|
CharlestheHammer posted:They say that but every time a mechanic that isn’t conquest is implemented they whine about it. MEIOU and Taxes would not be so popular if they just wanted to whine about something.
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 12:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:50 |
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Lol sure Did it not occur to you that not everyone follows random rear end developers on Twitter 24/7? You’re getting weirdly smug about people asking for clarification. I even googled it before I asked and didn’t find anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 14:00
|
|
|
Senor Dog posted:Did it not occur to you that not everyone follows random rear end developers on Twitter 24/7? You’re getting weirdly smug about people asking for clarification. Maybe be less hostile next time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 14:07
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Maybe be less hostile next time. Huh
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 14:08
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Vicky II's economic simulation is extremely accurate in the sense that it's whimsical, nobody really understands it and yet you need to try and control it or you die Nah; you just go state capitalism. If you need a raw resource sphere a country with it. Having a balanced budget is relatively easy, the hard thing is letting the AI run a country economically.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:V2's economics is a fine example of why you actually have to design mechanics and use abstraction, making something actually player-facing rather than a black box that doesn't really work. why, exactly? i think v2's economic system does a pretty great job of simulating the way nations were tossed and turned by grand forces beyond their full control. the specifics of how it works inside the black box are a weird libertarian-ish nightmare (that laissez faire *still* fails within, which is funny) but the idea of a black box economy is a perfect fit for the period. abstraction and simplification aren't always good, even if they usually are.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 15:41
|
|
|
Yeah if you perfectly understood what is happening and can min max it then Vicky would lose everything that made it interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 15:58
|
|
|
The answer is always "conquer & sphere as much as possible, subsidize everything (especially if its overproduced) just to drive everyone else's economy into the ground." Bonus points if you fully occupy the industrial heartlands of any rival power long enough to shatter their supply chains and steal their profitabilty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 16:16
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:why, exactly? i think v2's economic system does a pretty great job of simulating the way nations were tossed and turned by grand forces beyond their full control. the specifics of how it works inside the black box are a weird libertarian-ish nightmare (that laissez faire *still* fails within, which is funny) but the idea of a black box economy is a perfect fit for the period. abstraction and simplification aren't always good, even if they usually are. CharlestheHammer posted:Yeah if you perfectly understood what is happening and can min max it then Vicky would lose everything that made it interesting. It creates systems that a profoundly uninteresting to actually play. It's fun to talk about, but it's not really interesting to play. You can min max it- the epitome of a good system is when you min max it, and it's actually fun to work with- it gives you different solutions at different times, you have to adapt. This is nothing like what Vicky 2 has on offer. It's a lot like distant worlds in a bunch of stuff happening but it's not interesting as a player at all- it boils down to one thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
It was interesting to play. Had a lot of fun in Vicky specifically because I never understood it. Take that out and the game would be insanely uninteresting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
the economy isn't there to be fiddled with and min-maxed though. it's there so that due to the random vagaries of the world market you end up wanting to be in a stupid war just to seize the prussians' goddamn artillery monopoly, or whatever. it's an outside force that shapes your desires and leads you on idiotic military ventures for tea. which is extremely victorian
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 19:16
|
|
|
best part about vicky was when youd be like #3 in industry because you have like one factory thats actually profitabpe and massive. Yes britain you may have a dozen industrys pulling resources form around the world, but dod you know i have a level 9 distillery? enjoy 2nd place 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 19:19
|
|
|
if having a monopoly on alcohol doesn't let you rule the world i don't know what would
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
Min-maxing the economy is finding the one province in China thats RGO is the lynchpin of the entire world economy, and occupying it for three years. Rise to GP status off the back of fifty bankrupcies
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
Prav posted:if having a monopoly on alcohol doesn't let you rule the world i don't know what would +50% influence on non-Muslim countries
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:the economy isn't there to be fiddled with and min-maxed though. it's there so that due to the random vagaries of the world market you end up wanting to be in a stupid war just to seize the prussians' goddamn artillery monopoly, or whatever. it's an outside force that shapes your desires and leads you on idiotic military ventures for tea. that's a lot of work to end up with that CharlestheHammer posted:It was interesting to play. vicky is insanely uninteresting as it is
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:It creates systems that a profoundly uninteresting to actually play. It's fun to talk about, but it's not really interesting to play. You can min max it- the epitome of a good system is when you min max it, and it's actually fun to work with- it gives you different solutions at different times, you have to adapt. This is nothing like what Vicky 2 has on offer. It's a lot like distant worlds in a bunch of stuff happening but it's not interesting as a player at all- it boils down to one thing. Panzeh posted:vicky is insanely uninteresting as it is Wow this is a really bad series of opinions
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Wow this is a really bad series of opinions It reminds me when people would bitch about the randomized Alpha Centauri tech tree when that was literally the mechanic that kept me interested in the game for years and years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Wow this is a really bad series of opinions can't account for people's taste in lovely game mechanics ThatBasqueGuy posted:Min-maxing the economy is finding the one province in China thats RGO is the lynchpin of the entire world economy, and occupying it for three years. Rise to GP status off the back of fifty bankrupcies i will say that's cool as gently caress though- it's a play straight out of 1830 or something
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
the problem isn't that vicky's economy forces the player to deal with arbitrary events outside of their control, its that those events are not set up in an interesting way nor communicated well to a player
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
The best part about Victoria 2 is that it was like playing it for the first time, every time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
let ck2 and eu4 and hoi4 and all the other paradox games be proper games. let us have this one kind-of-simulation mess that is Victoria
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
HoI IV is part of this month's Humble Monthly package for $12.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:the problem isn't that vicky's economy forces the player to deal with arbitrary events outside of their control, its that those events are not set up in an interesting way nor communicated well to a player
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:let ck2 and eu4 and hoi4 and all the other paradox games be proper games. let us have this one kind-of-simulation mess that is Victoria To hell with that! I loving hate this opinion. You know why? Because I CRAVE a Paradox game set in the time period of Victoria, and I don't want it to be a worthless, frustrating shitpile. I say that having poured 300+ hours into trying desperately to extract good times out of Victoria 2. I couldn't find them. I'm not willing to sacrifice such a fascinating and crucial period of history for the sake of "no, but it's good that the economy is impenetrable and nothing works, that's immersive". I want to have FUN. I don't want the game to be effectively the same whether I'm playing it or watching the AI play it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:If you consider things in a ludonarrative sense, the difference between the "solved" game of EU4 vs. the opaque economy of Vicky II, perfectly matches the ideological landscapes of the periods covered. During the EU4 period, there was broad consensus about the structure of society, so having the player be certain in how their actions affect the world makes a lot of sense. In contrast, the Vicky period is one where that consensus truly breaks down - and thus forcing the player to make ideological choices is entirely appropriate. To reduce the economy to a structured and predictable system would be a massive disservice to the period - you might as well just get an EU4 mod that expands the game into the 20th century. This is very close to the post I started to write and gave up on. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:let ck2 and eu4 and hoi4 and all the other paradox games be proper games. let us have this one kind-of-simulation mess that is Victoria 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
It's funny how the elements that the people that like the Victoria series love the most are the same elements that the people that hate the Victoria series hate the most. It's almost like different things appeal to different people and that there's no one correct way to do everything. If only there was some hypothetical game that I could use as an example of that concept.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 21:45
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:If you consider things in a ludonarrative sense, the difference between the "solved" game of EU4 vs. the opaque economy of Vicky II, perfectly matches the ideological landscapes of the periods covered. During the EU4 period, there was broad consensus about the structure of society, so having the player be certain in how their actions affect the world makes a lot of sense. In contrast, the Vicky period is one where that consensus truly breaks down - and thus forcing the player to make ideological choices is entirely appropriate. To reduce the economy to a structured and predictable system would be a massive disservice to the period - you might as well just get an EU4 mod that expands the game into the 20th century. I don't quite know how to put this, but I think you can make an economic system that allows for the vast forces of the international economy to totally gently caress everyone's plans up without making it a giant black box that behaves in entirely counter intuitive ways
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Something I'd kind of like to try in Vicky 2 someday is to try to drain the world money supply and see what happens. I feel like it'd be doable as China given their huge RGO output (hell, also pretty historically accurate for the period, too). I know there are a few safeguards in the game to prevent the money from completely running out but I don't think there's enough to actually stop you from just stockpiling so much money that nobody can afford to buy anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:Something I'd kind of like to try in Vicky 2 someday is to try to drain the world money supply and see what happens. I feel like it'd be doable as China given their huge RGO output (hell, also pretty historically accurate for the period, too). I know there are a few safeguards in the game to prevent the money from completely running out but I don't think there's enough to actually stop you from just stockpiling so much money that nobody can afford to buy anything. Be sure to take out incredibly large loans after you gain that surplus, to help throw money into the furnace that is interest payments
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 22:41
|
|
|
Technowolf posted:HoI IV is part of this month's Humble Monthly package for $12. Very tempting but I'd be swamped with the sea of games. Still have a lot of Stellaris to play yet so I might wait until next month to see what the next unlocks are.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:00
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:If you consider things in a ludonarrative sense, the difference between the "solved" game of EU4 vs. the opaque economy of Vicky II, perfectly matches the ideological landscapes of the periods covered. During the EU4 period, there was broad consensus about the structure of society, so having the player be certain in how their actions affect the world makes a lot of sense. In contrast, the Vicky period is one where that consensus truly breaks down - and thus forcing the player to make ideological choices is entirely appropriate. To reduce the economy to a structured and predictable system would be a massive disservice to the period - you might as well just get an EU4 mod that expands the game into the 20th century. [stroking beard pensively] this is thoughtful video game analysis
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:If you consider things in a ludonarrative sense, the difference between the "solved" game of EU4 vs. the opaque economy of Vicky II, perfectly matches the ideological landscapes of the periods covered. During the EU4 period, there was broad consensus about the structure of society, so having the player be certain in how their actions affect the world makes a lot of sense. In contrast, the Vicky period is one where that consensus truly breaks down - and thus forcing the player to make ideological choices is entirely appropriate. To reduce the economy to a structured and predictable system would be a massive disservice to the period - you might as well just get an EU4 mod that expands the game into the 20th century. That's one of the dumbest things i've ever heard. And tbqh EU4's trade system isn't all that good, either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:09
|
|
|
Thinking about making a Rome mod that covers a massive empire that was at its height from 1836-1936 or so. Not sure what to name it yet though 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:09
|
|
|
Shark Sandwich posted:Thinking about making a Rome mod that covers a massive empire that was at its height from 1836-1936 or so. Not sure what to name it yet though I say you keep it short and sweet: Tsar
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
Shark Sandwich posted:Thinking about making a Rome mod that covers a massive empire that was at its height from 1836-1936 or so. Not sure what to name it yet though Bismarck
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
Czaria Universalist?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:That's one of the dumbest things i've ever heard. Games in general may not be for you. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:50 |
|
|
Just give me more political dickery. I want to fund the Frankfurt parliament, secretly send arms to Polish revolutionaries, send that Lenin guy over to Russia and generally give my rivals a hard time beyond clicking a button to remove a country from their sphere or declaring war on them. Even just a "support rebels" causus belli would be an amazing improvement, the sphere system is nice as a generalization of how powerful a GP was compared to earlier ages but I think it should go further. The economy being a black box is fine but I do kind of wish industrialization had a few more benefits?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:50
|
|
