Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Note of worry about Eastern Europe

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Victoria 3 9042 Bug Reports 5235 User Mods 385 Multiplayer 44 Suggestions 2283 Tech Support 532 After Action Reports (AARs)
Reader mode
In the sense of hoping for more period appropriate borders and less focus on modern day borders, I agree. It was weird in Victoria 2 how many inaccuracies were present for the sake of being able to create borders that didn't appear until the very end of the game's timeframe or, in some cases, well after it.
 
  • 7Like
Reactions:
Ottoman Master said:
In the sense of hoping for more period appropriate borders and less focus on modern day borders, I agree. It was weird in Victoria 2 how many inaccuracies were present for the sake of being able to create borders that didn't appear until the very end of the game's timeframe or, in some cases, well after it.
Click to expand...
if you don't move from state, region, and county borders, the game will never evolve! and it has always been a paradox error since europa universalis 2 it is necessary to be able to divide the regions without blocks. without taking either all or nothing
 
  • 12
  • 2
Reactions:
harold lorre said:
if you don't move from state, region, and county borders, the game will never evolve! and it has always been a paradox error since europa universalis 2 it is necessary to be able to divide the regions without blocks. without taking either all or nothing
Click to expand...
What you are talking about is a complete redesign of the Clausewitz Engine. I know they have iterated changes in Clausewitz but I believe the existence of a 'province' is core to the engine.
 
  • 13
  • 1
Reactions:
Stanislaviv said:
True
Click to expand...
I think they want to give a lot variety of governance and diplomacy so I think that "free territory" basically pops up like civil war would in hearts of iron. Maybe it starts out as legit revolution before largely back Ukrainian lead revolution (most pops supporting or most of leadership) decide to make it war of independence. Maybe if has decisions or options in game to do so. You can decide to treat Russians as equals in new republic or shun or etc. You get point. Less "wars to death" or total wars of conquest like Hearts of Iron. You can fight to stalemates
 
OfficePins said:
What exactly is wrong with Victoria 2's Russian provinces? They more or less followed the Russian governorships map, it only split them in more pieces. Also I don't think many people have the map of the imperial Russian governorships in mind to lose immersion when looking at the map.
Click to expand...

1. Some of provinces were too big. Like, come on, Poltava is too huge and always had a funny density on map, looking like a Prague in East Europe.

2. If you separate Budjak then you shouldn't have it easily connect to Odesa. The Dniester Estuary is a major obstacle with a single thin bridge near shore, which means any fleet can disrupt connection there... or another side by using a fortress, like Akkerman (Bilhorod-Dnitrovsky, Cetatea Alba, etc) did not too long before the start date and dating way back into Roman and Byzantine times, serving as a major border point.

It is a nitpick, but people are gravely offending Moldova by taking away the importance of the Bendery (Tighina) town and fortress that for centuries were used to bypass the Dniester Estuary and served as a major crossing through Dniester.

3. Awful shape of Cherkasy province, 0/10, taken straight from 00s. EU4 still has this shape.

---

Yes, I know they are doing a different map for Victoria 3. I just express my grievances with Victoria 2 map and mistakes carried from old designs.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Oglesby said:
What you are talking about is a complete redesign of the Clausewitz Engine. I know they have iterated changes in Clausewitz but I believe the existence of a 'province' is core to the engine.
Click to expand...
Stellaris is Clausewitz and it absolutely has no provinces, borders in that game were also extremely granular in its first iterations.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
any map is wrong because it is based on current borders and not historical borders! as I have already said the borders of austria hungary were not the current ones and hungary was much larger and included slovenia, croatia, and then in 900 bosnia. savoy is nice and made only to justify annexation in 1860. all borders are just one big hasbro risk, they do not take into account the population, demographics and borders and human decisions. the African borders the Belgian congo for example was decided by Belgium, France. England on a geographical basis, as well as Cameroon and Somalia and Northern Oregon between Canada and the United States. and the state of washington and oregon first united into a single territory including ohio
 
  • 8
Reactions:
Hungary isn't on the map since it's not independent, and if you do release them they will most certainly own all the territory that they would have historically.
Click to expand...
Hungary isn't on the map since it's not independent, and if you do release them they will most certainly own all the territory that they would have historically.
harold lorre said:
any map is wrong because it is based on current borders and not historical borders! as I have already said the borders of austria hungary were not the current ones and hungary was much larger and included slovenia, croatia, and then in 900 bosnia. savoy is nice and made only to justify annexation in 1860. all borders are just one big hasbro risk, they do not take into account the population, demographics and borders and human decisions. the African borders the Belgian congo for example was decided by Belgium, France. England on a geographical basis, as well as Cameroon and Somalia and Northern Oregon between Canada and the United States. and the state of washington and oregon first united into a single territory including ohio
Click to expand...
Also, as has been repeated hundreds of times, you're asking for the impossible over and over again and refuse to listen. There are limitations to game design, and limited resources and physical limitations when it comes to hardware and software. You literally can't have everything and it is getting tiering to see you repeat the same thing over and over and over again for months on the forums when it's completely pointless as your suggestions will never happen and you will never be satisfied with the game.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
harold lorre said:
I'm talking about the borders between states of the wrong maps
Click to expand...
State regions are not supposed to be 100% 1-to-1 real life administrative divisions and for practical reasons can't change the way you suggest during the course of the game. Having Austria-Hungary just be two state regions (Cisleithania and Hungary) would not make the game/simulation any better or more historically accurate outside of just making the borders line up.
 
Last edited:
  • 7
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
JKComposer said:
States are not supposed to represent real life administrative divisions and for practical reasons can't change.
Click to expand...
I am fine with that. I just hope they make states purely mechanic base and there for convenience. For administration divisions it should be very fluid and flexible. Basically I can change and decide zoning in that state.
This can relate to local people demanding historical borders being respected like individual German states in new unified Germany while some push for more strictly geography or “conventional” state lines like of France or US. Based more of geography and not regards for historical borders especially former dynastic or ethnic ones.

This was actually major issue with nationalization of states in Europe. The church and nobles still owned a lot of land and even peasants could be stubborn about moving themselves even if public project improves things for everyone. Some buildings go back centuries.

They should break down strategic or regions of interest which they likely are currently doing at some level. Strategic regions of interest should be mix of geographical regions and major civilization/population centers but largely geographical in focus.

For example, Baltic and Scandinavia should be it’s own regions of interest while Prussia should not be part of “Poland” but Eastern Europe(minus Balkans who its is its own thing).
The Balkan region in dev dairy did not even include Thrace! Like why? That is using modern borders and does not make sense from demographic or geographic standpoint. Also Russia should honestly be one region of interest(Rus being everything west of Urals and Eastern Europe including Ukraine, Belarus, Poland, and maybe Baltic if not it’s own thing). That map on these regions did make me wonder where hell they are getting or deciding map divisions in game
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
JKComposer said:
States are not supposed to represent real life administrative divisions and for practical reasons can't change.
Click to expand...

It has already been announced that all american states would be represented as states in game.
So it's not surprising that people would start asking for the same level of care to be put into other nations especially the ones that had a rather stable administrative division of their territory through the game period.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
the problem for example of the Bosnian and Serbian minorities are a problem to be taken into account, the Italians and the Slavs in Istria the Hungarian Bulgarian Romanian minorities in the Balkans and in Hungary any encyclopedia says it or book of history
 
  • 2
Reactions:
unmerged(760025) said:
It has already been announced that all american states would be represented as states in game.
So it's not surprising that people would start asking for the same level of care to be put into other nations especially the ones that had a rather stable administrative division of their territory through the game period.
Click to expand...
The American states do not change - no state regions change in the game because that is not how the game works. What Harold is suggesting (and repeated for several months) is that all possible administrative divisions of every country on earth, historical or a-historical, including microstates, needs to be represented or else the game will be a failure. He wants all of the Kingdom of Hungary to be one single state in the game (meaning Croatia, Slovakia, Transylvania etc. don't exist as states) that then becomes several states later on if appropriate with any possible including ahistorical layouts to be possible (and he also want province borders to change to allow for any theoretical border changes).

Having all of the Kingdom of Hungary as one state would mean you couldn't build factories specifically in Croatia or Eastern Hungary, and that any diplomatic plays would be for the entirety of Hungary, you couldn't prioritise infrastructure in only one part of Hungary, etc. It would be detrimental to the gameplay for some surface-level historical accuracy that would only work as long as the entirety of Hungary remains a part of Austria since there is no way to split state regions.

For context, he's previously used Civilization as a good example of how borders should work, except I think he wants the tiles to be able to change shape and size down to the pixel level, which is just not how the Clausewitz Engine works.

Also, he has previously said he is not happy with the American states either since they are static and can't change shapes (he's previously talked about how the game needs to have the possibility of having Texas' state borders change depending on what happens, like the Texas state region changing to include all of the US south west).
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back