Free Market and Industry?

[Dogukan91]

Hi,

First of all, I have to say, I know this game is not a Victoria, it is focused on warfare etcetcetc...

However, I was wondering if the free market economies also build their own industries? I mean, does all civillian industry rely on the player constructing "industry"?

Are there at least different modifiers to abstract it differently than Corporatism or Central Planning or Authoritarian Developmentalism?

What amazed me was the MEIOU&TAXES mod for EU regarding how they handled the concept of development. They made it event related which in turn depended on many modifiers including stability, culture, manpower...etc.
So I was wondering if it is possible to kind of "randomize" the economy a bit more and make it feel more dynamic rather than click-related through events?

Or if not, modders can keep this in mind. I thought it was a genius idea.

 

[Denkt]

Yes everyone can build industries. Free market have bonuses which make it the best at peaceful industry buildup.

 

[GuderianTA]

Interesting post. While I do believe that having an aspect of the free market would be more realistic, there was kinda not much free market during this period. "Everyone" instituted prices controls of some kind and the production demands of the war created sort of artificial economy. Also, If its one thing the state does very well is gear for war.

Its a game, so waiting around for individuals to open factories may not be the most stimulating thing here.

 

[Dogukan91]

Yes but you could "incentivize" industrial expansion.

In this case, when the play clicks "build industry" as Germany or Soviet Union can feel understandable as their economies were more controlled. But as UK, clicking "build industry" would have to abstract economy growing in the region on its own. From a roleplay perspective, a player could of course imagine that clicking symbolized economy growing. But its just not the same.

In the EU mod, when you meet many modifiers and support various development models through policies, things develop over time.
Maybe the game includes too little time to reflect economic growth though, and considering a great deal of it is warfare time also weakens my argument. But the game is more dynamic now. And economic dynamism could be an amazing addition. Its not going to be a Victoria for sure.

 

[Kovax]

Interesting idea, and good for something with a bit longer timeframe, but this game is probably way too far into development to add something like that at this stage.

 

[Phi]

All war economies were mostly planned. If the game would start 10 years earlier, then free market things might make sense, but not like this.

For example the US:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_home_front_during_World_War_II#Controls_and_taxes

In fact even today US military equipment (or the equipment of every other proper army) is highly standarized and regulated (including most of the Civilian gear).

 

[keynes2.0]

Free market economies weren't usually building industry directly but the New Deal did create a whole lot of demand for industries.

 

[GuderianTA]

Yes but you could "incentivize" industrial expansion.

Once you used the word "incentivize," you can no longer call it the free market

 

[GuderianTA]

Free market economies weren't usually building industry directly but the New Deal did create a whole lot of demand for industries.

What?? Oh i see..... your username is Keynes. This is not the place to get into a discussion on the merits of a free market vs the disillusions of a planned centralized economy, even though i really want to, but what you said smacks of the rigidity and programmed responses given by someone who had been brainwashed

 

[keynes2.0]

XD