• 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
Not open for further replies.

Johan

Studio Manager Paradox Tinto
Administrator
Paradox Staff
Moderator
15 Badges
Dec 14, 1999
18.750
50.995
  • Diplomacy
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • War of the Roses
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Magicka
  • Starvoid
Welcome to the second developer diary for the upcoming strategy game March of the Eagles from Paradox Development Studio. Today we want to let you find out more about the victory system :)

The Victory System
As many of you know, most of our games are very open ended and you as a player set your own goals in what you want to accomplish. We have two exceptions among the games we have developed. The Hearts of Iron series that is very open, but still has the goal to win WWII and Sengoku, where we first introduced set victory conditions - which meant that you as a player had the overall 'goal' of uniting Japan.

In our upcoming wargame March of the Eagles, we are introducing set victory conditions inspired by the games above. But the ‘goals’ is not as simple as winning a war, because people are making and breaking alliances all the time, switching teams and so on. So what we have done is that we created a 'Domination' system. Your goal is to become the dominant land and naval power in Europe, and there are several ways of making this happen.

Eight Major Powers
You can play as any country in Europe, but there are only eight countries that can really 'win' on their own. It's very similar to the set up in Hearts of Iron, where you can only really win the war if you're part of the Axis, Allies or Comintern. In the Napoleonic era, you have eight countries that can win the game on their own, and they all have different ways of winning.
The following countries have victory conditions. France, Great Britain, Russia, Austria, Prussia, Sweden, Spain & The Ottoman Empire.

Land Dominance & Naval Dominance
To acquire Land Dominance, you need to hold 7 key land provinces out of a possible 11. To acquire Naval Dominance, you need to hold 7 key port provinces out of a possible 11.
Each of the majors starts a with a different number of victory provinces already in their possession at game start, giving some countries a leg up when it comes to victory. This also gives the majors a differing level of challenge when you come to play them. For example: France starts the game land dominant and Great Britain is naval dominant. These two countries are already half way to victory.
Only one country can be dominant in each category at the same time. This means that even if you meet the other requirements, you need to make sure the current holder gets defeated and loses its status as dominant country in order for you to become dominant.

Different directions
Each major power has different key provinces needed to achieve dominance, creating different natural enemies for each great power at the beginning of the game. This also allows countries to cooperate with each other, for a while, while still advancing yourself towards victory.

Prestige
If the game session ends without any power winning a conclusive victory (being both land dominant & naval dominant), the major power with the most prestige will be the winner. Prestige is gained for various actions throughout the game, victories on the battlefield being a key component.

Minor Countries
Playing as a minor country it is still possible to be one of the winners. However, instead of winning yourself you need to be the ally of the winning Great Power. As a minor power you need to work our which way the wind is blowing and be on that side. Then be ready to jump ship at the right time.
Satellite states cannot jump ship so if you jump ship too early you may see the error of your ways at the point a bayonet. This gives minor countries an interesting gameplay all of their own. Also all is not lost if you happen to hold a province that is in the sights of a major power. A major power is considered to control a province if it is held by a satellite nation, so surrender is always an option.

That´s all for now, stay with us next week where we spill the beans about diplomacy!

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • 2.png
    2.png
    2,4 MB · Views: 12.448
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow! I love it.

But if one country is land dominant and two other countries have 7 key cities /11. Then, the land dominant country loose a key city and fall to 6 key cities. Which of the two countries who met the conditions become the new land dominant?
 
That actually sounds like a pretty good mix of HoI and era-flavor, even though I would love a more dynamic system - this seems workable though. It will also be interesting to see if victory conditions are moddable or not.

What I REALLY like is the sound of the minor nations part. Seems like they actually get some love in regards of gameplay quality - thanks folks, for people who much prefer being second-in-command to being captain (like me), this is really intriguing.

My new goal for my first (minor nation) playthrough: Occupy 5 crucial provinces and dig in, then proceed troll the other nations. :cool:
 
So... becoming naval dominant is achieved by conquering port provinces. So in theory you could become the leading naval power without owning a single ship? :D


What would you say was the 'historical' result of the real-life Napoleonic wars, expressed in game terms? Britain wins on prestige, having naval dominance but not land dominance?
 
So... becoming naval dominant is achieved by conquering port provinces. So in theory you could become the leading naval power without owning a single ship? :D

What would you say was the 'historical' result of the real-life Napoleonic wars, expressed in game terms? Britain wins on prestige, having naval dominance but not land dominance?

I can see how the former makes sense, assuming that a fleet without a harbor is not worth a lot. Then again, the Royal Navy didn't really mind having half of Europe's harbors being occupied by the French and their allies...

The latter would interest me as well. Also: how do the hundred days factor into it? Is it possible for a beaten major power to return to the political map in a similar manner?
 
Satellite states cannot jump ship so if you jump ship too early you may see the error of your ways at the point a bayonet.
Wasn't Prussia a satelite of France that jumped ship?
 
I can see France winning a 'naval' victory through the Continental System, that's true. I guess they'd have to control or vassalise the major ports of the other continental naval powers to do so - including St Petersburg, which would be why they need to invade Russia to win the game.
 
Sounds good, although I find it a bit curious Spain, the Ottomans and especially Sweden are considered Great Powers. For what I know of it, the latter two played a very minor or no role and Spain was not the power it once was after the Spanish Succession War. There seems to be an overall trend by Paradox to go for eight great powers...
 
Sounds good, although I find it a bit curious Spain, the Ottomans and especially Sweden are considered Great Powers. For what I know of it, the latter two played a very minor or no role and Spain was not the power it once was after the Spanish Succession War. There seems to be an overall trend by Paradox to go for eight great powers...
Because the only way to get Sweden in there as a "major" was to include Spain and the Ottomans as well ;-)
I'd much much rather just have the usual big five in there.
 
Because the only way to get Sweden in there as a "major" was to include Spain and the Ottomans as well ;-)
I'd much much rather just have the usual big five in there.
I prefer like this as long as the three are a challenge (think about the Ottomans, they're big but backwards and very far away from the victory provinces, probably) as it gives more possibility to the player.
 
Interesting concept, that naval supremacy ties to (land) provinces held. I'll have to see how that plays out!
 
This reminds me of grenat I played years ago.... Imperialism 1 ans 2!! I really love where y ou guys are going!
I doubt the economy would be as complex as Imperialism II's was though. ;)

And no tactical battles. I replayed the game recently and it's still awesome.
 
So will this mean that we will have weird cases like for example the UK and a France that lost it's landed dominance status fighting against an Russia or Austria with land dominance?

I mean if so it really just feels so weird another nation going "napoleon" mode in this game and the other nations allying against it, specially since after France was defeated you didn't see the other nations turn against each other immediately.
 
Last edited:
So will this mean that we will have weird cases like for example the UK and a France that lost it's landed dominance status fighting against an Russia or Austria with land dominance?

I mean if so it really just feels so weird another nation going "napoleon" mode in this game and the other nations allying against it.

Well, yeah, France fighting all of Europe was a bit of a special case, one would think, and the direct result of everyone ganging up on the fledgling republican regime. Then again though, one could imagine a monarch coming to power in another nation who has all the ambition of Napoleon and then some, all the spite for other nations, all the talent to make European conquest happen. One could imagine King George reluctantly joining forces with Napoleon to stop such a threat, even though they would likely be at each other's throats sooner rather than later.
 
Well, yeah, France fighting all of Europe was a bit of a special case, one would think, and the direct result of everyone ganging up on the fledgling republican regime. Then again though, one could imagine a monarch coming to power in another nation who has all the ambition of Napoleon and then some, all the spite for other nations, all the talent to make European conquest happen. One could imagine King George reluctantly joining forces with Napoleon to stop such a threat, even though they would likely be at each other's throats sooner rather than later.

Dunno I was half expecting something more historical like France vs all, with sometimes coercing other major powers to side with them due to threats or promise and the victory conditions would depend on national objectives (Sweden maintaining Finland and conquering Denmark for example which could put them working for either side, I guess the key provinces kind of work in this way but at the end of the game what you want is still the dominance status) and on how much you contributed for/against France.

I was expecting literally an HoI set in the Napoleonic age with a mostly historical progression but with some randomness in events and in the AI that would allow for some ahistorical outcomes (like National Spain siding with the Axis)
 
Last edited:
Forty years after Napoleon's fall, Britain and France were indeed allied, fighting side by side against Russia.

(Lord Raglan, commander of the British army in the Crimea, had fought with Wellington in the Peninsular Campaign and had his arm amputated after being wounded at the Battle of Waterloo. )

So while I think it's highly unlikely that France under Napoleon could be so utterly defeated that Russia or Austria would take over from them as hegemonic power of Europe, I have no doubt at all that Britain would be willing to ally with France against them if it happened. "Nations have no permanent allies, only permanent interests".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.