|
One Proud Bavarian is negative about the update and explains it in a video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xFF_MrOwAM I don't think this dude is usually a hater, so his opinion might be interesting.
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 10:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:34 |
|
|
Ichabod Sexbeast posted:The beauty of history and politics is that for every unintuitive in-game edge case, something as stupid or stupider has absolutely happened in real life. I like starting with the mines and going for everything that needs the resources afterwards. I find there’s usually always resource crunches going on and no one has enough of them for me to set up large import routes to build up that way.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 10:12
|
|
|
Vichan posted:Yep, was exactly the same for me. If that's as intended then this a bit of a let-down. I wasn't expecting complex power struggle mechanics but I was expecting something.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 10:40
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:Somehow the patch killed performance on my 2016 MacBook Pro to a point where I can‘t play past the 1850s. ive heard that from a couple goons now, seems bad coz thats one of the main reasons I stopped playing was I thought it was too slow already even on my reasonably sick rig
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 13:21
|
|
|
Yeah performance has not been great for me. Honestly, my France run has been one of the best times I've had with Paradox games period...but only part of that was due to all the paid features, which were nice but not transformative at all. I don't mind flavor packs but..yeah it's pretty expensive for just one nation. But I just file it under "The patch as a whole rules so I'm supporting development of the game."
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 14:08
|
|
|
Really like the changes to law passing, feels much more active as opposed to before where if I got a -20 on enactment time I could forget I was even passing a law between events
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 14:15
|
|
|
Ichabod Sexbeast posted:Quick question while I wait for the performance issues update that's allegedly coming - is it better to build industry top down, by building factories and importing materials, or bottom up, by developing the mines etc first?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 14:20
|
|
|
How you industrialize will depend a lot on factors like available population and your starting political situation. If you have strong landowners and a lot of pops and bad laws, then you want to focus on things like wood and mines and moving into tooling factories so that you don't increase the clout of the landowners while you get better laws. If you have good laws, but low pops (like belgium) you want to leap right into factories and just import your raw materials from other markets. If you have good laws and lots of pops (cant think of a starting example) you can lean into commercial agriculture without strengthening the landowners and build up a big base for your industry. If you have low pops and bad laws, then you are hosed. You want to focus on a couple highly profitable goods and get a vertical industry going and get as many improvements into that and find markets to export it to.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 15:53
|
|
|
Ichabod Sexbeast posted:Quick question while I wait for the performance issues update that's allegedly coming - is it better to build industry top down, by building factories and importing materials, or bottom up, by developing the mines etc first? I've had good results with keeping construction sector/industrial goods (so coal, iron, wood, steel, tools) as negative in price as you can get them, cheap construction is rocket fuel for both the state budget and the private sector. So not really a top-down/bottom-up distinction so much as focusing all my state construction on a few key industries until the snowball is really rolling, while letting the private sector flail around keeping the consumer supply chains on life support. For the first like 25-50 years depending on where exactly I'm starting, I usually don't directly build any economy buildings besides steel mills, tool factories, arms factories, and enough coal/iron/wood production to keep them humming. Maybe a handful of paper mills and sulfur mines if paper is really breaking my budget, but core focus on the construction sector. Once you build the snowball for a few decades and get better tax laws, then branching out into getting cheap raw materials for the consumer industries your private queue has built by then is usually a good idea, but whether that means going and doing colonialism for dyes, or importing fabric, or whatever depends pretty heavily on where you actually are and how the great powers have been doing up to that point. In general terms though I think it's best to keep as much of the supply chain in your territory as possible, both for capturing the most growth and for not getting hosed when a major trading partner stumbles into a war/revolution. Imports are for letting a small population country punch above their weight by concentrating as much population in highly profitable factories as possible rather than working mines and farms, but if you have a large population and/or can get some colonies with large populations then doing domestic resource extraction is better.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 16:36
|
|
|
More or less what I was doing then, thanks! Now I just need the game to work.... gently caress it just gonna roll it back to 1.2, it worked ok-ish then
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 16:47
|
|
|
If you're fairly small and/or poor in tech, some early game furniture and clothing production can be a good way to spike SOL before the private sector really gets going with building factories over plantations. You can obviously trade for it instead, but that takes bureaucracy that you usually don't have.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
Groceries/clothing/furniture/tools is what I aim for when I'm playing small countries with small population. Jumping into a customs union is also another method I use to speed run development because it means my construction benefits from raw materials supplied by the owner and a market for the light industry goods. If I'm big with a population approaching hundreds of millions I focus on developing heavy industry while private investment takes care of the rest. Also I tend to build up early game on coastal provinces because ports contribute to infrastructure irrespective of the convoy contributions.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 18:06
|
|
|
Dramicus posted:How you industrialize will depend a lot on factors like available population and your starting political situation. If you have strong landowners and a lot of pops and bad laws, then you want to focus on things like wood and mines and moving into tooling factories so that you don't increase the clout of the landowners while you get better laws. Tech is also an important factor in this, because you need the PMs that allow capitalists to be the owning pops for buildings. You need steel tools for lumber mills, atmospheric engines for mines, and mechanical tools for tool factories. Before that they will be owned by shopkeepers, which is fine but they tend to be petit bourgeois rather than industrialists.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 18:07
|
|
|
Tbh you need atmospheric engines for the mines in general because needing to build 3 mines to break even on iron in construction is extremely limiting while getting atmospheric engines, or better yet the one after that, lets you really go crazy while needing less buildings
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Tech is also an important factor in this, because you need the PMs that allow capitalists to be the owning pops for buildings. You need steel tools for lumber mills, atmospheric engines for mines, and mechanical tools for tool factories. Before that they will be owned by shopkeepers, which is fine but they tend to be petit bourgeois rather than industrialists. Absolutely, the tech is a big deal for low-pop nations. High pops can get pretty far by just leaning into their labour pool. This will keep SoL low, but also keeps wages low so the buildings are still relatively profitable. Obviously this will be a transitional strategy as you don't want to stay that way forever, as you want to develop a domestic market for luxury goods. But for a good while, especially with primary resources, it can go pretty far.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 18:25
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:One Proud Bavarian is negative about the update and explains it in a video. I was excited but share OPB's feelings about the DLC/patch. I think some mechanics are improved with revolutions and law passage but agitators are just flavorless. Revolutions feel a little more organic but you see the same events every time and I think some of the UI can be improved (show radicals across cities, style mismatch). I haven't done France yet but the review makes it seem pretty lackluster.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 18:55
|
|
|
It might be a dumb question, but am I correct in thinking that as long as you have peasants or unemployed in a state there's very rarely a reason to upgrade automation production method?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
In countries with a large population, at what point should you start looking into switching production methods to things that reduce the amount of employees? In particular the stuff that replaces laborers. I switched too early as France and got a whole host of angry, unemployed laborers as a result. I image that, as long as there are peasants in your country, it's best to just keep as many people employed / create as many new jobs as possible to ensure their SoL somewhat improves compared to being unemployed and unemployable?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 18:57
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:It might be a dumb question, but am I correct in thinking that as long as you have peasants or unemployed in a state there's very rarely a reason to upgrade automation production method? I found most effective way is to let investment pool overbuild until there are labor shortages then replacing production in buildings that can't hire. UI is not really great for that though so might not be the "correct" way to do it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 19:03
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:In countries with a large population, at what point should you start looking into switching production methods to things that reduce the amount of employees? In particular the stuff that replaces laborers. I switched too early as France and got a whole host of angry, unemployed laborers as a result. I would say you should only switch them when you need to make a building more profitable/efficient & you have somewhere else for them to work. Switching something to a better production method will let them do the same work with fewer employees which = more profits for the owners = more investment in the autonomous investment pool / more taxes if you are on the right law. This can be a big problem if you also have unemployment laws and nowhere else for those workers to go. One way of dealing with this in advance is by having a lot of agriculture. They have more levels of automation than other industries, which allows you to fine-tune how many people are employed there. So if you switch a big industry to being more efficient, you can knock your farms down a level or two and they should be able to absorb most of the unemployed. Then when you need more workers, put the farms back up a few production levels. Essentially, use the farms as a buffer/suspension to take or give to shocks in the labour market.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 19:06
|
|
|
switching PMs can also be nice to drive up demand of the imput goods and/or create some pops with stronger spending power to support other industries, but yeah all those benefits are negated if it also leads to a giant amount of unabsorbable unemployment
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 19:33
|
|
|
I treat automation as basically a reset for the economy as a big population nation. If you build up construction enough, you'll eventually start running out of people and your economy slows down. Then I just flip all the automation on, weather the hit to my gdp, and focus on evening out any shortages it causes. That's when your economy really starts to explode.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2023 20:19
|
|
|
Looks like they might be closing in on the cause of the performance issuesquote:In some cases buildings (trade centers, ports) in split states get duplicated. This can cause big performance problems https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/victoria-3-1-3-known-issues.1586653/
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 10:08
|
|
|
Gort posted:Looks like they might be closing in on the cause of the performance issues I saw someone on reddit post a screencap of Tabruk having like 144 trading centres that were all at 0% unemployment, which is probably linked to this
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 13:12
|
|
|
The spice must flow.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 13:28
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:I saw someone on reddit post a screencap of Tabruk having like 144 trading centres that were all at 0% unemployment, which is probably linked to this 144? Amateur hour, try 4000:  https://www.reddit.com/r/victoria3/comments/13pm5nk/there_are_4k_trading_centers_in_sahara/
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
piratepilates posted:144? Amateur hour, try 4000: Ai caramba
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
piratepilates posted:144? Amateur hour, try 4000: Hey, they added the ability to terraform the planet into an Ecumenopolis.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 17:34
|
|
|
Dramicus posted:Hey, they added the ability to terraform the planet into an Ecumenopolis. For real though, once the more "structural" (so to speak) development is in place, one thing that could be really awesome is off the rails content about the future for the endgame. Technocratic socialism, cosmism (the stuff from guys like Konstantin Tsiolkovsky), the even-crazier offshoots of futurism, etc I don't doubt that some enterprising spirits are definitely doing some TNO-like stuff, but official work tends to be saner on performance lol. Also reactions like losing the ability to feel human etc
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 22:22
|
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:For real though, once the more "structural" (so to speak) development is in place, one thing that could be really awesome is off the rails content about the future for the endgame. Technocratic socialism, cosmism (the stuff from guys like Konstantin Tsiolkovsky), the even-crazier offshoots of futurism, etc Star Trek total conversion?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 22:25
|
|
|
They have ever so slightly dipped their toes in that pool by adding the ability to make a technocracy and even a cybernetic state (in the original sense of the meaning of cybernetics, not the sci-fi borg type). So hopefully they will have a bit of fun on that front with a war of the worlds and beyond dlc.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 22:38
|
|
|
Countzer posted:If that's as intended then this a bit of a let-down. I wasn't expecting complex power struggle mechanics but I was expecting something. Oh it's better than that. I made a guy bonapartist, then both of my bonapartist IG leaders died randomly, and there was no way to ever get back onto bonapartism because you need a bonapartist in government to make people bonapartist.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 22:44
|
|
|
If a Bonapartist ends up in another country can they make it a Bonapartist monarchy
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 23:19
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:If a Bonapartist ends up in another country can they make it a Bonapartist monarchy It's only bonapartism if it comes from the corsican region of france, otherwise it's just sparkling reactionary monarchist imperialism
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2023 01:28
|
|
|
I really like that Paradox is investing resources into making V3 better for free - a lot of CK2 and EU4 dlcs felt like they were including mechanics to make the game harder in the free patch and then giving you the tools to manage it in the paid DLC. Steam looks upset because the paid DLC is anemic but that's a better alternative to making you pay for features which should be in the base game. I know the Pdox model is to release paid DLC to fund the ongoing work on the base game but I don't know how to square that with people's expectations that DLC has sufficient content. I guess what I'm saying is I hope that Pdox doesn't look at the response the FranceDLC got and decide that they should either stop supporting Vic3 or start gating necessary improvements to the game behind $250 dollars worth of DLC, because I think that's the wrong conclusion to draw.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2023 03:04
|
|
|
MinistryofLard posted:I really like that Paradox is investing resources into making V3 better for free - a lot of CK2 and EU4 dlcs felt like they were including mechanics to make the game harder in the free patch and then giving you the tools to manage it in the paid DLC. They seem to have taken on board that people really don't like the "fill up a bar to make poo poo happen by magic" mechanic which I think is the most legitimate complaint beyond "this is too expensive"
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2023 05:37
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:They seem to have taken on board that people really don't like the "fill up a bar to make poo poo happen by magic" mechanic which I think is the most legitimate complaint beyond "this is too expensive" I think it was a dev who said that they'd eventually like to move to a legislation model that isn't "three EU4 sieges in a trenchcoat".
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2023 06:57
|
|
|
I am a total cheap rear end and think there are a lot of fair criticisms to this dlc, but I honestly don't understand how anyone is complaining about the price. If you can't afford $15 don't buy it, 90% of the features were a free update, you're welcome. There will be mods (include 1PB's own mod, which I am sure he will be promoting as soon as it's ready for this update) as well as future updates to refine the mechanics. Isn't is like traditions for pdx games to be kinda poo poo at the start? I bought the pass not because I wanted to play as france, not because I wanted the features, but because I want pdx to keep working on this game to make it into what everyone knows it could be. How many updates until the criminal pop type becomes a thing???
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2023 07:01
|
|
|
just a kazoo posted:How many updates until the criminal pop type becomes a thing??? Aristocrats and capitalists are already in the base game? 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2023 07:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 04:34 |
|
|
just a kazoo posted:I am a total cheap rear end and think there are a lot of fair criticisms to this dlc, but I honestly don't understand how anyone is complaining about the price. If you can't afford $15 don't buy it, 90% of the features were a free update, you're welcome. Sure, that's great in theory, but if it keeps up like this, I'll not be buying any of their DLC going forward. Because, why would I when I get all the features in the patch? I'm not complaining, this will make my wallet happy. However, I wonder how effective it will be to release content-bare dlcs for high prices while putting everything interesting in free patches. It doesn't seem like a sustainable long-term business plan.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2023 14:01
|
|