All I want from Dev diaries is: "How we balanced the game so it's not too easy"

[Al-Khalidi]

Here I'd like to gather concerns around game balance and difficculty expressed by me and several other forum members following the stream, hoping the devs would see this.

1. First and foremost: AI in diplomatic plays. Please please balance it so its not easy for small countries to manipulate GPs. If you can easily lure GPs to do all the fighting for you it kills all the fun, challenge and satisfaction from conquering territory. How am I supposed to be happy and satisfied if I reconquer Greece as Ottomans if I know I can just make Austrians and Prussians do all the fighting for me? If I see that at the same time Zulus took british lands in Africa by getting France do the job for them by promicing them something they don't possess? (Correct me if I'm wrong: if Zulus become french protectorate for that, it is fine. If they promice the French Singapore it is not). Make GPs not naive and altruistic. Make GPs cynical. Make GPs brutal. Opportunistic. As they were.

2. Connected to that: please don't make it THAT easy (THAT easy is crucial here) for unrecognizeds to bash GPs by manipulating other GPs against them (guy from reddit who conquered parts of USA as cherokee bcz GB decided its such a great idea to help them). I think that in that era point of being unrecognizeds is that big guys dont treat you seriously. If unrecognized asked one GP for help against another I think historically the most likely outcome would be GPs splitting the poor guy between themselves i think the most lovely thing in playing unrecognized is that after a tremendous effort and some hard earned successes those big guys finally START treating you seriously!

3. Don't make the whole world explode with revolts. Don't get me wrong: maybe its not the case as of now. But I've seen some concerning screenshots with GB collapsing early in game bcz of revolts. Again don't get me wrong - this should totally be possible but should require a country to go through series of disasters like lost wars and crisis to make it happen. Regular huge commie revolts every 3 years was extremely tedious and irritating part of vic2. Revolt once put down should not reoccur in any near future.

4. East India Company making D-day in Europe? Dutch East Indies messing with overlord by supporting their enemy? Shouldn't it be like that subject on lower autonomy level (coloured with overlord colour, I understand?) has no possibility of doing politics independently? Otherwise, whats the point? I think that the first thing GPs were doing with protectorates was taking away their sovereignty on international stage?

As we are getting close to the release, I would be extremely grateful if the devs could address these concerns in a similar way as they did with Belgium case (which was just amazing). @Wizzington @lachek ?

 

[mikhail321]

I think at some point we were promised an AI dev diary. The ai is evidently not ready, so no diary so far.

 

[JesterInYellow]

And when it comes to internal management, please make it a little more difficult to build one-trick-pony economies, especially if that one-trick-pony does not involve food production!

 

[The Goldfinch]

I basically agree with every word of this thread and we should comment it every day until the release date so that the devs have a chance of noticing our concerns.

I can't stress enough how much I DO NOT want a game where Cracow first buys Prussian support to take Galicia, then buys russian support to get Silesia and Posen, then buys Austrian support to get Warsaw. All for mysterious unspecified obligations that can easily be gamed around

My small additional request: make it hard to transform your government form. Make conservatives push back really strong against reforms.

 

[Nwnsnslej]

I can't stress enough how much I DO NOT want a game where Cracow first buys Prussian support to take Galicia, then buys russian support to get Silesia and Posen, then buys Austrian support to get Warsaw

Are you saying that the Vic2 meta can't be used in Vic3? What do you even mean? /j

 

[shoebird]

1. First and foremost: AI in diplomatic plays. Please please balance it so its not easy for small countries to manipulate GPs. If you can easily lure GPs to do all the fighting for you it kills all the fun, challenge and satisfaction from conquering territory. How am I supposed to be happy and satisfied if I reconquer Greece as Ottomans if I know I can just make Austrians and Prussians do all the fighting for me? If I see that at the same time Zulus took british lands in Africa by getting France do the job for them by promicing them something they don't possess? (Correct me if I'm wrong: if Zulus become french protectorate for that, it is fine. If they promice the French Singapore it is not). Make GPs not naive and altruistic. Make GPs cynical. Make GPs brutal. Opportunistic. As they were.

I have the feeling that wargoals in dyplomatic plays should be limited to the strategic region of the initial wargoal and maybe surrounding ones. If you want to add a wargoal somewhere else you need to escalate the conflict and also risk nations with interest on the strategic region of the new wargoal to get involved. Having an interest in the region where you’re expanding the war should be required also, maybe.

 

[Arbus]

Please, everything in this thread, signed and subscribed.

Full endorsement to Al-Khalidi to represent our interest group.

 

[Muezzinzade]

Please, everything in this thread, signed and subscribed.

Full endorsement to Al-Khalidi to represent our interest group.

I basically agree with every word of this thread and we should comment it every day until the release date so that the devs have a chance of noticing our concerns.

I can't stress enough how much I DO NOT want a game where Cracow first buys Prussian support to take Galicia, then buys russian support to get Silesia and Posen, then buys Austrian support to get Warsaw. All for mysterious unspecified obligations that can easily be gamed around

My small additional request: make it hard to transform your government form. Make conservatives push back really strong against reforms.

Same here, folks! It appears we have substantial part of the community speaking with the same voice here, I'm hopeful the devs will see it!

 

[Al-Khalidi]

I have the feeling that wargoals in dyplomatic plays should be limited to the strategic region of the initial wargoal and maybe surrounding ones. If you want to add a wargoal somewhere else you need to escalate the conflict and also risk nations with interest on the strategic region of the new wargoal to get involved. Having an interest in the region where you’re expanding the war should be required also, maybe.

Hmm, yes, this solution was mentioned a while ago. It doesn't completely solve the problem but could help in mitigating the flaw's results. I generally think GPs should be able to demand things outside of the region of play (historical example - Italy getting Venice from Austrian Prussian war) but indeed only if they have an interest there, yes.

Please, everything in this thread, signed and subscribed.

Full endorsement to Al-Khalidi to represent our interest group.

Thank you (and others as well) so much for this support! I care a lot as this game looks pretty lovely so it makes me care more for those things that should perhaps be polished before release.

[Section deleted by moderation]

 

[Enska]

There was already a response by Wiz. His statement was, that AI polishing comes very late in development.

 

[Muezzinzade]

There was already a response by Wiz. His statement was, that AI polishing comes very late in development.

As late as two months before release? If so, then yes, as author of OP states, we would appreciate a Dev diary showing how it was done and what was improved exactly, before we buy the game (at least me, speaking for myself).

 

[dav77-b]

And when it comes to internal management, please make it a little more difficult to build one-trick-pony economies, especially if that one-trick-pony does not involve food production!

Proper logistics would solve this. We can only hope for a logistics (trade+war) DLC.

 

[shoebird]

Hmm, yes, this solution was mentioned a while ago. It doesn't completely solve the problem but could help in mitigating the flaw's results. I generally think GPs should be able to demand things outside of the region of play (historical example - Italy getting Venice from Austrian Prussian war) but indeed only if they have an interest there, yes.

I was thinking more on demands like a colony in the other side of the world. I don’t know the strategic regions by heart so I don’t know if Venice would be in a neighboring region of that of the original wargoal. But Austria was a continuous territory so that should be taken into account too I guess. In any case escalate the conflict should be possible at the cost of infamy and the risk of other countries getting involved.

Btw, am I the only one that thinks that countries interested in diplo plays should be able to made specific offers to the sides instead of only setting an stance? In the case you mention, I think Italy should be able to offer Prussia her help under the condition of getting Venice, instead of just wait for Prussia to offer it.

 

[Al-Khalidi]

I was thinking more on demands like a colony in the other side of the world. I don’t know the strategic regions by heart so I don’t know if Venice would be in a neighboring region of that of the original wargoal. But Austria was a continuous territory so that should be taken into account too I guess. In any case escalate the conflict should be possible at the cost of infamy and the risk of other countries getting involved.

Btw, am I the only one that thinks that countries interested in diplo plays should be able to made specific offers to the sides instead of only setting an stance? In the case you mention, I think Italy should be able to offer Prussia her help under the condition of getting Venice, instead of just wait for Prussia to offer it.

You're not the only one. Its absolutely crucial thing and I'm very surprised making offer yourself is not implemented. How the heck would AI behind one unrecognized state know I'm not interested in them banning slavery, I just want one particular treaty port?

[Section deleted by moderation]

 

[Oglesby]

All for mysterious unspecified obligations that can easily be gamed around

I thought we didn't yet know the full scope of obligations? How do we know that they 'can easily be gamed around'?

 

[Nawolith]

Im with you on this one. I fear a CK III syndrome, that the game will be very easy and i can achieve a lot in 10-30 years. (Duke to emperor in one lifespan stuff.)

Please dont make it so!

 

[alanschu]

As late as two months before release? If so, then yes, as author of OP states, we would appreciate a Dev diary showing how it was done and what was improved exactly, before we buy the game (at least me, speaking for myself).

My experience with game development is that it's trying to land a burning plane on an aircraft carrier at night in super rough seas.

Varying degrees of changes/fixes/iterations are done right up until someone officially says "this thing is locked down, no more changes."

(It's not ideal, and I feel most studios have goals to reduce this at the start of every project, but for a myriad of reasons it ends up being the case in my experience due to wanting to get more stuff in, wanting to improve the experience, needing to make changes to foundational issues that weren't obvious until enough stuff was built on top of them, etc)

 

[Fletz]

Im with you on this one. I fear a CK III syndrome, that the game will be very easy and i can achieve a lot in 10-30 years. (Duke to emperor in one lifespan stuff.)

Please dont make it so!

Exactly! My concerns! But I am also hopefull that in Victoria 3 some things can get fixed by mods until the devs fix it.

 

[grommile]

Connected to that: please don't make it THAT easy

If you want your games that don't rely on the reliability and performance of your peripheral nervous system to be hard, then:

• Don't read guides.
• Don't watch videos.
• Don't read the game files.
• Don't ask the Internet for advice

 

[Fletz]

If you want your games that don't rely on the reliability and performance of your peripheral nervous system to be hard, then:

• Don't read guides.
• Don't watch videos.
• Don't read the game files.
• Don't ask the Internet for advice

didnt do any of these things and still CK3 was much too easy.