I clicked the attachment icon.
It is huge and applies an unmanageably high density of subdivision to Europe.
- 2
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.
It is huge and applies an unmanageably high density of subdivision to Europe.
Well, at least on that scale Rhode Island would be big enough to be its own state.
Good point. The A-H Empire didn't "collapse", it was forcibly dismantled by the victors after WWI, and the policies to make certain that it stayed dismantled were part of the underlying motivations which drove Europe to war again just over 20 years later. Some of the less stable pieces (YUG, CZE) which were created by those victors have fallen apart even further since.
My biggest concern with a new game is that it maintains the level of complexity and depth, and manages to make politics less stylized and ridiculous. As it stood in V2, you could have 200 Relations with an ally, and they'd suddenly break the alliance to ally with some other country with a nasty reputation, just because you're the player, or because of some random hidden die roll telling the AI that it was time to prepare for war against you. Diplomatic Relations really didn't seem to do anything (I've been attacked - for seemingly no reason - by countries with Relations over 50 or over 100 far more often than by nations with negative Relations numbers), and that's about ALL that the non-GP countries have to work with. Relations SHOULD matter, a lot, and be a lot harder to change quickly unless there's some traumatic incident like being on opposite sides of a war.
Randomness is great for tipping the balance a bit in close situations, but not for making completely absurd events happen out of the blue on a frequent basis. Most things in reality happen for a reason, even if that reason isn't obvious at the moment. A few random events, which impact Relations or change Core claims, could lead to wars, but those events shouldn't force the issue unless there are already strong sentiments and conflicts of interest leading up to violence, merely shift the balance point a bit one way or the other.
- 3
I do not give a flying wossname at a rolling doughnut about the hyperdetailed verisimilitude your proposal offers.
I care about being to click on the damned provinces without unprecedentedly fine-grained levels of zoom.
- 6
- 3
I understand your concern. Nonetheless, whether usual gameplay requires you to frequently micro-manage things on a county level depends on which government actions actually are executed on that level, rather than on a provincial, regional or even national one. E.g. I imagine provincial centres representing larger towns being the place for factories, barracks, courts etc.,that are unbuildable on "normal" rural counties.
These primarily serve to give more diversity to RGOs, make military interactions with terrain much more realistic and fun, and depict local distributions of population traits like culture and religion better. Furthermore, it allows for more histocal border changes and makes it feasible, to display rivers, channels, mountainranges, passes etc. as being "border traits" between two counties.
IMHO, the major problem with a richer, more detailed map is that it splits POPs and thus will increase required computing power.
In a smart game design concept however, the gaming experience should increase with a more immersive map, not decrease. Micromanagement is not linked to detail. Yes, more detail makes more micromanagement possible, but it does not need to. Relevant questions are: Do you need to baby-sit things, do you have to perform similar actions in repeative ways? These are mere decisions in game design independent of the level of detail (of the map or anything else, really). There can be smart options to put ingame commands in scale, such as "hire 10 more teachers in every primary school with a pupil/teacher ratio over 30" or "expand all towshalls in counties, in which they are fully staffed with bureaucrats and yet do generate local administrative efficiency rates below 40%".
Last edited:
You could start out with Google Earth or some other real-world map, edit it to reflect the world in the 1800s, and add in all of the game stats you like. That would allow you to play down to the individual farm and hovel, and maybe even check the health and financial status of every individual in your empire. I don't think it would take more than a few dozen Terabytes of disc space for the game. A set of commands in your native language, with a 5000 word vocabulary and the ability to parse commands for complex conditions should be technically possible for a AAA development team with a limitless budget. If Paradox starts work on it today, they might have a functional beta before the end of the millennium.
.....or we could have a fairly detailed and playable simulation that doesn't quite go into all of that, and perhaps even have it released this decade. I want detail, as much as in V2 or possibly a shade more, but I have no interest in different zoom levels for local, county, state, and national layers, or for a complex command line interface with conditional branches for each of the hundreds of possible options we might wish for under various circumstances. It's simply not practical or economically feasible using today's development tools, and probably won't be anytime in the near future, for the handful of players who would be willing to pay for it.
Fix the late game balance issues with Vicky2, give it a moderate facelift (not a hideous 3D map that jumbles everything into one undecipherable mess) and one or two new features, and it's a "must buy" for most of the current player base.
- 5
- 1
Thank you for your very serious answer. All I propose is ONE step more into detail: dividing Provinces into an agglomerational centre and a few rural counties, mostly holding an RGO and the corresponding pops.
Yes, I am well aware that such a design decision will increase devellopment time and required computing power, but I think, this increase will be somewhere about +20%, not + some 20000%, as you imply. IMHO, what I propose should be seriously thought about as it might provide a HUGE step towards more immersion, realism and opportunities for fun game mechanisms due to better ingame geographie (real infrastructure connecting centres allowing for realistic trade models, interactions between military tactics and relief types/border traits...)
Last edited:
- 3
I think you underestimate the influence of adding additional provinces. Remember that these provinces now need to be taken into account by the AI. Those provinces also have values that need to be stored. The values need to be accessed at least once a second, given the demand of the global economy UNLESS it ticks monthly, will also influence how much can be done in a second.
That's before we even talk about balance.
Pretty sure in the image you have of Europe constitutes more provinces in that than the entirety of Vic2.
That game starts gets slower and slower as the game progressed due to the rules in place and you want the equivalent of the entire world in Vic2 in Europe at game start.
These are my concerns. Compound on that that each of those provinces are likely to hold at LEAST 2 different POP types, and it gets worse.
Personally would love to see HOI4's combat system brought over (Would love to see the front system to improve the way I could play the British Empire or Russia... Maybe bring over the naval system from HOI 4, I like how that was handled), some polish on the global economy (make it regional, give ports and railroads more importance with throughput of goods...)
Basically the existing map was fine, just would like to see some changes to the game play and some of its systems.
That's before we even talk about balance.
Pretty sure in the image you have of Europe constitutes more provinces in that than the entirety of Vic2.
That game starts gets slower and slower as the game progressed due to the rules in place and you want the equivalent of the entire world in Vic2 in Europe at game start.
These are my concerns. Compound on that that each of those provinces are likely to hold at LEAST 2 different POP types, and it gets worse.
Personally would love to see HOI4's combat system brought over (Would love to see the front system to improve the way I could play the British Empire or Russia... Maybe bring over the naval system from HOI 4, I like how that was handled), some polish on the global economy (make it regional, give ports and railroads more importance with throughput of goods...)
Basically the existing map was fine, just would like to see some changes to the game play and some of its systems.
The focus of Vic3 should be economy and politics, not warfare. A basic "group these armies together under AI control" and battleplan with "here frontline, here attack" fine, but not the division designer, way less modifiers for combat, HOI4s take on equipment.
Edit: Actually I take that last bit back, maybe exactly HOI4s take on equipment, just not with that many different categories.
Edit: Actually I take that last bit back, maybe exactly HOI4s take on equipment, just not with that many different categories.
Less annoying event's for USA (Copperheads, Anti-Slavery Society etc.). I mean really before the Civil War I can't even play a week without these popping up.
Wickedness must be stamped out.
Wickedness must be stamped out.
- 4
As well as an atheist "religion" that appears after great wars are unlocked, I'd like to see more late game pops like teachers and doctors. It's weird being forced to rely on clergymen for literacy etc. as a secular or atheistic state, especially if you have a public education system.
Last edited:
- 3
- 1
Idk about the rest of the world, but the Netherlands had religious clergy as teachers all the way up to post ww2, so it could be historical.
There's a difference between "relying on clergy" and "some schools have clergy as part or all of their teaching staff".
More relevantly is that fundamentally, the purpose of clergy is to transmit and reinforce an ideology (which happens to pertain to the divine as well as the mortal realm), and state-funded education tends to have ideological elements even in countries where it's not officially intended to, so in one sense, continuing to call the education POPs "clergy" actually communicates something important about their function that "teachers" (educators, whatever) wouldn't.
you mean by adding "intellectuals" as a new pop type, running schools, conducting research etc ?
- 2
Yes, they should be the craftsmen to the clergy's artisans. Bigger bonuses to literacy and tech points, without the reduction in consciousness.
The one peeve I have with Vicky2 base game (sorry, I don't have the expansions...yet, so not sure if it's changed) is that CBs give you "free" DoWs, not discounted. It tends to be "all or nothing", so you either pay full price in Infamy or else zero. Many, if not MOST, real world situations involved some factor as an "excuse" which reduced, but did not eliminate, any sense of unfairness or threat. In that regard, the CBs in EU3 were much better, providing reduced Infamy gain (ranging from "Well, you can hardly blame them" to "I suppose they had a reason, but that's an over-reaction"), or lowering the amount of warscore needed to make the demand (the opposing country is less adamant about holding out to the last man over something that it doesn't feel it has all that much of a right to keep).
I think I'd like to see the dependency system of Victoria 3 be more like the one for Hearts of Iron 4; where the degree of control one state has over another is varient, thus allowing for the unique relationships that happned in this period such as Austria Hungary, French Morroco, the early period of Japanese control of Korea before total annexation, the British protectorate of Egypt, ect. Also, sphere of influence should be specific territories that you have economic control over, rather than access over the economy of an entire country, like it was in history.
- 18
The expansions did something in this line.
You can't declare war at all without a CB, and you fabricate them during peacetime as a diplomatic action which takes time. If your fabrication attempt is detected, you incur part of the infamy cost of the CB; if it isn't, you get your CB without incurring any Infamy and can now declare war Infamy-free to take something covered by that CB. (Of course, any wargoals you add during a war without having an unexpended CB of that type still have their full Infamy cost.)
What they didn't fix was that Germany can trivially burn tens of Infamy a year by releasing OPMs and reabsorbing them
