'That won't last two weeks before going back to bellow a thousand though';

'Is this just because Laith and OPB and Ludi etc. are trying to will something into existence or what';

'>>1703356
They are doing this since last month and looks like is working, for how long though, but I guess is just because they got really tired and bored of doing same challenge for the billion time in eu or hoi and tried something else to retain their sanity';

'undefined';

'Doesn't matter, you won't keep it, pdx is not dumb to waste money again on this turd';

'If they really want this game back, the next and last chance MUST be a dlc extending the game and adding the big names';

'Zoom out.';

'>>1703349
The shilling has worked and I intend to buy it. Annoying to see it at $12 when two months ago you could get the game+DLC for $3.';

'Can't believe they never tried the civil wars that lead to the fall of the republic, the third century crisis or the fall of the WRE, they didn't look at rome total war at all? those are the most interesting events of the roman era, lazy cunts killed their own game';

'That was the peak, not bad, considering for the last year it didnt even reach a thousand on average';

'>Red Hawk is also pushing Imperator content
Is the gsg cartel trying to tell Johan something';

'>>1703376
I thought the reason Republics were hated in Imperator was because some cunt would always try to start a civil war somewhere';

'>>1703411
Yeah, but I'm talking about the historical ones, imperator is very guilty of the bad sandbox system pdx tried and lacks historical figures like pompey, sulla, caesar, etc.';

'So what is up with all the shilling?';

'(((youtubers))) bored with playing the same shit for the trillion time in eu, hoi, giving a go at imperator to avoid going insane';

'>>1703517
I don't know. It feels pretty artifitial.';

'>>1703349
>Wiz fucked Vic3 so badly people are begging for Imperator';

'>>1703364
My main complaint is the trading mechanic. They should've done supply and demand like in Victoria.
I say Victoria is fine on its own and Invictus is a serviceable overhaul mod.';

'>>1703588
Invictus since around mid last year had put such flavour in the game that people were already talking a lot about it, but I guess the main culprit this time was indeed johan's return with eu v and interest in his work again, which is retarded because he has nothing to do with the imperator fix provided by 2.0 and invictus';

'Johan was shilling it too';

'they are subtly telling Paradox that GODhan is better than the wizcel';

'>>1703349
So all Paradox actually needed was a cute Tunisian boy shilling their games?';

'>>1703864
Cute twinks are on the spotlight, see dunc and spiderslop';

'>>1703356
Who';

'is this actually decent or just a meme and you have to mod the shit out of it to get something borderline functional?';

'Has the better internal management of all pdx games, but the char system needed for it to be a gem is very barebones, also you only need a single mod invictus, will give flavour to white peoples food that were the vanilla missions and also balance a few things';

'>>1703897
The latter. The game, when first released, was so shit that it buckbroke the entire fanbase; a few years passed, game was reworked, now painfully mediocre.';

'>>1703899
>>1703900';

'>>1703912
Duality of man';

'2k already for the second day and is not even close to peak hours, we beating 3k and may even reach 4k today';

'>>1703349
trade, resources and the tech tree are all quite dull in this game, and I don't get an 'antiquity feeling'';

'>>1703349
We keep strong senators';

'>>1703364
They will not extend the game into the time of Christ.';

'>>1703364
>dlc extending the game
There are more pressing issues at hand than that, like a barbarian rework';

'>>1704177
Although this could be circumvented with an A.D. start date.';

'>>1703349
>We are so b-ACK';

'>>1704187
lmao, have you even played the game? Imperator has the worst blobbing problem in any paradox game. Adding a Roman Empire start date would just result in Rome doing world conquest every single time.';

'>>1703349
Bought this game on sale but I'm honestly baffled atm. Ui is really bad, ngl';

'>>1703897
One mod is needed.';

'>>1704197
It also has the insane civil wars that cripple anyone, which is essentially what lead to the empire falling, add a few more mechanics perphaps but chars as it is will already do it very quickly';

'>>1704204
Have you never played a paradox game before?';

'I spend the last two days playing this slop again and my god... it's so fucking boring.';

'>>1703878
eu4 youtubers who decided to all play IR at the same time for some reason.';

'>>1708642
It's only boring if you're not interested in the historical period. I can enact all sorts of historical and alternate historical scenarios which keeps things interesting. Sucks to be you.';

'>>1708739
The alt-history scenarios of blobbing as x country? Damn, you're boring.';

'>>1708743
>The alt-history scenarios of blobbing as x country?
In I:R you can play tall. But you'd know that if you played the game for more than 30 minutes. You probably didn't even play as anything other than Rome so fuck off retard.';

'>>1708750
>In I:R you can play tall
kek, playing tall in the blobbing game? Oh boy, I get to sit there and collect gold!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe build a few buildings?Q!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?1?1/1/1

Fuck off. At least I move the toy soldiers around as was intended, dumbass.';

'>>1708739
>It's only boring if you're not interested in the historical period.
Like most people?';

'>>1708764
but muh men think about Rome all the time memes';

'This might've been a decent game if characters weren't a thing. Replacing offices constantly because people kept dying got old really fast.';

'>>1703349
Zoom out.';

'>>1708700
>for some reason
they're 99% actually partnered with Paradox, figure out the rest';

'>>1703356
>Ludi
HE's the only one I've not shilling Imperator so far. Which makes me think the rest of them hate him for whatever reason';

'>>1708739
I'm interested in the time period and it's still boring, it's soulless slop like all nu-paradox games';

'>>1703917
one of them isn't human';

'IMPERATARDS!';

'isn't that more than vic3 by now?';

'They actually keeping 2k players for an entire week, cant believe people fell for this trap';

'>>1709446
>isn't that more than vic3 by now?
9,768 playing an hour ago
11,315 24-hour peak

So not even remotely fucking close to V3';

'I'm playing the GoG version and enjoying it, what the fuck.

Also: Is there ANY WAY to survive as Epirus without cheating? The only strat I think might be legit is fucking bumrush Crete on day one before you unpause, just like immediately launch a no CB war and start taking land down there, because otherwise you won't have the levies to win against Rome. It's actually pretty bad playing as a Greek state in general just because you're waiting to get mobbed by Rome, like they're the Mongols or something.';

'>>1708849
The only thing that annoys me about characters is how the fuck do you keep your royal family in charge of things when there is NO MARRIAGE OPTION for side characters, like how there is in CK2/3? Your ruler and his wife better fart out a ton of kids, otherwise your power base is going to naturally dwindle.';

'>>1708959
I highly doubt paradox will spend any more money on a project they already abandoned. They probably rather everyone forgets it exists. If anyone is paying them it Johan out of his own pocket to in some weird Johan vs Wiz power struggle';

'The fact that I have to log in into some fuckignParadox account to play Ironman mode is just absolutely fucking bullshit.';

'>>1712190
>like they're the Mongols or something
They kinda are though lol';

'Is there a way to get a lot of land as a diadochi without collapsing? I took all of the antagonid's asian land and got stuck with 100 AE, which led to having 0 stab, which in turn led to 0 pop happiness across the board';

'>>1713180
>Collapsing after massive overextension
Truly you are the heir of Alexander.
In all seriousness if you're gonna play longer than your starting characters' lifespan just aim to complete one or two mission trees that give you expansion CB's then stabilise and build up your cities. Otherwise, you'll just be putting down rebellions non-stop which is super gay and boring';

'>>1703356
>Ludi
How can people tolerate the way that guy talks ?';

'>>1713180
Max out your tyranny by selling prisoners into slavery';

'>>1703604
yeah, that's my takeaway too';

'>>1714362
He's a funny sounding slav.
What's the problem?';

'>>1703604
JVHVN I kneel!!!';

'>>1714435
Schnappledorf makes me want to gouge my ears out';

'>>1712190
Try invading Italy while Rome is busy in another war and seek advantageous battles, you might score some victories named after your king.';

'>>1704554
That would require Paradox to be competent and code something worthwhile though';

'The building system in this game is so jank. It gives you a shitload of percentages to this or that but doesn't tell you what they actually do. Ie: You think building a marketplace will give you more taxes or trade? Well, it won't dickhead. It gives you a PERCENT of the idea of trade, and it makes assimilation go faster. So basically, they suck. The way to get money is actually completely unstated: Build slave estates and dump pops on them. That and build cities/foundries in cities, or sack cities, or sell people into slavery. Other than that you're boned.

Now that I've ranted, is there any logical reason why someone playing as one of the Black Sea merchant lords shouldn't just max out commerce and hire mercs when needed? You don't have the pops for a big peepee army, and it takes forever to tech up into cohorts.';

'>>1704197
>Imperator has the worst blobbing problem in any paradox game.
This is actually my biggest criticism of the game. If you lose any war, you lose the game because they'll just take 100% of your land and that's that. Yes, that is historical, but it's such a quick ass rape that you have to savescum to keep playing, sometimes. I'm not saying CK2 with its restrictive CBs is a good idea because then you'd have to wage a trillion wars to get anywhere, but the notion you can wipe out an entire nation in one or two battles is pretty rough.';

'>>1703364
DLC with a 476 end date would be better. I want to see Rome fucking implode under the weight of its own contradictions.';

'Has anyone here done the mega-campaign stuff where you export a save to CK3? I have a nearly completed vanilla save (I know) that I want to export, and I think the converter only supports Invictus saves. Will it tell me to fuck myself if I load a vanilla save into the converter? Will Invictus let me load a vanilla save and then resave as an Invictus save?';

'>>1703349
last "okey" paradox game';

'>>1715640
Imperator gets a lot of shit for a bad launch, but the mixing of CK2 family politics, Vicky 2 pop considerations, and EU4/CK3 war mechanics is actually a pretty solid mix. You have to ask yourself who is actually shitting on this game, too, because the answer is obvious: People who watch twitch streams of EU4 and HOI4. Hearts of iron 4 is so dreadfully fucking boring';

'>>1715795
>Hearts of iron 4 is so dreadfully fucking boring
true
Without mods, it’s almost unplayable.';

'>forced to face down Armenia as the Bosporan Kingdom
>hire mercenaries to attack the southern approaches while my Scythian allies and I attack through the softer north with levies
>mercs sack Trapezeum
>but somehow burn 80 fucking food doing it
>forced to wage the war in the north while the mercs just camp the city
>take outpost after outpost in the frigid cold while mercs continue to sup on the finest meats and wines
picture related, my merc commander';

'>>1703356
Yeah';

'>>1714362
I did in order to learn the game until that ugly fat fuck decided to add face cam';

'>>1715910
imagine learning the game from a cheater';

'>>1714717
Unironically try to get mad less';

'>>1715921
It literally doesn't matter you drama fag';

'>make a guy governor of a wealthy province
>give him honors via an event
>adopt him into my family
>his loyalty drops 25 points
really nigga';

'>>1715942
it's just not very helpful for learning. for real tips you should be looking at real autists like budgetmonk, playmaker, or student because all the mainstream eu4 people are terrible at the game';

'I've played quite a bit of Imperator without any mods and alongside recent EU4 it's definitely the best vanilla gsg. Pretty fun, needs more flavor though. If it was supported after the major patch that made it good, we could have had one of the best gsgs from Paradox ever.';

'>>1715977
He lost respect for you since you've been kissing his ass too much';

'>>1715977
Based, hope he fucks your wife and takes your throne as well so you stop being less of a cuck people pleaser';

'>>1716277
>needs more flavor
This is one of my main complaints about the game, but honestly it's largely an issue with the setting. You'd have to write total fanfic to give flavor to most of the tribal countries since they didn't have writing';

'>>1715977
Immersive.';

'>>1716395
If only they went the CK3 route of making stuff up when dealing with boring nations.

Also EU Rome did things better than imperator.';

'>>1703349
I'd like to participate in this, but the beta patch they released year ago, broke the launch menu on Linux, so you can't even launch Imperator in Steam anymore but have to launch it offline.

Many fucks were given';

'>>1703349
lol';

'>>1716658
>stop liking what I don't like!
Speaking of dead paradox games, how's ck3, vicky 3, and basically everything else in their catalog but Stellaris?';

'Is there any reason not to fully indulge in the meta of personally sacking cities and destroying them, then enslaving the nobility and racking up the tyranny buff so you can immediately turn around and do it again?

>b-b-b-but muh civil wars
Don't fucking matter when you've got mercs on permanent hire because of the beaucoup bucks you're getting farming small shits.';

'>>1716735
I generally treat the cities gently so I can get more pops, but yes you should be selling all prisoners into slavery. Tyranny's benefits far outweigh its downsides';

'>>1716806
>I generally treat the cities gently so I can get more pops,
I will too if I intend to keep the place. But if I just want to smash their shit, I will burn it to the ground every time because it cucks the enemy country even after the war is over. There's no reason, for example, why I wouldn't burn every single city in Italy when fighting the Romans.';

'>>1716812
I guess it depends on the country you're playing. I like to play big blobs like Macedon who assimilate absolutely everyone';

'>>1716456
>Imagine defending the development of CK3 and being taken seriously.';

'>>1716806
>not roleplaying a trve patrician who eschews tyranny for the principles of the repvblic
NGMI';

'>>1703604
>"Leaving this company is not as scary as it sounds"
>The "nuclear" apocalypse occurs in the video game hobby as a whole';

'>>1720047';

'I love Imperator but imo the worst part of the mid to late game, as a large country, is managing the families and characters, particularly governors of each province and their assigned priority. I much prefer eu4 style “you’re the spirit of the country and you have a last name and a marriage with family X” abstraction.';

'>>1703349
Fattening Paradox Interactive by still buying their DLC, so that EA doesn't make a new C&C yet ,was a good idea for the strategy genre.';

'Character and trading systems need overhauled. If they could have shit out one more update fixing those, I'd still be playing it to this day.';

'>Reinstall imperator because it's getting attention again
>Get the mod everyone is raving about because it supposedly fixes the game
>Play for like 40 years
>Rome ignores Carthage and Greece, snakes into Germania just like the last time I played
>Armenia conquers everything north of the caucasus just like the last time I played
>Random gaulish opm conquers all of gaul just like the last time I played
>Random irish opm conquers all of britannia just like the last time I played
>Diadochi still implode and get conquered by parthians and galatians
>Zoroastrianism still gets wiped out immediately
>Tribals are still fucked
>Families and characters are still worthless and easy to placate
>Game is still boring to play besides all of that

Well I'm glad the short burst activity died out immediately because there's absolutely nothing praiseworthy about this broken ass game.';

'>>1703349
>start playing this
>realize it's WAY more fucking complex than EU4
Is this why it failed?';

'>>1721765
>it's WAY more fucking complex than EU4
Is it though?
EU4 has a shit ton of bloat.';

'>>1720052
I like that Imperator has family dynamics. I just wish it had CK2's depth when it comes to characters, because you can't really fucking do anything with the existing system. You can't arrange marriages how you want to, you can't kill when you want to, you cannot throw people in jail who physically started civil wars against you. It's insane. In Ck2, if a family revolts against you, you can steal all their shit and fucking merk them. In this game, treason is basically a stat modifier, -0.5 to popularity, which no NPC is ever going to give a shit about ever ever ever ever ever.

And now that I've written my blog, someone tell me how to assfuck Rome as Epirus, because they have 30-40,000 troops and I have 19,500, including mercs.';

'>>1720994
What did you want to happen?';

'>>1708966
>for whatever reason
Ludi is a plagiarist nigger';

'>>1723538
I don't know, probably anything other than what happened the last 5 times I played this game.';

'>>1723674
Think the issue is that the AI follows the path of least resistance.
Rome and Carthage do not have in-universe reason to fight, so it's just easier to conquer weaker powers.
PDX hasn't really solved this issue, CK3 has the issue.
And the only reason blobs in EU4 fight i because rival/power projection system.
I should value richer provinces try prioritize controlling them';

'I don't really get Imperator Rome. To me it feels like one of those mobile games that you see ads for where whoeever has the bigger number always wins and whoever has the smaller number always loses. Diplomacy sucks and has no nuance, the game goes on for forever (because there's no real end date), there's no seismic technology that changes the game, there are no huge endgame threats or crises, the whole family management shit just feels like a stripped down version of ck2, from a marketing perspective it is a mess because Rome and Persia the only countries anyone knows from the period, and if you play any sort of republic without lifetime elections it is impossible to manage stability';

'>>1723708
even if you force a rome-carthage war the naval ai is too stupid for them to actually fight';

'>>1723717
Imperator is a sengoku or march of the eagles sold as a full game.';

'>>1721765
Imperator today is not launch imperator. They're so different they're entirely different games.
Launch imperator was simpler than eu4, it failed because it was click button to do thing the game. It was a cookie clicker.';

'I'm trying to form Greater Iberia but I get cockblocked everywhere by defensive leagues and then Carthage comes and rapes my ass.
Any tips?';

'>>1723898
>even if you force a rome-carthage war the naval ai is too stupid for them to actually fight
I have played a lot of Rome runs and I have had games where after blobbing through Italia and Magna Graecia I was hyped up for a massive Punic war and then found that Carthage had deleted most of its navy to save money. Other games, they maintain naval parity (or supremacy) but either they like to hide their fleet in Carthago for protection if theyre feeling threatened, and you have to bait them into a major sea battle, or they just play the whack-a-mole game where they (and their feudatories) will just ferry about a 1000 stack of levies to some random edge of your land to siege stuff in your back line, just to be a dick.';

'>>1723991
Unsure about full on leagues, but defensive pacts are kinda ephemeral in my experience. Nations seem to gain and lose them for no apparent reason, which can produce an opening if you're constantly checking everything.

The game is very snowbally and the biggest fish are absolutely monstrous. I find they'll often leave you alone, but I don't have an answer for when they don't beyond getting even bigger first.

Cities and money are OP. If you can make enough cash, you can specialize cities to give you absurd quantities of whatever resource you need, be it more money or manpower. The AI is unsurprisingly poor at this, so you can punch well above your weight if you're able and willing to spend thousands of denarii building up your core provinces. Pop growth is still gated by number of provinces, though.';

'Two patches in two days, how we feeling bros?';

'>>1727605
its mostly modding support, which means its nit heralding a revival or anything but its better than nothing ig';

'>>1724010
>Carthage sends troops to your back line.

Literally Hannibal?';

'Is this the first Paradox game in wich you can "steal" territory from the AI?
It's a pretty cool mechanic.';

'>>1721765
>Imperator releases
>it’s shit
>Imperator being shit is cemented in the minds of autists
>it gradually is revamped to be a good game
>autists who refuse to play it again are still going around telling everyone that the game is shit and not to buy it, call everyone saying it’s fixed a shill
>the game continues to sell poorly and is abandoned
>people eventually find out it really was fixed but it’s too late
The archive is full of Imperator discussion that shows this happening in real time';

'>>1716734
do you mean all the games that are at their player peak and are more popular than any previous installments?';

'>>1728058
>if you aren't brainwashed into buying a game then waiting 2 years for it to become playable you're an autist, also if you don't buy all the DLC you're the culprit for it to be abandoned, not Paradox
That's why they will never go bankrupt, they teach their cattle well.';

'>>1728058
Game was playable and fun at release, too, albeit bare-bones. It was gradually improved and reworked over the next couple years. Shame. I still think a lot of the butthurt it got at release was misdirected fan anger at EU4's DLC policy, which is perfectly understandable, simply directed at the wrong game, imo.';

'>>1728338
It was fixed after 2 years but autists kept saying it wasn't. Do try to keep up.';

'>>1728058
No Man's Sky is one of the greatest comeback stories in gaming history, but I still don't like the idea of games taking several years after launch to finally become "good."';

'>>1728507
It's bad but preferable to the usual alternative: games launching like shit and being abandoned before any fixes happen. If I could monkey paw a wish that every game from now on will be good with the caveat being they would all take 3 years from launch to reach a good state I'd make that wish in a heartbeat.';

'I got it because my friend told me it was one sale. I do think it has a lot going for it, especially as a linguistics autist. I think I want to see empires begin to collapse and deblob more often, barbarians to become a far more serious threat.

I conquered Dacia and thracia as the Gaetae, rebuilt the neo assyrian empire as Judea, rebuilt the roman republican boders as the Eustrcans and the Perisan borders as Persis.

What other nations have some decent flavor? I know you have dieties from Urartu as Armenia, but the start seems too easy to seem fun.';

'Making a rome game like their others was a mistake, a roman game should be focused on internal politics, backstabbing, corrupting the senate etc, you should make ONE (one) character and try to make him raise to the top either with military glory or shrewd politicking';

'>>1728858
>What other nations have some decent flavor?
Assuming you're playing with Invictus: Any Turdetani nation > Tartessia > Greater Iberia. You get a series of unique mission trees plus culture specific tech. Bithynia, Bactria, and Germanics also have a lot of unique content.';

'>>1729483
Thanks! I'll give these a try after my Argos run is done';

'>>1729350
That would have been a massive departure from their other games, the investors wouldn't have liked gambles like that.';

'>>1729925
Nah. CK is a perfect fit for a Rome game.';

'>>1728858
I think it's necessary (but difficult) to strike a good balance between blobbing and collapsing. I know this is about Imperator, but I was playing a CK3 Rome mod (476) and within 30 years the Visigoths, Vandals, and Ostrogoths all completely collapsed into broken counties/duchies (the Ostrogoths were left with half of Sardinia). It doesn't make the game too easy because it gives barbarians a migration cb that gives them 8k-12k troops and there's stuff like the Huns in the 395 start or the Rashidun caliphate when you get to the early 600s but it bothers me historically because everything falling apart into single counties just doesn't happen usually.';

'Game is fun now. Blobbing is king, though. The current meta is to hire mercenaries to tackle enemy armies, while your king's levy sieges towns and loots them to fund the mercenaries. You can conquer basically anyone doing this.';

'>>1729350
The problem with this game is that blobbing IS the game. I don't want a hard focus on internal politics and backstabbing, but it definitely should be in there. Imperator needs CK2's character system and it would be a perfect title.';

'>>1733121
yeah I don't like how OP mercenaries are, at least I've seen the ai abuse them too.';

'>>1733134
>at least I've seen the ai abuse them too.
Well this game also does something which no other Paradox game has done as far as I'm aware: It lets you hire enemy mercs out from under their master. So assuming you've gone balls deep in the trade system, or have simply looted enough towns during a war, you can pull an Uno Reverse mid-war and completely fuck the other side. I've done this against Macedon and Rome before, waiting until they've marched their main stacks against mine, and then bought out half their army right before impact and turned it into a one-sided slaughter. You'd better have a lot of money though.';

'I fucking hate the senate.';

'>>1733297
So did IRL emperors. You're getting the true life experience.';

'Is it worth it to try a Magna Graecia run? Trying to switch from a city-state to a challenger to Rome seems like it might be fun. Or high-speed anal rape.';

'>>1733670
It definitely is. I had a blast pulling off Syracuse > Sicily > Magna Graecia while taking Latium, all within Agathocles lifetime. Once you've got Latium you're basically unstoppable which is not going to be everyone's cup of tea but the run up to that involves defeating both Carthage and Rome in turn which is very satisfying. Naturally I sacked and salted both.';

'>>1734184
Doing a Cyrenaica run right now and enjoying it pretty well. Rome's AI kind of short-circuits if Carthage is taken out. They're just invading random lands and getting their shit kicked in by Macedon. It's a mess. I'm going to do a Syracuse run next I think once I get bored of this one (probably gonna happen soon).

I'd say the main problem with this game is actually that power scales up WAY too fast, especially compared to something like EU4. You go from being a nobody to being a major power in two or three wars sometimes, and then after that you never face difficulty again.';

'Why the fuck do ALL GOVERNORS rebel? Like it's impossible to keep their loyalty in check. The only thing you can do is give them a free hand and then max out wages to fight their corruption uptick. Or alternatively, you just let them rack up max corruption and then bring them to trial and replace them with someone else, like a new car battery. Are there any techs that get governors to stop acting like pussies and do their job instead of wasting my time with rebellions?';

'>>1734352
>Why the fuck do ALL GOVERNORS rebel?
The power base they gain from controlling the region directly decreases their loyalty. I only pick high loyalty zero corruption characters for governorships.
>Are there any techs that get governors to stop acting like pussies and do their job instead of wasting my time with rebellions?
Yes, anything that increases character loyalty (including, iirc, ones that increase 'primary culture happiness' and 'primary religion happiness' and so on)';

'>>1734352
>Why the fuck do ALL GOVERNORS rebel? Like it's impossible to keep their loyalty in check.
Take a closer look at the Oratory tech tree, the right side.
>The only thing you can do is give them a free hand and then max out wages to fight their corruption uptick
In ~1,000 hrs I've never once increased wages, and only use free hands as a last resort. I find bribes to be the best way to manage loyalty especially if you have corruption reducing modifiers, but loyalty ceases to be an issue if you invest in the Oratory tree.';

'>>1734271
>I'd say the main problem with this game is actually that power scales up WAY too fast, especially compared to something like EU4. You go from being a nobody to being a major power in two or three wars sometimes, and then after that you never face difficulty again.
Agreed, it plays more like CK2 where the early game is intense but things really slow down by midgame. Although I'm playing a game as Mariandynia now (Thracian/Hellenic migratory tribe that starts in Asia Minor) and having settled in the Tarim Basin am finding that being landlocked really changes things. It's now the first century BC and I only recently managed to become a major power because I'm walled in by mountains and surrounded by three massive blobs on the other side (Mauryans, Parthians, and Seleucids). I've only been able to expand very slowly by allying with each of them in turn and grabbing dirt poor mountain provinces where I can, but the snowballing I'm used to in this game hasn't happened because despite having oasis provinces with the potential for extremely wealthy cities, I'm starved for pops since I can't get coastal migration or easily enslave pops due to few targets and difficult terrain. I also had to invest heavily in the Oratory tree just to get the diplomatic range to interact with anyone. It's been a different sort of game and I'm thinking I'll give it another go with Terra Indomnita to see how it plays out with neighbors to the east.';

'>>1734713
You should try increasing wages. It pays for itself in the long term due to the lowered corruption. I set it to max during my initial setup that I do as every country.';

'>>1734795
I'll give it a try. I could see it being a good alternative to bribes in the early game when you're starved for PI and wages aren't as big of an expense.';

'I'll repeat. The problem of Imperator was that 1.0 was not a new game but EU: Rome remastered.';

'>at war with Carthage
>commit royal legion (because this game won't let you raise legions even if you have the tech for it unless you have 500 territories first, which if you have that much turf then you don't fucking need the legions anyway)
>Carthage double-stacks my merc army+legion combo
>legion loses
>gets a permanent demerit forever, "Trepida", which makes having a royal army virtually useless now due to the -15% morale debuff

This has to be a bug/oversight. I don't want to use only mercenaries and levies for expansion, but I don't see how I can avoid it if the royal guard is 100% guaranteed to lose every fight, now.';

'>>1734817
Imperator is EU:R redux period. EU:R was released half baked and earned a bad reputation. Modders started turning it into a good game, PDX incorporated these ideas into vanilla updates and then, just when the game was turning into something interesting, dropped support.';

'>>1734836
Keep using the legion. There are so many legion bonuses you'll eventually stack enough to more than cancel out the malus.';

'>>1734713
I can only see one tech on the Oratory side that explicitly gives bonuses to loyalty. The problem is that I took a lot of Carthage's territory, and Africa is a lot like Latinum where anyone you put on it is going to rebel virtually every single time, because you're giving them a gigantic army. There's no real way to stop this except to swap out governors constantly. If there are other techs which mitigate this problem, it's certainly not listed on the tech ledger.';

'>>1735031
Are you playing Invictus or Vanilla? Haven't played vanilla in a while but in Invictus there are three innovations that give a combined +8 bump to loyalty for all characters plus another that gives a +5 bonus to loyalty to governors, and that's just what's on the right side of the oratory tree. There is also a +2 loyalty bonus from fruit surplus and a cultural happiness bonus. If all of the above fails you can usually give free hands to bump their loyalty enough and then immediately revoke office.';

'>>1735031
>There's no real way to stop this except to swap out governors constantly
You can also set Punic cultural rights to slave and put down revolts until the province is depopulated, then colonize with integrated culture. This is my go to for dealing with Africa.';

'>>1734837
the modders should have made it into an excellent game by now, especially since they no longer have to worry about patches breaking their mods as seen with titles still receiving updates';

'>>1735160
I think it's good now with mods, albeit flawed. The Invictus devs have said Imperator modding in its current state is very limited though so without further development by PDX I'm not expecting the game's full potential to ever be realized. It does certain things better than other PDX games though and scratches a civilization-building/map painting/raping and pillaging itch which has compelled me to sink more hours into Imperator than any of their games since EU4.';

'>>1735160
The game is good. It just has a few aggravating flaws you encounter every now and then. I wish the character interaction system was more fleshed out, I wish there was a better way to track powerbases and who has what holding, I wish there was a way to marry off family members to whoever I wanted, including to foreign powers in exchange for alliances, I wish every single general, governor, court member, and researcher didn't try to rebel every five years, I wish legions weren't restricted to global powers with 500 territories that no longer need legions since their economy can just buy up endless mercenaries, I wish there was a "fractured world" mode where everyone starts off with one province, etc. These are all somewhat minor problems though. The core game is enjoyable, and it's fun to smash hoplite armies into barbarians.';

'>>1735349
I wish moving slaves was less tedious and allowed you to transport them on ships. Moving slaves around in bulk is really good for assimilation games';

'It's up: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/anniversary-patch-2-0-4-augustus.1671441/';

'>>1738217
How many of these changes are separate from the beta that's been out for a while?';

'I think I wouldve liked that game more if they fully leaned into character stuff like CK, as it stands I see no point in having characters over abstract "characters" like EU4';

'>>1708966
Can't blame them.
The way he speaks is something entirely different.';

'>>1738217
Is it happening? They said they wanted to restart development on it.';

'>>1738720
that was an april fools joke. they seem to be hoping modders can finish the game for them if they provide them with tools';

'>>1703604
Total Johan Victory

>captcha: AAWMNA, "awww, mana"';

'>>1716277
>>1716395
>needs more flavor though
They should have made the campaign last past the beginning of Christianity and had some kind of decadence mechanic so that you have something to do once you've großed out, something that starts out slowly with some debuffs and eventually snowballs into what Total War Attila did. Instead the campaign just kinda ends right before you get to the good part.

I don't remember if EU: Rome went past the death of Jesus. I didn't play it much, but I remember one of the start dates was Rome blobbed out almost to the fullest extent it achieved in OTL so maybe Imperator could have a bookmark like that, unfortunately we live in the Paradox era where they're against multiple bookmarks (or pandering to history autists over larpers)';

'>>1728058
>people eventually find out it really was fixed but it’s too late
This is not what people said at the time. What people said was that the game was beginning to be good, but it was still flawed, and with Paradox saying the game's development was put on hold everyone just assumed the game will forever be in this better but still flawed state. No one who played it ever said it was fixed like how Victoria 2 was "fixed" after A House Divided.

>>1728507
This is what PDS has been doing with most of their titles since as far back as HOI2 (maybe even further back, but HOI2 is the oldest Paradox game I've messed with so I can't say). Crusader Kings 2's launch was lightning in a bottle for them.';

'>>1738935
>They should have made the campaign last past the beginning of Christianity and had some kind of decadence mechanic so that you have something to do once you've großed out, something that starts out slowly with some debuffs and eventually snowballs into what Total War Attila did. Instead the campaign just kinda ends right before you get to the good part.
Invictus + Extended Timeline + Crisis of the Third Century. Playing vanilla Imperator is like playing vanilla Victoria 2: there's no reason to do it.';

'>>1738990
Funny you should say that; I almost exclusively play vanilla Victoria 2 because I don't really like what most mods add to the game. But then again, I have my own mini mod I always play with that plugs up the hole in Canada so that the US doesn't blob into Yukon, so you're actually right now that I think about it.';

'>>1738999
I played vanilla Vic2 for years before getting bored enough to really give mods a try, now that I'm used to them l can't imagine playing without stuff like PDM. But Imperator had so little development post-release that it really needs them to keep the game interesting, and Invictus at least is so seamless I think of it as a sort of semi-official continued development of Imperator.';