Even worse, there is a small but real chance that Paradox might not even implement "push for this state" on a nation level. You can not simulate an aggressive push like the Union did in Victoria 3 front mechanic. You can't assign an aggressive general to push one portion of the front any more than any other portion of the front. The way Victoria 3 front is "supposed" to work is that you assign General and army to a non-specific location front. One of the first concern for Union (north side) was they need to have control/access of the river Mississippi from Midwest States all the way up to New Orleans. When the war first broke out and both side were mobilizing.
#Victoria 3 warfare full
Let me put forward a historical example that just is not possible at all with the initial combat Victoria 3 reveal version full stop.Īmerica Civil War. Which is a major sore point many have rightly point out preventing the game Victoria 3 from accurately simulating the "economical/warfare" immediate goal of your General/Army/Navy. How do you figure that you can control exactly where the next battle be? The way Victoria 3 describe it, you do not have that kind of degree of granular control. And the rest is history.īattles and tactics have always been automated, have always been roll based, and have always been statistics based. You can still manually control where the next battle would beget. Only thing missing really is the armies on the map which you can control, and micromanaging to chase after insignificant rebel scatters. War is still there, with the means of supplying and having the economy to maintain military as part of the gameplay. Not a major difference which your analogy suggests. Originally posted by Gift Gas:Fair point. I'm wondering if anyone else has that concern or I'm alone in this worry. This system would also work because the idea of a front line came in the later part of the time period that which Victoria takes place. In my perfect world, we would start the game with control of our individual armies like EU 4 or Imperator because we would lack enough troops for a front line and then as time progressed, we could institute a HOI 4 style system with front lines, as shown in WW1. With those two recent developments in mind and many online theorizing of the implementation of "strategic zones" rather than a system to actually control your army, I am concerned. This is understandable as Victoria 2's main objective wasn't war, but overall nation building like what Victoria 3 is going for. With that in mind, we also have been told that war isn't going to be the main focus of the game and that they don't want the game to be a map painter. I'm going off the art style here because we haven't seen what the smallest division on the map is going to be, whether it's a state, province, etc. Though we haven't got a lot of information, I'm concerned warfare is going to be implemented in a way that doesn't allow you to micro-manage.
0 kommentar(er)
