Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Victoria 3 - is it really a necessity? And if yes, why?

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.
LordofWarN02 said:
Victoria 3 could have bookmark like 1821 for Greek Revolution, 1836 like Vic 2, 1848 for Liberal Revolution, 1861 for American Civil War like Vic 2 and 1880 for Scamble for Africa.

World War I bookmark is nearly end game as 1936 is end game.
Click to expand...

an intresting thing is if V3 has a different time progression system. instead of daily, there could be 12-hourly. 200 years packed into 100. or even 6-hourly at the slowest progression, which would make V3 about as long as EU4 and vanilla CK2- just packed into a single century instead of 4. plus then, HOI-level warfare could be implemented.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Victoria 3- is it really a necessity?
Click to expand...
Would be awesome to bring Vicky up to the graphics standards of the newer games, plus I'd love to see what they'd do with it, given all they've learned since Vicky 2 was released.
 
Just make Victoria III have a timeline from 1815-1918. The interwar period really has little place in a game about the rise of the european powers to world domination and the Age of Imperialism, as although there were some final imperial extensions because of the Treaty of Versailles for the most part the first world war was an indictment of the world order since Vienna. Let the Interwar period be something to be dealt with in another game.
 
Immortal Impi said:
Just make Victoria III have a timeline from 1815-1918. The interwar period really has little place in a game about the rise of the european powers to world domination and the Age of Imperialism, as although there were some final imperial extensions because of the Treaty of Versailles for the most part the first world war was an indictment of the world order since Vienna. Let the Interwar period be something to be dealt with in another game.
Click to expand...

And which one? Hearts of Iron is even worse to represent the interwar period than Victoria...
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Thure said:
And which one? Hearts of Iron is even worse to represent the interwar period than Victoria...
Click to expand...
To add to this, a separate game would not be too much viable from a financial and market point of view, and frankly, seems quiet shallow to me.
 
Last edited:
loup99 said:
To add to this, a separate game would not be too much viable from a financial and market point of view, and frankly, seem quiet shallow to me.
Click to expand...

Yes. A own Interwar game? I don't think this would be worth. I really think Victoria is the best game to represent the interwar period.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Thure said:
Yes. A own Interwar game? I don't think this would be worth. I really think Victoria is the best game to represent the interwar period.
Click to expand...

HOI 4 might be up to the task if an extended period of time is spent at peace doesn't become mindcrushingly dull. but yeah, vicky is simply the best for the interbellum with how much more in depth it is with politics.
 
call me shallow, but I played the game for 4 hours and the graphics were almost too bad to play with when compared to EU4 and CK2. I usually don't care about graphics, but something about the boxy borders and sprites all over just turns me off, put the very dated graphics on top of the incredibly hard learning curve (good thing if you can stick with it) and well... I really really want to play the game, but it feels a tad bit too unapproachable. Vic3 would be an insta-buy for me since they have learned very well with the success of EU4 and CK2 how to make the interface and graphics more approachable for a noob.
 
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
TheeLord said:
call me shallow, but I played the game for 4 hours and the graphics were almost too bad to play with when compared to EU4 and CK2. I usually don't care about graphics, but something about the boxy borders and sprites all over just turns me off, put the very dated graphics on top of the incredibly hard learning curve (good thing if you can stick with it) and well... I really really want to play the game, but it feels a tad bit too unapproachable. Vic3 would be an insta-buy for me since they have learned very well with the success of EU4 and CK2 how to make the interface and graphics more approachable for a noob.
Click to expand...
You should try to fire up Darkest Hour or any HoI2 successor and compare the graphics with HoI3/Victoria 2. That is what I personally call bad graphics, but I see your point.
 
Vicky 2 was probably the best PDox game because it wasn't just waging war or getting a CB, there was tons of stuff to do and to adjust. Vicky 3 with the support and post development love that EU IV is getting would be amazing.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Yes, because its focus is a welcome change from the mechanics of EU, CK or HOI at times. Why only have three flavours when you could have four?
 
Last edited:
Macdon said:
Yes, because it's focus is a welcome change from the mechanics of EU, CK or HOI at times. Why only have three flavours when you could have four?
Click to expand...

bingo. with V3, the 4 corners of the 4th generation PDS dynasty shield will be complete!

plus, if CK2 can spawn every mod scenario from fantasy middle ages stand-in A Game of Thrones to post-post-apocalyptic (2 posts intended) After the End to freaking space in Crisis of the Confederation; imagine what a game like V3, with populations, ethnicities, world economy, and so much more can do!
 
Last edited:
spiller68 said:
come on paradox just announce the game already
Click to expand...
I think they have to wait for the stars to align properly or something. Or is it chicken bones?
 
I just had my second long campaign of Victoria 2 (where I didn't get stomped), playing as Afghanistan, and I noticed two things that the real Afghanistan did that you can't do in-game.

One of them is getting subsidies from the local Great Power to act as their border cop. Afghan governments have pretty much never been self-sufficient, and have generally relied on foreign subsidies to pay their armed forces (and in the case of the more progressive, infrastructure*) and maintain themselves in power.

The second is that you should be able to acquire core territory without being a Great Power. In the real world, Afghanistan conquered Nuristan in the 1890s, but after the population was forcibly converted to Islam, there was never any separatist movement. (I think in-game Nuristan is part of Kabul province.)

* Abdur Rahman Khan allegedly calculated that if Afghanistan was wealthy enough to provide a decent standard of living to its inhabitants, it would be wealthy enough for Russia or Britain to annex, and did his considerable best to ensure that he maintained an extractive regime that impoverished and brutalised his people.
 
Anyone know who was the lead dev on V2? I remember seeing podcat talking about expansions when they were about to come out. If he was lead dev, he will prob be lead for vic 3 as well. And due to the fact HOI IV is such a big project now and it has been delayed it seems unlikely we will get Victoria 3 for some time.

I'm praying to be surprised at E3 tomorrow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back