![]() ![]() Trading isn't exciting - you never have the feeling of well planned trade route bringing back money. Micromanaging becomes ridiculous and laughable when you have the power to declare wars on other nations, and also have to decide if one single farm in Kentucky is going to plant a few peach trees alongside the corn fields. Otherwise label it as "Victoria 3: The Alternate Reality We Think Is Better". Alternate history is supposed to happen AFTER the game begins, not before, Paradox. Soundtrack is a an all-time low comparing to other Paradox Games - uninspired and repetitive. Nothing is eye-catching, exciting or charming. ![]() 2D art is simplistic, bland and derivative. Graphics are below mediocre - the map is passable, but character models are nausea-inducing. After five or six games, the replayability value sinks like a rock. There are very few actual choices, and the pretext that every country is different is false. The game is far too easy if you go the only cultural build that the devs deem "correct". I'd rate all of these games (maybe except Imperator) with at least 8/10. I have played their games for around 6350 hours putting together CK2 and 3, Sengoku, Imperator, Hoi3 and 4, Victoria 2 and Stellaris. I have played their games for around 6350 hours putting together CK2 and 3, Sengoku, Imperator, Hoi3 and 4, Victoria 2 I'm a Paradox veteran. And there is a ton of major game balance problem to mention Also, the game is guaranteed to lag and crash on some older pc. And the ironic thing is, all of the historical events mentioned above do exist correctly in Victoria 2 and are present in Victoria 3 loading screen. The black ship, Meji restoration, world expo, South Pole expedition, the Franco-Prussian war, US land purchases and civil war, and the annexation of Manchuria by Russia either don't exist or only happen rarely for AI-controlled nations. As a strategy game based on the historical Victoria era, there are almost no historical events in the game except the game starts on 1836 and the opium war. This makes the combat system basically a dice game, but you do not know what number you are rolling for, how many dice you're rolling, and what have you rolled. Combat width, supply, battle strategy preference, and many other major mechanics are unexplained in the game and those that are explained such as army buffs, debuffs, remaining manpower, and types of equipment are hidden behind layers and layers of secondary windows. To be honest, I do like the auto-combat system, but the confusing mechanic, stupid AI, and lacking explanation made warfare in V3 the most painful warfare among all other strategy games. First of all, the warfare mechanic is horrible. I currently rate the game 9/10 … ExpandĪs a paradox fan who spent 1k hours on hoi4 and at least 300 on all other paradox games, I say the current state of this game is basically an As a paradox fan who spent 1k hours on hoi4 and at least 300 on all other paradox games, I say the current state of this game is basically an unpolished mess and painful to play with. Of course, the potential of the game is enormous. Overall, they are very satisfied with the game after a few hours. But I would have expected a little more depth and more options to wave the fights. In general, I like the idea of automatic control of battles, I don't miss individual units on the map. ![]() I know a lot of people complain, but personally I didn't come across anything major. Strengths and weaknesses (in my opinion): + market and meeting demand and supply (relatively complex, but not complicated system) +society and its gradual change from agrarian to industrial +diplomacy and escalation of tensions + graphics + the game is in quite good condition and polished. As usual with Paradox, the game is more or less a sandbox for "what if" history. The game covers the period from 1836 to 1936. As usual with Paradox, the game is Victoria 3 is another great strategy from pradox interactive. Victoria 3 is another great strategy from pradox interactive. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |