Do you Agree with me? extending to 1900 and industrial revolution!!!

[Pbanned]

please think what will happen if time line extend to 1900?
new mechanics?
new unit tier?
expanding factories?
coronation of queen Victoria?
new colonizing in Africa? or colonizing casus belli against African nations?
such a DLC How much will sell?
and much more!
see this thread too:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...y-victoria-iii-never-came-to-reality.1057821/
thanks

 

[Aythne]

https://www.paradoxplaza.com/victoria-ii/VAVA02GSKvic2001.html

 

[Nyrael]

EU can never represent the post-Napoleonic periods, so big fat no.

 

[Pbanned]

EU can never represent the post-Napoleonic periods, so big fat no.

Why not?Some new Mechanics can solve this problem.

 

[TenshiN]

Please not. EU4's base mechanics don't fit that period, and making tons of new mechanics just to extend the game for 80 years that the majority of people won't play anyway (considering how much people drop the game somewhere in the 1600's) is... not productive.

 

[Nyrael]

Why not?Some new Mechanics can solve this problem.

Because, unless you want a game that is on quality level of an amateurish mod, you'd need to have so many new and overhauled mechanics, as well as turn off others, that you may as well just make a new game. The feature bloat would also be too high.

 

[holyvigil]

Paradox doesn't like to have their games overlap in time period. Viccy 2 goes through that entire time period. They could increase the date to 1836 which is the start of Viccy2 but they would never overlap the whole game.

 

[Umbaretz]

No. While early industrial revolution, railroads etc would be fun in EU, Victorian era proper should be left for V3.

 

[TheDungen]

I would rather see Vic3 start a bit earlier. Perhaps in 1814 right after the congress of Vienna, with an event early on for the return of napoleon and the 100 days. If it wasn't for that it would be hard to portray the napoleonic age I would have liked to push it further back, there's plenty of industrial revolution before that, with canals being the predecessor of railways and so on.

 

[ahyangyi]

Do you mean the first industrial revolution or the second? The first seems to be covered by the EU4 timeline well (or if not, an extension to 1836 would do):

The Industrial Revolution was the transition to new manufacturing processes in the period from about 1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840. This transition included going from hand production methods to machines, new chemical manufacturing and iron production processes, the increasing use of steam power, the development of machine tools and the rise of the factory system.

 

[Rashie]

A proper Victoria 3 is what should be done instead. EU4 struggles to properly represent the last century of the game as it is already.

 

[Pbanned]

Please not. EU4's base mechanics don't fit that period, and making tons of new mechanics just to extend the game for 80 years that the majority of people won't play anyway (considering how much people drop the game somewhere in the 1600's) is... not productive.

thanks.maybe you are right.but did you think ever why people mechanic in Vic 2 can not implement in EU4. see in the period of EU4 we have aristocrats,clergy,soldier,officer,slave and ... except capitalist,craftman.So with a mechanic based on people we can solve these problems.it can be a overhaul mechanic that amazed all of period.

Paradox doesn't like to have their games overlap in time period. Viccy 2 goes through that entire time period. They could increase the date to 1836 which is the start of Viccy2 but they would never overlap the whole game.

I think if this period extend to 1900 and HOI4 period start at 1900 we have no need to Vic3.So no overlap.

No. While early industrial revolution, railroads etc would be fun in EU, Victorian era proper should be left for V3.

is it not better to add some road mechanic to EU4?

Do you mean the first industrial revolution or the second? The first seems to be covered by the EU4 timeline well (or if not, an extension to 1836 would do):

maybe it's better that second industrial revolution comes after the first one

 

[Rebel1776]

Make Victoria 3, unless Wiz is on the Dev Team, or don't even try it.

 

[Pbanned]

Make Victoria 3, unless Wiz is on the Dev Team, or don't even try it.

maybe yes maybe no.

 

[tip001]

Its only viable to add 200 years in front, game starting at 1244. Current game mechanics could cover that if 3 or 4 new institutions are added
Edit: Think of institution making tech up 600 base around 1400. Before that you need 2000 per tech and start at 1, some nations like natives start at 0. Just brain storming

 

[Pbanned]

Its only viable to add 200 years in front, game starting at 1244. Current game mechanics could cover that if 3 or 4 new institutions are added

maybe they don't do such a thing because CKII cover it.Vic 3 didn't announce yet So we can discuss about it

 

[Rebel1776]

How on Earth do you intend on working in the surge of Classical Liberalism?

Trade goods dont even function in such a way to constitute a supply and demand that affects how Nations could have industrialized.

It requires a new game, because it demands a new Core to build those mechanics around.

There is no maybe, it's a simple, No.

 

[Nyrael]

thanks.maybe you are right.but did you think ever why people mechanic in Vic 2 can not implement in EU4. see in the period of EU4 we have aristocrats,clergy,soldier,officer,slave and ... except capitalist,craftman.So with a mechanic based on people we can solve these problems.it can be a overhaul mechanic that amazed all of period.

People and factions that mattered were completely different. Such a detailed POP system would be just a hindrance to EU4, where the Game of Thrones was played by different rules. Not to mention all the other mechanics.
In general, there is a reason why PDS has one game for each timeframe: in theory, it can all be one game. In practice, not really. you can't just add stuff and think it will all work alright. Feature Bloat ids a major problem in Game Design, and going too far with adding features and mechanics is known to destroy games, or at very least make a n extremely flawed game. It's always better to specialize

Its only viable to add 200 years in front, game starting at 1244. Current game mechanics could cover that if 3 or 4 new institutions are added
Edit: Think of institution making tech up 600 base around 1400. Before that you need 2000 per tech and start at 1, some nations like natives start at 0. Just brain storming

PDS added 1399 bookmark in EU3. They consider it to be one of their greatest mistakes.

 

[petertel123]

I think if this period extend to 1900 and HOI4 period start at 1900 we have no need to Vic3.So no overlap.

Are you trolling?

 

[Pbanned]

Are you trolling?

No never. I only offer some advise. only that