I just bought Art of War and this happened. Is this usual?They never asked me,not even once, to change their governor and liberty desire just keeps rising.
My colonial nations don't ask me to change governors.Is this intended?
- Thread starter darthfanta
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
WAD, people didn't like the micro (I liked it, allowed you to direct their progress somewhat, give them mil leaders to beat up the other colonies).
There is now a distinct lack of ways to lower liberty desire beyond just beating them down when they revolt.
There is now a distinct lack of ways to lower liberty desire beyond just beating them down when they revolt.
Yeah,what paradox did sounds like a lazy option.Well, you could always have an option to make it automatic
Last edited:
What you said sounds preposterous.All governors were appointed directly by the crown.I have heard of elected premiers but never have I heard of colonies electing their own governor,especially in the game's timespan.
Last edited:
I realize it may have sounded different, but I agreed with you. Colonies choosing their own governors is prepostrous.
Yeah Paradox clearly took the easy way out here rather than implement a (presumably) harder automatic election system.
As previously said, colonial governors (viceroys in South America) were appointed by the kings of the overlord.
As previously said, colonial governors (viceroys in South America) were appointed by the kings of the overlord.
Sometimes a suspension of belief is needed to lessen the micromanagement of what really is a small area of the game. If you are unhappy with them electing their own governor why are you not up in arms that the Colonial Nations start as Republics under Monarchies?
Surely the Colonial Nations head of state is still the Crown?
Surely the Colonial Nations head of state is still the Crown?
They aren't republics.Nowadays they are however.At any rate,I don't see selecting a governor every few years is micromanagement.It was a useful way to decrease liberty desire. Nowadays,there's nothing you can do to decrease liberty desire.Sometimes a suspension of belief is needed to lessen the micromanagement of what really is a small area of the game. If you are unhappy with them electing their own governor why are you not up in arms that the Colonial Nations start as Republics under Monarchies?
Surely the Colonial Nations head of state is still the Crown?
They are for all intents and purposes, they Elect their Leaders and they have Republican Tradition.
But this is getting OT
That's only after the patch.I am talking about before AoW. By no means should they elect ANYONE. Not even the super decentralized British North American colonies elect their own governors. Most certainly not for the Spanish ones.They are for all intents and purposes, they Elect their Leaders and they have Republican Tradition.
But this is getting OT
Ah, that's why colonial liberty desire seems to rise faster across the board this patch. I like the current balance better (slow Iberian colonization of South America notwithstanding), but I can see how this would be frustrating as a colonial overlord.
I agree that overlords should appoint colonial governors but I also think that liberty desire was too easy to manage before. I'm playing as GB right now, it's about 1715 I think, and my three colonial nations all have liberty desires around 13% to 15% which I think is plenty low. Although I have actively chosen event options to keep them low, and I don't think I have raised tariffs once, because I make enough bank as it is, bro.
Reducing tariffs lowers it by 5-10 percent if I remember right. I've personally found keeping tariffs at around 6.5% is the best as it freezes liberty gain and gives your colonies more money to expand