As a player of Imperator Rome, I have put a solid amount of time into the game, 500 hours. The game is in a weird place where it is fun for someone who roleplays as different dynasties/republics/tribes. Further, Imperator Rome is fun whilst I actively go achievement hunting in the game. This gives an assignment for the player to fulfill. I think most of the achievements are compelling to give a whirl, except "The Spice Must Flow" achievement which is stupendous and long. The game has plenty of character/empire-wide events that makes the waiting more interesting. With remorse I will concede, in regards to the common events, I don't think about them and always choose the same option. I would have to agree that the game is too similar across the board no matter where the player starts. The game is a map-painter. That's correct and inexcusable. Duchies were yet to be conceived throughout the games' timeline. Being a god-like figure who controls every decision a character whom is loyal chooses works, as a map-painter game would, but should be more like Crusader Kings. If the game were to change into a Crusader Kings inspired experience, I think governorships should only be under the control of the character the player chooses to play as. Governorships should be similar to the duchy mechanics in Crusader Kings; which I have some time on but not enough to fully understand the mechanics. This would obviously change with the amount of centralization the republic/kingdom/empire has over its subjects and leadership appointees. For example, as Rome the senate would bestow a governorship to the reigning consuls. This would be up to the game to choose which province(s) the consuls would be granted. Then if the player were a consul at that moment, they would then go from ruling sovereign of the nation of Rome and governor of Italia to the governorship of the granted province(s). I believe this would be interesting if the politics of the republics were better, which I understand is a daunting task for the developers. Still, this would be a remedy to move further away from the Europe Universalis 4 experience which isn't suitable for the title. Imagine for yourselves something similar for a kingdom/empire. Anyways, great video and quality for the likes of a small youtuber. I wish you the best Strat Tom!
Thanks for your thoughts, Parker. Some interesting ideas from someone who has clearly put more time into this game than me. I think that to achieve what I lay out in the video, then yes, they would have to totally overhaul the mechanics and come up with a convincing Republican style gameplay which is unlike both the Crusader Kings and Europa Universalis models.
@@georgimihalkov9678 It's an okay game. Some fun to be had. But as the video suggests, doesn't have the intrigue of CK, which I would have loved to see.
As a player of Imperator Rome, I have put a solid amount of time into the game, 500 hours. The game is in a weird place where it is fun for someone who roleplays as different dynasties/republics/tribes. Further, Imperator Rome is fun whilst I actively go achievement hunting in the game. This gives an assignment for the player to fulfill. I think most of the achievements are compelling to give a whirl, except "The Spice Must Flow" achievement which is stupendous and long. The game has plenty of character/empire-wide events that makes the waiting more interesting. With remorse I will concede, in regards to the common events, I don't think about them and always choose the same option. I would have to agree that the game is too similar across the board no matter where the player starts. The game is a map-painter. That's correct and inexcusable. Duchies were yet to be conceived throughout the games' timeline. Being a god-like figure who controls every decision a character whom is loyal chooses works, as a map-painter game would, but should be more like Crusader Kings. If the game were to change into a Crusader Kings inspired experience, I think governorships should only be under the control of the character the player chooses to play as. Governorships should be similar to the duchy mechanics in Crusader Kings; which I have some time on but not enough to fully understand the mechanics. This would obviously change with the amount of centralization the republic/kingdom/empire has over its subjects and leadership appointees. For example, as Rome the senate would bestow a governorship to the reigning consuls. This would be up to the game to choose which province(s) the consuls would be granted. Then if the player were a consul at that moment, they would then go from ruling sovereign of the nation of Rome and governor of Italia to the governorship of the granted province(s). I believe this would be interesting if the politics of the republics were better, which I understand is a daunting task for the developers. Still, this would be a remedy to move further away from the Europe Universalis 4 experience which isn't suitable for the title. Imagine for yourselves something similar for a kingdom/empire.
Anyways, great video and quality for the likes of a small youtuber. I wish you the best Strat Tom!
Thanks for your thoughts, Parker. Some interesting ideas from someone who has clearly put more time into this game than me. I think that to achieve what I lay out in the video, then yes, they would have to totally overhaul the mechanics and come up with a convincing Republican style gameplay which is unlike both the Crusader Kings and Europa Universalis models.
Imperator Rome is not as good as the others.... it's better 😌
Well opinions are subjective. Except that one, though. That one is objectively wrong.
@@strattom1759 I'm joking 😁
I'm yet to play IR myself
@@georgimihalkov9678 It's an okay game. Some fun to be had. But as the video suggests, doesn't have the intrigue of CK, which I would have loved to see.