Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Why don't rebels fight each other?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Victoria 2 17560 After Action Reports (AAR)
Show only dev responses
unmerged(53301)

unmerged(53301)

Banned
Jan 26, 2006
1.302
0
I was watching a revolt in another country and saw Jacobin rebels occupy the same province that Citizen Guard rebels were in. They both occupied it together and didn't fight. I thought different rebel types were supposed to fight each other to simulate civil wars/revolution-counter revolution?
 
k-59 said:
Since rebels are such a small threat, I don't think it's good idea to make them weaker from infighting.
Click to expand...

I dunno, rebels got buffed pretty hard. Maybe they are a small threat to great powers, as they should be since great powers were often known for domestic stability, but to secondary nations they can be serious. Many rebels have an occupation strength multiplier now, which means that they can increase in size by a factor. For instance, nationalist rebels will increase their army size by a factor of 5 every time they occupy a province. That means an army with only 3k becomes 15k, and then if they cap a second time, they amass to 75k. You also have to take into account that rebels were buffed significantly in HOD and their frequency was reduced significantly as well. So in all honestly, I think at the moment rebels that fight each other would be a good system. I mean why should communist and fascist rebels ignore each other? If anything it's horribly inaccurate to leave out rebel "street battles."
 
Naggafin said:
I dunno, rebels got buffed pretty hard. Maybe they are a small threat to great powers, as they should be since great powers were often known for domestic stability, but to secondary nations they can be serious. Many rebels have an occupation strength multiplier now, which means that they can increase in size by a factor. For instance, nationalist rebels will increase their army size by a factor of 5 every time they occupy a province. That means an army with only 3k becomes 15k, and then if they cap a second time, they amass to 75k. You also have to take into account that rebels were buffed significantly in HOD and their frequency was reduced significantly as well. So in all honestly, I think at the moment rebels that fight each other would be a good system. I mean why should communist and fascist rebels ignore each other? If anything it's horribly inaccurate to leave out rebel "street battles."
Click to expand...
Agreed.

1) But... rebels can still be a major threat to great powers. I'd disagree with k-59 that rebels are a small threat: they only are if you play well/conservatively. If you accumulate lots of war exhaustion (I'm playing PDM, where I think this is a bigger deal...?), rebels can still be a huge problem for #1 GP. As the US, I had to deal with major communist revolutions periodically from 1890-1920 as a result of my hyper-imperialist war exhaustion.

2) Semi-on-topic: rebels should definitely fight each other. It doesn't make sense that white reactionaries and Jacobins cooperate, or that fascists-communists-anarcholiberals do the same. Unless they're nationalists/patriots (I mean, unless you have Hungarian nationalists and Slovak nationalists who aren't fighting for the same territory), they should all be enemies. I also think they should all get their own flags (Jacobins get some sort of tricolor maybe, idk... fascists get a black flag, communists get red-and-black, anlibs get black-and-yellow, nationalists/patriots get a modified flag of their homeland - maybe with a special border or something- whites get a white flag, etc. etc.).
 
The solution I think is this: ideological rebels should fight each other in most cases, nationalist rebels on the other hand should band together with anyone else taking up arms against their government
 
It wasn't build into the Vicky II engine, so all rebels have the same nation tag.
I guess it would need a in-deep rework like with the EU3 expansions.
 
Valenhiem said:
Agreed.

1) But... rebels can still be a major threat to great powers. I'd disagree with k-59 that rebels are a small threat: they only are if you play well/conservatively. If you accumulate lots of war exhaustion (I'm playing PDM, where I think this is a bigger deal...?), rebels can still be a huge problem for #1 GP. As the US, I had to deal with major communist revolutions periodically from 1890-1920 as a result of my hyper-imperialist war exhaustion.

2) Semi-on-topic: rebels should definitely fight each other. It doesn't make sense that white reactionaries and Jacobins cooperate, or that fascists-communists-anarcholiberals do the same. Unless they're nationalists/patriots (I mean, unless you have Hungarian nationalists and Slovak nationalists who aren't fighting for the same territory), they should all be enemies. I also think they should all get their own flags (Jacobins get some sort of tricolor maybe, idk... fascists get a black flag, communists get red-and-black, anlibs get black-and-yellow, nationalists/patriots get a modified flag of their homeland - maybe with a special border or something- whites get a white flag, etc. etc.).
Click to expand...
Most definately yes on the above. I've had very large rebellions in my current Prussia> German Empire game,and they will multipy. I have to have 10 armies of 42k each all around the homeland to handle them. I do win,but when there are 2 different groups rebelling,and have different ideologies,they should fight each other as well as the Government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back