|
Cease to Hope posted:and even then, i'm skeptical. paradox has a system where you win wars by pouring resources into a bucket: HOI4's aerial layer. it's not interesting at all. i'm curious what about war is more interesting than that system, and they've been keeping the details on war pretty close to the chest. Seems to me they’ve communicated pretty clearly that what’s supposed to be interesting about wars is not the action of the war itself, but how it impacts the belligerent societies and the global economy at large. Which makes sense for a game that is about those societies and which they openly present as “not a wargame.” Basically war exists to be the ultimate stress test of the society you’ve built and not a tactical test for the player.
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2022 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:36 |
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:and even then, i'm skeptical. paradox has a system where you win wars by pouring resources into a bucket: HOI4's aerial layer. it's not interesting at all. i'm curious what about war is more interesting than that system, and they've been keeping the details on war pretty close to the chest. In theory at least. I think if there ends up being anything frustrating about this system it will probably be that you just can't do something you should be able to for some arbitrary reason. I don't think it'll be a fiddly or hard to learn system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2022 21:43
|
|
|
We've also seen that Paradox (and, specifically, Wiz in games he's the lead of) isn't afraid to throw out systems intended to be core tenets of game design post-release when they're just not working (see: original FTL system in Stellaris), and I feel like if the worst comes to pass and the V3 military system proves to be actively detrimental to the game experience, there's a good chance the devs could decide to completely overhaul it. But I'm glad they're trying something different, even if it doesn't work out in the end. The "traditional" Paradox game military system has never been especially interesting to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2022 22:32
|
|
|
At worst I worry that the military system will just be boring, or just something that feels a bit too much like it's happening in the background as your nation burns itself to the ground. But what I can say for certain, is that having played V1+2, Stellaris and many of the Europa games is that the military system always felt like it had either a bit too much micro in it that was eventually softened with updates, or it was an utter nightmare of covering borders and carpet sieging that made me consider longer than I would want to whether I really wanted to play that game again. As much flak Wiz and Paradox gets for the Death of Warp, I'm wholly onboard with trying something new, even if it resembles something that people don't fully enjoy. death of ground combat when
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2022 23:19
|
|
|
Yes I for one am glad I won't have to worry about EUIV stack wrangling and carpet sieges, let alone looking away for a moment to find a deathstack snuck in from some neutral border and is counter-capping all my poo poo. Or the ever-classic "Forgot about my fleets doing trade route protection and they got wiped by the French Armada on day 3" Arrath fucked around with this message at 00:15 on Jun 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 00:12
|
|
|
as someone that developed wrist issues from too many v2 wars it's already in a new league for me. lets just hope there's a bit less clicky
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 00:14
|
|
|
As always, my fear is that it will get too bogged down in "simulationist" logic and make the player constantly feel that their generals are making dumb decisions instead of just being abstracted.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 00:36
|
|
|
My generals are all idiots but have high charisma so I can’t really do anything about it
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 00:54
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:My generals are all idiots but have high charisma so I can’t really do anything about it - Abraham Lincoln in 1861.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 01:02
|
|
|
Clarste posted:As always, my fear is that it will get too bogged down in "simulationist" logic and make the player constantly feel that their generals are making dumb decisions instead of just being abstracted. Yeah, this I am worried about. At least I can save scum my own dumb missteps. AI general will probably do it again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 01:08
|
|
|
This had me thinking about Sengoku, which was used to test some design concepts for CK2, and March of the Eagles, which was for EU4(?). I'm curious how a focused, WW1 war game focused on the proposed war system would look like now. At the very least I expect someone to mod in a WW1 scenario.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 01:43
|
|
|
Arrath posted:Oh hell yeah now I'm imagining community challenges (like I've seen the Rimworld subreddit do), download some whack setup and see how you did when the Martian Tripods showed up, vs everyone else running the same challenge. Inject Vicky 3 War of the Worlds into my veins.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 07:26
|
|
|
Clarste posted:As always, my fear is that it will get too bogged down in "simulationist" logic and make the player constantly feel that their generals are making dumb decisions instead of just being abstracted. This would be the case if the game would be abstracted on HoI4 level so that you see individual divisions. You'd be furious about specific decisions of AI. When it's abstracted on the level of a front it's different. Like when in EU4 the siege is going badly you don't get mad at your general for bombarding wrong wall or not preparing for enemy sortie. You get mad at luck and not bringing more guns. 8 imagine Victoria 3 will be like that but bigger.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 09:00
|
|
|
MervBushwacker posted:Inject Vicky 3 War of the Worlds into my veins. Yes please
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 15:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/PDXVictoria/status/1542145932405354496
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 16:16
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:This is why I legitimately think it could be a cool addition to Victoria 3 to eventually add in NGO's into the game, like Corporations to further flesh out not only the East India company but also expand upon the influence of large corporations like Exxon-Mobile, Krupp, Mitsubishi, and with modding support for the eventual modern day mods, Apple and Microsoft and Huawei and represent and simulate the ways these large corporations can influence domestic politics as a interest group in of themselves above and beyond just the mere monied interests. ExxonMobil? I think you mean Standard Oil friend. The power Standard Oil had in contribution to American doctrine was ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 16:59
|
|
|
I can only assume they have a minimum of half a dozen full-time programmers working on the Fruit Wars DLC already
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 17:02
|
|
|
maybe it's overly simulationist of me but honestly poo poo like "i sent a general to afghanistan with a big army and only two guys got out alive because he was a huge racist dumbass" is an essential part of bringing that victorian feeling to the table and i'm gonna have fun with it even when i lose because of it
Jazerus fucked around with this message at 20:02 on Jun 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 18:42
|
|
|
If it was just another game where 90% of your time is spent directly ordering troops around it wouldn't be half as interesting to me
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 19:12
|
|
|
The only thing I sort of want with Vic 3 combat is tiny men and horses running around on that simulated battlefield front. And that they look different depending on who is fighting, and what tech they have.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 19:56
|
|
|
Pooned posted:The only thing I sort of want with Vic 3 combat is tiny men and horses running around on that simulated battlefield front. And that they look different depending on who is fighting, and what tech they have. Unironically for me the 6 man formation in V1 being replaced by one giant dude in V2 was the most triggering part of V2's release
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 19:58
|
|
|
Eiba posted:In contrast to HOI, setting up your resources is going to be the interesting part in this game. Throwing resources into a bucket is going to be boring in a war game, but it's exactly what an economy and politics game needs. my other big worry is that the crisis system will end up boring, easily solved, or easily exploited. so much of the game is hanging on it, and stuff like countries supporting their own annexation (to stave off what, being annexed?) makes me leery.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 20:01
|
|
|
Pooned posted:The only thing I sort of want with Vic 3 combat is tiny men and horses running around on that simulated battlefield front. And that they look different depending on who is fighting, and what tech they have. Yeah it's a real groggy complaint but I love that stuff and always get swindled by those culture DLCs Paradox makes so I'm all for it
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 20:12
|
|
|
Gort posted:If it was just another game where 90% of your time is spent directly ordering troops around it wouldn't be half as interesting to me Also, so much of my victoria 2 experience was figuring out how to "trick" the AI in very cheesy ways, it was never good at micro
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 20:42
|
|
Pooned posted:The only thing I sort of want with Vic 3 combat is tiny men and horses running around on that simulated battlefield front. And that they look different depending on who is fighting, and what tech they have. NATO symbols on the simulated front moving against eachother in procedurally generated animations would be dope.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 21:02
|
|
|
Procedurally generally flags but for 19th century regimental standards
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 21:07
|
|
|
lmao last carried in action getting wooped by Boers and probably causing the recognition of Transvaal as an independent state, well done lads.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 21:23
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:Unironically for me the 6 man formation in V1 being replaced by one giant dude in V2 was the most triggering part of V2's release mods please ban this sick non-counter using monster
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 21:39
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:my other big worry is that the crisis system will end up boring, easily solved, or easily exploited. so much of the game is hanging on it, and stuff like countries supporting their own annexation (to stave off what, being annexed?) makes me leery. It makes no sense from a game mechanics standpoint but it makes perfect sense from a real life standpoint (there are a fair few examples of independent polities willingly being annexed into larger countries) so I think this is mostly a gameplay vs. simulation thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 21:40
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:It makes no sense from a game mechanics standpoint but it makes perfect sense from a real life standpoint (there are a fair few examples of independent polities willingly being annexed into larger countries) so I think this is mostly a gameplay vs. simulation thing. It makes sense in CK though mechanically, because there are systems in place to support lower levels of government and their effect on the higher levels. Though these would be less pronounced outside the feudal world, they could still exist and be compelling in a politics and economy driven game. Get annexed into the large imperial power, then politically maneuver your people into positions of power/become sand in the gears to eventually become the crisis that empire has to deal with. I'm not game designer enough to flesh out what such a system would look like, but I'm sure there are plenty of players out there who would enjoy it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 21:50
|
|
|
Warmachine posted:It makes sense in CK though mechanically, because there are systems in place to support lower levels of government and their effect on the higher levels. Though these would be less pronounced outside the feudal world, they could still exist and be compelling in a politics and economy driven game. Get annexed into the large imperial power, then politically maneuver your people into positions of power/become sand in the gears to eventually become the crisis that empire has to deal with. I'm not game designer enough to flesh out what such a system would look like, but I'm sure there are plenty of players out there who would enjoy it. this would definitely be an interesting system for austria-hungary but idk how many other tags would benefit from it enough to implement in a complex way maybe formables like gran colombia Jazerus fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Jun 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 21:54
|
|
|
I thought countries would support getting turned into protectorates or colonies not just being annexed. That seems fair, keep some kind of self-governance and get access to a market (in the video game not like real life obvs)
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 21:59
|
|
|
Objecting to countries being willing to get annexed is maybe the dumbest objection you could make, because that is reflective of a bunch of actual events and attempted events from the time period.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 22:05
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:my other big worry is that the crisis system will end up boring, easily solved, or easily exploited. so much of the game is hanging on it, and stuff like countries supporting their own annexation (to stave off what, being annexed?) makes me leery. Some countries should absolutely support their own annexation in some cases. It probably shouldn't happen too much outside of pan-nationalist situations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 22:06
|
|
|
Eiba posted:Do you think you should have to fight each and every German minor, all desperately fighting an existential battle to survive, before you can form Germany? no but the system requiring self-sacrificing motivations not modeled well in the system seems like a possible long-term problem
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 22:30
|
|
|
Sure. Things could go wrong for any number of reasons. I'm not really worried about this one. Even if you're able to launch a diplomatic play that results in a country accepting its own annexation, that would just be representing a government that knows it can't win and won't sacrifice its people in an unwinnable war. I don't know if that's going to be possible (I assume countries are going to go down swinging by default), but even if it was it wouldn't really be a problem. I think that would be a pretty rare case though, since everyone with an interest in a region gets a say in every diplomatic play, so you're not going to ever just get your way unless you have no great power rivals in a region, and in that case, sure, you should be able to do what you want. At least, that's if everything works as intended. There will probably be weird edge cases that won't work so smoothly, but generally it seems like a pretty simple framework. I'd still be more worried about it preventing us from doing something plausible, rather than allowing something gamey.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 23:29
|
|
|
Eiba posted:Sure. Things could go wrong for any number of reasons. I'm not really worried about this one. Even if you're able to launch a diplomatic play that results in a country accepting its own annexation, that would just be representing a government that knows it can't win and won't sacrifice its people in an unwinnable war. I don't know if that's going to be possible (I assume countries are going to go down swinging by default), but even if it was it wouldn't really be a problem. I feel like there are other mechanics that would also make "simply annex your way across the planet by asking nicely" a non-viable strategy since even if a country accepts without fighting in the short term, it's not going to do anything to mitigate the unrest that's going to follow from forcibly integrating a bunch of culturally mismatched people living in their now non-independent homelands.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2022 23:39
|
|
|
It's not ahistorical for countries to vote to surrender their sovereignty and independence and annex themselves into another state. This can be for nationalist reasons but there have been plenty of short lived states effectively formed for the purpose of having a recognised sovereignty to give up. Texas being the most famous. For example, the treaty of Waitangi, while a little more complicated than giving up sovereignty and wasn't mutually understood to be as such, involved a confederation put together for basically this purpose: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Tribes_of_New_Zealand It's complicated but things like this are what V3 should model as a peaceful annexation. The incorporation and union of states into other states is a complex relationship but there can be a lot of advantage for the powerbrokers in the smaller party many of whom are making decisions based on individual or ideological concerns - it's much more nuanced than simply a hostile takeover enforced under duress by the larger party. MinistryofLard fucked around with this message at 13:28 on Jun 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:18
|
|
|
I don’t think the problem is that it’s not historical, the argument is it’s contradictory to the ‘goal’ of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:36 |
|
|
Isn't the goal of the game to be a bizarro history simulator?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2022 13:30
|
|