• 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
Not open for further replies.

unmerged(75409)

Field Marshal
Apr 30, 2007
7.727
101
So this is my take... I loved Victoria, played it for months, led Greece, Prussia, the USA and Austria to glory. Formed a Habsburg led Germany. Crushed Canada and created a US empire from pole to shining pole. Had tons of fun. Even if half the time I was wondering, how is this feature supposed to work? Why can no one build factories?

Having played Victoria a lot, and having followed the EU3 and HOI3 boards for a long time, I am by now convinced that Paradox is just aiming too high with its games. They try to make each one more complex than the predecessor, and just give us more, more, more of everything. But that does not always make it better. Just look at the mess that HoI3 has become in its 1.1 version. Way too many features that they could not finish on time for the release.

And may I remind you of how long it took until the economy in Victoria worked? It was over one year. The economics system -stalinist control over factories and populations- was only fixed with the release of Revolutions. I live complex games like most people here, but I don't want a game where half the features are broken. (POPs not having any cash, emigration spam far in excess of what would be realistic, half the countries in the "world simulation" failing totally, Poland depopulated by 1855 and so on and so on)

Needless to say if the feature list that Johan posted is accurate I will not buy this game until patch 1.05 is released. Upper and lower house? 50 trade goods?? Jeez, and above all you are not going to get rid of the POPs? The POPs were the single biggest nightmare in micromanagement and buggy features.

Sorry but this is just a recipe for disaster. I for one could live with a feature list half as long. Put the axe to the economic system and the POP system. Just do away with POP management altogether, and make the economy something that does not throw the whole game out of whack if it does not work right. (preventing industrialization, military buildups, draining all my national income, causing massive population migration and so on)

I would be happy just with a game that retains the elections, the war gaming, the infrastructure part, the colonization and most importantly the diplomacy. A 19th century game that has war, diplomacy and politics game does not need a gazillion things tacked on to it to be worth buying.
 
I would argue Victoria does need a lot of things. One of the stronger points of Vicky 1 was the fact you could still have fun with the game even without engaging in wars, as you had a lot of internal management.

Streamlining yes, simplification, please no! :mad:
 
For the love of the deities, the title is only just announced and all we have are a few general ideas being talked about and already people expect the game to be too complex/not complex enough.

Let us wait and see what the development diaries, if any, tell us about the title first before jumping off a cliff ranting and raving about the how the game will be too complex/not complex enough.

Thread closed. If people want to discuss their expectations of what a Vicky 2 might entail, use this thread
 
Status
Not open for further replies.