You mean having techs boost the amount of money that can be loaned internationally as the game goes on? Interesting idea, esp if everyone maxes out their loans in the early game.
Developer Diary 23 – Gold
- Thread starter King
- 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.
You mean having techs boost the amount of money that can be loaned internationally as the game goes on? Interesting idea, esp if everyone maxes out their loans in the early game.
For simplicity's sake we say 2% of a population of 100 million work in railway related activities, ie 2 million. A population of 100 million translates to 25 million POPs, who are assumed to represent your entire work force. Of that 25 million, 2 million = 8% are working in rail.
Of course this is based on the assumption the game makes that exactly 25% of each segment of your population is your available workforce, while the other 75% are not interested in employment.
That's the important part. The rest is if you need more convincing (though I'm too tired to guarantee it will make sense):
There are situations where the percentage is unchanged by the POP = 4 people set up, for example implementing women's suffrage. Some people make the mistake that it would benefit the more populace lower class, but the proportions in that case are unchanged. If your POP make up is 6 poor:3 middle:1 rich (60%:30%:10%), and you double each class' vote by going from male universal suffrage to giving females the vote too, the split will still be 60%:30%:10% (though the absolute differences will be larger, this would only make a difference if Mrs Smith were allowed to vote differently to Mr Smith - complexity that is not needed yet).
To work out whether the percentages will change, you need to know whether the population you're considering has changed, and whether the subset sizes have changed. For the women's suffrage case, voting population has doubled, but so has each class-subset's population, therefore no change in percentage terms. For our railway workers case, the population under consideration has changed from your whole country's 100 million to just the workforce of 25 million (by ignoring the 75 million not seeking employment), but the railway workers subset is unchanged at 2 million (because they're entirely made up of members of the workforce, you haven't cut any of them). Therefore there is a change in percentage, ie what I showed in the first paragraph.
________________________________________________________________
As for the gold, it sounds good to me.
Last edited:
This wouldn't work. Without any banks that can go bankrupt because of risky lending you will be showing only part of truth. This would be like free insurance or something like that. Any other system than gold standart would be too complicated to be shown properely in the game. You can try going circles around it with events or inventions, but I am afraid every "cool" ideas I've read here was only half done at best.
I'm sure it had a huge impact over time, but for Vic2 I think that should be modelled by gradually increasing RGO efficiency and tax efficiency together with growing expectations, rather than with unnecessarily complicated mechanisms "layering" a railway game and a shipping game on top of a global political and economic model...
In short, I think that the transportation technologies are very important, but in a game of this scope it would be better to abstract their effects rather than try to model them explicitly - at least until the "basic" model is stable and understood.
But the idea is intended to generate crashes... like modern banking the system takes on the nature of a giant globe-spanning pyramid scheme. Think of the crashes as 'venting' excess money, hopefully at the expense of radicalize-able POPs yearning for a strong man with charismatically delivered answers and a grudge against international finance.
How many resources will change in game? I seem to recall Rubber being one, and oil, and gold, any others?
Without having read the whole thread:
Since gold did only back up the currencies of the time, as opposed to being the currency itself, wouldnt it make more sense, to limit what countries can loan from their national banks by what amount of gold they have deposited (only talking about the state-side ´revenue´ of precious metals, not the rgo-workers´ side - the later would be paid for their gold in $$$ by the NB directly)? The difference is: In the former case, the states would have to pay interest for all their money (as long as it´s not coming from taxes), while in the later, they´d get it for free.
The interest on money at its genesis is the impetus for growth in capitalism IMHO, be the currency backed by gold or not and thus should not be overlooked in the model. It will make competition really fierce, as growth is not optional, but a must. You will see a scramble for africa. And you will see nations going bancrupt.
Since gold did only back up the currencies of the time, as opposed to being the currency itself, wouldnt it make more sense, to limit what countries can loan from their national banks by what amount of gold they have deposited (only talking about the state-side ´revenue´ of precious metals, not the rgo-workers´ side - the later would be paid for their gold in $$$ by the NB directly)? The difference is: In the former case, the states would have to pay interest for all their money (as long as it´s not coming from taxes), while in the later, they´d get it for free.
The interest on money at its genesis is the impetus for growth in capitalism IMHO, be the currency backed by gold or not and thus should not be overlooked in the model. It will make competition really fierce, as growth is not optional, but a must. You will see a scramble for africa. And you will see nations going bancrupt.
But the idea is intended to generate crashes... like modern banking the system takes on the nature of a giant globe-spanning pyramid scheme. Think of the crashes as 'venting' excess money, hopefully at the expense of radicalize-able POPs yearning for a strong man with charismatically delivered answers and a grudge against international finance.
When there will be less abstracted banks in the game and more complex "savings and loans" system, I would maybe agree.
Isn't the National Bank system here like an abstracted version of (among other things) Savings & Loans?
A bit late on getting to this diary so this may have been addressed, but will macroeconomic actions like devaluing or appreciating the currency relative to gold be possible? The diary makes it seem like this won't be the case, and I imagine it would be difficult to implement, but being able to manage depressions et. al. through macroeconomic actions would be interesting.
Gold IS the currency. There are no national currencies. It's an ok abstraction as anything else, e.g. national currencies with international currencymakrets etc, would be very complicated to implement. Albeit cool...
Isn't the National Bank system here like an abstracted version of (among other things) Savings & Loans?
I didn't mean Savings&Loans but simple savings and loans
And the abstraction with national bank is too big abstraction to make it work.Anyway I wonder how many people would call for dynamic crises and real monetary system if this game would be developed prior to 2008
I didn't mean Savings&Loans but simple savings and loans
Anyway I wonder how many people would call for dynamic crises and real monetary system if this game would be developed prior to 2008
lol
no but there were at least 3 important crisis in the period with diplomatic, economic, social and/or political effects. you know, some mechanism should be included to at least have chances to be driven to a big crash after the massive development of credit.
This point of the game actually disappoints me but the game looks good and we have to think that no paradox game lacks a good expansion to extend it so we can still cross our fingers.
So hypothetically, if you controlled enough of the gold supply you could throttle the world market to an extent, right? I mean if my country has 80% of known gold production and I don't spend it on anything, and only my populace spends their share, then I can effectively put the brakes on the world market...slowing it, though not stopping it? And then once I've built sufficient reserves (or just found lots and lots of ways to try to keep the gold in-country as much as possible) I could open the floodgates all at once and try to outrun the market on the way down?
::strokes evil pet cat:: gooood. gooood.
If you hoard money, you'd theoretically create deflation, not impact real economy activity.
Britain started selling opium to China in order to reverse the currency (silver) deficit that they had there, which eventually led to the Opium Wars. While I don't expect things to be quite that in-depth (forcing a country to buy goods at gunpoint), a monetary system that adheres to the basic underlying idea makes me quite happy.
Well, if the rest of the world values their money alot more than you do, then you can effectively leave them in the position of having unfulfilled demand, stocking yourself up quite nicely before a good ole' fashioned war against somebody who can no longer afford it because you never bought their goods...
It's not the way to create the wealthiest or most efficient country, but it could be fun just to be the monopoly guy in a world full of beggars.
As to the point about the Opium War: I guess if somebody like me was hoarding gold, that'd be a good time for some other country to develop their machine part manufacturing abilities or something else, to force me to spend...
Will the pops and RGOs be price and wage sensitive?
Will there be the ability to offer more money to succeed in purchasing short supply items?
Will there be the ability to offer more money to succeed in purchasing short supply items?
Deflation is awfully detrimental to lender's and manufactures.
After all, prices and wages are inherently sticky.
As people won't cut their wages and prices voluntarily and simply cut back on other areas when it gets in bad extremes. And usually when they do, its too late to stop the deflationary death spire where layoffs and lack of purchasing happens.
Say... The great depression.