There is a manual for VV, found in FAQ (was: we need a manual for VV)

[unmerged(94657)]

I'd like to vote for a manual also. I haven't played Rome for quite a while, and it really looked pretty different during a quick perusal. (I believe quite a few changes were also introduced by version 1.3; I had patched to that verion, but have not really played since before that patch). The extenssive character and UI changes really beg for something a bit more than the list of new features that was posted this week. Nothing elabaorate is really required--something along the lines of NA would be fine. Digging through this forum for multiple dev diaries is not an adequate substitute IMO. BTW, my hat's off to Nyrael--I have trouble learning Paradox games WITH a manual. Just dumb, I guess.

 

[Nyrael]

Sorry mate, not everyone here is a dedicated and experienced fan.
Don't assume everyone is used to strategy games and is as experienced as you.

Experienced? I played PI games for only two or three months.
Dedicated? I play everysecond day for an hour or two.
Used to strategy games? I am ashamed to say that my experience with serious strategies was non-existing until few months ago.

That all is just why I am so annoyed. When a n00b sees that so many better and more experienced players have trouble learning new mechanics, he is annoyed.
While I agree that IN manual could be useful because it adds a lot, VV doesn't add enough to be worth serious effort. Writing a manual can be a pain and doing it for an expansion of not very succesful game means that expansion would need to suffer a feature lose or have less bugfixing and ballancing. That may be taken care of if a PI member gets enough free time or if expansion becomes a financial success.

 

[blwizard]

That all is just why I am so annoyed. When a n00b sees that so many better and more experienced players have trouble learning new mechanics, he is annoyed.

Lol, read my whole sentence please.

 

[unmerged(125561)]

While I agree that IN manual could be useful because it adds a lot, VV doesn't add enough to be worth serious effort. Writing a manual can be a pain and doing it for an expansion of not very succesful game means that expansion would need to suffer a feature lose or have less bugfixing and ballancing. That may be taken care of if a PI member gets enough free time or if expansion becomes a financial success.

Didn't know we had Paradox's accountant on hand - lucky us! If a manual is not something you need, great. your needs have been satisfied with or with out it. Others however, would like such a product so, to satisfy the less capable members of the community - lets have one and everybody is happy.

 

[Bertouch]

While I agree that IN manual could be useful because it adds a lot, VV doesn't add enough to be worth serious effort.

An excellent point. Since VV doesn't add much, preparing a written addendum like those that were available for IN and NA--a few pages' summary, with a few colorful images--should take little time for Paradox. A full manual's worth isn't needed, so providing this material to players who like to have it written and handy would be relatively easy for the company to do. I'd suggest that some player do as much, but hey...! -We're already volunteer beta-testers for their products, and have been, for years. I think creating written documentation is best left to those who are most familiar with it, having developed the game to begin with.

 

[Silktrader]

While I sympathise with Your complaint - that is, lacking a manual which introduces the newest features - I also have my opinion on why this kind of material wasn't provided.

A.

The game is quite exhaustively documented, with its tooltips - which are the most immediate form of information. Hardly a substitute for the verbose prose, featured in a manual ... but the quickest and most immediate help, in my view. Certain dynamics are nonetheless not described, within tooltips, as they elude the context of the many buttons and labels. There always is a lot of effort being put into describing events and concepts, with these popups.
​

B.

Given the continuous nature of development, which assumes that not just bugs are being solved but also game balance is being looked into - it's hard to, at least initially, draft a manual.

How to exhaustively write about, say, the effect certain "titles" ("Legate", "Magistrate", "Consort", "Pro Consul", ...) have on characters - if those are bound to change from one release to another.

If You anticipate an immutable game, with but bugs to be taken care of, You can certainly expect a manual to be a speedier undertaking. It usually is not the case with Paradox titles, which patches do not just address bugs, but alter some game mechanisms - resulting in manuals becoming obsolete rather soon.

The size of this forum mirrors the need to continually update and explain information on certain games, as well as propose new directions.
​

Regardless of these points, Your argument remains sound: a manual would surely help.

I expect a wealth of information to be shaped up pretty soon - that will contribute to getting You up to date.

 

[AKronblad]

I agree with davisb:

Those who don't need a manual, don't use the manual. For those who need a manual there should be one available.

And I need a manual, and many with me, it seems.

 

[unmerged(125561)]

B.

If You anticipate an immutable game, with but bugs to be taken care of, You can certainly expect a manual to be a speedier undertaking. It usually is not the case with Paradox titles, which patches do not just address bugs, but alter some game mechanisms - resulting in manuals becoming obsolete rather soon.

As it stands at the moment, an outline of the cause and effect relationships the expansion has introduced is really all that is being asked for. Coming to terms with changes in the variables down the track after the inevitable tweaking is par for the course with most games. However, an understanding of causality and how to manipulate it is what is being asked for.

Anyways, lets not get hung up on the word manual: It doesn't need to be 80 pages worth, just a reasonable explaination of the new additions to facilitate scheming based on informed decisionmaking rather than trial and error.

 

[blwizard]

It doesn't need to be 80 pages worth, just a reasonable explaination of the new additions to facilitate scheming based on informed decisionmaking rather than trial and error.

This is what I think should at least be given out to players.

 

[FangThang]

It just seems like I've seen patch notes from paradox that have more details then what has come out about VV.

I had to read the the bullet points on the gamers gate website, search for and read all of the developers diarys, and then read a mini-strategy guide from one of the beta testers, just to get an idea of what had changed.

I've been playing and figuring it out as I go a long, and I love the expansion so far, but the lack of documentation is still kind of frustrating. I'm kind of looking forward to the first patch, just to read the patch notes and figure out what all is going on.

 

[Fookison]

What about the PDF Strategy Guide found in the Rome - FAQ section? It is pretty basic and covers most items. The rest you will find in the threads....

 

[unmerged(12217)]

This is pretty full of groggy BS - search the forums, read the FAQ's, track down the developers notes. Sorry fanboys, purchasers of even a measly expansion deserve some sort of documented guidance. I'm a Paradox fan myself, but I admit they dropped the ball on this one.

 

[Bertouch]

What about the PDF Strategy Guide found in the Rome - FAQ section? It is pretty basic and covers most items. The rest you will find in the threads....

But with respect, the point isn't how to get some idea of playing Rome. It's how to quickly learn the new features included in VV. A relatively short addendum could have done this, just as it did in EU3's NA and IN. Paradox didn't provide this.

 

[jelay14]

I thought I saw something Vae Victus-related in PDF format in one of the threads...

 

[Lys91]

Yep an manual is a great idea, really need it.

 

[Fookison]

But with respect, the point isn't how to get some idea of playing Rome. It's how to quickly learn the new features included in VV. A relatively short addendum could have done this, just as it did in EU3's NA and IN. Paradox didn't provide this.

Noted. The Development Diaries don't really spell it out do they?

 

[Nimic]

A manual/summary could fuel some of my attention towards enjoying the new features, rather than getting annoyed over things I don't understand.

 

[unmerged(106235)]

Another in a "manual would be nice and is pretty much expected with any release" category. My $0.02

 

[Bertouch]

Noted. The Development Diaries don't really spell it out do they?

I think it's safe to say that very few players use the development diaries for more than quick, cheerful PR. Detail and images aren't what you go to a DD for, but to short, expressive addendum. Like the sort Paradox created for its EU3 addons. I don't care if we pay $10 or $15 or $20 for the addon, I just think we deserve that much to make the gameplay easy to grasp and dig into.

(This feels weird. It's like telling people that I think yes, there's no reason to remove the flavor from chocolate, or the color from the sky, and having to justify it. )

 

[arkcheung]

Also thanks to Ironhead 5 for his great Doomsday tutorial AAR!

Can I get a link to this tutorial AAR?