Victoria 3 - Dev Diary #132 - Pivot of Empire

[BrotherJonathan]

I wonder why the 'our' was dropped from the quote, or at least some article still left. 'Pivot of our Empire' and 'Pivot of the Empire' sound a lot better than 'Pivot of Empire' to my ears

"Passage to India" could work, but they'd probably need to get permission from the Forster estate first.

 

[PerhapsItsChondoLal]

Second, I think you should add the Marathi kingdom of Thanjavur to the northeast of Pudukkotai. It was at this point ruled by it's last monarch, Raja Shivaji, and wouldn't be disestablished until 1855, and due to its size its absence is certainly noticeable.

Pretty sure it's in; I noticed a princely state in Tamil Nadu in roughly the same position as Thanjavur.

 

[Avian Overlord]

I rather like the title. Emphasizes uncertainty.

 

[Olliganak]

Pretty sure it's in; I noticed a princely state in Tamil Nadu in roughly the same position as Thanjavur.

I think that's actually Pudukkottai state, Thanjavur would be to it's northeast, along the coast.

 

[Oglesby]

Presumably it's search engine optimization, right? If you google "Victoria crown jewel" it's just going to show a bunch of Wikipedia articles. "Pivot of Empire" is much easier to search for.

I am not sure if that was meant for me as all I wanted was the return of an article before Empire. Searching "pivot of our empire" and everything was about the DLC except for the last item on the page which was the wiki for Victor Bruce where the quote came from.

"Passage to India" could work, but they'd probably need to get permission from the Forster estate first.

Yes, they might have had issues with it but had been able in the past to use book titles (it was a pattern for EU4 DLC).

 

[PerhapsItsChondoLal]

Also Shudras are Dalits, and why does the Kshatriya caste have no officer or soldier pops lol. Most British Indian officers and soldiers were Bhojpuri or Avadhi Kshatriyas or Brahmins.

 

[BrotherJonathan]

Yes, they might have had issues with it but had been able in the past to use book titles (it was a pattern for EU4 DLC).

True. But in those cases the books they used were hundreds of years old and definitely in the public domain.

 

[SaintPetersbourg]

The art for the announcement is so beautiful!

 

[SaintPetersbourg]

While you are focusing on India, please fix the spelling of the SINDHI culture. It is missing the 'h' in game which is just a random unjustified typo.

 

[Vityviktor]

I’m not against Carlist Wars being in the game. Back to you! Still waiting for that explanation on why a regional civil conflict over ideology and a couple provinces absolutely must be included before anything else

Vanilla Victoria 2 had Carlists since day one. Using core mechanics and a bit of Spanish unique flavor, Carlists appeared as unique Spanish Reactionary rebels that would try to install an Absolute Monarchy (instead of generic Reactionaries that would switch to Presidential Dictatorship once the country becomes a Republic). Of course it wasn't the most detailed and accurate depiction of this historical phenomenon, but they were actually a thing.

I just can't understand why Victoria 3 chose to completely erase any trace of them and turn Spain into a dull and flavorless Alternate History version of itself. They could've been a Reactionary Revolt with Carlos Maria Isidro as their leader fighting an ongoing war against Isabel-led Conservative government, all of this in game terms. They could've made a single unique Carlist ideology for some Spanish characters, or have them use generic ideologies. But currently we have nothing of that. It's been two years, and, as I said, V2 had them from the start.

And I think none of this is in contradiction with having South America or the Indian subcontinent depicted in more detail with upcoming DLCs... but come on.

PD: That regional civil conflict over ideology and a couple of provinces was the deadliest civil war in 19th century Europe.

 

[BrotherJonathan]

Vanilla Victoria 2 had Carlists since day one. Using core mechanics and a bit of Spanish unique flavor, Carlists appeared as unique Spanish Reactionary rebels that would try to install an Absolute Monarchy (instead of generic Reactionaries that would switch to Presidential Dictatorship once the country becomes a Republic). Of course it wasn't the most detailed and accurate depiction of this historical phenomenon, but they were actually a thing.

I just can't understand why Victoria 3 chose to completely erase any trace of them and turn Spain into a dull and flavorless Alternate History version of itself. They could've been a Reactionary Revolt with Carlos Maria Isidro as their leader fighting an ongoing war against Isabel-led Conservative government, all of this in game terms. They could've made a single unique Carlist ideology for some Spanish characters, or have them use generic ideologies. But currently we have nothing of that. It's been two years, and, as I said, V2 had them from the start.

And I think none of this is in contradiction with having South America or the Indian subcontinent depicted in more detail with upcoming DLCs... but come on.

PD: That regional civil conflict over ideology and a couple of provinces was the deadliest civil war in 19th century Europe.

Good point, but in fairness I think it's important to keep two things in mind:
1. At launch almost no country in Vic III had any type of nation/region specific content except for the USA, Ottomans, Japan, and China a little bit, so its not just a Spain issue.
2. There is a good chunk of the playerbase that is violently allergic to almost any type of nation/region specific content, seeing it as unnecessary railroading of the game experience. The devs almost definitely know this, and it might make them leery of adding things like the Carlist Wars.

 

[Jakuga]

All the whinning about the choice of region for this pack just makes me wanna play it even more

Keep up the good work, boys. I love more and more the direction this game is taking after each update o7

 

[Vityviktor]

Good point, but in fairness I think it's important to keep two things in mind:
1. At launch almost no country in Vic III had any type of nation/region specific content except for the USA, Ottomans, Japan, and China a little bit, so its not just a Spain issue.
2. There is a good chunk of the playerbase that is violently allergic to almost any type of nation/region specific content, seeing it as unnecessary railroading of the game experience. The devs almost definitely know this, and it might make them leery of adding things like the Carlist Wars.

Yeah, but:
1. Even without this national or regional specific content, the omision of the Carlists and the First Carlist War (even if it's a rebellion using core game mechanics) constitutes an example of lost content.
2. Adding a war that was already happening for three years (1833-1840) is not railroading, it's part of the setup. There are ongoing wars in Brazil (Grão-Pará and Piratini).

 

[greywulfos]

Yeah, but:
1. Even without this national or regional specific content, the omision of the Carlists and the First Carlist War (even if it's a rebellion using core game mechanics) constitutes an example of lost content.
2. Adding a war that was already happening for three years (1833-1840) is not railroading, it's part of the setup. There are ongoing wars in Brazil (Grão-Pará and Piratini).

Maybe they just don't want to implement unfinished content for a pretty complicated conflict and then wind up drawing other complaints. There are plenty of obscenely incomplete countries, there's plenty of lost content - i mean, when victoria 2 ended development, they had content for the sokoto caliphate and that certainly doesn't exist anymore. It strikes me as a bit odd to come into a thread about the new DLC being for a vitally important, dynamic and interesting part of the world, and then say "I think it's ridiculous that they haven't done the part of the world that I care about yet."

 

[Vityviktor]

Maybe they just don't want to implement unfinished content for a pretty complicated conflict and then wind up drawing other complaints. There are plenty of obscenely incomplete countries, there's plenty of lost content - i mean, when victoria 2 ended development, they had content for the sokoto caliphate and that certainly doesn't exist anymore. It strikes me as a bit odd to come into a thread about the new DLC being for a vitally important, dynamic and interesting part of the world, and then say "I think it's ridiculous that they haven't done the part of the world that I care about yet."

Unfinished content is still content, and I wasn't even hoping for the obvious Iberian DLC to be released on the first year, but simply waiting for a provisional solution. It's been two, and still counting. And yes, the same can be said about the Sokoto Caliphate.

Also, I don't know about others, but I'm not even complaining about the DLC. I was mainly addressing a questionable take about how the Carlist War was somehow unimportant or even a minor issue.

 

[CarbonBoy26]

Top two culture-related things which I hope to see:

1. An actual Ahom culture, instead of Thai Animists in Assam. It would also be nice for them to have their own religion, since I see Shan on map too.
2. Romani culture, their ancestors may have left India long ago, but they were part of the story of the 20th century. In fact a Brazilian president was Romani during the timespan of the game.