Southern Italy base tax too low?

[Knab]

Given the fact, that the Papal States doesn't survive in many LP which I saw, and that Naples is even in grade to regain Sicily, this would overpower Naples even more. If we touch the balance, we must add also something to the Papal State (I would even suggest two provinces, Perugia and Ancona proper, redoing Urbino. This province always makes me cry). If we do that, Firenze needs one more province. And Venice. And Milan. All to keep the balance. I think that PI had other, more serious concerns than some italian players, and went on to other topics on the list, not beeing aware of the fact, that Calabria has now the same revenue like St. Helena.

Fortunately there are plenty of new provinces that might be added.
And mods!

Back on the main topic, until now in the demo I too saw Naples doing well; might be that we are arguing about something that does not need changes (on the vanilla, obviously).

 

[Belegurt]

No 'sir', the one who did not read the other's post was you.

I never claimed that you have to live in the South to be looked down upon by Northerners, I stated that you must have Southern origins (while living in the North). It's quite different.

And given my past experiences with people reacting your way when it comes to neo-borbonism, my bet is that no matter where you live, your origins are most like Southern.

Or am I wrong? (no need to post sources about your private life, just tell me where your parents' origins lie, if you feel like, ofc)

Do not worry about your English, you should rather worry about the fact you assume you are able to give me a history lesson, which according to your provided source, it's unlikely.

You quoted a good source (wiki) whose reliability I do not dispute, but within your very source there are sentences like:

"Abject poverty meant that, throughout Naples and Southern Italy, thousands decided to leave in search of a better future." Many went to the United States.[3] It was heavily agricultural, like the other Italian states;[4] the church owned 50–65% of the land by 1750."

and

"...and the first railway in the Italian peninsula (1839), which connected Naples to Portici. However, until the Italian unification, the railway development was highly limited. In the year 1859, the kingdom had only 99 kilometers of rails, compared to the 800 kilometers of Piedmont."

(aside from the fact the first railways were built by Piedmontese companies funded by Cavour afaik)

The wiki article seems to prove my point instead of yours, unless you can find a decent source stating that the abovementioned "abject poverty" was Piedmont's fault, something not even remotely hinted or mentioned in the article.

Besides, you quote something to prove your point, but the sources completely lack the most important thesis you were debating upon ("Two Sicilies's situation was North's fault!!!")?!?!

Just to whom do you pretend to be able to give history lessons ?

my family comes from rome but i'm actually milanese born and raised... and a nation is not rich only when the money is equally distributed over its population, a nation is rich when its government have the money to do things, buy things, wage war, u may then argue that its not an healty economy and that sooner or later it will have to change if it doesnt want to destibilize the country, but that is a totally different argument...
usa have a laughable distribution of its money from an european point of view, but its still arguably one of the most powerfull nations in the world, military advanced and all those shiny little things that bring power to a nation and to an economy... of course i'm not saying that naple was a powerhouse and the economical situation its different now but it serves as an example

by the way, i'm getting tired of this discussion, really, and i dont really know why i am trying to explain something like this here since the best arguments that are brought are jokes and racial prejudices (soon i will hear that asian guys are good at math and that mexican people smells) instead of facts :/ i think i will just pass on this topic

so, back with the main topic, it just need to be tested if the game becomes too unbalanced with a richer land in the south... but the main problem with that probably isnt with the economy system of the game... from what i've readed around the forum its the ai who is a bit too entusiast with wars

 

[Hastu Neon]

Premise: south by origin, living in north Italy, objective attitude, pls no flaming then.

South Italy was poorer then Florence, Venice, Milan in XV century. That's a fact. Reasons where also partly due to more wars, taxes, foreign domination.

That was not the case in centuries XI to XIII (when probably south was on average richer than north) but this period is covered by CK2, not EU4.

Said that, i believe South cannot be considered dirty poor in EU4 timeframe, i mean probably something in line with mid-level Spanish or French provinces (Aragon, French midi?). Even in XV having Naples, Sicily was a great boost for the coffers of every Valois or Trastamara king.

 

[Te. Kenzo]

@Te. Kenzo: You mentioned the bt. What about the manpower? Did the developers split them, too, like the bt?

Actually I don't know that, I have not EUIII installed, however the bt divided by the splitting of the regions, is a reasonable theory, if someone can have a look of the euiii provinces file, could confirm if that is true.

Sicily have a good base tax in both the provinces, Naples have very good base tax, Abruzzi have a respectable 4 base tax, also Sardinia (if we want consider it as "south" have a 4 base tax.

are just the Calabria and Puglia, now splitted, to have it so low. I don't know if is a coincidence. However in game terms, Naples only gained from this splitting, becose more regions in south italy means more solidity and more building spots.

 

[Heliocon]

Actually I don't know that, I have not EUIII installed, however the bt divided by the splitting of the regions, is a reasonable theory, if someone can have a look of the euiii provinces file, could confirm if that is true.

Sicily have a good base tax in both the provinces, Naples have very good base tax, Abruzzi have a respectable 4 base tax, also Sardinia (if we want consider it as "south" have a 4 base tax.

are just the Calabria and Puglia, now splitted, to have it so low. I don't know if is a coincidence. However in game terms, Naples only gained from this splitting, becose more regions in south italy means more solidity and more building spots.

Who is going to build province improvements for tax when they are all (with the exception of temple) %bt improvements?

 

[Marco Dandolo]

Fortunately there are plenty of new provinces that might be added.
And mods!

I assure you, they will...

Actually I don't know that, I have not EUIII installed, however the bt divided by the splitting of the regions, is a reasonable theory, if someone can have a look of the euiii provinces file, could confirm if that is true.

Would be helpful.

so, back with the main topic, it just need to be tested if the game becomes too unbalanced with a richer land in the south... but the main problem with that probably isnt with the economy system of the game... from what i've readed around the forum its the ai who is a bit too entusiast with wars

Well, besides the fact that a bt of 5-8 more can be a huge advantage in this area, the italian states seems just as blobbing as the HRE states, which in fact wasn't as possible as shown. The same goes for Venice, which is invaded by Austria in several games. A good player may be able to solve the problem diplomatically - but I'm sceptical if the AI is able to do that.

All in all, like the HRE members were eager to preserve their liberty, the italian states had the same goal in common. When a state in the area grew too strong, the others alliied suddenly against this menace. The whole system of the Italic league of the 15th century, which preserved the status quo until the Italian Wars, isn't even in. Instead, nations as France, Austria and Aragon have some decisions/missions which lead to certain doom.

My considerations are the following:

- Overhaul of the Italian peninsula without destroying european balance (in this context, the big neigbours must get some advantages, too)
- Removing north italian provinces from the HRE
- Adding triggered modifiers, which determine the power status of an italian state on the peninsula by monthly income, provinces and vassals in this geographic area, giving a bonus to smaller, and a malus to bigger powers. If a power becomes too strong, the other states will unite in a coalition by event.
- Adding event-chain/decisions concerning the Italic league to provide a sub-system, which would make expanding in Italy (by italian states and foreigners) difficult
- Giving France the chance to claim Naples after Anjou/Provence doesn't exist anymore, and France holds these provinces; same case for Orleans and Milan. In that case, the league may break, and HRE/Aragorn gets the chance to intervene, starting the DHE of the Italian Wars.
- HRE has the chance to regain Northern Italy as HRE-lands, in a manner like Charles V had in mind
- Because of that, making Italy more interesting - more provinces, better bt for the boot - it would be more rewarding to follow this approach and Italy won't be unbalanced or overpowered, but a unique playground with new strategies and options (not only for Italian states, but also the neighbouring great powers)

 

[Belegurt]

i think i will try to create an event that trigger with certain condition that will bring ai to create leagues to defend itself... exactly what happened against venice with the league organized by the pope... i have yet to see the commands that modders will have at theyr disposal in eu4... so i dont know how hard it can be to do something like this here... but if its something that wants to simulate this only in the hre or maybe in the northern italy, it should be possible to do it as long as there is a command that count how many provinces u have.

i dont know yet

something like "if venice gets more than 3 provinces then start event x" "event x = nation y, z, w and k declare war on venice"

not scripted this way and not so much deterministic, but this is the idea i got here reading ur post

 

[Te. Kenzo]

Who is going to build province improvements for tax when they are all (with the exception of temple) %bt improvements?

Yes, maybe this can be a gameplay issue

In the we came to the conclusion, that the vanilla never satisfied, and for is an inspiration for the creation of mods

 

[Marco Dandolo]

something like "if venice gets more than 3 provinces then start event x" "event x = nation y, z, w and k declare war on venice"

not scripted this way and not so much deterministic, but this is the idea i got here reading ur post

Nope, as Johan wrote that it is possible to make coalitions via events, it is more like making coalitions before you reach the aggression limit. No deterministic declarations of war.

 

[Belegurt]

Nope, as Johan wrote that it is possible to make coalitions via events, it is more like making coalitions before you reach the aggression limit. No deterministic declarations of war.

well, on victoria 2 it was possible to start wars via events... did they cut that option out? if so its just a terribly stupid move... mod options are there for a reason... u dont want it in vanilla? k.. but cutting something out for mods its just plain stupid

as a modder im just pissed off

 

[HabemusZlatan]

I love how Southern Italy is, according to this thread, either the land of milk and honey or grim and frostbitten siberian steppes.

 

[WeissRaben]

I assure you, they will...



Would be helpful.



Well, besides the fact that a bt of 5-8 more can be a huge advantage in this area, the italian states seems just as blobbing as the HRE states, which in fact wasn't as possible as shown. The same goes for Venice, which is invaded by Austria in several games. A good player may be able to solve the problem diplomatically - but I'm sceptical if the AI is able to do that.

All in all, like the HRE members were eager to preserve their liberty, the italian states had the same goal in common. When a state in the area grew too strong, the others alliied suddenly against this menace. The whole system of the Italic league of the 15th century, which preserved the status quo until the Italian Wars, isn't even in. Instead, nations as France, Austria and Aragon have some decisions/missions which lead to certain doom.

My considerations are the following:

- Overhaul of the Italian peninsula without destroying european balance (in this context, the big neigbours must get some advantages, too)
- Removing north italian provinces from the HRE
- Adding triggered modifiers, which determine the power status of an italian state on the peninsula by monthly income, provinces and vassals in this geographic area, giving a bonus to smaller, and a malus to bigger powers. If a power becomes too strong, the other states will unite in a coalition by event.
- Adding event-chain/decisions concerning the Italic league to provide a sub-system, which would make expanding in Italy (by italian states and foreigners) difficult
- Giving France the chance to claim Naples after Anjou/Provence doesn't exist anymore, and France holds these provinces; same case for Orleans and Milan. In that case, the league may break, and HRE/Aragorn gets the chance to intervene, starting the DHE of the Italian Wars.
- HRE has the chance to regain Northern Italy as HRE-lands, in a manner like Charles V had in mind
- Because of that, making Italy more interesting - more provinces, better bt for the boot - it would be more rewarding to follow this approach and Italy won't be unbalanced or overpowered, but a unique playground with new strategies and options (not only for Italian states, but also the neighbouring great powers)

Could I interest you with this?

 

[Galaahd]

Location: Novara, Piedmont, Italy

LOL Quite fitting though that you have a rat for an avatar.

Wat

 

[HappyMephisto]

My considerations are the following:

- Overhaul of the Italian peninsula without destroying european balance (in this context, the big neigbours must get some advantages, too)
- Removing north italian provinces from the HRE
- Adding triggered modifiers, which determine the power status of an italian state on the peninsula by monthly income, provinces and vassals in this geographic area, giving a bonus to smaller, and a malus to bigger powers. If a power becomes too strong, the other states will unite in a coalition by event.
- Adding event-chain/decisions concerning the Italic league to provide a sub-system, which would make expanding in Italy (by italian states and foreigners) difficult
- Giving France the chance to claim Naples after Anjou/Provence doesn't exist anymore, and France holds these provinces; same case for Orleans and Milan. In that case, the league may break, and HRE/Aragorn gets the chance to intervene, starting the DHE of the Italian Wars.
- HRE has the chance to regain Northern Italy as HRE-lands, in a manner like Charles V had in mind
- Because of that, making Italy more interesting - more provinces, better bt for the boot - it would be more rewarding to follow this approach and Italy won't be unbalanced or overpowered, but a unique playground with new strategies and options (not only for Italian states, but also the neighbouring great powers)

+1
I like the general idea of a revamped Italy, especially with another layer of diplomacy somewhat like the HRE (somewhat like, not identical to).
Regarding the economical decline (or rise in case of good management):
Shouldn't this be simulated by steering trade and such? I guess however it could or should be possible to change trade routes and nodes through events. It would at least be fun (from an ingame perspective, mind you) to annihilate Venice and change all incoming routes towards naples or messina.
It should also be possible to add more bt via events or one chain of decisions, if certain conditions (stable government, high administration etc.) are met - so why not take 1bt as mismanaged, corrupt backwater estates that can be gradualky improved?
Assuming it costs enough to still be balanced for gameplay reasons of course, so that unification coming from the north would also be possible.
1bt's still piss poor though.

 

[Marco Dandolo]

Could I interest you with this?

If you add Padova for Venice and Arezzo for Firenze, and if we split Ancona in Ancona and Urbino, I would wholeheartly agree. Maybe Austria should have Trieste, too, so that it is still a little bit stronger than the italian states.

+1
I like the general idea of a revamped Italy, especially with another layer of diplomacy somewhat like the HRE (somewhat like, not identical to).
Regarding the economical decline (or rise in case of good management):
Shouldn't this be simulated by steering trade and such? I guess however it could or should be possible to change trade routes and nodes through events. It would at least be fun (from an ingame perspective, mind you) to annihilate Venice and change all incoming routes towards naples or messina.
It should also be possible to add more bt via events or one chain of decisions, if certain conditions (stable government, high administration etc.) are met - so why not take 1bt as mismanaged, corrupt backwater estates that can be gradualky improved?
Assuming it costs enough to still be balanced for gameplay reasons of course, so that unification coming from the north would also be possible.
1bt's still piss poor though.

I had something like this in mind.


In general, I would more concentrate to use an existent mod for EUIV and build an italian-submod on this basis. Normally, I was more a fan of SRI and MM, but now with D&T, which may give some balance to MEIOU, I would wait what they're doing. Maybe it could be a proper basis to work with.