Pops

I'm quite curious about how the pops will be implemented in vicky 2. What kind of automation options will be available? Will there be pop efficiency "magic" (smaller pops being better than large ones)? Etc.

At least we know that there will be pops in the game, because Johan anounced that there would be new kinds of pops.

Kazmir said:

Certain POPs should have it harder to convert though, for example the Jewsih minorities in Europe. How that is done I don't know, but I do like your idea.

Perhaps add certain 'mean time to happen' indicators on POPs similar to events, which will start running after certain requirements are fulled (clergy religion in the province, majority religion in the province etc.). The POPs could be made to split after the conversion has fired, with some of them converting while others stay loyal to the original faith. This would of course depend on the size of the POP.

I'd also like to see religious policies have more of an effect.

Click to expand...

Maybe agitation factors could contribute?

People with high revolt risks etc.

Also I'd like to see Atheism in the game, it would be tiny throughout the game, but important with Communists and in Communist nations - which would include decisions/events increasing religious apathy or Atheism.

As for state religions, I'd love if you could select/change it based on certain factors.

Most definately what I want to see is the ability to change from X religion to secularised or atheist. In the case, of let's say, Germany, if the Catholic population outweighs the Protestant, what's the point in labelling it Protestant?

Edit: Maybe base it on national POPs only?

I agree with RELee.

I want an upgraded version of Victoria, not an silly version of Eu.R being turned into 19th century stuff.

POPs are a must. Micromanagement is a must. Controlling international prices. Having a different revolt-risk for each POP. Different needs during different ages for different POPs altering in their culture, religion and location would be awesome.

I am not trying to be mean nor trying to complain a lot, but I hate decisions. o I have survived so far with events and I shall proceed with the usage of events.

Enewald said:

I agree with RELee.

I want an upgraded version of Victoria, not an silly version of Eu.R being turned into 19th century stuff.

POPs are a must. Micromanagement is a must. Controlling international prices. Having a different revolt-risk for each POP. Different needs during different ages for different POPs altering in their culture, religion and location would be awesome.

I am not trying to be mean nor trying to complain a lot, but I hate decisions. o I have survived so far with events and I shall proceed with the usage of events.

Click to expand...

I agree 200% until the last point. Decisions I find are useful, I think there should be a healthy mix of both.

Somethings can be handled by events, others by decisions.

JoeGiavani said:

I think I'm the only person here who actually enjoyed industrialising China

Click to expand...

No, you're not alone!

John Buford said:

I hope there will be Pops in it again...but in a more realistic way. I hope for a more evolutionary approach than the promotion thing

Click to expand...

This. I dislike how you can just spend a couple thousand quid and get 50,000 clerks out of 50,000 farmers immediately.

Zanza said:

This. I dislike how you can just spend a couple thousand quid and get 50,000 clerks out of 50,000 farmers immediately.

Click to expand...

I agree.

That does have to be reworked somehow, to add a touch of realism.

However I disagree with simplification, unless you keep the current POP system but combine it with an EU:Rome system, ie research and policies create a automatic conversion (ie. let's say education) of POPs.

Hardstuff said:

However I disagree with simplification, unless you keep the current POP system but combine it with an EU:Rome system, ie research and policies create a automatic conversion (ie. let's say education) of POPs.

Click to expand...

Or better yet a gradual shift from one category to another, which is how I undertand it works in Rome. Your entire free peasant pop doesn't automatically become slaves, but rather the balance between the two changes in favor of slaves over time as you follow certain policies.

That would be what I'd like to see. Follow certain policies, and have peasants (or more likely the new artisans at first) become factory workers, with some factory workers rising to clerks/bureaucrats/"white collar workers" etc over time so that after many years following those policies, the balance will be shifted.

Hardstuff said:

However I disagree with simplification, unless you keep the current POP system but combine it with an EU:Rome system, ie research and policies create a automatic conversion (ie. let's say education) of POPs.

Click to expand...

Simplification is for beginners.

Victoria has the most loyal fanbase any pdox game has, why the heck simplify anything for us?
I say no for EU:R pop system. It just does not work.
Victoria is ought to be unique. There should be very few things that would be borrowed from Hoi3 or from EU's.
Please keep it unique. Don't make it something that lies between Vicky, EUs and HoIs.

OHgamer said:

Or better yet a gradual shift from one category to another, which is how I undertand it works in Rome. Your entire free peasant pop doesn't automatically become slaves, but rather the balance between the two changes in favor of slaves over time as you follow certain policies.

That would be what I'd like to see. Follow certain policies, and have peasants (or more likely the new artisans at first) become factory workers, with some factory workers rising to clerks/bureaucrats/"white collar workers" etc over time so that after many years following those policies, the balance will be shifted.

Click to expand...

It will also stop stupid levels of industrialisation. Ie unsustainable and unrealistic industrialisation by any nation, you can only industrialise based on your nation's ability to do so, based upon a myriad of factors including POPs, growth rate, territorial size, population size, taxes, colonisation etc.

Eg. Switzerland converting 90% of its POPs to clerks and workers and getting a high industrialised score with 30 factories is a bit ridiculous to say the least. By 1920 the world had more industrial capacity ingame than by 1960s in real life, the amount of glass the world would've had would've been insane.

OHgamer said:

I think what we'll see will be something akin to what is in Rome in terms of how pops in a province evolve according to the positions you as a player make during the course of the game.

Which means there will be much less micromanagement and instead focusing on implementing the right kind of policies to achieve the goals you have for your nation in any specific game. You don't "promote" pops in Rome, but if you choose specific policies, as I understand it, you will see your population change in terms of the balance of free-slave for example.

Something similar which would transform populations into workers from peasants if you adopt more pro-industrialization policies in game would not be all that much different, and make for much less focusing on individual POPs to get the economy you want. Combine that with capis who build factories for you, and voila, the economic game becomes a lot less detail-oriented, without hopefully sacrificing the kind of detail in terms of POP breakdown by ethnocultural and socioeconmic criteria that people love most about the Victoria pop system.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a good idea. Perhaps a similar system could be used to assimilate pops, with a gradual assimilation rather than the whole pop either changing at once or never changing.

For what it's worth, here are my 2 cents. I've bought Victoria and read the entire manual, walkthroughs compiled by forum members and dug through the thousands of posts in order to try and grasp the basic mechanics of the game's POP system. I couldn't...

Now, that may be due to the fact that I'm a bit thick, or that I no longer have the time it takes to master such a game (*sigh* ah the good old days of high school and college *sigh*). While I understand that this is probably the most hardcore game in the Paradox catalogue, and that is one of the main reasons why it has garnered such recognition and a diehard fan base, it would be nice if Vicky 2 would shed some of those features to allow the game to expand to a broader (but not much) more casual audience (and by casual I mean just 3 hours a day ) that is craving to sink their teeth into this one without getting a massive tooth ache.

Or at least include a half decent tutorial...

Cheers!

Enewald said:

Simplification is for beginners.

Victoria has the most loyal fanbase any pdox game has, why the heck simplify anything for us?
I say no for EU:R pop system. It just does not work.
Victoria is ought to be unique. There should be very few things that would be borrowed from Hoi3 or from EU's.
Please keep it unique. Don't make it something that lies between Vicky, EUs and HoIs.

Click to expand...

Why do you assume that every fan of Victoria is in agreement here?

I like the pop system but it's a nightmare for bigger nations. I've played China once, twice and that's it. And I'm a great fan of China, I'd like to play as China many more times, but when I remember the micromanagement I just lose the will to do it.

They said there will be pops in Vicky 2. Whether it would be exactly the same like Vicky remains to be seen, but the big part of Vicky was the economy model and I don't think they'll change it much. What Paradox is gonna do, is give us possibility of automation of the aspects we don't want to bother with. It's 1920, my industry is really strong, I want to challenge UK or Germany. Let capis build factories and auto improve workers to work in them, I want to concentrate on the war at that time...

I don't see anything wrong with reducing micromanagement. The problem would be with reducing complexity of the game which I don't think they'll do. In HOI3, their main effort was to make it easy and fun to contro,l not to make it simpler.

I love pops, but I think they ought to be less interactive and generally more passive. Rather than promoting/demoting/splitting pops which was an annoying task for a populous power, I'd rather see national policies and laws affect conversion between pops and pop behavior.

I'd go on to say that nobody, including communist governments, should be able to promote Pops into other types; the only way to do so should be by pop/provincial decision, and that would only influence the natural conversion rate.

Rome's system was a bit too easy and too simplistic, but the basic approach could well be applied to Victoria.

I hope the current pop representation makes it in vicky2, because of all the information they give to the player and how it affects a nation.
However, This can be made even more important if properly implemented with an automatic pop "evolution" system in which pops evolve or devolve depending on the nation's economic circumstances, literacy, political admosphere, policies, the party in power, the pops religion and nationality in contrast with the country's, etc...

I also see a good opportunity for implementing laws. ( Say, prussia passes conscription law, increasing the amount of farmers that convert into soldiers or officers, or the US passes the chinese exclusion act, stopping all immigration from china and making it hard for chinese pops to evolve, but lowering RR of all US citizen pops and increasing the popularity of the current party in power for the next election)

Enewald said:

I agree with RELee.

I want an upgraded version of Victoria, not an silly version of Eu.R being turned into 19th century stuff.

POPs are a must. Micromanagement is a must. Controlling international prices. Having a different revolt-risk for each POP. Different needs during different ages for different POPs altering in their culture, religion and location would be awesome.

I am not trying to be mean nor trying to complain a lot, but I hate decisions. o I have survived so far with events and I shall proceed with the usage of events.

Click to expand...

Wait! What did I say?

RELee said:

I don't think I'll ever be unloading Revolutions from my hard drive. POP management is one of the cooler aspects of the original game for me, although I have to agree that it can get tiresome from time to time, depending on just how large your nation is. Don't get me wrong. I'm very, very hopeful that the new game will be absolutely wonderful, but I think that I may come to miss my old favorite every now and again.

Click to expand...

Mmm. Don't think I advocated not using the Clauswitz engine. In fact, I was lamenting the loss of the old pop system for the new-fangled ways that must always come with progress. I'll never let go of the old game while I embrace the new. That's all I'm saying.

I'm hoping that the new ways will result in a game that is as unique and different as the first Victoria was, but by using the new game engine. Looking at the engine being used by EU3 and HOI3, I see a whole world of possibility for Victoria 2. Instead of a "dumbed-down" Victoria, I see the possibility of a "stream-lined" Victoria, where I can make decisions that affect more than just converting one pop from a laborer to a clerk. I see possibilities of better military action, more sweeping political decisions with real consequences to game play actions, an improved and involved technology tree that still covers everything from military equipment to banking decisions.

What I'm not going to do is waste my time by stomping my feet and insisting on the same old pop system and (excuse me) retarded user interface that Vicky 1 had. I'm wanting to move on to something better and more involved.

I don't reckon most people take into account that I am in love with the time period as much as the game mechanics, but that is true too.

I'm not for simplification. I'm for stream-lining. If they manage to stream-line the pop system, they can improve the economic and military system. Can any of you imagine a Victoria game with HOI-like leaders and command structure? Mmmm, tasty.

Making a more effective and realistic economic/population system and making it less exploitable and wonky shouldn't be too hard. If you look at it in terms of what Vicky had before, basically every nation on the entire earth was stalinist simply due to the way the economic system of the game worked. Just take away the ability to control things that nation-states of the time could not realistically control directly and make the player work more through the political system to achieve economic goals rather than simply "build factory X in province Y".

Industrialization should not be a thing that the player imposes on the nation, it should be something that grows out of the player having created the right conditions for it to thrive.

MadImmortalMan said:

Just take away the ability to control things that nation-states of the time could not realistically control directly and make the player work more through the political system to achieve economic goals rather than simply "build factory X in province Y".

Industrialization should not be a thing that the player imposes on the nation, it should be something that grows out of the player having created the right conditions for it to thrive.

Click to expand...

I think a system like the national ideas in EU3 or policies in HoI3 would be pretty nice to model that. Just pick some ideas (some of which should conflict) and thus create a state. New ideas are added with research ("We have researched social state. Absolutelty no scribes allowed." or by decisions or events (e.g. the "revanchism" when you lose cores and are nationalistic).

Ideas could relate to economics, education, science, various areas of politics, etc.


National Idea "Bureaucracy": Clerks conversion rate +5%
National Idea "Sponsor Railroads": Capitalists build more railroads. Capitalist tax rate -10%.

Or something like that.