/games/ - Games

Theres an assimilation problem in 1.8.4, half of India turns British. It's so bad when you look at the global ethnicity stats of English then the majority are Hindu.

>>38489
pol be like 'just like real life hurhur amirite'

but seriously thats funny, I feel like the basic mechanics of vic dont really account for how a country can have both a ruling culture (not just a ruler of a different culture but a whole cultural apparatus built around foreign and local elites) and a popular culture

>>38489

At least they finally fixed collectivized agriculture. Finally can nationalize all of the sector without having to stay on tenant farmers or commercialized.

Though I find it hard to break the landlords in the newest version; Used to be you would just force a rev by banning slavery or getting tid of serfdom, now things are a bit tougher; University, gov. admin & construction spam are also too expensive early game. So I think the trick is state farms + logging + food ind.

>>38510

* too expensive for smaller more tech backward nations

>>38510
How does collectivized agriculture work now? All subsistence peasant-owned, but newly built farms are state owned and can be collectivized, or what?

Haven't played the latest versions, but what's this shit about foreign collectivization? Do you seriously just like invest into other countries' pops owning buildings now? Cooperative ownership sounds hilariously bad now, to stay on par with porky economies you'll have to hike taxes to the max and micromanage all construction on top of that. In comparison, command economy will allow you to straight up abolish taxes and live off factory profits put directly into budget, and then you just put min wage laws to the max to achieve high standard of living

>So I think the trick is state farms + logging + food ind.
Last time I played, it didn't work already. Always work towards fixing imbalances. Unless you can trade surpluses off, but technically speaking all it does is it is pushing low prices in your nation up to restore profitability of low profit factories, so it's better to focus on shortages in your nation instead of trade.

>>38640

Yes basically, check the patch notes for 1.8.4; Collectivized agriculture now allows people proper state owned farms.

>>38645
>Collectivization now only ever targets privately owned levels and is the number of levels to collectivize is calculated as a fraction of privately owned levels, so nationally owned levels are not subject to it, meaning that countries with Cooperative Ownership/Collectivized Agriculture can now also have a public sector and make proper use of public sector foreign investment

So, now you transfer your state-owned enterprise's profits to investment pool to create more cooperative-ownership buildings. Still have to tax to the max, lmao

>>38650
>>38640

I mean just plain state ownership in the minimal sense of the word is apparently so op they had to artificially handicap the hell out of it with dividend efficiency & scale economy penalties. Its pretty funny actually.

Honestly I think they should have just slspped a high bureaucracy cost on each state-owned building level and left it at that.

>>38659
Youtube personalities did calculations that say that laissez faire is the best, because it gives the most money through taxes, but in my experience, state ownership is really good (but is not automated, and comes too late anyway). There's a whole argument about how deletion of money is destroying the economy (government dividend efficiency straight up erases a fraction of factory profits when these are moved to treasury). But, like, isn't this what capitalists are doing? They just consume a fraction of profits for no output, and on top of that demand you producing for them luxury goods. Erased money is probably gets to the same ratio as capitalist investment ratio (part of POP income, before expenditures, that gets sent into the investment pool to be invested into the economy).

I think it's just balancing issues. Devs want to make all playstyles viable. For example, even slavery has a crazy flat bonus of having 50% workforce participation ratio for slaves

>>38661

I am not against balancing, I just think the way they did it was silly. The main trade-off should be that state ownership requires much more bureaucracy to administer effectively (perhaps lowered a bit for command economy).

I think the tradeoff for public education & healthcare is much better designed.

I say this, but I also disagree with calling agrarianism, industry banned, coop ownership, etc. economic system. There should simply be a seperate category for "industrial policy" where all the bonus & maluses are found with econ system strictly reserved for what the player can and can't do and to what degree (eg. have it so that interventionism allows between 25 & 75% state construction allocation, but with each 10% above 25 costing extra authority, bureaucracy, etc. and needing time to implement).

>>38661
>laissez faire is the best, because it gives the most money through taxes
This is the most insane interpretation of laissez-faire in gaming.

Up
I present the second cock of America
Is that the state of Utah, Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona or are you just happy to see me?
Anyways, still sucking at this game. Went into this playthrough hoping to get the Mexico achievement but i don't think I have enough time. I at least now know the power of deficit spending.
Are any of the DLCs worth getting? Still running vanilla here

Update: the witch is dead.

>>39134
It's what neolibs actually believe

Played for the first time since 1.8. Seems like a very different game now. That's the problem with these pseudo simulators, you just dial a few numbers here or there and everything comes out different in a chain reaction.

>>39969
Any game will always be an approximation of real life, not its carbon copy. And politics are such a biased field that some important data may be conveniently forgotten while tuning the game. And there's also a question of if something can even be turned into data.

>>39979
I'm just saying the whole chain of effects in such a complex game make it impossible to learn especially if they keep changing the rules.

I did another Haiti playthrough. I took someones advice and spammed tobacco plantations with no construction industry early game and it worked. I even paid off the debt to france by 1860 something but then I started just losing money like crazy I don't know how. It says my governent exspenses were through the roof even after setting them to the lowest and I only built gov to cover my trade with 0 institutions. You can only declare a single interest as Haiti and I set it to Brazil for tobaccy because they were offering insane money. I always end up with 0 unemployment and I can't do shit to attract migrants and can't get enough people to work my industries. If I subsidize one, it just pilfers workers from another lol.

>>39996
A lot to memorize in the game, you just have to know what products will be in demand in any given decade.

>>39996
It was funny too, when I finally switched to democracky, I had a government with just the agrarian party with 100 legitimacy but shit went off the rails. I could've sworn it gave you an estimated revenue when switching tax systems before, but maybe that was just a mod.

They need to help you understand what the fuck makes the income meter go up and down. Most of the games I noped out of I started debt spiraling for unknown reasons.

Oh yeah, for Haiti, most of the tech tree is useless. Well for most nations I've played as I guess which were the third world ones.
>If you're not trying to invade other countries
mil tech tree useless
>If you can't keep up an insanely deep supply tree
the production tech tree is useless
Which leaves just the society tech tree, but most of that is useless to so I mostly went for the ones that give you free money and bureaucracy whatever bonuses.

>>39996
Just ally with France, join their bloc and use their resources to industrialize.
You should avoid building gov admin in general but especially until you research better PMs for them.
I wouldn't build agriculture either, that empowers the landowners and rural folk
As for migrants, being a part of a larger market helps with that if your SOL is high. I believe there's a minumum # of states that you need to be eligible for mass migrations so expand a little. Ran into this problem during a Luxembourg run
>>40000
You'll want military techs for defence, economy techs for infrastructure and better PMs and society techs for better PMs and laws, especially multiculturalism

Ok, I speedran the debt this time. Kept taxation on max but I didn't even go crazy with the consumption taxes. Only did Tobacco and services and I paid it off by 1850.

>>40001
>You'll want military techs for defence, economy techs for infrastructure and better PMs and society techs for better PMs and laws, especially multiculturalism
Mil is useless as haiti unless ypu are going to invade. I did a playthrough where I cancelled the debt and France blockaded me until they gave up but were too pussy to invade. Other than that it is useless. It was way easier to pay it off by 1850.

>>40001
>Just ally with France, join their bloc and use their resources to industrialize.
Could join any bloc, why France? I guess it might help with migrants because they speak French? But Spain has countries in the carribean.
>>40001
>I wouldn't build agriculture either, that empowers the landowners and rural folk
What would you build then? Haito has no resources and starts with no literacy.

>As for migrants, being a part of a larger market helps with that if your SOL is high. I believe there's a minumum # of states that you need to be eligible for mass migrations so expand a little. Ran into this problem during a Luxembourg run
Yeah but expand where? Lol. Every cpuntry is part of a bloc that can stop me. I had an idea to do the Haitan naval power run.

>>40001
>>40003
Honestly I could've paid it off even faster probably. Already did less than 15 years. Not so odious with game magic.

>>40003
So what now? Just start doing everything I can to bribe people to move to Haiti? I got 8.79k+ on max taxation. I can set it probably to the second lowest now if I want. Too bad money is rather useless in this game. Only maintaining the inflows and outflows. Would be cool if you could use your massive reserves to do anything with them except for when some event comes up. My previous playthrough I fucked up by not getting the schools when the Catholics were popular. The rural folk don't want no schools. I'm already way high literacy than I was when I ended the last playthrough in the 1870s. I think the Catholics are going to help me get all the socdem policies I can bribe people to move to Haiti with.

>>40004
>Mil is useless as haiti unless ypu are going to invade
Which you should if you want any meaningful amount of migration. I looked it up: "Each country has an attraction score which equals the average migration attraction of all its eligible states. Countries with fewer than 4 eligible states receive a penalty of 20% for each fewer state, up to 60% penalty for a country with only one eligible state."
If you don't want to expand, defence is important too. I'm surprised that France didn't invade. Even still, what about later in the game? It's not an either or thing anyway, you can get deep into all three tech trees by the end of the game even if you don't build universities.
>Could join any bloc, why France?
France often forms a Trade League bloc which lets you into their market. The US often does as well. Otherwise only Prussia starts the game with one. This may be less relevant if you have the DLCs, I do not.
>What would you build then? Haito has no resources and starts with no literacy.
I believe they have some lumber, no? Should be good for tools, furniture, paper, and glass. With so few pops it should be enough to delete the peasants and tide you over till you join a Trade League.
>>40004
>Yeah but expand where?
Anywhere. S. and C. America are close, or you can get cheesy and start taking valuable states in Africa/Asia

>>40007
> I looked it up: "Each country has an attraction score which equals the average migration attraction of all its eligible states. Countries with fewer than 4 eligible states receive a penalty of 20% for each fewer state, up to 60% penalty for a country with only one eligible state."
That's stupid, arbitrary, and how would anyone figure that out lol?

>If you don't want to expand, defence is important too. I'm surprised that France didn't invade. Even still, what about later in the game? It's not an either or thing anyway, you can get deep into all three tech trees by the end of the game even if you don't build universities.
No France will not try to invade unless you cancel the debt and even then it's easy to make a larger army than they will try to land with. The problem is they will blockade you until they get bored.

>France often forms a Trade League bloc which lets you into their market. The US often does as well. Otherwise only Prussia starts the game with one. This may be less relevant if you have the DLCs, I do not.
I do have the power bloc DLC.

>I believe they have some lumber, no? Should be good for tools, furniture, paper, and glass. With so few pops it should be enough to delete the peasants and tide you over till you join a Trade League.
Not much lumber at all. Hmm I guess I did forget lumber goes into tools and glass, but still it's a useless thing to get into because things like tools and whatever will be useless to trade to big countries, and small countries, you turn on the trade when it says +12 and in 2 months it will be -3. The small countries that need the advanced shit won't need them for long, they'll be satiated quite fast.

>Anywhere. S. and C. America are close, or you can get cheesy and start taking valuable states in Africa/Asia
I found they gang up on my when I do invasive stuff. It was hard enough as Brazil taking unalligned states in South America and also colonization is useless with no population. I guess I could setup micro colonies just to get past the immigration debuff. That's so fucking cheesey.

>>40008
Just started a Haiti run (2nd time a leftypol post has prompted me to do this) and the situation is much worse than I thought. You have a lot more peasants than I assumed, maybe more than the limited amount of lumber and relevant industries can provide for.
So far I maxed out taxes, bottomed out the gov expenses and deleted my army. This put me in the black/tiny defivit. Will see if industrializing is viable but I can definitely better understand your train of thought now

>>40009
I think it was also me last time. I've only been playing the smaller nations because I figured it would be easier to learn with less to manage. So far I played: Haiti, Persia, Ethiopia(Shewa), and Brazil.

Maybe we should do weekly challenges or something. That'd be fun. See who can get the farthest in a given nation, I'm thinking on vanilla. I guess I can also disable my DLC to make it fair, but you should get the Power Block one. I think it's one of those essential Paradox DLCs.

>>40010
> I'm thinking on vanilla. I guess I can also disable my DLC to make it fair, but you should get the Power Block one. I think it's one of those essential Paradox DLCs.
Or we could do 0 DLC + mods but we should be on the same update.

>>40011
>Or we could do 0 DLC + mods but we should be on the same update.
I mean and the same mods. We could make an official leftypol mod playlist.

>>40010
Debts paid off in 1847. Other than 2 livestock ranches, a rice farm and a dye plantation I only built resources and factories. All demand was satisfied domestically. One advantage of this approach, as far as paying off the debt is concerned, is that since I'm not reliant on trade I can downgrade the PM on the ports which saves quite a bit of money in government wages.
If I was to continue, I'd be able to take the newly freed up money and put it into construction, allowing me to keep the industrialization train going a bit longer, but at this point I'm definitely needing to either expand or join the trade league blocs that both France and the US have formed. I'd also be gunning for better economy and society techs for better PMs (higher SOL) and multiculturalism (more pops) respectively

>>40012
I found this collection in steam workshop for vic 3 collect mods related to communism.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3002033678

I am pretty sure if you use all of them combined your game will crash. Maybe there is a mod that makes almost all of them compatible, but i don't know, it has been so long since i played vic 3. The blocs thing confused me a lot.

>>40015
Ok I tried again with your suggestions to just do resource(which means logging because that's the only resource Haiti has besides fish) and then manufacturies that only use inputs I can make myself. I didn't manage to pay off the debt but I did boss out the GDP more than you. I don't even know how because all my shit looks fucked up and retarded.

>>40017
Another big thing I learned is you have to use that social mobility decree to increase the qualifications

>>40017
>I didn't manage to pay off the debt
Hmm. Besides what I already mentioned (deleting army, max taxes/minumum wages, downgraded port pms), adding consumption taxes (I put them on services, tobacco, luxury clothes and furniture), cancelling trade routes that I didn't need (not sure if this makes a difference but I ended the game with just the tobacco export that you start with) and researching banking might have made the difference. I also get charity schools/hospitals ASAP but again, don't know if that will make a difference.
Nice GDP tho, easily clears me and ya like I said without joining a larger market or making more demand largely through construction sectors the economy isn't exactly thriving.
>>40018
Yep, super important. I'll run it on the most populous states until well into the game on most countries. I also add greener grass campaign on as many states as possible and a road maintenance on whatever state I'm building in for the construction efficiency. Nice run.

>>40019
oh and one more thing, I set stuff to privatize stuff as soon as I build it. gotta monetize that investment pool somehow while you don't have any construction sectors. i don;t think much of it sold but every little bit helps

>>40019
Ok now I need to attack New Grenadine, they're unalligned, not that strong, and have coal and iron. After failing at invading one time, trying to invade through Antioqua, I managed to successfully invade through Panama. Problem is my cash flow ended up so negative even deleting my whole military couldn't save me. Goddamn this mil thing is so hard. I read that the best for a naval invasion is an even lancer infranty mix so I tried that. It take forever to train the damn navy so next time I build up my mil I'm definitely going to start with the navy. I just don't know how I go from crazy positive money every turn, to removing every subsidy and deleting the military does nothing. It will turn green for a second then just immediately start dropping down to red.
>oh and one more thing, I set stuff to privatize stuff as soon as I build it. gotta monetize that investment pool somehow while you don't have any construction sectors. i don;t think much of it sold but every little bit helps
Yeah I think I'm going to start doing that too. I tried doing it when I needed it but it didn't give me any moneys.

>>39996
>I'm just saying the whole chain of effects in such a complex game make it impossible to learn especially if they keep changing the rules.
The game is a work-in-progress essentially.

>>40016
Nah i have playlists with a shotload mods.no crash no gamebreaking bugs, but like I said, who knows what mjnor tweaks in tge numbers does until you experiment with a full playthrough shain and again. You told me about the immigrstion debuff i had no idea about. What if every mod had undocumdnted no warning debuffs?

Le butterfly effect is wha i'm sayin. Nah mean?

John Leno

Not a lot of activity here lately. How are you guys feeling about Charters of Commerce? Imo it's 100% the best update to the game so far, and with 1.9.0 the majority of the game's systems seem to be in a reasonably mature state. Trade is actually viable now and you don't have to basically be an autarky as Belgium anymore in order to build your economy.

So what's next for you guys? I know a lot of people are still clamoring for more in-depth warfare, but I think focusing on diplomacy, technological advantages and supply chains instead of military tactics is pretty accurate to the era and lays the focus more on where Vic's strengths already lie. My Marxist heart would love a DLC focused on late-game politics, i.e. economic crises, the rise of fascist and communist movement and inter-imperialist conflict (I suspect the new treaty mechanic will be expanded later in order to better "regulate" colonization). Call it "Crisis of Capital" or something. Save this for when it happens

>>43131

My most critical wants, in order of importance, are:

1. Making goods physical with one to one penalties to output if there are shortages, & stockpiling mechanics (government & private).

2. Goods needing actual transportation to be traded within & between regions.

3. A complete end to money appearing and disappearing out of thin air (from anything except minting or potentially banks).

>>43137
1 is definitely a good call. Atm, it's maybe a bit too easy to swap PMs for most of your industries at once after researching a new tech, with your econ doing ok even though you're facing massive shortages (especially late-game inputs like oil, rubber, etc.)

I'm curious, how do you see transportation being used for goods? The way I see it, it's a bit of a confusing right now since it's not clear what it entails exactly. E.g. railways generate both infrastructure and transportation, ports only infrastructure and public trams in urban centers only transportation.

Imo, this reflects the idea of transportation as (primarily) a pop need and infrastructure as a state's capacity to integrate its industrial output with the wider region. But then you have labor-saving PMs like railroads for mines and logging camps that use transportation anyway. I think PDX has painted itself into a corner somewhat, since the ambiguous relationship between infra and transportation will become difficult to untangle. What do you think?

>>43168

Thanks for the support on the physical goods issue. The current quasi+virtual nature of goods has bothered me since before Vic3 even released tbh.

For transportation itself, I think it could be divided into teo services: Local which brings goods to market within a region, and inter-regional which transport it from one region to the next. With the way they have reworked trade centers recently, I think this is eminently doable. It would also eliminate the beed for local proces to create/delete money, since the relative efficiency or inefficiency of local production or transport from other places would be simulated directly by extra transport costs

As far as infrastructure goes, I am not against the idea of certain of goods or services needing infrastructure capacity in order to operate (and that some level of government involvement is necessary for this).

I think it would however it might make more sense to completely detach transport (and later electricity and maybe even telecom) provision from the infrastructure that carries it. So have the railway itself seperate from the train operator (or transport logistics company). All operating companies could only expand up to the infra capacity. Basically this would simulate the eminent domain / long term infrastructure layout planning & regulation that governments do.

I also strongly believe this infrastructure should be disaggregated further (roadways, railways, waterways, ports, electricity, maybe even telecoms, irrigation & sewage later on)

>>43168

Oh another smaller set of changes, not nearly as essential:

Make it possible for governments to own company HQs.

For scale economies to be limited by number of buildings owned by a given owner, rather than spill over all owners in a given region. If this is fone then there comes a potential emergent benefit from granting a company or the state s monopoly in the form of potentially higher scale economies. (And this simulates things like why infrastructure is often a government granted monopoly in real life, because multiple grids tend to be extremely wasteful duplication, triplication, or worse)

>>43170

* need for local prices