Print

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

[Gantolandon]

The VIP system kills all the fun from colonization for me, especially if I'm playing as a country which is "destined" to conquer this area. To gain an enormous territory, I don't have to do anything (except from hitting the proper button), and the enemy won't usually try to take this territory (because of badboy and loss of prestige). Even in the worst cases I have to surrender a small amount of pounds, or perhaps fight a few weak irregular units.

I agree that the vanilla system of merry, careless grabbing was not very good. It could have been better if the natives and "Demand cessation of colonialism" worked properly. Still, at least it required some activity from the player.

[Ampersand]

I think it is a mild improvement over the original status quo, but I agree that it does need to be handled differently. Since I mostly played Texas a lot to get a hang of it, I'm mostly familiar with the problems in that regard. After the war for Texas Independence, the territory claimed and controlled by the Republic of Texas should stretch up into Colorado, but those provinces continue to be held by Cherokee and Apache until events trigger their concession.

I also would have changed things such that territories with known fortifications in 1835 should start with at least level one fortifications. Some event chains also seem to be bugged, or otherwise don't fire when appropriate, such as the rare Grossdeutschland chain should Austria be the unifier of Germany instead of Prussia.

[John Hopoate]

Some event chains also seem to be bugged, or otherwise don't fire when appropriate, such as the rare Grossdeutschland chain should Austria be the unifier of Germany instead of Prussia.

Events that don't even exist are even more frustrating. Why shouldn't Prussia be able to form a "Grossdeutschland" and give Italy everything it wants if it completely rapes in 1866? I didn't occupy 95% of the German speaking world and lose 300,000 soldiers to attrition just to accept some limp wristed peace accord. I had machineguns FFS, in real life the humble needlegun was enough to send the Austrians routing, if those cowardly Papists had been facing machineguns they wouldn't know what the hell to do except bow down to mighty Prussia.

The same thing happened when I was playing as Italy, I kicked Austria's arse in the same war and didn't get shit.

[mainiac]

If you are acting in an unrealistic fashion (having tech decades before it's effective implementation), don't complain if the game doesn't have a realistic response.

[John Hopoate]

If you are acting in an unrealistic fashion (having tech decades before it's effective implementation), don't complain if the game doesn't have a realistic response.

It's ahistorical but not unrealistic, the first Maxim guns used regular black gunpowder, because of this they jammed a lot but they generally worked. There's nothing that would have stopped an enlightened Prussian monarch from focusing military research on rapid firing weapons and ending up with something similar.

[mainiac]

You know with historical hindsight which technologies are practical and impractical.  For a contemporary to successfully invest in getting such technologies to work without the decades of trial and error would require investing heavily in a broad range of really stupid technologies as well.  And prussia could not sustain that politically, culturally or economically.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Keep in mind that this is Prussia we're talking about, the "army with a country"; if anyone were to heavily invest in new weaponry, it's them.  And it's not all that far a stretch of reality to imagine someone randomly stumbling on a way to have viable machine guns earlier than usual, and if they did so in northern Germany the Prussian military would have snapped it up without hesitation.

That's really not the point of the post anyway, the idea is that an utterly smashed Austria probably would give, say, the Trentino and Dalmatia to Italy (well, France, technically, but ultimately to Italy) as part of the peace treaty along with the parts Italy actually gained from that war.  I'm not quite so sure about forcing a union with Austria... possible, though very unlikely, I think.  That's one thing I hope to see Vicky 2 simulate better than Vicky 1, the balance of power concept that prevented Prussia from forcing a Greater Germany historically...

[John Hopoate]

That's one thing I hope to see Vicky 2 simulate better than Vicky 1, the balance of power concept that prevented Prussia from forcing a Greater Germany historically...

If Prussia had annexed Austria to form a Grossdeutschland, they'd probably have granted the non-Austrian areas of the Austrian Empire independence.

Or what if Prussia had allied with the Hungarians in 1848 and defeated the Austrians before the Russians had a chance to intervene?

You know with historical hindsight which technologies are practical and impractical.  For a contemporary to successfully invest in getting such technologies to work without the decades of trial and error would require investing heavily in a broad range of really stupid technologies as well.  And prussia could not sustain that politically, culturally or economically.

The first Maxim Gun was deployed in combat in 1886, just 20 years after the Austro-Prussian War. The first machinegun patents were made in 1870 by Rudolf Kjellman of Sweden, just FOUR years after the Austro-Prussian War.

[mainiac]

Yeah, and Leonardo deVinci drew up blueprints for helicopters and internal combustion engines.  There is a world of difference between an idea being proven feasible and it's widescale implementation.

For a good example of what happens when you think idea's can be rushed ahead of their time, look at German efforts in rocketry and jet aviation during WWII.  Vast sums of money were wasted with very little to show for it.  It's not that the technologies were impracticable, just ten years later they were in widespread use.  The problem was wanting the technology too soon.

[Gantolandon]

For a good example of what happens when you think idea's can be rushed ahead of their time, look at German efforts in rocketry and jet aviation during WWII.  Vast sums of money were wasted with very little to show for it.  It's not that the technologies were impracticable, just ten years later they were in widespread use.

Every technology needs some time to become effective and the problem wasn't wanting it too soon. It didn't help Germany, as they had been totally screwed even when they produced their first V1. They pissed off too many in too short time and I don't think they could win this war even if they had discovered nuclear bomb before Americans.

[Goron]

For a good example of what happens when you think idea's can be rushed ahead of their time, look at German efforts in rocketry and jet aviation during WWII.  Vast sums of money were wasted with very little to show for it.

I disagree completely. Little money was wasted in their research, and much came out of it. Whether the technologies were not refined to 'modern' standards for another X number of years is irrelevant- the work done during WW2 was essential to the future development of the technologies.
The Me 163, while an ineffective fighter, was terribly important in the design and development of rocketry (and the work to determine that jet propulsion was more effective).
And, the V2 was breakthrough. Did you forget the V2 rocket was the first long-range ballistic missile??? Not to mention the v2 paved the way for United State's manned space exploration!!!
Let's also not forget that it was Nazi Germany's rocket scientists were some of the most sought after people by the US after the war! For goodness gracious Operation Paperclip went so far as to falsify the backgrounds of several scientists and engineers (including the father of modern rocketry von Braun) in order to get around Truman's anti-Nazi rules!

Germany's rocketry work was far from rushed, wasted, or ineffective... ...

[mainiac]

German rocketry did not produce a single effective weapon over the course of the war, despite years of research.  Yes, it was great stuff ten years later but it was beyond useless when they tried to develop it.  The vast amounts of resources that Nazi germany pissed away on Hitler's pipe dreams was a major reason why the german armed forces become less and less effective as the war dragged on.

If an "enlightened" monarch had attempted to create a versitile machinegun in the 1860's, his milage would have been simular to Hitlers dreams of jets.

[Goron]

German rocketry did not produce a single effective weapon over the course of the war,

V2.

I really don't know what else to say...

I agree with you on all other points; Yes, Hitler's reality was off, resulting in some very poor strategic decisions. Including the focus on terror weapons (rocketry). BUT, the resulting terror weapon (v2) was a phenomenal advance, maybe not the most effective for that stage of the war, but groundbreaking nonetheless. The research was not wasted. It was the essential groundwork for all future rocketry research. Had Germany not performed that research, someone would have had to do it in order to reach the technology of today. Again, the v2 laid down the basic design of the United States' space exploration. How can the necessary precursor  technology to manned space flight be considered wasted work?

[Dakk]

Aye, the V2 was really a landmark in long distance missiles, it terrorized everyone.

Anyway, I just hope they improve the AI, the only shining flaw of paradox's games is that the AI is a bit too random and makes por choices all the time, making illogical decisions for reasons you simply can't grasp. Like a weakened nation that can barely stand by itself attacking the most powerful empire in the world, etc.

[John Hopoate]

I don't want to derail this thread any more than it already is but the Me-262 would have been a cost effective weapon if all of them had been deployed as pure interceptors as it had originally been intended but the Me-162, V-1 and V-2 were all wastes of money. I don't have time to go into the details but any serious military historian will tell you the same thing.

Ohh and if having machineguns in 1867 instead of 1887 is too ahistorical for you, you should probably stop playing Paradox games. In real life there was no technology that prevented the mass production of semi-reliable black powder machineguns in 1867, only a lack of vision. My Prussia in 1867 had a larger industrial base and an even more militaristic outlook than the real Prussia, it's hardly incomprehensible.

The smuggest, stupidest "fact" you peedle is the notion that that there's no real life historical precedent for my Prussian machineguns. Prussia had a large amount of BREACH LOADED RIFLED ARTILLERY with a range of 4500 yards from a lightweight 3" gun in 1863, in 1870 when they went to war with the French, the French Army, like most armies, mostly used smoothbore bronze cannons and for this they suffered terrible consequences.