|
Has V2 toned down the inexplicable and incessant revolutions, or is there a mod to make it less annoying and more... realistic?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:57 |
|
|
az jan jananam posted:Has V2 toned down the inexplicable and incessant revolutions, or is there a mod to make it less annoying and more... realistic? Rebels are still completely unthreatening, unfortunately, but they're fewer and further inbetween (with more rebels when they do, to boot).
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:15
|
|
|
Really? 'Cause I get tons of rebels all the time. Unthreatening, yes (Especially later on) but still several massive revolutions per decade, with smaller poo poo sprinkled in between. Running a happy fun-time country can help a little, but sometime people just wanna rebel it seems.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:38
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Really? 'Cause I get tons of rebels all the time. Playing as unciv Persia and gradually marching along the chain of Westernization I was dealing with reactionary uprisings literally constantly, a new rebellion would start before the last bunch of rebels was dead. I had been conquering to gain research points but had to stop and just wait to build up RP for the last reform normally, because my entire army was tied up playing whack-a-mole with hundreds of thousands of pissed-off reactionaries. Actually worked out pretty well, because the reactionaries rebelled so much that I killed most of them and the liberals were able to pick up a majority in the upper house by occupying the newly-vacated seats of the dead. Allowed me to immediately pass a couple of political reforms I wanted as soon as I westernized.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:47
|
|
|
Mister Bates posted:Playing as unciv Persia and gradually marching along the chain of Westernization I was dealing with reactionary uprisings literally constantly, a new rebellion would start before the last bunch of rebels was dead. I had been conquering to gain research points but had to stop and just wait to build up RP for the last reform normally, because my entire army was tied up playing whack-a-mole with hundreds of thousands of pissed-off reactionaries. Yeah, while playing as Japan, the road to Westernization was paved with endless revolts. They pretty much ground to a halt the moment I Westernized, though.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 16:18
|
|
|
I'm trying to get into Darkest Hour, having played as Germany from 1933 to the end of my Spanish Civil War in 1937. My biggest trouble is I'm a min/maxer and it's hard to judge what are good decisions. I'm wondering about a couple of things: * Any good mods that won't kick my rear end and add lots of historical events and decisions? I really like those but I'm relatively inexperienced in HoI games and I'm afraid these mods jump the difficulty level too high. I've conquered France a couple of times, finished the Spanish Civil War in a year, but never could bring myself to bring a campaign against the Soviets to completion, so I'm probably mediocre at best. * When should I build what and how much approximately? For example, how long should I be building IC? When should I expand my army, my air force and my navy? Are infrastructure/AA/Radars worth a drat? Any penalty in keeping those in the deployable queue? * Should I focus on multiple types of fighters, bombers, etc? * Any diplomatic/espionage/decisions/events actions I should work towards? I've been doing "invest in national research" a lot, but I'm unsure if its really worth it.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 16:44
|
|
|
I'm playing as Belgium and I'm trying to whittle down the Netherlands. I managed to annex their southern state (I forget the name), but now whenever I justify and declare a war to annex their northern areas the war keeps ending in a white peace before I've even had a chance to raise my warscore a great deal. I have France as an ally and I'm using them to absolutely crush the Netherlands/Spain/Luxemburg alliance, and I think this may have something to do with it? I get that because they are a great power they get privilages to negotiate peace for the whole alliance, but I'm getting sick of declaring war then them just deciding to call it a white peace within a few weeks in-game.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Picked up Victoria 2 (w/ AHD & HoD) a few weeks ago and have been learning the basics (coming from playing a lot of Ricky years ago). I had a solid run with westernizing Japan and overrunning Asia but when I made the jump to Prussia I realized there is a lot about the game I was missing, especially with regards to manipulating politics to my advantage. For Prussia my general goal is 'most massive Germany possible'. Specifically I want to try and keep the Absolute Monarchy in power for as long as possible, mainly because the Reactionary Party (with State Capitalism and Jingoism) seems like such a powerful tool for industrialization and conquest (also gently caress the capitalist pops' ability to make good factory building decisions). That said what are the best ways for keeping this type of government in power indefinitely? As of now I try to get the 2% Clergy bonus ASAP (as I read this can combat the increase of consciousness tied to pop literacy), avoid any political reforms whatsoever (especially those allowing any further freedom of press), and drive up taxes/tariffs to 100% across the board (again since I read that access to luxury goods triggers pops to accumulate consciousness). I've gathered in general that militancy is my friend while consciousnesses/plurality are my banes. But what else? Are some of the cultural technologies best avoided since they inevitably shoot plurality through the roof? Generally I bleed off militancy as it accumulates with social reforms (healthcare & education), but does this just create a feedback loop with pop consciousness and desire for political reforms only increasing the chance the Absolute Monarchy will be driven from power? Event decisions during the Liberal Awakening strike me as particularly opaque. Specifically: 1) I choose anything that gives an instantaneous rise to militancy and consciousness over those which apply a ticking accumulation to consciousness. Is this the best long term path to minimizing consciousness gain? 2) In events which covert percentages of the population directly to the liberal party I tend to choose the options which act only on one state/province directly (for a higher % gain) than those which affect entire strata of the population. Again, I'm not sure if this is the best choice in the long run. Also I'm worried about some long term unclear economic consequences from running State Capitalism: 1) Does State Capitalism retard the conversion rate of populations to craftsman even if the factory is profitable or forced open via subsidizing? Does the fact that a factory is subsidized influence the pop's "choice" to become craftsman of that factory, even if profitable? 2) Once I subsidize a factory does that 'cut off' a capitalist pop from profiting off it even if it is running in the green? Lastly, even with the most 'ideal' manipulation of politics will the rolling back of political reforms (like turning the upper house to appointed party only) ever be possible?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
If you want to stay as Reactionary in an Absolute Monarchy, all you have to do is never change from No Voting to Landed Only. That's really the only thing you need to worry about: as long as you're No Voting, it doesn't matter what the people think. EDIT: Feel free to pass other reforms if militancy gets high enough. The Union ones are good because they channel public reform desire into Social Reforms rather than Political Reforms, and even for the most reactionary state, Healthcare and Education reforms are OP must gets. :bismarck:
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
France agreed to the Franco-British union rather than surrender to Germany in my Darkest Hour game:  e: No mods, just used the command panel at the start to force USA to release CSA at the start of the scenario, then reloaded as the Confederates for fun. Ofaloaf fucked around with this message at 19:08 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
Would it be possible to create different categories for tariffs? It would be a godsend to be able to subsidy raw materials to the industry and tax consumer goods, for instance. Also, I would like to know better about how you guys manually manage the economy. Patter Song said he beat France's with Belgium, so I am very curious about that...
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
Holy poo poo almost finished my first NNM France game. Highlights: -Crazyness with UK breaking up then entirely turning into "Canada" then "Canada" losing a war with the USA and having to release England. -CSA surviving to the end of the game due to US economy absolutely failing for some reason (10 industrial score by 1880's). USA is finally #2 industrial nation by 1910 though. -France, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales repeatedly beating the poo poo out of England until I had totally annexed it. -Two massive great wars between France and its allies, Austro-Hungary, and Russia vs North Germans and Prussia (yes they existed independently) resulting in the german speaking world being a fractured mess and no threat to anyone. -Suddenly around the turn of the century going form almost no colonial immigration to massive amounts, resulting in a French-majority north-west africa. -A fully united and independent India becoming a great power by the turn of the century due to being released very early by a failed UK. -China absolutely making GBS threads the bed and falling apart then failing to westerize and generally be picked on by Japan, India, the USA, and Russia. At the end of the day France has a 3000+ score while the next great powers all have in the 900-600 range. An insane run-away game for France.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:If you follow the chain of replies back it actually does all start with over-production. Shouldn't they import goods if you've got subsidies to make imported goods cheaper than local ones?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I'm playing as Belgium and I'm trying to whittle down the Netherlands. I managed to annex their southern state (I forget the name), but now whenever I justify and declare a war to annex their northern areas the war keeps ending in a white peace before I've even had a chance to raise my warscore a great deal. I have France as an ally and I'm using them to absolutely crush the Netherlands/Spain/Luxemburg alliance, and I think this may have something to do with it? I get that because they are a great power they get privilages to negotiate peace for the whole alliance, but I'm getting sick of declaring war then them just deciding to call it a white peace within a few weeks in-game. Yes, that's the problem. If you call in a more powerful ally, they become the war leader and can negotiate their own terms to end the entire war. Obviously France has no interest in you acquiring more Dutch lands. If you want it, you're going to have to do it alone. That shouldn't really be an issue for you, since the only country you should have to worry about is Spain, and they'll have to boat all their troops up to you.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Yes, that's the problem. If you call in a more powerful ally, they become the war leader and can negotiate their own terms to end the entire war. Obviously France has no interest in you acquiring more Dutch lands. If you want it, you're going to have to do it alone. That shouldn't really be an issue for you, since the only country you should have to worry about is Spain, and they'll have to boat all their troops up to you. That would be the case if Prussia hadn't just allied themselves with the Netherlands...sigh. Also, somehow the UK got involved in my last attempt. I have no idea why.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:e: No mods, just used the command panel at the start to force USA to release CSA at the start of the scenario, then reloaded as the Confederates for fun. Wait, the Confederacy can exist in Darkest Hour? How do they come about? ThomasPaine posted:That would be the case if Prussia hadn't just allied themselves with the Netherlands...sigh. Also, somehow the UK got involved in my last attempt. I have no idea why. A great power can intervene to protect a nation that has a "Friendly" opinion of it, but is not in its sphere. Farecoal fucked around with this message at 20:59 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
Kalenden posted:I'm trying to get into Darkest Hour, having played as Germany from 1933 to the end of my Spanish Civil War in 1937. Kaiserreich is the best mod for Darkest Hour (it's an alternative history mod looking at how World War 2 might have been if Germany had won World War 1) but I have heard good things about World In Flames 2 if you're into real history instead. quote:I've conquered France a couple of times, finished the Spanish Civil War in a year, but never could bring myself to bring a campaign against the Soviets to completion, so I'm probably mediocre at best. IC takes about five years to "pay for itself", and you generally want to be building units while at war, so I don't usually bother building any at all unless I've nothing better to do. Submarines are cheap as chips, the 1933 model is basically the same as the 1937 model, so those should probably be the first things you build. If you want to break the Royal Navy, sixty submarines in two 30-boat fleets will sink anything you meet. (except heavy cruisers on their own, which are curiously immune) Make sure you give them the overpowered torpedo attachment. Don't bother with a surface fleet - subs escort your transports just fine. Planes you probably shouldn't build until you've got at least the 1937 models - upgrades are expensive. Motorised infantry are a good choice to build as soon as you can, but tanks go through a lot of models between 1933 and 1939. Leave them late - ideally until you get the first medium armour model, which is researched in 1939. Infrastructure is pretty worthless. It makes units go faster, and causes buildings in the province to repair faster. Since the only provinces you care about being damaged are your home provinces, and they're all at like 90% already, there's no real reason to build infrastructure for repair bonuses. Likewise, you don't really want units going faster in your territory, since it'll speed up an enemy advance, so don't bother with it. AA seems to damage planes a little, but not nearly enough to stop them. The IC is better spent on planes. RADAR stations reduce the damage opposing planes do, curiously enough. Again, though, the IC is better spent on planes. If you leave things in your deployables queue, it costs you transport capacity, so it makes your units perform worse in combat. quote:* Should I focus on multiple types of fighters, bombers, etc? Generally speaking, no. Interceptors are the best unit for clearing the air of the enemy, so use those. Tactical bombers with escort fighters are a good workhorse bomber - able to take a bit of a beating from enemy planes, unlike CAS. CAS hit very hard, though. I'd say you have three options to go for as far as the airforce is concerned: 1. Interceptors plus tactical bombers with escorts. 2. Interceptors plus CAS. 3. Fighters only. Fighters can fulfil all missions and fight well even if intercepted. quote:* Any diplomatic/espionage/decisions/events actions I should work towards? I've been doing "invest in national research" a lot, but I'm unsure if its really worth it. I normally like to do "Purge of the army" if I can afford the dissent. The "diplomatic campaign" decision pre-war Germany gets is great as well - helps you get other nations into the Axis quickly. With Germany you basically want to learn whenever you're about to trigger an event that lowers your dissent, then get the most out of that event. For instance, if you're about to fire the Munich Agreement (-10% dissent if I remember right), you might as well fire all sorts of conscription events, purge the army, and swap your ministers around beforehand. You want to minimise your time spent building consumer goods to lower your dissent, so you can spend that IC on troops. Finally, keep Germany as Free Market as possible. The bonuses for Central Planning are off-set by a horrible penalty to upgrade time and cost.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:A great power can intervene to protect a nation that has a "Friendly" opinion of it, but is not in its sphere. GPs can also intervene in the wars of their sphered countries. Otherwise what's the point? You can, conceivably, avoid having a GP intervene in a war, though. GPs can only intervene if the country they'd be intervening on behalf of hasn't set any wargoals yet, and if the country is losing. So theoretically, if you declare war on the Netherlands and then purposely throw the war until they set a wargoal, the UK would never be able to intervene.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 21:30
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:GPs can also intervene in the wars of their sphered countries. Otherwise what's the point? Another thing you could do, but one that's a bit harder, is to join in with the UK in another war, then declare on the Netherlands. Though this only lasts as long as the first war does.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 21:41
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:GPs can also intervene in the wars of their sphered countries. Otherwise what's the point? Actually, this is something I appreciate in Victoria II; the ability to find your opening and really take advantage of a country being distracted. In EU3, it always felt like such a gamble, where you declaring war on a weakened foe could see a war that was absolutely not going in their favor being white peaced away for no drat reason. In Victoria II, a war is at least likely to gently caress with their ability to retaliate effectively, giving you enough time to at least complete limited goals. A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 21:51 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
I'm really liking the newt HoD beta patch Darkrenown/Wiz! I was wondering about something though, and i want to clarify that i know gently caress all about programming AI's. Would it not work to make it so that if the AI has available ports and a strong economy that they should always 100% of the time start building up enough transport ships to be able to at least transport a good amount of It's army across the world if it needs to? If certain factors like X amount of money and ports are there, the AI BY GOD MUST/WILL build a bunch of transports. So frustrating to watch for example 80k French troops stationed in north Africa standing there unable to get home while French provinces are being capped in Europe. Edit: Fixed! Pooned fucked around with this message at 22:33 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
Pooned posted:I'm really liking the newt HoD beta patch Darkrenown! I was wondering about something though, and i want to clarify that i know gently caress all about programming AI's. I know you addressed Darkrenown, but AI is my department so I'll take this one. Basically, the AI as coded right now is absolutely supposed to have a certain amount of transports, and I'm honestly unsure what's causing the absence of fleets midgame. I plan to look into it before we finalize the beta patch. Mind you, it's entirely possible the AI *has* the transports but isn't bringing its troops home anyway, because the military AI is pretty bad at strategic planning... that part isn't something we can fix in a beta patch.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
I'm sure having people/me who have zero experience giving you "advice" on how to fix your game can be pretty annoying, so thanks for taking the time to respond. The game is a lot of fun right now, having a blast!
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 22:40
|
|
|
Pooned posted:I'm sure having people/me who have zero experience with something giving you "advice" on how to fix your game can be pretty annoying, so thanks for taking the time to respond. The game is a lot of fun right now, having a blast! Nah, you don't have to know how to make a game to provide input to the devs. Sometimes it can get a little silly (guy on Paradox forums who suggested I code a self-learning AI in order to save development time comes to mind), but I honestly appreciate any and all input because even with testing and betas, there will always be problems that aren't caught until a title is released and thousands of people start playing it, and in my experience this is the general stance of Paradox as well.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Nah, you don't have to know how to make a game to provide input to the devs. Sometimes it can get a little silly (guy on Paradox forums who suggested I code a self-learning AI in order to save development time comes to mind), but I honestly appreciate any and all input because even with testing and betas, there will always be problems that aren't caught until a title is released and thousands of people start playing it, and in my experience this is the general stance of Paradox as well. 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 23:02
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:It would help though, wouldn't it? Help Wiz, or help the field of artificial intelligence leap forward 20 years or so? Do it Wiz, take one for the team and make an AI that can learn and code itself, if you get the time  .
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:Help Wiz, or help the field of artificial intelligence leap forward 20 years or so? Hmm a learning AI designed to play grand strategy games god help us if it goes rogue.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
Rumda posted:Hmm a learning AI designed to play grand strategy games god help us if it goes rogue. President Putin, Skynet has offered to bind our two nations with a royal marriage. What is your response?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Wait, the Confederacy can exist in Darkest Hour? How do they come about? They're a releasable country, yes. I released them (and California and Texas, but then I acceptall/demand territory re-annexed them) by starting off as USA at the 1933 start and then firing event 2049048 with a console command. 2049048's supposed to fire only if the US is horribly beaten in a war by Japan or the USSR, but that never happens.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 00:05
|
|
|
Rumda posted:Hmm a learning AI designed to play grand strategy games god help us if it goes rogue. ParadoxNet launches all its nukes at Nepal, and repeatedly marches its Terminator armies back and forth between L.A. and San Diego while demanding the unconditional surrender of all Mankind. After two years it surrenders and cedes its servers to Luxembourg.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:President Putin, Stop looking at the sky!
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:ParadoxNet launches all its nukes at Nepal, and repeatedly marches its Terminator armies back and forth between L.A. and San Diego while demanding the unconditional surrender of all Mankind. After two years it surrenders and cedes its servers to Luxembourg. When all warfare is computerized in the future, this is what it's going to be like.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 00:25
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Nah, you don't have to know how to make a game to provide input to the devs. Sometimes it can get a little silly (guy on Paradox forums who suggested I code a self-learning AI in order to save development time comes to mind), but I honestly appreciate any and all input because even with testing and betas, there will always be problems that aren't caught until a title is released and thousands of people start playing it, and in my experience this is the general stance of Paradox as well. In the same thread, another fellow advocates, well, see for yourself. Paradox Forums posted:In my opinion it might be fun to put human in a condition of informational disadvantage. The player has still the possibility to win by intuition and chance, but that way victory becomes a satisfying achievement, not a boring mechanical routine. It's worth pointing out that he mentions later that he personally never saves except to pick up the game again later - he advocates always-on ironman because he feels that a majority of players will enjoy the game more if they played like he does, and that they would ultimately be grateful for being forced to play that way and thereby be challenged by the game.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 00:29
|
|
|
Tomn posted:In the same thread, another fellow advocates, well, see for yourself.  On the topic of "self-learning AI", I imagine the dude meant something absurd like running a full-on genetic algorithm cycle instead of coding even the most basic empire-management rules. But now it makes me wonder if there might not be a useful purpose for some very basic machine learning in EU and possibly Vicky: creating a sort of "national memory" and character. That is, if [Country] takes [Decision] and that is followed by a period of success / decline (doesn't have to be actually related!), [Country]'s AI will be irrationally predisposed towards / against taking similar decisions for a few generations. E.g. "Since we sided with Martin Luther [in the Reformation event] things have gone to poo poo [Stability much lower, smaller territory, etc.]! drat those monks! [Result: -100 to any pro-religion decisions, +25% chance to convert away from Protestantism]".
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:President Putin, The AI resolved that the only way to have the prettiest borders, was to conquer the whole world. That is how WW3 started.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 01:09
|
|
|
Rumda posted:Hmm a learning AI designed to play grand strategy games god help us if it goes rogue. It's like it's really WarGames!
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
edit: Gah, wrong thread. Sorry guys.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
Tomn posted:In the same thread, another fellow advocates, well, see for yourself. I save-scum generally when I gently caress up a game mechanic thing. I'll declare war on the Ottomans in EUIII and get stuck in a long war, they draw in allies who are in the rear end end of africa and unable to help and when the white peace notices come in I expect Ottomans to be the lead nation and somehow bumfuck African Nation negotiates for the entire Alliance. Even though it says what is going on it's such an out in left field proposition for a single province nation to be in charge of an Empire in war that I don't even glance at the terms of white peace.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
YouTuber posted:I save-scum generally when I gently caress up a game mechanic thing. Just like in X-Com Enemy Unknown, a game-enforced ironman mode would suck whenever it fouls up through no fault of your own. My first attempt at forming Germany ended up with Austria, Bavaria and all the principalities forming the German Empire, but without Prussia 
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 02:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:57 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:My first attempt at forming Germany ended up with Austria, Bavaria and all the principalities forming the German Empire, but without Prussia I kind of want to see that. An Austria-led Germany without Prussia in it is a nice reversal of Prussia-led Germany without Austria.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 02:27
|
|