Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Is it worth it to convert to empire when playing as Rome due to influence debuffs

  1. #1

    Default Is it worth it to convert to empire when playing as Rome due to influence debuffs

    First all, congrats to 1.3 beta release! Big thanks to all the developers for all your work throughout the years.

    I started a Rome VH/M campaign last December. It is actually my first DeI playthrough as Rome and I mainly played eastern factions for DeI in past years. I found that the influence ranks for Rome is disproportional to the grids. For example, a 50%+ influence is ranked 6/8. and a 60%+ influence is ranked 7/8.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20220206131652_1.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	356.4 KB 
ID:	366574

    In order to convert to empire, I need 65% influence, which means reaching influence rank 7/8 (whisper of tyranny by the senate) with many negatives a significant debuff to the morale of my troops. Since now it is already turn 100+. it is almost impossible to drop my influence back to below 60%. So after converting to empire it is almost certain that I have to live with the -10% morale for the rest of the campaign.

    Before I convert to empire I thought the influence ranks will be recalibrated after the conversion since it is not a republic any more. An emperor should not be penalized for having a 60%+ control over the politics. Unfortunately the modifiers are not changed at all.

    I'm not sure if it is a bug or it is intended. If it is intended, I think for Rome it may not be a good move to convert to empire due to the morale penalty. It will make some battles significantly harder.

    I'd like to hear the thoughts of you guys!

  2. #2

    Default Re: Is it worth it to convert to empire when playing as Rome due to influence debuffs

    The morale penalty is actually the least of the problems of being an empire. But no, converting to empire is never worth it, for any faction I have ever tried (most of them). Oligarchy is usually the best form of government

  3. #3

    Default Re: Is it worth it to convert to empire when playing as Rome due to influence debuffs

    Quote Originally Posted by PietrolEremita View Post
    The morale penalty is actually the least of the problems of being an empire. But no, converting to empire is never worth it, for any faction I have ever tried (most of them). Oligarchy is usually the best form of government
    To me the morale penalty is the worst, because for many close call battles holding a bit longer will make a huge difference. Auxiliary units under a new recruit general with 10% less morale is kinda disastrous.
    The public order penalty is also bad, but at least it could be overcome by more happiness buildings/governors. Anyway Rome does not struggle with economy that much.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Is it worth it to convert to empire when playing as Rome due to influence debuffs

    I never got that far.

    If all the effects are bad, what is the purpose of the empire form of government?

  5. #5

    Default Re: Is it worth it to convert to empire when playing as Rome due to influence debuffs

    Quote Originally Posted by CIaagent11 View Post
    I never got that far.

    If all the effects are bad, what is the purpose of the empire form of government?
    One of the reasons I post this is that I don't think forming an empire should have this much of negatives. Dictatorship is actually a more advanced political system in that period of history and a 60% influence is definitely not "too much". Not sure if it is a DeI or base game issue but I think there is room for improvement for better reality.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Is it worth it to convert to empire when playing as Rome due to influence debuffs

    DeI can change the values, I saw it in the files. But they must have made it this way for a reason. Maybe it's to make the last-game more challenging.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Is it worth it to convert to empire when playing as Rome due to influence debuffs

    I noticed this too. I don't understand why the whispers of tyranny modifier holds up as an Empire. I mean there were definitely, at least initially, some issues between Emperor and Senate did exist but the vast majority of the Roman Empire's existence the Senate was utterly irrelevant and absolutely nobody cared. In fact a lot of people viewed this as a good thing since the Senate was largely seen as ineffective, corrupt, and only utilized to uphold the interests of the elite. I don't take any issue with the major debuff that comes from transitioning governments. That sort of maneuver should result in a civil war. But tyranny of the Senate modifier is just a bad mechanic IMO. I would also throw any starting factions leader having the ineffective leader modifier in there. You might as well slap that massive debuff on the faction page because it's the equivalent of having one for the entire early game which is the most difficult part of the game anyways. Really don't understand that decision at all.

    With the beta the switch to Empire does make more sense though. You get access to two pretty powerful tech buffs that reduce slave unrest and provide a factionwide order boost. You also only sacrifice diplomacy/empire maintenance/building cost which are pretty irrelevant compared to the advantages.

    EDIT: Actually the Empire Maintenance is definitely a legit burden but not an unbalanced one.
    Last edited by Shlazaor; February 22, 2022 at 09:46 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •