|
Another interesting thing that will change is that with the "cover everything in small armies" tactic you used to be able to kill new units as they were being built. You'll now either have to devote a stack to doing that. Due to the changes in dynamics I presume these trickles in re-enforcements won't be able to recapture stuff easily but it still gives the country a chance if you don't take care of them. That could especially become an issue with large countries who might be able to rebuild a sizeable force in the fog of war without the player really noticing.
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 15:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
Tomn posted:I don't think it particularly matters where a good is produced so long as it's available, does it? Victoria 2 doesn't seem to factor transportation costs into its factory equations, it's all a matter of whether the goods are in your market or not. Oh, well, just when I thought I was beginning to get a hang of industry management. What exactly does effect profitability then? Is there a guide to industry management anywhere? I haven't been able to find one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
ThePutty posted:To be honest that Dakota thing comes off as really corny but it's your mod v Well yeah, what do you think their
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 15:33
|
|
v
|
Port the game to East vs West and form the Sioux Fracking Bureau.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 16:02
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:The only people who you should care about satisfying are the rich and to a lesser extent the middle class. gently caress the poor and keep them just on the edge of starvation in order to ensure that your huge base of lower class economic fuel are stuck there (just like in real life I've never been ENTIRELY sure of what I'm doing in Victoria 2, but I always kept taxes low as I could because I figured that if my people have the money needed to buy goods, that would stimulate demand which would improve the profitability of my factories which would help improve my economy in general. It's not like I really needed the money most of the time. Does that actually work? Shorter Than Some posted:Oh, well, just when I thought I was beginning to get a hang of industry management. What exactly does effect profitability then? Is there a guide to industry management anywhere? I haven't been able to find one. Dunno about a guide, and as mentioned above I'm not exactly Adam Smith, but at its simplest, factory profitability seems to work much like you would expect - income minus expenses equals profit. Income comes from sales, so you want your factories to make something that's in demand and at a decent price - the trade screen should help there. Expenses comes from buying up factory inputs, factory maintenance, and worker salaries, so you want to make sure your inputs are something that's affordable and available within your market (within your sphere if you're a Great Power, within the Sphere of your Sphere Leader if you're not). In terms of technology, input efficiency means you can make the same output with fewer inputs, output efficiency means you can make more output with the same amount of input, and throughput means you can make more more output if you have more input with the same amount of workers and factory size. So if you're having a problem with the expenses of your factory, output techs are useful if you're sure you can sell the extra, while input techs are always useful for cutting on costs. Throughput is useful if you're already profitable and there's still available demand to be filled. Personally I tend to run laissez-faire economies so I'm not really good at working out what factories should produce. I mostly focus on making sure that I have the right inputs within either my sphere or my country while researching whatever seems required at the time and of course making sure taxes for the rich are low as can be. Seems to work out all right, though I've never been able to figure out how the heck the AI pulls off their late-game economic booms.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 17:00
|
|
|
Hmm. Should RGOs be known before an expedition is sent? I mean, it took Livingstone and Cameron and Stanley's first expedition, plus the knowledge and experience of Zanzibari slave traders who had been exploring the region for hundreds of years, before anyone knew that there was anything of value in Central Africa and the Congo Basin. Geographic discovery is the whole point of sending an expedition in the first place. Actually, I'd pay good American Dollars for a Stanley & Livingstone DLC, where the African interior is still unexplored and the game randomizes things like the shape of the African Great Lakes and whether or not the Lualaba is the Congo or the Nile.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 17:01
|
|
|
You should rename North Dakota to DPRNDK, a la DPRK.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
Tomn posted:I've never been ENTIRELY sure of what I'm doing in Victoria 2, but I always kept taxes low as I could because I figured that if my people have the money needed to buy goods, that would stimulate demand which would improve the profitability of my factories which would help improve my economy in general. It's not like I really needed the money most of the time. Does that actually work? Basically, the slider is deceptive; putting it to 100% only means you want to take 100%, the amount you actually take is determined by your tax efficiency, under "effective tax" when you hover over the slider. Early game even if you set it to 100%, you'll only be actually taking ~23%
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
Pylons posted:Basically, the slider is deceptive; putting it to 100% only means you want to take 100%, the amount you actually take is determined by your tax efficiency, under "effective tax" when you hover over the slider. Early game even if you set it to 100%, you'll only be actually taking ~23% Well, yeah, I know that, I was asking whether keeping taxes low so that pops can buy more things to stimulate demand was an effective tactic, as opposed to Nuclearmonkee's proposal of "tax them into space and then tax them into the dirt"
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 18:13
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Well, yeah, I know that, I was asking whether keeping taxes low so that pops can buy more things to stimulate demand was an effective tactic, as opposed to Nuclearmonkee's proposal of "tax them into space and then tax them into the dirt" I'm pretty sure what would happen there is the lower class is constantly promoting to capitalists, so you might experience a shortage of craftsmen?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 18:15
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Well, yeah, I know that, I was asking whether keeping taxes low so that pops can buy more things to stimulate demand was an effective tactic, as opposed to Nuclearmonkee's proposal of "tax them into space and then tax them into the dirt" Late game you do want to stimulate demand, but only once finished goods are over saturated. And you do that by lower taxes on the lower class, and massively taxing your capitalists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
So guys, I just now realized that I'm technically still a Victoria 2 beta tester and have access to the HoD beta. I'm the worst beta tester. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:So guys, I just now realized that I'm technically still a Victoria 2 beta tester and have access to the HoD beta. drat, I've applied for every single beta since EU3 came out and never got in 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
I applied for the HoD beta and here I am waiting impatitenly for the bloody game. Why couldn't they have released on Friday 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 19:34
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Well, yeah, I know that, I was asking whether keeping taxes low so that pops can buy more things to stimulate demand was an effective tactic, as opposed to Nuclearmonkee's proposal of "tax them into space and then tax them into the dirt" The amount of goods POPs demand is unaffected by purchasing power. If they need 100 canned food but can only afford 20, the demand is still 100.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
Fired up EU3, started a game as Ming. Forgot about war exhaustion and only noticed when my entire country was at a revolt level of 15-20% or more. I don't think I've been actually angry at a game in a long long time but those rebels popping up everywhere all the time sure did it. I like how in Victoria 2 the rebels have to come from somewhere and it is possible to just murder them all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
EU3 actually has a little going on behind the scenes in regards to rebels - Its based on province manpower. I tested this by giving a province 1000 manpower in a save file. The several thousand unit stack it spawned pretty much proved that theory. So, I guess they don't come from anywhere in the strictest sense, but theres a bit of math and sense to it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
So I was out of the paradox loop for the launch of MotE, judging by the fact the OP isnt even updated with info on it I assume it was another sengoku?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
Nope, it's actually pretty good. The singleplayer is alright but the multiplayer is exceptional.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
No, MotE is a solid game. It's not a traditional Paradox style grand strategy game though. There's barely any domestic management and very little in the way of politics. It's HoI for the Napoleonic era and it executes on that very well. You can have a few fun experiences against the AI but that tends to get old, fast. There's limited diplomacy options and the short game length was kind of tailored to multiplayer. It's great fun in MP, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
I've never played Victoria 2, but I'm going to get into it for HoD. Question: how much of your population will you lose over a game killing rebels? Should I be worried about draining my population?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
Its good and polished but very forgettable. Its a pure combat game, and the combat is awesome. Its very, very shallow and its filled to the brim with stupid unique units. But its good! Worth playing! Much better in multiplayer! But unlike V2 I don't see myself playing it in a year's time. Its waaaay better than sengoku BUT it feels alot like a sengoku type game. That being said, I can't really post in this thread without mentioning V2. I can't wait for V3. I hope V2 is making paradox lots of money because I love the concept of V2 and I hope for many more DLC and games along its' lines. I want a DLC for V2 to randomize the world. I also want a DLC for V2 to add newspapers and improve naval combat and increase the amount of steps I need to take to genocide africans. Plus I want naval bases to be much more important and a combat system that rewards a mixed army.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
Consider it a Napoleon Sengoku, except fun in multiplayer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:I've never played Victoria 2, but I'm going to get into it for HoD. Question: how much of your population will you lose over a game killing rebels? Should I be worried about draining my population?  But really, I've never had any problems with rebel killing draining the population, warfare is probably the bigger concern. That's my experience at least. I am a pretty nice guy though, being all reform friendly all the time, so maybe the people who go hard line might be culling their population?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 21:13
|
|
|
Is there a "no fog of war" cheat in Victoria 2? It'd fun to able to actually see the wars between other nations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 21:16
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Is there a "no fog of war" cheat in Victoria 2? It'd fun to able to actually see the wars between other nations. I imagine this would probably slow things down to a crawl unless you're on a really high-end system. I was just dragged into The Great War between France (my ally) and a democratic NSDAP-controlled Germany/socialist Russia and it brought my computer to its knees just watching the carnage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 21:22
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Is there a "no fog of war" cheat in Victoria 2? It'd fun to able to actually see the wars between other nations. Yeah, just press ~ and type in "fow".
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 22:09
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:I've never played Victoria 2, but I'm going to get into it for HoD. Question: how much of your population will you lose over a game killing rebels? Should I be worried about draining my population?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
Wolfgang Pauli posted:Each dead soldier costs you 0.3 POPs (might be 0.2 in vanilla, I can't keep those straight). My homebrew mod runs that at 1:1 and it's pretty devastating. I seem to recall that each POP point represents a family unit rather than an individual person, so that is pretty devastating - every time a soldier is killed on the field of battle his wife and children back home spontaneously drop dead. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 22:17
|
|
|
gently caress burgundy
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 22:18
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:I've never played Victoria 2, but I'm going to get into it for HoD. Question: how much of your population will you lose over a game killing rebels? Should I be worried about draining my population? Not really very much at all, because after you research Medicine and such only about 1/4th of the people you kill in battle will actually die, the rest are supposed to desert/get hospitalized/etc. You're never going to make more than a small dent in your population unless the country. There are far more serious things that cause depopulation, like being a small country with one of the rougher disease events firing multiple times in the 1830s-1840s, or being a really reactionary country that people want to emigrate the hell out of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 22:29
|
|
|
Is there a way to mod in reforms in V2? I'm kinda curious if there has been any attempts to tackle Women's Rights. I can see it being rather difficult since PoPs are PoPs, but I think it could be an interesting event path or decision tree to add on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
The end result of womens rights should be a doubling of your population as women are then allowed to be fully productive members of society.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:The end result of womens rights should be a doubling of your population as women are then allowed to be fully productive members of society. Heart of Darkness Patch Notes for 3.41 - PoPs designated as "female" will now receive 75% of male PoPs' salaries
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Heart of Darkness Patch Notes for 3.41 Geez, what are you, a pussified feminazi? They'll only work when men are off doing more important things like slaughtering natives, and they better be loving happy with 25% pay and a pat on the rear end from time to time. PrinceRandom fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Apr 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
PrinceRandom posted:Is there a way to mod in reforms in V2? I'm kinda curious if there has been any attempts to tackle Women's Rights. I can see it being rather difficult since PoPs are PoPs, but I think it could be an interesting event path or decision tree to add on. APD adds a bunch of new reforms, including one for women's suffrage (although I'm pretty sure women's suffrage itself is just an event that you get and it gives you some kindof permanent bonus, like to immigrant attraction or something).
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
If Woman's Suffrage basically doubled your available populations, any sensible player would just beeline straight for it. It'd be an amazing sort of "endgame" thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 00:32
|
|
|
Mister Bates posted:I seem to recall that each POP point represents a family unit rather than an individual person, so that is pretty devastating - every time a soldier is killed on the field of battle his wife and children back home spontaneously drop dead. DrSunshine posted:If Woman's Suffrage basically doubled your available populations, any sensible player would just beeline straight for it. It'd be an amazing sort of "endgame" thing. *e* vvvvvvvvvvv ThatBasqueGuy posted:Would instantly turn all Vicky 2 players into unabashed feminists. Wolfgang Pauli fucked around with this message at 01:46 on Apr 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 01:29
|
|
|
Would instantly turn all Vicky 2 players into unabashed feminists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 01:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
Could be easiest to just add some mild bonuses to productivity/science and so on and maybe upset conservative/religious pops? It's not like women didn't do anything back then, they worked bloody hard actually. It's not like their labour was wasted or lost or women were just sitting on nice chairs all day wishing they could participate in the world. If they aren't slaving for little or no pay around the house or farm someone else would. It's not a huge source of free labour, but it was inefficient and pointlessly segregated labour so a moderate bonus to pop productivity could be a simple way to model it. Something like +10% productivity and a similar overall science boost? Maybe an overall shift to the left in voting trends as historically occurred? Yeah it's pretty hard to model without ending up sexist or just not making sense.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 01:47
|
|