oscarthewilde posted:

the reward you get for spending hours finishing some althist focus path is just more hearts of iron, but this time you're communist instead of fascist.

Dreylad posted:

I wonder if the biggest hurdle to doing a game that's more based on a material history is it runs counter to what most of your players believe and so you'd run into problems of people struggling to succeed because everything is counterintuitive unless you abstract things enough that you teach them to play your game. Like AoE or something.

alarumklok posted:

super ambitious tirefires are the best

everyone should play amazing cultivation simulator

StashAugustine posted:

vicky war is designed to never really interact with the player so i suspect it'll be less awful an idea

Raskolnikov38 posted:

thankfully the hoi4 dlc last month was such a disaster as to remind me to not touch Vicky 3 until probably next year

Mandoric posted:

started with a japan run, i think the focus on being an ~open-ended sim~ kinda hurts the game as i didn't gently caress up and thus i'm saddled with a shogun who refuses to participate in government but still has exclusive personal legitimacy so no one else can pass any laws, in 1907

got the confederate new york thing, got the repeated communist revolutions in nova scotia , got anatolian egypt, italy and prussia both failed

and now i have the papal states taking a swing at the nonchristian great power, a sort of last crusade (beating the us after it gets dismembered still counts for westernization.) gonna see Japanese Parma on the map when the war weariness ticks down enough--the spicy cheese for 1.0 is going to war against someone who has no boats and just tanking the war weariness penalty for a week, since loser gives up first demand even if you never fight and ai is on a strict timer.

e: when i saddled , i mean it. can't ditch the bakufu without either a civil war, the generic liberalization event, or waiting until lategame for the landowners to go broke. don't get the civil war if the landowners just storm out of government and aren't in charge to be rebelled against, can't liberalize with 10% bills every ten years because the landowners still have all the clout, they themselves don't rebel because ??? they sat at 30% support 90% radicalism for a decade and still no dice.

KomradeX posted:

Parodox has always hated the concept of Socialism

gradenko_2000 posted:

1stGear posted:

And on the sixth day, the LORD created the Market and saw that it was a rational and infalliable guide to economic activity.

Danann posted:

Atrocious Joe posted:

all the scrubs are up in arms about how Vicky 3 doesn't sufficiently model "free market capitalism," but the real grogs are still annoyed about how CK3 models the development of an early modern fiscal-military state hundreds of years too early.

Atrocious Joe posted:

The weirder political issue for me is the "comfy" aesthetics of Vicky 3 combined with the reality of the period.

It was interesting to watch this live streamer get a genocidal event and struggle about how to answer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydJqPlbxhGY&t=639s

In other parts he pursues edicts like women's suffrage because "it's the right thing to do." that question pops up and suddenly its all "from a gameplay perspective, this is the better button."

I think the idea of gameplay that has the internal politics and development of a country be a "garden" is more interesting than map-painting, but it's a pretty harsh garden. CK3 is fine portraying player characters as monstrous, but Vicky 3 doesn't take that direction. I'm not sure it could if it wanted too, with the games having major differences with regards to historical distance and POV of the player.

Tropico actually faces a similar dilemma in subject matter, and settled on the tone of a farce.

Lostconfused posted:

Slim Jim Pickens posted:

Everybody's a genius when they play Prussia

Mandoric posted:

The world at the end of (the war at the end of) an era.

Mistakes: Many.
- Early dev whether or not the Shogun approves gets Japan off on an extremely strong midgame footing, but the Shogun never forcefully disapproves, just lets you work yourself into a soft failstate where they'll stomp out of government, preventing you from either passing reforms that further disempower them or pissing off the growing industrialist and samurai interests enough to kick off a historical Meiji Restoration. Around 40 years midgame were spent just cycling RGO/factory dev and waiting for the politics timer.
- I never really managed to deal with the peasant economy or severe research constraints as a whole due to this; SoL is passable just due to PM changes keeping everyone fed but eh.
- Around another 20 years was spent focused on bullying what was left of the US. Bullying for territory is extremely suboptimal even if it's good territory; you get one state unless you can bait them into actual war and still get your five-year truce timer and huge bad boy points (I think my BEST foreign relation, barring an incongruous protectorate in Parma I took on a lark as my wargoal in a Cut Down To Size play from the Two Sicilies and then they collapsed, is -1500.)
- Because of the research constraints only allowing for one military path, and how fatal being behind in land tech is if you can't swarm, my navy's loving dire and my economy did tank hard when I attracted convoy raiding while waiting these out.
- I didn't think to start spam-coring after going multiculturalism/separation of church and state, so this also meant regular rebellions to clean up after the main war.

Successes:
- Every other major except the Qing was buried by near-continuous civil conflict, so while I'm nominally the fourth GP--in a dead heat with the UK for 3rd--if I wanted to map paint I have a clear path through just continuing to shred Russia and Qing.
- Cut Down to Size seems to just not work if you don't share a land border; everyone but Russia, I didn't even seriously mobilize, just was able to wait them out and WPed.
- If you don't have major unprofitable sectors to subsidize, and starting from enforced autarkhy encourages this, forcing through Council Republic rapidly gets you to a 100% legitimacy 100% voteshare national unity government dominated by the unions.

Systems s:
- Autocrats who leave government rather than kicking off a civil war, but still have autocratic legitimacy.
- I don't mind the war system per se, but:
-- Lots of the fate of all Kamchatka resting on 2000 dudes from two 400k armies meeting in some forest for the scheduled battle that month. But the AI definitely doesn't care about whatever limited supply system there is, and will flood their 400k in to pingpong a more reasonably sized force to death.
-- Fronts get extremely weird around impassable/seas. Holding Okhotsk but not Kamchatka or Transbaikal, you cannot march east as it's considered part of the Transbaikal front; conversely, if fighting in Hokkaido the front gets split sometimes into west and east of Asahikawa, and woe unto you if your general gets reassigned to the east and needs to do a full redeploy to hold a thrust coming toward/through Sapporo.
- And you will be fighting in Hokkaido if you're Japan, as you can't actually colonize it until after your reform process kicks in and the Euros will snag it and Sakhalin first. But you get a reclaim state claim on Sakhalin? But not northern Hokkaido?
- Apparently can't garrison unruly islands against separatism; you get booted out and have to land again.
- If you're naughty, everyone will want to cut you down to size. Even people on the other side of the world with no navy.
- Conceding a Cut Down to Size war definitely isn't just returning all conquests within the prior 10 years like the tooltip says. Might be conquests from targets who you've conquered from in the prior 10 years, or past 10 years plus uncored, but I'd been keeping my plate spinning and lost literally everything when I tried it.
- AI doesn't dev unusual resources well at all; if you want there to be oil or opium or even rubber in the world you basically have to conquer somewhere that has it and dev it up yourself. Opium kind of stands out because unless you start extremely early you have to be able to take either the British or the Qing.

For my next run, I'm going to manually disassemble the US and then try and take one state up.

Orange Devil posted:

Overall though, still not very difficult and most of the decisions seem very obvious. I think it's because what is supposed to be a careful modernizing balancing act is trivialized because radicals don't uhh do poo poo at all? I regularly had 5m radicals on a total pop of 20m, with only 200k loyalists. Turmoil in almost all my provinces. I got good police though so impact is minimal. If a full quarter of your population is radically opposed to your government you'd think they would do something. But they don't. So I just merrily keep industrializing until I finally reach the point where I can throw all that cheap construction capacity into RGOs and consumer industries, quality of life shoots up, the whole population deradicalizes, further increasing state income, funding yet more industry, and then the virtuous cycle never ends.

Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 posted:

I have also entered into a customs union with GB as Chile, but now I have no idea what's going on.

I was using the trade interface to track my domestic consumption through the details tab to check for deficit or surplus.

Now I have no idea what my domestic consumption is. Is this somewhere else?

Orange Devil posted:

Not having to use convoys seems like an insane benefit. Sucks from a simulation perspective though as apparently goods can cross oceans through the magic power of a common market?