Rework Mercantilism

[Incompetent]

The way things are now, Mercantilism is like Patriarch Authority for shekel masters. It builds up gradually over the centuries and you don't need to do anything to maintain it at its present level, no matter how high that level is. The name refers to an economic theory popular in the early modern period, which doesn't make a lot of sense relative to how it works (a policy choice would have pros and cons, not just be some kind of stock you build up over time). Also, its effect just duplicates the effect of 'provincial trade power' modifiers. Overall it doesn't make a lot of sense and in terms of how much it contributes to the game, it doesn't really warrant a line on the trade screen.

Option 1: just get rid of it - it doesn't really add much to the game and it has no real basis in history. Compensate historical merchant republics with slightly better trade NIs.

Option 2: turn it into 'Mercantile Tradition', which is something you have to actively maintain (similar growth/decay to army/navy tradition). Instead of being all about provincial trade power, mercantile tradition would also give bonuses like caravan power and embargo strength, and you get bonus merchants at high levels. The main way to gain it would be to establish trade dominance in nodes where 'competition' is high (competition meaning there are lots of provinces that you neither own nor extract TP from), so it doesn't reward the usual blobbing game. There could also be smaller bonuses from ideas, government type, estates and so on. Events that currently give mercantilism would instead give a one-off boost in MT.

 

[BrokenSky]

Option 3: turn it into a scale with modifiers from one end to the other; Free trade vs Restrictions with positives and negatives at each end (and in the middle) Events would pull you one way of the other depending on choices, and you could boost one way or the other with diplo-points. The cost of boosting would increase further from the center, and the Edges would be better than the middle (the middle would give only very slight bonuses).

I like Option 2 better, but this is a reasonable alternative which ought to be considered.

 

[zeredek]

Option 4: Give us sliders back PLEASE

 

[Anatur]

A slider would probably be easiest to represent all the stages between full mercantilism and the ruler not giving a crap.

I miss the EUIII sliders myself ,it use to be so much fun being a narrowminded,serf,mercantilist,centralised,quantitative,land empire.

 

[TheDecider]

Option 5: Like Reformed or by the looks new Native Policies, have buttons/policies which focuses your nation in one direction or another... if you really want a bar maybe have a ticking effect which increases over time.

Option 6: Use the new Estate system and tie in mercantilism there somehow.

 

[saegoto]

there are two main economical thoughts in modern europe in eu4 time period.
mercantilism through renaissance and baroque and then about 1750 through enlightenment classical economics by Adam Smith

as western/eastern state u can implament one of this. when renaisance show up u can choose mercantlism. when enlightenment shows up u can choose smithian economy. what it gives?

e.g.
feature for mercanlism:
u can collect only in main trade node
u can not place a merchant where u dont have provincial trade power (or your subject)

every point of mercantlism give:
+2% provincial trade power in trade node where you collect
-2% trade power for foreign country in your main trade node if it is not its main trade node (Free Trade policy is resistant to this)
-0,5% manufactory cost
+0,2% global tariffs
+0,2% good produced in provinces with the same culture group

feature for Free Trade (available for western powers about 1700) (adapt it removes Mercantilism)
every point of trade efficiency gives:
0,5% trade power aboard
0,2% trade steering
0,1% caravan power

 

[Vaximillian]

Option 4: Give us sliders back PLEASE

Absolutely not.

 

[zeredek]

Absolutely not.

Absolutely yes.

 

[BrokenSky]

Absolutely yes.

Absolutely ... maybe?

 

[Incompetent]

Option 3: turn it into a scale with modifiers from one end to the other; Free trade vs Restrictions with positives and negatives at each end (and in the middle) Events would pull you one way of the other depending on choices, and you could boost one way or the other with diplo-points. The cost of boosting would increase further from the center, and the Edges would be better than the middle (the middle would give only very slight bonuses).

I like Option 2 better, but this is a reasonable alternative which ought to be considered.

You could do this, but I don't think Paradox want to bring back EU2/3-style sliders, which is what this would be. Also, 'free trade' would be a polite fiction at best in a world where the major trading powers casually invade each other in order to force the trade to go in a particular direction, and simply having trade power in a node is seen as a legitimate reason for someone to attack you (trade conflict CB). Historically, major trading powers were strongly monopolistic in their behaviour for most of the era. Free trade can only really exist in a world where trade is mutually beneficial (trade power in EU4 is pretty much a zero-sum game) and there is a certain minimum level of respect for other countries' sovereignty and property.

 

[BrokenSky]

You could do this, but I don't think Paradox want to bring back EU2/3-style sliders, which is what this would be. Also, 'free trade' would be a polite fiction at best in a world where the major trading powers casually invade each other in order to force the trade to go in a particular direction, and simply having trade power in a node is seen as a legitimate reason for someone to attack you (trade conflict CB). Historically, major trading powers were strongly monopolistic in their behaviour for most of the era. Free trade can only really exist in a world where trade is mutually beneficial (trade power in EU4 is pretty much a zero-sum game) and there is a certain minimum level of respect for other countries' sovereignty and property.

I was thinking more like Patriarch Authority or Piety, in the trade screen.

But yeah, that's more a problem with how trade works in EUIV; it ought to be mutually beneficial some of the time.

 

[Dutchman251]

there are two main economical thoughts in modern europe in eu4 time period.
mercantilism through renaissance and baroque and then about 1750 through enlightenment classical economics by Adam Smith

as western/eastern state u can implament one of this. when renaisance show up u can choose mercantlism. when enlightenment shows up u can choose smithian economy. what it gives?

e.g.
feature for mercanlism:
u can collect only in main trade node
u can not place a merchant where u dont have provincial trade power (or your subject)

every point of could mercantlism give:
+2% provincial trade power in trade node where you collect
-2% trade power for foreign country which has a merchant is present but it is not its main trade node (if it does not implamented Free Trade policy)
-1% manufactory cost
+2% global tariffs
+1% good produced in provinces with the same culture group

feature for Free Trade (adapt it removes Mercantilism)
every point of trade efficiency gives:
0,5% trade power aboard
0,2% trade steering
0,1% caravan power

I don't think you did understand mercantilism completely. What you describe sounds like isolationism, what is also a result, but not a desired one.
Isolationism should occur at 100% mercantilism, the point where nobody wants to trade with you - you basically made that impossible.
It would be an event, with a MTTH of 10 years, giving you 'the isolationist' modifier:

Your trade is no longer counted in any node.
You collect all your trade value yourself, but have no possibility to get from others.
You get a -50% trade efficiency modifier. (Because the end of international trade will hurt you badly).
This could be linked to nasty events with regard to money, but could also give -unrest events because of nationalism.
Burghers Estate loses 50% of it's influence.
Aristocrats gain 25% influence.

Trade policy should be a slider, like piety. One should be able to influence it with decisions, and by events, like piety. ( can be influence for -/+25% by decisions upon new ruler, (some mercantilist decisions require admin tech 20, because they are the more advanced ones). Beforehand, it will only be -20%/+10%. There will also be events to in/decrease it, I suggest 10% per event, on a 10-year pulse.

100 mercantilism will have the following effects (scaling):
+100% provincial trade power
+50% tariffs
+50% goods produced
+50% embargo efficiency
+25% liberty desire for colonial nations
-25% better relations over time.
-1 diplomatic reputation.

0% mercantilism is Free Trade.

Events should give:
Not related to percentage:
+Relations and diplomatic modifiers for less mercantilism
Money losses/gains

Also, if >50% mercantilism:
Money losses/gains (mainly losses)

Depending on goods produced (modifiers are 20%):
If produced, you get it anyways
If not produced, you can avoid a negative modifier by giving up mercantilism
Copper & Iron: -Army cost
Gold: Inflation
Slaves: Tariffs
Naval supplies: -Ship cost
Corn, Wine, Wool, Cloth, Fish and Salt: -2 Unrest
Fur: Influence of noble estate grows
Tropical wood: -Build cost
Colonial goods: Decrease of Aristocrats' influence, increase of burghers' one.

Edit:
There should also be a 'failed embargo' and 'successful embargo' event.
If embargo gives <10% trade damage in all nodes, you will get an 'failed embargo' event giving you yourself -10% trade power and -10 prestige.
If embargo gives >25%(>10% for merchant republics) trade power damage in one or more nodes, the embargoed country will get -50% goods produced in all provinces in the respective nodes. Both modifiers last for ten years, and the event should have an MTTH of 3 years. It cannot fire if the embargoed country has 50% more mercantilism than the embargoer, and also not if the countries are at war with each other.

Feel free to comment!

 

[grommile]

Isolationism should occur at 100% mercantilism,

Which basically never happens. Even as a merchant republic you have to really try to get 100% merc.

 

[Anatur]

I dont think a full end to trade is resonable even with max mercantilism.

I mean taking the example of china and the opium wars.

China had everything it could ever want so it forced european traders to pay it in gold and silver instead of barter.

Since china was an important source of asian goods the europeans had no choice but to go with it untill they figured out they could just make them all junkies instead.

So ingame maybe we could have 100% mercantilism render your common trade goods worthless but make the valuable ones give you direct cash similair to how gold works.

So lets say you have 3 grain provinces and 1 silk province,the grain provinces wouldnt do anything for your trade but you would be getting some extra cash for the 1 silk province.

 

[Dutchman251]

Which basically never happens. Even as a merchant republic you have to really try to get 100% merc.

With my suggestions, you can end up with 100% mercantilism in 50 years.

It's true that max mercantilism doesn't have to end into isolationism, but it is a reasonable possibility in that time, when transport costs were much higher, and the gains of trade need to be higher than the costs - which could happen to exceed them with much mercantilism. Moreover, mercantilism elicits mercantilst actions from other nations, (like in the timeframe 1914-1945, especially after the Great Depression), leading to a destructive spiral of measures, and being very harmful of trade as a whole. An example in the timeframe is Japan - not entirely comparable, but that is isolationism, and 100% egoistic mercantilism is close to that point. But it should be the to make 100% mercantilism risky, and not OP.

But giving up like 50% mercantilism one should be able to get back to trade.

 

[Incompetent]

There seems to be a confusion here between mercantilism and autarky. Mercantilism is all about exporting your finished goods to the rest of the world, getting paid in hard currency so you control the world's bullion, and only importing lower-value raw materials. For instance, in recent times China and Germany have been accused of mercantilist policies.

Thing is, mercantilism is factually wrong in EU4. The name of the trade game is to *import* as many goods as possible, and never export anything. In effect, EU4 is based on a consumerist model, which is the reverse of mercantilism.

BTW, 'mercantile' just means anything to do with merchants, whereas 'mercantilist' specifically relates to the ideology of mercantilism.

 

[Dutchman251]

I'm not confused, I'm just suggesting that full mercantilism may lead to isolation.

Full mercantilism has so much trade barriers, tariffs and quotas ,that no one imports is able to import something at a profit into your country. This could easily lead to decisions of other nations to do the same as well regarding you, and when they all do that, you can no longer export anything, too. It is a bit hypothetical, but I like the idea, and I want it as a counterbalance against the profits of mercantilism.

And please, do not the discuss the representation of economics in EU4; it has to do so few with reality that we can abandon it. The current trade is about a stream of money, of which people try to take the largest part. It has little to do with the tariffs and trade agreements of the past

 

[Anatur]

I would just like to add that run amok mercantilism was part of the reason for the colony wars the european powers had between themselfes.

Back then if a nation had a monopoly on a certain type of goods(sugar,silk,porculean etc) they could literally extort other nations to buy them since those nations would like nice things and wouldnt have any alternative.

One only needs to look at the wars in the americas as well as the drive to east asia to see how desperate nations were to get such an advantage.

 

[saegoto]

MONOPOLY MECHANISM could be also interesting. any ideas?

 

[BrokenSky]

MONOPOLY MECHANISM could be also interesting. any ideas?

How about if one nation (or trade league? - next expansion possible feature?) controls 80% of the production of a resource it gets a +75% price increase? or something?