From Leaders portraits to causulty listings, what do you want to be added to the new Victoria 2?
What New Features Would You Like In Combat
- Thread starter JeanNYGUARD
- 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.
This will probably get moved to the features thread. But...
I'd like a basic supply system, so an encircled unit can't fight its way out as easily as it could in Vicky.
The navy also needs some purpose, either through blockades or commerce raiding or something other than just heavily armed troop transport convoys.
I'd like a basic supply system, so an encircled unit can't fight its way out as easily as it could in Vicky.
The navy also needs some purpose, either through blockades or commerce raiding or something other than just heavily armed troop transport convoys.
Is this section for anything military-based or just battles?
If its just for battles than the main suggestion I can come up with right now is some sort of battle summary, like the ones in Total War. It would tell the name of the battle (Battle of Province), who won, the nations involved, the armies or units involved and their generals, how mnay each unit had at beginning of battle and after the battle, and maybe even the experience gained (if any).
What would truly make Victoria II the best game ever is if they had fully-controllable, up-close battles, like in Total War. But of course that would be such a change from Victoria I that I doubt its even possible
. And the game would move along painfully slow so, really it isn't realistic.
If its just for battles than the main suggestion I can come up with right now is some sort of battle summary, like the ones in Total War. It would tell the name of the battle (Battle of Province), who won, the nations involved, the armies or units involved and their generals, how mnay each unit had at beginning of battle and after the battle, and maybe even the experience gained (if any).
What would truly make Victoria II the best game ever is if they had fully-controllable, up-close battles, like in Total War. But of course that would be such a change from Victoria I that I doubt its even possible
. And the game would move along painfully slow so, really it isn't realistic.Oh, I forgot, another suggestion I have is:
When an army's morale reaches 5 and they lose the battle, they surrender and then dissapear, to represent them being taking as POWs. They would be returned to their nation at the end of the war. Losing armies didn;t just turn around and march slowly to the next controlled province, they were usually either taken as POWs or rounded up and executed, as with the Texian soldiers after the battle of Goliad. Maybe execution should also be an option for the winning side but it would stir up alot of hatred amoung your enemy, perhaps raising their morale, and maybe even causing your own citizens to revolt or at least raise their consciousness. Also, your enemy may choose execution when he wins if you're doing it to his guys.
When an army's morale reaches 5 and they lose the battle, they surrender and then dissapear, to represent them being taking as POWs. They would be returned to their nation at the end of the war. Losing armies didn;t just turn around and march slowly to the next controlled province, they were usually either taken as POWs or rounded up and executed, as with the Texian soldiers after the battle of Goliad. Maybe execution should also be an option for the winning side but it would stir up alot of hatred amoung your enemy, perhaps raising their morale, and maybe even causing your own citizens to revolt or at least raise their consciousness. Also, your enemy may choose execution when he wins if you're doing it to his guys.
Mobilization can do a little improvement in two levels.
1) First is the option between Partial or Full Mobilization. This is significant for countries with large mobilization pools and not so favourable revenues on the budget. After all, if you want a war as Germany say, against the Netherlands, and you lacked/didn't saw necessary enough standard divisions to wage war appropriatly, you shouldn't be forced to call your 120 divisions into the mobilization pool, basically removing all of them from contributing to your economy. You should be able to choose in partial mobilization how many divisions you want to mobilize.
2) Secondly, it was rather odd that it took a few months, and suddenly you can deploy a gigantic force anywhere at any time. On one day, the French are easily advancing to Koln, the very next day 150000 spawn in Koln out of nowhere because the mobilization date just hit. Likewise, you could have the option of rapid mobilization, where you can deploy your troops in their home provinces after only a few months or an extended mobilization, where you can deploy your mobilization divisions anywhere as long as it doesn't border a province owned or controlled by your enemy.
1) First is the option between Partial or Full Mobilization. This is significant for countries with large mobilization pools and not so favourable revenues on the budget. After all, if you want a war as Germany say, against the Netherlands, and you lacked/didn't saw necessary enough standard divisions to wage war appropriatly, you shouldn't be forced to call your 120 divisions into the mobilization pool, basically removing all of them from contributing to your economy. You should be able to choose in partial mobilization how many divisions you want to mobilize.
2) Secondly, it was rather odd that it took a few months, and suddenly you can deploy a gigantic force anywhere at any time. On one day, the French are easily advancing to Koln, the very next day 150000 spawn in Koln out of nowhere because the mobilization date just hit. Likewise, you could have the option of rapid mobilization, where you can deploy your troops in their home provinces after only a few months or an extended mobilization, where you can deploy your mobilization divisions anywhere as long as it doesn't border a province owned or controlled by your enemy.
In all honesty I'd like the ability to make a battle for a province hourly-based like the HoI series.
>What New Features Would You Like?
Sharks with friggin' laser beams attached to their heads!
Sharks with friggin' laser beams attached to their heads!
Automated Fronts or at the very least to be able to automate the armys so those of us that arent so keen on the war side of it can hand it to the generals and be done with it
Keep it simple (stupid).
No tactical battles. This suggestion pops up every now and then, the problem is that there'd be thousands of them.
Anyway, a better mobilization as mentioned. No million-man armies being nowhere one day, and there the next. May I remind you that at the start of WW1, the projected mobilization timeframes where of extreme importance to military planners and the initial movements at the start of the war.
In the game this should would work in the way that mobilized divisions do not become available all at once, rather it would depend on how compact, advanced and the infrastructure of the nation and the home-province (or state) of said division. Also, when they are first put up, they would have lower strength and org, and would be unable to move until strength is full. Maybe they'd have a flag saying "getting mobilized", this would simulate remaining soldiers and supplies arriving. Technology, infra and peacetime investment could lower or practically remove this effect.
In battles I think the EU-like marching to battle system is better compared to "movement is attack". Maybe a hybrid system where if enough troops face each other you enter the movement is attack phase? Or after some tech? Whatever isn't too costly on the processor, but remember that you have several years of experience and many good systems tried out. Use them.
About statistics, I think having lots of them would be good, but there should be an option to wipe them from the save, lest we end up with 20mb+ save-files that end up slowing down the game.
And no rebel popping. What is it that makes it possible for 10.000 men to get weapons and training to be able to fight, just like that? A better system is needed, rebel popping is not very realistic and not very fun.
No tactical battles. This suggestion pops up every now and then, the problem is that there'd be thousands of them.
Anyway, a better mobilization as mentioned. No million-man armies being nowhere one day, and there the next. May I remind you that at the start of WW1, the projected mobilization timeframes where of extreme importance to military planners and the initial movements at the start of the war.
In the game this should would work in the way that mobilized divisions do not become available all at once, rather it would depend on how compact, advanced and the infrastructure of the nation and the home-province (or state) of said division. Also, when they are first put up, they would have lower strength and org, and would be unable to move until strength is full. Maybe they'd have a flag saying "getting mobilized", this would simulate remaining soldiers and supplies arriving. Technology, infra and peacetime investment could lower or practically remove this effect.
In battles I think the EU-like marching to battle system is better compared to "movement is attack". Maybe a hybrid system where if enough troops face each other you enter the movement is attack phase? Or after some tech? Whatever isn't too costly on the processor, but remember that you have several years of experience and many good systems tried out. Use them.
About statistics, I think having lots of them would be good, but there should be an option to wipe them from the save, lest we end up with 20mb+ save-files that end up slowing down the game.
And no rebel popping. What is it that makes it possible for 10.000 men to get weapons and training to be able to fight, just like that? A better system is needed, rebel popping is not very realistic and not very fun.
The things I hope most are that
- supply lines are important
- superstacks of doom are made impossible
- supply lines are important
- superstacks of doom are made impossible
Yes, something should be done about mobilization. Once you decide to moblize, you ought to be damn sure you want war. It should cause even more trouble than in Vicky 1 (where other countries started to mobilize once you did, but that was about it) and war should be close to unavoidable at that point.
Maybe institute some kind of mobilization plans; maybe you could decide beforehand where your mobilized divisions appear after mobilization.
Let's say it's the mid 1860s and as Prussia, you're looking shiftily towards Austria and thinking about war. You adjust your mobilization plan south, to have the vast majority of your divisions come to the south of the country, ready to cross the border as soon as they're ready. You handpick the provinces in which you want different divisions to go to once they're assembled, and how many should go where. You might even prioritize the railroads in those provinces to put troop transportation above all else (so let's say it takes 2 weeks to mobilize - in those two weeks the railways in the provinces you prioritize for troop transportation free the rails of all cargo trains and make way for troop trains, hurting your economy and costing you money, but shaving a day or two off of your troops' travel time, giving you the edge over Austria). Now, this would be a set plan which would be in place until you change it. There would be a certain amount of time which would have to pass between changing plans, which would represent the time it takes to alter such massive timetables, etc. - similar to the already implemented time during which you're not allowed to increase mobilization. So if Austria backs down, but Russia becomes a new threat in the next few months, it will take some time to adjust them, and you might want to stall a possible war as long as you can.
Having said that, there could also be some kind of system (a variation of the BadBoy, if you will) which would represent tension between states. Once that tension is too high, and if either state initiates mobilization, war is automatically declared between the two.
Yes, it's a slow day at work so I have enough time to think about this.
An easier way would be to make peacetime mobilisation so ruinously expensive that once you mobilise you almost have to use your new army. So if Germany and Austria both mobilise then either one of them backs down (thus inviting an invasion from the other power) or attacks before they go bankrupt
I will say though that I don't think that mobilisation should be all that detailed. What I am interested in is making sure that it makes historical sense and either should only become available at a certain tech level or have major political disadvantages. Not many governments thought it smart to give military training to unruly populaces...
I'd like to see some realistic reinforcement mechanism a bit like in HOI. You shouldn't be able just to pump your manpower into an army that occupies a province far away from home. On the other hand, it shouldn't take that long to reinforce a division standing on home soil and not doing anything. Having a "Reinforce" mission for your units would probably be best.
To be completely honest, none. I like the simplified combat system and I don't see the need to over-complicate things in Vicky2. I am not a fan of wargames anyway, so my opinion is suspect. I play Vicky for the diplomacy, the economy and the colonization parts of the game. I very rarely take part in wars and, when I have to take part in a war, I do not want to have to be a mastermind tactician to be able to fight it.
Consumtion of canned food, ammunition & small arms/guns for fighting divisions.
If you can't supply them with whats needed (via a HOI3 like logistics) They fight much worse
If you can't supply them with whats needed (via a HOI3 like logistics) They fight much worse