Paradox Grand Strategy: From the Carnival of Lust to the Enlightened Times

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Paradox Grand Strategy: From the Carnival of Lust to the Enlightened Times

«‹›799 »

DrSunshine: Mar 23, 2009; Did I just say that out loud~~?!!!

DStecks posted:

I'm sorry for freaking out, guys. I'm... unwell... right now. I should have dropped it as soon as I started getting mad. I apologize.

That's okay. At least it started us thinking and talking about the way the military system worked, and that's fine. :glomp:

# ? Jan 7, 2014 07:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 29, 2024 08:18

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

BBJoey posted:

Yes please. I mean, it's possible to let the AI take control of all your armies in the wargame of the series, why can I not do the same in the less combat-focused games?

The way they structured the AI-handover system where you have to arrange units according to Front -> Army -> Corps -> Division says to me that realism/theme might have been a part of it - they put it in HOI but not in other games because communications and doctrine had evolved to the point where such organization was possible by then, but not in any other timeframe covered by the earlier games, even if an AI-handover would be better in EU/Victoria from a gameplay perspective.

Don Gato posted:

Isn't this one of the features that a lot of people complain about when talking about HoI3? On top of the ahistorical WW2, the thousands of provinces, the extreme complexity etc etc.

In a vacuum, giving the player an option to let the AI control his armies isn't a bad thing - it's only bad in the context of everything else that HOI does such that it's practically mandatory just to be able to play the game at a decent pace. The horrible AI on release also played a part in wrecking the perception of the system, even if not directly related to feature's usefulness in and of itself.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 07:38

Tomn: Aug 23, 2007; And the angel said unto him
"Stop hitting yourself. Stop hitting yourself."
But lo he could not. For the angel was hitting him with his own hands

gradenko_2000 posted:

The way they structured the AI-handover system where you have to arrange units according to Front -> Army -> Corps -> Division says to me that realism/theme might have been a part of it - they put it in HOI but not in other games because communications and doctrine had evolved to the point where such organization was possible by then, but not in any other timeframe covered by the earlier games, even if an AI-handover would be better in EU/Victoria from a gameplay perspective.

One might argue that a realistic take on command and control in pre-modern eras would basically be giving your army to the nearest general and hoping he doesn't gently caress it all up when he heads out, perfectly justifying (nay, requiring!) AI control of your armies. :haw:

# ? Jan 7, 2014 08:20

uPen: Jan 25, 2010; Zu Rodina!

Tomn posted:

One might argue that a realistic take on command and control in pre-modern eras would basically be giving your army to the nearest general and hoping he doesn't gently caress it all up when he heads out, perfectly justifying (nay, requiring!) AI control of your armies.

This would accurately reflect the King/Emperor/Player's army being loving badass while his second cousin twice removed is off losing thousands of men.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 08:23

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

ThePutty posted:

I remember the combat in Vic 1 being a pretty decent compromise between complexity and simplicity, I might be wrong though. As far as EU4 goes, it's pretty fine, but I think games like Vic 2 really should have had a more expanded combat system.

Victoria 1's combat was functionally the same as Victoria 2's combat: March stacks into provinces, winner comes out victorious. Key differences were:
- a Manpower system more reminiscent of HOI and IMO worked better than V2 brigades being tied directly to the source soldier POP
- manual replacements; not necessarily a UI-only failing given the nature of the Manpower system since ordering up replacements depletes soldier POPs
- none of Clausewitz's "combat width, shock-and-fire phase" combat system, AFAIK, and the way the STR/ORG levels worked out you had to order retreats manually or face total evaporation of your brigades
- forts were a lot tougher and as a result Great Wars turned out somewhat more like WWI if the battle lines were drawn accordingly

Tomn posted:

One might argue that a realistic take on command and control in pre-modern eras would basically be giving your army to the nearest general and hoping he doesn't gently caress it all up when he heads out, perfectly justifying (nay, requiring!) AI control of your armies.

Good point; Victoria 2 deserves its Grand Duke Nicholas vs Conrad von Hotzendorf DLC

# ? Jan 7, 2014 08:44

Rogue0071: Dec 8, 2009; Grey Hunter's next target.

gradenko_2000 posted:

Victoria 1's combat was functionally the same as Victoria 2's combat: March stacks into provinces, winner comes out victorious. Key differences were:
- a Manpower system more reminiscent of HOI and IMO worked better than V2 brigades being tied directly to the source soldier POP
- manual replacements; not necessarily a UI-only failing given the nature of the Manpower system since ordering up replacements depletes soldier POPs
- none of Clausewitz's "combat width, shock-and-fire phase" combat system, AFAIK, and the way the STR/ORG levels worked out you had to order retreats manually or face total evaporation of your brigades
- forts were a lot tougher and as a result Great Wars turned out somewhat more like WWI if the battle lines were drawn accordingly

Good point; Victoria 2 deserves its Grand Duke Nicholas vs Conrad von Hotzendorf DLC

There were also two ways to make manually reinforcing armies quick and easy, and one of them was an unintuitive button and the other was hidden in a menu. Discovering those made reinforcing armies much, much less tedious.

Late game armies with lots of artillery would deal extremely high amounts of damage, making WW1-era combat actually feature battles as deadly as the Somme or the Italian offensives on the Isonzo.

Forts functioned fundamentally differently in V1 than V2, in V1 they were not primarily about sieges but rather about giving bonuses to armies defending the provinces that they were in. The higher level forts were also quite expensive, so you tended to have a very strong front line of forts with a weaker back line.

E: Clicking on the fist would reinforce the entire army; the other options were using one of the ledger pages on an army basis or reinforcing each individual division through a series of clicks. It took me like two months to realize that that was a button.

Rogue0071 fucked around with this message at 09:16 on Jan 7, 2014

# ? Jan 7, 2014 09:05

Riso: Oct 11, 2008; by merry exmarx

DStecks posted:

Also, sorry Riso, but I guess I'm not planning on contributing to Sengoku any more.

Three weeks later I am still waiting on those ideas!

# ? Jan 7, 2014 09:15

Darkrenown: Jul 18, 2012; please give me anything to talk about besides the fact that democrats are allowing millions of americans to be evicted from their homes

Dibujante posted:

Historical railroading was fun for a few playthroughs (there were some amazing modpacks that fleshed things out even more) but it killed replayability.

True story: My first ever Paradox game was EU2 and I first played as Austria. The event where you're forced to give all your western provinces to Spain was what got me into modding, I was super mad about it and wanted to find a way to undo it. I like EUIV's way of doing it, if you meet the right triggers you get an event and some historical blurb about the real event.

Necroneocon posted:

If your next game is a new HOI, just make a really, really, really, really, REALLY, REALLY, good tutorial and maybe even a starter scenario.

Also i'm sorry you have to deal with racists and crazies on your forums.

edit: Often times I check the LP subforum on HOI3 for a tutorial LP and it's just... well people roleplaying. I always wanted to really give HOI3 a try but there aren't any tutorial LPs with the latest expansions, whereas you have good ones for CK2, EU4 and Vicky2.

Next HoI needs to have Uncle Joe narrating it. Teaching you how to play will be ditched in favour of puns "Quit Stalin and click that menu!" "You can't advance until you get full Marx in this section!"

On a more serious note, have you seen the tutorial videos here?
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?599501-Hearts-of-Iron-3-FTM-Video-Tutorials-%28WIP%29

Speaking of tutorials, did people like the MotE/EUIV tutorials?

Necroneocon posted:

Darkrenown if you're still reading this thread, for April Fools, force-release a patch that gives your games ugly borders. I would get much joy from the anger.

That is all you ever want, you are cruel!

Dibujante posted:

Darkrenown please save us from shitposts with more quotations of idiot flamewars from the other forums

quote:

Guys I strongly "believe" now that it is simply johan being angry that this game is getting more attention on the forums then EUIV!

Thrust me when I say we should all wait for an official response for BI-logic! (not johan, not BI) that will probably settle most of our doubts!

If you share my point of view then I am sure you won't be disappointed, more I cannot say.

gradenko_2000 posted:

Johan/Darkrenown please put in Cryptocurrency as a Secret Tech tech in HOI4 TIA

I could honestly see Podcat doing this, I hope he doesn't see your post :ssh:

uPen posted:

e: Seriously I play WitP for fun

By the way, I have been reading your WitE LP recently, and while I wonder what is wrong with you that allows you to play it, I enjoy reading about it!

# ? Jan 7, 2014 09:53

Alchenar: Apr 9, 2008

I have many things to say about what's wrong with HOI3 and not nearly so many solutions but as far as the AI generals goes I think the concept is actually solid, the problem is that the AI isn't 'clever' enough by half. The behaviour it produces is just broad-scale offensive shoving matches where the larger/more powerful army wins. It doesn't understand that it should use the OOB to establish a coherent frontline (ie. divisions in a corps should be adjacent to each other). It doesn't understand how to mass forces to create breakthroughs and local offensives. Combat delay effectively makes fast moving offensives impossible.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 11:15

fuck off Batman: Oct 14, 2013; Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah!

gradenko_2000 posted:

Johan/Darkrenown please put in Cryptocurrency as a Secret Tech tech in HOI4 TIA

Ok, the cost of building this factory will be 50 HoIcoins. Now you can pay us...wait, it is 100 now...150...250...now it is 30 eh gently caress it, gimme 10 bux and we'll call it even.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 13:47

Orange Devil: Oct 1, 2010; Wullie's reign cannae smother the flames o' equality!

uPen posted:

More shocking than no MP is that the game is over 6 months out from release, goddamn.

Paradox throwing good money after bad.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 14:09

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Darkrenown posted:

Speaking of tutorials, did people like the MotE/EUIV tutorials?

The EUIV one was helpful, but it felt kinda like it maybe had too many parts?
I guess you can't really make a tutorial level in your kind of game...

# ? Jan 7, 2014 14:27

QuoProQuid: Jan 12, 2012; Tr*ckin' and F*ckin' all the way to tha
T O P

DrSunshine posted:

The "Form [X]" decision should be there. Zip up your save file and lemme take a look.

Sorry, I haven't been checking this thread recently and did not see you had replied. I can still send you my save file if you want.

DrSunshine posted:

How about decoupling army movement and other considerations like that from provinces, and making provinces just important for administrative and economic things? Then you could have wars lining up on fronts and whatnot, with terrain being the primary factor since the armies would be represented as freely-moving "blobs" rather than individual units.

Looking at the decision again: one of the requirements for forming the Great Lakes Union is that the USA does not also exist. Is there a United States nation anywhere?

Yeah, rebels popped up in Maryland and re-established the United States in Washington. I'll think that I'll just have to remove it from Empire's sphere and conquer it.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 14:36

Westminster System: Jul 4, 2009

I dont see any form X decisions for anyone - though all the cores are there and this often leads to weird rebel nations, rebellions overthrowing a rump one province alabama and establishing the CSA etc.

Also, United Virginia y r u so stronk?

With Virginia becoming a GP so fast and sphereing all its neighbours and getting all its cores - sans Delaware which I happened to Sphere first - its a nightmare. Obviously when UV came for the rest of Maryland and all I had was a motley crew of New England States to fend off Virginia + the entire midwest and all its bordering nations, I basically just surrendered when the first stack of 300 stomped its way into Pennsylvania.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 18:53

DrSunshine: Mar 23, 2009; Did I just say that out loud~~?!!!

QuoProQuid posted:

Sorry, I haven't been checking this thread recently and did not see you had replied. I can still send you my save file if you want.

Yeah, rebels popped up in Maryland and re-established the United States in Washington. I'll think that I'll just have to remove it from Empire's sphere and conquer it.

Please do! It'll save me the trouble of running the game and building up to GP status and all that.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 19:27

ExtraNoise: Apr 11, 2007

Westminster System posted:

I dont see any form X decisions for anyone - though all the cores are there and this often leads to weird rebel nations, rebellions overthrowing a rump one province alabama and establishing the CSA etc.

Also, United Virginia y r u so stronk?

With Virginia becoming a GP so fast and sphereing all its neighbours and getting all its cores - sans Delaware which I happened to Sphere first - its a nightmare. Obviously when UV came for the rest of Maryland and all I had was a motley crew of New England States to fend off Virginia + the entire midwest and all its bordering nations, I basically just surrendered when the first stack of 300 stomped its way into Pennsylvania.

Thanks for this report. I'm actually surprised to see United Virginia so strong again - I thought I had balanced it out so that it wouldn't go on murder-sprees. Though perhaps it is balanced and UV just got lucky in your game.

Is that the United States in most of Georgia?

# ? Jan 7, 2014 20:05

ThatBasqueGuy: Feb 14, 2013; someone introduce jojo to lazyb

In the mod, does everyone get the insane new world immigration rates, thus leading to a more depopulated old world?

# ? Jan 7, 2014 20:27

mmtt: May 8, 2009

Can anyone recommend me some good tutorial AARs on the other forum? I can't be bothered to sift through all the I'm-a-serious-author crap and the supposedly hilariously funny ones. Work can be a bit boring and I have read all Kersch stuff here. Would appreciate it, goons.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 20:46

RabidWeasel: Aug 4, 2007; Cultures thrive on their myths and legends...and snuggles!

ThatBasqueGuy posted:

In the mod, does everyone get the insane new world immigration rates, thus leading to a more depopulated old world?

I don't think it works that way, I think pops basically decide "gently caress it I want to emigrate" and then choose a destination based on reforms / government type.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 20:59

ThatBasqueGuy: Feb 14, 2013; someone introduce jojo to lazyb

RabidWeasel posted:

I don't think it works that way, I think pops basically decide "gently caress it I want to emigrate" and then choose a destination based on reforms / government type.

It does, but I think that having a bunch of separate democracies to go to helps draw out those who would be more borderline. Or I don't know what I'm talking about.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:01

uPen: Jan 25, 2010; Zu Rodina!

Darkrenown posted:

By the way, I have been reading your WitE LP recently, and while I wonder what is wrong with you that allows you to play it, I enjoy reading about it!

It's a very fun game once you get over the scale of it, you just need to mentally compartmentalize it so the scale doesn't overwhelm you. WitW is going to be coming out later this year with a reworked weather/naval/air system and is looking to be incredible since the air system is one of the biggest failings of WitE.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:03

Westminster System: Jul 4, 2009

ExtraNoise posted:

Thanks for this report. I'm actually surprised to see United Virginia so strong again - I thought I had balanced it out so that it wouldn't go on murder-sprees. Though perhaps it is balanced and UV just got lucky in your game.

Is that the United States in most of Georgia?

Yes, UV came in like a wrecking ball early on in the game after Georgia's first war and beat up Georgia who had annexed most of Alabama - liberating the US from Georgia itself, whilst Georgia ate a rump CSA and went into Florida. ~ALTHISTORY~

I'd recommend removing all the US cores and making that a decision - Indeed, all the Union Cores might want to not be assigned except through decision, given that the wonkiness - as seen in Illinois, leads to them being made randomly and with little sense to them. Though I perfectly understand if you're just waiting on someone elses event coding.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:05

binge crotching: Apr 2, 2010

Defeatist Elitist posted:

Yes my intention is to hopefully make it it ~~actually playable~~ not quite as visionary.

edit: Also the idea is it would replace tech group tech rate differences. And the events would be fairly infrequent and unlikely to trigger in, say, normal European circumstances.

One thing you could do is just make it a lot easier for the AI to Westernise. I never really got into eu4, but I spent more than 2k hours playing eu3, and one of the best changes I ever made was to make it very easy for the AI to migrate to the Western tech group.

As an example, here is my AI Westernization decision for the Nomad/Indian/Chinese/Sub-Sahara/New World tech groups:

code:

	ai_rotw_westernisation = {
		potential = {
			or = {
				technology_group = sub_saharan
				technology_group = new_world
				technology_group = indian
				technology_group = chinese
				technology_group = nomad_group
			}
			ai = yes
			year = 1450
		}
		allow = {
			any_known_country = {
				or = {
					technology_group = western
					technology_group = eastern
					technology_group = ottoman
					technology_group = muslim
				}
			}
			stability = 3
			not = { has_country_modifier = western_influences }
			not = { has_country_modifier = action_and_reaction }
		}
		effect = {
			set_country_flag = hidden_tooltip
			random_owned = {
				limit = {
					owner = { has_country_flag = hidden_tooltip }
					technology_group = sub_saharan
				}
				set_country_flag = muslim_from_sub_saharan
			}
			random_owned = {
				limit = {
					owner = { has_country_flag = hidden_tooltip }
					technology_group = new_world
				}
				set_country_flag = muslim_from_new_world
			}
			random_owned = {
				limit = {
					owner = { has_country_flag = hidden_tooltip }
					technology_group = indian
				}
				set_country_flag = muslim_from_indian
			}
			random_owned = {
				limit = {
					owner = { has_country_flag = hidden_tooltip }
					technology_group = chinese
				}
				set_country_flag = muslim_from_chinese
			}
			random_owned = {
				limit = {
					owner = { has_country_flag = hidden_tooltip }
					technology_group = nomad_group
				}
				set_country_flag = muslim_from_nomad_group
			}
			clr_country_flag = hidden_tooltip
			technology_group = muslim
			random_owned = {
				base_tax = 1
				change_manpower = 1
			}
			innovative_narrowminded = -1
			centralization_decentralization = -1
			stability = -5
			remove_faction = temples
			remove_faction = bureaucrats
			remove_faction = enuchs			
			add_country_modifier = {
				name = "western_influences"
				duration = 18250
			}
		}
		ai_will_do = {
			factor = 1
		}
		ai_importance = 600
	}

And then I also made it very easy for the AI to also reform their troops at any level:

code:

	ai_military_modernization_muslim = {
		potential = {
			technology_group = muslim
			not = {
				or = {
					unit_type = muslim
					unit_type = western
					unit_type = eastern
					unit_type = ottoman
				}
			}
			ai = yes
		}
		allow = {
			stability = 3
			not = { has_country_modifier = action_and_reaction }
		}
		effect = {
			unit_type = muslim
			stability = -6
			add_country_modifier = {
				name = "action_and_reaction"
				duration = 730
			}
			remove_country_modifier = "western_influences"
			clr_country_flag = muslim_from_sub_saharan
			clr_country_flag = muslim_from_new_world
			clr_country_flag = muslim_from_indian
			clr_country_flag = muslim_from_chinese
			clr_country_flag = muslim_from_nomad_group
		}
		ai_will_do = {
			factor = 1
		}
		ai_importance = 500
	}

I also made it so that even if the AI doesn't Westernize, they aren't completely screwed as far as tech levels go, by using the slow_limit modifier in common/technology.txt:

code:

groups = {
	nomad_group = {
		modifier = 0.1
		start_level = 11
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 1.0
		slow_limit = 17
	}
	western = {
		modifier = 1.0
		start_level = 4
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 0.5
	}
	eastern = {
		modifier = 0.85
		start_level = 8
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 0.6
		slow_limit = 33
	}
	ottoman = {
		modifier = 0.8
		start_level = 8
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 0.6
		slow_limit = 33
	}
	muslim = {
		modifier = 0.7
		start_level = 7
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 0.8
		slow_limit = 30
	}
	indian = {
		modifier = 0.5
		start_level = 6
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 0.6
		slow_limit = 25
	}
	chinese = {
		modifier = 0.4
		start_level = 5
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 0.3
		slow_limit = 25
	}
	sub_saharan = {
		modifier = 0.2
		start_level = 4
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 0.4
		slow_limit = 25
	}
	new_world = {
		modifier = 0.1
		start_level = 3
		cav_to_inf_ratio = 0.8
		slow_limit = 25
	}
}

(I also made hordes stupidly powerful at the start, which was fun to watch)

Basically, all of this just makes it so that by the 1600s, the entire AI world is in the Western tech group. Not at all historical, but it makes for a much more enjoyable game IMO.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:08

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Actual Victoria 2 gameplay question: Are there any guidelines to fleet composition and/or ideal number of ships in a stack?

Also, are you supposed to go from Man-o-War to (pre-Dreadnought) Battleships? All of the other ships (Monitor, Commerce Raider) don't seem like they're supposed to be main fleet units.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:08

Shimrra Jamaane: Aug 10, 2007; Obscure to all except those well-versed in Yuuzhan Vong lore.

uPen posted:

It's a very fun game once you get over the scale of it, you just need to mentally compartmentalize it so the scale doesn't overwhelm you. WitW is going to be coming out later this year with a reworked weather/naval/air system and is looking to be incredible since the air system is one of the biggest failings of WitE.

Holy poo poo, actual screenshots from WitW. Are those newly released? Also why does the map include all of Russia west of the Urals if it's focusing on the West?

Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Jan 7, 2014

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:14

uPen: Jan 25, 2010; Zu Rodina!

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

Holy poo poo, actual screenshots from WitW. Are those newly released? Also why does the map include all of Russia west of the Urals if it's focusing on the West?

Because after WitW 43-45 they're doing 41-42 then 40 then WitE-2.0 which will plug in to WitW for a France to the Urals grand campaign at 10 km/hex. :getin:

uPen fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Jan 7, 2014

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:19

Darkrenown: Jul 18, 2012; please give me anything to talk about besides the fact that democrats are allowing millions of americans to be evicted from their homes

gradenko_2000 posted:

Actual Victoria 2 gameplay question: Are there any guidelines to fleet composition and/or ideal number of ships in a stack?

Also, are you supposed to go from Man-o-War to (pre-Dreadnought) Battleships? All of the other ships (Monitor, Commerce Raider) don't seem like they're supposed to be main fleet units.

Ideally you want 1-1 screens to capital ships. And there's Ironclads before Battleships. Monitors can kinda do the capital ship thing, but they are not great at it.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:24

Defeatist Elitist: Jun 17, 2012; I've got a carbon fixation.

SeaTard posted:

One thing you could do is just make it a lot easier for the AI to Westernise. I never really got into eu4, but I spent more than 2k hours playing eu3, and one of the best changes I ever made was to make it very easy for the AI to migrate to the Western tech group.

As an example, here is my AI Westernization decision for the Nomad/Indian/Chinese/Sub-Sahara/New World tech groups:

I also made it so that even if the AI doesn't Westernize, they aren't completely screwed as far as tech levels go, by using the slow_limit modifier in common/technology.txt:

(I also made hordes stupidly powerful at the start, which was fun to watch)

Basically, all of this just makes it so that by the 1600s, the entire AI world is in the Western tech group. Not at all historical, but it makes for a much more enjoyable game IMO.

I've definitely seen that done before, and it works well enough, but the idea of having a more organically or situationally based system is just really really appealing to me, if probably a bit out of reach. I'm more or less okay with different areas westernizing more slowly or not at all, I just feel like the tech groups are a really weird and arbitrary way to do it (though I understand they probably exist because trying to represent everything would be a nightmare).

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:35

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

Holy poo poo, actual screenshots from WitW. Are those newly released? Also why does the map include all of Russia west of the Urals if it's focusing on the West?

Those 2 particular screenshots have been around for a while, Matrix just sucks at marketing and the beta is under a very tight NDA.

The map is that large because it's going to be THE map for the rest of the series, including WITE 2.0

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:49

Top Hats Monthly: Jun 22, 2011; People are people so why should it be, that you and I should get along so awfully blink blink recall STOP IT YOU POSH LITTLE SHIT

One thing I don't like about the Divided States mod is the fact my eyes burn when I take a look at Wyoming.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 21:52

ExtraNoise: Apr 11, 2007

Defeatist Elitist posted:

I've definitely seen that done before, and it works well enough, but the idea of having a more organically or situationally based system is just really really appealing to me, if probably a bit out of reach. I'm more or less okay with different areas westernizing more slowly or not at all, I just feel like the tech groups are a really weird and arbitrary way to do it (though I understand they probably exist because trying to represent everything would be a nightmare).

Thinking about EU4, maybe you could incorporate tech level adjustment into the trade system. It would be more organic and historical to have nations that trade a lot with Western powers westernize faster, and those that don't trade westernize slowly or not at all.

If you'd go full Vicky 2 with a dynamic market system, you could even significantly change up from game to game which nations westernize. That would be cool, but also probably a total clusterfuck of a system, to add to a game which is already a clusterfuck of systems.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 22:30

Pimpmust: Oct 1, 2008

BBJoey posted:

On the war side of things I'd like to see Victoria's combat get fleshed out a bit more. I mean, we're talking about the period in which the Great War occurred - when I think WW1 I think lines of trenches, defence in depth, human wave attacks and a contiguous frontline manned by both sides. Victoria 2's combat system where the best way to bring an enemy to the peace table is to force a single pitched battle in one specific province with all your dudes in it is just completely incapable of representing WW1.

Of course I have no idea how you would actually go about crafting a combat system that can accurately represent both 19th century and 20th century combat, but it's still my dream~

Actually I think it would be pretty easy (relatively) with a HoI like counter system, it's just a reversed tech progression so instead of going ww1 -> ww2 it starts with highly mobile armies that can stack a lot of rather mobile counters into a province (but manpower/cost wise can't mobilize millions easily) and then instead gets forced over time by tech progression to spread the frontage out (provinces wise and stacking limits for individual battles to prevent Vicky 2 lategame situations) while the pure number of counters and strategic (Railroad/redeployment) mobility increases.

The basic idea is already there in vicky 2, but the stacking/army system doesn't work as well as in the HoI games to prevent dogpiling.

If there's only thing that needs solving though it's the situation where entire divisions gets wiped out, a more organic system where individual "units" can detach ones their morale/strength gets too low and retreat ala EUIV but keep the big battles going would probably solve it (the HoI games kinda need this too).

The other trick is integrating the economy and pop systems, which I don't think vicky 2 does all that well. The economy bit is probably the hardest to not create really weird situations.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 23:21

Dibujante: Jul 27, 2004

Pimpmust posted:

Actually I think it would be pretty easy (relatively) with a HoI like counter system, it's just a reversed tech progression so instead of going ww1 -> ww2 it starts with highly mobile armies that can stack a lot of rather mobile counters into a province (but manpower/cost wise can't mobilize millions easily) and then instead gets forced over time by tech progression to spread the frontage out (provinces wise and stacking limits for individual battles to prevent Vicky 2 lategame situations) while the pure number of counters and strategic (Railroad/redeployment) mobility increases.

The basic idea is already there in vicky 2, but the stacking/army system doesn't work as well as in the HoI games to prevent dogpiling.

If there's only thing that needs solving though it's the situation where entire divisions gets wiped out, a more organic system where individual "units" can detach ones their morale/strength gets too low and retreat ala EUIV but keep the big battles going would probably solve it (the HoI games kinda need this too).

The other trick is integrating the economy and pop systems, which I don't think vicky 2 does all that well. The economy bit is probably the hardest to not create really weird situations.

Yeah, HoI's system could sort of work for this. The only thing keeping armies in HoI from eschewing the frontline and being highly mobile is that they are so massive that it's really easy to just plunk 3 infantry in every single province. But, if you didn't have enough manpower to even form a coherent frontline, then you'd both have to adopt a more mobile combat solution. As populations rise during the Victorian era, (and defenders get more and more bonuses due to machine guns, entrenchment, defense in depth doctrines) it starts to make sense to form an unbroken frontline.

edit: to me, though, it seems like you might as well just end V2 at 1914 and then play both WW1 and WW2 in DH.

# ? Jan 7, 2014 23:34

Emanuel Collective: Jan 16, 2008; by Smythe

gradenko_2000 posted:

Actual Victoria 2 gameplay question: Are there any guidelines to fleet composition and/or ideal number of ships in a stack?

Also, are you supposed to go from Man-o-War to (pre-Dreadnought) Battleships? All of the other ships (Monitor, Commerce Raider) don't seem like they're supposed to be main fleet units.

I always destroy my man o wars as soon as I can build monitors and ironclads, following a France game where 40+ man o wars got sunk by 10 confederate monitors

# ? Jan 8, 2014 02:17

Agean90: Jun 28, 2008

It always warms my heart when a 30 ship fleet sinks the 100 ships of the english navy, which consists entirely of frigates and manowars.

# ? Jan 8, 2014 03:30

Shimrra Jamaane: Aug 10, 2007; Obscure to all except those well-versed in Yuuzhan Vong lore.

uPen posted:

Because after WitW 43-45 they're doing 41-42 then 40 then WitE-2.0 which will plug in to WitW for a France to the Urals grand campaign at 10 km/hex.

How the gently caress is the game going to work without completely making GBS threads itself? And what about Africa? And how about then combining the finished WiTWEA with WitP Admirals Edition :getin:

Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 06:41 on Jan 8, 2014

# ? Jan 8, 2014 06:38

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

How the gently caress is the game going to work without completely making GBS threads itself? And what about Africa? And how about then combining the finished WiTWEA with WitP Admirals Edition

War in North Africa (Afrika Korps' campaign up to the fall of Tunis) is going to be a separate game from War in the West 1940 (Fall Gelb, Fall Rot, hypothetical Sealion), and then War in the East 2.0 is another game (not sure of the order) - theoretically they're going to merge them all, but who knows how long turn times are going to be once that happens.

Emanuel Collective posted:

I always destroy my man o wars as soon as I can build monitors and ironclads, following a France game where 40+ man o wars got sunk by 10 confederate monitors

Darkrenown posted:

Ideally you want 1-1 screens to capital ships. And there's Ironclads before Battleships. Monitors can kinda do the capital ship thing, but they are not great at it.

Thanks! I'm playing a game as Russia right now trying to break into the Arabian Sea via Afghanistan>Makran>Kalat and I was trying to get a fleet ready when I eventually challenge the UK for India.

EDIT: Are there any events for Russia with regards to taking back Constantinople/Istanbul? IIRC to get the Ottomans to move their capital to Anatolia I need to isolate Istanbul as the only remaining Ottoman-owned state, right?

gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Jan 8, 2014

# ? Jan 8, 2014 06:48

podcat: Jun 21, 2012

Darkrenown posted:

I could honestly see Podcat doing this, I hope he doesn't see your post

Too late! All future games will now feature Dogecoins.

EDIT: a coworker suggested Coinye West currency might be the future? Help! Which one should we pick?!

podcat fucked around with this message at 14:22 on Jan 8, 2014

# ? Jan 8, 2014 14:20

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 29, 2024 08:18

Riso: Oct 11, 2008; by merry exmarx

Kanye has already sent his lawyers to shut it down. Dogecoins all the way.

# ? Jan 8, 2014 15:38

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Paradox Grand Strategy: From the Carnival of Lust to the Enlightened Times

«‹›799 »