How is your Victoria Game going?

[Antilogic]

Building on that regional aspect, I find that countries tend to shift uniformly liberal or conservative, or whatever, but I always figured it was the result of how the AI uses its NFs for party promotion. It doesn't reflect an urban-rural divide, nor does it reflect a sort of immigrant-nativist divide, both of which were important to American politics (and I'd guess more generally on both continents) during this time period.

I wish there was a government type for the United States that called elections automatically every 4 years for the control of the government and every 2 for the politics screen (lower house, I guess?)--a more restrictive form of democracy, if you will. I figured the time to do it was with the House Divided expansion, since they were focusing on the US and the Civil War, but they let the opportunity pass.

The game also needs more national-level election events like the PDM/APD mod has (and I guess POD, the latest incarnation) instead of just state-level single issue events. That would let more radical political shifts happen between the liberal and conservative parties.

EDIT:

Well Antilogic, those are the percentages after realignment. Liberals were about 30% of the UH but there was a massive abolition movement that sped things along.

I was wondering how you did it without a huge militancy causing the Democrats to barely vote in favor of outlawing. Calhoun must be spinning in his grave as he sees the Democrats bow to popular pressure of the abolitionists.

 

[madviking]

I was wondering how you did it without a huge militancy causing the Democrats to barely vote in favor of outlawing. Calhoun must be spinning in his grave as he sees the Democrats bow to popular pressure of the abolitionists.

Well, as I currently understand the game mechanics, there are movements for stuff, but never movements for the status quo. Hence the immense abolition movement caused no reaction from the Democrats.

 

[germanicus12]

Started a new game as the USA again after trying a brief spell as Prussia and unifying Germany and becoming the number one superpower in the world after crushing the UK in a great war.


Decided to try a more aggressive approach and quickly turned my sights on British Columbia and beat the British by sending my colonists there first. Idaho, Oregon and Washington became protectorates quickly while the UK and I fought a colonial war over B.C. I lost the colonial war against Mexico for Oklahoma and Colorado due to insufficient resources which had been diverted towards our efforts in B.C.

Ultimately it went to crisis mode where the Russians and Ottomans quickly joined the British camp leaving France, Prussia, Spain and Austria to decide who they wanted to support. France joined me as did Prussia, which pushed Austria into the UK's camp. That left Spain, eventually I offered them the opportunity to humiliate the UK and they readily agreed and joined my camp. I eagerly prepared for war knowing the UK would not back down, but to my surprise my Ambassador came to me with the UK's offer of cessation, they were willing to drop the matter, much to my disappointment, but I was not about to draw Europe into a pointless war so I accepted and won B.C.

After I defeated the Mexicans and took my lands under Manifest Destiny, then taking Cuba from Spain to placate the Slave States, Mexico quickly formed an alliance with the UK. Then my Civil war hit which I quickly put down the CSA and kept the country together, which propelled me to the 2nd Great Power ranking. Then I apparently started the American Opium Wars against Japan which forced me to send my small standing army, which at this point has been engaged in nonstop wars for the last 20 years and traveling to Africa, South America, Europe, and all across the USA in response to wars. (I should mention that 2 Crises in this period has been unresolved and in both cases I ended up on the side of Britain because I was not ready to fight the UK in a land war just yet with my small army, and in both cases it was won by our side, Greece was liberated, as well as Poland.)

So I sailed to Japan, losing almost half my fleet because Russia, whom I have terrible relations with and Britain refused to give me Military Access to their territories, and landed a powerful 30,000 strong army which was quickly attacked by a 80,000 strong Japanese force, my battle hardened warriors quickly put them down and advanced quickly, besieging and winning land quickly. Eventually Japan surrendered and I returned home only to have Mexico declare war on me for Arizona and the UK joining. At this point I was militarily ready to compete with the UK so I kept them at bay and forced a white peace but then 10 years later or so, Mexico declared with UK support again, and again, and again. It got tiring and I quit the game.

Eventually I might go back and just annex Mexico outright since I have no infamy and can take the hit, but for now I decided to start a new game as Russia.

By the way the ending year was 1872.

 

[madviking]

In my US game, the one where I abolished slavery in the 1840s, I've whittled away at British Canada, leaving only Saskatchewan and Nunavut left. I've also sunk the Royal Navy by 1890.

 

[Civ'ed]

So I've been thinking of playing a game as Jan Mayen.
Seriously.
Since you only start out with 15 people, rebels wouldn't be a problem.
So would it be viable to build up a shipping industry on the island and have a navy to protect yourself?

 

[Lohrenswald]

No, you just predict the weather.

 

[madviking]

There's an event where you can purchase Greenland and Iceland.

 

[SouthernKing]

Jan Mayen is the new Ryukyu.

 

[madviking]

I tried playing as the Confederacy from the 1861 start date. It's nigh impossible to resist; the Union has so much more manpower. The one thing saving me was the loltastic "King Cotton" decision. For it, get 500 cotton supply. Then every European great power gets a 'cut down to size CB' versus the Union! The UK actually used the CB too!

But the most irritating part of playing the Confederacy is the Laissez faire tax policy; you can't squeeze any money out of your populace. It doesn't help with all the slaves work for free and can't be taxed. Hence, you have no tax base as the Confederacy. No tax means no income. No income means no replacement soldiers. No replacement soldiers means a guaranteed Union victory every time!

 

[Antilogic]

Well, as I currently understand the game mechanics, there are movements for stuff, but never movements for the status quo. Hence the immense abolition movement caused no reaction from the Democrats.

Yeah, that does seem to be a very important oversight...

I tried playing as the Confederacy from the 1861 start date. It's nigh impossible to resist; the Union has so much more manpower. The one thing saving me was the loltastic "King Cotton" decision. For it, get 500 cotton supply. Then every European great power gets a 'cut down to size CB' versus the Union! The UK actually used the CB too!

But the most irritating part of playing the Confederacy is the Laissez faire tax policy; you can't squeeze any money out of your populace. It doesn't help with all the slaves work for free and can't be taxed. Hence, you have no tax base as the Confederacy. No tax means no income. No income means no replacement soldiers. No replacement soldiers means a guaranteed Union victory every time!

How far can you go into debt (reflecting the issuing of paper currency) until you go bankrupt?

Also, I thought the starting techs for both sides in the 1861 start were terrible. The Confederates start out with far better military technology than the Union. It's all sorts of bad balance.

 

[madviking]

How far can you go into debt (reflecting the issuing of paper currency) until you go bankrupt?

Pretty far. I quit before I went bankrupt, though.

Also, I thought the starting techs for both sides in the 1861 start were terrible. The Confederates start out with far better military technology than the Union. It's all sorts of bad balance.

It's to give the CSA the proverbial fighting chance. The fact that slaves give no tax money is the single biggest problem facing the Confederacy.

In other news, my Greece game is going pretty well. I'm most of the way to reforming the Byzantine Empire!

 

[Lohrenswald]

There's an event where you can purchase Greenland and Iceland.

That removes some of the challenge, no?

Also what do you pay with? A month's supply of weather forecast for free?

 

[madviking]

Yes, but you can't gain population as Jan Mayen. You will lose population due to random events.

Something apparently.

 

[civ_king]

Yes, but you can't gain population as Jan Mayen. You will lose population due to random events.

Something apparently.

Spoiler :

Behold, the king of Scandinavia and the royal whore

 

[uat2d]

What's the trigger for the Greenland purchase?

 

[madviking]

- Jan Mayen great/secondary power
- Denmark not great/secondary power
- $4000 (you start with $5000)

 

[Sonereal]

It's to give the CSA the proverbial fighting chance. The fact that slaves give no tax money is the single biggest problem facing the Confederacy.

Couldn't they have just given generals with awesome stats?

 

[madviking]

Couldn't they have just given generals with awesome stats?

Yea, they do. CSA starts with R.E. Lee, J.E.B. Stuart, and Stonewall Jackson. But the Union starts (ahistorically) with Phil Sheridan, U.S. Grant, and William Tecumseh Sherman. So generals are roughly even.

 

[Sonereal]

Yea, they do. CSA starts with R.E. Lee, J.E.B. Stuart, and Stonewall Jackson. But the Union starts (ahistorically) with Phil Sheridan, U.S. Grant, and William Tecumseh Sherman. So generals are roughly even.

I figure it would better in that case to give the USA an event to spawn those generals later, so the CSA starts off strong, which is when they had their best chance of victory. The solution is a tad better than "US has poorer military tech".

 

[madviking]

I figure it would better in that case to give the USA an event to spawn those generals later, so the CSA starts off strong, which is when they had their best chance of victory. The solution is a tad better than "US has poorer military tech".

Yea, hence the "ahistorically". The Union had to deal with scumbags like Irvin McDowell and John Pope before they had Sherman or Grant.

Either way, if you're playing from the 1836 start, you're going to have Grant-and-Sherman-esque Generals already at your disposal.