Everything Victoria 2 Does Better Than Victoria 3

What about comparing to victoria 1 ? I always think victoria 3 lacking the historical aspect unlike victoria 1 which always triggers event on certain time frame which is cool.

You guys are normies. Of course we miss the ones we've used to play. Just like how we miss Windows 7 when Windows 8-10 is introduced.

Warfare in vic2 is fun in the early game as long as you're in europe. Late game microing gets ridiculously tedious especially if you're playing as Japan, Russia, US, China etc. since AI can invade random places deep in your country. EU4's fort zone of control system made large scale wars manageable and predictable.

i miss red death toll numbers coming out of armies in battle, that looked so dramatic.

Also the way market was represented, pop's statistics, etc...

From my point of view, everything is wrong in vic3

140 hours so far in vic3, and gotta say I still find myself going back to vic2.
For the time being, I don't see a reason to play the game. In vic2 I absolutely loved winning/losing a Great War, having rebels take control of my government and having to rebuild my country from practically scratch. I loved winning the war and having to oversee my new colonial holdings and/or keeping my new puppets in check. I love losing the war, planning a series of events that will most likely lead to a second world war once I transfer my game file to hoi4. I loved the political system, changing social and political reforms drastically and having to figure out how to operate my country with Liberals in power, or having to appease Communists and Socialists when Conservatives were in power.

Then we get to vic3. The game that "wasn't rushed we swear" when it released without a music player, the game the community modded the same day to have a music player and fix a lot of bugs/economic shortcomings. The game that "enterally was created to center around it's economy" when the first two patches were specifically made to fix the economy of the economy focused game.

The programmers did an amazing job with the graphics, and I love the flags. Diplomacy is more detailed (somewhat) then vic2, atleast when it comes to the amount of options. Besides this however, a lot of the content just doesn't add up.

War wasn't just "not focused on" it was completely overlooked. I enjoy the combat system, I do not enjoy reasons/meaning of the wars in the game.
Why can I only add my wargoals before the war starts? Someone on reddit (I know) said it best I believe "The Treaty of Versailles wasn't written before World War 1"
The main enemy at the start of World War 1 was Austria, it quickly grew to be Germany however as Germany became a much bigger threat to the entente then Austria ever could. France suffered way more casualties then it was ready for and Russia straight up collapsed. France definitely wanted Alsace back before the war but after wanted to see Germany *destroyed*. A better example would be in the east when Germany sent their first treaty to Russia, which demanded a sizeable portion of the east to become their own countries under German and Austrian supervision.
Russia refused, leading to more Russian defeats and a second German treaty, this one more harsher then the last.
This is an example of the wargoals *expanding*. Yet, in vic3, this simply doesn't happen.

Vic 3 is the Velma of video games. New devs hate the original game, but need to use the IP according to management, so they just shovel it full of their own hot air and claim it's not meant for you, the Victoria 2 fan who literally demanded Vic 3 and drove the hype train, as if a sequel should be a completely different game for a completely different audience. It's just baffling. They hear that people who don't agree with them politically have valid criticisms about the game and their brains just shut off

If they had wanted to make VICTORIA THREE, they would have done all of this. They just wanted to make a game that would appeal to people who don't like Vic 2 and HoI 4. That's why every defense of Vic 3 is just someone complaining about the basic game mechanics or fundamental economic principles in Vic 2 as if they were objectively bad and unplayable, (and not obviously fixable and largely playable with mods,) and then gushing over cringey 3d models and more flavour for socialism. (hmm wonder why?)

"Hey Paradox, I'd like to see a map mode to see which areas have the best potential amount of this resource"
Paradox: That's illegal

I also like Victoria 2's graphics more, unironically. Especially with the better textures in mods such as DoD or just HPM

Wrong title, it should have been Victoria 2 does everything better than Victoria 3

i just pretend victoria 2 keeps coming out and i just keep playing that...i play more of hearts of iron 2 darkest hour trp mod and vic 2 and ck2 lol...the new games just suck

I'm new to Victoria 2. Got the entire dlc + base game for like 10$ as a self Christmas present. I'm currently having fun building railroads and navy bases as Netherlands. Thanks for the vid, it helped me make my decision

i like vic 3, but i have MORE fun playing vic 2 <3

Ease of access is what's gone wrong. I hate the new people coming and then bragging and hating on the older BETTER games. And I do oppose the new warfare system. It must be removed, we must not let paradox make these games idle games.

My missed features are the text fluff on technologies and music. Also there is no jazz tech!

Victoria 2 it's simple and fun.

Victoria 3 is complex and boring.

Simple as that

Victoria 2 did war better

The best change in vic3 is the ability to tab in and out in a reasonable time where in vic 2 it rather takes 30 seconds or crashes which is quite bad In a multiplayer setting where you are probably using discord

1. UI is shit
2. Economy is simplified and waaaaay too micromanagey. Its like a much worse version of factorio
3. War is god awful and even if you dont care about war being engaging its mechanically broken as shit and only accurate for 20th century warfare when most of the game is in the 19th century.
4. The game has 0 flavor in the name of no railroading. Countries dont act like they did historically, and they all play the same.
5. The economy is both fickle and broken. You can get haiti to have the highest living standards on the planet in a few decades and then have your economy completely collapse for no good reason.
6. Diplo is shit. No sphereing and everybody cares about the slightest things you do to minor countries on the other side of the planet.
7. The political system. No more do parties matter and have a diverse set of issues per party. You can just do whatever you want with no opposition no matter the government.

People who say "oh its not that bad" are just in the honeymoon phase where everything seems new and wondrous which will end very quickly when they realize every game is the exact same. As a V2 player, it has been nothing but a massive disappointment. I would say "oh it could get good like what stellaris 2.0 did" but this is worse than launch Stellaris and would be much harder to overhaul. "it might get better with dlc even without a rework" isnt an excuse because its a full priced paid game. I can get all of V2 for the price of a single modern paradox DLC, so why waste 50 dollars plus countless 30 dollars dlc to get a less complete experience than i can for 30 bucks in V2?

The amount of map modes seem to be a steady regression each newer Paradox game.

hoi4 war system wouldent work for a game mostly in the 1800's

No fucking flavour man. The journal sucks so much ass. Also every nation plays pretty much the same. That said it’s still pretty fun.

I missed the part when capitalists and aristocrats took care of most of the production I wish that there is an update for Victoria 3 to add that feature again otherwise I would go back to Victoria ii

Victoria 3 really feels like the devs want you to "play their game", with all sorts of mythology about "political reform" necessary to build steel mills, or mass "education" needed to produce research scientists.

I've watched playthroughs, and it really seems like the devs have bought into all sorts of nostrums about "how a country develops", and by god the player must as well.

It's like, the devs are retards imagining that "democracy" works as advertised, or that policy has anything to do with public opinion, anywhere, ever. And don't realize that "democracy" has always been a shell game, and ultimately policy is decided by a group of unelected interests, one which happened to become more wealthy as the traditional economy (which universally emerges as a kind of default mode of organization if nothing else is forced or believed in) was forcefully replaced with some common market construct.

There was a weird period where people with money were not the same as those who controlled the fantasy structure of the state, due to the creation of common markets and freedom of professions. This new economic elite created a new oligarchical structure - the house / senate.

And the way it models public opinion is borked. What actually happens with public opinion is that basically all policy changes are unpopular, and over time they become popular because they're the new status quo. In addition, the opinions of pops are bizarrely rational.

In victoria 2, ironically, the more primitive model that had slaves being pro-slavery was balked at by players, but like... uh... has anyone actually done any research to see what the opinions of actual slaves tended to be? "Slaves will be opposed to slavery" - why? Are conscripts opposed to conscription? Were serfs opposed to serfdom? Or did they find it honorable to serve their duty to their lord?

Can someone explain me how the last point "the concert of Europe" was better in Vic 2?

Unfair comparision. Vic3 does not have expansion packs yet while vic2's many features came in DLCs.

I really wanted to love Victoria 3. But I must admit after 10 hours I am missing Victoria 2.

One big gripe i have is the back down system, if i have multiple claims on a target they shouldnt grt out easy by backing down, what if i want a fight to take them down a notch

I dont understand the society we live in. All there is in life these days is a franchise system in the movie, music and gaming industry. Most movies, music and games now are pretty much rehashes of the ones before. Ppl buy games and wish they were like its predecessor but why do we live in a society where we want the same things over and over again.
What has happened in the movie, music and games industry. What I do know is that they all lack creative talent.
By that I mean just look at those 3 facets of entertainment that we all live within. What I do know is that the movie and music industry is crap unlike 25 or more odd years ago where there was so much variety is so many different ways and fields that you couldnt keep up. Movies is nothing but marvel movies, rom coms and animation now or has been for a good 10yrs or so. Music is just 2 line lyrics, one beat and just outright painful. Games are just the same games and game designs with nothing fresh and innovative other than a cashcow for developers and publishers. The amount of greed that has enveloped these industries has destroyed the creative talants they once were. Their thought process is just sell junk and promote it and the ppl will buy it or watch it. Then theres always those that have a bit of a whine about the new stuff but quickly get over it because they buy the next crap that comes out those in these industries know this full well.
Where has all the creative imaginations gone in these industries. The gaming industry is the same way now. Its always the same type of survival, strategy or whatever games and they bring them out every year or few years. Same games, music and movies, just different technology added to it. Thats pretty much all society is happy with these days. Even so called 'smartphones' are brought out every year but its the same rubbish that does the same thing. Is the gaming industry that bad that we are satisfied with the same game rehashes paid dlcs and stripped down base games they sell thsee days.
I dont mind this game once you really get into how it all works because I like strategy games but in the end they are pretty much all the same anyway.

Tbh every paradox game should be combined into one game from ancient Rome to ww2 or even ww3 if you have mods , I'm sick of over monetization and paradox is worse than ea for it

Concert of Europe should be in the game!

No mode to make vic3 like Vic 2?

Victoria 3 is Anno 1800 without 3d graphics. nuff said

Mapmodes, I agree . In the game with most stats dependency in your core gameloop it is baffling that this is the game paradox chooses hide things. Most likely to not scare off newbies , however instead of scared of they will be clueless and frustrated. Not only mapmodes, bring back the ledger! Luckily mods are bringing the ledger functionality back somewhat.

Warfare, yes more like HOI4 was needed. Not micro hell but not this very obscured warfare either. It seems like it was the very last thing they did, and it was too late to redevelop before release. They will take feedback and redesign this I'm sure, don't bring back vicky 2 though.

Economy, sorry hard disagree. Laissez faire was terribly boring. It was only a necessary evil for big countries because the micro would overwhelm you otherwise. I think the prevention of subsides and investment bonuses is a good compromise that doesn't take away the games biggest plus, building, while still differentiating between the different economic models.

The sphere of influence minigame, was awful imo. It was too simplistic and gamey. I think the new one much better captures all kinds of relationships that are described under a sphere. Diplomatic plays has other problems, mostly regarding AI, but sphere of influences already exist.

Pop Movement don't make any sense. I had some pops from Siberia moving towards some where in Africa. Also colonization makes no sense. Russia colonizes like Africa. Reason americas and africa got colonize by western europeans is distance from atlantic ocean. Russia and other have to take the routes that waters are block by Europeans. Reason why Europeans look for those routes were Ottomans closing the silk Road.

Colonization is also too easy. The longer the distance the more support it should get. Some how its so easy for colonies to threw out of no where. It should have a element of invasion with troops first or get killed off by natives.

Terrain should also matter. From desert to tundra should be little to no humans. Would be almost impossible for settlements etc... Until modern day usage of oil to sustain those outpost. But would make it very costly.

EVERYTHING lol

The battle system in Vic3 is the worst I've ever seen, yesterday my US troops invaded Italy, won naval invasion battle and then just teleported back to the midwest in one day after establishing HQ. Then when I ordered them to advance front it was about to take them 70+days meanwhile italy took that hq back.
wtf is that shit xD

war should be like hoi4

I don't mind the new combat however could've been better HOI4 style.

It would be better to see economy with Capitalists actually do things unlike what it is now.

i have to ask why my market screen excludes good i dont have
simply not having them shouldnt mean that they have no price or thag i cant see their potential or where theyre produced

Tell them to fix the launcher so I can play the game I bought

I think I'm definitely in the minority, but I really love the new war system. The 2 gripes I have with the game (and the second is very much related to your point about concerts of Europe) are the UI issues and diplomatic plays.

UI issues include the lack of map modes, tooltips inside tooltips inside tooltips, vital information that needs to accessed regularly being hidden. Why the hell do I need to go 3 tooltips deep every time I want to check the prices of goods required to upgrade the standard of living? I need to check that info every 15 mins or so to see how to continue improving, and every time it's mouse over the standard of living, wait. Mouse over the strata I'm working on, wait. Mouse over the price comparison, wait. Finally, I have the info I need. If I hadn't seen that on a dev stream before release, I would never know. How the hell is a new player ever going to find that? I actually thought that they simply forgot to include Romania as a formable nation during a Wallachia run because I couldn't find the tab for formable nations, and I was convinced it was a decision that should appear if you fulfill the conditions. It's so hard to find anything in this mess of a UI.

Diplomatic plays are glorified war declarations at this point. Why the hell are they strictly binary? Why can't I offer a "peace deal" inside the diplomatic play which gives away something for getting something? I can't start a diplomatic play for Eritrea as Ethiopia against Egypt if Egypt is friendly towards me, which makes sense in the current system, but why can't I offer a trade? Something like give me Eritrea and I become a puppet, or Eritrea for war reparations, something like that. Egypt could then accept or refuse. The diplomatic plays themselves need some way of offering something for both sides, which the 2 main participants need to say yes to. The fact that it requires a winner and loser before the war, but both sides can get stuff in an actual war is such a glaring omission.

I miss the old paradox CK2/Vic2/HOI3 maybe a new company will come out to take the reigns of true Grand Strategy

Vic 2 is the same ui as ck2

There is no fixing Vic3 man, there isnt even a real economy in the game, there is no real market its just an illusion. Also the people have gone through the actual code of the game and there is no war mechanics, its literal dice rolls based on battle, roll dice for size between 1-10, then proceed to roll dice for damage and losses 1-5.

victoria 3 is worse than victoria 2 in
every. single. way.

TL;DR Everything

It starts with a constructive conciliatory tone, but when they don't listen to you for years it'll feel a bit different. All the points in this video are valid of course.

Needless to say there are probably going to be a lot of DLCs for this game like there is for HOI

Really nice video, I agree with everything you said. Maybe a video about what victoria 3 does better than 2 would also be nice. I find that victoria 3 is funnier to play with minor nations because of the new building mechanics. in Vic 2 if you didnt have coal or iron RGO you are doomed the whole game.