• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Developer Diary | German Systems

Willkommen zurück to another German Dev Diary!


Last time we talked about the Common Branches and the Historical Branch of Germany. Now, I, Paradox_Danne, ManoDeZombi, D3vil, and Nattmaran (please insert joke about how many content designers it takes to make a Germany) will at least try to explain the various new systems for Germany. As we alluded to and hinted at in the last German Dev Diary, Germany has a whole swath of new mechanics we’d like to go through with you. Keep in mind that all of this is still very much a work in progress, which means things may change. So without further ado, let’s press on!

The MEFO Bills
Historically, the MEFO Bills played a major role in the German rearmament in the 1930s and were devised by Hjalmar Schacht. It was partly a way to keep military production hidden (because it directly violated the Versailles Treaty from WW1) and functioned as a means to pay for the actual rearmament program. While Austrian and Czech gold reserves that were seized helped to bolster the economy and staved off an impending collapse, it only bought the Germans some time. In the end, this glorified Ponzi scheme almost bankrupted the country and can be seen as a motivation for why Germany went to war when it did. The armament program constantly required new resources to devour, so Germany was forced to continue to feed the beast as it were. This led to large-scale plundering and theft wherever the Nazis and the Wehrmacht went, to sustain the ever-hungry war machine.

In-game, this economic collapse was never really seen or felt, and it wasn’t until after the first war that you had to pay back the MEFO Bills. This means that the vast majority of players probably never even knew there was a price to pay for them. This is all changing. The intention of the reworked MEFO Bills is partly to slow down early German build-up somewhat and at the same time drive a German player to go on a conquering spree.

1_germany_systems_starting_mefo_bills.png

The MEFO Bills at the start of the game in1936

Granted, this is a far cry from what the MEFO Bills looked like in the old version, but if you read the previous German Dev Diary (which you really should) you know that this National Spirit can be improved. But something else you probably picked up on, is that Consumer Goods Factories factor (that is to say, the percentage of your civilian factories that are put on producing Consumer Goods, ergo not able to trade or build anything) is increasing each month, and it will continue to increase until it reaches 100%. This is the price Germany pays for quickly rearming again; all available resources are diverted to military production. The keen-eyed among you have also read two other things; additional penalties will be added once you reach 100% Consumer Goods Factories factor (henceforth known as CGFF because I can’t be bothered to type all of that out every time I refer to it), and that the rate of increasing CGFF will be higher based on the amount of non-core states controlled by Germany. What does all of this even mean? Well, simply put, if you fail to feed the beast that is your arms industry, you will start to produce less material. And by controlling non-core states, you’re diverting valuable resources away from rearmament.

2_germany_systems_high_mefo_bills.png

Bad things will happen if you can’t manage the MEFO Bills

Price Controls
There are of course ways you can manage the MEFO Bills - at least for a while. Institute Price Controls will not only lower the monthly CGFF increase by 0.5% (so from 3% to 2.5%), but it also unlocks decisions to temporarily lower the CGFF.

3_germany_systems_institute_price_controls.png

Institute Price Controls will reduce the monthly CGFF increase ever so slightly

4_germany_systems_price_controls_decisions.png

Price control measures will be crucial to managing the MEFO Bills


Seizing Gold Reserves
Sooner or later you’ll run out of tricks to keep your economy afloat though, and what do you do then? You do what every other dictator does when things are going south at home; go to war. Going to war will trigger an event, asking you if you want to get rid of the rearmament program and receive Recovering Economy instead, or if you want to switch MEFO Bills for Economy of Conquest and unlock the decision to Seize Gold Reserves.

5_germany_systems_mefo_event.png

Would you rather have a Recovering Economy or an Economy of Conquest

The decision to Seize Gold Reserves is key to managing the ever-increasing CGFF. Once you have capitulated a country (and this is important; the country must have capitulated to you or one of your subjects) you will be able to seize their gold reserves. This will temporarily reduce the CGFF - just as with the Price Controls decisions. The CGFF reduction is based on the number of total factories in the core states of the targeted country you control. Ergo, more developed countries will reduce the CGFF more. These decisions can however only be taken for countries in Europe - so don’t go around thinking you can seize the USA’s gold reserves. There’s one catch though; seizing the gold reserves of a country will increase Resistance and lessen Compliance in the states. I’m also toying with the idea of giving each state a productivity penalty for a short amount of time.

6_germany_systems_gold_reserves.png

Seizing Gold Reserves

Seizing other country's gold won’t fix your own economy though, it’s just buying you more time. Is there a way of getting rid of the Economy of Conquest? Why yes, yes there is! But it obviously involves a lot of conquering before you can fix the mess you’ve put your economy in.

7_germany_systems_autarky_achieved.png

By completing Autarky Achieved you will transform your economy and gain Wirtschaftswunder

As you can see, you need a lot of natural resources. (Just a quick fyi here; these numbers are not set in stone yet and might change before release.) Not only will Autarky Achieved replace Economy of Conquest with Wirtschaftswunder (or Economic Miracle, for those who didn’t read the previous German Dev Diary - naughty, naughty!) but it will also improve the Trade Law Autarky.

And that’s all there is to say about the MEFO Bills and Economy of Conquest and how to manage them. Let’s move on to another brand-new mechanic, an utterly unique one for Germany.

The Inner Circle
The Nazi government functioned in a pretty peculiar way; on the one hand, you had the proper government and all its institutions and whatnot, but on the other hand, you had the Nazi party functioning as a parallel ruling body. This system of having two governing bodies often clashed with each other, and people within the Nazi hierarchy often plotted and intrigued against each other to gain the favor of Hitler. Hitler was happy to let them do this, he even encouraged it - as long as the results benefited him. Nazi officials often had overlapping roles, and these roles often overlapped with government institutions, creating a chaotic administrative system. We knew that we wanted to have this represented early on - but we struggled for a long time to get it right. Finally, Arheo and ManoDeZombi found a very (imho) interesting solution.

8_germany_systems_inner_circle.png

The people of the Inner Circle will try to ascend within the Nazi hierarchy

So how will we represent the in-fighting between these fellas and the parallel administrative system that existed? By letting each one of them work on and complete focuses in their own mini-branch. This means that you will be able to work on multiple focuses at the same time.

9_germany_systems_goring_1st_focus.png

An Ascending Reichsleiter will work on and complete his own set of focuses

If you paid close attention you will have noticed that the GUI (Graphical User Interface) for the Inner Circle is shaped like a pyramid with Mister Mustacheman himself on top, and three empty slots just under him. And some of you might already have guessed that you can only have three Reichsleiters ascending (that is, working on their own focuses) at the same time. Yes indeed, you can only have three Reichsleiters simultaneously completing focuses.

10_germany_systems_inner_circle_gui.png

Only three Reichsleiters can Ascend within the Inner Circle at the same time

The cool thing though, is that you can swap out which of the Reichsleiters you want to ascend within the Inner Circle, which means that you can prioritize different things depending on your needs.

11_germany_systems_inner_circle_4th_advisor.png

Swap out your Inner Circle depending on your current and future needs

This doesn’t mean that swapping out one Reichsleiter for another will save you from the jaws of defeat; it takes them quite some time to complete the focuses they work on.

12_germany_systems_goring_3rd_focus.png

Letting a Reichsleiter ascend within the Inner Circle takes time and investment

Besides, why would you even want to let someone ascend within the Inner Circle? Well, they all offer different bonuses based on their historical roles. You can see their traits and bonuses both in the new UI in the Focus Tree, by hovering over the portraits, and in the National Spirit tab.

13_germany_systems_full_national_spirit.png

All Reichsleiters have their unique traits and bonuses

Worth mentioning, most of these advisors have a small daily PP cost when ascended, which increases once they complete their second focus in their branch. On the other hand, your Party Chancellor (be it Bormann or Hess), will grant you daily PP bonus which counters part of the PP cost from the others, so if you are not swimming in PP it might be a good idea to save one of the Ascending slots for the Party Chancellor of your choice.

Another reason why you’d let someone ascend is if you want to swap out Hitler. Who needs that low-life scumbag anyways, right? Surely Himmler, Göring, or Goebbels could do a better job! Or why not maybe Hess? They all seem like very reasonable and stable people…. Yes, this is how you get to play with an alternative Führer. They keep their Inner Circle traits and get a new one to boot!

14_germany_systems_fuhrer_borman.png

A new Führer has Ascended

How do you go about usurping Hitler then? Well, first off, you have to have three Reichsleiters completing all of their focuses they can complete and then finish A Strong Successor.

15_inner_circle_strong_successor_strated.png

Whoever will you choose to become the new Führer

We hope you like this new feature and find it interesting! It took a lot of blood, sweat, and tears (mostly ManoDeZombi’s) to get this working. One of the main goals of this system was to declutter a bit the otherwise-overcrowded political advisor list, so players can choose different political advisors within the three political advisor slots, while still being able to pick among historically party figures in the Inner Circle, which can in turn evolve and provide different bonuses and effects on their own, allowing the player to utilize the invaluable focus time in whatever branches they consider most important.

Moving on, we would like to mention a small system that we didn’t have the time to talk much about in the first German Dev Diary, and that is quite interesting and can prove to be pretty useful if you are planning on expanding your influence across the Ocean, and challenge the USA’s hegemony in America.

The Monroe Doctrine
Hello again, Malin Monroe (it’s actually Nattmaran though) here to talk about the Monroe Doctrine. We’ve all come to know the Monroe Doctrine through Trial of Allegiance, but as a recap; the Monroe Doctrine was USA’s attempt at keeping the peace in America, primarily to make sure no one else, and certainly not someone hostile, got a foothold that close to them. Of course, the Germans however, would most certainly have liked to have a foothold that close, and we wanted to represent this in game.

germany_systems_monroe_1.png

The focuses below Crossing the Atlantic are meant to give you the tools to challenge the USA’s military and influence over America

germany_systems_monroe_2.png

Decisions on the map will appear to sway American countries, once you have brought at least five countries into opposition, you will be allowed to destabilize the doctrine once and for all.

The decisions are rather straightforward, you can bolster sentiments to boost the popularity of fascism in the target country. A fascist country is more likely to oppose the Monroe Doctrine. You are not alone in this endeavour however, the United States will be alerted of your actions, and like you, they might very well start their own campaign in search of support. Once you have garnered enough support (which is actually opposition) you can click the button, and demand the dismantling of the Monroe Doctrine, and as such, you will most likely have a good landing point for further American crusades, invasions and expansions.

germany_systems_monroe_3.png

Finally we are rid of some of the guarantees…when I took these screenshots, it came at a high cost however…

And we have one last system we need to talk about before wrapping up this Dev Diary, namely-


The Reichskommissariats
And now for the new Reichskommissariat mechanics, brought to you by D3vil and ManoDeZombie.

Hi, it’s me, Jonathan here again to now introduce all of you to the new mechanics and content surrounding the Reichskommissariats! Starting off with how to get them, you will enable the mechanic after completing the focus Uplift the Rosenberg Office near the top of the fascist part of the focus tree.

Screenshot_RK_1.png

The focus in question.

Alfred Rosenberg, head of the Reichskommissariat projects, will not show up as a regular national spirit or advisor. Instead, he will show up in his own GUI in the decision category, and you will be able to see what effects he grants by hovering over his icon.

Screenshot_RK_2.png

Alfred Rosenberg.

Now I hear you asking, why would I create these puppets when I could just occupy the territory normally? Well about that, as explained previously, the MEFO bills/Economy of Conquest grows ever more taxing the more non-core territory you occupy yourself, not counting puppets. Apart from that, these special puppets have various bonuses to both their leaders and national spirits, and not only that, because Alfred Rosenberg gets stronger the more Reichskommissariats you create.

Screenshot_RK_3.png

Alfred Rosenberg becoming stronger when founding a Reichskommissariat.

As seen in the image above, creating Reichskommissariats also gives you the choice of what kind of leadership you want to instate. One of them being a German governor who is better at keeping resistance down and granting more resources for you, the other being a local collaborator, one who will be better at gaining compliance in the Reichskommissariats-owned territories. The new Reichskommissariats do not have any cores, similar to Italian East Africa, but that shouldn’t be too much of a problem due to the bonuses they possess.

Screenshot_RK_4.png

The event you get when creating a Reichskommissariat.

Reichskommissariats also possess a new type of ownership referred to as contested ownership, where, apart from their established capital state, they do not actually own states unless you own them first before selecting their respective decision. This helps to not mess with the surrender progress of the nation you are invading, for example the Soviet Union, so that you won’t have to push past the Urals because you founded RK Ukraine, whilst also ensuring that not only the capital (for example Kiev for RK Ukraine) counts for the Reichskommissariats own surrender progress.

Screenshot_RK_5.png

How contested ownership looks.

From the beginning, only European Reichskommissariats are available to you, but there are a few focuses that can enable the creation of such states in other continents as well.

Screenshot_RK_6.png

All of the Reichskommissariat focuses.

And as one final thing before moving back to Paradox_Danne, here is how the world looks when having created every possible Reichskommissariat.
Screenshot_RK_7.png

The New World Order.
Closing Words
Paradox_Danne here one last time for this Dev Diary, just to say that’s it from us! All of these systems and mechanics are part of the German rework and won’t require the Götterdammerung DLC, but will be baked into the base game. Hopefully, you’ve enjoyed this Dev Diary about German Systems. We hope these systems will distinguish Germany from any other nation, and more importantly, that you feel they’re interesting and fun. But wait, we’re not quite done with Germany just yet! We still have to talk about the alt-historical branches for Germany; how will we handle the old Democratic and Imperial branches, and will there be a Communist one? Who knows! Tune in for the next, and last, German Dev Diary coming later. But before that, why not stop by to read the very next Dev Diary that’s coming on October 28th about Raids? And if that doesn’t sound too interesting, we have Belgium to look forward to as well!

Tschüss


 
  • 53Love
  • 51Like
  • 4
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
I think you don't realize how big of a debt Germany actually incurred, how much of their own people's savings (among many other things) they also cannibalized behind the scenes, and how little the seized foreign assets/gold reserves actually did to quell the raging fire. The near-collapse of the German economy is a historical fact, as are the very desperate measures taken to hide/freeze the imminent hyper-inflation. That all a historical fact.

Just as much as Keynes and his theory of deficit spending as a form of anti-depression government investment didn't just remain a theory. The overall very positive impact of the New Deal is real and shows the difference in outcome for both Germany and the USA.

But I'm really curious now, why do you want to go down the entire MEFO/Economy of Conquest route, if you don't plan on building an economy that relies on conquest? Wouldn't it make more sense then for you to go down the solid economic route towards Wirtschaftswunder, with no debuff? Why bother with the whole autarky?


And I'm happy that this option is always on the table for everyone, I genuinely hope you'll have as much fun with the DLC as I'm sure I'll have. :)
I'm sort of starting to feel like people might not be asking the more important question ; How much work and interaction will the economy take?

There's quite a difference in clicks and busywork between having to activate new decisions every 2-3 months to stabilise your jenga-tower economy or needing to click buttons maybe once or twice a year.

The real challenge will be keeping it from becoming tedious to the point of detracting from gameplay enjoyment.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
The easiest telltale of the inaccurate, uneven, selective and choosy application of historical context and so called "realism" in context of this patches Germanys MEFO bills debuff is USAs New Deal initiative itself and its state as currently represented in the game.

Both MEFO bills and New Deal initiatives were essentially deficit spending programs, with differences in focus and discreetness. The American one was a public government initiative focused on Infrastructure and Economy and the German one was a discreet one focused on military and rearmament. It is true that such policies will inevitably lead to financial trouble down the line (for the US it was the stagflation of the 1970s) but not in context and timeframe of this game.

Go on and press disagree/laugh and reply how wrong I am, I will not respond, I insist on my stance that the developers are not doing Germany properly in this game and that I will be modding the game to my own liking anyway.

That is all.

Have a good one.
nice way to act like a pigeon, i'm right and you're wrong.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:

ManoDeZombi

pardon me for pinging you, but in Seizing Gold Reserves, have you definitely included the historic evacuation of Poland's gold reserves?
Here you have the dates when the evacuation was done and where it eventually went.
https://idfmetale.pl/wpis/polskie-zloto-w-anglii-historia-z-ii-wojny-swiatowej
And here is a link to a pdf file from NBP (National Bank of Poland) in English. Describing the war time and the evacuation of gold.
https://nbp.pl/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Bankoteka_4_September_2014_internet.pdf

Officially, Poland also never signed an act of state capitulation with Germany because the authorities of the time fled the country.
https://muzhp.pl/kalendarium/kapitulacja-warszawy
“Warto zauważyć, że w Polsce nikt nie podpisał aktu kapitulacji państwa. Kapitulacja stolicy została potraktowana jako zakończenie działań wojennych.”
In English:
“It is worth noting that in Poland no one signed the act of capitulation of the state. The capitulation of the capital was treated as the end of hostilities.”
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
This sounds like far too much economic/political busywork & feature bloats for a game supposed to focus on warfare.

Gosh it is truly time to give HoI4 a break and start work on its sequel.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
HoI4 having as selling point to be a grand strategy game, having grand strategy in it rather than tedious tactical micro management seems quite fine. If I want a more "battle" oriented experienced, there is a lot of excellent proposition already on the market. So having the devs pushing toward what make their game special is quite a good idea for me. If I was in the shoes on Arheo for a day (and hopefully for everyone including it won't be the case), I'll start by removing the ability to manually move a unit. That would be disastrous as battle plan aren't enough to manage your army for now but the latest AI development let me hope for something like that in a distant future, and I'd love it much.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
What's wrong with believing one's right and others are wrong?

Are you implying I should adjust (or re-adjust) my beliefs according popular vote?
no, I don't think so, but if you are so keen to defend your point you should do it in a sound manner and mainly with data and sources, I myself believe in your point of view, I like the new system but I don't know if the buffs compared to the debuffs are ok, now going further, unless you prove that you are the right side, there is no point in debating and acting like a pigeon will not help either
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
no, I don't think so, but if you are so keen to defend your point you should do it in a sound manner and mainly with data and sources, I myself believe in your point of view, I like the new system but I don't know if the buffs compared to the debuffs are ok, now going further, unless you prove that you are the right side, there is no point in debating and acting like a pigeon will not help either
I don't need to "defend" my viewpoint here, let alone with "data" and "sources". You are not in a position for me to "prove" something to you, besides, to me this is a failure of application of basic common sense.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Anyone else afraid that the new German systems, raids etc. will lead to a more tedious gameplay?

Managing MEFO effects reminds me of managing Stalin's paranoia, interesting at first but bogs down gameflow and quickly becomes a repetitive chore in future playthroughs.
I mean, once you've figured out your ideal approach, it will likely result in the same dozens of clicks over and over again. It might simply lead to more micromanagement.

PS: I don't really understand the logic behind "Don't MEFO's just suck now? - They are supposed to suck!"
Then why is Hjalmar Schacht even in the game and why is his scheme considered to be smart historically? Realistically most players won't even build MIC in the first two years, leading to only downsides of the MEFO system...
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Anyone else afraid that the new German systems, raids etc. will lead to a more tedious gameplay?

Managing MEFO effects reminds me of managing Stalin's paranoia, interesting at first but bogs down gameflow and quickly becomes a repetitive chore in future playthroughs.
I mean, once you've figured out your ideal approach, it will likely result in the same dozens of clicks over and over again. It might simply lead to more micromanagement.

PS: I don't really understand the logic behind "Don't MEFO's just suck now? - They are supposed to suck!"
Then why is Hjalmar Schacht even in the game and why is his scheme considered to be smart historically? Realistically most players won't even build MIC in the first two years, leading to only downsides of the MEFO system...
Valid argument, however the MEFO bills don’t “just suck”. Going down the focus tree improves them immensely.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
The same world where the British Empire managed the Raj with a relative handful of actual UK subjects.

The Raj had the Princely States.

Remember the Spanish?


Yeah, this. And the Dutch too.

The Spanish split their conquered regions of the Americas into 4 governorates during a period of history in which the whole Indigenous population of the Americas was around 7-15 million people. The Dutch colonial companies appointed governors of specific colonies e.g. the governor-general of the Dutch East Indies rather than directly administering each colonial area as a one big colony.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The Dutch colonial companies appointed governors of specific colonies e.g. the governor-general of the Dutch East Indies rather than directly administering each colonial area as a one big colony.
My argument is that the Dutch ruled us Indonesians as one, big colony stretched from Sabang in the west to Merauke in the east (equivalent from Lisboa to Yekaterineburg in Europe) ruled from Batavia; rather than a collection of subjects like the case of 140+ kings and sultans here that has their authority removed bar 4 successors of the Mataram Sultanate (all of it is at Central Java). Granted, bar a few expeditions to map the Bornean and Papuan inlands, they pretty much leaves the native (bumiputra) tribes alone there, but they held a firm grasp everywhere else.

Ironically, that single governance played into our nationalistic development of shared identity as inhabitants of the Dutch East Indies, propagated first by Ernest Douwes Dekker in 1911.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
My argument is that the Dutch ruled us Indonesians as one, big colony stretched from Sabang in the west to Merauke in the east (equivalent from Lisboa to Yekaterineburg in Europe) ruled from Batavia; rather than a collection of subjects like the case of 140+ kings and sultans here that has their authority removed bar 4 successors of the Mataram Sultanate (all of it is at Central Java). Granted, bar a few expeditions to map the Bornean and Papuan inlands, they pretty much leaves the native (bumiputra) tribes alone there, but they held a firm grasp everywhere else.

Ironically, that single governance played into our nationalistic development of shared identity as inhabitants of the Dutch East Indies, propagated first by Ernest Douwes Dekker in 1911.

Estimates of the Indonesian population at the time are around 69 million people. China's population was 268 million, Japan's 304 million, French Indochina 25 million, Thailand's 15 million and Mongolia's 819,000 for a combined total population of this one colony that stretches far more land and sea than the Dutch East Indies/Indonesia did of over 612 million people; over a quarter of the world population in one Reichskommissariat.
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I think the maximum monthly increase from holding non-core territory is 2.5%. You can also lower the monthly increase by 0.5% by capitulating a certain country that offers reparations ;)
Oh nice, I just realized that this makes Vichy France give actual benefits now, besides just historical reasons lol. They lower the MEFO consumer goods build-up by reducing the non-core territory you control, and additionally pay reparations which reduce the build-up even further.

At the moment, agreeing to Vichy France just means you get less factories overall, and even more resistance in your remaining part of occupied France. From a gameplay perspective, occupying everything is always the better choice.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Estimates of the Indonesian population at the time are around 69 million people. China's population was 268 million, Japan's 304 million, French Indochina 25 million, Thailand's 15 million and Mongolia's 819,000 for a combined total population of this one colony that stretches far more land and sea than the Dutch East Indies/Indonesia did of over 612 million people; over a quarter of the world population in one Reichskommissariat.
Well, about the population argument, i'm agreeing with you on this one.
 
You're right, but you don't draw the right conclusion from it. The important difference is that deficit spending with a focus on economy and infrastructure is an investment with a ROI (return on investment) in the future. You put money/effort in and get a better economy with higher taxes out. Win-win for everyone.

Deficit spending with a focus on military is not an investment, it's a government subvention for some select key industries in the military sector, and the only ROI is the spoils of war the weapons will eventually bring (or not).

Deficit spending on its own is not the problem, modern economic theory even requires deficit spending during economic depression, to keep industries afloat, to ensure workers are getting paid and poverty doesn't spread. When the economy grows again, the government has to reap the rewards, build up its reserves again for the next depression, and start deficit spending again the moment the economy slows down.

In a way Germany stumbled upon the benefit of deficit spending by accident. Germany went into huge debts to rearm, and that surge in demand really eliminated unemployment and generated a facade of wealth. I say facade, because remember, investments into weapons aren't investments with a ROI. The things that money bought had no value to society.

Like overdrawing a dozen of credit cards. If you use that money to generate more income than you have to pay back, you're going to create wealth for your household. If you overdraw a dozen credit cards to buy weapons, you're generating nothing of value. Eventually the bill will come and ruin you... unless you use those weapons to generate some wealth. And there are not many legal and friendly ways of using weapons to make bank.

That's what you missed here. It's not the deficit spending itself that causes the problems for Germany, it's what Germany spent the money on which causes all the problems.

For how little HoI4 actually simulates national economies, it's pretty reasonable to have the US focus result in a purely positive outcome, while the German focus is a double-edged sword, accumulating problems that can only be solved via war.


Sry, but this is not correct.

Before i comment, i want to make clear that i am certainly not out for defending the nazi regime. It was a totalitarian tyranny and the governement full of evil personalities that brought so much harm to the world. Actually i find this inner circle mechanic highly problematic as it runs the risk of endorsing those crimininals.



Economywise, your statement just repeats the common stuff that gets taught in a 7th grade of a public school. There is much more to it that gets neglected in such a simple depiction of events.

As was stated earlier, the New Deal of the US administration and the MEFO bills had quite a lot in common. Much more than the morale standpoint of emphasis towards civilian instead of military sector may indicate to us who have the luck to have been born in a postmodern world.


In their core, the processes of both policies are very much the same - as it's about industrial enterprises and attracting their money to government projects in both cases.

The goverment borrows money from those (huge) private investors. This money then gets used to pay for contracts the government makes orders for. It is a system of 'promises' and 'trust'. The element of 'promises' are specific government contracts being given, the 'trust' element is the probability that the government makes and stays true to those contracts in a sufficient manner. And in consequence the domestic economy growing to continue - therefore splling back money into the coffers of the previous investors. So far for the background that a potential investor considers before he decides to invest or not.


For those larger businesses it is not only about making profit with every single unit sold, it also is about reaching and expanding the scale they work on. Per piece prices do reduce if the scale can at least be kept (to keep things up and running instead of a decline) - or even better - increased. Having a machince operate 24/7 is better than having to turn it on and off for only limited amounts of time. The key word is efficiency. It does not actuylly matter what the machine produces.

The next aspect is the RoI dimension. Firstly, roads and tanks have in common that they do not produce anything in their own right. But the one who ordered them pays for them. In this case the borrowed money flows back while the business is up and running. The government afterwards collects taxes from all of

1. the business (which can reduce the amount by taking the investment into account which reduces the overall taxation for them)

2. The workforce that now has employment (wellpaid work) instead of taking government money via social welfare

3. customers of the products that are now available at affordable prices. Remember that the businesses were not selling to the government exclusively, they were selling to the domestic public sector as well as exporting internationally - on a large and growing scale.



Despite the afore mentioned simplified teachings, the MEFO bills weren't put into military exclusively. They reached a maximum of 45% in military spending at some point and already were significantly reduced to a portion of only 20% for military purposes in 1939.

The effect of such a policy is an overall growing economy and an increased circulation of money and economic assets (goods) in the markets. This is beneficiary to all players on the market, from the individual person over to businesses and the governement in the end, too. BTW, such methods are standard appliances in developed industrial countries around the world today...


The systems of the New Deal and the MEFOs, both being appliead by the respecitve governments at about the same time, could also be compared to some kind of a substitute stock market. Private investments are being made in the hopes of the system working and growing.

Just like with stocks, there are risks. It could alternatively also either go awe or the initial recipient of the investment could be forced to pay back. To avoid this, the recipient has to create the 'trust' in his word and in his measures to get the processes into machination.
Both, The US and the German governments achieved that goal and the risk of going bancrupt by not being able to pay back never realised. Instead, both economies took off and profitted significanty from these governmental programs.

They carefully and successfully limited the amount of money borrowed - in overall volume and in time - they were collecting money before the risk of collapse could become acute. In both cases they even could have been able to pay back if it had become necessary. Due to that fact, the 'trust' of the investors stayed and the necessity never arose, since the investors saw no reason to recall their investment. It already was paying off when the size of their contract books constantly grew.


If this instead had happened, the economies of both countries would have significantly suffered. But it did not happen. in neither of them. The used policies were successfully been kept in check.


What admittedly differs the New Deal from the MEFO is that the US program concentrated on civilian projects to a (much) higher degree. Civilian unlike military projects have an additional effect that can be descriped as a 'multiplier effect': In the long term projects like roads, dams and other industrial production facilities have an additional prositive effect on the civilian sector when working on their own. This works as an additional benefit to the general economy and also does not create the same amount of follow-up cost of a large standing military (or crippling cost of a gigantic fleet in case of the UK).


But we have no maintenance costs for standing military in the game! Neither the UK has to pay billions for their ww1 fleets rusting in harbor nor the USSR or Germany for building up oversized land armies...


The risks of the New Deal overall were lower than that of the MEFO bills. The New Deal also assumingly achieved a higher degree for the overall positive effects on the domestic economy. I do not even contest this being a fact. But both programs did not fail - they succeded and helped their respective countries to lift up economic prowess significantly.



The problem i see with the new MEFO design is that it - in stark contrast to history - pretends as if the German economy already would have collapsed - the private sector recalling their investment and the government having to pay back - with constantly growing - and - non-stop - rates. This 'worst case scenario' is being made the default course alleged by the game. Getting a 10% bonus for MILs and NICs while paying ever growing interest rates reducing the amount you can apply that meager 10% to. It is borderline ridiculous.

As i explained above, this mechanic is as non-historical as it is illogical.



If the end of the developers is to limit / reduce German economic growth they should at least try do it in a sensical and balanced way, not by artificially crippling the second/third most powerful industrial nation of the era the game takes place in.



To me, this looks like a stupid Disney treatment on the game's most important antagonist. I ask myself who would be interested in Darth Vader being turned into a silly wimp.
And i really look forward to players complaining about the AI GER crumbling even without all to much external intervention on the part of a player.

The sad part of the story is the length in time it will need to rebalance all this when the public beta testing starts after release.

Next to this, players of course will find exploits and shenanigans to circumvent the mechanics as designed - leading to even weirder META-dominated gameplay...
 
  • 4Like
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Sry, but this is not correct.

Before i comment, i want to make clear that i am certainly not out for defending the nazi regime. It was a totalitarian tyranny and the governement full of evil personalities that brought so much harm to the world. Actually i find this inner circle mechanic highly problematic as it runs the risk of endorsing those crimininals.



Economywise, your statement just repeats the common stuff that gets taught in a 7th grade of a public school. There is much more to it that gets neglected in such a simple depiction of events.

As was stated earlier, the New Deal of the US administration and the MEFO bills had quite a lot in common. Much more than the morale standpoint of emphasis towards civilian instead of military sector may indicate to us who have the luck to have been born in a postmodern world.


In their core, the processes of both policies are very much the same - as it's about industrial enterprises and attracting their money to government projects in both cases.

The goverment borrows money from those (huge) private investors. This money then gets used to pay for contracts the government makes orders for. It is a system of 'promises' and 'trust'. The element of 'promises' are specific government contracts being given, the 'trust' element is the probability that the government makes and stays true to those contracts in a sufficient manner. And in consequence the domestic economy growing to continue - therefore splling back money into the coffers of the previous investors. So far for the background that a potential investor considers before he decides to invest or not.


For those larger businesses it is not only about making profit with every single unit sold, it also is about reaching and expanding the scale they work on. Per piece prices do reduce if the scale can at least be kept (to keep things up and running instead of a decline) - or even better - increased. Having a machince operate 24/7 is better than having to turn it on and off for only limited amounts of time. The key word is efficiency. It does not actuylly matter what the machine produces.

The next aspect is the RoI dimension. Firstly, roads and tanks have in common that they do not produce anything in their own right. But the one who ordered them pays for them. In this case the borrowed money flows back while the business is up and running. The government afterwards collects taxes from all of

1. the business (which can reduce the amount by taking the investment into account which reduces the overall taxation for them)

2. The workforce that now has employment (wellpaid work) instead of taking government money via social welfare

3. customers of the products that are now available at affordable prices. Remember that the businesses were not selling to the government exclusively, they were selling to the domestic public sector as well as exporting internationally - on a large and growing scale.



Despite the afore mentioned simplified teachings, the MEFO bills weren't put into military exclusively. They reached a maximum of 45% in military spending at some point and already were significantly reduced to a portion of only 20% for military purposes in 1939.

The effect of such a policy is an overall growing economy and an increased circulation of money and economic assets (goods) in the markets. This is beneficiary to all players on the market, from the individual person over to businesses and the governement in the end, too. BTW, such methods are standard appliances in developed industrial countries around the world today...


The systems of the New Deal and the MEFOs, both being appliead by the respecitve governments at about the same time, could also be compared to some kind of a substitute stock market. Private investments are being made in the hopes of the system working and growing.

Just like with stocks, there are risks. It could alternatively also either go awe or the initial recipient of the investment could be forced to pay back. To avoid this, the recipient has to create the 'trust' in his word and in his measures to get the processes into machination.
Both, The US and the German governments achieved that goal and the risk of going bancrupt by not being able to pay back never realised. Instead, both economies took off and profitted significanty from these governmental programs.

They carefully and successfully limited the amount of money borrowed - in overall volume and in time - they were collecting money before the risk of collapse could become acute. In both cases they even could have been able to pay back if it had become necessary. Due to that fact, the 'trust' of the investors stayed and the necessity never arose, since the investors saw no reason to recall their investment. It already was paying off when the size of their contract books constantly grew.


If this instead had happened, the economies of both countries would have significantly suffered. But it did not happen. in neither of them. The used policies were successfully been kept in check.


What admittedly differs the New Deal from the MEFO is that the US program concentrated on civilian projects to a (much) higher degree. Civilian unlike military projects have an additional effect that can be descriped as a 'multiplier effect': In the long term projects like roads, dams and other industrial production facilities have an additional prositive effect on the civilian sector when working on their own. This works as an additional benefit to the general economy and also does not create the same amount of follow-up cost of a large standing military (or crippling cost of a gigantic fleet in case of the UK).


But we have no maintenance costs for standing military in the game! Neither the UK has to pay billions for their ww1 fleets rusting in harbor nor the USSR or Germany for building up oversized land armies...


The risks of the New Deal overall were lower than that of the MEFO bills. The New Deal also assumingly achieved a higher degree for the overall positive effects on the domestic economy. I do not even contest this being a fact. But both programs did not fail - they succeded and helped their respective countries to lift up economic prowess significantly.



The problem i see with the new MEFO design is that it - in stark contrast to history - pretends as if the German economy already would have collapsed - the private sector recalling their investment and the government having to pay back - with constantly growing - and - non-stop - rates. This 'worst case scenario' is being made the default course alleged by the game. Getting a 10% bonus for MILs and NICs while paying ever growing interest rates reducing the amount you can apply that meager 10% to. It is borderline ridiculous.

As i explained above, this mechanic is as non-historical as it is illogical.



If the end of the developers is to limit / reduce German economic growth they should at least try do it in a sensical and balanced way, not by artificially crippling the second/third most powerful industrial nation of the era the game takes place in.



To me, this looks like a stupid Disney treatment on the game's most important antagonist. I ask myself who would be interested in Darth Vader being turned into a silly wimp.
And i really look forward to players complaining about the AI GER crumbling even without all to much external intervention on the part of a player.

The sad part of the story is the length in time it will need to rebalance all this when the public beta testing starts after release.

Next to this, players of course will find exploits and shenanigans to circumvent the mechanics as designed - leading to even weirder META-dominated gameplay...
Fully agree already thought about writing something similar in how the new system is non-sensical from an economical perspective but you did it wonderfully.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
And you don't think to add ahnenerbe-related events to the game, just to make the players laugh, because their theories are really funny (they haven't reached practice yet).
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
HoI4 having as selling point to be a grand strategy game, having grand strategy in it rather than tedious tactical micro management seems quite fine. If I want a more "battle" oriented experienced, there is a lot of excellent proposition already on the market. So having the devs pushing toward what make their game special is quite a good idea for me. If I was in the shoes on Arheo for a day (and hopefully for everyone including it won't be the case), I'll start by removing the ability to manually move a unit. That would be disastrous as battle plan aren't enough to manage your army for now but the latest AI development let me hope for something like that in a distant future, and I'd love it much.
Next your going to propose that they copy Victoria 3's combat system.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Please could we have a separate Reichskommissariat for Indochina / South East? The East Asian one looks a bit too large.
I find it strange that completely fictional subjects (on the other side of the world, with ridiculous borders) have been designed while historically planned subjects have been excluded or have glaring historical inaccuracies like Ukraine requiring provinces Romania occupied IRL or Moscow extending beyond the Urals. American/British RKs are especially cursed, what's the point of subjecting them like this and not splitting up their populations/resources more effectively? I don't understand why they even put the dev time/effort in at all for territories that couldn't realistically be integrated eventually, which was the goal for RKs IRL, rather than just drawing up collaborative/satellite states for large/distant territories. I guess we just have to hope you can add/take land from individual RKs manually so you can refine borders yourself, or it's back to using mods to fix them.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions: