• 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.

Ispil

HIP Advisor
42 Badges
Dec 13, 2013
1.679
2.549
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • PDXCon 2017 Awards Winner
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Heir to the Throne
I've mentioned this idea in a couple other threads but want to concentrate it fully here.

The primary crux of the idea is that individual populations also "own" technology. This is instead of the usual model of technology in Paradox games that have each tech owned by the state, maybe with some location-level diffusion. The point of this is that it means that technological development can be moved from being a primarily state-run enterprise, to something happening specifically at the buildings that would benefit from whatever technology is developed.

What I mean by that is that, improvements to mining happen at the mines; improvements to shipbuilding happen at the shipyard, and so on. The actual rate of technological development is a matter of literacy of the owning pops and just how large the building is in a given location (or rather more specifically, the number of owning pops; it goes up as the building size goes up). This means that if you happen to have a particularly abundant, say, glassblowing industry, you'd likely see more technological developments in glassblowing than you would some industry that you leave completely untouched.

Secondly, the technology is specifically given not to the location, but to the pops owning that building. Having a pop own a building where that pop also happens to have some sort of technology that would let you, say, change production methods or whatever else, lets you actually do such a thing. In other words, it's the pop with the technology that matters for making use of that technology. This technology then spreads from pop to pop, more likely to pops in the same location with a lower chance of pops in adjacent locations, with a rate depending on the literacy of the pop "learning" the technology and also what other technologies they know. This creates a diffusion model of technology, where technological developments will spread across the world over time.

However, people move faster than ideas. In the event that a pop with some technology that you don't have happens to migrate to your country, you can just... make use of that technology, wherever they happen to be located. Saxons develop advanced mining technology that you would like to benefit from? Invite them to migrate over and given them ownership of your mines (very much a real thing in Hungary and Serbia at the start date).

Now, since technology isn't a sort of linear step-ladder of progress, what actually decides the next innovation explored? For the sake of avoiding endless progress meters and the like, I would say that this would be something that the player decides the moment some new technology is researched. Or rather, the player gets to make the decision at that moment. You'd get your choice of which technology to pick from a selection presented given the technology currently known by the owners of the building, perhaps with some randomness also applied so that you can't simply always choose a path towards the "best" technologies. Ideally the selection also reflects some conditions that are broadly applicable to the market of the location; an abundance of a resource that could be used in an alternate, unresearched production method, for instance, would encourage researching that production method (assuming that other resource is cheaper than the current production method inputs). Same idea for alternate outputs, if there'd be more profit to be made. As for military, the context would be your history of military encounters in recent history (previous 20? 50? 100?). Things like terrain, the sort of forces you were up against, how often you're sieging and what sort of forts you're sieging... all of that stuff.

As for technologies regarding laws and the like, I would say that those would follow the same principle, except the building in question would be... whatever capital building exists, since we've been told that there'd be some number of buildings that only function or can be built or whatever else in the capital.

One more twist: universities work on a unique component of this system. They get to choose from a random selection of all available technologies every time their "technological development" meter/whatever else fills up. This helps alleviate being in a technological deficit in some building that you've not built up. The downside, of course, is that this knowledge is concentrated at the university.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
In theory you are right. Technology makes more sense if you track it through ethnic groups/people who speak the same language than if you track it through the state, but the question is how to implement such a thing without making a huge mistake? An example of a huge mistake might be Zulus culture switching to English to get rifle technology...

There would be a lot of work to implement such a system well because it hasn't really been done before by Paradox (ck3 would fall into a lot of mistakes category if tech actually mattered that much), but there could be a lot of benefits.
 
In theory you are right. Technology makes more sense if you track it through ethnic groups/people who speak the same language than if you track it through the state, but the question is how to implement such a thing without making a huge mistake? An example of a huge mistake might be Zulus culture switching to English to get rifle technology...

There would be a lot of work to implement such a system well because it hasn't really been done before by Paradox (ck3 would fall into a lot of mistakes category if tech actually mattered that much), but there could be a lot of benefits.
For context, I was referring more towards PC's earlier-stated representation of "pops" as "people", not tying technology to culture.
 
For context, I was referring more towards PC's earlier-stated representation of "pops" as "people", not tying technology to culture.
The pops have culture and should be communicating technological understanding fairly quickly within their language group, so I don't see how your way of phrasing it differs. Yeah, moving Saxons into Transylvania should speed up technological adoption, but not give Hungary instant access to what Saxons know. As far as doing it granularly where Saxons get to work jobs Hungarians don't that would require 100s of times more information to be tracked at a pop level than Johan intends.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
The pops have culture and should be communicating technological understanding fairly quickly within their language group, so I don't see how your way of phrasing it differs. Yeah, moving Saxons into Transylvania should speed up technological adoption, but not give Hungary instant access to what Saxons know. As far as doing it granularly where Saxons get to work jobs Hungarians don't that would require 100s of times more information to be tracked at a pop level than Johan intends.
Fair. I suppose then that there needs to be a restriction on statewide culture conversion, though it wouldn't necessarily help you all that much if it's still at the "pops of that culture still need to be around" layer. Which is to say, just because you converted from Zulu to English doesn't mean you get rifles for free; you still are a country of nothing but Zulu pops.

I'd argue that the only time a state should really be changing a culture voluntarily would be some sort of cultural genesis event or the like.
 
Fair. I suppose then that there needs to be a restriction on statewide culture conversion, though it wouldn't necessarily help you all that much if it's still at the "pops of that culture still need to be around" layer. Which is to say, just because you converted from Zulu to English doesn't mean you get rifles for free; you still are a country of nothing but Zulu pops.

I'd argue that the only time a state should really be changing a culture voluntarily would be some sort of cultural genesis event or the like.
Yeah, tracking tech at the cultural level would rationalize some game mechanics that are otherwise unmotivated. For instance, the UK could not realistically conquer an interior African tribe in 1750 and put them to work in manufacturing. There are certain social and cultural adaptations that the Africans would have to make in order to be effective workers in these foreign styles of industry, which don't happen automatically or quickly. Some are fairly straightforward like learning the job through a language barrier, but others are difficult to quantify. It's unlikely that these people would understand a fixed 10 or 12 hour labor day when they are accustomed to variable farm labor. How do you account for that except as technology?
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
In theory you are right. Technology makes more sense if you track it through ethnic groups/people who speak the same language than if you track it through the state, but the question is how to implement such a thing without making a huge mistake? An example of a huge mistake might be Zulus culture switching to English to get rifle technology...

There would be a lot of work to implement such a system well because it hasn't really been done before by Paradox (ck3 would fall into a lot of mistakes category if tech actually mattered that much), but there could be a lot of benefits.

They won't switch culture overnight or with ease like in EU4. It would be gradual (if at all) thanks to the population mechanics. Technology could in theory spread from culture to culture if they are in neighboring provinces/locations or if they own a key trading location which would act as a hub to spread ideas and information of different peoples.
 
They won't switch culture overnight or with ease like in EU4. It would be gradual (if at all) thanks to the population mechanics. Technology could in theory spread from culture to culture if they are in neighboring provinces/locations or if they own a key trading location which would act as a hub to spread ideas and information of different peoples.
Stuff.
 
improvements to mining happen at the mines; improvements to shipbuilding happen at the shipyard, and so on. The actual rate of technological development is a matter of literacy of the owning pops and just how large the building is in a given location
i think this is workable if its not gonna introduce pop splitting vic3 style