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

[The Silent Hero]

Agreed. V2 needs the Hoi4 treatment. Better graphics, more navigable menus, more tooltips and better notifications.

 

[magitsu]

I always feel like the AI fails to keep up with you in Vic2.

It's ultra passive and almost completely railroaded. Almost every game it goes after the same things, in the same order. Only difference is random crisis going the other way (probably even then due to player's influence). Everything is too clearly just there for the player.

I guess if you applied Hoi4-treatment it would go completely free for all after hard railroading if Hoi3 to Hoi4 transition is any indication.

 

[TheDecider]

I guess if you applied Hoi4-treatment it would go completely free for all after hard railroading if Hoi3 to Hoi4 transition is any indication.

While HoI4 got the historical NF-focus option I think that is precisely all it does, so not very "railroaded" ( perhaps too little? ). Then again, if some NFs do give CBs... that might throw them onto a path that will give a quite plausibly railroad with little wiggle room or small outcome differences between games.

 

[deanwebb]

... just keep offering me the crown from the gutter. I love forming Germany that way.

 

[sirrichard]

Don't expect them to announce the game as early as they did HoI4.

 

[dfcrcesar]

Yes, having to have 3000 soldiers with the same language is annoying, especially when you are playing as a small/diverse country like Transvaal.

,
Man, but it makes sense your pop type is what defines your type of brigade. Traansval isn t meant to be powerful, if you wanna make it powerful, it s easy to mod something not way too cheetos and yet give power to it.

 

[fudd_bopo]

I can't help but feel a little worried after HoI 4 and hope a Vicky 3 won't get the same treatment.

The UI does have problems, but to me it's some specific parts rather than the whole thing. For instance founding colonies can be really tedious and could as well be more automated after you place one. Improving relations is a similar case where you want to repeat the same action multiple times at an interval and should be changed, could work more similar to influence. Automatically increasing opinion could be another useful checkbox.

Some gameplay changes I would like to see is relations more akin to CK2 and EU4 rather than a single value as well as a more dynamic infamy system like EU4.

I find the brigades populations discussed in this thread to be a good way to represent the pops in your army and mostly don't have a problem with them being single pop as it makes them able to interact with their current conditions. Maybe an improvement could be to promote one culture to soldiers at a time in order to get at least one brigade available in case there are a lot of different cultures present. Or have them be represented as a multiple pop brigade until there are enough soldiers of one culture to switch to a single pop.

Would love to see a little more depth in the army and especially wars as well next time around as I think there are a lot of things to improve on there, not to mention more use for the navy as others have already stated in this thread.

But most of all I would like to see new ways to interact with the world such as selling/giving away provinces, inciting/supplying rebels in other countries, affecting crises or improved wargoals/peace offerings.

 

[dfcrcesar]

fudd_bopo I agree with most that you said, about the infamy I disagree, the infamy system of Vic 2 is supposed to be limiting because it s mainly a industry and trade based game, not like EU4 itself which a map painter, only if the next system still limiting I would agree with a change.

And the idea about colonies being more dynamic is very agreeable, also I believe you shouldn t colonize big chunks, you should choose a state, and a province would be picked to start colonization, and from there on more and more provinces would be added in your part of the state, this whole colonization of Vic 2 seens very artificial.

 

[General WVPM]

fudd_bopo I agree with most that you said, about the infamy I disagree, the infamy system of Vic 2 is supposed to be limiting because it s mainly a industry and trade based game, not like EU4 itself which a map painter, only if the next system still limiting I would agree with a change.

And the idea about colonies being more dynamic is very agreeable, also I believe you shouldn t colonize big chunks, you should choose a state, and a province would be picked to start colonization, and from there on more and more provinces would be added in your part of the state, this whole colonization of Vic 2 seens very artificial.

I hope they rework colonial crisis so there can be some agreement (not horrible one sides treaties), like the US and UK did with Oregon.
Both sides claimed the area and in the end they split it up instead of 1 guy annexing it all or a ww -1 starting....

 

[robobo]

To me, the biggest issue in the game is the lack of regional and internal markets, seeing as this is more or less what drove most of the imperialism of the 19th century. Along with the lack of "subtle" methods of colonisation that were employed, trucial states, British intervention in Egypt, American interventions in Mexico, Russia in Romania, the list goes on. I want to be able to manipulate uncivs into screwing their economy through nice friendly investment loans or forcing them to open their markets, then step in to restore "order" all overseen with my advisors of course, who mearly advise.... honestly they do.... give me more flexibility in territorial control please, between just the map being my colour or the country not being under my control.

Anything on top of those two as far as I'm concerned is a bonus, more naval immersion would be nice, but I think that could come from regional markets (shipping goods from one to the other for example etc)

Vicky 2 was as far as I'm concerned the best grand strategy that has ever been made. The planning and foresight needed to manage politics and the (flawed) economic system immersive, coupled with the almost natural scaling of scope from playing minor nations, focusing just on your region and the neighbours to playing the UK and spending all the game at the slowest speed, hoping from continent to continent identifying where my primacy is being threatened (ahhhhh the paranoia)

 

[RELee]

Two things I want an extensive reworking on.

• The economy.
• The conscription system

The economy can kill the late game experience, and the conscription system in use in V2 kills the American Civil War.

Otherwise, I love V2.

 

[paulatreides0]

The biggest Vicky issue, by and far is not any economic or UI issue. It's that Vicky fails completely and utterly to even vaguely reflect war during the 20th century. If they fixed that and that alone, Vicky 3 would be worth buying.

 

[Challenge]

@Paul.. How does it fail to do this?

 

[HavelockVetinari]

I hope there will be an option for some kind of automated troop management like in HoI4, because its sooooo tediuos sending my 300 brigades into Russia while trying to always have my frontline closed. Also more events, more decisions!

 

[paulatreides0]

@Paul.. How does it fail to do this?

It represents WWI as being the same as Post-Napoleonic Warfare just with higher casualties. It wasn't. Not even close. The warfare from WWI was closer in similarity to the warfare from WWII than it was Post-Napoleonic war. If you slapped HoI's warfare system onto Vicky it would do an immensely better job of portraying the war than the joke of the system in Vicky, where instead of front lines and actual, well...fronts, you just make huge doom stacks and send them crashing into each other.

 

[Oliver Twopence]

I do think the "move=attack" system is something they should look into for Victoria as well.

It may come at a price, but I think the current system hurts the late game more than a new system would hurt the early game.

 

[paulatreides0]

I do think the "move=attack" system is something they should look into for Victoria as well.

It may come at a price, but I think the current system hurts the late game more than a new system would hurt the early game.

They could literally just make it a technology. Problem solved.

 

[Hrv123]

I hope no Vic3 for year, two or more. In any case until Clausewitz Engine get update to work on x64 and can run on CPUs with multithreading game AI and other calculations. If Vic 3 remain on x86 and single (or is it now partially 2 in hoi4.exe?) threads in CE it can only look better with more graphics but will get more of it core content optimized (freeing CPU to do more gpu related i guess).
So no, please no because it will end up more visually beautiful and content optimised.

 

[Bella Gerant]

@Paul.. How does it fail to do this?

There's also the lack of supply lines (troops away from coastlines and not bordering friendly/occupied lands ought to take extra attrition and have penalties to organization and morale. Troops didn't forage at this point in history; they had rail systems to send supplies. Overextending forces ought to be punished). Hell, that was a lesson from the Napoleonic era (Napoleon in Russia) and before, yet 50k French troops can dance around Moscow without any occupied lands nearby and still have supplies over the course of months.

 

[anomanderus]

It is indeed the next game in Paradox's mind, I'm pretty sure. Definitely looking forward to seeing how they decide to make it, let's hope it'll be as good as Hearts of Iron IV; if not even better. VIctoria 2 as it stands probably isn't the easiest Paradox game to learn and I think if they get some nice tutorials in and "simplify" it a little bit to make it easier for new-comers to learn it will definitely be a big hit with players new to the whole grand strategy franchise.

Although, first of all we'll probably be seeing a bunch of DLC coming out for Hearts of Iron IV, seeing as there already is an expansion pass that you could buy or that you would get with the FIeld Marshal pre-order edition, and it'll probably be a year or so until we see the announcement. But I am positive that this is the next big grand strategy game Paradox is going to come out with. Gonna be interesting to see how well they manage to do it, don't disappoint us Paradox, we're counting on you

I'm reasonably sure the HOIIV DLC team is separate from the game development team, similar to how CK2 and EUIV still get DLC even while HOIIV was being developed.