-
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.
There is one thing I would like to see blockades do, and it wouldn't drain the CPU very much.
If your army cannot trace a land connection to a owned, controlled province of your country or an ally, it should be unable to regain lost manpower if it does not have an unblockaded port that connects it with the home country of an ally.
Put another way, a German Army that lands in Wessex should not be allowed to regain lost manpower if the Royal Navy blockades either the occupied coast of England or all of Germany and her allies. This would prevent a tactic even I have used where I tie up the Royal Navy with U-boats and DNs just long enough to land 200 divisions in England. Once the army lands, it doesn't matter that the Royal Navy sinks every single German ship and cuts the German Army's access to home. Occupying a single province enables all 200 divisions to replace manpower, despite the fact that no reinforcements can possibly come from home.
It would also prevent armies that are encircled, but who occupy their one province, from replacing manpower. This is less of a problem, thanks to both human and AI taking advantage of isolated units.
If your army cannot trace a land connection to a owned, controlled province of your country or an ally, it should be unable to regain lost manpower if it does not have an unblockaded port that connects it with the home country of an ally.
Put another way, a German Army that lands in Wessex should not be allowed to regain lost manpower if the Royal Navy blockades either the occupied coast of England or all of Germany and her allies. This would prevent a tactic even I have used where I tie up the Royal Navy with U-boats and DNs just long enough to land 200 divisions in England. Once the army lands, it doesn't matter that the Royal Navy sinks every single German ship and cuts the German Army's access to home. Occupying a single province enables all 200 divisions to replace manpower, despite the fact that no reinforcements can possibly come from home.
It would also prevent armies that are encircled, but who occupy their one province, from replacing manpower. This is less of a problem, thanks to both human and AI taking advantage of isolated units.
I know its out of the timeframe of the game, but given that this statement is so generalized, I'd come up with the war effort of Nazi Germany after 1944 (labour reform) or the soviet union during the great patriotic war.OHgamer said:
Both of them produced war materials at quite high efficiency rate (at least at the later stages of the war) and at a high absolute value, still in both countries people were not too happy and did not care much about their wealth in those hard times.
jadam said:
And how much in resources were both regimes having to spend to maintain domestic control - something that isn't modded well in Victoria is the rise of the kind of overarching terror state based on fear of arrest against anyone who spoke out against the State that was key in ensuring that totalitarian regimes remained in power unquestioned. In part this is due to the earlier end date of Victoria in 1920, before the rise of totalitarianism, though I think this rise of the Terror State might be something that could be modded, I will need to do some testing to see.
Why were the Soviets and the Nazis able to produce so effectively, because of state compulsion that ensured a cowered population unwilling to resist State demands (yes there were appeals to patriotism/nationalism as well, but there was always the understanding that there was no way to say NO to the demands of the State regardless of the conditions of work. Compare to the US where there were several major strikes during the war, most of which were resolved in favor of labor's demands). In other words, high investment in crime fighting to fight "crimes against the state" based upon the ultimate threat to potential dissent - death as "enemies of the People".
Also in WW2, specially in Germany consumer goods stay at a high level for a very long time, Germany switch to war economy very lately. If we compare to Victoria model, I would say that Germany provided its POP's with 100% life good and at least 50% everyday good until 44 when it severely drops. This was not the case in UK where restriction on consumer goods has been put in place as soon as 40.
In the end the naval blocus during WWI on Germany has had much more effect than the one in WWII.
In the end the naval blocus during WWI on Germany has had much more effect than the one in WWII.
I'd say you neglect the huge effect of successful propaganda in those states (soviet union and nazi germany). If the entire population was driven by fear, it would not last until the very last drop of blood, until the very end when the allies have met in the center of germany. The population in both of those countries actually believed that they have a duty, they are working, fighting for a good (the best) ideology on earth.OHgamer said:
Therefore large percentage of the population did not oppose the state rule, thus it was not neccessary to suppress them (via crime fighting).
I conclude that blockading is worthless. The only one out there really worth blockading is the UK, and your probably not really going to be doing that very easily. 
I also don't understand what the point is of even having such a huge navy, because it's expensive as hell to maintain at full funding during a war, and since you're so powerful, nobody ever wants to come out and fight you.
It's kinda stupid. There I am as the UK, I rule the waves completely. But Prussia/Germany, and everybody else just says, "Ha! I don't care, man! It's not like I have any colonies anyway! I'm just going to conduct all my business here on the continent... try and stop me, with your small national population!"
The Royal Navy is just the proverbial, "all dressed up, and nowhere to go". Other than costing me a fortune that is.
I also don't understand what the point is of even having such a huge navy, because it's expensive as hell to maintain at full funding during a war, and since you're so powerful, nobody ever wants to come out and fight you.
It's kinda stupid. There I am as the UK, I rule the waves completely. But Prussia/Germany, and everybody else just says, "Ha! I don't care, man! It's not like I have any colonies anyway! I'm just going to conduct all my business here on the continent... try and stop me, with your small national population!"
The Royal Navy is just the proverbial, "all dressed up, and nowhere to go". Other than costing me a fortune that is.
Jagdmaus said:
Prestige, control of the seas in case war starts, shorebombardment and deterrent (by pumping up the military score).
Also, RP and historical accuracy should be reasons enough for building navy. What is UK without a proper fleet?
Yes, the shore bombardment value can be massive by the end of the game. If you stick to the coast, you can be pretty much unstoppable. But yeah, unfortunately I largely build fleets for the fun of it more than anything else.
Just finished reading through this huge thread. Indeed, naval blocade and economy wars are quite difficult to render. While most of the european nations had a self-sufficient war economy, increased industrial power lead to more needs, so that around 1900, everyone was to import huge stocks of raw goods, mainly from the colonies. In Ricky, the blocade system reflects the beginning of this evolution, and not the end. I think best way to render economical wars is WW. If one point of the map bursts out, everyone around becomes involved, because of the economical networks; so that quickly everyone is fighting on either side.
I just think they should implement the HoI1/HoI2 supply and convoy system.
A) The good(s) are produced in a colonial province.
B) The goods of several contiguous provinces amass at a resource depot - ready to be picked up by convoy.
C) You manage the convoy, and can actually SEE the path of the convoy - on the map.
D) The enemy stations his ships/subs in certain key sea lanes, and starts taking a toll on your shipping. You lose the resources (and ships) every time a convoy is attacked.
E) You can assign escorts to the convoys to better protect them, and then use your actual ship units to go out and hunt the commerce raiders.
See, that's how it should work. Anybody who's played HoI (1 or 2) knows it's system is far superior. In Vicky, you send some ships to the far side of the world and just give (each and every) enemy colonial port a 'bad look' and hope they sail/steam less.
A) The good(s) are produced in a colonial province.
B) The goods of several contiguous provinces amass at a resource depot - ready to be picked up by convoy.
C) You manage the convoy, and can actually SEE the path of the convoy - on the map.
D) The enemy stations his ships/subs in certain key sea lanes, and starts taking a toll on your shipping. You lose the resources (and ships) every time a convoy is attacked.
E) You can assign escorts to the convoys to better protect them, and then use your actual ship units to go out and hunt the commerce raiders.
See, that's how it should work. Anybody who's played HoI (1 or 2) knows it's system is far superior. In Vicky, you send some ships to the far side of the world and just give (each and every) enemy colonial port a 'bad look' and hope they sail/steam less.
Haven´t posted in a while but I´m back to Victoria after some time...here is my take on this
I think there are two aspects, one military and the other diplomatic, a "cease trade with..." option may be implemented (probably not in this game but, hopefully, in Vic 2), even as part of a deal...the military aspect should probably work more like HOI2 where the merchant fleet is represented, even if in an abstract way...Also, the blockade of specific ports by actual units in the map could add to the fun...
The adventage of a multiple aproach is that not only your military might comes to play but also your diplomatic/economic capacity, so the build up for long wars against great powers may require not only the acumulation of military units and money but of some sort of "diplomatic reserve".
I agree war is not the main aspect of a game like Victoria, but then more the reason to make trade and lack of resources an important part of the war sub system. Few nations were/are able to field large modern armies for long periods.
I think there are two aspects, one military and the other diplomatic, a "cease trade with..." option may be implemented (probably not in this game but, hopefully, in Vic 2), even as part of a deal...the military aspect should probably work more like HOI2 where the merchant fleet is represented, even if in an abstract way...Also, the blockade of specific ports by actual units in the map could add to the fun...
The adventage of a multiple aproach is that not only your military might comes to play but also your diplomatic/economic capacity, so the build up for long wars against great powers may require not only the acumulation of military units and money but of some sort of "diplomatic reserve".
I agree war is not the main aspect of a game like Victoria, but then more the reason to make trade and lack of resources an important part of the war sub system. Few nations were/are able to field large modern armies for long periods.
Last edited:
The whole "world market" system strikes me as as gross oversimplification anyway. This is but one manifestation of its fundamental incorrectness.
shasla6 said:
To a degree. the 19th C was not an era of bilateral trade either, compared to what the Germans did in the 30s and during WWII.
There was a global market for goods that nations could then apply tariffs to help protect industries if so desired (and were used heavily by the USA, Germany and France to keep out British manufacutres at various points to help ensure local producers did not have to compete against better produced, lower cost imports) and this is something that is not modelled in Victoria.
But the 19th C economy was more along the lines of a global market than the system in HoI2 based on bilateral trade agreements - that was a development that arose from the impact of the Great Depression and Germany's desire to become self-sufficient. That line of thinking did not really exist in the 19th Century or even in the aftermath of WWI.
OT but I'm finally spending some time w/ HoI2 now, and my tactic for trade has been to just approach the AI every 7 days and get it to eventually take a deal where the 'chance' is 20-25% (sometimes even less). I've got all kinds of deals (all of which I proposed, and that heavily favor me) with various nations along these lines.
"Ohhh-ho-ho... you won't give me 40 rare materials for a small handful of supplies, comrade Stalin? Well, I'll just see you again in 1 week's time!"
"Sweden, you will give me 1.3 times more metal than I give you in coal. I'm not taking 'no' for an answer.... FINE! See you again in another week. You can't resist forever!"
I feel like I'm being a bit exploitative. Plus I'm spending way too much time trying to rip off the AI. It's actually become tedious just to play the game (my first game, in fact). So, on that note, the Vicky WM is pretty nice, IMO.
Maybe a combination of the 2 would be ideal.
"Ohhh-ho-ho... you won't give me 40 rare materials for a small handful of supplies, comrade Stalin? Well, I'll just see you again in 1 week's time!"
"Sweden, you will give me 1.3 times more metal than I give you in coal. I'm not taking 'no' for an answer.... FINE! See you again in another week. You can't resist forever!"
I feel like I'm being a bit exploitative. Plus I'm spending way too much time trying to rip off the AI. It's actually become tedious just to play the game (my first game, in fact). So, on that note, the Vicky WM is pretty nice, IMO.
Maybe a combination of the 2 would be ideal.