|
Fister Roboto posted:Also apparently, as you'd expect, government employee POPs receive a fixed salary per person based on your slider settings. Wow, Bureaucrats are expensive as hell. e. Not that I didn't already know that, but seeing how much more they're paid like that brings it home, in a way.
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
I just cannot get a handle on Vicky 2. Got the latest expansion and tried again, and just...blah. My factories never turn a consistent profit, I can't afford to maintain an army anywhere near significant in size, and it seems like anyone I'd ever want to go to war with is always allied with Great Britain.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 21:22
|
|
|
A couple of questions about HoD: What makeups should I use for armies? I'm doing like 5 inf 4 art 2 huss 2 eng for my main battle stacks but these are unwieldy to use and take alot of attrition. I was thinking of just having my professional military be the specialist units like engineers and artillery and depend on my drafted army for the infantry ratio and then only have one main battle stack for every continent to keep the peace, is this a good idea? Also, should I use a separate stack for beating up on uncivs that's heavy on Cuirassiers and Guards? How exactly does the RP gain by conquest work? Am I only supposed to use the conquest CB or do other CB's work as well? I conquered that tiny bit of Borneo but only got a small bit of RP for my trouble with one military reform. It seemed like a better idea to just wait to get sphered by a good cultural / industrial GP then rush all those right side techs for the sphere discount. Does the throughput bonus apply also to the goods made by factories in the same state or is it RGO only? Can I depend on natural promotions for my capitalist pops or should I promote capitalists a bit to get them started?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
After experimenting a little more, it seems the salaries for workers and aristocrats is a little more complicated. With 10M farmers and 100K aristocrats, the farmers were taking in $772 while the aristocrats only took $16.43 (only 2% of the total RGO income). When I doubled the size of the aristocrat POP, they took about 4% of the total. Doubled it again and they took about 8%. Doubled it AGAIN and they took about 16%. This trend continued for two more steps (3.2M aristos to 10M farmers), at which point the two POPs took home equal pay again. After a little more experimentation, I found that the breakpoint is at aristocrats making up 20% of the RGO workforce. So in conclusion: aristocrats take home pay equal to 2.5 times their percent composition of the RGO workforce, up to 20%, and the farmers/labourers take home the rest. If an RGO makes $100 each day and the RGO workforce is 10% aristocrats, then the aristocrats will take home $25. I'm so glad I spent all this time trying to figure out something so inconsequential :spergicide:
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 21:38
|
|
|
Do you still have to pay for non-culture bureaucrats even though they can't actually be hired by the state? If so, what's that supposed to be modeling or representing?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Do you still have to pay for non-culture bureaucrats even though they can't actually be hired by the state? If so, what's that supposed to be modeling or representing? After adding 10000 turks in bowler caps to the Hawaiian islands, I can safely conclude that yes, you do pay non-culture bureaucrats, and at the same rate. However, non-culture bureaucrats still serve a function, as they still contribute to your overall national efficiency (just not at the state level). State administrative efficiency only affects your crime-fighting rate within the state, so it probably represents higher crime in minority ghettos or some such.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:If so, what's that supposed to be modeling or representing? That Victoria 2 is an incomprehensible mess of algorithms kludged together to create a 'model' that bears only the most nominal relationship to what it's 'simulating', with a decent empire builder balanced precariously on top?  (It's actually sort of fun now with HoD, though, so whatever.)
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:I have the best let's play of HOI3 right here: Oh my God it was like Neo being plugged in. I know HOI3. (This video owns)
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:The POPs don't keep that extra cash, it just completely vanishes from the system. At 0% efficiency, you're paying twice as much as you should be for your bureaucrats. Fintilgin posted:That Victoria 2 is an incomprehensible mess of algorithms kludged together to create a 'model' that bears only the most nominal relationship to what it's 'simulating', with a decent empire builder balanced precariously on top?  Orwell would be so pissed at all the mixed metaphors in the POP goods model. I've said it before, but I don't think anyone has sat down and actually tracked down what all these values mean since the game was pre-alpha.Socialism is always the way to go, since, like most games, you end up rolling in more cash than you can spend. You might as well provide for your population, since they're incapable of doing so for themselves (this is realistic, to be fair, but poverty is not the same thing as clunky AI. Well, I guess that's debatable, too). Wolfgang Pauli fucked around with this message at 22:32 on May 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:30
|
|
|
There really has to be a nice compromise somewhere between there being no real economy or citizenry as in EU3, and the baroque-rear end complexity of Vicky II's economy and political model. I get frustrated in Vicky II that's it's really hard to understand what's happening to my country – the mechanics feel so hidden and not particularly realistic anyway. Not that it's a bad game with HoD, just kind of an inelegant design. V2 rebels, however, are just dumb.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
 Why you never fight in the Amazon.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:59
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:There really has to be a nice compromise somewhere between there being no real economy or citizenry as in EU3, and the baroque-rear end complexity of Vicky II's economy and political model. I get frustrated in Vicky II that's it's really hard to understand what's happening to my country – the mechanics feel so hidden and not particularly realistic anyway. Not that it's a bad game with HoD, just kind of an inelegant design. Patter Song posted:
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:03
|
|
|
pdxjohan posted:Thats a nice way to describe "not profitable and made redundant" Creative Assembly's going to beat you to Rome 2. And I think they have an AI this time!
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
The whole V2 economy and pop system could be half as complex and probably end up giving more realistic abstracted results. It really does feel like a kluged mess where no one remembers or understands how anything works. I mean I love the game but hot drat I'd be happy to pay for a $20 economy expansion that simplified the economy and interfaces/feedback into something you can really understand and track your results. Free up a bunch of that processing power so the game just runs faster or add a transport system where goods actually flow around the world from state to state via your rails and sea trade routes.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:
It's pretty hilarious that you gained over 3 times the war exhaustion of Britain.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:11
|
|
|
I can't stand all the forced micromanagement. I go with laissez faire whenever it's available, not because it produces superior results, but because it's the only way I can stand to play the game. It's unspeakably dull otherwise. God, and just try setting up an army as a large nation. I'm building dozens or hundreds of brigades, and have to assemble the ideal makeup for each of them. It's enough to make you scream.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
Nightblade posted:It's pretty hilarious that you gained over 3 times the war exhaustion of Britain. The Brits know what to expect when someone lets a Haig take command.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:14
|
|
|
Nightblade posted:It's pretty hilarious that you gained over 3 times the war exhaustion of Britain. The blood flowed knee deep that day. It was not battle, merely butchers work. The 'victors' will long be haunted by PTSD and the sights they saw that day. 
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:26
|
|
|
Nightblade posted:It's pretty hilarious that you gained over 3 times the war exhaustion of Britain. In all likelihood, it's probably because he lost a larger percentage of his total fighting force than the brits did. For the UK, 54K men is a drop in the bucket, but 3K men is probably more than most South American nations can muster.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:29
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:I can't stand all the forced micromanagement. I go with laissez faire whenever it's available, not because it produces superior results, but because it's the only way I can stand to play the game. It's unspeakably dull otherwise. Yeah, army techs need to increase brigade size. It's just a nightmare having to shuffle around 500+ of them in the late game. Just have every one of 'em pop out with 10,000 men after 1860 or so. Abstract all the tanks and planes and stuff into attachments like in HOI2. Also, and maybe this is moddable, the culture techs could reduce rebel revolt frequency and increase their strength and maybe size. It'd help alleviate some of the late-game whack-a-mole. And do away with some of the more silly types as time goes on (Jacobin rebels in 1920?) Anybody know if any of this could be done?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:I can't stand all the forced micromanagement. I go with laissez faire whenever it's available, not because it produces superior results, but because it's the only way I can stand to play the game. It's unspeakably dull otherwise. Yeah, army management needs a make-over too. I wish I could build an entire army in one go and have it automatically build and assemble on its own. If I decide 10 infantry, 3 horsies, 3 engineers, and 3 arty are my standard army I just want to build and forget it. If a pop goes under population to support a unit it should automaticaly be replaced by another pop that CAN. Christ sitting there at like 150/380 military and having tons of under-popped units is stupid. I'd love it if they just went with a more EU3 or HoI2 style generic "manpower" pool. If 25% of my soldier pops are hungarian nationalists and a rebellion breaks out then just have a random ~25% of my military units join them or what ever. Abstract that poo poo. Or at least pool based on nationalty or other factors. You'd have your pool of French soldiers, your pool of Walloonian soldiers and so on. Want to build an army? Go into the army builder, assemble the army more or less how you build them now and it would built HoI2 style and go into a deployment pool which you could then deploy manually to provinces, deploy to existing armies, or deploy all at once. Add in an auto-replacement or sorting option too. Merged some units, split them up, and everything is hosed? Just put all the units back into your deployment pool and re-deploy those pre-defined armies. Missing an arty here or a hussar there? The game will tell you or even build them for you! Yeah, streamline and abstract the economy better and put a bit more detail into the military so it's a bit more HoI2 like. I'd love to see brigade attachments and upgrading ships/equipment and such.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
So what the gently caress. Playing with the beta patch and NNM with hotfix A (I think) edit: I just noticed that I had that bug in my Greece playthrough too, and only in the capitals in both cases Michael Bayleaf fucked around with this message at 23:48 on May 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:God, and just try setting up an army as a large nation. I'm building dozens or hundreds of brigades, and have to assemble the ideal makeup for each of them. It's enough to make you scream. This. I don't mind the economy so much, as I usually play large enough nations for the capitalists to run things smoothly enough (although probably not optimally), but the army management is like a 10+ year old system. It's difficulty through interface, not mechanics. So many needless deaths because I just plunge my massive amounts of mobilized citizens into the breach, because I cannot be bothered to provide them with adequate support units.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Want to build an army? Go into the army builder, assemble the army more or less how you build them now and it would built HoI2 style and go into a deployment pool which you could then deploy manually to provinces, deploy to existing armies, or deploy all at once. Add in an auto-replacement or sorting option too. Merged some units, split them up, and everything is hosed? Just put all the units back into your deployment pool and re-deploy those pre-defined armies. Missing an arty here or a hussar there? The game will tell you or even build them for you! The funny thing is that this is almost word-for-word the system used in Victoria 1. Actually the whole military model (apart from the HoD naval systems) from Ricky was the one aspect where that game is still superior to the sequel.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
meatbag posted:This. I don't mind the economy so much, as I usually play large enough nations for the capitalists to run things smoothly enough (although probably not optimally), but the army management is like a 10+ year old system. It's difficulty through interface, not mechanics. Hell yeah. My provocation for saying all of this was a game where I Westernized China. By 1887 I was more than double the UK's industry, had a higher millitary score than any three powers, combined, but had zero interest in continuing. Why? Because the only fun thing I could do anymore (all colonies were snapped up within 10 years of the scramble beginning) was go on a gigantic murderspree across asia, and that would have been about as fun as a hole in the head.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:There really has to be a nice compromise somewhere between there being no real economy or citizenry as in EU3, and the baroque-rear end complexity of Vicky II's economy and political model. I get frustrated in Vicky II that's it's really hard to understand what's happening to my country – the mechanics feel so hidden and not particularly realistic anyway. Not that it's a bad game with HoD, just kind of an inelegant design. I said it before, but I really do think the fact that you can take a major power from the period, like France, Prussia, or the US, and never interact with the population or economy model at all for the entire game and not just do well, but become the highest ranked industrial powerhouse in the world, means that the design is fundamentally flawed. I've played a couple games now, where I've become the #1 world spanning colossus of the 19th century, and I don't even know what factories I have. It doesn't feel like it's really simulating anything that actually resembles the real world particularly, it's just a black box full of sound and fury that has been hammered (over a ton of patches and two expansions) into spitting out results that kinda work, most of the time. I mean, it's nice that your 2127 bureaucrats in Fucksilvania, Kazakstan add .136% bonus efficacy to your 6793 craftsmen, who produce 1.948 widgets a day that can be turned into .36 megawidgets in a megawidget factory, which gets a 4.612% production bonus on alternate Thursdays because you have a national focus there, but it's not a system that the vast majority of players can meaningfully interact with. I've posted the article before, multiple times in reference to Victoria, but I'm just going to quote it again, because it sums things up far more eloquently then I ever could. quote:Creating story-based games can be an intoxicating experience for designers, many of whom go overboard with turgid back stories full of proper nouns, rarely-used consonants, and apostrophes. Furthermore, games based on complex, detailed simulations can be especially opaque if the mysterious inner workings of the algorithmic model remain hidden from view. As Sid liked to say, with these games, either the designer or the computer was the one having the fun, not the player. I actually don't want to poo poo on Paradox, but I really like the period, and wish there was a game about the 19th century that was a little less.... well... whatever Victoria IS. FAKE EDIT: Don't get me started on HOI3 REAL EDIT: It's like the empire builder Victoria 2 that I've been playing is a completely separate and unrelated game that is running in parallel to the crazy pop and factory machinery the computer is churning away in the background at (and slowing down my game). Fintilgin fucked around with this message at 00:05 on May 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
Holy poo poo I want everyone involved in V2 to read that exert like 50x I mean I love the game but that quote sums up everything wrong with V2 and a lot of Paradox's design choices.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 00:58
|
|
|
So uh, if I ever want to pass reforms of any kind (as Japan) and still get tax and tariff income, what should I be doing? Since I've had the Court/Conservative Party in power for basically the whole game, and of course they don't really want to change reforms, but if I change to the liberals my maximum tax rate get cut down to roughly 50%, and the tariff down to about 20%. So uh, what should I do here?  my total militancy is about 0.06 as well, so it's not like that'll be pressuring the government into making any reforms, anytime soon.I just want to give my people nice things is all, sheesh! You'd think they would want a minimum wage! 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 01:22
|
|
|
The only way I have found to consistently get all reforms passed is militancy. Piss people off. Be a poo poo ruler. Tax them to hell. Change ruling parties on a whim. Only then will your pops be mad enough to force all reforms from your government.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
Major Isoor posted:So uh, if I ever want to pass reforms of any kind (as Japan) and still get tax and tariff income, what should I be doing? Since I've had the Court/Conservative Party in power for basically the whole game, and of course they don't really want to change reforms, but if I change to the liberals my maximum tax rate get cut down to roughly 50%, and the tariff down to about 20%. So uh, what should I do here? Your ruling party has absolutely no impact on your ability to pass reforms. Upper house composition is what determines it, and that's based on your peoples' ideologies (not electorate vote, this is crucial) and your upper house composition laws (which determine what portion of your population is represented in the upper house). The most important thing for getting reforms is increasing your peoples' consciousness. With low consciousness, their issues will only be party platforms (like free trade or moralism), but once they get passed 6 CON, they'll start caring about actual reforms. And as long as those reforms don't get passed, they'll start forming movements and gaining militancy, and that causes your conservatives in the upper house to start voting in favor of reform. I know it's not obvious at all (otherwise this question wouldn't keep coming up) and fintilgin is right, V2 is still such an opaque black-boxy game. Even with HOD it still has a long way to go before it can actually be a good game. Probably have better luck waiting for Vicky 3.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:12
|
|
|
New Dev Diary for EU IV Nothing exciting, just the ideas and governments for the Mamelukes, Persia, Timurids and Oman. The Mamelukes look really strong early game, so its events are gonna have to cripple it for the Ottomans to ever have a chance of conquering it.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:19
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:REAL EDIT: It's like the empire builder Victoria 2 that I've been playing is a completely separate and unrelated game that is running in parallel to the crazy pop and factory machinery the computer is churning away in the background at (and slowing down my game). Well, that's kind of the point. You can control, or at least influence, just about every part of your country, but your people are doing their own thing too and if you ignore them they will still get something done. quote:It doesn't feel like it's really simulating anything that actually resembles the real world particularly, it's just a black box full of sound and fury that has been hammered (over a ton of patches and two expansions) into spitting out results that kinda work, most of the time. I mean, it's nice that your 2127 bureaucrats in Fucksilvania, Kazakstan add .136% bonus efficacy to your 6793 craftsmen, who produce 1.948 widgets a day that can be turned into .36 megawidgets in a megawidget factory, which gets a 4.612% production bonus on alternate Thursdays because you have a national focus there, but it's not a system that the vast majority of players can meaningfully interact with. You're over-complicating things, possibly on purpose for dramatic effect, but in case you actually think this: Bureaucrats don't affect factories, national focuses do not affect factories, and anything that does affect factories does so in a consistent fashion, not on alternate Thursdays. Factories are really pretty simple. They take in <Inputs> and turn them into <Outputs>. If Output is worth more than Input, profit! A few factors can reduce the needed Input or increase the given Output, or can affect Throughput which affects both equally. Once you're comfortable with that you can dig in and see what the factors are, but there's no need to count widget production unless you are sperging out over building a perfect economy (which can be fun, but it's hardly vital).
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:24
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:If Output is worth more than Input, profit! Except not always, because sometimes (most of the time) not all of your outputs get bought, and I guess your capitalists just dump all the unbought goods in the ocean or something each day. Please make Vicky less opaque.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:28
|
|
|
Nah, everything is always bought, the price is just lowered dynamically when there's excess supply. No one here thinks our games shouldn't be less opaque though, V2 was just made a long time ago and expansions can't overhaul the UI enough. Our new games should be better at this, we even have a full time UI designer now.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:44
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:The only way I have found to consistently get all reforms passed is militancy. Piss people off. Be a poo poo ruler. Tax them to hell. Change ruling parties on a whim. Only then will your pops be mad enough to force all reforms from your government. Fister Roboto posted:Your ruling party has absolutely no impact on your ability to pass reforms. Upper house composition is what determines it, and that's based on your peoples' ideologies (not electorate vote, this is crucial) and your upper house composition laws (which determine what portion of your population is represented in the upper house). Ah, alright then yeah, that makes sense. (or at least as much as it can, heh) I've changed my party around a couple of times and that slightly boosted militancy, and I'm now taxing at 100%. There's a bunch of movements popping up too, which is nice - I suppressed a couple of them so that they come back more radical, so hopefully that'll pay off in the long run, in the 'actually pass some reforms' department. (on that note, I've almost-constantly got 100 suppression points. Should I just keep suppressing these movements for a while to make them more angry in the long-term, or should I just let them gather momentum regularly?)
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:47
|
|
|
AnoMouse posted:New Dev Diary for EU IV Oman and the Mamelukes both look pretty fun, good places to start messing around with the new trade stuff. Yeah, I think I'm beginning to get pumped for EUIV.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:55
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Nah, everything is always bought, the price is just lowered dynamically when there's excess supply. Then why does the tooltip say "X out of Y widgets didn't get sold today"?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
I have just found out that the Hegemony war needs BOTH parties to have nationalism and imperialism to exist. Goddamn it guys I gave prussia a free tech just so I can smash them in the face. Also austria-hungary needs ITALY AND GERMANY TO EXIST to be formed? no way to set off an austria -> austria hungary -> Germany game?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 03:32
|
|
|
AtomikKrab posted:I have just found out that the Hegemony war needs BOTH parties to have nationalism and imperialism to exist. Goddamn it guys I gave prussia a free tech just so I can smash them in the face. Well yeah, Autria-Hungary only existed because the Austrians done goofed and lost two wars in succession, Van5 fucked around with this message at 07:00 on May 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 04:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
Van5 posted:Well yeah Autria-Hungary only existed because the Austrians done goofed and lost two wars in succession, makes me sad I wonder if I let those pan german nationalists enforce their demands in mecklenburg if prussia will kneel to them.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 04:22
|
|