Singleplayer vs Multiplayer balance

[am300307]

So a gaming community im connected with has been having a slighly big problem in their multiplayer game

Image provided by MagisterEquirium*

Suppose to be 1889 not 1869, on the last period.

Unlike the AI, players love to maximize their militaries while ignoring industry. Which makes sense, because if you focus on just your industry, someone who focuses more on military will simply beat you. It seems there is not enough iron in the world to share it evenly among the world powers.

Its gotten so bad that the #2 prestige country France, can hold off the combined armies of Russia, NGF, and Italy alone. Granted its a good player that has like +6 defence commanders(named Napoleon ) on the front line and what not. But the problem is that NGF and Russia cant equip their armies because of the lack of Iron. Meanwhile France can buy all its supplies from China artisans leaving the scraps for his enemy.

We have taken some actions to minimize this in the future. Some idea's like banning the NF of soldiers, and possibly adding more iron provinces.

This hasnt been a problem in previous victoria 2 versions. Also the group is using the original vanilla HOD. So maybe future patches will fix this.

Ideas?

 

[Thanik]

1. Mod the game , or just edit save game:
a) lower consumption of armies
b) higher production of iron from RGO (from technologies/inventions), or in production_typex.txt
c) more iron provinces

2. I think you are capture all valuable iron provinces holded by AI? Shanxi/Manchuria/Korea/Africa ?
3. Banning NF soldiers? Bad idea for low population countries...
4. Prepare for real lack of rubber, oil, and fuel in future. So propably one/two nations will have access to tanks, and others not....

 

[EUnderhill]

So a gaming community im connected with has been having a slighly big problem in their multiplayer game

Image provided by MagisterEquirium*

Suppose to be 1889 not 1869, on the last period.

Unlike the AI, players love to maximize their militaries while ignoring industry. Which makes sense, because if you focus on just your industry, someone who focuses more on military will simply beat you. It seems there is not enough iron in the world to share it evenly among the world powers.

Its gotten so bad that the #2 prestige country France, can hold off the combined armies of Russia, NGF, and Italy alone. Granted its a good player that has like +6 defence commanders(named Napoleon ) on the front line and what not. But the problem is that NGF and Russia cant equip their armies because of the lack of Iron. Meanwhile France can buy all its supplies from China artisans leaving the scraps for his enemy.

We have taken some actions to minimize this in the future. Some idea's like banning the NF of soldiers, and possibly adding more iron provinces.

This hasnt been a problem in previous victoria 2 versions. Also the group is using the original vanilla HOD. So maybe future patches will fix this.

Ideas?

The beta patch took away most of France's coal and iron...iirc timber is the new bottleneck in many cases.

 

[unmerged(250188)]

In my game as the UK we had a huge steel shortage and I alone fixed it. It ended up with me producing 80%+ of the worlds steel........

 

[unmerged(624310)]

4. Prepare for real lack of rubber, oil, and fuel in future. So propably one/two nations will have access to tanks, and others not....

Doesn't matter, tanks are terrible now. They somehow have less defense than infantry. They completely subverted its name by making the Tank into a Glass Cannon. I used to love my tank armies that never died, now I just get more glorified cavalry.

 

[Baneslave]

Doesn't matter, tanks are terrible now. They somehow have less defense than infantry. They completely subverted its name by making the Tank into a Glass Cannon. I used to love my tank armies that never died, now I just get more glorified cavalry.

As long as you aren't defending with those tanks the lack of defense never comes up. Which is kinda historic, as I don't think that WW1 were ever used effectively in defense.

 

[unmerged(624310)]

As long as you aren't defending with those tanks the lack of defense never comes up. Which is kinda historic, as I don't think that WW1 were ever used effectively in defense.

Yea but the game is mixing up strategic and tactical defense in its stats for them. Tanks made such good offensive units Strategically, because they were so hard to kill Tactically compared to infantry and infantry positions.

 

[Thanik]

And tanks + airplanes can really boost your military score if you have money to maintain them.

 

[GC13]

Yea but the game is mixing up strategic and tactical defense in its stats for them. Tanks made such good offensive units Strategically, because they were so hard to kill Tactically compared to infantry and infantry positions.

Tanks are no easier to kill than Infantry, they are just less useful when the army is defending a position. You already agree that they're more useful on the offense in the real world, so why object when it's so in the game?

 

[pkderek]

Yea but the game is mixing up strategic and tactical defense in its stats for them. Tanks made such good offensive units Strategically, because they were so hard to kill Tactically compared to infantry and infantry positions.

Were they really that hard to kill? From what I know of WW1, tanks were anything but hard to kill. If anything they were death traps for whoever was inside. This is WW1 not WW2 lol (even WW2 tank crew was a scary thing).

 

[unmerged(624310)]

Tanks are no easier to kill than Infantry, they are just less useful when the army is defending a position. You already agree that they're more useful on the offense in the real world, so why object when it's so in the game?

The reason they were good is the part that bugs me. Picture an entrenched position. Machine guns, barbed war, trenches the whole nine yards. Sending infantry in is basically suicide. But a tank can shrug off machine gun fire, roll right over the barbed wire and trenches, drive up the machine gun position and take it out. Now infantry can advance though the gap in the defenses and suddenly the enemy is on the wrong side of all the carefully set up defenses.

Tanks were a hard target compared to infantry, infantry was easy to take out, tanks took effort, direct hits from artie or mortars, or really heavy machine gun fire, and a lot of it.

 

[Pkaem]

The strengh of armored divisions is their mobility. Speed combined with heavy armamanet which enables mobile warfare as strategic option, that is the real strengh of a tank. The way we use them in Vic2 is the way they were used generally in WW1 and like the french did in WW2. Heavy support unit for infantry. Tanks are usually very good at offence due to mobility, penetration and resilience. In defense, their main strengh, the mobility is gone. They aren't more than weak artillery there. So it's modeled okay IMO.

Further I think it would be pretty cool if there was anything like an very late invention for mobile warfare, since the game goes on to 1935, there have been already first thoughts about armored spearhead doctrines. So something that makes a very fast moving combination of tanks and airplanes alone viable. Very expansive but a massive blow to every enemy line wich is focused by these stacks.

Back to topic: I don't think tanks are crap, they have siege, so replace your eng's with them. This works very good for me. They aren't a 1st line unit (what is kind of odd) but they work fine as support unit. An army with airplanes for recon and tanks for siege, combined with a strong line of infantry and good artillery support is the best lategame composition for me, so if there are just 2 players in an multiplayer session able to build those, it can be a huge advantage. Tanks are totally op in taking out heavy fortifications.

 

[Baneslave]

As long as you attacking, tanks' (or any units') defense value doesn't matter at all. It works similarly with defending and attack values.

 

[unmerged(376721)]

Back to topic: I don't think tanks are crap, they have siege, so replace your eng's with them. This works very good for me. They aren't a 1st line unit (what is kind of odd) but they work fine as support unit. An army with airplanes for recon and tanks for siege, combined with a strong line of infantry and good artillery support is the best lategame composition for me, so if there are just 2 players in an multiplayer session able to build those, it can be a huge advantage. Tanks are totally op in taking out heavy fortifications.

Other than playing as German Empire, I have yet to have substantial tank in my army, 'cause stupid capis refuse to build enough barrel factory. Regardless how good or bad it is, if I can't build it, then it is worthless.

 

[Beagá]

Well tanks only began showing in large numbers after 1917, and I don´t think you could say the Reich built even one brigade-sized unit of them in World War 1. If after 1916 no one had any tank brigade, THEN we could say there is a major problem.

 

[unmerged(624310)]

Other than playing as German Empire, I have yet to have substantial tank in my army, 'cause stupid capis refuse to build enough barrel factory. Regardless how good or bad it is, if I can't build it, then it is worthless.

You can set your stockpile to buy 2k of em, and/or try to build a few to generate a demand that may or may no get filled (NF helps too), but honestly I just switch governments long enough to manually throw up half a dozen. I once played a game as France and it took till the 2100's till any capitalists build a tank factory. I modded my end date, obviously.

 

[unmerged(376721)]

Well, I know all that. Still, usually it takes like 1920s for the first tank brigade to appear, and will still take a long time to produce a sizable tank army. So to me it is worthless.

 

[podcat]

Try it with the 3.02 patch before you make changes. I seem to recall us rebalancing iron and coal production.

- Did any of the non french side grab iron provinces in sweden etc, does germany have the rheinland etc do you have your iron techs up?
- I can see how it can be a problem now that China isnt sphereable so you cant gang up and kick france out of the sphere there. If none of the above works I'd play around with relocating the huge Iron RGO in china to be spread out among the smaller substates where it can be competed over.

but the problem might be much less in 3.02, so it would be cool if you let me know next time you have a huge MP war

 

[NapoleonI]

Its gotten so bad that the #2 prestige country France, can hold off the combined armies of Russia, NGF, and Italy alone.

There is a shortage of iron in the latest version of the game. That said, why are Russia, NGF and Italy fighting France, if they have a shortage of resources? Why are they not grabbing some iron provinces in China instead?

 

[Beagá]

It´s a MP game. Unlike SP with the AI, the contestants are proactive, not reactive. Would you sit idly seeing your opponent grab an advantage to crush you later? However that´s one GP versus 3, what is UK doing BTW?

Considering how Germany has its troubles to form in SP however it´s probable that yes, France is OP.