Development Diary #20 - National Focus
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Yeah, because the old way really broke emersion. Now we can feel old school and nostalgic like the victorians did in their time as we save and quit only to minimize (or quit) the game and bring up notepad (or the text editor of your choice) and hunt and find for the right line of code while consulting a province ID # list or a map (made by the community most likely), just so you can return that Pinkish Red hole in the middle of Russia to Russia.
Sounds streamlined to me!
Sounds streamlined to me!
Except war and peace has been redesigned, with specific war aims which the countries will work towards. So if you end up in a war guaranteeing Serbia's independence, it will be very difficult to get away with doing anything other than keeping Serbia independent (unless the war expands...). I'm also fairly sure land won in wars will be done on a state rather than province basis. Combining the two you get sensible wars with sensible outcomes, and blocky yet reasonably smooth borders. So no British holdings in Russia following a Crimean War, because that wasn't part of their war aims.
Ahhh, I forgot about that. Never played that new Expansion to EUIII, so it's easy to forget about for me.
Still, doing a quick and dirty modification such as releasing a satellite and giving land to them was always easier under the Victoria 1 and EUIII system...
It was, and I'd be willing to bet there'll still be situations you'd wish you could tidy things up yourself. At the end of the day it was just too exploitable though, one look at a Krakow AAR is enough to see that. One day the AI will be up to it, just not yet.
i've read through last 6 pages and couldn't find this question.
would national focus be limited to national provinces (no colonies) or restrictions alike depending on government ideology or main issues?
besides, what's that foci thingie?
would national focus be limited to national provinces (no colonies) or restrictions alike depending on government ideology or main issues?
besides, what's that foci thingie?
Maybe that's because... he wasn't responding to you? :wacko:
Umm... Clausewitz games are stupidly easy to modify this way. Most of the steps you list would be utterly unnecessary.
foci = multiple of focus (the latin word, focuses is... well, not a later English colloquialism or something).
You can put a national focus on colonies, either to place a claim or develop an already claimed colony towards profitability or even statehood.
I was thinking that you could encourage aristocrats to migrate west as the US, and they should take their slaves with them. No need to worry about Bureaucrat POPs then. But you'd need a lot of Aristocrats to qualify for statehood, so you might be better off attracting farmers or laborers.
I think it's great that there is some sort of limit on how much can be done in a province, it will make room for interesting lebensraum-mechanisms.
My idea was that a size penalty to farms (well size = maximum number of people employed, quite disconnected from output) would eventually cause farmers to go unemployed (and then angry) if you advance technologically but keep some areas of your country underdeveloped, with no industry to provide other jobs. And/or if you don't help the newly useless farmers promote to said jobs. This adds a lot of interesting dynamics and extra considerations to the game. If "province size" or something similar also affects the maximum industrial capacity of factories (or number of factories in a state), it might make the game an even more interesting balancing act. No longer would it be possible to have a hundred million people each in NY and Los Angeles (for the sake of example), with all the land in between practically empty (well the Native Americans might not mind too badly 
).
About the Malthusian overtone, King did mention that at the very start of testing, when they fired up the game, the world market screen told them on day 1 that there wasn't enough fish to feed the world. This easy availability of information on actual supply and demand of goods, combined with the fact that production values (how much is the base production of a fish RGO, for example, and the various factory input/output base values, etc etc.) will be easily moddable in text files, should make both pre- and post-release balancing easier, to avoid widespread famines.
Of course, if the global population growth advances much farther than technology does, you could hit the "feeding limit". Or if something like a modded-in Krakatoa event dropping farm efficiency worldwide by 5% (or 10% or 20%) for a couple of years (assuming this is even possible), POPs in some parts of the world would face a lack of food, unless there was significant overproduction to begin with.
).About the Malthusian overtone, King did mention that at the very start of testing, when they fired up the game, the world market screen told them on day 1 that there wasn't enough fish to feed the world.
This easy availability of information on actual supply and demand of goods, combined with the fact that production values (how much is the base production of a fish RGO, for example, and the various factory input/output base values, etc etc.) will be easily moddable in text files, should make both pre- and post-release balancing easier, to avoid widespread famines.Of course, if the global population growth advances much farther than technology does, you could hit the "feeding limit". Or if something like a modded-in Krakatoa event dropping farm efficiency worldwide by 5% (or 10% or 20%) for a couple of years (assuming this is even possible), POPs in some parts of the world would face a lack of food, unless there was significant overproduction to begin with.
I just hope it will be better than in H3T. Yes, the new casus belli system makes conquest harder and more logical, but it won't prevent it. I feel like the reputaion hit is not big enough, so you can still use trade disputes for annexations and feel quite safe.
There is one small problem. When the technology improves you can also use new land, which was previously useless. You can free some land for farming cheap enough to make it worth or good example is current oil production. As the technology improves you can drill for oil in new places (bottom of the sea) or use new variations like oil sands. So technology on one hand decreases number necesary labour, but on the other hand it can cause the RGO expansion.
I hope that's not entirely true. Suppose I were to play as France, crush China in the Opium wars and demand a single province so that I can have my own French Hong Kong. It'd be terrible that I have to take an entire state rather then just Nanjing, etc.
But I do believe that the AI should only accept state level territorial changes (unless a single province was their war aim).
The goods produced by laborer RGOs should pretty much just see technology giving bonuses to the size in this era (maybe they start out relatively small, or at least eg. oil does).
For farming, sure, irrigation and such could increase the amount of arable land, but the vast majority of technological progress should lower the amount of people needed to work a fixed area, and so the overall trend should be decreasing size for farm RGOs in technologically more advanced countries.
For farming, sure, irrigation and such could increase the amount of arable land, but the vast majority of technological progress should lower the amount of people needed to work a fixed area, and so the overall trend should be decreasing size for farm RGOs in technologically more advanced countries.
Yes, output per person will increase faster than the maximum number of people decreases. So the net effect is less people producing more.
I was going to say the same thing, but on reflection... no, it's not.
I've said before why, but a short summary: The AI screws things up, either alone or as alliance leader. Land exchange is great for smoothing up borders and correcting the AI's screwups. Another thing: As Belgium yesterday, I and my allies wrecked Prussia and France as alliance leader gave me half of Prussia or thereabouts. Borders were a mess, so I fixed that by exchaning some with Prussia afterwards, taking and giving to make it look better. Then I wanted a buffer state, I figured Belgium wouldn't manage to double its size IRL and it looked weird anyhow. So I released a vassal, Mecklembourg being the largest available. But that was only three provinces and it looked bad. So I gave my new vassal lots of land. Seems none of this would be possible in V2...
I've said before why, but a short summary: The AI screws things up, either alone or as alliance leader. Land exchange is great for smoothing up borders and correcting the AI's screwups. Another thing: As Belgium yesterday, I and my allies wrecked Prussia and France as alliance leader gave me half of Prussia or thereabouts. Borders were a mess, so I fixed that by exchaning some with Prussia afterwards, taking and giving to make it look better. Then I wanted a buffer state, I figured Belgium wouldn't manage to double its size IRL and it looked weird anyhow. So I released a vassal, Mecklembourg being the largest available. But that was only three provinces and it looked bad. So I gave my new vassal lots of land. Seems none of this would be possible in V2...
You can still exit the game, open the save file in notepad, and edit the provinces by hand. So lovely.
But I will shut up about it and wait for the released game before I start clamoring for console codes again...
Thats not a solution, thats a work around and a pain in the neck work around too
1. When you release a state as a satilite you should be able to choose what provinces you give it. Not be forced to blindly accept its cores whether you want that province or not.
2. You should be able to trade land cos its a damned useful feature
1. When you release a state as a satilite you should be able to choose what provinces you give it. Not be forced to blindly accept its cores whether you want that province or not.
2. You should be able to trade land cos its a damned useful feature