|
Crazy Joe Wilson posted:CK1 had a good system for making you demobilize/sending the levees home afterward: they made them expensive as f*ck and if you kept them raised too long you went super bankrupt. I can't remember if that was true in Vicky 1 as well (It's true in EU4, for sure). I feel like that "finance" in general could be better. There's more to national budgets than revenue vs expense and a black box of "loans"; V2 was more interesting because you could "borrow" indirectly from other countries once you exhausted the ability of your pops to own your debt. But it isn't clear to me if POPs or other nations actually made money off the interest. Things like war bonds, treasury bills; gold vs fiat currency; interest rates; an albeit abstracted system like this might help with being able to afford a war while at war, and then force you to realize that keeping that massive military going post-war is unsustainable and get you to try to like; sell off excess arms to developing nations to make back some money. That's another thing, I wish "Firms"/corporations/international businesses/finance are a thing. Like Krupp or Colt competing to arm the industrializing unrecognized nations; maybe the military-industrial complex is also a lobby that wants more arms spending and wars so they make a profit. And also with international finance/banking an additional source of loans after exhausting t-bills and bonds. Of course as your financing ability improves and your industry and tax base develops the easier it is to maintain a standing army; as part of the political system laws you could pass could be things like the Income Tax (also a war time measure), abandoning the gold standard (also a war time measure that became permanent), and additional duties and dues, fees, and taxes on various goods (i.e Russia passing a vodka tax) to raise revenues and support a larger army and the late game arms race. I've seen games where people built like 100 Dreadnaughts, and scrapped all other ships to max out on the mil score; this really shouldn't happen and I think the military but navies in general should be way more expensive and that getting certain techs like ironclads there's reasons why they weren't hundreds of them.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 15:24 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 15:51 |
|
The other limitation of war should be force projection. It was (and for the most part still is except for superpowers like the US) difficult and expensive to move soldiers from your capital to halfway across the globe. You would be losing troops to disease, it would take months, and they wouldn’t be ready to fight as soon as they step off the boat. Likewise, even moving navies halfway across the world was a major logistical challenge. You were either Great Britain and had to maintain naval bases loving everywhere or you were Russia and lost half your fleet to the *stupidest* loving accidents by the time they made it to Vladivostok.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 15:59 |
|
Crazy Joe Wilson posted:CK1 had a good system for making you demobilize/sending the levees home afterward: they made them expensive as f*ck and if you kept them raised too long you went super bankrupt. I can't remember if that was true in Vicky 1 as well (It's true in EU4, for sure). In CK3 Men At Arms are the only troops worth having, and it's very easy to make them cost nothing!
|
# ? May 27, 2021 16:17 |
I mean, with the number of provinces they have, unless they have a frontline system like HOI4 then they are either going to have a nightmarish micro intensive combat system, or a completely different military setup from previous games. Like theaters that you pour resources, men, and officers into rather than directly controlled units.
|
|
# ? May 27, 2021 16:27 |
|
Nitrousoxide posted:I mean, with the number of provinces they have, unless they have a frontline system like HOI4 then they are either going to have a nightmarish micro intensive combat system, or a completely different military setup from previous games. Like theaters that you pour resources, men, and officers into rather than directly controlled units. no points for guessing which one ends up happening
|
# ? May 27, 2021 16:29 |
|
Cantorsdust posted:The other limitation of war should be force projection. It was (and for the most part still is except for superpowers like the US) difficult and expensive to move soldiers from your capital to halfway across the globe. You would be losing troops to disease, it would take months, and they wouldn’t be ready to fight as soon as they step off the boat. I think this could be partly alleviated by a combination of an improved Hoi4 and Hoi2 "range" system. Ship's can't pathfind if there isn't the range to get there. The range of ships is improved by also improving and expanding the port facilities. You can also limit/bottleneck the construction of a massive fuckoff navy by having something like a manpower pool for sailors like in EU4, perhaps split sailors from soldiers who are needed for your fishing and merchant marine fleets. It costs a certain amount of sailers to maintain a fleet and if you suddenly lose a whole chunk of sailors it should make it "harder" to recouperate your fleet until your sailors recover. Also I feel like the return of EU4's "Navy Tradition" could work out here, it takes 2 years to build a battleship but a century to build a naval tradition. China can't just build 10 Ford-class sized supercarriers and expect to compete. You need years of training and fleet exercises. You should be incentivized to have your ships traveling around, patrolling, doing port calls, the more your ships are sailing the more expensive it is but the more you accumulate naval tradition which affects how far your ships can go without being crippled by the point you get somewhere. Less accidents, better cohesion, better tactics. You can counterbalance this by having a way to say "I have only a Brown water fleet" for coastal/port defence which gives you a similar advantage to max naval tradition proportional to how close to your own waters your operating in; submarines excepted. A more granular system of how heavy armaments and hardened steel production works, separate shipyards from factories and ports could also help reflect the bottlenecks different nations had. The Kaiserreich had a great deal of difficulty producing enough heavy guns for the ambitious naval expansion plans and so on. Obviously you want to balance this so it mostly runs itself and the player only "directs" things like with foci, you don't want to replace one form of factory clicker micro with a different kind of cookie clicker micro. In short there should be more to your navy size and ability to project force then just spaming fleet facilities. Nitrousoxide posted:I mean, with the number of provinces they have, unless they have a frontline system like HOI4 then they are either going to have a nightmarish micro intensive combat system, or a completely different military setup from previous games. Like theaters that you pour resources, men, and officers into rather than directly controlled units. I hope it's something that changes over the course of the game, starting like EU4 warfare but transitioning towards Hoi4 warfare so you have a weird middle ground somewhere around the time of the Franco-Prussian war.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 16:29 |
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:wiz is like a couple of pages up the thread man, lol You need at least two goons working on it to qualify as a goon project.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 16:44 |
|
Clearly Victoria 3 needs an in-depth ship designer which is both needlessly opaque and over-complicated while also having just one or two actually competitive designs that require scouring multiple threads on the paradox forums to figure out.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 16:51 |
|
ANOTHER SCORCHER posted:Clearly Victoria 3 needs an in-depth ship designer which is both needlessly opaque and over-complicated while also having just one or two actually competitive designs that require scouring multiple threads on the paradox forums to figure out. Vic2 fans won't like it if the economy and politics are proper mmechanics comprehensive to a human mind. So it'd probably be good if they get some inconsequential oldschool system like the one you talk about.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 16:58 |
|
https://twitter.com/PDXVictoria/status/1397945705566818305 https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-1-pops.1476573/
|
# ? May 27, 2021 17:01 |
|
Having sailor as a pop type that staffs your navies, but is also needed for certain resource jobs and running your merchant marine, would be v good dlc.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 17:09 |
|
Hmm, I wonder if Groceries resource is service provided by Shopkeepers?
|
# ? May 27, 2021 17:43 |
|
quote:After a bloody war many Dependents of soldiers may be left without sufficient income, and you may decide to institute pensions to help your population recover.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 17:45 |
|
They should let us write letters of condolence directly to Dependent pops for a Loyalist boost.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 17:47 |
|
ANOTHER SCORCHER posted:Clearly Victoria 3 needs an in-depth ship designer which is both needlessly opaque and over-complicated while also having just one or two actually competitive designs that require scouring multiple threads on the paradox forums to figure out. I feel like when it comes to navies where these things are (a) big, thus take a long time to build (b) expensive (c) tech moves quickly: the result is probably "any battleship on hand is better than a better one tomorrow", so the incentive is slap a new turret on a design and start building immediately in smaller batches then waiting forever for enough "Naval XP" and the right tech to have a fleet of "optimal designs"; actually having a system where you actually need a navy operating at all times and I think it all shapes together as "just do what you want" instead of people needing to be optimal like with Hoi4 division templates which was annoying. Maybe having shipyards that take time to accumulate shipbuilding XP would help avoid the worst of it, can't build the optimal design if you don't have a solid grasp on welding yet at the yard. Kinda like how originally you had province by province "inventions" firing to give the province a specific modifier.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 18:09 |
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I feel like when it comes to navies where these things are (a) big, thus take a long time to build (b) expensive (c) tech moves quickly: the result is probably "any battleship on hand is better than a better one tomorrow", so the incentive is slap a new turret on a design and start building immediately in smaller batches then waiting forever for enough "Naval XP" and the right tech to have a fleet of "optimal designs"; actually having a system where you actually need a navy operating at all times and I think it all shapes together as "just do what you want" instead of people needing to be optimal like with Hoi4 division templates which was annoying. Some sort of naval-presence-protecting-traderoutes thing does seem important for the period...
|
# ? May 27, 2021 18:11 |
|
Vasukhani posted:How would it be modeled besides a boring pop up event about losing 3% of craftsmen or something You really can’t think of interesting or tough decisions a government might face in dealing with an epidemic? Do you spend huge amounts of money to speed up cures? Do you enact harsh quarantines that get you through the crises quicker but have tough short term consequences and militarized part of your population against you or just do nothing and hope the situation passes naturally? Do you continue to spend on medical/infrastructure once the crises is over and things are back to normal and epidemics are a thing of the past?
|
# ? May 27, 2021 18:15 |
|
OddObserver posted:Some sort of naval-presence-protecting-traderoutes thing does seem important for the period... They mentioned that navies protect trade routes... somewhere. I don't remember exactly the source, sorry
|
# ? May 27, 2021 18:19 |
|
Any kind of disease management would be dlc, likely similar to reapers due for ck2. Which was a neat dlc, though I'm not sure how much you could wring out of that for an empire compared to when you're controlling an actual dude/dudette
|
# ? May 27, 2021 18:20 |
|
pseudodragon posted:You really can’t think of interesting or tough decisions a government might face in dealing with an epidemic? Whether to suppress news about it during WWI seems like an obvious choice to present.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 18:20 |
|
really queer Christmas posted:Any kind of disease management would be dlc, likely similar to reapers due for ck2. Which was a neat dlc, though I'm not sure how much you could wring out of that for an empire compared to when you're controlling an actual dude/dudette
|
# ? May 27, 2021 18:51 |
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:the challenge is to give it enough upsides that people will want it. Obviously you patch the ravaging diseases into the base game and keep the public health options in the dlc, duh.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 19:02 |
|
Re dependents, I was actually thinking about that the other day. Anyone know how this worked in Vic2? I know that pops were just men, and there was an invisible multiplier to account for women and children. Did losing military pops in war kill their dependents too?
|
# ? May 27, 2021 19:18 |
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:Re dependents, I was actually thinking about that the other day. Anyone know how this worked in Vic2? I know that pops were just men, and there was an invisible multiplier to account for women and children. Did losing military pops in war kill their dependents too? Correct. Every pop represented 4 people (wife and 2 kids) and losing a pop from war deleted the whole family. So representing a pop with different numbers of workers and dependents does open up new avenues of simulation, eg families with 10 kids, aging population, veterans and widows etc.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 19:26 |
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:Re dependents, I was actually thinking about that the other day. Anyone know how this worked in Vic2? I know that pops were just men, and there was an invisible multiplier to account for women and children. Did losing military pops in war kill their dependents too? Yes, but it's more like those dependents never really existed anyway. The x4 multiplier was just for display, it had no effect on gameplay.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 19:27 |
|
pseudodragon posted:You really can’t think of interesting or tough decisions a government might face in dealing with an epidemic? Let's not forget the era's weirdest medical tragedy, invest in hospitals which then cause even more people to die, because your doctor's don't have the Wash Your Hands technology.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 19:29 |
|
I don't want to read dev diaries, I want wiz to read them to me in his handsome victorian outfit.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 19:45 |
|
Baronjutter posted:I don't want to read dev diaries, I want wiz to read them to me in his handsome victorian outfit.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 19:50 |
|
OddObserver posted:Some sort of naval-presence-protecting-traderoutes thing does seem important for the period... This is something that always bugged me about Victoria 2 - that your navy basically did not matter most of the time. Sure you could spam capital ships to pump up your mil score but otherwise you basically only needed enough of a navy to get your troops across the water to wherever you were invading, and if you never went up against the British, that usually wasn't a lot.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 20:14 |
|
pseudodragon posted:You really can’t think of interesting or tough decisions a government might face in dealing with an epidemic? Believe it or not the spanish flu epidemic wasn't actually covid. It basically just leaped around for two years, would come some place new, burn its way through the pop, and then leap to another place. There was no "cure" and mitigation methods were slightly effective, but not very since there was limited understanding of viruses. I wouldn't want a "stop the plague" mechanic in CK3 either. Sorta the whole point of it is you have all that state capacity, and no where for it to go. Maybe it could be event where you can click "something must be done" to spend 10000000 pounds and lose 2% instead of 3% of the pop or something. wisconsingreg fucked around with this message at 20:29 on May 27, 2021 |
# ? May 27, 2021 20:19 |
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:This is something that always bugged me about Victoria 2 - that your navy basically did not matter most of the time. Sure you could spam capital ships to pump up your mil score but otherwise you basically only needed enough of a navy to get your troops across the water to wherever you were invading, and if you never went up against the British, that usually wasn't a lot. A design goal of V3 is definitely to make naval power more important, especially if you want to maintain a global empire.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 20:24 |
|
Wiz posted:A design goal of V3 is definitely to make naval power more important, especially if you want to maintain a global empire. Nice. I assume then it can get to the point of the late 19th early 20th century British Empire where the costs of maintaining the Empire (particularly projecting naval power and protecting sea lanes) were seriously outpacing the economic benefits, at least in terms of state finances, alot of private individuals (financiers, manufacturers, and people further down the social ladder who took well-paying jobs in the colonial administration far away from home for some years) still benefitted obviously.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 20:30 |
|
Can I ban gunnery training so that I get prestige from having the cleanest and shiniest ships?
|
# ? May 27, 2021 20:30 |
|
Cantorsdust posted:Correct. Every pop represented 4 people (wife and 2 kids) and losing a pop from war deleted the whole family. So representing a pop with different numbers of workers and dependents does open up new avenues of simulation, eg families with 10 kids, aging population, veterans and widows etc. Where did domestic servants fit into the equation in Vicky 2's simulation? Where they just counted as dependents of the aristocratic pops or did you need to maintain them as a pop to keep the blue bloods happy?
|
# ? May 27, 2021 20:38 |
|
Vagabong posted:Where did domestic servants fit into the equation in Vicky 2's simulation? Where they just counted as dependents of the aristocratic pops or did you need to maintain them as a pop to keep the blue bloods happy? They didn't. There wasn't a server poptype represented.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 20:41 |
|
Vagabong posted:Where did domestic servants fit into the equation in Vicky 2's simulation? Where they just counted as dependents of the aristocratic pops or did you need to maintain them as a pop to keep the blue bloods happy? Vicky 2 didn't have "dependant" pops. Off the top of my head you had: Upper Capitalists Aristocrats Middle Bureaucrats Clergy/Teachers Officers Artisans Clerks Lower Farmers Laborers Craftsmen Soldiers Slaves
|
# ? May 27, 2021 20:41 |
|
HisMajestyBOB posted:Can I ban gunnery training so that I get prestige from having the cleanest and shiniest ships? I vaguely recall every event choice in Victoria 2 being: 1. "Bah! Our people have no need of health/welfare/cleanliness/anything but dying down a coal mine!" (+5 prestige) 2. "Fine, institute the reforms" (+100% happiness, -100 prestige)
|
# ? May 27, 2021 21:23 |
|
V2 didn't represent anybody outside able-bodied working males at all, yeah. Your "population" number in the ledger or whatever took the number of POPs and multiplied it by 4 to account for the wife and 2 kids but it had zero effect on gameplay it was purely cosmetic.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 21:27 |
|
You forgot giving the first option a bump in militancy This means that in vicky2 actually improving your country requires you to take the first option because politicians don't support changes unless your people are pissed off.
|
# ? May 27, 2021 21:29 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 15:51 |
|
Since female and child pops will be considered dependents at first, and that status seems to be independent from their profession, does that mean that it'd be possible to have female and child soldier pops if there was a way for them not to be dependents anymore?
|
# ? May 27, 2021 21:34 |