a new update for victoria 2 EVER or victoria 3
- Thread starter panzerpanzer5
- 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.
- Status
Victoria II won´t get an update, as all the Devs have been working on new Projects for a while. Victoria III is surely highly requested, but Paradox has stated, that it won´t be happening, until there is some "Internal Champion" - A Dev that has a vision for the game.
Correction: there are internal champions for V3, but they are all busy with other projects. After they finish their current projects we might see a V3.
I admire Paradox for not making a new game until they actually have fresh ideas or technology that can actually make it new. Personally, I have a lot of ideas on how Victoria could be made better, but I think it would be arrogant to suggest that I know how to make a good game. For me, there's still plenty of fun to be had in Victoria II, but then again I'm still fairly new to the game.
- 1
I still think they should expand V2 instead of thinking ahead to a V3. Namely, they should make the code more moddable for the likes of PDM. V3 might as well ask the PDM creators to volunteer as (lay) co-developers on the project from start to finish.
- 6
- 1
I hate to sound mean but I wish that people would stop saying things like this. PDM may be fairly popular but a large amount of people don't like it, I'd HATE IT if Vic 3 were modeled after PDM.
I would much rather they stick to their own guns.
- 13
The more code that gets shifted from hardcode to the script files, the slower the game runs. There's a limit to what can feasibly be opened up for modding, and most of the issues with V2 are in modules that simply cannot ever be opened for modding. Opening up more stuff wouldn't help, and the game badly needs to be 64-bit in the first place, too - let V2 die and move on to V3. 5-year old IP that no longer generates much revenue stream can be laid to rest, imo.
I doubt anyone was suggesting that V3 should be modeled on PDM - amongst other things, I'd at least hope that some of the hardcode changes would render lots of things I had to begrudgingly add in unnecessary. If I were asked to do design work on V3 (which is unlikely, unless I suddenly decided to move to Sweden and apply for a bottom-level scripting job at P'dox - it's more likely that I'd be invited to beta test, which is several months after the design stage has been and gone), I'd be looking to start with a very different basic model from the one in V2. I'd change how money worked, for starters, and also remove buying order. Once those things are different, modelling what remains on any existing V2 mod would make no sense.
Additionally, you do realize I don't write literally every single thing in the same way I designed PDM, right
? I've worked on dozens of mods for many different games (and on a couple of actual full games too, for that matter), and each is an original design in itself, not a port of one particular mod. I'd no more be trying to insert stuff from PDM into a new game than I'd be trying to bring in stuff from the 1792 MotE mod, or introducing my Stardrive 2 or Civ 4 economy mods into it.- 1
Hey I mean no disrespect against PDM or you, I just see all the time people suggest that V3 should be more like PDM which I very much disagree with. I don't even know why you'd think I was insulting you I really wasn't, you do great work on lots of mods, some of which I've played extensively. I just don't like this one is all
Hey I mean no disrespect against PDM or you, I just see all the time people suggest that V3 should be more like PDM which I very much disagree with. I don't even know why you'd think I was insulting you I really wasn't, you do great work on lots of mods, some of which I've played extensively. I just don't like this one is all
Oh, I took no offense and didn't take it as an insult
Just noting that my input isn't a byword for making something more PDM-like.
I would not want a Vicky3 based on PDM. At least not the map part.
PDM has horrible, horrible states that not only look bad but also result in ahistorical, nonsensical borders. For example Persian and Chinese states extending into India, German states extending into Belgium and Luxembourg as well as Poland and Romania, and so many more that I could name. They just make no sense at all and all they do is result in unbalanced, completely ahistorical borders. Don't know why it was put in at all.
It is the main reason I don't play PDM much. Those terrible states put me off, and the resulting nonsense borders makes me feel even bad.
That is also due to Vicky2's lazy development, because the devs didn't care to add a casus belli that allows us to take individual provinces instead of entire states.
Pardon my rudeness. Actually PDM is a very nice mod, it is extremely enjoyable and really makes Victoria II feel like a great game, as long as I try to bear with the terrible state map. Which pisses me off.
Last edited:
- 1
Dude, seriously, drop the 'lazy development' line. There's many issues with Vicky, but apathy on the part of the dev team most assuredly isn't one of them.
'Poor design choices' is a fairer assessment - because there's quite a lot of those, and some of them (like, for example, state-based CBs) were obviously bad even before they were implemented. You can forgive the more obscure economic and political ones, since they weren't obvious in advance, but some are pretty hard to defend. Not just state-based conquest, but the lack of emphasis on all aspects of the military side of the game, for example - the original military system could be drawn up on the back of a fag packet in 5 minutes, and the upgrades it's received in expansions, while improvements over the original, have still been distinctly underwhelming. The design of the diplomatic game proved fundamentally boring, too, and the addition of CB generation was a mistake in my opinion - it made it even harder to get into a war, causing the game to become more stagnant.
- 1
Victoria 2 needs to go to 3 because if nothing else, because of how CK2 and EUIV have shaped up, and with how HoI4 is shaping, V2 just isn't gonna fit right. The systems for example, for transferring a game over, just don't make sense anymore. Colonization for example in EUIV has changed completely how V3 will have to function in that regard. The game code is just completely unwieldly at this point, and needs much of a rewrite, if nothing else, to update it's processing power.
I just wish they had been working on V3 instead of HoI4. We already had V2 by the time HoI3 came, if memory serves.
I just wish they had been working on V3 instead of HoI4. We already had V2 by the time HoI3 came, if memory serves.
That, I have to agree with. Perhaps not lazy development, but the pathetic design choices were what made this game so weirdly restrictive at so many places. That especially includes ability to rename brigades and ships, or demolish docks to build in a better place, in my opinion.
But then, wouldn't it be laziness (or rather, lack of attention or unwillingness to develop) for example to not create a WW1 or any late-Victorian start date, even as a DLC? There is much more accurate data available for that era compared to 1836. What would I call it if they couldn't add a simple 'demolish dock' button so that I can destroy the docks in silliest of places that AI has built up and rebuild it somewhere more logical, without having to resort to silly cheats? What would I say about so many typos that still keep appearing in the game, or for example how migration could've easily been fixed so that POPs could migrate everywhere instead of insanely favouring USA and Brazil (and the Americas in general)?
That too is perhaps a part of bad game designing? Why do these simple things have to be fixed by mods?
This is why I hope for a Victoria III. With those illogical design decisions and weird restrictions in Vicky2 fixed, combined with new engine improvements, some more features, various gameplay improvements with a better UI, a more moddable experience as well as in-game customization (like in EU4/CK2 DLCs that allow custom rulers/nations), a game of high quality like that of EU4 can easily be put out. Besides with a better tutorial and documentation, it would be a profitable game for PDS too.
The lack of additional scenarios is simply because you can't make them functional, tbh. Adding a start date in Vicky isn't like adding a start date to EU. You can't just check who owns what and then paint the map differently; that way leads to a borderline unplayable scenario because the economy tanks instantly. While I know some players like to think that it would have been simple because the scenario existed in V1 so 'the research had been done', the truth is that the research doesn't matter remotely - it's the balance work which needs to happen after everything's in place which takes forever in V2. The more scenarios you add, the harder it is to balance everything else - just by having two start dates, you've basically removed half the tools you can use to balance it because now changing goods prices or production output has to work in two wildly different economic set-ups. Every additional scenario risks wrecking the existing ones if you want to try and make it work. That's not down to laziness, or even a bad design choice - it was a GOOD choice to leave out further scenario work, because other factors make it unachieveable. It would have been a huge waste of development time, wouldn't have worked very well, would have likely damaged the existing scenarios just to get it working at all, and would have been played a couple of times by most players and forgotten about (much as the ACW scenario was - almost no-one actually plays anything other than the Grand Campaign anyway).
Migration's problems run pretty deep, too - and there's no easy fix really, since the system is pretty badly planned out at its core. The hardcode is over-engineered and yet still doesn't achieve what it's supposed to, because POPs don't look before they leap - they migrate based on conditions HERE without checking if anywhere else is actually better. Targeting comes later, and is a set of random array rolls, so it's possible to see POPs leaving the most developed nations on Earth to move to awful hell-holes. And the whole thing uses way more system resources than it has to (something mods invariably have to make even worse if they try to improve the situation). It's a perfect candidate for a ground-up revamp.
This is largely why V3 is needed; there's a lot of fundamental design flaws which have proven unworkable. And this really couldn't be foreseen in many cases. V3 can be built with this issues in mind from the beginning.
Migration's problems run pretty deep, too - and there's no easy fix really, since the system is pretty badly planned out at its core. The hardcode is over-engineered and yet still doesn't achieve what it's supposed to, because POPs don't look before they leap - they migrate based on conditions HERE without checking if anywhere else is actually better. Targeting comes later, and is a set of random array rolls, so it's possible to see POPs leaving the most developed nations on Earth to move to awful hell-holes. And the whole thing uses way more system resources than it has to (something mods invariably have to make even worse if they try to improve the situation). It's a perfect candidate for a ground-up revamp.
This is largely why V3 is needed; there's a lot of fundamental design flaws which have proven unworkable. And this really couldn't be foreseen in many cases. V3 can be built with this issues in mind from the beginning.
- 3
One could go on and on of why V3 needs to happen (the whole economy simply not working for example), but ultimately, we need a champion.
Holding out for a hero, Paradox! Who'll be that brave soul to step forward?
Holding out for a hero, Paradox! Who'll be that brave soul to step forward?
as somebody said, that is just a stupid lie - theres no way out of paradox nobody wants to make V3
@The idea of other scenarios - just look at modern age - it's been made piecemeal for a long time now with a lot of work put into what should be where, and it's nowhere near finished, because everything has to be made. The more scenarios there are, the worse the game will be overall, and is why there's words eu5 won't have more than a grand campaign.
Besides, at most, there's going to be 115 years in vicky 3 (eu4 end - HOI4 start), why would even less time to alternate history be good?
Last edited:
Starting in 1821 is far better than starting in 1836 though. Besides Victoria 3 would become a platform for modern-era mods (and many alt-history ones with longer timeframes) just like Vicky2, so despite the short timeframe it can be a good game.
i feel like youre disagreeing with something i said, but we are in agreement so... ok?
I am not disagreeing with you. I am simply reinforcing your point that starting in 1821 is actually better. But at the same time a good alt-history campaign (or even historical one) even with less time can be good and fun.
- Status