|
Phi230 posted:So is the goon opinion that Vikky 2 is not a good game then? It's the only Paradox game where you truly feel like you are playing a realistic alternative history. The game creates a fairly real-feeling world. It's just the systems that you use to make that happen within the game are awful.
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:50 |
|
|
Vicky 2 is the best game that I do not understand at all. I see those spreadsheets of goods and services and trading and production and I just black out and wake up 2 hours later
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
jb7 posted:It's the only Paradox game where you truly feel like you are playing a realistic alternative history. The game creates a fairly real-feeling world. It's just the systems that you use to make that happen within the game are awful. This is it exactly. I still maintain that the event-style system in V:R/VIP were slightly better for letting the player feel like they were creating a believable world (and this only works given the limited timeframe of the game when compared to other Paradox games), but V2 is definitely easier to play and get into.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
i love vicky 2 anyway here's this: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
i'm going to rate my level of shock that you, when playing the elder scrolls mod, immediately leapt into the Land of Furries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:i'm going to rate my level of shock that you, when playing the elder scrolls mod, immediately leapt into the Land of Furries. it was one of the recommended starts. actually i tried playing in morrowind first but i didn't know what the hell anything meant (why do you need to rename steward? it's a normal word drat it) so i thought maybe one of the default beginnings would be more comprehensible managed to attain my independence, which is good. hooray! corn in the bible fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Jun 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
tried out a couple countries in elder scrolls, seems cool. that's the only screen though since it's the only time i tried playing a straight up vassal (and got free of it)
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
vicky 1 is better than vicky 2, because you can actually interact with the pops. Granted I'm no great shakes at victoria 2 but I don't understand how you get more soldiers. Although I really like the crisis system
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 19:48
|
|
Bitter Mushroom posted:vicky 1 is better than vicky 2, because you can actually interact with the pops. Granted I'm no great shakes at victoria 2 but I don't understand how you get more soldiers. Although I really like the crisis system I don't know, one of the things I like about Vicky 2 is that you only have tenuous control over your pops. It seems more fitting to me that all you can really do to get more soldiers is to put more money into the army (military spending) and putting out military ads and recruitment drives (encouraging through national focuses).
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
Bitter Mushroom posted:vicky 1 is better than vicky 2, because you can actually interact with the pops. Granted I'm no great shakes at victoria 2 but I don't understand how you get more soldiers. Although I really like the crisis system Soldiers are capped at 5% of a region. Set a national focus for them and also raise their wages to bolster growth. Focuses are less effective with higher percentages so be sure to move the focuses around, usually when you get to 3%
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:So is the goon opinion that Vikky 2 is not a good game then? Victoria 2 is probably my favorite Paradox game. It's a really good game for allowing you to feel like you're watching a critical period of the world unfold as the roots of westernization take root and sets the stage for one of the greatest conflicts the world has ever known. That being said, the game was... special... sometimes. Things that wouldn't make a lot of sense to new players who hadn't played previous map games. Phi230 posted:you'll know that I was being sarcastic Debatable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:Soldiers are capped at 5% of a region. Set a national focus for them and also raise their wages to bolster growth. They're not capped, not as far I've seen at least. It's more that 5% soldiers is a good mark to hit if you plan to war for any extended period of time. And I'd say there are several pops you want to go above 3%, craftsmen and clerks, for example. While you obviously don't want 3% capitalists in every state. I usually try to hit 5% soldiers, 2% clergy, get some states with at least 0.5% capitalists, and then use the rest of the time to promote craftsmen and clerks at a 4/1 ratio. Party loyalty can also be good depending on if you're a democracy or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
i remember that in older versions of vicky 2, i would consistently end up with about 25% of the population of one of my states becoming soldiers. different state in each game. to this day i don't know why
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Star posted:They're not capped, not as far I've seen at least. It's more that 5% soldiers is a good mark to hit if you plan to war for any extended period of time. And I'd say there are several pops you want to go above 3%, craftsmen and clerks, for example. While you obviously don't want 3% capitalists in every state. I usually try to hit 5% soldiers, 2% clergy, get some states with at least 0.5% capitalists, and then use the rest of the time to promote craftsmen and clerks at a 4/1 ratio. Party loyalty can also be good depending on if you're a democracy or not. Iirc if it's over 5% they'll start converting to other things once you stop focusing there so that's kind of a waste
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Victoria 2 was my first Paradox game and I didn't know what I was doing for weeks. I miss it 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Victoria 2 is cool, I just wish its wars weren't so exhausting. Especially late game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
Is there a way to manually increase the number of brigades you can mobilize in victoria 2 then? That might be a good work around if I cant directly make more people join the soldier caste/class
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Bitter Mushroom posted:Is there a way to manually increase the number of brigades you can mobilize in victoria 2 then? That might be a good work around if I cant directly make more people join the soldier caste/class It's solely based on how many soldiers you have in each given region of your nation. This is part of why population is so incredibly important! If you don't have enough then get some allies and make them fight for you, or go establish a protectorate on a heavily populated primitive nation (morocco is a good choice) so you can use their POPs! However, it is more efficient to focus on lots of regions than one single one because the amount of POPs needed for each new brigade past the first one from a region is much higher. corn in the bible fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Jun 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
The only thing I hate about pops in v2 is that soldiers don't go into a common pool so you can have just short of enough for a brigade in multiple areas and not be able to do anything with them
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
on the other hand, concentrating your soldiers together leaves you much less likely to be unable to reinforce your regulars midway through a war.Slaughterhouse-Ive posted:The only thing I hate about pops in v2 is that soldiers don't go into a common pool so you can have just short of enough for a brigade in multiple areas and not be able to do anything with them iirc a popular mod change was to make soldiers all move to the capital of a state, like bureaucrats apparently do?, which alleviates this to some extent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:on the other hand, concentrating your soldiers together leaves you much less likely to be unable to reinforce your regulars midway through a war. Yeah I tweaked the game to do the capital fix and I get how if they all relocated to the national capital that would be bad. It would be nice if they went into an EU4 style manpower pool not attached to a geographical location but then you couldn't get the experience of recreating the pals battalions I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
Slaughterhouse-Ive posted:Yeah I tweaked the game to do the capital fix and I get how if they all relocated to the national capital that would be bad. It would be nice if they went into an EU4 style manpower pool not attached to a geographical location but then you couldn't get the experience of recreating the pals battalions I suppose. also having all the soldiers native to one spot or in a pool fucks up uprisings and rebellions. the civil war in particular becomes a laughable non-issue though tbh it usually is anyway corn in the bible fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Jun 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Slaughterhouse-Ive posted:The only thing I hate about pops in v2 is that soldiers don't go into a common pool so you can have just short of enough for a brigade in multiple areas and not be able to do anything with them Yeah, I never understood why did it that way. It's really frustrating if you're not a major power. I think Britain and Germany were the only nations that had battalions recruit from one specific area, and even they switched to a common pool method in WWI because they were realized they were wiping out the male population of entire towns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
Vicky 2 (and 1 really but less cool since its got the old fashioned event scripting) is awesome as a simulator but kind of discouraging as a game for the same reason. At any given moment you can ostensibly control what is happening both in local and geopolitics, but more often you feel you are just caught in the flow of consequences of decisions someone half a world away made 15 years ago and most of what you are doing is trying not to get swept over a waterfall, which is only pointing you at a different waterfall 30 years in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
If Paradox ever does get around to tackling the Victoria 3 challenge I hope they'll do their best to try and preserve the feel of being in charge of a living, breathing nation. Imperialism was a fun and good game and all, but it's also explicitly a game where your pawns exist only to help you win the game. Victoria 2 had plenty of faults, but it's also one of the very few games in existence that gives you a sense of your nation being its own thing and not just an extension of your godlike will in your contest against the other nation-gods.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
Bitter Mushroom posted:vicky 1 is better than vicky 2, because you can actually interact with the pops. Granted I'm no great shakes at victoria 2 but I don't understand how you get more soldiers. Although I really like the crisis system Absolutely - I've always argued for V3 they should bring back manual pop promotion and the simplified world market. It was dumb and a-historical but at least you could understand and manipulate it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
zedprime posted:Vicky 2 (and 1 really but less cool since its got the old fashioned event scripting) is awesome as a simulator but kind of discouraging as a game for the same reason. At any given moment you can ostensibly control what is happening both in local and geopolitics, but more often you feel you are just caught in the flow of consequences of decisions someone half a world away made 15 years ago and most of what you are doing is trying not to get swept over a waterfall, which is only pointing you at a different waterfall 30 years in the future. That's the best part.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Vicky 3 should crib from Empire Total War where you could switch to controlling the revolution. The communists and fascists and stuff were usually pretty easy to beat down so unless you were playing to lose in a sense you typically wouldn't be able to play those types of games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:That's the best part. Yeah, this. Being barely in control of the fate of your nation really helped it feel like you were in a living world, that you were a ruler of the times rather than some kind of animating collective spirit. It made the game difficult and impenetrable -- probably the most difficult game I've ever learned to play (I never learned how to play HOI3) -- but it was so rewarding.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Like I think at one point I remember seeing fascists and communists just waltzing past each other during the collapse of France and that certainly didn't seem right. A third expansion focused on those internal politics and basically making the Russian and German revolutions representable would have really finished the game in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
My problem is V2 with HoD was my entrance to Paradox games so EU4 feels sort of soulless in comparison. It feels more like I'm playing a Pantone color than a nation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Slaughterhouse-Ive posted:My problem is V2 with HoD was my entrance to Paradox games so EU4 feels sort of soulless in comparison. It feels more like I'm playing a Pantone color than a nation. Absolutely my feeling as well. V2 (and CK2, albeit in a different way) is about being a world leader rather than... whatever you are in eu games. The will of the nation? The fact you can't possibly account for everything is to its benefit. Thats also why I like Power and Revolution though that's not a pdox game of course
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
Ghetto Prince posted:Yeah, I never understood why did it that way. It's really frustrating if you're not a major power. If I remember right they wanted to have casualties inflict population reduction on the specific pop they were raised from. It's a cute idea, but it didn't really gain us anything and the problems it introduced were pretty major. Vicky 1 has a global manpower pool (segregated by culture) and it works perfectly fine. I tried to dig up the original DDs and see what the reasoning actually was, but it looks like those threads don't exist any more.  Bitter Mushroom posted:vicky 1 is better than vicky 2, because you can actually interact with the pops. Granted I'm no great shakes at victoria 2 but I don't understand how you get more soldiers. Although I really like the crisis system Sir, I regret to inform you that you are a lunatic Manual pop management was: a) A micromanagement nightmare. The mother of all micromanagement nightmares. b) Not actually interesting gameplay! All that work and not a single meaningful decision to be found. c) Nonsense. So, what, you cart a couple wagonloads of paper down to the slums and suddenly everyone's clerks now? Don't even get me started on pop splitting.  Slaughterhouse-Ive posted:My problem is V2 with HoD was my entrance to Paradox games so EU4 feels sort of soulless in comparison. It feels more like I'm playing a Pantone color than a nation. corn in the bible posted:Absolutely my feeling as well. V2 (and CK2, albeit in a different way) is about being a world leader rather than... whatever you are in eu games. The will of the nation? The fact you can't possibly account for everything is to its benefit. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
Agreed. EU3 was my first Paradox game, but now after many years I think the EU series is my least favorite. With Victoria the pops make you feel like an actual nation rather than a blob on a map. With CK2 the tighter focus on your character makes you really feel like the king dealing with vassals, not just a blob on a map. With HOI the detailed war mechanics help you forget that you're a blob on a map, and with Kaiserreich the storyline adds to the illusion. I haven't played Stellaris yet, so I can't comment there. Basically, I think every other game series does a better job of "characterizing" your nation. Each has mechanics that help you relate to the abstract entity you're playing beyond the numbers in the ledger. EU4 just doesn't do it for me, even though I really do like the trade and colonization mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:a) A micromanagement nightmare. The mother of all micromanagement nightmares. Yet another problem (for me anyway) was that I'd promote all my RGO workers unless they were mining something valuable, so after a few decades all the farms would lie fallow. No point in rich countries doing agriculture when transport costs are zero. corn in the bible posted:Thats also why I like Power and Revolution though that's not a pdox game of course That looks insane and unplayable but it has some ideas I really like and want Paradox to steal. Vivian Darkbloom fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Jun 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:Thats also why I like Power and Revolution though that's not a pdox game of course Really? Power and Revolution? That looks awful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
It's clearly poorly made and incredibly stupid, but it captures the feeling of barely struggling to stay in power and fighting with the legislature. so i like it. pretty much every issue has advocacy groups who will protest or commend your actions on their issues; there's political parties galore; you can run guns to terrorists in order to destabilize the british government. it is crazy corn in the bible fucked around with this message at 03:29 on Jun 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:It's clearly poorly made and incredibly stupid, but it captures the feeling of barely struggling to stay in power and fighting with the legislature. so i like it. I would read an LP of this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Tomn posted:If Paradox ever does get around to tackling the Victoria 3 challenge I hope they'll do their best to try and preserve the feel of being in charge of a living, breathing nation. Imperialism was a fun and good game and all, but it's also explicitly a game where your pawns exist only to help you win the game. Victoria 2 had plenty of faults, but it's also one of the very few games in existence that gives you a sense of your nation being its own thing and not just an extension of your godlike will in your contest against the other nation-gods. Yeah this is one of the most interesting aspects of Vicky 2 to me and something that really no other strategy game does. You'll usually see games with systems to represent your population being unhappy or something, but it's always very game-y and feels more like just another resource to be managed rather than something that actually significantly affects the direction of your nation/civilization/whatever. Chief Savage Man posted:Vicky 3 should crib from Empire Total War where you could switch to controlling the revolution. The communists and fascists and stuff were usually pretty easy to beat down so unless you were playing to lose in a sense you typically wouldn't be able to play those types of games. Yeah this is something that's kind of funny to me - a lot of Vicky 2 strategies involve basically "let the rebels win", since communist/fascist governments give you a lot more direct control over your nation than the more traditional ones. I feel like that's fine as a gameplay thing, but you should at least have to actually win the revolution yourself to take advantage of it rather than deliberately surrendering. Losing against an uprising should turn you into a government-in-exile or something if you side with the state.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:50 |
|
|
corn in the bible posted:It's clearly poorly made and incredibly stupid, but it captures the feeling of barely struggling to stay in power and fighting with the legislature. so i like it. How playable is it, is it one of those games that tries really hard to be realistic and simulationist and just winds up being absurd/buggy/broken? Price tag looks really high
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 04:36
|
|