It don't matter how many mines I build coal will always be expensive in this piece of shit game, also how the frick do you deal with unemployment? I wanna close down clearly unproductive useless buildings but it says my goverment laws don't allow to close privately owned buildings. Are capitalists moronic in my game? They enjoy losing money? Why does this piece of shit game favour state owned factories? Fricking Paradox scandinavian socialist propaganda scum
just play vic2 moron
>Why does this piece of shit game favour state owned factories? Fricking Paradox scandinavian socialist propaganda scum
When you play as the central authority, centralization will always be beneficial. The only way it won't be is if you get significant arbitrary penalties or if you have so much shit to manage that you can't do so while remaining sane.
>it doesn't matter how much shit I eat it still tastes like shit
maybe stop eating shit?
Significantly moronic post. If you can't downsize buildings you're using laissez faire which is literally defined by you not having a choice in the matter. Yet at the same time since the investment system is in place, investment efficiency literally creates money out of thin air. Laissez faire is built around inertia from already profiting industries, central planning instead allows you full control but worse efficiency in building.
Worker coops are way too OP, but central planning vs laissez faire is not.
>Worker coops are way too OP
Not Op, but it depends on your goal and, more importantly, population size. You can easily butt-frick yourself into oblivion if you decide to go with co-ops as, say, China, making already near-impossible economic balance completely busted, since the SoL will skyrocket and require so much luxuries and top quality goods, the game is simply not designed to deliver.
And by "Not Op" I meant "different anon". Boy, that did came out wrong
The real question is:
Commercial agriculture or Homesteading?
That depends. Do you want farmers empowered or landlords completely neutered?
>Homesteading
You are an uncivic and/or backwater that has serfdom/tenant farmers and can access Romanticism pronto (or already have it). This way you can butt-frick landowners in three different ways, while not causing a revolution. Also, homesteading is simply within your reach, rather than requiring extra techs. The goal is to abolish serfdom/tenant farmers and in the same time impose agrarianism, so you can get the ball rolling despite having maybe 500 capitalists nation-wide.
>Commercial agriculture
You already have Homesteading or are advanced enough to push toward Mutual Funds soon. This will get the ball rolling for capitalists like crazy, regardless if you have interventionism or LF. And having so many capitalists will push your economy on overdrive.
>Homesteading
>not causing a revolution
That -20 and "This will Radicalize the Landlords" says otherwise.
>Install Professional Army
>Push for Dedicated Police Force, which is useful anyway
>Get literally ANY other law that they will enjoy
>Push Homesteading right after that
>It's 1839, you have either Homesteading or Slavery Banned
Yeah, I know it's so fricking hard to figure out you need to placate any given IG by bending to their desires, just to strip the real power out of them.
Next thing, you gonna say how hard it is to prevent ACW from happening, missing the memo you can quite literally sugarcoat it to Landowners via Trail of Tears events.
Literally all it takes is making sure your landowners are +11 when you switch to Homesteading. And they usually by default are at +15 or more - while it is piss easy to make them that anyway if they aren't.
The arbitrary opinion based revolution shit is incredibly easy to manage. It's very hard to trigger a landowner, army, or church revolution unless you're intentionally trying to or being a moron trying to pass radical reforms back to back.
The funny part is that if you know what you are doing, triggering a revolution of the IG you want to take down a peg is great.
>Switch barracks in areas that are going to revolt to different setttings, also for artillery
>Start passing law that will piss the group you are targetting
>In next 4-5 months the revolution will start
>You are facing an army that has the reorganisation debuff and potentially also set on irregulars and no artillery; if AI switches it to anything else, they just extend the debuff
>Mop up the revolutionaries in next 2-3 months
And bam! you don't have to deal with those gays for next 10-15 years, or maybe even ever, depending on your reforms during the post-war period
And before someone starts going all "b-but why neutering aristocrats if imposing agrarianism": because the less of those fricks you have in your government and less aristocrats you have in general, the better off is your long-term economy. They quite literally are the leeches in this game, not offering anything of value other than their investment pool, and not by much. Case the point: if you impose homesteading as FRICKING CHINA, your investment pool goes down by 15 k over tenant farmers, which is about the price of building a single building in the pool. However, by doing so, you liberate a shitload of resources to trade and for domestic market, so you get money back to budget for buildings your investment pool can't cover anyway.
Seriously, frick how aristocrats are scripted in this game. I thought on release that billion shopkeepers going PB are bad, but aristocrats keeping Landowners above 20% is just horrendous, especially in underdeveloped and/or uncivic countries.
>Worker coops are way too OP,
yeah, cuz they are workins without any problems
in theory a worker coop/communist state is paradise but not in practice
the game doesn't want to shit on you for choosing something so it gives you the fairy tale version of it and thus it is OP as it is a literal utopia in this case
It's literally just the thing working as promised. Might as well make the same case for every economic system in the game.
>It's literally just the thing working as promised. Might as well make the same case for every economic system in the game.
You certainly can't make that case for command economy.
not him but command economy not working is cuz of (you) the player no? a workers coop is supposed to be out of your control so it will be good since you are not able to frick it up
>not him but command economy not working is cuz of (you) the player no?
No, because money disappears for no reason.
>You certainly can't make that case for command economy.
Why?
>Might as well make the same case for every economic system in the game.
Which the game does. It's the only Vicky game where in the same time:
- Lazy Fairy works as advertised
- Command economy is fricking great
- State interventionism is awesome
- Slave-run plantations are awesome
- So are freeholder small plots of land
- Small-size shareholders getting their shit together to bank a factory works
- Big-size shareholders are going to trinkle down their wealth
- Co-ops and labour movements work
It's almost like the point is not to find best option and/or push an agenda with it, but to select a choice that matches your overall economic plan. Literally everything that isn't early-modern with no machines, not even in agriculture, is portrayed as equal.
V3 is a bad game, and has variety of completely fricked systems, but it having equal mark between various economic models is not the case. I remember how tiresome late game V2 was, where you either elevated communists to power to prevent endless factory spam by capitalists, or you had to manually delete that shit every month to make the UI even readable, while they were building the worst shit in the worst places imaginable - to say nothing about luxury clothes memes, because not even mods can really counter that.
*early-modern serfdom
capitalism is awesome for a medium economy in vic3
it sucks late game or for big countries like china because the investment pool is arbitrarily reduced iirc up to 2/3 of the money disappearing into a black hole because your gdp size
minting is also arbitrarily capped at some value of gdp so bigger economies are being unfairly fricked over by the game in general
>it sucks late game or for big countries like china because the investment pool is arbitrarily reduced iirc up to 2/3 of the money disappearing into a black hole because your gdp size
That got fixed in like... 1.1? 1.1.1?
>minting is also arbitrarily capped at some value of gdp so bigger economies are being unfairly fricked over by the game in general
Exact reverse is true: the bigger your economy, the bigger your capacity for minting, since it's % of GDP
The real morons are people who obsess over gold mines. Unless you have a tiny ass economy with a population of 100 people and a pack of mules, gold mines are a fricking joke in terms of affecting your budget, to say nothing about long-term economy.
>That got fixed in like... 1.1? 1.1.1?
Last time i checked the GDP size multiplier was still there
>Exact reverse is true: the bigger your economy, the bigger your capacity for minting, since it's % of GDP
Its a % of your GDP up to a number in the defines file, after that it stops growing
Iirc China literally starts the game hitting the minting cap
Nta, but I fail to see how any of those is a problem. Minting is like 2nd least important income source, only being overshadowed by tarriffs. And those scale really badly with your economy, because a tiny country is going to earn large chunk of its income via tarriffs, while China is going to barely notice tarriffs even existing, despite selling ten times as many goods
I honestly don't understand how tarriffs and trade work in 3 and I'm tired of pretending otherwise. You don't really have a slider, only three-button setting, the amount of money made is a pittance, your pops source goods in the most unclear way imaginable (especially when you're land-locked), and then there are also centers of trade, which make me more money via taxation of people working in them than the tarriffs their trade generated. Like what the frick is even going here?
Trade pretty much exists to get rid of surplus of your market, so under more liberal economic laws, your buildings don't start mass-firing employers.
That's literally it. It does not serve any other purpose, and especially not profit. Also, if you are particularly backward nation, extra shopkeepers are better than having bunch of peasants.
>tarriffs
They don't. Tarriffs are only useful at preventing AI from buying military goods you are underproducing yourself. Say, you want to get your shit together as China and start building armament industry. Except you are now the only arms producer in Asia and everyone will buy 3.5 artillery pieces and 5 guns from you, because you are the only supplier. Impose heavy export tarriff and they will stop.
>trade
It's Ricardo's competitive balance taken to the extreme.
Importing wood from Russia? Russian capitalists and Russian AI is now told that they should build more lumber camps, because they got a trade deal on that crap. Industry? Nu-uh, they need to sell more wood.
Selling your own clothes? Your capitalists are told to build clothes factories (which is part of why luxury versions are by-product of the main production, as it makes it easier for AI to handle). You need to build steel mill for the FUTURE investments? Tough shit, you have to build it on your own, capitalists are too busy with clothes.
>b-but profit?
Trade centers. Tarriffs are meaningless. However, privately owned trade centers use all the massive wealth they generate by employment and speculation to pay back capitalists (by default they employ shopkeepers). Capitalists contribute heavily to your investment pool, so you can get your buildings cheaper/for free with big enough pool.
>b-but trade profit
I'm sorry, this is Victoria 3, a game about building 99 lvl glass factory as a city-state with 20k people in it, not a commodity trading game.
Oh, and keep in mind that due to the game using Ricardo's theory for trade, you can completely butt-frick majority of countries you are trading with. It doesn't matter if you are buying from them 7 of something or selling them 5 of something else. What matters is that you are directly affecting prices on their market, so they start to mold their economy around those, in the most brain-dead way imaginable (and just like Ricardo assumed it works).
Selling all your excesss Chinese grain to Mexico? They won't build a single farm and focus on other things.
Buy all Mexican clothes, even if they are bought at a loss? Congrats, you've gave Mexico incentive to build clothes factory.
Mexico is not making any steel? Tough shit, because you can't encourage them into making it for you, and since they aren't making steel at the game start, this means they never should going into that venue.
Which is the part where Ricardo's theory comes apart irl, but in Vicky it's not a problem, because your goal is to buy cheapest possible input goods and sell the most expensive processed goods. Other countries molding themselves into third world shitholes that rely on raw resource exports, with underpaid masses of low-class workers? Who gives a shit, their job is to provide you with cheap shit and be an endless siphon for your own processed goods. Them building an actual, functional economy? Literally the worst thing that could happen to you.
In fact, the game HEAVILY punish you for trying to run an autarkian economy. 19 out of 20 Chinese games fall apart, because people try to use the fact China can be a raw resource supplier for itself AND also have endless hordes of workers for sweatshop-tier factories. Except the end result is having frick-huge raw resource industry that's selling you at a marginal profit input goods, and thus the local workers are on minimal wages and can't afford anything, while still generating crazy amounts of demand, since they are no longer peasants
it literally just arbitrarily punishes you and the investment pool thing makes it optimal to switch to command economy late game
not because of any actual structural problem with your economy but because your investment is divided when the gdp is too big
also yeah tariffs suck
>it literally just arbitrarily punishes you
>punishes you
Are you an ESL, or just a zoomershit that doesn't know what "punishment" is?
>makes it optimal to switch to command economy late game
not because of any actual structural problem with your economy but because your investment is divided
Those things aren't even remotely related with each other, you dumb frick.
Seriously, what the frick are you even harping about? Other than make-believe story about how minting is "punishing" people and thus game bad and command economy good.
In fact, there is ONE country in the game that can profit off gold mines:
Mexico.
You start with virtually no economy whatsoever, low-tier tech and horrible laws, BUT you get huge amount of gold fields, in places with close to zero people, so that's going to both fuel your economy early on and also attract immigrants. I've managed to siphon once 70 k people from the falling apart USCA, because their turmoil went so high, they've triggered mass migration. 70k doesn't sound like much, but when you have two states with total population of 5k people, getting there 50 k and to the other state another 20 is massive.
How does even mass migration works. From what I understand, it's
>Pops in bumfrick, nowhere, get super-high turmoil
>There are no internal prospects for employment
>Once the turmoil is high enough, they migrate
But it feels so fricking random most of the time, it might as well be a roll of dice, rather than actual mechanics. Especially when it comes to states they pick as their target. I once had a Niger Delta colony that had rubber events, which happened right before 4 different mass migrations (German Unification went to shit and most of Germs had turmoil around 70%). So in a total shithole with no jobs and no real economy other than already crowded plantations and barracks, I suddenly had 200k Germans and 30k Poles
The problem with LF in Victoria 2 was that when a factory went bankrupt, all of its size except 1 would vanish into the ether. If that nonsensical behaviour wasn't present, and if there was a retooling mechanic to convert a factory of one type to another, LF's periodic closures would be completely fine.
The real problem with LF in Vicky 2 was that they've introduced a plethora of mechanics, but left the AI on the stage of Ricky. Ie incapable of using all the new stuff. The real solition was simply not having the idiotic "8 factories per state" limit, that the original simply had due to a technological limitation of the engine, rather than any sort of balance.
>t. didn't play the actual game
Ask me how I know
I have 100 hours in it and it's trash as op points out. Is there not an establish company button? That's not how companies work. Where is the shareholders? Where is the stock market? Constructing more buildings for more clout is so basic. So much abstracted nonsense throughout the game. Whoever beats their dick to this "economic simulator" is absurd.
>Is there not an establish company button?
Why would you need a button to establish a company, when investors are building it on their own, from their own pocket?
>Where is the shareholders
Bankrolling the construction from their finances and/or being employed in the finished thing
>Rest of the post
Here is the (You). Eat up. You aren't yourself when hungry
>when investors are building it on their own, from their own pocket
Except they aren't unless they totally changed the system in the week and a half since I played it. You, as the other anon said, press a button that says "establish company". It's silly to be such a condescending homosexual when you're wrong.
>Construction pool? Nu-uh, doesn't exist in my build of the game
Would be such a shame it was already in beta and present ever since...
Construction pool does not create companies. By "company", the first poster almost certainly meant the new company mechanic they've added and was not using it as another name for factory. By "construction pool", I assume you mean the investment pool. It was in the game since the beginning, but it did not automatically create buildings until recently. You are wrong and obviously have not been keeping up with the development of the game. Why come into a thread and defend it if you know nothing about it?
>t don't matter how many mines I build coal will always be expensive in this piece of shit game
Wrong
>how the frick do you deal with unemployment
Build coal mines
> I wanna close down clearly unproductive useless buildings
No such thing in Vicky 3
>my goverment laws don't allow to close privately owned buildings
Welcome to the Lazy Fairy
>Are capitalists moronic in my game
No, they are moronic ever since automated construction by AI was added in Revolutions in 2006
>They enjoy losing money
That's literally and unironically their job
>Why does this piece of shit game favour state owned factories
It doesn't. In fact, this is the only Vicky where private-owned shit is better than command economy.
>Fricking Paradox scandinavian socialist propaganda scum
I wonder what would you say when playing the original Vicky, then.
Do you think that moron even knows what "Consciousness" refers to?
I don't really think he's even aware why there is "3" in the title of the game, even less so expecting him to play prior ones.
> play meme game
>gets meme'd on
Reposting from different thread, since this one sounds like a better place to ask:
Is it possible to mod in as a modifier specific laws?
I am tinkering with the Tanzimat events, and I thought it would be nice to have a temporary, 5 yo bonus equal to interventionism if you properly urbanise the empire, so the growth for the next 5 years is done on the expense of your pops, rather than your (usually badly strained at this point) budget. However, no matter how I try to add the
modifier = {
country_subsidies_all = yes
country_private_construction_allocation_mult = 0.5
}
build_from_investment_pool = {
bg_agriculture
bg_plantations
bg_ranching
bg_manufacturing
bg_mining
bg_logging
bg_rubber
bg_whaling
bg_fishing
bg_oil_extraction
bg_infrastructure
}
bit from the economic laws files, it doesn't work at fricking all.
Ideas? Suggestions?
If you have a law enacted, it will by default overwrite whatever bonus you will try to add. Meaning you can get at best private construction allocation, but not what's in the investment pool.
The only thing that comes to mind is writing it as two events: first getting your law switched to interventionism (if it's done by an event, you don't cause any reaction from pops or IGs), and then, 5 years later, switching to whatever else you had (but that would probably had to be pre-definied, too).
How do you find such relatable images? So relevant to the thread... It's almost like... It's almost like you made it right now inspired by this thread
wait till this guy finds out about oil
Oil is genuinely broken, thou. PDX even made it on the record twice that they've just throw in random values to see if it's going to work and to be rebalanced later, which they never actually did.
My biggest issue with oil is how railroad is organised. You literally don't have the most sane setting for it: the "mixed" one, that pretty much everyone implemented.
Also, if you want a resource that's just flat-out impossible to ever sustain, how about electricity? And radios. And late game luxury clothes.
Because frick you for wanting to have separate factories in this game making just a single good, we are going to give you factories that produce insufficient amount of good A or super-insufficient amount of A and insufficient amount of B. Need explosives? Frick you, no explosives factory. Need artillery? No foundry, sorry, can only overbuild guns factory. Luxury furniture? Yeah, how about building in the process enough regular furniture that the GLOBAL price is going to be at -35% thanks to exporting all the surplus.
You can fix unproductive buildings by making the shit they produce more expensive. For example if you have unproductive iron mines you gotta build steel factories so iron becomes more expensive.
You don't even need to do that. You can just temporarily switch a production method
>Steel mill is barely employing, despite barely covering 1/3 of your steel production
>Switch tool factory to steel for a week
>Steel price goes to +75%
>Steel mill makes suddenly surplus counted in thousand(s)
>Switch the tool factory back to iron
>Steel price goes back to where it was
>Steel mill still has its surplus money, spent to hire new people, so the steel production will be increased and cover your actual needs
Or, you know, you can just subsidise things if your economic model allows it. Any country that starts or can get interventionism easily is playing with training wheels, especially if you have investment pool set to manual
Bureaucrats always end up sucking my nation dry with their wages in this game, how does one fix this?
.... lower their wages?
I mean this is not rocket science
The only PDX games I ever bought was Vicky 1. Which was added to the daily newspaper that I'm buying in... '08? 7? And EU2, which was in bargain bin back in '04
Everything else was pirated.
But hey, I guess that makes me a Black person, for piracy is worse than drugs, right?
Even at minimum wages they still make up majority of my expenses.
What country, what economic model, what's your taxation system (and do you have majority of your population within the tax limit), what's your GDP per capita (not total, per capita).
Also: are you sure it's their wages, or general government expenses (so the paper they use up)
And don't tell me "any country", because that will be either a lie about it being an universal state or about you trying to replicate it with other nations.
Oh, and how big are your government buildings (so administration, universities, ports and potentially also railroad [that one depends on economic model])
I mostly put down admin buildings so i have at least 90% efficiency, railroads probably arent the problem since i make them private.
I tend to get this problem with every country, usually i go for interventionism and per capita tax. Last time i played was like a month ago so i cant say what the GDP was. I always make sure paper is as cheap as possible.
You didn't answer my questions, Satan.
Right now, you are telling a tall story how you are having this universal problem, except no details to it. And the only way this could spiral into being a drain on your budget is having 20% of your population working in administration and universities. Which is pretty much impossible, unless you are playing as some tiny-ass country with population below 100k
Speaking of which:
Why the frick the research system is so fricking moronic?
>Innovation points are only ever generated by universities
>Universities hire people by the thousands
>Playing as a small country? Frick you, you literally don't have the manpower for the research
This leads to ridiculous situations where your research is directly tied to the size of your workforce, and it sucks being you if you can't afford employing 70k people in universities, because your total population count is 100k
To play devil's advocate: you only ever need an university of lvl 21, which is 63k employees.
By the time you research Dialectics (which might even be your 2nd tech to research), you will be making 125,6 innovation points, while your innovation cap at 50% literacy is 125.
It's still a moronic system, way fricking worse than either Vicky 1 or 2, but there is a clear break-point, where it's quite literally pointless to expand your universities any further.
63k people is only a lot if you are playing a minor, but if you do hire 63 people out of 100k population in a single building, then you will create a massive manpower shortage that's going to attract immigration to fill the gaps, and with the right setting, they will auto-assimilate right off the bat, Vicky 1 style.
Or at least that's the theory, because there is bazillion of other factors to account for when trying to out-research the game. The real trick is to play as a country that has at least a million pops to itself, because the game is modeled around being a mid-size European country with a population between 1 to 5 millions. Having more people is doable till about 30 mil mark, having less creates all sorts of (super-exoloitable) problems.
tl;dr the research system is bad, but it's not completely broken
>where it's quite literally pointless to expand your universities any further.
If you start as a country with literacy of 50%, then you are going to be 70+ by 1850 by wealth distribution from pre-researched technologies alone. That's another 30+ points to your cap. Which is 10 more universities, with another 30k people. And even with the maximum setting, you need to make 200 points, which is 30 universities on +4 innovation setting and having the tech that increases your economy of scale by 10%. So 99k people still need to churn out research points.
And this is a single fricking university in a single state, because if you won't cram it all in a single space, then you will need proportionally more universities in total, as you don't have the 29% throughoutput bonus from single stack. On the flip-side, if you only build your university in a single state, you will massively decrease qualification increase for your population, so sucks being you if you need qualified pops all around your country, as they will be provided at snail's pace without having at least a single uni build in your state with heavy industry
Seriously, who had this moronic idea to have the research system reworked into this clusterfrick?
Lvl 21 uni in most suitable state + lvl 1 uni dotting your countryside is quite literally an exploint to turn even the biggest backwater into technological and industrial powerhouse.
It's a feature, not a bug. Unless, of course, exploits aren't features.
But yeah, the innovation rework was dumb. The fact you can't trade tech, even to your subject nations, is still singlehandedly the most moronic part of it. I get it, it was super-abusive to trade tech in the original game, but how about simply spreading what you already have researched/support research of your subjects, so you don't end up with the ultra-moronic shit like BIC being a technological backwater in 99% of games, simply because there is no way on earth it's going to get British tech simply imported there. Nu-uh, they have to research everything on their own.
The real problem is that you HAVE to build universities as your first structure, even if you aren't making paper, there is no timber in your country to be made and there are seemingly other problems. It's pretty much same shit every single game, with every single country:
1) Build construction sector, so it's making 30 construction points
2) Build university as your main project, use surplus to expand construction sector
3) Once you have 50 construction, add 2nd university to the queue, on 2nd place spot in it
4) Rinse and repeat, until you have 11 lvls of uni in construction/expanding your biggest starting uni to lvl 11 going on
5) Only by then you can build OTHER stuff
... and the moment you are done with the most mediate needs (which is likely to be timber and/or paper, rather than actual needs), you will switch to build even MORE universities, unless your starting literacy was below 20%
And I fricking hate when the game forces me to take the exact same steps, no matter who am I playing as. It's especially annoying here, where you genuinely have different problems to face as different countries, but unless you are going to increase your innovation gain right off the bat, you are going to suffer long-term consequences. So either you have a lvl 11 uni by January 1837, or you're screwed, especially as an uncivic (and, of course, grand majority of them CAN'T build universities, which means your first tech to research is going to be Academia - and sucks being you if you don't get spread to it).
Another dog turd evaded. How this studio manages to trick so many people so often is unfathomable to me. The world is filled with idiots who simply must have their games sold to them in overpriced beta test status slices
Vic 2 exists.
/Thread
Devs need to stop using Wikipedia for historical research. Does paradox have any historical consultants? Cuz devs bring a communist view of history. Independent companies are established by the player and capitalists have very little agency and no jockeying for influence.
Of course there’s an illiterate sounding underage ESL sperging out about Le Communism
You literally control everything in the "economy" Black person. Straight down to production methods and trade lanes. How is that not a commie state? No agency from pops. No depth.
nobody gives a shit, this isn’t r/politicalcompassmemes
The argument is that it's not a commie state, because the UI says so, and you're just supposed to pretend like a central authority (you) isn't making all the management for everyone else.
I enjoy victoria 3 but recognize that is heavily flawed and in need of much work
Is this game good yet
Even Imperator kinda got rehabilitated even if it was too late for anyone to give a shit
it only hef three batten and no political compas !!!! israelite scam game !!! Resist soros
Is the political system better than the placeholder garbage in Vicky 2 yet?
Always has been.
I mean was there even a political system in Vic 2?
Something was causing facists to rise up against my facist government
Probably the same thing as always: either liquor or automobile shortage, depending on year.
I really don't understand certain criticisms of V3
"the game is just cookie clicker, building more factories"
What exactly do you think players were doing in V2?
The only possible leg to stand on is the more granular army command, and that's of subjective preference.
Removal of army micro, so you can't abuse AI into attacking you in mountains really made some shitters mad that their tiny country can't win against a major power.
There was also that dipshit TommyKay that implanted the idea that the warfare in Victoria 3 should be HoI4, so his dipshit viewers kept repeating that for a year.
I think the "mobile graffix" shit came from spudgun and his inbred viewers.
You can still cheese the AI with their broken new war system
You can destroy nations significantly larger than you even easier than in Vic 2
Liquoria apologists just make shit the frick up about a game they don't play.
No need to be mad that you can't figure out how to do it
See how he just says a bunch of bullshit, and when called out, just resorts to making all lowercase "lol don't care" tier posts? Disingenuous homosexuals.
Black person, as long as your country has a population of 40k people and sea access, you can conquer the GB and Russia. In a single war. That's how busted the automated war system is. 1.5 mitingated most of the loopholes, but it's still kinda there, and you can still do just fine, except now you need about 90k people to pull that shit off
Let me reitterate: you can conquer any country you wish, as long as you have 90k, and prior to 1.5, 40k people. Boer War is always fun with this
Step 1
Pick country
Step 2
Introduce epic communist feminism
Step 3
It's late game or something and everything is laggy lol you aren't supposed to play this long just start new country to turn into communist utopia sis