Europa Universalis: Rome

[Zaknafien]

Finally, a paradox made strategy game focusing on the Republic. Here is the annoucnement and then the forums:

http://www.wargamer.com/news/news.asp?nid=4647



http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...play.php?f=378

[EasternScourge]

For you for finding this information.I just startred getting into the Europa Universalis series,and now that one is coming out based on the rise of the Roman Republic makes me so very glad.Of course,theres no way it'll surpass EB in my list of favorite games.

[Radier]

Game look cool! I love paradox. Heh I saw people mentioning EB a few times over at the paradox forums.

There are no historical events. I liked those soo much in their other games.

The provinces looks kind of large btw. Sure that's a thing you can change if you want to, but it is nothing like Victoria´s or Crusader Kings mini provinces.

[Zaknafien]

well, it does say ALPHA, you know. Some of us from EB have offered to help Paradox with research and development, we will see how they respond, they're generally pretty open to suggestions and their games are incredibly moddable, anyway.

[Bellum]

What about other factions from that era? (Never played EU, so I don't know how their usually set up)

[Zaknafien]

in EU games you can play as any faction at any start date in the game period. Johan (one of the lead developers) has said at least 50 factions.

Johan on Rome having "a significant character system":
Quote:
it will


Johan on Kurek's hope of Rome having "actual CKesque characters, generals and politicians and all that republican era sexyness that goes along with it.":
Quote:
I dont want to give out all the information yet, but your hopes sounds close to our design document.


Johan on what calender will be used in Rome:
Quote:
The dates are in AUC


Johan on what AUC is, and when the game starts:
Quote:
474 Ab Urbe Condita (years since the founding)
And that is a about a decade or so before the 1st punic war.


Johan on the conclusion of C.N. that the start of Rome is before the 1st Punic war:
Quote:
Thats the intent


Johan on the chance that there will be a tactical map:
Quote:
Won't happen.


Johan on whether we'll be allowed to play as Ultima Thule(Sweden) or not:
Quote:
no


Johan describing Rome:
Quote:
A detailed strategy game with great scope. The entire game is centered on the characters featured in the game, and diplomacy is completely character-driven. People have learnt to expect a game rich in warfare from us, and they will not be disappointed this time around either. Religion also plays a big part, as [religion was] much more [important] back then.


Johan on events and starting dates:
Quote:
There are no historical events as such, but players will be able to experience the creation of empires and the rise of Rome. Players will be able to start at any date, and at the beginning of each game, [conditions] will closely replicate history, but once the game evolves, characters develop and the game will develop with them.


Johan on playable nations:
Quote:
There will be more than 50 playable nations ranging from Rome itself to smaller Gallic tribes. Of course, we have nations like Carthage, Egypt, and Macedonia as well. We chose 280 BC as our starting point because there was a type of balance between several major nations at that time, and essentially any of those major nations could have created an empire similar to that of Rome. Players will have different resources, geographical locations, characters, and governments at their disposal, which will define their strengths and the capabilities of the nations.


Johan on the possibilities for the players to customize their countries:
Quote:
Players can set up trade routes to get access to other resources, appoint characters to various positions in their nation, elect different national ideas depending on their government type...and [they'll have] many more options. The outcome of Europa Universalis: Rome will completely depend on players' strategic and tactical choices.


Johan on what sort of forces Rome will have:
Quote:
There are six different units available in the game: militia (standard peasant levy); heavy infantry (such as the legionary); archers (missile troops, such as slingers); cavalry; horse archers (Parthians); and elephant cavalry.


Johan on the map's influence on the game:
Quote:
The 3D map and improved terrain adds substantially to the look and feel of the game, and in some instances it will play into [certain] strategies. It's more difficult to open trade routes if your nations are separated by mountains, or to wage war over sea, unless you have a strong fleet. What will be visible to players will depend greatly on the strategies applied.


Johan on the mentioning of POPs:
Quote:
Well... :P I wouldn't say "no pops".. We do differences of slaves, freemen and citizens in provinces.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
The ORG heard about it before but anyway...

I've been playing EU3 for hours to extreme levels of delight. Never tried myself but the series is told to be one of the most moddable games. At least dreaming an EB for EU is joyful.
.

[The Celt]

Wow this is awesome! I loved EU3 and the CKesque character system sounds equally good! I'm kinda disappointed that the map doesn't go at least to W.India but they might be saving that for some sort of "Alexander's Ambition" add-on.(However, if the date on the screen shot calender isn't just some random date for Alpha testing then Alexander is within the games time frame.)

[Zaknafien]

well, I think not, the dates are in AUC.. AFAIK, the period covered is 280 BCE to somewhere around Augustus' time. of course, this would be moddable if ever there were to be an EB for EU:R

[Lusitan]

What about other factions from that era? (Never played EU, so I don't know how their usually set up)

"factions" is something Paradox games are never short of. Imagine for ex eu3, where you can play with any country in the planet, real or hypothetical, from 1453 to 1793.

Or Hearts of Iron 2: Doomsday, with again any country on Earth, during ww2, plus some fictional nations (scandinavia, arab federation...)

If you're curious about how that works, try to find EU2 in the bargain bins - still the greatest game ever IMO (sory CA & EB teams) and with the mods avaliable at the Pdox forums, it will probably remain so for years to come.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
So, do you favour EU2 over EU3? I heard that many fans do so. Do you think I'll enjoy it as much as I do EU3? (Stupid question but anyway... )
.

[The Celt]

well, I think not, the dates are in AUC.. AFAIK, the period covered is 280 BCE to somewhere around Augustus' time. of course, this would be moddable if ever there were to be an EB for EU:R

Yeah I just found that on the official forum.(Woops!) Which could mean that an expansion about either the Empire or Alexander would be logical. I wonder if the Goidils will be playable?

[Zaknafien]

I would almost guarantee they will be

[Tretii]

About the upcoming Rome game. If Paradox will make it look as ugly as EUIII, then good luck selling it. I am big fan of Paradox games, from CK to Viki and HOI series, but EUII was by far the biggest disappointment. If they use the same "graphics" in Rome as they did in EUIII, then I just settle with waiting another ten years of next EB release and be happy.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Don't know about the graphics (don't care much) but the interface of EU3 is simply b a d !

The rest is a marvel, though I know nothing at all about any other Paradox stuff to compare.
.

[pseudocaesar]

whats the deal with it? is it like RTW with battles etc...can someone explain the basics of this game?

[CountArach]

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...d.php?t=325959

Just saw the announcement Zak!

@pseudocaesar - Think the RTW Strat Map with Great AI in Real time. Very great games. Incredibly immersive.

[Lysander13]

whats the deal with it? is it like RTW with battles etc...can someone explain the basics of this game?

No...It's nothing like RTW. Battles in EU3 are pretty much highly abstracted. EU3 is not just about war. It's a grand strategy game were you can select one from over 200 countries to run during the Renaissance and Reformation periods of history. You literally handle everything from warfare, religious turmoil, trade, exploration, colonization, scientific deveplopment....you name it...not to mention diplomacy. Ahhh...If only Total War games had EU diplomacy..Now that would be a game!!

I've just received EU3 as a gift recently so i'm still learning my way around sort of speak but i have to say it is absolutely outstanding. I've never played any EU games before so a initially the learning curve seems a little high because there is so much going on. However, if you like strategy games mixed in with history, you may want to give EU3 a try.

I just read the announcement for EU: Rome and that the team will bring the world of EB for that game as well. Outstanding !! You fellas are sure gonna be busy for the next few years....

[Underhand]

.
So, do you favour EU2 over EU3? I heard that many fans do so. Do you think I'll enjoy it as much as I do EU3? (Stupid question but anyway... )
.

I preferred EU2 to EU3, with the caveat that I played many dozens of hours on the former and few on the latter. I found that states seemed too similar to each other in EU3, with the differences more or less being how big and wealthy you were, your religion and government type and how hindered by tech groups and other variables you were. In EU2, on the other hand, states that were important enough really felt different, due to their unique events, leaders and monarchs, and unique situations shaped by such things as cultures and cores (in EU3, these are quite mutable; you can gain or lose any culture if its provinces make up a sufficiently large or small proportion of those you own, and you can gain cores on your border in a random event). I should note that I didn't much like playing the minor states with few or no events and leaders, for basically the same reasons I didn't like EU3. I will freely admit that I don't think I have given EU3 a fair shake yet, however.

I think that EU:Rome could end up as bland as I think EU3 is, but I really hope that it doesn't. I've dreamed of Paradox doing a game covering this period for years, and I hope that they'll use their ingenuity, as well as the experience gained from EU3, to strike a good balance between allowing many possibilities and making the different states feel different. Having the different societies and military styles affect each other and other aspects of the game and be very hard to change would go a long way towards this, I think.

[Bava]

Whoa, nice, finally a paradox game in an interesting timeframe - everything since the 1800´s is just...gah. And EB is taking care of it, too. Makes me all warm and fuzzy


But this really makes me wonder if there´s ever going be a game with good strategic and battle map AI. I mean, the concept´s around since the eighties (Def of the Crown, North&South). Since "The freakin´EIGHTIES" (tm) !!!

[Sakkura]

Whoa, nice, finally a paradox game in an interesting timeframe - everything since the 1800´s is just...gah. And EB is taking care of it, too. Makes me all warm and fuzzy


But this really makes me wonder if there´s ever going be a game with good strategic and battle map AI. I mean, the concept´s around since the eighties (Def of the Crown, North&South). Since "The freakin´EIGHTIES" (tm) !!!

I couldn't agree more. I love paradox's grand strategy games (especially EU2), but it would be even more awesome combined with battles like you get in EB.

And, let's face it, the grand strategy aspect of RTW is really not that good. EB does the best it can with it, but it's nothing compared to EU2.

[Bootsiuv]

It has to be incredibly difficult to make both a strategic map ai and a battlemap ai that is intelligent and balanced.

That's probably why games that have only strat maps have superior ai...they can focus all of their efforts and testing on one aspect...

[Mouzafphaerre]

I preferred EU2 to EU3, with the caveat that I played many dozens of hours on the former and few on the latter. I found that states seemed too similar to each other in EU3, with the differences more or less being how big and wealthy you were, your religion and government type and how hindered by tech groups and other variables you were. In EU2, on the other hand, states that were important enough really felt different, due to their unique events, leaders and monarchs, and unique situations shaped by such things as cultures and cores (in EU3, these are quite mutable; you can gain or lose any culture if its provinces make up a sufficiently large or small proportion of those you own, and you can gain cores on your border in a random event). I should note that I didn't much like playing the minor states with few or no events and leaders, for basically the same reasons I didn't like EU3. I will freely admit that I don't think I have given EU3 a fair shake yet, however.

I think that EU:Rome could end up as bland as I think EU3 is, but I really hope that it doesn't. I've dreamed of Paradox doing a game covering this period for years, and I hope that they'll use their ingenuity, as well as the experience gained from EU3, to strike a good balance between allowing many possibilities and making the different states feel different. Having the different societies and military styles affect each other and other aspects of the game and be very hard to change would go a long way towards this, I think.

.
Thanks. It seems like I'll give EU2 a try.
.

[Big_John]

Mouz, i think that strat game buffs generally consider Victoria and Hearts of Iron 2 to be the best of the paradox games. i've never played Victoria, myself. might want to look into those.

[Victor1234]

Mouz, i think that strat game buffs generally consider Victoria and Hearts of Iron 2 to be the best of the paradox games. i've never played Victoria, myself. might want to look into those.

Victoria is 1836-1936 (with Revolutions addon, which adds alot to the game). Essentially, it's good if you like economic depth/complexity, nation-building, many diplomatic options and a greater focus on internal politics. The military system is notable for being much more basic than HOI2, but everything else (including diplomacy) is much more in-depth and there's alot of focus on military recruitment, loyalty and maintenance. As said, the Revolutions expansion adds alot to the game, extending the end date to 1936, providing a built-in savegame converter to HOI2, making internal politics and party policies have a greater effect, and representing private ownership/investment of the economy in a much better way than before. The private investment and military recruitment restrictions are the two biggest game changes with the expansion IMO, but there are lots more.


HOI2 is 1936-1948 (-1954 if you have the Doomsday expansion, and I think up to 1960 or further with the new Armageddon "booster pack"), focusing mainly on the military side of things. The internal politics of your country is not as intense as in Victoria, but you have a set amount of policy options, a cabinet, with each minister affecting aspects of your country and historical/hypothetical replacements for minister positions. Diplomacy, economics and internal issues are likewise more abstract, but espionage is now introduced into the game with various options and the military representation is the best you'll find in any Paradox game. Doomsday introduced the espionage element and extended the time-frame, Armageddon extends the time-frame and offers various bug-fixes for existing issues (airforce problems, mainly) and new features for the naval side of things.

Don't have Armageddon, so I can't comment on that, but these two with their relevant expansions (or even stand-alone) are very fun games. Victoria is sadly neglected in the modding aspects, as VIP (Victoria Improvements Project) is essentially the only big one out there, but it's got several good conversion mods too (Rise of Napoleon mod, Elizabethan Times mod, etc)

HOI2 has a ton of mods, most focusing on the WW2 era, with a number of conversions as well to different time periods, and alot of ahistorical mods. I'd say HOI2 is by far the most heavily modded game (featuring a large number of small nation improvements packs, adding lots of depth to the smaller nations that the larger mods neglect)

Edit: Oh, the savegame converter added in V:R also means you can technically play any nation from the 1836 scenario, straight through to 1954 (or on to 1960's with HOI2:DD Armageddon). With the large number of unofficial savegame converters already in existence, it's actually possible at the moment to play a country from 1066 to 1954 (or beyond to 1960's). Such games are called mega-campaigns, and are played in the order of CK --> exported to EU2 or EU3 --> exported on to Victoria or Victoria:Rev (although the EU3 --> V:R converter is still being worked on atm, the EU2 --> V:R one is done) --> exported on to HOI2 or HOI2:DD.

[Sakkura]

Mouz, i think that strat game buffs generally consider Victoria and Hearts of Iron 2 to be the best of the paradox games. i've never played Victoria, myself. might want to look into those.

No. Freaking. Way.

EU2 is an absolutely awesome game, if you can come to terms with the dated looks. Hearts of Iron 2 is good, I'll give you that. Victoria has lots of detail, but it's almost like it's trying too many things at one time. Plus it was stuffed full of bugs for ages; the release version felt like a late alpha version.

I played all three, and spent by far the most time on EU2, although HoI2 got quite a few of my hours too.

[AntiochusIII]

Warning: Victoria is hardcore. Not recommended for any casual gamers.

It's complex and with it both the goods and the bads of being complex. Micromanagement is hell in this game; I can't stand checking on every one of my [flowery] pops every [Samuel Jackson] month to make sure everything's alright so I kind of stopped playing at some point...after getting Revolutions, which kind of made things even more complex on the economic side [now you have to keep up with the AI's factory building schemes instead of controlling it on your own -- meaning even more pop management hell.]

HOI 2 is a wargame at heart and is, IMO, much more fun.

So it's like, my opinion for the major Paradox games:

- EU2/EU3 does the best Grand Strategy. Hands down the best of the group.
- HOI2 is the best wargame of the lot. I like this best.
- Victoria is the most complex...at the cost of playability IMO.
- CK is all about characters...at the cost of "stability" on the map, which kind of weakens verisimilitude very much.

So when I heard they're doing the rise of Rome period I'm excited, but when they said it's about characters like CK I'm disturbed. I *don't* want a CK map in an ancient world. It's already barely tolerable in the notably fluid Feudal Europe, if the Roman Empire's going to look like that then I *will* have a problem with it.

But considering how far away that is all I'm really doing right now is just whining.

On the EU2 vs EU3 issue...I think AGCEEP did wonders in enhancing the EU2 experience, kind of like what EB is doing to RTW -- prior to that it was just as random as EU3 is. Hopefully Magna Mundi will do the same to EU3 in time. Although I didn't get Napoleon's Ambition so Magna Mundi Gold is out of question for me.

Events Events Events -- that's the best thing in all Paradox games, yet it seems the devs are kind of wary at adding too many events in, so it's up to the modders to do so.

[Sakkura]

Edit: Oh, the savegame converter added in V:R also means you can technically play any nation from the 1836 scenario, straight through to 1954 (or on to 1960's with HOI2:DD Armageddon). With the large number of unofficial savegame converters already in existence, it's actually possible at the moment to play a country from 1066 to 1954 (or beyond to 1960's). Such games are called mega-campaigns, and are played in the order of CK --> exported to EU2 or EU3 --> exported on to Victoria or Victoria:Rev (although the EU3 --> V:R converter is still being worked on atm, the EU2 --> V:R one is done) --> exported on to HOI2 or HOI2:DD.

I love the way you can play from 1066 until the middle of the 20th century in one continuous savegame line. Pretty impressive, that. Plus the game style changes along the way, reflecting the difference in society across that millennium.
But I never got past Victoria with my 1066 game.

PS: I hate POPs.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Thanks Big_John, Victor1234, Sakkura and AntiokhosIII. I've noted the Paradox titles for my future targets.

The conversion thing sounds amazing! Playing a faction from 1066 to 1960 would be an experience worth trying at the least.
.

[CountArach]

I read a Polish Mega AAR once and I must say it was amazing! He become the sole powerhouse in Eastern Europe, then the Mongols came and wiped him out over about twenty years. He was reborn some years later as a minor nation, then built hsiw ay up to a regional power again. Truly awesome stuff to read.