|
the way capitalists work seems like a good compromise between having player control over internal development and the AI building 5,000 clipper factories in 1900
|
#
¿
May 22, 2021 07:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:05 |
|
|
I love to suddenly lose my game as Peru-Bolivia because Germany and France got into a big fight
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2021 22:14
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:The Shogunate clearly wasn't very centralized given it had to deal with a full blown civil war in which it lost. You're confusing how quickly the feudal domains allowed themselves to be re-centralized under the Imperial court and the resulting new government/Diet with how they were in the 50 some-odd years leading up to it. Feudal Japan is still Feudal Japan. Plenty of European feudal nations looked centralized from the outside until they weren't thanks to the feudal/social contract the landed nobility held with the King. And the power balance between the Shogun and the Daimyo changed from reign to reign. Making the case that Tsarist Russia was actually a decentralised state because it lost a civil war ?????
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2021 00:22
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:I was being facetious, but I do remember Wiz being driven off in the old Paradox thread by people going way too far, and accusing him of being a racist while criticizing something -- I think it was the term "Westernization"? Anyway it was a long time ago. interesting
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2021 01:35
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:To be honest, not very excited about this implementation. Social structure of the state is the last place I'd like to see stuff like "Police level 2", it's like researching Improved Farms in subpar 4X game. Maybe I don't get what it represents, but do you really need a big fancy separate screen for beuraucracy focus spread? The social structure is determined by your Laws. Institutions represent implementing those laws. You may have “police level 2” but the function of those police (secret police, community policing, local sheriffs etc) will differ based on your country’s laws.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2021 23:49
|
|
|
DaysBefore posted:A factory can be churning out something that nobody wants but it's still making money instead of going bankrupt? Or is money made by pops working at a factory seperate from the profit from said factory? I guess it will keep those pesky liberals from boarding up all of my specifically curated and subsdised industries at least Producing more things than there is demand for will lower the sell price of a good, and if that price drops below the cost of manufacture (ie wages+material cost), the factory will eat into its cash reserves until bankruptcy.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2021 12:37
|
|
|
In terms of great wars there's a few different ways I think they could do things. I think to kick things off you'd want a mechanic in the late game that makes backing down costlier. I was thinking that in the 1900s a technology would unlock that in a diplomatic play with a great power on each side, on backing down all demands are enforced, not just the primary goal. Secondly you'd want a mechanic that allows for parties to join as the war progresses. A simple way to achieve that would be to leave the diplomatic play open after war breaks out, so both sides can try and sway neutral parties in at any stage in the war. These changes would both raise the stakes for making diplomatic demands in the late game, as well as allow for great wars to expand beyond the initial participants. There's more stuff they could add, like introducing secret demands (ala Italy, Sykes-Picot) or a peace conference, but that might be better suited for a DLC that fully fleshes out great wars.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 23:24
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Sounds generally like a welcome improvement but disappointing as I would've preferred something that while de-emphasized direct micro in war still kept units on the map; my main worry as such is how they handle having measurable progress in war; half the fun is seeing the map change colour after all! They’ve expanded the number of provinces since V2 and Wiz said in the thread the province layer has an important role to play in war, so I expect you’ll be able to see the ebb and flow of combat on the map. I’m quite interested to see that element of the system - the main downside I see to abstraction is it become harder to represent the impact of terrain and geography. It’s easy to give a unit located in a mountain province a +50% defensive bonus; how do you reflect that when units are abstracted to a broader front? It’s possible of course but needs some careful thought.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2021 21:01
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I can't believe Wiz is wasting the longest dev diary on combat instead of straights. i don't think there's that much to say about the straights
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2021 04:44
|
|
|
I hate to let everyone down but the chuds on the forums don’t seem to be melting down
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2021 03:33
|
|
|
what obfuscating data would actually do to gameplay would be to make the player extremely risk averse. "yes it looks like i could win this war, but what if the numbers are wrong? better hold off" "well i might make profits if i build this new industry, but equally the prediction could be off and i could sink a bunch of money into nothing. maybe not"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2022 09:56
|
|
|
people like x so it should be in the game is the kind of sage advice you could only get on SA
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2022 00:20
|
|
|
Fellblade posted:I mean you folks can believe your ‘feelings’ on the matter and I guess I’ll continue believing the actual humans this happened to and we can go on living our lives. Can you provide a specific example of the events that led up to someone accidentally getting diploannexed? Because as it is, the reason people are bringing up quote unquote feelings is because they've got nothing to go on here.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2022 08:21
|
|
|
in the future anarchist utopia we have abolished imperialist measurements and i immediately die by overdosing on painkillers
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2022 02:44
|
|
|
Imo it makes a lot of sense to be able to differentiate to some degree say a Germany lead by Frederick III and a Germany led by Wilhelm II.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2022 04:14
|
|
|
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. there was in fact a large number of posts about Russia annexing parts of Japan or whatever happened to China
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2022 08:08
|
|
|
From playing for a while the systems feel really good (notwithstanding poor AI) but there don’t seem to be sufficient bespoke treatment for events like the oriental crisis, the Mexican-American war, the civil war etc so the game consistently presents ahistorical results. Ahistorical results every now and then are cool but I think the bizarre northern CSA or Egypt consistently conquering Constantinople are issues that should be fixed, even if they have to be a bit heavy handed with modifiers in the short term.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2022 01:33
|
|
|
Imo at a minimum there should be more events that are just “a thing happened” - eg forming a cultural union or a major war or something should have a nice piece of text + pic. It’s kind of bizarre that researching a technology has more fanfare than forming Scandinavia
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2022 02:50
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:Yeah I think this is the main issue, it's not that the game lacks historical events, it's that if you aren't playing as the country they happen to, you won't ever notice them happening. Victoria 2 had a nice option for this where you could toggle the notification for major events to display even if they weren't relevant to your nation, so for example when the US civil war kicked off you'd still get a popup about it no matter where you were in the world (the default setting was that it would do this for nations that were in your neighbourhood, but I liked to swap it to be global). The notification thing seems to be a trend in recent paradox games that is one step forward one step back - yea it sucked fiddling with the 500 different notification settings in early Clausewitz games, but it also meant that once you got to a sweet spot you received all the relevant global information you could want. V3 still has notifications - if you’re quick you can catch the bottom right telling you about major events such as the crowning of Victoria or diplomatic plays in areas you have an interest, but they’re swamped by notifications that Saxe-Coburg has declared and undeclared an interest in the Russian Far East. I don’t want to go back to the days of an event every tick notifying me that tractors have spread to one of my neighbour’s states, but some way to fine tune notifications to get rid of the noise and highlight things that may have no immediate impact but contribute to immersion. Also one thing I’m annoyed by is that the game will notify you (twice) that an interest group leader has died/retired but not who the new interest group leader is - you need to go to the menu for that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2022 04:48
|
|
|
If push came to shove imo you could merge military and civilian ships into a single good. You’d lose some fidelity from civilian vs military manufacturing but what’s currently there is pretty barebones.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2022 06:36
|
|
|
The decentralised country setup is odd to me. Areas like Western Australia or Hokkaido which are almost but not quite fully colonised seem to serve no purpose but to lead to unsatisfying borders. Of course everyone knows the US landsnake into Canada as well. Then you have something like Algeria where the decentralised countries follow the modern, artificial border exactly - colonisation is done at the state level, so why not have the Algerian decentralised countries own provinces on both sides of the state boundary to make a more natural border?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2022 02:14
|
|
|
Canopus250 posted:Thanks for the explanations, I'll try getting Council Republic going and see what happens. I effectively had to subsidize like five full industries already because the starting parts were necessary after I freed myself from the Qing, but nobody actually wanted them. Services seem to have extremely low demand (presumably so that early game they don’t make up a huge chunk of pop expenses without any means to increase their production) that doesn’t change much with wealth. This means that urban centre production methods are basically a trap. Give them electric lights and call it a day imo - otherwise as you’ve found you need to subsidise them to keep them solvent.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2022 09:06
|
|
|
I feel like design-wise, ie apart from the bugs and AI, the way that fronts are implemented is the biggest problem in the game. They can be both arbitrarily long like when you're fighting against Russia, or arbitrarily short if the combat AI decides to create a bunch of pockets as it advances. I feel like a simple bandaid solution for the latter problem would be for troops to be assigned at the strategic region level, not the front level - I guess you might lose some depth, but you wouldn't have the problem of unavoidably creating 6 different fronts because your troops advanced in a weird way, which I think is a good tradeoff.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2022 02:39
|
|
|
 Maths 2.0 BBJoey fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Nov 16, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2022 06:46
|
|
|
Check your fishing ports, and also any other nations in your customs union may still use clippers.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I've seen this mentioned a few times and I think I understand the logic as to why it's set up this way, but the interface needs to be better because a lot of people just don't even realize you can launch a play to annex a vassal since the option just doesn't show up at high relations. The reason I think it's set up this way is that high relations allow you, as a vassal, to create a safety buffer where your overlord can't annex you. So long as relations are above whatever the cutoff point is (20 I think?) you're safe. If your overlord starts damaging relations, that also gives you early warning that they're going to try some poo poo and lets you hunt around for some allies before they launch the play. The problem is that most players are seeing this from the overlord's perspective and thinking "They love me so I should be able to annex them for free" but from the vassal's perspective that high relationship is meant to secure their autonomy, not make them easier to annex. They could flip this so that low relations make it impossible to diploannex, which would accomplish the same result while also making more intuitive sense. As it is, a vassal state being rebellious and disliking their overlord is more susceptible to integration - doesn’t really make sense.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2022 04:56
|
|
|
The lack of stockpiles is one of the things I would not change at all with the game. When great powers mobilised in any great number - which is to say, during WW1 - every country involved immediately burnt through their pre-war stockpiles within weeks or, at the latest, months, and from then on were replenishing stocks as they used them. The problem with the game is an AI one in that every conflict is marked by complete mobilisation, which is a problem that impacts basically all the games' features. If the AI was a bit less willing to fully mobilise its conscripts to intervene in a conflict between Italy and Eritrea, you would only experience a shortfall in war materiel in a truly apocalyptic conflict, at which point it's entirely reasonable that you should have to crash-restructure your economy to a war footing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2022 10:29
|
|
|
It seems to me the fix for the front issue is some kind of front merging system - like yes these two fronts technically don’t touch because there’s a pocket in between them, but the distance between them is so small that they’re treated as one front. Maybe something like if there are fewer than X provinces between two fronts in a given strategic region, they are merged together. Alternatively, there are probably changes they could make to the province capture system to relieve some of the issues - so that you don’t end up with pockets which pointlessly create new fronts to begin with.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2022 01:18
|
|
|
I thought laws influenced which buildings the investment pool can be spent on? Eg on agrarianism it can only be used for rural buildings.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2022 00:39
|
|
|
I think they should re-add a legitimacy penalty for government size; as it is, at least at the start of the game, cramming every party into your government results in a fairly legitimate government which is funny but weird.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2022 10:57
|
|
|
The AI vastly overvalues obligations, it's what causes a lot of hellwars early in the game.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2022 10:59
|
|
|
I love(d) Victoria 2, especially with mods that add flavour and events, but there's very little game to it. It's a well trodden cliche that nobody understands how the economy works, but despite the apparent complexity it's trivial to "solve" your country's economy in the first five years and never need to look at the industry screen again. 3 does have a problem with your investment pool and building capacity hitting critical mass at which point economic decisions matter less, but even at that stage there's still an order of magnitude more strategic thinking required than in 2. Similarly, it's too easy to satisfy your people and get the good laws in 3 - but compared to 2, the interest group and law system is miles beyond 2's basic party and militancy mechanics. These are core systems that were unmoddable in 2, so even after a decade they were just as barebones and uninteresting as on release.The Narrator posted:I do unironically miss an enormous window with a mini Wikipedia article popping up to celebrate the invention of the saxophone or w/e Same, there needs to be more flavour text - production methods and laws would be perfect for a big chunk of encyclopedia copy paste
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2022 11:53
|
|
|
There’s some real problems with the prediction algorithms in the game - both the combat predictions and economic predictions are pretty useless.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2023 01:39
|
|
|
I don't see a problem with decentralising African states if it improves the experience of the Scramble for Africa tbh
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2023 02:19
|
|
|
imo they should remove battles completely and fully abstract the combat model. It seems odd to me to remove the ability to move units into battle, while retaining the battle itself. Battles are unsatisfying because there is basically no player agency - you assign a general to a front, and the rest the game literally plays itself. May as well remove them and create a more involved front system with greater player interaction.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2023 02:38
|
|
|
I think mega-Germanys will form pretty regularly as in all my 1.2 runs to date, Prussia launches a leadership war in the 30s and gets crushed alone against Austria and Russia. I feel like leadership wars (as opposed to unification wars) shouldn't allow external intervention as it's not really a "brothers war" if half of Europe joins in.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2023 01:43
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:As much as I enjoy line goes up on the GDP graph, there does feel like something missing from the game in terms of reactivity compared to V2 but I'm not sure what it is. It's certainly not perfect and can see people disliking it. For me it’s in the diplomacy. Much as I hated the sphere of influence mechanic in V2 it created a sense that you were actively jockeying for influence with the other great powers across the globe - Britain would be expelling your embassies in Siam, you’d be spreading rumours about France in Persia etc. This creates a feeling that diplomacy was multilateral, that other countries had agency and agendas they were pursuing. Foreign relations in V3 are much more bilateral and its nigh impossible to get a sense of what other countries are doing beyond the blunt tool of war. This makes the game feel pretty lonely during a time period when the world was more interconnected than ever before in history.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2023 14:16
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:05 |
|
|
Infamy feels really off. Often you’ll find that conquering an integral part of a European great power is less costly infamy-wise than taking one of their colonies in Africa, due to population differences. Maybe there should be some sort of scaling on the population factor based on discrimination or homelands.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2023 01:33
|
|