how I envision VIII

keynes2.0 said:

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.

Click to expand...

sry , didn't want to offend anyone here :unsure:

SDSkinner said:

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.

Click to expand...

indeed, without local markets and no transport costs, the one nation producing a good cheapest would (and currently does to as certain extend) produce the lions share and free of charge beam their product even to the most desolate, far distant place on the planet.
With local markets and thus bilateral trade and transportation costs, this is not really an issue.
(If it costs quite a deal of transportation costs and potentially multipe tariff charges for transaction coutries, a remote artisan POP in remote Mongolia should be aple to compete to western mechanical production to a certain extend even if production costs differ a lot.)
Add decreasing economics of scale and the entire thing shoud be quite stable, incouraging trade to a certain extend while still supporting local production in small amounts.

keynes2.0 said:

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.

Click to expand...

SDSkinner said:

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?

Click to expand...

keynes2.0 said:

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.

Click to expand...

I still don't quite get why some model of national currencies would be needed. IMHO, exchange rate changes are only necessary IF there actually are multiple currencies. Would be quite happy abount an explanation.

SDSkinner said:

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.

Click to expand...

make foreign occupation only decrease, but not totally stop local production?
The other issues should be no troblem with adequate transportation costs....

hmm yes, could become a problem, even though international trade should be way less than right now with local markets and transportation costs.
I guess that right now small countries simply cant buy as much as they want due to prestige? or why else is this not a moger problem right now?

keynes2.0 said:

Eichenthal, the notion that poor people have higher growth rates is very much deniable. I would offer you the example of the post revolutionary US which had one of the highest growth rates in history, even disregarding immigration at the same time that it's population had a very high standard of living and there was very little inequality.

Click to expand...

I never said this to be an iron rule without exceptions. Cultural and political factors do influence recreation rates quite stronly as well. IMHO, getting life needs fulfilled should increase POP-growth (all children can be fed and no one starves) while getting luxury needs (you are distracted with many pleasures life can offer and want it to stay that way, you want to focus education and inheritance to fewer children, etc...) should decrease it.
Just look at india or pakistan and compare it to "whealthy" western nations.

for anyone interested, Version 1.5 here

kunadam said:

Bilateral trades is something I would vote against. It is a pain in HoI3 and it also very unrealistic. Free trade is mostly about, well, free trade that is not colored by how a country sees the other. In HoI3 you can starve your industry if you don't have enough diplomatic points to negotiate trades and some refuses to trade with you.

Transport cost on the other hand would be great. Also some kind of convoy mechanism so that convoy raiders have a role.

I echo s1234567890m's assesment too. Develop it too complex and people won't play it.

I think the underlying mechanism can be complex, but most should be hidden from the players.

Click to expand...

Bilateral Trade would be between markets/POPs and (mainly) not between countries and thus automated...

As for the level of complexity: the one main feature about the Victoria franchise I like most is it's complexity. As long as mechnisms are plausible and thus understandable for the player, I want more of it. And I bet I am not the only one

For anyone interested, Version 1.8 is up now. Featuring amongst minor changes and better elaboration a new chapter about police and crime.

for anyone interested, version 2.0 Due to mediafire-display problems, just download the pdf.

Unauthorised link deleted.