Victoria 3

[crazy canuck]

The game has a pandemic event. If you thought that the random comets in EU2 were bad ....

In one of my games there was a devastating eruption in Alaska - just after I built a number of gold mining buildings there 

[Syt]

The game has a pandemic event. If you thought that the random comets in EU2 were bad ....

In one of my games there was a devastating eruption in Alaska - just after I built a number of gold mining buildings there 

I had floods and earthquakes in Argentina.

The pandemic (British Flu in my game) started in 1922. It's now 1927. It gives provinces a big increase in mortality. In the decisions you get the options how to deal with it: strict masking/distancing/shutdowns (wrecking your economy), nothing, and a measure in between. I don't feel any of the options does much. I was down to one province when it flared up again. Got it completely eradicated - and it still came back. I saw a tooltip that there's upß tp 4 waves per province.

[The Brain]

In one of my games there was a devastating eruption in Alaska

Burrito night at casa katmai.

[Tamas]

That legitimacy change that Tweet implies seems like very good and cannot wait for it.

Right now there is SOME risk to having a government of unpopular parties but its a trade-off usually well worth it to just weather the rise in radicals while you wait for your 10%-ish chance to pass some important law to be increased by events and pass. Making that harder could make things more difficult and realistic.

[crazy canuck]

In one of my games there was a devastating eruption in Alaska

Burrito night at casa katmai.

It was devastating. Not an extinction level event.

[Syt]

Apparently there's also another fix coming for trade. At the moment, country A might import good X from you, lowering the price in their market and increasing it in yours. This can lead to it now becoming profitable to re-import that good from country A, so you end up with circular trades. They aim to fix it in a patch, too.

[Syt]

I've completed two full games now. Argentina was fun, but immigration went through the roof for me. I went from 0.5M people to 20M by end of game. Mostly due to high standard of living, but I also had a happy intelligentsia for a while; one of their traits can give a hefty immigration bonus.

Prussia formed NGF in both games, and Germany in one (they turned commie by the end game). Russia remained autocratic and National Supremacy in both games. They had a few uprisings, but nothing serious. They also were quite active in colonizing Africa and grabbing that SE tip of Australia. France was quite active in Africa in both games, and was often fighting Prussia/Germany. Italy formed in my second game (in the first I prevented them as Austria), but they never went for the Italian parts of Austria, or Austria's minions (another common thing, from what I can see).

US was underwhelming in both games, struggling to take their historical territory from Mexico (and let's not mention the Canadian border gore). The African-American New Africa seceded in both games. In my second game slavery was alive and well in 1936. Their GDP never got off the ground in either game. They're quite eager to grab colonies in Africa, though.

Britain was also not performing well. While staying at the top and having the biggest GDP, they didn't expand much in terms of colonies. They had small colonies in Africa, but they (or the Aussies) never expanded their Oceanic territory. In my Argentina game, where I was their protectorate, they tried to make me a Dominion through force, but I managed to hold them off (their war reparations were a huge jump start to my economy). They fought more wars against tiny nations in Asia, but at least twice they had to give up and owed them war reparations.

Overall, some constructs seem a bit stable - Russia seems to have little issue holding things together. Austria in my recent game remained autocratic and discriminating against their non-Germans till the end (though Slovakia broke free in that one). There were some uprisings that I saw, but they were all ideology based and crushed. Similar with Russia, or China.

[The Brain]

In one of my games there was a devastating eruption in Alaska

Burrito night at casa katmai.

It was devastating. Not an extinction level event.

[Zanza]

Currently playing as Brazil. You start with two active wars in your North and South. I quickly concluded these and annexed the breakaway parts of my country.

Brazil starts in a fairly strong position: barely any big power interest in South America and a fairly strong economy. 

I bowed to my Paradox game instincts and used that to quickly conquer Uruguay, Paraguay (which had surprisingly good industry for being a shithole in real life) and then puppeted Colombia (New Grenada), Ecuador, and finally Argentina. I guess I can puppet or conquer Chila, Bolivia-Peru and Venezuela as well unless one of the great powers intervenes.

I am notorious now, but I have cordial relationships with the US, UK, and France thanks to improving relations. So great power intervention is less likely.

I had the offer to join the British customs union, but refused. I expect to be a great power eventually (currently at #9 or #10), so having my own customs union seems more sensible. Not sure what the upside of joining some bigger powers customs union is. Having their local prices? 

[Syt]

Unless I understand incorrectly, being part of their market means having direct access to all members' produced goods, and being able to sell directly to them - without the need for setting up trade routes/using convoys.

So it can help you out with supply early in the game, if you can produce things at prices that are competitive in their market. As Belgium my economy really took off once I joined the British customs union (and was thrown in turmoil when the French pulled an obligation to have me join their market, as suddenly my industry's prices got reset to their levels).

So I guess it mostly depends on how much you're limited by trade, and how big your own market is eventually going to be. In my Argentina game I never really expanded my market much, but I didn't have to - the British market was always in need of stuff that I could produce at profit.

P.S.: If you're part of a larger market and get notifications about lack of input resources - hover over the notification. It will tell you how many buildings are affected, and hovering over the number tells you where they are. In my Argentina game I had constant complaints about lack of some items, but they didn't affect me; e.g. some buildings that hadn't made the jump from man-o-wars to ironclads in some other nation.

[Syt]

On the topic of markets:

On the one hand I am glad that V3 does away with the bonuses for having production chains in one state (e.g. coal, iron, steel in one area leading to more efficiencies), because it railroads you a fair bit in how you develop your economy. On the other hand, seeing Britain build crazy profitable tooling workshops, chemical plants and textile mills in the Falklands and NOTHING ELSE (no livestock, no whaling) also seems a bit wrong. 

(Not to mention that some goods, like electricity, are shared within a market. So I was the primary producer of electricity in late game, supplying most of Britain, India etc. with power from Argentina ... )

[Zanza]

Electricity should be like infrastructure. It was not really possible to transport it very far in the late 19th or early 20th century. 

[Syt]

I think treating electricity as infrastructure would be a good idea. Maybe even add services/transportation to the mix.

One of the weird outcomes with the current market system is that in order to trade with a foreign market you have to be able to have a route to the "owner" of the market.

That means that as landlocked Sikh Empire I can trade with Qing, Russia, and other neighbors via land. However, I'm unable to trade with Indian parts of the British market because "We have no way of reaching this Market." 

[Zanza]

  That's silly.

But many of the silly things seem like they can fix them. The economic and politics model underneath seems to work fairly well.

[Josephus]

Ok, so I think I'm grasping the economics of the game. So moving on to military. I'm playing as Two Sicilies, and just for fun I decided to join France in their war against Kongo, which is in the interior of Africa. Now I've mobilized one of my generals but I can't seem to give it orders. Both "advance" and "defend" don't have any fronts available.