|
Digital Osmosis posted:never mind, looks like Paradox isn't serious about their economic simulation at all. Capitalists choosing to invest profits into the wider society? loving ludicrous Jazerus posted:governments of that era were somewhat more effective at extracting surplus from capitalists than many modern governments, and when things like railroads were both "good for wider society" and extremely profitable, they were indeed the target of tons of investment. one of the strangest thing about the 1800s is witnessing capitalism in its semi-functional, tightly controlled early state rather than the decrepit shambling corpse we're all used to
|
# ¿ May 22, 2021 06:54 |
|
|
# ¿ May 15, 2024 05:58 |
|
Vichan posted:They'd better keep that obnoxiously loud factory construction noise or I'm cancelling my pre-order.
|
# ¿ May 22, 2021 13:33 |
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:It’s 100% going to be a waldetoft score with maybe a dlc where sabaton sings about Prussians and Rorkes Drift
|
# ¿ May 22, 2021 18:32 |
|
JosefStalinator posted:I'm curious how immigration is gonna end up - I kinda don't like the idea of making it more deterministic and hardcoded to big events like the famine, if only because attracting immigrants and moving your population around is one of the more fun bits of the era. ThatBasqueGuy posted:From what I was reading it sounded like migration was way less deterministic, and was more a result of relative standards of living and freedoms, with crises like the irish potato famine happening as an organic result of gameplay The thing I'm most worried about here would be famines being natural disasters, rather than man made. Like, the reduction in production should be natural, but it should be the response of the government that determines if it's a famine - with some interests groups obviously not being in the business of helping people. Frionnel posted:Eh, doing that means you have to deal with the american wars of independence against Spain and Portugal right off the bat, which would be pretty hard to pull off dynamically. Makes more sense to start after the dust has settled. Frionnel posted:Plus, i'll fully admit that i'm biased since i'm from the region (Brazil) and would rather have a recognizable scenario where i get to play these countries right off the bat. Raenir Salazar posted:South America starting on fire I think would work really well for experienced players who want to try their hand at forging their own destiny in a trial by fire; especially if it actually models things like the various larger than life personalities like Simon Bolivar running about; and combat/war is a bit more complex than the current EU4/V2 system of raising regiments and smashing stacks against other stacks or worrying about your debt/war exhaustion et cetera; commanding an insurgency could be fun and Paradox has a lot of untapped ground it could try its hand at with asymmerical gameplay.
|
# ¿ May 23, 2021 06:16 |
|
karmicknight posted:The classic Victoria piece of advice is always "Start in Brazil" because Brazil in Vicky is basically in the perfect position for the player to start slow and build up into being a power of relevance. Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Constantinople's fate was already set in stone by the time EU4 starts. The Byzantine Empire should die 99% of the time.
|
# ¿ May 23, 2021 07:13 |
|
Veryslightlymad posted:I'm most intrigued by the immigration mechanic, as its worded in the post. It seems like the right combinations of factors between two countries could create big shifts of very specific populations to a very specific destination. Which is definitely a thing that happens.
|
# ¿ May 23, 2021 08:25 |
|
Charlz Guybon posted:This did not seem to happen in real life Beamed posted:something else i hope organically happens is that players will stride into 1914 arrogantly thinking "well ive definitely eclipsed all the other powers, time to steamroll them for their colonies", and then their entire country falls apart in an apocalyptic hellwar their economy couldnt possibly handle Actually, that has to be an achievement, right? Being the sole Great Power, every other country being too insignificant to claim the title?
|
# ¿ May 23, 2021 09:11 |
|
CharlestheHammer posted:They probably didn’t announce a release date as with their current issues they do not need a delay or worse yet an absolutely broken release.
|
# ¿ May 23, 2021 11:49 |
|
Wiz posted:Not my fault you guys aren't asking the important questions
|
# ¿ May 23, 2021 12:34 |
|
Fuligin posted:in my hours of daydream-designing about a future Vicky 3, one thing i've always though would be neat is some way of competing for prestige by means of exploration/archaeological pillaging; so, say, you could sponsor expeditions to climb the highest mountains, reach the poles, explore 'darkest' Africa and the interior of the Amazon, exploit and steal the cultural memory of other nations to stock your museums. This would be more likely to be DLC fodder than base game stuff, but im curious if anything like that is intended for the release candidate
|
# ¿ May 23, 2021 17:47 |
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:It seems like you could reasonably start the game in 1825, which is about when the independence wars in Spanish America wound down. Did something special happen in 1836 for the sake of the game?
|
# ¿ May 23, 2021 20:56 |
|
Barnaby Barnacle posted:Start date should be 24th of May 1819, surely.
|
# ¿ May 23, 2021 21:04 |
|
Randarkman posted:I'm not really a fan of the end date being as late as 1936 to be honest. The world before and after WW1 is just too different and the Victoria games were never good at actually simulating WW1 or its aftermath. And yeah, the awareness that a WW1 is likely on the horizon might very well be necessary to put the player in the right mindset for the 20th century years, making it less important that the actual war itself is perfectly simulated, because the real point is the influence on domestic policy leading up to it, and the effects of the war on domestic policy afterward. That said, they can for sure make the actual end of the war more satisfying, more seemingly final, and make the aftermath more interesting. Gaius Marius posted:I thought Victoria did a reasonably good job of simulating the Great War. The shift from horses to planes, making gas so powerful without a counter, and the increasing reliance on mobilization and the devastating effects it could have on your country were all very well done. Definitely need to add something to prevent subsequent Great Wars though. Making any conscripted pops far more pacifist and radical would help, as would making something akin to the League of Nations that strongly encourages beating up minor countries over having big confrontations. The end of the war triggering rebellions and independence wars all over the place could also help distract the GPs, by making them want to win the peace rather than start off some new trouble. Takanago posted:The game should have a Commonwealth variant with a Union Jack in the corner for every single tag in the game. British France, British Prussia, British Brittany, etc.
|
# ¿ May 24, 2021 05:46 |
|
Tuna-Fish posted:So much of HoI4 could be lifted as is and make wars better. I'm not actually into HoI at all, but the whole logistics side of things does actually feel meaningful to the period. I know the Danish leadership decided against more advanced firearms leading up to 1864 because it felt the army would chew through its ammunition too fast, which is sort of a parallel issue to the weapons themselves being expensive to replace. Obviously important to hit the right balance here, but if as you suggest they tie it into diplomacy, with the sale of older models (or even better, state of the art models) being a way to recoup some of the investment monetarily and/or diplomatically, then the focus could be shifted pretty convincingly away from like a HoI style war focus. If not part of the base game, "War Is a Racket" could be a decent DLC, and making it obvious that it was the economic side of war that was the focus would temper expectations of a full-on HoI style war DLC. Torrannor posted:I admit, I never even tried Vicky 1 or 2 because of the time period. I'm simply turned off by "modern" weapons. Sword and lances and bow (and optionally magic)? Sign me up. Ion cannons, plasma rifles, antimatter bombs? They're my jam! A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 11:28 on May 24, 2021 |
# ¿ May 24, 2021 11:22 |
|
Randarkman posted:One of the devs said on a discord that they (personally) were playing with an idea of making political parties/factions a dynamic label you get dependent on what Interest Groups you're pulling support from, somewhat simialr to the government flavor names in Stellaris. I at least thought this was a very neat idea.
|
# ¿ May 24, 2021 18:05 |
|
Zedhe Khoja posted:I really doubt the thinking behind the way the purges work was that Paradox is a hive of Grover Furr acolytes and more like "what if there was a way Trotsky could become leader lol".
|
# ¿ May 26, 2021 15:08 |
|
BillBear posted:Won't be worse than the "uncivilised" stuff for virtually all of native Africa and Asia in Vicky 2, which was all sorts of yikes. It's clear Paradox have done plenty of learning and maturing since then, so if anything it'll probably come down to accidentally making ancaps the best form of government or something, which is more funny than anything else. I suppose uncivilized is not quite racist enough for the period.
|
# ¿ May 26, 2021 16:12 |
|
DrSunshine posted:EDIT: And yeah, the fact that the colonial powers of Europe can beat up on you for no penalty. You can even become a recognized power by defeating one in combat, like in the Russo-Japanese war. I really like this system because it highlights the Eurocentric/colonialist viewpoint. Actually, now I’m wondering if it would make sense for China to start out as recognized and becoming unrecognized due to getting easily beaten up by Europeans?
|
# ¿ May 26, 2021 16:36 |
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Not only do I demand that the US states and Japanese daimyos are modeled as independent countries, but I want a start where every releasable nation is independent and playable.
|
# ¿ May 26, 2021 18:07 |
|
yikes! posted:texas and the 13 colonies are the only ones to have won wars at game start, so are the only recognized states
|
# ¿ May 26, 2021 18:20 |
|
AnEdgelord posted:Sure but i more meant to ask if when I do a United Fruit Company to some latin american countries do they just ahistorically turn into European Great Power-style colonies or does something else happen thats more reflective of their actual relationship?
|
# ¿ May 26, 2021 18:23 |
|
really queer Christmas posted:Any kind of disease management would be dlc, likely similar to reapers due for ck2. Which was a neat dlc, though I'm not sure how much you could wring out of that for an empire compared to when you're controlling an actual dude/dudette
|
# ¿ May 27, 2021 18:51 |
|
Baronjutter posted:I don't want to read dev diaries, I want wiz to read them to me in his handsome victorian outfit.
|
# ¿ May 27, 2021 19:50 |
|
Jazerus posted:My favorite absurd thing about v2 is that you can choose a socialist ruling party as an absolute monarch in europe without having austria or prussia come down on you like a ton of bricks. there's no sense that the various powers are ideologically committed in any way, which couldn't be further from the overall historical narrative of the 19th century
|
# ¿ May 28, 2021 10:07 |
|
Denmark banned the slave trade as "early" as 1792, with Britain following up in 1807 and actually trying to enforce it on other countries (including Denmark de facto it has to be said.) So yeah, it was much reduced by the start of the game. Still, the Atlantic Slave Trade survived until 1870, and even had a resurgence in the US in the years leading up to the Civil War. I can see why you'd want to not push the slavery angle even more, but from an entirely detached perspective, slaves as goods do actually make sense in terms of the design goals of Vicky and where the world was at the start of the game. Raskolnikov38 posted:yeah oceanic slave trading was largely over by the time the game starts but the US had a gigantic internal slave trade A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 20:41 on May 28, 2021 |
# ¿ May 28, 2021 20:39 |
|
Raenir Salazar posted:It'd be interesting to include slavery is a proper contentious issue; especially for megacampaigns where maybe there's alternate histories where slavery is still going strong and its the minority of nations who are trying to fight the slave trade and to make it possible for Abolition to be a more robust mechanic that any nation can try to deal with. I.e see Serfdom in Russia. That said, perhaps serfdom should be just one end of a spectrum dealing with the emancipation of rural laborers, which prevents them from emigrating, with the other end being peasants having ownership over the land they work (thus getting the full profits), the equivalent of the co-ops of urban laborers. The lack of ability to move off the land is probably the most important thing separating serfs and other agricultural laborers in terms of what Vicky models. e: Also the fact that serfdom made it easier for less advanced states to conscript the populace. Administrative reforms making the state less dependent on local landowners is at least the reason why serfdom was ended in Denmark. Serfdom giving a bonus to available recruits until you've sufficiently upgraded your administrative capabilities would be a pretty good way to make the player want to maintain it for a while. A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 05:41 on May 29, 2021 |
# ¿ May 29, 2021 05:36 |
|
Panzeh posted:Yeah, honestly, I think Russian serfs would probably be better modeled as peasants as 'peasants' is a much more useful catch-all for pre-modern subsistence agricultural workers. American chattel slaves are really not in the same category as Russian serfs.
|
# ¿ May 29, 2021 10:54 |
|
Panzeh posted:A specific pop for pre-modern agricultural workers was added for victoria 3. That's what peasants are for.
|
# ¿ May 29, 2021 11:03 |
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Yeah even after serfdom was abolished changing class from a tenant farmer was functionally impossible. Serfdom works better as a descriptor for a system not so well for an individual pop
|
# ¿ May 29, 2021 12:41 |
|
Panzeh posted:Yeah, if we're going to get into spectrums of unfree labor, you really can't ignore the colonies, where even though the colonial power officially banned slavery, debt peonage was very common.
|
# ¿ May 29, 2021 15:58 |
|
Charlz Guybon posted:We should introduce Matty Y to Victoria
|
# ¿ May 30, 2021 06:25 |
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Personally I like games that function instead losing a many-hour campaign because Bengal exists
|
# ¿ Jun 1, 2021 12:44 |
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:all that basilisk poo poo is eschatology dressed up with pullin poo poo out of their rear end
|
# ¿ Jun 1, 2021 17:22 |
|
Zeron posted:Confirmed that you can destroy the British Empire by stealing all their tea. Game owns. Kinda sounds like V3 will make an excellent base for a Cold War mod.
|
# ¿ Jun 1, 2021 17:44 |
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:Just gotta keep in mind that it's nothing more than a concept which may be modelled, and certain models support different viewpoints not necessarily supported by any rigorous study.
|
# ¿ Jun 1, 2021 20:47 |
|
karmicknight posted:That's literally just the way Victoria games work. It's almost as if the century following World War Two was not that different in a grand sense from the century proceeding it.
|
# ¿ Jun 2, 2021 11:44 |
|
Kaza42 posted:Even if functionally this works very similarly to mana, I like the capacity approach a ton better. It feels more connected to the game world, and isn't a hard on/off system Eiba posted:I've always felt this kind of capacity system is more satisfying than saving up a pile of ??? and spending it on a thing. Of course if you manage to balance things well, authority should be extremely powerful in terms of carrying out specific visions. Stalin's rule probably couldn't have been replicated in the Third Republic.
|
# ¿ Jun 3, 2021 18:35 |
|
golden bubble posted:China actually started almost all the reforms that Imperial Japan did as well. It's just that Japan managed to carry out the reforms to the end, and China had all of them consumed by Qing corruption and/or reactionaries. At the Battle of the Yalu River, the Qing Beiyang fleet had more ships, larger ships, and more technologically advanced ships. But corrupt Qing officials had sold all the cordite in the training shells, so the Chinese sailors had almost zero gunnery practice. And corrupt Qing officials had also sold most of the cordite in the actual battle ammunition. So the Chinese battleships were entering battle with 10% or less of their supposed ammo capacity. Predictably, the Japanese won a crushing victory in that battle. That is the level of corruption you are working with. Raenir Salazar posted:I think if instead corruption is something that can spread and takes effort to fight would be interesting. Like as an example; what if individual ships above a certain size (and then flottilas if below) could get different kinds of corruption modifiers (or positive modifiers in the inverse, like "Superb Gunnery Training: +33% reload speed") and to specifically root them out you need to assign an official to take care of it possibly in addition to some kind of Edict. If you wanted to make corruption hit a little harder, or have it vary between the various areas of state (bureaucracy/army/navy), then a corrupt bureaucracy could also change the rating from a single number to a range. So like, you just see "Navy Professionalism" 30-70%, with the upper bound perhaps being good enough that more ships can overcome the handicap, but 30% being a disaster. Shifting some of the modernization/reform issues over to dealing with corruption rather than beating up reactionary rebels seems like it'd be good too.
|
# ¿ Jun 4, 2021 05:43 |
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:Figuring out a way to handle corruption is going to be hard to do in a way that's realistic, because ultimately it represents a disconnect between what's true on paper, and the factual reality. Zohar posted:I'm not sure that's exactly what corruption is, it might contribute to that but bribes and embezzlement and so on are corruption regardless of whether the state is 100% aware of them happening. Corruption is modelled fairly precisely as a drain on state resources of various kinds, not so much fog of war stuff imo.
|
# ¿ Jun 4, 2021 20:17 |
|
|
# ¿ May 15, 2024 05:58 |
|
Randarkman posted:Just going to throw out here that when people talk about "secret" diplomacy and alliances, it's not the existence of the alliances that are secret, it's the exact terms of those alliances. That said, being able to establish an alliance against specific countries with promises of in the vein of "If we end up in a war, we'll fight for these war goals" would be neat. Actually, how common were functionally universal alliances in the period?
|
# ¿ Jun 5, 2021 15:34 |