|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Well if it's not Victoria 3 like that article this morning said, I don't know what the gently caress they could be possibly trying to release. My best guesses based only on "there's potential for a great game there which would be substantially different from existing Paradox games" are a Cold War or Migration Period game.
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 18:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:For example, a thing that always bothered me in Vicky 1 and 2 is that South American nations are much larger than European nations with plenty of resource variety, yet Belgium has much more means to develop its industry than Colombia (which has literally the largest coal mine in the world) because of the resource-per-province model, an abstraction that is counterproductive to a socioeconomic game. Actually, on this point, V2 does make some attempt to model the abundance of raw resources in the new world, by giving those provinces a 10x multiplier to their base RGO size, which is calculated based on the population there on game load. And by “on game load” I mean load. Load a save game fifty years in and suddenly all the RGOs will multiply in size. e: a more worse omission is of differential labour efficiency. One dude labouring to produce grain in Siberia will, all other factors being equal, produce exactly as much per time unit as a dude doing the same in the black earth belt. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 18:46 on May 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 18:43
|
|
|
Rynoto posted:Military-Industrial-Complex.txt Design for Vicky 3s economic system should be done in complete secrecy with multiple conflicting descriptions about how it works mixed in with outright lies, it's the only way it could recapture that vicky2 magic
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:My best guesses based only on "there's potential for a great game there which would be substantially different from existing Paradox games" are a Cold War or Migration Period game. There's also about 3,000 years of human history still left to cover before Imperator so maybe we'll see a bronze age game, I kinda doubt they'd do a migration period game so soon after Imperator but it's possible, and then there's 1950-2200 which would probably be a Cold War game to 2001 or something. Of course, there's probably also room for like three different ancient China games so maybe it's that, release would be far enough away that they wouldn't really be competing with the new Total War. It's totally Victoria 3 tho 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
design documents for Vicky 3 economy only exist for one meeting, after that the documents are destroyed and everyone's forced to code off memory 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 18:50
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:I enjoy them because it lets me stop make claims early on, which is A++, as making claims suck. Indeed. I wish one of the options in the diplomatic automation thing was 'go build a spy network and fabricate as many claims on <this guy> as possible'.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 19:03
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:Seriously, it’s amazing to me how no other grand strategy/4X game has done this. Military units are always some weird abstraction of “production” so you can have the Civilization equivalent of WW1 and yet somehow your population just keeps going up. The pops and the way the economic system interacts with them is the reason why I love V2 so much despite it suffering from a lot of “old Paradox” jank. I've been playing a lot of the original Master of Orion for the last week and it does this. You invade planets by loading up your pops into transports and sending them to another empire's planet, exactly the same way as you would send them to one of your own planets. Then when they arrive they fight to the death with the people already there. Of course Vicky makes a distinction between soldiers and civilians so it's not quite the same...
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:e: a more worse omission is of differential labour efficiency. One dude labouring to produce grain in Siberia will, all other factors being equal, produce exactly as much per time unit as a dude doing the same in the black earth belt. This is something Ricky actually nailed. That Rhineland coal RGO multiplier <3<3<3
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:Design for Vicky 3s economic system should be done in complete secrecy with multiple conflicting descriptions about how it works mixed in with outright lies, it's the only way it could recapture that vicky2 magic In the end, your country's income will just be determined by straight RNG, and all fiddling around with sliders and building factories will just make you think you're accomplishing things. Several years later, a dev will explain this, and all players will refuse to believe them.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 19:34
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:In the end, your country's income will just be determined by straight RNG, and all fiddling around with sliders and building factories will just make you think you're accomplishing things. The most realistic game ever conceived
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 19:35
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:e: a more worse omission is of differential labour efficiency. One dude labouring to produce grain in Siberia will, all other factors being equal, produce exactly as much per time unit as a dude doing the same in the black earth belt. That sounds just about right 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
I've just made it a point now to just not buy Paradox games on release anymore or have any faith that enough DLC will make a game good in the long term, and I imagine a lot of people are feeling similar "wait and see" attitudes towards Paradox games. Wait months, even years, to see if they "get good". The whole "Rush release of a buggy half finished mess then flesh it out with DLC" model paradox seems married to at this point is going to end up backfiring as people have absolutely no reason to buy new games on release. When I was chatting about Imperator with my friends they all had the same general response "Eh, I'll check on Imperator after a few months, see what the internet says about it and if there's any good DLC or if they'll just abandon it". If enough people have this attitude, it will doom their current model. But maybe the current model is actually bad and they should do something crazy like release polished full-feature games on release that only get better with DLC, rather than the current multi-year ongoing beta programs most of their games are.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
The Paradox model of release also sort of requires you to choose the "main" powers. Go be the Caledonians in Imperator and you get a much more limited game than if you're Rome. That's not to say it's incorrect of them to aim their games at the interesting powers at launch, but they still let you play as minors who can't really do all the fun stuff which can lead folks into thinking the games are not as intricate as they actually are.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I've just made it a point now to just not buy Paradox games on release anymore or have any faith that enough DLC will make a game good in the long term, and I imagine a lot of people are feeling similar "wait and see" attitudes towards Paradox games. Wait months, even years, to see if they "get good". The whole "Rush release of a buggy half finished mess then flesh it out with DLC" model paradox seems married to at this point is going to end up backfiring as people have absolutely no reason to buy new games on release. I mean apparently Imperium sold really well so probably not.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 22:23
|
|
|
Well then Johan has no reason to sound so sad!!
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 22:33
|
|
|
Well I mean regardless of sells he’s been getting hit hard for his design decisions and that’s got to hurt. I doubt they are gonna abandon a model that is financially successful for them despite goon anecdotes.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
These games make a lot of their money through DLC and people buying the game post release. It's not surprising that they're interested in more than week one sales figures and it's a good thing that they're invested in the long term popularity. Some people criticise their DLC model but it certainly incentiveises them to improve the games as much as they can in every patch.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I've just made it a point now to just not buy Paradox games on release anymore or have any faith that enough DLC will make a game good in the long term, and I imagine a lot of people are feeling similar "wait and see" attitudes towards Paradox games. Wait months, even years, to see if they "get good". The whole "Rush release of a buggy half finished mess then flesh it out with DLC" model paradox seems married to at this point is going to end up backfiring as people have absolutely no reason to buy new games on release.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 16:45
|
|
|
paradox i will pre-order a million copies of vicky 3 to balance out these cowards
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
the most Vicky way to release Vicky 3 is to do a Kickstarter and Let The Market Decide
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 17:45
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Its to the point for me that I would rather wait and pay $60 for one of their games if it means it gets 50% more dev time before they release it. Nah let me have a cheap and flawed game now and then a much better game later thanks.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:the most Vicky way to release Vicky 3 is to do a Kickstarter and Let The Market Decide Sorry, capitalist pops have decided to make a survival/crafting early access game instead.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 18:08
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Nah let me have a cheap and flawed game now and then a much better game later thanks. I'm okay paying $20 more if it's at least a cheap, flawed, but still good game.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 18:14
|
|
|
Beamed posted:I'm okay paying $20 more if it's at least a cheap, flawed, but still good game. And that's called first DLC 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 18:17
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Nah let me have a cheap and flawed game now and then a much better game later thanks. I rather have a cheap AND good game, is just a matter of waiting a lot and getting it on a sale. "wait for some patches and DLCs/expansions then get it on a sale" has been my buying philosophy for years, not only for paradox games, but for any game. You just need to have some patience
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 18:18
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Sorry, capitalist pops have decided to make a survival/crafting early access game instead. The true Vicky experience: pops investing in stupid useless projects.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 19:14
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:I rather have a cheap AND good game, is just a matter of waiting a lot and getting it on a sale. what a genius
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:the most Vicky way to release Vicky 3 is to do a Kickstarter and Let The Market Decide Only if the kickstarter somehow brings in army troops to help out after it got in trouble with a local Raj. And somehow half the kickstarter proceeds go to various paid-off members of parliament.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2019 19:56
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:I rather have a cheap AND good game, is just a matter of waiting a lot and getting it on a sale.  The patient gamer always wins
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 04:28
|
|
|
Is there any real alternative to "mana" for political-type resources? I mean EU3 had agents (spies, colonists, magistrates, etc) which are the same thing, and I can't really think of any other sort of system that would be good for representing the limited ability of royal courts to focus their attention in several areas.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 07:34
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Is there any real alternative to "mana" for political-type resources? I mean EU3 had agents (spies, colonists, magistrates, etc) which are the same thing, and I can't really think of any other sort of system that would be good for representing the limited ability of royal courts to focus their attention in several areas.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 09:22
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Mini games, that determine the cool down of whatever ability you used. The lower your monarch's stats, the harder the mini games become. Better government types give a variety of power-ups. Can't beat that candy crush level? No claim for you!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 09:26
|
|
|
RTS games (whether by design or by accident) end up using player attention as a balancing factor for a lot of things. That doesn't fit overly well in the grand strategy space though.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 09:30
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Is there any real alternative to "mana" for political-type resources? I mean EU3 had agents (spies, colonists, magistrates, etc) which are the same thing, and I can't really think of any other sort of system that would be good for representing the limited ability of royal courts to focus their attention in several areas. I mean, the existing alternative is the CK2 system where there's a much smaller number of resource pools (prestige, piety and money) and it's mostly done through assigning courtiers to do things. A change might be to go from CK2's method of having one spymaster that you can assign to one of five tasks at any given time, to a choice between having fewer spymasters doing fewer things, or getting a lot of spymasters to let you do a lot of things, with the tradeoff being that increases the number of powerful aristocrats and thus the risk of civil wars.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 10:55
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Is there any real alternative to "mana" for political-type resources? I mean EU3 had agents (spies, colonists, magistrates, etc) which are the same thing, and I can't really think of any other sort of system that would be good for representing the limited ability of royal courts to focus their attention in several areas. But EU4 already has the alternative: Agents that you can set to a task and recall at any time. Also, EU3 agents are nothing like mana.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 11:12
|
|
|
GrossMurpel posted:But EU4 already has the alternative: Agents that you can set to a task and recall at any time. Magistrates were pretty much mana. Honestly the primary difference between resources like monarch power, magistrates etc. vs money or prestige is how the income is determined, with the former being static/luck-based and the latter being skill-based. Skill-based income resources just feel better because (aside from initial advantages) you worked for them. You get more money because you played well. And when you need more money there's a clear way of getting it, playing better. Monarch power is mostly dependent on a roll of the dice and that feels kinda lovely and undeserved when the roll is poor... but you also do need something like that as a balancing factor for assymetrical starts. Something to give smaller states a tool that enables them to punch up and act as a counterbalance to the snowball effect. I think what the mana-style systems could do to become more satisfying is adapt some of the elements of how the skill-based currencies are used. You can take loans if you are running out of money, prestige can go into the negatives, etc. EU4 specifically has added a few things that feel similar like asking estates for monarch power, but I think a more fundamental rework of those currencies to make it so that you aren't poo poo out of luck if you are out would make them feel better in gameplay. e; Ah gently caress poo poo I mixed up DW and EU4. Yeah magistrates were pretty much mana (static-ish gain, capped, used for multiple things). YF-23 fucked around with this message at 12:00 on May 30, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 11:51
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:Magistrates were pretty much mana. Yeah the luck-based thing is probably what annoys me most about monarch power. The second-most annoying thing is how many completely unrelated things you spend them on. Hell, I was already annoyed when you had to use magistrates on buildings in DW and modded that out immediately. It was also stupid that you needed diplomats to recruit generals. EU4 double-dips on that in every way. I know I'm in the vast minority in this thread but I just find it horrendous gameplay to have to decide between getting a new idea or a new technology. Maybe it makes for interesting tense decisions for most people but I just find it boring. It also had the side effect of making money borderline pointless. I have absolutely no problem with the improvements to agents though. Having two missionaries you send on missions is superior to gaining 0.2 missionaries per month and then spending them.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 12:09
|
|
|
One thing I don't like about mana systems is that they tend to make the outcome instant after you've saved up the points. But that's not how governing works, so it feels fake How I would do it: You have one mana pool, called Focus. Mostly, it has a set maximum and recovery rate although some techs/reforms/traits or whatever can adjust it. Nowhere near as much as the current ruler MP points though. Each faction within your nation has a Trust score towards you. These factions could be EU4's Estates, or Rome's parties, or CK2's Major Nobles or whatever. Trust is very strongly based on your character. Each month, you have to pay Focus based on the size of your realm. Techs/Reforms/Administrators can reduce this, but never to 0 Every significant thing that your ruler would do instantly with MP before now takes time. While it's in progress, it costs Focus. Certain actions have a Trust minimum and/or require you to burn Trust with a given faction or factions. So for instance, if you want to pass a new law. Instead of saving up 200 Law Points and instantly getting the law, you'd commit 10 Focus per month for 20 months (number 100% asspulled, not designed around balance or experience). Events based on opposition factions could slow you down. You could burn Trust to speed up the process, or to reach the vote threshold needed to pass it. Add in a window for adjusting how much Focus you spend on various things to give the player extra control (REALLY need that law to go through fast? Burn through 60 Focus per month for 5 months. Note that this is less efficient). This system would A)make ruling feel less like magic, because things take time B)retain the advantages of a point-based system and C)give you extra ability to interact with the factions within your realm
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 15:09
|
|
|
I don't really think you need to get rid of activation being instant; at least personally I like that a lot. But bringing income more under player control is something you are definitely on the money on. Let's take EU4, you could have a part of your monarch power cap contributed by estates; so for instance for your military power, 25% of it is contributed by the nobles estate. That amount builds off estate loyalty and influence, in parallel to the rest of your monarch power. So if your cap is 999, and you have a 3 MIL ruler and a 1 MIL advisor, you get 7 MIL points which can build up to 750, and your nobility estates give you some extra, up to 249. Hell, ok, let's break it more. You have a base cap, monarch cap, and estate cap. Base cap is 50% of your cap, monarch cap and estate cap are 25% each. Base builds from the 3 base gain + advisors, monarch from monarch skill (minimum should move from 0 to 1), and estate from estate infuence/loyalty. You could then toy with balance by adding modifiers to specific caps, growth rates and so on. But the player could then have a greater influence on monarch power by actually caring for estates and giving you an actual important benefit from doling out land to them instead of constantly trying to rein them in.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 16:23 |
|
|
It's one of those things where you really just need to find the right sort of balance that feels good, and it's hard to really say what that is. It's not an inherently "fun" mechanic, but it's basically like ammunition in an FPS, there's nothing fun about not having bullets, but you want to give the player the tension of running low, or even making them consider alternative playstyles. The obvious issue being, if it costs resources to do any playstyle, then it sure does suck running out of everything. CK2 gives you the option of doing things for "free" if you're willing to do a bunch of digging around for claimants, as well as a smattering of tasks to do for when you're suck in long peaces that may be mostly flavor.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2019 16:09
|
|