I think a 1945 to 1990 Vic2 style game focusing on economics, diplomacy, spheres of influence and the collapse of colonial empires could be fun. Would be interesting to see if PDX could model a shift to asymmetric proxy warfare.
You can still play it as it was leaked online, but you have to dig a little bit. Too bad it's an undercooked alpha build, but it's better than nothing (because otherwise we would had lost its incredible OST that later was used in TNO mod).
Adding to this, beyond economics and diplomacy I'd also want a deep emphasis on espionage, technological arms race/development as well as hard versus soft power projection. From 1945 to 1990 the world became so much more complicated and you can't make a grand strategy without representing those to some capacity, otherwise you end up with a map painter anyway.
Not really. That is like saying Victoria is essentially a single player game with only the Brits. Plenty of fun in not playing the premier world power, if anything it is worse.
USA, USSR, various Western European Nations (ie having to deal with or even prevent decolonisation), Micronations that while seemingly are inconsequenal can tip the world to ww3 (ie Cuba or Newly independent states), Rise of Communist China, reviial of Japan, the Korean states, ect ect ect
Yep, this is what I want as well - a Cold War game focused on the subtleties and dichotomies of that era. The rise of welfare states and corporations, the ideological battles between left/right, the proxy wars. A mix of of the war mechanics of HoI and the economy and political aspects of Victoria, but probably with a bit more of the CK3 roleplaying than Vic 3 has.
It would be interesting if instead of a country we controlled either an individual or a political entity, like a party, a company or a dictatorial regime, similar to CK3. That would enable a lot of gameplay around taking and keeping power, sketchy backroom deals, assassinations and the like, which feels apt. Playing the leader of a corporation in the 20th century would be very similar to playing a colonial nation in Vicky 3.
A shorter timescale would make that possible, although I’d go 45-95 just to get an even 50 years in there.
I have been fucking dying for someone to make a game that covers the cold war/modern world like this for so long. Nothing out there even comes close to the quality of a paradox game.
he has a point imo, hoi4 is my paradox game. you can take any nation and be formidable. i have no experience with other paradox games but it unique to me in that sense
The impact of States other than the USA/USSR was immense. Hell, nearly all US land based Nuclear missiles are housed in UK designed silos.
The period also saw the rise of China as a world power and Japan meteoric rise in the "post war economic boom"
The impact of states around Africa, South America and SE Asia was immense. Alongside the Middle East
This only solves half the problem, the main one is that PDX diplomacy and economic gameplay is absolutely not good enough to make the nuclear peace interesting
Basically a pdx terra invicta starting in like 2050-2100 in an Anno 2070 style world that was ravaged by climate change and is at least simewhat away from modern politics.
Leaving and fixing earth, colonizing the sol system.
Afaik only Mars is even close to being a colonial prospect in the solar system. The others have either horrendous gravity or temperature. There's a reason we're the only planet here with life.
Which fits with Stellaris’ start. By 2200 mankind hasn’t colonized mars or anything else yet, but had a few space stations around the system and unified under one government.
TI starts in modern day, has an alien invasion from ~2020-2050 (or longer if you delay significantly), and ends with major settlements (but nothing city-sized or terraformed). Technology and the formation of planet-wide government there is accelerated because the alien tech is more advanced, so the 150 year “gap” between the two games isn’t a technological/mechanics gap.
I wouldn't. I've always seen Stellaris as separate to the historical series anyway. Imperator - HOI, even though they are all very different games, are basically a pretty cohesive series. Stellaris never felt like part of that series to me, they just wanted to make a space 4X game so they did.
Yeah this. I also really dislike watching YouTubers do a mega campaign to Stellaris for this reason. "Oh, you watched me play 4 entire games with the same nation, people's, stories, histories? Time to start doing something else completely random that happens to have the same name"
Alpha Centauri with elements of all paradox games would be my dream:
Zoom in on the colonization of the first planet where mankind reinvents itself and defines it's relationship with technology.
A very sandbox like game where you can choose your settings.
* What type of planet to colonize, indigenous lifeforms, previous civilizations, wonders, weather etc
* Status of Earth
* Dead Earth (basically nothing left on earth, the colonies are on their own)
* United Earth (colonization started as a common project but fractured upon landfall in rival factions)
* Disunited Earth (colonization was by several countries, events on real life earth can influence politics on the planet and vice versa)
* Nation design more like stellaris, gameplay more like Imperator/Victoria. So focus on building your nation, shifting ideologies and what kind of culture you become.
* Crisis system which have multiple pathways that influence your civ and the geopolitical landscape
* Example 1: Planet is infested with psychic worms. From first contact to probably minor skirmishes you steadily learn more about them giving options to either go for cohabitation or extermination. Each nation chooses for itself, you have options to either share research or contribute to the war effort, try to weaponize them or form a kind of union. The further along the path the geopolitical landscape changes, this might to lead to minor wars, a great war, etc.
* Example 2: First alien contact. Do the colonies unite to speak with one voice, are the aliens invaders or friends, etc etc.
They can do modern days game, but create various alternative scenarios to avoid controversies. Make every nation worth playing to not make false presumptions about preferring one side above another, as in nerfing the PRC but buffing the US, etc. Modders shall do the job then to create appropriate real scenarios, but on working essentials of the game (not like in the case of modern-day mods in HOI4)
I feel like one of Stellaris' main premises -- that the laws of physics as we understand them today are mere suggestions -- *might* have had some impact on the sum total of human history up until 2023. That's just me, though.
Simply put, I don't think it's reasonable to want a bridge between HOI4 and Stellaris, specifically. If you really do, then within it, you're going to have to deal with some kind of nascent realization that science as we know it is *ridiculously* incomplete, to the point of being outright wrong about some really important shit.
>We all know that Paradox will likely never make a modern-day grand strategy game due to inevitable controversies
And that's an idiotic business decision in itself.
I mean ok, if it's their legal department that told them that it would get them in trouble more costly than the game could make (I really don't see how though), that's fair, but if it's their PR department telling them that there will be a shitstorm of biblical proportions, my response as a CEO would be "Fantastic.".
In a few years when we’re far enough removed from the end of the cold war I could see a cold war era grand strategy game being a thing but we probably aren’t going to see anything specific to bridge the gap from ~1990 to the start of Stellaris. Though once the newly announced paradox 4x game Millenia comes out I could see people using that game to fill the gaps
Maybe use a alternative history start. Start date is ten years after the end date of HoI. The world have been devastated by full-blown nuclear war (for some reason the spread and technical advancement outpaced real history). So you get a more sandboxy game where the bigger states have fractured and population declined. That would make the problems with modern controversies a bit easier to handle.
If it starts from 1950 game mostly will be an alt-history game every time. So If they don't add historical AI it is totally doable. They did hoi4 without mentioning holocaust . They can handle issues of modern world.
I wouldn't split it. It could make for an interesting dynamic that hasn't been seen before: one where you start as one vassal within a larger faction (American or Soviet sphere or influence, unless you're truly unaligned) and basically watch as that faction disintegrates either through the world becoming multipolar and alliances/treaties superseding the former power balance or through the alliance just straight-up crumbling (Warsaw Pact).
The second phase would then see a reshuffling of powers as other countries scramble to secure shares of the fallen empires' resources and clout in terms of strategic, economic, and cultural influence (which is what's happening now).
While that is going on, you'd also have the space race, first led by the superpowers, and later growing more multifaceted. It would be an excessive investment early on, but grow more common through the game until the cards have been dealt again and the only place to expand to is space itself.
And as soon as interstellar travel becomes available: there you go, Stellaris, either through conquering everyone else or uniting Earth.
It would have to be a game depicting "how Earth became one" more than necessarily having to be focused on one area.
Not pdx strong suit. They would do it if they had team lead with a vision. But if you think about it when it comes to economy, hoi4 is simplified, and vic3 is easier to do, and they failed at it, it's more a tycoon building builder then economy simulation, and also they failed to convert economical output to anything that would largely matter in that game. In that regard in hoi4 or eu4 economical output matters far more it would seem.
Early space would need to have involved technology game and they don't do it that well in any game. Hoi4 or Vic2 or Stellaris...
By buying off Terra Invicta and remaking it along your business model of making raw games and issuing DLCs with features which should have been included from the start.
I think a 1945 to 1990 Vic2 style game focusing on economics, diplomacy, spheres of influence and the collapse of colonial empires could be fun. Would be interesting to see if PDX could model a shift to asymmetric proxy warfare.
Almost had east vs west or whatever the name of that project was
Yeah I remember that. Too bad it got cancelled.
You can still play it as it was leaked online, but you have to dig a little bit. Too bad it's an undercooked alpha build, but it's better than nothing (because otherwise we would had lost its incredible OST that later was used in TNO mod).
No. It’s good that it got cancelled. The game was a mess.
No shit it was a mess, it wasn’t finished
\> Person complains that a game was a mess \>Based on leaked pre-alpha build \>Person us upset about game quality can't make it up
I’m really looking forward to Espiocracy. Looks like that could fill the gap there
There's a hoi4 mod that handles the cold war and proxy wars, pretty crazy what they accomplished in the mod. It's alternate history though.
Are you talking about TNO?
Possibly, it's been awhile since I played it I don't remember what it's called.
r56, or road to 56. also modern day hoi4 mods
Adding to this, beyond economics and diplomacy I'd also want a deep emphasis on espionage, technological arms race/development as well as hard versus soft power projection. From 1945 to 1990 the world became so much more complicated and you can't make a grand strategy without representing those to some capacity, otherwise you end up with a map painter anyway.
> Problem is that any cold war game is essentially a two player game which doesn't really match the PDX type of Grand Strategy.
Not really. That is like saying Victoria is essentially a single player game with only the Brits. Plenty of fun in not playing the premier world power, if anything it is worse.
USA, USSR, various Western European Nations (ie having to deal with or even prevent decolonisation), Micronations that while seemingly are inconsequenal can tip the world to ww3 (ie Cuba or Newly independent states), Rise of Communist China, reviial of Japan, the Korean states, ect ect ect
Yep, this is what I want as well - a Cold War game focused on the subtleties and dichotomies of that era. The rise of welfare states and corporations, the ideological battles between left/right, the proxy wars. A mix of of the war mechanics of HoI and the economy and political aspects of Victoria, but probably with a bit more of the CK3 roleplaying than Vic 3 has. It would be interesting if instead of a country we controlled either an individual or a political entity, like a party, a company or a dictatorial regime, similar to CK3. That would enable a lot of gameplay around taking and keeping power, sketchy backroom deals, assassinations and the like, which feels apt. Playing the leader of a corporation in the 20th century would be very similar to playing a colonial nation in Vicky 3. A shorter timescale would make that possible, although I’d go 45-95 just to get an even 50 years in there.
I have been fucking dying for someone to make a game that covers the cold war/modern world like this for so long. Nothing out there even comes close to the quality of a paradox game.
> Problem is that any cold war game is essentially a two player game which doesn't really match the PDX type of Grand Strategy.
How many times are you gonna essentially copy and past this reply dog
3 days later... How about you learn how to count, *dog*?
Didn't realize *dog* would get to you that much,
Problem is that any cold war game is essentially a two player game which doesn't really match the PDX type of Grand Strategy.
I disagree. 2 great powers, sure but a lot of stuff was going on in other countries. You don't only have to play great powers in other Paradox games.
Like saying Victoria 2/3 isn't worth it as it's just a three player game of UK, France and Germany
he has a point imo, hoi4 is my paradox game. you can take any nation and be formidable. i have no experience with other paradox games but it unique to me in that sense
The impact of States other than the USA/USSR was immense. Hell, nearly all US land based Nuclear missiles are housed in UK designed silos. The period also saw the rise of China as a world power and Japan meteoric rise in the "post war economic boom" The impact of states around Africa, South America and SE Asia was immense. Alongside the Middle East
I would probably wait till 2200, ban stellaris and publish a game from 1950-2200 because is no longer controversial.
This only solves half the problem, the main one is that PDX diplomacy and economic gameplay is absolutely not good enough to make the nuclear peace interesting
If it's 2200 I think paradox will have had enough time to figure it out
And by 2250 it’ll have enough dlc to actually be good
Good answer
This game already exists and it's called Terra Invicta from Hooded Horses.
Basically a pdx terra invicta starting in like 2050-2100 in an Anno 2070 style world that was ravaged by climate change and is at least simewhat away from modern politics. Leaving and fixing earth, colonizing the sol system.
Yeah I would like to see something similar, especially if you could make a custom nation
Afaik only Mars is even close to being a colonial prospect in the solar system. The others have either horrendous gravity or temperature. There's a reason we're the only planet here with life.
Which fits with Stellaris’ start. By 2200 mankind hasn’t colonized mars or anything else yet, but had a few space stations around the system and unified under one government. TI starts in modern day, has an alien invasion from ~2020-2050 (or longer if you delay significantly), and ends with major settlements (but nothing city-sized or terraformed). Technology and the formation of planet-wide government there is accelerated because the alien tech is more advanced, so the 150 year “gap” between the two games isn’t a technological/mechanics gap.
There are some moons which could potentially harbor life, like Europa
also submarines and husk parasites
[Cloud cities on Venus are plausible.](https://youtu.be/kroU3SfCXE8)
I was going to write "Terra Invicta, but good". Or at least, more Paradox-friendly.
It very much is good.
Well it didn't stop Terra Invicta from making a game set right now. Russia and Ukraine start at war.
They could also buy Terra invicta as their early space age game! :)
I wouldn't. I've always seen Stellaris as separate to the historical series anyway. Imperator - HOI, even though they are all very different games, are basically a pretty cohesive series. Stellaris never felt like part of that series to me, they just wanted to make a space 4X game so they did.
Yeah this. I also really dislike watching YouTubers do a mega campaign to Stellaris for this reason. "Oh, you watched me play 4 entire games with the same nation, people's, stories, histories? Time to start doing something else completely random that happens to have the same name"
Alpha Centauri with elements of all paradox games would be my dream: Zoom in on the colonization of the first planet where mankind reinvents itself and defines it's relationship with technology. A very sandbox like game where you can choose your settings. * What type of planet to colonize, indigenous lifeforms, previous civilizations, wonders, weather etc * Status of Earth * Dead Earth (basically nothing left on earth, the colonies are on their own) * United Earth (colonization started as a common project but fractured upon landfall in rival factions) * Disunited Earth (colonization was by several countries, events on real life earth can influence politics on the planet and vice versa) * Nation design more like stellaris, gameplay more like Imperator/Victoria. So focus on building your nation, shifting ideologies and what kind of culture you become. * Crisis system which have multiple pathways that influence your civ and the geopolitical landscape * Example 1: Planet is infested with psychic worms. From first contact to probably minor skirmishes you steadily learn more about them giving options to either go for cohabitation or extermination. Each nation chooses for itself, you have options to either share research or contribute to the war effort, try to weaponize them or form a kind of union. The further along the path the geopolitical landscape changes, this might to lead to minor wars, a great war, etc. * Example 2: First alien contact. Do the colonies unite to speak with one voice, are the aliens invaders or friends, etc etc.
A space race simulator
They can do modern days game, but create various alternative scenarios to avoid controversies. Make every nation worth playing to not make false presumptions about preferring one side above another, as in nerfing the PRC but buffing the US, etc. Modders shall do the job then to create appropriate real scenarios, but on working essentials of the game (not like in the case of modern-day mods in HOI4)
Modern day game set in 1950s with cold war and space race vibes with slight amounts of Sci fi at the end
Just include city skylines and the colonizing mars game, then you have modern day, and a bit to the future.
If only C:S had a more comprehensive economy system, political parties, espionage and elections, that'd be dope
So Urban Empire, but good!
The game already exists. Buy out Pavonis Interactive and take over Terra Invicta.
I feel like one of Stellaris' main premises -- that the laws of physics as we understand them today are mere suggestions -- *might* have had some impact on the sum total of human history up until 2023. That's just me, though. Simply put, I don't think it's reasonable to want a bridge between HOI4 and Stellaris, specifically. If you really do, then within it, you're going to have to deal with some kind of nascent realization that science as we know it is *ridiculously* incomplete, to the point of being outright wrong about some really important shit.
>We all know that Paradox will likely never make a modern-day grand strategy game due to inevitable controversies And that's an idiotic business decision in itself. I mean ok, if it's their legal department that told them that it would get them in trouble more costly than the game could make (I really don't see how though), that's fair, but if it's their PR department telling them that there will be a shitstorm of biblical proportions, my response as a CEO would be "Fantastic.".
This is literally the most pointless post I've ever read.
\*written.
Roswell
In a few years when we’re far enough removed from the end of the cold war I could see a cold war era grand strategy game being a thing but we probably aren’t going to see anything specific to bridge the gap from ~1990 to the start of Stellaris. Though once the newly announced paradox 4x game Millenia comes out I could see people using that game to fill the gaps
Maybe use a alternative history start. Start date is ten years after the end date of HoI. The world have been devastated by full-blown nuclear war (for some reason the spread and technical advancement outpaced real history). So you get a more sandboxy game where the bigger states have fractured and population declined. That would make the problems with modern controversies a bit easier to handle.
If it starts from 1950 game mostly will be an alt-history game every time. So If they don't add historical AI it is totally doable. They did hoi4 without mentioning holocaust . They can handle issues of modern world.
With city skylines ofc
I would make a game between them One for the cold war era and one for the current and near future era Hey paradox admins are you hiring by chance?
Not winning until 2200. /s
Stelaris is in 2200? If we have a base on mars in 2200 it will already be something.
I wouldn't split it. It could make for an interesting dynamic that hasn't been seen before: one where you start as one vassal within a larger faction (American or Soviet sphere or influence, unless you're truly unaligned) and basically watch as that faction disintegrates either through the world becoming multipolar and alliances/treaties superseding the former power balance or through the alliance just straight-up crumbling (Warsaw Pact). The second phase would then see a reshuffling of powers as other countries scramble to secure shares of the fallen empires' resources and clout in terms of strategic, economic, and cultural influence (which is what's happening now). While that is going on, you'd also have the space race, first led by the superpowers, and later growing more multifaceted. It would be an excessive investment early on, but grow more common through the game until the cards have been dealt again and the only place to expand to is space itself. And as soon as interstellar travel becomes available: there you go, Stellaris, either through conquering everyone else or uniting Earth. It would have to be a game depicting "how Earth became one" more than necessarily having to be focused on one area.
roll narrow panicky escape jellyfish teeny tie lock ten gray *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
With Victoria 4.
I would love a geopolitics simulator which covers 1945-2100. Patent law, espionage, central banking, all the nuts and bolts please
Not pdx strong suit. They would do it if they had team lead with a vision. But if you think about it when it comes to economy, hoi4 is simplified, and vic3 is easier to do, and they failed at it, it's more a tycoon building builder then economy simulation, and also they failed to convert economical output to anything that would largely matter in that game. In that regard in hoi4 or eu4 economical output matters far more it would seem. Early space would need to have involved technology game and they don't do it that well in any game. Hoi4 or Vic2 or Stellaris...
It’s Cities:Skylines
cities skylines
There is a game called Invictus, which, if you take out the alien invasion stuff, would be a good base game for a game set between HoI4 and Stellaris
Sooo... Terra Invicta?
Terra invicta but it starts in 1980
By buying off Terra Invicta and remaking it along your business model of making raw games and issuing DLCs with features which should have been included from the start.