Proposal(s) for Victoria 3

[Simoleum]

Additionaly I would want more government types like there is in EUIV. I think considering how EUIV is and the development they've made in that, Vic 3 will be amazing as long as they go as hard for it! (personally I think Vic has a higher potential!).
Styles of government for unciv countries is one thing. Unciv countries should work differently and not have a upper house etc which I believe they do in Vic. There should be all kinds of Tribal democracies and Tribal monarchies and what not. I also hope there will be more dynamic forms of ties between countries. Take Norway, which shares Swedens king in this time period, but had its own constitution and more.

One thing that I've also scratched my head over is how pressure in a province grows untill it becomes a crisis. Then nobody backs the side which nationalists want to break from and its all over. Thats so weird! There should be a powerful rebellion in the province with tons of units that will try to take control over the disputed area! And if say the UK backs Albania in the crisis, and the Ottoman empire is not a GP nor backed by anyone, then surely there should happen something? What about an event that the Ottomans in this case would get, which either made them relinquish the areas or go to war with the UK and secesionist Albania?
This could be neatly filled out with a broader variety of rebel types and rebel collaboration with other countries and stuff

What do you think?

Just adding alot of stuff from HoI3 (like a more pronounced depicition on the map of conquered areas in a war) and EUIV would flesh out the game in such a good way, as well as adding alot of these suggestions here and I believe that Vic would be undisputedly the greatest game in Paradox's catalog.

Edit: Also a broader selection in province management diplomacy, like cedeing provinces for amongst other things strategical considerations, and most importantly of all like I wrote in a standalone thread: Option to carve out what provinces you want without having to conquer the whole state. That's a no brainer.

 

[LordofSaxony]

Thing's I'd like for VIC3..

1. Earlier Start Date - The length of time of VIC2 is just too short, it ends before it feels like it should. I'd like something around 1760 when the industrial innovations just started sparking into existence, but didn't take full shape until early 1800's. There could be a Napoleon DLC.
2. Prominent Citizens (with CK2 style portraits) - This doesn't mean its a CK2 RPG like game. But it gives faces to the factory owners, the politicians, monarchs, the leaders of riots, and so forth. I can already see the trendy sideburns (muttonchops)! On the development side, this opens it up to a lot of DLC too.
3. Semi-Randomization of Resources - Provinces that are known to be heavy with a particular resource would stay static, but the others are randomly assigned during game start. The reason is, each time I play Greece for example, I usually make the same factories each time due to it's resources.
4. Seasons - The same reasons as the other Paradox games.
5. Cities that Grow/Shrink - Each province gets a notable city to represent it, and they are displayed like in HOI4 with buildings. Aside from the population count, this would be a visual representation - more buildings means more population. Easy to see thriving metropolises.
6. WW2 End Date Lines it up nice a snug for a converter to HOI4.

 

[User29]

Eh, Vicky already ends on the date for HoI HoI starts in 1936, Vicky ends in 1936.

semi-randomization for resources doesn't make sense even though it sounds cool, that's not really how reality is?

Definitely want names at least for my leaders, and 1821 start date would be awesome.(Hold Greece as Ottomans!!!! /drool)

 

[LordofSaxony]

Eh, Vicky already ends on the date for HoI HoI starts in 1936, Vicky ends in 1936.

semi-randomization for resources doesn't make sense even though it sounds cool, that's not really how reality is?

Definitely want names at least for my leaders, and 1821 start date would be awesome.(Hold Greece as Ottomans!!!! /drool)

For the date I was just saying that it should be kept that way since I was hoping for a VIC3 to HOI4 converter. But I suppose I was stating the obvious ha!

I think the #1 thing would be the earlier start date, but much earlier than 1821. Probably pre-Napoleon or something like that would be cool. It's not the industrial age quite yet, but it's starting to show it a bit. My issue with VIC2 is just feels like it ends too quickly.

Names would be nice, but I think portraits would add a little something extra. It puts faces to some of the more important people in your country and other countries.

 

[FOARP]

All the way through: CKII--->EUIV--->Vicky III--->HoI IV.

These things always sound way cooler than they are - the reality is always a bit of a mess, with no localisation for what's going on in-game, and anyway, if you're actually playing to win, the map will be all yours by the middle of the second game if not earlier.

 

[User29]

These things always sound way cooler than they are - the reality is always a bit of a mess, with no localisation for what's going on in-game, and anyway, if you're actually playing to win, the map will be all yours by the middle of the second game if not earlier.

It will always be the coolest idea and you know it. The games just need to be balanced so you can't snowball into unstoppable abominations! EU4 is slowly moving into that(that's to say they are making getting too strong harder)

I think by EU5 and CK3 late-game balance will be the focus so Paradox can sell the Alternate-History Bundle for 100 bucks and make STACKS!

 

[Zero]

1) More political system transparency. I've played entire games as democracies/HM's govts and will still have the same garbage laissez-faire party in office at the end that I did in the beginning despite 30+ elections pushing my ideological aims in election events. Instead, protectionism will have gone up from 0.03% to 0.33% in a century. Why am I having to make all these election decisions if they have no apparent effect on the electorate whatsoever?

Agree! And get rid of all the other 0,00001% Events which require clicking and have almost no effect (e.g. tractors, dynamite, and the like). Less events with (much!) more impact would be nice. Inventions on province base get really annoying if the empire has reached a certain amount of provinves.

 

[User29]

Just want to mention, election events matter much more the smaller your nation is, you can get the Netherlands to lean entirely reactionary if you just spam elections, the country is very small.

 

[MasterOfGrey]

Just want to mention, election events matter much more the smaller your nation is, you can get the Netherlands to lean entirely reactionary if you just spam elections, the country is very small.

Aye, I find it a bit sad that there aren't more country-scope election events though.

 

[Turboflex]

I dunno if this has been mentioned before I haven't read the whole thread but I find this game is a lot less fun to play when you have a political system that doesn't let you build factories. Basically a huge part of the game is lost unless you are in state capitalism or planned economu. Wouldn't be so bad if the AI was decent at building but it blows. Perhaps not remove it entirely but I would say AI focus should be on supply chains not just picking certain industrial groupings, with the AI focused on getting to the highest end of that chain asap. So you would set focus on "steel chain" and start building steel factories, machine parts, steamers. The AI would be looking to build cars as a high priority but would do the checks first to see if it exists, and then if you had access to rubber. Same if you set your chain focus to wood. It would start with lumber & furniture, and have a high priority for tropical wood, pending market access to it. Also if something like cement demand shoots up at one point and you suddenly find your projects stalled because your market supply disappears, it should be a no brainer your capitalists rush to open a cement plant in a coal producing state (especially if coal prices are modest). Having to sit around with your thumb up your behind with all projects stalled, and your thousands of capitalists doing nothing when they would not hesitate to roll out a huge rail network upgrade instantly is a game fun killer.

 

[AmpsterMan]

I would like to see the dynamic events like EU 4 has. Example, instead of having China go through a generalized Westernization chain, make it an event chain. You can have Taiping Rebellion, Boxers, Xinhai, etc be chains that are dynamic depending on one's choices. I would say something similar for Japan and a fantasy one for India. (the AI should be weighted against the India one Imo)

These are just examples; Anything but the event spam we currently have.

 

[MilosM]

For the date I was just saying that it should be kept that way since I was hoping for a VIC3 to HOI4 converter. But I suppose I was stating the obvious ha!

I think the #1 thing would be the earlier start date, but much earlier than 1821. Probably pre-Napoleon or something like that would be cool. It's not the industrial age quite yet, but it's starting to show it a bit. My issue with VIC2 is just feels like it ends too quickly.

Names would be nice, but I think portraits would add a little something extra. It puts faces to some of the more important people in your country and other countries.

What if they made the game go hour by hour? Or at least like in March of the Eagles.That way 100 hundred years would be more than enough.

 

[wolfing]

These things always sound way cooler than they are - the reality is always a bit of a mess, with no localisation for what's going on in-game, and anyway, if you're actually playing to win, the map will be all yours by the middle of the second game if not earlier.

I agree 100%, the idea sounds cool, the practice not so much. After CK2 you probably own half Europe + North Africa. With such a country, the world in EU4 is yours in 100 hundred years. So Vicky 3 would be nothing really.
Now, a better idea would be to alternate countries, so in EU4 you play against your CK2 empire, and in V3 you play against your EU4 nation, etc.

 

[neverlay]

Thing's I'd like for VIC3..

1. Earlier Start Date - The length of time of VIC2 is just too short, it ends before it feels like it should. I'd like something around 1760 when the industrial innovations just started sparking into existence, but didn't take full shape until early 1800's. There could be a Napoleon DLC.
2. Prominent Citizens (with CK2 style portraits) - This doesn't mean its a CK2 RPG like game. But it gives faces to the factory owners, the politicians, monarchs, the leaders of riots, and so forth. I can already see the trendy sideburns (muttonchops)! On the development side, this opens it up to a lot of DLC too.
3. Semi-Randomization of Resources - Provinces that are known to be heavy with a particular resource would stay static, but the others are randomly assigned during game start. The reason is, each time I play Greece for example, I usually make the same factories each time due to it's resources.
4. Seasons - The same reasons as the other Paradox games.
5. Cities that Grow/Shrink - Each province gets a notable city to represent it, and they are displayed like in HOI4 with buildings. Aside from the population count, this would be a visual representation - more buildings means more population. Easy to see thriving metropolises.
6. WW2 End Date Lines it up nice a snug for a converter to HOI4.

1. I don't think that crossing so far into EU territory would be such a good idea. I think a better start date might be the 20 November 1815, which restored the borders to the 1790 status quo, and this would allow for the establishment of the Great power system, and give enough time scope for Greek and Belgian independence.
2. I think I would be better if they worked more like the advisors in EUIV, but they are "Great Men". Great men would have four types - Political(Bismarck/Rhodes), Military(Moltke/Kitchener,Industrial(Brunel/Ford, and Cultural(Twain/Kipling). Like the advisors they add bonuses to the country, but also have their own events, missions and problems.
(E.G Rhodes would allow for faster colonisation, for the expense of international relations)
3.Not something I would be keen on.
4.Good
5. Sounds good, but maybe with certain events for cities . For example, once you research medicine you can build sewer systems, and if you don't and a major city reaches a certain population, it could spark a 'Cholera outbreak' or 'the Great Stink', both of which could highlight Great men, or reduce costs.
Also, cities are a separate voting constituency.
6. As others have mentioned, 1936 is probably better suited, but maybe a 1938 end date wouldn't be to hard.

 

[spiller68]

2. I think I would be better if they worked more like the advisors in EUIV, but they are "Great Men". Great men would have four types - Political(Bismarck/Rhodes), Military(Moltke/Kitchener,Industrial(Brunel/Ford, and Cultural(Twain/Kipling). Like the advisors they add bonuses to the country, but also have their own events, missions and problems.
(E.G Rhodes would allow for faster colonisation, for the expense of international relations)

i like that idea, there could be several made up "great men" as well as well known politicians from the period, garibaldi or cavour could have a spot for italy.

 

[Rovsea]

Not gonna read through the whole thread, but a major inaccuracy in VicII is how the immigration system works. Only "colonial" nations in the Americas or Oceania can receive immigrants, the political system isn't easy enough to manipulate for the reforms necessary to compete with the US. The US also has some of the most powerful events in the game, and these events arbitrarily increase their immigrant count. These are all poorly done, rough simulations on immigration that don't even represent our timeline that well, let alone an alternate history. For instance, if Mexico conquers half of America, the CSA succeeds, and Britain takes a couple northern state, the US would still be a major competitor in immigration. Immigration is very important, as it very dramatically effects the entirety of the western hemisphere in game.

 

[User29]

Not gonna read through the whole thread, but a major inaccuracy in VicII is how the immigration system works. Only "colonial" nations in the Americas or Oceania can receive immigrants, the political system isn't easy enough to manipulate for the reforms necessary to compete with the US. The US also has some of the most powerful events in the game, and these events arbitrarily increase their immigrant count. These are all poorly done, rough simulations on immigration that don't even represent our timeline that well, let alone an alternate history. For instance, if Mexico conquers half of America, the CSA succeeds, and Britain takes a couple northern state, the US would still be a major competitor in immigration. Immigration is very important, as it very dramatically effects the entirety of the western hemisphere in game.

Mods help by miles in this regard. I used to say the same thing as you(Mexico has to be my favorite nation to play as)

If I beat the U.S. hard enough with a stick I can end up overtaking them in immigrant numbers as their nation erodes into civil war and the Mexican Emperor sits tall watching as German Immigrants start speaking Spanish

 

[Rovsea]

Mods help by miles in this regard. I used to say the same thing as you(Mexico has to be my favorite nation to play as)

If I beat the U.S. hard enough with a stick I can end up overtaking them in immigrant numbers as their nation erodes into civil war and the Mexican Emperor sits tall watching as German Immigrants start speaking Spanish

What mods would you recommend?

 

[Orinsul]

What mods would you recommend?

POD does it for me, I've been playing Mexico and I get the lions share of the worlds immigrants owing to reforms.

But it still has the problem where all the immigrants go to one or two countries, with basically no immigrants anywhere else. It ought be more even with even bad attract places getting some immigrants when the massive attracts are getting hundreds. There should be movement between old world countries too, and the issues of whole minorities up and leaving on mass to then assimilate away shouldnt be also

 

[LordofSaxony]

What if they made the game go hour by hour? Or at least like in March of the Eagles.That way 100 hundred years would be more than enough.

I suppose they could tweak the rate in which time goes by to make it longer. But, they would need to add more things to do, otherwise it may make the pacing of the game slower.

1. I don't think that crossing so far into EU territory would be such a good idea. I think a better start date might be the 20 November 1815, which restored the borders to the 1790 status quo, and this would allow for the establishment of the Great power system, and give enough time scope for Greek and Belgian independence.

I don't see a problem with crossing over into EU's territory, CK2 already does it to EU, although only by a few years. With the range of years in the EU series, I don't think it would be really hampered by starting Vicky 3 around 1790. It's an exciting period, the political turmoil in France between the crown and the revolutionaries, the rise of Napoleon, the steam locomotive was coming into being, the cotton gin, etc.

2. I think I would be better if they worked more like the advisors in EUIV, but they are "Great Men". Great men would have four types - Political(Bismarck/Rhodes), Military(Moltke/Kitchener,Industrial(Brunel/Ford, and Cultural(Twain/Kipling). Like the advisors they add bonuses to the country, but also have their own events, missions and problems.
(E.G Rhodes would allow for faster colonisation, for the expense of international relations)

I wouldn't mind seeing great men like you mentioned, but I think there should be a lot of average non-great men too - probably from randomized names and portraits, with random bonuses and penalties, etc. The reason for the randomization is replay value, so we don't see the same men over and over.

I think it would be a good idea to have the ability to assign people to government positions, and those positions depend on what type of government you are. If you're playing a country that has a monarchy, they would have the king/emperor, queen/empress, princes and princesses (basically, a lite CK2). Also, depending on if its a constitutional monarchy, would also determine whether or not you can even assign people to government positions. I do think that faction leaders and factory owners should have portraits too, to represent the working classes (aside from pops). Blocking voting processes, stomping rebellious factions, and all that would carry more weight when you see the people you're doing it to, instead of it being a faceless statistic. I guess this is similar, in a fashion, to Paradox's Rome game, now that I think about it.