• 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 3 - Dev Diary #23 - Fronts and Generals

16_9 (1).jpg

Hello and welcome! Today we will dig into the core mechanics of land warfare, including Fronts, Generals, Battalions, Mobilization, and more. But let’s take a moment first to recall the pillars of warfare in Victoria 3 from last week’s diary, which should be considered prerequisite reading to this one.

  • War is a Continuation of Diplomacy
  • War is Strategic
  • War is Costly
  • Preparation is Key
  • Navies Matter
  • War Changes

Before we get started I want to point out that a few of the mechanics I will be mentioning below are currently still under implementation in the current build. While development diary screenshots should never be taken as fully representative of the final product, this is especially true in this case. In some cases images will be artistic mockups and visual targets, and in other cases very rough in-game screenshots that will be revised before release. The reason for this is simply because, as we have stressed previously in these dev diaries, Victoria 3 is a game about economics, politics, and diplomacy first and foremost. War is a very important supporting system to all those three which tie them together, but we needed to make sure those three aspects were mature enough before we put the final touches on the military system. Furthermore, being a drastic divergence from how warfare works in all other Paradox games, these systems have required a lot of time in the oven to feel as fully baked as the others. Once we are closer to release we’ll make sure to update you on any revisions, and release more finalized in-game screenshots!

First I want to present the concept of Fronts. In Victoria 3, rather than manually moving armies around the map, you assign troops (via Generals, as we will see later) to the border provinces where two combatants clash. All combat takes place on these Fronts, where a victorious outcome consists of moving the Front into your enemy’s territory while preventing incursions into your own.

Fronts are created automatically as soon as two countries begin to oppose each other in a Diplomatic Play, and consist of all provinces along the border of control between those two countries. Therefore a Front always has one country on either side, but it is possible for Generals from several countries to be assigned to the same Front.

Let’s take a look at a screenshot from the current build of the game:

An early draft view of the Texas Utah Front. This Front belongs to the Texan Revolutionary War of 1835, which is in full swing on the game’s start date. Two Texan Generals are assigned to this Front, Samuel Houston with an Advance Order and William Travis with a Defense Order. On Mexico’s side, José de Romay is advancing with 10 Battalions. The four stars on either side indicates relative average fighting skill compared to the world’s best - here Mexico and Texas are tied with 40 Offense and 35 Defense each. From Mexico’s perspective this Front has a slight advantage at the moment and indeed one battle on this Front has already been won by them.
dd23_1.png

As mentioned at the top, these visuals - and all other images in this diary - are far from complete! We have many parameters left to expose, more UI layout to do, and more visual effects to add before release. Everything you are seeing today is only to give you a better idea of the mechanics, but is in heavy revision as we speak and will look different on release. As such it is not to be taken as representative of what you will see in the final product.

The health and status of your Fronts is a primary indicator of how well the war is going for you. Do you have more troops on the Front than your enemy does? That’s pretty good. Have you advanced it far into enemy territory? Great. Are your soldiers there demoralized and dying in droves from attrition? Double-plus ungood.

In a large end-game conflict you might have hundreds of thousands - possibly even millions - of soldiers in active service, which is a lot to keep track of. The number of active Fronts, however, is likely to be much more manageable. The design philosophy here is the same as with the economic Pop model. Our aim is to make the game playable and well-paced, without requiring frequent pausing, on every scale while retaining the detail and integrity of the Pop simulation. For warfare, the scale ranges from a small border skirmish between minor nations in single-player to a massive multiplayer world war involving every Great Power. Using the Front system we can account for every individual Serviceman and Officer in meticulous detail while giving the player a high-level strategic interface to monitor and manipulate. Much like with the economic interface of Buildings or the political interface of Interest Groups, from this Front view you can drill down through your Generals all the way to the individual Pops that actually do the fighting if you want to.

After a particularly punishing battle the Texan Barracks are desperately trying to recruit replacements to send to the front.
dd23_2.png

Generals are characters who command Servicemen and Officers into battle on Fronts. Every country will start the game with one or a few Generals - many of them straight out of the history books - and can recruit more as needed.

Generals are recruited from Strategic Regions, and gain command of as many locally available troops in that region that their Command Limit allows. Command Limit is determined by their Rank, which ranges from 1-star to 5-star. If several Generals are headquartered in the same Strategic Region, the troops are split up between them proportional to their Command Limit as well. Military operations can be complex to manage, and to model this every General costs a certain amount of Bureaucracy to maintain. You can promote Generals freely, but while higher-ranking Generals can effectively command more troops they also cost more Bureaucracy.

Like other characters, such as Heads of States and Interest Group Leaders, Generals have a set of Traits that determine their abilities and weaknesses. Admirals, their naval counterparts, work the same way. These Traits determine everything about how the characters function and what bonuses and penalties they confer onto their troops, their Front, and the battles they participate in.

All characters have a Personality Trait, with different effects depending on what role they fill. For example, a Cruel General might cause more deaths among enemy casualties, leaving fewer enemy Pops to recover through battlefield medicine or return home as Dependents, while a Charismatic General might keep their troops’ Morale high even when supplies run short.

Characters can also gain Skill Traits which are unique to their role. Generals may develop skills like Woodland Terrain Expert that increases their troops’ efficiency when fighting in Forest or Jungle, or Engineer that increases their troops’ Defense. Freshly recruited Generals start with one of these but can gain more as they age and gain experience. Many Skill traits have several tiers as well, so Generals that remain active across many campaigns may deepen their abilities over time.

Characters may also gain Conditions due to events or simply the passage of time. These often affect the character’s health, but might also influence their popularity or ability to carry out their basic duties. Shellshocked is a classic example of a Condition your General might gain.

This fellow (whose full name I refuse to write out) has a Direct personality, prefers to command troops in Open Terrain, and is an expert Surveyor of the battlefield. He’s also become Wounded, probably as a result of some recent skirmish.
dd23_3.png

Like all characters, Generals and Admirals are also aligned with an Interest Group - which is often, but not always, the Armed Forces. For Heads of States and Interest Group Leaders the impact of this political allegiance is obvious, but why (you may ask) would this matter for Generals and Admirals?

In addition to industrialization and revolutions, the 19th Century was also known for its revolving door between military and political office. Often given assignments far from the capital with very limited communications, Generals and Admirals were given access to enormous man- and firepower and sent off with little possibility of oversight to see to the nation’s best interests. This autonomy not only granted them considerable geopolitical power while in the field, but also made them extremely popular figures once returning home from a successful campaign. As such, in Victoria 3 your decisions on who to recruit, promote, and retire - which should ideally be based on meritocratic concerns - sometimes have to be tempered also by concerns for internal power balance and stability due to the impact Generals can have on the country’s Interest Groups.

First off, the character contributes directly to their Interest Group’s Political Strength, which as we know determines their Clout. The amount provided is dependent on their rank, so granting a promotion to a promising young General will also increase the influence their Interest Group wields.

Second, if a General is becoming a little too big for their boots - or perhaps crippled by adverse Conditions, like that 79-year old fossil who just won’t leave active service despite senility and various ailments - and you want to force them into retirement so someone else can take command of their troops, their Interest Group’s Approval will be impacted. Understandably so, since you just robbed them of some political power!

Third, and most important, if an Interest Group becomes revolutionary - which will be the subject of another dev diary - their Generals and Admirals will take up against you. If you’ve put all your eggs in the basket of some farmer’s boy who turned out to be a strategic genius and you suffer an agrarian uprising, you may end up fighting a rebellion against that same brilliant commander using fresh recruits still wet behind the ears.

Commanders can also be the focal points of special events, caused either of their own volition or by a situation you have put them in. Your decisions in these events may end up affecting your country in any number of ways.
dd23_4.png

Both Generals and Admirals can be given Orders which they are obliged to try to carry out. We will go over Admiral Orders next week. The Orders you can give Generals are quite straightforward:

Stand By: the General returns home from their current Front, dispersing their troops into their home region’s Garrison forces to slow down any enemy incursions
Advance Front: the General gathers their troops, moves to the target Front, and tries to advance it by launching attacks at the enemy
Defend Front: like Advance Front except the General never advances, instead focusing only on intercepting and repelling enemy forces

These orders may end up executed in different ways depending on the General’s Traits, resulting in different troop compositions and battle conditions during the operations. For example, a Reckless General may provide his Battalions with increased Offense during advances, but fewer of his casualties taken will recover after the battle. Further, his recklessness may lead to making a Risky Maneuver during a battle, which could prove a brilliant or catastrophic move. If you want to play it safer you could assign a Cautious but well-supplied General to a frontline, even though that may be less prestigious.

Generals charged with advancing a Front will favor marching towards and conquering states marked as war goals, but their route there may be more or less circuitous depending on how the war is progressing and possibly other factors such as the local terrain. Other such designated priority targets, which the player could set themselves to alter the flow of battle, is a feature we’re looking into adding to represent strategies and events such as General Sherman’s march to the sea. This is not currently in the game but is something we think would add an interesting dimension to the strategic gameplay, so something like this is likely to make its way in sooner or later!

Fronts targeted to Advance or Defend can also be a Front belonging to a co-belligerent, as long as you can reach it by land or sea. For example, if Prussia supports Finland in a war of independence against Russia, they could send one or two Generals to advance their own Front against Russia and another to help defend the Finnish-Russian Front, ensuring Finland can stay in the war for as long as possible while simultaneously striking at Russia’s own war support. To do so it needs to send its troops helping Finland across the Baltic, which require naval support we will learn more about next week.

Generals cannot be given Orders unless they are Mobilizing. In peacetime, all Generals will be demobilized, doing whatever it is 19th Century Generals do in peacetime (probably drink copious amounts of wine, have sordid affairs, and plot against their governments) while their troops are on standby doing occasional drills to keep readiness up. As soon as a Diplomatic Play starts, and for as long as the country is at war after that, players have the option to Mobilize any and all of their Generals, which will increase the consumption of military buildings (guns, ammo, artillery, etc) and start the process of getting that General’s troops ready for frontline action. The speed by which troops are readied is dependent on the Infrastructure in their local state, so high-infrastructure states can mobilize many more troops quickly while low-infrastructure, rural states might take much longer to gather and organize a lot of manpower.

This means when you choose to start mobilizing, and how many Generals and Battalions you choose to mobilize, will matter a lot to your initial success in the war - and as everyone knows, the first few battles could well prove decisive if the other party is taken by surprise. The magnitude of mobilization becomes immediately visible to the other participants in a Diplomatic Play as soon as the decision is taken. Choosing to mobilize big and early in a Diplomatic Play tells the other participants two things: one, you’re serious, and two, you’re hedging your bets that this won’t end peacefully. This in turn can trigger a cascade of mobilizations, and before you know it, a peaceful solution is no longer on the table. Choosing to hold off on mobilization until late means you save precious money and lives until it’s needed, but may cost you the war if that’s what it comes down to.

Mobilized Generals cannot be demobilized until the war is over. Once you’ve committed your troops to the war, they expect to be in the field and well-supplied until a peace is signed. If getting what you want out of a war takes a long time, your expenses may eventually begin to exceed the value of the potential prize.

In-progress artistic mockup of an Army overview, listing all your Generals with shortcut actions. In this case only General Long-Name has been mobilized (activated), preparing his men to go to the front at the expense of increased goods consumption and attrition.
dd23_5.png

Your land army is composed of Battalions, which are groups of 1000 Workforce with Servicemen or Officer Professions. Like all other Pops these work in Buildings, in this case either Barracks or Conscription Centers. The difference between these are that Barracks are constructed manually and house the country’s standing army, which are considered permanent troops, while Conscription Centers are activated as-needed during a Diplomatic Play or War and recruit civilians into temporary military service. In addition Barracks have a wider selection of Production Methods to choose from, particularly high-tech late-game Production Methods. How your army is divided between professional and conscripted soldiers depends on your Army Model Law, which we will cover in more detail in a few weeks.

The Production Methods in these two buildings work like other Production Methods do: they employ Pops of certain Professions, and consume goods to provide a set of effects. In this case they employ Servicemen and Officers in proportions depending on your organization style, consume a number of military goods, and in return provide Battalions with different combat statistics such as Offense (indicating how useful they are during an advance) and Defense (indicating how useful they are when defending against an advance).

Since military buildings work according to the same logic as other buildings, such as factories and plantations, all core mechanics such as Market Access, Goods Shortages, Qualifications, etcetera apply to them in exactly the same way. If one of your Barracks’ Battalions are supported by Armored Divisions but you cannot supply it with enough Tanks, recruitment will slow down to painful levels and both Offense and Defense will suffer. If you don’t have enough qualifying Officers the number of Battalions the building can actually create will be throttled. Just because you have researched a new type of artillery piece or a more efficient way of organizing your army doesn’t mean you’ll be ready to modernize straight away, and if your local infrastructure suffers the acquisition cost for the requisite goods could reach astronomical levels.

Upgrades to Production Methods in military buildings take considerable time to take effect. While any goods consumption changes happen immediately, improvements to combat effectiveness takes some time to realize. Keeping military spending low during peacetime by reverting your military to pre-Napoleonic warfare doctrines might be pleasant for your treasury but less great for both your war readiness and Prestige, the latter which is directly impacted both by how large and how advanced your army is.

In-progress artistic mockup of a Battalion/Garrison-focused list. Illustrations are selected for a collection of similar Battalions based on dominant Battalion culture (defined by the Pops in the military building) and tech level (defined by the Production Methods in use in the military building). Collections can be expanded to display the full list. From there the player can click through from a given Battalion to the military building supporting it.
dd23_6.png

All this leads us to Battles. Advancing Generals will eventually gather enough troops to launch an attack into one of the enemy-controlled provinces along the Front, which will be intercepted by defending troops and possibly an enemy General. In short, a battle then takes place over some number of days until one force has taken enough casualties and morale damage to retreat. We will go over in more detail how battles play out in a future diary, but suffice to say for now that a bunch of Battalions go in along with a number of different combat-related stats and conditions, some of them related to the General and their troops, others due to conditions like province terrain and chance. If the advancing side wins, they capture a number of provinces depending on how large their win was, what sort of technology they use, how dispersed or concentrated the enemy forces are across the region, and so on. If the defending side wins, they repel the advancers and will likely be able to launch their counter-attack at a nice advantage.

An item of note here is that just because one General might command 100 Battalions while the other side’s General might only command 20 does not mean every battle outcome on this Front is predetermined. A single Front can cover a large stretch of land and just because a General with 100 Battalions is “on a Front” does not mean they travel with 100,000 individuals in their encampment; those Battalions are considered to be spread out, simultaneously planning their next advance while intercepting enemy advances, and as such the force size each side in the battle can bring to bear may vary. Furthermore, Battalions under the command of other friendly Generals on the same Front may be temporarily borrowed for a certain battle, and even Battalions without mobilized Generals (considered part of the region’s Garrison) can be used to defend against incursions. However, Battalions not under the direct command of the General in charge of the battle do not gain the benefit of his Traits.

This variable sizing of battles, particularly when combined with mobilization costs, counteracts the otherwise dominant strategy of “doomstacking” and make wars feel more like a tug-of-war than a race. Each side can choose to either try to gain marginal advantage over the other on the cheap, or spare no expense to increase their chances for an expedient victory, with any position on this spectrum being a valid option in different situations.

We’ll get deeper into some of the combat statistics that go into resolving a battle in a few weeks when we explore military buildings in more detail, and we will talk more about how Battles play out and look on the map in a diary a little further down the line. We’re anxious to show them to you, but need to give these visuals a little more attention first!

That’s land warfare in a nutshell. In the two upcoming dev diaries we will go over the major role that navies play in this system as well as the economic and human costs of war, which are closely interrelated. For now I want to close by saying that we appreciate your patience in waiting for details on warfare mechanics! The reasons for why we’ve chosen to diverge so far from the classic GSG military formula would be hard to grasp until you’ve seen how the different economic, political, and diplomatic systems function.

Next week we will talk more about warfare mechanics as we get into how your navy plays into all this. Until then!
 

Attachments

  • 16_9.jpg
    16_9.jpg
    1,1 MB · Views: 0
  • dd23_1.png
    dd23_1.png
    2,6 MB · Views: 0
  • dd23_2.png
    dd23_2.png
    748 KB · Views: 0
  • dd23_3.png
    dd23_3.png
    321,4 KB · Views: 0
  • dd23_4.png
    dd23_4.png
    849,2 KB · Views: 0
  • dd23_5.png
    dd23_5.png
    2 MB · Views: 0
  • dd23_6.png
    dd23_6.png
    2,4 MB · Views: 0
  • milpad.jpg
    milpad.jpg
    3,9 MB · Views: 0
  • Thumbnail.jpg
    Thumbnail.jpg
    315,3 KB · Views: 0
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 407Like
  • 247Love
  • 217
  • 47
  • 22
  • 5Haha
Reactions:

Pete0714

General
115 Badges
Jul 5, 2010
1.766
3.320
  • Cities in Motion
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Semper Fi
  • Rome Gold
  • March of the Eagles
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Deus Vult
  • Darkest Hour
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Sengoku
Uh well, guess I was right about being skeptical. This seems like the kind of system that only gets fun after 3 expansion packs have fleshed it out enough. I think there's genuine potential in a more strategically oriented system, one of my personal favorite indie ww2 games is cauldrons of war which I think managed to get a really fun strategic system of war. But this just seems way too barebones to be engaging at launch.
This "barebones and boring at launch, hope they build on it with expansions and dlc" routine is getting old, and we need to stop settling for it. If they are going to build upon it, then they should just admit now that it is doomed to fail. If they are going to dlc fixes to the war system later because the original war system is expected to be inadequate, just tell us, so I can make sure not to bother purchasing the base game in the first place.
 
  • 19
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:

bjarni19

Private
75 Badges
Feb 13, 2014
11
37
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Age of Wonders II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Magicka
  • Semper Fi
  • Magicka 2
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Age of Wonders
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Prison Architect
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Victoria 2
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
This "barebones and boring at launch, hope they build on it with expansions and dlc" routine is getting old, and we need to stop settling for it. If they are going to build upon it, then they should just admit now that it is doomed to fail. If they are going to dlc fixes to the war system later because the original war system is expected to be inadequate, just tell us, so I can make sure not to bother purchasing the base game in the first place.
I mean I ain't gonna buy it until it has a satisfying warfare system, so I agree with you there.
 
  • 6
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:

SaydaNeen

Großadmiral
77 Badges
Sep 1, 2013
263
136
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Victoria 2
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Magicka
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Dungeonland
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44 Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings Complete
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Cities: Skylines
  • War of the Roses
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • The Showdown Effect
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Europa Universalis IV
I am not sure how you feel about the rest of the game, but for me Dev Diaries to this point have been bangers one after another. I have been very happy with everything up to this point. The warfare not being deep on a tactical level, does not bother me that much because everything else in the game seems to be great. I think it is hyperbolic to suggest this game is going the way of Imperator just because war has been automated to a greater degree.

I for one am happy that I don't have to micro troops around constantly. I am happy with a set it and forget it approach to wars. I want to spend my time managing my society, which is where this games depth is and what it is about.
Yes, the DD's have been very good, the changes to the game up to this point have been awesome in my opinion. But with some pretty big wars in this time period the war mechanic cannot be simplified! American Civil War, WWI, Russian Revolution, end of the shogunate. There are some huge events and a lot of them are civil wars and modelling a simplified war system to avoid microing I don't think is the correct answer to a good game. Less microing than HOI IV yes, I totally agree with that direction because HOI causes a lot of pauses or quick reaction to capitalize on mistakes at the front. But a 'fire and forget' approach is too hands-off to make the events I mentioned feel significant.
What we've been told so far is that, as a gamer/nation leader in VIC III our job is the preparation for war and manage the resources during the war. This cannot be the ONLY concern the gamer should have during a war/battle. If the only thing the gamer has to worry about is keeping his pops happy and supplied during war it's not going to be fulfilling at all.
 
  • 11
  • 1
Reactions:

MTGian

Colonel
50 Badges
Jul 27, 2004
1.128
2.715
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
Yes, the DD's have been very good, the changes to the game up to this point have been awesome in my opinion. But with some pretty big wars in this time period the war mechanic cannot be simplified! American Civil War, WWI, Russian Revolution, end of the shogunate. There are some huge events and a lot of them are civil wars and modelling a simplified war system to avoid microing I don't think is the correct answer to a good game. Less microing than HOI IV yes, I totally agree with that direction because HOI causes a lot of pauses or quick reaction to capitalize on mistakes at the front. But a 'fire and forget' approach is too hands-off to make the events I mentioned feel significant.
What we've been told so far is that, as a gamer/nation leader in VIC III our job is the preparation for war and manage the resources during the war. This cannot be the ONLY concern the gamer should have during a war/battle. If the only thing the gamer has to worry about is keeping his pops happy and supplied during war it's not going to be fulfilling at all.

Yeah, I agree. I think we all have slightly different opinions on how much the player should be involved in war planning, but the player should be involved. I don't count what the player is doing in the announced system as being involved.

Could I play a game where all I did was economic, political, and diplomatic stuff, but military was completely hands off? Yes, I could. Unless something very surprising happens, I will absolutely buy Victoria III and play it a fair amount even with the announced military system.

However, the place where I am really struggling is why? Why have military be completely hands off? I just don't see the logic in it.

I do understand the idea that the player would not micro the military part of the game. I get that. I can see that a game where the economic/political/diplomatic is the focus would not have the player controlling every military unit and making every military decision. I am 100% on board with that actually. I was a supporter of last week's DD.

However, assuming I understand this correctly, if my only action when war breaks out is to click on a front, click assign general, click attack/defend for that general and that is it throughout the entire rest of the war, then my response to that is why? Why so little? What reason is there for that? Because it is not a war game? You could have a helluva a lot more than that and still not be a war game. Because that is the maximum that the player could do and still manage the economic/political/diplomatic systems? Ummm, no. I call bullpoop on that. That is how many seconds worth of clicking? 30 seconds? When the ACW breaks out, how long does it take for me to click on Grant, click on assign to the thousand plus miles front, then click attack, then do the same for McClellan, then the same for Buell, and however many other generals. Okay, maybe it takes a full minute on a war that is pretty important and is going to last for quite a while in real time.

The only reason that I can think of is a philosophical one. That the player doing anything more than assigning generals to fronts would distract from the "purity" of the economic/political/diplomatic parts of that game. If that is true, then here is the thing...when you are in business, you need to be pragmatic. Idealism is bad for business.

This is really simple. Read through the 42 pages. The vast majority of players want to be more involved than that. Every person wants different things, but I believe that most just want to be able guide where the general starts a campaign, what the goal of the campaign is, and how aggressive the general is to carry out the campaign. That is it. The general can handle the details. That does not make the game into a wargame. That is not too many things to balance. How many additional clicks is that per general? Two? I think it is two (position on the front and strategic goal on top of the earlier three of select general, select front, select attack/defend). So, maybe it takes two minutes to setup the military when war breaks out instead of one. That is not too much. Finally, even if you think that it takes the player out of the "purity" of the economy/politics/diplomacy parts of the game, the goal is to sell games. Most players want to make some very simple, very high level strategic decisions during war.

If Paradox/developers stick with the current approach, I would really like to hear why. Because I don't get it.
 
  • 15
  • 4Like
Reactions:

Butter For Less

Sergeant
19 Badges
Jun 12, 2015
50
504
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Stellaris
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
Yes, indirectly - it depends on their Rank, which affects how many troops they are "owed".

Rehoming Generals between Strategic Regions is not part of the system as this would be too fiddly and introduce some unfortunate exploits. However, getting this option as a one-time thing to deal with a problematic General would be a very cool event! I'll ping the appropriate people. :D
An event for this isn't great consolation for a feature that really seems like it should be in the game... Even besides the case of getting rid of a problematic general, it would be nice if I could transfer a promising general from one strategic region to commanding troops in another. Say if I recruit a general from some rural corner of the empire and he performs well commanding the few dozen troops in that strategic region, it would be nice if I had the option to promote him and move him to a more populous strategic region so he could have more troops under his command.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:

BrotherJonathan

Petty King of Washington
49 Badges
Jun 15, 2015
957
2.100
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Knights of Honor
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 - Second Wave
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44 Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
Can the allegiances of generals/admirals change over time? Or are they locked into their interest group for life?
I think the military is its own interest group in this game, but I'm not sure.
 

IsaacCAT

Field Marshal
141 Badges
Oct 24, 2018
3.419
7.737
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
Besides sending the generals to the front and having distinctive wargoals, I want the player to be able to react to war developments.

Most of the player agency is indirect with supplies and military logistics. Thus, when the war is going awry, the player should be able to react by conscripting more troops by increasing militancy, soldier salaries, military buildings, downgrading production methods, etc..

Moreover, If the player identifies that a General is making mistakes or overwhelmed by the enemy tactics, the player should be able to help the General.

One possibility is to replace the General with another with better traits but also tactics. Generals should be predictable on which type of tactics they will prefer on the war front. The tactics will show up as number of battles, location, quantity of soldiers, type of engagement, etc…

Another possibility is to take strategic decisions on the battle front like a chess player. You sacrifice a piece to achieve a future victory. The player should be able to allow an enemy to get inside the player nation to then cut off its supply lines and destroy it. Sending a general with less troops in one front and keeping the other generals ready to attack when the front has advanced/broke, should be a possibility for the player.

The strategic side of war implies that generals have different roles as chess pieces (movement), have different power (type and quantity of units) and are constricted by the chess board (terrain). But the player has the power to dictate the strategy to win the war. Can you give us this PDS?
 
Last edited:
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions:

Marcus Pica

Major
35 Badges
Dec 8, 2018
549
1.407
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
Carefully reading the DD, there seems to be a lot happening behind the scenes like concentration of troops, generals choosing to fight in specific terrain types, flow of supply etc.

I dont mind the fact that the player has no direct input on the tactical level, its an interesting concept and warfare is designed to be more punishing for your economy and society, which is great.

Please just visualize as much of the above mentioned behind-the-scenes-happennings as possible. Moving away from gigantic single soldier units of other GSGs please present manevuering battalions on a smaller scale (the scale of city buildings, carts and trains that we get) with tiny country banners according to concentration of troops, visualise battles with more than just single sprites of fire and smoke etc. Also I want to see burned out forrest in the vicinity of battlefields, ruined towns,...
 
  • 6Like
  • 4
Reactions:

Axe99

Ships for Victory
127 Badges
Feb 13, 2003
15.951
13.022
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Lead and Gold
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
Why, oh, why are you giving the devs a freaking DLC opening?! Stop, before this game becomes DLC hell before release.

While I wish I had some sway over the game design (particularly the UX) you can rest assured that the devs won't be making decisions on what's included in DLC or otherwise based on my forum posts :)

I wasn't trying to give them an out - I want (as I made clear in my post) the system to be fun out of the box, and I'm quite sure the devs do to (I have no doubt the devs want to make a fun game - it's one of the reasons I'm confused by Paradox as a whole taking such an un-inclusive approach to its UX design, as I doubt they want to either exclude people or reduce their fun factor - despite this being what they've achieved with this approach). I just think (unlike the UX, sadly) that if the warfare isn't fun out of the box, we shouldn't lose hope. Sadly, I fear some kind of UX dogmatism (of the uninclusive, one-size-doesn't-fit anyone variety) has taken hold at Paradox and that particular element of game design, unless we're very lucky, is beyond hope (as, unlike most of the gameplay systems, where they show impressive creativity, initiative, flexibility and growth, their approach to UX has been quite the other way around in recent years, with grudging changes to paper over the worst issues and then stonewalling and focussing on other things).
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:

Millefleurs

Second Lieutenant
Apr 13, 2016
103
210
I read and reread the DD and also read many comments and watched some videos but there are still a few questions that I have and some things that are unclear to me. Maybe someone here can help me:

Generals:

"You can select a General of yours to counter a specific General from the enemy" (from a youtube video)

I can't find anything that would back up that assumption? Only if one General is used on both sides I see this as possible.


Wargoals:

- "Generals charged with advancing a Front will favor marching towards and conquering states marked as war goals" (DD)

- "Other such designated priority targets, which the player could set themselves to alter the flow of battle, is a feature we’re looking into adding to represent strategies and events such as General Sherman’s march to the sea. This is not currently in the game but is something we think would add an interesting dimension to the strategic gameplay, so something like this is likely to make its way in sooner or later" (DD)

"What we're considering adding is a method of prioritizing the various targets in the war, and setting custom targets, on a national (not Front- or General-) level. What we need to be careful with here is to not add methods of control that make the player technically able to control with precision how Generals act in every moment by microing their priorities." (Dev reply in DD)


I assume wargoals (=states that shall be conquered) are determind for a front and not for individual Generals?
So encirclements would be possible (on state level only)?
The Dev reply on the otherhand sounds like it won't be the case to determine the directions so detailed?
(If it would be possible it would lead to the question if you could prevent encirclements on state level by reatreating/ falling back deeper into your held territory.)

Encirclements inside a state haven't been mentioned anywhere? So I guess it's not possible (and woud be rng anyway).
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:

FOARP

Field Marshal
49 Badges
Sep 10, 2008
6.137
4.022
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Gettysburg
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44 -  Back to Hell
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 - Second Wave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • 500k Club
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
Do I understand this correctly? Your generals occupy the whole front with their troops one on top of the other? They don't even divide and select a specific area? Then what is the point of an attack/defense stance at all if you have to attack or defend the entire front at the same time? After all, you don't want to attack with only 1/4 your general/troops against your opponent's entire army. You might as well have chosen stances for the entire front.
This is indeed how it reads which is really disheartening.

Of course if the reviews are all brilliant I'll buy, but.... yeah, not pre-ordering. Definitely not. Did that for HOI4 and ended up regretting it because of the planning system.

I could entirely understand a system where instead of ordering individual units you order armies as a whole and where the armies follow your orders as given. My ideal system would have been essentially a Total War-type combat system but on a global map rather than a square battle-map - the lack of control over individual men in a regiment does not bother you too much in TW:Warhammer because you control the regiment and they conform to your orders directly.

Instead this is a system that removes war from your control and that is just not good. The mantra that Vicky is "not a war game" has been taken too seriously here: war is what the majority of people who play Vicky play it for, as a simple review of AAR shows.
 
  • 4Like
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:

Markus Rezai

Private
53 Badges
Jun 3, 2019
11
45
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Prison Architect
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris
  • Magicka
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
Although I'm generally very optimistic about the idea, I wanted to say that there is definitely potential to make the warfare system more nuanced: giving specific targets custom priority weights, more diverse orders for generals, maybe even a rudimentary planning system (like drawing arrows similar to HOI4). Unit design and battalion composition could also be a cool way to interact with war, without having to tediously micromanage movement of every single division.
 
  • 2
Reactions:

WhatThatStandFor

Corporal
38 Badges
Sep 3, 2015
43
214
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Prison Architect
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris
  • Semper Fi
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • For the Motherland
  • Darkest Hour
Now I've gotten a good night of sleep and some coffee in my system, a lot of my points have been made by others in far better wording. Are spearhead offensives, encirclements and other strategic maneuvers seriously impossible with this system? How will this represent any warfare in the period? It doesn't even do WW1 justice, because prior to the Trench Lines solidifying, the Western Front wasn't just two frontlines grinding against each other mindlessly with millions dying for a few miles of land, and without saying the other fronts were the same. How can you make maneuver warfare work in this system?
 
  • 5
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:

LordInsanity

Imperator Romanum
97 Badges
Nov 6, 2009
399
535
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV
Last edited:
  • 7
  • 2Haha
  • 1Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

Paul-Alain Léger

Second Lieutenant
66 Badges
Sep 12, 2018
102
668
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
The developers should realise the objectives during a war are MAINLY political and not military. For example in the franco-prussian war the military objective wasn't Paris, that became the objective LATER, to force the french government onto surrender. The same in the Franco-Austrian war. It was the POLITICAL LEADERSHIP which decided the objectives. The same in the Balkan wars, WW1 and the Interwar period wars. The Political Leadership had the first and foremost say in the war, sometimes they left it in the hands of the Generals but that was not usually the case

During the British colonial wars, you had mostly skirmishes not 'fronts'

In the Spanish Moroccan war, it was the same. Etc etc
 
  • 6
  • 3Like
Reactions:

Pete0714

General
115 Badges
Jul 5, 2010
1.766
3.320
  • Cities in Motion
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Semper Fi
  • Rome Gold
  • March of the Eagles
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Deus Vult
  • Darkest Hour
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Sengoku
I hope you don't let all the negativity get to you, I'm sure it just means people want this game to be the best !
While some of it may be "negativity, " let us not confuse criticism with negativity, which I hope they get as a professional game developer that expects customers to entrust their money to them for a high quality product on release. They had to know coming out with this would be controversial, and not just because it "new" but because it takes a lot away from player control. I want it to be the best, and I believe we all do. I believe that now, not at release, is the time to put as much feedback out there to make sure they know what concerns us, so they do not have to go through the PR nightmare that Paradox has had to rinse and repeat lately, and that alot of companies have had to for not working things out fully prior to release.
 
  • 7Like
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:

meyott

Recruit
90 Badges
Dec 26, 2019
4
9
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Island Bound
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Surviving Mars
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Prison Architect
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Darkest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Rome Gold
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
meh, i thought this system could be better but this definitely ruined the game F for Victoria 3
If battle mechanics ruined for you a game that was clearly intended to not primarily be about war from the beginning, I don't think you were the intended audience. Good news is you won't be forced to buy it.
 
  • 22
  • 3
Reactions:

LordInsanity

Imperator Romanum
97 Badges
Nov 6, 2009
399
535
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV
The developers should realise the objectives during a war are MAINLY political and not military. For example in the franco-prussian war the military objective wasn't Paris, that became the objective LATER, to force the french government onto surrender.
Yes, which is true. War is the continuation of politics, not diplomacy.
The same in the Franco-Austrian war. It was the POLITICAL LEADERSHIP which decided the objectives. The same in the Balkan wars, WW1 and the Interwar period wars. The Political Leadership had the first and foremost say in the war, sometimes they left it in the hands of the Generals but that was not usually the case.
Yep. 19th century armies were not autonomous warbands roaming around doing what they liked with no orders from higher up beyond "attack" or "defend".
 
  • 13
Reactions: