I just imagined that these gold mines were not very productive, as compared to the other trade goods being produces, which produced far more.
I didn't pay good money for this game so I would then have to imagine parts of it!!!!
I just imagined that these gold mines were not very productive, as compared to the other trade goods being produces, which produced far more.
I thought you wouldn't care.
What about the province losing its gold and maybe reverting to iron or something else? After all gold mines ran dry and I doubt if any lasted 400+ years that the game does. So if you want additional benefits you should have a risk that they disappear.
I wouldn't be surprised if that idea/theory would be dropped anytime soon. With average annual inflation of 1 or 2%, the inflation-wave was hardly a wave at all. Destructive, yes. Because of price-systems that couldn't adjust as easily. But just 'making things more expensive'? That's a bit hard for me too believe. It's not like gold was suddenly in abundance by 1600 in Spain or so. (If you were to measure the impact of the vast debts of the Spanish throne, now that would have been something. Or economic decline due to the fall of main economic sectors. But just a few tons of gold?)This a thousand times. Gold devastated the Spanish economy, thanks to bullionist thinking, and had adverse effects on some of the largest economies of Europe. A combination of high inflation and low wages, as well as high prices for necessities was not a recipe for success.
I didn't pay good money for this game so I would then have to imagine parts of it!!!!
It was not just the inflation that killed the Spanish economy. They also focused so heavily on the extraction of gold from the New World that their domestic economy suffered. While countries like England and France invested in what qualified as industry, for that time period, Spain continued to invest in its gold extraction. So, when the dust settled, although the French and English economies were certainly in a downturn, they at least had something to work with, whereas Spain did not.I wouldn't be surprised if that idea/theory would be dropped anytime soon. With average annual inflation of 1 or 2%, the inflation-wave was hardly a wave at all. Destructive, yes. Because of price-systems that couldn't adjust as easily. But just 'making things more expensive'? That's a bit hard for me too believe. It's not like gold was suddenly in abundance by 1600 in Spain or so. (If you were to measure the impact of the vast debts of the Spanish throne, now that would have been something. Or economic decline due to the fall of main economic sectors. But just a few tons of gold?)
Game-wise gold should indeed be valuable. Not by the late-game of course, but definitly early- and mid-game. Do we actually know of major conquests/wars/... fought just for control over goldmines?
I don't care how Paradox makes it the best trade good no.
You can't eat iron, but you can make tools for your workers, ploughshares for your farmers, wheel rims for your wagons, and weapons and armour for your soldiers from it.
Gold's only uses in the period covered by EU3 are as decoration and as money.
I didn't pay good money for this game so I would then have to imagine parts of it!!!!
It was not just the inflation that killed the Spanish economy. They also focused so heavily on the extraction of gold from the New World that their domestic economy suffered. While countries like England and France invested in what qualified as industry, for that time period, Spain continued to invest in its gold extraction. So, when the dust settled, although the French and English economies were certainly in a downturn, they at least had something to work with, whereas Spain did not.
You also have to imagine how it makes sense for Muscowy to become HRE, but in all serioussness: There are many things which had to be abstracted for the game to have any semblance of performance, for example during a War you also have to imagine how your troops are being suplied etc.
Make an event that has a chance to occur in gold-producing provinces, raising the base tax by 1, while giving a small amount of inflation.
In addition, one could argue that in a barter economy, the amount of money equals almost by definition the amount of goods. As such, it may not be too great an idea to consider gold as the only 'money' in game, or to connect the mining of gold to inflation and economc downfall in the frst place.Fiscal policy among the big states in the early modern period was pretty shockingly bad - France defaulted something like 10 or 15 times from the mid-1550s through the 1600s, and Spain operated similarly, largely because they had limited ways of raising taxes. The fact that EU3 players can actually manage their economy is, in a way, quite unrealistic. I'd agree with the above poster that, in cases like this, one must make the game functional before one tries for historical accuracy.
If you really want a more historical approach to the game, I guess you should basically remove censustaxes almost completely, and have the effects of buildings changed into cheaper debt (or just temporary access to debt, preferrably with skyhigh interest-rates). Minting should be close to impossible, and the game should last no longer than 40 or 50 years (to reflect life-expectancy and long-term-planning of your average ruler or noblemen). I guess in a set-up like that, even multiplayer games would result in mass-endebting yourself, raising armies and a general steal-thy-neighbour-attitude. Long-term games would see countries wrecked badly because of 'suboptimal' fiscal policies. I also guess that's slightly more realistic than creating excessive tax-incomes, or planning investments (including colonization) that will by definition pay for themselves in two centuries. (Honestly, what kind of person would invest nowadays in something that definitly pays off by 2100?)
As it is now, the player simply has no incentive to ruin his country. It would be a nice feature for EU4.
As it is now, the player simply has no incentive to ruin his country. It would be a nice feature for EU4.
(Honestly, what kind of person would invest nowadays in something that definitly pays off by 2100?)
I didn't pay good money for this game so I would then have to imagine parts of it!!!!