Grand Strategy Victoria 3

[Fedora Master]

I ended the Mexico-Texas war at the beginning of the game ONE WEEK into the first engagement because I caught Santa Ana.

 

[RobotSquirrel]

Also this game needs foreign investment. Ideally you should be able to profit somehow from owning foreign buildings but even if you can't do it directly I wish you could develop your customs union's natural resources for them. As Brazil my immediate neighbors tend to never actually build their mines even though mine are maxxed and, say, coal is 50% more expensive in the common market.

I definitely agree there, its infuriating as South Australia to see NSW and WA sitting on gold mines and not touching them. The AI is stupid.

 

[CthuluIsSpy]

Watching this dumpster fire made install Vic2 again.

Yeah I watched Arch break down the game and it doesn't look interesting at all.
Problem is though is that vanilla Vic2 also has some stupid with how capricious the economy system is :/

At least it doesn't have teleporting armies and politics though.

 

[whydoibother]

Yeah I watched Arch break down the game and it doesn't look interesting at all.

Have you considered playing video games to see if you like them, rather than watching other people play and adopting their views?

 

[CthuluIsSpy]

Yeah I watched Arch break down the game and it doesn't look interesting at all.

Have you considered playing video games to see if you like them, rather than watching other people play and adopting their views?

>Weak warfare system
> Every country operates the same
> No westernization mechanic
> No politics
> Barebones economics

Yeah no, I think I'll pass. It seems to be a real step down from Vic2, which had all that and only really suffers because of bugs. One of which just happens to affect the life-needs mechnanic and economy, which can quickly send everything to hell.

 

[whydoibother]

>Weak warfare system

I don't care. War was always shit in this game. As long as they fix the bugs, I'll be fine with this AI driven EU4 system.

> Every country operates the same

I dislike this too. I'm sure they'll drip feed niche governments with patches, like in their games. All countries should have the potential for all systems, but some standouts should have their unique options.

> No westernization mechanic

"West"ternization is probably not politicorrect, and they dropped it for that. Eurocentric, progressive view of history, etc. But honestly they should've had a "modernization" mechanic to describe the move from landlords and clans to businessmen and capital.

> No politics

Game has politics same as before, I don't get this.

> Barebones economics

Again, it has markets, in which supply and demand drive prices, there's tariffs and employment and so on. Seems fine.

You should try to play the game, to see if you like the game. Stop asking YouTube Jesus what to play, you pleb.

 

[CthuluIsSpy]

Warfare is even worse than Eu4 though. In Eu4 you still had to worry about troop movements and terrain. You still had to worry about losing a fort and getting your army cut off. You had to worry about supply limits and organize your forces to adapt to it. Now it seems that armies just teleport and you don't actually seem to have control over where to attack. A nation on the other side of the world can instant transmission their forces just to stop you from attacking your neighbor.

In Vic2 you had different types of political movements, all with their own goals and ambitions. Now it seems they just put them all under "radicals." Which doesn't really make sense, as in Vic2 if you want the liberals or reactionaries off your back you had to adopt policies that they'll like or try to shift the political views of pops. Now it seems communists, reactionaries, conservatives and liberals are all the same.

 

[Delterius]

In Vic2 you had different types of political movements, all with their own goals and ambitions. Now it seems they just put them all under "radicals." Which doesn't really make sense, as in Vic2 if you want the liberals or reactionaries off your back you had to adopt policies that they'll like or try to shift the political views of pops. Now it seems communists, reactionaries, conservatives and liberals are all the same.

Uh, what? The interest groups aren't lumped together at all.

 

[CthuluIsSpy]

In Vic2 you had different types of political movements, all with their own goals and ambitions. Now it seems they just put them all under "radicals." Which doesn't really make sense, as in Vic2 if you want the liberals or reactionaries off your back you had to adopt policies that they'll like or try to shift the political views of pops. Now it seems communists, reactionaries, conservatives and liberals are all the same.

Uh, what? The interest groups aren't lumped together at all.

Aren't radicals all the same? How does pop political alignment work this time?

 

[whydoibother]

In Vic2 you had different types of political movements, all with their own goals and ambitions. Now it seems they just put them all under "radicals." Which doesn't really make sense, as in Vic2 if you want the liberals or reactionaries off your back you had to adopt policies that they'll like or try to shift the political views of pops. Now it seems communists, reactionaries, conservatives and liberals are all the same.

You can't outright ban a political movement, so you may get coalitions like "moderate socialists" which include landlords, church and commies, and now you have to pander to commies. However, each political group does have its own law preference, and its own meter on how mad it is. They'll revolt as coalitions, if your laws make multiple movements mad at the same time, regarding the same issue, but they are separate.

Aren't radicals all the same? How does pop political alignment work this time?

PLAY THE GAME.

 

[HeroMarine]

PLAY THE GAME.

Make me, bulgarian retard.

 

[CthuluIsSpy]

Aren't radicals all the same? How does pop political alignment work this time?

PLAY THE GAME.

When there's a free week, I probably will.
The alternative is to use...other means, but I don't want to bother going through that process, so right now reviews is what I have to go by.
There used to be a time where game demos were commonplace, but it seems such a miraculous technology has been lost to AAA developers.

 

[Malakal]

While I did tell you not to buy it on release it does look better than V1 and V2 on release did. Less broken too.

Did you know that V2 foreign investment factories don't produce goods? They just take up slots. Amazing game V2.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

The alternative is to use...other means

cs.rin.ru is your friend.

 

[Delterius]

In Vic2 you had different types of political movements, all with their own goals and ambitions. Now it seems they just put them all under "radicals." Which doesn't really make sense, as in Vic2 if you want the liberals or reactionaries off your back you had to adopt policies that they'll like or try to shift the political views of pops. Now it seems communists, reactionaries, conservatives and liberals are all the same.

Uh, what? The interest groups aren't lumped together at all.

Aren't radicals all the same? How does pop political alignment work this time?

No? Pops are separated into interest groups. Each interest group has a set of policies they support and they abhor. Having the policy in place lower their approval. Proposing a policy they detest lowers it further. Raise their approval and they become loyalists. Lower it too much and they radicalize. Go against the interests of very powerful interest groups and they form political movements to effect policy. Nothing is lumped together into a general radical group. They are all different.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

other means, but I don't want to bother

i bothered, and i kept playing terra invicta.

 

[Malakal]

Ah also remember when goods would just disappear in V2? I do. Or when you had to whack-a-mole rebels for 10 years after losing a war.

Anyway you are looking at previous V game with rose colored glasses. V3 systems already look better in many areas - trade for one, actual trade routes, actual markets.

Still needs time patches and mods to achieve potential. Core game cycle looks boring, with clicking to expand buildings forever...

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

Still needs time patches and mods to achieve potential.

do you remember the universally loathed trade routes in civ5? everyone hated them. every single human being. what happened to them? they've been used in a spin-off and in civ6 too, and probably are here to stay forever. i would't put too much trust and hope, even if it's paradox here, and they have the habit of completely changing and twisting game mechanics (see stellaris). almost always for the worst (see stellaris).

 

[whydoibother]

Ah also remember when goods would just disappear in V2? I do. Or when you had to whack-a-mole rebels for 10 years after losing a war.

Anyway you are looking at previous V game with rose colored glasses. V3 systems already look better in many areas - trade for one, actual trade routes, actual markets.

Still needs time patches and mods to achieve potential. Core game cycle looks boring, with clicking to expand buildings forever...

People will get mad over this, but a very good example is Civilization 4 vs Civilization 5.
Similar dynamic with Vicky 2 and 3, from what I've seen so far. And like Civ5 on release, V3 is very raw right now, but I have a feeling it will blossom.

 

[Stavrophore]

So if you try to naval invade and your navy amount is smaller than regiment amount you get hefty penalty. But there's no split button for armies. Am i missing something?

 

[fantadomat]

Hahahahahaha the game is total shit lol.

 

[Stavrophore]

"We wuz progressive before the switch, im no rayciss, we wuz true republican"

 

[Scarcity]

Hahahahahaha the game is total shit lol.

Communism Simulator

 

[Stavrophore]

This would be NEVER possible in Vic 2.

 

[Hace El Oso]

What's the issue there? If the intelligentsia and trade unions continue to be upset they'll leave the party.