• 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.
Just caught up with the AAR after a while and I see you finally moved for Johore. That should pick up your income a bit giving you more room to maneuver.

Still, I have to say I'm quite perplexed by some of the choices that you've taken. I can understand researching the "extra" military tech if your not going to reach the other westernization goals in time, but the move to landed voting and subsequent liberal ruling party... that's going to set you back some ways in terms of getting that military score up. Limiting your military spending (and taxation) is not really helpful there, and I have a rather strong feeling that you won't resorting to spamming leaders to reach the requirements :). Let's hope you have something special in your back pocket to surprise us all. ;)
 
Decided to pop in and say nice AAR. V2 looks very interesting and I will be buying it soon when I can be bothered to get my debit card out and get it :D

Keep up the good work.
 
Still, I have to say I'm quite perplexed by some of the choices that you've taken. I can understand researching the "extra" military tech if your not going to reach the other westernization goals in time, but the move to landed voting and subsequent liberal ruling party... that's going to set you back some ways in terms of getting that military score up. Limiting your military spending (and taxation) is not really helpful there, and I have a rather strong feeling that you won't resorting to spamming leaders to reach the requirements :). Let's hope you have something special in your back pocket to surprise us all. ;)

To be fair Siam only has (once all the parties exist) 3 choices for Economic Policy: Laissez-Faire, State Capitalism and Planned Economy. the Socialist Parties have Planned Economy, the Conservatives have State Capitalism and the liberal parties have Laissez-Faire. no interventionism :(
 
It's not spamming leaders. The game doesn't give good leaders and when it does it kills them off very quickly. I had a +4 attack, +4 defence who lasted two months as opposed to a really crap general who lasted 30 years and never saw action. Out of 20 generals, I never have more than 4 or 5 whom I use to command armies. Without taking new leaders, leadership will reach 60 and just sit there.

Siam is building more ships and raising fresh troops: it needs more admirals and generals.
 
Obviously there are "legitimate" uses for a huge leader pool, but as it is now, the 4 military score per leader seems a bit excessive. Meaning that one can get to 50 military score even if there's no chance for an army that would require such a leader pool. This greatly undermines the necessity of the military score requirement to begin with, since the score doesn't necessarily depict the military might as much as the size of one's leader reserve. Just push out 13 simultaneous leaders and you're set for westernization, army or no army. Without leaders "dying young", the problem would be even more severe. It would however seem (to me at least), that a large number of leaders in the pool could maybe have an expediting effect in the demise of your existing leaders(?). Not too sure on that one though.

But you're right in the regard that "spamming leaders" would not really be an issue for the Siam Rensslaer is building. At this stage bumping up the officer population makes sense, +4 ms/leader or not.

Sorry for getting a bit OT, looking forward to a new AAR update, as it looks to be one more day of boredom at the office.
 
Decided to pop in and say nice AAR. V2 looks very interesting and I will be buying it soon when I can be bothered to get my debit card out and get it :D

Keep up the good work.
Most excellent! :D Welcome, MidgetRoxx! Thanks.

Being in Singapore; am following your AAR with interest as it is natural that one day I will want to play Johore (not the Singapore colony) and take on neighbours like Siam :D Keep it up.
Thanks, Tequila_powered! Welcome! I'd love to be able to visit Singapore one of these days. It seems... I don't remember who it was, but there was another fellow following my AAR in the old Victoria who was from Singapore, but I cannot recall who it was. Or maybe he was part of the beta team for EU III. Silktrader, maybe? Can't remember if he was from Singapore or not.

The other comments are all related, so I'm going to answer Isovasara, Chief Ragusa and Vaderi together.

Vaderi is correct -- Siam does not have the ability to choose an "in between" policy type between State Capitalism and Laissez Faire, so running its economy on balance like I would like to is somewhat like rowing a canoe (i.e. a boat without a rudder/tiller) -- you paddle on one side for a while until you've started to turn to the side, and then you paddle on the other side! :D

Early in the game, State Capitalism made sense, but it got to be "too much", so I switched for a short time. Later I switched back. At my present point in gameplay, as I approach 1900, State Capitalism has again gotten to be "too much" and its a matter of various factors when I will be forced to switch to Laissez Faire again. I didn't mind the tax situation too much -- it did reduce my taxes from what they were, but I generally prefer to run taxes low anyway, and if that means I have to increase tariffs for a while, so be it. The military spending, too, had not been much above 50% anyway, so it didn't hurt me too much. Most of my gradual buildup of my military has been using 45%, 50% or as high as 60% military spending, but rarely ever higher. I've increased at a rate which somewhat matches my financial ability to build to meet the maximum level of troops -- a level which would never have existed if I'd spent more on military spending instead of saving it in my treasury (i.e. I'd have ended up with more soldier POPs and the ability to recruit many brigades but no cash to build them with).

As for spamming leaders, I'm sure there's an imbalance there, and perhaps an opportunity for exploit. But I've not been doing it that way. Because of my low Military Spending, my Officer pool has not been growing any faster than my ability to build ships/units, so my officer/leaders have grown at approximately the same rate (i.e. a natural, logical rate) as my armies. I'm sure it would be possible for someone to max military spending so that they get lots of officers, but they would at the same time be getting lots of soldier POPs (i.e. potential military strength), and so I'm not so sure it badly skews the Military Score. Still, I can see the possible exploit -- rest assured I'm not using it. Early in the game, I found I had more need for officers than I had, and I couldn't recruit them fast enough. Later in the game, I have too many, and I can't stop them from coming unless I let my LP stagnate at 60 without building anybody. But by that time my Mil Score is high enough for legitimate reasons I don't think it's skewing anything, despite my having bunches of leaders of varying qualities (never seen a +4! Wow -- that would be nice).

Thanks, everybody! Sorry no update. Some of you may be aware that Colorado has a really screwed up election season going on (I'm a political volunteer, and to some extent a leader, so...), and I'm kind of embroiled in that right now. It's taking hours away from gaming and other priorities. :D

Rensslaer
 
As soon as leader dies, the MIL score is reduced by 4. I suppose it's possible to have 13 leaders in around 20 years, but they'd not all live that long. Poor generals ought to reduce the military score, improved whren they die and the better the general the better the mil score, but the greater the loss when that leader dies. The +4 leader would have been a wow, had he lived to cross the frontier and see any actual combat. I had to make do with a +3 instead. Rensslaer the moral is I have seen a +4, but not got any use out of him.

You pretty much have to run tariffs high to protect infant industries as you industrialise. Although I run State Capitalism, I never built any industry myself. As far as I can tell in the early 1900s is that ones capitalists won't expand the factories. I 'm not sure if that a bug or if you need laissez faire to have factories expanded by ones capitalists. Somehow, I don't envisage the Dalai Lama in any incarnation building factories by his State. I've not been able to switch to Liberalism - everytime they do get a boost, they lose half of the gain at the next round of appointments. I'll be an avid reader of Rensslaer's industrialization pattern.

As for leader pools, the British entered the Napoleonic Wars with over 200, only about 60 odd would trusted to command troops. Big pools of generals is pretty much the norm for armies; most of that pool is stagnant.

Most of your rivals create leaders at the same speed you do, so can't really pull away from another power just by creating leaders.
 
Question: Is VII like Vic1 in that it is better to have even a crappy leader in charge of a regiment than the default one? To clarify for we who have yet tohave the spare change for the game.

Yes, up to a point. Leaderless armies get a -2 penalty, same as a river crossing. So unless your general is worse than a -2 penalty, anyone is better than no-one.
 
Question: Is VII like Vic1 in that it is better to have even a crappy leader in charge of a regiment than the default one? To clarify for we who have yet tohave the spare change for the game.

Sorry, I meant to respond earlier.

Yes, it's the same, and the developers kept telling me it was always better to have a leader than no leader, so that's what I wrote into the Strategy Guide. But in practice, if you have a -2 Att/Def -50% Morale -10% Org leader, I'd rather keep him in the stable and let them use somebody else or go without. :)

When I get -50% morale leaders, I sometimes remove them after the battle so the unit will recover faster, but this is unnecessary micromanagement, and most of the time I don't bother.

I do spend quite a bit of time figuring out which leaders are best for which formation -- Attack vs. Defense, etc. And in a coming update I'll explain how to "transmit" new leaders through enemy territory if people don't know how to do that. Otherwise, any armies in enemy territory are stuck without leadership until you take the province.

Rensslaer
 
And in a coming update I'll explain how to "transmit" new leaders through enemy territory if people don't know how to do that. Otherwise, any armies in enemy territory are stuck without leadership until you take the province.

Rensslaer

Sounds interesting! Looking forward to that nugget, and of course the general course of Siamese history. :)
 
Remember, I recently allowed the Liberal Party into power, rather than the Conservative Royalist Party.

Because of the makeup of the Upper House (and I don't remember if I've seen an election since I brought the Liberals in or not -- seems not, but I obviously already had enough Liberals for Reform -- probably around 45% plus some Conservatives who were afraid enough of the Militancy that they would support Reform), I can enact Reforms.

JeffMethod.jpg


I choose to adopt the Jefferson Method of electing members to parliament. Why? Well, to be quite honest, partly because I didn't like any of the other choices. But also partly because the Jefferson Method allows some sensitivity to popular sentiment (okay -- what's popular with the Rich, anyway) without the likelihood of granting any fringe parties representation.

In 1864 not only am I still dealing with resentment over the collision of traditional Siamese customs with Western ideas and contacts, but also my POPs -- many of them -- are having trouble making ends meet. I lower my spending on Education and Administration in order to try to balance things out. I keep a modest Tariff, and about 50% Taxes, to get a gradual income for my Treasury (much of which is going toward building army units and Men o'War right now.

Budget1864Lib.jpg


Believe it or not, the reduced spending on Admin and Education doesn't completely stop, or turn around, my increase in Clergy or Literacy -- it just slows it down. I use my National Focus to try to mitigate this slowdown among Clergy. The Focus gets shopped around to different large states where the Clergy population is lower than elsewhere. I don't worry about the slowdown. I have plenty of time to get my Research Points -- this is a temporary economic doldrum.

Clergy.jpg


As you can see, I've been funding the military enough that I have lots of Soldier POPs, which I'm turning into armies as quickly as funds will allow (plus some debt). I'm dreadfully worried that a European power will decide to come knocking, or China, and so I want my military as strong as possible. Plus, I want the freedom to take on a moderately powerful enemy if I see an opportunity that will benefit Siam.

Around September 1864 I get the first election results with a Liberal Party as the Ruling Party. The results drastically favor the Liberals. Of course. Why "of course?" Because of my electoral system, as it stands now -- I have about a 25% bias toward the Ruling Party from Political Parties policy alone. Add in State control of the Press, the method of counting votes, etc. and the Ruling Party will always have a tremendous advantage in Elections until Political Reforms are well established. This is how I've quickly switched the balance of power from the Conservatives to the Liberals when I want to.

LiberalElection.jpg


The resulting Upper House arrangement puts Liberals in control of the Upper House. This will allow me to do Reforms again, when I wish to.

One thing that concerns me is the attention the USA is paying to east Asia. They're a huge and growing power, and they're sniffing around my neighborhood!

USAinAsia.jpg


They already have Japan in their Sphere of Influence, and they are working on Korea (note the "friendly" opinion Korea has of them, and the number of Influence points USA has invested in Korea. They're very, very close to entering the USA Sphere.

It's also worth noting that they have 25 points of Influence upon Siam, and we're already "friendly" to them -- the step before coming into their Sphere also! Hmm...

By mid 1866, I still have not been able to get a handle on either, the economic crisis for my POPs who can't buy enough of their Needs, and the rising Militancy which is partly caused by their lack of money.

30pctMilSpend.jpg


I crank back the spending and taxing again. Tariffs and Taxes lower, across the board, and my "big ticket" spending category (Military) goes down to 30%. Yes, I'm making a concerted effort to increase my Military Score in order to Civilize, but this seems to be an economic recession that I can't ignore without Militancy accelerating.

Umm.... I know this doesn't make much sense in light of the previous paragraph about our economic crisis. But I saw an opportunity for a quick score against Luang Prabang, and so I took advantage of their recently broken treaty to tackle them alone. The costs would have to be covered by our lenders. Burma was actually allied, and I prepared to defend that border too, but Burma was too weak to do anything -- they declined to participate in the war.

PrabangWar.jpg


It was a quick war, of course, (no enemy troops!) and so the costs were limited. Only 4 1/2 months from beginning to end. Our Infamy had been high to begin with, but a Humiliation war only increases Infamy by less than 2 points (if I recall correctly), so no problem there. The Prestige from winning the war catapults us over our 40 Prestige threshold for the Embrace Westernization decision. Very close in Military Score too, but I'll wait a little bit on that until we can handle the expense to expand.

PrestigeBoost.jpg


It's worth noting that, if I hadn't gone to war, I would likely have gotten the needed Prestige boost a few months later from Researching Romanticism. It wasn't 100% necessary for me to do this war, but I did speed up the Civilization process by about 9 months or so. That was worth it to me, to get out of the stagnation.

Civilization.jpg


I want to point to a couple things in the screenshot above before we go on. I can enact Political Reform, but choose not to for now. I COULD end Slavery, but that would anger alot of my Population because Slavery is THE most popular issue on the minds of both, voters and the people in general. I'm starting to see a little peep out of the socialist thought patterns, so I'll keep a careful eye on that. Not a problem for now. It's the Reactionaries and Anarcho-Liberals that have me slightly worried (look at the Rebel list!). But with a Military Score of 50, I should be able to handle any rebellion.

And so... In October 1867, Siam has met the requirements to become a Civilized country! :D

NewNation.jpg


Making the Decision to Embrace Westernization lifts us by another 5 Prestige, so that we have almost 100 total score, which is NOT insignificant.

Now, the time is ripe for us to look around for our next challenge, as an aggressive newly Civilized power, ready to test its new freedom!
 
Huzzah! Westernized! :) Presumably your infamy has been whittled down to an acceptable level, so you can subject the neighbouring countries to your wise and enlightened rule? IIRC, establish protectorate gives less infamy than a regular conquest.
 
Well done on westernising!

I've finally caved in and bought Vicky 2 thanks in no small part to this AAR.

My first run through with Argentina has gone a lot less smoothly than your modernisation of Siam, although I haven't been such a bully! :D
 
Good to see Siam has finally made it to the grown up's table. What will be your research emphasis after civilizing? Pluralism buffs through culture? Or maybe some immediate techs from the military tree to help "liberate" rest of SE Asia? I guess we'll see soon enough.

One tiny request though. Although I recognize the need to heavily crop the screenshots, I, and probably plenty of others, would like to see the top info bar with all the critical information in more shots. There's an awful lot said there and if you could squeeze it in some of the shots occasionally, it would give an immediate context to your thinking/strategy at any given stage. It would also give us the chance to compare the AAR to our own experiences in say RP generation or pop growth or other aspects that are often left untold. Pictures being worth a whole bunch of words and all that.
 
Excellence.

I would merely enquire about whether the American Civil War has taken place, what with the Democrats in power in the late 1860s, and whether you agree that those borders with Burma and Cambodia need to be tidied.
 
Congratulations, you beat me to westernisation by 5 years.

Once you reach 100% admin efficiency, is there any point in having any significant investment in administration? Does it go down if you neglect it below certain level?