Languish.org

General Category => Off the Record => Gaming HQ => Topic started by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 01:46:04 PM

Title: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 01:46:04 PM
So I guess we can open a new thread for this.

More importantly: Victoria 4 when?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Solmyr on May 21, 2021, 01:47:06 PM
Damn you Syt, you made the thread before I could! :P

Pop system is going to be in.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 01:47:48 PM
I like Martin's announcement. Basically it comes down to "We don't want to dumb anything down, and we promise we try not to fuck this up and try to live up to your expectations!" :D
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Habbaku on May 21, 2021, 01:50:00 PM
I have confidence in Martin, even if I am not especially jazzed about Victoria 3. I look forward to it.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Solmyr on May 21, 2021, 01:50:07 PM
https://www.paradoxplaza.com/news?aid=Victoria3-Announced

Quote
Shape A Grand Tomorrow In Victoria 3
Published: May 21, 2021 7:00:00 PM GMT+0300

The railroad and the telegraph. Steamships and the birth of flight. Mass conscription, emancipation and the campaign for women's rights. The Victorian Age saw a world transformed by new technology, new philosophies and new ways of doing politics. This tumultuous century springs to new life in Victoria 3, a grand strategy game from Paradox Development Studio.

After years of community requests and curiosity about the future of one of the company's iconic games, Victoria 3 is instantly one of the most highly anticipated grand strategy games in Paradox's history. Victoria 3 is a society simulator set in a time of great change. Track the needs and desires of national populations, each group with its own political and material preferences. Conservative factions may resist political reform as growing numbers of tradespeople and intellectuals push for a greater say in how the nation is run. Trade a wide range of goods on a global scale to make sure that needs are met at home, because if people are hungry and disenfranchised, revolution beckons.

Victoria 3 will feature:

Deep Societal Simulation: Cultural, economic and ideological divisions compete for power and resources in one of Paradox's most detailed historical worlds.
Tend Your National Garden: Nurture your population, educating it and preparing it for the future, guaranteeing their prosperity and improving their happiness.
Wonders of the Industrial Age: Scientific and social progress give you the chance to improve the lives of your citizens.
Sophisticated Economic System: Import goods to keep costs low, export goods to enrich your citizens, and then tax that wealth to advance your plans.
Challenging Diplomacy: Maintain harmonious relations with your neighbors or provoke a crisis to grab valuable resources or force open new markets.
Political Dealmaking: Manage competing interests in your government, opening up new reforms but risking revolution if key voices are not heard.
Detailed and Living World: Cities grow and factories darken the landscape on a beautifully drawn map of the 19th century globe. Play any of dozens of nations from 1836 and try to claim your place in the sun.

Victoria 3 will be available on Steam, Microsoft Game Pass and the Paradox Store.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Solmyr on May 21, 2021, 01:56:33 PM
I hope they won't try to artificially make every playable nation equally viable or some such. As a minor nation the gameplay should be navigating among the great powers (and hopefully the game gives tools for that), not outproducing the UK economy or conquering the world as Bhutan. Maybe, if you create the right conditions, you could rise to become a major player a la Japan.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: MadBurgerMaker on May 21, 2021, 01:57:44 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmrwgifs.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FAndy-Dwyer-OMG-Gif-On-Parks-Recreation.gif&hash=3b4d9651d280656dacdcdcf76f70610918caff0d)
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Maladict on May 21, 2021, 01:57:58 PM
Screenshots
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/steam-page-screenshots.1475057/
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 21, 2021, 01:59:09 PM
Map sucks.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 01:59:45 PM
Quote from: Maladict on May 21, 2021, 01:57:58 PM
Screenshots
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/steam-page-screenshots.1475057/

I'm slightly encouraged by a lack of mission trees?  :hmm:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 02:00:26 PM
Steam page: https://store.steampowered.com/app/529340/Victoria_3/
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: garbon on May 21, 2021, 02:12:14 PM
:thumbsup:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Liep on May 21, 2021, 02:28:28 PM
Yay!
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 02:29:18 PM
Martin says on the panel that the focus is on society management, and that their goal was that war shouldn't be the driving factor and not creating another map builder. That players should be able to play through 100 years without fighting a single war and still have a good time. Mikael says military will still be important, e.g. to help with diplomacy and a threat of war will be there, but anything you can get through war should be attainable through diplomacy.

Seems like a tall order considering the general Paradox fanbase, and I'm curious if they can pull it off.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Solmyr on May 21, 2021, 02:37:49 PM
Well, Victoria 2 has its own group of fans who probably want things like that.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: crazy canuck on May 21, 2021, 02:48:21 PM
If they can pull that off, I would be very happy.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Valmy on May 21, 2021, 03:15:59 PM
I kind of wish they did 1822 to 1935 just to make it continuous with the other games but hey just happy to see another entry in the series.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on May 21, 2021, 03:16:52 PM
I though Victoria 2 played quite well overall.  It was too easy to boost literacy in countries like Russia or the OE.  You could create an effective bureaucracy in a couple decades with some national focuses, throw some cash at education spending and watch it rise.  In reality those states struggled mightily to put together even a minimally functional bureaucracy, and there were many reasons why peasant education was not a priority.  Unfortunately this is an area where P-dox tends to give in to the fanbase demands for more player freedom of action, at the expense of realism.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Valmy on May 21, 2021, 03:18:03 PM
Quote from: Syt on May 21, 2021, 02:29:18 PM
Martin says on the panel that the focus is on society management, and that their goal was that war shouldn't be the driving factor and not creating another map builder. That players should be able to play through 100 years without fighting a single war and still have a good time. Mikael says military will still be important, e.g. to help with diplomacy and a threat of war will be there, but anything you can get through war should be attainable through diplomacy.

Seems like a tall order considering the general Paradox fanbase, and I'm curious if they can pull it off.

Yeah the general unpleasantness of wars in Vicky I think was a turnoff to many in the general fanbase. Not only is it a drain on your economy and your POPs but it can create political uncertainty and instability, all things Vicky players hate.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josquius on May 21, 2021, 03:20:19 PM
Wars as a bad thing was a pretty good and accurate part of the game.
Hopefully they'll make colonising Africa a loss making venture.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 03:23:38 PM
I hope they find a better way for influencing minors and adding them to your sphere of influence. The constant whack-a-mole against other nations was just tedious.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 03:24:20 PM
Quote from: Tyr on May 21, 2021, 03:20:19 PM
Wars as a bad thing was a pretty good and accurate part of the game.
Hopefully they'll make colonising Africa a loss making venture.

It should be a trade off between prestige and economic benefit.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on May 21, 2021, 03:25:02 PM
I thought Victoria 2 worked pretty well in that regard - it gave strong incentives to fight short, quick, and decisive wars.  It didn't handle the ACW particularly well but I'd prefer that outcome to focusing the game mechanics on the ACW.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Valmy on May 21, 2021, 03:25:47 PM
Quote from: Tyr on May 21, 2021, 03:20:19 PM
Hopefully they'll make colonising Africa a loss making venture.

Well it already kind of is in V2, but you do it for the prestige. That sweet sweet prestige.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 03:26:26 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 21, 2021, 03:25:02 PM
I thought Victoria 2 worked pretty well in that regard - it gave strong incentives to fight short, quick, and decisive wars.  It didn't handle the ACW particularly well but I'd prefer that outcome to focusing the game mechanics on the ACW.

Most games don't handle the ACW well. Modeling the indecisiveness, incompetence, and learning process of fighting the war is difficult for players who have the benefit of hindsight.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Valmy on May 21, 2021, 03:32:40 PM
(https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAKfdun.img?h=768&w=1366&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f)

Interesting how they have the political parties being social groups.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 03:51:20 PM
The way I understood it, these are interest groups, with pop affiliation depending on pop type, literacy, laws, etc. I assume that instead of parties it's meant to represent which interest groups are represented in government. Removing parties feels like losing flavor, though.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 21, 2021, 03:57:46 PM
Quote from: Syt on May 21, 2021, 03:51:20 PM
The way I understood it, these are interest groups, with pop affiliation depending on pop type, literacy, laws, etc. I assume that instead of parties it's meant to represent which interest groups are represented in government. Removing parties feels like losing flavor, though.

For sure but interest groups, as such, are more important. If only one of these can be had to keep the game playable, it should be interest groups.

e.g. You look at the House of Commons you learn exactly zero about the political issues driving British people.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 21, 2021, 04:04:06 PM
Oh, I agree.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on May 21, 2021, 04:06:25 PM
Yes, but..

the organization and structure of political parties within a political system matters.  And politics is more about identity into socio-economic categories - for example, section in America, or religion or regional identity in Germany.  The "intelligentsia" of 19th century France captures a fairly broad range of political views to take another example.  A political system that makes  farmers in Massachusetts in the same political "party" as farmers in Mississippi or Texas is going to have problems.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Brain on May 21, 2021, 05:20:04 PM
Quote from: Syt on May 21, 2021, 03:23:38 PM
I hope they find a better way for influencing minors and adding them to your sphere of influence. The constant whack-a-mole against other nations was just tedious.

OK Grallon.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: garbon on May 21, 2021, 05:27:02 PM
:P
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: jimmy olsen on May 21, 2021, 10:39:13 PM
1836-1936 is a crap time frame.

You're basically obligated to have WWI, so you have to stretch it out to 1920, but even that is going too far for any engine that simulates the 19th century well.

Starting date should at least be pushed back to 1815. It would be better if there were a few different revolutionary start dates, the first being 1792.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: FunkMonk on May 21, 2021, 10:55:43 PM
Looking forward to a Haitian world conquest by 1936 run.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Razgovory on May 21, 2021, 11:17:41 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 21, 2021, 10:39:13 PM
1836-1936 is a crap time frame.

You're basically obligated to have WWI, so you have to stretch it out to 1920, but even that is going too far for any engine that simulates the 19th century well.

Starting date should at least be pushed back to 1815. It would be better if there were a few different revolutionary start dates, the first being 1792.


Generally you don't want to have a world-shaking event at the beginning or you have outcome of that hanging over the rest of the game.  It is particularly annoying if the world-shaking event always gives an ahistorical outcome.  After the Congress of Vienna is good start.

I do wonder if you would be able to extend the game up the Modern day.  This is about the Industrial Revolution something that is arguably ongoing.  The game that has the latest start date in HOI, but it's not really that good at doing anything other than war.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 22, 2021, 12:01:14 AM
There's Cold War and Modern Day mods for V2. Not sure how good they are, though.

https://www.moddb.com/mods/victoria-2-cold-war-enhancement-mod

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/modern-age-mod.807447/

I thought Vic2 would make a better basis for a Cold War game than HoI (the attempt of that was gladly aborted) with its more indirect gameplay, less war focus, crisis system, spheres of influence system etc.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Zanza on May 22, 2021, 01:34:31 AM
Lots of details from a Reddit thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/victoria3/comments/nhzt1w/victoria_3_everything_we_know_so_far/?sort=confidence
QuoteFor a broad overview of Vicky 3, check out my announcement coverage on IGN: https://www.ign.com/articles/paradox-reveals-victoria-3-a-long-awaited-sequel-to-a-grand-strategy-series

For everything else...

CAVEAT: Everything I saw was very work-in-progress. Anything could change, especially specific numbers.

KEY: This is a simulation. It's not a map painter. Military conquest is not the main focus. Victoria 3 is more about diplomatic maneuvering, shaping your society and laws, building and industrializing your economy, and "tending the garden" of your nation.

• 1836 - 1936.

• 4 ticks per day, so the number of ticks per campaign is similar to EU4.

• The map is divided into States and Provinces. There are about 730 States at game start, which are the smallest unit you will interact with for purposes of politics and economics.

• It's possible to split existing states, such as when you demand a Treaty Port in a war or Diplomatic Play. This creates a new State that is only one Province in size. Even at game start there are some cases of having more than one State, gameplay-wise, within a single "State Area."

• Provinces are subdivisions that you usually only interact with for maneuvering armies and when colonizing (which is done one Province at a time as you add more Provinces to your Colonial State), and there are roughly the same number of individual Provinces as in HoI4. (According to Google, that's around 13,000 - roughly 18 Provinces per State on average.)

• Visually, urbanization will spread across individual Provinces within a State.

• The pre-alpha map we saw looks better than HoI4 but worse than CK3/Imperator. They did say specifically that it isn't done yet. You can definitely zoom in further than HoI4, so I'd say the map overall feels bigger than the HoI4 map. Zoomed all the way out it looks very similar to the Vicky 2 paper map. Zoomed in you can see realistic clouds and stuff drifting over the landscape. Railroads are visible.

• Well over 100 playable countries, but not all countries are playable. Most of Africa, parts of inner South America, and a few surviving native tribes in North America (including the Lakota, Dakota, and Cree) were not playable. These are "Decentralized Countries." Post-launch, they want to make them playable eventually. But they want to do them right because the gameplay experience should be significantly different. All the Decentralized Countries have names and governments. There are no "uncolonized" provinces, but you can colonize on top of a Decentralized Country without declaring war.

• Full POPs like Victoria 2. Over a billion people are modeled individually, which will roughly double by game end, including Dependents. These represent non-working children and homemakers. Your laws, i.e. Child Labor laws, determine how much economic output your Dependents create and if they collect wages. So like, kids will still be counted as Dependents, but your wages from Dependents might go up (along with mortality rate.)

• Example POP types I saw (not exhaustive): Capitalists, Laborers, Machinists, Farmers, Shopkeepers, Engineers, Aristocrats, Clergymen, Officers, Bureaucrats, Academics, Servicemen, Clerks

• Standard of Living is mostly based on a POP's Wealth, which is determined by your sources of revenue minus your expenses. This can be a salary from your job, stipends and wages from dependents in countries where women and children can work (or if they're receiving welfare payments), and dividends from buildings you own. Increasing wages, lowering taxes, and increasing the supply of goods (thus lowering the prices and therefore the lifestyle expenses) will all generally raise Standard of Living. Standard of Living affects POP Loyalty and Population Growth.

• Your GDP measures how much you produce and affects your Great Power ranking, but it doesn't necessarily reflect how much money you, as a player, have to spend. The Ottomans, for example, start with a very inefficient tax system, so they have a small state budget compared to their GDP.

• Capitalists work completely differently from Vicky 2. Capitalism isn't "Let The AI Do It Mode." Instead, Capitalists (and sometimes Aristocrats depending on your laws) invest profits from buildings they own into a new resource pool separate from state funds called the Investment Pool, which you can only spend on certain things based on your laws and economic system. So you are still personally directing the expansion of industry in a capitalist economy, with some restrictions.

• Every nation has a primary culture and state religion, with varying levels of acceptance for other religions and cultures based on your laws. Non-accepted POPs are paid lower wages (so have a lower Standard of Living) and are more likely to radicalize.

• In places like the US, discrimination is on a racial basis. This is based on your country's laws and can be changed. There are no culture groups, but cultures have traits like Heritage traits and Linguistic traits, and your laws will look at how alike or different those are to your main culture. So someone from England will be less discriminated against in American society. Someone from a different part of Europe will face some more discrimination than the Englishman but not too much. Someone from Africa or Asia will face a lot of discrimination.

• Every State has a proportion of Arable Land, which represents how much agricultural industry it can support. Arable Land you have not directly built any buildings on will automatically generate Subsistence Farms, which employ Peasants. Peasants represent the vast majority of the world's population at game start, and they don't produce very many taxes or sellable goods since they're just focused on their own survival. So you'll generally want to start moving them to work in other industries if you want to grow your GDP and your tax base.

• Spheres have been replaced with Markets. There are many local markets instead of a single world market. Expanding your market is going to be a new playstyle aside from conquest - "painting the map economically". You can bring other countries into your market diplomatically or through war. Trade between markets is done by setting up one-way Import and Export trade deals for specific goods, of which you can only have a limited number at a time per market, based on a number of factors.

• An example given was that Mecklenburg starts out in the Prussian market (modelling the historical Zollverein Customs Union), which may allow them to build luxury furniture to meet the demands of the wealthy Prussian elite. But if they leave that market to form their own, their own elites may not have enough money to afford those luxury goods, and their economy will suffer unless they can set up trade deals to find buyers abroad or join a different, larger market.

• The number of countries that can be in your market at a time is based on the market leader's diplomatic Influence, which is one of the main capacity types. Capacities are different from power/mana in that it's not a pool of points you build up and spend. It's more like having enough electricity to run a lot of devices. Influence is also used for things like alliances, etc. You get Influence primarily from having rivalries, your Power Ranking (Great Powers get a ton), and a few other things that add percentage modifiers.

• Prices of goods are based on Supply and Demand. It's not event-based with arbitrary starting prices like EU4. Full market simulation. POPs and Industries will place Buy orders while Industries will also place Sell orders for finished goods. There's a screen that lets you see what are currently the five most under-produced and the five most overproduced goods in your market, so you can set up trade deals or expand industries to meet demand better.

• The other factor that affects this is Infrastructure. Having insufficient infrastructure will make it harder to get goods from a given State to your wider market efficiently.

• Around 50 trade goods divided into Staples - Consumed by all POPs for daily needs, Industrial Goods - Consumed by industries to make other finished goods, Luxury Goods - consumed by POPs with higher Standard of Living, and Military Goods - Used to create military units including infantry, artillery, ships, and later tanks and planes.

• Trade Goods (incomplete list, mostly guessing based on icons): Tools, Glass, Wood, Coal, Luxury Furniture, Porcelain, Silk, Iron, Chemicals, Meat, Cannons, Ammunition, Fish, Sulfur, Basic Furniture, Clipper Ships, Ironclads, Luxury Clothing, Paper, Artillery Shells, Fruit, Tea, Tobacco, Baked Goods, Coffee, Wine, Steel, Standard Clothing, Guns, Grain, Automobiles, Alcohol, Cotton

• Production buildings have resource inputs and outputs, Throughput rating, and pay wages to all employed POPs. If their output can sell for more than their inputs, they will generate dividends that are paid to the owners and increase their Wealth. Otherwise, they will need to be subsidized or else they will fail. Each also has a personal cash reserve, presumably so it can run at a loss for a bit without subsidies.

• Production Methods affect how buildings operate. For instance, a workshop can be Privately Owned, belong to a Merchant Guild, Publicly Traded, Government Run, or a Worker Cooperative. This affects what kind of POPs are employed here, what wages they are paid, and who collects the dividends/profits. i.e. Privately Owned workshops will employ Capitalists who get most of the wealth generated with the workers getting only wages, whereas in a Worker Cooperative, the people doing the work own the workshop and split the Wealth it generates evenly.

• Government Run industries have mandatory subsidies, meaning any losses they incur will come directly out of your national treasury rather than letting them go out of business. But you can also pocket any profits.

• You can have a Statist, command economy without being Communist. Communism itself, while it often goes hand-in-hand with a command economy, is now more directly related to distribution of wealth and political power. Communism is not when the government does things. The government doing more things doesn't make it more communister.

• POPs can promote/demote and some types are more likely than others. Engineers and Shopkeepers are more likely to become Capitalists, for instance.

• Command Economies do not allow Capitalists or Aristocrats to be employed in your nation, so they will have to find a new job or leave. They also get fewer foreign Trade Routes to work with, but can enact Encourage Consumption, Discourage Consumption, and Consumption Taxes more cheaply. They can embargo all goods and they can (must) subsidize everything.

• You need to have a Command Economy to switch Production Method to Government Control.

• Free Trade gives you more import/export routes, reduces loan interest rates, allows you to subsidize only Service Industries and Infrastructure, and increases the amount of wealth Capitalists contribute to the Investment Pool.

• Isolation cuts off all foreign trade (so you can only operate within your Market/Customs Union), you can embargo all goods, you can subsidize all buildings, and both Capitalists and Aristocrats will contribute to the Investment Pool.

• Traditionalism (used mostly by Unrecognized countries and represents pre-industrial economies): Fewer trade routes, can subsidize only Services and Infrastructure.

• Agrarianism gives you more export routes, lets you subsidize agriculture, infrastructure, and services, Aristocrats contribute to the Investment Pool, and you can embargo Luxury Goods

• Different economic systems dictate what you can or cannot spend Investment Pool money on.

• Services are a non-tradeable good, so they cannot leave your home market. Access to services is based on Infrastructure. So for example, you might have lots of services being produced in New York, but if you don't build railroads out to California, the people in California will have very little or no access to those services (and goods from California won't be able to get to market efficiently) even though both states are in the US market. Until you have better infrastructure, you'll have to rely on producing most things locally.

• Services come from buildings called Urban Centers, which can't be directly built but are generated automatically based on the Urbanization of your States. All buildings you build produce a little bit of Urbanization in the target State, but some provide a lot more than others. If you focus more on expanding agriculture, you won't have as many Urban Centers. If you build lots of Factories and government buildings, you will generate much more Urbanization. The Service sector will employ POPs as well.

• Classes: Lower, Middle, and Upper strata. Determined by POP type. It mainly determines their wage level and taxation under uneven tax laws. Standard of Living goes all the way up to 100, which would be "Jeff Bezos level", but you generally won't see anything above 50 unless you're trying to break the game.

• If you have a system like worker-owned factories, you can get to a point where even the lower strata POPs in your country are richer by the late game than the capitalists were at the beginning.

• Each POP is represented by a 3D character model, looks like the same basic models from CK3, including regional and class-appropriate dress.

• National leaders have 3D, CK3-style portraits and character traits (up to 3 in the build we saw). Monarchies have heirs who also get a portrait.

• POPs can belong to Interest Groups, and these are the main forces that you must contend with to make changes to your society. Not all POPs of a specific type belong to the same Interest Group. i.e. Capitalists are likely to join the Industrialists interest group, but some of them might instead belong to the Devout.

• There are a handful of "Templates" for interest groups that will be used in just about every country, but they can have different traits and desires. For example, Industrialists in Prussia are very pro-Monarchy, whereas in the U.S. that is very much not the case.

• Example Interest Groups we got to see: Industrialists, Landowners (called Junkers in Prussia, Landed Gentry in Britain, Plantation Owners in the US, and Scholar-Officials in Qing), Intelligentsia (called Literati in Qing), Devout (called Anglican Church in Britain and Confucian Schools in Qing) - they said this one specifically will change A LOT in ideology depending on the dominant religion of your country, Armed Forces, Rural Folk, Petite Bourgeoisie, Trade Unions

• Interest Groups have a set of Ideologies, as well as Traits that can be active or inactive at any given time.

• Interest Groups also have a leader with a portrait and traits.

• Ideologies can change over time (such as Trade Unions becoming more socialist). They will be stable for most of the game, but certain events, ideas, and leaders can cause them to shift. The leader of the Interest Group might be a socialist, for instance. They are still tweaking how ideologically malleable or fixed these groups should be.

• Prussian Industrialists have Monarchist (very upset if you switch to any non-Monarchy form of government), Individualist (Disapprove of most welfare/social security/government healthcare/public schools), Abolitionist (Don't like slavery), two others that we didn't get to see.

• If Ideologies are what an IG wants, Traits are what they can do for you. These traits will become active if the IG is loyal enough to your government. Kind of like how loyal Institutions provide bonuses in EU4. The one we got to see for the Industrialists was Job Creators, which increases the contribution to the Investment Pool by Capitalist POPs by 10% if their loyalty is at least 20.

• You can invite Interest Groups into your government. The ones that aren't part of your government will be in Opposition. You can never make everyone happy so you have to choose which groups to champion.

• Clout is how much influence an Interest Group has in your nation. In 1836, the main factors are Wealth, Status, and Workforce. If you liberalize your country you can offset this with Votes. When you hold elections, each Interest Group receives Votes from the enfranchised POPs that support it, which increases their Clout by a set amount per Vote until the next election. Various laws can tweak the political weight of Votes vs Wealth, or give more people Votes, though Wealth will always be a factor. So a truly egalitarian society will need to level the playing field in terms of wealth inequality in addition to democratic reforms.

• Not all POPs belong to an Interest Group at game start. Some of them are considered Politically Inactive.

• Literacy is back from Vicky 2, with your education spending determining what percentage of the country has access to education rather than just how fast it ticks up toward 100%. 100% Literacy will be very hard to achieve. Literate POPs can take certain jobs that illiterate ones cannot. It will be hard to get modern factories and government institutions up and running with low Literacy.

• Higher Literacy also affects your likelihood to join an Interest Group rather than being Politically Inactive, which sort of replaces the Consciousness system from Vicky 2. Uneducated laborers are more likely to stay out of politics. Likewise, ideas like Egalitarianism and Socialism will spread to your country faster if the lower classes are educated, which further increase political participation, expected minimum Standards of Living, and cause more attraction to groups like the Trade Unions among laborers. If the expected minimum Standard of Living goes up but the actual Standard of Living for those POPs does not, they will start to radicalize. So you can give them more beer and amenities to suppress class consciousness, is basically what it sounds like.

• You can Suppress or Promote IGs directly using your Authority, which is an administrative capacity stat. More absolutist forms of government have more Authority, and so will have more control over the IGs in their nation, whereas democracies will be less able to combat or uplift the ones they prefer.

• Legitimacy is basically a check against inviting too many Interest Groups into your government. If you try to form too large of a coalition, your Legitimacy will tank. You also get Legitimacy from having the Interest Group your leader belongs to in the government – so as Prussia, we had to have the Armed Forces in the government, because they're the king's faction, or we would take a hit to Legitimacy. And that in turn makes it harder to ever pass any laws the military doesn't like. In a Presidential Republic like the US, you might have a different interest group represented by the head of state every election cycle, which dictates what you can accomplish during that term.

• An Autocracy requires you to work with fewer Interest Groups to maintain Legitimacy, whereas a Parliamentary Republic can form larger coalitions. By the same token, Autocratic governments can commit to a more defined strategy (at the risk of annoying everyone who is not part of the government), whereas Republics will have to make more compromises and only be able to pass policies with very broad, cross-party support (while making more people feel their voices are being heard).

• Trickle Migration (Vicky 2 style) will mostly happen within cultural regions, to/from colonies, and within your market. i.e. Germanic cultured pops will be free to move around the Germanic home region, between your metropole and your colonies, or anywhere in their home country's market. POPs won't just trickle migrate wherever at all times.

• The exception to this is Migration Waves, which can be caused by poor economic conditions, political unrest, ethnic discrimination, etc. These will be major events, rather than a trickle. i.e. famine in Ireland might trigger a Migration Wave from Ireland to the US. They will try to target countries that have better standards of living and freer laws than the place they're leaving, but it's not explicitly tied to New World vs Old World like in Vicky 2. So the US and Brazil won't have any arbitrary advantage in attracting immigrants, though conditions in those nations might still make them popular destinations.

• Falling Standard of Living can generate Radical pops (replacing Vicky 2's Militancy system), while rising Standard of Living can convert Radicals to neutrals, or neutrals to Loyalists. Having more Radicals in a state generates Turmoil, which can affect the economy and lead to uprisings. Having more Radicals in an Interest Group will lower that group's Approval score toward the current government (and Loyalists in an interest group will do the opposite), which can lead to a civil war or revolution. Cultural discrimination can also generate Radicals.

• Higher wealth POPs have a lower threshold to radicalize because they expect a higher standard of living. "They can only afford 100 Ming vases instead of 150, and this is absolutely unacceptable."

• Loyalist POPs (and Radicals) can die off, which causes intergenerational conflict. If you had an era of prosperity that generated a lot of Loyalists, and then they die, the younger generation with worse economic opportunities might suddenly be not so happy and change the loyalty and attitude of your Interest Groups.

• You can fund Police Institutions to reduce the local effects of Radicals. They don't go away, but they won't be able to cause as much trouble. You can also bring up the standard of living or change discriminating laws to deradicalize them. Or you can discriminate even harder and hope they decide to go live somewhere else.

• Enslaved POPs will be modeled. This is a historical simulation. They don't want to stray away from the parts of history that are horrific and pretend they didn't exist. They also don't want to pretend that it was a good idea. As an example, slavery is not a flat boon for your country, but it is very profitable for plantation owners, and those Interest Groups will fight against abolition because it's in their economic interest – they want to keep those unpaid wages for themselves and spend them on luxuries. You as the player will have to decide how to deal with those groups.

• At the same time, not every nation needs to be on a set trajectory toward liberalism. If you want to keep Russia an absolutist feudal serf state until the endgame, you can do that assuming you can deal with any radicals who want to change it. There is no assumed best path.

• Example needs for higher wealth pops: Free Movement (Transportation or Automobiles), Luxury Items, Luxury Drinks, Intoxicants, Communication, Heating - Needs are different from goods, and many of them can be filled by multiple different types of goods.

• Example Laws (Not a complete list, just the ones I saw) -

POWER STRUCTURE

• Governance Principles: Monarchy, Chiefdom, Presidential Republic, Parliamentary Republic, Council Republic

• Distribution of Power: Autocracy, Oligarchy, Elder Council, Landed Voting, Wealth Voting, Census Suffrage, Universal Suffrage, Anarchy

• Citizenship: National Supremacy

• Church and State: Freedom of Conscience

• Bureaucracy: Appointed Bureaucrats

• Conscription: Conscription

• Internal Security: No Home Affairs

ECONOMY

• Economic System: Mercantilism, Free Trade, Traditionalism, Isolationism, Agrarianism, Command Economy

• Income Tax: No Income Tax, Payroll Tax (more burden on the poor), Proportional Tax (everyone pays a flat percentage), Graduated Tax (more burden on the wealthy)

• Poll Tax: No Poll Tax

• Colonization: No Colonial Affairs

• Policing: Local Police Force

• Education: Public Schools, Religious Schools, No Schools, Private Schools

• Health System: No Health System, Charity Hospitals, Private Health Insurance, Public Health Insurance

HUMAN RIGHTS

• Free Speech: Censorship

• Labor Rights: Serfdom Abolished

• Children's Rights: Child Labor Allowed

• Rights of Women: Propertied Women, Legal Guardianship

• Welfare: Poor Laws, Wage Controls, No Social Security, Pensions

• Migration: No Migration Controls

• Slavery: Slavery Banned

• Passing laws an interest group doesn't like will lower their approval. If they get upset enough, they can start a civil war. You can only pass laws if at least one interest group that is part of your government approves of it, and many of them require specific inventions as a prerequisite (ie: Graduated Income Tax requires Socialism.) The more Interest Groups that are part of your government approve of a law, the faster you can implement it.

• Institutions are like the organs of your government. Some Institutions are unlocked by specific laws. They have five levels each, with increasing bonuses but also increasing Bureaucracy cost. Bureaucracy is the third capacity, along with Authority and Influence, that is generated by building government buildings in your states and having Bureaucrat and Clerk pops working in them (which also requires literacy). Going over your Bureaucratic capacity will give you a tax penalty due to governmental inefficiency, but there's also a hard cap on the number of Institution levels you can have, which can be raised over time.

• Example Institutions- These modifiers can change based on your laws

• Conscription Office: +2% Conscription Rate and increases the number of Battalions you can mobilize per level (with Conscription)

• Education: +15% Education access per level (with Public education), +2% Wealth-based Education Access (this scales with Wealth so it works out to much higher than 2% at very high Wealth levels) and +20% Intelligentsia Political Strength (with Private Schools), +10% education Access, +20% religious Conversion rate, +20% Devout Political Strength per level (with Religious Schools)

• Law Enforcement: +10 Landowners Political Strength and -20% State Penalties from Turmoil per level (with Local Policing), -5% Radicals from Standard of Living decreases and -15% State penalties from Turmoil with ???

• Colonial Affairs: +20% Colony Growth per level

• Social Security: +10% Industrialists political strength and +2 Minimum Wealth per level

• Workplace Safety Offices: -2% Mortality of Laborers, Machinists, and Engineers employed in Mines and -20% to Dangerous Working Conditions per level

• National Security Agency - No modifiers shown

• Institutions only apply their benefits to Incorporated parts of your country. You can also have Unincorporated areas. The Bureaucratic cost per investment level is based on the total population in all of your Incorporated states, so the more people benefitting from services will result in needing more bureaucrats to maintain.

• Institutions also have a financial cost since you're paying the wages of the Bureaucrat POPs out of the state treasury. There will always be some bureaucrats, even if you're not funding a bunch of government institutions, just from enacting your laws in Incorporated states.

• States like the Qing will begin with massive, sprawling bureaucracies that have a significant impact on their playstyle. They have a huge population in their Incorporated States day one, which is a colossal bureaucratic sink before you even start adding Institutions on top. You probably can't bring 100% education access to everyone in China because it would take an absurd amount of bureaucratic investment, while smaller nations will have a much easier time doing this.

• It's a valid playstyle to run a "lean state" with very few bureaucrats and very few or no public services, freeing people up to do other jobs and relying on the Investment Pool instead of state revenue to expand infrastructure and industry. Minting can allow some countries to replace taxation.

• Diplomatic actions are your standard Paradox stuff. New ones include Trade Agreements, Invite to Customs Union (making them part of your Market), Violate Sovereignty, Start Bankrolling - I didn't get to ask what those last two do but Bankroll is probably just monthly subsidies.

• Diplomatic Plays: Basically an evolution of the crisis system from Vicky 2. This is now the default way you try to get things from other countries who do not want to give them to you! I described it as almost like "Diplomatic Combat."

• Types of plays:

• Conquer State, Liberate Subject, Make Puppet, Open Market, Take Treaty Port, Transfer Subject, Annex Subject, Cut Down to Size, Declare Independence, Ban Slavery, Make Territory, Make Vassal, Return State, Take Colony, Unify Region (in the example we saw it was called "Unify Germany").

• You put your starting demands on the table. Enemy puts their starting demands on the table. It then enters a maneuvering phase where either side can add wargoals, other countries can become involved (mostly if they actually want something from either side - rivals will be very likely to join just to stop you from getting what you want.)

• Ultimately you can back down (the side that didn't blink gets their original wargoal, but not any extra wargoals that were added later by themselves or other nations that became involved), or let the timer expire and go to war (everyone who placed a demand on the table gets called in and all demands on both sides are up for grabs).

• It's possible to Sway nations during the maneuver phase, offering them spoils of war to join your side. This isn't just useful for securing their alliance if it does go to war. Tipping the balance of power more and more in your favor also makes it more likely that the other side will Back Down.

• The more demands you add to your side of the table, the more POTENTIAL threat you will generate and the more likely it is that other nations will pledge their support to your enemy. Particularly if you are a Great Power, other Great Powers will try to head off any massive wars of conquest before they even start by pledging their support to the target and trying to get you to Back Down, to maintain the balance of power. So it's generally safer to eat your neighbors one bite at a time unless you think you can take on everyone at once.

• Allies will generally side with you or stay out of your way. Countries with friendly relations or who don't see you as a threat are also generally unlikely to get involved, so maintaining a strong diplomatic position with other Great Powers will enable faster conquests with less meddling.

• At any point during this process, before war is declared, you can Mobilize your armies to have a head start, which might cause your opponent to back down. If you wait until the war has already started to mobilize, you will be on the back foot compared to countries that mobilized before the timer ran out.

• They don't want this system to make every single conquest into a World War and it's being balanced accordingly. It's always a possibility though if you as a player try to overreach too much.

• They don't want to say One Tag World Conquest is impossible because the players will always find a way, but they described it as "implausible."

• There is no Status Quo in a Diplomatic Play. Either you go to war, or one side Backs Down and the other gets their initial wargoal. (But ONLY the initial wargoal.) So you can't use it risk-free to test the waters.

• No more "uncivilized" nations. Instead there are "Unrecognized" nations, which basically means they weren't seen as equals by the Great Powers at the time. They do NOT get any arbitrary debuffs to technology or combat just for having the "unrecognized" flag. They play by the same rules as everyone else for the most part.

• They will start out technologically behind in many cases, based on historical circumstances, and the social and economic conditions they have to deal with will generally make it harder to become an advanced, industrialized, technologically competitive nation. But that's all tied to the laws, POPs, Interest Groups, resources, and starting infrastructure, not their Unrecognized status.

• The one direct, mechanical difference is that it's cheaper and generates less threat for Recognized nations to take land from Unrecognized nations.

• You can go from Unrecognized to Recognized, for example by beating up a Great Power. The Russo-Japanese War was given as an example of an Unrecognized nation becoming Recognized.

• Colonization works in two different ways: Colonization against Decentralized Countries can be done like in EU4, where you can theoretically do it without open conflict. You establish a Colonial Institution back home and employ POPs as Colonists who will slowly build up the colony in the target province. During this time, you will generate a Tension score with the Decentralized Country you are colonizing on top of, which can result in open warfare. The natives will annex your colony if they win.

• Machine Guns no longer magically make you able to colonize new areas like in Vicky 2. They just help against uprisings if you do have to fight. Medical advances like Malaria Medication will have a major impact on where you can colonize, though.

• Colonization against Unrecognized nations, it's more like declaring a regular war. You can make them your colonial subject, or you can demand a Treaty Port, which will create a new State under your control and give you access to their market.

• Outright annexing overseas territory by either method will create a Colonial State, which is not the same as an Unincorporated State. They are affected by colonial policies, have special migration rules, and distinct mechanics.

• War/combat is unfinished. They're not ready to talk about it yet.

• Prestige is still a thing and affects your Great Power ranking. Cut Down to Size wargoal will take a bite out of your prestige.

• GDP affects your Great Power ranking directly, even if you as the state are not benefitting from that production through taxation. What matters is production, not government revenue. Factories, especially late game, will cause GDP to skyrocket, so you will need to industrialize to remain competitive as a Great Power.

• Each Power Rank has its own intended play experience.

• Minor Powers: Ideal for playing tall. Local concerns. Min-maxing your economy, encouraging immigration, building exactly the society you want, "tending your garden," becoming regionally powerful/influential.

• Major Power: Might have some colonies. Mass political movements outside your control might try to change the shape of your country (this is less of a concern for minor powers). Becoming a Great Power is a realistic goal.

• Great Powers: Global influence. Maintaining and disrupting the worldwide balance of power. Getting involved in smaller nations' affairs in lots of ways beyond just conquest. Proxy conflicts. Gunboat diplomacy. Being #1. They get more tools to change industry top-down, from a macro level, with a single click. You shouldn't be really concerned with economic micromanagement, but still have a lot of control over your economy in broader ways.

• Three different Tech Trees: Production, Military, and Society. More like a traditional, branching 4X tech tree, not like the tech columns in Vicky 2. No split between techs and inventions. Seems like no more RNG for inventions other than that Tech Spread has some RNG involved.

• About 10 "tiers" of tech. Earlier ones might only have three techs in them but later ones have up to 11.

• Production Tech represents the major civilian inventions of the era that directly affect industry. Dynamite, Railways, Cotton Gin, Telegraph.

• Military Tech is pretty self-explanatory. Hardware as well as doctrines. Ironclads, Machine Guns, Modern Nursing, Defense in Depth. Tanks and Planes are at the very bottom. Having something researched doesn't automatically implement it, so for example, just researching Defense in Depth won't give you its benefits until you decide to enact it.

• Society Tech is stuff like Romanticism, Urban Planning, Central Banking, Dialectics. Anarchism and Socialism are two separate ideologies now that function differently. Antibiotics, Malaria Prevention, and other civilian stuff unrelated to direct production of goods is also in this tree.

• Innovations (including social movements like Socialism) can spread into your country even if you choose not to research them, which can be combated by things like censorship at the cost of slowing down your Innovation rate and upsetting the Intelligentsia.

• Almost every tech has advantages and disadvantages. i.e. automation increases overall throughput and reduces costs, but also reduces the number of available jobs in that industry, so you have to figure out what to do with all the newly unemployed.

• Technology Spread is based on your Literacy rate. Higher literacy and a free press will cause techs that are spreading to you from outside to spread faster. This is separate from Innovation Points, which you invest directly into a single tech you are trying to research at a given moment.

• Innovation Points you can spend directly come from building universities and employing Academics. Literacy rate affects how many of those points you can directly invest into research each week. So if you have a well-funded academic elite but low general literacy, you might not be able to spend all of your Innovation Points. These "overflow" Innovation Points beyond your direct investment cap will increase Tech Spread instead. So there's a balance between increasing Literacy, which speeds the adoption of outside ideas, and building academic infrastructure, which gives you more direct control over research. (This is a complicated system and we got to see it for like 30 seconds but I'm pretty sure I was able to get the general idea. I'm sure Martin can find me and yell at me if I'm wrong.)

• Ideas like Socialism, Anarchism, Egalitarianism, will increase the minimum Expected Standard of Living for ALL POPs once present in your nation, so you will need to provide them with more stuff to keep them happy. This might also increase attraction for Interest Groups that want broader suffrage or to abolish slavery, for example.

• Having Anarchism as your organizing principle produces no Authority, so you will have a very reduced ability to make changes to your country directly once you have switched over to it.

• Anarchists can implement a Council Republic government, which gives more Political Strength to Farmers and Machinists and opens up the Worker Cooperative production method, in which workers own their factories and collect dividends from them. This is distinct from USSR-style communism, in which the state controls the industries and (theoretically...) passes the proceeds on to the workers from the top down in the form of subsidies and social programs.

• If a revolution happens, you can side with the rebels. So you can be super duper capitalist on purpose, make life hell for all the workers, then switch sides when the socialists rise up. Neighboring conservative countries will be likely to step in and try to stop a socialist revolution.

• They want it to be playable without a lot of prior experience. It's a very complex game but it should be much more approachable than Vicky 2.

• Rather than a game where you learn how to play "correctly" by following a guide, the goal is for it to be the kind of game where you do what comes naturally and are able to easily understand why your actions led to certain consequences.

• Historical events (Taiping Rebellion, US Civil War) can happen, but only if the correct conditions exist. If the US player plays the interest group game really well and manages to abolish slavery peacefully in the 1850s, there won't be a hardcoded Civil War event chain that fires.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 22, 2021, 04:23:31 AM
Looks good, but let's see if it all comes together in the finished product and doesn't end up a broken unbalanced jumble. :D
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2021, 04:59:36 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2021, 04:23:31 AM
Looks good, but let's see if it all comes together in the finished product and doesn't end up a broken unbalanced jumble. :D
Vicky 2 was all that and it was great!
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 22, 2021, 05:02:59 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 22, 2021, 04:59:36 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2021, 04:23:31 AM
Looks good, but let's see if it all comes together in the finished product and doesn't end up a broken unbalanced jumble. :D
Vicky 2 was all that and it was great!

Yeah but a decade or two have passed though. We are too old to plug in the holes with our imaginations.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 22, 2021, 05:03:37 AM
Yeah, Tim, but they're building from scratch from what I understand.

To quote Martin Anward from last year:

QuoteI've seen this rumor posted before but as far as I know (and have heard from others at the company who worked on V2) it's not true - it's more that the economy code has been refactored and optimized to the point of being nearly unreadable. There's a fairly solid understanding of how it should operate in theory, but it's an extremely complicated piece of code (written at a time when paradox played pretty fast and loose with code standards) that ends up behaving in weird and unexpected ways. For example, I'm reasonably sure that artisans making tanks out of fruit wasn't in the original design.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 22, 2021, 05:08:30 AM
V2 peaked in terms of concurrent player count in the last 24 hours on Steam. :D

https://steamcharts.com/app/42960#All

(Misleading, for sure, as it was released originally before Paradox games were on Steam IIRC).
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Brain on May 22, 2021, 05:18:13 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2021, 05:03:37 AM
Yeah, Tim, but they're building from scratch from what I understand.

To quote Martin Anward from last year:

QuoteI've seen this rumor posted before but as far as I know (and have heard from others at the company who worked on V2) it's not true - it's more that the economy code has been refactored and optimized to the point of being nearly unreadable. There's a fairly solid understanding of how it should operate in theory, but it's an extremely complicated piece of code (written at a time when paradox played pretty fast and loose with code standards) that ends up behaving in weird and unexpected ways. For example, I'm reasonably sure that artisans making tanks out of fruit wasn't in the original design.

Maybe, maybe not. Many countries in that era used sharpened mangoes as weapons.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Razgovory on May 22, 2021, 08:28:15 AM
Man that's complex.  I like ambitious games even if they don't entirely work properly.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Crazy_Ivan80 on May 22, 2021, 11:27:55 AM
some things remind me of that AGEOD game that was barely playable
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Solmyr on May 22, 2021, 03:09:09 PM
Quote from: The Brain on May 22, 2021, 05:18:13 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2021, 05:03:37 AM
Yeah, Tim, but they're building from scratch from what I understand.

To quote Martin Anward from last year:

QuoteI've seen this rumor posted before but as far as I know (and have heard from others at the company who worked on V2) it's not true - it's more that the economy code has been refactored and optimized to the point of being nearly unreadable. There's a fairly solid understanding of how it should operate in theory, but it's an extremely complicated piece of code (written at a time when paradox played pretty fast and loose with code standards) that ends up behaving in weird and unexpected ways. For example, I'm reasonably sure that artisans making tanks out of fruit wasn't in the original design.

Maybe, maybe not. Many countries in that era used sharpened mangoes as weapons.

Only the ones Captain Blackadder was fighting.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Agelastus on May 22, 2021, 03:10:41 PM
Quote from: Solmyr on May 22, 2021, 03:09:09 PM
Quote from: The Brain on May 22, 2021, 05:18:13 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2021, 05:03:37 AM
Yeah, Tim, but they're building from scratch from what I understand.

To quote Martin Anward from last year:

QuoteI've seen this rumor posted before but as far as I know (and have heard from others at the company who worked on V2) it's not true - it's more that the economy code has been refactored and optimized to the point of being nearly unreadable. There's a fairly solid understanding of how it should operate in theory, but it's an extremely complicated piece of code (written at a time when paradox played pretty fast and loose with code standards) that ends up behaving in weird and unexpected ways. For example, I'm reasonably sure that artisans making tanks out of fruit wasn't in the original design.

Maybe, maybe not. Many countries in that era used sharpened mangoes as weapons.

Only the ones Captain Blackadder was fighting.

Well, according to Blackadder, Douglas Haig was there as well...
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: grumbler on May 22, 2021, 04:58:02 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on May 22, 2021, 11:27:55 AM
some things remind me of that AGEOD game that was barely playable

I actually quite enjoyed that game once I understood the mechanics.  Too bad it won't work on 64-bit computers.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 23, 2021, 01:40:52 AM
Quote from: grumbler on May 22, 2021, 04:58:02 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on May 22, 2021, 11:27:55 AM
some things remind me of that AGEOD game that was barely playable

I actually quite enjoyed that game once I understood the mechanics.  Too bad it won't work on 64-bit computers.

The Steam version (Pride of Nations, I believe Pardox's was Vainglory of Nations?), appears to run on my Windows 10 64-bit system. Turns still take about 1 minute to process, though (on an i9-10900). :P
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 23, 2021, 04:09:35 AM
Yeah I have been meaning to get back to ProN and see how my 10600 runs it. :)

Oddly enough, after all the talk here I fired up Victoria 2. I tried to, several months ago, modded and unmodded but it would crash on launch. Now it worked, not sure what happened. Anyhow, I found myself not ready yet to re-learn the UI and mechanics.

the Reddit rumour-dump sounds amazing obviously, but if they will really create a billion pops the game won't ever get even close to being balanced or making sense.

Overall, I am hopeful, in part because after the recent fiascos I think disappointing with the meme-game could become a devastating blow to their community. So, hopefully they choose to err on the side of hardcore simulation not gamey BS.

But let's not forget Victoria 2 we liked despite ridiculous flaws. The world market never made much sense, IIRC fleets were next to useless, India used to become British culture in a matter of a decade, and regardless of which country you played the easiest road to stability and prosperity was to go 20th Scandinavia-style democratic welfare state in the most direct and quickest way possible.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 23, 2021, 04:15:42 AM
I believe the 3.0.4 beta patches actually help with stability a bit, not least because they allow you to properly alt-tab without crashing the game. :P
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Brain on May 23, 2021, 04:19:24 AM
Quote from: Tamas on May 23, 2021, 04:09:35 AM
and regardless of which country you played the easiest road to stability and prosperity was to go 20th Scandinavia-style democratic welfare state in the most direct and quickest way possible.

Deal with it.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Zanza on May 23, 2021, 04:35:15 AM
When you look at all kind of indicators regarding human life, the argument that Scandinavian welfare states are the pinnacle of human civilization can be legitimately made. So the game is just realistic.  :P
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Habbaku on May 23, 2021, 03:24:37 PM
Quote from: Tamas on May 23, 2021, 04:09:35 AM
the Reddit rumour-dump sounds amazing obviously, but if they will really create a billion pops the game won't ever get even close to being balanced or making sense.

I think you're misreading the post. They don't want "one billion pops" from what I've seen, but start with "one billion people".
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 23, 2021, 03:50:00 PM
Quote from: Zanza on May 23, 2021, 04:35:15 AM
When you look at all kind of indicators regarding human life, the argument that Scandinavian welfare states are the pinnacle of human civilization can be legitimately made. So the game is just realistic.  :P

Possibly. What I mean is, for example, from the (cruel) point of view of trying to keep together the Russian empire in the late 19th century, avoiding democratisation was a valid course of action (for a while). But in the game, it was just suboptimal play, when you could just switch to a welfare state without causing any internal instability.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Zanza on May 24, 2021, 12:40:56 AM
Quote from: Tamas on May 23, 2021, 03:50:00 PM
Quote from: Zanza on May 23, 2021, 04:35:15 AM
When you look at all kind of indicators regarding human life, the argument that Scandinavian welfare states are the pinnacle of human civilization can be legitimately made. So the game is just realistic.  :P

Possibly. What I mean is, for example, from the (cruel) point of view of trying to keep together the Russian empire in the late 19th century, avoiding democratisation was a valid course of action (for a while). But in the game, it was just suboptimal play, when you could just switch to a welfare state without causing any internal instability.
I agree. There was one optimal way to play regardless of context. That is something I hope they get right this time.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Solmyr on May 24, 2021, 03:15:36 AM
Switching to a welfare state should probably at least tank your prestige (assuming it's a sort of "imperialness" indicator) and, in larger empires, cause all sorts of regional nationalist separatist movements. I.e. it should be impossible to institute a modern welfare state and still keep a multinational empire.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Sheilbh on May 24, 2021, 03:39:37 AM
I think that moving to an interest group approach to politics probably makes sense - though issues with that as JR said.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 24, 2021, 05:10:42 AM
The slides from the Vickynomics presentation can be downloaded here in PDF form: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/vickynomics-panel.1475691/
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 24, 2021, 06:52:08 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 24, 2021, 05:10:42 AM
The slides from the Vickynomics presentation can be downloaded here in PDF form: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/vickynomics-panel.1475691/

Thanks Syt, it's actually looking pretty promising. I so like this period, it will be tough to keep myself away from pointless hype for the next year or two before release.

Do they still recruit beta testers for their projects? I might apply when it gets there, for old time's sake.  :D
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: jimmy olsen on May 24, 2021, 07:05:24 AM
Upon further reflection, I would change the timeline of the games even more if I were in charge

Europa Universalis 5: 1399-1763
Victoria 3: 1764-1901 (Fully cover the industrial revolution and liberal revolutions)
Hearts of Iron 5: 1902-1962 (Obviously twelve to fifteen start dates will be required)
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 24, 2021, 07:29:30 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 24, 2021, 07:05:24 AM
Upon further reflection, I would change the timeline of the games even more if I were in charge

Europa Universalis 5: 1399-1763
Victoria 3: 1764-1901 (Fully cover the industrial revolution and liberal revolutions)
Hearts of Iron 5: 1902-1962 (Obviously twelve to fifteen start dates will be required)

That's terrible :P

EU5: 1492 to 1820
Victoria 3: 1820 to 1920 (should be 1836 but realistically they'd want continuity)
HOI5: just never make it
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Sheilbh on May 24, 2021, 07:33:55 AM
Interesting :hmm:

I'd go 1492 - 1789 and 1789 - 1914.

HOI - I'd keep starting at 1936 or maybe 1933 because I think it's different.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 24, 2021, 07:54:18 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 24, 2021, 07:33:55 AM
Interesting :hmm:

I'd go 1492 - 1789 and 1789 - 1914.

HOI - I'd keep starting at 1936 or maybe 1933 because I think it's different.

The problem with the French Revolution/Napoleonic Wars and WW1 is they -in my mind- were violent switches of eras. Building a simulation that covers both one of those eras and the change into a new one gets needlessly complicated or entirely incorrect as a simulation. Might as well just skip the problematic few years.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Sheilbh on May 24, 2021, 08:10:18 AM
Yeah.

I agree those are pivots - but I think there's more difference between ancien regime and Napoleonic era than there are between Napoleonic and the sort of long Edwardian summer. Similarly with the 1900s v post-WW1 world. So my approach would basically be early modern building up to revolution and then the second game up to WW1.

I am not a game developer. But I think the approach I'd take is basically that you build in a series of events for the most powerful country from about 1700 on that more or less inevitably leads to revolution at the end of the game. Similarly with the build up to 1914 for a number of the most powerful countries (excluding the Americas) so you have events that strongly incentivise moving towards the formation of alliance blocs and escalating colonial/peripheral flashpoints. But that's when both games ends (but no doubt Paradox would like to make them able to transfer from one to the other).

Edit: And that's why I'm less sure on HOI and think the approach they took makes sense. It starts at a point when basically the world was on the track for war. I think it'd be tough for a game to cover Ruritanian 1910s (just reading the Sleepwalkers on this) and WW1 and the aftermath. Similarly I don't really think it'd be easy to cover inter-war, WW2 and the early Cold War - far less all of them. I think you need to basically be able to put certain pieces in place before launching.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josquius on May 24, 2021, 08:32:06 AM
I think its a given that WW1 in Victoria didn't really work. Its too much of a different time period.

Nonetheless from a pure gameplay perspective it does make sense to have this "Now lets fuck over the world" ending to the game.
This was one of the things that really annoyed me about Imperator: it just ends randomly on a date that in history meant something but in the game probably doesn't.

Definitely going way uncommercial and esoteric here but I'd be tempted to have this end game as a point where all the pre-established game mechanics just collapse and whole new ones suddenly emerge leaving you technically still in control but quite clueless at just what is going on.

Of course in my alternate-paradoxverse the true timelines of games are 1066-1648 (1660 for wiggle room),  1648- 1820 or there abouts, and 1820-1920.
Modelling one by one the end of distinct eras with apocalyptic events.,
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on May 24, 2021, 09:10:15 AM
If WW1 were accurately represented in game, it wouldn't happen.  Any rational human player or any decent AI would peace out rather than fight to utter ruin - or, more likely, not start the fighting in the first place.

Vic 2 had problems with WW1 for similar reasons it had trouble with the ACW - the system really isn't designed to simulate mass mobilization total wars.  If it did a better job modeling those kinds of conflicts, you'd risk having more of them and that total war tail would anachronistically wag the Victoria dog.

I've always felt that outbreak of a true Great War should just end the game, "Balance of Powers" style.

The pop-politics model can be stretched to cover the interwar period but it becomes increasingly creaky to do so.  There is a fundamentally different economic-financial framework in play and a different kind of mass politics in the age of radio and true mass media.  The Interwar period would be better served by a separate stand-alone game - which would be a great game for Pdox to make even though there is no chance of it happening.

By the same token it would be an awful idea to put the time period back into the Nappy era.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: FunkMonk on May 24, 2021, 09:32:46 AM
I feel like the most important part of this new game will be having like five dozens of different variations of each national flag, dependent on the type of government in power.

Good memories from Vicky 2 :wub:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Zanza on May 24, 2021, 10:19:22 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 24, 2021, 09:10:15 AM
If WW1 were accurately represented in game, it wouldn't happen.  Any rational human player or any decent AI would peace out rather than fight to utter ruin - or, more likely, not start the fighting in the first place.
Reading game forums suggests that there are lots of players out there as or more stupid then Wilhelm II, so WW1would still be a distinct possibility with a human player at the helm.  :P
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 24, 2021, 10:32:36 AM
Quote from: Zanza on May 24, 2021, 10:19:22 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 24, 2021, 09:10:15 AM
If WW1 were accurately represented in game, it wouldn't happen.  Any rational human player or any decent AI would peace out rather than fight to utter ruin - or, more likely, not start the fighting in the first place.
Reading game forums suggests that there are lots of players out there as or more stupid then Wilhelm II, so WW1would still be a distinct possibility with a human player at the helm.  :P

I think Besuchov said on stream that he once declared war over a failed loan just because he felt particularly petty, and that it spiraled into an all out conflict between the Great Powers, so ... yeah. :D
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Valmy on May 24, 2021, 10:45:13 AM
Having the game start in 1836 neatly sidesteps the chaos of the second wave of revolutions in the 1820s and 1830s. I am not sure why they do that since that kind of thing is very on-brand for what you are usually dealing with in Victoria. Why not start it in 1821 and get revolting Greeks and Poles and French? That is what we all signed up for.

But, you know, the game is called "Victoria" and not "George IV" but still...
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 24, 2021, 12:06:44 PM
For me MPing EU games was most interesting to experience to some degree the thinking and worries which might have gone into foreign policy decisions.

In particular I remember an EU3 game where I was: Ottoman Empire. I don't remember who was Russia, but basically neither of us wanted to fight in the Caucasus where our borders met (or anywhere else), but couldn't trust the other and leave it defenseless, so we gradually built forts and stationed larger and larger armies, worried that the other might get involved in some other conflict of ours. IIRC, inevitably, the war happened precisely because one of us (can't recall who) wanted to use the chance to strike at the right moment and secure the border for the future.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on May 24, 2021, 12:13:42 PM
By 1836 you have incipient industries in Western Europe and the USA and the beginnings of RR construction.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Zanza on May 24, 2021, 12:15:21 PM
If this iteration is successful, they may consider a DLC to extend the timeline...
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Habbaku on May 24, 2021, 12:27:40 PM
Quote from: Zanza on May 24, 2021, 12:15:21 PM
If this iteration is successful, they may consider a DLC to extend the timeline...

They've almost certainly already considered it. I don't think Paradox goes into any game design these days without a long-term DLC gameplan.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 24, 2021, 12:29:32 PM
IIRC the original Vicky 1 pre-expansion only ran till 1920.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on May 24, 2021, 12:30:15 PM
It seems promising that there are many local markets now, rather than the highly unrealistic one world market.  Modeling the world economy with the simplification of one global market is like modeling car tires with with a simplifying assumption of no friction.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 24, 2021, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 24, 2021, 12:30:15 PM
It seems promising that there are many local markets now, rather than the highly unrealistic one world market.  Modeling the world economy with the simplification of one global market is like modeling car tires with with a simplifying assumption of no friction.

Doesn't Vic2 basically have 8 markets, one per sphere of influence? Or do I misremember. :unsure:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on May 24, 2021, 12:47:51 PM
Quote from: Syt on May 24, 2021, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 24, 2021, 12:30:15 PM
It seems promising that there are many local markets now, rather than the highly unrealistic one world market.  Modeling the world economy with the simplification of one global market is like modeling car tires with with a simplifying assumption of no friction.

Doesn't Vic2 basically have 8 markets, one per sphere of influence? Or do I misremember. :unsure:
There was some prioritization around your sphere (sphere owner had priority on selling stuff if there was a glut of it, and priority on buying it if there was shortage), but there was essentially one market with one set of prices.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 24, 2021, 01:56:51 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 24, 2021, 12:47:51 PM
Quote from: Syt on May 24, 2021, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 24, 2021, 12:30:15 PM
It seems promising that there are many local markets now, rather than the highly unrealistic one world market.  Modeling the world economy with the simplification of one global market is like modeling car tires with with a simplifying assumption of no friction.

Doesn't Vic2 basically have 8 markets, one per sphere of influence? Or do I misremember. :unsure:
There was some prioritization around your sphere (sphere owner had priority on selling stuff if there was a glut of it, and priority on buying it if there was shortage), but there was essentially one market with one set of prices.

Yeah when I was reading the PDF I was like "oh so EU4's market system, that's better" but no, because apparently there will be market-specific prices, not global ones.

It sounds very good on paper. I wonder if this method of linking local market prices to factors like infrastructure could also give proper value to blockades - adding a % of blockaded ports variable shouldn't be a big deal.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on May 24, 2021, 02:00:58 PM
Local market prices should be determined by supply and demand.  The effect of infrastructure is to expand the pool from which you determine the total supply and total demand.  You don't care what the supply is in the area that you can't reach, either due to bad transportation efficiency or due to blockade.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Zanza on May 24, 2021, 02:18:02 PM
On political parties versus interest groups: (https://i.redd.it/7pa0a683c3171.jpg)
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josquius on May 24, 2021, 05:25:26 PM
Quote from: DGuller on May 24, 2021, 02:00:58 PM
Local market prices should be determined by supply and demand.  The effect of infrastructure is to expand the pool from which you determine the total supply and total demand.  You don't care what the supply is in the area that you can't reach, either due to bad transportation efficiency or due to blockade.
Yes, factor in development/technology level too wonder if this could be a good way to go to properly represent industrial technology being so much more expensive for Asian nations than European.
I guess the bother is how you represent colonies being similarly remote and undeveloped.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: FunkMonk on May 24, 2021, 05:33:04 PM
Quote from: Zanza on May 24, 2021, 02:18:02 PM
On political parties versus interest groups: (https://i.redd.it/7pa0a683c3171.jpg)

People will finally recognize the real differences between the Judean People's Front and the People's Front of Judea.  :cool:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: grumbler on May 24, 2021, 08:57:24 PM
Quote from: Syt on May 23, 2021, 01:40:52 AM
Quote from: grumbler on May 22, 2021, 04:58:02 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on May 22, 2021, 11:27:55 AM
some things remind me of that AGEOD game that was barely playable

I actually quite enjoyed that game once I understood the mechanics.  Too bad it won't work on 64-bit computers.

The Steam version (Pride of Nations, I believe Pardox's was Vainglory of Nations?), appears to run on my Windows 10 64-bit system. Turns still take about 1 minute to process, though (on an i9-10900). :P

Mine crashes on launch every time, and when I asked for tech help i was told there was no Windows 10 support.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: jimmy olsen on May 24, 2021, 11:32:24 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on May 24, 2021, 09:10:15 AM

By the same token it would be an awful idea to put the time period back into the Nappy era.
Why?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: jimmy olsen on May 25, 2021, 01:15:45 AM
Quote from: FunkMonk on May 24, 2021, 09:32:46 AM
I feel like the most important part of this new game will be having like five dozens of different variations of each national flag, dependent on the type of government in power.

Good memories from Vicky 2 :wub:
I heard it's going to have a dynamic flag engine that can make up a flag for any situation, like the flagmashup bot on twitter. So, if you want to see what a Zulu puppet UK flag looks like, you'll get your wish.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Brain on May 25, 2021, 01:31:02 AM
:rolleyes: Zulu puppeting the UK sounds like the kind of unrealistic player fantasy that should not be catered to.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: garbon on May 25, 2021, 02:14:44 AM
What about OHgamer's aren't I great thread:
QuoteThose of you who are long-time veterans of Paradox Games will recognize me. No, I hadn't completely vanished into the ether, though life over the past twelve years since the release of Victoria II took me in directions that greatly limited my ability to be involved with the Victoria community and Paradox in general.

Saw the news that Paradox is going to revisit Victoria for a new edition, and my heart filled with joy. I was heavily involved in the development of Victoria II as a beta tester and data contributor during its development in 2008 and 2009 (as well as creating, along with XieChengnuo, the map layout that would be used in not only Victoria, but be the base for the maps of EU3 and HoI3/4), and while the game was not, as Mary Poppins would have preferred, "Practically Perfect in Every Way," there was a lot of great things about the game and how it built upon the foundations established by the original Victoria I release combined with much of the modding work that the Victoria Improvement Project (VIP) mod had done with the first iteration of the game. This is clear from the devotion shown by fans of the game to this day the Victoria franchise and Victoria II.

Although my spare time these days tends to be rather limited, I will definitely be following developments of this new version closely. Godspeed to the development team for Victoria 3

OHGamer
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 25, 2021, 02:54:32 AM
Quote from: garbon on May 25, 2021, 02:14:44 AM
What about OHgamer's aren't I great thread:
QuoteThose of you who are long-time veterans of Paradox Games will recognize me. No, I hadn't completely vanished into the ether, though life over the past twelve years since the release of Victoria II took me in directions that greatly limited my ability to be involved with the Victoria community and Paradox in general.

Saw the news that Paradox is going to revisit Victoria for a new edition, and my heart filled with joy. I was heavily involved in the development of Victoria II as a beta tester and data contributor during its development in 2008 and 2009 (as well as creating, along with XieChengnuo, the map layout that would be used in not only Victoria, but be the base for the maps of EU3 and HoI3/4), and while the game was not, as Mary Poppins would have preferred, "Practically Perfect in Every Way," there was a lot of great things about the game and how it built upon the foundations established by the original Victoria I release combined with much of the modding work that the Victoria Improvement Project (VIP) mod had done with the first iteration of the game. This is clear from the devotion shown by fans of the game to this day the Victoria franchise and Victoria II.

Although my spare time these days tends to be rather limited, I will definitely be following developments of this new version closely. Godspeed to the development team for Victoria 3

OHGamer

:lol: wtf
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 25, 2021, 02:56:50 AM
I should go and brag about the flags and flavor events I made for Vic1 in development. :P

Though to be fair, the guys who worked the POP mines back then are probably still traumatized to this day. :D
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: celedhring on May 25, 2021, 02:57:54 AM
I must make a thread about the EU2 events I wrote and which OBVIOUSLY are the basis for the success of the entire saga up to this day.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 25, 2021, 02:59:46 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 25, 2021, 02:56:50 AM
I should go and brag about the flags and flavor events I made for Vic1 in development. :P

Though to be fair, the guys who worked the POP mines back then are probably still traumatized to this day. :D

Yeah the "beta" test of Vicky1 was more like "please help us lift it out of alpha". I remember doing the resources for African provinces. Oh the naivety of youth.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Maladict on May 25, 2021, 04:36:46 AM

Quote from: garbon on May 25, 2021, 02:14:44 AM
What about OHgamer's aren't I great thread:
QuoteThose of you who are long-time veterans of Paradox Games will recognize me. No, I hadn't completely vanished into the ether, though life over the past twelve years since the release of Victoria II took me in directions that greatly limited my ability to be involved with the Victoria community and Paradox in general.

Saw the news that Paradox is going to revisit Victoria for a new edition, and my heart filled with joy. I was heavily involved in the development of Victoria II as a beta tester and data contributor during its development in 2008 and 2009 (as well as creating, along with XieChengnuo, the map layout that would be used in not only Victoria, but be the base for the maps of EU3 and HoI3/4), and while the game was not, as Mary Poppins would have preferred, "Practically Perfect in Every Way," there was a lot of great things about the game and how it built upon the foundations established by the original Victoria I release combined with much of the modding work that the Victoria Improvement Project (VIP) mod had done with the first iteration of the game. This is clear from the devotion shown by fans of the game to this day the Victoria franchise and Victoria II.

Although my spare time these days tends to be rather limited, I will definitely be following developments of this new version closely. Godspeed to the development team for Victoria 3

OHGamer, insufferable as ever

fyp
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Sheilbh on May 25, 2021, 04:43:19 AM
Quote from: Tamas on May 25, 2021, 02:54:32 AM
:lol: wtf
That is incredible :lol:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: FunkMonk on May 25, 2021, 06:22:55 AM
There's something about Victoria that really fosters a community  :cry:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Maladict on May 25, 2021, 06:37:26 AM
Didn't he post here at some point?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: garbon on May 25, 2021, 06:38:46 AM
Quote from: FunkMonk on May 25, 2021, 06:22:55 AM
There's something about Victoria that really fosters a community  :cry:

On p'dox forum it has only garnered likes.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 25, 2021, 06:56:17 AM
Quote from: Tamas on May 25, 2021, 02:59:46 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 25, 2021, 02:56:50 AM
I should go and brag about the flags and flavor events I made for Vic1 in development. :P

Though to be fair, the guys who worked the POP mines back then are probably still traumatized to this day. :D

Yeah the "beta" test of Vicky1 was more like "please help us lift it out of alpha". I remember doing the resources for African provinces. Oh the naivety of youth.

Yeah, I'm not as enthusiastic about these things any more. I'm happy to wait for the release these days. :D
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josquius on May 25, 2021, 06:59:36 AM
Here's a weird idea.
So CK is set during the age of feudalism. You control a dynasty.
EU is set during the fall of feudalism and  rise of nation states and that's what you control.
Victoria is set during the dawn of the age of ideology.

So. In this weird alternate Victoria you don't play a nation but rather an ideology. Your job is to battle other ideologies and spread yours around the world.
I know it won't work in practice given CK still basically comes down to paint the map.
But an interesting thought.
And yes. Obviously the victorian age was peak nation state so not quite a perfect parallel.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Valmy on May 25, 2021, 07:58:25 AM
Quote from: Maladict on May 25, 2021, 06:37:26 AM
Didn't he post here at some point?

He did but on the old 2003-2009 version of Languish.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: FunkMonk on May 25, 2021, 08:17:27 AM
Quote from: garbon on May 25, 2021, 06:38:46 AM
Quote from: FunkMonk on May 25, 2021, 06:22:55 AM
There's something about Victoria that really fosters a community  :cry:

On p'dox forum it has only garnered likes.

Figures  :lol:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 25, 2021, 11:56:50 AM
PDF with the slides from the "Art of Victoria" presentation in this thread:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/the-art-of-victoria-panel.1476135/

:wub:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Valmy on May 25, 2021, 11:59:56 AM
(https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/711151/V3_Social-Template_1%20The%20art%20of%20Victoria%203.png)

Could this be a better painting of Matthew Perry?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Valmy on May 25, 2021, 12:09:17 PM
(https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/711157/Screenshot%202021-05-25%20at%2017.53.43.png)

I mean that is a pretty awesome Haitian Revolution painting but that happened 32 years before the start of this game...
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: garbon on May 25, 2021, 12:09:30 PM
I'm confused on the map images they had for publication with the announcement. Map looks infinitely better in that art pdf.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 25, 2021, 12:14:46 PM
Question is which one is more likely to end up in game.  :hmm:

(Though Imperator has the prettiest map of their games IMHO)
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 25, 2021, 01:11:22 PM
Heh, found my old V1 flags in my old backup files. Such cringe. :D

(https://i.postimg.cc/1Rb5YwLv/Commie-Rebel.gif)

(https://i.postimg.cc/BnYTdhsr/Commie-GER.jpg)

(https://i.postimg.cc/nLNvLCXT/CommieTX.jpg)

(https://i.postimg.cc/sfYpVfs9/KingCSA2.jpg)

(https://i.postimg.cc/PJQZKy2F/Monarch-US2.jpg)

(https://i.postimg.cc/Y9gQLMg7/Commmie-US6.jpg)
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Valmy on May 25, 2021, 01:16:17 PM
Marxist Texas made their star gold? Surely the Texas Proletariat would have made it red. Chairman Jim Hogg will direct the central committee to initiate world revolution against the Yankee Bourgeoisie.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 25, 2021, 01:19:22 PM
I didn't think too hard about such things back then. :D There's a reason why the redesigned all flags for V2. And I understand V3 will have dynamic generation of ahistorical flags. :P
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 27, 2021, 11:13:21 AM
First dev diary about: Pops.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-1-pops.1476573/?utm_source=twitter-owned&utm_medium=social-owned&utm_content=post&utm_campaign=vic3_vic_20210527_for_dd
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 27, 2021, 11:17:50 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 27, 2021, 11:13:21 AM
First dev diary about: Pops.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-1-pops.1476573/?utm_source=twitter-owned&utm_medium=social-owned&utm_content=post&utm_campaign=vic3_vic_20210527_for_dd

CK3-style 3D models for pops? OMG the skin colour & dressing style of culture debate is going to rage into eternity.  :lol:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 27, 2021, 11:53:29 AM
(https://i.redd.it/vm1ymezxto171.jpg)
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: FunkMonk on May 27, 2021, 11:55:45 AM
Imagine if actual fascists didn't post their stupidity on Steam forums

Is that the Steam message boards or Paradox forums?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Barrister on May 27, 2021, 12:00:48 PM
Quote from: Syt on May 27, 2021, 11:53:29 AM
(https://i.redd.it/vm1ymezxto171.jpg)

I'm open to the argument that Paradox is being too-PC and as a result ahistoric.

But when their opening suggestion is that Europeans should have faster research times because of their higher IQ levels... :bleeding:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on May 27, 2021, 12:01:51 PM
Looks like Steam and hopefully a troll, although Steam forums are a cesspool.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Sheilbh on May 27, 2021, 12:04:37 PM
Christ :bleeding:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: crazy canuck on May 27, 2021, 12:07:37 PM
Quote from: FunkMonk on May 27, 2021, 11:55:45 AM
Imagine if actual fascists didn't post their stupidity on Steam forums


To quote Malthus, Unpossible.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: KRonn on May 27, 2021, 06:52:50 PM
I've been reading up on this game. I really like Vicky games but Vicky 2 was tricky with the diplomacy stuff on the screens where you applied influence to try and control provinces. I didn't like that, had a hard time working it sometimes. 
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on May 27, 2021, 11:16:22 PM
Yeah, that was my biggest gripe with V2's concepts and UI - the tedious diplomacy management as a great power, a constant whack-a-mole in competing with other powers for influence and endless "improve relations"/"discredit other power". Having it on a separate screen didn't help, either. I look forward to seeing how they'll improve on it.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josquius on May 28, 2021, 02:50:29 AM
Yes, it was annoying how twitch based things were. Press the button first and the influence /colony can be yours!
Pff.



Quote from: Syt on May 27, 2021, 11:53:29 AM
(https://i.redd.it/vm1ymezxto171.jpg)

:lol:

Is political compass a far right thing?
I have noticed the political compass sub reddit (of course there's such a thing) is packed with baby fasc
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: grumbler on May 28, 2021, 06:32:04 AM
The Political Compass has been around for decades and its inventors were definitely left of center, but also more toward the libertarian pole (libertarian left by their definitions).
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: jimmy olsen on June 08, 2021, 05:08:26 AM
Hilarious reminiscing of Vicky 2's terrible economic code

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cyhfG6zeUQ
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Syt on June 27, 2021, 02:04:25 AM
Saw this screenshot on reddit, was reminded of Lettow :lol:

(https://i.redd.it/f4rqd914fo771.png)
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Brain on June 27, 2021, 03:18:11 AM
Mew.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Solmyr on August 27, 2021, 04:39:20 AM
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-12-treasury.1488588/

Interesting money mechanic explained in the new dev diary. Construction costs are no longer a one-off but instead weekly expenses, and indeed all income and spending is weekly. If you get a surplus, it gets added to your gold reserve (which becomes inefficient after exceeding a soft cap); deficit gets subtracted and you can go into debt that way (which is not a problem in itself but also has a ceiling). I like this system, basically you can start building things right away instead of having to wait until your money ticks up to a certain amount like in EU/CK.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on August 27, 2021, 10:33:02 AM
It's a bit confusing because both the budget and the credit markets are a hybrid of government revenue/expenditures and private capital accumulation and spending.  It's done that way I presume to give the player a guiding role even in a laissez faire system. But its not clear how the pools are separated (if they are at all).  Monetary policy is abstracted, which is probably fine for the period up to 1914, but would not work well post 1918 and would not allow playing hypotheticals like carrying out a Populist monetary program in the US in the 1890s.  It also leaves open the question of whether and how the game will model the credit cycle "panics" that troubled much of the 19th century.  For example, while it is close to correct to say that price levels were stable over the long terms during much of this period, there was quite a lot of year-to-year spikes and dips within that trend.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on August 27, 2021, 11:40:34 AM
What I really don't like is the lack of inventory mechanics.  I think having the factory dispose of everything they produced every day, one way or the other, is too much of a kludge.  Not having any stockpiles of war materiel for times of war is also disappointing.  I hated the "all income, no assets" philosophy in HOI4, as I think it limited a lot of mechanics, but at least HOI4 never pretended to be an economic simulator.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on August 27, 2021, 11:47:27 AM
Quote from: DGuller on August 27, 2021, 11:40:34 AM
What I really don't like is the lack of inventory mechanics.  I think having the factory dispose of everything they produced every day, one way or the other, is too much of a kludge.  Not having any stockpiles of war materiel for times of war is also disappointing.  I hated the "all income, no assets" philosophy in HOI4, as I think it limited a lot of mechanics, but at least HOI4 never pretended to be an economic simulator.

I don't have a problem with ending war stockpiles because it made the game too easy for the human player and was unrealistic to boot.  No goods inventories is another story because inventory build ups and draw downs play into business cycle fluctuations.  It is not clear if there is any in game system to model business cycle booms and busts.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Crazy_Ivan80 on August 28, 2021, 11:05:26 AM
Quote from: DGuller on August 27, 2021, 11:40:34 AM
What I really don't like is the lack of inventory mechanics.  I think having the factory dispose of everything they produced every day, one way or the other, is too much of a kludge.  Not having any stockpiles of war materiel for times of war is also disappointing.  I hated the "all income, no assets" philosophy in HOI4, as I think it limited a lot of mechanics, but at least HOI4 never pretended to be an economic simulator.

it's been a while but iirc you could build up stockpiles of this and that in hoi4
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on August 28, 2021, 11:26:38 AM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on August 28, 2021, 11:05:26 AM
Quote from: DGuller on August 27, 2021, 11:40:34 AM
What I really don't like is the lack of inventory mechanics.  I think having the factory dispose of everything they produced every day, one way or the other, is too much of a kludge.  Not having any stockpiles of war materiel for times of war is also disappointing.  I hated the "all income, no assets" philosophy in HOI4, as I think it limited a lot of mechanics, but at least HOI4 never pretended to be an economic simulator.

it's been a while but iirc you could build up stockpiles of this and that in hoi4
You can stockpile equipment and fuel, but nothing else.  You can't stockpile civilian production (which means you can't buy/sell equipment, hence the need for events that give you extra civ factories for a period in exchange for 25 bombers), and you can't stockpile resources.  The moment you lose access to steel, the ship and tank production grinds to a halt the very next day.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Brain on August 28, 2021, 12:03:09 PM
What if you give someone your heart?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Crazy_Ivan80 on August 28, 2021, 04:20:45 PM
Quote from: DGuller on August 28, 2021, 11:26:38 AM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on August 28, 2021, 11:05:26 AM
Quote from: DGuller on August 27, 2021, 11:40:34 AM
What I really don't like is the lack of inventory mechanics.  I think having the factory dispose of everything they produced every day, one way or the other, is too much of a kludge.  Not having any stockpiles of war materiel for times of war is also disappointing.  I hated the "all income, no assets" philosophy in HOI4, as I think it limited a lot of mechanics, but at least HOI4 never pretended to be an economic simulator.

it's been a while but iirc you could build up stockpiles of this and that in hoi4
You can stockpile equipment and fuel, but nothing else.  You can't stockpile civilian production (which means you can't buy/sell equipment, hence the need for events that give you extra civ factories for a period in exchange for 25 bombers), and you can't stockpile resources.  The moment you lose access to steel, the ship and tank production grinds to a halt the very next day.

ah yes, true enough. agree that this is indeed a rather annoying system
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Threviel on August 29, 2021, 03:19:24 AM
Quote from: DGuller on August 28, 2021, 11:26:38 AM
You can stockpile equipment and fuel, but nothing else.  You can't stockpile civilian production (which means you can't buy/sell equipment, hence the need for events that give you extra civ factories for a period in exchange for 25 bombers), and you can't stockpile resources.  The moment you lose access to steel, the ship and tank production grinds to a halt the very next day.

If I remember HoI3 correctly you could stockpile vast amounts of resources, enough to last a good part of the war and that seems to me even more unrealistic.

For example Germany relied on Swedish iron ore, without it tank and ship production would have ground to a halt. Sure they had reserves, but not years worth of reserves. And the same with everything really, no one had gigantic warehouses filled with aluminium for use in case of war.

I think the HoI4 system all in all works better, perhaps there should be a time lag based on distance to resource or something, but that seems overly advanced without much gain. It's a game after all, not a logistics simulator.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on August 29, 2021, 08:34:18 AM
I never played HOI3, but I did get a sense that this design choice for HOI4 was in response to over-stockpiling in HOI3, but I think that went way too far the other way.  Not only is it a bad gameplay, but it's also an annoying gameplay, since you get into these endless cycles of resource availability for trading changing every day, and you having to stay on top of it.  With some stockpiling you can just have "buy up to" orders and not have to be on top of them full time.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Threviel on August 29, 2021, 09:37:34 AM
Yeah, but that didn't happen in a strategical scale during the war. No one had gigantic warehouses chock full of resources just lying around.

The closest approximation would be some kind of lag representing the resources way to the final product, but that would be a two-egged thing since it would take months and months for some newly conquered resources to show up in the system.

I think the current way is an acceptable compromise.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: grumbler on August 29, 2021, 06:16:53 PM
Quote from: Threviel on August 29, 2021, 09:37:34 AM
Yeah, but that didn't happen in a strategical scale during the war. No one had gigantic warehouses chock full of resources just lying around.

The closest approximation would be some kind of lag representing the resources way to the final product, but that would be a two-egged thing since it would take months and months for some newly conquered resources to show up in the system.

I think the current way is an acceptable compromise.

Actually, Japan did exactly what you say no countries did, especially with oil, aluminum, scrap steel, and high-octane aircraft fuels.  In the case of oil, it was over a year's worth of stockpile (though planned at two years' worth, consumption was much higher than anticipated).

I think that a better system than the current one would have no explicit stockpiles, but a more gradual decline in manufacturing if resources are lower than needed.

What HOI is missing is any kind of civilian economy, and a link between it and stability.  Shifting resources to military production should have stability implications that get worse if the country isn't at war or world tensions are not high.  The concept of stability is greatly under-utilized.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Threviel on August 30, 2021, 12:37:04 AM
Quote from: grumbler on August 29, 2021, 06:16:53 PM
Actually, Japan did exactly what you say no countries did, especially with oil, aluminum, scrap steel, and high-octane aircraft fuels.  In the case of oil, it was over a year's worth of stockpile (though planned at two years' worth, consumption was much higher than anticipated).

Yeah, I don't think I mentioned fuel since HoI4 has a stockpile system for that and every state presumably had reserves.

Interesting with Japan, thanks for that. How did that work? What was the cost for them to do that? Did they even have much of an internal production of steel and aluminium?

My guess is that they had been at war for a long time and they planned on staying at war for a year or so at least, so they had a lot of time to plan and prepare. Knowing that they lacked resources they had no choice but to buy and store raw resources. But that is an uneducated guess.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: grumbler on August 30, 2021, 06:18:33 AM
Quote from: Threviel on August 30, 2021, 12:37:04 AM
Quote from: grumbler on August 29, 2021, 06:16:53 PM
Actually, Japan did exactly what you say no countries did, especially with oil, aluminum, scrap steel, and high-octane aircraft fuels.  In the case of oil, it was over a year's worth of stockpile (though planned at two years' worth, consumption was much higher than anticipated).

Yeah, I don't think I mentioned fuel since HoI4 has a stockpile system for that and every state presumably had reserves.

Interesting with Japan, thanks for that. How did that work? What was the cost for them to do that? Did they even have much of an internal production of steel and aluminium?

My guess is that they had been at war for a long time and they planned on staying at war for a year or so at least, so they had a lot of time to plan and prepare. Knowing that they lacked resources they had no choice but to buy and store raw resources. But that is an uneducated guess.

No state in the HOI4 world has two years' worth of wartime fuel reserves.  Japan stockpiled because she lacked the internal production of those materials and needed a buffer to cover the time between going to war and capturing those assets.  The cost was moderately high because of the infrastructure needed to store nd move the stockpile, but it was a cost they had to pay in order to avoid playing HOI4 Japan.

Speaking of Japan and aluminum, the A6M2 Zero used the most advanced aluminum in the world at the time to achieve its remarkable combination of firepower, weight, and agility.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: jimmy olsen on August 30, 2021, 09:08:18 AM
Quote from: Threviel on August 29, 2021, 03:19:24 AM
Quote from: DGuller on August 28, 2021, 11:26:38 AM
You can stockpile equipment and fuel, but nothing else.  You can't stockpile civilian production (which means you can't buy/sell equipment, hence the need for events that give you extra civ factories for a period in exchange for 25 bombers), and you can't stockpile resources.  The moment you lose access to steel, the ship and tank production grinds to a halt the very next day.

If I remember HoI3 correctly you could stockpile vast amounts of resources, enough to last a good part of the war and that seems to me even more unrealistic.

For example Germany relied on Swedish iron ore, without it tank and ship production would have ground to a halt. Sure they had reserves, but not years worth of reserves. And the same with everything really, no one had gigantic warehouses filled with aluminium for use in case of war.

I think the HoI4 system all in all works better, perhaps there should be a time lag based on distance to resource or something, but that seems overly advanced without much gain. It's a game after all, not a logistics simulator.

Didn't the Germans seize 6-12 months worth of nitrates in Belgium in WWI which made a huge difference in their war effort?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: garbon on October 28, 2021, 02:52:05 PM
The new system of war/diplomacy as outlined in the latest dev diary sounds interesting.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on October 28, 2021, 04:13:00 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on August 30, 2021, 09:08:18 AM
Didn't the Germans seize 6-12 months worth of nitrates in Belgium in WWI which made a huge difference in their war effort?

Germany did stockpile nitrates pre-war and they did seize nitrate stockpiles at Antwerp  - that said, those would not have been sufficient to fight out the war had it not been for the synthesis of nitrates by the German chemical industry.

As a more general matter, despite the long preparations for war by the great powers, it is a notorious fact that the combatant powers suffered from munitions shortages by a few months into WW1.

Given the choice between a system that permits a player to exploit by stockpiling vast stores of military supplies and a system with no stockpiles, I'd prefer the latter.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on October 28, 2021, 04:31:49 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 28, 2021, 02:52:05 PM
The new system of war/diplomacy as outlined in the latest dev diary sounds interesting.

Yep. Let's hope they can balance it reasonably.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Habbaku on November 04, 2021, 03:33:01 PM
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-22-the-concept-of-war.1496459/

I'm so excited about this.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on November 04, 2021, 04:12:11 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on November 04, 2021, 03:33:01 PM
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-22-the-concept-of-war.1496459/

I'm so excited about this.

QuoteThe second pillar, War is Strategic, is exactly what it sounds like. In Victoria 3, all decisions you make regarding warfare are on the strategic level, not the tactical. What this means is that you do not move units directly on the map, or make decisions about which exact units should be initiating battle where. Instead of being unit-in-province-based, warfare in Victoria 3 is focused on supplying and allocating troops to frontlines between you and your enemies. The decisions you make during war are about matters such as what front you send your generals to and what overall strategy they should be following there. If this sounds like a radical departure from the norm in Paradox GSGs, that's because it is, and I'll be talking more about the rationale at the end of this dev diary.

:o

It's VERY cool they have the guts to move away from standard Paradox stack chasing like that. I hope the crying on their forum won't be too much for leadership to make them revert.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: crazy canuck on November 04, 2021, 04:23:04 PM
Ohhh, I just got a lot more interested in this game.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Barrister on November 04, 2021, 05:00:28 PM
Cool idea, but you still have to make it fun.  Sometimes if you abstract things too much you lose the fun.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josquius on November 04, 2021, 05:45:44 PM
Sounds nice in theory but didn't the most recent HOI try something like that? And it was quite the unplayable mess....
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Habbaku on November 04, 2021, 06:09:58 PM
Quote from: Tyr on November 04, 2021, 05:45:44 PM
Sounds nice in theory but didn't the most recent HOI try something like that? And it was quite the unplayable mess....

No? HOI 4 has tons of micro.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on November 04, 2021, 06:16:11 PM
Quote from: Tyr on November 04, 2021, 05:45:44 PM
Sounds nice in theory but didn't the most recent HOI try something like that? And it was quite the unplayable mess....

I think what you mean is that in HOI4 you can put formations under AI control by giving instructions. I liked it because otherwise the AI was trivially easy to micro-manage around. In Vicky 3 they are planning to go away with all the unit micro. Which is great.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on November 04, 2021, 07:54:49 PM
HOI4 definitely has plenty of tactical micromanagement, if you want it (which you should, as otherwise you might suffer some casualties).  For that matter, it has plenty of strategic micromanagement as well, since front lines fall apart pretty regularly.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Razgovory on November 04, 2021, 09:14:35 PM
So is this game just not going to have military units?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Zanza on November 05, 2021, 12:19:13 PM
Maybe moving from tactical to strategical level allows them to build a competitive AI.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on November 05, 2021, 01:07:52 PM
Quote from: Tamas on November 04, 2021, 04:12:11 PM
It's VERY cool they have the guts to move away from standard Paradox stack chasing like that. I hope the crying on their forum won't be too much for leadership to make them revert.

My thoughts exactly.
E.g. Having to siege every crappy Mexican province to get the historical peace is not an experience that needs repeating.

Hopefully it will also help them address the never solved problem of how to model warfare in the 19th century wars of unification AND also the WW1 era
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on November 05, 2021, 01:17:50 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 04, 2021, 09:14:35 PM
So is this game just not going to have military units?

I think there will be units but they just won't be icons you move around on a map.  Rather you assign them to fronts and assign leaders to them with different capabilities.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Richard Hakluyt on November 06, 2021, 03:00:41 AM
The devil is in the detail but I am really pleased with their aims here. I do hope we see the corps and divisions moving about on the map though. I look forward to seeing my armies being comprehensively out-manouevred by the Germans because I foolishly failed to invest in an adequate general staff  :cool:

Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: jimmy olsen on November 08, 2021, 07:48:04 AM
This is insanely ambitious. If they can pull it off is the question.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Razgovory on November 08, 2021, 12:24:04 PM
It will probably resemble HOI4's battle system except that the AI controls both sides.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on November 08, 2021, 12:47:48 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2021, 12:24:04 PM
It will probably resemble HOI4's battle system except that the AI controls both sides.
That wouldn't be the worst thing, since HOI4 AI does simulate WW1 warfare pretty well.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: crazy canuck on November 08, 2021, 05:48:17 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 08, 2021, 07:48:04 AM
This is insanely ambitious. If they can pull it off is the question.

My uneducated guess is it might be easier than trying to code AI to move a bunch of units around the map.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on November 09, 2021, 04:10:21 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 08, 2021, 05:48:17 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 08, 2021, 07:48:04 AM
This is insanely ambitious. If they can pull it off is the question.

My uneducated guess is it might be easier than trying to code AI to move a bunch of units around the map.

Yeah the challenge is more about making it in a way that people used to microing stacks in an entirely unrealistic matter will still find it fun and not bury the game under negative reviews.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: KRonn on November 10, 2021, 08:53:12 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 05, 2021, 01:07:52 PM
Quote from: Tamas on November 04, 2021, 04:12:11 PM
It's VERY cool they have the guts to move away from standard Paradox stack chasing like that. I hope the crying on their forum won't be too much for leadership to make them revert.

My thoughts exactly.
E.g. Having to siege every crappy Mexican province to get the historical peace is not an experience that needs repeating.

Hopefully it will also help them address the never solved problem of how to model warfare in the 19th century wars of unification AND also the WW1 era

I'm keeping an open mind on this but I tend to like what they're trying to do with changing combat in this game. It's more a strategic game with the economy, colonies, etc so I guess they're trying to do something similar with combat. I haven't seen what navies and naval combat will be like.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Habbaku on November 11, 2021, 12:39:20 PM
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-23-fronts-and-generals.1497106/

:yeah:

Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: crazy canuck on November 11, 2021, 12:54:59 PM
Excitement level increased.  I will honour the promise to myself never to buy a paradox game on release again, after this one.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Habbaku on November 11, 2021, 12:56:40 PM
I was very pleased with my at-release purchase of CK3. So they've earned another at-release purchase with this.  :P
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on November 11, 2021, 03:02:10 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 11, 2021, 12:54:59 PM
Excitement level increased.  I will honour the promise to myself never to buy a paradox game on release again, after this one.

Same here.  :D
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josephus on November 11, 2021, 03:51:28 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 11, 2021, 12:54:59 PM
Excitement level increased.  I will honour the promise to myself never to buy a paradox game on release again, after this one.

Yeah, but will you pre order the special uber deluxe version with bonus song.?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: HVC on November 11, 2021, 03:53:04 PM
is it falalala?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on November 11, 2021, 05:22:01 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on November 11, 2021, 12:39:20 PM
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-23-fronts-and-generals.1497106/

:yeah:

Looks like basically it keeps much of the essence of the old system except without the ping-ponging, carpet sieges and other annoyances and exploits associated with province based movement.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on November 11, 2021, 06:15:21 PM
Posted this in the dev diary thread:

So far, looks good.
Really like the interaction between the generals and their political influence and effects.
However, if there is one nit it is that I think there was a missed opportunity on the general traits (positive) and conditions (negative?)
It is logical to think that the generals would acquire positive attributes through experience but in reality I think that is rarely the case. The Napoleon of 1812-15 was more experienced than the Napoleon of 1797-1805, but not I think the superior general. I don't think Rommel was an effective general in North Africa because he spent many years in deserts. etc.

What would be more interesting is if the general's personality was always known but key traits both positive and negative were hidden and unknown until after the general spent some time in action. That would better reflect the reality that the true abilities of many commanders in the period were not really known until after they had been tested - compare for example the evolution in the reputations of McClellan and Grant. It would also help recreate the real dilemmas that occurred during this period when generals believed to be effective were promoted and obtained political influence only to be exposed as incompetent in the field.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: crazy canuck on November 11, 2021, 08:08:39 PM
Quote from: Josephus on November 11, 2021, 03:51:28 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 11, 2021, 12:54:59 PM
Excitement level increased.  I will honour the promise to myself never to buy a paradox game on release again, after this one.

Yeah, but will you pre order the special uber deluxe version with bonus song.?

I am excited but not that excited - yet.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on November 11, 2021, 08:12:05 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on November 11, 2021, 06:15:21 PM
Posted this in the dev diary thread:

So far, looks good.
Really like the interaction between the generals and their political influence and effects.
However, if there is one nit it is that I think there was a missed opportunity on the general traits (positive) and conditions (negative?)
It is logical to think that the generals would acquire positive attributes through experience but in reality I think that is rarely the case. The Napoleon of 1812-15 was more experienced than the Napoleon of 1797-1805, but not I think the superior general. I don't think Rommel was an effective general in North Africa because he spent many years in deserts. etc.

What would be more interesting is if the general's personality was always known but key traits both positive and negative were hidden and unknown until after the general spent some time in action. That would better reflect the reality that the true abilities of many commanders in the period were not really known until after they had been tested - compare for example the evolution in the reputations of McClellan and Grant. It would also help recreate the real dilemmas that occurred during this period when generals believed to be effective were promoted and obtained political influence only to be exposed as incompetent in the field.
I like your idea, and I think it would also go a great way towards removing the gamey leveling-up aspect.  Right now in HOI, if I'm in the mood to min-max, I try to manage where the general fights to engineer a God-like combination of traits.  I find that too cheesy.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: garbon on November 12, 2021, 02:37:40 AM
Would it be fun though? Battle after battle, why am I losing? Oh secretly unrevealed terrible general. Okay immediately toss him out assuming I can take rep hit with his interest group.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on November 12, 2021, 04:27:38 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 12, 2021, 02:37:40 AM
Would it be fun though? Battle after battle, why am I losing? Oh secretly unrevealed terrible general. Okay immediately toss him out assuming I can take rep hit with his interest group.

Yeah I suspect generals is where they want to give players the feeling of control over battles and war.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josquius on November 12, 2021, 04:50:59 AM
I do wonder on generals. The way many games do it where you have this pool of generals just sitting around waiting for an army to lead...and you can swap them in and out at will with little ill effect.... That just doesn't seem right to me.
I do wonder whether abstracting this could be the right way to go. I don't give a shit whether the guy in charge of my army is General Jones or General Smith. Surely what makes the difference is more the quality of my officer pool as a whole, with a randomness factor thrown in. This is important both for the strategic decisions armies make when fighting a war and for how well elements of the army perform when they meet the enemy - who knows whether it'll be the top of the class junior General leading those units that run into the enemy or the guy who bought a commission just for the crack.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on November 12, 2021, 09:34:20 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 12, 2021, 02:37:40 AM
Okay immediately toss him out assuming I can take rep hit with his interest group.

That's the issue though - the trade off between problems on the war front and problems on the home front.

I don't think the existing system provides more fun factor - it's just a matter of taking the 10 seconds picking out the generals with the best modifiers.  The alternative could open some more creative options - e.g. using a promising but still unknown general in a backwater brush war (rather than a known and reliable hand) to test them out before committing to promotion. 

As DG points out the status quo system results in the ahistorical result that all wars are fought by brilliant generals and the dolts are all weeded out.  Whereas in real life this period of military history (like many others) was notable for the significant role played by limited or outright incompetent generals.  The lack of historical immersion would be reason enough to make a change but the decision to make generals into political characters as well reinforces that reason.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: garbon on November 12, 2021, 02:09:13 PM
I'm not saying current system is more realistic but question if it would be more fun by a player to be hamstrung in battles by something they were unaware of...and really until trait was revealed would have no idea that's why they were failing.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: PDH on November 12, 2021, 06:24:52 PM
Not sure if it would be fun, but Minsky's idea allows for something like the string of...interesting generals the Union had in the East during the Civil War.  Of course, the only way to overcome that would be huge grand divisions to chew up the confederates in battle after battle - but people would cry out "gaming the system" in that case.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josephus on November 13, 2021, 10:19:13 AM
You can have character tratis for the generals similar to traits in Crusader Kings and Hearts of Iron.
A general in Vic can have several traits. One or two might be known (studious, clever). One or two might be picked up in battle (good in mountain fighting or snow), and one or two might be latent until they show up in battle (coward, ruthless).

Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Habbaku on November 13, 2021, 10:58:22 PM
Quote from: PDH on November 12, 2021, 06:24:52 PM
Not sure if it would be fun, but Minsky's idea allows for something like the string of...interesting generals the Union had in the East during the Civil War.  Of course, the only way to overcome that would be huge grand divisions to chew up the confederates in battle after battle - but people would cry out "gaming the system" in that case.

This is one of my favorite Languish memes.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on November 14, 2021, 04:44:04 AM
Quote from: PDH on November 12, 2021, 06:24:52 PM
Not sure if it would be fun, but Minsky's idea allows for something like the string of...interesting generals the Union had in the East during the Civil War.  Of course, the only way to overcome that would be huge grand divisions to chew up the confederates in battle after battle - but people would cry out "gaming the system" in that case.

:lol:

:mad:
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Zanza on April 18, 2022, 05:41:59 AM
A developer version has apparently been pirated by a beta tester. Mixed reactions supposedly.
I hope this does not impact sales figures and they don't bin this like Imperator ...
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Josquius on April 18, 2022, 07:33:22 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 18, 2022, 05:41:59 AMA developer version has apparently been pirated by a beta tester. Mixed reactions supposedly.
I hope this does not impact sales figures and they don't bin this like Imperator ...

Zero interest in playing it (once upon a time I'd be right on that) but where did you read this? Curious to see people's reactions.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Tamas on April 18, 2022, 08:22:50 AM
Browsing the 4chan thread seems as useless as I expected. Genuine issue reports (like Hungarians migrating en-masse to North Africa) seem like standard early beta stuff, rest is just people not understanding how the game is supposed to work (like calling it broken because you don't control the military).
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: DGuller on April 18, 2022, 10:38:59 AM
Did the catch the asshole beta tester who leaked it?
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Zanza on April 18, 2022, 12:20:05 PM
Quote from: Josquius on April 18, 2022, 07:33:22 AM
Quote from: Zanza on April 18, 2022, 05:41:59 AMA developer version has apparently been pirated by a beta tester. Mixed reactions supposedly.
I hope this does not impact sales figures and they don't bin this like Imperator ...

Zero interest in playing it (once upon a time I'd be right on that) but where did you read this? Curious to see people's reactions.
I
Saw it in the Victoria 3 subreddit.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: The Minsky Moment on April 18, 2022, 08:55:10 PM
The AAR on the discord seemed promising.  Obvious balancing and scripting problems still as a key event was the UK government falling to a revolution over the size of the franchise, resulting in the deposition of the Queen.  But the political side seems to be more developed than Vic2 - the player had to struggle against landowner resistance to push through military reforms
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: Razgovory on April 19, 2022, 06:45:09 PM
Quote from: DGuller on April 18, 2022, 10:38:59 AMDid the catch the asshole beta tester who leaked it?
I hope so.  I fucking hate when this happens.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: jimmy olsen on May 15, 2022, 06:30:56 AM
Everything I've seen so far regarding politics looks good.
Title: Re: Victoria 3
Post by: FunkMonk on May 16, 2022, 09:45:09 PM
This could prove to be the greatest Paradox game of all time :hmm: