Taelyn said:
The fleet was at port or at sea? (I am not sure given your description). I think the protection is if the fleet is at sea.
-
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.
The fleet was at port or at sea? (I am not sure given your description). I think the protection is if the fleet is at sea.
Taelyn,
If it hadn't been implemented, I'd still be posting the occassional thread about it.
It's been in effect for a long time.
If it hadn't been implemented, I'd still be posting the occassional thread about it.
It's been in effect for a long time.
LE,
I'm open to suggestions...
But the truth is, continual minting ought to cause .75 inflation per year. Assuming no deflations or exceptional years, that's 7.5 points per decade. Even assuming 100 years past 1820 with no deflations, that's only 75% inflation. Which is a piddling number when it will affect all the wealthiest countries equally.
Those countries that aren't as advanced will be able to catch up and maintain lower prices for a while-which simulates exactly what happened in the nineteenth century. Birtian should be dealing high inflation. And it's not like it can't handle it. If you're turning out 1000/month, you should be dealing in financial problems (take a look at what's about to happen in China-relentless GDP growth ultimately has its own pitfalls).
I've long been in favor of an undeflatable global inflation figure. Prices ought to at least double between 1492 and 1820, and treble or quadruple would be better.
I'm open to suggestions...
But the truth is, continual minting ought to cause .75 inflation per year. Assuming no deflations or exceptional years, that's 7.5 points per decade. Even assuming 100 years past 1820 with no deflations, that's only 75% inflation. Which is a piddling number when it will affect all the wealthiest countries equally.
Those countries that aren't as advanced will be able to catch up and maintain lower prices for a while-which simulates exactly what happened in the nineteenth century. Birtian should be dealing high inflation. And it's not like it can't handle it. If you're turning out 1000/month, you should be dealing in financial problems (take a look at what's about to happen in China-relentless GDP growth ultimately has its own pitfalls).
I've long been in favor of an undeflatable global inflation figure. Prices ought to at least double between 1492 and 1820, and treble or quadruple would be better.
HolisticGod said:
No, they sure as hell shouldn't. Not with the current inflation system, which has very little to do with real inflation; only expenses increase due to inflation, never income.
The inflation system is totally nutty ... in the game inflation is always bad, deflation is always good ... of course, it was not quite like that in the time-frame in consideration.Hive said:
I figure that those countries that reach their tech limits first, though, will actually have an incredible advantage given the fact of full mint, the extra cost of things will actually be meaningless ... probably forcing all other countries to quit or at least limit their investment into techs just so they will have the economic resources to be at war as much as that nation. (Imagine, for example, how much above troop maintenance limit one could afford to be at full mint?)
Hive,
Yeah, because there isn't enough money in the game...
TPC,
Most majors are at the same relative tech level anyway-the exceptions are Austria, Russia, possibly the OE when it comes to naval. Possibly France and Spain, if they're poorly played (which, obviously, they won't be here).
Every country with its salt will have parity in at least one military tech and near-parity in at least one economic tech. Which ought to do it.
I do agree, though, that everyone will likely be minting during wartime.
Yeah, because there isn't enough money in the game...
TPC,
Most majors are at the same relative tech level anyway-the exceptions are Austria, Russia, possibly the OE when it comes to naval. Possibly France and Spain, if they're poorly played (which, obviously, they won't be here).
Every country with its salt will have parity in at least one military tech and near-parity in at least one economic tech. Which ought to do it.
I do agree, though, that everyone will likely be minting during wartime.
HolisticGod said:
And your solution is that the nations won't even have a choice not to generate much, much more cash for the last 50-100 years?
Hive,
I was responding to your comment on inflation in general.
In this specific case, pretty much. Might as well spend a fortune on war. Unless someone has another idea.
I was responding to your comment on inflation in general.
In this specific case, pretty much. Might as well spend a fortune on war. Unless someone has another idea.
Not to belabor the point unduly, but that's a rather large chunk of the majors -- Austria, Russia, & the OE -- if France, England, Spain, and Sweden are the rest, that's almost half ... (not to mention the considerable number of minors in the game.)HolisticGod said:
Sure, but that still wouldn't change the situation I was hypothesizing about -- which is in the late-game everyone would be forced to drop or severely curtail investments in technology if any country reaches full tech. This will provide a major advantage to said player ... especially the first one to do so.HolisticGod said:
But I wasn't objecting in my earlier post, nor am I in this, merely speculating is all.
HolisticGod said:
Its not just 100 years more like 120-130 years for a hyperteching country, and I dont think this is fair on slower tech countries like OE and Russia, or BB for that matter, my income goal is 300 a month with this full mint period any power I have would be broken due to massive minting by the trade powers.
Maybe we could simply limit the extra time to say max 25years or so? that gives you longer with Napoleon but wont rack up massive inflation etc. Most leaders in the game last a few years beyond 1820 anyway... This way i believe we can finish the Napoleonic wars for good but not become bogged down in constant warfare at the same tech levels and same political amd military environment.
Historically, deflations did work differently, this isn't exactly history. This is the best simulation of spend/actual cost ratio we can get with EU2. It's rather rough on warring nations or poor economists admittely!
Look at Germany from Weimar to WW2, they came out of a "horrific slump"
In our game, we only want the best. Should debts be forgiven, in cases of horrific monsterous Lag Loans cause of speed issues, I agree wholeheartedly. Though if people can mint their hearts out and expect that they can bet on the Game Engine to save their arses, I disagree! Make people pay and learn. Most here know how to develop and know how to deal. Don't push all your economists into one Corner! <KEY>
Break it up, if the game isn't evenly balanced... IMHO
In current Wens game no Deflations<the highest inflated nation is 30percent> some of the players are new... It's 1750 what... We don't need deflation by event we're good enough, so why aren't the rest of you good enough? Manage your bank book better and that should be that. BALANCE is key, and that is achieved by proper player placement and proper amount of war/diplomacy/trading/colonizing... If people aren't willing to do it right, the game will go one way, that's why I suggest KEY players in KEY places
Look at Germany from Weimar to WW2, they came out of a "horrific slump"
In our game, we only want the best. Should debts be forgiven, in cases of horrific monsterous Lag Loans cause of speed issues, I agree wholeheartedly. Though if people can mint their hearts out and expect that they can bet on the Game Engine to save their arses, I disagree! Make people pay and learn. Most here know how to develop and know how to deal. Don't push all your economists into one Corner! <KEY>
Break it up, if the game isn't evenly balanced... IMHO
In current Wens game no Deflations<the highest inflated nation is 30percent> some of the players are new... It's 1750 what... We don't need deflation by event we're good enough, so why aren't the rest of you good enough? Manage your bank book better and that should be that. BALANCE is key, and that is achieved by proper player placement and proper amount of war/diplomacy/trading/colonizing... If people aren't willing to do it right, the game will go one way, that's why I suggest KEY players in KEY places
Game End
I think LE has a point here. Do we really need to play an extra 100 years to get the post-Napoleanic effect? How about picking a random end date 25-50 years after the normal game end. That's plenty of time. 100 years would get dull honestly. There'd be nowhere left to colonize, nothing left to research, nothing left to build. Either you go to war or sit around bored. Just a thought.
I think LE has a point here. Do we really need to play an extra 100 years to get the post-Napoleanic effect? How about picking a random end date 25-50 years after the normal game end. That's plenty of time. 100 years would get dull honestly. There'd be nowhere left to colonize, nothing left to research, nothing left to build. Either you go to war or sit around bored. Just a thought.
I saw that Hive said he randomizes his leaders every session. Is that a lengthy procedure or pretty easy? I would be in favour of that if it's not that big of a problem.
The extra 100 years idea: What about reducing all tech levels by some percentage in 1819? Also throw in some more random leaders and let the events stay random. That way we could all enjoy the extra time.
I'm not a big fan of Nappy cannon warfare so it doesn't really matter to me, just a suggestion
Did we figure out who the Austrian is? I recall that Fredrick doesn't want to play it this time around.
HG's China: Will he be able to see Euro events and notifications or will that all be hidden from him as normal? I've never had a chinese player before so I'm just curious
*** BTW Our Wed game is in 1754 now. We blew through almost 30 years last session but we have yet another big war on our hands so it might be slower this week. I'd say another 3 weeks
The extra 100 years idea: What about reducing all tech levels by some percentage in 1819? Also throw in some more random leaders and let the events stay random. That way we could all enjoy the extra time.
I'm not a big fan of Nappy cannon warfare so it doesn't really matter to me, just a suggestion
Did we figure out who the Austrian is? I recall that Fredrick doesn't want to play it this time around.
HG's China: Will he be able to see Euro events and notifications or will that all be hidden from him as normal? I've never had a chinese player before so I'm just curious
*** BTW Our Wed game is in 1754 now. We blew through almost 30 years last session but we have yet another big war on our hands so it might be slower this week. I'd say another 3 weeks
Last edited:
Indeed, i rather not play Austria in one more game. If someone is ok to swap to Austria i would really appreciate it.Mrlifford said:
Fredrik82 said:Indeed, i rather not play Austria in one more game. If someone is ok to swap to Austria i would really appreciate it.
beh,i ve finished just monday a long term with austria
but if u really wont play for this,i dont mind to switch
france and austria are my favourites,even if preferred play france this time
Then you should play FranceDago said:
If no-one want to switch then i will go with Austria, np
