Please give us console codes for land swaps!!
- Thread starter unmerged(75409)
- Start date
-
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.
The main point is: why the hell do we even have to bother with console??? This option was in Vic1, removing it without any serious reason is just ridiculous.
They've already stated the reason, the negotiations were an easy exploit that broke immersion, because the AI that handled it was so bad.
I think the decision to remove it was the correct one because of this, but I've begun to think that a "sell province" button as in EU3 and/or a "grant gift" (including choices for techs and land) button would be nice to have, for multiplayer and so you can strengthen (/tidy up borders with) allies and vassals, or give away that one province that you think another GP is willing to go to war with you over. Maybe they have something else thought out for this though, or at least for some sort of tech "spread", so you don't need to take over those colonial RGOs to give them the tech production boosts. If they do have some (slow) tech spread to your vassals (or even SoI) and allies, I don't want the game to also have a choice to just give tech, since this would allow the player to boost his SoIs RGO production by granting all the relevant techs to the SoI nations that make the stuff he wants (if RGO production is falling behind his GP's factory consumption).
What if this feature was modified to a Great Power only feature that works only with countries in your SoI? That way GPs could make minor adjustments in areas they control, but it avoids major exploits.
Having edited save games in Victoria and in the newer Clausewitz games, I can tell you it's much easier now, especially on the province ownership front. The provinces are all listed seperately with ownership and the number code neatly identified for you. You can edit it down to the date at which the province changes hands. The file setup in Vicky was much more obtuse, but it's quite simple now.
The Clausewitz games do not work this way. It takes longer to wait for Notepad to catch up to changes than it does to make the changes themselves. You don't have to find the entry for either country involved at all now.
The Clausewitz Engine is a breeze to edit province owner ship in, it's so easy it's criminal.
Its so easy that its easier to edit it in notepad than to actually do it ingame!
Theres even this guy on youtube that edits WC in less than 1 min!
First of all I want to say I have no programming knowledge at all but I just cant shut up...
I think PI is doing the right decision to not have land swaps or negotiations in Vicky2 right now since we all want a game that really works and fun. But I think PI shouldn't rule it out completely, you never know after some extensive time of playing we discover that land swaps/negotiations actually will improve gameplay, so please PI leave some place in the game for a future inclusion of it.
I think PI is doing the right decision to not have land swaps or negotiations in Vicky2 right now since we all want a game that really works and fun. But I think PI shouldn't rule it out completely, you never know after some extensive time of playing we discover that land swaps/negotiations actually will improve gameplay, so please PI leave some place in the game for a future inclusion of it.
I said SERIOUS reason. If the feature is exploited it is not a valid reason to remove the feature alltoghether. AS it has bee said before: it is player's private issue if he wants to exploit the game and spoil his fun.
I'll give you the example: reparations from China was an exploit. If we carry on this way of thinking: let's remove reperations as peace option as it can be exploited.
Removing this so called, exploit, by removing extremaly useful feature from negotiations panel is as smart as removing headache by guillotine.
Last edited:
For me at least, that is a serious reason. It feels strange in a game to have the faculty to do something (not as a cheat, as an ingame feature), but to have to restrain yourself from doing it because it makes you much stronger than the AI.
Making it possible as a console code is a different matter, i would have no problem with that if it was easy to implement, but apparently it is not.
I'm even against the inclusion of console codes for the same reason I'm against the negotiation option, it's too exploity.
I don't agree that if a feature like Negotiations makes you over powered then you just shouldn't use it. That's like giving the player a button that auto-matically wins them whatever war they're in, you don't just say "Well then don't use it" because it robs you of fulfillment. It's one thing to emerge from a bloody scrap with Austria proud and victorious, but if there'd been an option all along to win the war deus ex machina style, you begin to wonder what was the point of my hard work.
I've always felt that ONE of the great things about Paradox games was the codes to help you along if you needed it. It was a great benefit to me when first seriously sitting down with the intention of learning not only how to win at Victoria, but just exactly how Victoria's internals actually worked. Now, I just don't use them. Seriously, it is really just that easy. I would ask that players not petition to take away facets of the games that are helpful to some, and I would encourage the programmers to include all the different codes that they have historically had in their games for the same reason.
Another great thing about Paradox games is the wonderful ability to mod the games to suit your personal tastes and historical interests. One of the things I really hated about Victoria was that if the USA decided to not go to war against the CSA, the CSA was limited to South Carolina only. This was historically inaccurate. Old and dumb as I am, I was able to mod the game to allow for the historically accurate 11 state CSA even if the USA choose to not fight.
And finally, one other great thing about Paradox games is this wonderful forum where we can all come together and discuss our favorite addiction even with all the personal and cultural differences that make us all wonderfully different from one another. Sappy, but true.
Another great thing about Paradox games is the wonderful ability to mod the games to suit your personal tastes and historical interests. One of the things I really hated about Victoria was that if the USA decided to not go to war against the CSA, the CSA was limited to South Carolina only. This was historically inaccurate. Old and dumb as I am, I was able to mod the game to allow for the historically accurate 11 state CSA even if the USA choose to not fight.
And finally, one other great thing about Paradox games is this wonderful forum where we can all come together and discuss our favorite addiction even with all the personal and cultural differences that make us all wonderfully different from one another. Sappy, but true.
The game is NOT a work. The game suppose to be FUN. Not just fun for you but for other players too. If you do not understandt it - I feel sorry for you.
It is easy! The code is there, in the form of events already. As they allow / forbid many types of commands, they can easily add this piece of code that enables land swaps.
I have to chime in here and add that the removal of the negotiations option is a HUGE PROBLEM! (Shouting intended!)
Think of all the "land deals" that actually occured during this period! The Gadsden Purchase, Alaska, the Virgin Islands, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and others. The Louisiana Purchase was only 33 years before the game, Greenland was almost purchased by the US in the 20th C, and I'm sure there are others.
Krupp sold his artillery to anyone with cash, as did Maxim and Gatling with their machine guns.
The biggest reasons, though, to include a negotiations option are the ability to "correct" multinational or foreign peace deals and to roleplay alternate scenarios. For example, say I am France, and allied with Russia, and we are close to crushing Germany. Russian troops are near Berlin, while I control the western half of the country. Suddenly, and for no real reason, Russia makes a seperate peace with Germany, gaining nothing for their hard fought victory. Russia is not about to erupt in revolution, is not entirely bankrupt, and is not on the verge of collapse. Now, France can conclude the war on favorable terms, but can still pass on a few provinces to Russia for their share.
Obviously, this won't be a dealbreaker for me, but it's something I sure don't like. I'm not a programmer, nor do I claim any special knowledge of coding or suchlike, but I have to think that adding this feature should be relatively simple: after all, it was in V1 AND EU3!
Think of all the "land deals" that actually occured during this period! The Gadsden Purchase, Alaska, the Virgin Islands, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and others. The Louisiana Purchase was only 33 years before the game, Greenland was almost purchased by the US in the 20th C, and I'm sure there are others.
Krupp sold his artillery to anyone with cash, as did Maxim and Gatling with their machine guns.
The biggest reasons, though, to include a negotiations option are the ability to "correct" multinational or foreign peace deals and to roleplay alternate scenarios. For example, say I am France, and allied with Russia, and we are close to crushing Germany. Russian troops are near Berlin, while I control the western half of the country. Suddenly, and for no real reason, Russia makes a seperate peace with Germany, gaining nothing for their hard fought victory. Russia is not about to erupt in revolution, is not entirely bankrupt, and is not on the verge of collapse. Now, France can conclude the war on favorable terms, but can still pass on a few provinces to Russia for their share.
Obviously, this won't be a dealbreaker for me, but it's something I sure don't like. I'm not a programmer, nor do I claim any special knowledge of coding or suchlike, but I have to think that adding this feature should be relatively simple: after all, it was in V1 AND EU3!
The land deals could be implemented as decisions.
This is handled through the world market, similar to vicky1.
No, not for all the nations and for all the lands it can't. The main point is: it is irrelevant that USA bought Alaska - becouse Alaska could be bought by somebody else. USA could buy Greenland. Or Cuba. Or many other provinces. Making a "decision" for each of them doesn't make any sense.
You have missed his point. What he meant high-tech weapon was sold everywhere. It is not simulate by WM, as on WM you buy weapon on your current tech level. Selling high-tech guns may by simulated by tech deals.
I had considered that a simple "sell province" function as there is in EU3 might rectify things, but if I think about it, you then nerf the uncivs: how can anyone civilise without tech purchases from great powers?
You would also have a scenario where competing GPs seeking to regularise colonial borders wouldn't be able to trade claims.
You would also have a scenario where competing GPs seeking to regularise colonial borders wouldn't be able to trade claims.
It's the player who will buy the game and play it the way he wants, even if it means constructing Verdun-like fortifications on every island, while focusing on maintaining tobaco production monopoly.
If the player wants a feature to be implemented in the game, then why the hell not?! You Pdox guys already showed your Might and Power by not implementing peace treaties in HoI3 (together with some other things) and see how extremely popular is this game compared to good ol' DD/Arma.
So, long story short, you guys make the game with as much features as possible, and leave the playing and deciding wether I'll use something as an "exploit" to me and my conscience.
You can make the deals more expensive, you can add some kind of time delay, but why remove whole feature?
Last edited: