|
And completed! Highlights of the game:
Overall it was pretty fun, though I would like to play a nation with alot of military power now. Communist Bear fucked around with this message at 10:56 on May 5, 2013 |
#
?
May 5, 2013 10:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 10:44 |
|
|
So what do you NF in the very late game, when you have enough bureaucrats, craftsmen, literacy is over 90%, and don't need a shift in political parties (glorious communist turkey is here to stay). Soldiers and officers?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 11:12
|
|
|
Alright, due to Mexico's desire for California, my Californian Republic game (/more chaotic version of the US civil war) is a no-go. I've been considering playing other countries, although I'm not sure which one would be best for someone who's only played one game before. (and that was sometime last year as Brazil. Didn't quite finish, but got halfway or so through 1904) Here's the main ones I was thinking of, anyway: 1) Australia - The main question for this is how difficult would it be to cut my ties with the British? (well, in terms of being their vassal, anyway) Also, will I be able to industrialize early and effectively enough to be able to become a reasonably-sized military power, to possibly wage a war in SE Asia? (more than likely, anyway. I'm not sure where else I'll be able to reach) 2) Japan - Doesn't Japan start off as an unciv at the beginning of V2? I'm mostly wondering about how hard it would be for me to westernize and establish my industry, considering I've only played as Brazil. (uh, they start off westernized, don't they? I can't remember, it's been too long) 3) Mexico - Well, I read about your discussions about a campaign against the USA+Texas, which I may-well not be suited for, as I haven't had a lot of war experience in V2, although I might have a chance, now that I know to let the Yanks suffer attrition damage in the desert, and to go evade their forces and capture provinces with some cav while keeping their main force tied up. Thanks guys, I'd be lost without you! (and hell, probably still would be a little, regardless!) 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 11:20
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:So what do you NF in the very late game, when you have enough bureaucrats, craftsmen, literacy is over 90%, and don't need a shift in political parties (glorious communist turkey is here to stay). Soldiers and officers? Yep. My late game, at least, is invariably wildly militaristic, but I do play with the Great War mod that makes this a bigger aspect of 20th century politics. Now that you can afford a giant army, pad it out and spread the light of $IDEOLOGY_OF_CHOICE throughout the world!
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 11:23
|
|
|
Major Isoor posted:Alright, due to Mexico's desire for California, my Californian Republic game (/more chaotic version of the US civil war) is a no-go. I've been considering playing other countries, although I'm not sure which one would be best for someone who's only played one game before. (and that was sometime last year as Brazil. Didn't quite finish, but got halfway or so through 1904) Major Isoor posted:2) Japan - Doesn't Japan start off as an unciv at the beginning of V2? I'm mostly wondering about how hard it would be for me to westernize and establish my industry, considering I've only played as Brazil. (uh, they start off westernized, don't they? I can't remember, it's been too long)  From how people describe Japan though, and my experiences with Brazil (and the dearth of resources in South America), Japan is probably better for industrializing than Brazil, even if you have to kick in the teeth of your neighbors first to be allowed to industrialize.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 11:57
|
|
|
Japan is an easy unciv. Although they start out uncivilized they get decisions and events to boost tech growth and are surrounded by uncivs to beat up (namely Korea). Once you civilize you can walk all over everyone.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 12:51
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Of course Brazil start off as westernized, they're a culturally European country. Heh sorry; I was just slightly surprised that Japan was classified as an unciv at that point, (I mean, I know they adopted firearms a good while after Europe, although I had forgotten it was quite that much later on) so I wasn't certain if all of Brazil would be classed as that as well, (or is it an 'all or nothing' affair? I'm not really all that familiar with V2's mechanics) since aren't there swathes of it that are just forest/jungle? I wasn't sure how that would be categorized. Also, isn't Korea a vassal/satellite of China? Or am I remembering wrong? If not, is there a way to pry them apart, without getting into a full-scale war with China too? Since that could be a good re-introduction to warfare for me, although I'm not certain how I'll cope against China after not playing the game in yonks. Major Isoor fucked around with this message at 13:12 on May 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 13:06
|
|
|
Major Isoor posted:Heh sorry; I was just slightly surprised that Japan was classified as an unciv at that point, (I mean, I know they adopted firearms a good while after Europe, although I had forgotten it was quite that much later on) so I wasn't certain if all of Brazil would be classed as that as well, (or is it an 'all or nothing' affair? I'm not really all that familiar with V2's mechanics) since aren't there swathes of it that are just forest/jungle? I wasn't sure how that would be categorized. Unless they changed it in the patch, Korea starts off with no diplomatic ties and should be the first thing you conquer as Japan. Pyongyang is a ridic region for industry purposes.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 13:38
|
|
|
Major Isoor posted:Heh sorry; I was just slightly surprised that Japan was classified as an unciv at that point, (I mean, I know they adopted firearms a good while after Europe, although I had forgotten it was quite that much later on) so I wasn't certain if all of Brazil would be classed as that as well, (or is it an 'all or nothing' affair? I'm not really all that familiar with V2's mechanics) since aren't there swathes of it that are just forest/jungle? I wasn't sure how that would be categorized. "Civilization" in Vicky is a nebulous term that refers to a variety of abstracted factors. It generally means either 1) European-style government and principles or 2) "Modern" technology like post-Napoleonic combat and industrialization. Japan at the time was still a bit of a shut-in on the world stage and had trouble adopting modern technologies and government. Pretty much all of south America by this point has been colonized and has subsequently thrown off colonial oppression. Despite the fact that a lot of Brazil would be jungle, that jungle was still nominally under the control of a modern government with diplomatic recognition from the great powers. As far as uncivilized nations go, it's mostly Africa Asia (as well as the Pacific natives, but they mostly don't even get their own countries...) that are included in that term.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 13:41
|
|
|
Major Isoor posted:Heh sorry; I was just slightly surprised that Japan was classified as an unciv at that point, (I mean, I know they adopted firearms a good while after Europe, although I had forgotten it was quite that much later on) so I wasn't certain if all of Brazil would be classed as that as well, (or is it an 'all or nothing' affair? I'm not really all that familiar with V2's mechanics) since aren't there swathes of it that are just forest/jungle? I wasn't sure how that would be categorized. This should clear it up for you:  *And honestly also today, in terms of how we treat other cultures, even if we couch it in different language.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 13:48
|
|
|
Major Isoor posted:3) Mexico - Well, I read about your discussions about a campaign against the USA+Texas, which I may-well not be suited for, as I haven't had a lot of war experience in V2, although I might have a chance, now that I know to let the Yanks suffer attrition damage in the desert, and to go evade their forces and capture provinces with some cav while keeping their main force tied up. Just remember that in Vicky most of all, war is a game of numbers - Pick fights that kill more of their boys than yours. When you have to fight, favour luring them into good defensive terrain where you've had time to dig in. Only attack when they're thinned out, worn down, in terrible positions, or not there at all. Give your dudes time to recover between big throw-downs. Also, HoD made support units really useful. Engineers, Horses and cannons do a lot to improve your effectiveness. Early game you're better off building a few big heavily-armed killpiles made to win battles than trying to spread yourself out.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 13:51
|
|
|
The Narrator posted:"Civilization" in Vicky is a nebulous term that refers to a variety of abstracted factors. It generally means either 1) European-style government and principles or 2) "Modern" technology like post-Napoleonic combat and industrialization. Japan at the time was still a bit of a shut-in on the world stage and had trouble adopting modern technologies and government. Pretty much all of south America by this point has been colonized and has subsequently thrown off colonial oppression. Despite the fact that a lot of Brazil would be jungle, that jungle was still nominally under the control of a modern government with diplomatic recognition from the great powers. Ah alright, thanks for clarifying that; I can see why A uttery Pastry had the reaction he had, now! But yeah, at the time I was primarily thinking uninhabited/'lack of civilization anywhere nearby', rather than 'ruled by savages and heathens', sort of thingAnd alright then, excellent. I might try to take Korea as Japan and go from there, (should I leave it as just straight-up Japanese territory, or release them? I suppose it's all up to whether I still get the resources there, etc. That's if I actually get the land for myself to begin with, anyway) with Australia as my main alternative, in case things get hairy as Japan EDIT: Oops, missed a couple of posts writing this. Heh well, I'm pretty sure a fair few called us Aussies uncivilised anyway, due to the environment; although mosly because of the first settlers on the east coast, plus the fact that there were natives/the Aboriginal people who didn't live the way the Europeans lived. (shock, horror!) But yeah I get your point And yeah, I think I may need to play combat a little smarter than in CK2 - the sad thing is I've lost all my experience with warfare in HoI, which probably would've been a little more helpful! EDIT EDIT: Also, I like it how Persia, etc. are regarded as 'half-civilized', even though they were traditionally more advanced than Europe; especially Baghdad, as I recall Major Isoor fucked around with this message at 15:16 on May 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 13:55
|
|
|
This image is the best to show what Europeans thought, cicra 1821
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 14:50
|
|
|
Major Isoor posted:Heh well, I'm pretty sure a fair few called us Aussies uncivilised anyway, due to the environment; although mosly because of the first settlers on the east coast, plus the fact that there were natives/the Aboriginal people who didn't live the way the Europeans lived. (shock, horror!) But yeah I get your point Australia was considered one of the "frontiers of civilization", basically, and keep in mind that Aborigines weren't really considered "Australians". Keep in mind that the "civilized" status of a country was determined by who the ruling elites were, not the majority populations - hence, South America was civilized because its rulers spoke Spanish and were raised on European culture, even where most of the population were indigenous people or slaves. And Australia was civilized because it was ruled by white Anglophones. In other words, you're uncivilized if people who talk and dress funny have a say in how things are done. quote:EDIT EDIT: Also, I like it how Persia, etc. are regarded as 'half-civilized', even though they were traditionally more advanced than Europe; especially Baghdad, as I recall Traditionally, yeah, but note how quick European historiography was to retcon things so that white people were always and naturally the most advanced. Of course, this is hardly unique, successful cultures do tend to universally have a sense of snooty superiority: consider how part of the success of the Crusades was due to the Muslims underestimating the "Frankish" knights, as they initially believed them to be refugees from the war-torn and backwards land across the sea. Or how the Chinese viewed all foreigners as barbarians with no culture until said barbarians completely dominated them. Top Hats Monthly posted:This image is the best to show what Europeans thought, cicra 1821 I love how much this resembles those "How Americans see the world" maps. "So where's Ethiopia, exactly?" "Uh, I'm sure it's in there somewhere." Guildencrantz fucked around with this message at 15:01 on May 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 14:59
|
|
|
Top Hats Monthly posted:This image is the best to show what Europeans thought, cicra 1821 Ugh, just imagine that nearly 200 years ago ol' W.C. Woodbridge was probably pretty proud to have his name on that thing, to be credited with making a work like that.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
Guildencrantz posted:I love how much this resembles those "How Americans see the world" maps. That's odd, I thought Abyssinia WAS Ethiopia. So what did they consider to be Ethiopia back then?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 15:31
|
|
|
Guildencrantz posted:love how much this resembles those "How Americans see the world" maps.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 15:32
|
|
|
AtomikKrab posted:Some people have mentioned they wish to see an LP of the game mechanics and stuff... I've been tossing around doing a VIC II LP... Go for it, man! I was planning on doing one of those when I was finished with World Stage, but there's so many different aspects of V2 that are dependent on the country you pick that there's room for more than one "How the Hell do I Play Victoria II: Heart of Darkness?"
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
While we eagerly await some goon LPs, this Paradox forum AAR was good enough to get me into V2 at least even though it's AHD.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 16:09
|
|
|
telcontar posted:Least badass flag. It looks like a metal band's logo. Isn't the Fascist party called Babylon Zoo?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 16:14
|
|
|
Tomn posted:That's odd, I thought Abyssinia WAS Ethiopia. So what did they consider to be Ethiopia back then? Might be a dash of Classicism seeping in there-- the Greeks and Romans basically dubbed everything from the Sahel southwards Æthiopia, even West Africa and the Niger River watershed and all that. A lot of 19th century European maps seem to have used the name in that fashion up until the Berlin Conference and Scramble for Africa.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 16:21
|
|
|
I haven't played V2 since release, and now apparently there's two expansions out. I'm burnt out on CK2 and have an itch to start a new V2 game - are the expansions important for enjoying it? At full price? If they're not critical then I might just wait for a Steam sale and play the base game.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 16:22
|
|
|
CmdrSmirnoff posted:I haven't played V2 since release, and now apparently there's two expansions out. I'm burnt out on CK2 and have an itch to start a new V2 game - are the expansions important for enjoying it? At full price? If they're not critical then I might just wait for a Steam sale and play the base game. Basically, you're not really playing Victoria 2 without the expansions. The HoD addition of ticking warscore alone makes it worth getting because you never need to conquer all of Russia/Britain to force them to give up some unimportant colony somewhere.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
Necroneocon posted:Please tell me this is a joke and you don't really believe this. This was a while ago, but I couldn't respond to it at the time. The Civil War was fought over the issue of slavery. The Confederacy's constitution enshrined State's rights. Hence, the CSA was a confederation of states that fought for the right for southern aristocrats to own slaves. That's why I specifically said that the Confederacy was founded upon principles of state sovereignty. I didn't say that the Civil War was fought over state's rights. Alchenar posted:The Confederation wasn't founded on principles of state sovereignty at all. The only meaningful changes it made in it's constitution as opposed to the US constitution was to enshrine slave property rights. Oh.  Well then I got that wrong!
DrSunshine fucked around with this message at 17:09 on May 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 17:00
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:This was a while ago, but I couldn't respond to it at the time. The Confederation wasn't founded on principles of state sovereignty at all. The only meaningful changes it made in it's constitution as opposed to the US constitution was to enshrine slave property rights.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 17:07
|
|
|
To further ehmpahsize that point, you can see the Confederacy's constitution in a side-by-side comparison with the Union's right here. In many ways the Confederacy was all about restricting states rights... so that they could continue to prop up the institution of slavery.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:To further ehmpahsize that point, you can see the Confederacy's constitution in a side-by-side comparison with the Union's right here. Right. Okay, I see. Looking at it, it almost seems pretty petty and stupid. They were basically a bunch of rich guys who were throwing a fit because they couldn't get their way and the world was moving on around them. Sort of a weak premise to found an entire country on. In any event I don't think the CSA would have lasted very long even if by a miracle they could have won.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
Yep.  The degree of historical revisionism has altered contemporary perception of the CSA is pretty crazy. In effect the Confederacy wanted to preserve some of the worst aspects of USA's early history in order to become an evil slave empire, but today a lot of people just think it was about state's rights and are freedoms. Someone should make a joke mod in a similar vein as Wiz's old nationalism/true Poland/true Balkans mod where the South is just a collection of slave-owning ubermensch who are here to save America from dirty northern schemes. 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:Yep. Yeah, I knew that much at least was patently false, but I never got a good look at the CSA's actual policies and laws to see if they were more or less institutionally decentralized than the USA was. I always knew that the central issue was slavery, but I'd always figured based on the name and some of the things that had happened, with the states sometimes withholding their militias and having various disputes with each other, that there was generally less central organization than in the federal USA.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
CmdrSmirnoff posted:I haven't played V2 since release, and now apparently there's two expansions out. I'm burnt out on CK2 and have an itch to start a new V2 game - are the expansions important for enjoying it? At full price? If they're not critical then I might just wait for a Steam sale and play the base game.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
Does anybody have any recommendations for a united Italy to defeat a united HRE that just annexed half of France? This is Eu3
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
Krataar posted:Does anybody have any recommendations for a united Italy to defeat a united HRE that just annexed half of France? This is Eu3 Scorched earth in the alps. Conquer the middle east + india for manpower.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Yeah, I knew that much at least was patently false, but I never got a good look at the CSA's actual policies and laws to see if they were more or less institutionally decentralized than the USA was. I always knew that the central issue was slavery, but I'd always figured based on the name and some of the things that had happened, with the states sometimes withholding their militias and having various disputes with each other, that there was generally less central organization than in the federal USA. There was less central organisation, but that's because the petty landowning aristocrats who made up the South's political elite were too busy being petty and self-aggrandising to get their poo poo together and actually fight a war. The amazing thing about the ACW is that it takes the US about 100 years to fully absorb the lesson that maybe things go a lot smoother if you maintain a professional army that can get the job done by itself.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
So, just finished a game and: 1 - the sphere mechanic is only "fun" if you are the dominant nation. As the player, the fact that you have absolutely no defense against it is really lovely. You can't even try and force a war to end the condition. 2 - Any good strategies to civilize? I always seem to take way too much time, which by then, China has already westernized as well and woop there goes the game.  (by the way, China ALWAYS westernizes.) 3 - Communism is fun. 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 19:34
|
|
|
Transmetropolitan posted:So, just finished a game and: Get 1-2 of the +RP from conquest ideas, then conquer everyone. Use this RP to westernize. As for sphering I think there's a decision that allows you to leave your sphere.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
Question for anyone familiar with Vic 2: What's the best way to attack someone who's allied with one of your allies? I'm playing Brazil and want to take Uruguay, but we're both allied with Peru. How can I best avoid losing that alliance?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
BKPR posted:Question for anyone familiar with Vic 2: What's the best way to attack someone who's allied with one of your allies? I'm playing Brazil and want to take Uruguay, but we're both allied with Peru. How can I best avoid losing that alliance? You could declare a second war that Peru would join, and then declare war on Uruguay. If you don't try to bring in Peru, they'll be forced to refuse Uruguay ('Cause you two are already allied in a war).
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
Transmetropolitan posted:2 - Any good strategies to civilize? I always seem to take way too much time, which by then, China has already westernized as well and woop there goes the game. First, you need to sculpt your population. Get bureaucrats to 1% in all your big states, the admin efficiency will let you get the most out of your tariffs and boost conversion rates for all other pops, speeding the process overall. Next, start pilin' on the clergy starting in your biggest state and heading on down the line. Drag each up to 4% and keep education funding maxed for as long as you can afford it. This will get you started on improving your literacy, which gives more research, cuts reform costs, and gets your people ready to shift into better pop types down the road. For reforms, get at least one of the first four military reforms as soon as possible and hold off on fighting any wars until you have it. Each of those four lets you get RP from taking land. Pretty well all of the viable uncivs have neighbours they can beat up on, and with these reforms those conquests will turn around and shave huge piles of time off your westernizing progress. And finally, favour cheap reforms over bigger ones unless you have a very specific need for a pricey one, or a cheap one would be of absolutely no use to you. The wave of free techs you'll get when you westernize will be worth more to you than just about anything you'd get from putting it off for the higher reforms. An example would be making a beeline for education reform over land/admin/finance if you're not having any money trouble, since you want that sweet literacy boost as early as you can.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
Looking at the CSA constitution, I get the impression in V2 they should pretty much only have laissez-faire/free trade parties.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 10:44 |
|
|
uPen posted:As for sphering I think there's a decision that allows you to leave your sphere. Only if you are a secondary power A_Raving_Loon posted:First, you need to sculpt your population. Get bureaucrats to 1% in all your big states, the admin efficiency will let you get the most out of your tariffs and boost conversion rates for all other pops, speeding the process overall. Next, start pilin' on the clergy starting in your biggest state and heading on down the line. Drag each up to 4% and keep education funding maxed for as long as you can afford it. This will get you started on improving your literacy, which gives more research, cuts reform costs, and gets your people ready to shift into better pop types down the road. Nice. Thanks for the tips.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 20:00
|
|