An Immodest Proposal

[Damocles]

I would like to see a Multiplayer game that utilizes a scenario which makes a single key change, along with a significant gameplay adjustment.

The trade value of all provinces are halved. Most of us are citizens used to a modern industrial country, where the main growth of wealth is through commercial trading, not the acquisition of land. 400 years ago, it was a vastly different situation. Beyond that, I feel that the trade incomes that are able to racked up are greatly out of proportion with the provincial income of the provinces in Europe.

Thus, I would suggest that a future scenario halve these values. Or perhaps even quarter them. This would make gold correspondingly more valuable. And actually give a reason to endure the Spanish bankruptcy. (I.E, inflation is less of a heartbreak when your income is in the 150 range, not the 530).

The second rule I would offer is that no province swapping is allowed. Or fake wars for that matter. And that engaging in them would result in harsh penalties.

Thoughts?

 

[unmerged(1631)]

Perfect.

Edited land swaps and fake wars are bad for EU. Rulers simply didn't give large European provinces away willy-nilly like I see so often.
I am curious how the effects of less cash on a map would affect a campaign. Wouldn't mind trying it out.

I would like to see a Multiplayer game that utilizes a scenario which makes a single key change, along with a significant gameplay adjustment.

The trade value of all provinces are halved. Most of us are citizens used to a modern industrial country, where the main growth of wealth is through commercial trading, not the acquisition of land. 400 years ago, it was a vastly different situation. Beyond that, I feel that the trade incomes that are able to racked up are greatly out of proportion with the provincial income of the provinces in Europe.

Thus, I would suggest that a future scenario halve these values. Or perhaps even quarter them. This would make gold correspondingly more valuable. And actually give a reason to endure the Spanish bankruptcy. (I.E, inflation is less of a heartbreak when your income is in the 150 range, not the 530).

The second rule I would offer is that no province swapping is allowed. Or fake wars for that matter. And that engaging in them would result in harsh penalties.

Thoughts?

 

[unmerged(10894)]

OTOH colonial deals were done frequently.

 

[Damocles]

OTOH colonial deals were done frequently.

If someone took the idea seriously enough to edit the scenario for a campaign, I could see limited colonial deals being permitted via a houserule.

The main gist is to make european provinces more valuable, and then prohibit any fake wars to acquire them.

For example, during the 1700s, France engaged in twenty major wars. This is during a 100 year period.

They weren't doing this because they were stupider then EUII players. They engaged in these wars because there was a palatable, lasting benefit to acquiring more territory in Europe.

Again, it is hard for us modern Western citizens to grasp, since the major avenue of improving a nation's power and wealth has shifted from military conquest to commercial enterprise. See Germany and Japan for prime examples...

This was not possible before trading on a international scale really became possible. Historically, Spain, France or England couldn't just send 6 merchants to Tlaxcala. In fact, you could state that historically, all of Spain's RL income came from the provincial taxes and gold income from Spain.

OTOH, I believe that some trade is neccessary to model. But it should be an alternate path roughly equal to province or gold income. Not 10x more lucrative.

 

[Count Drew]

Real Estate definitely falls short in EU2, for two reasons. Well for one, you cannot collect MP From the New World Colonies. Making Trading Empires Purely Naval, Technological bandits. They'll wait for their Key Leader strike Massively with reserves and pray that win an outstanding victory. Nations like Russia, France, even OE or Austria played right cannot be beaten by a Naval Power on European Soil only Ally themselves and use their Money instead. We've played many games where we use weaker trade, I've had difficulties with these games, being so use to Trading the Hell out of the World and Taxes was not important past Trade 5. I could trade land for more Trading and I Recruit Mercs 10Xs over the MP I lost. Though there are a few weakling nations that require extra CCs...

The problem is you do not have enough income, it's quite difficult to produce certian things, like new Forts<that are very expensive> something Europeans didn't have a trouble doing. Many other goodies as well, such Manus, newer Technologies, and Ships... We need to cheapen the cost of certian items, lower the value of Trade<do not wipe out altogether> though make it say 1/3rd the income of max of any Nation. Also somehow pay off better Trading Posts, Pay off better LandOwners... Real Estate is the key to success and to trading. Warped in EU2, you just have to trade in those regions useless resources noone really wants anyways. Just have the tech, and the right Sliders... The Trade Value of Certian Real Estate should be increased, thus making it profitable to fully Colonize. I'd make them Mega-profiteable to colonize. It's painful and costly to colonize and New Games of Eu2 have done away with the Colonial aspect of the game, to more trading and possessing Key points. Yes control the gold early and then later screw that, just hold the Key Provinces of strategic value and CoTs... You need nothing else to win...

There are so many aspects to be tweaked in these departments


as far as these worthless treaties, NonAggression Pacts, these land trades... They're not all bad, there should be a game limit on them So many deals allowed per session per pair of players, that's that<also nothing that is a conflict of interest>. FRIENDS, should be smelt out. How would you feel if you're playing Poker with Freddie, Johnny, Scottie. and you know Fred and John are Pals and keep winking at one another when they got an Ace? You'd feel like this collusion and you're losing your cash to them!? You'd be pist, why not also in EU2? Many are set buddies comming from other games, set alliances and they'll never change. Friends should be sniffed out and placed at the odd ends of the map... Also penalized for any sort of special deals they may conduct outside of the normal realm. I am not guilt free of this, I'll definitely give favoritism though ask Dave One Minute I'll be your buddy, the next I'll stab you in the back... You have to do this! Otherwise you're not living up to the real feel of History.

To add some of my other thoughts, these constant reloads, these constant unfair rulings...Hell with that, in the old days we sacrificed Fair for Speed, something that isn't done anymore. Now all people care about is well, do I get this, and do I get that edit? Oh, my inflation is too high. Whiney little children, if everyone accepted their fates as they have created them we'd all come out about equal with the random factors of the game. Plus with the bugs as well. You endure them, 1 century someone might lose a Top Notch leader the next another might, deceased before their time but hell, that's life and it happened in real life as well.

Just saying that too many players have become overly picky and overly sedate in this game and it leads to boredom. It's alright to be a little bit friendly, and a little bit gamey but there is such a thing is too much.

 

[Fredrik82]

Great idea Damo,

I would definitely join a game like this

 

[unmerged(18425)]

I wouldn't mind trying this out too.

But I sure as hell will play Russia then

 

[Chaingun]

How do you halve the trade value of the provinces, technically? Do you edit the .EUG scenario files or must it be edited in some .CSV data table file?

I think it's a great idea though if it can be done since I'm one of those people who don't give jack shit about trade unless I have to. I think such an edited scenario should also be followed with an additional rule that no one is allowed to be anything but land/naval = 5 (if moved by events, edit back at end of session). I remember having this is some game, I cannot recall which, and it helped decrease the difference between land and naval nations even more. I want to have it because I fear nations that used to rely on trade income to pay for mercenaries in wars may feel they cannot now and thus not fight if they went naval and their enemies went land.

As for the other suggestion for fake wars and province deals; I wouldn't mind trying it out but it doesn't necessarily make for a more fun game. Then again, I think for most players wars = fun and this could reduce the conflicts that can be resolved peacefully.

 

[unmerged(7276)]

I dont think the problem is so much the trade value. It would be nice if the owner of the provinces had more control over their trade value, not just the owner of the COT.

in terms of a scenario though i agree this is interesting idea. Agriculture, and therefore land, was certainly the vast bulk of nations economys. The easiest way to simulate this would be through reducing cot values.

of course their is always a downside. England, holland and others will suffer. I actually think the game simulates well their strength and halfing their trade will hurt bad.

 

[unmerged(18425)]

You could increase tax values of provinces with goods like slaves, sugar, tobacco and china ware significantly. Then Holland, Portugal and England can fight for control of those provinces, instead of the tradtional CoTs in Malacca and such.

 

[unmerged(1631)]

You could increase tax values of provinces with goods like slaves, sugar, tobacco and china ware significantly. Then Holland, Portugal and England can fight for control of those provinces, instead of the tradtional CoTs in Malacca and such.

Another darned good idea

 

[Damocles]

Part of my hypothesis is that trade is so out of balance...That even halving it, England, Holland and Portugal (etc) would still benefit greatly from it.

Since we're at a stage where every Spanish gold province is fairly inconsequential compared to keeping a mono in Isfahan or Ganges.

And I agree with just about everything Count Drew said, regarding the winking across the table during poker. But I thinK CD missed one thing...

People pal up because it behooves them to do so. If historically, the nations of Europe had a surefire way to get rich, wealthy and prosperous by simply making non-aggression pacts with each other, they would have done what we do now.

And I believe by having provincial income be significant, it would give the needed impetus to most players to realize that they can't just sit back and hypertech, they must enlarge their holdings. And at least if you gain wealth from provinces, it balances out by raising your tech/stab costs.

Some nations will still be able to get away with it. Such as Portugal, England and the Netherlands. As historically, that should be what makes them unique until roughly the 19th-20th century. Not have everyone copy them from the 15th because they don't need to spend the ducats on wars. So this would actually help those three nations.

 

[unmerged(7276)]

Im convinced

 

[HolisticGod]

Damo,

Manpower also needs to be cut significantly and centralized.

 

[Stonewall]

Part of my hypothesis is that trade is so out of balance...That even halving it, England, Holland and Portugal (etc) would still benefit greatly from it.

Not to be the only dissenter in the thread, but wasn't the commerical success of English and Dutch traders the centarl source of income for those nations during their heyday?

The only way the Dutch can compete in EU2 MP is by dominating trade. The increased tax incomes from Far Eastern provinces will not be remotely enough to make up for halving their trade income. Combine that with manpower weakness and the Dutch are just another european minor.

I agree that trade needs to be toned down. Would love to see the TE penalty for embargos removed and a more Europe oriented CoT alrogithm. Perhaps the solution is a partial cut in trade values combined with a province tax boost for all land provinces. Or, an alteration to the infra.csv file that increases production efficiency faster. This allows the tax value requirements for forts and shipyards to remain in place, but gives players a higher production income, which I think is what people are shooting for.

You could even do the same to the trade.csv file to decrease trade efficiency. This makes it harder and thus more expensive to place merchants and reduces the trade income as well.

 

[Damocles]

That is about what I am advocating, Stonewall. I wish there was a way to make it so that trade was funnelled more towards European cots. I.E, instead of having a 600 Tlaxcala cot and a 231 Madrid, it would be reversed.

But again, I feel that even if trade values were halved...Nations like England, Netherlands and Portugal would still dominate. In fact, they would dominate even more. Because they would have the time to devote to trading while others were embroiled in provincial land wars. As it stands, with everyone peacing and NAPing each other, the 'trader nations' can find themselves being beaten at their own game, by the likes of France, Austria, Spain or OE.

The most significant and notorious overseas income, should be from Spain's gold provinces. So that I think, is a useful global barometer with which we can judge the cot value of other regions.

Moving beyond this to touch on what Hog said...

Manpower could also be decreased.

What this would do is make battles more decisive, and make war exhaustion more damaging. This would in turn create shorter, sharper wars. In my opinion, MP games should also be played at a higher difficulty, to make military forces more expensive. As in real life, getting together a 50k army under a good leader would be given the respect it deserves. Instead of now, where we find ourselves throwing half a million troops into the meat grinder even by 1600.

I think this would all combine to make our teching about 30 years slower then usual. So that levee en masse and conscription centers would arrive just in time for Napoleon, to create the final cataclysmic showdown. But would cease dominating the game by 1720. The more manpower there is, the less strategy there is.

Fixing the land-naval slider might also help.

I think this would create a vastly different and more realistic experience. But some of these points are obviously, almost worth threads of their own.

 

[HolisticGod]

Damo,

Manpower should also be heavily centralized in key provinces, rather than spread out as it is now.

And the trick with trade is to greatly increase overseas tax values. Yes, England and Holland were dominant through trade, but not the high finance commerce represented by COTs. They controlled key sea lanes, shipping, ports and resources, something that would be better represented through provinces.

 

[PJL]

A very simple way of reducing manpower and to level the land-naval powers (if you wanted to) would be to set all nations to 0 land. This also increases overseas tax values for all nations. It also makes naval warfare cheaper relative to land warfare (important since naval wars tends to be more expensive).

In fact since it reduces manpower by 50% (compared to land 10, which most land nations would want to get to anyway), you don't really need any other manpower modifications.

 

[Damocles]

HoG,

That is also a good point. But in my opinion, tax values should stay the same, while trade is lowered.

Also, EUII is currently balanced so that you can play anywhere. Whether it is the Timurids, China, or the Kongo. Why not make a completely euro-centric scenario that shows these 'shores' what they were really like during this time?

There should be little inclination to annex swathes of territory in China, Japan and India.

Personally, all that overseas trade should be an avenue of wealth that is equal to gaining provinces in Europe. An alternative. As it stands, racking up a high trading income is the only way.

It more accurately resembles Cold War commercial corporate behavior, then 15th-18th century conquest.

PJL,

Perhaps. But a part of me feels that everyone should be able to modify their slider to customize their country. It's part of the allure of EUII, and there is nothing terribly wrong with Russia going all land while Netherlands goes all naval. The kind of changes I'm advocating are foundational in regards to base tax/trade/mp distribution.

 

[Sterkarm]

I'd be interested, whether the people in the game would be interested in my being in it is another question

But really, this sounds like a great idea, I've always been quite annoyed by the fact that trading is absolutely necessary to even survive. But 0 Land would be a bad thing methinks. That would make it easier for naval powers to dominate and essentially, land powers like Poland and Russia would be powerless to invade naval powers but be threatened greatly by the prospect of a naval power invading them.