Victoria 3

[ulmont]

Thanks!

There's already a 1.05 patch.  I quote the https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/529340/view/3407563246856257033 patch notes in full:

"- Changed so that Trade Centers cost 1 infrastructure per 10 levels instead of 1 infrastructure per level"

[mongers]

T should get this,

play the tutorial for 20-25min,

and in 2-3 years time find it in my steam library*


* as per my SOP with Paradox games since HO2. :embarassed:

[Syt]

So after trying to survive as Sikh Empire, or reform Japan, or (as Britain) dismantling the Empire and trying to turn the isles into an isolationist agrarian serf autocracy I've started a game as France, playing "normal" (develop industry, expand influence in the world) ... and after the last more niche game it suddenly feels like easy mode. Decent income, good laws, footholds in various areas, big military ... currently thinking, "There's got to be a catch somewhere ..."   

[Syt]

Really don't know why people keep saying that fronts during warfare and diplo plays are "a mess" ... seems perfectly fine to me.

[Solmyr]

So after trying to survive as Sikh Empire, or reform Japan, or (as Britain) dismantling the Empire and trying to turn the isles into an isolationist agrarian serf autocracy I've started a game as France, playing "normal" (develop industry, expand influence in the world) ... and after the last more niche game it suddenly feels like easy mode. Decent income, good laws, footholds in various areas, big military ... currently thinking, "There's got to be a catch somewhere ..."   

France usually dominates the vanilla game as AI, so it's definitely easy mode in the hands of a player. The problems seem to be 1) no historical demographic decline, so the French population grows out of control, 2) treaty port in Ponidcherry gives France free access to British market.

[Syt]

Yeah, I can see that. In my game before this (a couple of years as Japan), GB was going quite ham, though - taking over colonies and making puppets all over. Maybe it was a fluke.

One thing I'm not sure how I feel about it: if a protectorate of yours forms Italy, then Italy becomes your protectorate. I was painstakingly trying to protect all Italian states when they suddenly dropped from the outliner and I see Italy has formed by 2Sic via diplomacy (I had stopped a previous military attempt of theirs). But since they were my protectorate, the entire country is now my protectorate. Seems a bit gamey, since you could target likely country unifiers that way.

[Zanza]

My mid 1840s absolute monarchy in Prussia just passed Multiculturalism. Somehow the leader of the Junkers (where did Bismarck go?  ) was a reformer and in favor. It's a stretch to call Germany 180 years later a multicultural country, but Prussia in the 1840s should have no way to pass this.

[Syt]

I think a problem here is that the game treats discrimination in a very simplified way, i.e. only looking at discrimination done by the state, basically. So "multiculturalism" (which, in its modern meaning is a bit misleading in the game IMHO), basically should mean, "no discrimination by the state."

What's not covered, really, is discrimination between POPs. Now, I'm not sure how best to model in game that if you have non-discriminatory laws your German shopkeepers might still discriminate against e.g. Jewish clerks. Laws could then be expanded to not just go non-discrimination (current "multiculturalism") but also "ban all racial discrimination", "ban all religious discrimination" etc. This will lead to less discrimination but will lead to more radicalism from the ones who want to do the discriminating.


Secondly, it needs to be harder to enact laws that a) are disliked by a large chunk of the ones who hold political power, b) are only liked by a small percentage, c) don't have significant support from the current government (which should have high legitimacy). It should still be possible, but it should lead to harsher consequences to go against the majority. It should require you to shore up more support, reform the government, weaken IGs who are against the change, lead to more radicalism/revolts, etc.

That said, in my France game, I had to abandon attempts to change voting laws (despite a whopping 25% support ) a few times because IGs were going into revolt. I had been pissing off the landholder class for a while at that point, though.

[The Brain]

Are there soldier pops?

[Josephus]

My first game, Two Sicilies, was going fine...trying to stay out of wars. But I wasn't paying attention to the revolution ticker and lo and behold a civil war broke out. Got into a bit of a mess so I stopped that and am going to try something more placid, New South Wales.
Still not sure how a few thousand angry petite bourgoisies managed to make several states secede, and get allies, but whatever. Was expecting something more in line of a good old fashioned EU rebellion.

[Tamas]

Are there soldier pops?

yes

[The Brain]

Are there soldier pops?

yes

Do they lack voting rights in places like Third Republic France (where applicable)?

[Tamas]

I think a problem here is that the game treats discrimination in a very simplified way, i.e. only looking at discrimination done by the state, basically. So "multiculturalism" (which, in its modern meaning is a bit misleading in the game IMHO), basically should mean, "no discrimination by the state."

What's not covered, really, is discrimination between POPs. Now, I'm not sure how best to model in game that if you have non-discriminatory laws your German shopkeepers might still discriminate against e.g. Jewish clerks. Laws could then be expanded to not just go non-discrimination (current "multiculturalism") but also "ban all racial discrimination", "ban all religious discrimination" etc. This will lead to less discrimination but will lead to more radicalism from the ones who want to do the discriminating.

Yep, luckily they are testing changes where the more progressive citizenship laws make primary cultures more unhappy.


I am trying a set of modifications for myself such as:

• Multiculturalism linked to a non-researchable tech I added, and made the USA start with it - multiculturalism just feels way off in this time period, but flat-out deleting it would mess with a bunch of references to it elsewhere, plus I wanted to leave it available for the US, not that it makes much more sense there.
• locked racial and cultural segregation behind the pan-nationalism tech, mainly to slow down their enactment across the world a bit
• increased minimum assimilation numbers both for culture and religion to try help with late game performance - it's not really helping, but according to the devs the issue isn't with tiny mini-pops after all, but with myriad of dependent pops created in the background and then withering to zero eventually. Hopefully the fix will be out soon.
• increased AI weight on resources their buildings need and are not being produced - I MIGHT be seeing that improve the Opium situation, although not dramatically. Will see what happens when I get to oil being needed
• I have tweaked peace-preference scores for the AI, slightly increasing white peace willingness and weight of devastation and turmoil, and significantly reducing the positive effect of gold reserves (they are still one of the key numbers but not outweighing much everything else)
• Made violate sovereignty more readily available (unavailable only on best -warm- relations), doesn't seem to make the AI any more ready to use it, unfortunately
• Treaty port diplomatic play can only be launched by recognized countries against uncreognized ones. Sadly the wargoal is still freely available as a secondary wargoal as I haven't been able to find where to remove that
• French treaty port at Pondycherry removed altogether and handed to the EIC - I read that the free access to the British market greatly contributes to the French juggernaut - well, by the late 1880s they are still massively ahead in GDP of everyone but China, but in overall score they are in competition with UK so that's an improvement I guess

EDIT: I have also added claims of Italy on the Austrian provinces in Italy but it doesn't seem to have any effect on the AI. Quite possibly because Two Sicilies are chums with Austria and Piedmont is so bloody weak that its always Sicilies uniting Italy.

EDIT #2: and I forgot that I increased research costs across the board by 1/3rd

[Tamas]

Are there soldier pops?

yes

Do they lack voting rights in places like Third Republic France (where applicable)?

The game doesn't have "specific pop occupations cannot vote in specific countries" kind of things. There are country-wide voting laws of none, land-based, wealth-based, census-based, and universal suffrage. Plus there is the additional layer of whether women can vote or not.

So in your case, it depends. If you have wealth or census restrictions then likely they cannot vote, but that's independent of what weird setup France had historically.

[The Brain]

Are there soldier pops?

yes

Do they lack voting rights in places like Third Republic France (where applicable)?

The game doesn't have "specific pop occupations cannot vote in specific countries" kind of things. There are country-wide voting laws of none, land-based, wealth-based, census-based, and universal suffrage. Plus there is the additional layer of whether women can vote or not.

So in your case, it depends. If you have wealth or census restrictions then likely they cannot vote, but that's independent of what weird setup France had historically.

Thanks.