While We Wait: Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Which we really shouldn't, modern regimes know the right steps to take to create wealth and thus can be oppressive and still grow quickly.Back in the day there is no model of economic development/catch-up to follow and oppressive states flounder due to lack of information and paths to follow that have already been trodden by more relaxed nations.
I don't follow. The hypothetical state was one with high economic freedom, but a controlling government. It seems clear, if the stats are to have any meaning at all, that the government is controlling in everything other than economics, and consequently doesn't take many steps to effect the economy in any way whatsoever. Merchants and businessmen will take care of that, in their profit maximizing way, and they can, due to the high economic freedom.
 
I don't follow. The hypothetical state was one with high economic freedom, but a controlling government. It seems clear, if the stats are to have any meaning at all, that the government is controlling in everything other than economics, and consequently doesn't take many steps to effect the economy in any way whatsoever. Merchants and businessmen will take care of that, in their profit maximizing way, and they can, due to the high economic freedom.
Much of this hinges on what "government control" means. If "government control" means "government control of trade" then certainly, trade would be diminished. But if I meant "government control of other aspects of the people's lives", then trade might florish. My original thinking has quite vanished, but was related to high level economic concepts like free trade and government run economies. I was trying to allow for the introduction of socialistic/communistic economic models should player want to introduce those at some point. I saw the two sliders as working against one another which in retrospect doesn't make a lot of sense since one slider is all that is needed. They probably should be like so:

economic freedom: the degree to which the government lets traders act in their own best interests and allow markets to funcition without excessive interference.
government control: how repressive the government is on personal freedom, freedom of the press and freedom of religion.
 
Control and repression are not necessarily the same, and the latter is frequently irrelevant enough in real life.
 
Control and repression are not necessarily the same, and the latter is frequently irrelevant enough in real life.
Ok which would you consider more relevant to NESing and how should it impact game play and stats?
 
TC TP EP Value
12 0 12 NWE
13 0 13 MED
5 9 7.25 MC
6 4 7 IOS
7 0 7 SR, Silk Road
4 7 5.75 WCA
3 11 5.75 IP
3 6 4.5 ENA
4 0 4 CJ
2 5 3.25 ECA
0 9 2.25 ESA
2 1 2.25 WSA
0 4 1 ANZ
0 1 0.25 WNA
0 0 0 NP
0 0 0 SP
0 0 0 CA, Central Asia; Any non coastal TCs of Muscovy, Khazan and east
4 0 4 CE, Non coastal cites of Germany, Poland


TC count: 65
TP count: 57
EP value: 80

Silk Road, Central Asia and Central Europe are new items on the list and aren't really VoD, they involve contact and knowledge of them.

By changing to a global trade calculation, adding a TC benefits everyone with a VoD to that area in a small way. Stat calculations change quite a bit under this methodology. I am testing different formulas. I may need to add back a nation's own TCs.

Using the following calculations Austria would have an econ of 4 and Portugal of 8

Economy = trade + religion + national Confidence/2 – army upkeep + wealth from colonies

Trade = (EP value of VoD/10 + Population/2 + Economic freedom) /2
VoD to undeveloped areas will require at least 1 TP to count towards trade value.

Religion values (economy, culture) will be changed as follows:

Altars (0, 0)
Shrines (0, +1)
Temples (+1, +1)
State Religion (0, +2)
Religious Education -1, +2)
Converting (-2, +3)
Jihad/Inquisition (-3, +4)
Secular (+1,-2)
 
Ok which would you consider more relevant to NESing and how should it impact game play and stats?

As far as influence on the stats goes, obviously the measure of control over the economy would be much more relevant. It has been previously suggested that it should influence the speed of economy's rise and decline, and the degree of player's control over/interference in such matters (this was the way it worked in some of Jason's rulesets, I think).

I think it would be wise to rename "government control" to "political freedom," for simplification.

Government control seems to be more along the lines of social freedom, here. Political freedom is a matter of government form.
 
the
Religion values (economy, culture) will be changed as follows:

Altars (0, 0)
Shrines (0, +1)
Temples (+1, +1)
State Religion (0, +2)
Religious Education -1, +2)
Converting (-2, +3)
Jihad/Inquisition (-3, +4)
Secular (+1,-2)


Seems silly that temple "level" or state religion gives the most "gain" , where secularism will actually be overall negative to a nation.. unless i am reading this wrong...
 
I like this VOD idea.. especially if it is calculated to the number of trade posts in the area.

THO, how we protect our own interests.. suddenly MY TP's will benefit others.... perhaps just your OWN TP's count.. tho that would be VERY hard for you to calculate i know...
 
I like everything else, but TCs must be added back in, or else the cost for creating them must be lowered dramatically. What do sort of religion do Shrines and Temples denote?

Abaddon, PM, answer, now!
 
Seems silly that temple "level" or state religion gives the most "gain" , where secularism will actually be overall negative to a nation.. unless i am reading this wrong...
Altars and Temples are for time frames that are pre 400 AD and would be used by ancient civs. The represent the transition to urban cultures and centralization of authority. they don't apply to this NES.

I've got to go out for an hour, but will be back.
 
Doesn't culture give economic gain indirectly? I seems to me you need something specific for this time ear rather than a progression..
 
I agree with abaddon, a secular state should gain culture instead of losing some.

For the Silk Road, I've said numerous times, why are Persian ECs NORTH of the Silk Road still ECs :p
 
Perhaps a Secular state should gain National Confidence instead of Culture?
 
I don't think a state religion, or secularism, should have set effects on culture or confidence. For example, if Poland abruptly switched to secularism, there would be a significant drop in confidence. Equally so, if a secular state shifted to a state religion, confidence might drop as well.
 
Doesn't culture give economic gain indirectly? I seems to me you need something specific for this time ear rather than a progression..

I agree with abaddon, a secular state should gain culture instead of losing some.

For the Silk Road, I've said numerous times, why are Persian ECs NORTH of the Silk Road still ECs :p
I can live making secular a +1, +0. They are collectors of regional trade that funnel into the SR.

Perhaps a Secular state should gain National Confidence instead of Culture?

I don't think a state religion, or secularism, should have set effects on culture or confidence. For example, if Poland abruptly switched to secularism, there would be a significant drop in confidence. Equally so, if a secular state shifted to a state religion, confidence might drop as well.
Careful transitions that take place slowly will minimize disruptions.

Currently:
Culture = Education + Religion + RCs
National Confidence = Civil Leadership + Infrastructure + Education

High culture keeps outside influences from having effects on your nation and influences neighbors or possessions to see things your way.

National confidence keeps rebellions at bay and contributes half its value (rounded down) to economy.

Culture is deliberately not an influence on economy. I want to keep those separate. Religion acts as an anchor on the economy if it gets too extreme. Sudden changes (like Poland switching to secular) would cause a major disruption and cause rebellion or severe unrest. In general I will not allow such rapid swings. And as seen in Portugal last update, the very strong government support for the Order, caused a swing from secular to Religious Education. The people jumped on the bandwagon.
 
Wait... when is my TP on Sulawesi going to be there as then IP should have 12, and thus 6 EPs worth ;)

On another note, I think the trade values of Europe are over-powered. The combined EC worth of NWE (12) MED (13) and CE (4), or 29 out of 80 total EPs is too great, around 36% of the world's combined trade "wealth."

I feel that Europe may have been ah... more blessed with TCs than the rest of the world because the origin of the NES was to be one more based on Europe as opposed to the rest of the world.

What are the cities of Paris, Madrid, London, Vienna, Berlin, Barcelona, Lisbon, and the other ECs of Europe compared to the cites of the Orient? Great Asian cities, despite more wealth and greater trade, are not adequetly compared to the "ECs" of Europe. Traditionally in NESing, there have usually been more TCs in Europe than elsewhere.

For example, Guangzhou and Split are both ECs and thus under the current rules have the same wealth production status of +1 EP. But is it really equal to compare their respective wealths? :p There are simply too little TCs in Asia compared to Europe. "Cities" in Asia, with more population and wealth then their European counterparts are not shown as either cities or TCs at all.

Also, just because a nation has a TP in an area shouldn't necessarily mean they get all the wealth of the area to be added. Also, what would be the point of creating TCs if they benefit everyone who has a TP in the region? They should provide some direct benefit to the nation that control them as well.

For example, let's say Khmeria established a trade post in northern Egypt in the MED region. That doesn't mean we should automatically gain all the trade wealth of the region as implied in the proposed rules. I mean, a nation could have ONE TP in every single region so to speak and would gain the benefits of EVERY SINGLE region in the world. A nation who concentrates on a few regions would thus be at a disadvantage compared to a nation who's everyone despite the historical trends. Something should be done to ensure that nations with a bigger slice of the cake of a region should get more than someone who just has one TP :p
 
Europe blessed with EC's? Iberian Spain has NONE and has a cap on the limit despite there being at least 5 obvious candidates. France has like...2. Britain has about 2 as well.
 
Yea, i have, 1... a capital is always going to be a TC... europe has more capitals...

a TC is a quite specific thing, not merely a big city.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom