-
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.
ok konig the only way i know of to break being a satellite is to declare war on and win vs your master country..humiliate them take a colony whatever as long as its a positive in your favor and its broken
M.ShawPyle said:
A misplaced comma does not crash a book , as anyone who has read F. Scott Fitzgerald can attest.
A misplaced semicolon can crash a program.
That said the profit readings of the RGOS and the fact that unemployment information is now shown when leaving the mouse over the state are nice additions.
Peter Ebbesen said:So long as the "dozens against" are posted by the same one or two dozen people, likely so. Should it prove a general belief, likely not.
As for your 1:10 weight of opinion, you are of course wrong. Everybody who does NOT complain is counted a supporter, and the Paradox development team counts for about 1,000,000 in the final equation. ]
***********************
Well, I've been silent but I think economy in the 1.02 patch is in need of serious tweaking. I'm very sure paradox will take people's concerns into consideration.
The lack of basic materials such as fabric and paper and the fact that the chair doesn't yet seem to have been invented just doesn't ring true for the time period. So come on Paradox, Her Majesty's royal derrier is chaffing with all the handuls of dock leaves, please give us paper!!!
Theirs a catch though I cant desolve the alliance for some reason with The Netherlands I click on disolve Allience and tryed it many times and it says are you sure and I click on etc, but it dosnt desolve the alliance
I click on disolve Allience and tryed it many times and it says are you sure and I click on etc, but it dosnt desolve the alliance 
Garuda said:Ah, but that appears to be a question about the initial allocation of manufactories in the scenario setups, a different beast than the "economy sux and is broken and I cannot do anything for 30 years plus" that is the main focus of this thread's complaints.Peter Ebbesen said:The lack of basic materials such as fabric and paper and the fact that the chair doesn't yet seem to have been invented just doesn't ring true for the time period. So come on Paradox, Her Majesty's royal derrier is chaffing with all the handuls of dock leaves, please give us paper!!!
Some of those materials are purposefully restricted by the lack of manufactories in scenario setups to prevent early industrialisation (paper is one of those - the fact that it was invented earlier is less relevant than the game mechanisms that paper availability affect), others are currently too limited (especially fabric manufactories) because the number of manufactories in general has not been rebalanced for the 1.02 patch game mechanic changes. As can be seen from the readme, the general thrust of 1.02 was changing game mechanics based on player feedback and bug reports, not changing the scenario setups.
Before anybody screams bloody murder, yes, there is no doubt whatsoever that 1.02 would had been a better patch overall if all the scenario setups were completely rebalanced to better fit the new game mechanics, but including testing that would probably have added a month to the patch delivery date, and Paradox made the choice to deliver the patch now, before Christmas. Given that (unlike many in this thread), I think that the new economy is a big step forwards, I can only applaud that decision, but I acknowledge that the choice between one or (if you are lucky) two big well-tested patches with several months between and many less well-tested but more frequent patches is not an obvious one. Different companies use different strategies here, and Paradox' is "patch early, patch often".
"Different companies use different strategies here, and Paradox' is "patch early, patch often"."
Which is a good strategy since it allows more involvement from the players.
Which is a good strategy since it allows more involvement from the players.
Peter Ebbesen said:
Then hopefully something is done about this sort of thing towards the future, even if only 3 or 4 "important" countries (their manufactories, in particular) are balanced in such a manner, they certainly would have an overall good effect on the starting worldwide economy, without making it "too easy", I'd suppose.
ORIGINALLY POSTED BY PETER:
"Before anybody screams bloody murder, yes, there is no doubt whatsoever that 1.02 would had been a better patch overall if all the scenario setups were completely rebalanced to better fit the new game mechanics, but including testing that would probably have added a month to the patch delivery date, and Paradox made the choice to deliver the patch now, before Christmas. Given that (unlike many in this thread), I think that the new economy is a big step forwards, I can only applaud that decision, but I acknowledge that the choice between one or (if you are lucky) two big well-tested patches with several months between and many less well-tested but more frequent patches is not an obvious one. Different companies use different strategies here, and Paradox' is "patch early, patch often"."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what you are saying here Peter, is that we should wait for 1.03 to be able to play the game as it was meant to work?
"Before anybody screams bloody murder, yes, there is no doubt whatsoever that 1.02 would had been a better patch overall if all the scenario setups were completely rebalanced to better fit the new game mechanics, but including testing that would probably have added a month to the patch delivery date, and Paradox made the choice to deliver the patch now, before Christmas. Given that (unlike many in this thread), I think that the new economy is a big step forwards, I can only applaud that decision, but I acknowledge that the choice between one or (if you are lucky) two big well-tested patches with several months between and many less well-tested but more frequent patches is not an obvious one. Different companies use different strategies here, and Paradox' is "patch early, patch often"."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what you are saying here Peter, is that we should wait for 1.03 to be able to play the game as it was meant to work?
Peter Ebbesen said:
Did everyone catch that?
Mr. Ebbesen, who if I recall is a betatester for vic, just criticised the patch, and discussed that the point was to fix player-reported problems.
Can we please now lay aside the betatester conspiracy theories?
Arado said:
Yes, but only in the sense that you should always wait for every paradox patch.
Someone referenced F. Scott Fitzgerald earlier. He was still revising The Great Gatsby until the day he died, years after it was published. Paradox games are perpetual works-in-progress. Part of the nature of having a highly-moddable game. Someone's always working on it.
In that case....... We can all call ourselves "Gamma Testers" of the game... Hurray!!! ;-)
Wheels said:
If someone tracks back I think you'll find I made the same point about factories about an hour after the patch came out.
And I'm the bete noir of betas according to some people There were quite a few things that we would have liked to fix before 1.02 came out. Better economic starting positions, 1848 event triggers being too easy to avoid, Austria, Java and Persia's populations being between 2x and 10x too high to name but a few. But Christmas is inflexible and 1.02 had to come out before xmas or everyone would be v. pissed off.
So sorry to anyone who feels shortchanged by the patch. I happen to believe that Victoria is more like the game that was intended by Paradox than 1.01 was. As others have said, Paradox games rightly or wrongly are developed after release. I prefer this to the "buy another expansion pack to get the features we promised at the start" approach that CIV III took.
Vulture said:Baaah! I'll just quall this uprising
Seriously, I think the game has never been better. There's nothing wrong with the way it works, and a few minor gripes will of course be addressed. There's at least some challenge in the game now.
And @ Scott: French AI does reasonably well on my puter... You should be gentle with software, talk to it from time to time, it helps
French AI is doing well, but is outperformed by the Belgian Empire. Covered by my Britisch friends, I went into super alliances and attacked France a few times. Now I own all lands above Paris - I needed some place to make that extra steel and dye,
And I've seen migration to Brussels! The sun is shining!
And to all those people who would like to industrialise as "Bhutan" = first try EU2 and do a WC with Aztec empire, come back when you've managed this without cheating
Derek Pullem said:
yep, or buy the new game "Buthan, the industrial empire", it should come out in the next galactic cycle,
Victoria is a game with more boundary conditions (read more handles to pull) compared with EU2. So either you like it, or dislike it.
The whole picture is that the 1.02 patch is much more fun and more challenge. The further tweaks will get introduced,
A few days ago the first flight of the Wright brothers was celebrated. Their plane did fly and it wasn't a jumbo jet with business class seats,
I haven't installed 1.02 yet, so I won't comment on that. I will, however, comment on the game in general.
Overall, I think the economy in Victoria could be much, much better, but this is Paradox's first attempt in a decent economy model. I feel that Paradox is trying to improve the perfect military game of EU engine with another dimension. This is an innovative work, give them some time. There is no other game that has this much depth and coverage after all.
One thing that I like about these EU enigine series is the fact that almost the whole game can be customised to everyone's liking since it's all saved in txt files. If I don't like something in the game, most of the time I can just go and mod it myself.
I normally do not like sequences to a game that I think is already perfect. Civ3, CM4, and HOI are huge failures to me. In Victoria, I see the potential for a truly great military/economy game. It's not quite there yet, but no strategy gamer can doubt the potential. For me, that keeps it interesting.
Reading the list of fixes in 1.02, there are changes that I like and there are changes that I don't like, but they fixed the two things that I posted in the Bug Forum. So I'm sure if enough people have the same opinion as you do about how to improve the game, Paradox will put it in the coming patches.
Just be patient, this is a masterpiece in the working. In the meantime, keep modding the game yourself, not too many games give you the opportunity to do that.
Overall, I think the economy in Victoria could be much, much better, but this is Paradox's first attempt in a decent economy model. I feel that Paradox is trying to improve the perfect military game of EU engine with another dimension. This is an innovative work, give them some time. There is no other game that has this much depth and coverage after all.
One thing that I like about these EU enigine series is the fact that almost the whole game can be customised to everyone's liking since it's all saved in txt files. If I don't like something in the game, most of the time I can just go and mod it myself.
I normally do not like sequences to a game that I think is already perfect. Civ3, CM4, and HOI are huge failures to me. In Victoria, I see the potential for a truly great military/economy game. It's not quite there yet, but no strategy gamer can doubt the potential. For me, that keeps it interesting.
Reading the list of fixes in 1.02, there are changes that I like and there are changes that I don't like, but they fixed the two things that I posted in the Bug Forum. So I'm sure if enough people have the same opinion as you do about how to improve the game, Paradox will put it in the coming patches.
Just be patient, this is a masterpiece in the working. In the meantime, keep modding the game yourself, not too many games give you the opportunity to do that.
Wheels said:
Do you believe that yourself? Some just can't catch anything.
And I happen to like conspiracy theories!
// Rico
Economy in 1.2
The obsurdity is that the Government is paying for these factories to begin with. I don't remember that in my history of the US or Uk industrialization. What are the Capitalists for if not to provide the capital to make the factories.
In addition, I think starting out in such suicidal budget is weird. Why isn't the scenario started with you in balance. Were all of these governments run by tax and spenders?
It is just odd to me how the game starts out.
Perplexed.
The obsurdity is that the Government is paying for these factories to begin with. I don't remember that in my history of the US or Uk industrialization. What are the Capitalists for if not to provide the capital to make the factories.
In addition, I think starting out in such suicidal budget is weird. Why isn't the scenario started with you in balance. Were all of these governments run by tax and spenders?
It is just odd to me how the game starts out.
Perplexed.
Crimson King said:Nobody can afford to colonize ... except the British and Dutch. It is commonplace to see Africa blanketed in orange and pink by 1850.
And yes, the armies are smaller ... Paradox delivered very nicely on that promise
Can't comment on AI bankruptcies, as I usually have those messages muted. (I suspect it's still an issue, seeing that agrarian economies are still DOA.)
Am I the only one getting more French colonization in Africa? In my games the OE and the Russian have more colonies in Africa than the Dutch..