Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Is it a good idea to have French soldiers in the German army?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Victoria 2 17560 After Action Reports (AAR)
Show only dev responses
Dron22 said:
Check which issue is currently most important. It seems like you have too few liberals in your upper house. As Germany I can normally get at least 40% liberals in the Upper House by 1860's without any effort. Did you promote capitalists? Are you still taxing the poor and middle class over 50%?
As for your coal issue, it might be some countries you have in your sphere of influence which eat up all your coal. Also check in the trade screen to see how much coal your industries and POP's use. By that time as Germany my capitalists build so many glass factories that I have to start importing, anyway it's not a big deal as long as there is enough coal on the world market.
Click to expand...

Hi Dron22,
Can you teach me how to get 40% liberals in UH by 1860? Step-by-step guide is highly appreciated. My Germany is always massively conservative, and if I don't break infamy, seems like conciousness will actually drop.

About the coal, I had sphered most of South America, China and a free India (Bengal + Patna), plus a few more. What I don't understand is, my coal RGO is hardly filled. In fact, there are huge umeployment issue there, why isn't them filled up to produce more coal? I tag switch to Russia and check their coal province, they have employment of > 50%, whilst mine is lingering around 10%. What give? My tech is up-to-date also.
 
delra said:
The typical way of passing social reforms in the AHD has nothing to do with the political system.
Click to expand...

You pass social reforms by either your Upper House being dominated by Socialists or by popular demand for the social reforms in important issues box. People will normally not demand social reforms before most political reforms had been passed. I don't know any better way to get school and healthcare reforms other than giving your people all the political reforms they want so they start asking for social ones too. Now I know you don't like passing universal voting too early because they keep voting for Conservative parties instead of the Liberal ones you like to have in power.
 
paulthebug said:
Hi Dron22,
Can you teach me how to get 40% liberals in UH by 1860? Step-by-step guide is highly appreciated. My Germany is always massively conservative, and if I don't break infamy, seems like conciousness will actually drop.

About the coal, I had sphered most of South America, China and a free India (Bengal + Patna), plus a few more. What I don't understand is, my coal RGO is hardly filled. In fact, there are huge umeployment issue there, why isn't them filled up to produce more coal? I tag switch to Russia and check their coal province, they have employment of > 50%, whilst mine is lingering around 10%. What give? My tech is up-to-date also.
Click to expand...

I always have at least 2 NF used to promote Capitalists across Germany, Capitalist tend to be liberal in your Upper House.
I don't know what is wrong with your coal RGO's, I never really look at what my RGO's do, will check next time if I have a similar situation although I never had to import coal until 1900's as Germany. Think well before sphering large nations, I usually sphere Brazil much later when I get the technology to produce electric gear and automobiles because Brazil has lots of rubber.
I think the South American nations are taking all your coal produce, because coal is scarce there.
I hope someone else here knows why your RGO's do not produce at full their capacity.
 
Last edited:
paulthebug said:
Here is the situation:
1. I passed the last 3 column of political reforms during liberal agitation & springtime of nation period.
2. By the end of springtime of nation, I only managed to pass Only Landed.
3. It is now already 1979, I still cannot pass one single social reform, my upperhouse is dominated by conservative by large margin.
4. Every time I change party to National Liberal, all hell break lose on rebellion, I already have 3 Jacobin, 2 Anacho-Liberal & 1 Reactionary rebellion. Super annoying when it breaks during war time. And I can feel that the next to come is communist, making me very hesitant to change party again, but yet I want LF & limited citizenship.

What shall I do?
Click to expand...

I think your problem is low the low overall CON.
Because of that only few people want reforms. Since no majority is supporting them, you can't pass any reforms and they will start to gain MIL and revolt over and over again.
Try to research techs that increase your overall CON gain, and reduce the number of clergymen. Try to make your pops buy luxury goods.

Apart from that, you should try to stay at weigthed wealth or similiar voting rights levels, because rich pops are usually liberal or socialist, while poor pops tend to be conservative unless socialist events drive them "red".
 
delra said:
Never give people what they want, their liberalism will end when they get what they wanted and they will go blue. They will stop rioting, but you won't get full reform package either.
Click to expand...

I don't get, why do all of you want to pass as many reforms as possible? - Ofc it's annoying to deal with communist's every six months, but can't that be achieved in other ways?

I mean, I get why you WANT health care and education system, and why elections rights, voting system, unemployment subsidies and pension are fairly harmless.

But why would you want a free press, that always rats you out when you justify war, public meeting making suppression much harder and why not keep the ban on trade unions, to prevent people from turning communist? And why on gods green earth would you minimum wage, maximum work hours and work safety, which just makes your industry less efficient? I don't get it.

For me, the best event in the game is the one where I can ban trade unions for the prize of a gazzilion militancy, which in turn let's me pass two health care reforms, because the conservatives get oh so afraid. Less demand for the harmfull social reforms? CHECK. More population from health care? CHECK.
 
Last edited:
Besides my personal political libertarian preferences or house rules, the habit of reforming comes from older builds where you could severely reduce emigration that way if you were European, or considerably boost it if you were in the Americas. In the final count healthcare seemed less desirable than just not having people leave the country en masse. Among social reforms, I admit I mostly desire healthcare (as everybody), but the costs of others are often very much exaggerated and if I have to pick up a couple, why not. It's a habit as old as Vicky1 actually. My favourite events are the ones that give bucketloads of RPs because people are happy to be free in the country.
 
delra said:
... the habit of reforming comes from older builds where you could severely reduce emigration that way if you were European, or considerably boost it if you were in the Americas. In the final count healthcare seemed less desirable than just not having people leave the country en masse....
Click to expand...

Well said!
You see, life used to be easier in Vanila Vicky, just passed everything on the right column, then all the social reforms one-by-one.
Now, I am super confused.

Obviously, I want healthcare, and to hell with all others. What's the best way for that?
Previously, it wasn't a problem for me, because I break infamy early, 'causing conciousness to skyrocket. But, if one were to stay good-boy, what shall I do?
 
delra said:
Besides my personal political libertarian preferences or house rules, the habit of reforming comes from older builds where you could severely reduce emigration that way if you were European, or considerably boost it if you were in the Americas. In the final count healthcare seemed less desirable than just not having people leave the country en masse. Among social reforms, I admit I mostly desire healthcare (as everybody), but the costs of others are often very much exaggerated and if I have to pick up a couple, why not. It's a habit as old as Vicky1 actually. My favourite events are the ones that give bucketloads of RPs because people are happy to be free in the country.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that comment, but I'm a bit confused. Is it just an old habit of yours, or do you still think it's a good idea to try to pass all the reforms ASAP in 2.3?
 
DrLulz said:
I don't get, why do all of you want to pass as many reforms as possible?
Click to expand...

Well, I actually don't. I have a list of reforms I want to pass, reforms that I don't care if pass, and reforms I hate to pass.

Want to pass:
Healthcare
Minimum Wage (later in the game, though, after the capis are swimming in money)
Voting Rights to non-secret ballots (if monarchy, so I can get HMs)
Voting Rights to secret ballots (if democracy, because I get tired to the ruling party winning elections all day, everyday)
Appointed Upper House (monarchy will stay at this unless I have to change it because it's easier to get aristocrats and capitalists to support certain social reforms than it is to get a bunch of conservative farmers and soldiers to pass anything)
Proportional Upper House (for democracies to make ideological representations in the UH more accurate)

Don't care if they pass:
Safety
Pensions
Unemployment
Suffrage
Unions
Education (by the time I can pass this reform, I've already got enough clergy and education techs in place to do what I need to do)
Public Meetings (usually not an issue)

Don't want to pass them:
Press rights (late game I don't care as much)
Work hours (boy do I hate this reform)
Suffrage (when I have a proportional UH and less than universal suffrage)


The thing about most social reforms is that by the time I can even pass them, the cost is a drop in bucket compared to my military. Who cares if pensions and unemployment cost me 5000 a day? My stockpile is costing me 20-30k a day or more. The increased admin cost of healthcare? No problem. I can get enough crats promoted WITHOUT NFs in just a couple of years through high crat spending. Minimum wage isn't hurting the capitalists because they are swimming in money by the time it passes. Safety regulations? Yeah, it hurts factory profitability, but guess who's making all that cement and machine parts the factories are buying? I am, so the money just gets moved around the economy, not leaving the economy altogether.

Work hours are a real pain, but eventually I end up passing some of them.

That's because there's one thing I hate more than anything: killing my POPs. The game's model of capitalism promotes a view of even POPs as a resource (human resources for the win, and I hate even saying it...). Maximizing POPs is almost always a good thing because of the game's economy; shooting thousands of communists every year just puts a crimp in my plans for economic domination. :)
 
Secret Master said:
There's never been a good way in either Victoria to model colonial troops. I'm not sure there is one, to be honest.

WWI saw about 1 million Indian soldiers in the British Army (sheesh, talk about The White Man's Burden...). That's a respectable 333 brigades, more than some humans have in their entire army (last night as Japan, I had 250 brigades out of a possible 400, including colonial troops from conquered Chinese states). I think only about 700,000 served outside India during the conflict (with a lot of them employed against the Ottomans and against German colonies), but most humans never leave their colonies completely defenseless anyway. Some of them served in France, so it's not like colonial troops of any nation only served in limited capacities in the colonies.

It's not just the UK, either. France started WWI with only 47,000 colonial troops, but ended the war with 475,000 colonial troops. That's only 158 brigades, but it's certainly not a drop in the bucket.

If other GPs during WWI had colonial empires of similar magnitudes, it would not have been unreasonable for them to have fielded as many colonial troops.

But how do we prevent "Let's conquer Panjab for the soldier POPs?" kinds of strategies. I mean, I can't think of a single historical conquest in the period that focused on acquiring more manpower for the army. (The concept would probably be laughable to most of the imperialists in the period.) The only solution I can think of is twofold: one, we need a "colonial policy" like HOI3 has occupation policies (modifying manpower from soldiers and officers, RGO efficiency, aristocrats, and so on). The other thing to do would be to demote all soldiers and officers in a state to farmers upon colonial conquest, forcing you to conscript from scratch and nerfing manpower from the region temporarily (until you can get POPs to turn soldier again).
Click to expand...

The white man probably (I'm saying probably because I'm not especially familiar with the subject) would have been scared about a million-man army of "savages" running around their homeland. So, the solution could be to have:

1. Colonial troops suck. Not as much as uncivilized troops, but worse than homeland troops.
2. Colonial brigades can be raised, but they are not allowed to move into non-colonial land. Thus, your million-man Army of India has to stay in India. In real history, massive colonial armies were necessary just to keep all hell from breaking out (maybe colonies always gain a Militancy boost when you don't have troops stationed there?).
 
Lemont Elwood said:
The white man probably (I'm saying probably because I'm not especially familiar with the subject) would have been scared about a million-man army of "savages" running around their homeland.
Click to expand...

Well, it's more complicated than that. How many brigades does the historical UK need to garrison the home islands if they have a historical navy that is bigger than the next two navies combined? It's not like historical Germany is going to ninja London with a surprise amphibious invasion. And even if they did get a foothold, the UK can mobilize tons of troops at home to deal with the problem, again obviating the need for huge colonial armies sitting in southern England. It's the threat of Russian intervention in India throughout half the period that really scares Westminster, to say nothing of garrisoning the place just to prevent revolts.

So, the solution could be to have:

1. Colonial troops suck. Not as much as uncivilized troops, but worse than homeland troops.
Click to expand...

Except they didn't suck. And the game has a mechanic like that, anyway. Guards can only be built with POPs of the right culture. Whether guards are worth the cost is another question.

2. Colonial brigades can be raised, but they are not allowed to move into non-colonial land.
Click to expand...

But they did serve in non-colonial land. Indian soldiers fought in the trenches in France in WWI. That's the problem. Historically, the colonial powers did use their colonial troops in the ways we do. They didn't spam them the way we can, but then again, I can afford 100 times more dreadnoughts than my historical counterparts, too.

Thus, your million-man Army of India has to stay in India. In real history, massive colonial armies were necessary just to keep all hell from breaking out (maybe colonies always gain a Militancy boost when you don't have troops stationed there?).
Click to expand...

Well, colonies could be made more restive. Part of the reason they aren't is because they are more economically prosperous in Vic2 than they were historically. The moment I take a colonial concession from China, the standard of living goes up by 200% just because of my techs. Of course the POPs aren't going to stay angry at me; life under colonial rule is preferable to life under the rule of their original owner.

Colonial territories could be made much less prosperous overall, but that might screw the economy up in other ways. Right now, the economy depends on large portions of the world upgrading to western tech levels by 1890 or so. If you removed techs from colonial states, the world would run out of coal, iron, timber, wool, and grain by 1870.
 
Secret Master said:
Well, I actually don't. I have a list of reforms I want to pass, reforms that I don't care if pass, and reforms I hate to pass.

Want to pass:
Healthcare
Minimum Wage (later in the game, though, after the capis are swimming in money)
Voting Rights to non-secret ballots (if monarchy, so I can get HMs)
Voting Rights to secret ballots (if democracy, because I get tired to the ruling party winning elections all day, everyday)
Appointed Upper House (monarchy will stay at this unless I have to change it because it's easier to get aristocrats and capitalists to support certain social reforms than it is to get a bunch of conservative farmers and soldiers to pass anything)
Proportional Upper House (for democracies to make ideological representations in the UH more accurate)

Don't care if they pass:
Safety
Pensions
Unemployment
Suffrage
Unions
Education (by the time I can pass this reform, I've already got enough clergy and education techs in place to do what I need to do)
Public Meetings (usually not an issue)

Don't want to pass them:
Press rights (late game I don't care as much)
Work hours (boy do I hate this reform)
Suffrage (when I have a proportional UH and less than universal suffrage)


The thing about most social reforms is that by the time I can even pass them, the cost is a drop in bucket compared to my military. Who cares if pensions and unemployment cost me 5000 a day? My stockpile is costing me 20-30k a day or more. The increased admin cost of healthcare? No problem. I can get enough crats promoted WITHOUT NFs in just a couple of years through high crat spending. Minimum wage isn't hurting the capitalists because they are swimming in money by the time it passes. Safety regulations? Yeah, it hurts factory profitability, but guess who's making all that cement and machine parts the factories are buying? I am, so the money just gets moved around the economy, not leaving the economy altogether.

Work hours are a real pain, but eventually I end up passing some of them.

That's because there's one thing I hate more than anything: killing my POPs. The game's model of capitalism promotes a view of even POPs as a resource (human resources for the win, and I hate even saying it...). Maximizing POPs is almost always a good thing because of the game's economy; shooting thousands of communists every year just puts a crimp in my plans for economic domination. :)
Click to expand...

I agree with most of that, but:

1) Press Rights: Passing "Free Press" and "All Trade Unions Allowed" reforms early will help you get the health and schooling reforms sooner, because Free Press increases consciousness and Trade union reforms increases desire for social reforms. Of course unless you can get your Upper House dominated by Socialists early on, then of course avoid these reforms. Personally, the only time I had more than 40% Socialists in the Upper House is when I kept refusing to pass the maximum works hours reform for years.

2) You said: "Suffrage (when I have a proportional UH and less than universal suffrage)". By Proportional Upper house you mean "Based on Population" reform? And what do you mean by Suffrage reform? Do you mean universal voting?
If yes, then how does that affect your Upper House?

3) Why do you buy cement and machine parts constantly and how? When you are not using them to build factories or railroads, you stop buying these goods once your stockpile is filled until you use some. When Capitalists build something they get it themselves from your factories or the world market. Unless of course you have "Allow POPs to buy from National Stockpile" ticked all the time.
 
Dron22 said:
2) You said: "Suffrage (when I have a proportional UH and less than universal suffrage)". By Proportional Upper house you mean "Based on Population" reform? And what do you mean by Suffrage reform? Do you mean universal voting?
If yes, then how does that affect your Upper House?
Click to expand...

What I want is either an UH that is appointed (rich POPs only) or proportional IF I have wealth voting or landed voting. This makes it much easier to get it liberal in the early and middle game because middle class POPs are more likely to be liberal and rich POPs are more likely to support reform if they are doing well. Letting a bunch of farmers and soldiers vote in the UH too early just means that the UH sits at 60% conservative for decades on end. Bleh.

3) Why do you buy cement and machine parts constantly and how? When you are not using them to build factories or railroads, you stop buying these goods once your stockpile is filled until you use some. When Capitalists build something they get it themselves from your factories or the world market. Unless of course you have "Allow POPs to buy from National Stockpile" ticked all the time.
Click to expand...

No. What I mean is that the safety reforms increase factory consumption of maintenance goods like cement and machine parts. If my own economy is producing all the machine parts and cement that my industry consumes when I keep increasing safety reforms, then the money those factories spends is spent at home. As long as I'm not importing British machine parts or German cement, it's fine.
 
paulthebug said:
How about NF clergy or clerk, if I have weighted wealth or wealth? Since I can get more clergy or clerk in number?
Click to expand...

That would work only if your Upper House is set to "Based on Population", but the problem is that you will eventually have to pass universal suffrage and let everyone vote and if it's still quite early then you will be stuck with a 60% or 70% Conservative Upper House. But using NF to boost clergy and clerk is always a good idea as they both boost your research points. As for Capitalists, just get a good number of them in the most populated and industrialized states, you should have at least some of them in most of your states but don't focus on Capitalists too much when you have other POPs to promote, you just need a small number of Capitalist spread across your nation which does not take very long to accomplish.
 
Last edited:
Secret Master said:
What I want is either an UH that is appointed (rich POPs only) or proportional IF I have wealth voting or landed voting. This makes it much easier to get it liberal in the early and middle game because middle class POPs are more likely to be liberal and rich POPs are more likely to support reform if they are doing well. Letting a bunch of farmers and soldiers vote in the UH too early just means that the UH sits at 60% conservative for decades on end. Bleh.

But you would eventually have to pass universal voting, so I leave it the Upper House set to "Appointed" until late game.
What would you say about Press Reforms then? Don't they help getting the people to demand social reforms?



No. What I mean is that the safety reforms increase factory consumption of maintenance goods like cement and machine parts. If my own economy is producing all the machine parts and cement that my industry consumes when I keep increasing safety reforms, then the money those factories spends is spent at home. As long as I'm not importing British machine parts or German cement, it's fine.
Click to expand...

But that could drive some factories out of business too as not all them will be able to afford to buy more machine parts. At least minimum wage reforms actually boost the cash for your POP's which means that they buy more goods from your factories which can compensate for increased costs.
 
Dron22 said:
But that could drive some factories out of business too as not all them will be able to afford to buy more machine parts. At least minimum wage reforms actually boost the cash for your POP's which means that they buy more goods from your factories which can compensate for increased costs.
Click to expand...

Just get management strategy and everything will be hunky dory:D
 
Dron22 said:
But that could drive some factories out of business too as not all them will be able to afford to buy more machine parts. At least minimum wage reforms actually boost the cash for your POP's which means that they buy more goods from your factories which can compensate for increased costs.
Click to expand...

I agree that minimum wage is a better reform. But by the time I can usually pass safety regulations, factories are able to handle the hit in maintenance goods.

I should point out that safety regulations in the early game are bad. Machine parts are way too expensive in 1850; a sudden increase in maintenance goods will send factories into bankruptcy. But I'm usually not in a position to grant any social reforms that early in the game.

Note: I haven't tried gaming the reform system too much in AHD since it is easier to pass reforms than it was in vanilla. Those of you passing tons of reforms really early might want keep in mind the costs of those reforms.
 
Secret Master said:
I agree that minimum wage is a better reform. But by the time I can usually pass safety regulations, factories are able to handle the hit in maintenance goods.

I should point out that safety regulations in the early game are bad. Machine parts are way too expensive in 1850; a sudden increase in maintenance goods will send factories into bankruptcy. But I'm usually not in a position to grant any social reforms that early in the game.

Note: I haven't tried gaming the reform system too much in AHD since it is easier to pass reforms than it was in vanilla. Those of you passing tons of reforms really early might want keep in mind the costs of those reforms.
Click to expand...

I had on a few occasions been able to pass social reforms quite early, all I did to help this was pass all the Trade Union and Press Reforms. Early in the game I would only pass health care and education reforms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back