|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:no one does, though All of the Malaysian culture tags can form Indonesia. Apart from the Philippines, who can only form Iberia. Which kind of sucks because they're by far in the best position of all the tags there, in terms of technology and population and recognition.
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 13:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:51 |
|
|
I have been playing as the Ottoman Empire and I don't understand the Tanzimat "Army Modernization" event- does it include both conscription centers and barracks?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 20:58
|
|
|
Red Bones posted:All of the Malaysian culture tags can form Indonesia. Apart from the Philippines, who can only form Iberia. Which kind of sucks because they're by far in the best position of all the tags there, in terms of technology and population and recognition.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 21:13
|
|
|
Pump it up! Do it! posted:I have been playing as the Ottoman Empire and I don't understand the Tanzimat "Army Modernization" event- does it include both conscription centers and barracks? You can't just have the production methods switched, you also have to be supplying them all with input goods. If you don't have enough artillery/small arms or whatever it is, then it's not going to finish.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
Pump it up! Do it! posted:I have been playing as the Ottoman Empire and I don't understand the Tanzimat "Army Modernization" event- does it include both conscription centers and barracks? It’s just barracks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 23:03
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:i've got 100m russians obsessed with loving coffee, and it's ruining their standard of living because they refuse to spend less on coffee The little-known cause of Russian influence in the Horn of Africa: needing something for the Siberian winters
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 23:26
|
|
|
What can block dependent workers from promoting if you got high education access / qualifications? The steel factory pays high enough wages, it seems to only be an issue in a single state. Sadly one with 900k pop.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 00:40
|
|
|
Discriminated culture?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 00:48
|
|
|
Eiba posted:I figured out something important that this game needs: Yeah I'm really not a fan of the way reforms are so hard locked behind leaders. It's so impossibly hard to have women's rights AND socialism because once you go socialist your trade union leaders get an event that makes them go 100% communist every time, meaning they will practically have a rebellion to stop universal suffrage if you try to move away from propertied women. The feminism events only ever make the intelligencia feminist, but if you're running a strong socialist nation they've probably been marginalized as useless liberals or worse, fascists (my intelligentsia almost always go fash???) and it all just feels so binary and wrong. I'd love the ability to choose the next leader, or have leader ideology a bit more of a mixed bag, where a communist leader would have a few hard set core ideologies, but others could be a bit more varied. So you could get communists who were ALSO feminist.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 03:35
|
|
|
Zeron posted:You can't just have the production methods switched, you also have to be supplying them all with input goods. If you don't have enough artillery/small arms or whatever it is, then it's not going to finish. Okay thank you! It is fun playing again and the AI building on its own for you makes it a lot more fun- I still can't figure out who the hell thought having laws being passed with a percentage chance was a good idea- it is utterly infuriating failing over and over.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 14:02
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Yeah I'm really not a fan of the way reforms are so hard locked behind leaders. It's so impossibly hard to have women's rights AND socialism because once you go socialist your trade union leaders get an event that makes them go 100% communist every time, meaning they will practically have a rebellion to stop universal suffrage if you try to move away from propertied women. The feminism events only ever make the intelligencia feminist, but if you're running a strong socialist nation they've probably been marginalized as useless liberals or worse, fascists (my intelligentsia almost always go fash???) and it all just feels so binary and wrong. it's doubly "funny" that it's this binary considering the role of women in socialist movements.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 14:23
|
|
|
 I just wanted to post this because I'm juvenile, but apparently it's topical!
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 14:38
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Yeah I'm really not a fan of the way reforms are so hard locked behind leaders. It's so impossibly hard to have women's rights AND socialism because once you go socialist your trade union leaders get an event that makes them go 100% communist every time, meaning they will practically have a rebellion to stop universal suffrage if you try to move away from propertied women. The feminism events only ever make the intelligencia feminist, but if you're running a strong socialist nation they've probably been marginalized as useless liberals or worse, fascists (my intelligentsia almost always go fash???) and it all just feels so binary and wrong. I get that some ideologies should be incompatible- like you shouldn't have a nihilist royalist or an abolitionist slaver- but there are plenty that should just keep stacking. I don't think there's any ideology incompatible with feminism, besides traditionalism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 15:34
|
|
|
THE BAR posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 15:39
|
|
|
The broader issue is ideology being relegated to randomly generated Great People, and almost completely divorced from the population simulation (I know ideology RNG is influenced by some material conditions, but still).
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 16:30
|
|
|
I like IGs and ideologies and stuff. I think the missing link for stuff like feminism is that pops should be able to make movements without going through IGs or without their support. Or maybe go in a different direction and expand political parties a bit. Like give every political party an overarching political issue/ideology every election that can override their default. So instead of individual IG leaders becoming feminist, the Social Liberal party will pick feminism as it's platform for an election. Tie it in with momentum, so the next election they get a momentum boost/malus based on if they managed to push their agenda. If you don't have some form of democracy I guess that puts you out of luck though. I think making IG leaders a bit more dynamic or selectable would help there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
I've seen movements start with no IGs attached, so I assume pops already can start movements without them. I don't know what the biggest issue with IGs is right now, but I agree that the binary choice between certain character ideologies is a major problem. Being a feminist should never rule out being a socialist, and being either should never rule out being an abolitionist. It's a pretty ridiculous system when you think about it in those terms.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 17:05
|
|
|
It feels like they’re trying to use leader ideologies to patch over the fact that IGs don’t actually change over time. The trade unions should just have a socialist ideology added to their default list under appropriate conditions. Instead, it has to be hammered into the square hole of making their leader socialist, with all the jank that implies.
megane fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Mar 26, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 17:51
|
|
|
There's a few things like having IG's give up on being monarchist if you get rid of the king for long enough, but yeah more IG evolution based on member POPs or tech or whatever would definitely help spice things up in the future.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 18:00
|
|
|
Dayton Sports Bar posted:The broader issue is ideology being relegated to randomly generated Great People, and almost completely divorced from the population simulation (I know ideology RNG is influenced by some material conditions, but still). In fact I'd probably be fine with all of it if you could just have multiple ideologies active at once and if there were more events to influence ideologies. Having a big old ideology badge on a leader is a very convenient and gameplay-friendly way to understand how different movements are doing. It just needs to be a little more flexible and under the player's influence.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 18:13
|
|
|
I really like the idea of more events or actions causing IGs to evolve over time. Something like passing a law that furthers a popular leader's ideology enshrines it into the group that supported it. (Wheras an unpopular leader forcing their will in the party by passing the law might not.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 18:23
|
|
|
I started a Great Qing run and it felt a bit strange that the Confucians don't care about schooling at all, nor do they care about freedom of conscience. However, they're the *only* interest group that has any opinion on state religion, so it's impossible to change until a nihilist/communist shows up. Since private schools are kinda bad in the land of eternal peasants that means your only good option for schools is religious ones, which the Confucians don't even care about helping to pass. Maybe this is intentionally tough to do, but there aren't even any events centered around generating nihilists like there are for radicals/feminists. You are of course still able to immediately end serfdom and traditionalist economy with no opposition by following the corn laws event chain.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 18:35
|
|
|
I had a hardcore socialist state that developed pre-feminism. Near the turn of the century I got the women's suffrage events and I picked every option to embrace it. It of course turned my 5% intelligencia feminist rather than influencing my 70% trade unions. So, I did everything I could to boost them, even doubled my universities to try to employ more of them. I actually got them up from marginalized so I could include them in my government. I checked my trade unions and communists support propertied women and claim to be neutral on women in the workplace and universal. So, with about 10% power I tried to pass universal suffrage as it seemed to upset noone. Nope, the dominant trade unions had a meltdown over it and fought it tooth and nail because the game is very bad in this particular case. I spent year after year of cycling through trying to pass women in the workplace and universal suffrage over and over and over hoping to get lucky, but every time I'd get the worst reform events that would give it like -15% chance of passing and hurting support of intelligentsia and radicalizing them. I did this for a solid 8 years or so until my event-driven feminist leader died, and with her the chance of ever reforming past propertied women for the entire rest of the game. What's fun though is that the next intelligentsia leader was a fascist. All those failed reform events seemed to have radicalized their supporters into fascism, and I had spent a good 8 years doing everything I could to boost their numbers. Luckily they were still easily ignored, but it was funny to see a political party go from single-issue feminism to fascism so quickly. Then again the "feminist" movement in the UK shows this is quite realistic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
Barono posted:I started a Great Qing run and it felt a bit strange that the Confucians don't care about schooling at all, nor do they care about freedom of conscience. However, they're the *only* interest group that has any opinion on state religion, so it's impossible to change until a nihilist/communist shows up. Since private schools are kinda bad in the land of eternal peasants that means your only good option for schools is religious ones, which the Confucians don't even care about helping to pass. When I get around to a China run I think I'll deliberately fail the national cohesion events and play as one of the resulting fractured Chinese states and build up something more coherent from there. The Heavenly Kingdom at least shouldn't be burdened with Confucian intelligentsia. Baronjutter posted:I had a hardcore socialist state that developed pre-feminism. Near the turn of the century I got the women's suffrage events and I picked every option to embrace it. It of course turned my 5% intelligencia feminist rather than influencing my 70% trade unions. So, I did everything I could to boost them, even doubled my universities to try to employ more of them. I actually got them up from marginalized so I could include them in my government. I checked my trade unions and communists support propertied women and claim to be neutral on women in the workplace and universal. So, with about 10% power I tried to pass universal suffrage as it seemed to upset noone. Nope, the dominant trade unions had a meltdown over it and fought it tooth and nail because the game is very bad in this particular case. I spent year after year of cycling through trying to pass women in the workplace and universal suffrage over and over and over hoping to get lucky, but every time I'd get the worst reform events that would give it like -15% chance of passing and hurting support of intelligentsia and radicalizing them. I did this for a solid 8 years or so until my event-driven feminist leader died, and with her the chance of ever reforming past propertied women for the entire rest of the game. You can see it more clearly here than in the game that they're inherently neutral, not situationally neutral in your case: https://vic3.paradoxwikis.com/Human_rights_laws#Rights_of_Women If it helps you can think that it's not that the trade unions are actually "neutral" to women in the workplace, they've got a value of 0 for it. They have a value of 1 for "propertied women" and a value of -1 for "legal guardianship". If you want them to be happy about moving to 0, they need to be at -1. If they're at +1 then 0 is a step down that they'll be angry about. That's not the game being bad in this case, except in displaying information. It's working as intended. For whatever reason the developers wanted the intelligentsia and the trade unions to actively oppose women in the workplace and giving women the right to vote, so long as they already have 'baseline' property rights. This does make some historical sense to me. If you've got completely oppressed women they'll think "we should do better than this" and join in with some radicals saying the same but if your women have nominal rights they'll think "why are we overturning the natural order? Sure they're people and we should treat them nicely, but that doesn't mean they should work or vote." until an actual feminist comes along to tell them they're being stupid. The event, by the way, is definitely not linked to the intelligentsia. You also want to read it closely when you get it because it always turns someone feminist and gives them the 'trailblazer' popularity boost, but sometimes you can say "that's opposition talk" and it will still keep the same trailblazer person as a feminist and also convert someone in the opposition to feminism. I almost always take that option because it results in two feminist IGs. Eiba fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Mar 26, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 19:19
|
|
|
l m a o
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 04:11
|
|
|
Eiba posted:I'm actually fine with the leader's ideology representing quirks of the IG. I don't think the game is saying that all the intelligentsia are nihilists now because this one guy randomly was, rather that one guy was chosen because of a wave of nihilism across that group. This. That person is the leader because they have broad support from the IG. I would find it darkly hilarious for the trade unions and rural folks to start splintering into different factions once you have full communism going and they've always got communist/anarchist/vanguardist leaders.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 06:20
|
|
|
I just ran into the first thing about the war system which seems really messed up, I went to annex a vassal of mine, GB intervened, it went to war, I quickly capitulated and annexed my vassal, and now ticking warscore will make GB win the war because we can't reach each other to fight (I barely have a military navy and they don't seem to want to try a landing) and since I took a few casualties from the fighting vs. my vassal plus I now have a bunch of angry pops I just annexed I'm losing war desire faster than they are so they will eventually be able to enforce on me in spite of not touching my territory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 10:37
|
|
|
The warscore system is messed up, in particular about how allies who join because of alliances can't add war goals, so are fighting for nothing, so leave wars at the drop of a hat. The system is built so you can't end up with aml ww1-style alliance cascade because allies aren't invested in wars at all
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 10:44
|
|
|
Also the strange interaction is that the enemy cares if you've reached all of your goals. If your wargoals are provinces A and B and you capture and hold A they tend to not give away the province A because you didn't conquer B from that yet, and if your goal was just A they'd give it away.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 10:47
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I just ran into the first thing about the war system which seems really messed up, I went to annex a vassal of mine, GB intervened, it went to war, I quickly capitulated and annexed my vassal, and now ticking warscore will make GB win the war because we can't reach each other to fight (I barely have a military navy and they don't seem to want to try a landing) and since I took a few casualties from the fighting vs. my vassal plus I now have a bunch of angry pops I just annexed I'm losing war desire faster than they are so they will eventually be able to enforce on me in spite of not touching my territory. It's really weird how countries called into a war can stay in the war after your play target capitulates. I mean, I guess it would make sense if the remaining countries in the war could make you roll back your conquests, but they can't. They can't do anything but enforce their own war goals which most likely aren't going to be all that ambitious anyway. And you typically can't do anything at all if you didn't add war goals on them. However, if you're ticking down to 0 faster than they are, that doesn't mean you're going to lose the war. They can't bring you into negative war support unless they control a war goal. So most likely, you'll still be able to white peace once GB gets low enough too, even if it takes a few months. It's dumb, but that's how it is. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 11:07 on Mar 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 10:55
|
|
|
Green Wing posted:The warscore system is messed up, in particular about how allies who join because of alliances can't add war goals, so are fighting for nothing, so leave wars at the drop of a hat. The system is built so you can't end up with aml ww1-style alliance cascade because allies aren't invested in wars at all It's even worse with cultural leadership wars, where theoretically all the relevant minors are meant to pick a side and fight with them in a battle royale, but instead they just all immediately leave the play, spamming you with notifications.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 10:56
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:However, if you're ticking down to 0 faster than they are, that doesn't mean you're going to lose the war. They can't bring you into negative war support unless they control a war goal. So most likely, you'll still be able to white peace once GB gets low enough too, even if it takes a few months. It's dumb, but that's how it is. That's interesting, I'll just wait it out and see what happens instead of reloading. I need those Afghan pops!
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 11:52
|
|
|
I *thought* something was up with communist rebellions in my current game - I just helped communist scandinavia storm to victory in a civil war, which resulted in this...decidedly non-communist government  I'll bug report it later. I thought I saw this happening a couple times before but have just been able to confirm it. Edit: I think the communists are in *government* but nothing has changed 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 12:31
|
|
|
Yeah, revolutionary movements being not-at-all-revolutionary and winning their bloody civil wars to enact exactly the same government with one minor law change, maybe, has been an issue since release
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 12:33
|
|
|
Revolutions are named after who's doing to rebelling. If the communist party rebelled, then it's a communist revolution, even if the only thing they're rebelling over is like, regulatory bodies or welfare or some poo poo like that. I don't know if it's even possible to go from a constitutional monarchy with voting to a communist state in a single revolution, to be honest. To be fair though, there were a few distinct phases between Russia being a tsardom to going full autocratic, command-economy communism. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 12:37 on Mar 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 12:35
|
|
|
Well now I regret participating in a two-year long bloody war-to-end-war with Russia and Mexico over allowing Scandinavia to have nordic OSHA or something
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 12:45
|
|
|
Is there any other reason a state region, with a port, might be isolated?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 12:51
|
|
|
Green Wing posted:Is there any other reason a state region, with a port, might be isolated? Convoy raiding? Even if you’re not at war yourself, if you’re in a customs union and they get raided it’ll isolate you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 12:55
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:However, if you're ticking down to 0 faster than they are, that doesn't mean you're going to lose the war. They can't bring you into negative war support unless they control a war goal. So most likely, you'll still be able to white peace once GB gets low enough too, even if it takes a few months. It's dumb, but that's how it is. So the situation was- my war goal was occupied, the French had no war goal. I had taken a ton of casualties and had a ton of radicalism. My war exhaustion was going down a lot faster, but France hadn't occupied anything and couldn't occupy anything- even when they got past my navy they couldn't get a beachhead against my massive garrison armies. And so I let things tick down until I was at 0... and then I started going negative. Maybe it was because they didn't have a war goal and were only fighting for a white peace, but it was frustrating to have everything occupied and still be losing. I suppose I could rationalize it that my people weren't afraid of actually losing anything so they weren't willing to keep up the fight. Still, it was contrary to what I was expecting. Now that I think about it there was a bizarre situation in a multiplayer game that must have been caused by the same issue- Russia jumped into a war, and we all pressed claims against them and pushed into their territory after we annexed the primary war goal, but then we all got peaced out even though we were winning, just because Russia didn't have any war goals against us and we were taking a lot of casualties compared to Russia. It's kind of counterintuitive, but I guess if you've got a distant colony that a local power is attacking, you're better off not asking for anything, even reparations, and you've got a chance of peacing them out if you just inflict more damage on their army, even if they occupy all their war goals. hailthefish posted:Yeah, revolutionary movements being not-at-all-revolutionary and winning their bloody civil wars to enact exactly the same government with one minor law change, maybe, has been an issue since release Or else make it more clear that the revolution is really limited- have a monarchical revolution be called something else (no "communist revolution" should be retaining monarch) and give them a placeholder leader and restore the old monarch if they win. If they're not changing the power structure, then they're not changing the reigning monarch. If they're installing a new dynasty, they might as well install a new power structure law. That said, they can and do change multiple things at once- though it can be hard to notice sometimes. I had a revolution for workers protections instead of poor laws, and it changed my economy from agrarian to interventionism, free trade to protectionism, and per capita taxation to graduated taxation, all at the same time. It actually saved my India play through because I was kind of hosed with bad taxes no one could change before it happened. Eiba fucked around with this message at 13:38 on Mar 27, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 13:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:51 |
|
|
I just got massively big brained by the AI, I started a play vs. the Ottomans, the UK protected them but I just allied China (who is pretty strong this game) so I'm fairly confident we can win. Then just after the war starts Russia begins its own play for a random piece of Central Asia, which I think I could have fought and won, but it made far more sense for me to just give in. If they'd joined in the original play I definitely wouldn't have backed down but by waiting the AI actually managed to get something for itself. I suspect that this was mostly because of Russia not wanting to defend the OE even if it meant getting to fight me, but it was still a good move.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2023 13:49
|
|