It's in reference to a misunderstanding regarding this line:
However it seems the original calculation was more complex than it was first assumed. And now King's tweaked it further anyway, as he explains in the post above.
Enjoy.
Beta of 1.3 - 23rd February 2011 - Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Johan
- 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.
- Status
It's in reference to a misunderstanding regarding this line:
However it seems the original calculation was more complex than it was first assumed. And now King's tweaked it further anyway, as he explains in the post above.
Enjoy.
I set up the separate thread in bug reports to in an effort to avoid this thread being spammed with regards to the pricing model feedback, as it amounts to only one aspect of the beta patch. While I feel it's a major concern, and clearly many others do too, I had no intention of hijacking a thread intended for general discussion and feedback - so I hived it off from the main discussion and bug reported it for consideration elsewhere. The number of improvemets to the economy (and the rest of the game) generally in 1.3 is staggering, but that doesn't preclude it from potential bugs.
I'm glad to hear that this issue was anticipated, but not adjusted enough; surely the entire point of beta releases is so that we can provide the feedback that shows it needs to be slightly stronger? I can provide screenshots of goods hovering at base price with huge demand and low supply, which I felt was worthy of consideration, could not be WaD and indicated something needing adjustment. I encouraged others to avoid spamming this thread with it by directing them to the bug report thread if they wished to comment on it, and that appears to have worked - the number of comments in here regarding it drops sharply after that point in the thread. So it doesn't seem entirely fair to accuse us of threadjecking when I took steps to avoid it, or of preventing others from giving feedback.
I made no claims to be 'so important'; I actively attempted to prevent it spamming the thread and preventing others from having their opinions heard by setting up the bug thread. I just flagged up game activity that appears not to be working as intended, and posted a bug report about it when comments about it began to overload in this thread. I apologise if that made you angry, as my only intention was to help find issues - and since you have made an adjustment based on this, I think we did find just such an issue, which is hopefully fixed by that adjustment.
So I can't fire Seward's Icebox, even though I have 720,000 pounds. It says I don't have 72,000 money. Here's the decision file:
alaskan_purchase = {
potential = {
war = no
has_global_flag = american_civil_war_has_happened
NOT = {
has_country_flag = you_did_try
}
tag = USA
RUS = {
OR = {
owns = 1
owns = 2
owns = 3
owns = 4
owns = 5
owns = 2599
owns = 2630
owns = 2631
}
}
}
allow = {
prestige = 1
nationalism_n_imperialism = 1
money = 72000
}
effect = {
USA_1 = {
add_core = USA
}
RUS = {
country_event = 32509
}
set_country_flag = you_did_try
}
ai_will_do = {
factor = 1
}
}
I think i must have exactly 72,000 for it to work, but I don't know how to fix it.
alaskan_purchase = {
potential = {
war = no
has_global_flag = american_civil_war_has_happened
NOT = {
has_country_flag = you_did_try
}
tag = USA
RUS = {
OR = {
owns = 1
owns = 2
owns = 3
owns = 4
owns = 5
owns = 2599
owns = 2630
owns = 2631
}
}
}
allow = {
prestige = 1
nationalism_n_imperialism = 1
money = 72000
}
effect = {
USA_1 = {
add_core = USA
}
RUS = {
country_event = 32509
}
set_country_flag = you_did_try
}
ai_will_do = {
factor = 1
}
}
I think i must have exactly 72,000 for it to work, but I don't know how to fix it.
Looking at the posts in your sub-forum:
I have; twicewe seriously need to mobilize some re-enforcements on this - it will basically eliminate any dynamism from the economy outside of oversupply and landfill chicken scenarios. Do we really want an economy where the only way for prices to move is if we create unthinkable surpluses at the start of the game?
These were all made before your bugreport thread, and it seems pretty clear you wanted people to spam the issue here to get it attention.
Then, after you made your report thread:
I can't see any other way to read your posts, but if it really wasn't your intent to spam this thread until you got the attention you wanted then you should be more careful about what you write.
Last edited:
The equal operator in events and decisions actually means equal to or greater. Are you sure you satisfy the other criteria? Do you have Nationalism and Imperialism and have fought the Civil War?
It has been like this since release and I think it was intentional.
As you can see, I qualify in all the fields, except money. If you look at my slavery reform, you can tell I've already completed the Civil War.
I have 2,3 % bureaucrats and gain about up to 90 a day with zero spending.
As you can see, I qualify in all the fields, except money. If you look at my slavery reform, you can tell I've already completed the Civil War.
That is a pre 1.3 issue which was well known and which I submitted a big report concerning: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...-does-not-work-as-an-event-decision-condition
Apparently it hasn't been fixed in this beta patch. Hopefully a fix makes it into the next beta.
Is there any way I can mod the decision to where it just takes 72,000 from me?
I wouldnt have a problem with this if money spent on bureaucrats wasent tied to crime fighting. We are forced to choose between low crime, but with bureaucratic bloat, or normal bureaucratic levels, but massive amoutns of crime. It excludes the possibility of a normal level of bureaucratcs and low crime. A state should be able to hire the people it needs, and then provide them the resources they need to do their job. The system as is ties the two elements together into one bill, and creates the problem. Either decouple the two into seperate buget sliders, or institute a cap like the other classes.
I am not using the 1.3 patch as it is the first beta but as far I cant see Norway haven't gotten it's core on Jan Mayen when I look at the chance log.
I am aware of this.
The point of the post really had nothing to do with that though, it was about how the game gave me hegemony anyway, even though I didn't ask for it in the peace deal and even though the required warscore was over 100. Kind of a show stopping bug that.
![Sute]{h](https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/styles/paradox/owneditems/avatars/Stellaris_pre_order/s/stellaris_avatars_fungoid_12_special.png){kind=avatar}
Yes... but experience shows that it is very hard to hit the sweetspot. States either underfund the bureaucracy or overfunds it.
I haven't been able to play the beta yet due to launch errors, but re: 'bureaucrat bloat':
Darkrenown: Would it be possible to mod in a demotion modifier for bureaucrats once the national or regional percentage of them goes, say, 1 or 2 percent over their maximum potentially useful percentage (I don't recall what this is, but I realise the actual useful percentage changes with reforms)? In other words, something similar to the demotion modifiers clergymen receive when over 4 percent but the player would still be punished for bloat - but crucially with the extent limited to somewhat reasonable levels.
I suggest this because in every version of Victoria II I have experienced the problem of unreasonable bureaucrat bulge has been present (with, for example, a bureaucrat population still proportionally growing even though they shouldn't be receiving any wages), and it seems to be extending into this version too through reading comments.
Darkrenown: Would it be possible to mod in a demotion modifier for bureaucrats once the national or regional percentage of them goes, say, 1 or 2 percent over their maximum potentially useful percentage (I don't recall what this is, but I realise the actual useful percentage changes with reforms)? In other words, something similar to the demotion modifiers clergymen receive when over 4 percent but the player would still be punished for bloat - but crucially with the extent limited to somewhat reasonable levels.
I suggest this because in every version of Victoria II I have experienced the problem of unreasonable bureaucrat bulge has been present (with, for example, a bureaucrat population still proportionally growing even though they shouldn't be receiving any wages), and it seems to be extending into this version too through reading comments.
- Status