The best proposal.my favorite proposal is that it should happen
- 5
The best proposal.my favorite proposal is that it should happen
It's been discussed, but not recently. I agree that transport should affect price, but tracking individual buyers and sellers for every product would likely be difficult. In my opinion, transport of goods should initially be limited, and expand as your economy, ports, and international connections grow. The early-game problem would be getting your goods ONTO the world market, to get cash. The mid-game problem would be trying to keep enough of the product OFF the market to meet domestic needs. The cost of transport to the closest market could be borne by the seller by reducing the money actually received, and the cost to bring it from the nearest market that has a source, to your country, could be included in the price to the buyer.no clue if someone has proposed this but my idea is that transporting goods should have a transporting cost. so that people pay a bit to have transport your goods from other places which depends on how far is it, how good infastructure and tech you have. which would make so that you can just transport stuff from other side of the world for literally no cost.
Bonus points if the shopkeepers hold a small amount of inventory from day to day, so goods don't magically vanish if not sold instantly.my idea for solving this issue would be a new middle class pop called "shopkeepers" or so, they'd buy the goods from the local artisans/capitalists/aristocrats and people buy their goods from them, shopkeepers would also buy needed goods from other shopkeepers in other regions at the normal price + an additional cost inversely proportional with infrastructure percentage (port level give a bonus, however if your port is blockaded though then your shopkeepers can't buy goods from overseas anymore) + some tarrifs if it's from another country if the country has some
Bonus points if the shopkeepers hold a small amount of inventory from day to day, so goods don't magically vanish if not sold instantly.
I'd think it would be better as a a mechanic built into the sphering system rather than events and decisions, as the events for annexing the Indian princes in Victoria II are a bit dodgy and its not clear what you have to do to get it done, and I'd be worried that decisions could take up so much room, especially if you have a lot of un-westernised nations in your sphere. EU4 does use diplomatic options with vassals but this has the same issues of player interest and message as I mentioned before. Of course a custom mechanic could have the same problems, so it would be dependent on how it's designed.I do agree that some mechanic to annex 'uncivilized' spherelings could work. It could be an event or decision, like the Doctrine of Lapse.
As for resistance to colonial rule, I see a large role for the Great Powers. Communists or Asian powerhouses might try to liberate colonies by supporting rebels or invading outright. Without outside help or true nationalism, rebellions will likely be localized and fail. For example, the in Sepoy Rebellion several Indian states supported the British against other Indian states. I suppose this is already represented by the independence movements for the original Indian states.
Tbh, this is something that I think could be substantially improved. There is no difference between the form of goverment of Japan, China, Persia an Indian princely minor and some of the African countries. China had strong regional goverment and an overarching state that could put a million men in the field at the start of the period, whilst most African countries lacked developed bureaucracy. There is also a substantial difference among even African state. Sokoto shouldn't just be a bigger blob than Benin and Zulu could have its relatively impressive military better modelled - I'd love to see a path for west African unity, or for a supercharged Zulu conquest of the South. That aside, we do defo need better models for national governments.The recent discussion about the upper house and elections reminded me of one thing I desperately desire in Vicky 3: Different governmental structures for different nations. The USA, Great Britain and the Chinese Empire all had different governments, and should have different mechanics to reflect that.
Nice suggestion for the diplomatic actions. I updated the post.I'd think it would be better as a a mechanic built into the sphering system rather than events and decisions, as the events for annexing the Indian princes in Victoria II are a bit dodgy and its not clear what you have to do to get it done, and I'd be worried that decisions could take up so much room, especially if you have a lot of un-westernised nations in your sphere. EU4 does use diplomatic options with vassals but this has the same issues of player interest and message as I mentioned before. Of course a custom mechanic could have the same problems, so it would be dependent on how it's designed.
I agree with great powers and local powers undermining colonial rule by supporting resistance or independence movements, especially with Japan or a westernised China. Could be a system secondary powers use in place of sphering, allowing for some means of influence without being a great power while also offering a path to undermine great powers or opposing secondary powers (such as the Netherlands and Ottomans, with they colonial and conquered empires). This could also make playing secondary powers more interesting and assist in "tall" playstyles.
Possibly one idea to handle the shift from localised independence movements to pan-national ones (such as the Indian National Congress, the various groups within Austro-Hungary and Russia, Indonesia, Vietnam and others) would be to possibly implement something similar to EU4's institutions, allowing for ideas to spread to states either naturally or through a nations embracing them. For this example, say nationalism is one such spreadable idea giving bonuses to nations that embrace it, like infamy free cases belli's and lower unrest in core pops, with the idea's spreading to core populations quickly but spreading slower to non-core pops slower, possibly also being slower if they are in a colonial sate. If is spawns around 1850, a similar time that it can be research in Victoria 2, the UK may embrace it around a similar time, with a slow drip to their colonies, possibly faster in some more than others. As the states in a colony adopt the idea, they flip from supporting a local state (such as an annexed princely state in India), to supporting a unified nation (India in this example).
Currently playing an unciv, and not a speck of Cattle, Fish, or Fruit gets past China, not that much is even available to them after every civilized country takes all they want. 20 years into the campaign, none of my pops can even meet their basic needs for lack of those products. The world market desperately needs an overhaul.
Worse, in all of SE Asia and China, there are only one or two provinces with fish, none with cattle, and only a few with fruit. Europe gets it first, despite lack of sufficient shipping capacity to deplete entire economies during that historical timeframe. In the early stages of the game, it should probably be more difficult to get stuff onto the world market to get cash than to keep at least a pittance of what your own country produces.
The recent discussion about the upper house and elections reminded me of one thing I desperately desire in Vicky 3: Different governmental structures for different nations. The USA, Great Britain and the Chinese Empire all had different governments, and should have different mechanics to reflect that.
I don't know about that, I think it would overly complicate a very straightforward and well-done system in my opinion. The population in Vic 2 is already divided into recruitable males and overall population. I can see how such a system would add further depth to the social policies though. The generational divide would be a bit arbitrary if implemented, unless it worked in a somewhat dynamic fashion (liberal government does really well in 1859 to 1864, older voters in 1888 vote mostly liberal due to that good governance etc).I think age and sex demographics would add a lot to the mechanics, so pops have different age bands and have a chance to promote to be older depending on the age range or die depending on medical technology and crime rates and such.
For example soldiers are going to be mainly young men, so if thousands die in battles in a war then it's going to mess up the working age population and birth rates, you might have to implement programs to train women to work in factories, or allow polygamy and encourage large families, or attract young male immigrants with sponsorships and business grants (perhaps from colonies, or the ability to open borders to certain countries and change visa requirements, maybe alliances and relations affect it as well) which is going to change the race and culture makeup of a nation.
Younger people could have their literacy rates influenced a lot more since they will be the ones in school, so if you all of a sudden spend a lot on education then you'll get a young generation with high literacy that will make a good workforce once they age, and your previously uneducated populous dies off over time, and laws on years of schooling will change at what age a pop starts becoming productive and going in to jobs and will also make education cost more.
Older people might make better teachers and business people, or just earn more money since they will have been promoted in their jobs. Having a large retired population is going to weigh down the economy with social security spending and little income contributions, so maybe you change the retirement age or don't support them at all and leave them with just their own savings, but maybe life expectancy will have an effect on your prestige, or it will spur emigration to countries with paths to citizenship and better state retirement.
There's loads more stuff that could be implemented like child mortality depending on vaccinations and generational divides in political views etc. Would be really cool to see in Vic3, or maybe I'll try to mod it in!
Yeah. People would probably need a Cray to run the game.I don't know about that, I think it would overly complicate a very straightforward and well-done system in my opinion. The population in Vic 2 is already divided into recruitable males and overall population. I can see how such a system would add further depth to the social policies thought. The generational divide would be a bit arbitrary if implemented, unless it worked in a somewhat dynamic fashion (liberal government does really well in 1859 to 1864, older voters in 1888 vote mostly liberal due to that good governance etc).