• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Victoria 3 - Dev Diary #64 - Post-Release Plans

16_9.jpg

Hello and welcome to the first of many post-release Victoria 3 dev diaries! The game may now be out at last (weird, isn’t it?) but for us that just means a different phase of work has begun, the work of post-release support. We’ve been quite busy collecting feedback, fixing bugs and making balance changes, and are now working on the free patches that will be following the release, the first of which is a hotfix that should already be with you at the time you read this.

Our plans are naturally not limited to just hotfixes though, and so the topic of this dev diary is to outline what you can expect us to be focusing on in the first few larger free patches. We will not be focusing on our long-term ambitions for the game today; we certainly have no shortage of cool ideas for where we could take Victoria 3 in the years to come, but right now our focus is post-release support and patches, not expansion plans.

However, before I start, I want to share my own personal thoughts on the release. Overall, I consider the release a great success, and have been blown away by the sheer amount of people that have bought and are now playing Victoria 3. I’ve had a hand in this project since its earliest design inception, and have been Game Director of Victoria 3 since I left Stellaris in late 2018, and while it certainly hasn’t been the easiest game to work on at times, it is by far the most interesting and fulfilling project I’ve ever directed. The overarching vision of the game - a ‘society builder’ that puts internal development, economy and politics in the driving seat - may not have changed much since then, but the mechanics and systems have gone through innumerable iterations (a prominent internal joke in the team is ‘just one more Market Rework, please?’) to arrive where we are today, at what I consider to be a great game, one that lives up to our vision - but one that could do with improvement in a few key areas.

V3-PostLaunch-ForLoc.jpg


The first of these areas is military: The military system, being very different from the military systems of previous Grand Strategy Games, is one of those systems that has gone through a lot of iterations. While I believe that we have landed on a very solid core of how we want military gameplay in Victoria 3 to function and we have no intention of moving back towards a more tactical system, it is a system that suffers from some interface woes and which could do with selective deepening and increasing player control in specific areas. A few of the things we’re looking into improving and expanding on for the military system follow here, in no particular order:
  • Addressing some of the rough edges in how generals function at the moment, such as improving unit selection for battles and balancing the overall progression along fronts
  • Adding the ability for countries to set strategic objectives for their generals
  • Increasing the visibility of navies and making admirals easier to work with
  • Improving the ability of players to get an overview of their military situation and exposing more data, like the underlying numbers behind battle sizes
  • Finding solutions for the issue where theaters can split into multiple (sometimes even dozens) of tiny fronts as pockets are created
  • Experimenting with controlled front-splitting for longer fronts

The second area is historical immersion: While we have always been upfront with the fact that Victoria 3 is a historical sandbox rather than a strictly historical game, we still want players to feel as though the events unfolding forms a plausible alt-history, and right now there are some expected historical outcomes that are either not happening often enough, or happening in such a way that they become immersion-breaking. Again, in no particular order, some areas targeted for improvement in the short term:
  • Ensuring the American Civil War has a decent chance to happen, happens in a way that makes sense (slave states rising up to defend slavery, etc), and isn’t easily avoidable by the player.
  • Tweaking content such as the Meiji Restoration, Alaska purchase and so on in a way that they can more frequently be successfully performed by the AI, through a mix of AI improvements and content tweaks
  • Working to expose and improve content such as expeditions and journal entries that is currently too difficult for players to find or complete
  • Ensuring unifications such as Italy, Germany and Canada doesn’t constantly happen decades ahead of the historical schedule, and increasing the challenge of unifying Italy and Germany in particular
  • General AI tweaks to have AI countries play in a more believable, immersive way

We're balancing cultural/religious tolerance laws by having more restrictive laws increase the loyalty of accepted pops, so there is an actual trade-off involved.
DD64 01.png

The third area is diplomacy. While I think what we do have here is quite good and not in need of any significant redesign, this is an area that could do with even more deepening and there’s some options we want to add to diplomacy and diplomatic plays:
  • ‘Reverse-swaying’, that is the ability to offer to join a side in a play in exchange for something
  • The ability to expand your primary demands in a diplomatic play beyond just one wargoal (though this has to be done in such a way that there’s still a reason for countries to actually back down)
  • More things to offer in diplomatic plays, like giving away your own land
  • Trading (or at least giving away) states
  • Foreign investment and some form of construction in other countries, at least if they’re part of your market
  • Improving and expanding on interactions with and from subjects, such as being able to grant and ask for more autonomy through a diplomatic action

While those are the major areas targeted for improvement, there are other things that fall outside the scope of either warfare, historical immersion and diplomacy where we’ve also heard your feedback and want to make improvements, a few examples being:
  • Making it easier to get an overview of your Pops and Pop factors such as Needs, Standard of Living and Radicals/Loyalists
  • Experimenting with autonomous private-sector construction and increasing the differences in gameplay between different economic systems (though as I’ve said many times, we are never going to take construction entirely out of the hands of the player)
  • Ironing out some of the kinks with the late-game economy and the AI’s ability to develop key resources such as oil and rubber
  • Making it more interesting and ‘competitive’ but also more challenging to play in a more conservative and autocratic style

One of the first mechanics we're tweaking is Legitimacy, increasing its impact and making it so the share of votes in government matters far more, especially with more democratic laws.
DD64 02.png


The above is of course not even close to being an exhaustive list of everything we want to do, and I can’t promise that everything on the list is going to make it into the first few patches, or that our priorities won’t change as we continue to read and take in your feedback, only that as it stands these are our plans for the near future. I will also remind once again that everything mentioned above is something we want for our free post-release patches. At some point we will start talking about our plans for expansions, but that is definitely not anytime soon!

What I can promise you though, is that we’re going to strive to keep you informed and do our best to give you insight into the post-release development process with dev diaries, videos and streams, just like we did before the game was released. I’ll return next week as we start covering the details of the work we’re doing for our first post-release patch. See you then!
 

Attachments

  • V3-PostLaunch-ForLoc.jpg
    V3-PostLaunch-ForLoc.jpg
    4,7 MB · Views: 0
  • 372Like
  • 193Love
  • 33
  • 23
  • 19
  • 7Haha
Reactions:
There are lots of great points! I do hope tho that you share plans for Unification for Italy and Germany in the design phase and not when its too late for us to react.

Simply making them harder doesnt cut it for me if it doesnt reflect the struggles they had. An early 1848/49 Germany with Austria could be very much historical. But especially the Union with Austria should reflect on the reasons it failed historically. If Austria is a monarchy it doesnt want to give up the Non cisleithanian lands.

Furthermore a recently united Germany should more look like e federal system with the federated countries having either an autonomy level like a subject or special falvor or a journal that forges them into the entities weve come to know now.

Also this character should vastly differ on who forms it. A crown from the gutter or even no crown should feel a lot more different than a unification from the top for just a small German solution.
 
My take on the features mentioned here:

-I haven't experimented warfare much on my own, so not sure what it is lacking. But it is hard to easily understand what is going on in wars of other states. Not just during warfare, but getting informed on when and why a war starts and ends. I'm sure somewhere are options to tweak notification settings, but I haven't found them. But nevertheless should as default be a notifier when two neighbouring great powers start to fight each other

-Historical immersion is somewhat lacking. The events happening to me so far have been entertaining, but small in scope. In case the AI has gotten some of the juicier stuff, then I would have liked to be informed in some way. For example Italy and North German Federation were formed, but I just happened to notice both when looking at the map. I even had an interest in North Germany

-Foreign investment abroad or at least to puppets would make it much easier to balance markets and make historical sense. Think for example the rush to extract rubber - it was not spontaneous local decisions. This should also help in the "AI ability to develop key resources in late game" thing. It might not make sense for a puppet to focus on dye production instead of goods that can be used to industrialise such as iron and tools. But for the master dyes is all that matters.


-I have a hard time currently knowing why my pops are, why they are happy or not and what would happen if I changed laws. Please do improve not just Pop overviews, but ability to easily drill down. For example I might want to look at peasants, catholics or catholic peasants. Additionally I do not know how big an impact certain good has to which pops. I can make a hunch that acquiring a puppet with coffee production makes some Pops happier, but who actually demand coffee and who at the moment can't afford it? No idea.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
I know I'll get some flack for this but, language like



"I consider the release a great success, and have been blown away by the sheer amount of people that have bought and are now playing Victoria 3" and



"to arrive where we are today, at what I consider to be a great game, one that lives up to our vision"



It's a lot of patting ourselves on the back despite the fact that the game has a 60 on steam, and a 5/10 on meta critic. That's barely passing and failing respectively.



The language makes it feel like the goal was just to make a lot of money, much less a good game, even less to make a worthy sequel to Vic II. And I think that's what a lot of people feel. The game lacks a lot as a sequel to Vic II with so many features vanishing. And maybe Vic II fans like me need to accept it never will be. That it it's own game, and we'll just have to deal with that. That doesn't mean I have to like it, but if the priotiy was making money out of me, well you got me. It took me longer than two hours to realize everything it was so you win my 50 dollars.



I was really expecting some catharsis, we see where we went wrong, we understand why old fans are disapointed here's how we can compromise half way and it just feels like instead I'm getting, we win, you lose.
 
  • 11
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Hello and welcome to the first of many post-release Victoria 3 dev diaries! The game may now be out at last (weird, isn’t it?) but for us that just means a different phase of work has begun, the work of post-release support. We’ve been quite busy collecting feedback, fixing bugs and making balance changes, and are now working on the free patches that will be following the release, the first of which is a hotfix that should already be with you at the time you read this.

Our plans are naturally not limited to just hotfixes though, and so the topic of this dev diary is to outline what you can expect us to be focusing on in the first few larger free patches. We will not be focusing on our long-term ambitions for the game today; we certainly have no shortage of cool ideas for where we could take Victoria 3 in the years to come, but right now our focus is post-release support and patches, not expansion plans.

However, before I start, I want to share my own personal thoughts on the release. Overall, I consider the release a great success, and have been blown away by the sheer amount of people that have bought and are now playing Victoria 3. I’ve had a hand in this project since its earliest design inception, and have been Game Director of Victoria 3 since I left Stellaris in late 2018, and while it certainly hasn’t been the easiest game to work on at times, it is by far the most interesting and fulfilling project I’ve ever directed. The overarching vision of the game - a ‘society builder’ that puts internal development, economy and politics in the driving seat - may not have changed much since then, but the mechanics and systems have gone through innumerable iterations (a prominent internal joke in the team is ‘just one more Market Rework, please?’) to arrive where we are today, at what I consider to be a great game, one that lives up to our vision - but one that could do with improvement in a few key areas.

View attachment 902219

The first of these areas is military: The military system, being very different from the military systems of previous Grand Strategy Games, is one of those systems that has gone through a lot of iterations. While I believe that we have landed on a very solid core of how we want military gameplay in Victoria 3 to function and we have no intention of moving back towards a more tactical system, it is a system that suffers from some interface woes and which could do with selective deepening and increasing player control in specific areas. A few of the things we’re looking into improving and expanding on for the military system follow here, in no particular order:
  • Addressing some of the rough edges in how generals function at the moment, such as improving unit selection for battles and balancing the overall progression along fronts
  • Adding the ability for countries to set strategic objectives for their generals
  • Increasing the visibility of navies and making admirals easier to work with
  • Improving the ability of players to get an overview of their military situation and exposing more data, like the underlying numbers behind battle sizes
  • Finding solutions for the issue where theaters can split into multiple (sometimes even dozens) of tiny fronts as pockets are created
  • Experimenting with controlled front-splitting for longer fronts

The second area is historical immersion: While we have always been upfront with the fact that Victoria 3 is a historical sandbox rather than a strictly historical game, we still want players to feel as though the events unfolding forms a plausible alt-history, and right now there are some expected historical outcomes that are either not happening often enough, or happening in such a way that they become immersion-breaking. Again, in no particular order, some areas targeted for improvement in the short term:
  • Ensuring the American Civil War has a decent chance to happen, happens in a way that makes sense (slave states rising up to defend slavery, etc), and isn’t easily avoidable by the player.
  • Tweaking content such as the Meiji Restoration, Alaska purchase and so on in a way that they can more frequently be successfully performed by the AI, through a mix of AI improvements and content tweaks
  • Working to expose and improve content such as expeditions and journal entries that is currently too difficult for players to find or complete
  • Ensuring unifications such as Italy, Germany and Canada doesn’t constantly happen decades ahead of the historical schedule, and increasing the challenge of unifying Italy and Germany in particular
  • General AI tweaks to have AI countries play in a more believable, immersive way

We're balancing cultural/religious tolerance laws by having more restrictive laws increase the loyalty of accepted pops, so there is an actual trade-off involved.
View attachment 901288
The third area is diplomacy. While I think what we do have here is quite good and not in need of any significant redesign, this is an area that could do with even more deepening and there’s some options we want to add to diplomacy and diplomatic plays:
  • ‘Reverse-swaying’, that is the ability to offer to join a side in a play in exchange for something
  • The ability to expand your primary demands in a diplomatic play beyond just one wargoal (though this has to be done in such a way that there’s still a reason for countries to actually back down)
  • More things to offer in diplomatic plays, like giving away your own land
  • Trading (or at least giving away) states
  • Foreign investment and some form of construction in other countries, at least if they’re part of your market
  • Improving and expanding on interactions with and from subjects, such as being able to grant and ask for more autonomy through a diplomatic action

While those are the major areas targeted for improvement, there are other things that fall outside the scope of either warfare, historical immersion and diplomacy where we’ve also heard your feedback and want to make improvements, a few examples being:
  • Making it easier to get an overview of your Pops and Pop factors such as Needs, Standard of Living and Radicals/Loyalists
  • Experimenting with autonomous private-sector construction and increasing the differences in gameplay between different economic systems (though as I’ve said many times, we are never going to take construction entirely out of the hands of the player)
  • Ironing out some of the kinks with the late-game economy and the AI’s ability to develop key resources such as oil and rubber
  • Making it more interesting and ‘competitive’ but also more challenging to play in a more conservative and autocratic style

One of the first mechanics we're tweaking is Legitimacy, increasing its impact and making it so the share of votes in government matters far more, especially with more democratic laws.
View attachment 901289

The above is of course not even close to being an exhaustive list of everything we want to do, and I can’t promise that everything on the list is going to make it into the first few patches, or that our priorities won’t change as we continue to read and take in your feedback, only that as it stands these are our plans for the near future. I will also remind once again that everything mentioned above is something we want for our free post-release patches. At some point we will start talking about our plans for expansions, but that is definitely not anytime soon!

What I can promise you though, is that we’re going to strive to keep you informed and do our best to give you insight into the post-release development process with dev diaries, videos and streams, just like we did before the game was released. I’ll return next week as we start covering the details of the work we’re doing for our first post-release patch. See you then!
 
I was really hoping to see the performance issues addressed in this post. I hope that you and your team are going to solve the performance issues that so many people have when getting to the middle and late game. This should be a priority before even thinking of gameplay tweaks and add-ons if you ask me.
Performance is less "an area of the game to callout" and more an area we are constantly working on. Developers are taking rotational shifts on performance to ensure all the changes done to the AI by myself and other developers doesn't cause too many problems.

We have a late game pop fragmentation fix, but it needed more testing before we felt comfortable putting it in the hotfixes.
 
  • 26Like
  • 6
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
Hello and welcome to the first of many post-release Victoria 3 dev diaries! The game may now be out at last (weird, isn’t it?) but for us that just means a different phase of work has begun, the work of post-release support. We’ve been quite busy collecting feedback, fixing bugs and making balance changes, and are now working on the free patches that will be following the release, the first of which is a hotfix that should already be with you at the time you read this.

Our plans are naturally not limited to just hotfixes though, and so the topic of this dev diary is to outline what you can expect us to be focusing on in the first few larger free patches. We will not be focusing on our long-term ambitions for the game today; we certainly have no shortage of cool ideas for where we could take Victoria 3 in the years to come, but right now our focus is post-release support and patches, not expansion plans.

However, before I start, I want to share my own personal thoughts on the release. Overall, I consider the release a great success, and have been blown away by the sheer amount of people that have bought and are now playing Victoria 3. I’ve had a hand in this project since its earliest design inception, and have been Game Director of Victoria 3 since I left Stellaris in late 2018, and while it certainly hasn’t been the easiest game to work on at times, it is by far the most interesting and fulfilling project I’ve ever directed. The overarching vision of the game - a ‘society builder’ that puts internal development, economy and politics in the driving seat - may not have changed much since then, but the mechanics and systems have gone through innumerable iterations (a prominent internal joke in the team is ‘just one more Market Rework, please?’) to arrive where we are today, at what I consider to be a great game, one that lives up to our vision - but one that could do with improvement in a few key areas.

View attachment 902219

The first of these areas is military: The military system, being very different from the military systems of previous Grand Strategy Games, is one of those systems that has gone through a lot of iterations. While I believe that we have landed on a very solid core of how we want military gameplay in Victoria 3 to function and we have no intention of moving back towards a more tactical system, it is a system that suffers from some interface woes and which could do with selective deepening and increasing player control in specific areas. A few of the things we’re looking into improving and expanding on for the military system follow here, in no particular order:
  • Addressing some of the rough edges in how generals function at the moment, such as improving unit selection for battles and balancing the overall progression along fronts
  • Adding the ability for countries to set strategic objectives for their generals
  • Increasing the visibility of navies and making admirals easier to work with
  • Improving the ability of players to get an overview of their military situation and exposing more data, like the underlying numbers behind battle sizes
  • Finding solutions for the issue where theaters can split into multiple (sometimes even dozens) of tiny fronts as pockets are created
  • Experimenting with controlled front-splitting for longer fronts

The second area is historical immersion: While we have always been upfront with the fact that Victoria 3 is a historical sandbox rather than a strictly historical game, we still want players to feel as though the events unfolding forms a plausible alt-history, and right now there are some expected historical outcomes that are either not happening often enough, or happening in such a way that they become immersion-breaking. Again, in no particular order, some areas targeted for improvement in the short term:
  • Ensuring the American Civil War has a decent chance to happen, happens in a way that makes sense (slave states rising up to defend slavery, etc), and isn’t easily avoidable by the player.
  • Tweaking content such as the Meiji Restoration, Alaska purchase and so on in a way that they can more frequently be successfully performed by the AI, through a mix of AI improvements and content tweaks
  • Working to expose and improve content such as expeditions and journal entries that is currently too difficult for players to find or complete
  • Ensuring unifications such as Italy, Germany and Canada doesn’t constantly happen decades ahead of the historical schedule, and increasing the challenge of unifying Italy and Germany in particular
  • General AI tweaks to have AI countries play in a more believable, immersive way

We're balancing cultural/religious tolerance laws by having more restrictive laws increase the loyalty of accepted pops, so there is an actual trade-off involved.
View attachment 901288
The third area is diplomacy. While I think what we do have here is quite good and not in need of any significant redesign, this is an area that could do with even more deepening and there’s some options we want to add to diplomacy and diplomatic plays:
  • ‘Reverse-swaying’, that is the ability to offer to join a side in a play in exchange for something
  • The ability to expand your primary demands in a diplomatic play beyond just one wargoal (though this has to be done in such a way that there’s still a reason for countries to actually back down)
  • More things to offer in diplomatic plays, like giving away your own land
  • Trading (or at least giving away) states
  • Foreign investment and some form of construction in other countries, at least if they’re part of your market
  • Improving and expanding on interactions with and from subjects, such as being able to grant and ask for more autonomy through a diplomatic action

While those are the major areas targeted for improvement, there are other things that fall outside the scope of either warfare, historical immersion and diplomacy where we’ve also heard your feedback and want to make improvements, a few examples being:
  • Making it easier to get an overview of your Pops and Pop factors such as Needs, Standard of Living and Radicals/Loyalists
  • Experimenting with autonomous private-sector construction and increasing the differences in gameplay between different economic systems (though as I’ve said many times, we are never going to take construction entirely out of the hands of the player)
  • Ironing out some of the kinks with the late-game economy and the AI’s ability to develop key resources such as oil and rubber
  • Making it more interesting and ‘competitive’ but also more challenging to play in a more conservative and autocratic style

One of the first mechanics we're tweaking is Legitimacy, increasing its impact and making it so the share of votes in government matters far more, especially with more democratic laws.
View attachment 901289

The above is of course not even close to being an exhaustive list of everything we want to do, and I can’t promise that everything on the list is going to make it into the first few patches, or that our priorities won’t change as we continue to read and take in your feedback, only that as it stands these are our plans for the near future. I will also remind once again that everything mentioned above is something we want for our free post-release patches. At some point we will start talking about our plans for expansions, but that is definitely not anytime soon!

What I can promise you though, is that we’re going to strive to keep you informed and do our best to give you insight into the post-release development process with dev diaries, videos and streams, just like we did before the game was released. I’ll return next week as we start covering the details of the work we’re doing for our first post-release patch. See you then!
That's what I want to hear from u. Guys we are waiting this game about the at least 10 Years please work hard. Fix the bugs and crushes and do some flavors, war mechanics and etc. You have to make this game more playable if u not
U gone lose your loyal fan base that's for sure
 
are there plans to make Russian colonization of Hokkaido, or the USA's colonization of Alberta/Saskatchewan happen less often, or have ways that those territories are transferred back to the "correct" owner to make the map less jarring, more historical

and have decisions like the transfer of northwestern states happen more often by the AI?
That's on General AI balance and trust me its in the feedback lists, we've got ideas and hope to get to it soon but as you will notice I'm not promising when because that one is likely 100% on me to fix when I get time and I've already got a fun backlog of things to tweak for you all.
 
  • 22Like
  • 3
  • 2Love
Reactions:
I have to ask - is reworking and improving the game UI part of these post-release plans? There are tons of forum suggestions and even mods around UI improvements, so clearly players feel the current state of UI leaves something to be desired.
See my above comment in regards to performance UI/UX work is a constant iteration and bug treatment - it can relate to the gameplay areas of the game we called out above or be something that Aron, Henrik, and I are looking to address. We keep eyes on the mods that pop up and see what stuff we can do better in game and such.
 
  • 24Like
  • 3
  • 2Love
Reactions:
I don't know if I am doing something extremely wrong but as a player, unifying Italy as Sardinia-Pedimont is a titanic task and I only managed to do so near the 1900s and with extensive save scumming, and just "forming Italy without wrestling the Italian states under Austria out of them.

Apparently the AI does it very consistently and early and IDK how but I really think unification for Italy needs to be easier rather than more difficult unless there is some sort of secret trick that I can't understand (and can't be found online apparently)

You need to be somewhat aggressive with Austria early and grab Lombardy to become a major power then be friendly to Italian minors to do they’ll join your customs union and unify. Afterwards it’s a fairly straightforward.
 
See my above comment in regards to performance UI/UX work is a constant iteration and bug treatment - it can relate to the gameplay areas of the game we called out above or be something that Aron, Henrik, and I are looking to address. We keep eyes on the mods that pop up and see what stuff we can do better in game and such.
For example Anbeeld mod?
Bigger economies so more trade can go on.
According to its comments apparently it hurts tiny countries.

1F288DA33CD0F1FB83B667A45373C9727F4ADA5B
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Having a blast with the game! Thanks to the team for the efforts.

Quite keen to see how the tweaks work, especially foreign investment mechanics.

My main complaint so far is the fact that I can't use compression-based refrigeration of meat as a production method and recreate the glorious technology history of my hometown in New Zealand. ;)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Foreign investment! This is what I'm waiting for. I've been playing Prussia lately and made a Brazilian puppet, they hardly produced rubber. And I thought it would be fun to be able to invest in other countries' economies. Everyone would benefit from this. I am curious how you will solve it. It would be nice if some laws determined whether we allow investments in our country. It would also be nice if, depending on the law, some of the profits from the factories we built would go to us when we have a planned economy or when we have laissez-faire capitalists in our country have grown up. I can already imagine these possibilities... One could make a state made up of wealthy capitalists, making other states dependent on itself through investment. Other economies would work for my prosperuty. I want like that.
I am waiting impatiently for you to do something in this direction, I believe that you will come up with something nice!
I cordially greet all of you!
/And sorry for mistakes, English is not my language;)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Yeah I've got a few outstanding notes to myself to see what I can do to address that but not make it a painful process as a result. Don't want to just nerf tech spread into the ground though, need to find that middleground. But I am keeping eyes on it, and if you don't see it in the next few patches thats because I'm working on a few other things first.
Tech spread in Asia compared to Europe is a pain. It's one of the reasons why Japan is so horrible to play RN. On top of everything else minmaxing innovation is a MUST.
 
1.) France is, It must be said, far, far too powerful for this era of history. While post-napoleonic france (Circa the beginning of this game) was far from powerless, it was also not the all-encompassing land power that it had been in the early 18th century., and its economic power was held back by the lack of international trade presence and colonial holdings In the game, France remains utterly unassailable in Land combat for the entire duration of the game. Their offense and defensive strength are leagues ahead of other states, regardless of technological levels, and it becomes extremely frustrating to play against them in any European conflict unless every other Great Power jumps on them with both boots - and even then, the outcome is in doubt.

With this vastly superior land-army, France can overcome pretty much every single other negative in terms of Naval combat (It's navies suck, and spend most of the game sucking)simply by virtue of being able to *outlast* every single War. No one can invade the French mainland (I watched Austria, Germany, Italy and the UK execute a land-invasion of France Circa 1890s, and the Front never moved an *inch*.), ergo, no one can actually win a war against France.

Combine this with in-built advantages over *every other economy on earth*, including and *Especially* The British Empire, France is immune to all of the political turmoil and struggles of the 19th century. It sails through the entire game, utterly unbothered, unaffected, and indomitable in power, straight through to the Modern Age.
Interesting - my experience so far is also that France is overtuned, but not nearly to this degree. Indeed, my major problem with France wasn't that they were winning every conflict, because they were frequently getting stuck in the Austrian Alps and grinding themselves into paste in Alsace (though Prussia never did manage to form Germany). My issue was that their economy after they turned Italy into a Dominion became such a juggernaut that the only three players in the economic game were myself (Spain), France, and Britain.

When the French had a communist revolution while I was off trying to fix the global rubber and oil supply, they crashed my economy to the tune of losing 6000 steel and glass buy orders, and because the remainder of the world were relying on my market for exports of one critical goods or another (tools, steel, coal, explosives, engines, glasswork) the resulting economic recession made the great depression look like a minor dip. Funnily enough, this did also cripple the French militarily because I was their main supplier of ammunition and ironclads, so the resulting communist wars involving 1300 French battalions of barely-supplied infantry was absolutely browbeaten by Austria.

TL;DR: I had a very different experience, but yes, France is indeed overtuned. The fact that France can pretty much ignore the naval stuff has more to do with the Navy system being opaque and less useful than it should be in a game named after the Empress of the largest navy on the planet (who notably "rules the waves").
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I really hope adiditonal primary wargoals cost a lot more infamy then. Like 3 or four times as much. Because as I have pointed out already the game it too blobby as is. Otherwise I see no reason to ever put anything but primary war goals in there and the game gets even more of a blobfest.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
I know that you developers are working non-stop and aprecciate it, but any idea how long until some of these things come out? I am split bewteen waiting until good changes come out and playing more (the trade routes cost I admit annoy me a little)
 
When it comes to military system I have couple of comments:
1. It would be cool to represent military high staff of different countries. Like for example USA having better generals on average because they actually have to have qualifications and they had to to army stuff to get in the leading seat. Unlike Austria where you have to be a noble and... that's basically it. Sure, right know you have only two options, but they are randomly generated so it doesn't represent those kinds of things well.
2. Represent main strategies better. By that I mean IRL some military innovations took pretty long to introduce due to higher ups thinking they know better. (Stuff like British military finding submachine guns "not honourable" until Germans showed them how useful they are during WW2.) And change of tactics that were pretty rapid during wartime, but very slow during peace. (Like France in 1914.)
3. I think that the equipment if too abstract. And with how it's now represented doesn't allow to have weird scenarios that happened IRL (Like Austria-Hungary equipping some units with black-powder guns.), or the British strategy of keeping it's subjects weapons one generation lower than it's own after some rebellions in India.
4. Some sort of chain of command would be pretty nice even if completely fictional. Mainly so if a general dies in battle or during war his army got immidietly a new one. (TBH. I have no idea what happens in current build in that situation, but I just guess that the battalions teleport back to HQ.)
5. Let us move armies between HQs, even at cost of attrition or more infrastructure cost to represent supplies from HQ.
6. Infrastructure should affect how fast the army can move and during movement the army should occupy some of if. (Like c'mon it should take some effort to move an army from Poland to China, and then return back. Not just teleport it!)
Also I forgot to add that currently navies are way too abstract. Like I don't think I've ever lost a ship and if I did, I immediately build new one. Switching from man of wars to aircraft carries and submarines? One click of a button and it happens pretty instant. Doesn't building one take couple of years and tons of money IRL?
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Also I forgot to add that currently navies are way too abstract. Like I don't think I've ever lost a ship and if I did, I immediately build new one. Switching from man of wars to aircraft carries and submarines? One click of a button and it happens pretty instant. Doesn't building one take couple of years and tons of money IRL?
That you beat the enemy fleet 10 times and it still has the same number of ships every time (with only less morale) and the same to battalions means that any enemy losses are not really taken into account
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Sorry, but I'll have to put a hard disagree on this. I am convinced that the "how" is at least as important as the final result. Two impossible things break my immersion twice. They don't cancel out, they sum.
Sure. I would rather the result be something closer to reality than virtually any other Paradox game, which is the intended effect of the change. YMMV.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
In regards to this.

Some production methods like barbed wire for livestock farms is unlocked after electric fences.
Now I`m no historian but I would assume barbed wire was a common item way before electric fences :D
Not as much as you'd think - 1886 versus 1867 - but yeah, electric fences should probably be on a later tech.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: