Mercantilism should give higher TP in own nodes, but lower in upstream nodes.

[Pellucid]

Thus making there be a reason not to have high mercantilism. The penalty should not be too big at low levels of Mercantilism, but should get multiplicatively worse, making high mercantilism attractive only to nations with low foreign trade power, and forcing nations with higher amounts of foreign trade power to consider what amount of mercantilism works best for them.

 

[Nyanako]

As someone who has studied economics, when I first started playing, I would always pick the Free Trade decisions... cause Mercantilism is actually very bad for economic growth. Perhaps it would be better to have instead a tradeoff between mercantilism and free trade, with Free Trade increasing the goods produced, the other increasing trade power? As it stands, there is no real reason to want to reduce mercantilism.

I agree fully that the mechanic needs an overhaul

 

[alertiu5]

There are almost no decisions/events which actually reduce mercantilism, so those events will need some change in frequency/effects they give if it gets changed.

 

[magnusvejby]

As someone who has studied economics, when I first started playing, I would always pick the Free Trade decisions... cause Mercantilism is actually very bad for economic growth. Perhaps it would be better to have instead a tradeoff between mercantilism and free trade, with Free Trade increasing the goods produced, the other increasing trade power? As it stands, there is no real reason to want to reduce mercantilism.

I agree fully that the mechanic needs an overhaul

But.. but mercantilism is GOOD...... i think

 

[TheDungen]

But.. but mercantilism is GOOD...... i think

In game yes defiantly. In reality, no its actually very very bad. It's however very intuitive, which is why people keep returning to and idealising protectionist ideas even today.

 

[Pellucid]

In game yes defiantly. In reality, no its actually very very bad. It's however very intuitive, which is why people keep returning to and idealising protectionist ideas even today.

Well, it's good if you're more concerned with keeping your merchant class wealthy than you are with keeping the rest of your population wealthy.

 

[Nyanako]

Mercantilism had nothing to do with the merchant class; its primary aim was to use all means for the betterment of the state; accumulating money reserves through positive balance of trade, and using state power to facilitate this. The primary philisophical concern with Mercantilism is that "It was determined that the state should rule in the economic realm as it did in the diplomatic, and that the interests of the state as identified by the king were superior to those of merchants and everyone else. The goal of mercantilist economic policies was to build up the state, especially in an age of incessant warfare, and the state should look for ways to strengthen the economy and weaken foreign adversaries" (Encyclopaedia Britannica)

 

[TheDungen]

Well, it's good if you're more concerned with keeping your merchant class wealthy than you are with keeping the rest of your population wealthy.

No economics isn't a zero sum game. Wealth is created as it moves around. As such everyone gains more by everyone gaining more.

And mercantilism is basically the same thing as protectionism. The only relation to merchants is that the kingdom treats itself like a merchant in that it wants to sell more than it buys.

 

[t6.28]

Would be a nice change.
But you should then also add more ways to gain/lose mercantilism.
The game could maybe allow you to sign trade agreements with other giving you influence in their nodes and losing you mercantilism
or apply trade restrictions, lowering foreign influence in your trade node and giving you mercantilism.

 

[TheDungen]

Anything that makes the trade game more important and complex. Trade ruled the world in this era.

 

[kitemasaki]

It is a shame that the only real choice is to take mercantilism boosts in this game. There should be real effects of doing one or the other. Lower mercantilism should definitely have its own bonuses attached, perhaps it should be more efficient trade companies/protectorate goods output (similar to how merch repubs affect goods). This is opposed to high mercantilism giving you stronger provincial trade power at home but less bonuses with trade companies, etc.

There should also be more diplomatic events tied to your level of mercantilism. Higher mercantilism should cause conflicts in the region while lower mercantilism can increase relations or possible price fluxes (bad/good) in trade goods.