Another question: Will the system be similar to EU3, where you can pick any starting date you wish from the game's timeline?
Scenarios
- Thread starter unmerged(144721)
- 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.
Attending what Johan said, I'll say a huge NO.
It'll be a real nightmare changing a dozen of thousands of POPs daily...
So, only grand campaign, mmm, if i want the political situation of the years 1860-70, i need to start in 1836 and pray for luck.
I have written yet in this topic, but i repeat that togheter with great campaign the only other default start point should be a game with Italy unificated, German Empire Rised, Meiji Japan Reformed and the other important thing that create the context of the period.
I have written yet in this topic, but i repeat that togheter with great campaign the only other default start point should be a game with Italy unificated, German Empire Rised, Meiji Japan Reformed and the other important thing that create the context of the period.
I would like both, well done game and couplle of scenarios (specially one that starts 1914). However if it is a matter of choice between two, definetly GC is enough.
The thing is, we are all spoiled with EUIII and Rome where we get the start at any year during time frame of the game, and now I would like it for Victoria2 and for any future game of PI.
The thing is, we are all spoiled with EUIII and Rome where we get the start at any year during time frame of the game, and now I would like it for Victoria2 and for any future game of PI.
You know, I completely agree with you wandreing Knight that the ability to start at any date was awesome....
However, I really only start in 1399 in EU3. The only exception is starting in 1420 as England and Venice for better starting position later in the game, compared to the small loss of time.... otherwise, I really only use the "other dates" feature to look at history and compare to my current place in a long running game.
So, the answer is effeciency. If I can get my choice between a "any date" starting system on the one hand, or a realistic immigration system on the other, I would choose the immigration system. Obviously, I'd rather have both, but in reality, we (historical gamers) are a sufficiently niche market that they have to make these games on a shoestring budget (at least compared to the Halo-esque games), so in order to get our somewhat rarer fix, we have to except some sacrifices.
I think I would pick other start dates as one of the first things to "give up" to get other things in the game, personally. (And i do realize you said GC was enough, I am jsut expounding
)
However, I really only start in 1399 in EU3. The only exception is starting in 1420 as England and Venice for better starting position later in the game, compared to the small loss of time.... otherwise, I really only use the "other dates" feature to look at history and compare to my current place in a long running game.
So, the answer is effeciency. If I can get my choice between a "any date" starting system on the one hand, or a realistic immigration system on the other, I would choose the immigration system. Obviously, I'd rather have both, but in reality, we (historical gamers) are a sufficiently niche market that they have to make these games on a shoestring budget (at least compared to the Halo-esque games), so in order to get our somewhat rarer fix, we have to except some sacrifices.
I think I would pick other start dates as one of the first things to "give up" to get other things in the game, personally. (And i do realize you said GC was enough, I am jsut expounding
)
Ouch....
So no ACW, no Meiji Restoration, no Italian or German Unification, or at least the 1848 Revolution in a game that set in "the long 19th century" and wanted to simulate the 19th century political, social, and economic upheaval? Well, tough luck selling that kind of game.
I mean me, for instance, first played Vic 1 as Germany in WW I. I mean some (I daresay many) people wants to play the game as CSA, The German Empire, The Kingdom of Italy, heck, some people even want to play as Bolshevik Russia! And yes, some people also played this game because it is the only grand strategic game in which you could fight in WW I.
My point is, only GC start will be utterly selfish. Okay 95% wants to only have GC in PI games, but what about the other 5%? Is it just because we are a very small minority that our voice won't be heard by the "elites" (sorry, but this is how I feel...)? If that kind of mental attitude persist, believe me, you won't even break even with this game.
And, yes, I know that researching for many start dates and programming them is a nightmare, but like someone said before, "I'd rather have a 90% done(I even daresay he won't mind even if it's 50%) 1861 start that I can modify, rather than start making a start date from scratch", it means that even if it is a little bit "weird" or "ahistorical", the community could live with that and try to improve it. Remember PI, you have a lot of fans here willing to help you in all sorts of manner such as becoming a paying beta tester. And if the game meets their expectations, believe me, sell will rise because these so called 5% would tell other people how great this game is and ask them to buy it also.
My point is, please add at least 1861 or 1914 Scenario in Vic 2. A lot of people will be grateful because of that and they will tell how good this game is to other people and tell them to buy this game. And I'm really sorry if my opinion sounded a little harsh, it's all because I love you Paradox.
Sincerely Yours,
Aat Jago
(a big fan of Paradox since the first Europa Universalis)
So no ACW, no Meiji Restoration, no Italian or German Unification, or at least the 1848 Revolution in a game that set in "the long 19th century" and wanted to simulate the 19th century political, social, and economic upheaval? Well, tough luck selling that kind of game.
I mean me, for instance, first played Vic 1 as Germany in WW I. I mean some (I daresay many) people wants to play the game as CSA, The German Empire, The Kingdom of Italy, heck, some people even want to play as Bolshevik Russia! And yes, some people also played this game because it is the only grand strategic game in which you could fight in WW I.
My point is, only GC start will be utterly selfish. Okay 95% wants to only have GC in PI games, but what about the other 5%? Is it just because we are a very small minority that our voice won't be heard by the "elites" (sorry, but this is how I feel...)? If that kind of mental attitude persist, believe me, you won't even break even with this game.
And, yes, I know that researching for many start dates and programming them is a nightmare, but like someone said before, "I'd rather have a 90% done(I even daresay he won't mind even if it's 50%) 1861 start that I can modify, rather than start making a start date from scratch", it means that even if it is a little bit "weird" or "ahistorical", the community could live with that and try to improve it. Remember PI, you have a lot of fans here willing to help you in all sorts of manner such as becoming a paying beta tester. And if the game meets their expectations, believe me, sell will rise because these so called 5% would tell other people how great this game is and ask them to buy it also.
My point is, please add at least 1861 or 1914 Scenario in Vic 2. A lot of people will be grateful because of that and they will tell how good this game is to other people and tell them to buy this game. And I'm really sorry if my opinion sounded a little harsh, it's all because I love you Paradox.
Sincerely Yours,
Aat Jago
(a big fan of Paradox since the first Europa Universalis)
Last edited:
Okay, I think we need a little bit of perspecitve here. How can 95% of the players be considered an "elite" group? On the contrary, if Paradox were to cater to the desires of 5% of their customer base at the expense of the 95%, then there may be a case of elites having their way. But in what language does "elite" mean "95% of the population"?
And, incidentally, my impression is that the first Victoria wasn't particularly successful in financial terms. It would seem that the presence of scenarios didn't lead to financial success for that game. How, then, does it follow that the lack of scenarios will lead to a lack of financial success for Victoria 2?
And, for what it's worth, I've never played Victoria. I am a recent Paradox customer (with just EUIII complete to my name.) I am, however, very interested in what I hear about Victoria 2, and am looking forward to playing it.
most people played the GC but everyone had a go with the others and 1860 was well placed to the start of colonialism, and had a few great events going on and so it was a great one and WWI was obviously had the war in it, those three ought to be there. if not from the get go atleast in optional patches.
King, Johan, any chance for information if player can choose the country in ACW (or any other secession situation) in-game, instead of "save/leave/reload as new country" method?
It would add greatly to the playability - current system, while perfectly viable for people used to EU games is not really intuitional nor newbie friendly.
It would add greatly to the playability - current system, while perfectly viable for people used to EU games is not really intuitional nor newbie friendly.
I think it's good that they are focussing on one scenario date. When they get that right I hope that they'll release an expansion or perhaps just DLC with different scenarios. I know that atleast 1861 and 1914 would be excellent start dates for two of the scenarios. Otherwise I think that we will see on day 1 or 2 after release that a modder group starts to make a WW 1 scenario.
Otherwise I think that we will see on day 1 or 2 after release that a modder group starts to make a WW 1 scenario.
This post is chock full of reasonableness and sanity, which means that I agree with itI think it's good that they are focussing on one scenario date. When they get that right I hope that they'll release an expansion or perhaps just DLC with different scenarios. I know that atleast 1861 and 1914 would be excellent start dates for two of the scenarios.
- Dec 14, 1999
- 18.404
- 38.945
We want the player to have a choice of who they play, depending how they handle the HUGE US-specific civil war event/decision chain.
I don't want to promise that it will be possible in the release, but the goal is that it should be.
I don't know where the "95% of players never used anything but the Grand Campaign" stat comes from.
only the problem is that 95% of players dont have anything to do with AARs
and yes i made that number up, but that doesnt mean its not true
and yes i made that number up, but that doesnt mean its not true
Über-please, it's really amazing what you're hinting here...
I suppose this is one of the adventages of focusing in one scenario: more immersive gameplaying
Thanks King. Readers can judge for themselves whether AARs are representative.
- Dec 14, 1999
- 18.404
- 38.945
Other starting dates it is a great field for modders.
I personally really prefer developers to focus on gameplay rather that spend time and resources on other scenarios.
I personally really prefer developers to focus on gameplay rather that spend time and resources on other scenarios.