|
Lady Radia posted:no i actually agree that i hate the vicky 2 war system and really look forward to the vicky 3 war system. i thinnk going to the goon game dev like "hey nooo ignore those people i, this poster, love you" is embarrassing lol I missed who they were replying to
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 19:35
|
|
i'll fix it in a bit, need to find another good pic
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
i miss wizposting but i guess when map games are your job it's harder to effortpost about them for fun too
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 19:36
|
|
|
My only big worry about managing big nations is all the production method "micro" you need to do to really make your economy work nice. It's nice you can do it state by state or globally but so often there's cases where there's really a reward for hyper-managing them to get the exact right balance and react to the changes in prices as they cascade through your economy. I worry there will be lots of moments where you're focused on other things and realize "oh gently caress, I've got half my glass industry using the outdated production method" or "oh poo poo, I didn't notice my arms industries were running at a loss for the last year because there's a shortage of a resource and I should have dropped 1/3 of them down to a more simple output". Auto-expand is nice, but I wonder if there's any way an auto-method could work. Where you even hand over production method and output choices to the AI and it tries to switch your industries around to hopefully make the most money and automatically drop enough buildings down when there's a shortage of something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 19:38
|
|
|
Lady Radia posted:no i actually agree that i hate the vicky 2 war system and really look forward to the vicky 3 war system. i thinnk going to the goon game dev like "hey nooo ignore those people i, this poster, love you" is embarrassing
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 19:39
|
|
|
Lady Radia posted:i miss wizposting but i guess when map games are your job it's harder to effortpost about them for fun too My effortposts nowadays are called dev diaries!
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 19:40
|
|
|
i feel like even using newer PM's is itself a deliberate choice so that's not necessarily something I want automated away? like, switching to oil for my canneries (or whatever) if i have no oil is gonna bankrupt that industry, and i'd -want- to make the decision to ease it in i guess you're saiyng it'd be a choice you'd make yourself to automate it. those are just my thoughts. i was going to note too that like, if it is something that can be completely automated, because there's always a "right" decision, that's probably a flaw in design, but i realized even the most advanced PM's have downsides for certain countries - like sometimes it's better to keep 10k more laborers employed than 1k more machinists, depending on demographic makeup. that's cool. e: Wiz posted:My effortposts nowadays are called dev diaries! does this make you responsible for the OHIO dev diary?!?!!?!?!?!~?!?1/1/1/11?!11/1?! and using ofaloaf to take the fall...
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 19:40
|
|
|
Lady Radia posted:i feel like even using newer PM's is itself a deliberate choice so that's not necessarily something I want automated away? like, switching to oil for my canneries (or whatever) if i have no oil is gonna bankrupt that industry, and i'd -want- to make the decision to ease it in Yeah, this is for sure part of the design - no PM should always be better under all circumstances than the previous. There should always be a reason to want to use the simpler method, like lacking the input good or not enough demand for the increased production. Generally speaking though, you don't want to balance shortages by downscaling parts of your production but rather by upscaling other parts or using trade to make up for surpluses or shortages - downgrading a PM is going to result in a bunch of unemployed pops of a particular type and will probably cause an issue in your production chain somewhere else, so it's something you do only if there's no better way to solve the problem. Also, I am responsible for Ohio and thus indirectly responsible for the Ohio dev diary. Sorry about that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 19:43
|
|
|
In the last stream it seemed like they were switching out their production methods quite liberally, especially for their barracks. But I guess that's because they had a specific plan to stretch themselves before their first war and then concentrate on other things during the truce. One industry that seems to be the most critical for balancing the budget seems to be construction. I noticed you all even added buttons on the budget screen to change production methods for your construction industry. Honestly if there's one thing I'm kind of worried about, it feels like there's not enough granularity in construction funding. It's all or nothing and makes a huge difference in your budget and economy. It seems like something where you should be able to run at half funding or something so you don't have to jerk your economy around so violently whenever you've got to balance your budget.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 19:55
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:My only big worry about managing big nations is all the production method "micro" you need to do to really make your economy work nice. It's nice you can do it state by state or globally but so often there's cases where there's really a reward for hyper-managing them to get the exact right balance and react to the changes in prices as they cascade through your economy. I worry there will be lots of moments where you're focused on other things and realize "oh gently caress, I've got half my glass industry using the outdated production method" or "oh poo poo, I didn't notice my arms industries were running at a loss for the last year because there's a shortage of a resource and I should have dropped 1/3 of them down to a more simple output". Auto-expand is nice, but I wonder if there's any way an auto-method could work. Where you even hand over production method and output choices to the AI and it tries to switch your industries around to hopefully make the most money and automatically drop enough buildings down when there's a shortage of something? I feel like making those mistakes and responding to them is going to be like half the game's fun though. Like sure you can pause liberally and micromanage your entire country and finish the game in a hundred hours, in which case you would never automate anyway, but you can also just react to stuff as it goes on and work towards a long term goal or two in general. I was worried about it for big nations like Russia etc, but for the most part it doesn't really seem like you would need to think too hard about it. As bigger nations you just build en masse according to your needs and not worry about micromanaging the efficiency of every individual state. Kind of the perennial fight against getting players to optimize their own fun away.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 20:02
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I think the issue with allowing adding wargoals after the war declaration is it ends up turning every war into total war. If you're losing, you want to fight to the last man because what started out as a minor conflict ends up becoming something that will completely cripple your nation if you surrender, and if you're winning you want to ride the momentum to take as much as you possibly can. It discourages peacing out quickly to try to minimize the impact on your soldier-age population, which is a big deal in Vicky because pops are your entire economic engine rather than just a passively regenerating pool of manpower you spend fighting wars. Encouraging that sort of "sticking in way longer than we should" makes sense for a great war, but there was only one actual great war in the time period. WW1 was notable because it was such an aberration, and while I do think that should be mechanically represented in the game since it's the pivotal moment at the end of the timeline, it's probably not something that should be present in the basic mechanics of every conflict. If you compare something like the the Franco-Prussian war, which was still a very major conflict, it only lasted about 6 months and ~200,000 dead, and despite a total victory by Germany they still only took Alsace-Lorraine and a bunch of war reparations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 20:32
|
|
|
Eiba posted:Honestly if there's one thing I'm kind of worried about, it feels like there's not enough granularity in construction funding. It's all or nothing and makes a huge difference in your budget and economy. It seems like something where you should be able to run at half funding or something so you don't have to jerk your economy around so violently whenever you've got to balance your budget. I think that this is specifcially so you don't massively ramp up your construction industry for a while, then downsize it, then ramp it up again. Getting the right amount of construction set up seems like a fairly major decision and being able to partially circumvent it would probably result in it always being correct to have a major excess construction capacity to retain the possibility to quickly go into a growth spurt if needed
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Seems pretty easy to avoid that, just make adding additional war goals require far higher casualties. Like, a war dynamically becomes a Great War when the combatants start racking up millions of deaths, not merely hundred of thousands. There probably needs to be more to it than casualties, otherwise the Taiping Rebellion would be considered a Great War.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 21:41
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I think that this is specifcially so you don't massively ramp up your construction industry for a while, then downsize it, then ramp it up again. Getting the right amount of construction set up seems like a fairly major decision and being able to partially circumvent it would probably result in it always being correct to have a major excess construction capacity to retain the possibility to quickly go into a growth spurt if needed Pylons posted:There probably needs to be more to it than casualties, otherwise the Taiping Rebellion would be considered a Great War. Honestly, it's something I'm fine with them adding in a DLC later on rather than half-assing it now. The current diplomatic play system is really solid and you'd basically have to push it aside entirely and make a whole parallel system for great war dynamics. It's definitely worth doing that eventually, but it's not the end of the world if it's not in the base game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 22:08
|
|
|
Pylons posted:There probably needs to be more to it than casualties, otherwise the Taiping Rebellion would be considered a Great War. Yeah it's a thing where you can imagine a lot of edge cases cropping up that would make it a pain. Like China going to war always means a ton of people are going to die simply because of the fact that they have such a huge population and even a fraction of a percent of that is still millions of people. But on the other hand, would it make sense for like, Luxembourg to decide "this is the Great War" if they lose 50,000 people? That's a lot relative to their population but not that much relative to Europe as a whole.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 22:10
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Agreed, long live the shogunate! Ironically the shogunate lost because they listened to French military advisors to buy cutting edge rifles, but the rebel provenance listened to the British and bought cutting edge artillery. In a very Victoria 3 manner, it turned out that cutting edge artillery beats cutting edge rifles, even if the side with rifles had a slight economic advantage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 22:36
|
|
|
I'm playing Terra Invictus this week and holy poo poo, it makes Victoria 2 look like an easy to jump into mobile game with minimal micro management or obtuse mechanics. It's still amazing though. But good god, it's like V2 levels of management and jank but covering the entire solar system. If you've ever wanted a mash up of x-com and a paradox map game experience, this is it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 23:07
|
|
|
Eiba posted:In the last stream it seemed like they were switching out their production methods quite liberally, especially for their barracks. But I guess that's because they had a specific plan to stretch themselves before their first war and then concentrate on other things during the truce. It does look like there are penalties for the military doctrine changes where they're learning how to use the new fangled guns, but I'm curious if there is anything similar for industrial methods.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 23:11
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I'm playing Terra Invictus this week and holy poo poo, it makes Victoria 2 look like an easy to jump into mobile game with minimal micro management or obtuse mechanics. It's still amazing though. But good god, it's like V2 levels of management and jank but covering the entire solar system. If you've ever wanted a mash up of x-com and a paradox map game experience, this is it. This is making me really want to play it and also really not want to play it at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 23:22
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I think a simple way to balance adding more war goals for yourself would be having casualties and economic damage justify additional war goals. As long as the required damage is high enough, that should do a lot to prevent gaming the system, while still allowing a Great War equivalent to escalate over time. Other than that, I guess doing a diplomatic play to get another country to enter the war on your side should be another way to expand war goals, though obviously those goals would reward your ally and not yourself. Mussolini posted:I only need a few thousand dead so that I can sit at the peace conference as a man who has fought.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2022 01:11
|
|
|
AG3 posted:This is making me really want to play it and also really not want to play it at the same time. It's currently early access (so like a paradox release) but it's pretty solid so far, only problem are a need for more tooltips and some interface improvements and general quality of life stuff but it's otherwise an amazingly unique grand strategy sort of game. I'm like 50 hours in and only just building my first spaceships. What's neat is that you start out playing a more traditional paradox map game focused on earth, and then it becomes more and more x-com but also building an entire space economy. It's tough too, real tough. I hate micro management but with a game like this it's all sort of worth it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2022 02:19
|
|
|
Wiz posted:It's not. But the demands of the belligerent powers in the war certainly escalated over time. How is that going to be simulated?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2022 03:00
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I think the issue with allowing adding wargoals after the war declaration is it ends up turning every war into total war. If you're losing, you want to fight to the last man because what started out as a minor conflict ends up becoming something that will completely cripple your nation if you surrender, and if you're winning you want to ride the momentum to take as much as you possibly can. It discourages peacing out quickly to try to minimize the impact on your soldier-age population, which is a big deal in Vicky because pops are your entire economic engine rather than just a passively regenerating pool of manpower you spend fighting wars. Encouraging that sort of "sticking in way longer than we should" makes sense for a great war, but there was only one actual great war in the time period. WW1 was notable because it was such an aberration, and while I do think that should be mechanically represented in the game since it's the pivotal moment at the end of the timeline, it's probably not something that should be present in the basic mechanics of every conflict. If you compare something like the the Franco-Prussian war, which was still a very major conflict, it only lasted about 6 months and ~200,000 dead, and despite a total victory by Germany they still only took Alsace-Lorraine and a bunch of war reparations. I think it's pretty simple to make adding wargoals unlockable by tech so that great powers would only be able to do so after 1900~.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2022 03:03
|
|
|
Pylons posted:There probably needs to be more to it than casualties, otherwise the Taiping Rebellion would be considered a Great War.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2022 05:29
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:But the demands of the belligerent powers in the war certainly escalated over time. How is that going to be simulated? (ive waited so long to say this) go play a history book 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2022 07:08
|
|
|
23 days
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2022 15:03
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Also, I am responsible for Ohio and thus indirectly responsible for the Ohio dev diary. Sorry about that. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
I just want Deseret.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 12:21
|
|
|
What years does Victoria 3 have content for? I don’t know the start or end year
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 17:32
|
|
|
buglord posted:What years does Victoria 3 have content for? I don’t know the start or end year 1836-1936
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 17:42
|
|
|
 3 weeks
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 18:01
|
|
|
Thread: I’ve never played a Vicky game, but I’ve played a ton of HoI, EU, Imperator, and CK. Is the recommendation for Paradox games still to wait a couple months, or are they releasing more polished stuff now? I was pretty impressed with CK3’s release state, for instance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 18:18
|
|
|
Things are usually pretty good after the initial hotfix patch in the first week or so. I'm sure there will still be issues but it should be plenty playable
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
Paradox has mostly gotten better about having functional releases. The games themselves may or may not be well filled-out, but we're a ways away from the horrific bug-ridden "wait a few months for basic playability" of early Paradox.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 18:32
|
|
|
Hard to tell. We're a couple of weeks from release and they've still hit gamebreaking bugs in streams. Honestly as long as there's nothing game breaking, any bugs that are left in release should just add some charm to your first playthrough
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 18:42
|
|
|
Worth noting that the stream bugs are from in progress post-1.0 builds, so if the game released today it would be version 1.0 and it wouldn't have those bugs in it. The idea being that if they manage to get the current patch in a decent shape it can be applied to the game when it releases but if there's any showstopper bugs (like, uh, all your buildings disappearing) then they can just go ahead with the "good enough" build they already have finalised.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 18:53
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Thread: I’ve never played a Vicky game, but I’ve played a ton of HoI, EU, Imperator, and CK. Is the recommendation for Paradox games still to wait a couple months, or are they releasing more polished stuff now? ehhh the question nowadays is one of support vs fundamentally not working, and Vicky has a ton of support behind it with all the marketing hoopla and the like. Either way may as well wait the first week after release in case a game breaking bug sneaks in
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 18:57
|
|
|
Lady Radia posted:Either way may as well wait the first week after release E: VVV Same Arrath fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Oct 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 19:03
|
|
|
Genuinely considering taking a day or two off work when it releases
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 19:13
|
|
|
On the other hand there's nothing really like discovering all the broken poo poo in a new paradox game/patch.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 19:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
gonna crash the world economy by going all in on clipper factroys
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 19:26
|
|
