File: 0c87a599-2c8d-40d6-9858-3(...).jpg (468 KB, 1569x2001)

468 KB JPG

Vicky 3's warfare system is actually good and I don't miss playing with shitty toy soldiers at all.

Huh? Whuzzat? Law passing changed?

>>2314899
Yes. You can now negotiate with IGs, promising to financially destroy your country in exchange for -7 stall chance.

>>2314512
I don't consider it "good" but previous Paradox war systems were utter shit to the point that this is serviceable in comparison
War is the last thing I care about in Victoria 3 regardless

>>2315052
It being almost totally automated other than making sure your troops are supplied fits the theme of the game very well if you ask me.
>>2315045
Absolutely love the bizarre scaling of AF requests in late game.
>we've got a power projection of 80k? Good, now increase it to 180k in 5 years

>>2314512
>MUH TOY SOLDIERS
This is a shill phrase.

>>2314137
did you forget the rest of the OP

>>2314137
for future dumb fucks
https://rentry.co/v3gpasta

File: 64px-Decree_promote_socia(...).png (9 KB, 64x64)

9 KB PNG

Decree: Promote Social Mobility
Requirement: No Hindus and(?) No Caste System
Effect: State enforced education + vocational experience for everyone

Why is it called social mobility if it's about creating harder workers, not increasing promotion and demotion?
Why is my marxism simulator not about fighting the rigid social hierarchy where the rich get richer, and instead is all about educating people until they're eligible to become factory owners, workers, civil servants, and most importantly, taxpayers?

>>2316103
Because it isn't a Marxism simulator, it's a br*adtuber simulator

The law casino is actually a dogshit system altogether. It's kind of impossible to fix. It has to remain dogshit due to how the game was designed, but man is it BAD.

>>2316103
No its not Marxism it's a libcucks idea what social progress is simulator.

File: house of commons.jpg (118 KB, 800x600)

118 KB JPG

I wish the law system was different:
>if you are The State (autocracy, single party, etc), you propose reforms
>if you are any degree of a democracy or distributed power (oligarchy), governing interest groups with legitimacy propose reforms, the frequency scaling with how democratic you are
>any governing parties that don't actually agree on a reform don't propose it, the same as how political deadlocking happens currently in the game
>anarchy means you yourself cannot propose reforms, illegitimacy also stops you same as currently
>authority no longer reduces enactment time but instead is the mana you use to affect the current reform's success or failure
>>authority spent early will improve the chance for your preferred outcome the most
>>authority spent will help or hurt relations with interest groups with a slow decay - an inflammatory law will tip disorder into rebellion if it's not left up to the Will Of The People (dice rolls + interest group clout) to decide
>>authority kept in reserve can be used to change Randumb popup event outcomes and directly negate a setback or even send it back a step if that 5% success chance somehow got it to the last phase and you don't want to roll the dice and have a new law you don't like!
There's a semblance of a private economy in the game and it's gotten better since release's fully state planned economy, but the politics is still autocratic and democracy isn't very democratic. It would be nice if players were told "Oh, you want to enact fully automated gay space communism? Have you considered reactionary monarchy, socialism, communism, or the third way?" with some players being laughed at for unknowingly re-enacting historic conservatism of delaying suffrage because it's taking away their control.
Maybe the system could also support competing reforms, where if someone proposes Charity Hospitals you can say "Fuck that, let's have Public Healthcare!" before you're locked into a difficult law like poll tax.

I checked the reddit
I'm surprised how self aware some of them are
>hey what interest group r u? I'm a trade unionist intelligentsia because I'm a student, lol
>I'm an engineer IRL, so in game I'm the petite bourgeoisie
>lawyer, so petite bourgeoisie
>blue collar in a union, trade union
>peasant
>dependant (unemployed)
>dependant (homemaker)
Makes a slight change to the "Here's my run where I became the top GDP in the world. Oil and gold mine conquering optional. Why yes my country is now Hindu-Islamic and here's the chart to prove it."

>>2316409
>dependant (homemaker)
more proof that paradox games are all just the sims now

>>2314512
It's not "good" in any shape or form. The amount of weird shit still happening after numerous fixes and reworks is staggering. If wiz wasn't fucking retarded, he would have copied HoI4 fronts (battle plans only, no micro)

Is it possible to play Byzantium without going full globohomo? The Turks keep rebelling.

>>2316919
What laws have you tried?
Do you have Dedicated Police + Secret Police? Those used to make revolt literally impossible.
Is your economy okay?

>>2316919
Pass Subjecthood.

>>2316928
I’m on national guard, I’ll try switching to secret police

>>2316938
That's not enough. To stop Turkish rebellions you need either multiculturalism or subjecthood.

The new coup mechanic sucks ass. I found only one way to avoid it without eating penalties: only hire unpopular commanders. It's better when everyone hates your generals.

This game is dead. DEEAAAAAAAAAD

>>2317505
Only Paradox game I didn't get my money's worth out of.

>>2317336
You can just move the general doing the coup to an army with no soldiers or send him away from your capital

>>2317547
One weird trick

>>2317547
Decreasing the general's troop count gives you an event with penalties. If he's popular it's also not enough to prevent the coup. Just don't ever hire popular generals.

>>2317520
Only game not worth the download kek

>nerf sovereign empire
vs
>buff all other power blocs
thoughts?

>>2317642
I'd rather they remove power blocs.

Shamelessly shilling my own retarded video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoRPUakY4yo
I play Denmark, trying to develop the Financial Centers (+ MHs and CHs) to the point where the economy depends exclusively on dividends from financial assets (no more national industries or resources).

>>2314512
you are gay

>>2317642
Sovereign empire isn't that good tbqhwy. Makes subjects too weak and if you want to full annex you just protectorate + trade states and/or go high infamy.

>>2317726
I am trans actually

>>2317744
The point of power blocs is to generate mana. Subject members are better than non-subjects, since the latter tend to grow into major powers and leave your bloc. Sovereign empire is best because it generates the most mana and saves the most infamy with free subjugations.

>>2317835
The problem is that you're losing out on mandates since the vassalization mandate sucks beyond the first level, siphoning too much money from puppets is bad as it causes them to be stuck in a cycle of instability.

>>2317744
>Sovereign empire isn't that good
People who keeps saying this are just wrong. Please stop saying things that aren't correct.
I could excuse it when people didn't know anything about the game.

You could argue that there's situations where trade leagues are objectively better. That's unfortunately where the buck stops. Additional authority and decree cost reduction has crazy synergy. If other bloc types had permanent 100 cohesion, they'd maybe be able to compete a little.

>>2317880
Yes, the extra authority is good, but extra subject payments is a debuff as it is an inherently destabilizing factor for them. Secondly, there is nothing inherent in sovereign empire that creates higher cohesion, in fact it decreases it if you pick the non-vassalization principle. Trade league, military treaty and cultural commonwealth all have better primary principles depending on playstyle.

Furthermore, the free subjugation is a lot less valuable on the current patch, though I can agree it was definitely worth it back on 1.8/9.

>>2318441
Play the fucking game. As long as you are a GP sovereign empire has great cohesion, which is rare among power bloc types. Its primary principle is perfectly fine, since it gives you a bunch of free authority. Here's the experience of picking other types:

>everything except trade league
You have shit cohesion and don't get principles.
>trade league
You build up an empire with great cohesion and tons of point generation. Then the members get too strong, leave, form their own power bloc, and rival you.

This is why sovereign empire is best. The others should only be used in niche circumstances.

>>2318558
>You have shit cohesion and don't get principles.
That's because you're not increasing economic entanglement but rely on money transfers to keep your subjects liberty desire low. The reason this is a bad thing is because it puts the subject into a bankruptcy spiral, while optimally you want your own companies/domestic capitalists to build their profitable shit and they themselves to build the less profitable agriculture.

In fact here are all the use cases for all power bloc types:

>Military Treaty
You want 20% training rate and nothing else.
>Ideological Union
You want -33% stall chance and nothing else.
>Cultural Commonwealth
You're doing a nation formation cheese run.
>Religious Convocation
You want 5% birth rate and nothing else.
If you're catholic then it becomes a worse version of trade league (this is praiseworthy).
>Trade League
You want an actual power bloc but aren't a monarchy.
>Sovereign Empire
You want an actual power bloc.

File: 1765858963428801.png (323 KB, 900x806)

323 KB PNG

>play autocratic government
>cant just pass any law i want

I don't like power blocs.
On the outside you think it's the Entente, Central Powers, Allies, Axis, NATO or BRICS.
In game it's just Sphereing++. That's not a bloc, that's just saying you need to not annex an unrecognised power to unlock all these game changing buffs. The biggest bloc is the British Empire and even then, what's that? Colonial Australia is coming to invade? Oh I'm so scaaaared.

It's insulting that my ruler is stood next to that of these pathetic fake countries on the bloc screen as if they're equals.

>>2318633
>play autocratic government
>you can only pass laws your ruler wants
>shocked pikachu.avif

>>2314512
THE WAR SYSTEMS IS WHY THIS GAME ISNT MORE POPULAR. SEND THIS RETARD TO SIBERIA

>>2318800
i AM the ruler

>>2318945
You're not a centralized commie to dictate reality though.

>>2318800
That’s only true if you are a republic with autocracy. Monarchs only give a buff to clout to the ig they are in, and their ideology is absolutely worthless. Your monarch can be a reformer industrialist, but you ain’t passing compulsory schooling if industrialist leader isn’t reformer as well

>>2318633
That doesn't work in real life either.

This is the best Paradox game apparently.

>>2319017
Been saying this for a long time, in spite of the protestations of philistines.

>>2318573
This is a clear-headed post.
I could imagine going for military treaty if you aim to break up big countries and protectorate everything.
More wargoals, less time spent in truces.

Cultural commonwealth is great if you're up to nonsense. Without the nonsense, it also kind of stinks.

>>2319017
Yes. It's unfortunately the case. I think EU5 has potential, but they messed up with a basketful of (in)decisions in that game.
Victoria 3 might be kind of a mess at times, but there's an actual vision here. It's the difference between imperial and metric system, where EU5 representing the imperial units is just a collection of mechanics.
Vic3 representing the metric system is an actual system built of mechanics.

>>2319192
>It's the difference between imperial and metric system, where EU5 representing the imperial units is just a collection of mechanics.
>Vic3 representing the metric system is an actual system built of mechanics.
There’s two types of systems of units: those that make sense, and those that have put men on the moon.

File: 34672d0459b318538e3527866(...).jpg (33 KB, 540x540)

33 KB JPG

>>2318633
Damn, the internet is full of Joffreys.

When am I going to be able to use my home country's techology in a foreign investment ? Can this shit be modded in any way ?
Its retarded to have a corporation from a modernized country be limited to just building farming huts outside of it.

>>2319246
>men on the Moon
NASA use predominantly metric units tho

>>2314512
agree and disagree... I did hated the mobilization system and how every war was dragged out by infinite infantry spam but at same time i miss cheesing by forcing ai to fight me on the top of mountains KEK

File: c58c1895-0cb1-4e72-9200-a(...).jpg (168 KB, 1200x1200)

168 KB JPG

Why cant i put a gun to my central bankers head and tell them to just print more money in thus game?

File: 20260112234311_1.jpg (856 KB, 2240x1400)

856 KB JPG

maybe I missed some part of the tutorial, so what's the best way to hold positive income? I drop down to -13k whenever I want to build anything, but I'm presently stuck with my infrastructure limit and only just started getting steel production so I could build train engines for my privately-built railroads
what're good ways to increase SoL, while we're at it? It's not too clear

>>2320338
Because Victoria 3, like all Paradox games, doesn't model prices and the value of money correctly. So it can't simulate inflation in a realistic manner. So they have to restrict your ability to issue currency. If they modelled money correctly as a good governed by supply and demand like everything else, then you could issue as much as you want. Although they'd also have to have separate currencies for each country otherwise you could just destroy everyone's economy through hyperinflation rather than just your own.

>>2320734
Lower the price of construction goods and/or swap off iron frame.

>>2320338
Technically you do that constantly, Minting is a major source of income for most nations and it's literally just printing money. Fortunately inflation doesn't exist because this game is designed by Communists.

>>2320734
Economic growth tends to snowball, so if you fuck it up early it can be painful to claw through later. The railroad bottleneck is a particularly early and brutal example of that.

SoL is hard to intentionally raise IME. In theory it's just (Wages - Expenses), so increasing wages or decreasing the cost of goods should boost it. I've never been able to get the latter to work right, even with cheap goods my SoL drifts very slowly.

I suspect producing whatever is valuable to boost wages is the better strategy, but I've never properly tested it.

>>2320314
>MUH LE MOUNTAIN CHEESE
This strawman or the word "gookclick" were the terms used to astroturf support for Vicky 3's meme warfare system way back when.

>>2320787
>astroturf
>literally never debunked the argument
Seethe harder.

>>2320789
>the AI doesn't factor in terrain and the idea that the tiny stack in the alps might have a 30k behind it
>this means we should gut everything and start again with an even worse system
Imagine there was a choice that wasn't just a binary one between copying Vicky 2's war system, LE MOUNTAIN CHEESE and all or this new abortion they came up with
No middle ground, no nuance, only two ridiculous points. Welcome to post-2016 internet!

>>2320813
Nah, fuck your "sick micro" skills.

>>2320338
>central bankers
>bankers
>bank
>central
None of these exist in game. Money printing is decentralised on the blockchain where independent workers create and destroy bitcoin based on their CPU and GPU's productivity relatively to the productivity of other people's CPUs and GPUs.
Unfortunately a side effect of this is that the more people who start mining bitcoins, and in diverse ways, the more people who realise they can hack into the "planetary" CPU which slows down time and makes the last 10 years take as long as the first 50.

>>2320734
>I drop down to -13k whenever I want to build anything
>only just started getting steel
>what're good ways to increase SoL, It's not too clear
When you have no loans, if you're raising your taxes above normal, and it's not because you're temporarily at war, you have too much expenditure. Reduce your construction sectors or lower your institutions.
Your tax law is also important because
1) Land tax takes money from peasants (no peasants = no money)
2) Poll tax takes money from peasants and workers
3) Proportionate and Graduated tax take money from workers and owners (no factories = no tax, "farm" buildings are factories aka opium isn't taxed on land tax)
4) Consumption taxes are good

To increase SoL you generally need to
1) Increase income
2) Decrease outgoings
3) Provide enough consumer goods
which have multiple answers. The "normal" way is to go for fully automated gay space communism. The standard way is to increase wages, reduce tax, provide welfare (helps a lot), and have a mature consumer economy. So you might need to get to 1900 before it noticeably improves.
Wages are affected by expected SoL (derived from high literacy and social technology), labour scarcity, citizenship, and minimum wage laws. You cannot meaningfully affect wages in a way that helps SoL because of the labour scarcity calculation.
Child labour helps SoL for immature peasant economies and may even be good for SoL in mature economies. I can't remember if Feminism skyrockets SoL (or does nothing at all) by nearly doubling household income (debatably unlike real life) but of course you need job openings and more consumer goods to support it.


Don't worry about not understanding. Just remember reduce your outgoings, tax less when able, and the game basically plays itself and you should hit 14-16 SoL without even trying by 1900 for reasons 90% of players don't understand.

File: 20260113144951_1.jpg (858 KB, 2240x1400)

858 KB JPG

>>2320750
i think it's presently cheaper for me to use iron frame, I make so much that the cost is pretty low; the labor is just so much
>>2320734
is my mill making steel? I can't really tell if it's profitable
>>2321127
i'll try to look into it. Is there a better way to see the balances of specific factories/goods? Or is it more just if it's in the green/yellow it's good all of the time? I can't tell what industries are profitable right now in spite of the direct in/out prices being there

Protip: The current meta crop is bananas. Always build bananas if you can. It's more profitable than opium.

I think locking companies behind technologies (except cases with oil, electric and auto non-charted buildings) is retarded. They should have locked prosperity bonus behind tech

Genuinely though, what the fuck were they thinking when it came to warfare in this game?

>>2321412
>this game isn't about warfare
>era of peace
They wanted to get rid of cheese strats but they didn't have enough time to properly develop the new system. I envisioned something like HoI battle plans but you can't micro units.

>>2321353
t. united fruit

>>2321438
Ironically United Fruit itself is shit, since it has a ridiculous -25% infamy decay. You're better off keeping the plantations nationalized, since you get a lot of government dividend income.

File: Expanded Building Grid.jpg (30 KB, 710x120)

30 KB JPG

why the fuck do i need to get a mod so that Infrastructure limit is shown in the building tab
it's critical information when building en masse

>>2321441
i'm shocked that the commies at pdx designed the game this way. shocked.

>>2314512
After playng EU I wish I was playing vic3

>>2321477
EU5*

>>2321446
You would also think the game woudl tell you about total number employed and open jobs too

>>2321161
>it's cheaper to use iron frame
Where is most of your money going?
How much does turning on your construction sectors cost?
You might have too many.
>is my mill making steel? I can't really tell if it's profitable
It is. But it looks like nothing's using it. It's currently not profitable (weekly balance £-224) and that's because you're subsidising it to overproduce for the current market condition... if you click the steel button in the factory menu you might be able to see how much is being consumed locally and by who.
You might also want to swap to the bessemer process but only after you need more steel.
>balances of specific factories/goods? green/yellow? I can't tell
Generally you just go by what the map says when building and you'll roughly get an idea of what a good profit margin is. For example, most farms are barely profitable.

just realized ashkenazi jews are more tolerated in germanic countries then french, italian and slavic peoples

>>2321810
I mean they are indeed whiter and more civilized.

is subjecthood the best citizenship law after multiculturalism?

File: vic.png (108 KB, 836x522)

108 KB PNG

>get itch to play again
>check DLCs
>Play as [literally who] to decide [alt history question] using [bad, buggy, and poorly reviewed] journal mechanics!
Which DLCs do anons recommend?

>>2321810
Would you like to look a bit closer at the fascist petite bourgeoisie interest group and how it only bars membership for wrong culture and not religion, i.e. Jews?
Some might call that whitewashing. It gets weird when it's popular on reddit to point out the protestant-catholic split on the Nazi party, which would give Paradox an fand support excuse to make the pet bourg membership limited by the strictest religion law as well as the (cultural/"""social construct""") race law.

>>2321997
Depends on your country and what you want.
Authority, wages, fervor, acceptance, political influence. Isn't subjecthood just multicult-lite for those who cannot get multicult yet, with problems like how it works perfectly until internal migration happens?

File: law passing.png (830 KB, 1107x553)

830 KB PNG

>play poortugal
>queen is now a shopkeeper rather than a bureaucrat
>unelected oligarchy with elections
>colonies are growing slower than day one release vicky despite being on colonial affairs 2 by default
>arm immediately being twisted by an interest group for a law, so try to follow through
>group who doesn't want it decides to "support" it
I swear this event used to check if an interest group actually cared about it.

>>2321997
Yes. Especially if you start with the new racialization amendment like Cuba. It removes its main downside (no agitators/immigration).

Meta-wise, multiculturalism is best. Personally I hate it because it's ahistorical and disables assimilation. Second best is Subjecthood + Colonial Racialization. It's almost-multiculturalism that allows slavery. Third place is a tie between regular Subjecthood and Cultural Exclusion. Cultural Exclusion is the default all countries should be on, unless you plan on directly conquering and holding a lot of unaccepted pops. They each have their own upside and downsides.

The rest are trash and should never be used.

>>2322206
I'm playing again since a long break and I see race now has twice as many values, such as mother tongue.
Are there now people who actually benefit from cultural exclusion as compared to racial? I can't tell if it just means afro-americans will now be accepted under (same tongue) european rulers and if places like russia will still have bad acceptance for non-caucasoids.

>>2322231
Cultural Exclusion makes all pops have minimum 20 acceptance, which is really good. The only "downside" is that it drives very similar cultures to have 100 acceptance, meaning they do not assimilate. Canada with Cultural Exclusion cannot assimilate English pops.

File: Ontario in 2026... er 1853.png (661 KB, 530x943)

661 KB PNG

>>2322240
>Canada with Cultural Exclusion cannot assimilate English pops.
Ironically I'd say actual Canadians today are just English pops, if not American pops.

And if I click on Canada in my game right now, year in the filename, oh boy. Maybe if total separation of church and state was historically accurate it'd mitigate this awful ahistorical melting pot born from extremely ahistorical migration mechanics.

play as USA
>monarchy, corporate state or presidential republic
>autocracy, oligarcy or single party state
>state religion
>subjecthood (if monarcy) or cultural exclusion
>conscription
>national guard
>isolationism
>lazeus faire
>commercial agriculture
>colonial exploitation
>militarized police
>relgious schools
>private healthcare
>outlaw dissent
>no workers right
>child labor allowed
>legal guardianship
>no social security
>closed borders
>debt slavery
>combination act or anti-strike laws
MAGA!

>>2322240
>The only "downside" is that it drives very similar cultures to have 100 acceptance, meaning they do not assimilate.
thats retarded. they should implement a modifier that cultures with the same heritage and language woukd assimilate even if they are 100% accepted

>>2322142
>feel like country's engine has finally turned on
>still a lot to do
>barely breached 10 SoL
>trade unions in charge under census suffrage, don't know why, does wealth not affect votes anymore?
>only just got cure for malaria, colonies look pitifully small
>true goal was to militarise and conquer brazil
>brazil has been allied to someone else all game, britain no longer joins your wars no questions asked

>check year
>nearly 1900
Why bother?
I managed to colonise the less full Eastern Africa with Portuguese pops and told my colonial admin there to become the New Portugal. I'm still not sure how colonisation works but I'm slowly putting on labour saving production methods to encourage people to move elsewhere. I would have preferred to do it to Brazil.

The new amendment system feels like a mess. I haven't double checked to see if I can convince someone who hates it to back it for +clout, then put them in power to remove their own amendment. I feel like interest groups are being neutered one update at a time, I'm paying attention to them and loyalists less and less.

>>2322513
>does wealth not affect votes anymore?
It affects political power, but the baseline wealth for voting in census suffrage is only 10. If you only want the wealthy having power then go for landed or wealth voting, otherwise your laborer and machinist base will heavily influence politics

can you turn usa or new england into a colonial administrations if you puppet them as britain?

>>2322728
No.

>>2322695
>If you only want the wealthy having power then
I don't mind, I'm just confused because I haven't played for a while and TUs used to get buried in elections but they're basically 80% of the vote.
Though I don't know if I simply reformed into a democracy after I depeasanted.
I'm also confused as to why all of Africa and Asia (from inside my borders) didn't move to my mainland to cause turmoil like they used to but I didn't reform tenant farming so maybe that's why.

10SoL for census suffrage seems a little low. And looking at wealth voting I'm not sure if that's too low as well.

The new investment rights subject interaction is awful. It causes your (already puny) investment pool to build iron mines in your overlord instead of your country. Being a subject is so bad you want to stop being once ASAP in 100% of all cases. I don't understand why the devs hate subjects so much.

File: investrights.png (426 KB, 1052x320)

426 KB PNG

>>2322856
This one?
Also
>playing a subject
>in a high imperial era
Get annexed, lmao

Anyway, to be serious, I don't remember if the private sector was allowed to invest in subjects before (you still can as the state). I don't see why it's another -0.05 liberty desire button because paradox usually abhores letting you have fun. And I assume as soon as anyone from your country builds in the subject, you will also impact liberty desire because "you" then own their economy.

It's basically the same as any investment rights decision to me. Why would you do it with a country with more money, more army, and more construction sectors? Someone you're a vassal of is not your peer and you won't ever be able to privatise buildings with this agreement in place.

>>2322856
Why would you ever want to get investment rights in another country before being fully industrialized? Are you stupid?

>>2314137
>game will be playable after 10 years of DLC and updates.
so like every other PDX grand strategy?

>>2323641
Your overlord forces it on you, retard. It also gives you negative liberty desire despite being terrible for you.

>>2323613
Other way around. This lets subjects invest in the overlord. Because overlords have better tech, it means all their private construction queue is stolen.

>>2321412
I love VIctoria 2 but its war system was goofy. If you want real warfare, play HoI.
While the front drawing could be better, I think that the current system is a good enough abstraction of warfare at that time. We can focus more on economic and society rather than solving all of our problems by just outmanoeuvering a dumb AI.

>>2324019
Tech decides international investment?

File: 529340_20260119183345_1.png (3.01 MB, 1920x1080)

3.01 MB PNG

India richest cleanest superpower saars

File: 529340_20260119183213_1.png (3.03 MB, 1920x1080)

3.03 MB PNG

>>2324705
Britain just shits itself once you get your independence. Interestingly enough, my rulers were English, then Scottish, and the current one is Irish.

>>2324700
Because the devs are incompetent, foreign investor use the tech of the country they are building in. So mines for example will use the worst and least profitable PM, and investors always look for the most profitable option. This means Canadian investors will build iron mines in England instead of Ontario.

File: v3 trump.jpg (62 KB, 959x299)

62 KB JPG

LOL

>>2314512
I like the idea of it (I used to do battle plan-only runs in HoI4) but the UX is still garbage. You should be able to issue directives to your generals from the map instead of having to go through menus.

is free trade and laissez faire the best economic laws? i rarely played so long that socialist laws becomes available

>>2324755
Free Trade yes. Laissez-Faire only during a specific period in the midgame. Early on Agrarianism is best. In the late game you want Command Economy, since otherwise the investment pool sits unused and grows to infinity.

>read gay commie subreddit
>slave trade is um good actually because pop line goes up
Maybe there's hope for this playerbase.

>>2324712
The most profitable place is where there's consumption.
A solution, other than not being a vassal in the first place, would be to
>build consumer industry (e.g. steel mill)
>subsidise so it forces consumption of iron/coal that doesn't exist to create an inflated demand
>put high tariffs on import of iron/coal to starve the steel mill and further drive up price
>wait
>optionally: create and subsidise input industries, e.g. tools and (post-atmos engine) coal
I have never tested this because it's very boring to watch and the only time this matters is when your private investor pool is going to be abysmally tiny and it'll be very expensive to subsidise even small starter industries relative to your tax intake and payments to your overlord.

From a realism point of view, I think it makes sense that in the Victorian world all the investors would want to go to a developed economy with infrastructure and an urban environment with luxury goods and services provided by starving cityfolk, and that your aristocrats and captila- sorry, forgot which game we're talking about, and that your financial districts, manor houses and company HQs move to London and Paris.
From a fun point of view, I still don't understand why this part of the game is immobile. Before the world market existed I'm not sure if a "feudal" economy could ever advance, because there was neither a supply nor demand for things like iron.

>>2324777
Anon, please play the game. Consumption (aka, demand) doesn't matter since trade works now. The world market always demands something.

>>2324755
>free trade
Turns off the tariff buttons that you forgot you set to high/low, so yes it's the best.
>lazy fairy
Depends on your situation. It's the "I don't care about the economy" law and you're generally locked in when it's passed.
I wish construction mana was different somehow because I prefer lazy specifically for the 75% construction sector usage.
I used to think Agrarianism was right, like anon said, because in most countries you start with farms and aristos but I only recently learned that subsistence farms destroy half their dividends and I'm not aware if built farms still send most of their dividends to the farmers. So 30% dividend investment from aristos doesn't feel that good.
I've never done Command Economy because lmao who plays to year 1934? But seriously the game's over when you both unlock it and have someone who wants it in charge (everyone hates it, only the unions want it, and the unions prefer hugbox coops, so it doesn't exist).

>>2324780
Okay which part of what I said is having an issue with me suggesting how to create profitable conditions for investors?
A subsidised local industry that wants the goods? High tariffs?

>>2324784
Until your companies start taking off most reinvestment comes from aristocrats and shopkeepers, so Agrarianism is objectively better. The only country which starts with strong enough capitalists to be worth switching to laissez-faire ASAP is the USA.

>make a whole dlc about latin america
>still mess up paraguay which is arguable the most unique amd interesting nation in the region at the time

File: 20260120224327_1.jpg (550 KB, 1920x1080)

550 KB JPG

EIC somehow got independence and then blew up; I'm gonna move right in and protectorate everybody for the authority boosts but should I annex any states for myself?

Is V3 more of a sandbox simulation than a game or am I actually retarded? I've tried to get into it multiple times, and even after my latest run where I've started to understand correlations and mechanics it just doesn't feel like a coherent nation-state experience. I'm either trying to manage laws/politics or endlessly clicking around tabs trying to balance supply/demand/import/export of goods, but I never feel I have a holistic view of my country and clear goals as opposed to V2/EU4/HOI4/CK2 etc. It feels more like fiddling around with an engine or a coding project.

>>2325099
You need to set self-imposed goals. All countries/cultures play the same, so you're not going to get it from the mechanics.

> oh shit Vic 3 is on sale
> give it a goo
> basic gameplay loop is fucking with your economy, passing laws, international politics, and war
> economy is waaaaay overbaked, opaque mechanics, too much micro
> passing laws is a complete gamble
> international politics involves retarded AI, swaying is super limited and broken
> warfare REALLY sucks
> check out reddit for tips
> even the subreddit thinks the game sucks

You know a game sucks when even the cucks on reddit can't find reasons to glaze it, holy shit.

No part of this game succeeds. It's just a spreadsheet with timers welded on and the only reason people play is because it creates an addictive skinner box. It's compelling but not enjoyable, the strategy game equivalent of tiktok.

>>2325898
V3 has the best economic system of any game ever made. That's why people play it. There's nothing better in its niche.

>check declare war
>highest supporting opinion is -20, even on the defensive ally
>declare war
>defensive ally joins
>half the (third) world joins
I keep forgetting that the number just means they can offer something trivial and get them in.
I'm also not sure if the "On the fence" list of countries properly includes everyone eligible as the Raj (dominion) joined in out of nowhere unless I missed something.

Unfortunately I couldn't win the war because I required more fleets than I could afford to mount a naval invasion comparable to the defending army, and the AI is incapable of fighting wars across seas so couldn't punish me.

>>2325059
Depends, are there any pops you would accept, or wouldn't mind owning directly?

>>2325898
Yes.
The reddit cucks usually glaze it for letting them go turbo communist but I'm not sure if a lot of them have moved on since launch.
Politics used to be more straightforward before the last update, now there are modifiers on modifiers and some of the laws have been changed again making even more historic internet discussion meaningless and the answers you seek not exist.

>>2325969
Anything less than -20 can be swayed in with an obligation or war goal, if any country has claims on your lands they will join for a claim, if you incur any infamy during the war (including the initial diplo play initiation) it will affect the attitude modifiers and may drop them below the -20 needed to intervene

>>2325971
The tooltip really does suck doesn't it?

>>2325898
>>2325969
People that complain about this game 99% of the time just don't understand the mechanics or are expecting the game to be something it's not, though I'll grant it was indeed rather half-baked at launch, in its current state it's a very good strategy game.

>>2326046
>crazy and retarded AI
>pol gacha
>Adobe flash UI
>no logistics
>no boats
>units do longs marches losing millions in the process
>retarded front splitting
Ah yes, indeed a very good strategy game

>>2324712
>foreign investor use the tech of the country they are building in
The most retarded aspect of a game thats supposed to be focused on imperialism.

>>2327021
Hey, at least they made foreign investors build railways even if the target doesn't have the tech. I'm sure in 10 years it will finally be properly fixed.

File: file.png (3.5 MB, 1913x1058)

3.5 MB PNG

Anglo chads...

File: file.png (2.14 MB, 1519x901)

2.14 MB PNG

>>2327122
Such a shit UI, here's some clarification.

>>2327122
Only 670 million as China in 1899? Terrible play.

File: file.png (1.02 MB, 771x1022)

1.02 MB PNG

>>2327562
It is not enough that I succeed, but that others fail.

>>2327661
What's the current game year? Still weak both in terms of GPD and pop numbers as China.

Also, it looks like you ate India or something? Since neither it or any of the successor states are in the top 20. If so, that makes your efforts even more pathetic.

>>2327680
1910, I started by timmying russia in 1845 and fracturing India in 1850, so from there I used the foothold in the Baltic states to knock out the germans, decolonized England, France, and Spain, and neutered America by conquering D.C. and New York.

Even if I go bankrupt or CDTS, I am the market leader for all resources, and there cannot be a parallel power built around me. That's more of a win than making the line go up, domination.

>>2327687
Cringe

File: 1735537052373758.gif (13 KB, 128x128)

13 KB GIF

>>2327693

File: chinagameledger.png (591 KB, 565x895)

591 KB PNG

>>2327687
But are you really dominating if you're not doing so economically?

This is 1916, also not even a GDP-maxxing run but just a casual playthrough to get the Western Protectorate achievement.

>>2327695
My record is 8 billion in 1890, after that, everything felt trivial, so of course I had to do a "kill everyone" run.

>>2327705
Yeah, I could have definitely done at least a partial world conquest with this one, but I needed the western powers to keep existing for the achievement and also couldn't be arsed to manage a bunch of states, and thus decided not to go too hard on annexation.

File: r vic3.jpg (121 KB, 791x732)

121 KB JPG

>I hate the racists and fascists
>I want the [historically hyper racists but hyper neoliberal communists in this] in charge
>>just imperial conquest to destroy national identity, lmao
>>>yeah don't, you'll get a lot of rural folk, I hate peasants

>don't take private schools, those are racist
>>did you read the law? it helps the intelligentsia and public schools creates assimilation, aka creates more shopkeepers
>>>yeah but it's racist
(and one redditor believes it hurts when going wide because conquered pops can't afford education to get jobs... he doesn't realise unincorporated states have zero institution access)

>organise IRL
>>haha okay and I'll be suicided by 11 gunshots

I feel like my shopkeepers are always led by a democrat, a market liberal, a radical, or a feminist. Maybe that's because I don't specifically choose to piss them off. Maybe that's also the same reason why I don't get communist takeovers - it's too easy to please every group. And the less said about how the game models racism the better.
Then again the OP of that is just pissed off Le Nationalist faction exists.

>>2327924
My default playstyle is also anti-racist, economically liberal, utopian, preferably technocratic authoritarianism (shout outs to the GOATs Lee Kuan Yew, Park Chung-hee and Deng Xiaoping), but you really shouldn't be having trouble with IG manipulation anymore. Once again, the people complaining about mundane aspects of this game simply do not understand how to play it.

>reach 1936 again
>gave up microing the economy, again
It's weird how compounding the problem is
You'd think it's just the railway production method that sucks
>requires building a lot of
>bad for low pop (island) provinces
>cannot be switched over all at once
>you will never have enough steam engines
>without alternative industries, it might be a bad idea to unemploy people
but then you hit electricity and it's the same problem all over again with the exact same steam engine consumption issue

I don't know why countries are willing to trade a state for the same state but opposite borders in a treaty, I wish there was a better UI so I know what I'm actually trading because region names are not helpful, I also wish it was integrated into the actual swap state function so the AI would gain more acceptance for joining split states... and I wish the AI would recognise that enclaves are not good to keep a hold of nor to create via a treaty

The military access treaty seems to break when the other side is puppeted/protectorated by someone you don't have a military access treaty with

I still don't understand why ethno-nats are "fascists" and join the "fascist" party to then trigger the "fascist" election events when literally every other mechanic states fascists are fascists and integralists
The most extreme politician I got was a single positivist

>>2322191
i wish latin american countries (except uruguay and argentina) had a unique law replacing subjecthood that represents the mestizo caste system that worked like the racialisation amendment but wherent exclusive to monarchies or theocracies. would make more sense for them historically then racial segregation

>>2329018
How would that work in game?