Paradox's Upcoming Game - Imperator: Rome ...Excellent News!

[Grim.Reaper]

i am puzzled by the comments as well about it not being interesting.  maybe because i am no expert in paradox games i am blind to it.  never expected it to be greatly different than last games but seems people had bigger ideas in their heads regardless if it was clear what it would be.  maybe the paradox formula is losing some of its charm for some people but i am sure in the end it will turn out like the other games and further built over time.

with this version i am going to do my best to finally learn this system, but if it doesn't work out i am not going to blame the game since it is what i expected anyway.

[HoodedHorseJoe]

My own personal issues with the game are a combination of knowing what has already been done with previous Paradox games, coupled with my own personal reading into the era. Granted, most of my reading is about the 2nd Century BC and only on the Republic, but it means I found it hard to ignore the missed opportunities that could have really made these factions feel different to one another.

Like JH, I know this is an investment and that it will get better over time, but it also doesn't mean that Imperator is wholly immune to critique even at this early stage.

Call me a nerd, but Rome (and plenty other factions for that matter) shouldn't have standing armies at this point in history, and given that CK2 basically pioneered mechanics around raising levies/temporary armies, I personally feel it's a bit weird they didn't try to do something similar for Imperator's launch. If they bring it in later, fine, but it feels they've presented a fairly homogeneous picture of the the ancient world in order to provide an even playing experience everywhere which basically means nowhere has much character to it.

I can't help but feel even at this early stage, they probably could have done a bit better? I try to avoid criticism like that though because game development is hard and it's not like I could have done a better job myself. Devs get a lot of flack they don't deserve.

But agreed, I've had a good time with it. It's been immensely satisfying planning out my defensive fort network, and then connecting those forts with roads and then providing additional roads to other parts of the coutnry for rapid redeployment.

[Pete Dero]

This is from one and the same real review on Steam :

Pro
Good learing curve

Con
You can learn the game in 1 hour


Also someone complained they didn't get a stable high FPS in game as if he was reviewing Counter Strike.


I watched a few videos on Twitch and Youtube before buying and I feel I got what I expected.

[Grim.Reaper]

My own personal issues with the game are a combination of knowing what has already been done with previous Paradox games, coupled with my own personal reading into the era. Granted, most of my reading is about the 2nd Century BC and only on the Republic, but it means I found it hard to ignore the missed opportunities that could have really made these factions feel different to one another.

Like JH, I know this is an investment and that it will get better over time, but it also doesn't mean that Imperator is wholly immune to critique even at this early stage.

Call me a nerd, but Rome (and plenty other factions for that matter) shouldn't have standing armies at this point in history, and given that CK2 basically pioneered mechanics around raising levies/temporary armies, I personally feel it's a bit weird they didn't try to do something similar for Imperator's launch. If they bring it in later, fine, but it feels they've presented a fairly homogeneous picture of the the ancient world in order to provide an even playing experience everywhere which basically means nowhere has much character to it.

I can't help but feel even at this early stage, they probably could have done a bit better? I try to avoid criticism like that though because game development is hard and it's not like I could have done a better job myself. Devs get a lot of flack they don't deserve.

But agreed, I've had a good time with it. It's been immensely satisfying planning out my defensive fort network, and then connecting those forts with roads and then providing additional roads to other parts of the coutnry for rapid redeployment.

Of course games can be criticized, especially when something is not correct.  Just seems the more vocal audience is coming across as "surprised" by what they got.....everyone should have known by now what was coming through all the pre advertising and that is just how paradox is....you either like it or you don't

One area I think is a complete waste and dumb is the tutorial.  If they seriously want to make this game more accessible and to even a larger audience, they must do better than a bunch of objective cards that you read and go do something.  Tell us why?  Tell us how? Tell us some strategy?  The one objective said to go sacrifice something in the religion screen and it wasn't readily listed as a big picture like other things...instead it was on a tiny button at the top.....took me 20 minutes to figure that out but they could have shown a picture indicating where to click.

[HoodedHorseJoe]

It's funny, I really like the tutorial... but then I don't need it as a tutorial, because I've always been good at figuring things out. How well it works as an actual tutorial isn't something I'm in the best position to judge.

I think it was more the presentation and format itself that I liked - I'd liked to see that kind of check-list/objective set thing rolled out to the main game in some way. It's oddly comforting being able to just follow a list of things to do, instead of trying to internalise reasons for doing things. Again, that's just me though.

[Jarhead0331]

^I think the objective list is a great idea for a game like this and it could serve multiple purposes if done right. For instance, it would be a much more effective tutorial if there was more explanation behind each task. As it is presently, it does very little to actually teach the game beyond introducing the major UI areas and giving a very broad overview of some of the fundamentals.

More importantly, the objective list could be useful, on easier difficulty settings, to suggest key goals to the player for each empire, or at least the more significant ones. These grand strategy sandbox games are sometimes a turn off to players who have trouble knowing where to start and where to go, particularly when the historical goals of some of the more obscure or lessor well known factions are not as obvious. Such a list of suggested goals could address this issue and bring those players back into the fold.

[Grim.Reaper]

Yep thats my point...tells you to do stuff but teaches you nothing useful for a game like this

[HoodedHorseJoe]

More importantly, the objective list could be useful, on easier difficulty settings, to suggest key goals to the player for each empire, or at least the more significant ones. These grand strategy sandbox games are sometimes a turn off to players who have trouble knowing where to start and where to go, particularly when the historical goals of some of the more obscure or lessor well known factions are not as obvious. Such a list of suggested goals could address this issue and bring those players back into the fold.

Exactly this, well said.

[devoncop]

[quote author=Grim.Reaper link=topic=22337.msg646214#msg646214 date=1556273202








One area I think is a complete waste and dumb is the tutorial.  If they seriously want to make this game more accessible and to even a larger audience, they must do better than a bunch of objective cards that you read and go do something.  Tell us why?  Tell us how? Tell us some strategy?  The one objective said to go sacrifice something in the religion screen and it wasn't readily listed as a big picture like other things...instead it was on a tiny button at the top.....took me 20 minutes to figure that out but they could have shown a picture indicating where to click.
[/quote]


're the tutorial I assume you know that by mousing over the objective buttons there is an explanation of "how" to achieve each one (this mechanic is explained on the first tutorial screen)

I get your point about the "pig sacrifice" button not being highlighted regarding the increase in stability ability and having the button flashing would certainly help. I realised where it was having watched some you tube let's plays prior to purchase.

It took me years to grasp the EU4 concepts and mechanics and only managed it a few months ago (and the marriage mechanics of CK2 still evade me!)  but I genuinely think the game design is very good and will only get better.

The decisions regarding troop composition and army stances in particular are far more involved and nuanced than previous games.

[JasonPratt]

Re complaining about the games and then spending hundreds of hours on them anyway? -- also hundreds of dollars.  >:D On each one.

Re the standing armies: yep, I had the same reaction to seeing Samaria have a standing army of six thousand light infantry (1K per cohort, and I think I'm currently limited to six cohorts). What?! In freaking Samaria?!? If these were occupation troops from Phrygia I'd understand them, but I'm theoretically capable of adding to that army whenever I want, so they are my troops. As noted upthread, why would they drop game mechanics from CK2 reflective of periods before then? -- in this case, the prevalence of temporary armies and how that worked? Shouldn't those 6K troops be out farming or making bricks or something useful until I need them?

I'm kind of thinking of trying a livestream tonight, as I stumble around learning the mechanics.

[mikeck]

I'll parrot the same thing I do with other games...how about a damn manual?

[fabius]

Johan just posted a road map:

Hey everyone,

With Imperator: Rome, a project very close to our hearts, now released and finally in the hands of our awesome community (that's you!), we have been taking the time to look at the feedback you've provided. As always, we pride ourselves on the continued support of our games and by no means will Imperator be different.

We are working towards releasing a 1.0.1 patch early next week, which we're calling 'Demetrius'. This patch will improve the AI, fix compatibility issues, game crashes, some multiplayer out-of-syncs, and will also contain some performance improvements.

At the same time, we have been looking at all the feedback from play-testing, our Twitch and YouTube communities, and the press for the past month and a half as we prepared for release. Now we are adding all of your feedback from Steam, the forums, and social media to that! With it, we have begun developing a major patch which is aimed for release in June.

This 1.1 patch is nicknamed 'Pompey' internally. We will go into more detail with upcoming development diaries before it's released. Pompey will cover the following topics:

Balancing of Technology Progress, Mercenaries, Shattered Retreat, Truce Breaking, Assassinations, Governors, War Exhaustion, and Legitimacy.
Improving the mechanics for Population Growth, Stability, and Barbarians.
Tweaks to Civil War mechanics, with new power-base mechanics.
Naval rework, with Naval Combat mechanics and multiple ship types, as well as navigable major rivers.
Deeper Holding mechanics for characters, where you can give characters holdings and they can purchase new ones as they grow in wealth.
More character interactions.
New Piracy mechanics.
Redesigning of functionality where instead of spending power for an instant result, you now spend power to nudge it towards that result over time.
Better abilities to play tall, including centralising trade, impacting specific cities, etc.
Tribes being able to decide what units their retinues should have.
Dual Ruler mechanics for Roman Republic, and Consorts for Monarchies.
Government Abilities for all government categories.
'Quality of Life' features like viewing all characters in a foreign country, new alerts, road building being a continuous action, and more.
Adding of features from previous PDS games like moving capitals and regnal numbers on monarchs
Much more modding support.

Whilst we have already started towards patch 1.1, we will continue to look at fixing any major issues that come up between now and then as well.

[Gusington]

You nerds complete me.

[Jarhead0331]

Its really interesting how Paradox games evolve over time...sometimes, in fact, they turn into nearly an entirely different game. For instance, I recently got back into Stellaris after a long time away and I'm shocked by how different it is. Some of the core game mechanics from release and a few of the large early DLC packages seem to be entirely reworked, or simply non-existent and replaced. In some cases, this is for the better, yet in others, not so sure...

[HoodedHorseJoe]

Its really interesting how Paradox games evolve over time...sometimes, in fact, they turn into nearly an entirely different game. For instance, I recently got back into Stellaris after a long time away and I'm shocked by how different it is. Some of the core game mechanics from release and a few of the large early DLC packages seem to be entirely reworked, or simply non-existent and replaced. In some cases, this is for the better, yet in others, not so sure...

Stellaris was the first of them to actually have had so drastic a change after release, I think. Before that, the next closest 'impactful' change could be Fuel in HoI 4 perhaps, or maybe how Forts worked in EU4.

But yeah, Stellaris pretty much went back to the drawing board on FTL options, how expansion works and about how planet/pops functioned. I'd be interested in hearing number or some kind of internal analysis as to whether this has been a positive thing, but now that the precedent has been set I can easily imagine Imperator under-going similar change. Hell, I WANT it in some cases to bring out more flavour, but even so there are a few things I can envision behaving differently than they are currently, hopefully for the better.