Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2023 23:24:11 GMT -6
This suggestion is connected to the MAJOR CONFLICT OVERHAUL.
1) RAPID ECONOMIC GROWTH - Remove the pre-determined rapid economic growth of certain countries. - Choosing "improve infrastructure, railways, etc" in the "booming economics" dialog options should have a chance to activate R.E.G. for between 5 and 10 years. - A draw in a MINOR war should have about 25% chance to end the R.E.G. - A loss should have a 50% chance to do that. - A draw in a MAJOR war should have about 50% chance to do that. - A loss should have a 100% chance to do that. - A win, followed by not spending a lot of points should have a big chance to activate R.E.G.
2) GUN RESEARCH - Divide naval gun research into 3 categories: A) Small guns (2-5in), B) Medium guns (6-10in guns), C) Large guns (11-20in) - Introduce a dialog option allowing you to buy a land-based gun made for the army. There should be a 75% chance for the industry to offer a small gun, 20% to offer a medium gun and 5% chance to offer a large gun. This wouldnt cost too much money, but it would cost a prestige point. - You have a chance to steal enemy gun tech in case of a harsh peace deal.
3) SUBSIDIZE INDUSTRY - If player has a large supply of money, he should be presented with a new dialog option - to subsidize military industry. - This would increase the national GDP, and give an increased chance for a new gun technology (later also AA tech or missile tech) - But it would also increase the chance for that tech to leak to some random nation.
|
|
conner
New Member
Albo Supremacy
Posts: 38
|
Post by conner on May 30, 2023 21:42:15 GMT -6
This actually sounds really cool and would love more economic stuff in the game
|
|
|
Post by ludovic on Jun 1, 2023 5:54:24 GMT -6
The economic suggestion seems like an excellent framework to approach more economic opportunities. Perhaps countries that already have REG should have an increased chance to get it. I've always thought that major wars should be much better for the winners than they are, but historically, it did not happen all the time, so rather than try to base it off of factors like the winner's political system and opportunities for home country expansion, it should be based partly off of luck.
In RTW3, do you ever steal enemy tech in a harsh peace deal? If not, I'd think that even beyond guns, you should be able to steal tech as part of reparations, perhaps spending points to do so. It just doesn't feel right that you can thoroughly defeat an enemy yet not have the opportunity to learn anything from their scientists or warships.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jun 2, 2023 10:49:26 GMT -6
More detailed economic stuff is certainly something we can consider, at least after things get more settled down and we have more time for adding new/bigger stuff.
|
|
|
Post by zedfifty on Jun 4, 2023 2:17:55 GMT -6
- A loss should have a 100% chance to do that. [Rapid Economic Growth loss] Hard no. Germany and Japan were World War Losers, yet they enjoyed phenomenal economic growth in the Cold War. France had also been roughly handled in 1940, yet enjoyed the Trente Glorieuses. Britain stagnated in the meantime. This is partly because it is easier to reach the middle-income trap than to escape from it. Perhaps emerging nations such as early Japan, Austria-Hungary and Russia should enjoy REG, but have it decay in a radioactive manner.
|
|
|
Post by hawkeye on Jun 4, 2023 2:37:22 GMT -6
- A loss should have a 100% chance to do that. [Rapid Economic Growth loss] Hard no. Germany and Japan were World War Losers, yet they enjoyed phenomenal economic growth in the Cold War. France had also been roughly handled in 1940, yet enjoyed the Trente Glorieuses. Britain stagnated in the meantime. This is partly because it is easier to reach the middle-income trap than to escape from it. Perhaps emerging nations such as early Japan, Austria-Hungary and Russia should enjoy REG, but have it decay in a radioactive manner. Well, what timespan are we talking about? 1945 to the early 50s, Germany's economy was completely shot (literally). After that, the fact that all factories had to be build anew (and thus were modern whereas countries that didn't have their industry destroyed had their old-ish ones remaining) gave Germany a big leg-up - well, that and a huge influx of money from the US because, you know, there was that big evil bear right over there --> So to lose REG for a couple of years after losing a major war sounds about right to me, followed by a huge amount of REG after that period.
|
|
|
Post by zedfifty on Jun 4, 2023 3:31:20 GMT -6
So to lose REG for a couple of years after losing a major war sounds about right to me, followed by a huge amount of REG after that period. Fair enough, but right now REG seems sticky for a long period of time. And actually 1920s Germany attracted a lot of US investment without too much government prodding. It had the promise of REG after World War I, even though life for the average German was at times miserable. Think of GM and IBM buying Opel and Dehomag, respectively.
|
|
|
Post by arminpfano on Jun 4, 2023 7:23:01 GMT -6
As someone from the team stated before: The economic development is just a side aspect of this game, allowing you to build ships. If you want to model the reality you would need a very sophisticated model - and as a result you also would only get a certain budget for buying ships.
What I find more important is some mechanism to keep the game exciting and challenging. Whenever my budget rises above all other nations due to won wars and/or economic developtment (as Germany or USA), I loose interest because it gets too easy to dominate everyone at will. In this case I would expect "firm" alliances of the other powers to build a balance - this also would be realistic I guess.
|
|