Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Great Order]

Which is fairly standard Paradox, really. The game's servicable at launch, not really bad feature-wise (Although bugs are another matter), but lacking the content that makes Paradox games good, along with tweaks or overhauls of the weaker systems.

Another couple of years and, assuming it's not abandoned like Imperator (Which it shouldn't be) it'll be a solid game.

EDIT: I do want to complain about markets though. The fact that you won't ever buy anything from anyone else unless you're either in their market or specifically micromanage trade routes is ridiculous and a pain in the arse. I got too powerful to be in the French market any more, and as a result my economy completely crashed, and I didn't have the bureaucracy nor the convoys to import all my needed goods. At least Vicky 2 allowed you to buy from the global market, and businesses could, provided you had capitalists, expand themselves to make up shortfalls. No such system in this game.

[EuchreJack]

Imperator's "legacy" is another "failed" title, so it was easy to justify pulling the plug. I'm actually amazed they both stuck with it long enough to make it decent AND left it in a workable version when they abandoned it.

[LoSboccacc]

people bitched for a decade that victoria ii was too railroaded. vic 3 tries to do away with event for solid mechanics and everyone wants event backs or smth

[Great Order]

The issue is that there's just... nothing really. There's no uniqueness beyond the absolute most basic like "do you start off unrecognised" and "How much tech do you have?" or "Can I form nation X?"

Anyway, I noticed in my pre- economic crash punjab game, sometimes revolutionary "nations" can become permanent. There's an aristocratic and a peasant revolt that have both been around for 30+ years, at peace with the nation they seceded from.

[LuuBluum]

The issue is that there's just... nothing really. There's no uniqueness beyond the absolute most basic like "do you start off unrecognised" and "How much tech do you have?" or "Can I form nation X?"

Anyway, I noticed in my pre- economic crash punjab game, sometimes revolutionary "nations" can become permanent. There's an aristocratic and a peasant revolt that have both been around for 30+ years, at peace with the nation they seceded from.

Yeah, I think I saw that one listed on the forum as a known bug.

[Great Order]

The game really needs to be more open about the reasons for a lot of stuff. I'm trying Brunei again and floundering because, for as far as I can tell no apparent reason, Qing keeps getting involved in any plays I start. I can get the Netherlands on my side, but they're always cowed by Qing even though the Netherlands could sink the Qing fleet the moment it left port and the fact that Qing's army is absolutely shite.

The reason it makes no sense for them to join:

It won't affect Qing at all
Qing loves me so much that they'd basically be willing to suck me off if I asked
Qing doesn't give a toss about the nations I'm invading

Despite this, every time they jump in because "OH SHIT THE PC IS TRYING TO HAVE FUN! THAT'S NOT ALLOWED!", at a guess. Because the game doesn't fucking tell you (Or doesn't make it obvious) WHY they're getting involved.

Honestly whoever did the UI needs shooting. Finding the information you want is such a goddamn pain.

[LoSboccacc]

...possibly quing want to invade them before you

[Great Order]

I waited 20 years and they're still getting involved.

[Lidku]

As of now, Victoria 3 only has a 66% positive review percentage on Steam.. It's looking like it's not being well-received at the moment.

A couple days later and Victoria 3 got a -3% percent drop in review positivity, bringing it to an overall 63% positive review score.

I thought it would be like Scorn, where at the initial release it debuted at mixed, but steadily went up into the positive margin (if only narrowly). Victoria doesn't seem to be in the same situation at all. If it keeps getting negative reviews, it's going to slip into negative territory.

[axiomsofdominion]

It has been steady around 63% for a few days now. It briefly dipped to 62% before recovering. Newbies were spoiled by the CK3 launch and oldies hate the newbiefication of the game on average. So there are two, heh, fronts that Paradox is fighting on against low reviews.

[Great Order]

Anyone know how asking to join a customs union works in this game? Half the time it'll just remove itself as an option for no readily apparent reason.

[LoSboccacc]

played a couple tutorials, the game is quite interesting, there's a lot going on at any given time, and the economic/political system has more depth than what people credit it for.

I hate the halfway warfare was handled, I would have preferred to assign generals to the diplomatic play instead of the many individual front, managing front/generals is just busywork that produces nothing of value.

The UX is... bad. it's terrible. it's the worst UX I've seen in a paradox game. in many context the information is incomplete, wasting a lot of space for telling me not the thing I need from that menu for example the wolume of a trade is hidden in the drilldown tooltip. because the good balance sheet doesn't distinguish between production and import it's unnecessary hard to find problem areas. I've found no good way to have a list of all the interest group but going in the government screen, which takes ages to load, and has them sorted in ways that are not productive to quickly find them. Finding wheter the military is at full strength requires a lot of drilling as well, and the navy management is too fucked up to even bother.

compared to stellaris it's day and night. I can hover on any number there and see exactly what's causing it, the modifier applied, the factors at play. figuring out what radicals want in vic3 is impossible until you get the small popup of a law proposal on the right.

[forsaken1111]

Some warfare improvements are on the roadmap, and yeah the UI really needs a pass. It's very hard to figure out exactly why certain things happen.

[Great Order]

Yeah, solid base I think, but it needs quite a bit of refinement before I'd say it's a good game. The way fronts split so easily is incredibly infuriating and really needs fixing, I've lost wars because the fronts split and allowed troops into my borders before the troops I redeployed got to the front to fend them off.

EDIT: I've noticed the AI seems to treat the player differently too. Even if a country loves you, has a genial attitude and you're making a play that's utterly irrelevant to them, they'll oppose you with incredible frequency. Meanwhile the AI gets away with stuff that'd set half of Europe on your back.

[Shooer]

The game does have a setting for how aggressive the AI is with the player with diplomacy.

Setting it higher means they oppose you more, setting it lower means they ignore/support you more.