My immigration rant (not a "how do I get immigrants" thread)

[Hagie Sophia]

Ok, I understand the factors that contribute to immigration...plurality, social reforms, which party is in power, etc. That is not what this is about. I just think the way it works, even though I have certainly figured out how to game the system to make it work for me, is pretty dumb.

To illustrate my issues with the system, let me lay out a couple of scenarios that happened to me in two recent GC's as CSA and Texas.

As CSA, I was getting no immigrants. I had high plurality, a great socialist party, plenty of open RGO and factory slots, etc. Even had several funded social reforms. Barely a trickle of immigrants...a few POPs every couple of months. Finally, I added one more social reform, health care, and the trickle turned into a veritable flood...several thousand a day was getting added to my population. I could barely keep up with all the new immigration, splitting and promoting POPs, etc. Industry score went through the roof. It was crazy.

So I say to myself...wtf? Were there hordes of German, Irish, Chinese, British, Italian, and French citizens just itching to go overseas, wants jobs, freedom, land, etc? Apparently not. How about a land with low taxes, lots of material wealth available, and the opportunities to advance in society? I guess not. How about a new land that offered good retirement benefits, unemployment insurance (even though I had practically 100% employment), good safety regulations, political freedom, etc? No. What they were all wanting, apparently, was free health care. Seriously? Was there any such thing as "free health care" anywhere in the Americas at this time? Was this really that high on immigrants' priority lists? I doubt it. But there it was...as soon as I offered free health care, they were beating down my doors.

Second scenario, as Texas...similar situation, only it was plurality holding me back. I was lagging behind USA in that department. Had all reforms, including health care, but plurality was low. It finally hit a critical point and the immigrants started to started to flow in. Got a few good events and plurality finally hit 100 and, again, I could barely keep up with influx. Then I got a -5 plurality event and all of a sudden, I was hearing crickets and seeing tumble weeds blowing. So I tried the trick of defunding social reforms to gain plurality (let me get this straight...to entice immigrants, I have to pass social reforms...but I also have to have high plurality...to get high plurality, I have to defund the social reforms I just passed...this somehow brings in more immigration...WTF?!?). As it turned out, maybe 6 months later, I got another +5 plurality event and the floodgates opened again. What the heck does "plurality" even represent? Diversity? Strange, since with full citizenship (which is another rant for its paradoxical (no pun intended) benefits) I actually have LESS diversity since everyone just assimilates a week after getting to my country.

Ok, and something that happened in both games...as soon as I got even the slightest debt, the immigrants stop coming. Seriously? I'm spending something like 3K a day on social programs, but if I get 300 in debt, immigrants would rather stay home than come to my obviously bankrupt nation? Would some farmer in Germany even know that I was in debt, let alone care? So I have to put everything on hold, all infrastructure building, all military building, to pay off my minuscule debt so Chinese peasants will once again have faith in my economy.

Ok, since I"m already at it, what is up with "full citizenship"? Immigrants love it for some reason, right? Sure, because with full citizenship, I can fully exploit all cultures in my nation, so if 10,000 Irish show up, I can put them right to work in the factories. Except...they assimilate as soon as they get there. So what's the point of being able to exploit all other non-state cultures? Why would foreign cultures want to assimilate so quickly if they can get all the benefits of full citizenship without doing so? In fact, they have the best of both worlds...they can do all the civilian jobs in my nation, but don't have to worry about military service since I still can't make non-state cultures into soldiers, even with full citizenship.

Shouldn't "limited citizenship" make assimilation more likely? Yeah, they are somewhat welcomed as foreigners, but do not get all the benefits of citizenship, being able to get promoted out of the mines and fields, until they have fully assimilated into the national culture...so wouldn't that encourage them to assimilate faster than if they could get all the benefits without having to assimilate? If you showed up in a foreign country and could do everything a natural citizen could do, but did not have to give up your language and customs, why would you bother trying to assimilate? On the other hand, if you showed up and could only do menial labor until you learned the language, etc, wouldn't that encourage you to try and do so? So, I think they have those two political ideas exactly backwards when it comes to how non-state cultures are treated.

Ok, that's about it, I think.

 

[Mr. Domino]

It's been a while since a looked at a FAQ. But I assume both CSA and Texas still have slavery which can really throw off the immigration.

IIRC The debt issue is about game balance. Technically, if you are in debt to $1 I don't think any of your reforms are considered to "work" for purpose of immigration. This stops people from putting in place reforms they can't pay for, going into debt but attracting immigrants, and then using that influx to build up your industry and get out of debt.

Limited citizenship, as I understand it, means you can't assimilate. A member of a religous or ethnic minority can't be accepted into the military, vote ect. There simple is no way to assimilate in that scenario. Admittedly that means America just winds up with a lot of "yankees" but I can't really think of a better model.

 

[Easy Max]

Adressing your second issue

You're attempting to rationalize how Full Citizenship should work based on its name, so allow me to argue a counterpoint based on what I think the *game* believes Full Citizenship means.

The game, as you obviously well know, is based on a culture system. This is so that the Irish dont conquer China and use their pops to equal effect as the Chinese could. However, in a Full Citizenship government, the idea is that all minorities *do* work as effectively as the accepted culture. In this instance, it seems to be that there are only two ways in which the game could proceed:

Option A) - Any country run by a government with the Full Citizenship policy would immediately consider *all* cultures in the game to be accepted.

Option B) - All other cultures in your country are assimilated into an accepted culture, given proper motivation*.

Option A has the problem of an inherent lack of realism. By this method, if the USA with a Full Citizenship Party when on a conquering spree in India, those Indian would immediately turn around and work completely diligently for their new beloved country.

I think option B is the correct one because, in my mind, Full Citizenship means that anyone who immigrates into the country has the capacity to become a fully fledged and industrious member of that society, which based on the game engine, means they "become" that culture. It probably isnt the most historical way to deal with the issue, but it works pretty well in my estimation


* = Being the minority in a society of the accepted culture.

 

[HMS Enterprize]

@Hagie Sophia

Yes you are right, health care does seem to be the magnet, its not that realistic to a certain extent but that is how it works. I dont really bother with the other reforms however- they only lower efficiency in other ways- such as max work hours for example.

A province that produces gold (and sometimes oil) is another POP magnet. As CSA, I had mexican Sonora, same thing I could barely keep up with the immigration. I had some immigrant POPs that were so big they did not assimilate, even with a full citizenship party in power.

@Easy Max

Yes I think your analysis of the options is a good one.

 

[Agenor]

@Hagie Sophia

Yes you are right, health care does seem to be the magnet, its not that realistic to a certain extent but that is how it works. I dont really bother with the other reforms however- they only lower efficiency in other ways- such as max work hours for example.

Is this true? Immigrants only respond to health care reforms, and other reforms are irrelevant in determining immigration? I thought all reforms were weighted equally.

I'm currently playing Transvaal, have had the Liberal Party in power for twenty years with full citizenship and plurality, full political reforms, and immigration has been a mere trickle. Really disappointing, but then my plurality is "only" about 40%.

 

[Hagie Sophia]

Is this true? Immigrants only respond to health care reforms, and other reforms are irrelevant in determining immigration? I thought all reforms were weighted equally.

I'm currently playing Transvaal, have had the Liberal Party in power for twenty years with full citizenship and plurality, full political reforms, and immigration has been a mere trickle. Really disappointing, but then my plurality is "only" about 40%.

Health care seems to be the key. I had all but health care, but got nothing, even with socialist party (which is another pet peeve...America got plenty of immigrants even when we were far, far more conservative than we would even think about being today), everything, but no immigrants...I passed health care, and they flooded in.

And yeah, it's the plurality holding you back. Whatever the heck "plurality" is supposed to represent, it seems to be extremely important.

 

[Emp_Palpatine]

I remember having read somewhere that 50% plurality is the limit where reforms do have effect on immigration... But I'm not quite sure.

 

[HMS Enterprize]

I'm currently playing Transvaal, have had the Liberal Party in power for twenty years with full citizenship and plurality, full political reforms, and immigration has been a mere trickle. Really disappointing, but then my plurality is "only" about 40%.

You are having to contend with the American continent bonus for starters. On top of that you have high life rating provinces like New York & then gold (& oil I think) provinces that are another immigration magnet.

Africa is gonna be a tough sell.

Even as CSA with african territories (including a gold province or 2) all the immigrants were going to mainland CSA and the provinces there (gold in particular, then some oil places in Texas).

 

[unmerged(74032)]

I recently played Argentina a lot of times to figure out which way I could max out my immigrants and I failed consecutively to gain more than a few. I followed all the guidelines and tried it several times as constitutional monarchy and as democracy.

In my Vanilla games as Transvaal on the other hand immigration never was a problem.

 

[unmerged(16488)]

the problem seems to me that there are solid limits. I did experience a lot witht the plurality, & did find out that the plurality is a hard limit, moving with the era(i.e. the later the more you need). While you should get more & more, or less & less, but not "100%///0%" as it is now. Just keeping the same factors, but with ponderation. The more plurality, the more immigrants. And not, "at 56,4, no immigrants; at 56,5, overflow from the entire world".

 

[Emp_Palpatine]

All that immigration things is so obscure and frustrating.
Playing Texas, having Full-C, Liberal party, almost 70% plurality, Good Healthcare, Good unemployement, no debt, High value RGO, empty factories and RGO and....
Not a single immigrant. None. Actually, in whatever game I play, I never get any immigrant, or so little. Must be damn unlucky.

 

[OHgamer]

All that immigration things is so obscure and frustrating.
Playing Texas, having Full-C, Liberal party, almost 70% plurality, Good Healthcare, Good unemployement, no debt, High value RGO, empty factories and RGO and....
Not a single immigrant. None. Actually, in whatever game I play, I never get any immigrant, or so little. Must be damn unlucky.

the biggest problem is that every game is going to have its own dynamic, and immigration will respond to the dynamics in that game.

70% plurality is good, but if USA has 80% at the same time it's gonna be more attractive, even with the reduction in bonus that were placed on it in 1.04 patch from earlier versions.

but in another person's game, the dynamics may result in the USA still having slavery in 1900, or not getting plurality as rapidly, opening up possibilites for other nations.

in some ways, it really is luck of the draw as to whether you will get immigrants as a country other than the USA, because a lot does depend on how the USA evolves in game.

 

[Armfeldt]

Did you abolish slavery? If not, you won't get alot of immigrants, or none at all.

 

[Emp_Palpatine]

Sure I did, as soon as it was possible.
Ok then, next game I'll do my best to take the US down.

 

[Hagie Sophia]

Can someone at least try to explain what "plurality" is supposed to represent? As I said, it makes no sense to, on the one hand, need social reforms to attract immigrants but, on the other hand, be able to raise plurality (also needed to attract immigrants) by not funding the reforms you just passed.

And why is socialized medicine necessary to attract immigrants, when there is STILL no such thing in the US and we STILL get more immigrants than any other nation on Earth, and have pretty much for the last 150 years or so?

 

[OHgamer]

Can someone at least try to explain what "plurality" is supposed to represent? As I said, it makes no sense to, on the one hand, need social reforms to attract immigrants but, on the other hand, be able to raise plurality (also needed to attract immigrants) by not funding the reforms you just passed.

And why is socialized medicine necessary to attract immigrants, when there is STILL no such thing in the US and we STILL get more immigrants than any other nation on Earth, and have pretty much for the last 150 years or so?

Pluraity is the degree to which your population thinks of itself as full citizens in your nation, with all the rights and expectations that come along with the duties of having to serve as citizens of the nation. Compare that to the pre-19th C concept of people being subjects at the beck and call of the holders of power in society. Plurality represents the shift away from the population seeing itself as subjects and towards seeing itself as citizens.

As for the 2nd point, American Exceptionality is not modelled in many features of this game, and this is yet another one of those things. If the game modelled every exceptional element to the American experience compared to the the European experience during the Victoria game period (where the foundations of the guarantor state were being laid as early as the 1880s by that radical socialist, Otto von Bismarck and demands for further extenstion of such reforms as the right and expectation of the citizens to the state simply grew and grew from that point on) you'd likely have had to expand the code to a point where the game would not have been held within the minimum requirements set for it.

 

[Armfeldt]

...but oh how sweet it could have been!

 

[Ambigore]

I'm currently playing Transvaal, have had the Liberal Party in power for twenty years with full citizenship and plurality, full political reforms, and immigration has been a mere trickle. Really disappointing, but then my plurality is "only" about 40%.

Are you expanding? I played as Transvaal, had a pop of over 150m by the 1900s if I remember right, most from immigration. At the least I had a bigger population than the USA.

Try to buy/conquer South Africa from the Brits as best as you can as South Africa is a HUGE state with a few gold RGOs, if I remember correctly again. And expand, expand, expand. Colonise the African coasts and deny the other European powers entry onto your continent. I guess the more provinces you have, the more "chances" that a foreign POP will choose a province belonging to you than another power. And build factories like crazy to attract clerks and crafstmen from Europe. Steamer ship factories along the coast seem to work best. I personally prefer the Socialists in power so I can build/improve factories myself.

 

[lizardo]

As for the 2nd point, American Exceptionality is not modelled in many features of this game, and this is yet another one of those things. If the game modelled every exceptional element to the American experience compared to the the European experience during the Victoria game period (where the foundations of the guarantor state were being laid as early as the 1880s by that radical socialist, Otto von Bismarck and demands for further extenstion of such reforms as the right and expectation of the citizens to the state simply grew and grew from that point on) you'd likely have had to expand the code to a point where the game would not have been held within the minimum requirements set for it.

It isn't American 'exceptionalism', sounds like we're something weird and incomprehensible. We simply didn't jump on the socialist bandwagon. America is a creature of the Enlightenment and the Age of Reason, with a bit of Rome and Native American thrown in.

Immigration to America is based upon several factors. Social mobility, land ownership, job opportunities, opportunities for wealth, and safety from pogroms. Plus America was 'marketed' by people who wrote about it, so the word got out and filled the dreams of those who wanted to do something more with their lives than what their father did or their class or their religion permits.

Vicly's 'world market' is a perfect example of the problem people faced in Europe. Without 'prestige' no amount of money can buy what you need.

As a late example, Nicola Tesla emigrated to America for an opportunity to make his dreams come true. Had he stayed in Europe he might have spent his life as a postal worker, teacher or other salaried position instead of becoming one of the world's most important inventors.

Problem is, the game is written by the descendants of the guys who stayed behind in Europe and Vicky is a perfect model of socialist thought. When you're a particular 'pop' all your progeny stay that 'pop'. Wealth is defined by class, not by what you really earn.

Much of what America is is defined in its constitution, which limits the effect of political fashion. Constitutionalism isn't modeled very well in the game, the effect of it is social stability such that you know what to expect. In fact it's rather odd that America has to invent it late in the game when we already invented it in the previous century, along with intellectual property (article nine of that constitution).

Another issue, assimilation, it easier in America because the requirements are very low. Just be there. In the rest of the world being a member of that society requires ancestry and/or the proper race. The American constitution specifically grants rights to all people, citizens or not, which is another consideration. Few other nations had such political features at such a high level that changes in politics didn't mean changes in rights. Most other nations were focused on being 'exclusive', whereas America started from the go on 'high suck'.

The only limit on emigration to America is how xenophobic the current political party is, that is, if the door is open or not. So a new political position on immigration policy is necessary for America. Open door or closed.

These things could be modeled, and that could be an interesting User/developer project to get the concepts right.

Another bad thing about Vicky assimilation is that the 'pop' change religion when they assimilate. That doesn't happen in America. So there should be an option in the Nation description data that allows for a change in culture without changing religion upon assimilate, and a larger pop size that can assimilate.

So, what we need are a list of political positions and their effects, and if those positions are at a legislative or constitutional level. Social programs are nice for population candy but have never been much for attracting emigrants.

 

[Armfeldt]

Interesting ideas, but I do not agree on all points. For example:

Social programs are nice for population candy but have never been much for attracting emigrants.

Why do you think ~10% of Sweden's population today is made up of "immigrants" (1st or 2nd generation)?