Wow I’m so glad that my favourite paradox game Victoria II got a sequel, I sure hope it doesn’t fall into every cliche about new Paradox games ever
@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714
Жыл бұрын
From what this videos shows is just might. Meanwhile Im gona redownload EU3.
@salty_peson9387
Жыл бұрын
@@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714 why? EU3 is significantly worse and less in depth than eu4, i understand playing CK2 instead of CK3 or Vic2 instead of Vic 3, but thats just an L-Take
@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714
Жыл бұрын
@@salty_peson9387 EU3 is more fun, there is less control which makes it more realistic despite the worse graphics.
@VinnyBloo
Жыл бұрын
@@salty_peson9387 I don't know what you mean by it being worse. It's easier to learn and is sold as a complete edition rather than being insanely expensive and locking basic necessary features behind DLC.
@jonb914
Жыл бұрын
"They definitely learned their lesson from Imperator. There is no possible way they would release an unfinished crap pile with no depth to it after what happened with Imperator."
@vincentfegley6068
Жыл бұрын
Idk man, they added a filing cabinets button, that alone is worth like $60. It's just so immersive.
@DedicatedCaffeineUser
Жыл бұрын
And they’re *only* selling it for $50. What a steal.
@carlose4314
Жыл бұрын
@@DedicatedCaffeineUser +future DLC
@honk813
Жыл бұрын
I find that most of the points you touched on I had too, like why I can’t add wargoals when I start a war, when I’m currently fighting Russia and I only get a single province, along with the military side of it seeming to be completely out of my control
@silverdeathgamer2907
Жыл бұрын
You can add them when you justify but not once the countdown to war starts. Though yes there should be some way for wars to escalate especially as they become more bloody.
@melon_man_dan6888
Жыл бұрын
Another part of war being really weird. There really isn’t a supply limit or something like that? And you’re able to teleport your armies without repercussions. And army quality has a very disproportionate affect to quantity (I mean as it should be to represent industrial mechanization of war). Biggest example: the Qing can go to war with Britain. When Britain naval invades and creates a front, China is able to deploy ~800 units onto that front, but a UK with like 50 units can easily smash through the Chinese army. In another game as Shewa, I tried to unify Ethiopia, and they have a larger army than every other Ethiopian state. However, an unlucky general roll can mean you lose all the wars. And I agree that the diplomacy is limited. I wish there were ways to diplomatically reach out and bring former subjects back into the fold because the amount of tags makes military reconquest practically not worth it.
@silverdeathgamer2907
Жыл бұрын
@@melon_man_dan6888 Yeah you can target their convoys after and hurt their morale but you can't intercept units unless they are doing a naval invasion.
@brandonlee934
Жыл бұрын
I've never really liked how the paradox wargoal system is, it seems artificially constrained
@melon_man_dan6888
Жыл бұрын
@@brandonlee934 I think it works and makes sense historically. Generally you aren’t going to war over an entire other state’s territory as it would be overly ambitious. For example, The Prussians specifically wanted to seize Alsace Lorraine from France. That land had a German speaking population, so it would give legitimacy for their formation of the German Empire. If one goes to war for that, if France is able to defend it but loses other parts, it looks bad for Germany because they fail to seize the whole point of the war. Or in EU4, you’re France and you want to take Aquitaine. If you can occupy that, but fail to occupy Normandy, you are evidently clearly winning because you’ve been able to meet your goals for the war. Declarations of war historically would mention specific tracts of land or territory that one seeks to control. Edit: In EU4 there is a trade conflict casus belli. In it, the war goal is to successfully blockade the enemy’s ports, crippling their trade. I think if we could declare war without specific war goals, it would simplify the point for wars and restrict diplomatic nuance
@TheNinthLord
Жыл бұрын
I feel Paradox has hit a problem with their production model. Imperator, Victoria 3, and CK3 have the same problem. Everyone wanted a certain game, and you may get the game after several expansions. CK2, EU4, and HoI 4 have the fan-base. Now, everyone just assumes (rightfully so) that it will be fixed later. That mentality, hurts sales and seems to be shooting Paradox in the foot. CK3, from what I hear, is still under-performing CK2. The only reason it ticked up is because of Royal Court. Stellaris was just a special gem.
@joshuagoodwin5249
Жыл бұрын
Stellaris is also a special case where the economy was completely retooled several patches into the game and then took several more to work properly (remember the terrible drag and drop mechanic where you slotted in aliens on a grid to get mana?)
@Ericshadowblade
Жыл бұрын
Stellaris also didnt have a predecessor for which to compare it too which certainly helped stellaris two will have that problem
@crowneproductions9908
Жыл бұрын
Yea the entire games industry is now suffering from this whole "development as a marketing tool" mindset where they show us exactly what they are working on every fucking week. I'm so sick of it. It's nothing but a marketing gimmick and it's toxic af. What happened to the days when somebody would be like "hey did you hear they released a new Victoria game?"..."no I didn't, might have to pick that up and give it a try". Everything is just so front loaded and in your face. We fans care too much. Find something else to do, it's just a video game. We aren't game devs but everybody acts like they are and plays captain hindsight. End the "development as a marketing tool" trend.
@mirkociamp
Жыл бұрын
The thing with ck3 is that it adds a few "quality of life" features that make the game slightly better to play, yet more boring than ck2. A big problem with the game is that the "Skill Trees" make the game extremely predictable, making the users most of the time choose the same path over and over, I prefer the ck2 system where you choose a focus and got random events that influenced your characters. Also you can't remove personality traits once you get them, if you are brave you'll always be, and if you are craven you will be until you die. It really hurts the RP. And the game has basically no flavour and no dlcs are being released, I mean 2 years have passed already and playing as muslims is the exact same as playing as a medieval ruler, being a ltitle tribe feels the same as being an emperor. The only thing that has a "little bit of flavour" are the vikings because the flavour pack.
@TheFireGiver
Жыл бұрын
Paradox is larger than they have ever been with more successful games then ever, so they're obviously doing something right.
@WileyBoxx
Жыл бұрын
Coming from an EU4 player, it feels way too simple. Especially the warfare. The economy seems complex at first but it's really just simple resource management.
@onecertainesquire486
Жыл бұрын
I haven’t played much HOI4, but the economy system just reminds me of a cruel and unusual fusion of EU4 and HOI4 with a dash of Victoria II thrown in their
@Rannos22
Жыл бұрын
EU4 at launch was extremely simple too
@AyaKho
Жыл бұрын
@@onecertainesquire486 Reminds you of? You're literally just tossing words around.
@tramachi7027
Жыл бұрын
Worst part is. Unlike in Vic2, Vic3 doesnt simulate a global market the same way Vic2 did it. You know...like how a global market function....global supply and demand and all that. And Vic2 did it a billion times better. In Vic3 your country only trades if YOU, the player, specifically demand it. If you dont have goods, your citizens wont buy it from outside unless you give them the trade deal. In Vic 2 you had your pops buying deficient goods themselfes..you know. like irl. Also Capitalists have been neutered and dont represent what Capitalists actually did. In Vic2 you had Private Capitalists spending money on projects THEY choose. i.e expanding/building factories and building railway. You could try nudging them in the direction, but just like irl, they didnt had to if it meant no good return for them and you could end up with projects that lead to nowhere because the Capitalists deemed it not worth it. In Vic3 this is completely gone. And dont get me started on the Pops in Vic3 Vic3 is a decrepit and bad economy "simulation" its predeccessor did a million times better.
@infernows
Жыл бұрын
Eu4 is one of the best paradox games out there
@nerva-
Жыл бұрын
Them ditching capitalists in favor of player micromanagement is one of the deal-breakers for me. They did away with the world market and a closed-loop money supply, in favor of the player having to micromanage international trade. In short, they looked at all the best parts of V2 and said, "that would be hard for us to implement, so let's just not do it and make up for it with window-dressing."
@canibezeroun1988
Жыл бұрын
Micro managing can be a good thing but that should be an indirect method for telling want people prefer markets. The markets aggregate decision making and make it faster. Micro managing should be difficult and come at the cost of efficiency. Getting a set number of products would be good, but it should be insanely difficult to manage it all yourself.
@nerva-
Жыл бұрын
@@canibezeroun1988 I'm thinking the more the player micromanages either the economy or elections, the more the bureaucracy grows and the worse corruption gets. So, if you let the capitalist AI do it, the capital improvements are done for the least amount of money, but the more stuff is dictated by the player, the more bureaucrats are hired and the less efficiently they do the work, so at some point the player's min/maxing becomes counter-productive, and this actually improves gameplay by encouraging the player to only meddle in the most critical areas rather than feeling like by not managing everything themselves they're not playing the game as well as they could.
@farklemybrainsout
Жыл бұрын
Capitalists in vicky2 imo were pretty stupid, there only real purpose was to build railroads, and when they did build a factory it was in the worst place possible. Not that I think they should've gotten rid of that mechanic I would've rather they improved it, but for capitalists micromanaging to be a deal breaker seems odd to me.
@nerva-
Жыл бұрын
@@farklemybrainsout oh I agree the capitalist AI was poorly written - laughably so. My point though was it was one of the things that gave the game it's "living world" flavor, along with representing something fundamentally important to the time period (that capitalists drove the industrial revolution, not top-down micromanaging monarchs). Yes, it desperately needed improvement for V3. The fact they decided to just leave it out rather than improve it says volumes about how the developers approached this project -- all the stuff in V2 that was unique, difficult to implement, and in need of improvement, they simply chose to ditch rather than put in the time and effort. V3 is a sequel in name only.
@Joostmhw
Жыл бұрын
@@canibezeroun1988 you do realize our economy is planned right? Just by businesses rather than central government.
@DuckSwagington
Жыл бұрын
My problem is that they fixed one of my biggest problems with Vic 2, which is that if a Laissaiz Faire party got in power, you're effectively locked out of your economy, a core gameplay section, and then decided to completely lock the player out of a different core gameplay section (warfare) without anyway to actually regain control. It's insane. I do see the potential in this game but right now it's a mess.
@MrThhg
Жыл бұрын
You can regain control, its called spam "elections'' and national focus on the party you want. you need to raise your standards bruh. Maybe in 5 years the game when they release 7 DLC's at 10$ each maybe it'll have potential then.
@DuckSwagington
Жыл бұрын
@@MrThhg Fact of the matter is that it shouldn't have been in the game in the first place. It also doesn't help that until socialists spawn, you have absolutely no way to build factories that you want to build unless you force the reactionaries into power, which is fine as a monarchy but as a republic it's quite frankly it's far too much hassle to considering like 10% of your voting pops support them.
@hugodelphan8638
Жыл бұрын
This actually what I like about vic2, when laissez faire party where in charge you really experienced “the anarchy of the market” of capitalism, yes the system was flaw because your capitalist where extremely stupid and put factories into random place but it was in my opinion one of the best things about the game. Now you can have a communist planned economy, a dirigiste fascist economy or capitalist laissez faire, it all feels the same added to the lack of difference between each country, the game become quickly easy and boring . And they still didn’t fix the real problem which was that the ai didn’t know how to build an economy. I
@commisaryarreck3974
Жыл бұрын
That and force everyone to use a command economy Lassaiz Faire my ass, capitalists can't do shit. You need to micro your economy. Pops are so simplified its not even funny, warfare is a joke and if yhe AI somehow pulls off an encirclement it will teleport the half that finished the pocket halfway across the planet cause screw you
@ABPHistory
Жыл бұрын
They didn't fix it they just created a new problem. Now you literally cannot have a Laissez Faire economy, everyone is essentially a centrally planned economy
@freelunch1458
Жыл бұрын
In this game you don’t play as a nation you play as a treasurer, when I downloaded the better automation mod so I could do things other than micro my economy I quickly found basically nothing else to do and got bored it’s really disappointing how they let down the whole geopolitical aspect of grand strategy
@angrymonkeynoises
Жыл бұрын
There is nothing left to do in this game besides microing the economy
@Gustav_Kuriga
Жыл бұрын
So let me get this straight. In a game series that was largely about building an economy, you found that once you automated the central aspect of the game there wasn't much of the game left to play? Oh wow. Man you won't believe this. If you automate the entirety of the military in Hearts of Iron, there really isn't that much to play. That's what your argument is. That removing the central core of a game and finding there isn't much else to do means that the game must be bad. Man you sure would hate Fallout 1 if there was a mod that completed all the quests for you.
@ThatIrishSOB
Жыл бұрын
The problem is they made Vic 3 JUST the economy, Literally vic 2 had so much more flavour and complexity outside of the economic system and vic 3 just does not have that. They took away being able to manage your own army and added more micro managing and navigating menus. The political/law system is a joke and just frustrating to use, war goals are broken and can make even the smallest of wars global conflicts, there's just a lot left to be desired. It runs about half the speed of Vic 2 so it just means even more time staring at menus doing nothnig. It seems it's just Paradox continuing the strategy of releasing a game unfinished and fixing it with DLC
@Gustav_Kuriga
Жыл бұрын
@@ThatIrishSOB You mean diplomacy that was reliant on mana, basically involved improving relations along a bar until the other country said yes, and even then the AI could refuse a call to war even if it said they would join? Or perhaps it's the military system that's literally just EU but with absurdly broken terrain/tech modifiers? The only thing Victoria 2 has that's actually uniquely"flavorful" outside the economy is the pop system, and that's an arcane mess. And if you think you don't manage the army, you clearly have not played the game. You're yet another one of the entitled players in the Paradox community who wouldn't know a bad game if it actually slapped them in the face. If you want to see what a shitty Grand Strategy game really looks like, look at something like SuperPower 3 or _shudders_ Europe Empire 2027.
@ThatIrishSOB
Жыл бұрын
@@Gustav_Kuriga How did Vic 3 improve any of these things? The diplomacy hasn't changed, you just use influence now. They've changed it so every major can get in on any conflict through that stupid sway mechanic. When I say you don't control your army, I don't mean you literally can't do anything to it, but your options are far more limited in terms of actually strategizing. I like to actually be able to pick and choose my battles in a grand strategy game, not just mobilize a general, send him to the front and pray that the RNG will go in my favor enough to win. Been playing Paradox games for a long time and dumped hundreds of hours into Vic 2, I'd like to think my criticisms come from an enjoyment of the franchise and not being entitled, but you're entitled to think that way
@Ronaldo-ss4qq
Жыл бұрын
Saw on the steam forums that someone dug through the code for Victoria Tycoon and found out that combat width is completely randomized on a ridiculous scale (from 1 times base width to 10). Features like randomized combat width and choosing not to have mp chat makes me think the issue is beyond most games that flop at launch due to bugs or lack of dev time. It seems like the devs do not have any ability to figure out what are strategy game mechanics that people enjoy despite working in a company that has had many well received grand strategy titles in recent years.
@burtreynolds8030
Жыл бұрын
As far I as can tell from playing 50 hrs the only effects on combat width are terrain modifiers
@Gustav_Kuriga
Жыл бұрын
Source: I made it the fuck up.
@Ronaldo-ss4qq
Жыл бұрын
@@Gustav_Kuriga Tried to respond directly with a link to the thread, but youtube deleted it, if you search in the steam forums "Just went through the Vic 3 war code and its a joke" you should be able to find the thread
@officialromanhours
Жыл бұрын
I will admit, even though I am a firm Vic2 fan, I did doubt you. Jesus christ it's all bloody real.
@sernold9527
Жыл бұрын
Let's not forget that when you go to war with a counrty and someone joins its side, the good samaritanian can just drop its 60 batalions into said victim of your expansion even if they have no boder with it. (Russia intervenied while I was annexing a Beluchistani country)
@crowneproductions9908
Жыл бұрын
I couldn't believe this the first time it happened to me. I was playing Ecuador and managed to get Brazil on my side in a War against Bolivia-Peru since Brazil had a reconquest on a partial state and I did to. Out of know where there are 60 Austrio-Hungarian battalions on the front lines fighting me on the fucking WEST COAST of South America. First week of the war and there is half of the Austro-Hungarian army, a nation that historically had no navy to speak of, somehow sailed around the south tip of South American and back up the coast to North West part of the continent (no Panama Canal yet). Mind boggling.
@Gustav_Kuriga
Жыл бұрын
@@crowneproductions9908 Austria-Hungary historically was one of the major European Naval powers. Especially during this time period. Their navy was pretty close to Italy's in strength. But do go on about your bullshit based on historical inaccuracies.
@Yuyam12
Жыл бұрын
@@Gustav_Kuriga Austria-Hungary had no influence at all in the region, do you really think the Austrians could teleport 10s of thousands of men to South America in the 19th century or something?
@Gustav_Kuriga
Жыл бұрын
@@Yuyam12 What the fuck are you on about? The person I was replying to stated that Austria-Hungary historically had no navy, which I responded specifically to about that being blatantly false, they did have a major navy during the time period. I said nothing about interventions in South America, and honestly it wouldn't be the any stranger than "Chinese man claims to be brother of Christ and creates an uprising in Qing China" that happened during the same time period as the Victoria series and is represented in the games. Said uprising (the Taiping Rebellion) was literally the 3rd deadliest conflict including both World Wars (World War I is actually ranked 5th).
@crowneproductions9908
Жыл бұрын
@@Gustav_Kuriga Italian unification didn’t complete until 1871 moron.
@OneOfcrowd
Жыл бұрын
Victoria 2 is quite difficult game for novice i suppose, but cuz of simple and informative UI, there are no problems to figure out what to do. You always have info about what is building right now ,how many people are unemployed to factories,what goods are not enough to cover demands, population in every state, literacy in every state, so u can decide, where you need to build factories, and everything was so deep,but so easy to get. Victoria 2 is a complete game in which you can play as long as your imagination lets you to not get bored, but what paradox made now is just a basic boring platform for further dlcs. They literally took the worst part of Victoria 2 if you ask me - is playing Russia as USSR with planned economy, when you need to manually build all the stuff for a whole country, and they made a game around this idea lol, instead of giving the capitalists ai more stuff to do.And i dont even know will dlcs help here,cuz even basics of this game sucks
@bigweevil
Жыл бұрын
Agreed. Victoria 2 had 2 dlcs that made the game what it is, but more modern releases have nearly a dozen.
@xXxSephirothxXx67526
Жыл бұрын
@@bigweevil While I do agree with the DLC part, you never see multiplayer games with people playing vanilla Victoria II either. It's usually a mod. I remember I didn't touch the game until HPM made it bearable with railroading the A.I.. Same with their previous games. Darkest Hour made Hoi2 one of my favorites and Victoria II became my favorite after playing it with DoD and HPM. The players know what they want more than Paradox, which is so incredibly frustrating at times when there is no alternative in the same vein.
@lightswitchy
Жыл бұрын
Very well put and thought-out, another Bigweevil hit :)
@Cecilia-ky3uw
Жыл бұрын
The debt is one thing I can praise about the game, the fact you are incentivised to take debt is a good thing that simulates well the expansion of the monetary capacity of governments, what I do not is the micromanagement in A FUCKING laissez faire economy
@Tabeezey
Жыл бұрын
I feel like the base game that they released is incredibly simplified in a lot of key areas for one reason. DLC
@beepbop6542
4 ай бұрын
Voice of the people really disgusted me, because half of it is just adding flavor content to France that should have already been in the game at launch. And a similar level of flavor should exist for every major power already, but nope!
@hyperthulean8649
Жыл бұрын
Pay attention the exports and imports from nations. I was the #1 producer of coal, iron, steel, basically every resource you needed to actually build a nation. I saw none of it, because France could import my entire production of it. The price of steel was so high that none of the factories that used it could profit. This problem was even worse since I was Germany, because there is literally no limit to how much France can import from me since we're connected by land. I build more, they import more. Eventually I just had to embargo them... I also think the economy is unironically less comprehensive than Victoria 2, for one reason and one reason alone. There is no lassiez faire, and capitalists don't invest their money into their own projects. Instead they just cover some of the expenses of certain buildings if their factories are profitable enough. You'll notice you get a special income when you build, think its called investment pool or something. Instead you build every factory, every railroad, regardless of economic policy. When I first heard of Victoria 3, I imagined there would be corporate conglomerates that could pressure your government to do things, to lobby or push for certain laws, to fund and influence different political parties that represent them. Instead we get less than what we had in Vic 2, even if it was already very little.
@andrewgreenwood9068
Жыл бұрын
You could embargo a nation that is harming your economy through trade
@beepbop6542
4 ай бұрын
Capitalist DO build their own things though? They don't cover any costs of what you're building, they choose their own projects and steal your construction to do so (The investment pool income is them paying for the construction they're using).
@BIGluisluis
Жыл бұрын
" i wont be leaving victoria 2 anytime soon" same
@dotaloop3002
Жыл бұрын
Masterfully reviewed and I like your voice. Subbed
@SpudgunOfficial
Жыл бұрын
Very generous towards Paradox for now, but we'll see what happens when they actually respond to the criticisms, and how they respond.
@bigweevil
Жыл бұрын
Our solution to fix war, is to remove it more, you now have truces until 1936.
@Urbanmember1
Жыл бұрын
@@bigweevil too believable
@WileyBoxx
Жыл бұрын
50% chance they pull another "our playerbase is so mean to us!!! why don't they like it when we release mobile games?!"
@hallu4696
Жыл бұрын
@@WileyBoxx 50%? Paradox has been openly hostile to players who aren’t lobotomized vegetables for years now just go to any of their forums and social media they openly show their hate for the old community who’m they’re trying to replace.
@Freedmoon44
Жыл бұрын
@@hallu4696 and they wont replace us because History nerds are the only crew they shall ever get because they the only group insane enough to see a map and be like "oh yea that Peak gameplay right there"
@SaviOr747
Жыл бұрын
The fact that Paradox did a really good job in overhauling Rome gives me hope that they can improve on Vic3 too
@Kathkere
Жыл бұрын
Unlike Imperator, I think the core mechanics of Vicky 3 shows promise. Imperator had many issues at launch that had to be fundamentally changed and I don't think they'll have to do that with Vicky 3. They just have to make the current systems a bit more complex and allow for more player agency. Diplomatic plays are an excellent idea but like the content creator said, they are far too rigid at the moment. Warfare without micromanaging units sounds great on paper as well and I am 100% on board the idea of planning for the war ahead for the war but we're lacking options to make proper strategy out of it. Then the various "capacities" rather than mana points are great too, I feel. So I'm hopeful that that Vicky 3 will improve. Its launch was disappointing but I still find myself sinking many, many hours into the game in spite of its shortcomings.
@jasonsweeney890
Жыл бұрын
whats annoying is the wargoal system, if you as america want to take everything from texas to california, and the AI decides to just give up the territory, thats 5 years per state as the back down feature just gives the main wargoal
@whynotcaptaincrunch
Жыл бұрын
I definitely agree about the UI and the diplomatic problems. Wars seem to either end arbitrarily, or go on long after the original point stopped mattering. I've played the game a ton since it came out, and I think it will be one of their better games, but not for a while. After CK3's relatively smooth release, I was hopeful for Victoria 3. But instead I feel like I paid money to do their QA testing for them.
@Da__goat
Жыл бұрын
The single biggest downgrade complaint that I have with Vic 3, is that Vic 2 simulated a global economy, Vic 3 doesn't do that. Trade between markets takes place between nations, there is no global market to buy and sell goods. There is no variation among government types either in Vic 3-The US government should not be able to even tax income let alone construct industry. This is true as any semi-presidential republic nation. An authoritarian nation, sure. There are no influence spheres, it's just markets now. As ISP said in his review, "It's like playing Anno 1800 with a building menu." Oh and every single war/diplomatic play becomes an international crisis so you get the UK intervening when some random arab nation like Lahej goes to war with its neighbors. There is no westernization and the literacy rates for any non-european nation are just not correct. Japan starts with railroads in 1836 -_-. The Meiji Restoration just doesn't matter, just like the slave debate in the US as you can just bypass those things right at the beginning of the campaign. Germany doesn't really form well, nations lack any depth, there is no good war AI because Paradox can't code an AI to work well at a game until its at the end of its development like EU4, 9 years post release. I hate that the Vic 3 launch reminds so much of Imperator, because I wanted the game to be good, but I'm glad I never bought it, as a company, Paradox releases games the quality and completion of which would be comparable to EA, only, and I am not giving them another red cent of my money.
@thecoolcarhd4402
Жыл бұрын
Imperative is a fine game tho
@p0xus
Жыл бұрын
How do you think global trade works? Nations don't trade with "the global market" - they trade with other nations, and collectivly that trade is known as the global market.
@Da__goat
Жыл бұрын
@@p0xus amazing. Everything about what you said is wrong. Actors within nations trade with each other, nations permit the transit of goods and services at given prices depending on tariffs and trade laws.
@barca227bc3
Жыл бұрын
Still hate that they ditched imperator when it was getting good for this. This is way worse to me.
@cdcastro7986
Жыл бұрын
Yo ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me
@PerfectDeath4
Жыл бұрын
Oh, one really annoying thing happened to me, I was starting up the timer for going to war over a state that was going to be easy pickings, it was a colony after all and I had the other half of the state. However, during the diplo phase it rebelled and became independant. The escalation would just continue even though the origional goal is gone... so I would have to backdown and lose territory because the AI had added their war goals while the game would just auto generate a war-rep goal for me... to fight an AI half way across the world to build up war goal... That seems exploitable, just lose a state someone is targeting and laugh as they take +20 infamy.
@Ericshadowblade
Жыл бұрын
Try having the provice your fighting and have occupied rebelling mid war losing everything youve gained or having the nation your fighting and half occupied resolve its rebellion and having all your progress yeeted. Or how about a third party capitulating cause all your generals to take their men and go home
@PerfectDeath4
Жыл бұрын
@@Ericshadowblade Almost sounds historically accurate. xD
@orbsytheumbreon
Жыл бұрын
Paradox: Alright guys time to make a march of the eagles SEQUEL!!! What’s the twist this time? Mobile release only. ARENT YOU GUYS EXCITED?!?!?!?
@madensmith7014
Жыл бұрын
Any working sequel to MotE would be an upgrade, even on mobile or samsung smartfridge
@__prometheus__
Жыл бұрын
@@madensmith7014 even the gucci smart toilet 🚽
@ohmmy999
Жыл бұрын
This is my experience with the economy. Have a thriving economy. Can build a car. Decided to try building a car but don't have rubber. Factory can't build metal boiler because you done have rubber. My whole economy that build around automation using boiler crash.
@cenotemirror
Жыл бұрын
Excellent and evenhanded review that avoids hyperbole and cheap shots in favor of a realistic assessment of where the game falls short. I’ve always said that with most Paradox games you need to wait 2-3 years to tell how they are. I’d hoped they’d moved to a faster timeline with the highly playable launch of CK3, but it looks like Vicky3 is gonna be another fixer-upper with promise.
@mrbling3868
Жыл бұрын
Based, and very fair and nuanced pilled.
@Dutchwheelchair
Жыл бұрын
after a couple of dlc it wil be a good title. Thats the paradox way
@tekken19901
Жыл бұрын
I played the new game and it feels like Vic2 was way better.
@patryk999000
Жыл бұрын
I agree with almost everything but a debt system In my opinion vic 3 deals much better with debt and deficit, country shouldn't have a problem as long as it's increasing it's own gdp enough and has a "healthy" economy (But the AI in vic 3 is terrible at growing their own GDP)
@zahzuhzay6533
Жыл бұрын
Exactly. Grand Strategist:Civil War depicts this well with your overhead place for the budget actually being replaced a credit rating.
@sapphicdisastertilda
Жыл бұрын
Liquor factories.
@unregierbar7694
Жыл бұрын
Modern gaming. You get better graphics at the cost of depth and features.
@DonPedroTheDude
Жыл бұрын
It's the classic issue which has emerged for paradox games - shipping an unfinished product so they can 'fix' the game with DLC. But as we have seen with CK3 the fix never comes. The product simultaneously lacks flavour, and this is taken as an excuse for flavour packs that don't fix the underlying issues with the game.
@beepbop6542
4 ай бұрын
Bingo!
@nomenicuss2091
Жыл бұрын
Sounds like honest and expert review, thanks :)
@tatamumu4505
Жыл бұрын
I have no idea if someone already pointed it out but you actually can refuse a call to arm from an ally, by just changing your stance on his diplomatic play (it costs relation and break the alliance). You can also immidietely capitulate at the beginning of the war if no wargoal targets you.
@shahedamere6976
Жыл бұрын
The SOL is so off the charts like if I don’t look at it for a single second then my people are suffering and starving and no matter what I do It doesn’t work
@XXStoogieXX
Жыл бұрын
I disagree with your statement on building farms. You're not building open fields for farming, you're building the irrigation systems and clearing land necessary for large-scale industrial farming. The zero-cost farming is already covered by subsistence farms.
@darken2417
Жыл бұрын
The economics also sucks despite it being the focus. All nations play like full on communist ones as the player not the capitalists builds factories and fully manages them.
@RoBYBoY97
Жыл бұрын
Something that I have a problem besides the points that you bring is factories building 2 or 3 products that can only be build together. I find it really annoying to have researched better luxury clothes production, to than try to remember where i built my factories than change it. Or I played Germany I couldnt build more ships because ships can be built with convoy streamers, but my economy already had -75% price on convoy streamers. Or I needed more wine but I couldnt build more wine since grain is already at max. And dont get me started on the trade system where all my clothes/groceries are sold to France with max import tarrifs and protectionism law, while my market struggles to get them at +50% price, while in the French market the price remains at -5%.
@ssmith5048
Жыл бұрын
So, yeah, I agree with your conclusion, just think you could have pointed out the more egregious failings of this current incarnation.
@D3Jouker
Жыл бұрын
I just got exactly what I expected from reading dev diaries and I am happy for it. The game needs some serious polishing but the core mechanics are good and deep and therefore can be improved upon and fixed. Much better than to get a game that is shallow in its core play. I feel like mechanics wise this is the best pdx game we've ever gotten at launch. Btw., Vicky 2 was horrible before the dlcs and we should not forget that when we compare those games.
@WolfTheTrueKing
Жыл бұрын
Largely agree with your points, and that's coming from someone that actually is enjoying the game as I find the gameplay loop of resource management quite fun. But I absolutely agree that the diplomacy and war system need a rework, there are quite obvious diplomatic manouvers which are weirdly lacking. In my Brasil run i find it super weird that I can't just buy core states in the Amazon like it happened in real life, especially since I was on good terms with Bolivia and didn't want to go to war. Also the AI doesn't seem to follow any particular logic but rather just some barebones scripts. It absolutely has the potential to be one of the great grand strategy games, but it needs one or two expansions and A LOT of Ai rework before that. I can recommend, it's not a bad game but it'll probably get way better over time
@lukedufaur5368
Жыл бұрын
Maybe it wasn't as over for victoria 2cels as I thought...
@JaySliZe
Жыл бұрын
Pretty much all of the issues you said were exactly the issues I’ve had so far playing, don’t get me wrong the game is still very fun but I’d still rather go back and play Vic 2 than play Vic 3
@whatever7338
Жыл бұрын
This game can literary remove everything except market screen and build screen. The whole game you are just switching between those two screens and building whats missing. The laws and research are pretty much linear since there is never a situation where youre deciding between two or more options because there always one option thats 10x better than others. When it comes to money you just need to care that you dont go more than 30k negative and as soon as youre positive you build more construction centers. Thats pretty much the whole game.
@Piechucker
Жыл бұрын
Excellent video Weevil
@emperorsolaris7
Жыл бұрын
Didn't watch the video just wanted to share my rage for losing 1 million pops to disease in my Vic2 Romania game
@bigweevil
Жыл бұрын
Who needs Medicine?
@emperorsolaris7
Жыл бұрын
@@bigweevil its romania after all I had just researched basic chemistry lmao
@theheiroflotharingia8543
Жыл бұрын
I think decreasing how many resources everything takes up would be super beneficial, as it is doing very minor things requires you to make 50 coal mines to support all the upkeep
@danielboone8256
Жыл бұрын
2:55 "I feel that Victoria 3 incentivizes a debt economy." Sounds like Paradox was influenced by the Keynesians, unfortunately.
@zahzuhzay6533
Жыл бұрын
Tbh, this is accurate to how IRL govts work. In fact in the 19th c was when the UK had the highest Debt to GDP ratio
@danielboone8256
Жыл бұрын
@@zahzuhzay6533 That only works short-term. It should represent the short-term potential benefits and the long-term negatives of it.
@zahzuhzay6533
Жыл бұрын
@@danielboone8256 Im just saying thats how real economies work. Generally speaking if a country is able to service their debts reasonably and the credit market thinks you can do so then your okay. Also, remeber its mostly foreign debt or debt not denominated in your currency thats problematic. A good amount of gov't debt is public and domestic and the only problem if you default on that is probably your party getting kicked put of office.
@commisaryarreck3974
Жыл бұрын
@@zahzuhzay6533 Generally in a real economy the government isn't micromanagement every last aspect with a lassaiz Faire economy
@Gustav_Kuriga
Жыл бұрын
@@commisaryarreck3974 Congratulations, you brought up a point that they weren't talking about.
@t-elmarbigriver2255
Жыл бұрын
When Vic IV!?
@plebisMaximus
Жыл бұрын
There's a hell of a lot of very obvious flaws, most of which you perfectly summarized here, but I still think it's real good fun. I always just wanted a market/politics sim from Victoria and those are the aspects Vic3 improved a lot imo. I get the common complaints and I agree with most of them, I just don't weigh something like warfare as highly as a skilled MP player would. I hope they don't overcorrect and make Vic3 yet another army game of conquest, we already have EU4 and HoI4 for that, although they do need to do something about warfare. But I also think we should acknowledge there are other ways to play a grand strategy game than just conquering all your neighbours. There's grand strategy in economically conquering the world too. I hope they keep the focus of the game, but round off a lot of the edges, both to please oldschool players like you and to give me different ways to play it. This might be some of the most potential there's ever been in a PDX title.
@blitcut9712
Жыл бұрын
Couldn't have agreed more.
@RoBYBoY97
Жыл бұрын
But economy is really flawed and I really dont find it rewarding spending time to have a better economy since there is no competition especially from the ai, big numbers go green till they dont because ai France tought they should have all ur clothes while and u cant do a thing only embargo them, but u cant emabrgo France since is the only ai that builds its economy.
@TRENCHESandTREADS
Жыл бұрын
I don't get your post at all, Vicky 2 does everything you praise Vicky 3 for, but better. Like this "There's grand strategy in economically conquering the world too" Bro, that's literally Vicky 2. Vicky 2 at its core is a market simulator, something that Vicky 3 fails at. In Vicky 2 the game was a closed circuit, if a resource could be bought, that means it was mined/created/built somewhere in the world, just like the real world, so if you needed a certain thing and it wasn't being created at a speed that suited your needs then you were incentivized to look for solutions. In Vicky 3 the game isn't a closed circuit, every resource exists infinitely, the prices just go up with demand, de-incentivizes alternate solutions outside of 'make more money'. Politics in Vicky 2 were also significantly more diverse than they are in 3, with government types radically changing what you can do, and various populations having their own distinct ideologies. Vicky 3 reduces everyone against the current government to "radicals" when in 2 every revolution had a goal, and a reason for existing. The people just complaining about military, and the people just countering those complaints are missing the fact that the very core conceit of Vicky isn't present in 3.
@plebisMaximus
Жыл бұрын
@@TRENCHESandTREADS I get you, I just disagree. Resources are absolutely limited, you can't build mines or logging camps infinitely, you will hit a cap and by then you need to start figuring out how to solve the new shortage. In Victoria 2, that meant just going off to conquer someone else because that's the easiest way of getting more shit. Just colonize China, it's easy money and pops. In Vic3, conquest is far from the best option, conquest being expensive and time consuming, instead you're incentivized to participate in the global market by importing, allowing other nations to get a lot of money off you and weakening your position on the international scene, colonize, another slow and tedious process, or letting your economy and population take the hit and going to war. Getting strong in Vic3 is a challenge, but not in war strategy, in resource management, and I like the way they did that. It's not for everyone, certainly not for people who were just looking for Vic2 with updated graphics, but it's still a good game if what you're looking for is what it delivers, a fairly interesting and stimulating resource management game. As for the politics, yea, I'll give you that point, each interest group and different government type doesn't feel super distinct from one another and I do hope they remedy that because there's a really good skeleton for a fantastic political system there, but I'm still having a lot of fun trying to juggle around different ideologies, supporting and censoring them as need arises, to try to use them to shape my nation into what I set out to make. Quite different from Vic2 where your best hope was to wait for the right revolution and if something like say, fascism just doesn't take hold in your country, then you're screwed, no way to remedy it, you'll just stay a republic forever because while monarchs may be temporary, Jacobins are forever. I do understand all the complaints, I like Vic2 as well, but implying that people who enjoy Vic3 just don't get Victoria doesn't seem quite right. It's different, way different, yea, but that only has to be a problem with the game if you aren't looking for something different and in that case, just play Vic2? There's enough mods out there to keep it afloat for decades to come.
@MundaneThingsBackwards
Жыл бұрын
@@plebisMaximus In Vic 3 conquest isn't the best option even though it should be (it's so easy to deal with and integrate foreign pops, it's rediculous...) because even a war against a colonial nobody can result in a full scale war with a great power FOR NO F*CKING REASON. At least in Vicky 2 you could use diplomacy to guarantee a major (literally the only coutnries who could sphere and thus protect people who weren't allies...) doesn't intervene. Even if they did, they couldn't dedicate the full force of their military against you because they were limited by transports and distance and supply, etc. ironically a game that attempts to take the game's focus away from war literally funnels you into it in its most impactful form the second you start doing what the time period was defined by, colonialization and the gathering of strategic resources to fuel the march of industrialization.
@frames-janco
Жыл бұрын
I enjoyed trying to micro the economy for a while, however, I was really annoyed by the fact that I cant protect my resource industry sufficiently enough to provide for my domestic markets first while selling the surplus abroad. As Germany, I was producing the most coal of any nation, but France as the nr. 1 economy buys out my entire coal supply for their industry, increasing the price of coal to ludicrous levels. When this happens, I would want to be able to increase export tariffs on coal to a massive amount so as to dissuade the french from buying out my markets, but I cant do that in this game…
@rogofos
Жыл бұрын
to expand a field of crops you need to get rid of the forests and other wildlife in the way in this case I'm assuming the construction crew is busy doing that with controlled fires and whatnot
@Jonsoner
Жыл бұрын
Even if the economy aspect of the game, is currently it's "best" feature, it's still handled weirdly. I understand that "the market goes where it needs to for profit", I like that, but why I am being forced to export into the negatives by another nation even if I went protectionism with max tax? Why is the only to ways to keep a positive production is to get a treaty port in every major market (India, Russia, France, Dutch, American, Qing) then embargo whoever is robbing you? Only for another one to come take your goods. Or, to build enough buildings that use that material in order to cause an extreme shortage, sending the prices sky-high and making the trade unfeasible, returning the goods to your market and stabilizing (kinda) the prices and demand for a small time. While again, I like that and it seems really cool that you are provided ways to manipulate the market, It's just weird that (if you are playing a government that cares about your population), that you are unable to prioritize their demands over trade. You build a super giant strong clothing or furniture sector able to service thousands of people? your people will be the nakedest and standiest of all Europe, as once you are producing thousands of an item, it takes thousands to increase it's price to the point trade is no longer better. I'm become literally Sisyphus if I try to balance pop needs, industry needs and trade bullshit. Vicky 3 still needs a lot more options AND time in the oven. Hopefully it'll become great in the future, and not left forgotten.
@azpont7275
Жыл бұрын
I know it’s a very bad industry habit, but if we look at most Paradox base games at release, VicIII is much more playable than most. That’s said, the game definitely needs additions to deepen it’s mechanics, IMO they are nice, just aren’t deep enough. (Like warfare, diplomacy, and some UIs really truly suck, not to mention the AI) The main problem I’m having is stability issues. After 1870ish the game loves to fucking crash.
@Hatsuzu
Жыл бұрын
The fact that you can choose how to make shit should be removed, it's simply not realistic for a ruler to decide that.
@v4enthusiast541
Жыл бұрын
How else am I gonna run command economy through my Laissez-Faire government policy?
@Whiteboard44
Жыл бұрын
Yea this is so true. Markets should be the one deciding those stuff, unless u r a socialist state. Vic2 allows control of some part of the economy and most of the war is good enough imo. War should also be controlled by the ruler to a larger extent that in Vic3.
@PerfectDeath4
Жыл бұрын
I get that it is there to balance resource use and production so you can fine tune your industries... but most of this is only an issue because they want one factory being able to act like multiple factories in Vicky 2. Like a tailor is a loom, clothing, and lux clothing factory in one. Then there is a branch for lux clothes to use rubber, the loom and sewers to use coal and electricity, and some others use railroad service to reduce labour counts. Instead they could create conditions like if the factory can access enough coal it can "boost" itself to reduce labour jobs, or enough silk to convert some clothes into luxury type, if also rubber then gain extra lux clothes. Because what I find myself doing is checking my production amounts for the inputs that will change from upgrades and then selectivly upgrading only as many of the factories as I can supply without the price of the input going to the moon. I also don't think the automated button even works, or it runs on the AI logic of only building if high profits... which means 95% of your stuff won't get auto upgraded?
@Testimony_Of_JTF
Жыл бұрын
The realism argument is silly dude, it's a game. You don't play as a person but the governement.
@Freedmoon44
Жыл бұрын
@@Testimony_Of_JTF great and even then the Governement doesnt just decide on what which factory shall be built and what they will do or make, unless its a socialist economy because the governement holds the power. Its a game yes, but unfortunately for this "argument" a game about leading a country to victory in a historical setting REQUIRES historical accuracy and therefore a great ammount of realism, most of dont play for the sake of playing a useless Arcade game like a Sandbox, sure we can do that but thats not nearly as fun as stuff like Larping or making alternative history etc... Vicky III follows the trend of oversimplifying the game in order to bring in more people from outside, but its just far to much oversimplified in ways that really brings fun, like cool you can now edit your political group better than you could even in Vicky II. Now your army is just a bunch of numbers with a few techs that are straight upgrades without any kind of strategy and tactics involved. Aka the preparation for war aside from the logistics, doesnt exist anymore, this has been oversimplified, and this is absolutely outrageous that there is nearly no alternative ways to make up your forces
@erikentenmann2117
Жыл бұрын
Out of everything here the construction queue is probably the most off-putting thing here. Military and combat has always been reduced to dice rolls in PDX games and the these random modifiers you'll see in combat is just a representation of that abstraction in a different way, so I didn't mind it, but things like army composition do not really come into play until much later in the game when you have all of those different specialists available. But you won't see those until post-1900. The queue is another example of the building/industrializing abstraction being represented in a different way, except it doesn't really make sense when plantations are using the same queue as a furniture factory is on the other side of your country. There should be a better way of representing it.
@ГенрихЯковенко-г6ч
Жыл бұрын
Hey Bigweewil like to see your new video keep going bro
@HurrpyDurrDerp
Жыл бұрын
Ah yes, Keynesianism 3
@JohnnyCash101
Жыл бұрын
Don’t forget the hilarious failures that major regimes frequently fall victim to. Egypt frequently takes states from the OE and I’ve seen the CSA swallow the US. Definitely evidence of the superiority of industrialization over traditional agrarian regime structures.
@thisishuhwow
Жыл бұрын
command economy the game
@definitelynotBlu
Жыл бұрын
I think the simplification in Vic 3 has made it alot more accessible. I hope it becomes more complex later with expansions in a similar way to HoI4 though. I feel like I've been eased into Vic3 where as Vic2 was just too much to learn in one go, for myself atleast
@Mediumpisser
Жыл бұрын
4:21 wait, you can't even deny a call to arms? Like for real?
@TheKillaShow
Жыл бұрын
My biggest issue with the game is how bad the tutorial is. I have no idea what im supposed to be doing so I put the game down after about an hour of fucking up constantly. Burned 60 bucks imo. Maybe it will get better with updates. Coming from ck3, that game was incredibly simple to learn compared to this specifically because of ck3's tutorial that at least got you leaning in the right direction. Vic3 will say "Hey fix your bureaucracy" then not give you a single idea about how to do that.
@insertgoodchannelnamehere
Жыл бұрын
Basically hit the nail on the head except for i think the economy is totally bad. Its just a game of making sure all your resources are in the green, and thats it. Its like they missed the entire point of multinational markets-in V3 ive found that its best to produce everything, while in V2 you want to produce only what is most profitable, and let other countries produce less profitable goods wherein you can import them and keep more money then you could by just building a factory for that thing.
@Marcel-li9zw
Жыл бұрын
cant wait for the 200$+ of dlc's
@lordjustinian2913
Жыл бұрын
The thing is I think some of these problems are a result of the Paradox business model, but I do personally think that the model they do use is much better than a business model that has a ton of micro-transactions and is quickly fired out year after year to get more money. I do enjoy the more slow build up of DLC which you buy over time but because you enjoy the game, you would buy the DLC, also I am seeing way too many 4X video gaming channels review Victoria 3 and play Victoria 3 which tells me they might be targeting that crowd with Victoria 3, while a lot of the Paradox game channels do regular CK3 playthroughs and do videos on CK3. I think CK3 and Victoria 3 also appeal to me in a different way to the other games, I'm hoping that customization becomes a big part of Victoria 3 because I want a legitimate playthrough where I can turn Australia into a Aboriginal Empire thus creating an alternate future where the Indigenous Australian people took control of their own lands and fought back against the British Empire because to me, the fun of a Grand strategy game is not following history exactly but creating an alternate history with a big difference. Crusader Kings 3 you can do that so easily, I'm not sure about Victoria 3 but if I find out you can, that opens up the game for me and it keeps my interest despite the systems being a lot simpler, and that interest can keep me looking at DLC and hoping those systems will improve. Like so, one thing I'm waiting for in Crusader Kings III is societies, like how it is done in CKII which basically made each character feel more unique. Victoria 3 should make each playthrough feel unique because like Crusader Kings III, a lot of nations play exactly the same and that is kind of not enjoyable because I want each nation to feel different and defined.
@johnsteampunk6408
Жыл бұрын
why am i getting an ad from someone talking about victoria 2 and 3 on a video about victoria 2 and 3.
@hellotherelolol
Жыл бұрын
no stop... you're making wiz cry... please stop...
@burtreynolds8030
Жыл бұрын
I hope the bigger fixes come with free patches and not locked behind dlc
@dennispashin4393
Жыл бұрын
After playing the game for a while, I have to say that once I learned "the meta" of the economy, the world became my oyster. You want to max out taxes and minimize spending whenever possible, and balance your construction with your base income, so you do not get surprise deficits when the investment money dries up. Generally you will not want to cater to your people's needs until late game, so just import grain if it's getting expensive, otherwise they will be perfectly content. Also maximize universities whenever possible, it makes the intellectual interest group stronger and the research speed is invaluable.
@youtuberobbedmeofmyname
Жыл бұрын
"Because I am able to game a broken system I am more than comfortable losing $50 because green number go up" Nevermind everything is broken.
@dennispashin4393
Жыл бұрын
@@youtuberobbedmeofmyname it's a fact that it's an unfinished product that's not worth the 50 dollars (or 80 in my case) in it's current state, but I would be a hippocrite if I said it is a "bad game" after a hundred hours into it and enjoying it after figuring out what the heck was going on. War is the only real archaic part of the game that seems to be completely random, and of course the sever lack of flavor and events...
@Chubbertonn
Жыл бұрын
Couldn’t have said it better myself
@shoddypeasant8762
Жыл бұрын
I tried most of the paradox grand strategy games, by far vic2 is my favorite, I was gonna try vic3 but watching this it doesn't seem worth it, eu4 is a neat game too hoi4 is a confusing one, easy and a bit hard for me to comprehend at the same time.
@utewbd
Жыл бұрын
Their resource system is way too simple. There are no finite amounts of goods, no stockpiles. Just provinces allowed to produce them. And it extends to non-material resources, like supply/infrastructure/construction. It doesn't matter where something is located, your market or country simply has access to a total number of these things, so when you spam power plants in one place or railways, it somehow will help elsewhere. It's just so awkward and bare bones as to be bothersome. Like, I understand how their economy system works but it's so wrong and senseless in many ways that I'm too annoyed to enjoy it even doing well.
@nedas592
Жыл бұрын
I agree with all your said problems
@josecouchetdiaz993
Жыл бұрын
I hate the construction system so bad. The game is a solid base for the greatest game ever, but as it stands today, i would rather play imperator rome
@FloraJoannaK
Жыл бұрын
War and the military suck in Vicky 3. But the biggest problem is the UI, and how construction works. I agree with the steel mill and wheat field example: there really ought to be different mechanics for different types of building. Some automation would be cool too, maybe give regions a budget and guidelines on what to build. At least a simple system of prioritizing regions and building types. And V3 would really benefit from a stockpile mechanic. Really get into the economics of international politics, with the player having have to take into account if their people will starve when they fight the biggest grain producer in their market, or if they can manage with with far less lead if a blockade disrupts trade with another country. I was kind of hoping for a Grand Strategy with Offworld Trading Company mechanics. Seems like I'll have to wait some more. 🤷♀
@Secretsofsociety
Жыл бұрын
I like the game. I'm guessing they will be tuning it with player data. I mean only a couple days ago there was practically no penalty to turning your government budget down. Made this choice feel very hollow. If something that relatively simple wasn't in already then there are probably a zillion tweaks they are going to be making now that they see how people are playing. The F-keys help a lot with navigating the UI. Also the tab key for moving around the map. Played 20 hours without knowing about either and my hands feel it.
@Roland_Deschain
Жыл бұрын
I wonder if paradox wanted these games to be the simulations of the eras they represented. If so they seem to have dramatically failed. It was a big turn off for me when you can conquer the world as luxemburg in hoi4. And now I see ppl doing world conquest with zulus and other opms. There is no challenge and backlash to industralisation and innovation. Its just so surreal..
@Damian-cilr2
Күн бұрын
And atleast in hoi4 a luxembourg world conquest is somewhat challenging and even if its unrealistic its (kinda,atleast up to a certain point) fun,and thats the most important part
@alcazar9266
Жыл бұрын
2 things: 1. irl, if youre in any kind of major war, youre going to be in debt 2. deficit spending has always been a thing, why are you pretending its not? even in other paradox games it isnt the case, in eu4 for example, being in debt is a natural part of the game. you use the debt to build up faster and outscale ur debt, then you pay it off (or even take more). why would this game be any different?
@m136dalie
Жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing your thoughts in a clear way. I probably won't buy this game since I don't think it lives up to the standard Vic2 set. Yes, Vic2 has issues but the fundamental mechanics are so engaging I really feel like the leader of a country making small differences to influence a nation in the long term. Especially the relationship you have with pops, which is what I love the most about Vic2 and seems to be lacking in the sequel. Also I really dislike the HOI4 tech tree style and construction queue, disappointed they replaced the old model which worked fine in my opinion. Definitely could have done with some improvements but this replacement really seems like a step back to me.
@wingy252
Жыл бұрын
Wonder who playtested it at paradox and thought. "Yeah the fans of vic2 will love this" Or do they simply hope to make it good over time through dlc releases with redicolous pricing?
@jones877
Жыл бұрын
Victoria 3 seems like it copied stellaris, hoi4, and ck3. I dont see how its connected to Victoria 2 at all.
@asatru1986
Жыл бұрын
Also if i am a absolute monarchy i should be able to change some laws without the whole RNG Change thing to go through
@grassynaga9092
Жыл бұрын
The real issue with the game is the game. I and a ton of people on the forums, reddit, etc can’t play past like 1880. The engine just seizes up and crashes. Paradox said it has something to do with late game immigration but who knows
@Oliver9402
Жыл бұрын
Vicky 3 will be a great game. Hello fellow open beta testers! we having fun?
@pfalzerwald8781
Жыл бұрын
My friend, why are you reading this like a uni sophomore literature class presentation 😂😂
@sharpkiller123
Жыл бұрын
tbh all the point you made is a good ones i think they have done it on purpose to market them in Future DLC which they are well known for that's my opinion.
@speedio42
Жыл бұрын
So. As someone who dabbled in vicky 2 years ago. But I kinda like vicky 3. Should I just invest a couple of hundred hours in vicky 2 rather than vicky 3? (it's a paradox game. There will be hundredths of hours..)
@bigweevil
Жыл бұрын
Your choice, they're pretty different games. If you want to play SP for Vic 2 idk recommend HPM or GFM. I prefer Vic 2 MP though. Vic 3 needs some work imo, but maybe it's just not for me.
@Mr_Mcgee_
Жыл бұрын
Honestly it isn’t even an economic simulation. It’s essentially a supply chain manager with a political simulator tagged on. Talk about reinventing the wheel into a square. To me it seems like the Devs decided to make their own game rather than building upon what made Vic 2 great. It seems fun enough, but it isn’t Victoria.
@MascletaTheFirst
Жыл бұрын
The whole economic win mode isn't even fun. As the netherlands I start out as 12th but after 2 decades I end up as 14th with about 200 prestige while france has like 2500. If this is the case with country number 12 it, pretty much means the other 300 or so countries are pretty much pointless to ever play.
@sherth6397
Жыл бұрын
I really was hoping Vic 3 would be good
@brencmrn
Жыл бұрын
Pretty much sums up everyone's grudge with the game, great video!
@naturalbornpatriot6369
Жыл бұрын
Pass, absolutely pass. Gonna be another Imperator Rome
@CandidaRosa889
Жыл бұрын
Maybe it's a little cheap to make war an undesirable thing by taking away player control but did people really want more unit whack a mole and terrain baiting? Having war be something that can turn out bad for the player instead of being able to exploit the ai all the time means the player focuses more on the internal aspects of developing a nation rather than focusing on the next war all the time. As a former vic2 player I think I'm satisfied with 3 because it fulfilled my expectations of it being an updated victoria 2 expierence that will be expanded on.
@Ronaldo-ss4qq
Жыл бұрын
Many wars and battles of the 1800s were determined by what you might consider "terrain moleing". If there were no Hills at Gettysburg maybe the American civil war would have gone on a couple more years longer or resulted in a confederate victory. I would rather have infinite terrain moleing than to have a idler war system where combat width is not decided by semi realistic values for terrain, or even tech, but by randomized dice rolls scaling from 1 to 10 times base value. War can still go horribly wrong in vic 2 if your enemy has advantageous terrain but can't really expect AI from 2009 to be perfect. In Eu4 which was made more recently Paradox implemented an Ai that is at least semi competent. I noticed in Eu4 for example the Ai was able to prioritize knocking out from the smaller nations from my alliance, thus slowly and effectively grinding down my total alliance combine military strength. The ultimate solution to AI being unchallenging is multiplayer in which for Victoria Tycoon is very bugged.
@notgoddhoward5972
Жыл бұрын
If you can play it on a mobile phone device(idk I don't have one, those guys from Blizzard think everyone does but I still use morse code telegraphs) its not a Victoria game.
@wilianrodrigues5280
Жыл бұрын
I honestly feel like Vicky 3 is more simplistic and flat than Vicky 2 was
@ethanwmonster9075
Жыл бұрын
Trade was super clunky and finding a balance between buy orders and sell orders was annoying.
Пікірлер: 310