eu4 player, and they have built in goals to try and achieve
>But the barbarians aren’t a monolith.
Eh... Kind of?
Your goal with all of them is mostly to become a monolith though. You can do some wild stuff if you try and pretend you are playing a Fall of Rome mod. But on average your goal is probably going to be to civilize and form a country.
In any paradox game I like to pick a people or country and achieve what they did historically or what they wanted to achieve
Yes, because you are a bland and boring subhuman.
Agreed. My most played paradox games are CK3 and CK2 specifically because of their RP elements. Not all of them have to be like that but Imperator would've benefitted greatly if they had done that.
i dunno
on the one part, Rome Total War was evidence of broad appeal of the Ancient era
and EU4 is the early modern period, it's not really something a broad audience groks beyond colonialism in general, and the conquistadors and pirates; not Holy Roman Empire memery or even the Ottoman Empire is well known via cultural osmosis (in the west). Broad audience knows the medieval shit because of Crusades and bucket helmeted knights on horseback and shit, not "knights with guns" as Cody put it
The major EU4 countries all have readily obvious roles that someone unfamiliar with the period can grasp after a minute or two of looking at the map and skimming the country info blurbs. Portugal is the colonizer country, France is the western heavyweight, Ottomans are the eastern heavyweight, Austria is the obvious entry point for learning the HRE, and so on. Imperator's start date has a couple of big countries in the east and shitload of little countries in the west with little to clearly differentiate most of them.
I feel like one might have been able to address both the RP element and differentiability problem at the same time by leaning heavily into mission trees like a lot of HoI4 mods do, where for example each tribe in the Gallic civilization has their own ambitions and prerogatives
As i understand it more prominent Gallic tribes like the Aedui and Arverni don't even get unique mission trees
>by leaning heavily into mission trees like a lot of HoI4 mods do, where for example each tribe in the Gallic civilization has their own ambitions and prerogatives
THIS is the REAL redpill imperabros don't want to acknowledge.
>reach X condition -> receive Y reward and a popup
yeah really makes you think...
I dunno
Game was extremely boring to play as either Rome or Seleucids(due to how blobbed they are) and bothersome to play as other diadochi states(due to the same villains blobing nonstop) and there is nobody of interest besides them
I did a few runs as celt tribes(uniting Britain, establishing Galatian kingdom) and didn't bother with anything else
I love playing the Seleucids. Imperator rome is the only paradox game where playing tall is actually fun as frick. It’s satisfying slowly culture and religious converting your empire and building great cities while you defined agaisnt the maurya and plot your invasion of Egypt.
>I love playing the Seleucids
>playing tall
... what?
Seeucids start with more land than anyone else in the game, you dumb Black person
>The game released in a fine state
Oh look, it's a bait post
Why does the Imperator map look so good while all the nuParadox maps look like trash?
This is honestly the hardest one to answer. You would think map games would have good maps, and it's not like good map design filters the normals like good mechanics might.
Because paradox are making bad games on purpose to spite the chuds.
It wanted to be all Paradox games at the same time but in the end didn’t really have any identity or strong points that would make you want to play it instead of another game. It had the CK RPG aspects (but watered down), it had the conquest and mana systems of EU4 (but watered down) and it had Victoria’s economy and population mechanics (but watered down), and in the end, didn’t do anything right. It was also really flavorless and there was no difference between playing Gallic tribe #32 or Gallic tribe #214.
i fricking hate the senate
thats all
you're right but did you really need to mass reply like that?
It wasn't bad. Just that autists sperg out whenever a game or a series moves from Medieval period to ancient/classical. Just look at how much of AoE II's playerbase was filtered by the Rome DLC.
>Just look at how much of AoE II's playerbase was filtered by the Rome DLC.
It wasn't because of the time period, it was because they zip-tied a strong AOE2 civ (romans) with a shitty remake of AOE1.
AOE1 is a bad game that no one plays because AOE2 makes it obsolete.
People wanted rome time period with AOE2 gameplay.
You don't even get a roman campaign in AOE2 despite there being several featuring Rome in the original (Huns, Goths), but only as AI enemy.
So for most AOE2 players it's just a single civ for $15, which is objectively a horrid deal.
Seeing as how the Roman civ is actually the Western Roman Empire i would fricking love a Rome campaign
Maybe following the path of Stilicho?
It would be fantastic.
The saddest thing is, people speculated that age team would adopt this mod
>https://www.moddb.com/mods/romae-ad-bellum
the same way they adopted forgotten empires, because it was a fantastic conversion of AOE2 mechanics into roman time period.
But the DLC missed the mark; At least the rome civ is cool.
AoE1 is based as frick, gay gay
Not with that pathfinding and unit cap
I lost in HoI3 when the USSR rolled my Italy, I lost again when Germany rolled my USSR.
Too much like Europa Universalis, not enough like Crusader Kings 2.
If i actually dive deep into this game is there even anyone around to talk about it with
>Legions seem like the CK2 retinue slammed into the HoI4 division designer
Legions are literally EU4 combat model, but with ability to use different pips in the same time. And it's explicitly EU4, not 3. So to put it into some perspective: imagine if EU4 allowed you to have 3 different settings for your cavalry in the same time, 6 different infantries and on/off option for artillery.
Of course in the end of the day you just want ONE type of each, with best and most universal stats, but the game won't tell you that. And ever since 2.0 introduced legions as the only standing army, AI got completely neutered, since not only it can't properly use legions (it just duplicates levy composition of their culture, so only Scythians have anything even remotely good), it also doesn't understand how levies works, as it still has script for the previous "endless unit production" behaviour, meaning it is trying to squeeze as many levies as it can.
The end result is a single legion under human player, composed of 2:1 parts of HC:HI and 4 units (units, not parts) of light cavalry on the flanks (2 units per flank) being capable of conquring the entire map, especially once you have 19 combat units in it and just keep adding engineers for faster sieges (or get a 2nd legion, that consists out of engineers and token force of HI, so they can siege any given fort within 20 days)
It's already been permanently mogged by Field of Glory: Empires. There's no need to revive it, nor any means to.
That game is deader than imperator
>That game is deader than imperator
That's more due to its more effective moron filter than a reflection of quality, also when you spend 3 times more on marketing than you do on development you tend to vacuum up a ton more morons.
That's basically the paradox business model, make the game barely acceptable, then insert it into the consciousness of as many morons as possible so they can finance its continued development.
>effective moron filter than a reflection of quality
Such an embarrassing piece of trashware. EU: Rome was garbage and this was a very low quality reskin of that, worse, they actually ripped shit out so it was a pared back reskin.
Should be the greatest game in their canon, such an interesting canvass, the intrigue, politics and turmoil of the time, but these clowns have absolutely no clue about how to make a proper grand strategy game, they are just churning out lazy remixes of the same tired old shit.
>they are just churning out lazy remixes of the same tired old shit.
That hit hard.
>Stating a truisms hits hard
Only if you have room temperature IQ
anyone tried mega campaign from imperator to crusader kings? what can you do with the time gap between these games? run it in the observer mode for 800 years?
AAAHHHHHHHH I HATE CIVIL WARS
NOT ANOTHER ONE
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
kinda based
at least the 2 back to back civil wars were worth it
got god ruler + empire government
Now I kinda regret killing the ptolemys and macedonias, could've married them to stack bloodlines
Canon ending
The reason the game officially ended around the time of Caesar's assassination is because of an aborted DLC plan extending the timeline, isnt it
horrible release; got good but everyone left and it was to late.
>got good
yeah, except first 1.5 and then 2.0 killed any capability of AI to play the game, introduces GOOD gameplay changes WITHOUT teaching AI how to use them. And that quickly turned the game off for the few hundred of people still left around, because it became the most dreadfully boring map painter
Has it, though? The chief complaint was that the game became good and then the development stopped. Steamcharts show steady pool of determined autists.
But I'm not on /vst/, if I don't regularly listen to bullshit claims about a game's performance.
Seems to me that an AI update, and a free content patch, and then the game is back on.
>The chief complaint was that the game became good and then the development stopped
That's the meme from /vst/.
What in reality happened was that I:R was getting a middling, one-step-at-a-time upgrades, without any real consideration if they are useful for the AI or if the AI can use them. This in turn but-fricked first any AI-controlled republic (Rome included), and then, when 2.0 did a total military overhaul, literally everyone who isn't human player is left defenseless and defanged.
>Seems to me that an AI update, and a free content patch, and then the game is back on.
Not really. The whole "2.0 fixed the game" spiel is build on the fact that when it came out, it was a first big change in the game since release-period patches (which cut out mana and added navy) and a first actual step into making the game good, which people obviously took as a great sign and good move...
... except it was also the last update the game received.
To put it into perspective: imagine having a total wreck in the car workshop being slowly and gradually restored. The mechanics install the engine, turn ignition and it works. It roars. Then they turn the engine off and the wreck is left as it was: rusted, crashed, with no hood, back door and seats, missing wheels, and the engine itself, while running, is attached on zip-ties and improvised weld.
That's what 2.0 is.
i gave the game a second chance recently and the worst part about it is you can tell they were planning on adding all the real content with dlc like paradox usually does and the base of the game was completely bare bones, no depth, no flavor. the Crusader-kings like character/dynastic mechanics feel completely tacked on and just suck
>the Crusader-kings like character/dynastic mechanics feel completely tacked on and just suck
To disappoint you some more: they are just 1:1 graft from EU:Rome. Where they were tacked on for the sake of it and I:R has them, because EU:R had them.
Welcome to I:R, a mid-budget remake of a no-budget EU3 reskin, launched as a DLC platform. Except it was so bad on release, even the most loyal of drones rebelled and here we are, with shitposters having endless thread material of "let's discuss this dead game that everyone hated for solid reasons for the n-th time as this hidden game with endless potential!"
it's very good. It has certainly got problems however
- barbarian wastes throughout central and eastern europe, no chance of there being any even medium-sized population centres that aren't in the civilised world.
-dumb ai, but not as dumb as other paracuck games to be fair.
-can chug, but not as badly as other paracuck games to be fair.
-the emphasis in the era was on battle tactics, and the highly abstracted way they model this ingame is crap.
-the levy system, whilst better, is still a joke
-incredibly tedious character politics; would benefit from ck2 absurdities and character dramas.
finally we draw up to the big point for most would-be players:
NO FLAVOUR!
I don't even get how this is an objection. The difference between a campaign with good flavour and bad flavour is nothing in say, EU4. It adds nothing more than a popup and a buff or debuff.
I agree with your take. For me, the revelation that "flavor" in these games is just pop-ups - and, indeed, that most of their DLC comes down to new pop-ups and buffs - made Imperator very blatantly lay bare that Clauswitz games are not games but engines or tools with skins atop them. Essentially, I realized that all this game was amounted to little army icons chasing around other little army icons across a mildly detailed map.
Sure, they could add statistics to it all, like a bunch of mostly useless army attributes in HOI4, but the actual "game" experience is laughably simplistic.
>-the emphasis in the era was on battle tactics, and the highly abstracted way they model this ingame is crap.
It's actually worse: the game does have a half-decent battle tactic resolution and mechanics. Except AI has no fricking clue how to use it. It's same shit as with AI making endless new divisions in GoY$, one worse than the other, not having a clue what to actually do with its military.
Not a fan, tried it a few weeks ago and it just felt lifeless and flat. Very little to do and it feels extremely one dimensional in the underlying complexity department.
Luckily I didn't buy it but got to play my cousins copy, to be fair to him he did warn me that it was crap.
>Try Imperator again and again every 6 months because I fall for the "Invictus makes it good!" meme
>It's the same old terrible game every time
I want to like it, but I can't. No amount of mods can fix it because it's flawed to the core. Adding China will not fix it. Expanding Tribals will not fix it. Adding more mission trees will not fix it. Every system in the game is bad and doesn't interact with eachother. It's a game set in an era where powerful individuals were the movers and shakers, but the individuals have no power and instead it's a shallow nation builder. You can't have complex relations with other domains because it's balanced for Johan's shitty in-house multiplayer games. You can't do anything because you're still stuck waiting for the mana to trickle up so you can press button to get modifier. Everything is modifiers. Thank you for reading my blog, I hate Sweden.
This
Mods can only ever do so much, but if the base game is utter shite and the core mechanics are either bare bones or simply not there, then mods just make it ever so slightly less shite.
Its like coating a piece of shit with chocolate. Does it taste a little bit better? Well uh yes but...
if Imperator is a piece of shit so is every paracux game. so yes.
>if Imperator is a piece of shit so is every paracux game
I fail how it makes Imperator any less shit
>b-but other games are bad, too!
Yes, and...? Nobody is even questioning that.
Why your average Paradrone is living in this idiotic binary state, where considering [PDX Game A] bad means you automatically think [PDX Game B] is the 2nd coming of Christ?
I feel like there are pretty much three fun experiences in I:R. Playing as Rome and doing all the fun missions, playing as a tribe or Carthage and beating Rome, and surviving as the Antigonids. Outside of those, things start to feel samey.
My favorite run was restoring Alexander's Empire as the Eumenid dynasty in Invictus. Taking revenge on Antigonus as Eumedes' son and reconquering the empire while at the same time stacking the bloodlines of every diadochi was pure kino
my favourite run was playing wide as syracuse and surviving the crossfire between and carthage
You literally can't play any other way than wide in Imperator, especially as Syracuse, since your basic survival depends on getting all of Sicily and at least a solid piece of southern Italy. And all the mechanics in the game are build in such a way, they heavily favour having as many provinces (and preferably crammed into your capital region) under your control as feasible. 1.5 made tall quite literally impossible, and 2.0 changes to military only further reinforced it. You either go wide and really fricking big, or you get fricked.
I guess in the context of imperator consolidating Sicily doesn't really seem very wide at all, but yes you do need to do that if you play tall. I think real tall play is still possible with defensive diplomacy, trade for food, slave raids, tech, and infrastructure.
Surviving and thriving as Syracuse depends on making coalitions to balance Rome and Carthage whilst you grow up. For example you can try to drag the egyptians into Italy, and make an expedition into Spain to eventually form an alliance bloc there. Still quite hard if you're not very good, like me.
>I think real tall play is still possible
All I have to say: single legion.
> form an alliance
Utterly pointless in I:R past 2.0, because military got reworked in a way that simply favours multi-state countries, and due to being population-based, you need multi-state with actual big pop count, rather than, say Carthage's initial colonies around African coast (each as separate state, but with close to no pops). AND due to the way how the game works, it's easier to conquer half a state and use its residual population than trying to build a single province with a single city in it to some big proportions - especially when there is no direct land link with your other territories.
>All I have to say: single legion.
what is the problem with this? if you're tall you probably won't need more than 4 cohorts
>You don't need a huge, professiona army to defend yourself from w whichever blob nearest to your borders
>Especially since you can't punch above your size, even if you have more population than third of the map combined
Cool story, bro
you can have a huge army, you just can't have it divided into more than 4 separate cohorts that have leaders
and if you even have to rely on your army to defend as tall syracuse you've fricked up. a decent navy is all you need to keep anyone from being able to touch you
>If you didn't expoit the shit out of the loops, holes and loopholes, you fricked up
Yeah, 2.0 fixed this game soooo much!
are you saying that navies being the best defensive option for an island nation is specifically an I:R issue?
>Island nation
If your Syracuse is not controlling at least 80% of Magna Graecia, and especially Napoli, you are doing something horribly, terribly wrong
playing tall yeah
>Barely controlling a single, capital province is not tall
Get it under that thick skull: 2.0 invalidated playing as anything smaller than 25 territories.
have you considered that you might be suffering from a skill issue?
I wish the 12% manpower rate of City-States actually mattered, but ehh...
>s-skill issue
The ultimate non-argument of a homosexual that got himself into a corner. I bet not playing CK2 as inbred dwarf with wrong culture and religions than the realm is also a skill issue, right?
>n-n-no you can't play tall in imperator!!! you can't have a territory with thousands of pops in it from slave raiding! who could POSSIBLY use a navy to defend the island of sicily against invasion by the absolutely moronic ai
>you can't have a territory with thousands of pops
Nta, but you literally can't, as 2.0 put hard limits on how many pops you can cram into a territory, buildings or not. The days of 500 pop Athens are (sadly) gone.
Also, to pull those slave raids, you would have to flat-out cheat, since there is not enough snatchable population within Sicily's naval range, cutting off both west- and east-most Med, along with everything outside of it.
>not modding the game to your personal preferences
Get a load of this guy.
>"2.0 fixed the game!"
>"haha, he doesn't filemod!"
So which one is it?
>Also, to pull those slave raids, you would have to flat-out cheat, since there is not enough snatchable population within Sicily's naval range, cutting off both west- and east-most Med, along with everything outside of it.
good thing there are tons of buffs for naval range. you also don't have to rely entirely on naval slave raids. just declare war and carpet siege other places to get some free pops and loot and then peace out
>good thing there are tons of buffs for naval range
There are exactly 3 and all three keep you bottled in the Med. You simply CAN'T reach outside of it, unless you conquer land at the very verges of your limit - and then the raids will fuel those outposts in turn.
Play the game without CE running in the background and see how useless slave raids really are, when you can't just sail in a single month from India to Baltic, suffer no attrition and steal 500+ pops in a single voyage, all to your capital region.
yeah bro, everyone with provinces over 1000 pops is definitely cheating
Nta, but everyone who claims you can raid outside of Med as Syracuse IS cheating.
>Surviving and thriving as Syracuse depends on making coalitions to balance Rome and Carthage whilst you grow up
Wrong.
You go right into the fricking peninsula and take as much land as you can early on, preventing Roman blob from getting there first (and they will be later impossible to remove). Then you pour your newly gained resources to push out Carthage off the island.
Leaving Rome around, especially when it's busy with Ethruscans, is a death wish. Steal land from under their asses while it's still for grabs.
Massalia is fun.
>IMPERATOR Rome
>Rome is a republic for most of the game
?????
Imperator just means "someone who holds command" in the Roman context.
>Strappy-Horse: Greece
What grinds my gears is that domestic trade is trash and less than half as good as international trade
i'm not going to leave 9001 one province minors sprinkled all over my empire just to have someone to trade with thats moronic
Just don't trade? It's not like is essential or anything. I only trade for important resources like elephants or silk, that's it
The only possible situation where trade has any sort of noticable impact on your income is either due to unlocking some production bonus from capital surplus OR you are a city state with handful of pops.
Otherwise, there is no way in hell to make trade impactful on income. The goal is still the same as in EU:Rome: get access to resources you don't have. Not making money out of it.
VGH
what the frick
the unlimited power of 2.0 without invictus
Your life splits into two possible paths.
Which road do you take?
they're the same decision
Social Equity - twice as many people to pick for government. Which you will badly need when going anywhere beyond a regional power
>b-but muh immersion
Black person, I'm doing world conquest as Emporion
I'm so sick of getting distracted and missing the omen anniversary. I wonder if I could make an event that pulses every 5 years after the start date.
>Base game even after all this time is still 40 dollars base price, so 10 bucks at 75% off
>Game+dlc is like 25 bucks with all discounts
i did like what i saw when i pirated, but..
>Even considering buying literal abandonware
>doesn't buy 'abandonware'
homie stop buying unfinished games
ironic tbqh