I just "finished" a new campaign (to test 1.8.0).
We must admit that it is much more stable than two years ago, fortunately.
It must also be admitted that this campaign is still as absurd as ever. The Empire destroyed, we say to ourselves as always: "Was the game worth the candle?"
I played quite "commonly" Khuzaits. I made this choice because I knew in advance that I would win more easily with them.
Note another improvement: at this point in the game (elimination of the Empire),
- there are Azeraïs still powerful enough to maintain their "borders",
- there are still Vlanders still powerful enough to worry us even if we have weakened them a lot and I know that in the long term, we could eliminate them (but to do what?
The surprises :
- the battanians, very powerful before, disappear very quickly from the map.
Classic stitches:
As before, the Sturgians all but disappear from the map.
What I do not understand :
The campaign is based on the idea of destroying the Empire but not of waging a perpetual war. It is originally, according to the speeches of the "quest giver" to revive cultural diversity against the homogenization imposed by the Empire.
So, if the economy, politics, alliance system, and especially the "war and peace" system, were better developed, when the Empire is destroyed we should enter this new phase:
- there should be a big council to re-establish the "old cultures" and thus agree on the borders (difficult to do, I admit, but it would be coherent),
- favor trade, diplomatic and political exchanges to find a "peaceful" balance (this would mean having a statistical witness that gives us an indication of the risks of war with this or that faction rather than a looped war system).
For that it would be necessary that the system of war in loop stops and that a newn loop function more diplomatic, political and commercial starts as soon as the Empire is destroyed.
The war in a loop could resume only if the statistical indicator "risk of war" turns red in all areas.
The war could happen because our Kingdom would be too hegemonic at the commercial level, because we would have made bad diplomatic choices, because a neighboring faction "would feel" militarily able to "break our hegemony", for example by founding a alliance against us.
A hegemonic position of our Kingdom could cause alliances in the opposing factions and a war.
For the moment none of this is possible.
And since I think that will never be possible, or that it will always be of questionable quality, I believe more in developing the game towards the RPG.
Finally, as before, when we arrive at the end of the campaign, we say to ourselves: “All that for that, it sucks”.
There is another possibility:
When the Empire disappears, we enter a period of peace automatically. We can then develop our business, policies, and other functions to invent and implement.
But above all, we are opening up the map to new RPGs, new points of interest, new stories.
The end of the war would open up possibilities to discover with our main character (or one of her children) little-known facets of Calradia and therefore real RPG quests allowing us to discover the Background of this world in depth.
The end of the war would open the doors to exciting new adventures that would allow us to discover the cultures of Calradia and its mysteries.
As I said before, rather than making a "bad Civilization game", make a good "episode" RPG game.
Thus finishing this painful main quest would open the doors to new adventures implemented on the map gradually. But for that, you have to do a lot of work to document this universe, write it, describe it, give "life" to characters, imagine the history of Calradia, mysteries, intrigues, etc. In short...
In short, the end of the war would bring us back to a period of peace where the management of the Kingdom or our clan would be in the background and the discovery of Calradia in an RPG style in the foreground.
Anyway, this "RPG" dimension would only be for the "Campaign" mode. Of course, I understand, you may not be able to do everything. But in the long run, it would make a "beautiful game".
I know that many players are asking for the "management" dimension to be more developed. I wonder if it's possible and if it will ever be just a very frustrating part of the game.
On the other hand, adding a "spiritual" dimension to it with religions, with witchcraft (metaphorically, no real witches), inquisition, murders, mythical stories stemming from the beliefs that could be found in the High Middle Ages, such as Celtic, Norse, Latin, Eastern mythology, etc. could make a great game. Working with students who are passionate about this period...
By having fun with the way people represented the world in the High Middle Ages, with old beliefs, you can make a beautiful game.
But, if you prefer to continue on the path of a bad "Civilization game", it's your choice...
Good luck...