Paradox Interactive games

Ah, I finally beat them. They sent around 7k troops to invade me, so they had around 30k left at Rhodos. They started to train new recruits, and I attacked them right after they were finished. The small morale reduction was the key factor for winning the battle :) Of course, I got a leader some months after I had annexed them...

Yeah, Rhodos isn't a very good province, but it was the last province I had claim/core on.
 
Imo the paradox games i've played (EU1, EU2, Victoria: Revolutions) are too much like each other. The eu series is too much like the HOI series, which is too much like Victoria, although of course they are focused on different periods, and Victoria is a lot more complicated than EU. In a way Paradox has become the modern Koei, producing a line of similar games, using the current tech (although not quite), much like Koei produced a series of very similar to one another strategy games (the ROTTK series; the Bandit kings series, the Ghenghis Khan series, L' Empereur- same as the rest, only the map being industrial Europe, etc). It can get boring...
I got the demo of Knights of Honor. It seems a bit different (mostly due to the graphics being more advanced) but probably deep down it is not (?) ; i didnt play a lot of it though.
Also im not sure if it was a good move to make tens of provinces for each nation. Just how many provinces does the Victoria map have? Although at first i was happy to see that Greece has 20 provinces (possibly more; i was too bored to count them all :lol: ) later on i realised just how boring it is to go to war with nations that have endless numbers of provinces... In that respect probably Eu1 and Eu2 were better; there was a reasonable number of provinces and not this hyberbole of Victoria (Germany/Prussia has some 50 provinces i think!).
It is an interesting game (Victoria) but i want to be able to play something to the end in one go (nothing new here as a problem; Eu1/Eu2 were taking aeons to finish as well) and then again in a way the game creates a bottleneck on itself since you have less than 100 years to play (which can seem not that much if you are forced to use the 'extremely fast' speed so as to avoid sleeping while you have to collect cash to build capitalists/factories etc.
Also the game is not balanced. If you control a minor nation there is nothing else that you can do apart from going to war. And then there are a number of entirely unrealistic ploys, for example as Greece i allied myself with Russia (which accepted a full alliance with a nation of 1 million people) and then declared war on the Ottomans. Naturally i made peace with them without caring at all about Russia, and at the same time using mostly the russian points scored. This is really a very bad ploy, since it is the exact opposite of the Crimean war, during which Greece was effectively occupied by "friendly" France and Britain, so as to dissallow it from declaring war on the Ottoman Empire.
But since in Victoria this is easy to pull off i got to control almost all of the balcans by 1860. From then on things become what they effecively are if you control a stronger nation, ie raising money and improving the infrastructure. But for what?
Imo Victoria (and the other paradox games; except perhaps Eu1, which was at least original) suffers from not having a distinct goal. You cannot hope to conquer the entire map. You cannot even hope to clarly defeat all other major opponents (as in the Industrialist series). But then what is your goal? To spend hours observing a perpetual balance of power? To march armies of 100k troops to a few key provinces, without getting anything much out of it? (after all, if you can afford 100k armies, nomatter what the provinces are like they would not increase your income much). Or is the goal simply to score enough points to be the nation that got the most of them? This reminds me of the end message of a game i owned for Gameboy, which had 100 levels, and then in the end there only appeared on the screan a message reading: "Congratulations: you are good player" (not even grammatically correct) :)
 
Imo the paradox games i've played (EU1, EU2, Victoria: Revolutions) are too much like each other. The eu series is too much like the HOI series, which is too much like Victoria, although of course they are focused on different periods, and Victoria is a lot more complicated than EU.

I haven't played HoI very much, but I found it very different. Of course they are kinda same, both are strategy games. But EU has more variations in type of nations. HoI has only warfare, when EU has warfare, diplomacy(HoI has too but hey, it is WWII), many historical events and colonization. Victoria is some more like EU, but it has political parties, social reforms and industrialization.

Also im not sure if it was a good move to make tens of provinces for each nation. Just how many provinces does the Victoria map have? Although at first i was happy to see that Greece has 20 provinces (possibly more; i was too bored to count them all ) later on i realised just how boring it is to go to war with nations that have endless numbers of provinces... In that respect probably Eu1 and Eu2 were better; there was a reasonable number of provinces and not this hyberbole of Victoria (Germany/Prussia has some 50 provinces i think!).

It is good to have many provinces. You can't conquer France in few years in real life at year 1600. And Greece isn't easy to conquer, it is very crowded area, so it is harder to conquer them than some part of Siberia. And in Victoria there could be more provinces, because Germany was divided into masses of small nations, like Italy.

It is an interesting game (Victoria) but i want to be able to play something to the end in one go (nothing new here as a problem; Eu1/Eu2 were taking aeons to finish as well) and then again in a way the game creates a bottleneck on itself since you have less than 100 years to play (which can seem not that much if you are forced to use the 'extremely fast' speed so as to avoid sleeping while you have to collect cash to build capitalists/factories etc.

Strategy games are not meant to play in 30 minutes to the end. But hey, you can start EU2 at Napoleonic wars and Victoria at WWI. With save game "converters" you can start at year 1066(Crusader Kings), play to 1419 and continue with EU2, play to 1820, then jump to 1836 to Victoria, and after that play until 1920 and jump to HoI. So THAT is a long game.

Also the game is not balanced. If you control a minor nation there is nothing else that you can do apart from going to war. And then there are a number of entirely unrealistic ploys, for example as Greece i allied myself with Russia (which accepted a full alliance with a nation of 1 million people) and then declared war on the Ottomans. Naturally i made peace with them without caring at all about Russia, and at the same time using mostly the russian points scored. This is really a very bad ploy, since it is the exact opposite of the Crimean war, during which Greece was effectively occupied by "friendly" France and Britain, so as to dissallow it from declaring war on the Ottoman Empire.

There is other things for minor nations than fight. Get allies to protect you and make some industry and colonization. After that you are not a minor nation. About the Greece-Russia alliance, what is that weird in that alliance? In WWII Finland allied with Germany. And the example you used could happen. Greece and Russia form an anti-Ottoman alliance, attack, Greece gets rid of the war with some excuse, Russia sees a chance to kick Turkish a**.

But since in Victoria this is easy to pull off i got to control almost all of the balcans by 1860. From then on things become what they effecively are if you control a stronger nation, ie raising money and improving the infrastructure. But for what?
Imo Victoria (and the other paradox games; except perhaps Eu1, which was at least original) suffers from not having a distinct goal. You cannot hope to conquer the entire map. You cannot even hope to clarly defeat all other major opponents (as in the Industrialist series). But then what is your goal? To spend hours observing a perpetual balance of power? To march armies of 100k troops to a few key provinces, without getting anything much out of it? (after all, if you can afford 100k armies, nomatter what the provinces are like they would not increase your income much). Or is the goal simply to score enough points to be the nation that got the most of them? This reminds me of the end message of a game i owned for Gameboy, which had 100 levels, and then in the end there only appeared on the screan a message reading: "Congratulations: you are good player" (not even grammatically correct)

You CAN conquer whole world. Many have done it, but it's veery hard. And what goals should there be? You said you conquered the Balkans. What about other Ottoman areas in Europe? That is another goal. And Crete, Rhodes, Cyprus and Corfu? Conquer them too.
 
The goal? lol!, the goal is to enjoy the game. In most games the goal is to win. In Victoria you can win by points and that is if I recall correctly, military score + Industrial score + 1/2 prestige score.

And remember, this is Victoria, this is played in the 19th century where Industrial capacity and National Population matter the most, not like in Eu2 where only you can conquer the world with a minor (even in Vicky that is possible).
 
The whole idea of these kind of games is to set your own goals. If you lack the imagination for that then you probably shouldn't be playing them. For example, take the Greek situation, yes, it's unlikely that you can conquer the world as them, but you can regain all of the provinces of Greek cultures, what next? Liberate the Balkans. After that? become a dominant mediterranian power, perhaps with an end-game goal to finish off the Ottomans if your skill allows it.

It's that amout of flexibility that I really like about the Paradox series, it's not just "conquer the world" which is tedium of the highest order once you've done it a few dozen times...
 
The problem is that the game does not follow history that well. Greece could have tried to go to war with the Ottoman empire early on, during the crimean war, but France and GB saw to it that this didnt happen. Instead here you can just create your own crimean war very easily, which i see as a ploy.
Moreover there is another bad ploy; unlike in the EU games, in Victoria you can pretty much declare war without having to worry about BB. Infact with Greece, or any other nation that starts with very good relations to a few major powers, you can just go to war with some uncivilized nation, conquer some of its land (eg Tunis is a very easy target) and then sell to to GB for over 20.000 pounds, effectively kickstarting your capitalism.
In RL a nation which would just declare war each 5 years for so obvious opportunistic reasons would have been met with more opposition by the great powers.

Moreover i do not agree that Victoria is complicated. Surely it is more complicated than the EU series, but in reality you always end up doing the same thing; build some lucrative factories and an army; keep the people happy and expand. With some powers that is so easy (eg Japan) that the game becomes a process of endlessly expanding factories and upgrading POP's, which can become in itself very dissapointing.

That said i would be interested in playing a game of it online; anyone know any good dedicated servers? :) (i have Victoria: Revolutions)
 
The problem is that the game does not follow history that well. Greece could have tried to go to war with the Ottoman empire early on, during the crimean war, but France and GB saw to it that this didnt happen. Instead here you can just create your own crimean war very easily, which i see as a ploy.

The problem of this is that you have several dozen countries, each following their own agenda (such as the AI can cope with). The longer you play a game, the more alternate-history you're going to get. This is probably one of the main reasons Paradox games have multiple scenarios, starting from different years to try and reflect the time periods.

Of course, this is coming form an EU2/HoI player, I never could break into Victoria.
 
Moreover i do not agree that Victoria is complicated. Surely it is more complicated than the EU series, but in reality you always end up doing the same thing; build some lucrative factories and an army; keep the people happy and expand. With some powers that is so easy (eg Japan) that the game becomes a process of endlessly expanding factories and upgrading POP's, which can become in itself very dissapointing.

That said i would be interested in playing a game of it online; anyone know any good dedicated servers? (i have Victoria: Revolutions)

Keeping economy on balance is very much more complicated in Victoria. You have to adjust trade tariffs, taxes, education and army spending and still gain money.

What difficulty level do you play? I have hard times in Victoria, because I play at Very Hard.
 
I have only played at the normal level. Are the next two levels anything different than just a negative bonus for the human player? (ie a positive for the AI) Or is there a negative bonus for all (both human and AI)?
I suspect that it is the first case, which i do not find that appealing :/

As for trade, i mostly keep taxes + tarifs as low as possible, so that i can enlarge the population more easily. The AI from what i've seen is unimaginative (France always lags far behind every other major) and although i have only played as Greece, Japan, Austria and France, i can say that with Japan it was a calm walk, with Austria it was frustrating since i got to 1880 before i could ensure going to a 2 year war without worrying about revolutions, with Greece it was the ussual trick with selling land to Britain and destroying the ottoman empire/egypt, and with France i am only now beginning to change the political system, after a quick war against Switzerland so as to force them to pay war indemnities (one of their corporals, who also was a painter, seemed to be a bit irritated by it) :)

I think thatVictoria would be simply great if there are servers that host massive multiplayer games. The great war scen would be ideal for such a quick game i think :)
 
I don't know the difference between normal and VH, I started with VH after playing EU2.

I have played Austria and France, both were bit easy. I suggest that you download V.I.P, what means Victoria Improvements Project(?).

Try Sardinia-Piedmont, Belgium, Netherlands or Spain. Sardinia has a challenge of unifying Italy, Belgium fighting Netherlands and colonizing Congo(like in real life), Netherlands colonizing East Asia and fighting Belgium and Spain conquering Morocco and colonizing Africa.
 
I'm about to reinstall Victoria for yet another attempt at getting to grips with it. I know of the Paradox site, and some helpful guides, but I'd be interested in any personal hints and tips from any Victoria players here :)

It's without the expansion, and I'll be downloading the latest patch (1.4?)
 
Download V.I.P also. It improves the game nicely, for example prevents unrealistic nations colonizing.

If you want challenge, then start as some small nation in Europe. They have to balance between Great Powers and small landmass. For moderate game take some nation in Americas or small European powers. I recommend Brazil, with V.I.P you have nice battles first with rebels and after that with economy. Colombia is also nice, so is Mexico. But don't take UCSA(?) in Central America, it has enormous rebellions. For an easy game take a big power.

Haven't played Vic for a while, but I remember that always set Machine Parts to Buy 1000. They are sooo rare. And don't trade techs for techs, your research points will go below zero.
 
I'm not really looking for a challenge. In fact, a challenge is the last thing I want when trying to learn this game :p

Playing as Sweden, as I read it was a good starter nation. Have to admit this is very true, my economy is in the green, and I managed to survive a couple of wars. One against Prussia for Denmark's sake (not really worth it) and joined the Crimean War in order to establish Finnish independance.

So far I'm enjoying it. I've kept on Britain's good side, as well as most of the major European powers, and I think I'm getting the hang of the damn game. Hopefully this will develop into a beautiful relationship!
 
Better control a nation that has a good steel industry. Othen than that you could also make some money by selling regular furniture. It seems that selling luxury items (lux furniture and/or lux clothes) will make your capitalists lose money, although i find this absurd (probably it has to do with the command for those items being set to "sell" which disables any purchace on your side, thus making the capitalists lose money since they have to buy them theirselves).
However the game is tiresome. Belgium looks like a nice little nation, with enough steel to be financially secure, but then it is landlocked between France and Germany. I am utilising an event for the ottoman empire which forces them to hand over Constantinople if it is captured, although i changed it since originally it had the unrealistic hand-over of the entire balcans (provided that you already controlled a part of them) whereas now it only causes them to hand over eastern Thrace. I am not keen on having the ottoman empire collapse entirely, since then there is only one nation that takes over the border, and that is Russia, which in Victoria means that you have no chance of getting it to back down from a war unless you can field massive armies.
I still am of the view that Victoria is very far away from being as good as Imperialism1, or Imperialism2. The Imperialism series were a lot more balanced, although ultimately their scope was smaller. Moreover although in theory all nations are playable in Victoria, it still is suicide to control uncivilised nations (minus Japan of course, but it becomes independent through an event). So that leaves only a handfull of nations apart from the european ones, and even less if one takes into account the german and italian unifications. In Europe the only playable nations are Greece, Prussia, Austria, Two sicilies, Piemonte-Sardinia, Spain, Portugal, France, Denmark, Sweden, Russia (well, it must be boring), Britain (boring as well i trust), Ottoman Empire and Netherlands. Possibly Bavaria too, although im not sure if it can stay out of war with Prussia, and finally i am not sure if the Papal states have any chance of unifying Italy.
Apart from them there are some latin-american nations, and then the Usa and Japan. That is not that great a number of playable nations afterall ;)
I could also add Serbia and the Hegemonies (Wallachia and Moldavia) but they start as Ottoman vassals and most probably will remain such for eternity; even waiting until the ottomans are at war with Russia can take ages.

Also i was quite surprised that Bulgaria has as its core provinces those it got to control in the end of the first balcan war. If it was so then Greece should also have Vlore as a core province, since it controlled it for a short while, but was forced to give it away due to Austrian/Italian pressure, which resulted in the creation of Albania. Overall the twenty-five provinces of the Greek core could have been a bit more; Izmir (Smyrna) and some other ones in coastal anatolia could be added, and also Varna and Burgaz could have formed Eastern Rumelia, which had been briefly a protectorate nation, before it was annexed by Bulgaria.
In the edited ottoman collapse event the ottomans are forced (if Constantinople is under greek control) to give Konstantinye, Edirne and Vlore, with the two other albanian provinces forming Albania as an independant nation, and Greece getting claims in Izmir and some other surrounding provinces.

I think that i will try the byzantine mod for Victoria, since there you have a real shot at making a huge nation in the region, although effectively it still is pretty much the same as the ottomans. However at least it allows for more interesting wars with Persia, and another block of alliance (with Russia).
 
Playing as Sweden, as I read it was a good starter nation. Have to admit this is very true, my economy is in the green, and I managed to survive a couple of wars. One against Prussia for Denmark's sake (not really worth it) and joined the Crimean War in order to establish Finnish independance.

:goodjob:

How do you keep your economy in balance? I had problems with it when I last time tried Vic.
 
It is very worth to defend Denmark, if you support them in both wars and select twice Scandinavian Surge and if you manage to get a white peace from both wars with Prussia, an even will appear in 1862 i think that will let you form Scandinavia...
 
General luck, so far. This is my my first game in which things are generally going the way I want. I'm no expert on Victoria. My general impression is that you simply sell everything on the trade market, except stuff that you need. This however, is the area I'm weakest in, so if anyone has any other suggestions I'd be most welcome.

Finnish independence isn't as great as it sounds. It's just three provinces in the north (including two that should belong to Russia). I'm trying to buy off two British provinces that they claimed in the Crimean War, but I'm hoping to have an opportunity to attack Russia sometime in the future. I can't do it alone though, so I'll have to bide my time.
 
Well, the best way to get Finland is to buy it via techs and a bit money, but you must have +190 relations with the bear...
 
Back
Top Bottom