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.

 

[victimizer]

Perhaps higher mercantilism should increase development costs?

This way, the adverse effects of mercantilism would be modeled, as it would force local producers to buy costlier and lower quality local products, while also increasing the price of food.

 

[Anatur]

You keep thinking in modern terms.

Back then trade had f.ck all to do with national development.

Everyone who wanted a house would cut down local wood and build one,for a fort you would use the closest stone available etc.

Trade was more a way for the ruler to make hard cash with tolls and such since he couldnt tax his nobles or the clergy(only other people with actual money)

 

[Cthetheslayer]

I think that perhaps a trade alliance should be had, ie nations that worked together can form a semi-permanent alliance with massive growths in both nodes for both powers, ie the 2 signers get a chunk of each others power in a node as well as boosting (this one wont take away power from either) both of them, but it should HURT to break it, like a lot, diplo power, temporary trade power loss, etc etc.