Victoria 3 is going to be bigger than Grand theft Auto V for me... I know its 2 different games but still... It's truly gonna be game of the year in my eyes....
-
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.
One thing I hope, apart from tons and tons of new features and even more depth is that they keep the style of the map, and graphics. Personally I think the Victoria look beats EUIV anytime. It just has a great feel.
- 1
Add submarines, a more developed economy, and a heck-ton of new nations/unions, to start. The main thing I want to change is the rebellion mechanics. Make it so that large rebellions, upon rebels taking a couple of provinces, becomes a civil war. Give generals/admirals political affiliations, and allow them to revolt and lead rebels. This could also allow portions of armies under control of said generals joining him. And also rebel fleets. Give also rebels distinct flags, such as if communist rebels rise in Britain, they use the British communist flag. Finally, allow other nations to fund, and possibly train rebels. With infamy costs added.
I'm not going to repeat good suggestions others have already made, I'm just going to revisit a topic which the devs apparently floated around already while the vanilla game was being made, but with my thoughts on how it could/should be implemented in practice.
Local markets
Divide the map into interconnected nodes of trade just like EU4. Let every node work like the world market does currently, with its own supply, demand and price level for every good. But instead of goods just flowing on their own in arbitrary predetermined directions from one market to another, it would take actual traders to make that happen. The capitalists of each country could own merchant ships and caravans, moving goods along routes, making use of the difference in price between markets to profit. Trade income would not magically appear out of nowhere, but follow from differences in production levels and consumption patterns between different markets, and profits to be made from trade by limited by it (the more trade evens out disparities in supply and demand, the smaller the price differences between different markets would be, and the lower the profit margins of long-distance trade).
Shipping routes would start off a lot more efficient (in terms of cost per distance moved) than overland routes, but the arrival of railroads would equalize things. Long-distance railroads could be built between trade nodes, allowing for much more efficient freight trains to replace caravans. The higher the level of the railroad, the lower the cost of transportation between the two nodes. Naturally, better steamships would also make shipping correspondingly cheaper. Railroads as we know them from V1 & V2 could also be in and work as they did, instead representing local rail networks meant to transport goods inside the area covered by a trade node (primarily from individual provinces to the province containing the node, and vice versa).
Apart from being an interesting feature in itself, I belive something like that would also have a secondary effect of improving other, currently lacking aspects of the game. Blockades would actually be handled sensibly, the cessation of the flow of goods would actually be directly represented in the game, with all its consequences. No more would there be absurd situations where (for example) a landlocked country that has relied on overland trade for the entire game would become royally screwed by obtaining one coastal province that would subsequently become blockaded. Tariffs and protectionism would actually be meaningful as there'd be actual price differences between different markets. Finally, and I think most significantly, capitalists would have a pre-industrial source of income helping with initial industrial buildup, something that V2 doesn't handle all that well. It would be historical as well, since long-distance trade was indeed the most significant cause of wealth concentration and the appearance of high bourgeoisie before the industrial revolution.
Local markets
Divide the map into interconnected nodes of trade just like EU4. Let every node work like the world market does currently, with its own supply, demand and price level for every good. But instead of goods just flowing on their own in arbitrary predetermined directions from one market to another, it would take actual traders to make that happen. The capitalists of each country could own merchant ships and caravans, moving goods along routes, making use of the difference in price between markets to profit. Trade income would not magically appear out of nowhere, but follow from differences in production levels and consumption patterns between different markets, and profits to be made from trade by limited by it (the more trade evens out disparities in supply and demand, the smaller the price differences between different markets would be, and the lower the profit margins of long-distance trade).
Shipping routes would start off a lot more efficient (in terms of cost per distance moved) than overland routes, but the arrival of railroads would equalize things. Long-distance railroads could be built between trade nodes, allowing for much more efficient freight trains to replace caravans. The higher the level of the railroad, the lower the cost of transportation between the two nodes. Naturally, better steamships would also make shipping correspondingly cheaper. Railroads as we know them from V1 & V2 could also be in and work as they did, instead representing local rail networks meant to transport goods inside the area covered by a trade node (primarily from individual provinces to the province containing the node, and vice versa).
Apart from being an interesting feature in itself, I belive something like that would also have a secondary effect of improving other, currently lacking aspects of the game. Blockades would actually be handled sensibly, the cessation of the flow of goods would actually be directly represented in the game, with all its consequences. No more would there be absurd situations where (for example) a landlocked country that has relied on overland trade for the entire game would become royally screwed by obtaining one coastal province that would subsequently become blockaded. Tariffs and protectionism would actually be meaningful as there'd be actual price differences between different markets. Finally, and I think most significantly, capitalists would have a pre-industrial source of income helping with initial industrial buildup, something that V2 doesn't handle all that well. It would be historical as well, since long-distance trade was indeed the most significant cause of wealth concentration and the appearance of high bourgeoisie before the industrial revolution.
A more complex tariff system, with the possibility for tariff wars. Maybe multiple tariff sliders for the top GPs, and an ability to grant "Most favoured nation status".
- 1
Is Nickjbor still active? It'll be good if we can sort all the suggestions made here....
After feedback-ing on a friend's EU IV, i find that the coalition systems is something good that might be possible to be implemented in Victoria 3
However, I do want World War 1 to be at least simulated.
After feedback-ing on a friend's EU IV, i find that the coalition systems is something good that might be possible to be implemented in Victoria 3
However, I do want World War 1 to be at least simulated.
Judging from the responses in the Paradox AMA over at reddit, V3 isn't very high on the list of priorities... 
Paradox, hear our plea!
Paradox, hear our plea!
Judging from the responses in the Paradox AMA over at reddit, V3 isn't very high on the list of priorities...
Paradox, hear our plea!
It can take at most 5 years. They said before 2020.
Aw, Victoria II is my fav game of all time..
Sad to hear that it's gonna take a long time to make a sequel
Sad to hear that it's gonna take a long time to make a sequel
1. A more transparent resource management. I want to see where are my the resources used, and why do i have a shortage. Also who am i buying from.
2. Protectionism that really works. Currently most of the game you spend at tarrifs being zero.
3. A better production management system. Making something happen in big country`s economy requires an insane amount of clicks. Make planed economy actually planned. You set up how much you need to produce, and to who, in what proportion should the resources/goods be distributed to.
4. A better service sector. Medicine, transportation, small buisneses, all are currently incorectly abstracted under either artisans, buerocrats, or clergy.
5. Less one-size-fits-all pops demand. Especially wierd things like Muslims demanding booze, or africans demanding coffe.
6. More substitution, akka more different components to produce goods. Close can be produced of wool, cotton, silk, ex. Luxury furniture should be creatable without tropic wood. Canned food should be producable from almost any kind of food. Ammunition should not sololy rely on sulphur especially late game, when nitro-celulose and other sulphur-less explosives took over.
2. Protectionism that really works. Currently most of the game you spend at tarrifs being zero.
3. A better production management system. Making something happen in big country`s economy requires an insane amount of clicks. Make planed economy actually planned. You set up how much you need to produce, and to who, in what proportion should the resources/goods be distributed to.
4. A better service sector. Medicine, transportation, small buisneses, all are currently incorectly abstracted under either artisans, buerocrats, or clergy.
5. Less one-size-fits-all pops demand. Especially wierd things like Muslims demanding booze, or africans demanding coffe.
6. More substitution, akka more different components to produce goods. Close can be produced of wool, cotton, silk, ex. Luxury furniture should be creatable without tropic wood. Canned food should be producable from almost any kind of food. Ammunition should not sololy rely on sulphur especially late game, when nitro-celulose and other sulphur-less explosives took over.
Yup. Which is why I played Vicky 1 obsessively when it came out despite its (glaringly obvious) drawbacks. Vicky 2 was a bit of a let down (though still very enjoyable) because you still felt there was so much unfulfilled potential in the series.
However, with Chris King leaving Paradox, I'm not sure where the Vicky series stands now. I personally think the reason why Vicky always felt like it had so much potential which it failed to deliver on was because it was trying to do too much in one game. WW1, which was supposed to be covered by this game at some level, is not really covered at all by it, and this is a big dissapointment. Ideological conflict, which should be a big part of the game, rarely seems to arise properly - it often takes the form of you combatting generic rebels in your own country without really paying attention to who they are, and ignoring ideological conflict outside your borders.
I hope Paradox will take the opportunity in the next game to sharpen just what it is that this game is supposed to do and not try to make it all things to all people. Alternatively, they could take the opportunity to fill the space Vicky fills in the Paradox canon with something else.
- Jul 23, 2007
- 12.812
- 38.541
Attempting to perfectly model WW1 was never on the list for Victoria 2 to be honest. Not to say we wouldnt try in V3, I was missing a few things pretty badly that base design did not allow to add in expansions. Submarines and blockades for example.
- 1
I absolutely believe you when you say you'd like to model WW1 properly in Vicky, I think a lot of us would love to see you do it as well, but like you say, it wasn't really possible in Vicky 2. You guys did implement a pretty decent Great War diplomatic feature though.
i think submarines and blockades could be modeled perfectly if you do something similiar to the trade routes in eu4. maybe that way you could harm a countries trade without needing to blockade their coast directly you just need to prevent the trade getting there like britain blockadeing germany in the north sea. paradox i know you can do this you make some of the best games ive ever played and i have full faith in you.
Dear podcat, I hope you replying in this topic isn't a sign that we shouldn't expect any further expansions for Vicky2 until V3?
That would make me a sad panda POP...
One of my absolute favorite things about Paradox titles is that you're not ALWAYS stuck playing as some big, great power. What other title will you ever see that will let you play a game as Oranje, Khiva, or Trieste? I've had some fun games as Switzerland and Quebec, but other lesser-played countries can be like watching paint dry. Try playing a game as Estonia or Armenia. With such low populations, you are consigned to a fast but very dull game. No pops? Then forget about having much money or a military or industrial score of any kind. If you're landlocked, colonialism is almost always impossible, and God help you if need to Westernize first.
I'm not suggesting that such countries automatically be allowed to become sprawling global empires. But at the very least they could have more decisions and events, and it will give games for such countries much more flavor. Even if there will never be a Pax Estoniana, playing such countries should still be as interesting as one of the traditional great powers.
I'm not suggesting that such countries automatically be allowed to become sprawling global empires. But at the very least they could have more decisions and events, and it will give games for such countries much more flavor. Even if there will never be a Pax Estoniana, playing such countries should still be as interesting as one of the traditional great powers.
please paradox im dieing for news here please give us something, victoria 3, another expansion, a patch please anything.