About idea groups, mercantilism and the coming DLC

[HansBaer]

There have been many suggestions, some good, some bad, about changing the existing idea groups. Nothing major happened, though i'm quite pleased with the tweaks that were done to them since launch.
There are still some major issues that always bother me when i play the "trade game", go vertical not horizontal, e.g. control the trade and get filthy rich.

First of, the trade ideas:
Although they are kind of ok overall, i find them lackluster and just never take them and even if i do it is very late in the timeline. The reason is not that they are bad taken by themselves, it's rather that the other idea groups are so much better and trade ideas can be so easily supplemented.
Taking expansion and naval ideas is simply the better choice in 90% of the games, there may be some exceptions i can't think of right now. This is specifically true for merchant republics, the prime candidates for a game of trade dominance. Plutocracy, expansion and naval ideas are definitely the way to go in that case, i don't think this can be disputed.
As a merchant republic, you get a total of 6 merchants without even taking the trade ideas, 7 if you are the Hansa or the Netherlands. (2 base, 1 merchant republic, 1 East Indian trade, 1 Plut, 1 Expansion). You can steer all the trade you want with that number if you use the trade map layout halfway efficiently.
Even as a standard kingdom, 4 merchants are usually 1 more than you really need.

Imho, the only nation trade ideas were somewhat viable for was England. If you wanted to control all of the American and African/Asian trade, you needed them. Yet, our much beloved WETN reduced the needed number to exactly 2 merchants, 3 if you want one for the collection boost in your home node, 4 if you don't want anything to flow into Alexandria. Also 4 if you want to channel everything around to the North Sea.

I know there might be some (not notable) exceptions where they still seems halfway viable, Ragusa for example if you want to switch to a merchant republic and for the nice Naval FL boost early on. Just switching to a kingdom and getting expansion and/or naval would still be the better choice imho.

Trade ideas are kind of in the same spot like quantity, not bad per se, but just worse than the alternatives under most circumstances. Whereas, in my opinion, they should be a MUST HAVE for every nation that wants to be seriously involved in the trade business. But unlike quantity, i think this could be easily fixed for trade because there is another "feature" that always bothers me, namely

Mercantilism

Why is there no real downside to it!??!!? 'Nough said


Suggestion

How about, kind of fitting for the next DLC, you rearrange those things.

• Kick naval ideas out
• Add Mercantilist Ideas
• Add Free Trade Ideas
• Introduce a malus in foreign nodes for high mercantilism similar to the bonus it gives in home nodes. Foreign nodes are those you don't own any land in and/or are in another region.

Mercantilist Ideas:

• Merchant, +20% Mercantilism
• Local Trade Power
• Trade income
• A big embargo efficiency boost
• Maybe a small naval FL boost
• A tax boost
• Revolt risk reduction
• maybe another merchant, or something else useful like production efficiency.

Free Trade Ideas:

• Merchant, -20% Mercantilism
• Trade steering
• Trade income
• Merchant
• A big naval FL boost
• Ship cost + Ship repair out of port
• Colonial, supply and trade range increment
• maybe another merchant, or something else useful like trade efficiency or +2 relations.

This would make those ideas actually useful situationally, for example Mercantilist Ideas for Russia, Free Trade Ideas for England and still neither of both for Austria as prime examples.
Note, this is just a rough sketch and is open for debate, please don't zero in on me for my oversights

I think changes along those lines would be a good fit for the next DLC and could also add some more depth to idea group choices.
I would really love to pick something else than Off, Def, Plut, Naval, Adm, Exploration, Expansion, Innovative, Dip and maybe Quality at least once in a while, i just can't see any reason to do so in the current state.

Opinions?

p.s.: There are some mods, VeF and MEIOU for example iirc, that do something similar and do it good. I don't want to make it seem like i was the only one who thought of that. Yet i think those changes could be essential enough to get included in the vanilla version.

 

[Mauer]

I like these suggestions, Naval is currently too good not to take unless you're landlocked and Mercantilism should have some penalty, though maybe not too much since it is very hard to come by.

For the Mercantilist ideas you suggest I'd change the tax boost or the finisher to some trade value increase in all provinces or maybe some boost to trade power gained from CN, protectorates and peace deals.

 

[HansBaer]

I like these suggestions, Naval is currently too good not to take unless you're landlocked and Mercantilism should have some penalty, though maybe not too much since it is very hard to come by.

For the Mercantilist ideas you suggest I'd change the tax boost or the finisher to some trade value increase in all provinces or maybe some boost to trade power gained from CN, protectorates and peace deals.

Good suggestions, though i imagine the Mercantilism events more like a choice between foreign and home power. Not get Dip points or Mercantilism as it is now, i never took the dip points. Maybe you should even be able to spend Dip points to increase or decrease Mercantilism as you will.
Something else i just thought of: How about getting the trade war CB against everyone that shares your home node as a Mercantilist finisher?

Also i forgot to add something obvious: There have to be bad events if you take both, like +3 inflation, merchants leaving etc.

 

[Nirmara]

Trade ideas actually have a bunch of decisions related:

House of Trade: Adds 5% mercantilism, +2.5% global trade income, +5% stability cost modifier, -5% light ship cost

Merchant Shipping Act: Adds 5% mercantilism, +2.5% Trade efficiency, -5% global tax modifier

Pass Importation Act: -5% mercantilism, +10% global trade income, -5% production efficiency modifier, +5% technology cost

Pass Navigation Act: +10% naval force limit, +0.5 navy tradition, -10% manpower modifier, -1 diplomatic relations limit

Plus, each merchant (over 2) increase your naval force limit by 5.

Trade ideas are situational, to make good use of them, you need to be in the right conditions. Still, it's probably the most lucratives ideas (in term of ducats) if you can set up a trading empire.

 

[oblio-]

Maybe I'm missing something but why do you need traders these days? Just to collect, right? I think there was a change in 1.5 but I'm not entirely certain what it was.

 

[Korashy]

There are some downsides to Mercantilism as high Mercantilism won't allow you to enact some decisions. India Trade Company for example.

 

[HansBaer]

Trade ideas actually have a bunch of decisions related:

House of Trade: Adds 5% mercantilism, +2.5% global trade income, +5% stability cost modifier, -5% light ship cost

Merchant Shipping Act: Adds 5% mercantilism, +2.5% Trade efficiency, -5% global tax modifier

Pass Importation Act: -5% mercantilism, +10% global trade income, -5% production efficiency modifier, +5% technology cost

Pass Navigation Act: +10% naval force limit, +0.5 navy tradition, -10% manpower modifier, -1 diplomatic relations limit

Plus, each merchant (over 2) increase your naval force limit by 5.

Trade ideas are situational, to make good use of them, you need to be in the right conditions. Still, it's probably the most lucratives ideas (in term of ducats) if you can set up a trading empire.

This is all true, but it only adds to the points i made imho, as these are some of the worst decision in game.
I also stated that the force limit increase is nice in the beginning, but there is no reason to choose them over naval if FL is what you are looking for.
I'm not sure as it is hard to try out, but i highly suspect that naval ideas might even be the most lucrative idea set in terms of ducats if you have access to some good trade nodes. Especially if you can just syphon the WETN.

I still think a complete overhaul would really benefit the game. A trade game shouldn't be possible without trade ideas. You probably would never try to establish a military power without offensive either, or do the HRE game without Dip.

There are some downsides to Mercantilism as high Mercantilism won't allow you to enact some decisions. India Trade Company for example.

Nah, that's not true. The only downside to Mercantilism was a triggered modifier you couldn't get if you had over 30% Mercantilism. It is called "East Indian Trade Route" and gives you a mighty +5% trade income. However, this restriction was dropped in a recent patch, so there really are no drawbacks to Mercantilism anymore afaik. That's just wrong imho, there should always be some kind of dilemma.

 

[Nirmara]

Maybe I'm missing something but why do you need traders these days? Just to collect, right? I think there was a change in 1.5 but I'm not entirely certain what it was.

Merchants increase the amount you steer by 5% which can add up quickly yielding huge benefits. Plus, you always need more merchants to steer trade properly from Asia to Europe by passing throught the Cape of good hope.

This is all true, but it only adds to the points i made imho, as these are some of the worst decision in game.
I also stated that the force limit increase is nice in the beginning, but there is no reason to choose them over naval if FL is what you are looking for.

The decisions aren't so bad, +12,5% trade income can give you a lots of income when ducats still need more ducats. The navigation act is a very good decision, +10% naval force limit can save you a lot and help you keeping naval tradition high.

Trade might not be so useful late game since money isn't a problem and nearly all of the new world trade go through the WETN which require a lots of light ships and a single merchant. Still those ideas are great during mid game when ducats might still be a problem and naval force aren't at their highest potential.

 

[HansBaer]

I can't think of a circumstance where I would trade a relation slot and manpower, 2 of the more limiting resources in game , for easy to come by naval tradition and a small fl increment.
Anyway, what do you think about the provided idea changes? Do you think merging fleets and trade ideas could work out as they are so closely tied together anyway?

 

[Iduakil]

I don`t like your proposal. I find current ideas balanced optimally, Diplomacy tree is working good. You include in both Trade oriented Ideas a boost to FL which is quite frankly silly ... doh

 

[Charles555nc]

I don`t like your proposal. I find current ideas balanced optimally, Diplomacy tree is working good. You include in both Trade oriented Ideas a boost to FL which is quite frankly silly ... doh

You are living in a fantasy world. And you can barely speak. "Diplomacy tree is working WELL".

 

[HansBaer]

Yeah, Diplomacy Ideas are working well, so do Offensive, Innovative and a bunch of others, Trade Ideas aren't, so what?
Why is a FL boost on both ideas silly? Exploration gives it, too. "Frankly silly" isn't an ironclad argument as far as i'm concerned

 

[spyroware1]

My problem with this suggestion is clinging too much on the binary free trade - mercantilism. Imo it's almost a fictitious difference. All nations had free trade and mercantilistic policies in place. I mean what is free trade after all historically? An instrument of influence, a casus belli if you like, to make your own empire more self-sufficient ie mercantilistic.

 

[Iduakil]

You are living in a fantasy world. And you can barely speak. "Diplomacy tree is working WELL".

Yeah, Diplomacy Ideas are working well, so do Offensive, Innovative and a bunch of others, Trade Ideas aren't, so what?
Why is a FL boost on both ideas silly? Exploration gives it, too. "Frankly silly" isn't an ironclad argument as far as i'm concerned

Great, mission accomplished. My post wasn`t sincere. It was a simple provocation to get a response from you. Browsing formus yesterday I stumbled upon a post from you in which you responded to TheMeInTeam about coalitions.

By my post I wanted to show you how does it feel propably for TMIT to get bashed by argumentless people backed by nothing more than just thier opinion on the game – on the other side we`ve got both of you, wanting to improve the game and provide very good arguments to strengthen your belief.

Now a sincere opinion. It all comes down to that We still don`t know enough about the real aspects of WoN. Pdox might add ton of improvements to economical model of EUIV. Your poroposal is a good one with few debatable elements.

Trade Ideas – I agree 100%, I have almost identical approach to it in my games
Mercantilism – I agree at a 100%, it`s too much a fictional number with no way of control by player, I`d rather try to make it a maybe as tariffs with proper balance or CooldDown, giving high mercantilism rate a negative malus in foreign provinces is a brilliant idea- kudos!

New 2 Trade Ideas – Now this is the hard part and will require a lot of thought and balance. Only one straight opinion – the openers are a bit too powerfull and imbalanced, getting a free Merchant and +20% mercantilism should be hampered by a -20% to trade steering.

Just my 2 cents! Overall great ideas!

 

[HansBaer]

Ok, as long as this thread doesn't mutate into another debate about coalitions and AE, i'm fine

The opener is so steep because it should be a decision, either Mercantilism or not. It might be a bit to harsh, but remember i want mercantilism to have drawbacks.

Introduce a malus in foreign nodes for high mercantilism similar to the bonus it gives in home nodes. Foreign nodes are those you don't own any land in and/or are in another region.

So, going with the Russian example, say you took the Mercantilist Idea Set, you will have an easy time controlling your Russian and Siberian nodes, but if you want to direct the Indus Trade to Novgorod or Kazan, you will a hard time with just light ships, as you will have a big trade power malus depending on your Mercantilism.

My problem with this suggestion is clinging too much on the binary free trade - mercantilism. Imo it's almost a fictitious difference. All nations had free trade and mercantilistic policies in place. I mean what is free trade after all historically? An instrument of influence, a casus belli if you like, to make your own empire more self-sufficient ie mercantilistic.

I'm no Economist by any means, in fact it's a domain where i am comparably ignorant. All i remember from a seminar years back or maybe even from economics lessons back in school, is that Mercantilism somehow excludes the idea of Free Trade because of its protectionist aspects.
Feel free to object or correct me, the names could be changed accordingly.

 

[Iduakil]

The opener is so harsh because it should be a decision, either Mercantilism or not.

Well that`s the real source of problems with your proposal in my opinion. Trade idea changes and mercantilism mechanic getting a real meaning, not just a flat +%, are all valid and needed IMO. But .... Your concept would provide a drastic change in how Ideas are working as a mechanic. Currently they are all a set of benefits - giving only positive bonuses - to various feature of our empires, big or small. Your change would bring out to the world a real excluding Ideas (not like Quantity vs Quality). I fear that it can be too much of a drastic change for developers.

 

[MiniaAr]

I must say I don't like everything in your proposal:

Mercantilist vs Free Trade ideas: No. It would be a return of EU3 sliders, and for better and or worse, they are gone in EUIV (don't be fooled by the names Defensive/Offensive, they are not opposed and should actually be named Logistics/Leadership, or something). Nobody during the game's timeframe was a free trader, every country was mercantilist, some more than other. I recognise that high mercantilism could have a small penalty, for example reduced relations over time. But it already costs to always chose mercantilism events (either ducats, stab or DIP points if I recall correctly).

Examples of Trade ideas more useful than Naval: Russia needs Trade before Naval, otherwise all it's trade value will never be properly collected or forwarded. It's not totally a question of getting richer, but more to prevent your ennemies from doing it, which in turn makes you fight tougher wars than necessary. Another example of trade ideas, look at this awsome AAR as the Hansa. The writAAR used a high number of merchants to maximise his trade income globally. You cannot do that without the 4 merchants Trade ideas give you (3 in the group, 1 in combination with Naval for the decision). A real trade/naval empire has both idea groups and chose only the order in which they are taken.

Naval ideas out: I don't understand this. Naval ideas are no much greater for a DIP group than Offensive is for a MIL group. Some groups are better than others given your situation, but the solution is to buff/give situational bonuses to them instead of removing useful groups.

 

[spyroware1]

I'm no Economist by any means, in fact it's a domain where i am comparably ignorant. All i remember from a seminar years back or maybe even from economics lessons back in school, is that Mercantilism somehow excludes the idea of Free Trade because of its protectionist aspects.
Feel free to object or correct me, the names could be changed accordingly.

Yes FT is anti-protectionist, and Protectionism itself is Mercantilist. But note that Mercantilism is more about the balance of trade (imports-exports) and not letting precious metals leave your country. So it has more to do about the overall economy of a country, what you trade, but also what you produce and how you spend your money in the global market. The scramble for colonies was exactly a mercantilist endeavour, eg Sweden trying to to set up tobacco plantations in the new world to limit the outflow of money to the English tobacco exporters, or every country having its 'sugar island'. And that's why by default colonies could trade only with their mother countries, because having them as a single unit would balance the scales. Yeah England advocated 'free trade' to open up the Spanish colonies but don't be fooled, it was so that they would buy English manufactured goods and enrich the English industry, not so much to do about trade itself. The Opium wars, the deindustrialisation of India, are all high points of Mercantilism. Free trade is what rich nations force on less developed nations. Only the Dutch had some elements of free trade going on within the timeframe, but that was simply because they were agents of the global trade, they handled many goods that weren't necesserily destined for them, so import-export labels were of little value.

It is rather unfortunate that EU3 had the FT - M slider, with Mercantilism being bad. If anything everyone should strive to have highly mercantilist, globe spanning empires producing everything. So to get back to you, Mercantilism should be a lot like what you describe, -RR, tax boost, production efficiency, also more goods produced etc. As for free trade, maybe it should be renamed.. Trade XD :ninja:
If anything Mercantilism should be a revised Econ/Adm group, which have so many lame ideas woven in in their groups that people dont really bother with them. But the point is that mercantilism would really be a no brainer idea group, especially for large and already strong empires ie the player. It's like having an idea group called Dynastics - You can marry female monarchs and inherit their countries - You can appoint bishops in neighboring theocracies. Well duh, give me a dozen of these equals no strategy, sadly.

 

[AnguyTheArcher]

Mercantilism should be more about production, than about the trade, really. The whole point was to protect domestic industries after all... Increase exports, decrease imports. So it should increase production value. I don't believe it should require it's own idea, instead there should be 2 new sliders in economy screen - tariffs and taxes. Higher tariffs would automatically mean higher mercantilism. Also the tax slider should be no brainer. It's pretty absurd, that you can lower or increase taxes in Total War, but you can't do it in EU.

 

[birincikalite]

I like these suggestions, Naval is currently too good not to take unless you're landlocked and Mercantilism should have some penalty, though maybe not too much since it is very hard to come by.

For the Mercantilist ideas you suggest I'd change the tax boost or the finisher to some trade value increase in all provinces or maybe some boost to trade power gained from CN, protectorates and peace deals.

You may still not take naval ideas if you need other ideas really for more flexibility and fun