Victoria 3 isnt focused in war and it hurts

  • 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
But the new approach doesn't even consist of warfare. It's just a simulation of how AI will do it with it's RNG. No skill involved, you just place a general and your war will either be won or lost. But you don't care you have your little economy to worry about. There should be a balance between eco, diplo and war. Currently this isn't the case because the war part is the same as not managing anything extra.
You're mistaken. Currently, there is no balance. In all other Paradox games, war is put on a pedestal and raised above every other gameplay mechanic to be given more attention by both the developers and the players. War is a showstopper that makes the player ignore every other gameplay mechanic, and war micro is a required action where misplay can make every other mechanic irrelevant. What's the point of economics when you can go out there and conquer more for yourself, while also harming your enemies? What's the point of diplomacy when you can out-micro every AI opponent in warfare against what should be impossible odds, and allies only serve to slow you down? What's the point of politics when you can end all internal strife by beating down all rebels in, you guessed it, warfare!

Victoria 3 is the one game that promises to rebalance these elements in a way where war is not important enough to eclipse literally everything else that you can engage in during a game.
 
  • 13
  • 6
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
war is not important enough to eclipse literally everything else that you can engage in during a game.
and when it is, you know you've done something wrong. i like that.
 
  • 3
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
You're mistaken. Currently, there is no balance. In all other Paradox games, war is put on a pedestal and raised above every other gameplay mechanic to be given more attention by both the developers and the players. War is a showstopper that makes the player ignore every other gameplay mechanic, and war micro is a required action where misplay can make every other mechanic irrelevant. What's the point of economics when you can go out there and conquer more for yourself, while also harming your enemies? What's the point of diplomacy when you can out-micro every AI opponent in warfare against what should be impossible odds, and allies only serve to slow you down? What's the point of politics when you can end all internal strife by beating down all rebels in, you guessed it, warfare!

Victoria 3 is the one game that promises to rebalance these elements in a way where war is not important enough to eclipse literally everything else that you can engage in during a game.
Yeah but now war is just being thrown out of the window. Russia didn't have great economy most of the time but they still did well at wars a lot of the times. I don't ask to go back to micro hell but at least give us more control. Give us something to do that can change the state of the war with our armies. Just not the bloody 3 buttons on a general and that's it.
 
  • 5
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
You can. Have you ever watched any skilled players play? Perhaps participated in an mp game where players go against each other (in a war no less, whoooo scary). Those are situations where you want interactive gameplay. Not wars that you start, assign general, click button, and boom your war is being fought for you.
You can't dude, stop arguing in bad faith.

Try it for yourself: I attached a save game of CK3, heretic count vs Basileus, zero preparation, war started over title revocation because heretic (that could have been avoided with a changement of the contract, but as we said, zero preparation). Try to win.
 

Attachments

  • challenge.ck3
    4,7 MB · Views: 0
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The thing is your the minority in these discussions when asking for the removal of this new war system. The majority of people here are favorable towards the system but want to add some features like assigning objectives.
To clarify that, the majority of the people here are somewhat favorable to the basic concept behind the proposed system, but they want to see a few more features before they're willing to say that they like it. Without those "possible" features, it's got a lot less support. If Paradox DOESN'T add something beyond the rather bare-bones mechanics they've described, it will turn off a lot of players, INCLUDING many who have voiced support for the ideas behind the change.

I'd say that Typhion-fre is in the minority in wanting to scrap the new system, but he's nowhere near alone in voicing concern that it's looking rather underwhelming so far. It's up to Paradox to do something with the new system to flesh it out a bit, otherwise I suspect that this will end up as a VERY niche game, and the odds of ever seeing a V4 will go way down.

Not all players want to get bogged down in war mechanics, but not all players want a pure economic sim either. The game needs to do something a bit more immersive with BOTH the peacetime and wartime aspects, or to make the level of player engagement during wartime optional (which takes significantly more time to program).

While I don't entirely agree with Typhion-fre, I don't totally disagree with him either. He makes a few valid points, although I think he's asking for a lot more of a war mechanics focus than the developers ever intended to add into this game.
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
You're mistaken. Currently, there is no balance. In all other Paradox games, war is put on a pedestal and raised above every other gameplay mechanic to be given more attention by both the developers and the players. War is a showstopper that makes the player ignore every other gameplay mechanic, and war micro is a required action where misplay can make every other mechanic irrelevant. What's the point of economics when you can go out there and conquer more for yourself, while also harming your enemies? What's the point of diplomacy when you can out-micro every AI opponent in warfare against what should be impossible odds, and allies only serve to slow you down? What's the point of politics when you can end all internal strife by beating down all rebels in, you guessed it, warfare!

Victoria 3 is the one game that promises to rebalance these elements in a way where war is not important enough to eclipse literally everything else that you can engage in during a game.

But actually that makes sense, for example in stellaris beating all the opposition in warfare and ending all internal strife by beating down all rebels, and also in real life:



Impero Romano
Si inizia a parlare di brigantaggio già nell'antica Roma, quando a Taranto intorno al 185 a.C. avvenne un'insurrezione sociale composta perlopiù da pastori, che arrivarono a formare vere e proprie bande.[9] Per risolvere la questione, il pretore Lucio Postumio Tempsano attuò una dura repressione in cui furono condannati circa 7.000 rivoltosi, alcuni dei quali furono giustiziati mentre altri riuscirono ad evadere.[10] Anche Lucio Cornelio Silla prese provvedimenti contro i briganti (a quel tempo chiamati sicari o latrones)[11] con la promulgazione della Lex Cornelia de sicariis nell'81 a.C., che prevedeva pene capitali come la crocifissione e l'esposizione alle belve (ad bestias).[11]

Roman Empire
We start talking about banditry already in ancient Rome, when in Taranto around 185 BC. there was a social insurrection made up mostly of shepherds, who came to form real gangs. [9] To resolve the issue, the praetor Lucio Postumio Tempsano carried out a harsh repression in which about 7,000 rioters were sentenced, some of whom were executed while others managed to escape. [10] Lucius Cornelius Silla also took measures against brigands (at that time called sicari or latrones) [11] with the promulgation of the Lex Cornelia de sicariis in 81 BC, which provided for capital punishment such as crucifixion and exposure to wild beasts (ad bestias ). [11]


Fine ottocento e inizio novecento
Lo Stato Italiano iniziò una lotta serrata, per arginare e debellare questo fenomeno, che si ridusse con l'inizio del Novecento.

Late nineteenth and early twentieth century
The Italian State began a close fight to stem and eradicate this phenomenon, which was reduced at the beginning of the twentieth century.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
  • 8
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Give us something to do that can change the state of the war with our armies.
redeploy troops. send more. i'm sure you'll be able to change generals' orders.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
To clarify that, the majority of the people here are somewhat favorable to the basic concept behind the proposed system, but they want to see a few more features before they're willing to say that they like it. Without those "possible" features, it's got a lot less support. If Paradox DOESN'T add something beyond the rather bare-bones mechanics they've described, it will turn off a lot of players, INCLUDING many who have voiced support for the ideas behind the change.

I'd say that Typhion-fre is in the minority in wanting to scrap the new system, but he's nowhere near alone in voicing concern that it's looking rather underwhelming so far. It's up to Paradox to do something with the new system to flesh it out a bit, otherwise I suspect that this will end up as a VERY niche game, and the odds of ever seeing a V4 will go way down.

Not all players want to get bogged down in war mechanics, but not all players want a pure economic sim either. The game needs to do something a bit more immersive with BOTH the peacetime and wartime aspects, or to make the level of player engagement during wartime optional (which takes significantly more time to program).

While I don't entirely agree with Typhion-fre, I don't totally disagree with him either. He makes a few valid points, although I think he's asking for a lot more of a war mechanics focus than the developers ever intended to add into this game.
No I am exactly pointing at this. I like the idea too of making it optional but as a programmer I understand that that isn't easy to make. Good post
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Status
Not open for further replies.