Horrible geography (representing the French-Italian border)
- Thread starter Galaahd
- Start date
-
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
They probably won't. The only time they seem to make geography changes is in expansions, like in EU3 where they added a bunch of balkan provinces.
Otherwise they seem to ignore it.
cant you model the map with mountains but not define the region as mountanous?
Now THAT would be confusing.
@King:
OK, I can understand that. For me it is still one more reason to make the map as acurate as possible from the very beginning, but I never made any games.
I must say that I do agree with Galaahd and other posters. We (the French) have almot never been invaded by the Alps. Hannibal was a longtime ago, but this was never really done in any paradox game to be fair to King ! think about Hoi2, EU I, II and III, Victoria I and Revolution and CK (BTW : I Don't care about a CK II but it's not the subject so please don't answer to that or just by MP to insult me 
). all of those games never gave me anyone a hard time to cross the alps...
So okay that should be fixed... But to be fair it's not the fault of Victoria II neither the fault of King
). all of those games never gave me anyone a hard time to cross the alps... So okay that should be fixed... But to be fair it's not the fault of Victoria II neither the fault of King
Part of the issue here is of course province size. Unlike in HoI3 where the sheer number of provinces makes it much easier to model differing geographies in a region, the much larger provinces of Victoria make it difficult to capture things like flat valley land right around Aosta or Grenoble (surrounded by mountains to be sure, but the cities themselves are not mountainous) or the division of Turin between mountainous regions west of the city and the flat plains of the Po Valley heading eastward towards Lombardy.
Just as an example, in Clio for Victoria (which is what the V2 map is based on) Aosta is a single province, but in the HoI3 Clio's Iron Heart, the same area is occupied by IIRC three provinces. Since Clausewitz IIRC can only assign one terrain to a province for purposes of determining things such as battle bonuses/maluses (and as King said, impact on RGO production in V2), you thus get stuck in a conundrum as what is the best terrain to represent an entire region at the scale of Victoria's provinces. In those cases, sometimes it is necessary to look at what is best for gameplay when making those decisions.
And of course those who disagree with Paradox' decision on how to model this region or any other region of the world can simply tweak the appropriate map files to better reflect how they see the geography should be. Unlike V1 and other older games, map modding in the Clausewitz engine is a much easier process that anyone with a basic knowledge of graphical editors (Paint, Photoshop etc) can do.
Just as an example, in Clio for Victoria (which is what the V2 map is based on) Aosta is a single province, but in the HoI3 Clio's Iron Heart, the same area is occupied by IIRC three provinces. Since Clausewitz IIRC can only assign one terrain to a province for purposes of determining things such as battle bonuses/maluses (and as King said, impact on RGO production in V2), you thus get stuck in a conundrum as what is the best terrain to represent an entire region at the scale of Victoria's provinces. In those cases, sometimes it is necessary to look at what is best for gameplay when making those decisions.
And of course those who disagree with Paradox' decision on how to model this region or any other region of the world can simply tweak the appropriate map files to better reflect how they see the geography should be. Unlike V1 and other older games, map modding in the Clausewitz engine is a much easier process that anyone with a basic knowledge of graphical editors (Paint, Photoshop etc) can do.
Last edited:
While, on the one hand, I agree that this is a tempest in a teapot, what King puts forward as the argument against is basically the same. There is no particular reason to do it one way or another - you can always just adjust the terrain somewhere else to make up for the critical shortfall in hypothetical wine production, or whatever, caused by this change. Given that most people won't mod the map, however, it seems reasonable to simply make it a mountain range, so it has its proper defensive significance.
i wonder how much map changes really matter to players... if you go by what the forum people say youd thing it was the most important thing ever. An easy workaround is to give that province more starting forts to represent the difficult terrain but still retain the rgo's.
Woudn't what's best for gameplay be accurate strategic representation?
No need to get finicky with details, but there ought to be the basic. Like alps at the french/italian border, mountainous Switzerland, pyrennes range to Spain, amongst others.
In vicky 1 and every previous paradox game I can think of, the alps have been present, no?
No need to get finicky with details, but there ought to be the basic. Like alps at the french/italian border, mountainous Switzerland, pyrennes range to Spain, amongst others.
In vicky 1 and every previous paradox game I can think of, the alps have been present, no?
Please don't mention HoI3 and geography in the same sentence...
This way Sardinia is going to become the second Czechoslovakia in the way that their best defensive asspect (difficult terrain along the borders) will disappear. And that is something that will influence the game, especially when it is supposed to be less historical. I'm not going on a fix-or-I-don't-buy rant, but I still see those errors as crucial for anyone who wants to play Czechoslovakia in HoI3 and Sardinia-Piedmont in Vicky2
Given that V2 also uses Clausewitz, surely the obvious solution is to add more provinces to the region?
I'm sure its very easy to mod this game but I think its safe to say that most people would prefer to see an error like this fixed before release
Eu3 have odds to get different terrain bonus/mauls in battles.
Something like:
50% hills
20% mountain
30% plains.
No idea if this is possible in v2 but on the other hand same engine as eu3.
Except that it is not an error, it is a delibrate design intent for balancing purposes.
Because Victoria 2's prime focus is economics and politics, not warfae. Thus what drives us for provinces is the economic and the political effect first and the militayr effect is secondary. It is all about what your priorities are.
Perhaps one way of working around the problem of losing RGO efficiency would be to divide the Grenoble province in two, leaving the more easterly newly created province to become mountainous, and keeping the 'original' westerly Grenoble province as forest terrain. That way there is no change to the material value of the Grenoble province, and the alpine Franco-Italian border can be better simulated.
In my opinion, the trick is to stop worrying about what my design ideas might be and try to get my head wrapped around the Paradox designers' design ideas. Otherwise I find that I'm unable to play their games well. It's been a truism for me since 2003, and it's worked well for me. These ol' boys do a good job of designing games that are deep, involved and yet fun to play, if you happen to be into deep, involved strategy games, at least. It took me a couple of months of serious work to get an understanding of Victoria 1. I don't expect anything different with v2, other than a much shortened learning period since I'm already somewhat learned in the Paradox system now.
There are times when I think you guys are all OCD. Provinces are large areas of land, and the designers are picking the more predominant terrain type that, as King points out, is more important to the economic, social and political areas of thought and design, with the military aspects taking a back seat to the game design.
Personally, that's what I'm wanting. There seems to be a handful of you still fighting hard for v2 to become a predominantly military wargame. Heaven forbid! That's HOI. Vicky is nothing like HOI and never should be. Just as she should never be another copy of EU or CK. The base engine might be the same, but the resultant games are all entirely different. That's the way it was with the older game engine, and that's the way it should be with the newer game engine.
Now, I'm not saying there is no room for improvement from the first iteration of the game, far from it. I'm looking for some of those things you guys are looking for as well. I want the battle engine to reflect the changes in technology that resulted in the huge defensive bonuses that created the WWI bloodbath. I want to see improved depiction of naval combat. I would like to see the technical advancement of early tanks help to break the trench war deadlock. These things are important to the game experience, but not nearly so much as the planning it takes to build up your chosen country from an agrarian society to a modern industrial powerhouse.
But y'all have fun stomping your feet and having your tantrums for your favorite little game pieces. It's like hearing the children at Wal-mart. Makes me glad my children are all grown.
There are times when I think you guys are all OCD. Provinces are large areas of land, and the designers are picking the more predominant terrain type that, as King points out, is more important to the economic, social and political areas of thought and design, with the military aspects taking a back seat to the game design.
Personally, that's what I'm wanting. There seems to be a handful of you still fighting hard for v2 to become a predominantly military wargame. Heaven forbid! That's HOI. Vicky is nothing like HOI and never should be. Just as she should never be another copy of EU or CK. The base engine might be the same, but the resultant games are all entirely different. That's the way it was with the older game engine, and that's the way it should be with the newer game engine.
Now, I'm not saying there is no room for improvement from the first iteration of the game, far from it. I'm looking for some of those things you guys are looking for as well. I want the battle engine to reflect the changes in technology that resulted in the huge defensive bonuses that created the WWI bloodbath. I want to see improved depiction of naval combat. I would like to see the technical advancement of early tanks help to break the trench war deadlock. These things are important to the game experience, but not nearly so much as the planning it takes to build up your chosen country from an agrarian society to a modern industrial powerhouse.
But y'all have fun stomping your feet and having your tantrums for your favorite little game pieces. It's like hearing the children at Wal-mart. Makes me glad my children are all grown.
- Status