Now that HOI4 is released, it's time for Victoria 3

[Oliver Twopence]

I don't quite agree with you here, as before playing Vicky, I hadn't played a single paradox. I learnt the game within a day.

I had the same experience. You don't learn every minute detail, but you get the basics very fast. It certainly took me a lot less time than with HoI3.

Have seen several people use V2 as an example when complaining about how "dumbed down" and "casualized" HoI4 is, but I would claim that V2 is a lot less complex overall. It has an interesting but flawed pop- and economic system under the hood, but that is just about it.

And I say this despite V2 being my favourite Paradox game.

 

[Grimdalusaugust]

Victoria 2 was my first Paradox game and the vicky series is my favourite series.

 

[Valtarien]

I, too, eagerly await a Victoria 3. I cannot count the number of times that I've been playing HOI4, when I think to myself how the world came to be shaped as it was in 1936, and all the fun I had in shaping those events leading up to it in Victoria 2. This franchise definitely deserves a sequel.

 

[EmpireMagnis]

One thing they need to remove whenever Vicky III is announced: infamy. As well as remodel the wargoal system.

 

[Flobalob]

One thing they need to remove whenever Vicky III is announced: infamy. As well as remodel the wargoal system.

I wouldn't say remove, but I'd definitely say overhaul. The reason I prefer Vicky to EU and CK is because it's less straight-forward easy-peasy conquering everything you see. Remove the infamy and you remove that restriction, then it's basically just EU in the 19th century. Personally however, I do find the infamy limits too restrictive and I've played on a limit of 40 with a decay of -0.3 at peace and -0.1 at war, which I found much more satisfying. The limit is still there, but you have at least some freedom.

 

[Nick Giordano]

I wouldn't say remove, but I'd definitely say overhaul. The reason I prefer Vicky to EU and CK is because it's less straight-forward easy-peasy conquering everything you see. Remove the infamy and you remove that restriction, then it's basically just EU in the 19th century. Personally however, I do find the infamy limits too restrictive and I've played on a limit of 40 with a decay of -0.3 at peace and -0.1 at war, which I found much more satisfying. The limit is still there, but you have at least some freedom.

Agreed. I don't like all-out conquering matches in games. Especially for the 19th century, where the upmost prerogative of the GPs was the balance of power.

 

[Westernbird]

Feels like Victoria 3 might be done on a new major version of Clausewitz Engine. I hope so.

 

[DesNibelungen]

One thing I like about Vicky is the limits on how much you realistically expect to accomplish over the course of a century. I definitely don't want a V3 where the Canary Islands conquer the world in 1934. As much as I love EU and CK, Vicky is the only series where I feel like I've participated in a semi-plausible history.

 

[Plasma Master]

I wish they'd release the source code instead of releasing Victoria 3. You know paradox loves reinventing the wheel with every iteration of their games, so V3 is gonna be drastically different, rather than an improvement upon things that have been shown to work and an rework of things that don't work. Expect militancy to be gone in the same way that dissent was taken out of HOI4 and you being forced to use political points to change ruling party. Expect pops to have even less agency when it comes to guiding the nation. Expect the economy system to be thrown out instead of improved upon. V3 is sadly going to be nothing like V2.

 

[pesgores]

I wish they'd release the source code instead of releasing Victoria 3. You know paradox loves reinventing the wheel with every iteration of their games, so V3 is gonna be drastically different, rather than an improvement upon things that have been shown to work and an rework of things that don't work. Expect militancy to be gone in the same way that dissent was taken out of HOI4 and you being forced to use political points to change ruling party. Expect pops to have even less agency when it comes to guiding the nation. Expect the economy system to be thrown out instead of improved upon. V3 is sadly going to be nothing like V2.

Turn your mouth somewhere else! If V3 is a cock-up, we riot!

 

[Flobalob]

I wish they'd release the source code instead of releasing Victoria 3.

 

[magitsu]

Victoria III is their way to expand the peacetime gameplay experience, which would translate to even better future games.
I'd also target movements and world market (not necessarily pops) and especially navies for improvement.

CK2 taught them about personalities and emergent storytelling
Stellaris about procedurally generated worlds, non-traditional map plane & fantasy setting

Developing new concepts in these areas is direly needed. For example the navy side of Clausewitz games has been underwhelming for way too long.

V2 with modern GUI and automation would be a big accessibility jump on its own.

 

[TheDecider]

Would be nice to see a better manpower system for V3, brigade per pop is just working poorly.

Been revisiting Victoria after a bunch of HoI, this is driving me nuts!

While I do like the fact I for roleplaying reasons can choose to use unaccepted cultures as cannonfodder and try to "take over" states culturally (I dont know if it actually works but its kinda fun to do, don't encourage clergy only soldiers and hope accepted well-educated moves in instead), the micro brigade per pop is very tiresome. Not only the fact that you have to disband brigades with insufficient pops from time to time, but the fact you have to do manual purges to remove un-loyal brigades with rebel allegiances when rebels are close to rebellion makes it very "click-festy".

For V3, how would they then track where the pops lost in battle came from so new soldiers could be promoted though? Are smaller "soldier chunks" the solution and allow a brigade to made up of many such source locations? These chunks made in each state with their earmarked source-location could then be "teleported" to a central global manpower pool and use as needed. I think doing it for every single soldier would break the system, so some chunk size is required and the source location is needed to know where new promotion can be done after death.

V2 with modern GUI and automation would be a big accessibility jump on its own.

I wonder what they will take from HoI4, the battleplanner system? Expand the convoy system for supply and resources?

 

[DesNibelungen]

I want my navy to have a use in peacetime besides just providing passive point bonuses. Maybe patrol to keeping shipping lanes secure, promote trade, go on world tours for prestige, intimidate other nations, force open closed markets, etc.

 

[General WVPM]

I want my navy to have a use in peacetime besides just providing passive point bonuses. Maybe patrol to keeping shipping lanes secure, promote trade, go on world tours for prestige, intimidate other nations, force open closed markets, etc.

And ofcourse attack civilian ships to create a crisis.

 

[TheDecider]

I want my navy to have a use in peacetime besides just providing passive point bonuses. Maybe patrol to keeping shipping lanes secure, promote trade, go on world tours for prestige, intimidate other nations, force open closed markets, etc.

In HoI4 fleets can be used to get increased trade relations with another country. If expanded upon and changed a bit it might serve the gunboat diplomacy a Vic3 could use.

 

[Flobalob]

I want my navy to have a use in peacetime besides just providing passive point bonuses. Maybe patrol to keeping shipping lanes secure, promote trade, go on world tours for prestige, intimidate other nations, force open closed markets, etc.

Besides gunboat diplomacy which I've meant a few times here already, Vicky could really learn from Total War on the navy front. E.g. you can bombard coastal towns and provinces and ships can provide naval fire support in a battle, which can be absolutely devastating. They can also raid trade lines (which can cripple economies on it's own, especially in Shogun 2 FOTS where all trade is done by sea). Navies are severely disappointing in Vic2 when they have so much potential.

 

[magitsu]

Navies are severely disappointing in Vic2 when they have so much potential.

Indeed. In SP you only need them for score. I've done plenty of games with only transports.

HoI already has coastal bombardment. Blockade war score is another small thing. Gunboat diplomacy used to be in V2, but it somehow didn't work properly (probably because it was an added CB after someone went bankrupt).

Does PDS really need to do a naval game before they get a proper handle on things?
Sea represents the ultimate maneuver. Which is probably the reason why it's so hard for the AI.

I think the concept of regional AI needs to be looked at. For example in V2 the UK and India are so remote.

It's probably very hard to make a generalist AI that can tackle running both the UK and Russia. Two very different propositions.

 

[Flobalob]

Indeed. In SP you only need them for score. I've done plenty of games with only transports.

HoI already has coastal bombardment. Blockade war score is another small thing. Gunboat diplomacy used to be in V2, but it somehow didn't work properly (probably because it was an added CB after someone went bankrupt).

Does PDS really need to do a naval game before they get a proper handle on things?
Sea represents the ultimate maneuver. Which is probably the reason why it's so hard for the AI.

I think the concept of regional AI needs to be looked at. For example in V2 the UK and India are so remote.

It's probably very hard to make a generalist AI that can tackle running both the UK and Russia. Two very different propositions.

I always feel like the AI fails to keep up with you in Vic2. From day one, you storm ahead whilst the other countries basically just spectate. AI wars are either dull and quickly stagnate, or a complete landslide. I don't see much interesting AI-AI interaction, not to mention the frustrating tendency to break alliances days after they're made, only to ask for one again a week later.

Maybe it could be based on a hierarchy-of-needs type system, where the AI realizes the most basic things it should have and ensures that it consolidates these before moving onto the next level, so that you don't get an industrial powerhouse 1930s China that still doesn't have a good military. Maybe this would make the AI too narrow, I don't know. I'm not a programmer.

 

[TheDecider]

Does PDS really need to do a naval game before they get a proper handle on things?
Sea represents the ultimate maneuver. Which is probably the reason why it's so hard for the AI.

I think the concept of regional AI needs to be looked at. For example in V2 the UK and India are so remote.

The remoteness of India can be solved by making an indian puppet ( HoI4 ) or "colonial nation" ( EU4 ) thing.

As for the sea, what do you think about lifting in HoI4's system? While the newest EU4 system with missions might be more realistic since you won't have that many ships early, towards the late game the number of units could make use of the HoI4 system, which I think handles larger amounts of ships and the "attrition" warfare better (not to mention the repair limit on ports but that's a separate issue).