|
BBJoey posted:There are lots of good posts here about Vic 3, but I also want a revamped combat system. I don't know how the gently caress to do it, but goddamn am I sick of seeing The Great War resolve by every nation involved sticking their hundreds of thousands of soldiers in a single province and waiting for the numbers to whittle down. I don't want full HoI, but mechanics to force long frontlines as well as to stress the importance of mobilisation and entrenchment would be nice. The problem is you're basically trying to model two very distinct periods of military history and it doesn't work. I've never seen a game that actually adequately simulated both WW1+ combat and Napoleonic/post-Napoleonic combat.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 00:24 |
|
|
# ? Apr 27, 2024 17:49 |
|
Panzeh posted:The problem is you're basically trying to model two very distinct periods of military history and it doesn't work. I've never seen a game that actually adequately simulated both WW1+ combat and Napoleonic/post-Napoleonic combat. Well, we pick one or the other then. We've defaulted to post-Napoleonic, but that seems to be unsatisfactory- and this was a period that has its major wars in the back half. So, try it the other way? (Didn't podcat say he wanted to go MotE style for V3?)
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 00:29 |
|
It's going to be very difficult to model the military advances in terms of tactics in any Vicky game. I can only hope that they at least move away from the system they have now for raising armies where they build regiments per province. That's really irritating.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 01:32 |
|
Vicky 3 isn't going to be complete until communist nations are also allowed to do foreign investments. Why no this has nothing to do with my foiled plan to industrialize a free African nation as commie USA
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 01:33 |
|
A cool feature for the next HoI, in my opinion, would be something that flatens out and/or re-assigns some of the leadership/IC/resource differentials in custom games, along with maybe the alliance partners? It'd be nice if you didn't have to do a KR-level mod to get an interesting starting history to start with.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 04:31 |
|
Personally for V3 I'd love for diplomacy to be redone. Like make there be more things like the Congress of Berlin and conferences between Great Powers. Let me play the Great Game.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 04:55 |
|
Fintilgin posted:I want to see more focus on characters in V3 (& all Paradox games). I want to have successful generals running for President or leading fascist coups. I want factories monopolized by families whose rich kids go into politics. I want every party led by a character who can be smeared or imprisoned or exiled or go on to rule the country. Call them Movers and Shakers. Have a set number alive at any one time, recruit a new one from a random POP when one dies / falls out of Popularity (see below). CHARACTER AMBITIONS: Enact/repeal reforms; become head of state; declare war on x country; seize Cuba; whatever. CHARACTER POLITICS: [politics] POPULARITY: Based on two stats, hometown popularity (how much your original POP loves you) and national popularity. If your national popularity goes to 0, you fall out of the public eye. Your hometown popularity helps cushion falls in popularity and boosts rises in fame - imagine your entire POP churning out pamphlets and badges for your cause. If your hometown popularity goes to 0, you stay in the public eye, but your support base has essentially gone - so watch out. INTEGRITY: This basically determines how much a character is willing to diverge from their political viewpoints to achieve their ambition. If you have 10 integrity, you won't budge from them in the slightest, and will denounce all Splitters - the only difference between Splitters being how loudly you denounce. If you have 0 integrity, then you don't give a poo poo and will align yourself happily with the party that matches your ambition - but if, say, a non-accepted capitalist hitches his wagon to a Residency-Only communist party, then his hometown popularity will probably take a beating! (see above). In between 0 and 10 integrity, you're more or less likely to affiliate yourself with a party that doesn't perfectly match your politics but is more convenient, depending on how far it diverges. RHETORIC: Rhetoric is how good the character is at swaying people to their point of view, and how effective their denunciations and affiliations are. It's more effective on POPs similar to the character, and actively counterproductive on your direct enemies - so a communist rabblerouser would actively engage a like-minded socialist, mildly interest a liberal, and enrage a reactionary to the point that they'd go out and kick a poor right there and then. I have no idea how any of this would work in game and I'm not sure I care, but it looks like the sort of thing that would produce bucketloads of CK2-style "THIS AWFUL FUCKER POPPED UP AT THE WORST MOMENT AND TURNED ALL OF CALIFORNIA INTO REACTIONARIES AND THEN THEY ALL ROSE UP AGAINST ME AND I'D *JUST* GOT INTO A CRISIS WAR WITH BRITAIN I loving HATE HIM" posts in this thread.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 04:56 |
|
Additionally a system like that of "semi-characters" could help model folks like Otto von Bismarck, or Vladimir Lenin, who had huge impacts on their countries.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 05:00 |
|
I want Victoria 3 to have economic warfare, let me take down my neighbours by loving over their industry and making them poor. And is it just me or do you get to a point in V2 where you just have more money than you ever need?
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 05:23 |
|
Autonomous Monster posted:Let's cut down on the the number of POPs. Autonomous Monster posted:I guess one trick you could pull is cutting down on the number of provinces. I wouldn't cut in, say, India, but you could junk a third of Europe and not notice or care. *That is, make provinces roughly equal area, so it's impossible to create the static warfare of the Western Front on the wider Eastern Front. Freudian posted:Call them Movers and Shakers.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 05:26 |
|
There's nothing better than rush-building the Panama Canal by using a Great Engineer.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 05:41 |
|
Two things for V3: 1. PUT EVERYTHING ON ONE SCREEN 2. BRING BACK MANUAL POP SPLITTING! (Seriously).
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 06:04 |
|
Pops shouldn't need to be split. I'd just like V3 to feel more like steering a sleek, slim ship than a freaking air craft carrier (but not a speed boat either). I keep trying to like the game, but I always get bored and just end up watching numbers go up and down with nothing to do. Am I industrializing enough? How come the USA is sucking up every drat immigrant despite trying my hardest to attract people to my freer and socialized country? I built factories for you people, I give you the best drat healthcare around, and still you refuse me. The US people need to turn xenophobic over time and pass restrictions or face anger by the reactionaries. Give me, the player, the freedom to do whatever I want to my country because I'm not playing as the temporary leader. Make every change and decision I make affect my people in an easily felt way. Playing a dictatorship? I can make more radical decisions, but the populace will get furious the fewer the people support such a change and will grow angry over time if you don't enact those changes they want. Inversely, democratic countries shouldn't let you make such drastic changes to represent the power vested in people and parties, you also suffer less from angry people revolting. Following that, parties should have impact on what support you can muster for your decisions (and maybe unlock some) and if you piss them off you're looking at revolts that force you to go back or change against what you want. You do your own thing, but once liberals are in power trying to keep your country a dictatorship is going to anger your most popular party. If they get really angry, they're going to say "screw the system" and force a change. In a way, I want revolts and forced government changes to be a punishment to the player. They may have to give up their conquests if their people aren't happy. And if you just don't care about your people or parties, then you have to deal with revolts between and during conquests. As a democratic country, good luck getting support to war with another country. And so on and so forth, really. Make it more exciting, make there be reactions to every action I make. Make it a give and take with your people, as you are no longer the omniscient dictator-spirit of a country. You now have to deal with people who have their own wants and desires and won't put up with your shenanigans. Unless you can convince them otherwise... but then you're investing in propaganda than your country, a quick way to fall behind against those worrying about economics. Oh yeah, and less "how can I make my people angry so I can do something" and more "I can do this, but my people won't be happy at all, is it worth it?".
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 09:05 |
|
While we're crafting the perfect Victoria game, they need to completely change the way revolts work. Revolutions shouldn't be a thing that comes around every five years on the dot which you then brutally suppress by murdering all the rebels with your standing army. Personally I'd like a rebellion system where anything less than a full-blown civil war (eg the Hungarian Revolution of 1848) isn't represented on-map at all; instead, your country should gradually (or not so gradually depending on the ferocity of the revolution) grind to a halt, beginning with lower administrative efficiency, going through a loss of tax and industry income and ending in your armies mutinying (eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Army_Mutinies). Making concessions or replacing leaders should cause a movement to slow or stop (depending on the level of concessions/charisma of the new leaders), but if you've treated your population badly enough they might not settle for anything less than a complete toppling of the old regime, which would lead to a civil war. Civil wars should be nation shaking events complete with a Rome-esque system where a new tag is created and provinces, characters and armies defect. Other nations should be able to intervene as well, though this will stir dissent in both nations and might actually make the participant you're intervening against stronger as the situation at the home front decays (why are we dying for another nation's internal squabble?) and more people are galvanised to the enemy cause.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 09:31 |
|
piratepilates posted:I want Victoria 3 to have economic warfare, let me take down my neighbours by loving over their industry and making them poor. V3's economic/blockade mechanics definitely need to be robust enough to let me recreate starving out Germany in WWI. A Buttery Pastry posted:I've suggested it before, but making pops per-state, with provinces being there largely to ensure warfare makes sense*, would be a way to drastically cut down on the needed number of pops. I think they're pretty much doing this for HOI4: strategic areas (regions?), then states, then provinces, so I have high hopes for V3.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 13:20 |
|
Are we all doing dream lists? Let's all do dream lists. For a theoretical V3, I wish there was somehow an ownership-on-paper sort of status that provinces could have, claimed by a civilized country (or just GP) but effectively controlled by an unciv. Maps of the early 19th century tend to show neat lines for the US-Mexico border, despite plenty of Indians being everywhere and effectively acting as a buffer zone in some instances. The on-paper thing wouldn't be exactly the same as a regular core, and other civilized countries would treat the on-paper claim as the actual border of the county, but in practice there'd be an unciv there stirring up all sorts of trouble until the Indian Wars happen.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 13:35 |
|
Ofaloaf posted:Are we all doing dream lists? Let's all do dream lists. Hmm, with de jure and de facto map modes? I can get behind that idea. Would be especially applicable to Africa.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 15:29 |
|
I'd like to just have the first non-static province system in a Paradox game, so you can just draw your own province borders in your imperialist adventures
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 16:07 |
|
Ofaloaf posted:For a theoretical V3, I wish there was somehow an ownership-on-paper sort of status that provinces could have, claimed by a civilized country (or just GP) but effectively controlled by an unciv. Maps of the early 19th century tend to show neat lines for the US-Mexico border, despite plenty of Indians being everywhere and effectively acting as a buffer zone in some instances. The on-paper thing wouldn't be exactly the same as a regular core, and other civilized countries would treat the on-paper claim as the actual border of the county, but in practice there'd be an unciv there stirring up all sorts of trouble until the Indian Wars happen. Frankly some system of that nature should exist in EU4. Probably the quickest, dirtiest fix would be to allow colonial nations to make claims on any uncolonized province they can see, and to have those claims count as their territory unless they're contested; since AoW will introduce revoking claims as part of peace treaties.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 16:10 |
|
Honestly, I'd be pretty satisfied if I had a way to edge competitors out of markets through price or quality. Currently the only way to dislodge a Great Power monopoly on any good is pretty much to occupy them permanently until all their former buyers go to you instead.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 16:32 |
|
Tomn posted:Honestly, I'd be pretty satisfied if I had a way to edge competitors out of markets through price or quality. Currently the only way to dislodge a Great Power monopoly on any good is pretty much to occupy them permanently until all their former buyers go to you instead. I don't know that that level of market strategy really works for the commodity-style economy Vicky generally tries to reflect. I mean it'd probably be more reasonable to ask for a cartel system to for goods, and basically treat it as a sort of in-between of diplomacy and economic policy. I mean cartels aren't really a concept until mid-Vicky period, but it's about as close as you get to price fixing/gouging.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 16:47 |
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:I don't know that that level of market strategy really works for the commodity-style economy Vicky generally tries to reflect. I mean it'd probably be more reasonable to ask for a cartel system to for goods, and basically treat it as a sort of in-between of diplomacy and economic policy. I'm not really too hung up on the details as long as there's a way to convince Americans to buy French fabrics instead of British fabrics without occupying the British Isles for a few years.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 16:48 |
|
Tomn posted:I'm not really too hung up on the details as long as there's a way to convince Americans to buy French fabrics instead of British fabrics without occupying the British Isles for a few years. At least from the perspective of 1800s government, I think the answer would either be some sort of cartel relationship between fabric makers, or maybe letting countries set punitive import tariffs on a country? So in that case maybe if your relations with the US are better than England's, you can convince them to set a higher tariff on British imports (or British fabric in particular) and then the POPs or whatever would opt to trade with you first for the lower cost. Again, that's kinda how I think you'd do something like that in the spirit of 1800's politics and economics...but then people might have better ideas.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 16:54 |
|
Freudian posted:Call them Movers and Shakers. Have a set number alive at any one time, recruit a new one from a random POP when one dies / falls out of Popularity (see below).
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 17:14 |
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Yeah, getting rid of the 1 Pop = 1 man + 1 woman + 2 children thing would be really nice. Imagine if pops were divided in age groups, perhaps in 10 year segments. Pop promotion in such a system would be more about the environment the lower two segments exist under, and the game could keep track of the "sum" of education/malnutrition/whatever over the last 20 years to determine the quality of the pops they spit out when they enter the 20-30 bracket. Done right, I think such a system could make the effects of whatever you're doing a bit more obvious, while also giving the system some inertia. Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Every time I suggest this everyone says "Give the intern a good tumble!" so there you go. V for Vegas posted:2. BRING BACK MANUAL POP SPLITTING! (Seriously). I have changed my mind. I no longer want, a Victoria 3.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 17:23 |
|
If anyone cares, I've been way too busy with work (rebuilding a store, last weekend was 3 concurrent 14 hour days for instance) and, kind of tired after coming back home, to be able to update the KR pseudo-LP I had going as Canada --> UK. Just if anyone was wondering, I did write a good deal of a branching event chain to end (or continue) the war in various ways, though, and that was kind of fun (for me at least).
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 17:41 |
|
wukkar posted:This smells like Great Man Theory. Just give me a cold hard geopolitical simulator please. Not wanting to start a derail here, but reducing history to inhuman "trends and statistics" is just as wrong as reducing it to the stories of great men. History is the culmination of the shared human story, and due to human nature, some of those stories are simply more important than others.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 17:49 |
|
PleasingFungus posted:I have changed my mind. I no longer want, a Victoria 3. It has to be admitted, one of the major issues with Victoria 3 is figuring out how to strike a balance between the people who loved V1, the people who loved V2, and the new Paradox design philosophy.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 17:52 |
DStecks posted:Not wanting to start a derail here, but reducing history to inhuman "trends and statistics" is just as wrong as reducing it to the stories of great men. History is the culmination of the shared human story, and due to human nature, some of those stories are simply more important than others. Men (and women) are a product of the society that bore them and the experiences they gained growing up in that society. But yeah, no derail. As much as I really hope V3 will happen, I also am not terribly optimistic that it ever will. Yes, Paradox has definitely hit the nail on the head with their last two games and has grown tremendously as a developer in the past few years, but I think a lot hinges on how Hearts of Iron 4 does. As much as I dearly love Paradox as a developer, I think reinventing Victoria is going to be their biggest challenge and part of me actually kinda thinks they shouldn't even try it.
|
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 17:58 |
|
That part is wrong.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 18:11 |
|
PleasingFungus posted:I have changed my mind. I no longer want, a Victoria 3.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 18:36 |
|
Manually splitting pops sounds like a gaping chunk of anti-fun.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 18:41 |
|
Agean90 posted:Manually splitting pops sounds like a gaping chunk of anti-fun. Thinking it through, my suggestion could be simplified greatly though, by simple representing age with a population pyramid instead of distinct age brackets. You'd still get the same effect, but it would be much less complex, and easily understandable at a glance.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 19:09 |
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:That's mean. You seem to be a good poster and a nice person but I am afraid I am not entirely in love with your design ideas. it's not a personal thing, it's just, I begin thinking about carefully tracking demographics across multiple age cohorts, and then I begin yawning uncontrollably and can't stop. you know how it is.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 19:13 |
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Absolutely agree. The mean part was putting my suggestion in the same category. Your suggestion was insanely spergtacular, and I'm saying this as someone who is literally a diagnosed autistic.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 19:13 |
|
Smoremaster posted:Hmm, with de jure and de facto map modes? I can get behind that idea. Would be especially applicable to Africa. Restating the request to be able to sphere states or provinces of a country instead of the entire area.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 19:15 |
|
DStecks posted:Your suggestion was insanely spergtacular, and I'm saying this as someone who is literally a diagnosed autistic. PleasingFungus posted:You seem to be a good poster and a nice person but I am afraid I am not entirely in love with your design ideas.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 19:55 |
|
Agean90 posted:Manually splitting pops sounds like a gaping chunk of anti-fun. It is. People who only played the sequel might find this difficult to believe, but V2 was a massive improvement over the original. gently caress, before Ricky there was no automatic factory construction
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 21:26 |
|
Really, my only major qualm with V2 is with the economic and political systems. There just isn't any real way to influence the politics of your country besides waiting for Unrest/Consciousness to gradually tick up and spamming elections over and over, and the reform system is really rather boringly linear. You always want to liberalize/increase social welfare. It'd be nice if there were less binary choices in the political system and a more direct way to influence politics than using a national focus to encourage party loyalty. Secondly, the economic system is not very transparent or easy to influence. Yes, you can sphere countries, but it's not clear to the player how that immediately translates to benefits for your population or your economy. The requirements for pop promotion/change are hidden behind several intimidating screens. It would be better if you could bring up the economy screen and see the activity of each trade good, both internally and on the world market, all at once. Each tick, you could see exactly what the price of each good was, how much demand your nation has for it, how many units were imported or exported, and how many units are available to you right now on the world market. Clicking on each individual good would show you which pops in your country use it, and a time-series graph of its price performance. The time-series graph could be set up on a variety of scales, from daily to yearly, to decadal. It would be helpful to divide such a screen up into regions, which would also make much more sense. So goods from the East Asian region are cheaper to import/export to other East Asian nations, than all the way to Western Europe or the Americas. The logical thing would be to divide it into two separate screens: a "Regional Trade" screen, that shows you what you produce from your RGOs and factories, and the demands that your pops make on your market, and a "Global Trade" screen, that shows you which nations you are trading with, and the volumes of commodities that are traded. Sphering a nation would put them in the same "effective region" as you, and you'd be able to immediately see the effects of this in the "Regional Trade" screen.
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 22:18 |
|
|
# ? Apr 27, 2024 17:49 |
|
DrSunshine posted:Really, my only major qualm with V2 is with the economic and political systems. Soooo.... 95% of the game?
|
# ? Oct 23, 2014 22:19 |