One thing I want to note: I was hesitant about certain elements of power blocs throughout this video, but my opinion of them has honestly turned a bit more sour as I discussed the concept throughout the evening. There will be a dev diary that also discusses power blocs a bit more in two weeks - I will go into the details of what really MASSIVELY irks me about them then! Quick initial overview of my issues (not all mentioned): cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/216873247176654849/1220475518630101143/Discord_bj4wPvkbEG.png?ex=660f1366&is=65fc9e66&hm=4bb042c20ec58f8f71d27b8a2e1305fcaa04ca7f4462a65f2b5173b9b6cea6b3& Check out the dev diary here: forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-109-power-blocs.1636916/
Opb wanted to ask with foreign investment do you think conquest for resources will be as necessary. Lets say for example I'm germany I want rubber but instead of getting it from africa I get the dutch into my market and invest in rubber plantations in the dutch east indies or something along those lines.
The historical reason for monuments I can think of would be something like statues of Lenin that were built around the Soviet Union. If they’d have shown a figure of a person rather than an elephant it may have come across better rather than a bit of a novelty item
Honestly i think how fun power blocks are will depend a lot on principles and how to implement them. I feel if the principles are unique rather than just a flat boost every time(like a new diplomatic sway, like joint diplomatic plays or something instead of just something like -25% infamy just as an example).
This statue system is really dissapointing to me, I thought it was just an iconic building/structure representing your power, like Eiffel tower, Hagia Sophia, Big Ben, and so on... instead, we get an elephant fountain for every capital :/
Also one thing missing from this dlc is capitulations.(ottoman style) We should be able to get monopolies of certain goods produced in a different country that owes us or has lost a war against us. These capitulations were maybe the biggest reason of Ottoman collapse and caused a lot of clashes between european nations for tobacco or cotton monopolies.
I think it indeed is more clear in minor Power Blocs, like smaller trade leagues, where prestige swings can make the struggle real. But, even going to today's politics (I still feel that Cold War/Cold War II makes a lot of sense because the world still works today with Victorian mechanics), the EU does have power struggles between members and, while Germany is usually at the front, we've been seeing at times France and even Spain and Poland getting a bit of control over the direction of the Union, even more so recently. And yeah, the UK won't get swept by Australia, but Australia never got to be that prestigious as to reverse the Commonwealth...
I feel like its trying to do a Trafalga Square with the monuments and how much people like the little map details. Fittingly, it feels more like a Roman thing than an 19th century thing sonce this is real similar to Imperator Rome
I definitely think that only allowing one power bloc per nation is a bad thing. How would something like the Central Powers or Entente ever happen if every great power would likely prefer to just create their own empire blocs. Historically a nation would easily do both, as well as be in a trade league if they it to. It’s going to inevitably become a thing where “I do like this type of bloc, but this other one is so much more powerful/cooler. Inevitably there’s going to be power blocs that are never chosen because you only get one.
Some nations should be allowed to be in multiple power blocks. With some requirements: -Be on the border of 2 or more power blocks -Not a great or major power -Not a vassal. Making it not all or nothing allows buffer states to exist.
@@ellidominusser1138 Who would be the leader of the entente? WW1 was caused by a cascade of alliances. WW1 is an Austrian prince being shot by a Serbian, so Japan has to fight Germans in the Pacific.
@@the11382 Alright then, the Entente can be better simulated by Alliances between the Leaders of the Power Blocs, makes more sense then to make the entente a power block, but it will be hard to recreate the Entente this way currently.
I think the monuments just are one more example of the quite-not-very-good-really-bad aesthetics of Victoria 3... (characters, some flags, icons for battles, etc.). The 'cape' looks like something straight out of WH40k, not the 19th century.
It's probably more about adding something that they could just use as a base and dump more and more stuff on later to make all later patches and dlcs look a bit beefier.
@@user-ez9ng2rw9c even that would be better than what we got with agitators and companies. Two half baked systems that don't interact with the world or eachother except through another gamey paradox modifier. Two dlc's later and agitators are still just vacant and empty shells for passing a law with no interaction with companies or blocs. Likewise companies are just a modifier to build speed and throughput, absolutely no interaction with your government or blocs or anything else. I had hope when vicky 3 launched that they might try a slightly differant approach considering all the backlash they get over this in ck3 and stellaris but it seems like we're on that track again 🙄
Takeover of a power bloc could be something like an enduring Entente, depending on how the war would play out in your game. Maybe France comes out stronger, maybe a United States joins early and takes over. There could be a power struggle, but we also don't know enough yet anyway.
15:57 I hope that the threat of joining the bloc won't just be about war, but also about reducing our “presence” in that country. This could lead not just to our setbacks in decreasing our leverage, but also to economic challenges for the target country, prompting them to reconsider joining. It could even be possible to implement a system where, when the target country sees a simple cause-and-effect relationship, such as after its refusal, your leverage artificially begins to decrease significantly and with it, the economic development of the target country. For example, if a country refuses to join the bloc, as punishment, we could reduce investment or even close a couple of tool production factories, thereby damaging the economy of the target country and forcing it to reconsider its stance on joining the bloc. Unfortunately, despite being an economic cal and political strategy, we all understand that such mechanics will not be there at all. There will simply be a checkbox for "threat of war" and that's it... which is a shame.
But it is also possible that I am completely wrong in suggesting the implementation of such a system. Because the very notion of leverage already speaks about the power you exert/can exert on a country. And if this power is not strong enough - the beginning of sanctions measures will not have much effect on this country. Still, I'd like to see more active political and economic intrigue than passive.
I feel power blocs are an interesting system for smaller powers, allowing more than just two countries to come together to resist a Great Power more easily. I can also see it as a secondary system to expand influence as a great power without direct conflict; China no longer needs to be invaded as Britain to make sure you keep France and Russia away from them. It's almost like what happened in this time period where the great powers were leveraging their power and prestige to contain some of the efforts of the others without direct war. I hope they continue to expand and iterate on the system to make it as interesting as it can be, and not just a bland mechanic that offers an RP alternative to outright conquest. The first thing I thought of when you said statue was the Statue of Liberty. France gave it to the USA to represent the ideas of Freedom and Brotherhood they both shared. Your embassy buildings idea would be freaking awesome, though. I hope they do that in the future as well, even if it's not sure accurate. Having a Japanese castle show up in Berlin would be amazing imho I really hope with a few new types of diplomatic plays coming, that they decouple some of them so you can maybe have 1 or 2 that you initiate, as well as being able to join others, even while you deal with rebellions.
What happens when the leader country of a power bloc falls to revolution? Do we get a Kaiserreich scenario where the British Empire still exists even when the British Isles aren't part of it?
An Block style embassy or governor house if it’s a colonial state would maybe have been better and you then build it to secure better diplomatic relations with the government
To expand a bit on my other comment I'm not opposed to power blocs per say I think they could be an interesting mechanical system to represent things like the zollverein or entente I just dont like the replacing of individual country sphere of influences with these more multilateral organizations, I think the vic 2 sytem needed to be expanded and fleshed out not replaced entirely
Thank you for this video. I was looking for information how this blocks work. Sad though, I was hoping it's mechanic that would allow me to create a huge empire without need to fight ever. But apparently, it's not working like this
Unrecognised countries are now confirmed to not be able to have a power bloc of their own. If you become recognised, you can do this as a major power. If you are unrecognised, you just vassalise them to get them into your market.
@@OneProudBavarian Didn't they literally say how "unrecognised" vs "recognised" was literally only a distinction in how great powers of a world treated a nation (aka discrimination based on few factual points but rather based on preconceived notions/geography/cultural differences) at the start of the game dev cycle? Why is it that they are gatekeeping certain features from unrecognised powers for seemingly no reason? Why can't you have a trade league with your neighbours if you're unrecognised?
@@Hotasianchickthe purpose of saying that was to signal a certain political opinion, not a real game opinion. Anyone who played vic2 or 3 can tell you unciv/unrecognize was not just a matter of other countries opinions. The game was always going to need to have mechanics for the colonizers and not the colonized if you were going to model this century. It was silly for Paradox to get signally about it.
Thank you for the great summary, I am very excited for SoI to arrive and the impacts, looks like it tackles really relevant issues of the game. Just my quick thoughts that came up: - i find these statues/buildings on power blocks also quite odd. The only historical example that comes up for me are these "soviet/communist" monuments you'd find throughout eastern Europe, however those were built mostly by the end of the game or even later. - An example of changing leadership within a Power Bloc could be seen in Germany, with Prussia taking over the contested leadership of the "Deutscher Bund". Sadly here Zollverein seems to be a Prussia dominated Bloc without Austria at the beginning of the Game allready. We shall see, maybe this opens up possibilities for a future DLC that tackles Central Europe/German Unification Mechanics 🥸 Excited for the next dev diary, the ownership and location unbundling + foreign investment are probably going to be my favourite parts of the DLC, if nicely done. I just hope, that overall Pdx keeps on following more a simulative approach rather than adding too much fan service .
I am only interested in the DLC if war among multi-great power blocs leads to truly great wars (with different mechanics than regular wars), which I think is not a feature of Sphere of Influence...
I had so high hopes on this after the first dev diary. This was the first time I was really, really disappointed with Victoria 3. Not everything was great, sure, but at least not too much of a damage. Closest was the removal of Ironman requirements for Achievements, but that's long time ago and less impactful. I have 2 point that got me disappointed and one of them is just my expectations while the other really makes me think the game may be worse with power blocks than without it. The first is just coming from the point they made if I remember correctly: Power block Comintern Google still shows the press release for SoI with the word Comintern while the page from Paradox does not (or no longer). Well, I hoped for power blocks of interest groups (just just Comintern was, a group of parties) and others like "Holy Alliance" could have worked the same way. Also they said it's multilateral but will... it's just One at the Top. No interest groups, no alliances of equals... that's bad enough. But point 2... That really hit hard. Only one block. In the era of overlapping systems and complex empires... - No way to be in 2 competing military blocks at one time (like Italy was at the start of WW1) - Then also China is not recognized so it's can't make a power block? - No way to be in one market union but in another military one -> No way to be in "Zollverein" and "Holy Alliance" at once. Or "Deutsche Bund". Or "Triple_Entente". Literally all 3 in the triple had their own empires. All this things are now impossible to happen. This change is insane. Before today the mechanics were missing. Bad enough. Now they will be added and actively forbid this interactions. That will keep this bad state for a long time. Literally all 3 in the triple had their own empires. I am deeply, deeply disappointed and don't see this as a way to a positive development. This "just" puts some complexity on things that aren't much more than common market + puppeting doing now. Just shiny stuff with the bad twist that complex relationships are harder to simulate than before. This looks more like Cold War than Victorian era.
Can’t think of an example of statues being built all over a power block. *points to Wikipedia page of “List of statues of Queen Victoria.” The only continent missing from the list is Antarctica and only 2 outside the UK proper are not colonially related.
@@FearlessXfulI agree with more interesting diplomacy, for instance through a dynamic clout system rather than a recognised/unrecognised binary. I am not drawn to play the canonical great powers so on a personal level I only really care about their AI behaviour, not their player content. Understand that is not everyone's vibe though.
@@FearlessXful They need to improve the general sandbox before trying to shoehorn flavour for specific nations, the problem with Vic 3 isn't that it isn't lacking flavour (it is but that's not why it's dogshit), the problem is that the game is fundamentally a waiting simulator where very little active play by the player takes place, making it feel boring and redundant in most playthroughs once you figure out how to grow your economy.
While I do agree with most of the criticisms and worries concerning SoI, I do think that there are genuine good ideas presented with the DLC. I also think that there is a bit of a misconception with the power blocks that existed before World War I and their less than formal nature. To be fair, the developers of V3 oversold their promise that the WW1 blocks could happen in their new DLC - but I think in retrospect they were talking more about bringing to bear whole colonial empires and spheres against each other, rather than the entente and central powers, which were far more fluid than I think people realize and having them be more rigid institutions such as the British empire (and to a certain extent the Zolleverein) would be both unrealistic and frankly frustrating for gameplay. All this to say, despite the goodwill that has been burned due to buggy patch releases and continuing issues in gameplay, I am going to give the V3 team the benefit of the doubt here and say that the vision behind power blocks, while perhaps marketed wrong, can still give us really solid and engaging gameplay - which at the end of the day is what we all really want.
Pretty meh about the monument builder. Didn't find it that interesting in "Imperator:Rome" either. But I guess if the code already exist, may as well use it. *shrug*
monuments does seem like eye candy and not worth the spotlight, however as a special thing for blocs, maybe a big statue works better than a special building? bloc principles sounds decent, but gaining them sounds a little confusing, as with leverage, which active/relative leverage sounds rl weak
actually for monuments, we can have them as commemoration between nations, like if Japan and GB allied for 10 years and they chopper Qing together, a big fountain celebrating that partnership would be cool. The monuments should be late game tech then. The outfit/vehicles is just silly
I don't like that I keep getting forced into a power bloc as an unrecognized, independent nation. the developers of this game really only make the great powers worth playing and make it silly to try to play anyone else. I don't want to be England and roll everyone. doesn't seem fun to me.
I'm dissapointed at the implementation honestly. The cars and statues feel silly. It also feels too unilateral, I expected the unilateral one was going to be the "sovereign empire". Members have no saying in the power bloc? I thought principles was going to just be a way to customize but instead it's just a tier system. Also, if a member is stronger than the leader, instead of taking over they should just prefer to leave and form their own based on their opinion. Also, why principles unlock faster the more members the bloc has? The more members the slower it should take because you have to get more people on board. It feels to gamey.
I'm still wary, this just seems like an overly compliclated and convoluted way to replace the simple and surprisingly immersive sphere of influence system of vic 2 (which had plenty of its own drawbacks and missed opportunities), I just want to be able to be say britain and have everyone else acknowledge that say nicaragua is in my sphere of influence and so I get investment priority and other countries will try to not interfere with them unless they want to worsen relations with me and be able to influence their domestic politics to be more like my own (or my in line with my potential interests), I really didnt ask for nor feel like I need any of these complicated mechanics or just get a weird victoria 3 version of stellaris federations, and I dont want to restrict myself to for example purely forming a trade league when I might have different interests elsewhere but are all within my own sphere of influence like say wanting to keep free trade with say europe but then exert more overt imperialistic power over asia or africa or try to change the politics of smaller american countries but this system makes everything the same and making us stuck with being required to negotiate with powers you want to dominate or dominate powers you would rather negotiate with because you have the wrong power bloc for that specific situation
I really do not like 3d cosmetics - it looks too much like Barbie than actual historical stuff. They should work on mechanics first, cosmetics seconds, or even third And yes, monument...why?
Very expensive DLC , considering some of the mechanics were in the base game of VIctoria II as well adds insult to injury.. that being said I'll continue to buy their products even though it seems with time their DLCs contain less and less. I still do love their games but am very disappointed in the direction the company is heading. The subscription model they set up for their dlcs is seeming like a better option for me more and more.
How can paradox work so hard for so long and even after all this time make a significantly worse game than Vic2. The SoI mechanics in Vi2, while flawed, are so much better than this.
One thing I want to note: I was hesitant about certain elements of power blocs throughout this video, but my opinion of them has honestly turned a bit more sour as I discussed the concept throughout the evening.
There will be a dev diary that also discusses power blocs a bit more in two weeks - I will go into the details of what really MASSIVELY irks me about them then!
Quick initial overview of my issues (not all mentioned): cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/216873247176654849/1220475518630101143/Discord_bj4wPvkbEG.png?ex=660f1366&is=65fc9e66&hm=4bb042c20ec58f8f71d27b8a2e1305fcaa04ca7f4462a65f2b5173b9b6cea6b3&
Check out the dev diary here: forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-109-power-blocs.1636916/
Opb wanted to ask with foreign investment do you think conquest for resources will be as necessary. Lets say for example I'm germany I want rubber but instead of getting it from africa I get the dutch into my market and invest in rubber plantations in the dutch east indies or something along those lines.
The clostest historic thing to the statues I could of is how there was a large Lenin Statue in afaik every Warsaw Pact capital.
Maybe triumphant arches could be also counted as a statue in this sense???
Theres a Queen Victoria all over the world, though mostly after she died
Theres one in Berlin the victory column :) was build after the win against France in 1871
That's the wrong time period.
"can't think of a statue built the same all over the capitals of an empire"
the bronze statues of George V have joined the chat
The historical reason for monuments I can think of would be something like statues of Lenin that were built around the Soviet Union. If they’d have shown a figure of a person rather than an elephant it may have come across better rather than a bit of a novelty item
Honestly i think how fun power blocks are will depend a lot on principles and how to implement them. I feel if the principles are unique rather than just a flat boost every time(like a new diplomatic sway, like joint diplomatic plays or something instead of just something like -25% infamy just as an example).
If they added something like -25% infamy as a buff to power blocks in EU4 style I would start rioting
This statue system is really dissapointing to me, I thought it was just an iconic building/structure representing your power, like Eiffel tower, Hagia Sophia, Big Ben, and so on... instead, we get an elephant fountain for every capital :/
Would be so much better if it was like that and there was only one that was built in the leader of the bloc.
Straight out of a mobile game
@@KaiserWellington Every time
I wish there would be an embassy or flag that would display the leader.
The cape and the car makes me cringe as well. I wish it was all a bit more subtle.
I completely agree to you on monuments. I think monuments in general hurt the immersion. And thank you OPB. Excellent video as always
Also one thing missing from this dlc is capitulations.(ottoman style) We should be able to get monopolies of certain goods produced in a different country that owes us or has lost a war against us. These capitulations were maybe the biggest reason of Ottoman collapse and caused a lot of clashes between european nations for tobacco or cotton monopolies.
I think it indeed is more clear in minor Power Blocs, like smaller trade leagues, where prestige swings can make the struggle real. But, even going to today's politics (I still feel that Cold War/Cold War II makes a lot of sense because the world still works today with Victorian mechanics), the EU does have power struggles between members and, while Germany is usually at the front, we've been seeing at times France and even Spain and Poland getting a bit of control over the direction of the Union, even more so recently.
And yeah, the UK won't get swept by Australia, but Australia never got to be that prestigious as to reverse the Commonwealth...
In the Game the East India Company just might be able to swing the Bloc. Or the Dutch East Indies if the Netherlands make a Bloc.
Paradox needs to see your questions. Very insightful
I feel like its trying to do a Trafalga Square with the monuments and how much people like the little map details. Fittingly, it feels more like a Roman thing than an 19th century thing sonce this is real similar to Imperator Rome
Devlet-i Aliye means "The Supreme State". Ottoman Empire was used to be called "Devlet-i Alîye-i Osmânîye" in Turkish :)
I definitely think that only allowing one power bloc per nation is a bad thing. How would something like the Central Powers or Entente ever happen if every great power would likely prefer to just create their own empire blocs. Historically a nation would easily do both, as well as be in a trade league if they it to.
It’s going to inevitably become a thing where “I do like this type of bloc, but this other one is so much more powerful/cooler. Inevitably there’s going to be power blocs that are never chosen because you only get one.
Some nations should be allowed to be in multiple power blocks. With some requirements:
-Be on the border of 2 or more power blocks
-Not a great or major power
-Not a vassal.
Making it not all or nothing allows buffer states to exist.
Nope. The british shoul be able to be in their Empire powerblock and at the same time the entente.
They should be allowed in power blocs of different types
@@ellidominusser1138 Who would be the leader of the entente? WW1 was caused by a cascade of alliances. WW1 is an Austrian prince being shot by a Serbian, so Japan has to fight Germans in the Pacific.
@@the11382 Alright then, the Entente can be better simulated by Alliances between the Leaders of the Power Blocs, makes more sense then to make the entente a power block, but it will be hard to recreate the Entente this way currently.
@@the11382 France was the leader of the Entente
I think the monuments just are one more example of the quite-not-very-good-really-bad aesthetics of Victoria 3... (characters, some flags, icons for battles, etc.). The 'cape' looks like something straight out of WH40k, not the 19th century.
As i see it, devs added monuments because they needed one more item to the dlc feature list.
It's probably more about adding something that they could just use as a base and dump more and more stuff on later to make all later patches and dlcs look a bit beefier.
@@user-ez9ng2rw9c even that would be better than what we got with agitators and companies. Two half baked systems that don't interact with the world or eachother except through another gamey paradox modifier. Two dlc's later and agitators are still just vacant and empty shells for passing a law with no interaction with companies or blocs. Likewise companies are just a modifier to build speed and throughput, absolutely no interaction with your government or blocs or anything else.
I had hope when vicky 3 launched that they might try a slightly differant approach considering all the backlash they get over this in ck3 and stellaris but it seems like we're on that track again 🙄
I wish the statue was more like a playing piece you would have on the map once your power bloc reached level 2/3.
Takeover of a power bloc could be something like an enduring Entente, depending on how the war would play out in your game. Maybe France comes out stronger, maybe a United States joins early and takes over. There could be a power struggle, but we also don't know enough yet anyway.
A building on the map next to your capital based on your Bloc's leader/pillar would have been so neat!
15:57 I hope that the threat of joining the bloc won't just be about war, but also about reducing our “presence” in that country. This could lead not just to our setbacks in decreasing our leverage, but also to economic challenges for the target country, prompting them to reconsider joining.
It could even be possible to implement a system where, when the target country sees a simple cause-and-effect relationship, such as after its refusal, your leverage artificially begins to decrease significantly and with it, the economic development of the target country.
For example, if a country refuses to join the bloc, as punishment, we could reduce investment or even close a couple of tool production factories, thereby damaging the economy of the target country and forcing it to reconsider its stance on joining the bloc.
Unfortunately, despite being an economic cal and political strategy, we all understand that such mechanics will not be there at all. There will simply be a checkbox for "threat of war" and that's it... which is a shame.
But it is also possible that I am completely wrong in suggesting the implementation of such a system. Because the very notion of leverage already speaks about the power you exert/can exert on a country. And if this power is not strong enough - the beginning of sanctions measures will not have much effect on this country.
Still, I'd like to see more active political and economic intrigue than passive.
I feel power blocs are an interesting system for smaller powers, allowing more than just two countries to come together to resist a Great Power more easily. I can also see it as a secondary system to expand influence as a great power without direct conflict; China no longer needs to be invaded as Britain to make sure you keep France and Russia away from them. It's almost like what happened in this time period where the great powers were leveraging their power and prestige to contain some of the efforts of the others without direct war. I hope they continue to expand and iterate on the system to make it as interesting as it can be, and not just a bland mechanic that offers an RP alternative to outright conquest.
The first thing I thought of when you said statue was the Statue of Liberty. France gave it to the USA to represent the ideas of Freedom and Brotherhood they both shared. Your embassy buildings idea would be freaking awesome, though. I hope they do that in the future as well, even if it's not sure accurate. Having a Japanese castle show up in Berlin would be amazing imho
I really hope with a few new types of diplomatic plays coming, that they decouple some of them so you can maybe have 1 or 2 that you initiate, as well as being able to join others, even while you deal with rebellions.
Based on this, you can't have the French and British in the Entente without one giving up its power block?
As I understand it if France and UK have a defensive pact they both drag their Blocs into the war.
16:45 as a Vermonter, this map made me laugh in delight 😄
it's basically the Federations system from Stellaris, no?
What happens when the leader country of a power bloc falls to revolution? Do we get a Kaiserreich scenario where the British Empire still exists even when the British Isles aren't part of it?
An Block style embassy or governor house if it’s a colonial state would maybe have been better and you then build it to secure better diplomatic relations with the government
To expand a bit on my other comment I'm not opposed to power blocs per say I think they could be an interesting mechanical system to represent things like the zollverein or entente I just dont like the replacing of individual country sphere of influences with these more multilateral organizations, I think the vic 2 sytem needed to be expanded and fleshed out not replaced entirely
Vermont being a big name on the map is very funny
I wonder how the mechanics of power blocs and country unification requirements will work together
Great vid, I can’t seem to find the customisation window for my powerbloc?
Making Customs Union harder is a nice change. The main issue will be how well the AI can interact with and manage all these features as always.
I just don’t know exactly how historical the outcomes of this system will be. I’ll just have to wait and see
Did they fix the warfare?
Great vid! Although I can’t seem to find the customisation windows?
This is my favourite timelapse AI only channel 🤩
Thank you for this video. I was looking for information how this blocks work.
Sad though, I was hoping it's mechanic that would allow me to create a huge empire without need to fight ever.
But apparently, it's not working like this
This feels like dlcs from other games glued together. Uniform fashion and monuments, just why...
I quite like the sound of this
As a non great power such as Iran can I still form a trade power block with the Sikh empire, Afghanistan etc
Unrecognised countries are now confirmed to not be able to have a power bloc of their own.
If you become recognised, you can do this as a major power.
If you are unrecognised, you just vassalise them to get them into your market.
@@OneProudBavarian Didn't they literally say how "unrecognised" vs "recognised" was literally only a distinction in how great powers of a world treated a nation (aka discrimination based on few factual points but rather based on preconceived notions/geography/cultural differences) at the start of the game dev cycle? Why is it that they are gatekeeping certain features from unrecognised powers for seemingly no reason? Why can't you have a trade league with your neighbours if you're unrecognised?
@@Hotasianchickthe purpose of saying that was to signal a certain political opinion, not a real game opinion. Anyone who played vic2 or 3 can tell you unciv/unrecognize was not just a matter of other countries opinions.
The game was always going to need to have mechanics for the colonizers and not the colonized if you were going to model this century. It was silly for Paradox to get signally about it.
Thank you for the great summary, I am very excited for SoI to arrive and the impacts, looks like it tackles really relevant issues of the game.
Just my quick thoughts that came up:
- i find these statues/buildings on power blocks also quite odd. The only historical example that comes up for me are these "soviet/communist" monuments you'd find throughout eastern Europe, however those were built mostly by the end of the game or even later.
- An example of changing leadership within a Power Bloc could be seen in Germany, with Prussia taking over the contested leadership of the "Deutscher Bund". Sadly here Zollverein seems to be a Prussia dominated Bloc without Austria at the beginning of the Game allready. We shall see, maybe this opens up possibilities for a future DLC that tackles Central Europe/German Unification Mechanics 🥸
Excited for the next dev diary, the ownership and location unbundling + foreign investment are probably going to be my favourite parts of the DLC, if nicely done.
I just hope, that overall Pdx keeps on following more a simulative approach rather than adding too much fan service .
I am only interested in the DLC if war among multi-great power blocs leads to truly great wars (with different mechanics than regular wars), which I think is not a feature of Sphere of Influence...
So they´re just gonna turn into big hugboxes then? Likewise, how will this affect people without the Dlc?
The only statue use case I can think of is USSR Comintern statues of the Soviet star
I had so high hopes on this after the first dev diary.
This was the first time I was really, really disappointed with Victoria 3. Not everything was great, sure, but at least not too much of a damage. Closest was the removal of Ironman requirements for Achievements, but that's long time ago and less impactful.
I have 2 point that got me disappointed and one of them is just my expectations while the other really makes me think the game may be worse with power blocks than without it.
The first is just coming from the point they made if I remember correctly: Power block Comintern
Google still shows the press release for SoI with the word Comintern while the page from Paradox does not (or no longer). Well, I hoped for power blocks of interest groups (just just Comintern was, a group of parties) and others like "Holy Alliance" could have worked the same way. Also they said it's multilateral but will... it's just One at the Top. No interest groups, no alliances of equals... that's bad enough.
But point 2... That really hit hard. Only one block. In the era of overlapping systems and complex empires...
- No way to be in 2 competing military blocks at one time (like Italy was at the start of WW1)
- Then also China is not recognized so it's can't make a power block?
- No way to be in one market union but in another military one
-> No way to be in "Zollverein" and "Holy Alliance" at once. Or "Deutsche Bund". Or "Triple_Entente". Literally all 3 in the triple had their own empires. All this things are now impossible to happen.
This change is insane.
Before today the mechanics were missing. Bad enough. Now they will be added and actively forbid this interactions. That will keep this bad state for a long time.
Literally all 3 in the triple had their own empires.
I am deeply, deeply disappointed and don't see this as a way to a positive development. This "just" puts some complexity on things that aren't much more than common market + puppeting doing now. Just shiny stuff with the bad twist that complex relationships are harder to simulate than before. This looks more like Cold War than Victorian era.
Primary, secondary, third? What happened to tertiary? 😂
Can’t think of an example of statues being built all over a power block.
*points to Wikipedia page of “List of statues of Queen Victoria.” The only continent missing from the list is Antarctica and only 2 outside the UK proper are not colonially related.
Sounds like playing unrecognised will become even more comparatively lacklustre, that abstraction continues to pain me
Imagine complaining about new content. First they need to make diplomacy and great powers more interesting. The rest comes later
@@FearlessXfulI agree with more interesting diplomacy, for instance through a dynamic clout system rather than a recognised/unrecognised binary. I am not drawn to play the canonical great powers so on a personal level I only really care about their AI behaviour, not their player content. Understand that is not everyone's vibe though.
@@FearlessXful They need to improve the general sandbox before trying to shoehorn flavour for specific nations, the problem with Vic 3 isn't that it isn't lacking flavour (it is but that's not why it's dogshit), the problem is that the game is fundamentally a waiting simulator where very little active play by the player takes place, making it feel boring and redundant in most playthroughs once you figure out how to grow your economy.
Please update VTM
I too wish custom unions happened less than they do, or at least for the mechanic to be more about trade relations and not literal market fusing.
stellaris federations? that's it? that's the update?
And itll cost you 20quid
If paradox were to develop euV, what advice would you give them to ameliorate their game?
JAIPUR MY BELOVED 0:59
Is this a mod or did you release all of the countries yourself?
I really don't like the indentity mechanic, it seems super artificial as a choice, I would have prefere a more organic evolution for it.
What about minors tech disadvantage ?
Really don't like the idea you can only be in one block.
Aka, why would Britain join the entente
While I do agree with most of the criticisms and worries concerning SoI, I do think that there are genuine good ideas presented with the DLC. I also think that there is a bit of a misconception with the power blocks that existed before World War I and their less than formal nature. To be fair, the developers of V3 oversold their promise that the WW1 blocks could happen in their new DLC - but I think in retrospect they were talking more about bringing to bear whole colonial empires and spheres against each other, rather than the entente and central powers, which were far more fluid than I think people realize and having them be more rigid institutions such as the British empire (and to a certain extent the Zolleverein) would be both unrealistic and frankly frustrating for gameplay. All this to say, despite the goodwill that has been burned due to buggy patch releases and continuing issues in gameplay, I am going to give the V3 team the benefit of the doubt here and say that the vision behind power blocks, while perhaps marketed wrong, can still give us really solid and engaging gameplay - which at the end of the day is what we all really want.
HRE restoration and EU creation games incoming
Pretty meh about the monument builder. Didn't find it that interesting in "Imperator:Rome" either. But I guess if the code already exist, may as well use it. *shrug*
monuments does seem like eye candy and not worth the spotlight, however as a special thing for blocs, maybe a big statue works better than a special building?
bloc principles sounds decent, but gaining them sounds a little confusing, as with leverage, which active/relative leverage sounds rl weak
actually for monuments, we can have them as commemoration between nations, like if Japan and GB allied for 10 years and they chopper Qing together, a big fountain celebrating that partnership would be cool. The monuments should be late game tech then. The outfit/vehicles is just silly
wait if you manage leverage on EIC, does it mean you can agitate them towards leaving GB’s bloc?
I don't like that I keep getting forced into a power bloc as an unrecognized, independent nation. the developers of this game really only make the great powers worth playing and make it silly to try to play anyone else. I don't want to be England and roll everyone. doesn't seem fun to me.
I'm dissapointed at the implementation honestly. The cars and statues feel silly. It also feels too unilateral, I expected the unilateral one was going to be the "sovereign empire". Members have no saying in the power bloc? I thought principles was going to just be a way to customize but instead it's just a tier system. Also, if a member is stronger than the leader, instead of taking over they should just prefer to leave and form their own based on their opinion. Also, why principles unlock faster the more members the bloc has? The more members the slower it should take because you have to get more people on board. It feels to gamey.
I'm still wary, this just seems like an overly compliclated and convoluted way to replace the simple and surprisingly immersive sphere of influence system of vic 2 (which had plenty of its own drawbacks and missed opportunities), I just want to be able to be say britain and have everyone else acknowledge that say nicaragua is in my sphere of influence and so I get investment priority and other countries will try to not interfere with them unless they want to worsen relations with me and be able to influence their domestic politics to be more like my own (or my in line with my potential interests), I really didnt ask for nor feel like I need any of these complicated mechanics or just get a weird victoria 3 version of stellaris federations, and I dont want to restrict myself to for example purely forming a trade league when I might have different interests elsewhere but are all within my own sphere of influence like say wanting to keep free trade with say europe but then exert more overt imperialistic power over asia or africa or try to change the politics of smaller american countries but this system makes everything the same and making us stuck with being required to negotiate with powers you want to dominate or dominate powers you would rather negotiate with because you have the wrong power bloc for that specific situation
Vic2 sphering is boring as sin
I really do not like 3d cosmetics - it looks too much like Barbie than actual historical stuff. They should work on mechanics first, cosmetics seconds, or even third
And yes, monument...why?
Uni statues that build everywhere: lenin in soviet
This is victoria 4
YO HO! The statues have got to go!
power blocks cewl
Honestly? I´m disappointed. It reads as just alliances/common markets with a bit new fluff.
Delvet-i Aliyyie means supreme state
Very expensive DLC , considering some of the mechanics were in the base game of VIctoria II as well adds insult to injury.. that being said I'll continue to buy their products even though it seems with time their DLCs contain less and less. I still do love their games but am very disappointed in the direction the company is heading. The subscription model they set up for their dlcs is seeming like a better option for me more and more.
Goodday
Ooo biiiiiiig China
👍
How can paradox work so hard for so long and even after all this time make a significantly worse game than Vic2. The SoI mechanics in Vi2, while flawed, are so much better than this.
hoi4 alliances for vic3 for 30$
garbage.
It's just Stellaris Federations... disappointing.
So much fluff, no substance