|
Yeah it's particularly tricky as Chile because your gold mines, iron mines, and core population base (and so your best place to put construction sectors in) are all in one state. Barely any other place to put your tool, steel, and engine factories too until you start conquering Argentina and wait out the conquest penalties on top.
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 15:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 12:35 |
|
|
It's not that complex, really the biggest difference is you want to pay more attention to the predicted earnings when putting down new buildings as they now vary a lot from state to state, but you do need to take resource availability into account when initially building up individual industries. Later on you'll be exploiting all your resources and building everywhere anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 16:00
|
|
|
Any major bugs in the patch or is it safe to jump in? Trying to decide if I want to start with Brazil, Paraguay, or some other LatAm country
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 17:06
|
|
|
There's a bug where if you have allies or subjects they can make it impossible for you to successfully advance a front because they keep initiating attacks with just their troops, failing, and causing you to lose progress. That's the worst one I can think of.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 17:48
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Any major bugs in the patch or is it safe to jump in? Trying to decide if I want to start with Brazil, Paraguay, or some other LatAm country Seems fine. Apparently performance got even worse though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 18:21
|
|
|
It's a bit crashy, but almost everything under the hood seems to be working as intended. Only game logic flaw I've seen is that in certain split state setups fronts can occur that can't be pathed to by some armies (specifically, saw it in an early US-Sioux war where armies from the New England HQ could be assigned but Dixie couldn't.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
The patch is good! I haven't run into any bugs and 90% of my issues with the game have been addressed. I'm into the 1860s in a really fun Peru-Bolivia game. I tried that start a few times a while back, and was frustrated by it. Either the game has become more intuitive or I'm getting used to what you need to be worried about, but it went a lot better. In fact this is the first time I've played a "small" country successfully without joining a major power's customs union. In fact this is one of the healthiest economies I've made so far. (The massive pile of gold mines may be helping.) I highly recommend this patch. It's a huge improvement. The new military system takes a little to get used to, but it's great. It's still hands off (which is great), but it gives you a bit more feedback and control about what's going on, and there are fewer unintuitive quirks you need to wrestle with. I did still get my whole army moving to the tiny southern front rather than the massive northern one when I cut Argentina in two, which required a worrying amount of time to fix, but that was a won war anyway, and I could have prevented it with a strategic objective I think. Once they add the ability to build up resources in your subjects, the game will be perfect.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 18:34
|
|
|
Gort posted:Seems fine. Apparently performance got even worse though. This is really surprising, cause previously the game slowed down to a crawl for me. And CPUs nowadays don' differ in terms of performance that much, so I can't imagine the endgame working well anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 18:45
|
|
|
Love to declare war on Britain to open their market to get rid of my slavery for free
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 18:51
|
|
|
To work on a less snarky reply, I played several middle powers in 1.5 to see what's been updated. The complaint about having to click a lot isn't really the issue, though building strategically useful industries, adding trade routes, and managing production methods all have considerable busy work involved. I do like how the private construction is implemented in a way that is both helpful and tied into other mechanics. But I think the most innovative parts of V3 are the economy and politics, so I'll focus on those. I like the market economy a whole lot better than what Vicky 2 had, because it is well thought-out and abandoned a lot of baggage - I sure don't miss having to stockpile stuff or desperately search for machine parts. The issue here is the lack of interesting decisions. It's cool that I can see what affects prices so well but no matter what I am going to try to get a lot of iron and coal. It also feels like progress is measured by construction capacity, which is dull and does not seem to make historical sense. I like that politics are based around a faction system and I appreciate that political mechanics have gone through several changes since 1.0. Even so I don't think this part is anywhere close to good. I have over 100 hours in game but I still struggle to understand the repercussions of my political moves. I can tell that having a faction at -10 or less makes them insurrectionary but I have often provoked revolutions by underestimating the movement to preserve the current law. Quite a few times I have accepted a popular movement to change the law but had to immediately backpedal, causing the popular movement to get furious and sometimes leading to guaranteed civil war. It would be nice if there were some middle ground before two-thirds of my country secedes and fucks up all my production methods. Moreover differentiation between different government types is entirely superficial. Some countries have elections but they do not matter. Even the Xianfeng emperor has to win debates in the public square or his proposed legislation won't pass. Factions care about laws but as far as I can tell they don't care about diplomacy, war, or anything else I can do. Political parties are in the game but I have no idea what they affect. If Vicky 3 is to become a really good game like HOI4, CK2/3, and EU4 it is going to need a huge redesign and it seems unlikely we will get it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 20:03
|
|
|
Parties fundamentally do two things: - If you have an American or British-style split system, you can fiddle a bit of extra temporary legitimacy/clout for the "other side" to get one thing you want out of them and then return to business as usual. - In exchange, you can't shift just the one IG that offers it into government, you need to take the whole package. It would be an interesting setup in some other game, but here it's just safely ignorable since there's neither a forced reshuffle at elections nor a bar on reshuffles between elections, nor is there any veto or decree power. V3 "government" isn't clearly either a cabinet or a legislature, and it's held back by having to uphold the situations where either is irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 20:22
|
|
|
I think my biggest pain points with V3 were countries lacking flavor and playstyles largely being the same. The other issue was mostly around regional/minor powers having not that much time do other than waiting for buildings to be erected. Kinda wish there were something like HOI4 focus trees to drip-feed narrative/gameplay changes and help create a story. It doesn’t have to be focus trees per se, but they did a great job of giving you something to focus on during peacetime. I figure 1.5 and the new DLC doesn’t really work on that? My impression is that the patch improved warfare but even in my most hawkish playthroughs I wasn’t at war super often. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 20:22
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:I like the market economy a whole lot better than what Vicky 2 had, because it is well thought-out and abandoned a lot of baggage - I sure don't miss having to stockpile stuff or desperately search for machine parts. The issue here is the lack of interesting decisions. It's cool that I can see what affects prices so well but no matter what I am going to try to get a lot of iron and coal. It also feels like progress is measured by construction capacity, which is dull and does not seem to make historical sense. You can run a modest agricultural economy, but if the game never lets an agricultural economy compete with an industrialized power... isn't that just historical? What interesting decisions do you think are lacking? I'm interested in could-have-been a-historical alternatives, and I think in the political sphere those are well supported with anarchist states and such. But I don't get the complaint that you have to get a ton of coal and iron every game. That's just the 19th century economic reality. quote:I like that politics are based around a faction system and I appreciate that political mechanics have gone through several changes since 1.0. Even so I don't think this part is anywhere close to good. I have over 100 hours in game but I still struggle to understand the repercussions of my political moves. I can tell that having a faction at -10 or less makes them insurrectionary but I have often provoked revolutions by underestimating the movement to preserve the current law. Quite a few times I have accepted a popular movement to change the law but had to immediately backpedal, causing the popular movement to get furious and sometimes leading to guaranteed civil war. It would be nice if there were some middle ground before two-thirds of my country secedes and fucks up all my production methods. If you have a bunch of loyalists and not a bunch of radicals, you'll just never be in that position, even when two powerful factions have fundamentally opposite desires. The thing is, no one playing this like a videogame will ever take the path that ensures you have more loyalists than radicals. You need to take things very slow, never over-tax, don't force through big government changes, don't zealously chase out the landowners, essentially sacrifice industrial progress and political for the sake of keeping people comfortable. Or you can play a small country with a dozen gold mines. That's how I discovered how mollifying low taxes the whole game can be on political discord. quote:Moreover differentiation between different government types is entirely superficial. Some countries have elections but they do not matter. Even the Xianfeng emperor has to win debates in the public square or his proposed legislation won't pass. I wish elections were more reactive and dynamic, but they are really meaningful. An absolute emperor needs a power base supporting them, and a democratic ruler needs an election. If you, the player, want to do something that your ruler would not want to do, it's pretty hard to do! I feel like that's the simulation aspect working pretty well. quote:Factions care about laws but as far as I can tell they don't care about diplomacy, war, or anything else I can do. Political parties are in the game but I have no idea what they affect. Political parties are basically a way of representing how inconvenient democracy can be. You want the intelligentsia in power, but not the industrialists? Too bad, they're both in the liberal party. Can't have one without the other. Why? Will of the people, deal with it. It adds flavor and is plausible given how party factionalism worked, at least in the US in this era. buglord posted:I think my biggest pain points with V3 were countries lacking flavor and playstyles largely being the same. The other issue was mostly around regional/minor powers having not that much time do other than waiting for buildings to be erected. Kinda wish there were something like HOI4 focus trees to drip-feed narrative/gameplay changes and help create a story. It doesn’t have to be focus trees per se, but they did a great job of giving you something to focus on during peacetime. I do think as a small country you're going to want to just hit speed 5 and let things progress. Things are in a good place balance-wise, but that doesn't mean you'll be managing a dozen things every day as Chile. I feel like improving performance so you can run through everything faster is going to be the thing that makes playing small countries more compelling. You've got meaningful economic and political levers to play with, no matter how small you are, but you're unavoidably going to have less to do if you're working with fewer resources.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
I think that they could just make those "part of your government wants you to pass a law" events more common and generalise them to a whole load of other stuff like - this IG is isolationist so they want you to cancel all your trade routes with X, or the military thinks that small state on our borders should really get conquered, or the intelligensia want you to break your alliance with Russia because they still have serfdom and absolutism and it would add a lot to the game. The political system is fun but there definitely need to be reasons to make geopolitical decisions which aren't completely logical. Or you can just ignore it and have an IG hate you for a while, which might lead to a civil war, which is its own kind of fun.Eiba posted:If you have a bunch of loyalists and not a bunch of radicals, you'll just never be in that position, even when two powerful factions have fundamentally opposite desires. You actually can go really quite hard on taxation and reforming and still be beloved, but the number one thing is keeping the economy running well. And having lots of loyalists makes IGs love you which can make it much easier to pass contentious laws in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 20:41
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:I like that politics are based around a faction system and I appreciate that political mechanics have gone through several changes since 1.0. Even so I don't think this part is anywhere close to good. I have over 100 hours in game but I still struggle to understand the repercussions of my political moves. I can tell that having a faction at -10 or less makes them insurrectionary but I have often provoked revolutions by underestimating the movement to preserve the current law. Quite a few times I have accepted a popular movement to change the law but had to immediately backpedal, causing the popular movement to get furious and sometimes leading to guaranteed civil war. It would be nice if there were some middle ground before two-thirds of my country secedes and fucks up all my production methods. Moreover differentiation between different government types is entirely superficial. Some countries have elections but they do not matter. Even the Xianfeng emperor has to win debates in the public square or his proposed legislation won't pass. Factions care about laws but as far as I can tell they don't care about diplomacy, war, or anything else I can do. Political parties are in the game but I have no idea what they affect. The big thing here is that IG approval ratings aren't just affected by laws, events and budget settings. They're also influenced by how many loyalists and radicals are supporting that interest group. That's why revolutions can sometimes seem to pop out of nowhere. If you propose a law that brings an IG down to -8 or -9, they won't immediately radicalize...but then maybe you go and downsize a few buildings, or some trade routes go inactive and choke your market, or your market leader brings a new country into the CU, and this temporary economic shakeup creates enough radicals to take a couple points off that IG's approval and turn them radical. And since angry IGs both withdraw from the government if they were in it (disrupting your legitimacy) and add their clout to the radicalism level of the political movement (which is also influenced by pop radicalism, so you're taking a double hit here), it's pretty likely that the movement will rapidly snowball into a budding revolution. On the other hand, if you're being pushed just over the line by a temporary economic blip like that, then it's pretty common for the threatened revolution to not erupt into an actual revolution, so you don't necessarily have to back down right away. If you have the right institutions or didn't piss people off too badly, the revolutionary fervor won't grow all that fast. If your economy stabilizes quickly and your SoL is generally trending upwards, it's entirely possible new loyalist growth will bring the IG back up to -9 and abort the revolution before it actually happens. And if you're still able to put together a government with decent legitimacy and good support for the law, you can often pass the law and end the political movement before the revolution actually fires. Of course, if the revolution isn't going to be a complete military or economic disaster for you (and the game helpfully gives you a preview of exactly how big it's likely to be) then you might just want to let it happen. If you defeat a revolution, the IGs that supported it will be forced into "Marginalized" status for a few years, so they'll be helpless to oppose any laws you pass.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 20:50
|
|
|
The CK2 council DLC had a system where your council would vote on both law changes and other actions (going to war, awarding titles, etc.) and it added a really cool layer of depth. You'd frequently want to give a title to your kid and find that some jerk who pressured you into letting him on the council has decided he hates your guts anyway, and he has also suborned 2 other councilors to block you, so you can't push through the action without tyrrany (or, you know, murder). Why not borrow that? When you try to start a war or something, have the ruling IGs vote with their clout and throw a fit if you go against them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 20:57
|
|
|
I started a USA game last night. In the 1850s I got a movement to abolish slavery that was very radicalized almost to the point of revolution, but then the Whigs won the election so I put those groups in power and used all that clout to pass abolition. Of course starting that immediately sent the planters into their own revolution, but I think because of the abolition movements strength the law had a > 60% success chance so it went through too fast to allow the civil war to happen. All hail the great emancipator, President Daniel Webster, an Authoritarian Petite Bourgeois Abolitionist who later became a Radical
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 21:11
|
|
|
megane posted:The CK2 council DLC had a system where your council would vote on both law changes and other actions (going to war, awarding titles, etc.) and it added a really cool layer of depth. You'd frequently want to give a title to your kid and find that some jerk who pressured you into letting him on the council has decided he hates your guts anyway, and he has also suborned 2 other councilors to block you, so you can't push through the action without tyrrany (or, you know, murder). Why not borrow that? When you try to start a war or something, have the ruling IGs vote with their clout and throw a fit if you go against them. in CK2, if some prick won't let you go to war you can assassinate him and put someone more compliant in his place Rather than letting IGs veto war decisions and other foreign policy moves, I think a more Vicky-style way would be pressuring the player to get involved in particular regions. During the game's era, expansionism and imperialism was heavily driven by popular opinion - not only were there various political movements pushing for the country to involve itself in foreign areas one way or another, but there were also plenty of cases of civilians, companies, and rogue officials just going off to conquer poo poo on their own and then inviting the mother country in anyway. Neither one is very well represented here; nationalism is just a tech choice that gives you some new country formation options, rather than giving you increasingly violent irredentists to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 21:33
|
|
|
Completely hosed up the initial industrialization as Brazil, gonna blame local prices instead of me being bad at games. My iron tools and coal mines got locked in a loop where none of them were profitable enough to fully hire, not sure what I can do about that. Also realized that you gotta start taking chunks out of Bolivia early of you want to prevent the confederation
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 23:08
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Completely hosed up the initial industrialization as Brazil, gonna blame local prices instead of me being bad at games. My iron tools and coal mines got locked in a loop where none of them were profitable enough to fully hire, not sure what I can do about that. Also realized that you gotta start taking chunks out of Bolivia early of you want to prevent the confederation What worked for me was declaring on England to get them to remove slavery for me, making them like me a lot and not join Bolivia in the war. 1st Bolivian war, I transferred his subjects, which didn't take the tiny one for some reason. 2nd war I ate them. Easier to win the war if you upgrade all the infantry to line, as many start as irregulars.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
megane posted:The CK2 council DLC had a system where your council would vote on both law changes and other actions (going to war, awarding titles, etc.) and it added a really cool layer of depth. You'd frequently want to give a title to your kid and find that some jerk who pressured you into letting him on the council has decided he hates your guts anyway, and he has also suborned 2 other councilors to block you, so you can't push through the action without tyrrany (or, you know, murder). Why not borrow that? When you try to start a war or something, have the ruling IGs vote with their clout and throw a fit if you go against them. Yeah, porting over the CK3 favor system, or just using something like obligations between nations, only to internal IGs, would add a lot of interest and depth to the political system. I think there would need to be more political levers for it to be worthwhile, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 23:16
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Completely hosed up the initial industrialization as Brazil, gonna blame local prices instead of me being bad at games. My iron tools and coal mines got locked in a loop where none of them were profitable enough to fully hire, not sure what I can do about that. Also realized that you gotta start taking chunks out of Bolivia early of you want to prevent the confederation Alternately, if, for instance, iron is too expensive making tools unprofitable- import iron to drive the production costs down, even if you plan on making iron mines as soon as you can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 23:18
|
|
|
Eiba posted:Not sure about Brazil's starting laws, but usually you can subsidize industries you need to get up to speed. They'll hire people to sit around if the government is guaranteeing a wage. Alternately make sure they're profitable- make sure there's a solid demand for whatever they're producing. It doesn't matter if there's a coal shortage- turn all the gas lamps on to bring up the price and get the mine started. Make tools more expensive by shifting more things to use tools. Brazil now starts with Agrarianism, so no subsidizing mines I believe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 23:49
|
|
|
Brazil starts on agrarianism, so no-go on a lot of subsidies. the optimal opening if you wanna dismantle the PBC is transfer puppet north peru and liberate the other two -- north peru will eat them and form peru anyways, leaving you with one bigger puppet for much cheaper infamy
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 23:49
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:Even the Xianfeng emperor has to win debates in the public square or his proposed legislation won't pass. If you think Chinese emperors were pure autocratic tyrants whose will was promptly manifested into reality and who never had to worry about factionalism or convincing their enormous bureaucracies to actually implement what they wanted instead of politely agreeing and then loving off to do their own thing, boy have you got a thing to learn about Chinese imperial court politics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 00:16
|
|
|
The new Red Scare journal entry triggered in 1890 when Costa Rica (with one battalion and no ships) became the vanguard of communism as the first and only council republic in the world. My trade unions don’t even have enough clout to do anything and yet random events keep radicalizing my capitalists. I can’t decide if this is insanely unrealistic or insanely realistic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 00:36
|
|
|
Mandoric posted:wood and iron go into tools Excuse the dumb question but, why not try to stay above break-even as a Euro? Wouldn't going into debt mean more interest is being paid, which is less cash you can spend on more construction?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 00:45
|
|
|
A Renaissance Nerd posted:Excuse the dumb question but, why not try to stay above break-even as a Euro? Wouldn't going into debt mean more interest is being paid, which is less cash you can spend on more construction? NGL I still wonder about this advice too, I'm just allergic to interest period
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 00:50
|
|
|
A Renaissance Nerd posted:Excuse the dumb question but, why not try to stay above break-even as a Euro? Wouldn't going into debt mean more interest is being paid, which is less cash you can spend on more construction? More being spent on constructing your economy now means more taxes flowing in means more construction etc etc. Going into debt to finance construction means you get the snowball of your economy rolling faster. As long as your credit limit is growing at least as fast as your debt, you're still financially sound. The reason you want to do this more sparingly as a non-euro is because unrecognized countries get a huge penalty to their interest rate which makes deficit spending a less attractive proposition until they can get recognized.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 00:51
|
|
|
A Renaissance Nerd posted:Excuse the dumb question but, why not try to stay above break-even as a Euro? Wouldn't going into debt mean more interest is being paid, which is less cash you can spend on more construction? rate of growth, a little debt is good as long as you're spending it to grow your total cashflows faster than interest is being added. Otherwise you're "safer" but growing slower than you might otherwise be -- and in a game that's basically about reaching an exponential breakpoint, faster = better also omg why is the loving brazilian naval power so loooong, even 20 years would be notable but 40 is just asking for it funny bug with the "exploiting the amazons" JE for brazil where relations with Austria are the determining factor on signing amazonian border treaties with your neighbors ThatBasqueGuy fucked around with this message at 01:06 on Nov 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 01:03
|
|
|
Swing State Victim posted:The new Red Scare journal entry triggered in 1890 when Costa Rica (with one battalion and no ships) became the vanguard of communism as the first and only council republic in the world. My trade unions don’t even have enough clout to do anything and yet random events keep radicalizing my capitalists. I can’t decide if this is insanely unrealistic or insanely realistic. Capitalists throwing a complete shitfit over the mere existence of communism anywhere on earth seems pretty accurate
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 01:04
|
|
|
buglord posted:I think my biggest pain points with V3 were countries lacking flavor and playstyles largely being the same. The other issue was mostly around regional/minor powers having not that much time do other than waiting for buildings to be erected. Kinda wish there were something like HOI4 focus trees to drip-feed narrative/gameplay changes and help create a story. It doesn’t have to be focus trees per se, but they did a great job of giving you something to focus on during peacetime. IMO, 1.5 actually does improve variety pretty significantly. Part of the reason that countries were samey is that industrial autarky was pretty easy. (note, this isn't the same as the *game* being easy.) 1.5 introduces a lot of constraints on growing your economy, has fiddled with your ability to mobilize pops into industry, and has also messed with resource locations. Plus Companies. End result being its a lot harder to just get it done by yourself unless you are a great power. Colossus of the South certainly adds some interesting regional gameplay to SA, its not just about playing Brazil. Also lol that Brazil Monarchy EZ Mode changed to Legitimacy Hellscape
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 01:10
|
|
|
So far I really like the Colossus content i've been encountering in my Brazil playthrough. much more so than the VoP French stuff, although reportedly that got a minor re-work of the re-work?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 01:14
|
|
|
also the frontline dioramas are neat
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 01:15
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:rate of growth, a little debt is good as long as you're spending it to grow your total cashflows faster than interest is being added. Otherwise you're "safer" but growing slower than you might otherwise be -- and in a game that's basically about reaching an exponential breakpoint, faster = better So it's just about using that deficit to build your GDP, and by building your GDP you build a credit limit as fast as or faster than your debt grows? While I'm asking dumb questions - is there a good use for import tariffs? I can see why export tariffs are good, they can keep other countries from buying up a good you produce but don't have a large surplus of, but the player determines what goods are imported - which to me makes import tariffs kind of redundant. If I don't have to worry about the goods being exported without my control, then what use are the tariffs?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 02:32
|
|
|
A Renaissance Nerd posted:So it's just about using that deficit to build your GDP, and by building your GDP you build a credit limit as fast as or faster than your debt grows? Discourages consumption of foreign goods? If foreigners are flooding your market with cheap opium or tobacco you can slap a tax on it to make your own businesses more competitive. Of course, because the AI is generally poo poo at this game that almost never happens. Plus, it's free money for you to use if you're taxing something that doesn't affect radicalism. Even better if the money is coming from upper class pops who are already above their SoL floor and are buying luxuries like wine or coffee.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 02:41
|
|
|
hoi4 isn't even a game in the traditional sense it's a cyoa lol trying to say vicky3 won't reach those lofty heights requires u hanging upside down or somethin
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 02:42
|
|
|
tariffs are primarily for revenue generation. they were a huge part of the tax base for most western states of the era. their effects on your economy are worth considering but ultimately secondary to funding more construction they don't seem good for revenue early on but they can be huge in the mid-game especially if you're a european GP with land borders to other GPs
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 02:46
|
|
|
free trade and protectionism are somehow still an interesting choice.. paradox has done it again
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 02:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 12:35 |
|
|
A Renaissance Nerd posted:So it's just about using that deficit to build your GDP, and by building your GDP you build a credit limit as fast as or faster than your debt grows? Building your GDP also results in more tax income. Those new buildings you make will put more money in the hands of your pops and more profits in the hands of your buildings, both of which leads to more money for you. Once you understand how to get your economy going, the increased income from your newly-industrialized economy will more than pay for the piled up interest and can even pull you back into the green. You will eventually want to slow down your building a bit and let the accumulated debt clear away, of course. But since industrialization starts off so slow and then snowballs so hard later, it's usually worth it to get that ball rolling as soon as possible, even if it means digging yourself pretty deep into debt to do so. That's especially true for European countries, which tend to have low interest rates and plenty of labor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2023 02:57
|
|