Iraq?
Europa Universalis IV
- Thread starter MoreEpicThanYou
- Start date
Iraq?
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Trajan's 116 AD campaign (which brought the empire to its greatest extent)
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Balkans, Anatolia, Mashrip, Cairo? It's clearly supposed to be the Eastern Roman Empire.
Lohrenswald
世界的 bottom ranked physicist
Even so
by the time you have conquered all that stuff it's far beyond that point
and
Germany didn't need to conquer spain and Iraq to be the roman empire
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy nor Roman nor an Empire.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
While EU4 is somewhat linear when it comes to stuff like technology, its determinism leaning heavily towards Europe, the state of the world in the end of the game is nowhere near set in stone. Polity creation and cultural developments are quite open ended. If a country managed to unite all of those areas, you could easily roleplay/argue that it, at some point, was/became about rebuilding some form of the Roman Empire. It's really not that difficult. For the whole of the dark ages *and* the Renaissance Europe has been obsessed with antiquity and the classical age. Just, well, rather than imagining things developing into the 1800s nation state, have the Enlightenment suck face on the Romans and Greeks even more, twist it a little towards Latin, (which Europe already obsteniously used) and voila, you have a meaningful thread leading to the reforming of Rome. Especially legitimized with political conquests, such aren't often detached from the ideas of the government.
The HRE considered itself Rome as much as Byzantium and Trebizond considered themselves Rome. There have been *a lot* of Roman Empires, at least namesake, in history. Even the Russian Empire at time had ideas about it being of Roman ancestry. Allowing the player to make another one isn't really a big deal, especially if conquering that much territory, overlapping that much with (Western) Rome.
~
But, anyways, was this about an achievement all along? It's not even about forming Rome? What's the problem then?
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Not earning an achievement ever is shameful. Most of mine have been accidental, or things I was trying to do anyway, or things that I was so close to doing anyway that I did them.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
I haven't got any in-game achievement, and I'm in the game credits. Nothing wrong with it.
>implying I've never signed a royal marriage
I think he's implying that no one's ever played Iron Man.
Besides, Joan, Oda's probably right - it's likely Trajan's empire, as Byzantium doesn't need another reformation decision.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
I've gotten a few achievements. I like Iron Man because I like being able to screw up and lose. Reloading is dull.
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Besides, Joan, Oda's probably right - it's likely Trajan's empire, as Byzantium doesn't need another reformation decision.
No, he's not probably right. He's certainly right.
You could always play as republics and theocracies.
I've never played Ironman and thus have zero official achievements in 700+ hours of EU4. The killer for me is that Ironman only allows one save. I like the ability to go back and view my empire, or my previous empires, at later times - e.g. I'm playing Novgorod, it's 1550, and I want to load up my Moscow game from around 1550 to see how it compares. Wouldn't really mind it other than that, as I already never reload a game to replay it.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
Over the past 2 years I've generally outperformed Arumba. I'd consider myself pretty darned good, but "elite" players are those like DDRJake, Path, Marco Antonio, Ikkiks, atwix, etc. I'd put florryworry/bbqftw in a tier ahead of mine too, there are things I can do better than them but on the whole they'd typically outperform me unless I got very lucky or they had a bad day.
Players delete forts because they cost heaps of money and what they offer for that cost almost never out-competes having better advisors or more military units. The AI is an exception since the vast majority of its forts are free to it (IE no maintenance).
People who want to reload in ironman can do so easily via task manager. Since the game tends to crash/screw up on reload anyway the difference is marginal anyway.
I do ironman for achievements but it's a farce; the game violates its stated rules and changes rules patch to patch without documenting it. I will reload lying UI situations without blinking an eye and look down on anybody who believes that's cheating
.If it says I will get a stab hit, I should get one. If the game tells me I can't take that province because I couldn't core it, I shouldn't be able to console-take the province and core it instantaneously. If the game says someone will join the war against me, I expect them to join the war against me.
Not to mention I like playing the game as opposed to not playing it, which makes regency councils problematic.
Nerfs already bad religions and ROTW. Additionally, it double-counts your nerf for having a bad ruler and penalizes attempts at monarch point efficiency by loading up on ideas, but mostly it's just a ROTW nerf.
Have some not-Europe then.
Spoiler :
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
Well if the point is to nerf ROTW...
Similar threads
