-
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.
He he, not that you would have anything to do with that capitalist icon my dear Comrade Sytass 
Originally posted by Dan Cook
Hey Sytass,
some of your pics are messed up.
they work fine for me
Just read your AAR Systass; it was great. In fact, knock Johan and Patric up for a 'raise' , because your AAR in fact, just tipped the scales in my debate, and thus I just preordered Vicky.
, because your AAR in fact, just tipped the scales in my debate, and thus I just preordered Vicky.
All those revolts in Russia look bad . . .
This is becoming a theme in my investigation of the game, but my goodness!
Those revolts in Russia are ominous. It seems revolts are as big a part of this game as in EU2. I just can't believe it.
Do they occur like that just during regular play? In the western powers?
This is a serious concern.
This is becoming a theme in my investigation of the game, but my goodness!
Those revolts in Russia are ominous. It seems revolts are as big a part of this game as in EU2. I just can't believe it.
Do they occur like that just during regular play? In the western powers?
This is a serious concern.
Well, people in Russia *really* revolted in 1917 , so this revolts (as well as "Belgian freedom fighters") seems quite accuratly for me.
, so this revolts (as well as "Belgian freedom fighters") seems quite accuratly for me.
Yes, these revolts historically in the middle of a great war that you are losing are ok. But I don't know that I trust the game system to model those revolts, without modeling lots of other revolts that aren't so historical. Its like the scattershot effect. If you have lots and lots of revolts in every country, then eventually one is going to look historically accurate.
But we'll see. Things look bad for the revolts engine. They seem too prevalent in a Victorian era game. It looks like too much EU seeped into it, but I could be wrong. Its just showing up in a lot of AAR's.
But we'll see. Things look bad for the revolts engine. They seem too prevalent in a Victorian era game. It looks like too much EU seeped into it, but I could be wrong. Its just showing up in a lot of AAR's.
Fair comment - but there were quite a few armed revolts in the period. A selection. Now some were bigger than others (and I haven't included the CSA ) but the point I'm trying to make is that armed revolution was probably more common than is believed.
Germany 1919
Russia 1917 (twice)
Ireland 1916
Arabia 1916
Turkey 1908
Russia 1905
China (Boxer) 1900
Sicily 1894
Egypt 1881
Bosnia (vs Turks and Austrians) 1881
Transvaal 1880
Bulgaria 1876
France (Commune) 1871
Spain 1868
Crete 1866
Sicily 1866
Romania 1866
Poland 1863
India 1857
Milan 1853
Dresden 1849
Rome 1849
Austria 1848
Milan 1848
Paris 1848
Sicily 1848
Poland 1846
France 1840
) but the point I'm trying to make is that armed revolution was probably more common than is believed.Germany 1919
Russia 1917 (twice)
Ireland 1916
Arabia 1916
Turkey 1908
Russia 1905
China (Boxer) 1900
Sicily 1894
Egypt 1881
Bosnia (vs Turks and Austrians) 1881
Transvaal 1880
Bulgaria 1876
France (Commune) 1871
Spain 1868
Crete 1866
Sicily 1866
Romania 1866
Poland 1863
India 1857
Milan 1853
Dresden 1849
Rome 1849
Austria 1848
Milan 1848
Paris 1848
Sicily 1848
Poland 1846
France 1840
Derek Pullem coming to the defense of a Paradox product or decision! I'm stunned!
Frankly, there are more revolts in one year of EU than in your entire list. If Victoria has even 1/10th the revolts of EU, something's wrong.
But we'll see. I think revolts are modelled wrong and maybe people will get annoyed. Most likely, revolts are modeled wrong and posters won't be annoyed at all, but lots of people will leave the game behind. That's how it usually works.
Edit: Plus a good portion of your "revolts" are actually related to the epic event of the 1848 revolution, not the random effect of stability or taxes or whatever models small scale revolts in Victoria.
Frankly, there are more revolts in one year of EU than in your entire list. If Victoria has even 1/10th the revolts of EU, something's wrong.
But we'll see. I think revolts are modelled wrong and maybe people will get annoyed. Most likely, revolts are modeled wrong and posters won't be annoyed at all, but lots of people will leave the game behind. That's how it usually works.
Edit: Plus a good portion of your "revolts" are actually related to the epic event of the 1848 revolution, not the random effect of stability or taxes or whatever models small scale revolts in Victoria.
a shame this game starts so late because we miss all those revolts in Spains empire, and greece, and belgium
Well - I could wonder at "lots" but yes I take your point. Revolts (as evidenced by popular unrest) were very common in the Victorian period. Are the red and black flag rebels in the game always representative of popular movements rather than miltary activity. Perhaps not. But would the player take any notice if the game submitted a petition a la the Chartist movement in UK. I think not
After all, it is a game in the end and not a socio-political simulation. Some excitement and creative tension is required
The "game" poses as a historical simulation of the period, but that's a debate for another time. Whether or whether not players will enjoy pushing small military units around to crush revolts or not is not really the most important issue. The AI in EU2 could never deal with them, leading to a breakup of larger AI run states. Which meant you had the net effect of the game's engine promoting the disintegration of nation-states rather than their creation.
If this happens in Victoria, I can't imagine more than the most diehard Paradox or ahistorical lovers will have much fun. Who wants to see the Russian Empire collapse in upon itself spawning small states left and right (ala EU or the early 90's) or the Austrians collapsing in the 19th rather than the 20th centuries.
But who knows, maybe Paradox has solved the elusive problem of the AI caring about revolts. I somehow doubt it, so I wish they would be small scale. The AAR's suggest otherwise, however.
I don't think the argument that revolts should simulate non-violent unrest is very valid, since I thought the game's whole engine was designed to simulate disfavor through elections, consciousness, militancy, etc. Using random revolts to simulate domestic instability smacks of using random events to simulate stability loss. Oh wait . . .
If this happens in Victoria, I can't imagine more than the most diehard Paradox or ahistorical lovers will have much fun. Who wants to see the Russian Empire collapse in upon itself spawning small states left and right (ala EU or the early 90's) or the Austrians collapsing in the 19th rather than the 20th centuries.
But who knows, maybe Paradox has solved the elusive problem of the AI caring about revolts. I somehow doubt it, so I wish they would be small scale. The AAR's suggest otherwise, however.
I don't think the argument that revolts should simulate non-violent unrest is very valid, since I thought the game's whole engine was designed to simulate disfavor through elections, consciousness, militancy, etc. Using random revolts to simulate domestic instability smacks of using random events to simulate stability loss. Oh wait . . .
I wonder if you only appear at the launch of each Paradox game Mr Scott to say how bad the game will be J = Jonah? (joke!)
As I said - fair comments all and if you wish you can see the end results in a week.
But addressing a couple of your points. It was emminently possible for Russia to have collapsed anytime after 1905. Possibly earlier.
Austria could have splintered in 1848.
And the Ottomans must splinter in the game timeframe in most cases.
These are counterfactuals which have to be available as apart of the game.
Ultimately the game does not let you be assassinated or voted out of office so there is no measure of non-violent resistance against your policies. It was thought that "game over, Archduke, you have been shot by an agent of a Serbian backed independence movement" was perhaps somewhat anti-climatic just as WW1 was about to kick off.
Anyway - game will be out soon.
J = Jonah? (joke!)As I said - fair comments all and if you wish you can see the end results in a week.
But addressing a couple of your points. It was emminently possible for Russia to have collapsed anytime after 1905. Possibly earlier.
Austria could have splintered in 1848.
And the Ottomans must splinter in the game timeframe in most cases.
These are counterfactuals which have to be available as apart of the game.
Ultimately the game does not let you be assassinated or voted out of office so there is no measure of non-violent resistance against your policies. It was thought that "game over, Archduke, you have been shot by an agent of a Serbian backed independence movement" was perhaps somewhat anti-climatic just as WW1 was about to kick off.
Anyway - game will be out soon.