There is. They (Soviet Russia) converted farmers to mine workers (labourers).
EDIT: Also: In Soviet Russia, RGOs expand you!
Development Diary #20 - National Focus
- Thread starter Johan
- 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.
EDIT: Also: In Soviet Russia, RGOs expand you!
Thank you. Probably as much as you understanding for a critics.
And thanks to this DD I just came to the decision NOT to pre-order - even if Vic1 was my favourite. I'll play demo (if there is one planned) and see reviews first.
What I mean: it can be a good game overall - possibly. But to me it seems you are taking too much away from the player and not add enough to keep him busy. I rather first want to see if you really managed to have it balanced before I spend my money.
As somebody said: I want to play the game, not watch the game playing itself.
EDIT:
Which you can't do in Vic2.
I take it back, you don't have a clue. Why not try to read this week's dev diary? It might help you ou.
Personally I would prefer if RGOs could still be expanded but had a natural maximum size for each province - but it's a somewhat more intuitive system to simply have RGOs be a fixed size, even though it can be a little ahistorical in some places. Natural expansion of mines etc. will simply be represented through increased output via technologies.
In any case it will certainly be better than Vicky having potentially massive RGOs in areas that quite literally could have never supported them, and I'll wager that the AI will interact with it much more effectively.
In any case it will certainly be better than Vicky having potentially massive RGOs in areas that quite literally could have never supported them, and I'll wager that the AI will interact with it much more effectively.
which is what technologies actually do for mines. Increase both the max size (for example deeper mining) and output (better technology)
You can't convert - you can try to encourage people - completly different thing.
And btw: you still don't have a clue how to react to criticism. Being sarcastic to somebody who clearly stating his concerns about a game you are developing is not the best thing to do. Especially if you consider what I said before: Vic1 is my favourite game.
Which is simply not what I'm talking about - Soviet Union could open new mines without changing technologies (at least at the beginning).
Thus, if I want to expand heavy industry - I should be able to expand some RGOs for a start.
Look, if you understood and played Victoria 1 you would no there was no way you could convert Farmers to Labourers. A province could have farmers or it could have labourers, but never both. It was simply not possible. In Victoria 2 we provide you the means to do this and you are complaining about it.
This would be simulated by not having the RGO filled at first, then filling it.
You can stick an oil derrick your back yard - doesn't guarantee you'll get oil.
Not allowing RGOs to expand also prevents the issue before where everyone flocked to one spot, where you could just keep expanding the RGO. Now, RGO workers will spread out, since there can't be infinite jobs in one state.
Exchanging provinces and technologies was just too easy to exploit.
Wait, wait, what?! I must have missed something along the way.
You can have farmers and labourers employed in the same province?
no you can't, but national focus will give a pull to those farmer to leave their farms and go work in th emines (if you so desire).
You mention long-term effects being, well, long-term, and so shifting national focus around is counterproductive, but this leads me to wonder -
Does Vicky 2 suffer what Vicky 1 did - a relatively short time to play compared to EU2/3? The problem was that time moved forward at the same pace in Vicky 1 as it did in EU2 - and thus Vicky 1 was one-fourth shorter, though perhaps more rich in features, being entirely a different game. Will Vicky 2 feel the same in this regard?
Does Vicky 2 suffer what Vicky 1 did - a relatively short time to play compared to EU2/3? The problem was that time moved forward at the same pace in Vicky 1 as it did in EU2 - and thus Vicky 1 was one-fourth shorter, though perhaps more rich in features, being entirely a different game. Will Vicky 2 feel the same in this regard?
The thing is, much (or pretty much all) of what you were concerned about had already been answered or discussed already in this and previous DDs, if you'd have gone to the trouble of reading them. As is the case with a lot of questions in this and other threads, as I keep noticing.
And tell me, how do you "expand" an iron RGO, since the vein of iron ore is only going to be a certain size IRL? You can increase output by having more people work there (national focus can help you achieve this), or by gaining new technology that allows for deeper mines or more efficient ore processing, like King says.
King: I suddenly got interested, do grain/other food production RGOs get a penalty to size (how many people they can employ) due to technology (while also getting compensating production boosts)? A full grain RGO at the start represents all the arable land in the province being farmed by so-and-so many farmers, right? When technology increases and the amount of work needed to farm a piece of land goes down, some of the farmers should be forced out of work I think. Well, they likely will be for pricing/earning reasons well before this, but still...
Sute]{h;11029668 said:
It's not a big deal, so I don't want to be combative about it, but settler colonies tended to be the most economically developed historically as well, did they not? So it seems like a choice is being forced here that isn't really warranted, unless national pops somehow attract development.
Last edited:
Yes, in fact no negotiations during peace at all. No land swaps, no technology trades, nothing.
