Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

To those who have Vicky 2.

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.
Europa Universalis IV 81889 EUIV: Bug Reports 444 EUIV: Suggestions 19145 EUIV: Technical Support 6714 EUIV: FAQ & Strategy Guides 235 EUIV: AAR's, Let's Plays, and Fan Fiction EU IV: Alternate History Short Story Contest Contr 29
D

DCosta

Corporal
21 Badges
Feb 16, 2012
27
0
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Sengoku
  • Darkest Hour
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Deluxe edition
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Prison Architect
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • War of the Roses
  • Victoria 2
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
I noticed a post where people listed their fav Paradox games and it seemed Vicky 2 came out ontop for alot of people. I think the post was in this forum but can't find it now.

ANyway can anyone explain why they find Vicky 2 to be the best game and how is it different to EU series.

I own CK2, EUIV and EUIII and HOI3.

Thanks
 
Populations. (the fact that the world population is modeled in a more or less realistic way and is the basis of the game makes it really immersive).

Also the era is really interesting, global empires, nationalism, gunboat diplomacy, etc...
 
You actually have peacetime gameplay. It is completely possible to play a nation and only fight defensive wars.

The westernisation model is much better than EU4, in that countries start with a certain amount of 'progress' that requires passing a number of reforms, each of which give you a small boost when you pass them but also increase the likelihood of reactionaries.

The economy model, although not perfect, is engaging and rewarding.

Rebels can be handled before they turn into annoying whack-a-mole manpower sinks.

There are less, kick-you-in-the-balls events that trigger when you are doing well and then spiral out-of-control. I.E. stability hit via event, monarch dies (-1 stab), now at -2 stab, manpower low, hello Peasant war; going from recovering from a recent war to crippled for 10 years in the space of a few months - without you being able to much about it.

Colonisation, again not perfect, but is more of a direct competition between two or three nations, whereby several nations with an interest in a province can compete by spending some of their limited colonisation points (gained from naval power etc) to out-compete a rival. Tensions can rise in these provinces and a war can trigger over colonial rights.

There are some big flaws, but as there is no ironman, you can use a few mods to 'fix' them.
 
it's a great game but i don't usually play it much since most the the countries are already large and well established. i prefer being small and building something myself. the population part is really great and has a huge impact on manpower and make wars quite a bit more realistic with battles being much more decisive. the only real complaint i have about the game is the whole great power and sphere of influence thing. building and managing industry is also quite fun as well as the economy as a whole
 
It can be fun developing your third world nation into a great power, however, at that point the game completely falls apart IMO due to the stupid influence minigame (if you thought non-automated curia control was bad you ain't seen nothing...)
 
Because there's more to do. EUIV is basically a wargame, and outside of that is really rather lacking. Vicky 2 has warfare that is reasonably close to that of EUIV (except with the added depth of POPs and more units with different roles), and involves peacetime gameplay. In fact, the peacetime gameplay is the primary focus of the game. Not only is there more to do as a result, but it also means that you're in a more sensible situation where you're fighting wars to acquire specific targets for good economic reasons, as opposed to fighting wars simply in order to expand your tax base in order to fight more wars.

This is not to say that it doesn't have its own share of pull-your-hair-out problems (whoever is responsible for the influence mechanics needs to be chucked off of a pier :mad::happy:), but IMO, it's ultimately a better game.
 
Complexity, complexity, complexity. Most major decisions in Vicky2, like building factories or outlawing slavery, are limited by ghe state of complex internal politics and world economy. You cannot directly influence these, but instead you must try to slowly drift towards the conditions that you want. Thus, most ongoing commitments - setting a national focus, for example - change in their effect over time and gameplay comes from being mindful of the changing conditions. Compare to EUIV where you push the button and watch the progress bar. I play EUIV now because I like the pretty newer version of Clausewitz, and EUIV still has a lot of interesting situations to play out. But deep down I am mostly waiting for Vicky3.

Also - play Vicky2 with PDM/APD/POD mod (depending on which expansions you buy). You'll get a more dynamic economy with more goods, more playable and formable countries, small and large. And tons of dynamic event chains with better history. Best example of this is the Mexican War - stock Vicky2 gives USA cores on the southwest by decision, and then USA gets to take them a few at a time because of warscore. PoD provides a decision for the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo to transfer all of those cores after winning *one* Mexican war.

Since there is no ironman, you give up nothing by using mods.
 
brifbates said:
It can be fun developing your third world nation into a great power, however, at that point the game completely falls apart IMO due to the stupid influence minigame (if you thought non-automated curia control was bad you ain't seen nothing...)
Click to expand...

haha... thank god hair transplants are affordable and I had been cultivating enough on my arse to deal with that UI and subsequent transplant.
 
Ethanol said:
Populations. (the fact that the world population is modeled in a more or less realistic way and is the basis of the game makes it really immersive).
Click to expand...

If you asked me to name one reason, POPs would be it. Managing life/everyday/luxury needs, controlling attitudes, promoting/demoting, immigrating, etc -- everything within the POP system is so engaging and has a meaningful impact on the game.

Iffy on the economy but it's deeper than EUIV's economy.

Like LarryLeica said, there are some flaws but I wouldn't call them game-ruining in most cases.
 
It has the most deep mechanics, compared only to CK2, but without need to micro-manage them.
The setting is intresing and a party is usually short compared to other games.
 
Last edited:
It actually has SUPER MICRO if you want to do it. Population management can be very micro-intensive if you're interested in that kinda stuff. Or, you can just do the big stuff and let the game handle the small stuff. Honestly, it's way, WAY deeper than ck2 or eu4 - and that's not neccessarily good for everyone (not everyone wants to deal with this much stuff). Also, you can't realistically become #1 with an OPM that has no good accepted cultures, since that matters a lot, which is a huge difference from eu4 (any opm can be #1 in the world and conquer everything).
 
Vicky has the pop model which many people wanted in EU series as well. That and some other stuff gave you actually something to do in peace times.

EUIV is some kind of "unwanted child" (There was once a thread naming the game like this) because it has none of the extra features from the other games and is simply reduced to the minimum which they then called "nationbuilding". I dislike this as I always hoped EUIV would take a big step forward by getting rid of simplyfication and abstract mechanics and instead go the path of real simulation.
 
DCosta said:
I noticed a post where people listed their fav Paradox games and it seemed Vicky 2 came out ontop for alot of people. I think the post was in this forum but can't find it now.

ANyway can anyone explain why they find Vicky 2 to be the best game and how is it different to EU series.

I own CK2, EUIV and EUIII and HOI3.

Thanks
Click to expand...

POPs, the best (through still silly sometimes) economic model, nice naval battles, militancy+CON makes for a better (but still not perfect) rebel model, and so on.

The diplomatic model is a bit old however, and the infamy model would certainly make the people that whine about expansion being too hard here would ragequit Vicky 2 in 2 hours.
 
And an actually interesting mid-endgame through things like unlocking great wars and more colonization opportunities and rising consciousness/militancy.
 
Beagá said:
POPs, the best (through still silly sometimes) economic model, nice naval battles, militancy+CON makes for a better (but still not perfect) rebel model, and so on.

The diplomatic model is a bit old however, and the infamy model would certainly make the people that whine about expansion being too hard here would ragequit Vicky 2 in 2 hours.
Click to expand...

"I conquered a single OPM and now everybody in Europe is at war with me!" :confused::happy:
 
Victoria 2 is probably my favorite Paradox game despite a couple glaring issues left over from the last expansion that will never get fixed.
I've done my best to mod my way around them but it's not always easy.
 
Beagá said:
The diplomatic model is a bit old however, and the infamy model would certainly make the people that whine about expansion being too hard here would ragequit Vicky 2 in 2 hours.
Click to expand...
Infamy is actually a lot more forgiving than AE because you know exactly where the threshold is - as long as you don't cross it, you won't have to deal with much fallout, and I can usually justify and finish a couple wars before I need to stop.

A major reason AE causes so much frustration is that there's no obvious threshold. Coalitions will sometimes form after a single claim war... or not. RNG is all that stands between you and World War whatever.

The biggest obstacle to a world conquest in Victoria 2 is not the mechanics - it's the time limit. You have 400 years to pull it off in EU4 - Victoria 2 only gives you 100. If Vicky 2 lasted for 400 years, you'd see numerous threads about successful WCs, as you can already go from a minor nation to #1 world power owning half the world in the hundred years the game already gives you.
 
brifbates said:
It can be fun developing your third world nation into a great power, however, at that point the game completely falls apart IMO due to the stupid influence minigame (if you thought non-automated curia control was bad you ain't seen nothing...)
Click to expand...
I wanted to load up a Vicky game, because I've been reading about the german revolutions of 1848. Now I remember why I shouldnt.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back