|
StashAugustine posted:It's funny because the turmoil mechanics are perfect for this but they're either not harsh enough or not clearly communicated I think it is the latter. You do get a bunch of radicals from unfulfilled movement demands, and, in theory, turmoil hurts a lot.
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
One thing I can think of to more closely model how gradual (and sometimes haphazard) law implementation is to gradually phase in/out bonuses and penalties when changing certain laws, like for example instead of instantly going from +100 to +50 authority after changing your form of government it'll slide towards that value over a number of years. The speed of the change would be determined by the strength of various interest groups supporting/opposing the law, turmoil, standard of living, etc. etc. You can even have events similar to the law passage process that "roll back" the progress of certain bonuses depending on your choices (like if your current authority from above is at +65 trending downwards and you get an event where you throw a lavish military parade and add +10 "back" to your falling authority). Heck, if you want to get really  then you can further divide the progress of law implementation to the state level to model stuff like rural hicksville states with paltry infrastructure and no government administration being much slower on the uptake on efficiently implementing progressive tax laws than centralized urban areas. And the difference in total implementation would serve as an additional source of turmoil that would need to be dealt with, lest radicalism grows out of control and revolts become more of a danger.Obviously, this wouldn't apply for all law changes, emancipating slaves is pretty much a "you either do it or you don't" kind of thing, but it seems like a neat idea that wouldn't outright upend the current system we have now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 03:48
|
|
|
I could easily see there being an instituiton relating to how well your state can implement its legal framework over its entire territory, and if you want to have all of the "good" laws it should probably get expensive to maintain. Though you'd have to have some kind of "default" local laws defined which might be tricky to figure out. Possibly it could be based on local clout of each IG, since that's something that the game already calculates?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 09:33
|
|
|
I bet they'll expand crime systems eventually. They can make it so that crime is affected by the difference between laws and people values. Like you need a lot of police in states where a lot of rural folk and church enjoyers live when you implement church separation and multiculturalism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 10:41
|
|
|
Games like Vicky already have many players complaining that there's no actual game there. You do want some degree 'if I do A then B' levers players can pull just so they feel like their decisions have meaning. Outlawing slavery but having slavery still be a thing except now all the landowners are mad at you may be realistic, but it's not very engaging on a game design level. I do think some degree of legal federalism may get like 70% of the way there without having to have that squishiness, so you get the full austria-hungarian/american south experience. TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 11:50 on Apr 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 11:47
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I could easily see there being an instituiton relating to how well your state can implement its legal framework over its entire territory, and if you want to have all of the "good" laws it should probably get expensive to maintain. Though you'd have to have some kind of "default" local laws defined which might be tricky to figure out. Possibly it could be based on local clout of each IG, since that's something that the game already calculates? It might work if it was even simpler- some sort of flat bureaucracy cost for "implementing new law" for a period after you enact a radical social change. If you don't pay it, the de facto law doesn't actually change. Have the law screen list your de jure and de facto laws and give you an option to spend bureaucracy to close the gap. TheDeadlyShoe posted:Games like Vicky already have many players complaining that there's no actual game there. You do want some degree 'if I do A then B' levers players can pull just so they feel like their decisions have meaning. Outlawing slavery but having slavery still be a thing except now all the landowners are mad at you may be realistic, but it's not very engaging on a game design level. But generally I think it would be best if this game remembers that it's a game, and not fall too far down the simulationist hole of trying to model too much. Everything's an abstraction, and while in real life everything would be messy gradients, for the sake of legibility this game does and should have distinct discrete states. There may be particular social changes that would be more satisfying if they required a bit more effort, like multiculturalism, but for the most part it's good that all these kinds of messy issues are abstracted through the enactment process, to keep things simple and understandable for the player.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 13:41
|
|
|
Is there a mod or some other way to make the game maintain a certain price range for a good? Say I want to keep coal in my market between -15% and -25% from base price, is it possible to have the game auto-stop other countries from importing my cheap stuff / automatically import if I have a shortage or export if I have surplus as needed to keep it in my selected range? Or do I have to enact isolationism / pay the attention tax of constantly canceling trade routes that siphon my precious coal away?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 14:02
|
|
|
I don't know how you can represent legal success but implementation failure in an engaging way without fundamentally altering the game. For example, to represent kings rolling back constitutions, you could have a system where after passing a law allowing voting, a sufficiently reactionary monarch would automatically start a counter-law proposal to return to autocracy. However, this would require allowing non-player actors to actively participate in the political system , which would be a huge design change. You could make a system within the current design where implementing a law after passing it requires a time or bureaucracy or institution or military cost or whatever, but I don't see how such a system would be interesting to engage with. As a player, you pass a law because you desire its effects, so any kind of additional tax would be included in the cost-benefit analysis of changing changing a law, and subsequently paid without thinking about it - there's no meaningful choice to be had. The example above of outlawing slavery and then deciding not to enforce it - why would a player bother outlawing slavery to begin with? I can't imagine the landowners would be happier with slavery being illegal but unenforced as opposed to slavery being fully legal. I can see it being useful for role-playing purposes, but I can't imagine the devs want to make a system that's only used when intentionally playing poorly. This kind of thing runs directly into the problem of the player as the spirit of the country. The reason reforms failed is (broadly) because the people in charge were forced into making a change that wasn't in their interest, and so they undermined it. In our case, the person in charge is the player, and it is always in their interest to socially and economically progress their nation. BBJoey fucked around with this message at 14:22 on Apr 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 14:19
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Is there a mod or some other way to make the game maintain a certain price range for a good? Say I want to keep coal in my market between -15% and -25% from base price, is it possible to have the game auto-stop other countries from importing my cheap stuff / automatically import if I have a shortage or export if I have surplus as needed to keep it in my selected range? Or do I have to enact isolationism / pay the attention tax of constantly canceling trade routes that siphon my precious coal away? You can't stop other countries from importing your stuff unless you embargo them. You can also adjust tariffs to protect domestic supply which will reduce the amount exported by virtue of making it pricier. That said the thing to remember about trade routes is that they're driven by price. If you just use more coal it becomes more expensive, which reduces the size of any export routes from your country. As such the solution to trade routes taking something valuable is to ignore it and build anyway as the route will automatically adjust itself to a lower max volume to compensate for price
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 14:25
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:You can't stop other countries from importing your stuff unless you embargo them. You can also adjust tariffs to protect domestic supply which will reduce the amount exported by virtue of making it pricier. I understand, but someday I'd like to actually finish the "economic dominance" objectives set which is downright impossible because a few objectives in it wants coal, iron and wood to be all at -20% from base price, which seems to be downright impossible unless you're an isolationist country I guess - by the time you're at that "objective" you're already in full industrialization swing and you'll never, ever see coal, iron and wood prices go below base price anymore because even if you're not using much, other countries will happily buy all your stuff even if it's at +10/+20% from base. Happened in about 3-4 games now, it's kinda pissing me off. e: people online suggest to willingly crash your economy very early on (as soon as you get the objective) by switching to PMs that don't use wood, coal or iron until the journal entry is completed, then resume as normal... this can't be the intended way to do it, surely?!? TorakFade fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Apr 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 14:39
|
|
|
The objectives are just overtuned in general. Especially the final parts. I had a great time with the economic dominance one because I was meeting the GDP requirement the day before the game ended and then it randomly dipped below it just in time for the game to end and deny the achievement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 14:48
|
|
|
My Mexico playthrough had 5% peasants, maxxed out social reforms... and 89.8% literacy. I was so close 
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 14:57
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:I understand, but someday I'd like to actually finish the "economic dominance" objectives set which is downright impossible because a few objectives in it wants coal, iron and wood to be all at -20% from base price, which seems to be downright impossible unless you're an isolationist country I guess - by the time you're at that "objective" you're already in full industrialization swing and you'll never, ever see coal, iron and wood prices go below base price anymore because even if you're not using much, other countries will happily buy all your stuff even if it's at +10/+20% from base. Happened in about 3-4 games now, it's kinda pissing me off. there are a few ways to run into it a bit more naturally at the start of the game, mostly by overbuilding the gently caress out of construction and having to backtrack the resources
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
I didn't have that much trouble getting all the industrial goods to -20% legitimately as rapidly growing Ottomans the one time I actually tried that objective instead of sandbox. Took a few years of spamming all my state construction into industrial goods while agriculture and consumer goods just got left to private construction, and I had to embargo Russia because they wouldn't stop importing all my coal, but Protectionism with tariffs set and a few years of state investment made it pretty easy for me at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 16:32
|
|
|
I do think that giving clout reductions from a law change a period in which they tick down ould be worth while; right now passing a law is usually the toughest part, as reactionary movements are immediately weakned by the law changes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
I like the idea of how the game handles monarchies loyalties dying. Where there's a 5 year tick and after it ends the monarchist supporters get a new spirit that essentially support democracy, but only the versions that give them all the power. Maybe that should just be expanded to more issues but instead of replacing it have it be a counter of reduction of their support. That way immediately after a law change, there's still a lot of support for landowners but after a year things should have quited down and after two the counter is either done for smaller law changes or nearly done for bigger ones. Have this be influenced by positive or negative burecracy so if you have surplus 2 year timer becomes like 18 months, and negative bureaucracy makes it a 30 month timer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 19:30
|
|
|
5 years is a bit short tbh. 20 years to fully expunge the ghost of monarchism would be a better challenge I think.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 20:09
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:5 years is a bit short tbh. 20 years to fully expunge the ghost of monarchism would be a better challenge I think. There's a lot of things in game that happen faster than I'd expect but this is one of the more jarring ones
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 20:36
|
|
|
no one told Napoleon 3 that monarchism had been passe and look what happened
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 20:42
|
|
|
imo they should add a way to influence the traits your commanders (and politicians) have. The Prussians invented tabletop war games (for 'studying') in the 1820s and I think they became pretty widespread by the 1870s, so founding a 'war college' or whatever would be very appropriate
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 22:03
|
|
|
I want to do Full France Simulator and influence my civilian politicians to be broadly republican while influencing my entire officer corps to be broadly monarchist until like 1950.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2023 22:05
|
|
|
I've just come out of a fairly draining civil war, and now loads of my buildings aren't making any money. My steel is worth nothing, my arms are worth nothing; ships, munition centres, urban centers are all worth nothing. In addition, loads of my other industries are barely making any money at all. Other countries are buying all of my cheap stuff, and I don't know what to do or what's going on.  Is it something to do with my landholders being marginalised now? The civil war was because I moved from traditionalism to interventionism. Edit: If I switch to irregular infantry then again to line infantry, the tooltip says that the cost of arms should increase by around 115, but instead it stays at 15. Chatrapati fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Apr 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2023 00:22
|
|
|
If you relied heavily on imports or exports, those trade routes probably got either canceled or lowered in size due to the civil war, so you might have to set those back up. Also make sure to check that the AI didn't change your production methods to use steel and the like. Other than that, yeah, your arms, munitions, and to a lesser extent shipyard industries will absolutely overproduce in peacetime if they were built for wartime production. You may need to export those if those jobs are important to you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2023 00:28
|
|
|
I pretty much always subsidize my arms, munitions, and shipyards industries. Have to make sure I have stable production in case of conflict. And can always export.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2023 00:31
|
|
|
I forgot about exporting. Well, I haven't fixed the problem, but now I'm making more money than I ever did before by selling my incredibly cheap steel and guns. Still seems really weird! Edit: A-ha. I may have figured part of it out. For whatever reason, my entire army disappeared after the war. Now all my barracks are recruiting from scratch. Chatrapati fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Apr 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2023 00:36
|
|
|
people die when they are killed op
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2023 02:28
|
|
|
Upgrade your urban centers to use more steel and glass. Build more construction sectors to increase demand for steel and glass too (if you have steel-frame buildings) Also yeah, your army is reduced after the draining civil war because... they died.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2023 03:41
|
|
|
Oh man. People kill each other? If I had known about this I would never have given them guns.
Chatrapati fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Apr 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
Discrimination is handled a bit weird, in that the only model for discrimination outside the legal framework is a few events where some IGs get their panties in a bunch of you don't say mean things about foreigners takin' our jobs, which are pretty easy to ignore. Since the Civil War is a big focus of the game, it's odd that Reconstruction and Jim Crow don't really work under that model.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
Capfalcon posted:Discrimination is handled a bit weird, in that the only model for discrimination outside the legal framework is a few events where some IGs get their panties in a bunch of you don't say mean things about foreigners takin' our jobs, which are pretty easy to ignore. Since the Civil War is a big focus of the game, it's odd that Reconstruction and Jim Crow don't really work under that model. Would the solution to be to make laws more like institutions? For example, passing a law like "Women's Suffrage" could grant 5% workforce ratio and 11% Dependent enfranchisement out of the gate, and then build over time to the law's current 15%/33% bonuses. Multiculturalism could have similar scaling, with events to spend money/authority/bureaucracy or delay the full adoption of the law while it scales up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
DJ_Mindboggler posted:Would the solution to be to make laws more like institutions? For example, passing a law like "Women's Suffrage" could grant 5% workforce ratio and 11% Dependent enfranchisement out of the gate, and then build over time to the law's current 15%/33% bonuses. Multiculturalism could have similar scaling, with events to spend money/authority/bureaucracy or delay the full adoption of the law while it scales up. Which reminds me, I meant to respond to: BBJoey posted:I don't know how you can represent legal success but implementation failure in an engaging way without fundamentally altering the game. For example, to represent kings rolling back constitutions, you could have a system where after passing a law allowing voting, a sufficiently reactionary monarch would automatically start a counter-law proposal to return to autocracy. However, this would require allowing non-player actors to actively participate in the political system , which would be a huge design change. You could make a system within the current design where implementing a law after passing it requires a time or bureaucracy or institution or military cost or whatever, but I don't see how such a system would be interesting to engage with. As a player, you pass a law because you desire its effects, so any kind of additional tax would be included in the cost-benefit analysis of changing changing a law, and subsequently paid without thinking about it - there's no meaningful choice to be had. In other words you'd do it for exact the same reasons as in history. I think it would add something to the gameplay if you could half-rear end a reform, and on the other hand, if it required some effort to follow up with a reform in practice. I still think a temporary bureaucracy hit would be a fine way to do it. When you pass a law it automatically costs some bureaucracy for a certain time to fully enact it. You should have the option to pull funding for that, with an accompanying opinion bonus from the groups that hate the new law. Or else cram all the bureaucracy in there to really push through something you need right away. Honestly, I think the whole idea would only be marginally useful for either a gameplay or an RP perspective, and I can understand if they wouldn't want to bother while they focus on bigger issues, but I think it could work as an interesting and meaningful gameplay choice for players.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 00:02
|
|
|
I think even if gradually phasing in a new law's effect isn't tenable or desirable, the idea of allowing states to have their own individual implementation of laws outside of your direct control and contingent on the demography of the state itself can lead to some interesting and challenging decision-making. Obviously the most obvious beneficiary for such a change would be the heavily federal US system of government it's not like implementation of laws within localities wasn't an issue to deal with everywhere. More broadly, I think one thing that rubs people the wrong way about this game is that while it does a bang-up job modelling the changes and effects of politics and political movements of the time period, it does a comparitively poor job modelling the changes and effects of government, which is a problem cause politics and government kind of go hand-in-hand.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 00:28
|
|
|
While it would be a dramatic change, you could have a secondary set of "customs" that are about the clout of IGs and their own modifiers. Example: Sure, you can reform serfdom somehow, but if landowners still have 45% clout... Well, things might *discourage* these perfectly free citizens from changing jobs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 02:18
|
|
|
I think the process of passing a law is also supposed to represent the process of implementing it. But that's a little too streamlined. Maybe the upcoming 1.3 change where laws go through stages will go some way towards making it feel more like a process, instead of a die-roll followed by the president using a comically oversized pair of scissors to cut a big ribbon and now discrimination is over forever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 02:36
|
|
|
Does anyone know exactly how overseas market connections work? I've conquered some territory but I can't make a market connection even though there's an active port in the state. The tooltip says that the number of port levels required "depends on local infrastructure usage" but doesn't actually tell you what this means in practice. I can't set the port to use any PM other than the baseline one, because the state doesn't have market access to make use of my shipyards, and I have extremely low construction efficiency there so I'd rather not have to build a ton of ports if there's some other war around the issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 09:54
|
|
|
Can't you upgrade the PM anyway, even without the ships? It will just cost 4x more for the transports until market access is back to normal, but that's fine. edit: can you also give the state a road maintenance decree?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 10:48
|
|
|
megane posted:Maybe the upcoming 1.3 change where laws go through stages will go some way towards making it feel more like a process, instead of a die-roll followed by the president using a comically oversized pair of scissors to cut a big ribbon and now discrimination is over forever. "We did it, guys! We voted in Obama!!" ____/ 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 14:21
|
|
|
the reactionary wave to him should be called "obamna"
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 14:39
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Does anyone know exactly how overseas market connections work? I've conquered some territory but I can't make a market connection even though there's an active port in the state. The tooltip says that the number of port levels required "depends on local infrastructure usage" but doesn't actually tell you what this means in practice. I can't set the port to use any PM other than the baseline one, because the state doesn't have market access to make use of my shipyards, and I have extremely low construction efficiency there so I'd rather not have to build a ton of ports if there's some other war around the issue. So, there's regular market access, which is literally just the ratio of infrastructure available to infrastructure required, and the "isolated state" status. The latter just means that the state has no land connection to the capital or a state with a port, though, so if you have a port there that is not the problem you have. (e: I am now doubting myself on this. I've never seen it require more than one port...) There's really only three ways to solve an infrastructure deficit: the Road Maintenance decree, like Dr Video Games said, building ports or railroads, and researching one of the techs that increases the free infrastructure you get from population. Though the last is not a practical solution in 99.9% of cases- I mention it for completeness' sake only. So Road Maintenance should do it, if the deficit is less than the bonus the decree provides (+1 point for every 100k people in the state, up to a maximum of... 20, probably? It's complicated but I think the way the math works out it's 20). If it's not, you gotta build ports and rail, that's your only option. And, frankly, you don't want to be solving this with Road Maintenance, that is auth you could be using to do a bunch of other useful poo poo. So it's build, build, build, baby. BUT! Important note! The basic port production method provides no infrastructure. So long as it's stuck on Anchorage that port is doing nothing for you here. On Cargo Port it's 5 per. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 15:25 on Apr 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 15:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
KOGAHAZAN!! posted:The latter just means that the state has no land connection to the capital or a state with a port, though, so if you have a port there that is not the problem you have. (e: I am now doubting myself on this. I've never seen it require more than one port...) This is exactly what I thought until this most recent issue, it might be because the state also has a huge infrastructure problem but the regular "just have one port" doesn't seem to be working for whatever reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2023 15:28
|
|