|
JosefStalinator posted:Wiz can you confirm we will still have graphs and charts monitoring population demographics like ideology (or interest groups), class, and ethnicity, etc? wukkar posted:What color is Prussia? You guys clearly haven't been trawling the pdx forums for dev posts. Wiz posted:If graphs and charts is your thing, I think you will be very happy with Vicky 3. Wiz posted:Yellow Prussia was just too beautiful for this world, I'm afraid. wukkar posted:Are newspapers a thing? They talked about newspapers on stream yesterday. Specifically that they weren't great  32:34:12 here:https://twitch.tv/videos/1029941722
|
#
¿
May 23, 2021 16:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
Some other interesting bits and pieces from the forum:Wiz posted:
Wiz posted:Norway starts as a subject (in a Personal Union under Sweden). Wiz posted:Finland is a a subject nation of Russia in 1836 in Victoria 3. Wiz posted:We try to make a historical judgment on how much autonomy different parts of empires had when deciding whether they should be an annexed incorporated, annexed unincorporated, or subject (of varying degrees of autonomy). For example we considered whether Poland should be a puppet instead of annexed territory, but their autonomy was basically entirely gone by 1836 so it didn't really make sense to us.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2021 16:31
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:
Gonna make 3 look as much like 2's intro as possible
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2021 23:28
|
|
|
Well, the thread has convinced me, I'm in favour of breaking up the US. Mostly because it sounds hilarious.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2021 10:43
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Haiti being tutorial island would be rad for all the reasons people say, but also because it would piss off the fascists. I like the idea, but they have no iron, they have no coal, they have no pop... Maybe for an advanced tutorial covering diplo/politics or more niche strategies but I don't think you'll be able to do much with them industrially.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2021 11:38
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I’m gonna object here to you sneakily trying to slip this one past us That's just the word everyone uses for them. Sorry!
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
AnoHito posted:This always manages to take people with like 7000 hours in the game by complete surprise, lol Buncha Johnny come latelys who weren't there for the DDs, clearly  AnoHito posted:Or, more simply, it was created by a Thatcherite with the goal of making a fun game regardless of what his real life political beliefs are. Y'know, people always level this accusation at King, but I have met the guy and from the things he was saying at the time I'd swear up and down he was a middle of the road social democrat.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2021 09:27
|
|
|
Xerophyte posted:I knew I'd seen that somewhere, thanks! If you go further upriver Mosul gets some too. Khuzestan doesn't, for some reason, but Fars does. e: I think I'm going to make a map
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:e: I think I'm going to make a map I would make a map if Map.SavePNG worked with any map mode other than countries 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2022 17:12
|
|
|
Xerophyte posted:Mosul's oil has yet to be found in my game, it merely has "discoverable resources". I'm honestly not sure how fixed that stuff is, the time to discover and I think yields are random, at least? Not sure about exact locations. Well, the files look like this: code:I think it'll pop eventually. Owner might need to have the extraction tech.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2022 17:17
|
|
|
Communist Bear posted:Custom unions seem a bit weird to me, but maybe i'm not understanding it right? If I'm an independent country that is part of a large custom union, the export of goods is only going to be useful if my country produces it. At the moment I can export all goods. For instance, for the current country I'm playing I know for a fact I don't produce coffee, and yet I can export this? What I gather that will do is improve the GDP of the country producing coffee. That seems bizarre - almost like i'm in full control of the market when I really shouldn't be? I think the way it works is that your trade centres will be shipping- and potentially making money from- other countries' goods. You're not in control of the market, you're in control of what your trade centres are doing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2022 17:48
|
|
|
Communist Bear posted:I see. So the idea is that even if you're not a producer of that good, because you shipped it you'd get the tariff fee? That I don't know. But I think your pops would be earning wages from the productivity of the route?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2022 17:53
|
|
|
sloppy portmanteau posted:Can anyone tell me which states in South America have good oil production? I don't think anyone there has the tech to discover it yet. The only discovered oil so far is in north Germany, and I'm not invading there.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2022 19:42
|
|
|
alcaras posted:Railways and Infrastructure This at least is entirely historical. Railways were/are never profitable. There's actually a very interesting passage in Hobsbawm where he talks about the Railway Manias and how they always went bust but did at least provide enough demand to grow the steel industry.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2022 20:12
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:Oh I should read Hobsbawm's book on this era, i never got around to that one It's a whole trilogy!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2022 20:19
|
|
|
    This was pretty fun. The shogunate was a massive boot on the neck of basically everything but especially education and healthcare, which was a pisser. Even once we modernised it was slow going until the army decided they were communist. After a very funny two years where the industrialists voted to have themselves expropriated because their leader was a republican (feeling like a leader's preferences should maybe only modify, not overwrite, an IG's natural endorsements? especially if it's neutral?), everything got turned into a worker's collective and every number started going UP UP UP BABY YEAH. Definitely the most satisfying experience of going communist I've ever had in a paradox game. Watching the lower class's lives massively improve over the course of a generation as the bourgeois bleed away to nothing. Beautiful.  But I did a lot of war in this game, and let me tell you, I hate the war system more with every minute I spend with it. There was a lot of chat prior to release on this and whether it was a good idea, most of it centred on whether unit micro was boring or if liking it constituted some sort of moral failing. All of that now seems like a misdirection from the much more pressing question of whether the system functions at all. It is a mess. It's like an intensification of everything that's wrong with HOI4's fronts (and don't get me wrong, I'm actually a lot more positive on fronts than most of the people in the HOI4 thread)- more bugs, more edge cases, more and worse failures when it encounters anything other than the simplest and most trivial of use cases- and without the ability to go in and manually fix things when it goes wrong. Letting your troops knock over some native country on full auto while you focus on something else is great. Anything more complicated than that is a nightmare. Solid, working fronts splintering into two or three distinct pieces because they formed a pocket, or made contact with some other enemy country's border. That's familiar HOI behaviour, but at least there it had the decency to concatenate fronts by alliance (...once you're at war...). Best hope your army is divided up between enough generals (because it's really great to hit assign to front five separate times, rather than once), because if they're all under one guy, whoops, no way to split them between those new fronts. And even if it is, how they divide themselves between the new fronts seems largely random. Here three hundred brigades have decided to surround three conscripted farmers, while the bulk of their army gets to attack the flank, unopposed. And you better hope none of the armies have decided to go home, because if they have reassigning them means they need to travel all the way from their HQ all over again. Sometimes- I believe this is a known issue with the player being involved in multiple wars- every guy you've got will desert the front and teleport home, just on a lark. Some of this seems like a bug, and some of it seems like it could be fixed with a couple of small tweaks to the core concept, but sometimes I get an issue where I'm not even sure what the correct behaviour would be. So, like, here's an example from an Egypt -> Arabia game I played earlier. I'd spent most of the early game puppeting the Arabian minors, on the (correct) assumption that this would let me hit the unification button and auto-annex the lot when I unlocked the correct tech. It was a good strategy and I was feeling pretty good about it when the Turks came knocking for the third or fourth time. We have the usual front in the Levant, and now one in Mesopotamia. That Mesopotamian front doesn't go so hot- it's manned entirely by my vassals' peasant levies- so they start pushing south from Basra. That's fine- I quickly managed a breakthrough on the Levantine and set an army to chase them from the north. This gets sort of silly when the ai doesn't reassign any troops from that southern thrust to defend against this advance- we run south unopposed and eventually the two fronts meet somewhere in the sands of Badiyat Ash-Sham. Whereupon, the northern front goes and... collapses the pocket without a fight. Because, you see, the fronts had touched, but not merged- one was Najd-Turkey, the other was Egypt-Turkey. And because, see, armies don't occupy space, they only exist along fronts- so when that Egyptian army went to advance, it got to advance as if there were no troops there. Working as designed, but what the gently caress is this design? Then we have issues with advances, and I don't just mean the way that you can have a massive numerical advantage on the front and be outnumbered in every engagement. No, I mean the fact that every front can only have one battle at a time, and that province captures don't- as far as I can tell, because the system is opaque as all hell and that's another issue- scale with the length/size of a front. Want to double your advance speed in a war you're definitely winning? Open a second front. And I mean, take the same number of troops on both sides, divided them in the same proportions between two separate fronts and you will get twice as much movement, because twice as many battles will be happening in the same amount of time. Or hey, are you having trouble with naval landings? Here's a neat trick: take that army, split it into five armies each one fifth of the size, and launch five separate simultaneous naval invasions, all in same region, and despite the fact that it's the same number of attackers fighting the same size garrison you'll get much better force ratios in the landing battles, for... some reason. The game has not eliminated micro, it's just made it weird and obscure. gently caress me, I just remembered the time I was fighting France as Italy and when they attacked they got to fight me on the plains of Savoy, rather than, y'know, in the loving Alps where the front and two hundred angry Italians very definitely were. I can't even keep track of all the problems with the war system. I feel like I need to be taking notes just so I can vent properly. And it's not like it's rare- every war, every single war, something goes wrong. There is always something. But hey tip for you guys: if you want to do a colonialism in a place that's mostly unrecognised rather than decentralised polities then the most infamy-efficient way to do it is Make Puppet -> Annex Subject. Make Puppet is like a half to a third of the cost of conquering outright and Annex Subject is almost free.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2022 22:14
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:Seeing the borders in North America and violently shidding and farding and puking Yet to have a game where it doesn't look like that 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2022 00:11
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:If I'm some salt of the earth peasant, how on Earth do I suddenly become a machinist, capitalist, academic etc just because someone built a tool factory in my area? There's actually a pool of "qualifications" in each region, and if there's not enough a factory won't be able to hire even if there are enough bodies. Not sure exactly how it works but I think literacy, education access and universities all play a role.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2022 00:44
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:The standard interest groups won't prefer something as extreme as that, you need a vanguardist leader for the group and then they will support it Well, they can if they hate whatever you have currently more. Like, check this out:   So, we have buy-in for communism from the army, the trade unions, the petty bourgeoisie (not in government but they're part of the movement) and the industrialists. Only the army has an explicitly vanguardist leader. So what gives? Well, we're a monarchy, and while the TUs are neutral on Council Republic, they're actively against Monarchy and that's enough. The industrialists and the petty booj are the same because their leaders are a republican and an atheist, respectively. Not sure either of the latter should do this no matter what the situation is, it was very much a the turkeys that voted for Christmas scenario, but it does work. e: The Cheshire Cat posted:I feel like it's good that this is being addressed because multicultralism is pretty much a no-brainer right now and way too easy to get passed super early, but I do feel like racism should be a stick rather than a carrot. Like I think the issue with multiculturalism is it's kind of a silly "racism is over" button where all discrimination stops because it's against the law. It strikes me as the sort of thing where discrimination is an element that is always present, but some kind of institution exists that mitigates them, with higher levels of religious/cultural tolerance laws unlocking higher levels of the institution. Then you'd have to actually commit resources to that institution because you can take racism out of official policy by just passing the law, but you can't stop your people from being racist unless you take an active effort to enforce protection of minorities (and I feel like even at maximum level it should never reduce it to zero, this is the 19th century and even in the 21st century we very much have not solved that problem). I dunno that I agree. Like, the authority penalty for multiculti/church and state/democracy etc is already enough to give me pause. Loyalist/radicals penalties on top of that and I don't know if I'd ever take those laws unless I was roleplaying. Or trying to set up a migration cheese strat, but I've yet to have a game where I'm really hurting for labour. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Nov 2, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2022 01:07
|
|
|
Waifu Radia posted:i dont care about realistic resources i want resources in fun and interesting places informed by history I know I'm not going to install any mod that makes resource deposits more concentrated until they teach the AI how to develop them lmao Though if someone if hacking the demographic transition into the game I might be interested in that
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2022 02:19
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:It's already in the game. Birth rate starts declining past 20 sol. Really, huh. I feel like it should probably kick in earlier than that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2022 02:28
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:Is this listed in a file somewhere or did you just go to each country and check somehow? A spreadsheet with all resources per state would be pretty nice. It's in /game/map_data/state_regions/, search for "bg_oil_extraction" But someone posted an imgur album with this and other resources in map form, so this is obsolete now. I think the link's in the OP?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2022 13:50
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:I do want to know if people with more powerful CPUs are able to do endgame faster lol, I know stux says it's a pipe dream but how can more FLOPS not be better I have played three campaigns and noticed no slowdown- on speed 4- whatsoever. There was a point in my first game where having the trade ui open created a lot of lag, but it was specific to that ui and didn't effect the tick rate as far as I noticed. 5900X e: I would not recommend this game to anyone until the war jank gets ironed out. It's like a glove constructed exclusively out of razor blades.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2022 01:40
|
|
|
I got Ripper Abraham Lincoln.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2022 01:27
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:And yet, in my very first game I turned Two Sicilies into a shining beacon of freedom and culture with 97% literacy by 1936 (women's suffrage and multiculturalism passed in like 1860, landowners marginalized by 1850 or so). I kind of agree with those that say it's kind of too easy, but of course this is from the point of a Paradox game fan so I'm used to bullshitting my way around modifiers and the like. I wouldn't really want "oh I chose Two Sicilies / Russia / any other backwards autocracy, guess I'm stuck with no freedoms until 1900" either. Two Sicilies isn't particularly backwards, I don't think. You start with serfdom abolished, professional army, slavery banned. That's about as progressive as backwards autocracies get.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2022 15:55
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:If you could grow opium in more in-game places you would have less incentive to do imperialism. Rubber, oil, and to a lesser extent coal, iron, sulphur, tea and silk are all already pretty potent drivers of that. I don't think you need opium to be as rare as it is to incentivise imperialism. Opium's position in the game right now seems a little weird. Field hospitals are one of the most potent military upgrades you can get in the early on- more potent, I think, than simple troop or arty upgrades because they're operating on an entire other axis of performance (recovery effect), and thus having a multiplicative effect- but require vast quantities of opium to fuel. The key to military success in this game appears to be "annex Vietnam early and turn the entirety of Tonkin into a single giant poppy plantation", which... seems like sort of a strange dynamic to me? I do not feel like opium-fueled space marines "makes sense" in the game's narrative?? I'm just sort of not vibing with that??? There's also no synthetic alternative. Synth rubber (1909, 1931) and synth oil (1913, 1925) were at least late enough developments that their omission sort of makes sense? (Plus: if you haven't done enough imperialism to secure yourself a supply of those resources I feel like you're probably not going to have the coal necessary to fuel ersatz production anyway). But ether was first synthesised in 1275 and began to be used as an anaesthetic in the 1840s. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Nov 8, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2022 17:55
|
|
|
I think my problem with the legislature is that it's so very passive. You hit go on the law and either the dice roll in your favour or they don't. The bulk of your input is rearranging the government to maximise roll chances, and that's a) all up front and b) eminently solvable. The event pool doesn't really help, because it's like:
I could use something with a little more push and pull.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2022 21:09
|
|
|
Waifu Radia posted:One of the devs on a stream mentioned that if you have more than 50 the game begins slowing to a crawl almost immediately. Likely means their algorithms around it are polynomial or - shudder - factorial Since Radia is referencing something I told her- my recollection is that it was, I think either the Mexico stream or a segment of the release day stream, with Wiz and Paul Depre- is that Ofaloaf?- where they're discussing coal in the game, and how they want to maybe split coal into different types- anthracite, lignite, etc- so as to better model the fact that not all coal was equally useful for all purposes, and not everywhere with coal had every type- I think Germany notably had a lot of lignite, which is basically dogshit, and not a lot of anthracite, which is what you really want for, say, steel production. And that turned into a discussion of the problems involved with adding more types of good, and then jokes about the inevitable megamod that will introduce a thousand hyper-niche goods, at which point the non-Wiz dev makes an offhand comment that if anyone tries to go much above fifty, they're going to start running into serious performance problems. Though, before you even get to that, the game's UI is barely sufficient to handle the number of goods it already has.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2022 21:33
|
|
|
Waifu Radia posted:There’s more than a few times you start getting input shortages and want to shore those goods up but that also requires a few other goods right after, sequencing is a huge pain. Something I feel like doing kinda regularly is interleaving batches of different building types, for this reason. And, like, that's not going to be easy in any UI, but it would be a lot easier with click and drag.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2022 00:33
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Apparently this happens when your GDP hits around 4.2 billion. ...it's an unsigned 32-bit int? They couldn't spring for longs?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2022 15:06
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I really think that this is just down to the game being so incredibly hosed by bugs and poor AI. Ticket got closed as WAD lol.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2022 21:56
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Anyone getting into modding? How open is it to editing/creating new pops? I'd like to enable laborer and lower-class pops to utilize the investment pool like capitalists and aristocrats, but digging cursorily through the files as stands I don't see any way to do that. Investment pool contributions aren't an element of pop type, they're an element of laws (the economic ones, specifically). Or, potentially, anything that can apply a country modifier, as that's what the laws do. Extending it to other types is going to require that the game has a concept of state_<poptype>_investment_pool_contribution_add modifiers for the types in question, which it... might? In earlier titles all modifiers were handcoded, but the newer ones have been better at generating them dynamically. Try adding a state_laborers_investment_pool_contribution_add = 0.1 line to one of the economy laws and seeing what that does.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2022 01:53
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:"AI should properly develop resource industries" Played a game today and AI USA was putting out 16k oil by 1920. Canada was up there too, and the UK was using tonnes of it. My eyes nearly fell out of my head.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2023 00:37
|
|
|
Albino Squirrel posted:I've started a new game as Britain. I would like to annex Canada because despite them being my puppet and in my market, I know the HBC isn't going to build its oil rigs as fast as I will in Alberta. Is there a way to annex the various Canadas without going to war with them? In addition to "no, you have use the cb", be careful to keep your relations with the US up because they like to intervene sometimes if you try this. If they do, don't bother adding any wargoals against them unless you've massively expanded your army already, because chewing through all those conscripts early on is a massive pain in the dick, but it's pretty easy to stall them while you knock out the HBC or whoever. Don't have to worry about anyone intervening if you try the same thing with Australia or South Africa, but there's also not as much point to it- some nice minerals but nothing spectacular. Annexing India is worth it, eventually- infinite free land for all the exotic agriculturals and endless millions of Indians to grow them- but it will tank your bureaucracy into the loving ground, so be prepared for that. And wait for it to turn into the Raj, that makes all of its puppets your puppets (which, apart from putting all those additional troops on your side, means you can push out of Baroda or wherever and not have to gently caress around with landings.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2023 01:25
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Coming to the end of my France run, game is getting better but still not there yet. It's not even 1900 yet and I'm almost done the tech tree, France has about 75% unemployment, and it's extremely hard to balance my economy at all. 75% unemployed? With no labour saving? That doesn't sound right. This is what my British Republic looked like by the end of 1935:  About 31% unemployed, which isn't great- definitely high enough to significantly impact my SOL- but I also have basically every labour saving technique in use, plus the feminism laws and the trade union buff that increase workforce ratio. This is about as large an unemployment pool as it would be possible for me to make. It's not due to lack of demand, either- we actually have significant deficits in a whole bunch of goods, mostly raw resources:  The problem is this poo poo:   And I did significantly worse on this front in this run than I did in my pre-1.2 UK run. (I think the mistake was not integrating India- all that arable solves a lot of problems) I suspect you've got yourself into some sort of low income trap where wages are low because employment is low, which is lowering demand. The lack of labour efficiency techs might actually be hurting you here. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 13:46 on Mar 21, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2023 13:43
|
|
|
Gort posted:The generals system isn't good, but I've never needed forty generals. When I play Russia I have like, five. Each one gets 100 regiments - did you miss the option to promote generals, or do you have 4000 regiments in your army? If I have a military region with some awkward small number of regiments in it, I just demolish the barracks there. There are things here like, you want your armies to be the same size or smaller than your navies so you can do (effective) naval landings, and then there are incentives to do multiple small landings rather than a few big ones, so you want to split them further than that. Then you need at least one general per front, which can be a large number if you have a lot of small, scattered colonial holdings and are fighting an enemy that also has a lot of small colonial holdings... You probably want more generals than fronts, in fact, so you can choose where to concentrate force. And of course it is entirely possible to have barracks in more than twenty strategic regions, and you might think you can just be like, oh, those guys don't need a general. That can just be a garrison force. But then suddenly you're at war with France, and you really need every man, even the conscripts (who you can't concentrate in a single region, even if you've done the smart thing with your regulars). There are things you can do to mitigate all of this, of course, but I have actually managed to hit my general cap in more than one game. Tahirovic posted:Having a large enough army to require more than 20 generals means you likely run into a Coal/Iron/Steel shortage, one you can't fix because there's simply not enough available resource nodes. Nah check this poo poo out:    I could quintuple the size of this army and it would barely move the needle on steel. Military consumption is a tiny fraction of the whole. (War machine factories are also a negligible fraction of engine consumption, for the record).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2023 12:38
|
|
|
Are you certain it was the military that was the culprit and not the rest of the economy? There's definitely a resource crunch in the game, but I don't think military sizes are a major part of it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2023 13:25
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Does anyone know exactly how overseas market connections work? I've conquered some territory but I can't make a market connection even though there's an active port in the state. The tooltip says that the number of port levels required "depends on local infrastructure usage" but doesn't actually tell you what this means in practice. I can't set the port to use any PM other than the baseline one, because the state doesn't have market access to make use of my shipyards, and I have extremely low construction efficiency there so I'd rather not have to build a ton of ports if there's some other war around the issue. So, there's regular market access, which is literally just the ratio of infrastructure available to infrastructure required, and the "isolated state" status. The latter just means that the state has no land connection to the capital or a state with a port, though, so if you have a port there that is not the problem you have. (e: I am now doubting myself on this. I've never seen it require more than one port...) There's really only three ways to solve an infrastructure deficit: the Road Maintenance decree, like Dr Video Games said, building ports or railroads, and researching one of the techs that increases the free infrastructure you get from population. Though the last is not a practical solution in 99.9% of cases- I mention it for completeness' sake only. So Road Maintenance should do it, if the deficit is less than the bonus the decree provides (+1 point for every 100k people in the state, up to a maximum of... 20, probably? It's complicated but I think the way the math works out it's 20). If it's not, you gotta build ports and rail, that's your only option. And, frankly, you don't want to be solving this with Road Maintenance, that is auth you could be using to do a bunch of other useful poo poo. So it's build, build, build, baby. BUT! Important note! The basic port production method provides no infrastructure. So long as it's stuck on Anchorage that port is doing nothing for you here. On Cargo Port it's 5 per. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 15:25 on Apr 16, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2023 15:23
|
|
|
I found a Reddit post from six months ago talking about a glitch where states with ports would be considered "isolated" until the save was reloaded: https://www.reddit.com/r/victoria3/comments/yhhmud/problem_with_state_isolation/ Actually, does your capital have a connection to a port?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2023 15:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
VostokProgram posted:is there any way to take a whole-map screenshot? So some of the newer (Imp and later) Paradox games have this, but it's not as easy or straightforward as in the earlier ones. You'll need to activate the console (this involves opening the game in debug mode), and try executing "Map.SavePNG countries <some filename> yes", without the quotation marks and replacing <some filename> with the filename you want. This might work.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2023 11:41
|
|