Income should not be steady.

[highsis]

National income should fluctuate based on random events like famine, good harvest, trade decline, etc. Am I the only one who feels EU4's income level is too steady which allows easy financial management? I hope it gets a lot more random, sometimes even requiring a player to lose money over a course of a year.

To MP: it will even out over a long term, and the game really should be balanced around SP for realistic features such as this to be implemented into the game.

 

[ero_sk]

Isn't it already influenced by factors such as famine/influenza events? In addition factor such as trade which actually DOES change over time influence income quite a lot. Income shouldn't be too much random IMHO. What I would like to see changed is inflation. Currently it is waaaay too steady.

 

[highsis]

Isn't it already influenced by factors such as famine/influenza events?

the events are so trivial that it's same as non existing IMO. Having tons of bad events won't harm your treasury nearly as much as it did in reality.

 

[Mztr44]

Isn't it already influenced by factors such as famine/influenza events? In addition factor such as trade which actually DOES change over time influence income quite a lot. Income shouldn't be too much random IMHO. What I would like to see changed is inflation. Currently it is waaaay too steady.

I think inflation events can vary depending on part of the world you play in, either that or just confirmation bias on my part. I've played many games in India and it seems like I get event for stability hit or +3 inflation on a regular basis, pumping my inflation up regularly despite not owning a gold mine or taking loans. Whereas my European games I don't get those events at all or extremely rare. It just varies is the main thing, i've had games where i've lost an easy thousand monarch points just to deal with inflation to prevent annoying bankruptcy event.

 

[Thrake]

Isn't it already influenced by factors such as famine/influenza events? In addition factor such as trade which actually DOES change over time influence income quite a lot. Income shouldn't be too much random IMHO. What I would like to see changed is inflation. Currently it is waaaay too steady.

Influenza event is insignificant, unless your an OPM. Otherwise, it's one out of all your Empire producing a tiny bit less for something like 6 months (the other choice about loosing MP and allowing it to spread doesn't feel like an appealing choice at all).

 

[Koivin]

Something along this lines was discussed in a historical accuracy thread. Something got me thinking about inevitable historical happenings (floods, diseases, etc) that were outside of human control. Could we not get multiple famines, disasters or pandemics simulated a la center of reformation mechanics? Illness pops up at (fixed?) x provice and spreads through either adjacency, trade routes or troops marching through the province. This way you could simulate actual economic collapses that were historically bound to happen yet can still differ in outcome (say a crucial (trade) point that spread the disease quarantined itself prior to infection) etc.

 

[IIWW]

Something along this lines was discussed in a historical accuracy thread. Something got me thinking about inevitable historical happenings (floods, diseases, etc) that were outside of human control. Could we not get multiple famines, disasters or pandemics simulated a la center of reformation mechanics? Illness pops up at (fixed?) x provice and spreads through either adjacency, trade routes or troops marching through the province. This way you could simulate actual economic collapses that were historically bound to happen yet can still differ in outcome (say a crucial (trade) point that spread the disease quarantined itself prior to infection) etc.

Lets make an advanced and complicsted system just to make the game more random and less strategic.

 

[BpestZ1]

You do not need to keep income steady, sure. This is not a comment on 1.8 right? Some events that have been designed for 1.8 are quite nicely income impacting. Vijayanagar has the loss of a stab point verse +40 LA in all of it's Tamil provinces. Can trigger multiple times. Oh I forgot the kicker is +.5 LA for 20 years in the provinces as well. Vijananagar really can increase trading income early as well if the player wants.

But if this is not a thread on 1.8 nevermind.

 

[ero_sk]

the events are so trivial that it's same as non existing IMO. Having tons of bad events won't harm your treasury nearly as much as it did in reality.

Agree, but that would require completely rework of economy system.

I think inflation events can vary depending on part of the world you play in, either that or just confirmation bias on my part. I've played many games in India and it seems like I get event for stability hit or +3 inflation on a regular basis, pumping my inflation up regularly despite not owning a gold mine or taking loans. Whereas my European games I don't get those events at all or extremely rare. It just varies is the main thing, i've had games where i've lost an easy thousand monarch points just to deal with inflation to prevent annoying bankruptcy event.

When talking about inflation system I wasn't thinking of events but inflation system in general. For instance the idea of minting in EUIV was quite good IMHO, just badly implemented. But it's hard to implement good inflation system without having deep economy system though... As pointed above.

Influenza event is insignificant, unless your an OPM. Otherwise, it's one out of all your Empire producing a tiny bit less for something like 6 months (the other choice about loosing MP and allowing it to spread doesn't feel like an appealing choice at all).

Well, influenza was just an example of talking about events. I can't even remember how it affects the income.

 

[Koivin]

Lets make an advanced and complicsted system just to make the game more random and less strategic.

You do realise that some fringe decisions by some insignificant figures at any point in time could've completed changed the course of time right? Kinda like, different decisions being taken by a countries leaders... kind of like... we are doing in this game?

 

[IIWW]

You do realise that some fringe decisions by some insignificant figures at any point in time could've completed changed the course of time right? Kinda like, different decisions being taken by a countries leaders... kind of like... we are doing in this game?

Yes I do, what does it change? My or even AI decisions aren't random. You're proposing something that adds unnecessery randomness.

 

[Alerias]

Given the playing field is even for the AI and the players here, I dont think its a huge issue.

Realistically a complex model for economic fluctuations would be both processing-intensive and players could exploit it better than the AI, which needs a certain amount of consistency to perform well. A sudden downward turn in revenue for instance, could lead the AI to disband many units it will be able to afford again in 6 months.