|
Gort posted:Do they? They've got like, double the stats They do - numbers matter much more than stats in naval combat, and 20 battleships backed by aircraft carriers will lose to 40 ironclads reliably. In general the naval combat model is underbaked and feels weirdly similar to land battles.
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 20:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 00:01 |
|
|
It literally just is the land battle system but with barracks reskinned as naval bases and regiments reskinned as flotillas, isn't it? They're definitely going to have to rip it all out and rebuild it to something that actually works, I did honestly expect something a little better on release. Like, your game about the long 19th century and global imperialism should probably not have wooden sailing ships able to zerg rush an oil-fired steel battleship, but that's what we got. They'll fix it eventually, I'm sure, but in the meantime the meta I've settled on (gently caress Reddit I don't care what they think the meta is) is just to spam a zillion flotillas on the cheapest PM and zerg rush the Royal Navy in 1910 with 800 flotillas of men o' war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 20:37
|
|
|
It's genuinely so bad that they should basically port the old hoi4 system over in a simplied form.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 20:52
|
|
|
Lawman 0 posted:It's genuinely so bad that they should basically port the old hoi4 system over in a simplied form. I misread this as "the old EU4 system" and imagined a galley going against a dreadnaught.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:04
|
|
|
I think I'm gonna do a vicky2 game this weekend to compare and contrast.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:05
|
|
|
How the hell do you manage to not make modern ships gently caress up the older variants? Like, did someone sneak in a power function on the number of ships with an n of like 7? Seems crazy to me to ship a game where even something as basic as the combat balance of navies is completely hosed. Like, how complicated can it be to make it so new types of ships represent such a step up from previous technologies that they make the old types (nearly) completely obsolete? Something which also has strategic implications, given that it allows a rival power to catch up in naval power by going all-in on navy poo poo after a major new breakthrough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:08
|
|
|
some of the big conflicts in the time period feature things like that! iconic things like the entire Russian navy being destroyed or the battle of hampton roads or the whole loving great war naval arms race lil
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:11
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:How the hell do you manage to not make modern ships gently caress up the older variants? Like, did someone sneak in a power function on the number of ships with an n of like 7? They 100% did not play after 1870 in their playtests. Edit: same studio that also literally handwaved naval warfare in crusader kings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:12
|
|
|
The quick and dirty fix I can think of is turning up all the numbers to crazy high levels, like add a zero on the end of all the stats of ironclads/monitors and two zeroes to the battleships/dreadnaughts. Because ironclads with explosive shells should be wrecking the poo poo out of wooden ships of the line and big gun battleships should likewise wreck the poo poo out of ironclads. But that's the kind of thing I can mod at home in a few minutes, if I was a whole studio I would just throw everything out and start over with HoI as a template or something. Just making the numbers bigger doesn't capture the actual changes in naval combat very well, some kind of range and speed/maneuvering stats would be necessary, probably visibility or something too. A big gun battleship should be able to kill about as many ironclads or men o' war as it has shells and not take any damage in return, just turning the offense/defense stats up would still let you zerg rush a battleship with men o' war if you had enough, you'd need to represent the fact that the battleship can just steam against the wind and shoot you from 100x farther than your smoothbore muzzle loading cannons can reach. Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Nov 22, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:14
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:if its so easy why hasnt anyone done it Someone has, it's called Best War and has been out for weeks lmao
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:15
|
|
|
the issue is that it shows naval improvements as just being linear increases in sophistication and not massive paradigm changing advances that functionally obsoleted everything that came before like there's no circumstances where a bunch of late 19th century steel ships aren't gonna effortlessly dunk on any number of early 19th century wooden ships but since in game it's just comparing numbers you can just get ur numbers higher.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:16
|
|
|
Imagine redoing the "Spearman vs tank problem" but way worse
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:17
|
|
|
Unironically the Vic 2 system was decent just bring that back and you have a solid enough way to simulate warfare without having to micro the ocean
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:20
|
|
|
Lawman 0 posted:They 100% did not play after 1870 in their playtests. It’s this I don’t think the naval system needs dramatic changes tbh beyond a much longer equipment transition and way bigger numbers gap
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:23
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:Unironically the Vic 2 system was decent just bring that back and you have a solid enough way to simulate warfare without having to micro the ocean I think it's important to see the individual botes as discrete units.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:27
|
|
|
the monkeys paw curls as we get a ship designer DLC to accurately simulate the tooling and retooling of combat fleets alongside the rapid development of technology.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:31
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:the monkeys paw curls as we get a ship designer DLC to accurately simulate the tooling and retooling of combat fleets alongside the rapid development of technology. It just launches Rule The Waves
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:37
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:the monkeys paw curls as we get a ship designer DLC to accurately simulate the tooling and retooling of combat fleets alongside the rapid development of technology. I would rather die.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:39
|
|
|
mod that launches both land and naval battles into fall of the samurai
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:39
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:The quick and dirty fix I can think of is turning up all the numbers to crazy high levels, like add a zero on the end of all the stats of ironclads/monitors and two zeroes to the battleships/dreadnaughts. Because ironclads with explosive shells should be wrecking the poo poo out of wooden ships of the line and big gun battleships should likewise wreck the poo poo out of ironclads. I suppose speed makes sense as an option if you want to give the player/AI the ability to run away from battle and save their lovely ships for struggles with their peers. And of course it would serve a purpose at the strategic level in terms of deployment speeds. Lawman 0 posted:They 100% did not play after 1870 in their playtests.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:40
|
|
|
Tomn posted:They do - numbers matter much more than stats in naval combat, and 20 battleships backed by aircraft carriers will lose to 40 ironclads reliably. In general the naval combat model is underbaked and feels weirdly similar to land battles. I'm curious what's different in my game, because this hasn't been my experience so far in my playthrough that's farthest along - I got into a war with Britain as Persia in the mid 1890s, with a smaller but more advanced fleet than theirs, and a 20-size fleet I had protecting convoys won 3/4 of the battles I saw with the 60-80-size British fleets that were raiding, and the one battle they lost was still close (with the British taking 10x casualties on top). I haven't unlocked the top tier naval stuff yet or gotten into another big naval war since then, though, so maybe it changes later in the game, or there's just another factor I'm missing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:53
|
|
|
Probably already answered SOMEwhere, but I'm feeling a bit comfortable with how much I've learned about growth/development (hey take it slow with minor powers idiot), and figuring out what I want to TRY to do and working towards it effectively, but one area I feel like I'm either missing something important or lacking knowledge is creating stronger trade relationships with countries I'm interested in developing stronger ties with for future purposes, because what their market is demanding doesn't seem to line up with what I'm capable of exporting or importing. Like they'll have tons of buy orders forrrr fabric, and I have positive fabric as far as I know (based on buy/sell), but I can't export to Austria for any type of productive profit. Is that just "sorry bub, that's the market" type problem I feel like I'm missing some key panel of info or high level overview that I need to help me understand my capacities better. Is there like a production panel that shows the flow of goods (like in my country, before trade, and after local consumption, I'm positive 100 fabric), is that just the market details page? Because everything is based on supply/demand and buy/sell orders? Do you adhere to the iron law of positive production or do you ever import things at a loss just to satisfy standard of living? I probably need to watch a 60 minute youtube on mid game education or something. Also the trade/market panels are abysmal, especially the individual trade management panel, with all of its auto scrolling and trying to hide poo poo from me under arrows. As impressive as this game is in its depth and scope, it really needs an overhaul on the high level presentation panels.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 21:56
|
|
|
I'm not 100% on this, but don't you need to have an interest in an area to start up a trade deal with the markets in that area?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 22:02
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:I'm not 100% on this, but don't you need to have an interest in an area to start up a trade deal with the markets in that area? Yeah, that was the first thing I teased out, accomplished that and can trade with them, but just seeing a disconnect in what is demanded vs what routes I can create for any profit
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
Lawman 0 posted:I think I'm gonna do a vicky2 game this weekend to compare and contrast. I thought about doing that. LMK how it goes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 22:04
|
|
|
smarxist posted:Yeah, that was the first thing I teased out, accomplished that and can trade with them, but just seeing a disconnect in what is demanded vs what routes I can create for any profit I think if you use the market map mode you can bring up a foreign markets screen to show you the buy and sell orders to see what's in highest demand Alternately the prices for what your selling are too high in your market so you take a loss selling it in another
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 22:06
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:I think if you use the market map mode you can bring up a foreign markets screen to show you the buy and sell orders to see what's in highest demand This, buy/sell order counts don't matter at all. Only your market price vs. their market price. The only thing buy/sell order volumes really tells you is price volatility, something trading in a high volume has a more stable price than something in small quantities to a market. Many consumer goods share demand types, like Tea and Coffee, and their demand can spike out of nowhere because your pops are dynamically buying them so their prices equalize.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 22:13
|
|
|
smarxist posted:Yeah, that was the first thing I teased out, accomplished that and can trade with them, but just seeing a disconnect in what is demanded vs what routes I can create for any profit The key to understand is that goods flow from areas of lower prices to areas of higher prices. If you are exporting a good to another market, the price in the importing market will fall, and the price in the exporting market will rise, and this effect increases as the shipped amount of the good increases. A trade route will grow until no further profit can be generated by shipping more units. So you need to look at the price of fabric in your market vs that in the Austrian market. Further, you need to consider whether you can actually ship a significant amount of fabric before the price disparity closes. The disparity will close faster if your own supply is small compared to Austrian demand or vice-versa. Trade policies also affect this as tariffs reduce the amount that can be profitably exported, and also set a minimum price disparity to do any trading at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Seems crazy to me to ship a game where even something as basic as the combat balance of navies is completely hosed I think it's simply the fact that they lacked manpower and resources for the technical challenge of the economic gameplay model while also going for a planned release date according to the financial schedule (since paradox is a public company after all) the continuous development idea would be a great thing if separate from the reality of a public company and the subsequent management policies due to that fact, at least seems that way to me
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
Ahh, okay, so good PRICE always trumps supply/demand in the end, so if i wanted to get fabric over the line to export, I need to get my local price down (more production/better production methods) That's what I'm doing now, building more livestock ranches. The lower level buildings like farms, logging, and livestock seem to be OP for early development, which makes sense, then the puzzle of the midgame is navigating the progress of the world, because you gain techs that create certain new attitudes or demands in your pop. It's really a fascinating game, first time I've gone deep in Victoria, and way deeper than other pdox games. Does this all culminate in WORLD WAR 1 if you follow the general flow of history? I imagine that's the fireworks factory at the end.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 22:40
|
|
|
smarxist posted:Does this all culminate in WORLD WAR 1 if you follow the general flow of history? I imagine that's the fireworks factory at the end. At the moment the game is not so great at following historical trends. For example, the US Civil War happens only inconsistently. Usually the goal for Paradox games is for things to hew somewhat close to the historical timeline, but the further you get the more things will deviate. WW1 is tough for Victoria games because it's end of timeline. Also, I hear the current economic sim can't really handle end game military demands, although I haven't played that far myself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 22:48
|
|
|
Also, and correct me if I'm wrong, aren't certain aspects of WWI, particularly countries such as the Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria, Rumania, America, etc. joining after the start date, kind of impossible under the current diplomatic rules?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 23:46
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:Also, and correct me if I'm wrong, aren't certain aspects of WWI, particularly countries such as the Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria, Rumania, America, etc. joining after the start date, kind of impossible under the current diplomatic rules? Yes and no, the exact way they joined is impossible but you can kinda kludge it in through the Violate Sovereignty action. I think they need to add a late game tech that would allow for ongoing escalation during a war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2022 23:49
|
|
|
Is there a reason available convoys fluctuates so wildly? I feel like I need to keep 300-400 buffer in order to stop messages about trade growth being halted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2022 00:03
|
|
|
smarxist posted:Is there a reason available convoys fluctuates so wildly? I feel like I need to keep 300-400 buffer in order to stop messages about trade growth being halted. Your trade routes are expanding/contracting based on your market prices.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2022 00:05
|
|
|
GreenMarine posted:I thought about doing that. LMK how it goes. Yeah you got it. Any requests to compare?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2022 00:12
|
|
|
Most of the mega wars I've had so far have been due to major powers jumping into diplomatic plays for little to no discernible benefit, rather than between large alliance blocs (which did happen in V2).
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2022 00:18
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:Yes and no, the exact way they joined is impossible but you can kinda kludge it in through the Violate Sovereignty action. I think they need to add a late game tech that would allow for ongoing escalation during a war. yeah, I think there needs to be some way for there to be at least a second round of diplomatic plays especially during a war. Maybe limited only to great and major powers (recognized or unrecognized)
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2022 00:21
|
|
|
Archduke Frantz Fanon posted:yeah, I think there needs to be some way for there to be at least a second round of diplomatic plays especially during a war. Maybe limited only to great and major powers (recognized or unrecognized) the great and major powers thing dosen't account for romania and bulgaria though
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2022 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 00:01 |
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:To be fair, if you increased damage and hit points/armor by a factor 10, then the result should be that each ironclad can beat up 100x as many wooden ships as it could before. I feel like that would have the desired effect, even if it's very brute force. Like, do you really need anything more for the level that combat happens at in the game? Only if each ironclad can only be fired upon by a single wooden ship at the time
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2022 00:31
|
|
