Holy moly. Not even a single person that ranked
their favorite economy systems like I ask you. Anyways...
Most of these other systems do not make sens for a game set in the early modern era. You would not exactly be building factories like in victoria 2, or how ever you would try to adapt stellaris. The economic system of EU4 is relatively strong, and one of the things I would change the least.
Every economy system can be adapted sucessfully for every era. The basic jobs of economy didn't change so much, only their ratios.
In the current EU4, you can already build (proto-)factories. They are called manufactories. Only that they produce a fixed amount, instead of having population work in them. And maybe this is a surprise for you, but there were economies (especially in northern Italy), that had an economy very reliant on manufactored goods. Other economies relied on basic goods, of course.
Adopting the stellaris system? Easy. Instead of species, you have cultures, obviously. Instead of planets, you have provinces. Most of the jobs would be farmer jobs (90% of them, roughly, with each farmer producing 1.1 or 1.2 food), and then you have noble jobs, merchant jobs, artisan jobs (creating consumer goods, but the need per pop would be very low), etc. Rare resources would be replaced by luxury items, such as Silk, Steel, Glass, Chinaware etc.
Re POPs: I've seen a lot of people say that a pop system will solve all of the game's problems. I've yet to see anyone actually tackle this as a thesis. Vic2 has many, many problems, include many of the same ones that EU4 has. There's been very little reckoning about I:R's many, many, many, many, many issues that still exist post-1.4 or 2.0. Its (forum) fanbase is so incredibly insular that its incapable of it. M&T exists in the same bubble, only people that "love" it will talk about it. Heck, the OP put a system that literally doesn't exist in any testable ecosystem and hasn't been played with as their "#1" system.
Yes. Pops can fix all the issues in EU4, because it already does. Just play M&T 2.0, and you can see for yourself. Vic2 has many issues, but none of them is related to Pops, quite the opposite. Vic2 is only an interesting game
because of the pop system, otherwise it would be a footnote. (The Concert of Europe mod fixes most problems of Vic2). The problem of I:R is simply, that the Devs didn't implement a real pop system, but went down with a half-simulation.
And yes, I am generally able to predict how a system is played from reading Dev Diaries. M&T 3.0 promises to simulate not only real population like 2.0, but also their strata like in Vic2 as well as dynamic migration. This is combinted with the realisitc M&T loot system, its geography system and all of the other simulation. It is truely exciting.
Please elaborate - how does MEIOU & Taxes trade system work, and in what ways it differs from vanilla EU4? I have simply no idea.
In M&T, trade goods and therefore trade value is dynamically calculated based on the number of population in your province. Production is split between rural and urban production, with the former being produced by rural pops and the latter being produced by urban pops. Rural production can be increased with farming efficiency (like building local canal systems), while urban pops can specialize to produce exclusive goods like silk, steel or chinaware to increase their profit.
The trade flow system is not changed in M&T 2.0, but a more dynamic trade flow system is announced for 3.0.
I don't like POPs and I don't want POps, so... who wins?
Probably you. My opinion seems to be not very popular.
