There needs to be another way to win without total military dominance. Certainly that is key, but wasn't always the case.
Special E3 Announcement - just for you! A House Divided
- Thread starter Kallocain
- 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.
#1. Good job on Victoria II - I think it is one of the best products put out by Paradox.
#2. Excellent Choice on 1861 - My only problem with Victoria II was the lack of Scenarios and that is definitely the next logical step.
#3. Dominion Day - 1867 - Any chance you can devote hours and hours of work to create a new scenario with the soul purpose of allowing me to play my home country? Or perhaps a better option would be coding the British A.I. so that they actually create Canada once and a while?
As with HoI, players might appreciate being able to build up a younger country that isn't constantly threatened by it's neighbours...
#2. Excellent Choice on 1861 - My only problem with Victoria II was the lack of Scenarios and that is definitely the next logical step.
#3. Dominion Day - 1867 - Any chance you can devote hours and hours of work to create a new scenario with the soul purpose of allowing me to play my home country? Or perhaps a better option would be coding the British A.I. so that they actually create Canada once and a while?
As with HoI, players might appreciate being able to build up a younger country that isn't constantly threatened by it's neighbours...
#3. Dominion Day - 1867 - Any chance you can devote hours and hours of work to create a new scenario with the soul purpose of allowing me to play my home country? Or perhaps a better option would be coding the British A.I. so that they actually create Canada once and a while?
I've always wanted to play as Canada, but switching to Great Britain and releasing it for no reason at all isn't really interesting. So I'd also like to see the British AI (or any AI for that matter) releasing dominions under circumstances and for good cause. And since Canada would then be a HM's Government, maybe change immigration mechanics so "democratic non-Democracies" might have a chance to grow
I would say pushing the game start back to the French revolution (so 30-40 years) would be the best step. You still have infant industry, which could grow much more naturally than in the current game where historically and in game, everything is prepped for full industralization in western europe. So you have a point where the west is phasing into industrialization instead of already started. But this time period is also about nationalism and ideology, the french revolution is pivotal to this and the dissasembly of the european aristocratic class and states sets the stage for the whole game. Also it would give a chance for other nations to start to industralize earlier, shortening the gap between the top and bottom countries a bit.
And just how do you suggest creating a proper game simulation for the ~12 years that Napoleon dominated Europe?
Does not have to happen does it? Without Napoleon France would not of been in that position, so while its a possibility it is one among many.
They could put in a random event that gives France other a great general/monarch and a massive reserve pool but automatically dow on every power in europe (except swiss) or where a "true" republic is finally formed after the radicals are done killing everyone, and their reserve pool is shrinked
as of 1.3 Francedoes not need napoleon to dominate europe, it just occurs naturally
I hope that war will be more of a problem and can potentially ruin your nation. Like germany in ww1
I'd heard rumors, but glad to get the straight dope from the horse's mouth. I will be one of the first in (metaphorical) line to pick this up! Particularly interested to hear/see what you do with politics and if we can fix the economy as well. Kudos!
@ Kallocain & "Paradoxians"
PLEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAASE improve Multiplayer performance!
1.) Reconnect/Resync option after "Synchronisation" error.
2.) Improve information exchange, so players can use higher speed without getting sync error every 2 minutes.
3.) Make MP more robust, because i've got lots of errors and sync-problems with Vic2. (1.4 beta made it more robust actually... i wonder why?)
PLEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAASE improve Multiplayer performance!
1.) Reconnect/Resync option after "Synchronisation" error.
2.) Improve information exchange, so players can use higher speed without getting sync error every 2 minutes.
3.) Make MP more robust, because i've got lots of errors and sync-problems with Vic2. (1.4 beta made it more robust actually... i wonder why?)
Awesome! Vic II is a great game (minus some glitches) and an expansion would only make it that much better. Still holding out for WWI but sounds like a plan!
few suggestions
Super I'm all for an expansion. The list contains a few items that need improvement:
Could say nothing negitive about expansion suggestions - although make US civil war avoidable, it COULD have been avoided, make difficult to avoid, but avoidable nonetheless; make German unification possible without Alsace-Lorraine conquest; also make possible where we can demand part(s) of a province in a peace demand.
Super I'm all for an expansion. The list contains a few items that need improvement:
- Political sytems do need updating (for instance, we could have a system where if the party who wins the election ends up with a minority government then they have to accomidate an opposition party's policies based on that party's election percentage win - things could really be made even more interesting with coalition parties). Plus I would like to see a little more realism in the USA political system (congress could be more complex; fixed elections; more "involment" between upper and lower houses; political parties could be set at more accurate - before 1960 cons. and lib. between Reps. and Demos were very blurry; high power socialists in USA are slighly inaccurate, both Reps and Demos did at different times support social programs usally based on local support).
- Also support for other countries besides war I would applaud as it creates more intrigue
Could say nothing negitive about expansion suggestions - although make US civil war avoidable, it COULD have been avoided, make difficult to avoid, but avoidable nonetheless; make German unification possible without Alsace-Lorraine conquest; also make possible where we can demand part(s) of a province in a peace demand.
Last edited:
Love the idea of being able to support allies with building up of industry in their country, foreign investment etc...
Perhaps there should be a way of turning spheres into satellites, and then into part of your nation, much like what Britain achieved in India from 1760 to 1850.
Perhaps there should be a way of turning spheres into satellites, and then into part of your nation, much like what Britain achieved in India from 1760 to 1850.
Oh, and please allow us to DOW these bloody satellites!
And love the foreign investment ideas...!
I beg of you, please introduce a "declare independence" CB for satellites/vassals.
I think the British doom stacks from India need to be resolved as well, and the fact that the world has a gillion people in it at the game's end.
This is a so much great news !!! I mean, I saw it several days ago but I did not had time to talk about my enthousiasm until tonight
There is this one thing though that I dream about for Vicky II add-on => a system that creat policies in the states !
I mean, there are the provinces, and the states, and the countries. So far the states have only one main role : to ease the administration and not to have each province to rule (yeah I know that's a caricature, the states are a little more important. What I mean here is that they have just the "name" "states", without real deap consequences on the game).
And one thing that really is needed in the game to effectively simulate politics, and the question of local powers. And I think this is especially true with an add-on on the war between the states ! I mean, this war came from a debate on States rights.
So clearly what is my point ? Well what about having States' policies ? It means 3 main things :
- Each country has to determine who has the power and that becomes a tough political subject. Several decisions might come to determine if the national country (the player or the national AI) or the states (local AI) have the power in states
- There are elections at a state level (if permitted by the national laws) which means Parties start to matter at a local level, and there strength are partially but a lot determined by their local strength : the number of states where they are elected. This is huge as it would definitely change how the player handle his country : in time, we often succeed at having the party we want in power nationally, with a minority and a divided opposition or through a majority of 55 to 60% of the votes (without always having the ideological win). With states politics, it means that a strong ideological division in a country will give less powers to the party in control nationally : winning with 35 o 40% of the vote will hugely handicap the ruling party.
- States rights gives local boosts because of the reactivity, but the national power receives less taxes (as it goes to local powers) and has less power on the States to developp the country has the player wish. In the same time, low states rights or no states rights means local malus but the player/national ruling party can give to the country the direction it wants and receive more % of the taxes.
How does it work ?
Well several examples :
- With strong states rights : if the party in power nationally is not the same party that rule a state, the player cannot (or very hardly) decide policies locally. If the party in power in the state is the same as the national party, the player can make decisions IF it goes with the principles of the party in power
- If very low states rights : the ruling party nationally can do everything he wants.
- Between those extremes, several steps between national power and local power.
- With strong states rights : the AI deals with states policies like if it was a small country owning just one state, but with the respect of the national power.
There can even be some radicals ideas like strong states rights + strong ideological opposition to the national ruling party + strong minorities = war of independance (a tool for the "civil war" ?)
What do you guys think of those ideas ? I wanted to publish this on the global Vicky II forum but I figured it was better here... Hope the devs could like this or might already have thought of it !!!
There is this one thing though that I dream about for Vicky II add-on => a system that creat policies in the states !
I mean, there are the provinces, and the states, and the countries. So far the states have only one main role : to ease the administration and not to have each province to rule (yeah I know that's a caricature, the states are a little more important. What I mean here is that they have just the "name" "states", without real deap consequences on the game).
And one thing that really is needed in the game to effectively simulate politics, and the question of local powers. And I think this is especially true with an add-on on the war between the states ! I mean, this war came from a debate on States rights.
So clearly what is my point ? Well what about having States' policies ? It means 3 main things :
- Each country has to determine who has the power and that becomes a tough political subject. Several decisions might come to determine if the national country (the player or the national AI) or the states (local AI) have the power in states
- There are elections at a state level (if permitted by the national laws) which means Parties start to matter at a local level, and there strength are partially but a lot determined by their local strength : the number of states where they are elected. This is huge as it would definitely change how the player handle his country : in time, we often succeed at having the party we want in power nationally, with a minority and a divided opposition or through a majority of 55 to 60% of the votes (without always having the ideological win). With states politics, it means that a strong ideological division in a country will give less powers to the party in control nationally : winning with 35 o 40% of the vote will hugely handicap the ruling party.
- States rights gives local boosts because of the reactivity, but the national power receives less taxes (as it goes to local powers) and has less power on the States to developp the country has the player wish. In the same time, low states rights or no states rights means local malus but the player/national ruling party can give to the country the direction it wants and receive more % of the taxes.
How does it work ?
Well several examples :
- With strong states rights : if the party in power nationally is not the same party that rule a state, the player cannot (or very hardly) decide policies locally. If the party in power in the state is the same as the national party, the player can make decisions IF it goes with the principles of the party in power
- If very low states rights : the ruling party nationally can do everything he wants.
- Between those extremes, several steps between national power and local power.
- With strong states rights : the AI deals with states policies like if it was a small country owning just one state, but with the respect of the national power.
There can even be some radicals ideas like strong states rights + strong ideological opposition to the national ruling party + strong minorities = war of independance (a tool for the "civil war" ?)
What do you guys think of those ideas ? I wanted to publish this on the global Vicky II forum but I figured it was better here... Hope the devs could like this or might already have thought of it !!!