My Theory on why Vic 3 is so difficult for some people.

[neroden]

I actually *really like* the main economic simulation in Vicky 3, and it's quite unique and intelligent, and it works great if you're playing with autarky (no trade outside your market), and it *is* counterintuitive to most people. Why? All flows, no stocks.

But there's one game-breaking bug with trade. Hope they fix it.

Victoria III - Trade loops of the same resource create free resources and money with no theoretical limit.

Short summary of your issue Trade loops of the same resource create free resources and money with no theoretical limit. Game Version 1.0.3 What OS are you playing on? Windows Do you have mods enabled? Yes Have you tried verifying your game...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

 

[Dman1791]

I can also vouch for the issues with AI resource buildings. It was 1890 and I could find precisely 60 total units of oil to import on the market. I was the #1 producer in the world using nothing but whaling.

 

[osvaldopiazzolla]

I would put those Completests in opposition to something called "Processer"

I sense your dichotomy as interesting but I'm not sure I quite grasp their essence. Would you classify a Football Manager player as a Processer on the grounds that they embark on a manager career with no precise goal other than being as successful as can be (whatever that means for them) and having fun in the process more than the result, unlike a player that wants to achieve winning the Champions League with Tranmere Rovers ? Or is it something else ?

 

[osvaldopiazzolla]

I actually *really like* the main economic simulation in Vicky 3, and it's quite unique and intelligent, and it works great if you're playing with autarky (no trade outside your market), and it *is* counterintuitive to most people. Why? All flows, no stocks.

But there's one game-breaking bug with trade. Hope they fix it.

Victoria III - Trade loops of the same resource create free resources and money with no theoretical limit.

Short summary of your issue Trade loops of the same resource create free resources and money with no theoretical limit. Game Version 1.0.3 What OS are you playing on? Windows Do you have mods enabled? Yes Have you tried verifying your game...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

I'm with you on this one. I want to try an Isolationist Merina kingdom. (But, if you play autarkic, this very bug would not affect you, would it ?)

 

[LoLuecoLueco]

Spoken like a true grognard.

typical of your kind to call everyone who disagrees with you a buzzword, but despite your accusation the oldest game i played from paradox is vicky 2, and it ain't even my favourite, that honor goes to stellaris
next time come up with a better rebutal than just saying "he just doesn't like change bro lmao"

 

[Sanvone]

I sense your dichotomy as interesting but I'm not sure I quite grasp their essence. Would you classify a Football Manager player as a Processer on the grounds that they embark on a manager career with no precise goal other than being as successful as can be (whatever that means for them) and having fun in the process more than the result, unlike a player that wants to achieve winning the Champions League with Tranmere Rovers ? Or is it something else ?

Well it wasn't my distinction to begin with but I had spoken because OP posts put them like opposites. I don't like those names because many of those concepts are really fluid into other areas as min-maxing, game expertise etc. I have never played Footbal manager so I won't call anything but IMO both types of player will have goal of having fun - just differently. "Completests" or player liking segmented game progression will want to go through stepstones, which signal him his place in race towards finish. "Processer" or player liking core gameplay loops will want to keep interacting with game math/algorithms in meaningful way and apprecieate knowing he is doing well when game doesn't explicitly signals him that.

Not sure if you are familiar with indie game - Battle Brothers (Turn Based Mercenary Simulator based in low fantasy setting. Each playthrough has randomly generated map).
- "Completests" will start his company with goal of getting certain equipment pieces, having roster of "Brothers" at certain level and doing x out of y ambition goals by some in game day. He will be more happy once he reaches those goals no matter the circumstances.
- "Processer"will start his company with goal of making the most of it. He will stomach bad rng better but also might be unhappy if he has great start but can't make most of it.

One type usually dominates early weeks after game releases when it comes to guides. "Completests" are better at grasping overall game dynamic. But by the time other type catches up, they already move onto mods because "game became boring". "Processers" need more time cause they must compile both data and experience in analysing it. But if the game is properly balance they start overcoming their opposite. Because in their tunnel vision they are able to better flow from one playstyle to other, while "completests" are more bound by limitation of needing stepstones to orientate themselves.

Another interesting metric to differentiate between them would be: game speed or time per turn. One type is trigger happy to let those buildings just finish, while other will move at slow space to keep observing and micromanaging, as you can't do some data reading on speed 5 in Paradox Games.

I always shrug when I see people doing 20 turns in 30 minutes when it takes me sometimes 15-20 minutes per single turn. I end with overal lower turn number by the time I see victory screen but longer game session time per playthrough. But it isn't ironclad rule and it spills into min-maxing/micromanagment territory.

From your other post you seem like fellow "unorthodox" player. Those also come in various color and sizes. By the discussed axis "Completest" variant would be hugely dependent on in-game options and be quite "tourist" type of player who wants the overall experience. If this was HOI4 then people complaining about not fleshed out various alt-history political focuses could be an example of that. "Processer" variant on the other hand might despise such shallowness as he wants to make something unique through core gameplay loops and thus won't be as happy with such "handouts" from devs. They might keep playing Communist Japan to leverage tiny differences in Japan game reality to achieve something unique.

 

[TheDungen]

typical of your kind to call everyone who disagrees with you a buzzword, but despite your accusation the oldest game i played from paradox is vicky 2, and it ain't even my favourite, that honor goes to stellaris
next time come up with a better rebutal than just saying "he just doesn't like change bro lmao"

Well if you had had a real argument I would have replied to that but since you didn't. Which is what makes you so grognardish. Note I enver said you were agrognard just that what you said was spoken LIKE a true grognard. If you're not you're doing an awefully good job at talking like one.

 

[TaxetTia]

Vic 3 is a VERY different game than most of us are use to.

Before I get started I need to explain two terms I am going use. Completest and Zero-sum.

Completest is a person that wants to finish something. Think of the game Monopoly when you get the final land that gives you a Monopoly. Now you can build houses and hotels. Even better think of when you have Hotels on your property. You are done. You are complete.

The other idea is Zero-Sum. Again think Monopoly. When you pass go and collect 200 you get 200 and no one else loses 200. In a Zero-Sum game you would collect 200 only because someone else lost 200.

One of the issues I think people have with Vic 3 is it is not friendly to the the Completest and it is a Zero-Sum game. You are never done.

I, as someone who is a Completest, can deal with it, but it is not easy. I want to be done. When I research that technology I want to upgrade everything. In Vic 3 this is killer. Take Japan you would think spending some coal to improve production would be a good idea. However, it is probably better to build more tool workshops, and hire some more of your vast population, than to use coal and limit the number of employees.
This is not intuitive.

The other idea, that ties into it, is that Vic 3 is a Zero-Sum. Yes, you can do good over here, but then you will lose out over here.

This does not make Vic 3 a bad game. I am not saying that. In fact, I am greatly enjoying it. I am just saying is goes against some of the things that we have learned playing games over the years.

For my part, I notice that there is a shortage of positive feedback in the UI. With other Paradox games, you get to paint the map, see your units accumulate into stacks and stomp some unfortunate, yada yada, and there's a sense of growth and accomplishment. In Vic3, all of the alerts and such are "fix this! fix that!" like some kind of naggy roommate, and most of the positive is "not so many problems atm." ... I do really like the game, the engine, etc. but I find I can't play it for very long at a sitting because I feel increasingly burdened by the to-do list, lol.

Some things aren't even to-dos, to speak of - ok, sure my tools are 12% above normal price, but they're still a blue stack of coins, and I've got bigger problems, so lay off on the "Government Goods are Expensive" nonsense, lol.

I'm looking for things to pay attention to in game other than tax revenue and GDP to provide some positive feedback that feeds my emotional game loop, lol.

 

[TheDungen]

For my part, I notice that there is a shortage of positive feedback in the UI. With other Paradox games, you get to paint the map, see your units accumulate into stacks and stomp some unfortunate, yada yada, and there's a sense of growth and accomplishment. In Vic3, all of the alerts and such are "fix this! fix that!" like some kind of naggy roommate, and most of the positive is "not so many problems atm." ... I do really like the game, the engine, etc. but I find I can't play it for very long at a sitting because I feel increasingly burdened by the to-do list, lol.

Some things aren't even to-dos, to speak of - ok, sure my tools are 12% above normal price, but they're still a blue stack of coins, and I've got bigger problems, so lay off on the "Government Goods are Expensive" nonsense, lol.

I'm looking for things to pay attention to in game other than tax revenue and GDP to provide some positive feedback that feeds my emotional game loop, lol.

Well there is as I udnerstand it, your cities grow in wealth anprosperity on the map as your cities becoem more numerous and wealthier. I much prefer that to map painting. It's one of the thigns I liked in previous paradox game zooming in at the cities and seeing them grow. I loved going into battlefield view on my cities in Rome Total war too.

 

[Putuna]

I haven't met anyone who says victoria 3 is "difficult". Most of the people I know who have the game complain its far to easy and has already cracked how you play. Which to anyone who doesn't know you just conquer Africa and parts of China then press multiculturalism and your country will no longer discriminate against any pop. Which is obviously beyond silly as there was not a single country that existed in the entire timeline that victoria 3 is set that did that. Basically it is the equivalent of having a button in Victoria 2 that makes every single pop in the game an accepted pop.

The other complaint is that it has very little flavor and every single country plays almost the exact same way.

 

[osvaldopiazzolla]

Well it wasn't my distinction to begin with but I had spoken because OP posts put them like opposites. I don't like those names because many of those concepts are really fluid into other areas as min-maxing, game expertise etc. I have never played Footbal manager so I won't call anything but IMO both types of player will have goal of having fun - just differently. "Completests" or player liking segmented game progression will want to go through stepstones, which signal him his place in race towards finish. "Processer" or player liking core gameplay loops will want to keep interacting with game math/algorithms in meaningful way and apprecieate knowing he is doing well when game doesn't explicitly signals him that.

Not sure if you are familiar with indie game - Battle Brothers (Turn Based Mercenary Simulator based in low fantasy setting. Each playthrough has randomly generated map).
- "Completests" will start his company with goal of getting certain equipment pieces, having roster of "Brothers" at certain level and doing x out of y ambition goals by some in game day. He will be more happy once he reaches those goals no matter the circumstances.
- "Processer"will start his company with goal of making the most of it. He will stomach bad rng better but also might be unhappy if he has great start but can't make most of it.

One type usually dominates early weeks after game releases when it comes to guides. "Completests" are better at grasping overall game dynamic. But by the time other type catches up, they already move onto mods because "game became boring". "Processers" need more time cause they must compile both data and experience in analysing it. But if the game is properly balance they start overcoming their opposite. Because in their tunnel vision they are able to better flow from one playstyle to other, while "completests" are more bound by limitation of needing stepstones to orientate themselves.

Another interesting metric to differentiate between them would be: game speed or time per turn. One type is trigger happy to let those buildings just finish, while other will move at slow space to keep observing and micromanaging, as you can't do some data reading on speed 5 in Paradox Games.

I always shrug when I see people doing 20 turns in 30 minutes when it takes me sometimes 15-20 minutes per single turn. I end with overal lower turn number by the time I see victory screen but longer game session time per playthrough. But it isn't ironclad rule and it spills into min-maxing/micromanagment territory.

From your other post you seem like fellow "unorthodox" player. Those also come in various color and sizes. By the discussed axis "Completest" variant would be hugely dependent on in-game options and be quite "tourist" type of player who wants the overall experience. If this was HOI4 then people complaining about not fleshed out various alt-history political focuses could be an example of that. "Processer" variant on the other hand might despise such shallowness as he wants to make something unique through core gameplay loops and thus won't be as happy with such "handouts" from devs. They might keep playing Communist Japan to leverage tiny differences in Japan game reality to achieve something unique.

Now, I think I get it, thanks. And it makes a lot of sense to explain what's going on on these forums post-launch compared to what was happening pre-launch.

 

[OODA Loop]

I haven't met anyone who says victoria 3 is "difficult". Most of the people I know who have the game complain its far to easy and has already cracked how you play. Which to anyone who doesn't know you just conquer Africa and parts of China then press multiculturalism and your country will no longer discriminate against any pop. Which is obviously beyond silly as there was not a single country that existed in the entire timeline that victoria 3 is set that did that. Basically it is the equivalent of having a button in Victoria 2 that makes every single pop in the game an accepted pop.

The other complaint is that it has very little flavor and every single country plays almost the exact same way.

Victoria 3 is extremely difficult... on my processor. End game lag can be terrible if you play a large nation and allow migration.

Victoria 3 is extremely difficult... on my eyes and developing carpal syndrome. The UI is a terrible click fest.

Victoria 3 is extremely difficult... on my wallet because I will be re-buying Victoria 2.

Difficulty is a matter of perspective

 

[santisav]

Vic 3 is a VERY different game than most of us are use to.

Before I get started I need to explain two terms I am going use. Completest and Zero-sum.

Completest is a person that wants to finish something. Think of the game Monopoly when you get the final land that gives you a Monopoly. Now you can build houses and hotels. Even better think of when you have Hotels on your property. You are done. You are complete.

The other idea is Zero-Sum. Again think Monopoly. When you pass go and collect 200 you get 200 and no one else loses 200. In a Zero-Sum game you would collect 200 only because someone else lost 200.

One of the issues I think people have with Vic 3 is it is not friendly to the the Completest and it is a Zero-Sum game. You are never done.

I, as someone who is a Completest, can deal with it, but it is not easy. I want to be done. When I research that technology I want to upgrade everything. In Vic 3 this is killer. Take Japan you would think spending some coal to improve production would be a good idea. However, it is probably better to build more tool workshops, and hire some more of your vast population, than to use coal and limit the number of employees.
This is not intuitive.

The other idea, that ties into it, is that Vic 3 is a Zero-Sum. Yes, you can do good over here, but then you will lose out over here.

This does not make Vic 3 a bad game. I am not saying that. In fact, I am greatly enjoying it. I am just saying is goes against some of the things that we have learned playing games over the years.

True that!

On the zero-sum game piece, I think its even more. Mercantilism was similar to a Zero-sum mentality. But Victoria shows how production raises through more means than isolationist self sourcing and the importance of markets, trade agreements, customs zones to help "grow the cake". But in other aspects it is pretty much a zero-sum-save-your-own-ass game such as when dealing with rubber, and oil supplies. And the best thing is that is pretty much what we see in the real world.

Awesome game!

 

[JJxvi]

I think the most similar game I've ever played to my experience so far with Victoria 3 is like Clicker Heroes.

 

[OODA Loop]

I think the most similar game I've ever played to my experience so far with Victoria 3 is like Clicker Heroes.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. J-POW Simulator 1836: LOL-Click-Button-GDP-go-BRR

 

[PikeStance]

I disagree. I think people are finding it difficult due to lack of feedback in the game, not that they are approaching it wrong. (And when I say difficult I do NOT mean difficulty in liking the game).

I dont think its fundementally doing anything different, at the basic level. Its really not that radical of a departure from other pardox games, its not even a new series. The idea that progress is non-linear, that people have to choose between different options, its always been present. Take a simple example from EU4: you have 200 gold, do you spend it on buildings that will increase your income or do you spend it on your military to defend against your big neighbour that doesnt like you and might invade? Neither are bad options, and you wont know whether its wrong immediately.

The difficulty in Voc 3 comes from systems that dont EXPLAIN what the effects will/could be. To use your example: would the player have chosen to improve production methods if he had known it would cause mass unemployment? Probably not. But its because they didn't know.

This is not even remotely true. When you hover over the new production method, it tells you which pops would gain employment and which would loose employment.

I think there is room for conquest, namely in Africa and Asia, (like in the RL). Prussia's success in the 19th century was due to improved logistics, command, and the use of technology, so there is a lesson in that. However, I do not see this necessarily in the tech tree. perhaps this is something that will be developed in a future DLC.

 

[Twenty Barrels of Rum]

Well for me Vic is generally hard overall. I'm 18 and I have around 1k hours in Hoi4 where economy is basic. I don't fully understand english economic terms nor do I fully understand IRL economy. It is really hard for me to even get my country to progress or function properly. I get laws and political side but for example as Chile I have very high taxes, lowest wages, I even decreased the levels of some buildings ans yet I am getting negative income, with no explanation on why that is so. It is a much better improvement with the tutorials in comparison to vic2, but they still don't explain a lot. I get tasks like build railways alright cool I build them but oh whats that suddenly I get negative income with no explanation or a fix. Thats my main problem with vic3 I just dont understand how the game works. Now I have around 100 hrs in stellaris and I can say I'm fairly good at economy in stellaris because 1. there aren't 100000 different goods and 2. you know which buildings and pops consume what whereas in vic3 the amount of different pops, buildings and goods and resources gives me a headache

 

[SeekTruthFromFx]

Well for me Vic is generally hard overall. I'm 18 and I have around 1k hours in Hoi4 where economy is basic. I don't fully understand english economic terms nor do I fully understand IRL economy. It is really hard for me to even get my country to progress or function properly. I get laws and political side but for example as Chile I have very high taxes, lowest wages, I even decreased the levels of some buildings ans yet I am getting negative income, with no explanation on why that is so. It is a much better improvement with the tutorials in comparison to vic2, but they still don't explain a lot. I get tasks like build railways alright cool I build them but oh whats that suddenly I get negative income with no explanation or a fix. Thats my main problem with vic3 I just dont understand how the game works. Now I have around 100 hrs in stellaris and I can say I'm fairly good at economy in stellaris because 1. there aren't 100000 different goods and 2. you know which buildings and pops consume what whereas in vic3 the amount of different pops, buildings and goods and resources gives me a headache

You are probably getting negative income because your investment pool has run out.

But negative income is often a good thing in V3. If you are investing in the construction of new buildings, then you are spending from your reserves (negative income), but once the construction has finished then you will gain taxes from the workers in those buildings.

 

[Skuchney]

I think the source of my pain might be that I am a bit of a minmaxer / perfectionist. I could not handle that I did not understand mechanics, and that when I would take some actions there would be unforeseen economical consequences. Add to that that the tutorial system in the game is very lacking, and the tooltips are a long and complex web of interconnected systems, it becomes very difficult to identify the cause of your economic woes in the game and then fix them. The game is so complex that trying to find information on what is going wrong in your particular game is like studying for the exam in an economics class that you have not attended, with the only sources of information being written textbooks, and you're dyslexic.

I was only able to play to learn the game by picking the same country ten times in a row and attempting to learn a few things each time, and then restart when I felt my economy was too much of a confusing mess for me to be able to fix with my limited understanding. It felt kind of like bashing my head against an economics text book until the knowledge somehow made it through my thick skull and into my squishy brain. Not at all a pleasant experience, but for some reason I was hooked, it was a puzzle I had to unravel. For some people it might be an even more painful learning experience that they are simply not willing to go through with. Not that this is a complaint, it's just the nature of the complexity of the game.

 

[paulxiep]

I've always had an affinity for tycoon games, so this geopolitical tycoon is no different.

And it's this very tycoon aspect that I've seen people complain about, about not having enough resources to just mindlessly choose the most innovative production methods at all times, or that by always choosing the 'bottom options', they have unbalanced goods with huge surplus of something and not enough of another (regular vs luxury on furniture and clothing, and fertilizer vs explosives came to mind). If you have the right mind for tycoon games, this would never be a concern. You're always balancing things based on available resources and constraints. Mindlessly and automatically picking the same options every time is very unstrategic and boring and would be akin to playing casual idle games.