|
Baronjutter posted:Sounds perfect, that's exactly the level of unit moving around I'd like in such a game. Everything else abstracted out into the combat system and special actions. The combat could take years to resolve if both sides keep pumping resources into the battle. this seems like exactly the wrong level of abstraction to be satisfying, why even have manually movable armies instead of a progress bar system that you pour resources into (like a vicky 2 crisis but much more interactive) with an underlying automated AI vs AI tactical layer, like we discussed above? how do you model the vietcong, or civil wars that are taking place over the entire country in general? Enjoy posted:You want to intentionally make a large aspect of the game boring for the sake of thematic style? conquest shouldn't be a large aspect of the game in a cold war game, unlike the period empire:tw is trying to portray
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 12:21 |
|
|
Jazerus posted:this seems like exactly the wrong level of abstraction to be satisfying, why even have manually movable armies instead of a progress bar system that you pour resources into (like a vicky 2 crisis but much more interactive) with an underlying automated AI vs AI tactical layer, like we discussed above? how do you model the vietcong, or civil wars that are taking place over the entire country in general? Jazerus posted:conquest shouldn't be a large aspect of the game in a cold war game, unlike the period empire:tw is trying to portray
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
You should have other reasons to pay attention to provinces half the world away though. Trade deals, espionage, international aid and development, as well as seeing how international events are shaping up and how that effects other stuff. I don't think just eschewing the map as part of the game interface would be a good direction. And also, being part of lots of global interactions should be super important. One of my main complaints with EU4 is how you can basically totally ignore all the colonialism and extra-continental trade that made Europe as fabulously wealthy and developed as it got over the period, but still have exactly the same outcomes. It's a strength of Paradox games that you can play as anyone and that the entire world is modeled, and it's pretty dumb if regions can still act as totally self-contained units without thinking about the rest of the world- in every period of history to an extent, but doubly so in a Cold War game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
Koramei posted:You should have other reasons to pay attention to provinces half the world away though. Trade deals, espionage, international aid and development, as well as seeing how international events are shaping up and how that effects other stuff. I don't think just eschewing the map as part of the game interface would be a good direction. And also, being part of lots of global interactions should be super important. One of my main complaints with EU4 is how you can basically totally ignore all the colonialism and extra-continental trade that made Europe as fabulously wealthy and developed as it got over the period, but still have exactly the same outcomes. It's a strength of Paradox games that you can play as anyone and that the entire world is modeled, and it's pretty dumb if regions can still act as totally self-contained units without thinking about the rest of the world- in every period of history to an extent, but doubly so in a Cold War game. there would still be maps involved. i'm envisioning a pop-up screen for each war where on the left you have a vicky 2 crisis progress bar and below it a bunch of different things you can tweak about how the war is being fought, while on the right there is a tactical map of the war showing what's going on at a level of granularity higher than the main map would have. you could set objectives (push for hanoi or whatever) but the AI has to carry it out, and does better or worse depending on the balance of resources poured in on each side.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
There would still have to be granular moving of some units though, due to the fact that naval units are scarce but the presence of a CVBG in the coastal waters represents an enormous projection of power.. Rather than controlling down to the province/army level, I think something like moving theaters of battle or HQ's around various centers of the map could be a better idea for a post WW2 era game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
Koramei posted:You should have other reasons to pay attention to provinces half the world away though. Trade deals, espionage, international aid and development, as well as seeing how international events are shaping up and how that effects other stuff. I don't think just eschewing the map as part of the game interface would be a good direction. And also, being part of lots of global interactions should be super important. One of my main complaints with EU4 is how you can basically totally ignore all the colonialism and extra-continental trade that made Europe as fabulously wealthy and developed as it got over the period, but still have exactly the same outcomes. It's a strength of Paradox games that you can play as anyone and that the entire world is modeled, and it's pretty dumb if regions can still act as totally self-contained units without thinking about the rest of the world- in every period of history to an extent, but doubly so in a Cold War game. DrSunshine posted:There would still have to be granular moving of some units though, due to the fact that naval units are scarce but the presence of a CVBG in the coastal waters represents an enormous projection of power.. Rather than controlling down to the province/army level, I think something like moving theaters of battle or HQ's around various centers of the map could be a better idea for a post WW2 era game. Jazerus posted:there would still be maps involved. i'm envisioning a pop-up screen for each war where on the left you have a vicky 2 crisis progress bar and below it a bunch of different things you can tweak about how the war is being fought, while on the right there is a tactical map of the war showing what's going on at a level of granularity higher than the main map would have. you could set objectives (push for hanoi or whatever) but the AI has to carry it out, and does better or worse depending on the balance of resources poured in on each side.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:It's precisely because there is so much to do all over the world (if you're a bigger country) that you wouldn't want the player to get bogged down with the details of a single war. The US getting bogged down in Vietnam didn't prevent it from loving around in the rest of the world, but if you make warfare require too much attention then that's what's gonna happen. Huh, I think we're talking past each other. I thought you were saying that without warfare, there'd be no reason to pay attention to provinces so far away. I totally agree with wars requiring tons of attention all over the world being a bad thing, regardless of what place exactly wars have in the Cold War game. Managing multiple theaters in EU4 is just endless frustration. I guess in a Cold War game you'd hope there wouldn't be eleventy gazillion wars going on simultaneously like you get as an expansionist in EU4, which'd abate the problem a bit, but even so it's always gonna be a pain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
Maybe you weirdos should make a game design thread or a cold war map game thread or just take this to a thread that has anything to do with what you're arguing about
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
lol yeah let's go back to viciously bitching about Stellaris and HoI4 rather than talking about possible future Paradox games in the Paradox games thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
Koramei posted:lol yeah let's go back to viciously bitching about Stellaris and HoI4 rather than talking about possible future Paradox games in the Paradox games thread. Fine by me
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:Fine by me 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 09:33
|
|
|
So, reading the Vic2 wiki, China should apparently never be at loss for money. I assume this was written a long time ago because china totally is at loss for money. How do I bring in the moolah before I can westernise?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 09:38
|
|
|
The economic system of V2 is pretty opaque to begin with, but honestly I find it hard to lose money as long as you keep tariffs up. You'll probably make it back after Westernizing. Some of the techs help you get more out of taxation too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 10:04
|
|
|
Tariffs turned out to be key! I thought it'd crash the economy but it seems to be irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 10:17
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I thought it'd crash the economy but it seems to be irrelevant. victoria_2_economy.txt
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 10:42
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Tariffs turned out to be key! I thought it'd crash the economy but it seems to be irrelevant. Always crank up taxes and tariffs, your population can take it. Especially since default tax efficiency is like 20% or something. Once you start getting factories you can have fun trying to find a balance between tariffs and subsidies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 11:47
|
|
|
Abstract wars sound about as much fun as HOI4s air game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 12:25
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Tariffs turned out to be key! I thought it'd crash the economy but it seems to be irrelevant. Your starting tax efficiency as a non-western country is so low that a 100% tax will only take in like 10% of their actual income, and will therefore not really affect them. When you get high efficiency through bureaucrats you can worry about economic effects.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
GrossMurpel posted:Always crank up taxes and tariffs, your population can take it. Especially since default tax efficiency is like 20% or something. Once you start getting factories you can have fun trying to find a balance between tariffs and subsidies. Caveat: keep taxes as low as possible on the rich strata unless you're uncivilized or have a planned economy party in power, you want capitalists to keep as much money as possible so they'll build poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:Your starting tax efficiency as a non-western country is so low that a 100% tax will only take in like 10% of their actual income, and will therefore not really affect them. When you get high efficiency through bureaucrats you can worry about economic effects. This is how tax efficiency actually works in V2: The official policy of the government is that 100% of people's income is to be taken in tax to the state. The taxman shows up at the Vanderbilt mansion, is shown to a state room by a butler, and asks Mr. Vanderbilt to declare his income for the year. With wide, innocent eyes Mr Vanderbilt opens his palm to show fifteen cents, a piece of string, and a half-eaten gummi bear. The taxman gives him a sympathetic hug, whispers: "Times are hard for everyone," takes the gummi bear in tax and returns to the IRS.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
High tarrifs in the early game would hurt a smaller country (even considering inefficiency) if that country didn't produce enough to eat or something. China can do whatever the gently caress it wants because it's like half of the worlds entire market at start and can manipulate the world economy at will.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
Pakled posted:Caveat: keep taxes as low as possible on the rich strata unless you're uncivilized or have a planned economy party in power, you want capitalists to keep as much money as possible so they'll build poo poo. before capitalists really exist tho you should tax the hell out of the rich because they're all just useless aristocrats
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
i thought aristocrats gave bonuses to RGO
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:i thought aristocrats gave bonuses to RGO I don't think aristocrats' money affects the bonus they give to RGO output, just their percentage of province population.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
I like how this is apparently a matter requiring the attention of the General Staff
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
So money woes aside I've now taken over a bunch of asia and westernised. The "RP for invading people" thing combined with all the free research boosts for allowing the west access to the country meant I was able to do it pretty quickly (as an aside, what's that meant to represent?), and now I have a budget of something like 4k, though my army of proper soldiers is accordingly pricier too. My army size is insane; something like 300 brigades? I'm barely using a third of it and have the world's most powerful military by miles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
spectralent posted:So money woes aside I've now taken over a bunch of asia and westernised. The "RP for invading people" thing combined with all the free research boosts for allowing the west access to the country meant I was able to do it pretty quickly (as an aside, what's that meant to represent?), and now I have a budget of something like 4k, though my army of proper soldiers is accordingly pricier too. My army size is insane; something like 300 brigades? I'm barely using a third of it and have the world's most powerful military by miles. It's standard in Paradox games for China to require a number of systems to hold them back from world domination
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
spectralent posted:So money woes aside I've now taken over a bunch of asia and westernised. The "RP for invading people" thing combined with all the free research boosts for allowing the west access to the country meant I was able to do it pretty quickly (as an aside, what's that meant to represent?), and now I have a budget of something like 4k, though my army of proper soldiers is accordingly pricier too. My army size is insane; something like 300 brigades? I'm barely using a third of it and have the world's most powerful military by miles. No clue what that RP for invading people is meant to represent - it was added in the last expansion, Heart of Darkness - but to be honest Westernization in this time period is a pretty hit or miss affair. Japan was the only country to Westernize in the Victoria time period, and they already have events for that. So I think the entire mechanic is to give a player a faster path to Westernization, with no real justification. How long did it take you to Westernize - my record is August 8, 1858?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
ulmont posted:No clue what that RP for invading people is meant to represent If I had to come up with a bullshit excuse within 5 seconds, I'd say it's supposed to represent your country doing western-style imperialism and as a result of that starting to be respected as an imperialist power by the rest of the world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
TS fuckin owns but it's the exact opposite of what he wanted given that the entire point is that it reduces the Cold War to Red vs Blue with no third party politics except as they affect Red or Blue
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
I really hope Paradox takes inspiration from Balance of Power forum games.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
Pakled posted:I really hope Paradox takes inspiration from Balance of Power forum games. I always found these interesting. Is there any kind of published "rulebook" for them anywhere?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
Athaboros posted:I always found these interesting. Is there any kind of published "rulebook" for them anywhere? They were all destroyed in the great Hoxhaist purge of 2015
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
spectralent posted:So money woes aside I've now taken over a bunch of asia and westernised. The "RP for invading people" thing combined with all the free research boosts for allowing the west access to the country meant I was able to do it pretty quickly (as an aside, what's that meant to represent?), and now I have a budget of something like 4k, though my army of proper soldiers is accordingly pricier too. My army size is insane; something like 300 brigades? I'm barely using a third of it and have the world's most powerful military by miles. To be honest every time I've played China I've never actually filled my army to capacity. You'll quickly find that your brigade limit grows faster than the rate you can actually be bothered to build them and even at 1/3rd of max you will have a larger army than anyone else anyway. Player controlled China is easy-mode in Victoria 2 (although be wary of the Boxer Rebellion spam - if they manage to occupy even ONE province, you immediately lose the rebellion which makes you lose control of everyone in your sphere, breaks any alliances you've formed, and generally hurts your relations with everyone. You can survive pretty easily on your own but constantly losing your sphere is annoying).
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
Gort posted:It's standard in Paradox games for China to require a number of systems to hold them back from world domination And then they completely threw that out the window with Mandate of Heaven for EU4...
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:To be honest every time I've played China I've never actually filled my army to capacity. You'll quickly find that your brigade limit grows faster than the rate you can actually be bothered to build them and even at 1/3rd of max you will have a larger army than anyone else anyway. Player controlled China is easy-mode in Victoria 2 (although be wary of the Boxer Rebellion spam - if they manage to occupy even ONE province, you immediately lose the rebellion which makes you lose control of everyone in your sphere, breaks any alliances you've formed, and generally hurts your relations with everyone. You can survive pretty easily on your own but constantly losing your sphere is annoying).  I... what? How does that work? "Prime minister, the rebels have seized Sainshand, we must cut all contact with America"?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
spectralent posted:
Well what is actually happening is that the Boxers, being anti-westernization rebels, commit unspecified atrocities against westerners when they occupy a province, which causes all sorts of diplomatic incidents as well as gives all the great powers the special "Boxer Rebellion" CB against China (although, again, if you're playing as China this is hardly anything to worry about because even if the AI DOES somehow decide that it's a good idea to declare war against you, you should be able to crush them easily). The main thing that's annoying about it is that for whatever reason they will just keep rising over and over again, so you have to constantly play Boxer whack-a-mole for the rest of the game - their numbers do deplete but since it's China, of course they've got millions of people so it's highly unlikely that they'll ever raise enough brigades for you to actually wipe them out completely.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:And then they completely threw that out the window with Mandate of Heaven for EU4... I have to say there's a part of me that enjoys Legendary Super Saiyan Ming nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 12:21 |
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:I have to say there's a part of me that enjoys Legendary Super Saiyan Ming nowadays. edit: I just think its absurd that half of Indonesia (or sometimes all, if Ming is aggressive) can become Ming Tributaries, which then closes the whole area off to outsiders, which is complete and utter a-historical bullshit. Portugal has no way of taking the city of Malacca (which is a hugely historic event) when Ming is this huge monolithic juggernaut that no one in 1500 is capable of defeating. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 15:22 on Aug 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 15:18
|
|
