|
RabidWeasel posted:Yeah, this would be a good change if your system doesn't have aristos and capitalists Not even that. The point of absolute monarchies was to depower the petty lords(aristocrats/landowners), but in turn this empowered the people who now had to do the in theory all powerful monarchs will, the bureaucrats. Or china and it's numerous puppet emperors controlled by the bureaucracy. It's a pretty common theme when a ruler becomes more centralized/absolute, that the bureaucracy flourishes because as they disempower the gentry they have to have SOMEONE govern in their stead.
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2023 12:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
WhitemageofDOOM posted:Not even that. The point of absolute monarchies was to depower the petty lords(aristocrats/landowners), but in turn this empowered the people who now had to do the in theory all powerful monarchs will, the bureaucrats. This reminds me of the CGP Grey video about the rules for rulers, which explains why even being a dictator doesn't mean you have absolute power: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2023 13:07
|
|
|
i genuinely wonder what kind of theoretical assumptions the devs are working from. economically speaking, they were clearly inspired by Marx, Riccardo and Smith, but politically Vicky 3 is much more muddled. if they haven't already, reading Weber's more political works might give them some good ideas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2023 13:18
|
|
|
oscarthewilde posted:if they haven't already, reading Weber's more political works might give them some good ideas. Pity they already did a legitimacy rework. Weber basically wrote this part for them describing three types of bonuses depending on the government.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2023 14:00
|
|
|
I wonder how these economic modes will affect qualifications/education.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2023 17:06
|
|
|
There's something I have to be missing with the Ottomans. I started up a game, started Corn Laws, chose a new leader, and then the new leader died within a few months. This happened a few times in a row after a reload from the beginning because gently caress that bullshit. The leader was seriously in power for about 2/3 of the time it took to enact laissez-faire, and then retired because reasons. Is there some sort of hidden event or bullshit happening?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2023 05:43
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:There's something I have to be missing with the Ottomans. I started up a game, started Corn Laws, chose a new leader, and then the new leader died within a few months. This happened a few times in a row after a reload from the beginning because gently caress that bullshit. The leader was seriously in power for about 2/3 of the time it took to enact laissez-faire, and then retired because reasons. Is there some sort of hidden event or bullshit happening? Seed is set at game creation. Start an entirely new game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2023 09:56
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Make France a substate of England Au contraire, Pierre. Make Angleterre a substate of Normandy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2023 21:04
|
|
|
Victoire Trois
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2023 21:38
|
|
|
Put 25 years into an Ottomans campaign after seeing the AI get bullied every single time and thinking that I could do better. Man, do they ever start in a rough position. The good news is that you start with a ton of mineable resources to serve as the backbone of your economy. The bad news is everything else. You start with a bunch of scripted penalties and a 20-year timer to fix your country or else more negative events will fire (I assume). The bonuses you get from successfully completing the "Sick Man of Europe" journal entries are okay, but nothing that will majorly boost your nation's economy or political stability. You also start with not much research and a shocking lack of buildings (your economy is almost entirely subsistence). Okay, I lied, there is one other piece of good news: France and GB loving love you for some reason and will come to your aid in any war as long as you lightly butter them up. I used an obligation to call France into a war with Egypt, and France used that obligation to pull me into their market, which is win-win in my book. Being in the French market allowed me to scale up my construction much more quickly without having to worry about balancing my economy. I was also able to instantly turn on all of the advanced PMs in my factories, and I started making a lot more money. Eventually I completed Sick Man of Europe by doing the ubanization (easy), bureaucratic reform (trickier), supress separatism (easy again, separatism was never even a slight issue), and army modernization (thanks France for the free guns and ammo). Completing the literacy mission seems doable, but it costs a lot of bureaucracy in a time when that resource is awfully precious. And the levantine reconquest mission seems really tough to pull off simply due to Egypt's tendency to back down once you become strong enough. This limited me to one province per five-year-truce after the first war. Paradox is gonna have to add an option to force a war if they want this mission to be more doable (just make forcing a war cost extra infamy or something). After that, I pretty quickly took Persia as a puppet, sniped more provinces off of Egypt, and I took the balkan claims option in the Sick Man of Europe success event, so I guess Greece is next. I also backed out of the French market once I felt like my economy was good enough to stand on its own, but I probably should've waited longer. Pro tip when declaring war on Egypt: Do not make the primary war goal Adana. Doing so will make it so none of your European friends can help you since the war goal ends up in the turkey region and not the middle east. I did that my first time and had to reload. edit: Oh, also a really confusing thing: for some bizarre reason, your border with Russia counts as a single front even though it's split by the black sea. I know the front system can be weird at times, but Caucasus and Bessarabia counting as a single front really takes the cake. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 11:46 on Jan 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2023 11:38
|
|
|
Holy poo poo is laissez faire loving crippling me this game. I have no rubber or sulphur so my economy is completely imploding despite having the number 1 sulphur mine in the game. But the wages are $4 to low so gently caress my entire economy I guess. Is there anyway to deal with wages at a factory being too low without subsidizing it? During my last war the ammunition factory wasn’t paying well enough so I had critical shortages and I just had to end the war since I have no way to make the factory actually employ any one. Is there a reason to switch away from interventionism? E: I’m now having a rubber shortage, because what was once the 9 most productive rubber plantation just fired all its employees and have shut down. I also got lucky and found a sulphur import route because both my mines (I put one in a state full of peasants to see if it would go) have just completely shut down now Demon_Corsair fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Jan 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2023 03:19
|
|
|
increase the cost of the good and the factory will be able to pay higher wages. or depress the local economy so the workers will not have higher paid jobs to jump to
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2023 10:01
|
|
|
Demon_Corsair posted:Holy poo poo is laissez faire loving crippling me this game. I have no rubber or sulphur so my economy is completely imploding despite having the number 1 sulphur mine in the game. But the wages are $4 to low so gently caress my entire economy I guess. If you've been relying on subsidies to the point where going off subsidies cripples your entire economy, your economy was deeply unhealthy to begin with and the subsidies were only allowing you to band-aid over them. Factories currently mostly try to seek full employment anyways, and if they can't it's because they're fundamentally unprofitable and will naturally cut back wages and employment until they can turn a steady profit. Most industries should be able to stand by themselves without needing subsidies (unless you've got a lot of welfare laws but if you do why are you going LF), with the minor exception of the arms industry which tends to suffer from demand being low in peacetime (for obvious reasons) while conversely having low supply in wartime. Even then it's possible to offset the issue by exporting arms to other countries to encourage demand, preferably in fact shipping arms to your enemies so that come wartime they lose your supply and you still have workers ready to adjust to wartime demands (though even then demand is usually still fairly low). That being said, in general maintaining profitability and indirectly raising wages is all about adjusting supply and demand. Either increase the supply of the input goods to the factory so that they're cheaper and allows the factory more profit to invest in wages, or increase demand so that the output good sells for more and gives the factories more funds to invest in wages. As for why to switch to LF, the answer is simple: LF is by a good margin the most effective system for increasing your investment pool, allowing you to fund greater construction which effectively means more economic growth which in turn increases your investment pool further and so on. A well-run LF economy can get stupid big, stupid quickly, and is easily the best system for making GDP go up. Funnily enough because of the way the game currently works that also means it's a good system for improving the welfare of your pops too, because a healthy economy means lots of well-paying jobs around - trickle-down works in Victoria 3. But yeah if you're not building enough to constantly drain out your investment pool, you need to build more, as a general rule of thumb. Of course eventually as you keep growing you'll run into input good supply shortages, at which point you need to choose between setting up import routes or doing an imperialism to secure resources, and odds are eventually you'll run out of exporters who can supply you which leaves you with, well...
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2023 15:49
|
|
|
Is there any way to lower infamy faster? Have a successful Romania game going but the border-clean up post scramble rocketed me to pariah and I need some more sulphur
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
Yuiiut posted:Is there any way to lower infamy faster? Have a successful Romania game going but the border-clean up post scramble rocketed me to pariah and I need some more sulphur Lots of surplus diplo capacity, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
Yeah, surplus diplomatic influence increases the rate your infamy decays, up to 25% I think.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
Yuiiut posted:Is there any way to lower infamy faster? Have a successful Romania game going but the border-clean up post scramble rocketed me to pariah and I need some more sulphur
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:I downloaded a mod to increase base decay from 5 to 7 because infamy values are hosed. Its 15 infamy to take Mauritius and Mahe from England. Two poo poo islands in the Indian ocean that have like 15k people between them. Oh, England colonized a little nub of Equatoria before you finished it off and you want that last little bit? 10 infamy to take it from them. It feels like all the infamy values are assuming incorporated states and there should probably be a discount for taking someone's colonies. It'd be nice to be able to feed territory to subjects too, to make it possible to say puppet a minor on Borneo and then give them the rest of the island.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2023 23:10
|
|
|
ro5s posted:It feels like all the infamy values are assuming incorporated states and there should probably be a discount for taking someone's colonies. It'd be nice to be able to feed territory to subjects too, to make it possible to say puppet a minor on Borneo and then give them the rest of the island. An ability to return homelands to subjects for cheaper would be nice - I puppeted Algeria and forcing the Tunisians to hand back the coast for lower infamy would make a lot more sense than conquering it outright
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2023 23:18
|
|
|
Yuiiut posted:Is there any way to lower infamy faster? Have a successful Romania game going but the border-clean up post scramble rocketed me to pariah and I need some more sulphur If you're already at pariah, then just keep going. There's no penalty for infamy beyond 100, internal or external, so go hog wild and conquer whatever the hell you want at that point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2023 09:21
|
|
|
Demon_Corsair posted:Holy poo poo is laissez faire loving crippling me this game. I have no rubber or sulphur so my economy is completely imploding despite having the number 1 sulphur mine in the game. But the wages are $4 to low so gently caress my entire economy I guess. LF is mainly for using the investment pool bonus to build up your economy in the early game. If you don't need that, go with interventionism. And what other people said. It sounds like there are other buildings in that state that are driving up average wages. It might sound counterintuitive, but you should expand those buildings to make them less profitable. High profit margins aren't always a good thing! A good rule of thumb is that if the productivity number is green, it's time to expand.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2023 17:30
|
|
|
LF is incredibly good right up until you get oil or some other vital industrial bottleneck. Build lots of ports and make a shitload of trade routes. But once you hit oil, everyone will steal it right out of your hands. Interventionism helps a little with that and at least your budget will get padded a bit. Edit: vvv I sure did. Ignore me completely! Zeron fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Feb 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2023 17:37
|
|
|
Zeron posted:LF is incredibly good right up until you get oil or some other vital industrial bottleneck. Build lots of ports and make a shitload of trade routes. But once you hit oil, everyone will steal it right out of your hands. Interventionism helps a little with that and at least your budget will get padded a bit. Do you mean Free Trade vs Protectionism?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2023 17:54
|
|
|
I really dislike free trade and mercantalism in general. Nothing feels worse than, after wondering why it seems like you can never catch up on iron demand, you look at the trade tab and see that you're trading away over half of the iron you're producing. But not even protectionism is enough to stop this a lot of the time. I've had campaigns where I've seriously considered going isolationist just to get all the leeches to stop sucking my country's resources dry. They're mine to use, not yours, dammit!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 03:23
|
|
|
Does the AI set up exports autonomously? I notice that they will gladly import from me, but will never export to me, even when the price of a good in my market is maxed out (and I'm frequently playing China, so it's not like most anyone's exports are going to make a dent in demand - pretty much everything they send will be at maximum profit). Also the whole Corn Laws and the events surrounding them really should be reimagined a bit. People whine and complain about how my country's policy of exporting grain is hurting their ability to eat when not only am I not exporting any grain, but grain prices are actually quite cheap. It's also really funny to me that I can't swap to agrarianism without a technology, but just doing the Corn Laws events for a little while until the aristos have a Market Liberal installed means that I can swap to Laissez-faire with no tech prerequisites (just have to abolish serfdom first). It trivializes that economic reform part of the early game since it makes the aristocrats happy enough to swallow the loss of serfdom and one or two other laws.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 03:44
|
|
|
They do export goods to you sometimes, but very very rarely compared to importing. In my last game the Netherlands were exporting liquor to me during a period when the price was high. They're more than happy to import so much furniture and clothing that their own industries can't operate at a profit though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 12:48
|
|
|
Free trade could potentially be really good if the AI developed its economy well and has free trade itself, allowing multiple economies to benefit from trading back and forth between each other. It doesn't work so well when the player has the only sane economy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 12:55
|
|
|
Free Trade is actually really good, because if your economy is the best, then when you go to war you completely gently caress up other nations economies in an extremely profitable fashion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 12:56
|
|
|
Free trade is absolutely amazing if you are industrial hedgemon, I will gladly enact it as manifest destiny US or industrialized Qing. It's an economic death sentence otherwise. You know, like real life. Nothing more hillarious than being the worlds sole industrial power because everyone else's economy crashed thanks to the amount of poo poo you shipped them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 14:29
|
|
|
Looks like the next big patch has an open beta starting next Wednesday I'm a little concerned that I don't see anything to make running thousands of construction points less of a chore, or to make outnumbering your enemy on a front cause you to outnumber them in the actual battles, those are probably the biggest issues for me as a player. Gort fucked around with this message at 16:24 on Feb 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 16:16
|
|
|
Gort posted:Looks like the next big patch has an open beta starting next Wednesday Isn't that part of autonomous construction? I think depending on your laws for the investment pool, a proportion of your construction points are taken and used autonomously instead of what you put into the queue. So you'll still be building stuff but not having to manually manage thousands of construction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:I really dislike free trade and mercantalism in general. Nothing feels worse than, after wondering why it seems like you can never catch up on iron demand, you look at the trade tab and see that you're trading away over half of the iron you're producing. But not even protectionism is enough to stop this a lot of the time. I've had campaigns where I've seriously considered going isolationist just to get all the leeches to stop sucking my country's resources dry. They're mine to use, not yours, dammit! FYI the size of the trade route is determined by the price of the goods, so if you expand your industry to use more iron the route will shrink and the price won't go up. Sometimes the tooltip lies and says there will be a shortage but the only way I've ever had trade cause a goods shortage is having 15 different minor countries each importing guns.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 17:44
|
|
|
ro5s posted:Isn't that part of autonomous construction? I think depending on your laws for the investment pool, a proportion of your construction points are taken and used autonomously instead of what you put into the queue. So you'll still be building stuff but not having to manually manage thousands of construction. It kinda gestures at the problem, yeah, but I don't really consider it a full on tackling of the problem. So right now let's say you have 5000 construction points. Each building can take 20 points, so you're juggling 250 concurrently-building buildings, spread over five pages of the construction interface. This is pretty horrible to manage. In the next patch, let's say 2500 of those construction points are now being managed by an AI. That helps a bit, but the interface is still going to be a huge mess, unsuited to this much construction, and that's assuming the AI causes zero extra problems of it's own. If they are working on making this better, it'd be good to hear about it - I consider it one of the biggest problems the game has right now. Getting to a huge construction score and getting burned out managing it is how 100% of my games have ended so far.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
Gort posted:Looks like the next big patch has an open beta starting next Wednesday Running construction points should be at least alleviated by autonomous construction and we're also looking at other changes over the course of the beta, as for the latter that is a change that's been made for 1.2 already (you won't always outnumber them but you're likely to).
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 18:07
|
|
|
Honestly it's not too bad if you let go of wanting to micromanage too hard. My last game I just let the game go on and occasionally looked at my prices and dumped a few hundred buildings of whatever was needed and it was barely much trouble at all. Once you get to the point of 5000 construction points you aren't going to be easily destroying your economy by messing up your queue. Also at that point you've already won the game by far anyway so..
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Running construction points should be at least alleviated by autonomous construction and we're also looking at other changes over the course of the beta, as for the latter that is a change that's been made for 1.2 already (you won't always outnumber them but you're likely to). Good to hear. I'm looking forward to Wednesday a lot more now!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 18:22
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:FYI the size of the trade route is determined by the price of the goods, so if you expand your industry to use more iron the route will shrink and the price won't go up. Sometimes the tooltip lies and says there will be a shortage but the only way I've ever had trade cause a goods shortage is having 15 different minor countries each importing guns. to an extent, yes, but trade routes will still often run up the price to +35%. I've seen it go as high as +60% from trade routes. this is not ideal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 18:24
|
|
|
Yeah the size of trade routes is based on the relative price between the two markets so if the importing market has no domestic production of its own and keeps ramping up demand, even if it starts to get really expensive in the exporting market it'll still keep growing because the price is pretty much maxed out in the importer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:to an extent, yes, but trade routes will still often run up the price to +35%. I've seen it go as high as +60% from trade routes. this is not ideal. I mean outside of the one tutorial mission that wants you to reduce goods prices, I don't know that having expensive goods is bad. If iron is +60% it means iron mines are more productive and steel mills are less productive, but does that actually matter if it doesn't make the steel mills fire workers? I guess with consumer goods it raises your living standard; but I don't think it makes a big difference compared to giving the pops more money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
that's when you start bullying them with diplomatic plays go ahead, collapse your economy to keep a colony you haven't even built anything in, I dare you
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2023 21:10
|
|