What I would prefer to see for Modernization (call it that, not "Westernization") is as follows:
1. You research different technology branches independently to improve them. So if Japan just wants guns and large standing armies (Mil), and otherwise remains xenophobic (no Diplo reform) and archaic (no Admin reform), so be it. However, there is a consequence to independent development.
2. To balance out point #1, you should try to keep your Mil, Adm and Diplo advancements aligned based on internal and external societal modifiers if you get out of whack. If you have a far higher-reformed military than admin, for example, national revolt risk can go up, since you have a lot of dangerous weapons, but no corresponding advances in the rule of law to deal with them. If you have a higher military than diplo, then you can get negative relations modifiers with neighbors and a hit to your trade power, since you don't seem to be able to make fair trade deals without threatening to kill all your neighbor's merchants. This would help balance out the war-mongering. If your Admin gets really far ahead of Diplo and Military, your nation could start becoming far too bureaucratic (increasing inflation, lowering discipline). And if it gets too far ahead in Diplo, it could mean that there's a loss of cultural identity (lower missionary strength, lowered army morale). Something like that. Ideally, you want to be advancing everything around the same rate, and mechanics should support that.
3. Your investment slowly decrements your malus to tech up, +5% step improvements per decade, for instance. You can reform one tech, two, or all three at a time. Each additional track you are reforming simultaneously increases instability to the process. This process would commensurately gradually lower your cap of storable MPs. Each +5% malus burned away getting you closer and closer to modernization. Rather than these huge lurching movements to Modernize in a discreet period of time, you instead naturally adopt technology over time.
4. You should be able to make trade deals with more advanced nations to help speed up your Modernization. Alliances, Protectorates, Vassals, Client States, etc., should help you with the process. Of course, political rivals or enemies could potentially block your trade to slow it down (ex: embargoes, naval blockades during war).
5. Cap the tech malus at 100% at worst, rather than the +250% now. That would require even the most aggressively-modernizing ROTW nations 200 years (10 years per +5%) to totally Modernize. I'm still trying to understand why Sub-Saharan nations have only a +60% malus whereas North and South America are, crazily, +250%. Why would a 16th Century warrior from, say, the Niger Delta be that much more technologically advanced than a Cherokee?
6. Allow nations that "modernize" to various levels to switch their unit types to a culture which they border or otherwise identify with. Maybe an Andean free state could eventually have Red Coats, especially if they had been helped in modernization by Great Britain.
7. Require an idea group to be finished per tech tree to undertake Modernization in that tech tree. For instance, until you complete an Admin idea group, you can't modernize your administration tech. Until you finish a Military idea group, you can't reform your army. Until you finish a Diplo idea group, you can't reform your navy. This would push back anyone from even starting to fully modernize until they get at least three idea groups completed, which shouldn't happen until around 1550-1600. However, some nations might want to partially modernize their nation before that, dealing with whatever malus is associated with such an imbalanced modernization.
A system like this, to my mind, gives players choices and varying strategies ("Do I want to start rushing modernization, or wait until all three idea groups are unlocked and keep the process balanced?" "Do I want to asymmetrically develop my nation for a tactical advantage, or keep everything even?"), makes technology adoption more of a gradual, natural process than the current "revolutionary" path, and generally seems to fit history better.
What are your thoughts and suggestions to improve this idea?
1. You research different technology branches independently to improve them. So if Japan just wants guns and large standing armies (Mil), and otherwise remains xenophobic (no Diplo reform) and archaic (no Admin reform), so be it. However, there is a consequence to independent development.
2. To balance out point #1, you should try to keep your Mil, Adm and Diplo advancements aligned based on internal and external societal modifiers if you get out of whack. If you have a far higher-reformed military than admin, for example, national revolt risk can go up, since you have a lot of dangerous weapons, but no corresponding advances in the rule of law to deal with them. If you have a higher military than diplo, then you can get negative relations modifiers with neighbors and a hit to your trade power, since you don't seem to be able to make fair trade deals without threatening to kill all your neighbor's merchants. This would help balance out the war-mongering. If your Admin gets really far ahead of Diplo and Military, your nation could start becoming far too bureaucratic (increasing inflation, lowering discipline). And if it gets too far ahead in Diplo, it could mean that there's a loss of cultural identity (lower missionary strength, lowered army morale). Something like that. Ideally, you want to be advancing everything around the same rate, and mechanics should support that.
3. Your investment slowly decrements your malus to tech up, +5% step improvements per decade, for instance. You can reform one tech, two, or all three at a time. Each additional track you are reforming simultaneously increases instability to the process. This process would commensurately gradually lower your cap of storable MPs. Each +5% malus burned away getting you closer and closer to modernization. Rather than these huge lurching movements to Modernize in a discreet period of time, you instead naturally adopt technology over time.
4. You should be able to make trade deals with more advanced nations to help speed up your Modernization. Alliances, Protectorates, Vassals, Client States, etc., should help you with the process. Of course, political rivals or enemies could potentially block your trade to slow it down (ex: embargoes, naval blockades during war).
5. Cap the tech malus at 100% at worst, rather than the +250% now. That would require even the most aggressively-modernizing ROTW nations 200 years (10 years per +5%) to totally Modernize. I'm still trying to understand why Sub-Saharan nations have only a +60% malus whereas North and South America are, crazily, +250%. Why would a 16th Century warrior from, say, the Niger Delta be that much more technologically advanced than a Cherokee?
6. Allow nations that "modernize" to various levels to switch their unit types to a culture which they border or otherwise identify with. Maybe an Andean free state could eventually have Red Coats, especially if they had been helped in modernization by Great Britain.
7. Require an idea group to be finished per tech tree to undertake Modernization in that tech tree. For instance, until you complete an Admin idea group, you can't modernize your administration tech. Until you finish a Military idea group, you can't reform your army. Until you finish a Diplo idea group, you can't reform your navy. This would push back anyone from even starting to fully modernize until they get at least three idea groups completed, which shouldn't happen until around 1550-1600. However, some nations might want to partially modernize their nation before that, dealing with whatever malus is associated with such an imbalanced modernization.
A system like this, to my mind, gives players choices and varying strategies ("Do I want to start rushing modernization, or wait until all three idea groups are unlocked and keep the process balanced?" "Do I want to asymmetrically develop my nation for a tactical advantage, or keep everything even?"), makes technology adoption more of a gradual, natural process than the current "revolutionary" path, and generally seems to fit history better.
What are your thoughts and suggestions to improve this idea?
- 3
- 1
Upvote
0
