-
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.
I think it could work.
In conclusion: Biggest producer of something gets:
-10 - 25 % more income from the product.
-1 - 3 free trade embargos.
-Victory points.
So what do you say???????
Last edited by a moderator:
I say as Carolus Rex would have said...
- It's not going to be included...
Opinion:
I think your bonuses are too good...
Why? I think for example Russia being the biggest producer of fur should get at least 25 % more money from their furs than some minor muslim country owning one fur producing province. As I have mentioned before this would lead to specializing which is one thing that I would like to see in the game. Wouldn't you?
The embargo thing, that I can give away.
The VP already in the game.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not really sure about that... Russia will gain more as they surely have higher infra and trade value (giving more production and merchant income) than those small muslim states... And I think that there are also more population in the russian provinces as well...
AND you could have merged those three posts in one...
Tips: Try the edit button down to the right...
Can you really say that for example Denmark owning one fur producing province could seriously get the same price from it's furs than Russia, that owns 80% of the whole fur market therefore being the biggest producer.
Umh, yes I can... but honestly, it's rather difficult to have more fur provinces than Russia (unless it's AI controlled)... What's wrong with danish fur?
Danish should stick to fish. And if you are the biggest producer you have the cheapest prices and most stock which leads to an almost monopolistic status which leads to more money
Originally posted by dictator
Danish should stick to fish. And if you are the biggest producer you have the cheapest prices and most stock which leads to an almost monopolistic status which leads to more money
It can tell you one thing for sure...
cheaper prices don't lead to more income...
fish in stocks aren't too nice unless you have loads of salt...´
and Denmark does stick to fish, the only province near them with Fur is Jämtland, which they'll inherit from Norway and probably lose to Sweden... but I think Russia has more than 100 times that Fur... giving MORE money to Russia...
Yes they do. Everyone buys russian fur and then Russia can fix the prices for fur and get the bonus.
10% sounds reasonable.
Does gold get the whole supply/demand/units produced calculations? I'm at work right now, so I can't check.
I do not think so, because it has no trade value.
Is there any way that these changes could be in 1.07?
Last edited by a moderator:
So it is a text error then when the it says "The leading nation gains 0 VP a year"? (This is when you hold the mouse over any leading nation data, except gold)
There should also be listing of the top 5 producers of something maybe in the ledger or something.
The bonus for being the largest producer of a good was a significant feature of the economics of the board game.
A bonus in EU2 would encourage and reward players to compete for (dominant) global market share in a type of good as well as competing regionally in the COT's. This bonus would represent market power, economies of scale and specialisation. Most (all?) other vp's are associated with a tangible advantage. At present, if one really does gain vp's for this (i.e. does this feature work?), one is gaining prestige or whatever vp's are supposed to represent for a condition with no practical or material benefit whatsoever. This seems strange.
I believe that the latest patches (thank you, Johan!) have greatly strengthened the game by reducing the attractions and ease of conquest and world conquest (which ought to be near impossible). A tangible reward for being the dominant producer of a good would make it a lot more interesting to take note of which province produces what and plan one's domestic economic development and foreign policy / expansion accordingly. How often is the economic map consulted? At present what difference does it make what you produce? Obviously some goods are more valuable than others: grain supports troops, naval supplies ships, and some combine with manufactories for added benefits.
As previously suggested in this thread, the bonus could involve an additional embargo capacity or greater income, or even an extra merchant.
A production income bonus (is 5% to little?), possibly embargo advantage (a free embargo if the country possesses the trade technology), to the leading producer of a good, thus benefiting the larger (or highly specialised) countries, would partially offset the loss in tax income from tax collectors in the latest (1.07) beta.
The mechanism of determining which country is the leading producer of a good is already in place. However, does the vp bonus actually work? A tweak to this would at a stroke make the economics of the game a lot more interesting.
I think this might improve play balance in the early game to the advantage of the Timurids (wool), Delhi (cloth), Gujarat (salt), China (grain), Golden Horde (double: iron and copper)), Aragon (fish and wine), Sweden (naval supplies), the Incas (gold), the Mayas (sugar cane), and the Iroqouis (fur) before colonial empires develop. Perhaps after the union of Poland and Lithuania it could aspire to be the leading producer of grain? Russia could become leading in fur. An initially strenghtened Golden Holde would encourage Muscovy to unite the principalities before expanding south.
The countries listed above are the leading producers in 1419 of goods found in Europe. Obviously the leading producers of non-European goods are all non-European in 1419. Therefore, by introducing an economic bonus, there would be a reward for colonial empires reaching a certain size, while at the same time making the initial stages slightly more difficult because the larger extra-European states would be strengthened. The dominant empire(s) would achieve a tangible material advantage. It would also relatively increase production income versus the proposed weakening of (census) tax income and the reworking of trade being discussed for the beta.
Any further suggestions?
Thank you, Castellon, for re-opening the thread and merging my posts. My apologies to the users for causing this disruption.
A bonus in EU2 would encourage and reward players to compete for (dominant) global market share in a type of good as well as competing regionally in the COT's. This bonus would represent market power, economies of scale and specialisation. Most (all?) other vp's are associated with a tangible advantage. At present, if one really does gain vp's for this (i.e. does this feature work?), one is gaining prestige or whatever vp's are supposed to represent for a condition with no practical or material benefit whatsoever. This seems strange.
I believe that the latest patches (thank you, Johan!) have greatly strengthened the game by reducing the attractions and ease of conquest and world conquest (which ought to be near impossible). A tangible reward for being the dominant producer of a good would make it a lot more interesting to take note of which province produces what and plan one's domestic economic development and foreign policy / expansion accordingly. How often is the economic map consulted? At present what difference does it make what you produce? Obviously some goods are more valuable than others: grain supports troops, naval supplies ships, and some combine with manufactories for added benefits.
As previously suggested in this thread, the bonus could involve an additional embargo capacity or greater income, or even an extra merchant.
A production income bonus (is 5% to little?), possibly embargo advantage (a free embargo if the country possesses the trade technology), to the leading producer of a good, thus benefiting the larger (or highly specialised) countries, would partially offset the loss in tax income from tax collectors in the latest (1.07) beta.
The mechanism of determining which country is the leading producer of a good is already in place. However, does the vp bonus actually work? A tweak to this would at a stroke make the economics of the game a lot more interesting.
I think this might improve play balance in the early game to the advantage of the Timurids (wool), Delhi (cloth), Gujarat (salt), China (grain), Golden Horde (double: iron and copper)), Aragon (fish and wine), Sweden (naval supplies), the Incas (gold), the Mayas (sugar cane), and the Iroqouis (fur) before colonial empires develop. Perhaps after the union of Poland and Lithuania it could aspire to be the leading producer of grain? Russia could become leading in fur. An initially strenghtened Golden Holde would encourage Muscovy to unite the principalities before expanding south.
The countries listed above are the leading producers in 1419 of goods found in Europe. Obviously the leading producers of non-European goods are all non-European in 1419. Therefore, by introducing an economic bonus, there would be a reward for colonial empires reaching a certain size, while at the same time making the initial stages slightly more difficult because the larger extra-European states would be strengthened. The dominant empire(s) would achieve a tangible material advantage. It would also relatively increase production income versus the proposed weakening of (census) tax income and the reworking of trade being discussed for the beta.
Any further suggestions?
Thank you, Castellon, for re-opening the thread and merging my posts. My apologies to the users for causing this disruption.
Last edited:
*Locked for action
Cleaned out the spam fest!
Let's follow the rules people.
*Reopened