I'd like to see a way to change back from previously-chosen doctrines, with a high cost for the player in question, of course.
Megathread : Technologies in Victoria 2
- Thread starter SamouraiSteven
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
In favor of HOI3 Tech
I have to admit I like HOI3's tech process, however has been stated before HOI3 is more of a wargame than Victoria. I really like HOI3's tech process, although for Victoria I would add add some of the research topics from Victoria I.
Keeping in items like political theory and art could be used to influence immigration or "national unity" and would be worth investing; just as much as the latest rifle. In short, I'd try to use Victoria's original technology but manage is using the HOI3 interface.
I have to admit I like HOI3's tech process, however has been stated before HOI3 is more of a wargame than Victoria. I really like HOI3's tech process, although for Victoria I would add add some of the research topics from Victoria I.
Keeping in items like political theory and art could be used to influence immigration or "national unity" and would be worth investing; just as much as the latest rifle. In short, I'd try to use Victoria's original technology but manage is using the HOI3 interface.
Tech
Perhaps the type of government should have a direct impact on the easyiness of researching certain fields.
For instance an autocratic government or dictatorship could direct research more than a democracy.
A democracy, especially with Laissez-faire economic policy is less directed but more inventive as it allows entrepreneurs to flourish and encourages free thinking.
Democracies are better at certain cultural and financial inventions but Autocracies are better at millitary and industrial research.
Even religion could play a part in inventiveness.
Either way every thing about a country and its government could contribute possitives and negatives to different areas of research which would give a more balanced game as certain countries play to their respective strengths and can trade with other countries those techs they find mutualy harder to research themselves.
Perhaps the type of government should have a direct impact on the easyiness of researching certain fields.
For instance an autocratic government or dictatorship could direct research more than a democracy.
A democracy, especially with Laissez-faire economic policy is less directed but more inventive as it allows entrepreneurs to flourish and encourages free thinking.
Democracies are better at certain cultural and financial inventions but Autocracies are better at millitary and industrial research.
Even religion could play a part in inventiveness.
Either way every thing about a country and its government could contribute possitives and negatives to different areas of research which would give a more balanced game as certain countries play to their respective strengths and can trade with other countries those techs they find mutualy harder to research themselves.
But that would be unfair to smaller nations, wouldn't it? A lot of key discoveries were made by scientists from these countries.
Honestly, having played a V:R game this week-end in an effort to stave off V2 hunger, I'm quite satisfied with the current Victoria system. The only chance I would add would be the opportunity to buy research points, so as to accelerate discoveries, notably in the endgame, when it's almost impossible to get all the historical techs.
The idea about "leadership" and "tech spreading" is excellent!Any developer reading this?
In my point of view, back in the Vicky time, the leadership, which depends on the number of wealthy/educated people, is even much more important than in the time of HOI.
In my point of view, back in the Vicky time, the leadership, which depends on the number of wealthy/educated people, is even much more important than in the time of HOI.
That however runs contrary to how it actually was, the most key (or basic) inventions in the field of industry and military in the timeframe came first from britain, after 1850-1870 until now they came from the USA, and follow-up inventions came from Germany. After 1870 there were almost no important basic inventions in countries outside of Germany and the USA.
Maybe the system should be changed completely, with technology being handled behind the scenes, all the player could do would be to allocate financial resources, build up educational facilities, finance spy networks to do economic espionage and the like to try to influence the progress of research, the aquisition of key technologies and the application of these technologies.
It's unrealistic that a key technologic discovery would be made in one country without the others learning about this and trying to reproduce this technology.
So it could work like this, you get a message "Prussian scientists have developed a new, more effective steam engine for locomotives. What do you want us to do?
A - Try to buy a sample from them (loose X $, gain + X amount of steam engine practical knowledge)
B - Order our spies to aquire the blueprints (loose smaller sum of $, X% chance of aquiring blueprints, 100-X% chance of worsening diplomatic relations with Prussia)
C - Order our scientists to speed up their research in that field
D - There is no future in railways, don't waste our ressources on this foolish pipe-dream.
So actual discoveries would only be made in the most advanced countries, investing the most money into their educational and scientific systems, enjoying the benefits of leading technologies, while knowledge would slowly spread to other countries according to their investments.
Researching a new basic innovation is not a result of a direct political order (unless in some areas of military research) but rather a result of an established innovation culture, the money available to scientists and the number and equipment (and liberty) of research institutions. The evolution of the german 'Technische Hochschulen" (which were in the beginning mostly institutions for reverse-engineering of british machines) might serve as an example for this.
I don't know if it would be more fun for most people, though. It's a game, after all.
Last edited:
What if, in a democracy, state capitalist or planned economy parties keep getting elected for decades? To me that would mean the country would have it's research pretty much directed by the government, although which government is in place is a democratic decision.