@@nicol64paIts one of the worst grand strategy game i have ever seen, the warfare system is beyond terrible, the internal politics is unbaked, foreign politcs is unbaked and broken, economy is boring af to manage and the entire game is just a waiting sim
As one of the devs that asked you questions, thank you again, and great to hear you're going for the epic grant! Best of luck! Good heads up about the if statement. My game generates maps at runtime so there's a LOT of funky shader stuff going on to blend textures and borders... can't just use a static texture unfortunately, so there's a lot of if statements. I'm going to try and just replace all my if statements with custom nodes to mask it properly... wish me luck!
You could also use a seperate Render target which stores RGBA masks for your materials to blend to and from. And then sub pack it (aka R = stone e.t.c so you can pack more info). Glad I could help and good luck!!
Great job Surprised you did great with Morocco's actual control, I hope you do the same for algiers, as it had control of the north with some key coties in the middle, but loyalty of the south
Thanks! From my understanding the regency was decently centralized until the French landed at Algiers it fell apart. As Algeria is significance to French history they'll have a ton of events. Plan for specifically what you're talking about is to have an event which when the French take Algiers the regency collapses, with them holding only Constantine and the surrounding areas, then the rest of it will fracture into heaps of small tribes, most pledging loyalty to Abdelkader or the French.
how do you feel about your choice too use a round map instead of a flat one, do you feel it has any real drawbacks, like making it harder too navigate,
I personally really like just how it looks, it's easier to render, a bit complex math wise to do stuff on it (once you get a couple functions done its smooth sailing). Main drawback is the texel density of textures around the equator is a bit lower but my AA solution kind of solves it. Navigation is pretty intuitive once you get used to it. Main pro is that it emphasizes the true size of the world rather then most pdx titles making Europe 3x as big.
It looks mad interesting and promising, for real. But I have to ask: have you tried to implement some kind of AI in order to see how well it behaves with all the systems that you have already put in place? The game might be great on theory but in practice if the AI is unable to play it due to the massive amount of variables... where is the fun? Have you tried to play with with some kind of units? The fun aspect must never be forgotten in a game.
It's still early days in terms of gameplay but the AI behavior will be pretty easy to implement in terms of economy and diplomacy as there just weighted chances from modifier stacks. Combat is more difficult, but I've got a basic idea of how to do it. Currently I need to just implement more stuff into the game so the AI can have things to do. In previous videos of shown that units can go around the map + a query system for the AI and all that so dw I've thought about all that (:
Plan is for most systems in the game to be automatable. But the player can choose to dedicate to the economy or military or both. Although this game is meant to be more combat related than Vic3, but will still have a large focus on the economy (:
Wow this looks so nice. Would you consider putting the world map and territory system up for sale on the Unreal market place? There's a modern RTS game I want to try making with it, similar to ICBM on Steam. Edit: Looks like you are considering it :)
Do you have a rough price point you are expecting to release the map editor plugin at? I'm planning on buying it and wanted to figure out what to budget for.
I dont have a solid number at this point but somewhere between 100-250 USD. Its a bit steep but it'll have all the stuff required to make a game only in blueprints (data base and tmap functions as well as the map rendering and pathing). Unfortunately the marketplace doesn't have localized pricing for countries with less fortunate exchange rates so I'm sorry if that effects you ):
Currently I plan to make a expandable version of the map + editors a marketplace asset so you'll be able to reverse engineer it or use it to make your own game (:
Are armies going to be like in vic2 with the way they are created and used ? except without the terrible managment of course. Also will you be able to make international organizations in the game ? for example lets say a federation is created between between spain and portugal with its headquarters somewhere in one of them, and you could play as the federation itself and use the resources you get to tie the countries closer or uphold any treaty, i think this could be insteresting for alt-history and more complex civil wars aka spain against portugal against the federation that is also against spain
The armies are going to be similarly made to Hoi4 (aka template designer) with special regiments or divsions specifically for mobalisation. With line managment and all that as well. But I've thought of a cool mechanic to simulate the change from line->skirmish warfare so at the start players will have to group up there armies into a stack (which will have its own automation features). I plan to have different types of international organisations, alliances, union, trade blocks. So in spain may beable to influence and make changes to a federation. But theres also about 6 types of subjects each with 3 levels of autonomy, so something like your iberian example would be, Portugal In SpainsSphere->Spain Heavily Invests->Portugal Becomes A Heavily Influenced State Puppet->Spain Lowers Autonomy Untill Portugal Is Annexed Or rebels
@@stupidonesgames5923 My idea was more in line with this: Spain and portugal make a federation, lets call it iberia, iberia is independent tag that can both be influenced by and influence portugal and spain, for example portugal achieves political supremacy in the federation and you have a strange iberian-led portugal, or possibly after winning a three-way civil war iberia (the tag) is able to take more control of spain and portugal's government, basically example one is portugal controlling spain by a proxy while also not controlling it and example two is the federation which is it's own independent country is trying to keep everything toghther, i think this could be very insteresting for alt-history, for one you could have all kind of strange but reasonable changes to history and countries that while stronger are less stable because federations should be at the very least hard to keep united in the game's time frame (nationalism and all that stuff). although i don't really expect this to be in the game at all given how hard it would be to implement Also another thing i wanted to ask was about is military casualties, i feel like grand strategy games understates how significant these things were. For example russia, russia was on trek to becoming the great power of europe but after fighting 3 costly wars in a row it's population was completely devastated, of course i am not saying wars should be absurdily costly like this (them being able to utterly cripple a country), i am more in line with the thought that wars should have some stronger maluses, so that nation's A armies can't just use meat waves attacks against nation B without any downsides.
So the international organizations I plan to implement will be less complicated than you're describing but I might expand on them later. Stuff like playing as an origination or a landless country will not be supported due to constraints on what I have time for. But events for union tags (Iberia) being a part of the civil war would probably be implemented or automated to some extent (there's a pretty extensive culture->culture group mechanic I have that has tags for union nations aka Britain France, Germany ...). Most complex alt history stuff like what youve said would have to be created manually via specific events and decisions (I have plans mainly for Scandinavia for this). Wars, unlike all paradox games, will have an escalation mechanic. think border skirmishes in hoi4. So, we won't have 500k men fighting over the Saharah. But total wars like ww1/2 will be incredibly costly. Both economically and demographically. As like in vic2/3 armies are recruited from soldier pops, with conscripts coming from laborers, you'll be able to seriously mess up your country by waging constant war. There's also an advanced demographic system so I can simulate children carers workers and elderly, which will simulate women joining the workforce when a large portion of men are off fighting or have been wiped out.
@@stupidonesgames5923 Will there be a more complex internal politcs ? for example lobbying, political movements and all that stuff to allow for a more insteresting and flavourfull experience. Also is there a prediction for when the game is going to launch ?
Don't really have solid plans for how politics is handled. Prototypes idea is pops have ideologies, like protectionist, moralist, e.t.c which are normally weighted (decimals adding up to 1). Then they choose a political party to vote for when elections come, based off their ideologies but also the influence of parties based in the region and advertising. aka most pops will be paternal/moralist at the start of the game which aligns with say Christian socialist or something. But without player intervention they will almost never get in power because other parties have more clout and certain pops (capitalists, aristocrats, intellectuals) increase the clout of their chosen party. Probably wont be as complex as vic 3 but they'll be all the reforms and stuff. But as its based around parties its easier to have historic flavour. I cant give a solid timespan but probably a years time (:
A couple ideas have been inspired mainly having different vegetation, terrain and climate types. Which is important for Blood & Iron because I derive RGOs based off it. EU5 looks like it'll have heeps and heeps of features, which I just cant implement on my own so im just try to get a Vic2 Like game working then work from there (:
I think this doesn't address the simple fact that Paradox is able to execute the pseudohistorical grand strategy genre, since they have the resources as a firm to fund and take the time and necessary labor hours to do historical research. Frankly, the majority of people whom are interested in this kind of game are often not exactly the most aware of human history and culture. This being titled "Iron and Blood", and Africa being damn near completely empty while Europe is minutely fleshed out, doesn't give me a lot of confidence.
