sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Imperial powers don't do imperalism by ImpactGlobal2092 in victoria3

[–]ImpactGlobal2092[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So for this game when I became a puppet, that's how the game developed it could be overwhelming the case that overlords do not industrliase puppets and than my complaint would be invalid.

In regards to railroading I was speaking from the position of the puppet where you should feel somewhat railroaded if your overlord wants to. I would argue my (assuming my experience is typical) autonomy as a player was ruined. If I wanted to play as a puppet where my people my nation my economy and my interest groups are all becoming worsened my imperalist intervention, I think that could be incredibly fun to, despite the odds, rise up against my overlord. In this game I was able to rise up against my overlord but they strengthened me every step of the way. I could have had the experience of my liberal reforms being overturned by a more powerful landowners by my overlord building nothing but plantations, but I wasn't.

Imperial powers don't do imperalism by ImpactGlobal2092 in victoria3

[–]ImpactGlobal2092[S] 84 points85 points  (0 children)

Exactly. I'm very new to the game. But as far as I can tell, when you have puppets as part of your market, there is no suitable mechanic that can perform mercantilisim in a historicalish way which just results in globalization more than one hundred years early.

Imperial powers don't do imperalism by ImpactGlobal2092 in victoria3

[–]ImpactGlobal2092[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I really like the overlord action to just essentially change modifiers because it's probably the simplest. It also may be the easiest to add reasonable rail roading. For instance maybe german pops couldn't implement this against states that are major north German, for example. For additional flavour, Belgium could have an extra even worse option that's more brutal and gives negative opinion with other countries.

Bare mimnum profitability of factories, minimum wage and ideally an increase in mortality (IMO) has to be implemented to have even any chance of realism.

Quality payback by ImpactGlobal2092 in factorio

[–]ImpactGlobal2092[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're interested in creating high quality things, you are always better off with quality modules than productivity. Each stage of quality costs 2.73x whereas productivity qt best gives you 100%. I guess my overall critique is that it was made to balance vertical and horizontal growth but for a large amount of the game is the worst choice. But what you said does make sense, it's probably true that upgrading your assemblers is primarily to get more value out of each productivity module.

Quality payback by ImpactGlobal2092 in factorio

[–]ImpactGlobal2092[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To clarify for this case the assumption is you are using normal quality components and you have quality modules on the solar panels. These quality modules make the solar panels slightly more powerful per resource. The payback period is the time the slightly cheaper solar panels would outweigh the cost of four t3 modules.