-
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.
Showing developer posts only. Show all posts in this thread.
That's exactly right! Which means that taboos and obsessions concentrate demand in certain goods but not others, increasing their prices and making things overall more expensive for Pops depending on them.
- 37
- 16
- 2
At those levels of living standard the base mortality will be higher than the base fertility, so if no additional factors apply the net population growth will be negative.
Note that this is only the systemic way that e.g. famines are represented economically. Particularly severe famine "event chains" may also arise during the game. We'll talk more about our approach to events in a later diary!
- 53
- 33
- 2
Feminism unlocks the possibility of passing these laws, in that there will now be people agitating for more rights, while what happened during the World Wars would be actually passing those laws.
- 50
- 20
- 17
- 1
I believe that in the lower end of SoL, increasing SoL also increases birth rate (you have more kids if you're not starving and such).
- 44
- 14
- 8
Unfortunately seasonal shifts in goods supply and demand cannot be easily simulated in our model, as we assume rational stockpiling happens behind the scene. As for climate, the production of goods varying by climate is simulated to some degree by permitting some buildings to be built in some states but not others - for example, some regions can grow Coffee and others cannot, some regions have Rice Farms and others have Wheat Farms - but the consumption of different goods cannot be made to depend on climate, time of year, or the combination of the two. However, the goods substitution system does permit for distinctions in consumption based on availability, so Pops don't smoke opium in markets where it's not present, and can subsist only on Fruit if that's the only food that's available.
- 38
- 24
- 11
Not at the moment, it's something I've thought about but we probably will not have for release at least.
- 50
- 12
- 4
Pops don't have an aversion to working in industries producing a taboo right now. It's an interesting idea though, maybe it's something we can explore at a later point.
- 54
- 37
Realistically? Absolutely. Would I like this to be in the game? For sure. However, this is also the kind of mechanical addition that I'm alright with not having in release and add in a at a later point, because it's more of a nice detail than a crucial mechanic (Heating is not a very significant part of expenses). I would also want a system like this to be used in other cases where it makes sense and I wouldn't just want to make it as simple as 'Pops in hot regions enjoy a higher average standard of living due to reduced heating expenses while Pops in cold regions are poorer'.
- 78
- 27
- 8
- 2
- 1
Professions can actually have different Dependent ratios, but we're not quite sure to what extent we will distinguish them yet as too drastic differences between them can lead to some counterintuitive game dynamics.
However, this is one of the major reasons why we've chosen to go with the term "Workforce" and "Dependents" instead of Men and Women - it's not intended to be the case that at a 1/4 ratio, everyone in the Workforce is a man and every Dependent is a woman. Rather, it's that when Women in the Workplace become the norm, more Dependents join the Workforce.
- 42
- 24
- 3
We want there to be plenty of room upwards in the system instead of pop incomes simply being wasted if they hit the highest level. SoL 99 is meant to be more or less impossible to reach.
- 61
- 15
- 1
You can discourage consumption of a good and embargo imports of it, but if there's a local supply you can never eliminate consumption of it entirely, as that isn't a feat even modern day states can achieve.
- 42
- 14
- 13
Sort of, I think, yes! Though if I understand the effect correctly, we've tried to compensate for it by both making staples quite substitutable and by gradually shifting Needs from certain staple goods to other goods as Wealth levels increase, so Pops don't get "stuck" in Wealth ranges where they're paying more for high-demand staple goods than they would if they had the option to switch to lower-demand luxury goods. While cool, this kind of Catch-22 could make a for a pretty annoying puzzle for players to have to solve, particularly since securing staple goods tends to be an early-game problem.
Should certainly be something a modder could simulate by undoing our compensations, though.
- 34
- 14
- 3
To address both these birds with one stone, we need the granularity of 100 levels instead of 10 to ensure that Pop needs don't flip-flop like that but remain at relatively stable Wealth due to market forces. Otherwise the sudden shift from Wealth 4 (40) to Wealth 5 (50) in a large Pop could cause demand to increase so much it devastates their ability to pay for it next week, causing them to drop back down to 4, etc. So the answer to why we don't see see-sawing and instability is because of careful tuning like that.
Also that.
- 37
- 22
- 1
Decreases consumption over time, meaning increased prices if supply remains the same.
- 25
- 7
- 3
- 2
In the game it's not natality that increases from increased Standard of Living, it's net population growth. So by enacting Women in the Workplace, natality immediately declines by 5% but will cause Dependents to gradually turn into Workforce, a process which can take many years to maximize. Assuming this leads to increased Standard of Living for most Pops over time, natality will decrease further, but mortality will decrease more, potentially leading to net population growth despite the two-pronged decreases to natality.
Between 1836 and 1936 the world's population doubled, largely due to industrialization and the increased Standard of Living it brought. Women's Suffrage and emancipation were also major aspects of the era in many countries that also experienced explosive population booms. We're attempting to model both these phenomena independently. How it turns out in your game might be different.
- 48
- 21
- 8
- 1
I think organized crime, black markets and so on would be a really interesting thing to add to the game, but we don't have any plans to explicitly simulate them for release (I know I keep saying that in this thread, but there are so many things I want to add to the game but where we need to prioritize the core features that we do have and ensure they're as good as they can be on release).
- 79
- 18
- 6
- 1
At the moment Wealth levels are balanced such that 10k Workforce at Wealth 1 require a total weekly net income of £150, and each level is worth roughly 10% more than the level before it, so it's a quite gradual exponential increase that nevertheless gets astronomically high by levels 60+. Of course this is at base pricing, so specific market prices can impact how much money Pops need to have to achieve a certain Wealth level a lot. And even if the goods your population needs to buy are quite expensive, if many of them are made domestically they might have the wages to match on account of their industries producing high-value goods.
Also, it's not enough to just be able to afford Wealth 2 (at £165 base pricing) to advance to it - rather, the Pop's income is compared to its expenses, and it progresses in one direction or another until it switches to the new level. So assuming perfectly balanced supply and demand, a Pop of Wealth 1 that has a net income of £180 would gain 180/150 = 20% progress towards Wealth 2 per week.
- 29
- 23
- 2
- 1
The national value as well as the state-specific strata values are not separate values, but are all examples of where we have aggregated individual Pops' Standard of Living along with a breakdown of what the most prominent factors are that affects them. The idea here is to give the player some approximate ideas of major trends and factors on different levels of granularity, to make it easier to play both large and small countries. If you're playing, say, USA it's not really feasible to try to parse the details of thousands of Pops individually to figure out how to best address their varied needs, but if you want to make things better for all Middle Strata Pops in Pennsylvania you'll easily be able to see that the best way to do that is e.g. increase access to Transportation or Furniture, or cut Consumption Taxes on Tea.
- 26
- 17
- 7
- 2