Cities and settlements depend situationally, which is an annoying answer but there isn't a flat way to look at them. Generally speaking it's not too bad to have one city in each region (I forget Imperator's specific terminology, but I say territories as a single "Space", region as in the area that lights up around a space when you click it (Though it can be split between countries), and province as even larger regions you can only see if you enable the province map mode) but settlements are useful too. Settlements tend to be better for bringing in food (Usually not something you have to fret over too much, but if you go too heavy on cities in a region they'll get hungry fast) and can produce trade goods fairly well, while cities can get you more pops, research, military, etc. A lot of the default missions you get to build up regions tend to have some questionable decisions like building food WAY the fuck high or over-building forts in a region so you can have "Defended ports" which then kicks your economy in the balls since over spending on forts is killer. I'd say experiment and figure out how you want to build shit but look at the missions with a skeptical eye.
Might be something related to land ownership. Legate's a full-time position so it's not like you can have someone as legate and also provincial governor, but you could have a legate that has personal land. Especially if the legate's one of the major families.
That's cuz you don't know your way around mods. EU4 with MEIOU mod is a thousand times better than this simplistic shit
But it also runs like shit unfortunately. Imperator Rome is a bit interesting at the start but after a few hours of play you are unbeatable. At least in CK2 your character can get cancer and die before your heir comes of age. Then your heir gets assassinated, his retarded inbred brother gets the throne and everything goes to hell.
I agree that Imperator needs more game-shaking events based on internal (like characters traits) and external factors. But if you make it a rollercoaster like in CK2 you end up harming it's "grand strategy" aspect (see Average Manatee complain on republics chaoticness above, for eg). So yeah, they should increase it more but without going overboard, I guess.
Well, I dont have much experience in these games but it seems to me a simple matter of adjusting modifiers like Tyranny, Agressive Expansion, etc. by making them harsher, no?
as frack.
Also last stellaris release is shit. absolutely no interest to play without heavily modding now.
They may say they will grow the game, etc., but if it's left dead in the water for a whole year, that pretty much means its development cycle is over. If they do come back to it, it'll just be for some bugfixing and the like.
