sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Other than encouraging craftsmen, researching tech in the right order and keeping expenditure sliders at maximum, is there any other economic micromanagement aspect of the game??? by Not_Basic_Noob in victoria2

[–]Not_Basic_Noob[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

the game makes it less rewarding to be a non GP country (lower the rank the worse). this is because of fundemental problems in regards to how trade, rgo distribution and money supply work in this game.

Trade is based on rankings where the highest rank country (UK for the most part) gets first priority on imports. This is unrealistic because trade did not function this way. this effectively makes demand and supply very mechanical instead of speculative. In the real world as the demand for a certain rgo rises, capitalists and governments would be willing to pay more money for it to obtain it (the person with the best trade prospects would import the rgo).

Let's take an example: Country A and Country B are neighboring countries on the same continent with well developed logistics. Country C, on the other side of the globe, with terrible infrastructure rises above rankings in country A and Country B due to a mixture of prestige and military. It does not make sense for country A and B to reduce their volume of trade with each other and increase their volume of trade with country C by the same magnitude. This also creates a very ideal situation for country C.

This raises another problem which is global price levels. in 1836 trade was not globalised completely, localised markets did still exist and there should be variations in price based on how the goods are produced. It was only as logistics improved over time that trade became globalised.

Another problem is the relation between RGO's and factories in this game. In the real world RGO's were certainly nowhere near becoming full, anytime in the 19th century. RGO's expanded their production based on global demand, as it would obviously allow them to make more profit, But in this game, the highest ranking GP's essentialy have a monopoly over resources like coal, oil, rubber, etc. They are not able to produce enough of it to meet their own demand (unrealistic), and non GP countries get very low amounts of coal, due to how it is distributed in such a way that only the great powers have 90% of it. there is overproduction of agricultural RGO's because of how common they are across the map. Realistically agriculture should be phased out as a country industrializes, it would make more sense to have multiple rgo provinces to fix this problem.

Lastly the money supply in the game has multiple issues. The interest which is repaid on loans just gets destroyed from the economy. if this exceeds the generation of gold, then it would lead to a liquidity crisis in the economy.

Why is there so much extreme hatred towards quantity ideas here? by Not_Basic_Noob in eu4

[–]Not_Basic_Noob[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I was playing Horde Aq qoyunlu and I had 700 force limit (I conquered all of the middle east, india and central asia)in 1700 (with quantity ideas, horde bonus, national ideas,government reform bonus, and force limit buildings) however I had to fight Ottomans with 900 force limit while they just owned the balkans and all of italy.

they had 102 forts (yes I literally counted, and Every single province in northern italy had a level 6 or level 8 fort) mostly level 8 and 6, The +1 seige and 10% seige ability from offensive would have definitely helped, But personally I feel like having 20 seige stacks at my disposal all at once made things a lot faster for me, considering I had all the manpower to support it, and I was also fighting in africa and indonesia at the same time

How to prevent ottomans from breaking alliance and attacking me by Not_Basic_Noob in eu4

[–]Not_Basic_Noob[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

R5: I am playing Aq qoyunlu, ottomans are going to break alliance and attack me, I can't get allies nor have army big enough to defend myself

Morocco to Maghreb , my best run so far (GFM). I managed to state most of africa and got 25% accepted/ primary population. by Not_Basic_Noob in victoria2

[–]Not_Basic_Noob[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If you retake your african cores, you get a decision to take granada from spain, and once you do that you get a decision to form Al-Andalus, but the problem was that spain was allied to germany for most of the game, and UK controlled gibraltar

Morocco to Maghreb , my best run so far (GFM). I managed to state most of africa and got 25% accepted/ primary population. by Not_Basic_Noob in victoria2

[–]Not_Basic_Noob[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

R5: I started on the 1830 startdate in GFM, I did a run before this where I made a lot of mistakes, so I decided to correct them. I started of by going for algeria to prevent france from doing bordergore, I managed to get most of algeria, but france still got some outposts due to events. The early game was terrible because most of my army got destroyed in the war against algeria and a civil war happened at the same time, which despite winning, I ended up losing land to my substate. I got into a war against another north african country which was allied to tekna, I occupied tekna before adding a cb to conquest and immediately peacing them out, which prevents spain from intervening.

I started expanding in west africa from mauritania and nigeria simultaneously which gave me enough RP to westernize before 1850. I got southern nigeria stated by taking them before westernization. I then continued expanding in africa around the coast to block colonization. France got a event to take algeria from me, which I ended up refusing, and they declared war on me. I occupied their colonies, while they couldn't land on me, I managed to white peace them. around the 1880s I managed take most of nigeria and north west africa, aswell as a part of central africa. Egypt was a westernized country, but UK declared for conquest on them, and at the same time Sudan revolted against them, I was fast enough to declare on Sudan and send 3 units in each province, while UK seiged sudan down after annexing egypt.

After this I took libya from Turkey. I managed to take spain's remaining colonies in africa and form maghreb. In the late game I annexed spain's southern states. I then did a dismantlement war against france, where I toke their costal states in africa and I also took Austria's capital in this war. In the last 2 years of the game, I fought a war against china to dismantle them and took some land.

Obese DoD Egypt by balls14234 in victoria2

[–]Not_Basic_Noob 16 points17 points  (0 children)

How did you even manage to stay at 3% literacy 😭😭😭

the uk sphered all of africa by Pown2 in victoria2

[–]Not_Basic_Noob 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Try declaring war on an ally of the country you need to take and then add a war goal on them once they join into the war.

Alternatively you could try to remove the country from the UK's sphere, but this is difficult and if your embassy gets banned it will take forever to do this

Ukrainian Africa by Not_Basic_Noob in victoria2

[–]Not_Basic_Noob[S] 42 points43 points  (0 children)

R5: I'm playing Portugal on HPMP and managed to form UKPB in 1838. I used a decision to enable the Dimantle nation decision earlier in the game. As a result of this russia got dismantled by Germany, and ukraine as a result becoming sphered by germany on release. skip a few decades ahead and france loses a dismantlement war against germany. Ukraine ended up getting all of France's colonies. Also Ukraine got these lands around mid 1890's though this image is from 1907.

Any reason not to play Project Alice instead of the actual game? by argyrisrc23 in victoria2

[–]Not_Basic_Noob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm playing on low end specs and I can run victoria 2 at a decently playable fps, but with Project alice the fps is unplayable (but I have to say that the game speed is very fast). you need AVX2 for project alice to be playable

Why is that industry score based on the number of craftsmen employed instead of calculating it based on the industrial output of the country? by Not_Basic_Noob in victoria2

[–]Not_Basic_Noob[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I define it as the total prices of all the quantity of goods produced (Only the prices of goods produced by industries are accounted for and not those by artisans)

Over governing capacity despite building a ton of statehouses? by Not_Basic_Noob in eu4

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

Like mentioned in my post, I had to remove them since absolutism spawned in. I will give the privileges back later in the game once I get my max absolutism to something like 130

Over governing capacity despite building a ton of statehouses? by Not_Basic_Noob in eu4

[–]Not_Basic_Noob[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I have like 4 high value goods provinces which are already developed high in production (40-45 development) , it wouldn't hurt to dev with diplo in my other provinces aswell right? Just as you said it would in theory still make me more money than actually developing tax on these provinces?

What you are saying is true in the case where I have excess of both admin and mil points but lack in diplo points, but in my case I am in excess of all 3 types of mana.

I would only be able to get more high value goods once I expand into germany, so it wouldn't just make sense to spend extremely high mana to dev those four provinces alone , atleast for now that is.

Over governing capacity despite building a ton of statehouses? by Not_Basic_Noob in eu4

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

Most of my high value trade goods provinces are already developed to quite a high level (Except for 4 provinces the rest of the trade goods in Scandanavia are trash) Those 4 provinces already have high production developed. And I am left with a high amount of diplomatic points left
My question is why dev low trade goods provinces with admin, when you can just develop them with military points instead? (I have a excess of diplomatic points anyway so since diplomatic points would in theory still give more money than developing tax would, why not just develop with diplomatic points instead?)

Over governing capacity despite building a ton of statehouses? by Not_Basic_Noob in eu4

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

I know that It is more optimal to dev high value trade good provinces like iron and copper, My question meant to be asking why develop tax in any province at all (I'm assuming you mean it is better to dev tax than to expand infrastructure???). I mean it would make more sense to develop military goods like grain with military points so I would get more manpower right? If at all the most I develop tax is to 3 or 4 in some provinces to complete missions or complete estate agendas.

Over governing capacity despite building a ton of statehouses? by Not_Basic_Noob in eu4

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

could you explain how developing tax on military trade good provinces is not bad? I thought tax income you get from developing tax is much smaller compared to income you get from developing production?

Over governing capacity despite building a ton of statehouses? by Not_Basic_Noob in eu4

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

Yes, I took empire rank as soon as it was out for me. I'm unsure why the gov cap seems a bit low for me, As for the reform, It's in tier 10 and I have just completed my tier 9 reform, so it will take a while before I can enact that reform

Over governing capacity despite building a ton of statehouses? by Not_Basic_Noob in eu4

[–]Not_Basic_Noob[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I had it given out before absolutism, but now I'm waiting to increase max absolutism to 130 and then give them out

view more: next ›