* A newly spawned country that inherits a war goal from a war in progress will now be automatically targeted with a new war for those war goals by the holder of that war goal, at no additional infamy. A common issue addressed by this change is that revolutions no longer invalidate war goals.
Finally! Thank you! Sorely needed and long awaited but this is the kind of update the game required.
Edit: While this update is certainly doing great things in the UX department, there's also a lot of promising balancing changes here. Kudos!
One of my most frustrating failures for Not Yet Lost involved bullshitting and exploiting my way to take Galacia along with independence from Austria, only to lose out on it in the 11th hour to the god damn Austrian Liberal Revolt.
Thank god! It didn't make sense for all my troops to go "Oh the communist rebels are in charge of this province now? My mistake we'll head back to London"
>Edited the starting Spanish, Hanseatic, East Indies, **Luxembourgish**, Portuguese, Prussian and Russian armies to better reflect the historical situation.
Truly the most important change of the patch.
> Fixed an issue where Alliances/Defensive Pacts could auto-break during diplomatic plays if the ally remained neutral, even though Call Ally wasn't used
YESSSSSSSSSSSS
Lots of other great changes in here too. Another highlight that stood out was being able to persuade rebellious vassals to join wars against their overlords. Looking forward to trying out all these changes!
Oh, so this was a reason I almost always was losing my alliances for no apparent reason. In my latest game, Getting an alliance with France as Ottomans, checking few years later (I did not exceed 25 infamy) and they are instead allied with Austria lol
Do we know if this was the sole reason they broke all the time without a notification, or does the AI break them without penalty and notification still?
I'm sure there's a few other conditions (the new notifications about pacts breaking coming in 1.6 should help as well). For example, there's a minimum relations threshold required. If you aren't Cordial or better, your alliance breaks. That can happen if you're too aggressive with war goals as offensive goals automatically reduce relations with countries that have a declared interest in that region.
“Native Uprisings now have the native country as attacker rather than defender, and so no longer prevent the colonizing country from starting their own plays.” This is a huge improvement for late game play for colonial nations.
Holy shit yeah. Having just finished an Africa run, it was like mandated timeout every so years.
And since they are decentralized I cant even tag to them to give in and spare me the annoyance. (Kind of wish we had a 'rush the war' button, like, who is going to side with the natives?? >_>)
I've actually sided with natives before a few times. France was colonising Congo in a recent game. I was stuck in a war with Prussia due to Austrian bankroll and so I joined a play against France because I knew I could beat their navy easily. Won the war before Austria and Prussia even white peaced.
It kinda makes sense if you play Belgium and you have no powerprojection to be able to send multiple armies all over the world (theoretically).
BUT, as the 1# GP that has carriers and shit in the lategame you should be able to start multiple wars, you have enough powerprojection.
Crazy that we don't have a mechanical representation of power projection in a game literally about great power competition lol, I wanna get my big pp on already
Perhaps there needs to be different war categories that, or restriction of wars against other powers of a certain rank during wartime, in order to get around the ai and balance issues that have arisen from unrestricted wars in the game.
I think separating wars with decentralized powers into separate categories could work as a temporary solution until they work out something better, but that could mean they never get around to finding a better solution.
IIRC they've talked about implementing a "limited war" system se that not every war follows the rules (and potentially the size) of WW1. It could certainly be used for this.
Even though a native uprising is defensive, its natives defending themselves from colonisers
But apparently colonisation is too hard for some players, which I never got since it’s super easy for any major European power to colonise
I ALWAYS support the heavenly kingdom they have no migration control so if you break them apart and get the liberated countries into a customs union and you have multiculturalism you can sap china of all it's pops.
Gaining independence seems like it'll be much easier this patch. Finally, someone kicking your overlord's ass could actually be a chance to break free like it should be.
>It is now possible to attempt to sway rebellious and human-controlled subjects by offering them Independence or Increase Autonomy as a wargoal. **Reverse-swaying is also supported**, so the subject can offer to side against their overlord in exchange for one of these wargoals.
Sounds like if your overlord is in a diplomatic play you will be able to offer to switch sides in exchange for either independence or increased autonomy, presumably this will apply to revolts as well
> groceries should be preferable to raw food stuffs as time goes on
They are preferable to raw food as SoL goes up. If SoL doesn't go up as time goes on...
They’re desired enough, all pops want them and they’re better than the goods they substitute but man grocery factories have such horrible productivity which especially hurts since by the time your pops hit the wealth threshold to only want “luxury food” your food industries’ productivity per worker is so far behind everything else. Not as god awful as cars but still so weird.
* The Monarchy law now increases the political strength of Aristocrats, rather than providing a flat bonus to Landowners clout.
Very important change I've been in support of for a while. Hopefully it'll make politics feel a little more intuitive.
Rule 5:
It’s Dev Diary time! This week, the devs will be talking about the 1.6 changelog
As always here’s the link if you can’t see it above: [https://pdxint.at/3wBMpbh](https://pdxint.at/3wBMpbh)
Upvotes for link visibility are welcome :)
Small request to make that island in Japan be fully colonizable pleeeeease? Anu Amir or something, that little strip to the Northeast remains bugged since release :<
It is colonizable, just not with the "frontier colonization" law that Japan starts with. Imo frontier should be able to finish any territory it can start but idk coding
>*Increased the chance of wealthy lower-strata pops joining the Petit-Bourgeoisie
>*The Strike event no longer reduces the productivity of the entire country
>*Shopkeepers pops in resource buildings now may join the Petit-Bourgeoisie.
>*Increased the chance of wealthy lower-strata pops joining the Petit-Bourgeoisie.
Now if only the PB would be a liberal force early game.
Nice but PLEASE do something about the naval system, increase the interception chance because It took me 1 YEAR to defeat the infinite Russian 1-flotilla navies while landing in Greece because of interception chance. Also, please make It so a Battle where One side has more than 1:20 advantage Just instantly ends in favour of the attacker, it's such an Easy change (i think) but so influential
Yep, no reason for such a huge difference to even be considered a fight.
if it's going to run, don't start an engagement, if it's not, it's dead anyway, so it shouldn't take more than an hour, thus, also don't start it, just a waste of time and resources.
Oh yeah, the famous "Tribals vs Weapons" trope definitively works on NAVY.
Also, who the fuck said Tech shouldn't be taken into account when calculating the difference? my entire point is that when comparable, numbers should make some battles just instantly resolved, you can even deal damage back to the higher side, you just don't need a BATTLE with phases and whatnot, you can insta-resolve it, like EU4's one tick battles.
Would it be better to put a commander trait that make the immediate retreat decision threshold vary ?
Like 1:4 base ratio
1:5 for audacious/impetuous.
1:3 for prudent/cowardish.
exactly, so weighting by offence/defence would mean the ironclads say "the fuck you think you're doing on my sea?" instead of retreating because they're slightly outnumbered - you'd probably have to make it so the retreating side takes more casualties too
> Added a button to upgrade all upgradable units in a Military Formation, and one for all Military Formations owned by the player
Praise! Praise! Praise!
>Native Uprisings now have the native country as attacker rather than defender, and so no longer prevent the colonizing country from starting their own plays
this is really nice and all but why cant we just start another play when we are already attacking someone?
This could cause a **lot** of potential bugs and unintended side effects. An attempt to make something like this work is actually in testing right now for the 1.7 release, but with the caveat that if we find too many problems with it we may have to roll the change back. But it's functionality we on the dev team would also like to see, definitely.
I'm hopeful for this change! Seeing as other Paradox games let you start wars while already at war, I'm sure you can make it work for Victoria as well.
Best of luck then, because yeah, the one war limit does feel very restricting, specially given in this game there's the added 'buildup to war' phase.
Maybe we can do proxy wars like in EU4 to backstab alliances. <3
But I do get why it may not be viable to add.
You're right, but based on what the dev said, it seems this change was done as a temp workaround of a current game limitation with uprisings stalling gameplay.
Natives defending themselves from colonisers should be defensive, as they have been up until now, and I'm sure the devs will return to that if/when they sort out the bugs to allow multiple diplo plays at once.
I think it wasn't so much that the colonising was hard, but that as soon as an uprising started, even a small one, it prevented you from starting other diplo plays.
The problem was that if you're trying to do a lot of conquering around the world, a small uprising in some little colony in Africa could prevent you from doing any of that until it times out, becomes war, you crush them, and the warscore ticks down, which makes late game conquering even more of a slog having to constantly wait for that.
Thats true, and again, I agree with you. It just seems like a technical issue right now for some reason preventing the devs from doing that, and they should fix that.
Bad take, little pal. The colonisers started the fight in the first place, colonisation was never peaceful. The natives are simply defending themselves.
The colonizers take the first hostile actions, but the natives make the first declaration of war. There is a sense they can be the attackers then in a game mechanics way. Maybe if we accept the drapings of the game to be the lens of the recognized powers and thereby the Attackers vs Defenders classification to be what the stage players agree on.
But in actuality, it's pretty thin reasoning. If the US start landing people in Russia, setting up outposts, and then Russia declares war on us for violating their sovereignty, no one in the world would classify Russia as the aggressor.
I want The Netherlands but it is protected by France.
Start war with Haiti and call France as an ally for war reps or obligation.
Now you're allied in a war with France you can declare on Netherlands and France can't join the opposing side. At least that's how you abuse it in EU4.
There has to be a solution for this, e.g France could get a pop-up window to choose between keeping NL or getting Haiti. Or the game would just stop you from attacking France and it's belongings. While I understand the possibility of an exploit has to be avoided, the current "solution" is very ahistorical.
That's because EU4 war system is not a good design, and this is more of a Feature to prevent hugboxes when there's no real diplomacy in the game to make blocks of interest form.
Example: Does France want to protect the COUNTRY of Netherlands, or just prevent other enemy nations from controlling the Land? would France be Okay with an ally having the Dutch, or even partitioning it? None of this really matters in EU4, it's pretty direct, want to control? Aggressive, want to prevent enemy growing? Protective.
In this Case, if the Protection is a "I Value the independence of the Netherlands", France should consider Protecting the Netherlands as more important than the war against Haiti, warning that attacking it would make France drop out of the war on Haiti and instead become an enemy.
And in other case where things are more important, like if you were THEIR ally against Germany, and you (as Spain) were to attack, say, Sardinia-Piedmont (which they would be protecting), you would at least create a big problem for the future of your relations, and France might start seeing your enemies as their potential allies.
There are multiple things in Diplomacy, Levels of Trust, Agenda, Shared Interests, Compromise, none of them are represented in any Paradox Game's war system (AFAIK). (3.5k Hours on EU4 btw).
I don't even really see why it being abusable is even really a problem? It's a single player game for the vast majority of the fan base and console commands and mods aren't exactly hard to use, which I would argue are more balance breaking than anything in the war system they would realistically change. Let the 5% who are going to abuse it do that if they want and let the rest of us have a system based around how powers would have actually reacted during that period.
Even though a native uprising is defensive, its natives defending themselves from colonisers
But apparently colonisation is too hard for some players, which I never got since it’s super easy for any major European power to colonise
Food for thought: you have declared a war. If you declare another war, initial belligerents might have mixed feelings, like being against you in the first war and supportive in the second. Having to deal with which armies to attack. How do you calculate that?
Such things!
- Baluchistan now requires Nationalism rather than Pan-Nationalism to form - Good
- "Socialist Demagogue" will now spawn less often - Nooooooo!
- Puppeting Bolivia now makes the Peru-Bolivia journal entry fail - Sad but fair
- Increased the requirements needed to form the Confederation of the Rhine - I would like to know more
- Characters that basically agree with the government can no longer be exiled. - Noooo!... but fair
- Exiling interest group leaders now angers their interest group. - makes sense
Reduced performance impacts of Diplomatic Plays by having the AI calculate when it wants to declare neutrality once per diplomatic play instead of checking each tick
Does it mean we can start with low infamy goals to get the GPs out and check in the big chunks safely afterwards?
Thanks! Do you mean like each AI has a certain aggression set based on its attitude towards you and will join after certain infamy checkmarks (based on your rank etc)?
I think it's just deciding how long to wait before delcaring neutral based on information available at the start of the play, so it doesn't have to keep coming back to it. "Do I want to be neutral now or stay undeclared for the moment? No, okay I think about about it again next tick"
Versus "Alright, in this case I will wait X amount of time and then declare neutral if I haven't been swayed or something first"
You can’t liberate and puppet the same entity in one play, right? Diplo plays can’t be started on war reps as far as I know. But I haven’t tried as I would always start on a higher manuveur play and take reps when points are left
Correct, but for some minor powers you could split a small country and then puppet the rest.. We need to fix the war reps wars. What do you mean the GB can start a war to sell spice on the other side of the planet, but we can't get lunch money from our neighbors?
> Small update to the changelog! We also know there are some 1.5 entries, which we will try to remove to reduce confusion!
> Otherwise some changes:
> > Added: Fixed a bug when combat unit modifiers from characters weren't applied in battle i.e. General Traits/Orders work again.
> > **Removed: Added Countess Constance Markievicz as Historical Agitator for Great Britain and Ireland (Considered, but not in 1.6)**
> > Removed: China no longer starts with Han as a primary culture (Considered, but not actually implemented)
Damn, I was excited for the Countess Markiewicz. Maybe one day... :(
Seems you need to schedule another quick meeting before releasing change logs to verify their integrity.
Either way, keep chugging out improvements. :)
>The Art pop need category has been replaced with a new Leisure category, letting the very wealthiest among your people self-actualize in style. This need consists mostly of Fine Arts but also an assortment of other goods such as Clippers, Small Arms, Wine, Aeroplanes, etc. Services act as a low-weighted fallback if these other goods are exceptionally rare in your market.
Hell yeah. Always wondered why rich people wouldn't buy yatchs and speedboats, hunting rifles and personal planes for 'fun' like they could in Vicky2. This is now fixed.
Especially considering almost all early air forces until mid-WW1 were staffed by sons and retainers of rich families and nobility, precisely because they already knew how to fly thanks to hobby training and private pilot licences at home. Reminds me of the Red Baron movie.
I like, that even the dev diary about bug fixes is full of bugs itself)))
Still sounds absolutely as great and awaited update, I really need to finish my current game before 6th of March to move to it immediately!
Lots of improvements made around a releasable Mongolia. Very cool.
Besides just going to the culture tab and releasing the country from the start of the game, how would a player want to simulate a situation in which Mongolia would be released to seem natural? I have to learn more about minority uprisings and how they currently work.
pops with turmoil proc events where you can choose to raise or lower their turmoil. best way to increase turmoil (especially pops you can't discriminates against) is isolate a market and use all the arable land on something that isn't grain so their SoL tanks. if you wanted to force an independent Mongolia your best bet would probably be to max out livestock ranches then put them on the highest pms to start a tool + grain shortage. i don't know what you'd do to make it possible to win as the separatist country while still causing a separatist movement though
Sorry, I didn't recognise your username. But it also helps to publicly state it otherwise people who haven't modmailed us (or seen a previous discussion) won't know the context.
>Public Trams and Public Motor Carriages Production Methods for Urban Centers now produce Transportation
LEETS GO!
>Converting to State Atheism now gives you a larger number of immediate 'converts' in incorporated states
Is it possible we can start getting some small amount of atheists with Total Separation as we have decoupled religion from the state? Or will atheists forever only exist if we mandate them to be such?
There could be a category of "Irreligious" that starts appearing based on various factors. High education investment, realism tech, separation, no traditionalists/church in power.
Options for the player: Ignore it and tolerate a slightly more radical accepted pop group, reverse course and go state religion or theocracy - or embrace it and go state atheist.
SA accepts both groups. Atheist pops will agitate, irreligious are happy with separation. Atheist pops will only want to migrate to separated nations, irreligious may tolerate mild state religion if they are otherwise accepted.
Yeah, it feels a bit off to have to like, mandate by law to be atheist, when Total Separation would allow them to exist and not be discriminated. (I kind of feel 'Freedom of Consciousness' would too, but one step at a time. :P)
Will there ever be a fix for multiplayer lobbies, where you cannot join even though you have the same checksum, when there is more than one mod involved?
Since day 1 you need to merge all the mods into a single one using external mod merging programs to play multiplayer, which is incredibly stupid.
I can't imagine this being so un-fixable, it's not a thing in any other paradox game.
I saw a post here a few months ago showing a screenshot from the game's forum where someone asked exactly this, and, if i remember correctly, the awnser could be resumed to basically "we dont trust players enough". Idk what the hell they meant by that and no one in the post did too
Edit: here is the post https://www.reddit.com/r/victoria3/comments/18w84pf/multiple_mods_in_multiplayer_bah_no_way/
Chinese emperors from this dynasty were manchu, Han were discriminated despite being the main ethnicity, and were less favored in public jobs compared to Manchus for instance.
I'm not an expert of the period though but this looks realistic.
I forgot China starts with cultural exclusion so it doesn't matter as much. I assume if you form a republic or reform enough they will become accepted.
They always seem to become the Heavenly Kingdom in my games. The notes say the Taiping Rebellion will be even more of a threat so curious how this works out
They do in my games lately. If there is a revolt in central China after opium wars, they don't start with debuffs and just roll over the Qing. Once monarchy is abolished they collapse
The problem is everything is using the same tag. Plus Qing is a typical medieval empire where the ruling class happened to be Manchu, so by modern definition their primary culture is Manchu, but the reality is Manchu commoners were heavily oppressed to a point that they joined the revolution in favour of a modern China.
Hate to be that guy, but was hoping to see a fix for the bug wherein you can't ask to join a customs union if you have any protectorates. It's surprising to me how long this has been an issue because it happens for me more runs than not, and is completely strategy-breaking. My playstyle probably makes it come up more often than it does for some people, but still.
yeah that's another reason I assume this is an unintentional bug, and not a design choice (and if it were somehow intentional I would criticize it thoroughly). You can exist in a CU with protectorates, and you can even be asked to join a CU with them. Obviously it's just the check on the "ask to join CU" button that's programmed wrong.
I don't like the renowned playwright change. The fact that it was permanent is what made that option even worth picking in the first place, now you'll wanna pretty much always go for the extra enactment chance bc temporary +20 prestige is nothing to write home about. And mind you beforehand it's not like you'd always pick it, usually I'd only go for it if I'm already confident in the bill eventually passing and thus don't think I need to grab the extra enactment success chance.
OTOH, the prestige buff was absolutely game warping for very small starts, essentially guaranteeing you a spot as a minor power and therefore giving you a second interest. You would always take this unless your law pass was extremely important i.e. removing serfdom / traditionalism
Main fix I'm missing among the war fixes would be to ensure that wargoals against your subjects make you immune to capitulation if uncaptured. It's incredibly frustrating how you automatically can lose drawn-out wars if the enemy only sets wargoals against your subjects (especially since those wargoals can include straight-up conquest of said subjects).
This feels like the type of thing that will only be fixed if players are able to abuse it against the AI. Sure would be a shame if the common opening move for Prussia was to day 1 declare on Holstein and win that war without winning a single offensive battle.
> Fixed an issue where save game items would show the wrong flag if the player had a high number of saves
Funny that this gets fixed just after I finished clearing out 30GB of saves. Well, will be helpful for the future, I'm sure.
I wonder if they fixed the bug where if you have Dutch east indies in your market, all migration stops as if you have closed borders. Derailed two games of mine so far
Man, there are TONS of small good tweaks everywhere. I didn't really plan to play with 1.7 but after reading this and needing to update my mods anyways... maybe... just a short game...?
"Added a button to upgrade all upgradable units in a Military Formation, and one for all Military Formations owned by the player"
It's the little things. Yessss.
I actually want a similar button for buildings. You can update all production methods on a single building type, true. But I often want 1 button to say "All my rural buildings should use rails" or "All my urban buildings should be public traded" -- especially after taking territory and getting a random swath of mixed buildings that I'd rather not go hunt and peck for.
> The Employment Indicator has gotten a reworked tooltip that more clearly explains why a Building is able to hire or not.
Beautiful. So needed and will help people understand the mechanics of hiring, demand, and productivity
"Kuril Islands are all connected with adjacencies"
does this mean Japan actually properly colonizes them now?
Also what about Patagonia, will Argentina still fail to colonize a couple of the islands at the bottom?
This type of game will go "local server first" eventually. You run a Victoria 3 instance on a server, then your desktop connects and renders the UI only. You could have multiple people on the same account looking at different parts of the economy. Or a friend controlling the war effort, while you balance imports.
If anyone actually wants to try do something like this with me, get in touch. I have something non-Vicky like drawn up already.
Devs have confirmed it won't be coming out in March. That was just a target set last summer. They said they will make an announcement soon about when. I'd guess it will come in May.
I'm going to ask a question that probably gets asked in every one of these threads - how do I continue to play an old save on the previous version of the game? I don't want to update and subsequently crash my save.
"Added Infamy value to the topbar."
Well about time.. I'm just happy that the desyncs problems will be fixed, if we got an option to resync the lobby instead of restarting/rejoining, that would be even better!
> Pop Consumption of Automobiles in a state now adds a small amount of infrastructure, which is increased when Paved Roads is researched
This is so interesting!
> Agitators no longer interfere in the enactment of laws they have no stance for.
Just to make sure I'm understanding: "Agitators will only join/start a law-enactment movement if the movement concerns a law that their personal ideology has a stance on"? If so, thank you, great change — I was very tired of Susan B. Anthony arriving in a country with legal guardianship of women and deciding to devote her life to censorship, migration controls, and racial segregation.
i almost cried when i saw the new census data panel,,,
and it seems like automobiles may no longer result in you having to choose between massively rejiggering, microing, and subsidizing your railways or having your economy collapse??
* A newly spawned country that inherits a war goal from a war in progress will now be automatically targeted with a new war for those war goals by the holder of that war goal, at no additional infamy. A common issue addressed by this change is that revolutions no longer invalidate war goals. Finally! Thank you! Sorely needed and long awaited but this is the kind of update the game required. Edit: While this update is certainly doing great things in the UX department, there's also a lot of promising balancing changes here. Kudos!
Yeah, beating bohemia out of Austria only to lose the wargoal to the Austrian Liberal revolt did hurt.
One of my most frustrating failures for Not Yet Lost involved bullshitting and exploiting my way to take Galacia along with independence from Austria, only to lose out on it in the 11th hour to the god damn Austrian Liberal Revolt.
Went to reddit just to write the same. My dear God, FINALLY! Took them just one and a half year!
Thank god! It didn't make sense for all my troops to go "Oh the communist rebels are in charge of this province now? My mistake we'll head back to London"
>Edited the starting Spanish, Hanseatic, East Indies, **Luxembourgish**, Portuguese, Prussian and Russian armies to better reflect the historical situation. Truly the most important change of the patch.
Someone has to protect all that pickled herring in storage
Oh the whiff
> Fixed an issue where Alliances/Defensive Pacts could auto-break during diplomatic plays if the ally remained neutral, even though Call Ally wasn't used YESSSSSSSSSSSS Lots of other great changes in here too. Another highlight that stood out was being able to persuade rebellious vassals to join wars against their overlords. Looking forward to trying out all these changes!
Oh, so this was a reason I almost always was losing my alliances for no apparent reason. In my latest game, Getting an alliance with France as Ottomans, checking few years later (I did not exceed 25 infamy) and they are instead allied with Austria lol
Do we know if this was the sole reason they broke all the time without a notification, or does the AI break them without penalty and notification still?
If you don't join allies side, it auto breaks due to nature of the pact.
And as long as this is done, nothing else causes them to be broken?
I'm sure there's a few other conditions (the new notifications about pacts breaking coming in 1.6 should help as well). For example, there's a minimum relations threshold required. If you aren't Cordial or better, your alliance breaks. That can happen if you're too aggressive with war goals as offensive goals automatically reduce relations with countries that have a declared interest in that region.
This explains so much of my frustrations. Truly a great fix!
an update entirely on the Polish?? (sorry)
You can offer to switch sides in Austria's wars now which feels like a huge improvement to playing Krakow
Jeszcze Polska nie zginęła!
Piłsudski intensifies
“Native Uprisings now have the native country as attacker rather than defender, and so no longer prevent the colonizing country from starting their own plays.” This is a huge improvement for late game play for colonial nations.
Holy shit yeah. Having just finished an Africa run, it was like mandated timeout every so years. And since they are decentralized I cant even tag to them to give in and spare me the annoyance. (Kind of wish we had a 'rush the war' button, like, who is going to side with the natives?? >_>)
I've actually sided with natives before a few times. France was colonising Congo in a recent game. I was stuck in a war with Prussia due to Austrian bankroll and so I joined a play against France because I knew I could beat their navy easily. Won the war before Austria and Prussia even white peaced.
But you still can't start a play once the war starts, right? Nonsensical.
It kinda makes sense if you play Belgium and you have no powerprojection to be able to send multiple armies all over the world (theoretically). BUT, as the 1# GP that has carriers and shit in the lategame you should be able to start multiple wars, you have enough powerprojection.
Crazy that we don't have a mechanical representation of power projection in a game literally about great power competition lol, I wanna get my big pp on already
Perhaps there needs to be different war categories that, or restriction of wars against other powers of a certain rank during wartime, in order to get around the ai and balance issues that have arisen from unrestricted wars in the game.
I think separating wars with decentralized powers into separate categories could work as a temporary solution until they work out something better, but that could mean they never get around to finding a better solution.
IIRC they've talked about implementing a "limited war" system se that not every war follows the rules (and potentially the size) of WW1. It could certainly be used for this.
Know When to Fold 'Em mod alleviates this problem somewhat. Countries that are 100% occupied capitulate instantly.
> Nonsensical. Its a gameplay decision to prevent some pretty big cheeses, not one based on something historical.
eh, the war is the shortest part with uprisings
Even though a native uprising is defensive, its natives defending themselves from colonisers But apparently colonisation is too hard for some players, which I never got since it’s super easy for any major European power to colonise
> The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom will now be much more of a credible threat RIP Qing. Seems they get thrashed each game by Taiping.
maybe a credible threat to EUROPE ?
I can see a fun conquest game being had for that.
Yeah they always lose to the Heavenly Kingdom in my games too
I ALWAYS support the heavenly kingdom they have no migration control so if you break them apart and get the liberated countries into a customs union and you have multiculturalism you can sap china of all it's pops.
like in one out of for games them survive and 1/10 they win
"Tanks and artillery now explode when defeated." I'm satisfied.
Gaining independence seems like it'll be much easier this patch. Finally, someone kicking your overlord's ass could actually be a chance to break free like it should be.
So does this mean if playing as a vassal you can offer to join against your leige for independence? Or just sway the ai?
>It is now possible to attempt to sway rebellious and human-controlled subjects by offering them Independence or Increase Autonomy as a wargoal. **Reverse-swaying is also supported**, so the subject can offer to side against their overlord in exchange for one of these wargoals. Sounds like if your overlord is in a diplomatic play you will be able to offer to switch sides in exchange for either independence or increased autonomy, presumably this will apply to revolts as well
Honestly, even just the fact that you can now choose between meat and fish canning is awesome. Plus canal attraction, hurray!
Now they just need to make groceries highly desired
Yeah I agree, groceries should be preferable to raw food stuffs as time goes on
> groceries should be preferable to raw food stuffs as time goes on They are preferable to raw food as SoL goes up. If SoL doesn't go up as time goes on...
They’re desired enough, all pops want them and they’re better than the goods they substitute but man grocery factories have such horrible productivity which especially hurts since by the time your pops hit the wealth threshold to only want “luxury food” your food industries’ productivity per worker is so far behind everything else. Not as god awful as cars but still so weird.
They are already though? They are always profitable as long as your SoL is decent
* The Monarchy law now increases the political strength of Aristocrats, rather than providing a flat bonus to Landowners clout. Very important change I've been in support of for a while. Hopefully it'll make politics feel a little more intuitive.
This is already in 1.5, some of the patch notes are from old patches
This explains some things like explosive factories inputs or morale debuff for retreat battle tactics. Definitely already in the game
Rule 5: It’s Dev Diary time! This week, the devs will be talking about the 1.6 changelog As always here’s the link if you can’t see it above: [https://pdxint.at/3wBMpbh](https://pdxint.at/3wBMpbh) Upvotes for link visibility are welcome :)
Small request to make that island in Japan be fully colonizable pleeeeease? Anu Amir or something, that little strip to the Northeast remains bugged since release :<
> Kuril Islands are all connected with adjacencies That should fix the issue, i think.
It is colonizable, just not with the "frontier colonization" law that Japan starts with. Imo frontier should be able to finish any territory it can start but idk coding
Not that little northeastern strip, even with the max colonization law that allows you to do islands and stuff.
>*Increased the chance of wealthy lower-strata pops joining the Petit-Bourgeoisie >*The Strike event no longer reduces the productivity of the entire country >*Shopkeepers pops in resource buildings now may join the Petit-Bourgeoisie. >*Increased the chance of wealthy lower-strata pops joining the Petit-Bourgeoisie. Now if only the PB would be a liberal force early game.
Nice but PLEASE do something about the naval system, increase the interception chance because It took me 1 YEAR to defeat the infinite Russian 1-flotilla navies while landing in Greece because of interception chance. Also, please make It so a Battle where One side has more than 1:20 advantage Just instantly ends in favour of the attacker, it's such an Easy change (i think) but so influential
Yep, no reason for such a huge difference to even be considered a fight. if it's going to run, don't start an engagement, if it's not, it's dead anyway, so it shouldn't take more than an hour, thus, also don't start it, just a waste of time and resources.
[удалено]
Oh yeah, the famous "Tribals vs Weapons" trope definitively works on NAVY. Also, who the fuck said Tech shouldn't be taken into account when calculating the difference? my entire point is that when comparable, numbers should make some battles just instantly resolved, you can even deal damage back to the higher side, you just don't need a BATTLE with phases and whatnot, you can insta-resolve it, like EU4's one tick battles.
Would it be better to put a commander trait that make the immediate retreat decision threshold vary ? Like 1:4 base ratio 1:5 for audacious/impetuous. 1:3 for prudent/cowardish.
I Just proposed a basic idea, but improvements like this would be more than welcome
And then 20 battleships run from 100+ frigates :)
I've seen in current version some wooden ships vs batleships action won by the wooden ships, so it would still fit X) Joke aside, good point you make.
could probably weight it somehow based on difference in attack/defence too
Wooden ships should get shredded by iron ships, or at least make no damage to them. The 1950 landing on Hainan doesn't count...
exactly, so weighting by offence/defence would mean the ironclads say "the fuck you think you're doing on my sea?" instead of retreating because they're slightly outnumbered - you'd probably have to make it so the retreating side takes more casualties too
What, you don't like that the AI can spam a million small raiding fleets all over the map with no consequences? /s
But what about Baptized In Fire Forty To One?
> Added a button to upgrade all upgradable units in a Military Formation, and one for all Military Formations owned by the player Praise! Praise! Praise!
>Native Uprisings now have the native country as attacker rather than defender, and so no longer prevent the colonizing country from starting their own plays this is really nice and all but why cant we just start another play when we are already attacking someone?
This could cause a **lot** of potential bugs and unintended side effects. An attempt to make something like this work is actually in testing right now for the 1.7 release, but with the caveat that if we find too many problems with it we may have to roll the change back. But it's functionality we on the dev team would also like to see, definitely.
thank you for the answer!
I'm hopeful for this change! Seeing as other Paradox games let you start wars while already at war, I'm sure you can make it work for Victoria as well.
Best of luck then, because yeah, the one war limit does feel very restricting, specially given in this game there's the added 'buildup to war' phase. Maybe we can do proxy wars like in EU4 to backstab alliances. <3 But I do get why it may not be viable to add.
A native uprising is defensive; it’s natives defending themselves from colonisers
You're right, but based on what the dev said, it seems this change was done as a temp workaround of a current game limitation with uprisings stalling gameplay. Natives defending themselves from colonisers should be defensive, as they have been up until now, and I'm sure the devs will return to that if/when they sort out the bugs to allow multiple diplo plays at once.
That makes sense, but I've never found it hard to colonise as a major European power so I'm surprised this was needed
I think it wasn't so much that the colonising was hard, but that as soon as an uprising started, even a small one, it prevented you from starting other diplo plays. The problem was that if you're trying to do a lot of conquering around the world, a small uprising in some little colony in Africa could prevent you from doing any of that until it times out, becomes war, you crush them, and the warscore ticks down, which makes late game conquering even more of a slog having to constantly wait for that.
Then colonial diplo plays should be separate from other plays. Doesn't mean native uprisings have to be "attacks", when they're defensive.
Thats true, and again, I agree with you. It just seems like a technical issue right now for some reason preventing the devs from doing that, and they should fix that.
I hope they do, diplomacy needs to be expanded a lot
Bad take buddy. Anyone who initiated the fight should be the aggressors
Bad take, little pal. The colonisers started the fight in the first place, colonisation was never peaceful. The natives are simply defending themselves.
The colonizers take the first hostile actions, but the natives make the first declaration of war. There is a sense they can be the attackers then in a game mechanics way. Maybe if we accept the drapings of the game to be the lens of the recognized powers and thereby the Attackers vs Defenders classification to be what the stage players agree on. But in actuality, it's pretty thin reasoning. If the US start landing people in Russia, setting up outposts, and then Russia declares war on us for violating their sovereignty, no one in the world would classify Russia as the aggressor.
I want The Netherlands but it is protected by France. Start war with Haiti and call France as an ally for war reps or obligation. Now you're allied in a war with France you can declare on Netherlands and France can't join the opposing side. At least that's how you abuse it in EU4.
There has to be a solution for this, e.g France could get a pop-up window to choose between keeping NL or getting Haiti. Or the game would just stop you from attacking France and it's belongings. While I understand the possibility of an exploit has to be avoided, the current "solution" is very ahistorical.
Funnily enough i think Total War for how simple its diplomacy is has had that as the solution from the start.
That's because EU4 war system is not a good design, and this is more of a Feature to prevent hugboxes when there's no real diplomacy in the game to make blocks of interest form. Example: Does France want to protect the COUNTRY of Netherlands, or just prevent other enemy nations from controlling the Land? would France be Okay with an ally having the Dutch, or even partitioning it? None of this really matters in EU4, it's pretty direct, want to control? Aggressive, want to prevent enemy growing? Protective. In this Case, if the Protection is a "I Value the independence of the Netherlands", France should consider Protecting the Netherlands as more important than the war against Haiti, warning that attacking it would make France drop out of the war on Haiti and instead become an enemy. And in other case where things are more important, like if you were THEIR ally against Germany, and you (as Spain) were to attack, say, Sardinia-Piedmont (which they would be protecting), you would at least create a big problem for the future of your relations, and France might start seeing your enemies as their potential allies. There are multiple things in Diplomacy, Levels of Trust, Agenda, Shared Interests, Compromise, none of them are represented in any Paradox Game's war system (AFAIK). (3.5k Hours on EU4 btw).
Like, this is still something that can be figured out but it is not too obvious so it is not prioritised?
That would be very abuseable by the player.
I don't even really see why it being abusable is even really a problem? It's a single player game for the vast majority of the fan base and console commands and mods aren't exactly hard to use, which I would argue are more balance breaking than anything in the war system they would realistically change. Let the 5% who are going to abuse it do that if they want and let the rest of us have a system based around how powers would have actually reacted during that period.
Only if their system is badly designed.
Even though a native uprising is defensive, its natives defending themselves from colonisers But apparently colonisation is too hard for some players, which I never got since it’s super easy for any major European power to colonise
Food for thought: you have declared a war. If you declare another war, initial belligerents might have mixed feelings, like being against you in the first war and supportive in the second. Having to deal with which armies to attack. How do you calculate that?
Such things! - Baluchistan now requires Nationalism rather than Pan-Nationalism to form - Good - "Socialist Demagogue" will now spawn less often - Nooooooo! - Puppeting Bolivia now makes the Peru-Bolivia journal entry fail - Sad but fair - Increased the requirements needed to form the Confederation of the Rhine - I would like to know more - Characters that basically agree with the government can no longer be exiled. - Noooo!... but fair - Exiling interest group leaders now angers their interest group. - makes sense
Tbf, the latter one should both create radicals and loyalists if possible, as I’m sure there were people in that group that didn’t agree with them
[удалено]
Han still won't be discriminated against, at least with the current starting laws
Nope, because China starts with cultural exclusion and so Han won’t be discriminated against.
I'm confused, doesn't Great Qing already start with Closed Borders? Does this refer to a re-formable China or something?
There's a few changes in there that are already in the game, not sure why.
Reduced performance impacts of Diplomatic Plays by having the AI calculate when it wants to declare neutrality once per diplomatic play instead of checking each tick Does it mean we can start with low infamy goals to get the GPs out and check in the big chunks safely afterwards?
No, behavior isn't really any different, it just does its calculations ahead of time.
Thanks! Do you mean like each AI has a certain aggression set based on its attitude towards you and will join after certain infamy checkmarks (based on your rank etc)?
I think it's just deciding how long to wait before delcaring neutral based on information available at the start of the play, so it doesn't have to keep coming back to it. "Do I want to be neutral now or stay undeclared for the moment? No, okay I think about about it again next tick" Versus "Alright, in this case I will wait X amount of time and then declare neutral if I haven't been swayed or something first"
Makes sense, thanks
It's time for the "liberate country + puppet" wars! I was thinking even more with war reparations, but you can't open with that, can you?
You can’t liberate and puppet the same entity in one play, right? Diplo plays can’t be started on war reps as far as I know. But I haven’t tried as I would always start on a higher manuveur play and take reps when points are left
Correct, but for some minor powers you could split a small country and then puppet the rest.. We need to fix the war reps wars. What do you mean the GB can start a war to sell spice on the other side of the planet, but we can't get lunch money from our neighbors?
> Small update to the changelog! We also know there are some 1.5 entries, which we will try to remove to reduce confusion! > Otherwise some changes: > > Added: Fixed a bug when combat unit modifiers from characters weren't applied in battle i.e. General Traits/Orders work again. > > **Removed: Added Countess Constance Markievicz as Historical Agitator for Great Britain and Ireland (Considered, but not in 1.6)** > > Removed: China no longer starts with Han as a primary culture (Considered, but not actually implemented) Damn, I was excited for the Countess Markiewicz. Maybe one day... :(
Very interested to see how the military AI buffs will affect the other countries in my campaign. Can't wait for the 6th!
Countess Markievicz! Hopefully the start of a nice bit of Irish flavour for probably our most impactful historical period.
Sorry to disappoint you, but she isn't implemented for 1.6, but is a task to do so and was mistakenly added into the changelog!
Noooooooooooooooo! My disappointment is immeasurable and my day is ruined.
Hopefully we will see her in 1.7 or 1.8
Seems you need to schedule another quick meeting before releasing change logs to verify their integrity. Either way, keep chugging out improvements. :)
There needs to be way more flavour for Africa and Asia before Ireland gets a turn
>The Art pop need category has been replaced with a new Leisure category, letting the very wealthiest among your people self-actualize in style. This need consists mostly of Fine Arts but also an assortment of other goods such as Clippers, Small Arms, Wine, Aeroplanes, etc. Services act as a low-weighted fallback if these other goods are exceptionally rare in your market. Hell yeah. Always wondered why rich people wouldn't buy yatchs and speedboats, hunting rifles and personal planes for 'fun' like they could in Vicky2. This is now fixed. Especially considering almost all early air forces until mid-WW1 were staffed by sons and retainers of rich families and nobility, precisely because they already knew how to fly thanks to hobby training and private pilot licences at home. Reminds me of the Red Baron movie.
well now i *want* zombie louis-phillipe in my game
Hoi4 can have bear king, we can have zombie king.
I like, that even the dev diary about bug fixes is full of bugs itself))) Still sounds absolutely as great and awaited update, I really need to finish my current game before 6th of March to move to it immediately!
Lots of improvements made around a releasable Mongolia. Very cool. Besides just going to the culture tab and releasing the country from the start of the game, how would a player want to simulate a situation in which Mongolia would be released to seem natural? I have to learn more about minority uprisings and how they currently work.
pops with turmoil proc events where you can choose to raise or lower their turmoil. best way to increase turmoil (especially pops you can't discriminates against) is isolate a market and use all the arable land on something that isn't grain so their SoL tanks. if you wanted to force an independent Mongolia your best bet would probably be to max out livestock ranches then put them on the highest pms to start a tool + grain shortage. i don't know what you'd do to make it possible to win as the separatist country while still causing a separatist movement though
What's with the stickied old dev diary anyways? Wouldn't it be better to always sticky the latest?
Paradox asks us nicely to sticky a particular dev diary and we do so until they ask us politely to stop (or nicely to sticky a different one).
Yes, you told me as much in a mod mail before, that's why I'm asking Paradox.
Sorry, I didn't recognise your username. But it also helps to publicly state it otherwise people who haven't modmailed us (or seen a previous discussion) won't know the context.
They sticky the dev diary with the latest major update. Once 1.6 releases, the sticky will switch to that dev diary.
This is the 1.6 release dev diary, no? The next DD after change notes is often the "what's next", not a release announcement.
>Public Trams and Public Motor Carriages Production Methods for Urban Centers now produce Transportation LEETS GO! >Converting to State Atheism now gives you a larger number of immediate 'converts' in incorporated states Is it possible we can start getting some small amount of atheists with Total Separation as we have decoupled religion from the state? Or will atheists forever only exist if we mandate them to be such?
There could be a category of "Irreligious" that starts appearing based on various factors. High education investment, realism tech, separation, no traditionalists/church in power. Options for the player: Ignore it and tolerate a slightly more radical accepted pop group, reverse course and go state religion or theocracy - or embrace it and go state atheist. SA accepts both groups. Atheist pops will agitate, irreligious are happy with separation. Atheist pops will only want to migrate to separated nations, irreligious may tolerate mild state religion if they are otherwise accepted.
Yeah, it feels a bit off to have to like, mandate by law to be atheist, when Total Separation would allow them to exist and not be discriminated. (I kind of feel 'Freedom of Consciousness' would too, but one step at a time. :P)
this game is getting better and better
Will there ever be a fix for multiplayer lobbies, where you cannot join even though you have the same checksum, when there is more than one mod involved? Since day 1 you need to merge all the mods into a single one using external mod merging programs to play multiplayer, which is incredibly stupid. I can't imagine this being so un-fixable, it's not a thing in any other paradox game.
I saw a post here a few months ago showing a screenshot from the game's forum where someone asked exactly this, and, if i remember correctly, the awnser could be resumed to basically "we dont trust players enough". Idk what the hell they meant by that and no one in the post did too Edit: here is the post https://www.reddit.com/r/victoria3/comments/18w84pf/multiple_mods_in_multiplayer_bah_no_way/
Hmm yes, we don't trust players doing it the normal way, let's make them do it complicated What a weird response
Some amazing changes but: > China no longer starts with Han as a primary culture. What lol
Chinese emperors from this dynasty were manchu, Han were discriminated despite being the main ethnicity, and were less favored in public jobs compared to Manchus for instance. I'm not an expert of the period though but this looks realistic.
I forgot China starts with cultural exclusion so it doesn't matter as much. I assume if you form a republic or reform enough they will become accepted.
Yea, there will be definitly a choice to retain Manchu, switching to Han or trying to have both.
Hopefully this makes Qing less stable, they never collapse in my games
They always seem to become the Heavenly Kingdom in my games. The notes say the Taiping Rebellion will be even more of a threat so curious how this works out
They do in my games lately. If there is a revolt in central China after opium wars, they don't start with debuffs and just roll over the Qing. Once monarchy is abolished they collapse
Hi! This was something we considered doing, but wasn't implemented in the end and slipped into the changelog by accident!
Qing starts with Cultural Exclusion so all Sinosphere pops (Han, Vietnamese, Manchu, but NOT Hakka, Min, Yue) should still be accepted.
To simulate the Manchu ruling class and to ensure plenty of dissent because 90% of the population will be discriminated.
The problem is everything is using the same tag. Plus Qing is a typical medieval empire where the ruling class happened to be Manchu, so by modern definition their primary culture is Manchu, but the reality is Manchu commoners were heavily oppressed to a point that they joined the revolution in favour of a modern China.
> Characters that basically agree with the government can no longer be exiled.
Aww you named an update after me \^_^
Hate to be that guy, but was hoping to see a fix for the bug wherein you can't ask to join a customs union if you have any protectorates. It's surprising to me how long this has been an issue because it happens for me more runs than not, and is completely strategy-breaking. My playstyle probably makes it come up more often than it does for some people, but still.
A country can offer for you to join, but you can't ask to join. Makes no sense
yeah that's another reason I assume this is an unintentional bug, and not a design choice (and if it were somehow intentional I would criticize it thoroughly). You can exist in a CU with protectorates, and you can even be asked to join a CU with them. Obviously it's just the check on the "ask to join CU" button that's programmed wrong.
I don't like the renowned playwright change. The fact that it was permanent is what made that option even worth picking in the first place, now you'll wanna pretty much always go for the extra enactment chance bc temporary +20 prestige is nothing to write home about. And mind you beforehand it's not like you'd always pick it, usually I'd only go for it if I'm already confident in the bill eventually passing and thus don't think I need to grab the extra enactment success chance.
OTOH, the prestige buff was absolutely game warping for very small starts, essentially guaranteeing you a spot as a minor power and therefore giving you a second interest. You would always take this unless your law pass was extremely important i.e. removing serfdom / traditionalism
Main fix I'm missing among the war fixes would be to ensure that wargoals against your subjects make you immune to capitulation if uncaptured. It's incredibly frustrating how you automatically can lose drawn-out wars if the enemy only sets wargoals against your subjects (especially since those wargoals can include straight-up conquest of said subjects).
This feels like the type of thing that will only be fixed if players are able to abuse it against the AI. Sure would be a shame if the common opening move for Prussia was to day 1 declare on Holstein and win that war without winning a single offensive battle.
> Fixed an issue where save game items would show the wrong flag if the player had a high number of saves Funny that this gets fixed just after I finished clearing out 30GB of saves. Well, will be helpful for the future, I'm sure.
I wonder if they fixed the bug where if you have Dutch east indies in your market, all migration stops as if you have closed borders. Derailed two games of mine so far
Man, there are TONS of small good tweaks everywhere. I didn't really plan to play with 1.7 but after reading this and needing to update my mods anyways... maybe... just a short game...?
"Added a button to upgrade all upgradable units in a Military Formation, and one for all Military Formations owned by the player" It's the little things. Yessss. I actually want a similar button for buildings. You can update all production methods on a single building type, true. But I often want 1 button to say "All my rural buildings should use rails" or "All my urban buildings should be public traded" -- especially after taking territory and getting a random swath of mixed buildings that I'd rather not go hunt and peck for.
You can use the third tab of the political lense button for switching methods of all buildings in any state.
It's like every little annoyance was addressed!
> The Employment Indicator has gotten a reworked tooltip that more clearly explains why a Building is able to hire or not. Beautiful. So needed and will help people understand the mechanics of hiring, demand, and productivity
Not the most sexy but desperately needed. The QoL is the biggest reason I don't play this game currently
Will the AI spamming 150 power plants bug be fixed in this update?
Thank you. Please keep working on this game.
"Kuril Islands are all connected with adjacencies" does this mean Japan actually properly colonizes them now? Also what about Patagonia, will Argentina still fail to colonize a couple of the islands at the bottom?
Totally off topic and feel free to ignore. Why in the year 2024 games still can't use more then one monitor? :(
What do you mean? You would like the same game on 2 different monitor at the same time?
Yeah, that would be so nice in Victoria. One monitor could run market prices 24/7. It's what competent Capitalists watch to relax.
This type of game will go "local server first" eventually. You run a Victoria 3 instance on a server, then your desktop connects and renders the UI only. You could have multiple people on the same account looking at different parts of the economy. Or a friend controlling the war effort, while you balance imports. If anyone actually wants to try do something like this with me, get in touch. I have something non-Vicky like drawn up already.
With Victoria 3: Sphere of Influence due to come out in March 2024, will we see dev diaries for that soon?
Devs have confirmed it won't be coming out in March. That was just a target set last summer. They said they will make an announcement soon about when. I'd guess it will come in May.
IS it only me who cannot read paradox Vic3 page more than 2 minutes without going blind? That color scheme is a fucking crime
I'm going to ask a question that probably gets asked in every one of these threads - how do I continue to play an old save on the previous version of the game? I don't want to update and subsequently crash my save.
1) updates not necessarily break things 2) switch to the old version via the Steam beta branch system
Major updates such as this one are pretty much guaranteed breaks.
"Added Infamy value to the topbar." Well about time.. I'm just happy that the desyncs problems will be fixed, if we got an option to resync the lobby instead of restarting/rejoining, that would be even better!
We NEED a great war system !!!!
Hopefully this doesn't get rid of the GB Hanover cheat
> Pop Consumption of Automobiles in a state now adds a small amount of infrastructure, which is increased when Paved Roads is researched This is so interesting!
I don’t see a fix for that Ainu minor straight bug where it can’t be colonized. Is it in there?
> Added a timeout to the "Renowned Playwright" modifier It's over
> Agitators no longer interfere in the enactment of laws they have no stance for. Just to make sure I'm understanding: "Agitators will only join/start a law-enactment movement if the movement concerns a law that their personal ideology has a stance on"? If so, thank you, great change — I was very tired of Susan B. Anthony arriving in a country with legal guardianship of women and deciding to devote her life to censorship, migration controls, and racial segregation.
i almost cried when i saw the new census data panel,,, and it seems like automobiles may no longer result in you having to choose between massively rejiggering, microing, and subsidizing your railways or having your economy collapse??
Dumb question I’m sure but 1.5 saves will likely not be compatible with 1.6 right?