Political Map - Aggressors: Ancient Rome

Political Map - Aggressors: Ancient Rome


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.


Political Map - Aggressors: Ancient Rome - History

This just keeps getting better and better.

Rome hard no enemies, only one federated tribe to convert to annexed, 173% happiness.

Almost all cities east of Italy and north of Syria, including Barium (for heaven's sake) were civil war'd into 2 new tribes.

Hi Will,
so I investigated your save files. I agree that this is a very bad event:)
For anyone interested to see what happened, here is the screenshot.

It is not a bug and neither something introduced with the new update. The civil war started in town "Pseira" which had just 57% general morale and spreaded. It actually seems like Rome empire has split into two parts, which is quite interesting:)

This is pretty much something what another players asked for to address the "too big to fail" problem and it didnt happen to them and it did happen to you:)

On the other hand, I understand that some players might not like it. There is currently just one solution for this - turn off the random events.
Although, this is not really random event (it is more like a semi-random event) because the civil war would not happen if you had the general morale on 100% or you had some garisson unit(s) or you build civil service (or at least amphitheater) in that city to maintain order. You basically left the whole part of your empire unattended (despite revolts), which is always wrong (And Roman empire was facing very similar issues when they leave provincies without garisson units).

This is a great place to discuss how such a civil war should raise and we might eventually change it. The last update actually made the civil wars less likely - once you have loyalty and general morale on 100% the civil war cannot raise in that city. On the other hand that is the spreading what you probably disagree with, correct? We can come up with some kind of incremental spreading per turn.

Like I said on DISCORD, this is crazy !! I love civil wars like this.
You invaded the whole world, I think it's realistic to see a civil war happen specially since you did not build anything in those territories, The roman empire had a lot of civil wars and revolts to face in his history, you can't invade that much countries and just hope that everyone will fall in line..

But I understand some people might not like events like this.
Consider that as an end game crisis :)

Hi Will,
so I investigated your save files. I agree that this is a very bad event:)
For anyone interested to see what happened, here is the screenshot.

It is not a bug and neither something introduced with the new update. The civil war started in town "Pseira" which had just 57% general morale and spreaded. It actually seems like Rome empire has split into two parts, which is quite interesting:)

This is pretty much something what another players asked for to address the "too big to fail" problem and it didnt happen to them and it did happen to you:)

On the other hand, I understand that some players might not like it. There is currently just one solution for this - turn off the random events.
Although, this is not really random event (it is more like a semi-random event) because the civil war would not happen if you had the general morale on 100% or you had some garisson unit(s) or you build civil service (or at least amphitheater) in that city to maintain order. You basically left the whole part of your empire unattended (despite revolts), which is always wrong (And Roman empire was facing very similar issues when they leave provincies without garisson units).

This is a great place to discuss how such a civil war should raise and we might eventually change it. The last update actually made the civil wars less likely - once you have loyalty and general morale on 100% the civil war cannot raise in that city. On the other hand that is the spreading what you probably disagree with, correct? We can come up with some kind of incremental spreading per turn.

Sorry, but this just doesn't wash!

I'm not good at posting screenshots, but if you click on happiness you will see that the vast majority of the map is dark blue, i.e. very happy. The general happiness is 173%. The vast majority of the cities that rebeled had no unhappy or disloyal citizens.

So you're saying in an empire with over 200 cities, if perhaps 1-2% are unhappy, then they can take a third of the rest of the empire into rebellion. in what world!

I sense you are saying that I mismanaged my empire and created this. Perhaps so, but the game sure as hell didn't provide much feedback that it was headed in the wrong direction.

I certainly don't remember any "People demand amphitheaters" or even "People unhappy over lack of amenities". Again, many, perhaps most of the revolting cities did have civil servce, trade, low maintainence, and in several- obedience.

So, before blaming the player, how about some feedback to the player about potential issues.

As to your suggestion that perhaps revolts should spread slowly to otherwise perfectly happy cities- YES.

  • There were two cities close to each other which have pretty low general morale (one had around 57% and the other around 72%).
  • There were no military (garisson) units on the whole Balcan. The closest unit was very far away close to Byzantium and that was the only one in the whole part of the map. Screenshot
  • In the whole empire there were just three amphitheaters. Screenshot
  • Civil service was in one third of all the cities (more precisely 71 cities out of 204).Screenshot
  • Obedience was built only in four cities on the whole Balcan.
  • The city where the civil war started was conquered only 30 years ago and didnt really fully integrate to the empire yet.
  • Some cities didn't join the civil war.
  • This is a semi-random event (and it also happens for AI).
  • Once you conquer a city, provide emergency aid and repair it.
  • If the general morale is lower than 100%, build amphitheater and civil service.
  • In the meantime keep garisson unit there.

I am happy to hear any suggestions and we can discuss them.
Pavel

I agree with the OP that local happyness should be taken into account for such an event.

That sort of civil wars are great to shake the endgame (that is often boring in other games) but the way they are currently implemented is quite too brutal IMHO and could be smoothered.

As Pavel suggested, some indicators that a civil war is brewing could also help.

Holy crap, it's the Byzantine empire.

On the other hand, I understand that some players might not like it. There is currently just one solution for this - turn off the random events.
Although, this is not really random event (it is more like a semi-random event) because the civil war would not happen if you had the general morale on 100% or you had some garisson unit(s) or you build civil service (or at least amphitheater) in that city to maintain order. You basically left the whole part of your empire unattended (despite revolts), which is always wrong (And Roman empire was facing very similar issues when they leave provincies without garisson units).

This is a great place to discuss how such a civil war should raise and we might eventually change it. The last update actually made the civil wars less likely - once you have loyalty and general morale on 100% the civil war cannot raise in that city. On the other hand that is the spreading what you probably disagree with, correct? We can come up with some kind of incremental spreading per turn.

Well, I'm someone who likes civil wars, but who never really got one in my game as Rome. I don't really like the idea of civil service and amphitheater city improvements because they are too "fire and forget". You build them once per city and then that city's revolution problem is pretty much out of your mind for the rest of the game.
Have you considered implementing a "happiness spending" slider similar to the birth rate slider to the state screen that has an impact on happiness/morale? That way you can make sure you won't get revolutions, but it would come at a hefty per turn price. Other players could neglect the slider somewhat to get extra resources, but have the added risk of higher chances for revolutions. Amphiteatre and civil service could continue to be city improvements which reduce the amount of resources "happiness spending" costs in that city by some percentage.

Edit:
I think the main reason why the OP is confused about this is because of the (in my opinion kinda weird) split between morale and happiness. The happiness seems to give a false indication of security because it doesn't show how bad the morale is?
Can you post a screen shot of the happiness map overview before that civil war broke out?


Aggressors: Ancient Rome Windows game

Aggressors: Ancient Rome is a historical 4X turn-based strategy game focused on the period of Ancient Rome. Its development started already at the end of 2008 as a free time project of its main developer, who decided to create a strategy game based on his own board game. Apart from its board game roots, the Aggressors were also inspired by other games, such as Civilization IV, Colonization and Rome Total War. Older hit games, such as Panzer General and Centurion, however, played a role in the game&rsquos motivation as well. From the very beginning of its development, the game was designed to support mods, various types of computer players and multiplayer support.

Over the years, a key part of the development became focused on the mod of Ancient Rome, which is now slowly nearing its completion. As the mod targets the era of ancient history, the team realized it was vital to not only create optimal rules and attractive game style, but also to achieve historical accuracy, i.e. to create as faithful a state of affairs as possible. This does not only mean accuracy in maps, which are based on historical sources. Also the way of playing and players' decision making needed to be as accurate as possible. The main emphasis was placed on the situations and state governing aspects, which were faced also by the rulers of ancient tribes and states.

The game contains many principles known from other strategy games such as micro-management, invention tree and various systems of government, but also a lot of new principles that help create a more faithful representation of historical reality.

The tactical side of combat is also greatly emphasized, which means that the conflict locations and units used need to be planned carefully. Each unit's combat characteristics are designed for certain types of fight and change in various types of terrain. The army unit's morale also plays a significant role in conflicts. This can not only affect your chance of winning or losing in individual battles, but also influence the success of the entire military campaign. The army morale partially affects the population's satisfaction. If the citizens are unhappy, you may experience unrest, rebellion and in extreme cases even civil wars. Even large empires, whose rulers let their people suffer, are therefore also not safe. The population's satisfaction rate is therefore dependent not only on successful military campaigns, but also on wealth, feeling of safety and many other factors.

The player, however, needs to do more than just maintain happiness within their own country. They need to carefully and proactively maintain foreign relations with other players. The game's diplomatic possibilities are numerous, from classic war and piece dichotomies, through various types of alliances and agreements (of which there are more than ten kinds) to the option of linking states on administrative, economic and even military levels. The states can in this way agree on gradual connection of their forces and countries. A federation might be an example of this process, being a union of two and more states, in which the administrative center is concentrated in one capital and the whole federation is governed by a single player. But this player has to be very careful in maintaining all of the parts of this new collaboration, otherwise they will be threatened by a termination of contracts and disintegration of the federation.

Working with resources is also a key aspect of the game, especially the importance of food and gold cannot be overstated. The player must necessarily make sure that the inhabitants and army have sufficient food resources, otherwise they would be facing the risk of famine and gradual emigration of population beyond the state borders. If there's not enough gold, the army units themselves can start to rebel.

Another important responsibility of the player is to maintain a balanced population, as people are crucial as the workforce for building the state as such and also as a source for new army recruits. Army recruitment lowers the productive population of cities, which can gradually lead to the cities not having enough citizens. Therefore, if a player maintains a long war that requires training of new units, they will have to tackle the issue of low active population, as this will, of course, have a negative effect on the economic performance of the state. Cities with a large population, on the other hand, show a significantly larger consumption of resources, which will present the necessity of increasing production, especially of food. One of the ways of controlling the amount of population is birth rate support, but this does not come for free.

Another option of supplying men to the army, and yet avoiding the negative effect on the size of cities and resource consumption, is trading. Virtually anything can be traded, including slaves and knowledge. The trade routes are created and changed on the basis of their safety, administrative costs and, of course, political situation. The safety and length of routes also influences the overhead costs of the trade itself.

Every player has a certain set of game &ldquoobjectives&rdquo. These objectives are in fact historically inspired tasks tailored to each country. Their completion is associated with special &ldquorewards&rdquo. These objectives motivate players to lead their countries in a manner similar to their ancient counterparts. It is, however, purely on the will of the players and their current situation, whether they want to complete these objectives or create their own version of history.

Another important element of the game is the so-called sphere of influence. Based on their development, size and international position, the players gain influence, which can then be used to initiate unrest in nearby friendly or enemy provinces. Therefore, not every territory has to be conquered by brute force. Influential states can encourage the activities of subversive elements on foreign territory and so gradually increase the chance of particular provinces to choose to associate with their own state. Simultaneously, however, each state must be on the lookout constantly, as the state itself can become the target of such subversive activity, either by their friends or their foes.

The player can play the game for any one of twenty states, starting with the greats, such as Rome or Carthage, through the Greek city-states and to the Barbarian tribes migrating into the Mediterranean. The game contains several ways of winning and the player may change the winning strategy even during playing.

This, however, is just a small part of all the possibilities that the game Aggressors: Ancient Rome has to offer. In the following months we will gradually disclose in more detail how individual concepts work and intertwine.

Even though the game may appear extremely complex, most of these game mechanisms are hidden under the game&rsquos surface. If the player chooses a lower difficulty level, they do not need to worry about them and can purely enjoy their conquest of the ancient world. But if they do want to test how difficult it would be to rule an ancient state, they can always choose a higher difficulty level, where it will be the player themselves who will have to make all the important decisions. The game therefore aims not only at diehard strategy fans, but also at those who like to test their governing capabilities in real historical context.


Political Map - Aggressors: Ancient Rome - History

Aggressors : Ancient Rome is a historical 4X turn based strategy game set in ancient times. The game has a complex home and foreign politics including trading, economics, research and human motivation. Great emphasis is also put on military tactics, esprit de corps and strategic planning. The main goal of the player is to lead his country through history and conquer other countries.

Great attention was given historical maps and sources to ensure historical accuracy. Three ancient scenarios will bring you to decisive points in history of Mediterranean and European cultures and will give you the chance to lead the nation of your choice to greatness.

We - Kubat Software - are a small Czech indie studio of passionate game developers. We have been working on this game for the past seven years and we think it is time to show it to the world as the release is planned for this year.

16 фев. 2017 в 4:49

I am always interested in seeing new historically based 4X games. We got plenty of space and even fantasy is starting to get a decent selection. However, we don't see as many in the theme of human history. Especially those that focus on a specific era. There is maybe 1-2 franchises only.

So it is always nice to see more in this field specifically.

We hope that you will be soon able to try it on your own:)

I am always interested in seeing new historically based 4X games. We got plenty of space and even fantasy is starting to get a decent selection. However, we don't see as many in the theme of human history. Especially those that focus on a specific era. There is maybe 1-2 franchises only.

So it is always nice to see more in this field specifically.

Hi Gilleous,
frankly we think exactly the same. There is so many scifi and fantasy strategies, but the number of historical ones is pretty low. That is also the reason why we pay big attention to historical details of the scenarios.

If you are fan of historical strategies, we are pretty sure (or maybe hope:)) that you will also enjoy this one.

21 мая. 2017 в 3:14

We totally agree with you and that is exactly what we are trying hard to achieve. )

A small Czech studio made a small game called Mafia. Mafia II. Mafia III.
A politically incorrect game series, steeped in history of USA.
Highly recommended.

A small polish studio did a little series called The Witcher.

A small indie Ukrainian studio made up something called STALKER.

All these games are classics, easily on any list of top 50 games of all time.


Political Map - Aggressors: Ancient Rome - History

Is it possible to annex a client I am in a fed or confed with? (The button to do so isn't there.)

If so, how can I speed up the process of getting them to accept annexation?

Hi Thandius,
welcome in Aggressors forum!:)

It is absolutely possible to annex your confederation or federation partner. You cannot do it the same turn when the federation/confederation is signed or when "similar" offer is negotiated (either by you or your partner). Otherwise it should be always available.

  • Treat your partners cities well (build improvements, maintain birth rate, etc).
  • Keep his cities safe.
  • Keep his own armies (created in his own cities).
  • Reduce the number of enemies.

Hey, my friends like it when I keep crushing their enemies .. )

I have been in a federation with the Germans as the Romans for 46 years:
- Theír attitude is admiring
- I have built tons and tons of improvements in their cities
- I have painted their lands with paved roads and farms
- No enemies even come close to their lands and I even eradicated some of them
- I haven't disbanded a single one of their units
- The only country I am at war with is Carthage and I am steadily winning it

. but they still won't let me annex them and still tell me I need to build trust.

I am stumped. *scratches his head*

In my Roman game, I federated Massila early on. Choosing to pursue total victory, near the end of the game, there was eventually no one left except for Massila.

Since I was required to defeat them for total victory, I revoked the federation and declared war.

To my great surprise, they now received many Roman cities in addition to the ones they owned at the time of federation.

Perhaps a sole remaining federated ally deserved better treatment and should have accepted one of my many annexation offers.

Hmm, I have to say this doesn't really make sense to me. The system described as "Federation" in the game is actually more of a client state system.

With an unequal power structure in such a relationship, the senior partner would most certainly reap the benefits in most cases as Rome quite often did with their client kingdoms, only giving away lands that were so far away from their reach that they would never be profitable for them.

Also, if there's only the player and their client states left, that imho, should constitute a total win.

Hi Thandius,
federation is not really a client state system because the player can always revoke it and get everything back (which was not really possible in client state systems).
I also didn't say that the member state of federation gets land far away. The member state "expands" his mainland once the nearby territories are taken (aka it is directly connected).

I guess my problem is that from the beginning, the terms "federation" and "confederation" seemed wrong to me, as both suggest a level of equality between the partners - something that doesn#t characterize how these systems function in the game.

They do seem to function more like vassals or client states.

You probably based "federation" on "foederatus" the roman term for a treaty bound (junior) ally. Those actually did on occasion rebel like for example the Goths against Rome.

I get why you chose to handle things a certain way from a game design standpoint (even if I disagree with small parts of those choices ) ), but the terminology is incorrect.

Yeah, I figured it would be. And I'm not trying to be nitpicky, if it weren't for the fact that these terms describe different systems thus potentially confusing the player.

I guess a band aid fix would probably be to slightly adjust the tutorial text and the pedia, but you guys will know better.

As for different terms, I think I'd probably your "federation" a "hegemony". It's a term that originated in ancient Greece, so it fits the time period well and it can still be easily understood due to its modern meaning, which of course is a bit more general. Also, due to the naming convention in your game, you can still call a country for example the "Roman Hegemony" without it sounding weird.

Now that "confederation" is a bit more complicated. In Roman history barbarian client states were called "foederati" as I meantioned . The term "socii" was also used, especially in case of the Italian states, but those were usually the kind that ended up getting annexed in exchange for them receiving Roman citizenship. However socii implies a bit more autonomy in the sense that socii weren't barbarians to be conquered but allies of the same "blood".

Easier for the naming convention of states would probably be to use the term "league" though, as in the Delean League, lead by Athens. Of course a league is also a form of hegemony in the modern sense of the word. )

Hey, I never said this was easy. )

Personally, I'd probably go with socii for client/allied states in a "federation" and foederati as client/allied states in a "confederation" but using the greek terms might be easier. It's a matter of preference.

I hope I didn't muddle things up too badly - I really like your game. :)

Okay, off to make dinner - the wife will go Hulk if she doesn't get food soon. )


Remaking History

Aggressors: Ancient Rome has two modes by default: the Mediterranean scenario and custom games. Custom games operate much like your standard game of Civilization, with all of the customization options you'd expect, from map size to climate. There are a handful of win conditions within custom games, from researching so many technologies to building the biggest army. You still have your standard global-domination victory, though. The real meat of the gameplay comes from the Mediterranean scenario. While you still have the same win conditions as in a custom game, you also have side objectives depending on which culture you chose. These can range from establishing a certain amount of trade routes to being at war with a specific culture to researching and building a specific technology. Each time you complete one of these objectives, the game will give you rewards. While these are often resources, they can also be units or map information. While they aren't necessary for victory, and you can certainly fail them, the bonuses these objectives give can pull you back from the brink.

If you know what you're doing, recovering your position can be rather easy. This seems to be by design, as certain map events can really place you in a bind. For example, during one of my Rome playthroughs, the plague ran rampant through my cities. This was relatively early on in the game, and I had not had the opportunity to research the counter to the plague. That didn't stop it from reducing the population of most of my cities down to one. Unable to build any more units, I had to quickly end all the wars I was in and focus on regenerating my population. Given that most improvements take two turns and none take more than four, I was able to bounce back within six or so turns. The short build times across the board tend to speed up play: while an average-length Civilization game can take me up to a week to finish, a game of Aggressors: Ancient Rome took me two afternoons. Granted, this was on Easy difficulty, and I had played a handful of games before to learn the ropes, but no game took me more than ten hours to see to the end.


Aggressors Ancient Rome by Slitherine

Aggressors Ancient Rome is another 4X(EXplore, EXpand, EXploit, EXterminate) type game. So, the first question is why did anyone bother to make another one? We have been inundated with 4X games from AAA ones to small indie games. To be honest, the genre rarely grabs my attention. Most are just poor facsimiles of the newest Civ game at the time. Pick your numeral from I-VI. History is usually only given lip service with the addition of a historical leaders name. I am very pleased to tell you that this game is mostly none of the above. It does have some mechanics from some of its well done predecessors, but doesn't fall into the pitfalls of the worst ones.


First screen when starting the historical scenario

"A mix of deep gameplay and rich historical flavor, Aggressors lets you relive history as the ruler of one of the mighty civilizations of the Mediterranean world. Will you bring glory to Rome and conquer the Mare Nostrum? Will you build an immortal trading empire with Carthage? Will you bring the light of Athens to the world? Or maybe you will restore the rule of the Pharaoh? Choose one of twenty available factions and conquer the world.

You can manage all aspects of your empire: war, trade, internal politics, diplomacy, cultural development. Play on your strengths, beware of your weaknesses. The ancient world is brutal, for no mercy shall be given to the defeated. Vae victis!

A lot of time and many sleepless nights were put into historical research in an attempt to give a real historical feeling to the game. The game’s systems are tailored towards a faithful representation of history.

A world which feels alive

Twenty factions, from migrating barbarian tribes to advanced empires which interact with each other through an extremely detailed diplomatic system. Make use of more than ten available diplomatic agreements, including the possibility of forming Federations and Confederations as well as affecting nations and provinces in your Sphere of Influence.

Experience the incredibly deep combat system, with each unit having its abilities and traits, and terrain truly affecting the war outcome in a meaningful way. Army morale and the supply system are crucial and need to be taken into account. You will need all your guile and strategic mastery to triumph on the battlefield.

Detailed political & economical representation

Rule your empire by managing its internal politics and developing its economy. Establish trade routes to reap wealth, ensure the loyalty of your citizens, manage demography, technological research, internal reforms, laws… the tools at your disposal are endless and seamlessly integrated with each other. Citizens react to the current situation and they can move to other places when they are not happy.

You have complete freedom: you can decide to start with an advanced nation surrounded by newer civilizations, or you can decide to start as a young tribe, ready to take on an older and decadent empire… or you can decide to completely randomize the map and play in a randomly generated world. The choice is yours!

Aggressors is very easy to learn thanks to the extremely clear tutorial and tool tips. Dive in the game gradually and explore all the options available to you."

When using the historical start, each nation is presented with the situation it was dealing with at the time. There has been no cookie cutter used to make the different civilizations. Playing each one does feel different than playing another one. For those of you who want a random game, the game can be set up to play that way with random maps etc. The developers, Kubat Software, stress that the game is meant to be incredibly mod friendly. When playing a random map, the civilizations do not start with a city this type of game will make a regular 4X player feel more at home. You will have to work from the bottom up in your civilization.

My kudos to Kubat Software for their very well done tutorials. There is both a basic and advanced tutorial for three civilizations: Rome, Carthage, and Ptolemaic Egypt. Most tutorials in games seem to be slapped together at the end, if they are present at all. The ones in Aggressors take the player by the hand through the game.

So does the game hit the sweet spot or leave a nasty taste in your mouth? Aggressors is definitely a game I am glad was produced. The game is much deeper and more complex than others in the genre. Playing it feels like you are leading Rome or the Antigonids to the preeminent position in the Mediterranean. You do not get the feeling that you are playing civilization B of A,B,C,D,E. The attention to detail, and even more important to historical detail, is evident while playing. I will add that being a historical gamer, the random start leaves me completely flat. I am not interested in that type of game at all. However, there is certainly enough in the historical setup to keep me happy for quite a while.

There is one item that struck me the minute I started the game, so I do want to mention it. The Antigonids start in what is actually Macedonia. This is about right for the time or close to it. However, the Macedon player actually starts in Thrace. Absolutely loving the age as I do, my head went a-tilt. The devs at Kubat have explained how they had to deal with the actual Antigonids. At the time of the start of the game, they also had to deal with the fact that Ptolemy Keraunos was king in Macedon (soon to be killed by the Galations). I will accept their slight adjustment of history for gaming sake.


Political Map - Aggressors: Ancient Rome - History

AlbertoC Slitherine
Posts: 1831 Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 5:22 pm

Aggressors Dev Diary #5 - Home Politics

Post by AlbertoC » Fri Jul 06, 2018 9:24 am

Throughout human history it has been expected that those accepted as leaders or emperors would be responsible for bringing the country wealth, prestige and prosperity.

I have always felt that country management has been quite underrated in many other strategy games. The reason is simple, micro- and macro-management can be quite tedious, repetitive and in a way ruining the “fun”.
But sidelining country management has, in my opinion, also provided less realistic experiences. We accepted the challenge and came up with a few new game concepts that on one hand keep the economic, military, social and cultural decisions in the hands of the player whilst, on the other hand, complementing the robust and logical game mechanics. All whilst bringing in surprising elements that deepen immersion. Country management should be mostly automated and decisions should be either made actively by the player or he should be alerted in special circumstances to reduce the boring and monotonous tasks.

So, what is under the hood of Aggressors' country management?

Firstly, it is the choice of government system. Different government systems are established in different societies reflecting the local conditions and have a profound effect on the economic, military and social life in the country. It also greatly affects the resource management or, more precisely, the resource production which applies both for mined resources as well as for those generated in cities, such as happiness, knowledge, citizens and influence of the country. And on top of that the morale of your armies also partially depends on the system of government – the soldier needs to know which master he serves!

The player is free to change the government system in the country to suit his plans and current situation but he should be always aware that such a change will ripple through the country leading to both positive and negative reactions.

But the state is not just the emperor! It is the masses of nameless people whose daily work lays the foundations for a stable and powerful state.

When playing other games, I felt that many underestimate the role the general population plays in the development of the state. This is the reason why I introduced citizens as a special resource from which both the workforce and soldiers are recruited.

Perhaps it is best to explain its unique role with an example. The populace is distributed in the cities which are the main recruitment centers. Building new units means that the city size is reduced as part of the population is taken into army service and at the same time the citizen resource decreases. But the production of other resources that are generated in cities such as knowledge or influence is determined by the city size, i.e. number of citizens. Therefore, once you recruit a new unit, the production of other resources in this city decreases. But supporting a wild population growth is also dangerous as it puts an increasing strain on the state resources as you will need to provide housing, livelihoods and safety for your people. You can regulate the population growth by building new cities, supporting immigration (people tend to move to cities with higher level of happiness) and giving incentives to increase birth rate. This support takes a form of nation-wide and local grants which allows you to “accumulate” citizens in cities where you need them most.

People are therefore one of the most important resources and balancing the population growth with the economic capacity of the state and the need for soldiers and workforce is a task for a real strategist.

Closely related to Birth rate is also the concept of Migration. The history is full of stories of mass movements of people from regions suffering from war, crop failure or natural disasters.

In the beginning we used migration of people as a random event but as the complexity of the game grew, we decided to make this minor side feature into a full-scale game mechanism in order to reflect the real historical events and natural behavior of people of that time.

When the lives of people are threatened or their livelihoods destroyed, they simply try to find another, better place for their families. They prefer locations nearby within the same region and state but when the situation does not allow it, they can also migrate abroad and so the state can suffer from a sudden outflow of citizens. Different events force people to move to different places. When your people are afraid of the enemy behind the borders, they move to the safer parts of your country. When they struggle with a lack of food and are threatened by starvation in your country, they tend to migrate over the border to more prospering places.

This actually brings us to yet another factor that affects the life of every single person. Life in the ancient era was not a piece of cake especially for the lower classes. Although the masses were virtually “voiceless”, we know from the historical annals that when a certain tipping point was reached, the angry crowds found their voice and used their great numbers to demand changes in their favor.

Underestimating this great force would be, if not foolhardy, then naïve to say the least. We call this fragile balance between people´s needs and their satisfaction “Happiness”. It is an indicator of the overall mood of the population and is also another special resource.

On the state level we speak about general happiness which is determined by many interlinked factors such as type of government, lack or abundance of resources, size of the army, number of successful military campaigns or the slave trade. All these and other factors together make the general mood within the country.

But naturally a man living in a border city which is currently under attack and a man living on the other side of the state far away from any potential danger, deal with very different life situations and so their level of happiness will differ greatly. Local happiness is therefore affected by more local factors such as army presence in the region, city infrastructure and the living conditions in the city, distance to a border or proximity of the battlefront.

It is needless to say that the internal political strategy is as important as foreign relations. Higher happiness positively affects army morale and cities and units are more resilient to foreign influences. On the other hand, low happiness is reflected in low army morale, higher emigration rate and could potentially lead to revolts or even civil wars.

Local happiness is also related to another quite original concept – Influence. It was a common practice for states to use subtle force to initiate or steer certain events in neighboring foreign cities in a hope of gaining a foothold in the region.

To allow the player more political action, we created a new resource type called Influence. It represents the prestige the state has abroad and it can be used to incite unrest in foreign cities while persuading the local governs to switch sides. After all, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. This way you can expand your sphere of influence without bloodshed even though reciprocal actions might come faster than you would expect. The usage of this resource and the chance of being successful in such actions depends on many factors like distance from the empire, local happiness of that city, attitude of the populace towards the player influencing the city, urban guards protecting it and many others.

But it’s not just the unexpected which makes the game fun. Even though home politics play a major role in the game, the famous figures of ancient history are more celebrated for their political and military deeds. Heroes are born on the battlefields and so we will dedicate the next Dev diary to the long-awaiting battle and war-related game mechanics!


Is Aggressors Ancient Rome a 4x game?

First of all, we should ask is the question and Aggressor Ancient Rome is truly a 4x game we had a similar question regarding Warhammer 40K Gladius, and while both games are no doubt a very successful and appealing titles the question still remains if this description is accurate. 4x games consist out of four very important stages or activities explore, expand, exploit and exterminate. Initially, this description was applied only to space games such as Master of Orion 2, which is widely considered to be the first of its kind. Essentially a player first explores his or her surroundings, then expands, colonizing the worlds in vicinity (or, as in this case, territories), to subsequently exploit local resources and finally exterminate all opposition. In my humble opinion, this game is far more of a grand strategy than a 4X game, having much more in common with titles such as Europa Universalis rather than Master of Orion, Galactic Civilizations or Endless Space. But regardless whether you agree with me or not, this is a fascinating strategy game that earns its share of attention and will definitely provide challenge for the players.

The Aggressors: Ancient Rome map works well enough for this type of games


Aggressors: Ancient Rome

Slitherine announces Aggressors: Ancient Rome – the new turn-based 4X strategy game that brings you back to the ancient world. A mix of deep gameplay and rich historical flavour, Aggressors lets you relive history as the ruler of one of the mighty civilizations of the Mediterranean world. Choose Rome to conquer the Mare Nostrum, or Carthage and build an immortal trading empire. Choose one of twenty available factions and conquer the world, changing the course of history, from Egypt to Athens and Sparta.

  • Be like Gaius Marius, with his exceptional abilities in reforming Rome and its army. You can manage all aspects of your empire: war, trade, internal politics, diplomacy and cultural development. Rule your empire by managing its internal politics and developing its economy. Establish trade routes to reap wealth, ensure the loyalty of your citizens, manage demographics, technological research, internal reforms, and laws the tools at your disposal are endless and seamlessly integrate with each other. But beware: citizens react to the current situation and they can move to other places when they are not happy.
  • Be like Caesar, with his unparalleled strategic genius.Experience the incredibly deep combat system, with each unit having its own abilities and traits, with terrain affecting the outcome in a meaningful way. Army morale and the supply system are crucial and need to be considered before any battle. You will need all your guile and strategic mastery to triumph on the battlefield. Vae victis!
  • Be like Hannibal, play your own way and surprise the enemy. Play on your strengths, beware of your weaknesses. The ancient world is brutal, for no mercy shall be given to the defeated. Twenty factions, from migrating barbarian tribes to advanced empires, which interact with each other through an extremely detailed diplomatic system. Make use of more than ten available diplomatic agreements, including the possibility of forming Federations and Confederations as well as affecting nations and provinces in your sphere of influence.
  • Believe us, you never played a 4X like Aggressors. Manage all aspects of your mighty empire with complete freedom: you can decide to start with an advanced nation surrounded by newer civilizations, or you can choose to start as a young tribe, ready to take on an older and decadent empire… or you can decide to completely randomize the map and play in a uniquely generated world. The choice is yours!Dive into Aggressor at your own pace: thanks to the tutorial and tool tips you can gradually explore all the options available to you.

Aggressors: Ancient Rome will be available on Steam and PC in Q3. The Beta is open now! Slitherine is looking for experienced players who want to test their abilities in Aggressors. Join up here! You can watch the Aggressor: Ancient Rome – Join the Beta Trailer and find out more about Aggressors: Ancient Rome at the games official webpage.


Watch the video: Aggressors: Ancient Rome Review and Gameplay