What is next with free updates | Victoria 3
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 сен 2024
- Today, Martin and Lino, will go over the future free update plans we have previously shown in Dev Diary 124 and talk a bit about ideas, reasoning and what thoughts we have about the topics covered in the lovely infographic!
__________________
#Paradoxinteractive #Victoria3 #Grandstrategy
Links:
Facebook - / victoriagamepdx
PDXTwitter - / pdxinteractive
PDXVictoriaDiscord - / discord
Forums - pdxint.at/2TaKh6Z
Official Website - pdxint.at/3B6hUrQ
Steam - pdxint.at/3fvxaV7
RUclips Network:
✔ / @paradoxgrandstrategy
✔ / @citiesskylines
✔ / @stellarisofficial
✔ / @lifebyyou
✔ / @ageofwondersofficial
✔ / @crusaderkings
✔ / @worldofdarkness
![Baby Kia - GLOVES & DRACS (BLACK AF1s) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ajm8LeB0qQk/mqdefault.jpg)
For militaries, I think there should be stockpiling weapons, ammo and artillery so that the manufacturies aren't just unprofitable during peace.
And you should be able to transfer weapons to other countries I feel
Most goods in this game should be stockpiled...
Tradable military goods is a great idea. Would love to be able to convoy raid and steal military supplies as well, though might be hard to balance
yeah i definitely feel like u should be able to profit more from wars either by military-industrial complex or selling a bunch of shit to everyone else
@@CandleLover69better and more complex convoy systems would make navy gameplay a lot more important which it definitely should be in an era where seapower meant so much prestige, influence, and economic power
A Happy Wednesday update? Big nice.
Happy Wednesday? No that sounds wrong!
@@Victoria3Official but it feels so right
Happy Thursday. Today i will serve people fish.
Happy Thursday. Today i will serve people fish.
Supplier of loud cars
I think revolutions and civil wars also need a major overhaul.
Give some way to help cut down major power pls. Some time I don't want to make only war to cut down power.
does that include abolishing the Capital Army exploit too?
Yeah, having every revolution be a civil war is just stupid. Most of the time it would be a mob storming the government palace. In places like France for example, centralisation was very high, thus controlling Paris meant you had control over the nation. It would be cool if it was linked to a “centralisation level”. Say to get more powers you have to centralise, but that would make you more susceptible to being overthrown.
Foreign powers should, at least in late game, also be much more interested in supporting the side in a civil war that corresponds with their ideology, even if they dislike the nation that corresponds with their ideology. Historically you saw this during the Estonian and Latvian wars for independence, the Finnish civil war, the Russian civil war etc., which all saw a lot of volunteers and aid from other nations
Companies have the potential to be a major part of the game, i'd like to see them be the cause for a rework of the investment pool system
They should do the heavy lifting of builing up industrie, its not a city builder its a country simulator!
@@DerFreiegedanke if we think Like that, maybe in later stages of the Game, we should build Up companies, instead of industries.
For example, we build Up the company "Volkswagen" instead of Motorindustrie, that gets bonuses If Volkswagen-company is selected.
for wars, I think capitulation should be re-worked. right now you have to occupy all war goals in order to capitulate someone - meaning if you start a war to transfer Canada and add war reparations, even if all of Canada is conquered and under your defacto control, Britain won't capitulate until you occupy London. I think a cool system would be for wargoals to have individual progress, so not all wars end in total capitulation or a white-peace. this'd also help with the AI, since any war to transfer colonies always escalates into needing to occupy a capital to end the war currently
I like those ideas! Whatever the fix is, I think the very nature of the "exhaustion doesn't drop below zero unless certain things are true about the state of the entire war" principle needs to be overhauled. Whether that means separate exhaustion tracks per war goal, or a rebalancing of the triggers for going negative, or maybe just having exhaustion pile up indefinitely and balancing everything around that. It just seems better to cut losses and start fresh on that system rather than keep jury-rigging something that has now been shown to inherently have too many wonky edge cases to be worth saving.
@@maxsilva11i think i’d be nice if we also had technologies that affect war exhaustion, so that at the start of the game wars are relatively quick but by the end, as you unlock things like mass propaganda then you loose war support slower
This would be a major upgrade. In almost every game I have, I encounter a situation like that. I can occupy 70% of a country but if I don't have that one extra war goal it's a white peace for me! If this system was made to be more dynamic, I guarantee that would instantly make warfare a lot more strategic and immersive.
I also like the idea of conquering my enemies colonies in east Africa but them capturing my holdings in southeast Asia leading to more dynamic map changes.
I think war reparations requiring a ocupation of the capital is too much of an ask.
Pops engaging in trade? Damn boy, i'm in.
Automate thing man, I'm in. Go go Laissez-faire economy lol
if only they take the next step and make construction sectors owned by individuals. Like they are in real life...
Automated trade was the best solution from the start. Ports and Transport/shipping should be a pop-owned business.
@@SBezmy And if i want to pay burocracy, i can set up trades myself. That will ensure you can create demand/supply, but keeps us from of micromanaging world trade.
One Proud Bavarian? Somebody has to warn that guy!
It is far too late for that, our plans are already in motion!
@@Victoria3Officialu hire him?
Was he mentioned? Must have zoned out?
@@markkajc at the very end
@@Victoria3OfficialUnderstand this: Things are now in motion that cannot be undone. I ride for Minas Tirith
I think you guys hit every major point myself and others have been asking for on the reddit, so its super glad to see these on the docket! Super excited.
This was very exciting to listen to, I am extremely excited for the future, thank you to the whole team for all your hard work :)
Thank you for the kind words!
@@Victoria3Officialim late to the party, this is my favorite paradox game I have ever played!
3:30 - regarding the Crimean War, one should note that, *diplomatically*, it absolutely involved all great powers around the globe. Austria occupied Wallachia and Moldavia to force out the Russians and to demilitarize the conflict in the Danube region. It had a partial mobilization that nearly bankrupted its economy, all so that it would not have a war on its doorstep that would unhinge its population in the Balkans. To simulate that, the game would need to be able to include the ability to exclude theaters of conflict as a war demand, as had Russia not acceded to the Austrian demand, they were prepared to go to war over it. The demand itself was agreed to after hostilities between Russia and Ottomans began, which bespeaks the need for more flexibility in war goals *after* the shooting starts.
Which leads to the next point, that of German, Swedish, and American involvement. Napoleon III was prepared to re-draw the map of Europe as regards to Russia and was pressing for Sweden to join in as part of that plan - promising lots of Russian-held territory to the Swedes. The British, not really wanting that to happen, pressed Russia to agree to demands after the fall of Sevastopol so that the war would not spread to the Baltic region. Both Britain and France pressed Germany to enter against Russia, or face their hostility in the future. Germany, therefore, was relieved that Swedish pressure got the Russians to sue for peace. Finally, the USA was seen as a possible entrant on the Russian side, so the British had one more reason to get things over with before it got too hot.
In the outcome of the war, Russia had to dismantle its Black Sea fleet, a massive humiliation for them and yet another war goal type that is not present in Victoria 3. It's also a war goal that arrived later on in the conflict. This was something that was sorted out by diplomats in Paris, an element missing from Victoria 3 warfare resolution. We need the ability to call general truces (with or without blockade enforcement) and then head to the negotiation table where we can pick and choose from existing wargoals that are pre-paid for in terms of infamy or create new goals out of whole cloth at a higher cost in infamy if pressed without there being an overall Great War going on.
And that's where a Great War system can emerge, if diplomacy is done so that one cannot fight a war without frequently staying on top of the diplomatic situation. Replace moving commanders and stacks on the map with making deals and bolstering allies as the war continues.
This would also open up cleaner Monroe Doctrine-like mechanics where we can see the British Empire use a declaration from the USA to bolster its position in the Western Hemisphere and eventually develop a solid working relationship with the USA. Not that it must be that way - I recently had a USA playthrough where the French Empire supplanted the British in that regard. But Victoria 3 needs that kind of constant statecraft mechanic going on so that wars aren't left in the hands of the generals.
The best part of this game are the stories that are shaped by this game’s systems - adding more complexity to political figures, movements, and companies helps to make what are essentially the “recurring characters” of the story more interesting. I’m happy to hear your plans with movements and discrimination. EDIT: and I’m excited about your plans with companies too!!! I hope you implement company presidents that can make deals with the government.
Add shore bombardments as a way to lower the war support when at war!!!
hopefully the interception of convoys, which right now mainly serves to "soft blockade" countries, can be fleshed out more to properly naval blockade countries, which does tangible war support damage so you can properly "Anaconda Plan" countries which can lead more directly to their capitulation.
@@Ereshkigal616 Yes! Blockading could be a way bigger aspect,as you can completely ruin a country's economy by doing so. I hope it doesn't make GB an even greater menace... Shore bombardments aswell,a lot of conflits were resolved by having an ironclad pointing it's guns at the foe's capital
And after all this is done:
Parliaments! One or two houses? different electoral/appointment systems when having two Houses? Different responsibilities? Laws pass in one or both? change funding for institutions needing approval in one but not the other? constitutional changes needing special support?
I wanna be able to have the 1836 Swedish Riksdag as well as the 1936 one. And the Westminster Parliament. And the US houses of congress. etc etc.
I want parliaments in this game so badly. To have a proper cabinet would also be nice
Also imo interest groups should have more characters attached to them, not only their leader. We could then assign those characters to ministries
@Myx_wieczorem I'm thinking 3 characters per IG. Leader dies? One of the other two takes over 95% of the time. Cabinets? Yes! That would have different sizes & powers based on laws.
I am not a speech of English but I translate this message to congratulate them for the unbeatable affection and dedication that you are getting to this game. From CK 2 that had no love for a paradox game.
Thank you for dedicating yourself to giving you a face washing and a new prespective to each update. It is very interesting in multiplayer campaigns that we do
Woah! These are some great news! Can’t wait to get my hands on the new companies!!! 😍😍
12:20 trade is definitely a bit frustrating when in late game you simply don't have enough convoys even with all the ports maxed out so you're forced to conquer a bunch of coastal states just so you could build more ports. Also I'm not completely sure on that but it seems like in absence of convoys the most productive trade routes don't want to grow even if convoys are allocated to lower productivity trade routes, so you need to cancel low productivity trade routes manually. It would be interesting if there was a price to convoys so that more productive trade routes outbid the lower productivity ones. I think current rules that decide if trade route should grow or shrink attempt to do this, but it feels a bit unreliable and tedious.
Regarding a more autonomous trade, would love for there to be some way to manage tariffs and specific policies in a more macro way rather than having to look at every single trade route to determine if I should encourage exports or limit them. Perhaps some button that would have the routes automatically be set to a profitable tariff if I chose a more protectionist option. And with so many trade routes, maybe there could be a way to tell the trade ai to not put any tariffs on particular nations if I wanted to maintain good relations.
This is absolutely what they should do. Fully automate trade, but let me as the player toy with tariffs, and volume limits.
Yeah, Vicky 2 market system was ok,
Absolutely I think the biggest problem with the current game is the randomness of the way ideologies appear and disappear in your country. While there is a weighted factor based on the state of your country it's still way too random. An IG should not be wholly determined by the leader. So everything you talk about from 10:00 on is very good sounding to me!
Yup, I had a devout leader who strongly wanted Theocracy like the main IG wants, great, we're enacting it. He dies and is replaced by a royalist. All of a sudden, the 70% pass chance changes to 0 and the devout group now hate me for starting to enact the law that they originally wanted.
I really hope that you are able to make changes more gradual in a nation. Such as when a law changes it takes time to fully implement, when a nation that has no or a limited history of colonization that colonization is more difficult to initiate and can't go crazy, same with warring, if a nation doesn't have a recent history of warring, they just wouldn't start attacking their neighbors. I like the idea that revolutions take time to mature and actually break out but when they do, more drastic changes can be made in the nation. I am kind of hearkening back to the days of Pride of Nations where the diplomacy came in stages and took time. Everything sounded good though and I think you are on the right track.
2:30 Army mentoned, good, supply mentioned, good, and the mil access too, but would have liked if u would have developped a bit more on that. Would there be a military stockpile? With the supplies will the armies be more tangible, no TP ing after naval invasions or being forced back when frontline disappears because too slow to travel to the frontline? Some changes to the combat itself? There is a lot to be tweaked upon... Can't wait the naval update tho.
What is discussed here with navies, trade, legitimacy and companies is what will flesh this game out even more. Perfect
I think a rework to infamy gain is a bit needed. My biggest issue is that Sokoto, an unrecognized African Power that I guarantee very few if any of the in game Great Powers would actually care about, costs more infamy to conquer than it would take to conquer Paris. I think for unrecognized powers in general, infamy gain should be reduced significantly.
I think Infamy is reduced by Colonialism and Civilizing Mission
@@Little_Compy that's right (Colonial office in power bock). However, because they can only be unlocked late in the game, their infamy reduction is countered by the increase of infamy due to the population growth, so it's not that interesting.
The system is ok, it's dependent on the population of stat or subject, you have few techs to improve and colonial specialisation to power bloc. If not it will be too cheap, now it's 16 inf to subjugation of Persia late game +10Millions pops,you want less?
@@TheNikoXEN He wants it reworked, not simply nerfed.
I'm really excited about the changes to companies. They sound great!
In general Victoria 3 is going into really good direction thanks to the work of all of you. Thank you!
I really love the foreign investment mechanic. Glad to see you are looking to integrate them with company mechanics. Btw, i cannot understate how going from this game with nested tooltips and then playing any other GSG without it is like going back to the stone age.
love these updates, both the navy and the army and regional wars are all key for me. Playing as USA having the civil war and getting russia, france, GB and Austria all involved in my mess is frustrating. Glad you're looking into that.
Thanks guys
Excellent update! All these innovations are particularly appreciable, especially those on internal politics (for me). I can't wait to read a more precise timeline on update 1.8. Good work :)
I am very excited about Victoria 3 future! I can't wait to see the plans for the next DLCs and if we will get a "season pass" again! :)
Companies have so much potential! They are one of my favorite improvements over Vicky 2. I think CEOs as characters would be a very interesting thing as well
ive been thinking that interests should be tied to where your navy is present, so cool y’all are actually doing that!!!
I love the way they talk about the game and I am really excited for the things to come!
I really like the possibility of having "World Wars" with major powers possibly joining most battles. Maybe to balance you could make wars more costly? I use the Slower Battles mod which kind of does that and makes wars more costly especially for major powers. Maybe smaller wars could be generally disinteresting to major powers but they may still be able to join especially if a rival is involved or one of the sides has great relations with them.
Really excited for all of these plans to come to fruition! Appreciate and respect the communication as always!
I really enjoy victoria 3 the mechanics and simulation just give it a certain feeling which you do not get from other strategy games. The game still has some rough edges but I am so excited about what you will do with the game in future update. Since, it seems to continually get better and better.
I love the game you guys made. Ill be here playing it on and off until the end of my days.
I am very excited to see the new features, specially about trade and companies. I hope you will look into the goods and their numbers as well, because as it is, some market goods are perma low price, like hardwood, sugar, Coffee and generally anything non escencial has no demand. That limits profitable trade options severely.
Also there might be a housing good, like services that will be effected when there are too many migrants there and there can be some events which can be tied to that
It’d be good if the ‘religious IG was split if there is more than one religion in the nation. Currently there’s no way to represent the different agendas of different religions, catholic vs Protestant etc.
Armies teleporting to HQ when their front changes or disappears is hopefully high on the list of issues to fix for this game.
Yes it is, we want to fix the edge cases that cause this to happen.
Enforcing peace should be like in Eu4 or in HOI4. Or maybe have limited wars be like EU4 and World Wars like HOI4.
I Loved everything I heard here. Can't wait for the DDs to go further into it
I think war it’s a feature you guys would need to rework because it lacks of flavor and it doesn’t rely on strategy or some smart movement. It’s whoever has more soldiers wins and technology wins
Great changes, can't wait to play with it.
This sounds like victoria 3 is moving in the right direction!
Thank you so much for this game, incredibly fun and relaxing
5:30 - a quid pro quo would be wonderful, especially if it allows for the purchasing of territory, trade rights, and such-like.
One thing I'd love is possible is to make better colonial borders and less bordergore or weird claims/colonial territories where they wouldn't historically make sense (like the British colonizing Algeria and Tunisia every game...). Incorporating a journal entry or event chain for European powers regarding the Scramble for Africa/Berlin Conference would also be really cool.
This game has really come along way, I loved Vicky 2, but it's safe to say she has been surpassed IMO.
Sounds great. Lots to look forward to by the sounds of it.
I firmly believe that some of the historical characters should have the ability to grant you historical decisions that have a huge impact. Also the game could use more historical characters.
With the Navy upgraded doing roleplay makes so much more fun now.
I already only did an interest into an area which was far away when I had a stronger navy. As otherwise it wouldn't make sense. Good to see that this connection will be a part of the game now 🎉
One big thing that diplomacy needs is more direct nation interaction and ways to make demands or requests without requiring to go to a diplomatic play, some other things that would be good would also be diplomacy that isn't a direct treaty or relationship (such as diplomatic visits that could cause lobbies to be created or relations to improve or worsen depending on events that happen during the trip), also more direct character impact on diplomacy especially for monarchies with an interaction to ask for a royal marriage and some kind of mechanic where new nations who are monarchies or nations that become monarchies have a choice to elect a new monarch increasing relations with the specific country the new dynasty comes from, there should be ways to make deals with countries to say swap or even sell territory, also a real more concrete sphere of influence system (or various mechanics which functionally create it) such as ways to put pressure on other countries to enact certain laws or to break relations with other nations and your strength and relations determine how willing other nations are to interefere in what's considered your sphere of influence and having various ways to gain influence over a country such as the amount of investment you have in them or if you are bankrolling (also perhaps allowing the player to choose how much to give with the bankroll interaction?) or if allies if you are much stronger etc. another thing is a feature from vic1 where alliances could actually specifically target or exclude certain nations (for example an alliance between prussia and austria that only concerned war with russia or an alliance between france and britain that wouldn't invoke if either were at war with spain), also actually having an international conference system where certain things (such as a monarch for a new nation or demand for territory) could be brought to where all the great powers and powers involved could come to an agreement and then enforce it if the losing party rejects it (basically a fully fleshed out crisis system from vic 2)
If companies are gonna be their own actors I strongly suggest you should eventually add monopoly and oligarchy features where businesses and maybe if companies get their own characters too as CEOs can affect political developments and support or oppose certain laws and affect pop wages etc.
Our boy Lino is there ❤
absolutely gigantic side note, but paradox game is one of the only place on the internet where you hear such a wide variant of accents speaking in english, its kind of crazy, its even affecting the devs as they get bit by a swedish man giving them a swedish accent
Wonderful update! I'm very excited, and grateful for you sharing. I'm especially excited about the "limited wars" (with the Crimean War example having been given.) I'm looking forward to working with this in my future videos. This also sets the stage for .. The Great War!
I would love to see the carlist wars added to the game.
Ooh, Lovely discussions!
Me for the entire duration of the video (but especially the first 6.5 minutes): They're listing all the things I want!
9:21 i am glad you guys are talking about it.
Historically, multi ethnic countries (i.e. Austria, russia, ottomans, and some others) suffered due to the rise of nationalism. Heck, the idea of a nation-state itself is a relatively new phenomena. There should also be a way to stop the rise of nationalism (or at the very least minimize its effects). Instead of nationalism being a requirement to make progress in the journal entries.
Religion also needs more flavor. There should be more religions. For example, the religion of the taiping rebellion, prussian calvinism, british anglican, and lutherans from minor german tags are all categorized as protestantism. Eventhough there are serious doctrinal differences between them.
All of the devout groups seem to support the same laws regardless of the religion they belong to. That should not be the case.
I really appreciate wiz pointing that characters IGs should be determined by pops. I hope they'll use character popularity to represent the popularity of ideologies so the player can see at a glance what ideas are popular in the political sphere of their nation. Then perhaps in the future we might see a cabinet type system to house these people, allow for more interesting distribution of power laws and more player interaction with characters as well as allowing for more characters to exist outside of only IG leaders and military leaders.
I really appreciate that I can just have fronts and do other things. I'n not playing a war game here. Hope that doesn't change.
As part of legitimacy and prestige perhaps the discoveries of dinosaur bones and geographical expeditions could be taken into account, or the rediscoveries of places like macchu Picchu , collecting wild animals into zoological gardens. Perhaps an explorer role could be implemented, similarly to the scientist in stellaris
Add "very hard" as a difficulty that works very similar to Eu4 (makes countries absurdly aggresive and buffed in most areas of the game)
You should add some mechanics around Absolutism. Even though it started to decline after Napoleon lost, it should give players some sort of better control of their nation. Maybe a flat bonus to pass any law would be a good start, it is the King's will, let it be done.
Please please PLEASE add the option to turn off event-specific music when opening events! The music in the game is amazing and I would like to keep hearing the track I'm currently on when I deal with events!
I’m liking the plans for the naval changes. Wouldn’t mind a ship designer like Hoi 4.
I always like seeing Wizz.
YESS BRING ON THE BOATS!!!
OPB name drop at the end felt like a cameo in a Marvel after credit scene 🤣
Yay! Ships!
Having navy ships be actual ships that you can build, equip, and control is great. Hopefully a similar step can be taken for army regiments.
Also, just a minor thing, but I think it would be a massive improvement to the US Civil War mechanic if the US proper could have an option to forcibly annex Maryland during the Civil War if it goes to the Confederacy. Per History, Lincoln suspended the right of habeas corpus for Maryland precisely to prevent the issue which I will now discuss. Which is that Maryland ALWAYS ends up in Confederate hands creating a ridiculous frontline where D.C. is all on its own, which of course results in way too many wars being won by the Confederacy, since it can just waltz into D.C. and gain warscore. This would add historical flavor, and be a massive QOL improvement to my eyes which have to endure seeing far too many KaiserReich style 4-way Civil Wars in America.
First rule of OPB, you don't talk about OPB
and second rule of OPB, you do not talk about OPB
@@jaguarlord7065 "His name was OPB"
3:23 jokes on you i try to turn all of my wars into world wars.
I would also love to see the dynamics of diplomacy regarding navies and consequential arms races. As we know historically, Great Britain was really pissed off at anyone trying to match or challenge their naval power. Germany got so hellbent on building as many Dreadnoughts as GB that they introduced a consumption tax on sparkling wine beverages that still exists to this day (sad noises). It was a proper arms race, where the most powerful and advanced economies really showed off their muscles, and spent ludicrous amounts of resources on. It is a key feature of this time period, I hope it will be reflected like that in the game. Thanks for the work you guys do, it is appreciated!
The fact that the developers focus on the nitty gritty like companies is nice but for me the biggest problem with vicky3 is still that almost every country feels the same and must follow the same path to be succesfull. Therefor I am kind of dissapointed to hear there is no focus on historical emersion which could improve doversity in gameplay.
Anyway, any free content is appreciated! And im thankfull that more than a year after release we still get free stuff!
In regards to internal politics, it'd be nice to have characters hold government offices; if you bolster an interest group that belongs to a party (or perhaps it could be possible to bolster a certain party orientation in the future, if you want the related politics to be influential in your country?), then you could make agreements with other parties for their support in a law you'd like to pass, for the promise of passing a law that they want - or make alliances with other parties, giving them government offices, which I imagine could work like the different court roles in CK3 does, so you could have a socialist Minister for Justice and a liberal Minister for Foreign Affairs i.e. - although with much more sway in the affairs of the country of course.
As well as ministers and the like, it goes without saying that the head of government also should be represented, as these were very essential to national pride etc., and could prove for interesting gameplay. In Sweden and Denmark for instance, the monarch had quite a lot of power and was able to remove the head of government on their own discretion for much of the time that Victoria 3 spans, which actually ended up almost causing Denmark to become a republic in 1920, in an event known as "Påskekrisen", where the Danish king sacked the konseilminister (what is known as a prime minister today) despite them having the support of the Danish government, in the hopes of getting a konseilminister that would pursue the integration of Flensburg into Denmark. I think it'd be really cool to have the game be able to portray events like that in some sort of fashion.
On a finishing note, it'd also be nice to have war support play a much bigger role. War support in a nation ruled by a communist or fascist government should erode slower than in a nation ruled by a liberal government, IF the correct measurements before war has been taken. Here I imagine propaganda would be interesting to portray in some manner, as well as the justification of the war goal. Taking back a piece of land that you have a claim on - or that your primary culture(s) consider their homeland - should have more support than taking a part of a country that is hard to justify conquering. So essentially, more portraying of preparing for war besides building up your war economy
If the descrimination is going to have a new mechanic are we going to have the chance to commit or stop an event akin to the Armenian Genocide?
I want the trade rework, but, after hear you all, I want it all!!!
I'm gonna love this one!
I beg you to please make it easier again to join custom unions of great nations. It’s so much harder and tedious to play nations besides the strong nations
I can not express how unhappy I will be with the game if I can never remove the Landowners from power and reform because I can't kick them out of government. If you plan to make it harder to switch out governments you need to re-balance the entire government mechanics to allow for the possibility of modernizing and liberalizing. I suggest adding movements like the Spector haunting the world and positivists. Maybe utilize new events like the "Corn Laws" to spawn new leaders with good/viable ideologies?
I hope you have something in mind for the East India Company and Hudson's Bay Company in your company update plans.
I’m loving that the game is getting more and more difficult so I’m happy
Lino mit dem Hänno Merch haha 👍
SPANDAUER!
Was ist euer Handwerk?!
The Battle Hymm of the Republic in the background sounds new... I wonder if the next DLC will be about the US
If you give us for example for warfare replacable weapons (give the soldiers breech loading rifles ones researched and produced), this would improve the game a lot, so we could absolutely crush austria as prussia (which also happened historically)
im looking forward to the navy and small scale wars
Diplomatic plays and wars need a kind of DEFCON-like escalation scale. That limit how many resources of the nation both the government or people or both are willing to commit to a conflict. The full mobilisations prior to WWI are definitely the highest level, but there should be serious maluses to both France and Britain if they both fully mobilise the entire nation for war over a small proctorate in Africa, where they can escalate but there should be a bigger punishment for whichever country decides to over-escalate over small scale conflicts without outright taking the choice away.
Fixing the unending wars bug would be awesome
Please consider a complete redesign of the military recruitment and barracks interfaces. Adding divisions and conscripts-- or reassigning generals-- or upgrading units or-- changing battalion supplies is an absolute nightmare and so profoundly unintuitive.
For trade, I suggest to have broad trade policies that automatically create government trade routes. For example, set it to export a particular good to whoever will buy, find profitable trades with a particular country (for diplomatic/power bloc reasons), etc. The two options I listed are the main ways I use the trade system aside from importing resources I’m short of.
If you’re looking at diplo plays, please allow secondary participants to gain maneuvers and seek their own goals in a war. That would make alliances and great wars more interesting. It’s just nit very immersive to have a Great War where only one country on each side stands to make significant gains just because they are the primary and can have multiple war goals.
I think that we should have an option to buy provinces in an diplomatic play!
I wish assimilation and integration of states played a bigger part in the game. For example, if the state in africa has been integrated and have been settled and assimilated by north italians for a long time it should allow the north italian pops living in that state to claim there to be their homeland.
Will we ever set DLC packs for unit sprites for like better late Victorian era British uniforms with the white pith helmets 😄
Loving the culture plans, I've been playing around with religion, as discrimination has been so immovable for an "conserative" gameplay.
So looking forward to seeing just how my north italian pops position in Austria will affect my gameplay :)
Companies should be able to do Banana republic shenanigans. Additionally the Tinto team recently mentioned that with Project Caesar about player banks which are not yet planned to be playable.
This leads me to two thoughts...
1. Banks should be made into their own companies which do bank things like banking and hedging on things that banks do whatever that is, aside from getting government handouts of course.
2. PLAYABLE CORPORATIONS! Now of course the main issue with this is optimisation. But not to worry big companies like mergers so perhaps mergers and the natural capitalist tendency towards monopoly should reduce late game lag from this. Lol
This would include cartels, monopolies, duopolies, etc. I think this doesn't need to be playable immediately but I do think it would be really cool. Companies should aim to try and control the entire production process. Corperate shareholders should have voting powers. On this same note unions should actually be real organisations, this could be part of interest group mechanics. Unions in a way also need to rally and congeal into larger and larger organisations able to do general strikes if possible. General strikes should actually be represented too in this should be represented in the form of a diplomatic play. If you're a socialist country with an interest in the region... You may wish to 'socialise' with these unions (probably with the pro x-y relationship groups) and even be able to involve yourself in those diplomatic plays just out of solidarity.
Bonus Thought: It would also be nice to extend this feature to legacy power structure groups, especially the landed aristocracy. The landed aristocracy should be capable of converting their assets into capital and do funny things like enclosing the commons and getting stinky rich from making the switch. This should also apply to influencial slave owner families. Peoples slave owners could have owners associations in each state which has slave pops.
Obviously this would take... A lot of work and time. And I imagine giving these groups AI could have disastrous effects on game performance. But were it possible to simplify it in a way and make it doable... IT WOULD BE MY BIGGEST FEATURE REQUEST! Who knows maybe I should wait for Vicky 4 on that one when we have consumer grade quantum computers. You know what that means... Might wanna catch up on your quantum mechanics over there at Paradox. I am sure folks who work/ed on Stellaris already have that in the bag.
Ok i don’t know if you guys take suggestions but i got an I idea for an event after the Mexican-American war there was a lot of discussion of how much land to take from Mexico and in fact most Americans senators wanted more land than what America had taken and the only reason why is because the negotiator we sent refused to be fired so I think if you added a event that fired after the US beats Mexico and essentially lets you choose between historical boarders, taking more Mexican land, or annexing all of Mexico I just think it would be some nice flavor
Most important video of the summer :o
One thing I would like to be updated, relating to politics is the Civil wars.
several things regarding them.
The market of countries in a civil war shouldnt be entire disconnected, that doesnt make that much sense. Trade would be significantly impacted, but still possible. Maybe a flat reduction to market access for all states and an increased one for states on the frontlines.
Alternativly, states occupied in a civil war should instantly flip ownership and get a bit of devastation(with a cooldown)
What annoys me about civil wars, it doesnt really take into account the influence of IGs in states.
I had an aristocratic+devout revolution spawn in areas where either the military or the Unions had the majority of Power (who were the government) Only because there was a significant number of radicals by discrimination.
And I do not mean they should be loyel. No the shouldnt. Instead the should go for independence. Their opressors are at each others throat. Now or never. Civil wars also should ease the enactment of laws. And I think you should be able to make promises to 1 or several IGs and population groups to calm them down.