IIRC Austria wasn't so exciting in Vic1 either. Most countries were uneventful for the first couple of game years. In my most exciting game, Greece to Greatness, the first ~10 years or so were just waiting for budget to reach 1000 so I could promote POPs...
Impressions from an Early beta-Preview
- Thread starter JaguarUSF
- 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.
PRODUCTION: It's okay.
BUDGET: Don't know about this. Since you just started the game, there might actually be nothing wrong with this?
TECHNOLOGY: Hm... What else would a leader of a country do with this anyway? It's fine, in my opinion.
POLITICS: Don't know about this. Though I would like to have some actions to do (propaganda for example) and
generally have more power in this area. Propaganda might have not been used in that period of time, but it was
just an example for an action.
POPULATION: Thank God it's automated. However, it would be nice to be able to force people into the army or
a factory during huge wars, but I really don't want to start splitting and converting POPs anymore.
TRADE: There's nothing to do when you don't use the features? But I agree, there might a bit too many resources
to handle (for some people).
DIPLOMACY: I would like some more options into this area. Like trading land, resources or technological knowledge.
Otherwise it's fine as it is.
MILITARY: It's fine as it is.
------------
EDIT: However, this doesn't mean I wouldn't enjoy the game (I hope I got the double negative thing right
).
EU3 was the same. First it felt like there's nothing to do, but I enjoyed it anyway after learning what everything does.
EDIT2: Haven't played the game and can't remember everything that was said to be in it, so don't take these too
seriously.
BUDGET: Don't know about this. Since you just started the game, there might actually be nothing wrong with this?
TECHNOLOGY: Hm... What else would a leader of a country do with this anyway? It's fine, in my opinion.
POLITICS: Don't know about this. Though I would like to have some actions to do (propaganda for example) and
generally have more power in this area. Propaganda might have not been used in that period of time, but it was
just an example for an action.
POPULATION: Thank God it's automated. However, it would be nice to be able to force people into the army or
a factory during huge wars, but I really don't want to start splitting and converting POPs anymore.
TRADE: There's nothing to do when you don't use the features? But I agree, there might a bit too many resources
to handle (for some people).
DIPLOMACY: I would like some more options into this area. Like trading land, resources or technological knowledge.
Otherwise it's fine as it is.
MILITARY: It's fine as it is.
------------
EDIT: However, this doesn't mean I wouldn't enjoy the game (I hope I got the double negative thing right
).EU3 was the same. First it felt like there's nothing to do, but I enjoyed it anyway after learning what everything does.
EDIT2: Haven't played the game and can't remember everything that was said to be in it, so don't take these too
seriously.
Last edited:
Take that back! Austria is ueber exciting. The game is actually about Austria and the only reason why people think different is that it is ill-named after some north German chick from England instead after Empress Elisabeth.
Frankly, that sums up most Paradox games. You either get (and relish) their brand of "Grand Strategy" or you go play Total War/Civ/whatever.
Here is your problem, you say this "POLITICS: nope, no reforms to do. Political party seems OK to me." and then say this "PRODUCTION: nope, all of the factories are started automatically by capitalists". if you want to build your own factories then your ruling party is most definately OK. Get rid of those weak willed Conservatives of Metternich's Faction and get the reactionary Neo-absolutists in. Then start building your factories.
IIRC Alot of these things can actually be changed by using your national focus points. But its a choice about what you want to change there.
If someone wishes to review Vic2, they should at least bother to play the game for the first 50 years of the time-frame, that's a bare minimum. Personally, I'd advise playing a GC or three with different countries, but I get reviewers don't have enough time for that.
This isn't a straight-to-the-action high-paced RTS like Company of Heroes. I love CoH, but the beauty of that game lies in a completely different corner than Vic2. Vic2 is a long-term game, with long-term goals on a global scale. The reviewer here claims you have nothing to do at first. I beg to differ. Your actions in the first ten minutes of the game, can still have consequences hours later. This is because a lot is automated and you can't reverse decisions at a whim. You aren't the grand puppetmaster, but the clockmaker, adjusting the wheels.
This isn't a straight-to-the-action high-paced RTS like Company of Heroes. I love CoH, but the beauty of that game lies in a completely different corner than Vic2. Vic2 is a long-term game, with long-term goals on a global scale. The reviewer here claims you have nothing to do at first. I beg to differ. Your actions in the first ten minutes of the game, can still have consequences hours later. This is because a lot is automated and you can't reverse decisions at a whim. You aren't the grand puppetmaster, but the clockmaker, adjusting the wheels.
Enough of that, first off I know this review site and your man there is a serious reviewer. Secondly this is not a full review but only some early impressions.
I'm surprised. Like movies critics, video game critics usually don't publish critical comments on the game before the release date.
For the second time, stop this. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Not every game we make appeals to everyone, if at the end of the day a reviewer gives his/her honest opinion that they did not like this game, what can you do?
JaguarUSF comments said:
Wait, there are no missions? Well, I don't remember having seen them mentioned in any DD, but...
From the Vic2 homepage among other places. I remember being surprised by this when I read it, but it seems it's not true? Or does it refer to a different feature I'm missing?Victoria 2 feature list said:
I am currently asking people why it is still in the feature list when it was cut very early in development process.
Good point Jaguar. Did you play Victoria 1: Revolutions? It suffered from pretty much the same problem, though it is still one of my favorite games. I wonder if you would have the same problem with that game?
EU3 usually lacked things for you to do as well after you had hired advisors, unless you went to war the first thing you did. Yet that game was great.
I'm not worried.
I'm not worried.
True. However, how much of a good idea is that, especially if your country is all conservative (as most are at the beginning of the game)? Basically, you'd have to wait for a revolution or change in political alignment to do so, yes? I could be wrong, as you know better than I.
**WARNING** BASED ON LATE BETA, SO MAY NOT BE STILL THE CASE
However, my bigger concern about production is the quality of the automated factories the capitalists build. Example time: in my game playing powerhouse Sardinia-Piedmont, I was allowed to construct one factory while the capitalists built four (Interventionism economic policy by the ruling conservative party). Here are the current daily incomes of the factories: +3.34, -9.07, -0.33, +0.70, 0.00. Guess which one I built. The factories from the capitalists don't take advantage of the goods produced in you country, so you have to import all of the goods for them. Now, this may be fixed in the release version, so I shall wait for the gold version of the game for further review. I think beginning players will have a tough initial go of it with not much to do if they don't pick an "active" country (the USA with all the Civil War events, or one with lots of rebels like Spain) from the start. Giving players the freedom to choose any country in the world comes with the requirement that some (at least the top 16) must be interesting to play.
This will be the last post by me until I can play the RTM/gold version of the game, so not to fuel the fire of speculation further.
Austria can pick their ruling party from day1, so pop a state capitalist party in power and get building your economy if you want to
8 out of 8 is my favorite review site, the reviewer takes the job very seriously and isn't afraid to call a bad game bad, even if said game is popular, and therefore this impression worries me.
Who are you and what have you done to the King who loves to silence people for voicing their opinion?
In my experience, the clickfest of promoting POPs has been eliminated, but there is plenty to do in its place. I find myself keeping a close eye on POPs' issues, their needs, foreign relations, influence, national focus etc. you don't need to check every stat every day by a long shot, but the tedious POP management being removed has not in any way left you with little or nothing to do.
Of course, this is just my opinion, however I'd be surprised if it isn't widely shared.