Remove ads

The Victoria Megathread

Introverted said:
Agrarianism, Interventionism & Command Economy modifies the percent allowing for a bigger portion of the money to be collected but some will always vanish.

LZF has 100 Dividends reinvestment modifier meaning that after the private owners get their wages all of the dividends gets dumped in the investment pool.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ah, I see it. Interestingly, Coop gives just as big a reinvestment bonus as LZF, making it the superior choice to Command Economy for Socialists. Take the L, Stalinists.

Rhel said:
Does Laissez Faire allow me to subsidize the arms industry?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I've noticed that LZF does allow this now, yes.
 
Last edited:
TBH I tend to value having a degree of control, even if it leads to some efficiency losses.

But if this
obssesednuker said:
Ah, I see it. Interestingly, Coop gives just as big a reinvestment bonus as LZF, making it the superior choice to Command Economy for Socialists. Take the L, Stalinists.



I've noticed that LZF does allow this now, yes.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Is true I might just give LF a go. So far my go to version of capitalism has been interventionism with free trade.

Of course, most of the time I have some specific goal in mind that economic efficiency has to give way to anyhow.
 
Rhel said:
Is true I might just give LF a go. So far my go to version of capitalism has been interventionism with free trade.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

They say a picture is worth a thousand words:




But yeah, against the AI you probably could outcompete just fine under Interventionism/Agrarianism... hell, maybe even Traditionalism, despite it's own penalties. Things have improved in 1.7 if the country doesn't get wrecked (I've seen the US screw itself over rather more frequently now, but if they don't then they're usually guaranteed to hit ~500 million GDP) and they've indicated they're working on making another improvement in 1.7.2, but they'll probably never be able to make the AI as hyperoptimized with the economy as players can.
 
Last edited:
obssesednuker said:
They say a picture is worth a thousand words:




But yeah, against the AI you probably could outcompete just fine under Interventionism/Agrarianism... hell, maybe even Traditionalism, despite it's own penalties. Things have improved in 1.7 if the country doesn't get wrecked (I've seen the US screw itself over rather more frequently now, but if they don't then they're usually guaranteed to hit ~500 million GDP) and they've indicated they're working on making another improvement in 1.7.2, but they'll probably never be able to make the AI as hyperoptimized with the economy as players can.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I've literally played 1.7.0, that screenshot doesn't do what you think it does.
 
Parzival said:
I've literally played 1.7.0, that screenshot doesn't do what you think it does.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It doesn't? I mean, yeah, I cheated the US over to LF in order to take those, but the subsidized button pretty clearly shows up and is togglable. Does pressing it just do nothing then? I'll experiment for a moment...

EDIT: Yep, they're working. Just opened another game in the debug mode to test it.


Before clicking the subsidy button:


After clicking the button:


Subsidy expenses pretty clearly went up by about over 1K from clicking that button. So what's the basis for your claim?
 
Last edited:
Parzival said:
I meant that the Government dividends efficiency thing doesn't do what you think it does.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

OH YEAH! You're right: the efficiency bonus only applies to government owned buildings. And under both LS and Coop, government owned buildings become either privately or worked owned buildings pretty quickly, so the bonus becomes meaningless there. Though LS does give capitalists a 25% bonus to the investment pool while Coop gives farmers a 25% bonus and they both give shopkeepers a 25% bonus. That does mean LS is superior in that respect, since farmers will only invest in the buildings they work in while capitalists will invest in a broader array but... eh, I guess you can make up for it with the 65% government construction allocation. Or mod the law to give an overall equivalent bonus to laborers, machinists, and engineers...
 
for those wondering, Command Economy gives a total of 75% government dividend efficiency. It just requires you to be responsible for literally all construction with all the good and bad of being responsible for all construction. Also, a crucial thing about state owned enterprises is that you must pay 1 bureaucracy per level of state owned business. So playing as say a technocracy with command economy late game, you will have a very politically powerful bureaucrat class.

As an aside, turns out, isolationism counts for getting to trigger corn laws now. Yes, agrarianism might be better for aristocratic heavy nations..but LZF/homesteading/free trade is vastly than the combo of traditionalism/serfdom/isolationism....and a market liberal landowner makes getting out of that shit as Japan vastly easier. So what if I would have grown faster with agarianism. I managed to speed run Japan out of the Sankoku Decree WITH the daiymo, heimin, AND the samurai all giving thunderous applause to my doing so while agrarianism was much less likely to pass at the time.
 
Last edited:
Parzival said:
Just literally play the game lol. Look at the dang reminder text. You'll see that you are wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I've read it, thats efficiency of dividends, the max of which is 75% with command economy and the various technologies, thats still a 25% loss in efficiency when you can go LZF and have 100% of that money going to your investment pool.
 
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top