|
God I hope someone makes a mod that starts the game around EU4 times. I don't care if the engine isn't perfectly suited to it. Probably can't do exploration, that's fine start it a bit later. I've just always wanted a paradox game that was a bit more "civilization" like in its scope.
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:07 |
|
|
Baronjutter posted:God I hope someone makes a mod that starts the game around EU4 times. I don't care if the engine isn't perfectly suited to it. Probably can't do exploration, that's fine start it a bit later. I've just always wanted a paradox game that was a bit more "civilization" like in its scope.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 22:16
|
|
|
Yeah pushing the start date back to French Revolution times would be fun but I think for the "standard" game an ahistorical French Revolution would be a pretty massive change for the rest of the game
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 00:06
|
|
|
Great Stream today I have no fuckin clue what that guy did the entire time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 01:45
|
|
|
just saw the stream, ofaloaf was indeed great
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 04:00
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Yeah pushing the start date back to French Revolution times would be fun but I think for the "standard" game an ahistorical French Revolution would be a pretty massive change for the rest of the game
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 06:01
|
|
|
Cool stream, I only got an hour in but I can't wait to get back home and finish watching.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 06:28
|
|
|
I can only assume sitting and doing nothing while all of your neighbours surrender to you for free is a Prussia only thing? With how fast he played, it also felt like as long as you're building -something-, you can't really go wrong. And while he did play on speed 5 through most of it, I also couldn't help but feel that a campaign's gonna be super short, now you don't have combat to micro. A campaign can probably be done in a day? I also got some flashbacks to how EU4 tries to explain which trade routes are profitable throwing light ships at, with how many of the buildings he put down were estimated to run at a loss. I assume I'm missing something here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 06:28
|
|
|
omg the train segment is also so good 
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 06:52
|
|
|
In hindsight, starting a new Stellaris game was a stupid thing to do. "When you spend money on war, you can't spend it on trains". Wipfmetz fucked around with this message at 09:49 on Oct 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 09:40
|
|
|
Plenty of time, my sweet. Plenty of time. If you don't finish it by the time Victoria 3 releases in two weeks you can switch into "waiting for patches with cool features" mode even before playing the release version. It's very cost-effective.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 09:43
|
|
|
I’m behind on watching the vids, but: there are no little soldiers and battalions? In the period with the most ~fabulous~ and diverse military uniforms (not just on generals), and the most striking change in the way that military hardware shaped the battlefield? That’s admirable as a way of downgrading war as a tool in a period that started the great peacening, but it’s a bit of a shame in terms of having a fun game. Players should be able to see little Qing cavalry sweeping through Alabama, redcoats marching through Hyderabad or an honour guard with assegais marching down a defeated Mall IMO. E: this is in no way a denigration of the “fronts”-based replacement to moving individual units, which I really like. 100% aesthetic
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 09:52
|
|
|
i think the first major change to warfare will be adding little mans to the map since it does seem to be a sticking point for folks
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 09:54
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:God I hope someone makes a mod that starts the game around EU4 times. I don't care if the engine isn't perfectly suited to it. Probably can't do exploration, that's fine start it a bit later. I've just always wanted a paradox game that was a bit more "civilization" like in its scope. I think you could have started V2 without any problems at 1792, and you could probably have rolled it back to 1754 and the start of the Seven Years Old without two much effort. Not sure about V3 since I haven't seen it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 09:55
|
|
|
A bit odd in the stream that they managed to stay competitive without changing production methods at all- I hope that there is a notification if you are using outdated production methods since otherwise, it will probably be quite easy to forget.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 13:59
|
|
|
little mans missing on the map is my only gripe with the war system tbh
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 14:01
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:I think you could have started V2 without any problems at 1792, and you could probably have rolled it back to 1754 and the start of the Seven Years Old without two much effort. Age of Enlightement mod starts V2 at 1700 and runs to 1821ish, and yeah the early years are kinda broke if you go too off rails and gently caress with the initial succession war outcomes too much
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 14:24
|
|
|
Pump it up! Do it! posted:A bit odd in the stream that they managed to stay competitive without changing production methods at all- I hope that there is a notification if you are using outdated production methods since otherwise, it will probably be quite easy to forget. PMs are explicitly not better or worse or even necessarily more efficient, and it looked like there was an icon in the construction menu letting you know if you had new PMs you hadn’t looked at available
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 16:33
|
|
|
Lady Radia posted:PMs are explicitly not better or worse or even necessarily more efficient, and it looked like there was an icon in the construction menu letting you know if you had new PMs you hadn’t looked at available Generally speaking more advanced methods of production are 'better' in the sense that if prices are all at base value they'll be more profitable, but that's assuming: 1) Prices are indeed favorable in this way, ie you have enough supply and demand for the increased throughput 2) You have a source for any new input goods added 3) You have pops that have qualifications and can take the more advanced jobs that advanced PMs generally require In some cases like automation it also depends on what the wage levels are like in your country - if wages are low automation is less profitable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 17:45
|
|
|
Yeah there are reasons to not switch to newer production methods. They're primarily there, as far as I can tell, for either efficiency or automation reasons, but even the efficiency ones require stuff you might not have a good source of.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 17:45
|
|
|
Wiz posted:3) You have pops that have qualifications and can take the more advanced jobs that advanced PMs generally require I must admit that I am quite curious to look at labor requirements and so on to figure out what factories/PMs might be best suited to be 'feeders' for more advanced jobs. Like something to turn laborers into mechanics/engineers and suffer turnover as they then promote into more advanced jobs or just more profitable factories without hitting the economy too badly by being not optimally profitable itself. E: New video up on youtube, nothing super new but still. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDFHJx4XWGU Arrath fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Oct 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 18:09
|
|
|
The Prussia stream could have probably micro'd those upgrades better, but between streamer brain, speed five, the Springtime of Nations, and the diplo focus of unification, it was very understandable to not be as concerned with wringing out as much value as possible from cutting edge industrialization. Very enjoyable stream, overall!
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 18:56
|
|
|
Wish they had time to discuss trains though, very sad
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 19:14
|
|
|
Arrath posted:I must admit that I am quite curious to look at labor requirements and so on to figure out what factories/PMs might be best suited to be 'feeders' for more advanced jobs. Like something to turn laborers into mechanics/engineers and suffer turnover as they then promote into more advanced jobs or just more profitable factories without hitting the economy too badly by being not optimally profitable itself. I think the main thing for Qualifications growth is your education laws - if you want laborers to gain mechanic quals faster then you'll need some form of non wealth based education to raise the literacy of poor laborer pops. Otherwise you'll be dependent on the natural growth of your smaller, richer pops that can afford education. The DD did mention some extra considerations though, for example mechanics have a bonus to engineer qualification growth, and likewise for officers becoming aristocrats. The question of whether or not to automate is an interesting one. I'm curious to find out how far you can get as someone like Russia or China by leveraging masses of uneducated labor as opposed to more "advanced" PMs. I recall a dev saying though that there are fixed wage ratios between the different professions within a given building. So if a factory needs to attract more engineers by raising their wages, it will have to also raise wages for its laborers regardless of how ample the unskilled labor pool is. I would hope they can eliminate that limitation so the wage markets of different education levels can move independently. This would better represent low-literacy countries where educated specialists are in short supply, hence expensive, but common labor is dirt cheap. I think Latchek said they tried this and it caused some econ stability issues, but hopefully they can find a workable solution eventually.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 19:20
|
|
|
How impactful are newer production methods on war? Because if I'm turning out twice as many artillery shells as the opponent due to my technological advantage I should probably be burying them in whatever war we're fighting. We saw Britain mop the floor with Qing in the Japan game (I think it was Japan) so there's definitely something to be said for military sophistication giving you more war power, but that was against Qing who aren't a great example of military efficiency. edit: War is the one place where market mechanics work very differently than consumer goods, at least I'm assuming that's the case. Ithle01 fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Oct 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 23:25
|
|
|
Ithle01 posted:How impactful are newer production methods on war? Because if I'm turning out twice as many artillery shells as the opponent due to my technological advantage I should probably be burying them in whatever war we're fighting. We saw Britain mop the floor with Qing in the Japan game (I think it was Japan) so there's definitely something to be said for military sophistication giving you more war power, but that was against Qing who aren't a great example of military efficiency. I think how much you can translate a production advantage into a military one will depend on whether your military is actually large enough to make use of all those supplies. I'm assuming the way it works is like in Vicky 2 where the military has a certain amount of goods upkeep required to remain at full strength, and then consumes additional goods when reinforcing after losses in battle, all of which is purchased from the market using the nation's funds. If you're already producing enough to keep your military fully supplied, the advantage of producing more would be making that upkeep cheaper due to the increased supply, but wouldn't actually make your army fight any better (although a cheaper army means you can re-invest the savings into making a larger army, barring non-financial factors that might prevent it like a manpower shortage).
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 23:49
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I think how much you can translate a production advantage into a military one will depend on whether your military is actually large enough to make use of all those supplies. I'm assuming the way it works is like in Vicky 2 where the military has a certain amount of goods upkeep required to remain at full strength, and then consumes additional goods when reinforcing after losses in battle, all of which is purchased from the market using the nation's funds. If you're already producing enough to keep your military fully supplied, the advantage of producing more would be making that upkeep cheaper due to the increased supply, but wouldn't actually make your army fight any better (although a cheaper army means you can re-invest the savings into making a larger army, barring non-financial factors that might prevent it like a manpower shortage). Military production following the law of supply and demand seems weird to me, but I'm not really informed about this period of time so okay sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 01:29
|
|
|
Well there’s a much more straightforward way production translates to combat power - higher tech military “production methods” just give your army flat stat increases while consuming more of the same goods. So switching to higher tier guns for, say, +10 attack/defense means your military needs to consume more units of small arms per day.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 03:59
|
|
|
Dayton Sports Bar posted:Well there’s a much more straightforward way production translates to combat power - higher tech military “production methods” just give your army flat stat increases while consuming more of the same goods. So switching to higher tier guns for, say, +10 attack/defense means your military needs to consume more units of small arms per day. That's makes way more sense to me. The combat system's nuts and bolts are a bit opaque to me, but it's a Paradox game so I'm not going to understand poo poo until I actually play it in about two weeks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 11:37
|
|
|
This seems like a big problem https://www.reddit.com/r/victoria3/...nt=share_button
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:00
|
|
|
On the one had it is very silly that building too many farms makes free states join the slavers, on the other the dynamic nature of the war is fun and more interesting than watching the US win the war in eight months every time so I'm pretty eh on it
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:07
|
|
|
yeah that sounds actually pretty cool and the simplest justification is "wow yeah we could make a lot more money by bringing back slavery"
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:11
|
|
|
This seems like "some testing and balancing" problem. In this reddit post, I see the same familiar mindset that wants Indian soldiers to be objectively worse than Europeans in 1790s because at that time historically British won wars there. This or that state was abolitionist in 1836 so it's impossible for them to join CSA 20 years later! This is backwards thinking that assumes that real history is the right version of history and even ignores how different that USA on this screenshot from what it really was in history at that point. ilitarist fucked around with this message at 15:16 on Oct 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:12
|
|
|
I am sympathetic to the idea that states where slavery was already abolished shouldn't be able to join the CSA.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:14
|
|
|
AnEdgelord posted:I am sympathetic to the idea that states where slavery was already abolished shouldn't be able to join the CSA. That doesn't make funny meme though
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:26
|
|
|
If there were giant plantations in the north it would be interesting to see if the southern planters could make the case that their states were holding back the potential of those estates by not allowing slavery. After all, slavery was mainly opposed by people who didn't directly benefit from slavery. An alternate history where powerful northern landowners were looking jealously at all the cheap labor the south had would be interesting. Or the system should be tweaked to change the weights. Something like a big penalty to landowner influence in free states if the landowners interest group is into slavery. Either way lol at the idea that it's a "big problem."
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:28
|
|
|
Yeah, it says a lot about our society that people thought this was too ahistorical, but there aren't many posts about Russia annexing parts of Japan or whatever happened to China.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:43
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:Yeah, it says a lot about our society that people thought this was too ahistorical, but there aren't many posts about Russia annexing parts of Japan or whatever happened to China. it says a lot about our society that americans are more familiar with their own country's history than that of other countries?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:44
|
|
|
Do you think all people on Reddit or here are Americans?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:07 |
|
|
ilitarist posted:Do you think all people on Reddit or here are Americans? i do think the people with those opinions are
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2022 15:48
|
|