I am staring to get into paradox games and i was wondering if i should get victoria 2. i have CK2 and EU4 and i love those two games? since i can't post on victoria 2 sub-forum i am posting this here
-
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.
Yes.
CKII is about dynasties, EUIV is about empires and VII is about industries, keep that in mind. It is more complex than the other two, but if you enjoyed them you will probably also enjoy V2.
CKII is about dynasties, EUIV is about empires and VII is about industries, keep that in mind. It is more complex than the other two, but if you enjoyed them you will probably also enjoy V2.
You like it?
I'm still torn about getting it. I have it sitting in my cart on Steam, but I havent pulled the trigger yet. I love CK2 but dont like EU4 all that much, & I'm guessing Vicky II is more like EU4 than it is like CK2. I'm thinking its gonna be kind of boring. I also dont really care much for the period of history it deals with. I'm a lot bigger medieval history buff....
I'll weigh in here a bit because Vicky II is my favorite PDS game. Originally, I put off buying it for the same reason RX2000 mentions.... I was interested mostly in medieval history and the early colonization era to a lesser extent, but I didn't feel there was anything to interest me in a more "modern" game. Today, I am a total World War I fanatic. Because of Vicky II.
I would not say it is more like EU4 than CK2. It's not really like either of them. It's something different.
There are a couple things that stand out in the Vicky experience.
1) Instead of vassals you have POPs (population) which need to be kept happy. The POPs have specific needs and actually consume goods from the global economy. They have basic necessities like food and clothing, but if those are available in sufficient quantities they will start desiring more interesting things like liquor. Or cars. If these things aren't available or they can't afford to buy them (because taxes or whatever) then they'll become unhappy. POPS have political affiliations. They want things. Like the right to vote. If enough of them want it they will rebel. Major rebellions have real causes and real goals and only happen if a large percent of the population desires a change your government refuses to make.
2) The goods produced in each province are absolutely critical. You will spend a lot of time thinking about the economy. What goods your country produces. What you import and export and in what amounts. You will plan wars around acquiring specific provinces for their raw materials. The majority of wars that I fight in Vicky are for resources, rather than mindless blobbing at my own borders.
3) Wars are IMPORTANT. Losing a big war hurts. It's a major setback that can derail a great power for decades. Potentially even knock them out of the game. Especially once you get up to Great Wars. I am so sick of fighting France in EU4, killing them down to zero manpower, occupying their entire nation, and having them bounce back completely by the time the truce is up. Not so in Vicky. When I wreck France in Vicky, it decimates their entire infrastructure and sends their country spiraling into chaos and anarchy that often ends in a fascist takeover. Even if they survive it takes them awhile to rebuild their industry and start putting a reasonable army back together, during which time they're no threat to me or anyone else. Of course, that means losing a war can be super bad for the player too.
Anyway, those are three ways that Vicky is very different (and far superior IMO) to EU4.
Which isn't to say that I don't like EU4. I do. I have consistently supported it on these forums since day 1 and I think it's a good game. I even like how streamlined it is. But compared to Vicky II it's a shallow experience. They are trying to do different things.
I would not say it is more like EU4 than CK2. It's not really like either of them. It's something different.
There are a couple things that stand out in the Vicky experience.
1) Instead of vassals you have POPs (population) which need to be kept happy. The POPs have specific needs and actually consume goods from the global economy. They have basic necessities like food and clothing, but if those are available in sufficient quantities they will start desiring more interesting things like liquor. Or cars. If these things aren't available or they can't afford to buy them (because taxes or whatever) then they'll become unhappy. POPS have political affiliations. They want things. Like the right to vote. If enough of them want it they will rebel. Major rebellions have real causes and real goals and only happen if a large percent of the population desires a change your government refuses to make.
2) The goods produced in each province are absolutely critical. You will spend a lot of time thinking about the economy. What goods your country produces. What you import and export and in what amounts. You will plan wars around acquiring specific provinces for their raw materials. The majority of wars that I fight in Vicky are for resources, rather than mindless blobbing at my own borders.
3) Wars are IMPORTANT. Losing a big war hurts. It's a major setback that can derail a great power for decades. Potentially even knock them out of the game. Especially once you get up to Great Wars. I am so sick of fighting France in EU4, killing them down to zero manpower, occupying their entire nation, and having them bounce back completely by the time the truce is up. Not so in Vicky. When I wreck France in Vicky, it decimates their entire infrastructure and sends their country spiraling into chaos and anarchy that often ends in a fascist takeover. Even if they survive it takes them awhile to rebuild their industry and start putting a reasonable army back together, during which time they're no threat to me or anyone else. Of course, that means losing a war can be super bad for the player too.
Anyway, those are three ways that Vicky is very different (and far superior IMO) to EU4.
Which isn't to say that I don't like EU4. I do. I have consistently supported it on these forums since day 1 and I think it's a good game. I even like how streamlined it is. But compared to Vicky II it's a shallow experience. They are trying to do different things.
Last edited:
Thanks blaidd, thats what I was looking for. Some experienced Vicky II player to tell my why its awesome. It sounds great.
Too bad I was thinking the Steam sale went til the end of 12-3. Turns out it ended at noon on 12-3, so by the time I got home yesterday afternoon the sale was over.
Oh well, I'm sure it'll go on sale again at Christmas. Maybe it'll be 75% off then instead of 50%. I'll pick it up then for sure. It sounds like I probably would like it, once I figure it out.
Too bad I was thinking the Steam sale went til the end of 12-3. Turns out it ended at noon on 12-3, so by the time I got home yesterday afternoon the sale was over.
Oh well, I'm sure it'll go on sale again at Christmas. Maybe it'll be 75% off then instead of 50%. I'll pick it up then for sure. It sounds like I probably would like it, once I figure it out.
I really enjoy it because of the depth. Sure the UI could use a lot of work and the game does bombard the player with tons of minor details. It's going to be tough going for your first few hours even as a Paradox veteran. You might want to check out some videos or tutorial AARs before you dive in. But since I'm not an aggressive blobber, I find the game very rewarding in that it gives me a lot to do and think about when I'm not at war, and it gives me reasons to want to go to war besides boredom. There are several strategic reasons to conquer lands (resources, colonization range, building canals). Also if you're playing for high score, you will need to defeat the major powers (Britain, France, Germany) to "win", but it really isn't necessary to expand aggressively. It's entirely possible to defeat them and wreck their scores enough to get on top without actually taking a ton of land for yourself.
I suggest going against conventional wisdom and playing a relatively large country in Europe for your first game. With the economy and stuff running a small country in the middle of nowhere is more painful and not great for learning the ropes. I tried to start with Colombia and got pretty frustrated with the game. Sort of like playing EU for the first time as the Aztecs. I actually recommend Prussia as a first game. You have a reasonably sized country with decent economic base that can support a decent army and lots of interesting goals to work towards (forming Germany). Once you accomplish that you'll have a fairly good grasp of the mechanics and you'll be a major force in Europe during the later half of the game so you can really experience Great Wars. IMO, it's the best way to really get a feel for the game.
Then you too can move on to do things like this:
But Europe is really the most interesting and fun place to be.
You'll want to get the expansions as well. Especially if you can get the whole package for 75% off. It uses a traditional expansion/patching model so the base game is pretty far behind the times.
Awesome. I was gonna start out as Brazil since I've heard thats good, but I honestly dont like starting out in traditional "newbie" lands in Paradox games. I've never done an Ireland game in CK2 for example. If I do pick up Vicky I'll probably try Prussia out first as you suggest.
Oh definitely. I'm sort of anal when I buy games, so I'll have to get it with EVERY available DLC (all the sprite packs & everything) or I wont play it.
i haven't not played it yet because this keeps on happening.
File exception:
Exception in: virtualfilesystem.cpp, line: 662. Description: The system cannot find the file specified
File exception:
Exception in: virtualfilesystem.cpp, line: 662. Description: The system cannot find the file specified
If you are having technical issues you should post it on the Victoria 2 Tech support forum, you'll be much more likely to get helpful answers there.
You'll have much more fun with Prussia than Brazil because as Prussia you'll get quickly entrenched in all of the various system VickyII has to offer. That's a good and a bad thing, of course! You'll have to get used to Sphere management quickly if you want to succeed.
Brazil isn't really a "noob" start... Your economy is poor, you get no coal which makes industrialising hard, and the literacy rate isn't all that good. It's just a "safe" location where you don't have to worry about being attacked by a stronger power in the first few years, so you can focus on building your nation into a competitor.
Either way, VickyII is fantastic, especially with the expansions.
Yes you should, and later you should spend lots of ours learning how to play it, because it's the more complex game of the three. Keep in mind that CKII is a dinasty simulator, EUIV is a nation simulator and VICII is at the core a Social Simulator, with politics, classes and industry.
All the 3 being Grand Strategy Games, the most difficult is probably the first you play, but if you try to learn all at the same time I think that VickyII is a more complex games, where you got to take care of: Research, Politics, Social Classes, Economy and inside economy, industry.
On CKII once you understood the basics of the Feudal system, who is vassal of who, etc. you basically got what you need to get your game going. EUIV is even simpler... I'm not sure where to put HOI on the difficult scale thou...
Last edited:
It depends. It´s very easy to get into CKII. If you want to become good (or good enough ), CKII will take longer then VicII. On the other hand VicII is way harder to actually master then CKII.
I love CK2. I bought Vic2, but found it very difficult to get into. I found the POP system especially difficult to understand. I was thinking about getting the DLCs and having another try, but I am hesitating now lest Vic3 be announced soon. Is Vic3 a likely announcement?