About that slave trade...

[Warhammer: 3025]

Instead of the Mamluks, I'm playing a game as Sakalava (one of the nations that starts on the island of Madagascar - now the only nation on Madagascar).

Almost all of my provinces produce slaves as their resource. I'm not a big fan of slave trading (I know it's historically accurate, but it's my kingdom, darn it). Can I somehow change what they produce? I'd really rather they all go fishing...

 

[TheDutchWarlord]

At some point in the game, somewhere between 1600 and 1700, you grt the option to abolish the slave trade. Though I can't remember if it was time-based or dependend on some technology. Before that I don't think there is a way to change what they produce, beyond tandom events that are REALLY rare.

 

[Sfan]

The decision is in the Age of Revolutions, so after 1710. All of the slave producing provinces in the game are in Africa except one in Crimea, so you can set up the goal of wiping out slavery if you so want. I did it as Kongo, tons of fun.

 

[Sian]

Yeah, better be politically correct against the historically correct graphic

 

[GaribaldisFleet]

At some point in the game, somewhere between 1600 and 1700, you grt the option to abolish the slave trade. Though I can't remember if it was time-based or dependend on some technology. Before that I don't think there is a way to change what they produce, beyond tandom events that are REALLY rare.

I guess it is available after the enlightnment is embraced. So right in the beginning of 1700s.

 

[petertju]

this will answer your question

https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/List_of_decision_lists#Pass_Abolition_of_Slavery_Act

Important detail of this:
- Dont build manufacturies on slave goods, they will be destroyed

 

[Sfan]

Well do build them if they pay for themselves before you abolish slavery. You can easily squeeze 0.8 per month out of a trade company in a stated slave province between trade and production, probably more. Count 10 ducats per year and you can consider it worth it to build them up to 1650.

 

[Troopperi]

Also, when you abolish slavery, you get new trade goods which depending on location could even be gold or ivory. Or probably just grain and wool, so it's hard to evaluate if it is worth it or not moneywise. But if you don't want to produce slaves and can even get some gold, it is probably worth it.

 

[Ultima_Ratio]

Also, when you abolish slavery, you get new trade goods which depending on location could even be gold or ivory. Or probably just grain and wool, so it's hard to evaluate if it is worth it or not moneywise. But if you don't want to produce slaves and can even get some gold, it is probably worth it.

Abolishing slavery drops slave price by 40 % (for a total of 2.2 if triangle trade was introduced), and if you control most or all slave producing provinces the AI is going to do it at some point anyway, so it's among the worst goods in the game to begin with.

 

[ruzen]

Snowflakes...

 

[Claremont Waltz]

Snowflakes...

Only snowflakes I see in this thread are the manbabies coming in to whine about how their feefees are being hurt by someone else playing a game differently from the ONE TRUE WAY according to them which, apparently, means rapacious slaving.

Some people in Africa wanted to abolish the slave trade even as others participated willingly and even in the 15th and 16th centuries when the African slave trade was mostly in the Indian Ocean and managed by Muslims. It's not implausible that an African monarch or state would have wanted to make that a priority. What is implausible is that an African state has to wait until the 18th century to abolish slavery when several did so well before.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Africa

Here's an African state that did literally exactly what OP wants to do, abolishing slavery in its territory and attempting to take over slaving sites.

"However, other communities in West Africa largely resisted the slave trade. The Mossi Kingdoms tried to take over key sites in the trans-Saharan trade and, when these efforts failed, the Mossi became defenders against slave raiding by the powerful states of the Western Sahel."

 

[Metz]

We should be able to focus on what we want to produce. Food if the supplies are low, production goods if the country is short on money, or equipment stuff if the country is gearing for war. It would all be based on the landscape and development. Low development provinces would be agriculture or natural resources, medium development would allow production goods, high level would enable manufactury goods.

 

[gia257]

i recall an event that mentions an african king offering slaves to you when you first reach africa, and you get to allow it or not, isnt it related?

youd start in africa, conquer into europe, move capital, get the event and start your snowflake crusade

I abolished, once, never again (just wait until you do a wc and abolish, have fun)

 

[Zyce]

It's totally understandable to have some feelings about slaves appearing as a "trade good". I think that's a natural feeling. I don't understand some of the nihilist responses - you're not a "snowflake" for having feelings, and it's healthful to express them in the proper forum.

I have a similar reaction to seeing this in-game. I'm sure there is a mod somewhere to swap it out, but I haven't gone looking. Best wishes.

 

[petertju]

It's totally understandable to have some feelings about slaves appearing as a "trade good". I think that's a natural feeling. I don't understand some of the nihilist responses - you're not a "snowflake" for having feelings, and it's healthful to express them in the proper forum.

I have a similar reaction to seeing this in-game. I'm sure there is a mod somewhere to swap it out, but I haven't gone looking. Best wishes.

We are talking about a GAME. But also a game in which you command thousands of people to kill and die per battle and can commit genocide on other cultures, or on indians. I don't think this should have such a big impact.

 

[Zyce]

We are talking about a GAME. But also a game in which you command thousands of people to kill and die per battle and can commit genocide on other cultures, or on indians. I don't think this should have such a big impact.

I totally agree, which is why I made my comment at all (and recommended they look for a mod). I just find it a bit ironic that people get upset over someone getting upset, and figured I'd offer some support instead of calling them a "snowflake". EU4 is still a game, we'll survive.

 

[Dakka]

Is it bad when my first response to OP is the corporate one: “But, that won’t be as profitable “?

 

[Badesumofu]

We are talking about a GAME. But also a game in which you command thousands of people to kill and die per battle and can commit genocide on other cultures, or on indians. I don't think this should have such a big impact.

War and slavery are not morally the same, not by a long shot. There's a whole thing called 'just war theory'. I have never heard anyone propose a 'just slavery theory'.

 

[gia257]

War and slavery are not morally the same, not by a long shot. There's a whole thing called 'just war theory'. I have never heard anyone propose a 'just slavery theory'.

economical theory

today's slaves are those people that offer themselves for cheap, some places there may still be people that are forced into literal slavery (by force)

 

[Warhammer: 3025]

Also, when you abolish slavery, you get new trade goods which depending on location could even be gold or ivory. Or probably just grain and wool, so it's hard to evaluate if it is worth it or not moneywise. But if you don't want to produce slaves and can even get some gold, it is probably worth it.

I mostly got fish and grain, but also got one province of ivory and one of textiles, so that was neat.

The whole game went pretty smoothly - my strong navy kept me safe from pretty much everyone, and by the end I had so much trade power from investing in merchant ideas and steering trade that my tiny little island nation was in the top 15 economies!