Err.... that's the best shortest term I can come up with.....
I think that a starting campaign a few years before WW1 would be somewhere around the corner...
Proposal(s) for Victoria 3
- Thread starter Pellaken
- 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.
Err.... that's the best shortest term I can come up with.....
I think that a starting campaign a few years before WW1 would be somewhere around the corner...
I'm still on the fence about getting Vic2. I've read new DD's, watched tutorials, let's plays and I feel like i know this game (even tho I did not actually played it). Time frame, setting and events are just my cup of tea, in short I'd love to play this game.
However, I've started of with Ck2 and there are just some things in Vic2 I don't think I could "go back to". Visuals seem extremely outdated* and that economy, wow. Playing communist country seems like crazy persons idea of fun, which makes me want to automate that which I can not understand meaning I'm forced to play some sort of capitalist state.
After all I just feel like playing Vic2 would not be worth investment (time and emotional, not financial) when there are games like CK2, EU4 ("soon") and EvW (still oldy in visuals, like Vic2, but I'm hoping closer to modern games in concept and accessibility). And beside it would be kinda of a spoiler to play it now when I can treat myself with Vic3 one day and have all that fun for the first time
Ah, and also... I've read this whole thread and understood suggested improvements and can say that it makes me optimistic about potential Vic3. And just wanna say 1 more thing: GLOBE instead of map, make my wet dreams come true. it's time, it's the future, hoverboards are coming in 2015, globed Vic3 might as well!
* Just to make clear, I not really Crysis 3 type of guy who values his game based on visuals, but some things in Vic2 are to bad to a point it ruins immersion. I mostly think of map, angular(I hope its real word) rivers, and some strange feel to it all in the end.
However, I've started of with Ck2 and there are just some things in Vic2 I don't think I could "go back to". Visuals seem extremely outdated* and that economy, wow. Playing communist country seems like crazy persons idea of fun, which makes me want to automate that which I can not understand meaning I'm forced to play some sort of capitalist state.
After all I just feel like playing Vic2 would not be worth investment (time and emotional, not financial) when there are games like CK2, EU4 ("soon") and EvW (still oldy in visuals, like Vic2, but I'm hoping closer to modern games in concept and accessibility). And beside it would be kinda of a spoiler to play it now when I can treat myself with Vic3 one day and have all that fun for the first time
Ah, and also... I've read this whole thread and understood suggested improvements and can say that it makes me optimistic about potential Vic3. And just wanna say 1 more thing: GLOBE instead of map, make my wet dreams come true. it's time, it's the future, hoverboards are coming in 2015, globed Vic3 might as well!
* Just to make clear, I not really Crysis 3 type of guy who values his game based on visuals, but some things in Vic2 are to bad to a point it ruins immersion. I mostly think of map, angular(I hope its real word) rivers, and some strange feel to it all in the end.
Some ideas if there was a new Victoria
-> start from the begining of the age of revolutions, ie shortly around the American Revolution/French to the early 1900s. This would help model the Napoleonic age well, not to mention the fact that the industrial revolution started around this time period. This gives seeing the major changes possible obviously with napoleonic france involved but also one might strive to keep gran columbia united.
-> Maybe it is just me, but I don't like how technology is done currently and I think there should be some change to it. not sure what though.
-> I really want leaders of political parties, maybe with some minor stats like +5 reform chance or +5 supression points every month or something. But I mainly just want to know that when my liberal party gets elected who might be running the country.
-> Monopolies and other economic things. I know that Monopolies, such as Standard Oil, were a major thing in the latter part of the game but you don't really get to see that currently. Something should be done to the economic model to reperesent that IMO.
-> start from the begining of the age of revolutions, ie shortly around the American Revolution/French to the early 1900s. This would help model the Napoleonic age well, not to mention the fact that the industrial revolution started around this time period. This gives seeing the major changes possible obviously with napoleonic france involved but also one might strive to keep gran columbia united.
-> Maybe it is just me, but I don't like how technology is done currently and I think there should be some change to it. not sure what though.
-> I really want leaders of political parties, maybe with some minor stats like +5 reform chance or +5 supression points every month or something. But I mainly just want to know that when my liberal party gets elected who might be running the country.
-> Monopolies and other economic things. I know that Monopolies, such as Standard Oil, were a major thing in the latter part of the game but you don't really get to see that currently. Something should be done to the economic model to reperesent that IMO.
- 2
This is all true. I suppose that, if the economic information available to the player is less impenetrable and if the economic simulation works as intended, it could really add to the game-- those are, however, two big 'if's. At the moment, it just seems to me it's a layer of complexity in a game that already has many such layers which render a player wondering what they're supposed to do when they're playing a country.
I remember when I first started playing Vic2, sitting there and wondering what exactly one did with their country other than sitting there, responding to events as they popped up. If you weren't actively trying to invade someone and expand your territory, that is. Sacrilege to the long-time Vic player, I know, but it's a big hurdle to overcome.
An economic simulation could be fun, if there was a way for the player to engage with it more directly. Provided that was the case, I think you're probably quite correct that the processing overhead will no longer be an issue in a future sequel. Which would be nice, provided there weren't even more features and graphical fidelity also added to soak up that extra buffer.
Lower taxes till you are running a deficit budget. Due to low taxes, the pops have more money, which they start putting into the national bank. Once they do that, you should promptly take all that money on loan (before any other countries do) to cover up your deficit. The interest you pay on the loan ends up getting paid to the pops too, further enriching them. You have, in effect dumped your cash reserves into your population.
- 1
What I would like to see in V3:
1) Corporations
It would be interesting if this was introuced, as a layer between the capitalists and their factories. The capitalists would setup a corporation with specific purpose in mind (lets say, an armaments corporation) which, would later expand either horizontally or vertically. This would allow factories to cross subsidise and compete against each other.
2) Banks and advanced financial system (just like Naselus described), with addition of stock exchanges (given corporations have been introduced in point 1)
3) Revamping of Research
By the 19th century was driven the corporations and the industries, not national governments. For example, most of the research in Chemistry in Germany was done by the big companies like Bayer, BASF; the research on the steel artillary and the breech loaded guns which allowed Prussia to win their wars against Austria and France was done by Krupp, not the Prussian government, and so on. The research in the more philosophical areas was largely done in Universities (which should be added as well). Basically, your scientific progress should be dependent upon how well your industry is performing and how much you are spending on your universities rather than you just getting research points every day.
4) More controls on taxation and subsidies to direct industry growth in a better way.
Right now, this is achieved by national focus. However, it can be achieved more elegantly by introducing "Corporation Tax", with the ability to tax various industries (divided in broader sections, such as Wood-based industry, Arms industry, Chemicals industry, etc just like it is for national focus) at separate rates. This will give a country with Lassez Faire policies greater control over getting the Capitalists build factories they want.
eg: Want your capitalists to stop producing canned food and start making furniture factories? Reduce corporation tax (or even make it negative, effectively giving money) for timber related factories, and increase it for canned food factories. After all, this is how real government directs investment into specific sectors.
This can also be refined further by allowing countries to have different tariff for different kind of goods... suppose you have a steel factory but it doesn't get enough supply of iron, you can increase tariff on steel, but reduce it on iron, allowing the factory to be competitive without increasing raw material prices.
1) Corporations
It would be interesting if this was introuced, as a layer between the capitalists and their factories. The capitalists would setup a corporation with specific purpose in mind (lets say, an armaments corporation) which, would later expand either horizontally or vertically. This would allow factories to cross subsidise and compete against each other.
2) Banks and advanced financial system (just like Naselus described), with addition of stock exchanges (given corporations have been introduced in point 1)
3) Revamping of Research
By the 19th century was driven the corporations and the industries, not national governments. For example, most of the research in Chemistry in Germany was done by the big companies like Bayer, BASF; the research on the steel artillary and the breech loaded guns which allowed Prussia to win their wars against Austria and France was done by Krupp, not the Prussian government, and so on. The research in the more philosophical areas was largely done in Universities (which should be added as well). Basically, your scientific progress should be dependent upon how well your industry is performing and how much you are spending on your universities rather than you just getting research points every day.
4) More controls on taxation and subsidies to direct industry growth in a better way.
Right now, this is achieved by national focus. However, it can be achieved more elegantly by introducing "Corporation Tax", with the ability to tax various industries (divided in broader sections, such as Wood-based industry, Arms industry, Chemicals industry, etc just like it is for national focus) at separate rates. This will give a country with Lassez Faire policies greater control over getting the Capitalists build factories they want.
eg: Want your capitalists to stop producing canned food and start making furniture factories? Reduce corporation tax (or even make it negative, effectively giving money) for timber related factories, and increase it for canned food factories. After all, this is how real government directs investment into specific sectors.
This can also be refined further by allowing countries to have different tariff for different kind of goods... suppose you have a steel factory but it doesn't get enough supply of iron, you can increase tariff on steel, but reduce it on iron, allowing the factory to be competitive without increasing raw material prices.
- 8
I'd like to see a gold bullion hard currency implemented in trade. So when you export goods you earn it and spend it on imports. What happens when you import more than you export and can't borrow you get an effect similar to a blockade meaning that price on goods inside your country starts to rise, abstractly simulating local currency loosing value and impoverishing pops.
So if you want to stop gold bullion out of the country you need to curb imports by taxing or raising tariffs.
So if you want to stop gold bullion out of the country you need to curb imports by taxing or raising tariffs.
Rebels
no more million 1-brigade rebels in every state.
Research
right now everyone saves their research for some Killer Techs. Some techs are absolutely useles and inferior to others. Year limitations prevents your from specializing in certain aspects.
no more million 1-brigade rebels in every state.
Research
right now everyone saves their research for some Killer Techs. Some techs are absolutely useles and inferior to others. Year limitations prevents your from specializing in certain aspects.
Less +10 liferating things and more +1 so that you can't just target machine guns and boom, own all of africa.
I agree with your points
I wanna add one better tariff system. one where protectionism really protects artisans instead of starve them. I feel it can be possible with new tariff sliders to luxusry goods, coal, and basic goods (grain, fish, cattle ...)
- 2
Either submarines or a better blockade system, to represent better situations like those the central powers had in WW1.
- 2
I liked the idea of Government Bonds and Better Banking System.
I doubt they would develop a Stock Market or a Futures Market, but an expanded foreign investment mechanic would (kind of) work like a Stock Market, where you sell/buy factories shares.
But I really want a better way to control pop stratas that are under government control.
Like 30% soldiers, 10% officers, 5% bureaucrats, 20% clerics.
I don't like to set 100% at my military sliders, cross my fingers, waiting to have enough soldiers at the end of the month.
Mobilization you say, but if I have enough resources to build a professional army, it would be much better than recruiting farmers to fight.
I doubt they would develop a Stock Market or a Futures Market, but an expanded foreign investment mechanic would (kind of) work like a Stock Market, where you sell/buy factories shares.
But I really want a better way to control pop stratas that are under government control.
Like 30% soldiers, 10% officers, 5% bureaucrats, 20% clerics.
I don't like to set 100% at my military sliders, cross my fingers, waiting to have enough soldiers at the end of the month.
Mobilization you say, but if I have enough resources to build a professional army, it would be much better than recruiting farmers to fight.
- 1
A system that simulates the transportation of goods. If done correctly, it would both simulate supply lines in wartime and assert the importance of a navy to protect the merchant marine even during peacetime. It would also stop sillyness like Indonesians eating German beef by having long-range and short-range goods. Therefore you could have Russia starve while the US is paying farmers to not grow corn and other historical quandaries. Sadly, if they did this for V3, no one would care and they'd be yelling about not getting corporations and an expanded timeline.
I also support Naselus's suggestions.
I also support Naselus's suggestions.
- 4
1. I fully support Naselus' suggestions, having actual bank systems would make the economy even more interesting.
2. Having a detailed coalition system would make big wars far more interesting. Coalition influence could be determined by things like economic and monetary influence, with extras like relations and direct subsidies; economic warfare (as detailed above) would make the world market far more engaging and relevant when you hit GP status; coalition influence could dramatically change the course of a war, as you switch opponent's allies to your side, or vice versa; and peace treaties could be more in depth, really change geopolitics, and cause things like revanchism and fascism in losing countries.
3. Redesigning the army screen could make micro infinitely better; for example if you could simply press "create new army" in X town/province, from which you could assign brigades as you please, depending on brigade type, POP, militancy, etc. No more worrying about shuffling brigade types around, no more worrying about brigades being instantly killed if the enemy is occupying their province, and so on.
4. I'd also like to put in a +1 for moving toward city-based provinces and away from occupying empty-fort provinces holding out for months and months. This really changes the rhythm of wars like Franco-Prussian or Civil War, in which defeating the opponents' armies was far more important. Having the ability to use more scorched-earth techniques would spice things up, too, and would more closely link military to economics and demographics. Imagine the effects of French armies burning Prussian Rhineland on Prussian industry and population. Military becomes a lot more vital in those situations. Finally, reducing the number of forts but making them more important could spice up military even more. For instance, this could level the playing field between stronger, more numerous armies and weaker ones, as the latter could harrass stronger armies from their forts and jeopardize sieges, battles, and so on; forts would need to be filled, but could also play a crucial tactical role. And you would have to strike a balance between using limited number of forts to either defend against seaborne invasions, plug up land-based chokepoints (Rhineland, Silesia, Veneto, etc), or secure colonial outposts.
Anyway (as you might be able to tell) I'm really jazzed by the ideas in this thread, that don't seem so unrealistic, and that could make a really fantastic game. <3
2. Having a detailed coalition system would make big wars far more interesting. Coalition influence could be determined by things like economic and monetary influence, with extras like relations and direct subsidies; economic warfare (as detailed above) would make the world market far more engaging and relevant when you hit GP status; coalition influence could dramatically change the course of a war, as you switch opponent's allies to your side, or vice versa; and peace treaties could be more in depth, really change geopolitics, and cause things like revanchism and fascism in losing countries.
3. Redesigning the army screen could make micro infinitely better; for example if you could simply press "create new army" in X town/province, from which you could assign brigades as you please, depending on brigade type, POP, militancy, etc. No more worrying about shuffling brigade types around, no more worrying about brigades being instantly killed if the enemy is occupying their province, and so on.
4. I'd also like to put in a +1 for moving toward city-based provinces and away from occupying empty-fort provinces holding out for months and months. This really changes the rhythm of wars like Franco-Prussian or Civil War, in which defeating the opponents' armies was far more important. Having the ability to use more scorched-earth techniques would spice things up, too, and would more closely link military to economics and demographics. Imagine the effects of French armies burning Prussian Rhineland on Prussian industry and population. Military becomes a lot more vital in those situations. Finally, reducing the number of forts but making them more important could spice up military even more. For instance, this could level the playing field between stronger, more numerous armies and weaker ones, as the latter could harrass stronger armies from their forts and jeopardize sieges, battles, and so on; forts would need to be filled, but could also play a crucial tactical role. And you would have to strike a balance between using limited number of forts to either defend against seaborne invasions, plug up land-based chokepoints (Rhineland, Silesia, Veneto, etc), or secure colonial outposts.
Anyway (as you might be able to tell) I'm really jazzed by the ideas in this thread, that don't seem so unrealistic, and that could make a really fantastic game. <3
I'd rather have 1-2 more expansions with Victoria II in a year's time than wait 1 1/2 years to get a "new" game.
Victoria II is a great game and with these two expansions, Victoria II is seeming like a Victoria III, at least to me
Victoria II is a great game and with these two expansions, Victoria II is seeming like a Victoria III, at least to me
I love AHD as it stands, and I don't expect Vicky 3 for a loooong time, but there are definitely some things I'd like to see changed.
A National Manpower System: Long prior to the era covered by HOI, numerous nations were moving towards a national manpower system that put soldiers from all over the nation together in units. Several actually started long beforehand. I'd like to see it start with a technological innovation or an invention, be started with a major decision that most great and secondary powers would undertake, and be followed by a multi-year organizational and leadership malus as the nation moves in that direction. Reserve units should stay regional. Units being recruited from a national manpower system would spawn in the national capital unless a National Focus was used to move the spawn point for such units elsewhere.
A Rework of Military Structure: This is actually two ideas.
1) I'd like to see the number of individual units that both a nation and province can support have a hard limit, similar to the supply limit. This limit can be modified by wartime mobilization, tech research, etc. but effectively the point is to keep most nations from having more than 30 or so independent unit groupings, both for armies and navies.
2) Unit size changes. I think that that the base unit size should either be 1000, or that primary units like infantry/cav/dragoons etc should be 3000 and artillery,air,tank,engineer etc should be 1000 in the same grain as HOI 3.
Assimilation Rework: In my USA games, I've seen French and South German immigrants assimilate to Afro American. It's just not that simple, for obvious reasons. While I understand that it is a touchy subject, I think that culture groups should be under a further "ethnic group" (call it whatever you'd like), such as the basic "European Caucasian", "African", "Indian/South Asian", "SE Asian", etc. Some of these already exist as culture groups. Effectively, groups from one ethnicity shouldn't assimilate to a culture group under a different ethnicity unless that ethnicity makes up an overwhelming percentage of the local population (>90%). Not because they can't, but because during this time period, they didn't.
Effectively, I think that immigrant or recently conquered populations should assimilate to the primary culture of their new country, OR to the predominant accepted culture of the province if the percentage of persons of that that accepted culture is greater than the percentage of the persons of the primary culture OR they should become an unaccepted culture or not assimilate if the overwhelmingly predominant culture (>75%) in a province is an unaacepted culture. I'm not sure if that's how it already works, but that's how it should work. 10 French people moving to an 80% Polish Warsaw should become probably become Polish eventually, even if the province owner doesn't accept Polish culture.
Other thoughts:
- I like the corporations concept, as in the last 40-50 years of the game they are a huge economic driver. Factories in your own country having to compete against eachother would give rise to a stronger push for either state capitalism or socialism/communism from people tired of being slaves or getting laid off/fired when their factories go under. In this same grain, I also think that the population's awareness of wealth inequality (based on their wealth vs. average wealth of rich strata in their region/nationally, with this awareness being influenced by consciousness, literacy, etc) could also drive pushes for social and political reforms or even push pops into the communist/socialist/fascist camps in the lategame.
- Parallel research, similarly to what has been previously mentioned. Research should be undertaken by capitalists or other pops, and subsidized similar to factory output. I think a great way to do this would be to introduce a new poptype, the intellectual currently used by some mods. A National focus could be used to boost a state's research. With this in play, the tech tree can be massively expanded. Theoretical research can unlock work on practical inventions.
- Universities: In a fork of the research thought, I think that educational institutions should play a part in research. They can be established by the government or by private citizens depending on reforms, government/party types and policies, etc. The openness of higher education to the middle class can also become an "issue" in the later game, and nations which push for public schools open to all can get great boosts to leadership and lategame research.
There's a lot more that can go here, I'm saving it for when they ask for thoughts for the next Vicky expansion. I agree with others that they can throw at least one more small expansion on before it's fully milked.
A National Manpower System: Long prior to the era covered by HOI, numerous nations were moving towards a national manpower system that put soldiers from all over the nation together in units. Several actually started long beforehand. I'd like to see it start with a technological innovation or an invention, be started with a major decision that most great and secondary powers would undertake, and be followed by a multi-year organizational and leadership malus as the nation moves in that direction. Reserve units should stay regional. Units being recruited from a national manpower system would spawn in the national capital unless a National Focus was used to move the spawn point for such units elsewhere.
A Rework of Military Structure: This is actually two ideas.
1) I'd like to see the number of individual units that both a nation and province can support have a hard limit, similar to the supply limit. This limit can be modified by wartime mobilization, tech research, etc. but effectively the point is to keep most nations from having more than 30 or so independent unit groupings, both for armies and navies.
2) Unit size changes. I think that that the base unit size should either be 1000, or that primary units like infantry/cav/dragoons etc should be 3000 and artillery,air,tank,engineer etc should be 1000 in the same grain as HOI 3.
Assimilation Rework: In my USA games, I've seen French and South German immigrants assimilate to Afro American. It's just not that simple, for obvious reasons. While I understand that it is a touchy subject, I think that culture groups should be under a further "ethnic group" (call it whatever you'd like), such as the basic "European Caucasian", "African", "Indian/South Asian", "SE Asian", etc. Some of these already exist as culture groups. Effectively, groups from one ethnicity shouldn't assimilate to a culture group under a different ethnicity unless that ethnicity makes up an overwhelming percentage of the local population (>90%). Not because they can't, but because during this time period, they didn't.
Effectively, I think that immigrant or recently conquered populations should assimilate to the primary culture of their new country, OR to the predominant accepted culture of the province if the percentage of persons of that that accepted culture is greater than the percentage of the persons of the primary culture OR they should become an unaccepted culture or not assimilate if the overwhelmingly predominant culture (>75%) in a province is an unaacepted culture. I'm not sure if that's how it already works, but that's how it should work. 10 French people moving to an 80% Polish Warsaw should become probably become Polish eventually, even if the province owner doesn't accept Polish culture.
Other thoughts:
- I like the corporations concept, as in the last 40-50 years of the game they are a huge economic driver. Factories in your own country having to compete against eachother would give rise to a stronger push for either state capitalism or socialism/communism from people tired of being slaves or getting laid off/fired when their factories go under. In this same grain, I also think that the population's awareness of wealth inequality (based on their wealth vs. average wealth of rich strata in their region/nationally, with this awareness being influenced by consciousness, literacy, etc) could also drive pushes for social and political reforms or even push pops into the communist/socialist/fascist camps in the lategame.
- Parallel research, similarly to what has been previously mentioned. Research should be undertaken by capitalists or other pops, and subsidized similar to factory output. I think a great way to do this would be to introduce a new poptype, the intellectual currently used by some mods. A National focus could be used to boost a state's research. With this in play, the tech tree can be massively expanded. Theoretical research can unlock work on practical inventions.
- Universities: In a fork of the research thought, I think that educational institutions should play a part in research. They can be established by the government or by private citizens depending on reforms, government/party types and policies, etc. The openness of higher education to the middle class can also become an "issue" in the later game, and nations which push for public schools open to all can get great boosts to leadership and lategame research.
There's a lot more that can go here, I'm saving it for when they ask for thoughts for the next Vicky expansion. I agree with others that they can throw at least one more small expansion on before it's fully milked.
- 3
I would like to see some more things for religions in victoria 2. Yes it was not as important as it was in the previous decades but that did not stop it from being important. A religious policy would be useful IMO. Also a morman and athiesm/agnostic religion. Yes I know atheism is not a religion, but for game mechanics it would use the same spot.
I would also like to see and set state laws. For instance, say I am playing as america it might be possible in the western states to vote for secert ballots without it being applicable all over the country. More interactions with the provinces would be good over all.
I would also like to see and set state laws. For instance, say I am playing as america it might be possible in the western states to vote for secert ballots without it being applicable all over the country. More interactions with the provinces would be good over all.
more of a victorian feeling for the era, better colonisation (which appears to be coming with HoD) better military and more cultures plus a culture map mode