Is there any way to add a wargoal to a crisis for yourself as crisis leader, or can you only add them as offers?
Quick questions / Quick answers Thread
- Thread starter Headshotcatcher
- 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.
You'd only be discouraging people from joining you during the crisis.
You can add war goals as normal once the war begins; the war goals you add during the crisis are to sway countries to your side.
You'd only be discouraging people from joining you during the crisis.
And if the crisis spawns a Great War, it's cheaper all around to wait anyway.
Two quick questions from a veteran, who hasn't until this date cared about going against the grain:
1. Is it ever worth keeping slaves instead abolishing slavery? For example as the USA if I'd back the CSA instead and extend slavery in all the to-be-states and unite the country as half full of slaves.
-How do slave pops exactly compare to farmers and laborers? I know the "physical" limitations, but what are the economic consequences?
2. Going protectionist, can't find a fresh topic about this after the vanilla version, so I'll ask here. Does the actual policy of free trade versus protectionism have any hidden qualities to it other than just the amount of tariffs you can put? And when putting the said tariffs, how exactly do they work nowadays? I have a very "real world" thinking about this, but does it hold in the Victorian economics?
- I know I've subsidized some imports before to speed up my economy, but does it actually hurt my own inefficient RGOs and factories?
- And going full protectionist with tolls, am I keeping my own economy at full gear by them by making the produce of my own crops seem suddenly cheaper than the imports, but in the long term hurting my economy by limiting the things I don't produce myself and killing my competetiviness compared to others?
1. Is it ever worth keeping slaves instead abolishing slavery? For example as the USA if I'd back the CSA instead and extend slavery in all the to-be-states and unite the country as half full of slaves.
-How do slave pops exactly compare to farmers and laborers? I know the "physical" limitations, but what are the economic consequences?
2. Going protectionist, can't find a fresh topic about this after the vanilla version, so I'll ask here. Does the actual policy of free trade versus protectionism have any hidden qualities to it other than just the amount of tariffs you can put? And when putting the said tariffs, how exactly do they work nowadays? I have a very "real world" thinking about this, but does it hold in the Victorian economics?
- I know I've subsidized some imports before to speed up my economy, but does it actually hurt my own inefficient RGOs and factories?
- And going full protectionist with tolls, am I keeping my own economy at full gear by them by making the produce of my own crops seem suddenly cheaper than the imports, but in the long term hurting my economy by limiting the things I don't produce myself and killing my competetiviness compared to others?
The timer is actually on the power falling out of GP status, not on the power acquiring it. You can only become a GP when a gap opens due to a power losing status. So if you are #7 while #8 and #9 swap places every couple of months, you'll never get to be a GP because no power will be out of the top 8 long enough to lose it.
1. Slaves are way less productive than farmers, USA gets a major boost to production when they are freed.
2. It's nothing but a limit on your tariff slider, slider which mostly ruins your factories - as most factories need to grab some imports from the WM. Doesn't affect your economy the same way it has done in real life, in either direction. Here it's just another tax on POPs and factories.
1. Slaves work less efficiently. On the flip side, they don't get paid, which means more money ends up in the hands of high-class POPs, which they can reinvest in your economy. Slaves also don't vote under any circumstances, which can be helpful if you want to remain conservative, because low-class POPs are more fond of turning liberal.
2. As far as I know, all protectionism vs. free trade does is cap tariffs or subsidies. Poor countries tend to get into a situation where they export their raw resources, then use the money to buy finished goods. Tariffs make imports more expensive, so that capitalists are encouraged to set up factories locally, because they are now profitable where they might not have been before. Once you have an industrial base that is competitive, it makes more sense to go free trade, because your capitalists will have the money to invest in those things which you can produce most efficiently. Tariffs will also make artisans go broke, turning them into more useful POPs instead. Import subsidies will make it easier for your POPs to meet their needs if you don't produce enough goods for that yourself, but I would never use it, myself. I'd rather subsidize factories themselves, if need be.
Goods have a single market price worldwide; all that applying tariffs does is make it more expensive for your POPs and factories to buy goods your country doesn't produce. If your country can't make a given product profitably, raising your tariffs will seldom help your ability do so and will quite often hurt your ability to do so.
Note also that slaves are bad at driving an industrial economy. Yes, they help money flow upward to rich POPs, but since slaves have no needs, they don't buy anything. I'd prefer that they be paying customers with an income that can foster demand and begin promoting/demoting to craftsmen.
But if you make it more expensive to buy a good your country doesn't produce, it becomes more profitable to start producing that good, because then you don't have to pay the tariff. Of courses, resources and circumstances do have to permit that industry to actually spring up. Tariffs can create large profit margins for producing locally, leading to construction of factories, and then the factories will stay even with a lower profit margin. It's getting over the initial speed bump of building industry that's key.
You'd only be discouraging people from joining you during the crisis.
Yes, but I'd like the option to get my goals during peaceful concessions. I keep offering Humiliate war goals during crises that are at an inconvenient time for me, so that I can at least hurt the other nation's prestige. In my last game as Russia, even with the -50 I'd still have France and Austria joining me. I would have liked to set "Humiliate the UK/Prussia" for myself instead of the Ottomans or whoever, though.
Are new world RGOs supposed to be 1000x the size of their old world counterparts or has something gone wrong with my install?
Wouldn't that be an abuse of the crisis system, though? You can't just declare a war goal unilaterally, and then enforce that, even though the crisis is about something else entirely and your coalition members don't necessarily approve.
Is there anyway to enable the tooltips in multiplayer that shows the chances for ai accepting deals; joining alliances,accepting deals, crisis offers etc? We are playing a multiplayer game but it is only the hosts that gets them. Is it anyway to either enable for all or disable for all?
Only half true. Factories depend on RGOs - almost nobody has every RGO.
That's true. But tariffs can help your economy start up as long as you have a broad resource base; you don't need every resource for that. Once your capitalists are wealthy enough, and you have enough craftsmen and clerks running around, going free trade will allow your economy to nicely establish a competitive advantage for certain goods. If you just have free trade the whole time, it will only grow slowly initially.
Yeah, you're right. I didn't really think of it that way.
I just like the way the crisis negotiation thing works, I wish there were more options for crises...
True, for all but the initiators (and even them) it seems quite passive, and should have more player input to make it even more tense.