Colonized Ogaden as Ethiopia, no trade goods and counts as a colony?

[Naveed]

For some reason after I colonized Ogaden as Ethiopia it does not have a trade good, it just says unknown? Is this a bug or will a trade good spawn?

Also I was irritated to see that it counts as a colony even though it's on the same continent as me, it's saying min autonomy is 50%. This doesn't seem right, is this WAD?

 

[O2N]

If I recall correctly, you will be notified about the trade good once the population goes above 200 or so.

 

[Castrolol]

Some provinces in Africa are corrupted in 1.8 and will not produce any trade goods nor can you kill the natives, I believe Ogaden is one of them. This has been fixed in the beta hotpatch, I suggest you get it.

Also colonies are now locked at 50% autonomy. It was one of the more infamous changes in 1.8 (colonial nations are immune to this however).

 

[Path]

For some reason after I colonized Ogaden as Ethiopia it does not have a trade good, it just says unknown? Is this a bug or will a trade good spawn?

Also I was irritated to see that it counts as a colony even though it's on the same continent as me, it's saying min autonomy is 50%. This doesn't seem right, is this WAD?

Autonomy is WAD--colonies have a minimum of 50% autonomy (unless they're on a different continent, in which case it's 75%--CNs are unaffected by this).

 

[Naveed]

Okay must be a corrupted province Ogaden and Afder are both doing this.

I really like the autonomy feature but I'm not too happy about contiguous provinces being counted as a colony. It seems like there should be a better way to tell which colonies are colonies and which are expansions to core territory.

 

[hwoosh]

Okay must be a corrupted province Ogaden and Afder are both doing this.

I really like the autonomy feature but I'm not too happy about contiguous provinces being counted as a colony. It seems like there should be a better way to tell which colonies are colonies and which are expansions to core territory.

All colonies are colonies, that's why they're called colonies ...

 

[Naveed]

Really what Ethiopia is doing is expanding it's core territory, conquering native tribes. There is no logical reason why these newly established lands directly next to fully established lands would have to have more autonomy than any of it's other territories. It doesn't make sense. The reason for autonomy in colonies is that they are distant from their core territories and could not be governed effectively from such distances.

 

[GUmby_Aaron]

Really what Ethiopia is doing is expanding it's core territory, conquering native tribes. There is no logical reason why these newly established lands directly next to fully established lands would have to have more autonomy than any of it's other territories. It doesn't make sense. The reason for autonomy in colonies is that they are distant from their core territories and could not be governed effectively from such distances.

I agree. I ran into the same thing playing as the manchurian at the top most of asia. I grabbed the land directly adjacent to my northern border and it set autonomy and list it as a colony. No idea why it can't be treated as my core country, it is adjacent right on my border and my country only has like 6 provinces. What am I suppose to do expand my tiny nation via a war instead of moving its border up into core?

 

[Ranjid]

Majapahit is even worse. If they colonize Oceania, they get this malus as well. Even though they had direct control over most of these lands at some point. I removed the LA floor completely in the defines, because it just doesn't make sense at all. I've aso never seen anyone arguing in favor of it, actually.

 

[User29]

I'm usually quite resonant with all changes Paradox makes, a fanboy even, but this Autonomy thing for colonizing land right next to you is absurd, just make it void if the land is contiguous or on the same continent as your capital, why would this be a bad change?

 

[oblio-]

I'm usually quite resonant with all changes Paradox makes, a fanboy even, but this Autonomy thing for colonizing land right next to you is absurd, just make it void if the land is contiguous or on the same continent as your capital, why would this be a bad change?

Because someone might exploit it. Playing devil's advocate here, I don't agree with this reason.

 

[DKinator]

The problem is that there's an autonomy floor at all. Colonies should start out at, say, 90% autonomy but be fully capable of reaching 0%. An even better solution would be to have autonomy based on distance from capital. Having a floor for autonomy reduces the player's agency with arbitrary restrictions.

 

[Arcaul]

I do realize that the main reason this was done was to prevent exploitation. Stops countries from switching from Europe to the new world and expanding that way and it also nerfs Russia. But having played as Ethiopia and others it is incredibly stupid and unrealistic. Also Portugal for awhile did switch its capital to Brazil and I don't remember them suddenly having difficulties with their colony deciding to become highly autonomous because of it. It was done to prevent exploits but just hems in people who want to play the game fairly and historically.

 

[Heatth]

Majapahit is even worse. If they colonize Oceania, they get this malus as well. Even though they had direct control over most of these lands at some point. I removed the LA floor completely in the defines, because it just doesn't make sense at all. I've aso never seen anyone arguing in favor of it, actually.

It does make some amount of sense in certain circumstances. Russian Siberia, for example. It is all contiguous to Moscow, but it was certainly colonial territory. I just think it was badly implemented overall.

A simple way to fix would be tie to culture. Provinces that were originally from the same culture group act like they are regular territories, not colonies. That would solve the problem for natives colonizing their neighborhood being hit by the penalty. Probably not the best way, but close enough.

 

[TheBoozehammer]

I'm usually quite resonant with all changes Paradox makes, a fanboy even, but this Autonomy thing for colonizing land right next to you is absurd, just make it void if the land is contiguous or on the same continent as your capital, why would this be a bad change?

Their reasoning is that colonizing on the same continent is one of the best ways to get land in the game and needed a nerf. That may be true, but I would prefer some system where you can integrate a bordering colony over time, removing the penalty. Wiz said he thought this was a good idea, so there is still hope.

 

[Arag]

I just think it was badly implemented overall.

i think this is the crux of the matter. A general solution was chosen that has a nasty side-effect of penalizing certain nations for no logical reason.

 

[Karnak]

Because someone might exploit it. Playing devil's advocate here, I don't agree with this reason.

ideally a colony would slowly lose autonomy, say by distance to capital.
so if a capital is X distance away, all autonomy losses would be equal to Y/X, where Y is the base autonomy loss.

that way you do not need to treat CNs as special cases since their capitals will be near colonies, and african tribals will be able to also colonize more successfully. european nations dabbling in siberia or making a land connection to africa will though have autonomy losses be as low as say 10% of normal

in any case making up arbitrary 'rules' how some provinces are exempted from game mechanics just do not make sense. look over the entire colonization mechanics instead.
you could move the capital closer to colonies to help the autonomy loss, but then it would be a trade-off.

i have no idea what nations are likely to exploit colonies the most, which the current system is attempting to 'fix', if we knew we could offer better alternatives

 

[donolaffo]

I tried playing Cherokee for No trail of tears achievment. Just guess how not being able to increase autonomy in my home land (for some reason being called a colony) helped me during westernization.

 

[Naveed]

I tried playing Cherokee for No trail of tears achievment. Just guess how not being able to increase autonomy in my home land (for some reason being called a colony) helped me during westernization.

I think this is a reason why this really needs to be fixed. For most nations it is just an inconvenience. But for Native Americans it is ridiculous.

 

[Denkt]

Why not just make it so that each country are assigned a native countinent that can't be changed in the game by any way.
Minimum LA for colonies would be for colonise controlled that was not founded on your native countient, make all Russian states native countinent europe while native nations and colonial nations could get america as native countinent.
That way European nations would not be able to effectivly immigrate to the new world but natives would be as good as before and russia would be the same as now.