Under the Rising Sun - A Review AAR comments and discussion thread
- Thread starter unmerged(18239)
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Does Meiji Restoration decision do anything besides civilising your country? And would these artisans' income increase were you to impose higher tarriffs?
Why aren't your unhappy artisans switching to a more profitable trade? Or are they just too backwards to compete with the European industries and as a result be forced to devolve into farmers?
It looks like the entire chunk of them are producing fertilizer (correct me if I'm wrong here).
Looks like they are getting no money at all, so fertilizer or whatever they are producing is probably worth less then the inputs needed to make it.
If Industries in 1840 already can force large groups of Artisans into poverty I don't see how there can be any artisans at all left by 1930.
Wouldn't the answer to that then be increasing tariffs, rather than lowering them, to safeguard domestic artisans from foreign competition?
Seeing as how artisans don't increase in efficiency I'm also a bit worried about these Japanese artisans. If they can't seem to make money at the game start they should die out in the first few years, as the market becomes harder to compete in.
A higher tariff should make production for internal consumption more attractive. At least, if it works like I think it does.
Shouldn't these artisans switch to a profitable trade at the beginning of the month? So either their trade became unprofitable this month or it doesn't work as intended.
Not all at once I think, they are a rather large group. Some scould devolve as well. But yes, if they are producing a good that has domestic demand raising tariffs might be a good idea.
Artisans consider changing their product once per month, so it could be that they haven't yet done that.
A higher tariff might indeed net them more money for their goods. My thought however were that by lowering tariff I would lower the costs of goods they needed for their daily and life needs. So, which of the two ways of thought is right?
And they change their ouput goods once in a while.
I guess when you lowered the tariffs all your POPs can now buy imported goods cheaper however this could mean that the imported goods are cheaper than those the artists make. Which means the artists cant sell their goods so they wont make money and hence cant buy what they need.
that could be what has happend
Perhaps experiment? Raise tariffs and let the game run handsoff for a while, check up on them, see if their situation changed. It would make sense for local artisans to benefit from protectionism.
Heh, I was thinking about the cheaper production goods too. As I'm not in the beta I don't know how it would work.
Seeing as they have no money and no income I don't think lowering the tariff does anything for their needs tho.
Great. Have you checked how often? According the dev diary they should switch once a month. So your money losing artisans should really change their trade when they can't even afford their life needs. That being said: the problem should fix itself by them changing their trade, shouldn't it?
EDIT: like LeeDub said, my natural instinct would be to raise tariffs to protect my local artisans. BUT if they also pay the tariffs for their input it might be counter-productive because they have to pay higher inputs but for all we know they sell their goods internationally. So higher tariffs would only work if they produce for the local market.
At the moment they are producing glass. The tariff is at 0% and for some reason they are doing a little better as they can pay some 25% of their daily needs (and all their life-needs).
Problems I've found:
1. Japan earns £185/day? I know that unciv like China and Japan could be relatively rich, but earning so much with almost full education and administration spending is still too unrealistic for me.
2. Japan DOW Korea without Chinese intervention is too ahistoric. China and Korea had been allied (or China guaranteed the independence of Korea) for hundreds of years. We have seen in the France beta AAR that France DOW Vietnam without Chinese intervention, now we see an indifferent China on Japanese invasion of Korea? Then how did Sino-French War and the First Sino-Japanese War break out? I can't help assuming Paradox' ignorance of the diplomacy of East Asia.
3. Japanese invasion of Dai Nam. This is not that unbearable, but no Chinese intervention again and Japan's capability of oversea war is still annoying. It was possible that Japan at the beginning could win a war against Korea/China, but I don't think Japan were able to win, even to fight, a war in a location further than Taiwan. The Vic2 game mechanics may allow an unciv to win a war against any weak country around the globe, which seems too much for me.
1. Japan earns £185/day? I know that unciv like China and Japan could be relatively rich, but earning so much with almost full education and administration spending is still too unrealistic for me.
2. Japan DOW Korea without Chinese intervention is too ahistoric. China and Korea had been allied (or China guaranteed the independence of Korea) for hundreds of years. We have seen in the France beta AAR that France DOW Vietnam without Chinese intervention, now we see an indifferent China on Japanese invasion of Korea? Then how did Sino-French War and the First Sino-Japanese War break out? I can't help assuming Paradox' ignorance of the diplomacy of East Asia.
3. Japanese invasion of Dai Nam. This is not that unbearable, but no Chinese intervention again and Japan's capability of oversea war is still annoying. It was possible that Japan at the beginning could win a war against Korea/China, but I don't think Japan were able to win, even to fight, a war in a location further than Taiwan. The Vic2 game mechanics may allow an unciv to win a war against any weak country around the globe, which seems too much for me.
no offense but it is still a game not a historical simulation. Also the difficulty level of the AI may play a role in absence of a reaction.
His forces actually got destroyed when they landed but he cheated with a reload.
Notice the minimum 50% taxes.
Education, administration and military expenses will also increase as those POPs grow.
I know, and I don't like a historical simulation, either.
But a historic flavored game should be based on history, at least at the beginning of the game. So I believe having China historically guarantee the independence of Dai Nam and Korea is not too much. It's just as common as having UK occupying large territories in India at the beginning.
