Developer Diary 23 – Gold

[Cinéad IV]

If I did say that (I tend to lose track of what I have and haven't said), then it was in error.

That's a shame, it would be a really good way to model an industrial society's demand for coal, and at the same time act as a nifty disincentive for people building railways across the Sahara.

 

[King]

Although this question has nothing in common with gold issue, I think most players will be interested in an answer.

Will this design philosophy mean that eventual expansion won't have to focus so much on polishing and we could possibly look forward to more new features then it is usual?

We always aim to add features in the design of expansions. What we is look at what we feel is missing from the current game.

 

[King]

I knew about this already from a previous DD. But does this mean that it will be possible to at least mod in a mechanism along the lines I've suggested?

I guess the minimum requirements for modding it in would be:
- a variable measuring the share of the budget coming from precious metals
- the salaries for the different POPs, including bureaucrats would have to be text-based and manipulable during the game.

Neither of those is possible in our current model. PRecious metals are fixed and bureacrat salaries are defined as percentage of goods purchases.

 

[KonradRichtmark]

There should be money becaue building railroads requires alot of labour that needs to be paid for.
Who that money would go to, I've no idea.

That's something I suggested awhile back: Building the damn thing should be done by labourer POPs, having a fixed "cost" in man-workdays, a time during which the labourers won't be working in their RGO. The monetary cost of building the thing should be paid to these POPs, and the cost depend on the general wage level in the area.

 

[Ignudo]

Neither of those is possible in our current model. PRecious metals are fixed and bureacrat salaries are defined as percentage of goods purchases.

by variable I meant a parameter that measures the relative share of gold income in relation to the budget. I've suggested the same for debt before. I think parameters like that could be very useful triggers for any serious modding of the economic model. Please give us the means to make a hardcore version of Victoria II just as Magna Mundi has done for EU III.

 

[ECLoco]

by variable I meant a parameter that measures the relative share of gold income in relation to the budget. I've suggested the same for debt before. I think parameters like that could be very useful triggers for any serious modding of the economic model. Please give us the means to make a hardcore version of Victoria II just as Magna Mundi has done for EU III.

Lua scripts would be the way to go here I think. With the right exports you could measure just about anything. The question is how much and for which parts they are planning to use Lua, if at all.

 

[KonradRichtmark]

With the rather tenuous grasp of economics on display here, it would be better if this game stayed as far away as possible from modeling the money supply.

With the rather tenuous grasp of game design on display by you, it would be better if you stayed as far away as possible from trying to influence the game.

Look, it's not a matter of them not knowing their economics. I think they've displayed, over the span of several dev diaries, that they do know what they're talking about. If they are simplifying things in not-so-realistic ways now and then, it's because the damn game needs to actually work.

 

[Sovereign]

Everyone uses the almighty pound sterling, as it should be.

Although some nations Sterling go further than others.

 

[OHgamer]

Keep the discussion civil folks, enough with the insults.

 

[naggy]

Why do I forsee several mods, converting the Victoria 2 economic system to follow different economic schools?

 

[Colon]

There is no money in to keep money in the system. This isn't because we don't release that railways cost money to pay people to build them, it was more a problem of who ended up with the money. In the magical world of victoria 2 the people who made the goods also build the railway.

Which really is fine by me. I've always had the understanding that other economic activities (construction, transport, finance...) are abstracted away into the goods they use.

 

[Sovereign]

Why do I forsee several mods, converting the Victoria 2 economic system to follow different economic schools?

I hope so, be nice to have choice. I wonder what VIP will do to it, hopefully VIP will implement FRB and RR that require ongoing coal to maintain... the question is- are these things modable?

I for one, hope so.

I respect the judgement calls Pdox have had to make though to get this thing to fly however.

 

[KonradRichtmark]

But if those things are modded in, will the AI pay heed, or will it spam railroads everywhere and bankrupt itself buying coal?

 

[Sovereign]

But if those things are modded in, will the AI pay heed, or will it spam railroads everywhere and bankrupt itself buying coal?

All part an parcel of the term "modable" as far as I'm concerned. I don't know if it's possible to get under the hood of the AI so as to make it able to play this stuff.

However the AI can play with factories and regiments needing continuous inputs...

 

[JoeGiavani]

But if those things are modded in, will the AI pay heed, or will it spam railroads everywhere and bankrupt itself buying coal?

capitalists would pay for it unless you had state-run railroads.

 

[Sovereign]

capitalists would pay for it unless you had state-run railroads.

But there will be state-run railroads as well...

 

[prevalcalifers]

One more thing: this DD affirmed that Vic 2 does not recognize seigniorage.

 

[Balesir]

One more thing: this DD affirmed that Vic 2 does not recognize seigniorage.

I'm not sure that's true - they have abstracted seigniorage, certainly, but at the scale of POP + Precious Metal Province => money (that is divided between the POP and the government - and aristos??) I don't see that seigniorage comes above the horizon, really.

 

[morganja]

With the rather tenuous grasp of game design on display by you, it would be better if you stayed as far away as possible from trying to influence the game.

Look, it's not a matter of them not knowing their economics. I think they've displayed, over the span of several dev diaries, that they do know what they're talking about. If they are simplifying things in not-so-realistic ways now and then, it's because the damn game needs to actually work.

I think we are saying the same thing here. They lack the ability to create an accurate economic model and should focus on gameplay. As for their economic acumen, I have to respectfully disagree. The statements made so far show a rather confused grasp of the subject no matter which economic system they adhere to. There is nothing wrong with that, they are game developers, not economists. But attempting to model an economic system with a tenuous grasp of economics is going to lead to a Vic 1 initial economy style disaster.

Just a thought having to do with gold provinces as modeled in the game, under a gold standard, the production of gold Q = the amount produced when the Marginal Cost of production = the value of the marginal amount produced. Gold mines are profitable, but not spectacularly moreso than any other product in the long term. It is only in the short term after a discovery when the production of gold costs much less than it's value.

 

[Te. Kenzo]

Piedmontese army wearing redshirts?

I want a Bersaglieri sprite

Also, Aosta should be mountainous.

Last but not last, as someone already said "ristorazionista" is wrong.

maybe paradox have choose to use "Garibaldi Red Coats" to rapresent the unit of Sardinia-Piedmont.
Is not a correct choose in a historical level, becouse Garibaldi (and red coats.) was an indipendent not "officially" linked with Sardinia-Piedmont, but maybe i have thinked to use the most rapresentative symbol of italian unification.