+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 72

Thread: how I envision VIII

  1. #41
    Field Marshal calvinhobbeslik's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of Darkness
    500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-orderEUIV: Call to arms eventEUIV: Wealth of NationsEUIV: Conquest of Paradise
    EUIV: Res PublicaEUIV: Art of War

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    San Jose
    Posts
    6,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratagyfan101 View Post
    Ideally, I think the biggest step of all Paradox games is a defensive AI. This along with a better warscore generator that factored in a collapsed nation would be much better.

    I should not need to Occupy an entire nation to get peace after total decimation of the army.

    One other thing, making States in Africa needs to be much much harder, if not impossible. Maybe I am wrong, but I do not believe France, England and Belgium industrialized the entirety of Africa.

    It makes no sense that by 1870 I cannot use a Place in the Sun CB on France because every African possession is not only a State but is more industrialised than the entirety of Spain.
    Huh? In my OE game in 1890, the only states in Africa were my original Libyan posessions(including Tripoli) and British South Africa

  2. #42
    Major
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesVictoria 2Victoria II: Heart of Darkness

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Montana, USA
    Posts
    532
    Transportation cost, for my money, is the big win. This would necessarily remove the World Market as it is now and would institute an actual buyer/seller scenario. Shipping and therefore naval might would become hugely important for purposes other than fighting the UK, and railroads would take on a whole new economic meaning. With known buyers and sellers numerous new socio-political relationships could be added, such as real tariffs and embargoes.

    To completely derail the comparative advantage discussion, it's meaningless while all non-rubber goods saturate the markets. Right now, country 1 makes all the steel and lumber while country 2 rots.

  3. #43
    Second Lieutenant iskallinn's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIIHOI3: Their Finest Hour
    Semper FiVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of DarknessEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Aarhus
    Posts
    139
    How would one go about setting up different currencies? That would be a great feature along with some sort of comparative advantages and transportation costs for goods.

    Actually the more I think about it, currencies would be so awesome. Making the ownership of colonies more important and also the "tuning" of the economy (import vs export).

    Making the AI understand it, don't know since most people do not even get it

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by marnues View Post
    To completely derail the comparative advantage discussion, it's meaningless while all non-rubber goods saturate the markets. Right now, country 1 makes all the steel and lumber while country 2 rots.
    This is a result of the lack of comparative advantage and substitution. If you have scarcity with comparative advantage and substitution then producers adapt to some profitable niche and consumers will get what they can afford. If you have scarcity without these balancing influences, you plunge the world into depression. This is why all the major economic rebalances of the game (AHD expansion, PDM, VRRP) "correct" shortages and make money easier to come by. The market has no means to deal with shortages and no way to keep 1 country from monopolizing all the industries.

    Quote Originally Posted by iskallinn View Post
    How would one go about setting up different currencies? That would be a great feature along with some sort of comparative advantages and transportation costs for goods.

    Actually the more I think about it, currencies would be so awesome. Making the ownership of colonies more important and also the "tuning" of the economy (import vs export).

    Making the AI understand it, don't know since most people do not even get it
    You would still handle all calculations in terms of the reserve currency, British pounds. These represent the precious metals that backed the currency in this time frame. You would just apply an exchange rate multiplier to the price of a good depending on the country you are buying from. So you might have to pay %110 of the WM price when buying from the UK but only %80 of the price when buying from Russia. A simple way to set the rate might be the import-export balance. On a tick when the country imports sufficiently more then it exports, the rate falls. A net exporter would have it's rate rise. This would however make it so that prices rather then prestige determine a countries market share, at least partially. If even 10% of the market was determined by prestige, that would still enable the most prestigious nation to be a huge net exporter, just less so then currently.
    Economic theory: P → Q, P ∴ Q, QED
    Economic practice: P → Q ∴ {!P} = ∅, QED
    Economic research: P → Q ☡ ∴ Q, QED

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by calvinhobbeslik View Post
    No problem. But I still don't see how creating a new currency helps factories sell their goods...
    it doesn't. It helps building/maintaing regional price differences. In times where transportation costs + tarrifs of an imported good would sometimes be more than 80% of the end-users price, local differences in price are a nobrainer anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Secret Master View Post
    As a concession in the direction of true regional markets, I'd settle for transportation costs. This would at least make overseas market penetration a bit harder than it is now.
    Quote Originally Posted by marnues View Post
    Transportation cost, for my money, is the big win. This would necessarily remove the World Market as it is now and would institute an actual buyer/seller scenario. Shipping and therefore naval might would become hugely important for purposes other than fighting the UK, and railroads would take on a whole new economic meaning. With known buyers and sellers numerous new socio-political relationships could be added, such as real tariffs and embargoes.

    To completely derail the comparative advantage discussion, it's meaningless while all non-rubber goods saturate the markets. Right now, country 1 makes all the steel and lumber while country 2 rots.
    actually transportation costs (+ decreasing economies of scale) is all that is needed to on the one side allow win-win trades due to comparative advantages while still having wide-variety local production to avoid "rotting".

    this is what I am proposing.

    Quote Originally Posted by keynes2.0 View Post
    This is a result of the lack of comparative advantage and substitution. If you have scarcity with comparative advantage and substitution then producers adapt to some profitable niche and consumers will get what they can afford. If you have scarcity without these balancing influences, you plunge the world into depression. This is why all the major economic rebalances of the game (AHD expansion, PDM, VRRP) "correct" shortages and make money easier to come by. The market has no means to deal with shortages and no way to keep 1 country from monopolizing all the industries.
    actually production side substitution (multiple production pacts for one single high-end good) as in APD DOES stabilize the economy loads. Of course, additional consumption side substitution would help further.

    Maybe seeing any need as "covered" if only , say, 50% are fulfilled and make people choose their purchases to fulfil these 50% cheapest possible would be an easy way of implementing consumption side substitution.

    Quote Originally Posted by keynes2.0 View Post
    You would still handle all calculations in terms of the reserve currency, British pounds. These represent the precious metals that backed the currency in this time frame. You would just apply an exchange rate multiplier to the price of a good depending on the country you are buying from. So you might have to pay %110 of the WM price when buying from the UK but only %80 of the price when buying from Russia. A simple way to set the rate might be the import-export balance. On a tick when the country imports sufficiently more then it exports, the rate falls. A net exporter would have it's rate rise. This would however make it so that prices rather then prestige determine a countries market share, at least partially. If even 10% of the market was determined by prestige, that would still enable the most prestigious nation to be a huge net exporter, just less so then currently.
    Once there is no "world market" any more, just bilateral trade (with transportation costs), market dominanace is not really an issue any more even without implementing national currencies. Nor would there be a need to distribute "market shares" depending on prestige. Which was a rather weird concept in the first place. If your willingness to is above price, you should get the desired good. If it is below, you should be able to sell it. Punkt.
    Last edited by Eichenthal; 16-04-2012 at 16:31.
    what an economist imagines VIII like : The vision

    CER : THE renaming mod : http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...1#post12834251

  6. #46
    If anyone could name me a location I could freely upload the current Version 1.4 of the document to, I would be quite grateful
    what an economist imagines VIII like : The vision

    CER : THE renaming mod : http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...1#post12834251

  7. #47
    Field Marshal calvinhobbeslik's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of Darkness
    500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-orderEUIV: Call to arms eventEUIV: Wealth of NationsEUIV: Conquest of Paradise
    EUIV: Res PublicaEUIV: Art of War

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    San Jose
    Posts
    6,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Eichenthal View Post
    If anyone could name me a location I could freely upload the current Version 1.4 of the document to, I would be quite grateful
    Mediafire? Dropbox?

  8. #48
    thanks.

    Version 1.4 here
    what an economist imagines VIII like : The vision

    CER : THE renaming mod : http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...1#post12834251

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by calvinhobbeslik View Post
    No problem. But I still don't see how creating a new currency helps factories sell their goods...
    If everyone uses a single currency than while comparitive advantage exists in game, it has near zero effect- country 2 only can take advantage of it as long as country 1 has a craftsmen shortage. Multiple currencies are one way to deal with this, although as I mentioned if the ratios for the goods are the same it wouldn't work. The only way out of that would be differences based on input prices, but I think as the game currently works there is a single price for all goods so that option is out as well.

    It is possible that you could create comparitive advantage without multiple currencies though- the big problem is that there isn't much of a way to get a comparitive advantage in the first place- the techs benefit everyone equally.

    I don't think local currencies can work without local markets and prices. You see anyway around this problem or would the whole edifice of the worlds economy have to be constructed in one go?

  10. #50
    Production side substitution certainly helps but I strongly suspect that demand side substitution would be preferable. In some releases of APD we see prosperous nations intermittently plunged into famine because of disruptions in the canned goods market. With consumer side substitution a nation could always at least eat it's own agricultural outputs, no matter how little it's WM clout. But flexibility in either regards would be great. This could go hand in hand with multiple outputs from RGOs/factories/artisans.

    And I'm pretty sure that comparative advantage can still work with symmetric prices. Prices being the same doesn't mean that profit margins are the same. As long as profits are asymmetric then a universal exchange rate multiplier would make some goods profitable for some countries to export and other goods profitable for others.
    Economic theory: P → Q, P ∴ Q, QED
    Economic practice: P → Q ∴ {!P} = ∅, QED
    Economic research: P → Q ☡ ∴ Q, QED

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

  11. #51
    it seems some rather funny ideas of what a comparative advantage is are floating around here

    imagine this simple cenario:

    farmer A works 50 weeks a year. It takes him 2 weeks to produce 1 ton of potatoes and 3 weeks to produce 1 ton of grain. As he favours eating those two in equal amounts, he will spent 20 weeks to produce 10 tons of potatoes and 30 weeks to produce 10 tons of grain.

    farmer B works 50 weeks a year. It takes him 6 weeks to produce 1 ton of potatoes and 4 weeks to produce 1 ton of grain. As he favours eating those two in equal amounts, he will spent 30 weeks to produce 5 tons of potatoes and 20 weeks to produce 5 tons of grain.

    Obviously, farmer A has an absolute production advantage for both goods. He can produce potatoes "cheaper" than he can produce grain. Farmer B can produce grain "cheaper" than he can produce potatoes. Thus, farmer A has relative production advantage for potatoes and Farmer B for grain.

    Overall production is 15 tons of potatoes and 15 tons of grain.
    If we allow them to trade, each will produce more of the good he is best at. In this example, Farmer B would produce 12.5 tons of grain and farmer B 17.5 tons of potatoes and 5 tons of grain.
    Overall production is 17.5 tons of potatoes and 17.5 tons of grain. Both could be better off with trading.

    This little example shows, that you do not need different currencies to allow gains from trade. Aparently you don't even need one
    what an economist imagines VIII like : The vision

    CER : THE renaming mod : http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...1#post12834251

  12. #52
    I know what comparative advantage is in the real world and how it can take place within, for example, a currency union. However we are not discussing the real world. We are discussing the Vicky II economy and any hypothetical changed version of that economy.
    Economic theory: P → Q, P ∴ Q, QED
    Economic practice: P → Q ∴ {!P} = ∅, QED
    Economic research: P → Q ☡ ∴ Q, QED

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

  13. #53
    academic outlaw Moderator safferli's Avatar
    DiplomacyV2 BetaHoi 2 BetaEU3 Collectors EditionEUIV: Call to arms event

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    11,456
    Comparative advantage can also be seen in a pure barter economy. But anyone who's as well-versed in real-life and V2 economy, and has the username of, keynes2.0 definitely already knows this
    When I speak in regal, manly grey I do so as a moderator.
    Never publicly comment or answer to a moderation post. Please write a PM (see Rule #2 of the Forum Rules).

    --
    How to give a proper man-to-man hug

    Ireland's Teardrop -- EU3 DW Munster/Ireland AAR. Follow the story of Munster, taking over the entire North American continent!
    Rule Helvetia! Helvetia Rule the Waves... -- Victoria 2 beta AAR. Watch Switzerland defeat the British Royal Navy... or die trying!
    What if the Pope had 200,000 men? -- A Papal States EU3 1.3 aar (abandoned/finished after owning 70% of the world)

  14. #54
    To Eichenthal
    Yes, but comparitive advantage with a single currency doesn't work if your factories can supply the entire world market- it just means they focus on what your country is best at first, before hitting the other good.

    Quote Originally Posted by keynes2.0
    And I'm pretty sure that comparative advantage can still work with symmetric prices. Prices being the same doesn't mean that profit margins are the same. As long as profits are asymmetric then a universal exchange rate multiplier would make some goods profitable for some countries to export and other goods profitable for others.
    Probably, but I don't think something like that currently exists in the game and I'm unsure what would be the best way to cause it. All I've ever heard suggested is having inventions fire that give bonuses to certain industries but provide malus to other inventions firing (like how the prestiege line works). I don't think that would get the results we are aiming for though.

  15. #55
    Um, assymetric profits are already in the game. Surely you noticed that the differences in input and output costs, not to mention the quantities needed mean that not all industries are equally profitable.
    Economic theory: P → Q, P ∴ Q, QED
    Economic practice: P → Q ∴ {!P} = ∅, QED
    Economic research: P → Q ☡ ∴ Q, QED

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

  16. #56
    Colonel Stratagyfan101's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIDeus VultEU3 CompleteDivine WindFor the Motherland
    Hearts of Iron IIIHeir to the ThroneRome GoldSemper FiVictoria 2
    Victoria II: A House Divided500k club

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Albany, NY (USA)
    Posts
    967
    Quote Originally Posted by calvinhobbeslik View Post
    Huh? In my OE game in 1890, the only states in Africa were my original Libyan posessions(including Tripoli) and British South Africa
    Maybe this was changed for AHD. I'm still on the original and its insane how quickly France will convert North Africa to a state.
    I got more icons, and they're awesome!!!
    Glory, To Ruin, To Glory: A Majaphit AAR

    Officially pysched for The Hobbit movies! *Prays for a new Middle Earth game that doesn't suck, looks at LotR Conquest and War in the North.*

  17. #57
    Field Marshal calvinhobbeslik's Avatar
    Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of Darkness
    500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-orderEUIV: Call to arms eventEUIV: Wealth of NationsEUIV: Conquest of Paradise
    EUIV: Res PublicaEUIV: Art of War

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    San Jose
    Posts
    6,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratagyfan101 View Post
    Maybe this was changed for AHD. I'm still on the original and its insane how quickly France will convert North Africa to a state.
    Yeah, it's one of the things AHD changed

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by keynes2.0 View Post
    Um, assymetric profits are already in the game. Surely you noticed that the differences in input and output costs, not to mention the quantities needed mean that not all industries are equally profitable.
    I missed your mention of currency multiplier. I'm not sure that would work though- wouldn't it just mean the country with the cheapest currency becomes the workshop of the world?

  19. #59
    No, a country would have it's currency depreciate until some factory or other became profitable for profit and the trade gap closed. At that point it's currency would stop depreciating. The factories wouldn't all become profitable at the same time (asymmetric profits) so currency depreciation wouldn't let you get ahead in everything. If for some reason you did get ahead in everything, your trade deficit would have been reversed so your currency would start appreciating until you start having industries become unprofitable.
    Economic theory: P → Q, P ∴ Q, QED
    Economic practice: P → Q ∴ {!P} = ∅, QED
    Economic research: P → Q ☡ ∴ Q, QED

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

  20. #60
    I see what you mean and it could potentially work. My immediate concern was that there would be a ladder of most to least profitable goods and countries would cluster, but that autocorrects as it becomes saturated and countries move to them next one causing boom and bust cycles. Unless you use government stockpiles to attempt to equalize imports and exports, but it would be insanely expensive and only work buying raw materials.

    Other problems I see.... since the currency is devaluing imports become more expensive which may screw over the factories and/or populance. While it woulld be historically accurate for aristocrats to continue importing goods, worsening the balance of trade and killing Latin American industrialization, it wouldn't be fun. Or an anarcho-liberal revolt in the US, taking over the grain districts, spiking the price of food which increases import costs for poor countries and since food is a giffen good, the value of their own exports drops, rapidly screwing them over and causing planet wide famine.

    I think subsistence farming would have to be modeled in game in order to avoid things like that from occuring.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts