Automation of Gameplay

[STABBY5]

This isn't the first time I have been told "we don't want it to play itself". I'm going to go ahead and say that there is no point to this philosophy. You do not need to force the player to do anything(I have better things to do than micro exploration ships-sorry wiz). The player will decide how they want to have fun. There is not a bad kind of fun. If someone wants to ignore the economy and play it as a war game then let them. If someone is overwhelmed by this kind of game but still wants to play with their friends, then let them. Some people just like to watch and there is no need to gatekeep fun. Having a check mark that turns on the economy AI for the player should be in the game.

This being said, the only thing I personally want is a check mark on each building type that sets it to auto expand. If multiple in a state have a check mark then it should auto build the most valuable good(or something like this). This will let me just set up a state and not have to worry about it after.

 

[alanschu]

This isn't the first time I have been told "we don't want it to play itself". I'm going to go ahead and say that there is no point to this philosophy. You do not need to force the player to do anything(I have better things to do than micro exploration ships-sorry wiz). The player will decide how they want to have fun. There is not a bad kind of fun. If someone wants to ignore the economy and play it as a war game then let them. If someone is overwhelmed by this kind of game but still wants to play with their friends, then let them. Some people just like to watch and there is no need to gatekeep fun. Having a check mark that turns on the economy AI for the player should be in the game.

I think a valid thing to consider though is that a player shouldn't be forced into a particular economic system within the game in order to get a play style that they enjoy either. If a player doesn't want to overly engage in construction of factories in Victoria 2, then a communist revolution happening in their country will 100% sour the game experience for them.

In order to make sure that the system they implement does not get tedious, they'll need to design the system to make sure of that. And this is for the benefit of all economic systems.

 

[STABBY5]

I think a valid thing to consider though is that a player shouldn't be forced into a particular economic system within the game in order to get a play style that they enjoy either. If a player doesn't want to overly engage in construction of factories in Victoria 2, then a communist revolution happening in their country will 100% sour the game experience for them.

In order to make sure that the system they implement does not get tedious, they'll need to design the system to make sure of that. And this is for the benefit of all economic systems.

As far as I know, they all play the same. You build everything in all of them. Its just a matter of investment pool vs government spending. Victoria 3 will play like communist nations in Victoria 2. This is why I am asking for various degrees of automation. I will never give up control over my economy to the AI, I just understand that other people will want to no matter how many times they are told that that's not how they're supposed to play.

 

[alanschu]

As far as I know, they all play the same. You build everything in all of them. Its just a matter of investment pool vs government spending. Victoria 3 will play like communist nations in Victoria 2. This is why I am asking for various degrees of automation. I will never give up control over my economy to the AI, I just understand that other people will want to no matter how many times they are told that that's not how they're supposed to play.

I'm not seeing that given that the investment pool (evidently) has restrictions on what can be invested in. Depending on how this is ultimately implemented, it could still provide for some degree of player agency, but not nearly the same level of control as state factories. On top of this income from state factories I believe goes to the government budget which is definitely not the case with capitalist created factories.

If there are costs (currencies or money) for persuading the capitalists to build a particular type of industry it could end up playing a fair bit differently than a state run command economy.

 

[STABBY5]

I'm not seeing that given that the investment pool (evidently) has restrictions on what can be invested in. Depending on how this is ultimately implemented, it could still provide for some degree of player agency, but not nearly the same level of control as state factories. On top of this income from state factories I believe goes to the government budget which is definitely not the case with capitalist created factories.

If there are costs (currencies or money) for persuading the capitalists to build a particular type of industry it could end up playing a fair bit differently than a state run command economy.

I don't think you understand. There is no other agent other than the player. You either build it with government money or capitalist money. If you can't build roads with capitalist money, then you will have to build them with government money. There's not any sort of capitalist ai to build things, its just you controlling their money. Everything plays like a planned economy. So an automation system would not need to change based on your government type as it just pulls from a different money pile.

 

[BrytonJSwan]

Iachek mentioned in a response to the dev diary that is it not the case that the player has total control of the country's economy regardless of economic policies and that economic policies enable and prohibit certain actions the player can take and make it easier or harder to engage in certain playstyles.

I've seen a lot of people complaining about the fact that even in a laissez-faire economy we'll have control of how private industry is developed in your country which, y'know, your prerogative, go for it. However, there's also been a lot pretending like we know exactly how systems like the investment pool down to the finest detail when really, if you read the dev diary and the dev responses, it seems pretty clear that the devs themselves have not yet nailed down exactly how that's going to work. I get that we all want to get our feelings out there but saying stuff like

I don't think you understand. There is no other agent other than the player.

acting like it's a done deal when the dev diary fully states that there may be autonomous building construction and that it may depend on some input from the investor class, I don't get it. We don't really know anything about a lot of the economy systems people are discussing, we just have tiny little scraps to go off of. Anyway, I don't really have a point here but. Yeah! (No personal shade meant by this comment, It's just a good example of something I've noticed.)

 

[alexti]

I don't think you understand. There is no other agent other than the player.

It might have seemed so from the early reveals, but devs recently commented and clarified that it's not necessarily the case and they are aware of the problems it would create. It seems the system is not finalized yet, so we'll have to wait until investment pool DD to learn more.

 

[STABBY5]

It might have seemed so from the early reveals, but devs recently commented and clarified that it's not necessarily the case and they are aware of the problems it would create. It seems the system is not finalized yet, so we'll have to wait until investment pool DD to learn more.

I did enjoy the capitalists and hope they are more independent. Can you direct me to these comments?

 

[alexti]

The most recent one is here - https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ary-3-buildings.1478868/page-19#post-27609513, but there were couple of shorter responses in other (non-DD) threads that I can't easily find unfortunately. One of those was saying that they'll go over investment pools in more details in a future DD.