Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Victoria 3 playable and anjoyable?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Victoria 3 7629 Bug Reports 3858 User Mods 317 Multiplayer 33 Suggestions 1687 Tech Support 331 After Action Reports (AARs)
PedroLuiz said:
Tools before iron?
Click to expand...
mines need tools so starting from scratch with 0 mats you make wooden tools to get iron for iron tools.
ofc getting into a market is better but I'm just illustrating how the hardest economic start possible is still just following a set order. Every. Single. Time
 
  • 7
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
TitaniumMan91 said:
Same as Vic2, same as EU4, same as pretty much every GSG.
Click to expand...
Except in those two other games, there were other things to do. People would not complain so much about the economy if the rest of the game was more engaging. The devs are selling the "economy" (aka managing the building queue) as the main thing in the game (and it is the core gameplay loop, indeed). Nobody is saying other games do it better, people are saying it is very boring.
 
  • 18
  • 1
Reactions:
Lys91 said:
Except in those two other games, there were other things to do. People would not complain so much about the economy if the rest of the game was more engaging. The devs are selling the "economy" (aka managing the building queue) as the main thing in the game (and it is the core gameplay loop, indeed). Nobody is saying other games do it better, people are saying it is very boring.
Click to expand...
The proper way to play Byzantium in EU4 is to follow a literal day by day guide of what to build, destroy, and who improve relations with diplomatically. People will reroll starts until you get the right nations to have right opinion of you before you launch a war based on cheesing the way the AI "thinks," and they're far from the hardest start in game.

You weren't talking about not having other things to do, you were complaining that starting as difficult nations followed the same basic playbook. If we want to talk about what there is to do in the game, that's fine, but please pick a complaint and stick to it because it's impossible to talk about this if you keep changing your criticism.
 
  • 14
  • 5
Reactions:
TitaniumMan91 said:
The proper way to play Byzantium in EU4 is to follow a literal day by day guide of what to build, destroy, and who improve relations with diplomatically. People will reroll starts until you get the right nations to have right opinion of you before you launch a war based on cheesing the way the AI "thinks," and they're far from the hardest start in game.

You weren't talking about not having other things to do, you were complaining that starting as difficult nations followed the same basic playbook. If we want to talk about what there is to do in the game, that's fine, but please pick a complaint and stick to it because it's impossible to talk about this if you keep changing your criticism.
Click to expand...

Who plays Byzantium in EU4 anyway ?

I mean beside the 0.5% of the playerbase who are simultaneously hardcore players and Hellenophile to the brick of toxicity ? Its equivalent in Victoria 3 would be Krakow.
 
  • 10
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Anna_Gein said:
Who plays Byzantium in EU4 anyway ?
Click to expand...
The sort of people who talk about the hardest starts in Vic3, for one. 4.1% of all EU4 players (including the ones who don't play Iron Man) have the Basileus achievement, which as I said isn't even the hardest start. None of which is particularly relevant to people acting like Vic3 is the only game where the opening moves are the same or similar across multiple nations or playthroughs. If you want to play a difficult country, your options are going to be inherently limited to optimal moves to avoid losing, however you care to define that in Vic3.
 
  • 5
  • 4
Reactions:
As someone with 300 hours in Vic 3 and last played was patch 1.3, enjoyment is subjective to everyone. There are people who couldn't enjoy the game for 40 hours and others who would enjoy the game for 500. Is it playable? Absolutely, you can play it right now and make it to 1936 and you probably don't have to lift a finger or do anything.

Now, I know this doesn't answer your question because the question it feels like you're asking is "Is it good?" to which I would answer not really. The game struggles to maintain my interest past the first ~30 years because every country industrializes the same. You may start at a different point when playing as say, Sokoto compared to the US or compared to Krakow, but all of those countries will end up looking the same by ~1900 unless you push the game to its limits. Last I played, war wasn't very good either. I also think the politics & pop system doesn't work with itself very well (with IG leaders usurping the will of their pops & politics essentially being an egg timer).

However, with all that said, there is satisfaction in seeing your number go up, something akin to Cookie Clicker.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
I enjoy it, with only using a minor mod I've created to do some map changes that makes more sense to me.

There are some annoyances like civilians and foreign countries making some moves that doesn't make sense to me, but I guess that's pretty much in character.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm trying to like it. If 1.5 improves the military that will help. My major complaint is the minutiae required for managing trade routes. Give me a button to select to automatically cancel dead routes. Give me a menu to cancel unprofitable routes based on country I'm trading with and how unprofitable the route is. That would help immensely. Help me understand WHY my pops aren't getting their daily needs met -- they have plenty of places to work -- don't make me guess, give me some specific suggestions for what I can do. I played ALOT of Victoria 2. Victoria 3 isn't ready for prime time yet.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Anna_Gein said:
Who plays Byzantium in EU4 anyway ?

I mean beside the 0.5% of the playerbase who are simultaneously hardcore players and Hellenophile to the brick of toxicity ? Its equivalent in Victoria 3 would be Krakow.
Click to expand...

When we last got metrics, IIRC they were the #12 most popular nation.

I rather doubt Krakow is quite that popular.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
TitaniumMan91 said:
The proper way to play Byzantium in EU4 is to follow a literal day by day guide of what to build, destroy, and who improve relations with diplomatically. People will reroll starts until you get the right nations to have right opinion of you before you launch a war based on cheesing the way the AI "thinks," and they're far from the hardest start in game.
Click to expand...

the point isnt that there are specific guides applicable to byzantium, the point is that the guide is applicable for every other nation in vic3.
 
  • 6
  • 2
Reactions:
It's playable and I like it, but it will be definitely better after some patches. I think it's worth to wait 1.5 patch and Sphere of Influence DLC. And maybe another 1-2 DLCs
 
za3tarani said:
the point isnt that there are specific guides applicable to byzantium, the point is that the guide is applicable for every other nation in vic3.
Click to expand...
A game about industrializing rewards the player for building the things than enable industrialization? I'm shocked.

If you don't want to to play the same play style every game, stop trying to achieve the same goals the most efficient way every time? This criticism just does not make sense to me, every Paradox game I've played has a few general rule guidelines you will use at the start of every game, especially if you are trying to be biggest/baddest/richest. Every HoI game, unless I was playing a particularly behind nation. begins with the same 3-4 techs being chosen, every Stellaris game is the same handful of techs and sectors built because the early game relies on the same things for 90% of origins, every EU4 game with getting my starting stack up to FL and invading neighbors after putting the focus on mil because tech 4/6/7 is just too important, etc.
 
  • 6
  • 4
Reactions:
za3tarani said:
the point isnt that there are specific guides applicable to byzantium, the point is that the guide is applicable for every other nation in vic3.
Click to expand...
No it isn't.

It falls down at any step where you don't have those resources, to name one obvious example. It also falls down if you have a low population, an isolated economy, or immediate other concerns that have to be dealt with. There are also numerous other specific situations where this "guide" is going to fail for someone who doesn't know what they're doing.

What it is, more or less, is a very broad guide for how to progress in industrialisation if you can acquire all the necessary resources. And presented as some flaw that developing the resources to run iron, coal, tooling and steel industries in the 19th century is a recipe for success in industrialisation. Wow, bruh, no kidding, coal and iron is essential to a country industrialising successfully in this period? Who woulda thunk.
 
  • 7
  • 2
Reactions:
I mean, fairness, it's kinda natural that at least the foundations of industrialization are going to look basically the same across countries cause... that's kind of how it works. My personal opinion is that right now joining a bigger market is arguably too reliably beneficial (It can make some of your industries unsustainable if they have to compete with a higher tech, more profitable competition from whoever is running the market, but I feel like that's less prominent than perhaps it should be in a game that's kind of about imperialism) and there's little incentive for countries to specialise after the basics of industrialisation are done. Though local prices seem to help in that regard.
 
  • 6Like
  • 2
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back