|
Beamed posted:We doing this again? I hope that they model the atrocities of ancient India with the respect they deserve.
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 05:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 20:59 |
|
|
lol if i cant watch a regions poplation get carted off into slavery in real time, just lmao
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
Ptolemy Soter was only 30% wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
I want to play as Syracuse. The city is placed in a great geographic position to dominate the whole Mediterannean.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 08:05
|
|
|
Sky Shadowing posted:I'll admit to always feeling a degree of affection for the city of Tarentum in southern Italy, because of always starting as the Brutii in Rome Total War. Best flag, best colors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 09:52
|
|
|
Play as Crete and have random strangers decided on every single issue ever. Populist!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 10:57
|
|
|
people questioning why india is in rome game are the same people who wonder why the netherlands get a focus tree in a ww2 game ie dumb
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 13:51
|
|
|
Or the people who complained about Africa in CK
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 13:52
|
|
|
I kinda want to divide Judea into as many factions as possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 13:57
|
|
|
Poil posted:I kinda want to divide Judea into as many factions as possible. Judean People's Front Popular Face of Judea Judah's Beloved Sons Anti Ahab League Sons of Moses Sons of Abraham Sons of Seth Sons of Enoch Sons of The Fathers Judean Familial Front etc
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 14:01
|
|
|
StealthArcher posted:Judean People's Front No, don't be ridiculous, it's the People's Front of Judea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 15:24
|
|
|
New Imperator dev diary focusing on combat and combat tactics.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
OK, so it's just EU4 combat but you can change some of the numbers a little bit some times 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
with an even smaller dice roll it's going to be horribly deterministic. looks a lot like they mashed the worst parts of CK2 and EU4 combat together.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
Technowolf posted:New Imperator dev diary focusing on combat and combat tactics.  Hype train has now officially stopped and I am disembarking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 16:41
|
|
|
Eh, I'll wait to see how it plays before I declare the sky is falling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
It does seem kinda odd, maybe there’s things behind the curtain we aren’t allowed to see yet? I think there’s more changes in a single Stellaris update than there is between eu4 and brand new game Imperator so far, not including all the features that are just removed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:12
|
|
|
Technowolf posted:New Imperator dev diary focusing on combat and combat tactics. I did love tinkering with tactics in CK2 and MotE, but only because you could pick one unit composition that was ridiculously OP and use that for everything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
Gort posted:Eh, I'll wait to see how it plays before I declare the sky is falling. edit: Like....I do not get much gaming time any more, so when I get to spend what little time I have I want to spend it wisely. I do not think that spending it on a re-skinned EU4 will be the way for me to go.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
Was anyone else really psyched when the announcement for Rome 2 was initially made and then became steadily less excited with each and every dev diary?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
I expected Europa Universalis: Rome Redux, and that seems to be exactly what I'm getting. The dev diaries are not the strongest writing I've seen from a dev diary, admittedly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
Fellblade posted:It does seem kinda odd, maybe there’s things behind the curtain we aren’t allowed to see yet? To be fair, Stellaris is undergoing a big overhaul in each patch at the moment to fix the weaker parts of the game - a process that need doing precisely because it started out with some pretty weak mechanics that needed fixing, much like other paradox strategies. It's strange to have such a disconnect between what people expected from the combat and what is being proposed though, I wonder what the story is here. Was it originally planned to be more interesting but had to be cut for some reason, or was it just overhyped? Or is it more complex than was described and the dev diary is just kinda bad? Chalks fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Oct 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:28
|
|
|
Technowolf posted:New Imperator dev diary focusing on combat and combat tactics. Why are roman era tactics being represented by napoleonic mechanics? Why is a 50% effective back line a thing? Why talk about "firing" at all, when the medium-heavy infantry should be the default unit? This just seems bad
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:30
|
|
|
Chalks posted:It's strange to have such a disconnect between what people expected from the combat and what is being proposed though, I wonder what the story is here. Was it originally planned to be more interesting but had to be cut for some reason, or was it just overhyped? Or is it more complex than was described and the dev diary is just kinda bad? The general sentiment seems to be the same for each dev diary: People expected something new from a new game, what they got was an EU4 mod. Still gonna get it and play it because I have only really started getting into EU this past year or two.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:38
|
|
|
Fellblade posted:The general sentiment seems to be the same for each dev diary: People expected something new from a new game, what they got was an EU4 mod. If that does turn out to be true I'd be pretty shocked simply because paradox seems to go out of their way to make all of their games play differently.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:44
|
|
|
I just noticed that the tactics don't even change your stats or whatever, they just make your army better or worse against other tactics. It's literally just rock-paper-scissors. Can't wait to find out that cavalry-heavy armies will still do the thing where extra cavalry hang out on the sides doing nothing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:Why are roman era tactics being represented by napoleonic mechanics? Why is a 50% effective back line a thing? Why talk about "firing" at all, when the medium-heavy infantry should be the default unit? This just seems bad Don't get caught up on specific English words the guy writing in his second language is using. "Firing" just means "attacking". A 50% effective back line just means a unit supporting one that's in the front line by doing a variety of stuff like reinforcing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
Not even dressing up your terminology in an appropriate way is insanely lazy for an official news release.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
Gort posted:Don't get caught up on specific English words the guy writing in his second language is using. "Firing" just means "attacking". A 50% effective back line just means a unit supporting one that's in the front line by doing a variety of stuff like reinforcing. While any particular example could just be a case of poorly conveyed ideas, all taken together it is very much seeming like this is just literally EU4 combat with slightly different numbers. But EU4 combat is very napoleonic, featuring two lines of troops facing each other and attacking, with cavalry mostly being flanking strikes from the edge. The reason this is a problem is that this is not at all how Roman-era combat should work. I'm not asking for Total War control over troops and positioning here, but armies should still be conceptually different in Rome than in EU4
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:59
|
|
|
Another entry in hungover Johan waking up at 10am realizing he's got to have a dev diary published in an hour and reheating the eu4 leftovers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
Eh, I'm not disappointed at it. I wasn't expecting anything more or different from what was described in the diary. Combat in Paradox games is always just a matter of mashing bigger stacks into smaller stacks, and I hardly pay any attention to it besides to make sure I am constantly pouring more and more little men/tanks/spaceships at wherever the fighting is going on. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 18:44
|
|
|
HoI4 has actually good combat but uh it's literally a wargame so not the best comparison
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
EU4 combat can also be surprisingly intricate with army composition and where you engage the enemy at being major factors in the outcome of battles, on top of all the other bonuses you can get on the strategic level. CK2 is the only modern paradox game that really feels like "more numbers win" when it comes to battle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:While any particular example could just be a case of poorly conveyed ideas, all taken together it is very much seeming like this is just literally EU4 combat with slightly different numbers. But EU4 combat is very napoleonic, featuring two lines of troops facing each other and attacking, with cavalry mostly being flanking strikes from the edge. Hmmm, within the extremely abstract framework of EU4 combat, are they really that different? How would you represent it, other than rows of infantry facing each other, with flanking cavalry? Maybe that's the point? You don't want highly abstract combat? Anyway I'm personally fine with "EU4 in a different time period" and it looks like a lot of non-combat stuff is quite different/better, e.g. the dynamic trading system. So I'm still excited, even if I agree that what's been revealed about combat is kinda boring so far.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
If we're just getting a mostly reskinned EU4, why not just play the Antiquity mod for Eu4? It's gonna have way more flavor than Imperator for the first couple years anyhow 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:EU4 combat can also be surprisingly intricate with army composition and where you engage the enemy at being major factors in the outcome of battles, on top of all the other bonuses you can get on the strategic level. Where you engage the enemy can also have a huge effect in CK2. Pagan homeland bonus, favorable terrain (especially if your commander has the matching combat trait), river crossings. Those allow smaller and lower quality armies to still come out on top. And nomad realms can consistently win with smaller forces against enemies, while tribals will nearly always lose if they bring as many men as their feudal enemies, on account of their troops being of lower quality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
The problem with EU4 combat is that there's literally only one battle tactic - infantry front and center, cavalry on the flanks, and artillery (or archers) in the rear. Outside of fiddly army micromanagement, you can't change that at all. You can't have your artillery focus on a single regiment to weaken their formation. You can't have your cavalry lead a charge to take advantage of their high shock damage. But then they add "tactics" which are literally just +10% versus other tactic, and it's like, what is even the point?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
Family Values posted:Hmmm, within the extremely abstract framework of EU4 combat, are they really that different? How would you represent it, other than rows of infantry facing each other, with flanking cavalry? Maybe that's the point? You don't want highly abstract combat? I'd be okay - though not really happy - with it being the same under the hood and just presented differently. Theme and appearance matter for creating how a game feels. However, ideally I'd like to see a more detailed battlefield map with the little unit pips moving around on it according to an AI (I do not want to be able to control them manually) to represent positioning and flanking differences in approaches. I think that a Roman game should be able to have Cannae happen, which is incompatible with the napoleonic two-lines model.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:The problem with EU4 combat is that there's literally only one battle tactic - infantry front and center, cavalry on the flanks, and artillery (or archers) in the rear. Outside of fiddly army micromanagement, you can't change that at all. You can't have your artillery focus on a single regiment to weaken their formation. You can't have your cavalry lead a charge to take advantage of their high shock damage. But then they add "tactics" which are literally just +10% versus other tactic, and it's like, what is even the point? What were you expecting this game would do?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 20:59 |
|
|
Literally anything else?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:05
|
|