Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Eu2Vic: Feedback and Comments

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Show only dev responses
Having tested to converter on my Inca game, I think it looks very promising. A small detail though as to province conversions...



1.gif




2.gif




I know there may be problems viewing my screenshots, but I tried to post them anyways. One could get lucky yes?

Anyways I suggest the following province conversion:

Honduras => San Salvador + Gracias + Trujillo + Tegusigalpa
Costa Rica => Managua + Nueva Segovia
Nicaragua => Poyais + Tonglas
Mosquitos => Rivas + Nicoya + Sao José

It would make the Victoria output look more like the EU save.
 
New attempt

OK, I read the comments about the drawbacks of the 1795 scenario and decided to give the 1773 scenario a whirl instead. I played to 1780 and converted.

1. Technology levels are generally so low that most countries appear to be on the verge of discovering the pottery wheel. This does make sense, however, since we are 55+ years from 1836. Nice to see that some countries (notably the UK) are doing very well relatively.

2. However, most countries are still civilised. Only 14 manage to get the Uncivilised Razzie. Which is a bit annoying, given that military and naval tech levels are 5-10 steps behind the 1795 scenario.

3. Populations are still weird. The UK, for example, looks sensible at 22.4m, while China is still at 14.9m. In some part this problem looks insuperable using the current conversion methodology. I had a look at the EU2 save game files, and the UK has a "population" of 1.5m while China is at 0.9m. (BTW, London accounts for two fifths of the UK's population LOL.) We are stuck, I believe.

4. Armies are converting better. I actually get artillery. :) However, the horses are knackered and few.

5. Navies are converting well. Many more countries had ships than in the 1795 scenario, and three (the UK, France and the Netherlands) had decent sized navies. BTW are you converting transports or galleys?

So far so good, but the population problem is buzzing in my bonnet. Seriously suggest an alternative means of converting populations. In the meantime, I shall go back to writing some events. Best of luck!
 
Emre Yigit said:
So far so good, but the population problem is buzzing in my bonnet. Seriously suggest an alternative means of converting populations. In the meantime, I shall go back to writing some events. Best of luck!
Click to expand...

The population conversion works OK for completed GCs, though, right? That's the start. I wonder, was China's population in EU2 slashed to prevent them dominating?
 
About population thing, as i said before, why not put like 3 options in the program, that say "GC game" "1500" "1700" (this is just an example) and for the GC games the program uses the current option, for the 1500 games, it uses different ones, and for the 1700 game another options?, what do you think of this, that way you can stop the people complaining about pop.
Another thing, i said this before but i think noone knew this.
There is a country called Alabama, and there is a country called Louisiana too, the first converts into cherokee, and the second into nothing :S strange, here is a picture of the second, the Alabama picture is in my computer (i'm using another computer) i'll post it when i get the time.
ScreenSave1.jpg

ScreenSave2.jpg
 
Last edited:
germax said:
About population thing, as i said before, why not put like 3 options in the program, that say "GC game" "1500" "1700" (this is just an example) and for the GC games the program uses the current option, for the 1500 games, it uses different ones, and for the 1700 game another options?, what do you think of this, that way you can stop the people complaining about pop.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I think that's the consensus. However there's currently a question over whether the later-starting scenarios can be converted at all.

Another thing, i said this before and noone belived.
There is a country called Alabama, and there is a country called Louisiana too, the first converts into cherokee, and the second into nothing :S strange, here is a picture of the second, the Alabama picture is in my computer (i'm using another computer) i'll post it when i get the time
Click to expand...

Cool. If they have non-native cultured provinces they should turn into CSA....
 
Cool. If they have non-native cultured provinces they should turn into CSA....
Click to expand...

Thats the thing, they have native cultures, but only an european country would free them, right? so, they always become in latin techgroup countries, so i agree with you in that those countries should convert into CSA
 
Golden_Deliciou said:
The Great Wall of China, to the extent it ever had any military value, certainly had none by 1836. If the player wants to turn isolated fortresses into a comprehensive fortress system he'll have to fill in the gaps himself. There's just no way to turn a fortified province in EU2 into a fortified line in Victoria. It would just end up being a blob of fortified provinces with no shape to it.
Click to expand...

Forts in EU2 don't have the same effect as forts in Vicky. EU2 forts are basically city walls (and restricted to the immediate environs of the province's major city) while Vicky forts are province-wide defensive systems that have to be explicity manned. There really shouldn't be any conversion of forts at all.
 
montyP said:
It hasn't really been adressed yet. But that's a tough one as a EU2 culture can have many Vic cultures, and many Vic cultures does not have a EU2 counterpart... But I'm open for suggestions!
Click to expand...

Perhaps cultures could be mapped as provinces currently are (so anglosaxon would translate to british, yankee, and dixie, while gaelic would translate to scottish and irish, etc.). This might make for some weird setups compared to history, but of course most EU2 games will look very little like history by the end - doubly so for the ever-more-popular randomized games. Every Vic culture has to have an EU2 counterpart, it's just that most EU2 cultures encompass a large number of Vicky cultures.

Another thing we haven't converted is social reforms. That is convertable. Maybe keep some (minimum wage, maximum work hours) at 0 and convert the others to low values (trinkets...).

Then there is literacy... There has been a lot of good suggestions about how to handle that.
Click to expand...

IMHO social reforms shouldn't be converted. Do any nations in vanilla Vicky have social reforms at game start?

Literacy could be determined by some combination of domestic policies - e.g. plutocracy, innovative, free subjects, and infra tech all contribute to a nation's literacy, while serfdom, narrowminded, aristocracy, and low infra tech all reduce it. Maybe centralization would also be a factor.
 
Specterx said:
Every Vic culture has to have an EU2 counterpart, it's just that most EU2 cultures encompass a large number of Vicky cultures.
Click to expand...

No, not really. Just consider these Indian EU2 cultures as an example:

navajo
mississippian
shawnee
delaware
iroquis
delaware
huron
abenaki
naskapi
zapotek

I placed them within the Vic tribes cree, cherokee, dakota, inuit, mayan. But then I don't have much knowledge about the Indian tribes. :)


Specterx said:
IMHO social reforms shouldn't be converted. Do any nations in vanilla Vicky have social reforms at game start?
Click to expand...

Belgium has some.
 
Sute]{h said:
Having tested to converter on my Inca game, I think it looks very promising. A small detail though as to province conversions...

I know there may be problems viewing my screenshots, but I tried to post them anyways. One could get lucky yes?

Anyways I suggest the following province conversion:

Honduras => San Salvador + Gracias + Trujillo + Tegusigalpa
Costa Rica => Managua + Nueva Segovia
Nicaragua => Poyais + Tonglas
Mosquitos => Rivas + Nicoya + Sao José

It would make the Victoria output look more like the EU save.
Click to expand...

I changed them... :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Golden_Deliciou said:
The population conversion works OK for completed GCs, though, right? That's the start. I wonder, was China's population in EU2 slashed to prevent them dominating?
Click to expand...

I ran a game as Japan from 1419 to 1820 and the results world wide POP size vice were satisfactory.

China's pop is most definately slashed. I don't know for what reason. In my game as Japan I had a bigger pop than China at the end. :cool:
 
Emre Yigit said:
OK, I read the comments about the drawbacks of the 1795 scenario and decided to give the 1773 scenario a whirl instead. I played to 1780 and converted.

1. Technology levels are generally so low that most countries appear to be on the verge of discovering the pottery wheel. This does make sense, however, since we are 55+ years from 1836. Nice to see that some countries (notably the UK) are doing very well relatively.

2. However, most countries are still civilised. Only 14 manage to get the Uncivilised Razzie. Which is a bit annoying, given that military and naval tech levels are 5-10 steps behind the 1795 scenario.

3. Populations are still weird. The UK, for example, looks sensible at 22.4m, while China is still at 14.9m. In some part this problem looks insuperable using the current conversion methodology. I had a look at the EU2 save game files, and the UK has a "population" of 1.5m while China is at 0.9m. (BTW, London accounts for two fifths of the UK's population LOL.) We are stuck, I believe.

4. Armies are converting better. I actually get artillery. :) However, the horses are knackered and few.

5. Navies are converting well. Many more countries had ships than in the 1795 scenario, and three (the UK, France and the Netherlands) had decent sized navies. BTW are you converting transports or galleys?

So far so good, but the population problem is buzzing in my bonnet. Seriously suggest an alternative means of converting populations. In the meantime, I shall go back to writing some events. Best of luck!
Click to expand...

I will include different pop modifiers depending on scenario. This is what I have in mind; 1795 and 1773 gets *2 to POP, 1700 and 1683 gets *1.5 to POP. The other's get no moddifier.

Yes, transports and galley are converted, transports to clippers and galleys to frigattes (I couldn't find a better alternative:)).
 
OK, tested last night with the latest version and I picked up Austria using Ironfoundersson's game.

All Europe is civilized, the US & Québec as well.

Austria has many factories, but in the EU game had practically everything built, so the conversion worked as designed.

The only thing is that on the country selection screen, there are many flags appearing, we should limit it to 8 (there were 10 I think)
 
Specterx said:
Forts in EU2 don't have the same effect as forts in Vicky. EU2 forts are basically city walls (and restricted to the immediate environs of the province's major city) while Vicky forts are province-wide defensive systems that have to be explicity manned.
Click to expand...

Only in the case of the later levels of forts (which aren't discussed here).

The first two levels are "redoubts". That is, individual bastions to act as the lynchpins of a defensive system.
 
Specterx said:
Perhaps cultures could be mapped as provinces currently are (so anglosaxon would translate to british, yankee, and dixie, while gaelic would translate to scottish and irish, etc.).
Click to expand...

Note there is no Scottish culture. In any case, don't most of the Gaelic provinces in Scotland turn anglo-saxon towards the end of EU2?

Anyway, I would think that the relavent provinces could be given Yankee and Dixie POPs regardless of who owns them, to represent the different culture of a French North America, or whatever.

IMHO social reforms shouldn't be converted. Do any nations in vanilla Vicky have social reforms at game start?
Click to expand...

One or two. I don't think it's important to convert them.
 
montyP said:
I ran a game as Japan from 1419 to 1820 and the results world wide POP size vice were satisfactory.
Click to expand...

A hands-off? Do you want more samples?

China's pop is most definately slashed. I don't know for what reason. In my game as Japan I had a bigger pop than China at the end. :cool:
Click to expand...

Yeah- my assumption is that China was too powerful in the early tests of those later scenarios and they killed the population because they were running up against a deadline and didn't have the time to come up with a real fix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back