-
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.
Thanks dude! That mod greatly improved readability! I hope Paradox makes better UI from now on. Games are played by people, not by computers.
political prisons and militant movements (as apposed to militant pops popping up randomly)
I know it's already been mentioned - I remember the post, some 10 pages back or so - but it's so important it should be mentioned again: the ability to auto-split and auto-assign POPs. This single, relatively simple feature would make the game infinitely more accessible to the average player. Also, an auto-trade system that isn't completely and totally 100% worthless would be nice. You know, one that buys according to your needs, instead of buying the most random, worthless crap you can imagine (and never important things, either).
EDIT: And when I say it should have the ability to auto-assign POPs, I mean it should be able to intelligently do so - something that doesn't really happen right now.
EDIT: And when I say it should have the ability to auto-assign POPs, I mean it should be able to intelligently do so - something that doesn't really happen right now.
Last edited:
Assuming the POP System returns, (and I hope it does, I loved it even though it certainly needs some work) I'd like to see, among other things, map modes allowing you to view certain demographics in your provinces. Ie, a mode that displays heavily liberal provinces as a solid yellow, or if the liberals have only a slight majority it would be a more diluted color. It would be like that for all political ideologies. Then there would be similar map modes for culture, religion, average income, etc.
Manual to Victoria 2
I think a complex game like this should have a real manual.
That explains how things work and how to play. They can't have a thin fps manual.
They did very good with Doomsday...
Is a vic 2 on its way...when ?
I really hope that. Because the current one doesn't feel
quite ready. I've haven't been able to get a grip on the game despite 50< hours of play...too many questions to be answered around how to develop the country. Its really not fun to play without actually know how to do right.
I think a complex game like this should have a real manual.
That explains how things work and how to play. They can't have a thin fps manual.
They did very good with Doomsday...
Is a vic 2 on its way...when ?
I really hope that. Because the current one doesn't feel
quite ready. I've haven't been able to get a grip on the game despite 50< hours of play...too many questions to be answered around how to develop the country. Its really not fun to play without actually know how to do right.
I think that Victoria 2 should be more realistic, and A.I. should be improved. But i would like particulary like to see more information about the actually ruler, king/president, qualities, experience and traits, things like that. And in the case of a ruler i would like to see his family tree, something that i really liked in crusader kings.
It's certainly been mentioned before (I mentioned it 3 years ago, and it did not make any difference on V-R), but the military needs a lot of fixes.
1. Movement Army: there should be a big difference between moving in friendly and enemy territory, especially the speeds in enemy territory can be quite to very unrealistic. Easy fix with re-introducing "strategic redeployment" button and cutting speeds for "tactical" movement
2. Movement Navy: Still not great - some too fast, some too slow. Not a detail question, we are talking huge differences to RL
3. Attrition and Range Navy: Total mess. Monitors or Ironclads parked in the middle of the Atlantic for weeks on end. I mean, come on. Attrition and range of unit types should be much closer linked - having coaling stations etc. was a main driver of imperialism, after all. This is an absurd oversight, IMO.
4. Forts & Fortifications. Just generally a bit weird, should have IMO higher defense mods for "lower tech" units (these advantages can be removed with high military tech, like heavy fire support). Drop the "trench system". Have at least the bigger forts with a fixed "garrison"-type defense rating (i.e. permanent manning, cannot be moved), very common in parts of Europe (Austria, Russia, etc.) and colonies.
Now if only someone was reading this ..(sigh)
1. Movement Army: there should be a big difference between moving in friendly and enemy territory, especially the speeds in enemy territory can be quite to very unrealistic. Easy fix with re-introducing "strategic redeployment" button and cutting speeds for "tactical" movement
2. Movement Navy: Still not great - some too fast, some too slow. Not a detail question, we are talking huge differences to RL
3. Attrition and Range Navy: Total mess. Monitors or Ironclads parked in the middle of the Atlantic for weeks on end. I mean, come on. Attrition and range of unit types should be much closer linked - having coaling stations etc. was a main driver of imperialism, after all. This is an absurd oversight, IMO.
4. Forts & Fortifications. Just generally a bit weird, should have IMO higher defense mods for "lower tech" units (these advantages can be removed with high military tech, like heavy fire support). Drop the "trench system". Have at least the bigger forts with a fixed "garrison"-type defense rating (i.e. permanent manning, cannot be moved), very common in parts of Europe (Austria, Russia, etc.) and colonies.
Now if only someone was reading this ..(sigh)
Slower naval battles. Ships are dying too fast, and one can lose all his fleet in one battle in seconds (specially if his enemy has better naval techs).
Cortes_R said:
Well, in all honesty, look at Jutland ... if I remember correctly, fourteen British ships and eleven German ship sunk between 6:30 and 8:30 P.M., including battleships and battlecruisers.
But I do agree that the naval battle apparatus (and the naval engine in general) needs to be thoroughly revitalized.
I agree - but sadly it is not likely because this version was not exactly a sales hitRedRalphWiggum said:
There is hope though 'cos people are working with the source code.
jonti-h said:I agree - but sadly it is not likely because this version was not exactly a sales hit
There is hope though 'cos people are working with the source code.
The thing is though that if they had just made it better in the first place, I mean in terms of user friendliness it could have sold a lot better. Although it is far from my favourite Paradox Game, EU3 and HOI2 score a lot higher in my opinion, I reckon that Vicky2 has the potential to be the best by far.
Indeed - it was rather intimidating to get to know. I think that if Vicky 2 was made it would sell better as long as there was more automation and less micromanagement.Lachlan Smith said:
Things like being able to upgrade all RGOs or railroads in a state with one click, or a switchable pop promoter.
I'd like more diplomatic options (embargo, trading goods with nations...), more techs and an earlier begining (1820?). Garrison units like HOI2 would be nice too. Plus, rebels units shouldn't be so well trained. I think it's frustrating to annex a country with only irregulars and have to fight regular infantry rebel units.
Yeah, a proper tutorial would have worked wonders for SOOOOOOO many people (myself included!). It is one of them games that you have to be patient with, and get to learn slowly at your own pace.Lachlan Smith said:
Well... more workable automations (unlike the current automated economy system that you can - thankfully - switch off).jonti-h said:
What would also be nice is to see who you are trading with... so not necessarily an official embargo, but you have a choice. Say if you operated a free trade policy, then this embargo-type thing would be disallowed??OP13 said:
Also, I couldn't agree more with the rebel point. I think this could have been sorted out in a patch a long time ago - no way would some unhappy farmers be of the same quality (or better) than actual regular soldiers!
OP13 said:
Yes, that would be good. Then you could at least starve their economy of things that they really need. It always seemed bizarre to me that if you were exporting small arms etc you had no control over where they went to.
OP13 said:
Indeed. Perhaps with some rebel suppression above the .20 that soldiers give?
OP13 said:
Very much so. It always amused me that I could blitz China with little effort (apart from the micromanagement bit) but have a lot more trouble fighting their farmers than their soldiers.
A message to pop up when someone was invading a province would be nice too.
The ability to create your own areas. So you could merge those little ones, which normally dont bring you much good alone, with bigger ones (The max number of provinces which can be united, should be limited to 10-15).