Can we finally have the Power Blocs removed, please?

[Hopciu]

Except there are plenty of features that I think work well (leverage, economic investments, foreign law changing, power bloc specialisations).

Leverage is ok, but it does not need Power Blocs - I've already explained it.
Economic Investments are not part of Power Bloc system.
Foreign law changing can be easily added as part of Leverage interactions - I've explained it before, no need for Power Blocs.
Power Bloc Specialisation - We already had Customs Unions before PBs, it worked pretty well. We have Defensive Alliances already implemented as a Diplomatic pacts. As for bonuses that Ideological Unions and Religious Convocations provide, I don't think we really need them, but if we wanted them badly, we still can have those as Diplomatic pacts. Again, no need for Power Blocs for it to function.

Especially since this is a DLC and therefore the majority (if not all) of what you dislike is installed by your choice.

Wrong. Power Blocs are not part of DLC, they were released along with 1.7 update.

 

[Hopciu]

I agree that PB’s should continue to be tweaked. But I don’t think the system will forever be useless- there’s things like a proper embassy system; appointed diplomats with a Pop farming system, PB rivals needed for war support in a proper war system, mandates that given proper bonuses in a research update or a trade update that mean more.

None of these should require Power Blocs. All these interactions could easily be made available for Countries themselves, and it wpuld also make much more sense.

I disagree that the whole system is rotten though, I’ve had a lot of fun competing or blocking someone’s leverage gain in MP

Again, tying Leverage directly to Countries would keep the fun that it provides, without having multitude of unnecessary, or outright harmful concepts.

 

[Prob32]

None of these should require Power Blocs. All these interactions could easily be made available for Countries themselves, and it wpuld also make much more sense.

Again, tying Leverage directly to Countries would keep the fun that it provides, without having multitude of unnecessary, or outright harmful concepts.

I feel like most PB’s leaders are player controlled countries - I get what you’re saying that leverage should be every country application not just PB. It probably would be a better system.

However, PDX sold a DLC on PB’s so they’re not inclined to revert it.

Also and most importantly PB’s work ok for what they are and it’s really not worth any dev time in the next two years given everything else that sorely needs a re-work:

Army fronts, Logistics and MAPI, navy, trade and companies come to mind.

Construction and technology, Production methods and finance also

I’d prioritize diplomacy tweaks to PB’s below all of the above items

 

[David29]

Leverage is ok, but it does not need Power Blocs - I've already explained it.
Economic Investments are not part of Power Bloc system.
Foreign law changing can be easily added as part of Leverage interactions - I've explained it before, no need for Power Blocs.
Power Bloc Specialisation - We already had Customs Unions before PBs, it worked pretty well. We have Defensive Alliances already implemented as a Diplomatic pacts. As for bonuses that Ideological Unions and Religious Convocations provide, I don't think we really need them, but if we wanted them badly, we still can have those as Diplomatic pacts. Again, no need for Power Blocs for it to function.

Wrong. Power Blocs are not part of DLC, they were released along with 1.7 update.

But again, it's all subjective personal opinion. That aside, do you understand that it's not a simple case of picking up a gameplay feature and dropping it into another part of the game? These features are tied together very delicately and trying to shoehorn just one of these - like leverage - into another area would require significant rewriting of code, and then much testing and patching. You would be causing more of the very issue you claim new DLC features create.

Also, who would be compensating me for the money I spent for the DLC?

 

[Fatherlorris]

These features are tied together very delicately

Could have fooled me.

 

[David29]

Could have fooled me.

Could you elaborate please?

 

[Hopciu]

But again, it's all subjective personal opinion.

Everything we post on this forum is a personal opinion, I see no reason to point it out every post.

That aside, do you understand that it's not a simple case of picking up a gameplay feature and dropping it into another part of the game? These features are tied together very delicately and trying to shoehorn just one of these - like leverage - into another area would require significant rewriting of code, and then much testing and patching. You would be causing more of the very issue you claim new DLC features create.

Yeah, sure, why improve anything? It would require rewritting the code! Not to say about patching and testing! Why did the devs ever release any patch, they should have just leave the game the same state as it was at release.

Also, who would be compensating me for the money I spent for the DLC?

Again, Power Blocs were part of FREE 1.7 update, not a part of DLC.

 

[David29]

Everything we post on this forum is a personal opinion, I see no reason to point it out every post.

Yeah, sure, why improve anything? It would require rewritting the code! Not to say about patching and testing! Why did the devs ever release any patch, they should have just leave the game the same state as it was at release.

Again, Power Blocs were part of FREE 1.7 update, not a part of DLC.

I think you need to check-up on what was included in the DLC, because only certain aspects of the Power Blocs were introduced for free in 1.7 - much more (including Monuments) required the DLC.

And you seem to be either misunderstanding my points or deliberately misrepresenting them. I'll be cordial and assume the former. Patching is very different to what you are proposing.

Here's a proposal: Why not simply rework Power Blocs? Remove/strip down the bonus perks and retain all the mechanics that work well?

 

[cdub8d]

I think the problem Vic 2 had was it was a game of click faster than the AI. Add to sphere before the ai bans you, ban the ai before the ai bans you, ect.

It was very close to being perfect, and would have probably been fixed if Vic 2 had a CK2 style development cycle.

I have no idea what a power bloc is trying to be, the whole thing is a mess.

Like a lot of things in Vicky 2, they threw the baby out with the bathwater

 

[Hopciu]

I think you need to check-up on what was included in the DLC, because only certain aspects of the Power Blocs were introduced for free in 1.7 - much more (including Monuments) required the DLC.

Just as I said, the Power Blocs were intruduced with free 1.7 update. It does not matter, which aspects came with it, and which were part of DLC - the concept itself was shipped freely with an update, and is NOT installed by my choice, in contrary to what you claimed.

Here's a proposal: Why not simply rework Power Blocs? Remove/strip down the bonus perks and retain all the mechanics that work well?

That's basically what I advocate for. The thing is, the only mechanic that works debatably well is Leverage. Keeping Power Blocs just for the sake of Leverage only is unnecessary. Leverage, as a form of indirect diplomatic influence, should be merged into diplomacy, just as diplomatic pacts, relations, attitude etc.

 

[RaccoonCity]

Its hard for me to understand how the mechanic got approved in development planning.

Yeah artificial flat modifiers for everyone out of thin air in a game that tries really hard to be a detailed simulator. Wtf?

I hope they do a rework of the mechanic soon.

 

[David29]

Just as I said, the Power Blocs were intruduced with free 1.7 update. It does not matter, which aspects came with it, and which were part of DLC - the concept itself was shipped freely with an update, and is NOT installed by my choice, in contrary to what you claimed.

Only Trade League Power Blocs were introduced for free. Other Power Blocs were introduced in the DLC. Why should I lose access to these which I have paid for?

That's basically what I advocate for. The thing is, the only mechanic that works debatably well is Leverage. Keeping Power Blocs just for the sake of Leverage only is unnecessary. Leverage, as a form of indirect diplomatic influence, should be merged into diplomacy, just as diplomatic pacts, relations, attitude etc.

No, you are advocating for the complete removal of Power Blocs. I'm saying that you could instead rework them.

And again I have to reiterate that moving features about is no straightforward process. UIs would need to be reworked, dependencies would need to be removed, potential bugs would need to be fixed, etc.

 

[Hopciu]

Its hard for me to understand how the mechanic got approved in development planning.

Yeah artificial flat modifiers for everyone out of thin air in a game that tries really hard to be a detailed simulator. Wtf?

I hope they do a rework of the mechanic soon.

Yeah, sometimes it really does seem, like there is some saboteour among decisive members of Paradox team. It's like every few updates, among bugfixes and useful improvements, we get some trashy, nonsensical concept, that no one asked for, thrown in.

The players want deeper economic and trade simulation.
- Let's slap some +15% bonuses here and there, name it "company", and call it a day.

The players complain, that the warfare system requires too much micromanagement.
- 3 unit types instead of 1. 12 general orders instead of 2. That will DEFINITELY help.

The players want deeper diplomacy, and some form of indirect influence.
- A monument of octopus wearing a top-hat is what we need.

 

[Hopciu]

Only Trade League Power Blocs were introduced for free. Other Power Blocs were introduced in the DLC.

Wrong, again. All of them were introduced with 1.7. DLC allows creation of other forms, than Trade Leagues. Nevertheless, all 5 starting Power Blocs are there at game start with DLC disabled, messing the game.

And again I have to reiterate that moving features about is no straightforward process. UIs would need to be reworked, dependencies would need to be removed, potential bugs would need to be fixed, etc.

Isn't that just normal development process? Every single patch, every single hotfix requires some degree of rework. This argument is so vague, that we should really cancel every single Thread in Suggestions subforum, if we considered it valid.

 

[osvaldopiazzolla]

I might be wrong, but I have

Its hard for me to understand how the mechanic got approved in development planning.

Yeah artificial flat modifiers for everyone out of thin air in a game that tries really hard to be a detailed simulator. Wtf?

I might be wrong, but I have the feeling that this strategic change was concomittant with a change in the dev team.

Also, there is another issue with Power Blocs : they have obviously been designed to be played as a power bloc leader. It is really a pain to try to interact with these mechanics if you're a "junior partner" which is a very sad design choice, probably based on metrics about how and what countries players were playing

 

[Voigt]

About Power Bloc statues giving ahistorical effects, since when do they?
If I remember correctly, the tooltip always said they give a big of flat prestige and a bit of urbanisation. I never saw migration attraction.
And I feel like having some statues or Arc d' Triumphs for a bit of prestige is fine.

Overall I agree that Mandates feels to gamey. Even if they are fun, they don't fit so well. As a junior member I like getting the "free" authority of police coordination or the market access if I broke free from UK for example but then quickly join another power bloc like France.

But yeah I was surprised at release, that there weren't plausible historical names for France and USA powerblocks that they are scripted to take.

Also as Germany, I got France into my powerbloc once. I had to put them on free trade and protected speech, aswell disband their created powerbloc (had to cheat for the last two things) and built lots in their country but I got them in. Although this didn't make a big difference for the game, after I accomplished that.

 

[FranklyJustNess]

About Power Bloc statues giving ahistorical effects, since when do they?
If I remember correctly, the tooltip always said they give a big of flat prestige and a bit of urbanisation. I never saw migration attraction.
And I feel like having some statues or Arc d' Triumphs for a bit of prestige is fine.

I think the effect they provide is an effect of Mandates that are in play, or something like this.

 

[FranklyJustNess]

I do feel there is a problem in this thread, and with how the Original Poster approaches the argument - Monuments.

Like okay, they suck. They are ahistorical weird buildings, that provide a weird selection of small bonuses, and are somehow built possible to be built in every single state, which makes them feel very not special at all. It's easily the worst feature of Power Blocs.

Do they ruin the game by existing and need to be removed? Not really... though maybe making some change to them would be nice, like maybe moving "Power Bloc embassy" from a diplomatic pact for leverage, into actually building one in their capital, using some of the Monument mechanics. While I feel few would really mind, if there was a major change to Monuments, or they just vanished in a patch, they also can stay in the game and whatever, they don't have much of an impact on anything.

But in this thread they are used quite heavily as the problem and the argument. You can't really have an argument, that Power Blocs are a good feature, or something that just needs some tweaks, without hearing "so do you think Monuments make sense?", and since they obviously don't, then the entire argument gets dismissed.

Like I can't really say I agree with many points by the Original Poster. To me it seems like they attribute a lot of completely unrelated issues to this one feature they don't like, and largely don't care about the effect on the game it would have - like there's no reason to remove naming of your Power Bloc, and yet they do list it as a necessary change.

But this "so you like octopus in a hat?" line of thinking really gets in the way of actually any meaningful argument. Power Blocs will be here to stay - they are a DLC feature that people paid for, you can't just remove it, even if it turns out not to be good, and Paradox just won't do it. Them receiving updates and changes and reworks is realistic though, but dismissing arguments by attacking the single weakest point of the DLC, which kinda sucks and barely anyone likes, is counterproductive.

 

[Voigt]

I am pretty sure I looked at the tooltip for the power bloc statues even with full mandates several times.

But I just realized something maybe. Are you people complaining that power blocs monuments give ahistorical boni, while haveing the gamerule active that national monuments give boni? I thought obviously people that don't like that like me, but then also complain on the forum will surely have either the prestige only or no monument effect active per default in all games.

Could be that power bloc monuments give ahsitorical boni with that gamerule, which I obviously never have active.

 

[Bisonmask]

Except there are plenty of features that I think work well (leverage, economic investments, foreign law changing, power bloc specialisations).

People are giving you way too much grace in this thread when you're saying nonsense like this. Power Bloc specialisations are maybe the most unbalanced feature Vic 3

Sovereign Empire is 5x better than Trade League and 10x better than the others. The Advanced Research, Offensive Cooperation, and Colonial Offices mandates are all ludicrously busted. In a way that is fundamentally unbalanceable too because no amount of infrastructure is worth simultaneously making whaling stations useful and getting the useful part of rapid advance but 10x better

If you know how to play the game I don't understand why you're trolling and if you don't I'm still not sure why you think power blocs are good as they exist