I'm playing AHD, might get HoD soon, so i'm not sure exactly how the colonial migration stuff works in HoD. Now my issue is that no matter what I do, I can't get people to move to my colonies. I've gotten all the techs for boosted migration and stuff but still nothing. Example: France at the 1836 start has a colony in Northern S. America, and the first national focus I use is to promote immigration there. Yet over the course of 20 years, only 10% of the state becomes french. And the overall population was no greater than 4k so I had less than 400 pops immigrate there. My proposed solution is a subsidize immigration button. I don't have a clear idea of how this would work yet but basically you'd be paying your primary or accepted culture pops to move to your colonies. Opinions?
Colonial Migration, I feel like it should be greater
- Thread starter JamesBond88
- 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.
From a gameplay stance, I'd like to be able to encourage colonial migration, because it'd open up new strategies.
On the other hand, I don't think there's much historic precedent for this. European colonies were generally poorer per capita than their respective homelands, especially since various types of colonial exploitation didn't always result in wealth flowing into native hands. In-game, this is arguably represented by the fact you can't get some of the event-based RGO bonuses (Tractors, electrical lighting, etc.) in your colonies. Either way, with some exceptions (due to European fascination with Oceania) I don't think a lot of people saw salvation or a better life in the colonies, and most of the ones that did were probably already well off to begin with.
Gameplaywise, if you select a specific POP group from the population screen and scroll over the number indicating their amount of colonial migration, you can look at the factors causing it and try to encourage migration. I think the canonical strategy for this is to industrialize and then shut down massive amounts of factories, causing unemployment. That opens up its own can of worms, so it may not be a great idea.
On the other hand, I don't think there's much historic precedent for this. European colonies were generally poorer per capita than their respective homelands, especially since various types of colonial exploitation didn't always result in wealth flowing into native hands. In-game, this is arguably represented by the fact you can't get some of the event-based RGO bonuses (Tractors, electrical lighting, etc.) in your colonies. Either way, with some exceptions (due to European fascination with Oceania) I don't think a lot of people saw salvation or a better life in the colonies, and most of the ones that did were probably already well off to begin with.
Gameplaywise, if you select a specific POP group from the population screen and scroll over the number indicating their amount of colonial migration, you can look at the factors causing it and try to encourage migration. I think the canonical strategy for this is to industrialize and then shut down massive amounts of factories, causing unemployment. That opens up its own can of worms, so it may not be a great idea.
Keep in mind that even after more than 100 years of colonialism very few of the people who lived in them were settlers from the "colonizing" nation. After all would you leave England or Spain for Niger or Somalia in the 19th century? I wouldn't do it NOW, lol.
I'm pretty sure most of the settlers to uncivilized lands were soldiers that decided to live there and go native.
You have example such as North Africa, with a non negligeable number of French people living there (though they went back during colonial war (50's-60's) as they were victim of massacres and tortures).
Adding to the french example libya was somewhat colonised by italians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_settlers_in_Libya
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_settlers_in_Libya
Indeed Deda, I read abou tthis while reading about the history of Libya, I think that definitely shows historical precedent.