Let's make a wish list for vic3.

[schnizzle]

I disagree, I think they were on the right track with Vicky 2, the only issue as the direction they balanced it along.

Hey I'm glad you like what's there already. Good for you. I don't think what's there right now is enough. The current system is a heavy abstraction of what combat in a Victoria game could be to make it both more engaging and more realistic. Your suggestion is a move in the right direction. It has problems, because if a battle happens and you pile every unit in that province to win, the ai will either do so as well, or not and the way I see it both can be exploited by a player. Maybe have the combat width system changed to account for that. Right now only a limited amount of regiments is engaged and the rest is in reserve. Maybe make it so that no more than 50% of the number of soldiers in combat can also be in reserve. So if you have a max combad width of let's say 10 units that can be in battle simultaneously, only 5 more can be in the same tile. This would make both the players and ai keep the frontline intact instead of piling everything together thereby exposing gaps in the line. There should also be automated movement for stacks similar to hunt rebels. The decision of making a stack ai controlled and giving it a stance like vassal contribution in EU4 will solve a few problems. Delegating control over stacks to your ai subordinates sounds like a cool mechanic to me and saves you the arduous task of always having to reposition your stacks after every battle. Have a stance for carpet siege, defend frontline and spreading out around a battle to reinforce in the right moment, just like you have the stance autonomous rebel suppression in eu4.

Others have mentioned a more involved political system which I agree with, but I'd like the devs to consider including something like the spanish civil war content in HoI4, where you chose a side internal to a nation and have to act through decisions, and eventually, open warfare, in order to pursue your revolutionary or reactionary aims. Events like the Meiji Restoration, the 1857 Indian Rebellion, US Civil War, various Springtime of Nations revolutionary moments, and obv the Russian Revolution(s), may be able to be simulated in this way?

That's cool, too. I dislike how in the current game you play as the nation undivided in a time where internal political strife was such an important concept. Making sure your party wins an election would give players something new aspect to play around. Switching to an extremist ideology like communist or fascist etc should either be your game goal from the start or if not be a complete desaster worse than losing a war. Right now when this happens to me, I'm usually okay with it because I'm still my nation. Ck3 is the game where you play as a person, imperator a game where you play as a family, eu4 the game where you play as a state... Vicky3 could be the game in which you play as a specific governmentt or party. Vicky has the most potential to be the franchise where peace is actually better than map painting. Build on that concept. Make internal politics cool. Make winning an election or not being ousted by a coup / revolution, by playing around internal factions just as important as warfare and economics. If you lose an election you're offered to either switch to the new ruling party or lose decision making power about much of your nation. Like a forced semi-spectator mode. And some of these transitions of power could result in a civil war implementing @Raven_Glory 's suggestions

 

[Kovax]

One aspect which V2 addressed to some degree, but nowhere near its historical impact, was agriculture. In the medieval era, over 90% of the population was involved in subsistence farming, and a substantial number of the remainder were involved in defending that 90% from plunderers and rival kingdoms. That left only a few percent to handle mineral extraction, manufacturing, politics, religion, education, art, and everything else.

By the end of the 19th Century, mechanization had boosted productivity by leaps and bounds, and farmers put out of work by the surplus production and subsequent drop in demand flocked to the cities to seek employment in other occupations. That process continued or resumed in the 20th Century with motorization.

The initial split between farming and mining at the start of V2 isn't even remotely realistic. Ideally, each province would have BOTH a farming and a mining RGO, with the sizes of each being highly variable from one province to another based on the region's suitability for agriculture and the historical placement of resources. Generally speaking, the workers in the farming RGO would initially outnumber the miners by AT LEAST 10:1 in most provinces. As agricultural improvements occur and industry begins to develop, the need for mineral resources and the surplus of agricultural products should drive farmers into other fields, particularly industry and mining.

Remember, he may be just a farmer, but he's out-standing in his field.

 

[Ratgar]

One aspect which V2 addressed to some degree, but nowhere near its historical impact, was agriculture.

I think agriculture is one of those things that is especially hard to model well without making transportation a type of product that is used up in transporting goods. Improvements in agricultural technology should be a huge pressure for pops to switch industries, but this should be moderated by the fact that early game transportation costs limit it to local areas only. An agricultural boom in Iowa should mean nothing to Chinese farmers until there are railroads and shipping efficient enough to make that affect the price of food in China. But it should have a fairly pronounced effect on the Eastern United States once railroads exist, because Eastern farms cannot compete on cost, so suddenly the farmers there should be converting to relatively more profitable other jobs.

In that same vein, pop changes should be much more closely tied to the profitability of different industries, and industry profitability more closely tied to maintaining optimum levels of pops. It should be possible for a new profitable industry to rapidly transform whole populations overnight, but most of the time pops shouldn't be converting so quickly because the markets can only sustain so much supply. A factory may be more efficient, but in the absence of more efficient transportation, artisanal production is more cost effective in the small market there is access to with building costs of factories and maintenance taken into account. Thus, industries don't just wait for the tech to unlock for them to suddenly spring into existence. Market conditions a tiny bit more accurately modelled would lead to them needing adequate conditions.

 

[Call Me Vandal]

I wish for it to be announced, l m a o

 

[thedarkendstar]

Better rebellion system for instance lets say I have 20 armies all with the same composition as say mid game germany 5 guard 5 arty 2 dragoon 2 engineer

I hate how every 3 months some random regiments will revolt and I then have to rebuilt the army to its proper comp

 

[Kovax]

Better recruitment system, for instance let's say I have a province with 900 Catholic pops of my accepted culture, 750 Protestant pops of the same culture, 350 minority culture pops of one religion, and 150 of another religion. I can't form a brigade out of them because no single pop is larger than 1000 men of recruitment age, yet the combination is well over the minimum. If one pop edges over 1000, I can form a brigade, but if that brigade takes losses in the next revolt or war, it may not have sufficient manpower to reinforce, so I'm stuck with an under-strength brigade despite having those other pops which would historically have been recruited and formed into smaller units of their own language and culture within that brigade. That hits Africa particularly hard, where you may have 6-8 different pops in a province, and none of them are large enough to form a military unit.