• 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.

Nikoleis

Captain
52 Badges
May 14, 2015
339
853
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II
One common complaint about the game is how ADM / DIP / MIL rules over the game as the ultimate currency limiting what you can do, due to being hard limited, RNG dependent or even of imbalanced use depending on game (ADM solo, MIL in MP). Meanwhile, their effects are generally immediate, such as stability never staying long in the negative or war exhaustion just disappearing. Yet, some interesting options exists that do spread the effect along, namely War taxes and Policy.

Thus came the idea: what if Mana could never be spent, and instead, make heavy use of policies for most mechanics, with a new paradigm? That's the subject of this proposition, meant for mechanical musings more than actual suggestion. Consider that other mechanics are adapted to conform to this when needed, the main ones being technology and coring as you'll see.

First, we will assume that the base value are still the same: 3 base, 0-6 from ruler, old "Free policy" bonus becoming straight up free points in their domain (since you don't accumulate points anyway). Advisors don't give a bonus, instead having a specific policy they boost on top of their reserve of free policies they offer. Let's say for example there is a "Recruitment Policy" that impacts maximum manpower. A "Master recruiter" advisor would increase this one by 1 rank, on top of giving 1-5 MIL policies points. Ranks gives the effectiveness of that Policy, ergo this recruitment one could give +10% Max manpower per invested rank in it (number given as example, balance pass on policies would be of course required).

Some Policies accumulates points toward a goal. Getting Generals requires to invest in a Military Academy policy, and each time it reaches a threshold, it grants a new General, meaning in the process that you do not have to worry about buying 5-8 generals to reroll stats while being above limit, since the constant roll out makes it redundant. Other sources can affect these accumulative policies, for example being at war for this one, or building an actual Academy, a building that could have a monthly maintenance cost to ensure you can't spam it. Larger / stronger countries would have a lot more officers at hand with that system naturally with that system, but war torn ones do bring the opportunity for heroes to rise up, so you are not necessarily penalized if you can't invest much in your officers. Some other policies meanwhile have additionally a natural decay, like Public order (the unrest part of stability), so you might want to keep some points around for these, but sometimes if you need to boost some other parts of your country you might as well need to let it go down naturally.

Other effects are impacted the same: integrating land is a Policy, and it gives a constant trickle of incorporated Governing capacity. Declaring a core only mean it will take longer for this new territory to get fully under your control, so you might prefer to do this progressively instead of a "core all" button, and over extension is based on this, so it goes down constantly instead of jumping around, with territories counting for less. Religion and culture conversion are also boosted by Policies and same religion, same culture land would be easier to Govern, meaning that you might prefer to convert people first, core later depending on your needs.

Ideas disappear in their current implementation, instead becoming a new "Improve administration" policy, something you buy out the same as Generals above, but instead your are buying new policies or improving the existing ones. "Quantity" is getting a couple improvement to that Manpower policy to get 15 or even 20% global manpower by invested point, "Administrative"'s CCR become improving the Governing capacity integration per ADM spent ratio, while buying out the ability to hire explorers or have special troops such as Marines or Revolutionaries Guards with scaling bonus could also be envisioned (so, yes, you could have straight up better elite, but how strong those elites are is one of those decaying policy requiring constant investment to keep them to their best)

Tech are basically rolled in this, with global constant effects when enough points are spent in it, but with local restrictions spreading like Institution. Getting guns requires the gunnery knowledge to spread, limiting where you can buy those new regiments / upgrade old units at, but you also need to assimilate the concept to make use of it. Similarly, something like the Manufactory institution would give a local boost to good production, that scales with how much you invest in improved manufactories to reinforce its effect. With a tight control on what can evolve from what, it should avoid "tech rushing" and in fact, promote timing your upgrade well, as when you discover a new thing, it will spread to others, making it easier for them to make use of it, while allowing strong countries to buy out a lead giving them an advantage early.

All in all, this stays as a basic concept, with probably a lot of flaws, but I hope it offers a basis for discussion and reflection on how to deal with what many considers a game design flaw. Hope you had a decent read
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
i had a quick skim and presumably you're talking about what you'd like to see in an EUV?
 
So, that's Victoria 3 capacities adapted to EU(I)V.

Don't get me wrong, I like it.

Just one thing, though : I don't think there should be a choice between "ideas" and technologies. Investing in improving the way we do stuff shouldn't translate as a decrease in the pace of research, so I would rather imagine a system in which every "points" always go to technology (as kind of a duplicate, in the background) and only "wasting" points on certain actions such as break fortification, stomping rebels, coring and increasing decreasing war exhaustion would translate into you diverting your academic (and genius) ressources from making your country learn new things.

That's a problem I had with the dichotomy between ideas and technology from the start. I guess with the way you are describing having generals from academia, generals could also be a "free" currency, technology wise.
 
I would go for what is probably a less drastic version of the same base idea.

I would describe the mana types as having their own pool and balance. The pool should still be capped of course. The "income" comes from the base number, ruler, advisors, and so forth, the "expenses" from any process you start. Most things you currently would instantly buy with mana would become like Diplomatic Annexation already works: A monthly expense that stalls if your mana pool is empty. This means that stretching yourself too thin slows down everything that you are working on (letting only mandatory expenditures pull you negative), but still lets you stockpile points in quiet times for when you want to run a mana deficit for a while during and after a war for example. I know Vicky 3 specifically won't have this, but i like it better than something like forcing excess mana into dev and not letting you prepare for when you need it later.

I see Tech as general research and Idea Groups as specializations. Tech research shouldn't be a thing you pay for all at once every 13 years, but a continuous process that can be sped up or slowed down according to how much mana you budget it. Having every X years you are ahead of time reduce the max monthly mana towards tech by 1 would put a cap on how far ahead you can get like the mana cap currently does. A reminder banner should show up if you are falling (further) behind on tech. Ideas on the other hand would stay mostly the same, specialized projects to be initiated when you have the mana to spare, that spend X mana pr month towards unlocking a new bonus.

Province Development and Culture Conversion would be like Ideas in this scenario, though maybe of a lower priority to prevent players screwing themselves over with it. This should probably be paired with other improvements to the dev cost calculation, caps on simultaneous dev projects, and modifiers like +1 simultaneous [type] dev projects, and +1 [type] dev speed.

I would make stability not an integer value, and increasing it a monthly expense of X admin power you can toggle on and off at any time. Stability Cost affects your stability gain pr mana (from a base of 0.01).

Events could still give or cost instant sums of mana, but changing to +/- mana pr month for a period whereever it makes sense would be more in line with the system.

Anything where a delay would just be annoying i wouldn't touch. Generals and especially explorers are examples: Because they can die at random times and having too many is a waste, making them take any significant time to recruit would add nothing but an annoyance. If we want to limit general spam, i would rather just limit it straight up.
 
What you're describing sounds a lot like EU3's system. Both stability and technology were time-gated based off of incremental investments made over a period of years.

Stability was also tied to the size of your country. An OPM might only need to invest in stability for a few months in order to secure an increase, while a massive empire would require years, if not decades depending on how much you're willing to sacrifice in terms of gradual tech investments.
 
So, that's Victoria 3 capacities adapted to EU(I)V.

Don't get me wrong, I like it.

Just one thing, though : I don't think there should be a choice between "ideas" and technologies. Investing in improving the way we do stuff shouldn't translate as a decrease in the pace of research, so I would rather imagine a system in which every "points" always go to technology (as kind of a duplicate, in the background) and only "wasting" points on certain actions such as break fortification, stomping rebels, coring and increasing decreasing war exhaustion would translate into you diverting your academic (and genius) ressources from making your country learn new things.

That's a problem I had with the dichotomy between ideas and technology from the start. I guess with the way you are describing having generals from academia, generals could also be a "free" currency, technology wise.
I suppose it is, not sure if what you use that capacity has sme elements where you only need to spend it for some time, but the idea is close, indeed. Also agree that Ideas and Tech are basically the same conceptual thing, but with one being a one size fit all (except infantry and cavalry units) and the other being specialization. Stuffs like Bombard or Harsh treatment would also become Policies (one probably giving a bonus chance to damage walls and the other being a general unrest management, but I do like that "points" are not to be wasted. Redirecting those to some sort of tech, however has one flaw I try to avoid: your kind isn't the lead scientist of the realm, so those are relegated to the Institution system of spreading, and you can pay to reap additional benefices when they are present, with new tech based policies only taking effect in areas where it is present (but having stronger benefits than basic ones, so you see your country evolving toward new policies as you go)


I would go for what is probably a less drastic version of the same base idea.

I would describe the mana types as having their own pool and balance. The pool should still be capped of course. The "income" comes from the base number, ruler, advisors, and so forth, the "expenses" from any process you start. Most things you currently would instantly buy with mana would become like Diplomatic Annexation already works: A monthly expense that stalls if your mana pool is empty. This means that stretching yourself too thin slows down everything that you are working on (letting only mandatory expenditures pull you negative), but still lets you stockpile points in quiet times for when you want to run a mana deficit for a while during and after a war for example. I know Vicky 3 specifically won't have this, but i like it better than something like forcing excess mana into dev and not letting you prepare for when you need it later.

I see Tech as general research and Idea Groups as specializations. Tech research shouldn't be a thing you pay for all at once every 13 years, but a continuous process that can be sped up or slowed down according to how much mana you budget it. Having every X years you are ahead of time reduce the max monthly mana towards tech by 1 would put a cap on how far ahead you can get like the mana cap currently does. A reminder banner should show up if you are falling (further) behind on tech. Ideas on the other hand would stay mostly the same, specialized projects to be initiated when you have the mana to spare, that spend X mana pr month towards unlocking a new bonus.

Province Development and Culture Conversion would be like Ideas in this scenario, though maybe of a lower priority to prevent players screwing themselves over with it. This should probably be paired with other improvements to the dev cost calculation, caps on simultaneous dev projects, and modifiers like +1 simultaneous [type] dev projects, and +1 [type] dev speed.

I would make stability not an integer value, and increasing it a monthly expense of X admin power you can toggle on and off at any time. Stability Cost affects your stability gain pr mana (from a base of 0.01).

Events could still give or cost instant sums of mana, but changing to +/- mana pr month for a period whereever it makes sense would be more in line with the system.

Anything where a delay would just be annoying i wouldn't touch. Generals and especially explorers are examples: Because they can die at random times and having too many is a waste, making them take any significant time to recruit would add nothing but an annoyance. If we want to limit general spam, i would rather just limit it straight up.
I agree on the fact that annexation is a good way to have an effect take time and resources during the process of its happening. I guess the idea of a pool of points for larger expanse could be a good idea too, but not have it as large as it is now.

The one thing I don't like with Mana to dev is how your Mana gain stays the same, but the value of a point of dev lowers as time goes. A 10 Dev OPM investing 60 points in Manpower to get +0.2 goods modifier for maybe 1 ducat / year (counting the trade value added) might have increased its economic base by a good 20%. The same thing for a 3000 Dev blob is probably a footnote in the base 750 / month its trade already generate. Meanwhile, Stability gives country wide benefits, so when your Mana base stays relatively the same all game long, so is the benefit

Having Monthly Mana modifier instead of direct cost is a good idea actually, maybe that's something that should be toyed with more and see where it could lead?


What you're describing sounds a lot like EU3's system. Both stability and technology were time-gated based off of incremental investments made over a period of years.

Stability was also tied to the size of your country. An OPM might only need to invest in stability for a few months in order to secure an increase, while a massive empire would require years, if not decades depending on how much you're willing to sacrifice in terms of gradual tech investments.
Didn't get the chance to play it so I cannot compare the ideas, but good to know
 
I don't see how this suggestion would solve the problems usually identify with mana. I would, for example, separate tech and mana, rather than keeping it dependant of ruler stats.
 
I don't see how this suggestion would solve the problems usually identify with mana. I would, for example, separate tech and mana, rather than keeping it dependant of ruler stats.
That's the idea. You don't pay for tech, you pay to reap their benefits while forgoing less efficient methods, with only a way smaller "Entry fee" to get it unlocked as an idea. Consider it like buying new units types for MIL, or new taxes methods for ADM
 
That's the idea. You don't pay for tech, you pay to reap their benefits while forgoing less efficient methods, with only a way smaller "Entry fee" to get it unlocked as an idea. Consider it like buying new units types for MIL, or new taxes methods for ADM
But you will still need to use mana to interact with the system, so it would still come from sources dependant of RNG and would still feel arbitrary.
 
But you will still need to use mana to interact with the system, so it would still come from sources dependant of RNG and would still feel arbitrary.
Indeed, that's the design space I chose for that idea, keeping the basis of EU IV. I personally don't like it, as I mentioned in the first post, but the exercice is to keep something and modify it using existing elements, not to make an entirely new game, something I did some time ago
 
Then the opening of your post is misleading, as the solution would only affect the instant effect of actions. Which while I agree would be a step in the right direction, I think most of the player base prefer the current approach.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Stuffs like Bombard or Harsh treatment would also become Policies
I like your points and there would certainly be a lot more to talk about, but this bit rubbed me in the wrong way.

I’m all for advisors giving modifiers and ideas being investments for future bonuses, but when it comes to specific orders you can give, I think you should keep the initiative.

Break fort would be tapping into your military resources to find a way to make the breach happen sooner. Force March should probably cost manpower, or even attrition, rather than mil points. It doesn’t take a military genius to order to march faster.

Then for war exhaustion and inflation, I believe they should take the Inperator route, where you have an initial boost and after that an increase to the normal modifier.

Stability should be laid to rest in light of all the other mechanics which were added over time, or used only as an indicator of the general situation your country is in.
 
I like your points and there would certainly be a lot more to talk about, but this bit rubbed me in the wrong way.

I’m all for advisors giving modifiers and ideas being investments for future bonuses, but when it comes to specific orders you can give, I think you should keep the initiative.

Break fort would be tapping into your military resources to find a way to make the breach happen sooner. Force March should probably cost manpower, or even attrition, rather than mil points. It doesn’t take a military genius to order to march faster.

Then for war exhaustion and inflation, I believe they should take the Inperator route, where you have an initial boost and after that an increase to the normal modifier.

Stability should be laid to rest in light of all the other mechanics which were added over time, or used only as an indicator of the general situation your country is in.
I'd put a minimal attrition damage on Forced March actually, instead of costing MIL. It would help preventing armies running in circles to avoid combat and make it less of an automatic toggle when you're ahead in tech in SP. I'm not a fan of sitting around for sieging either, but at the same time, a brand new General costs the same as making a hole in a fortress, and I am not a fan of that in EU4 (or a lot of other stuffs, like forts are better in low dev provinces due to low supply limit, or how coastal province forts can always be ship sieged... even when the fort represent something 50 kms away from the coast... but outside the scope). Basically localized actions should NEVER cost global money anyway, so nothing that isn't empire wide should consume Mana, and those interaction as such should take that in consideration. I'd rather for instance have breach wall results not be a separate modifier... but actually lowering the level of the fort, destroying it if it it at the lowest level. Capital province could stay as the one exception. So, you could instead asks an army to be careful not to destroy forts when sieging because you actually want to control it.

I'd go as far as getting inspiration from a VERY old game, Powermonger: you basically have three stances to follow: merciful, neutral and agressive. The first one would lowers the devastation / damage and fight more defensively, killing less soldiers but more morale to keep your ground, slower move speed as you're careful in how you move.... Aggressive on the contrary is all about razing everything on your way, sending human waves on the front, which could help sieging faster for the price of more attrition but also level the place to rubble in the process, and maybe cause higher mortality among generals. That way you incorporate some strategy / micro, without paying MIL points