According to Lambert's video, there is no downside from bribing estates (aside from spending the money obviously).
I feel like this should increase corruption, and corruption should:
- increase inflation (or just make everything more expensive)
- lower cabinet efficiency
- lower control
- lower research speed
- increase estate power
- lower taxation efficiency
- lower peasant and burgher satisfaction
(Yes, this is a lot, but I want it to be painful; if some of this is already affected by negative stability, it should not be here, but I can't find the stability effects currently).
Corruption should be influenced by events, but it would be cool if other actions that are "easy solutions" to or "extra-legal methods" of solving problems could also increase corruption; corruption could happen through diplomatic actions as well.
Maybe even having a really high stability investment can lead to increasing corruption, much like high minting leads to inflation, since we can interpret this as the state bribing important people in society or coming up with some wacky populist schemes to win support.
Having corruption would also unload a lot of pressure on the stability value, as currently, a lot of actions cost stability; so you potentially can have a choice of either lowering stability or increasing corruption.
High corruption could lead to more negative estate buildings or even organized crime (smuggling, robbing,etc), represented by buildings.
Please no debase currency, obviously, but maybe the estates can try bribing you to get you to do something, rather than the other way around, and that also increases corruption.
Corruption should be very difficult to eradicate and nearly impossible to keep at zero.
You shouldn't be able to throw money at it to solve it like in EU4 either.
Corruption should be lowered through things like:
- a cabinet action that costs stability
- a parliament issue
- events
- maybe high pop satisfaction?
- any other suggestions are welcome
I feel like this should increase corruption, and corruption should:
- increase inflation (or just make everything more expensive)
- lower cabinet efficiency
- lower control
- lower research speed
- increase estate power
- lower taxation efficiency
- lower peasant and burgher satisfaction
(Yes, this is a lot, but I want it to be painful; if some of this is already affected by negative stability, it should not be here, but I can't find the stability effects currently).
Corruption should be influenced by events, but it would be cool if other actions that are "easy solutions" to or "extra-legal methods" of solving problems could also increase corruption; corruption could happen through diplomatic actions as well.
Maybe even having a really high stability investment can lead to increasing corruption, much like high minting leads to inflation, since we can interpret this as the state bribing important people in society or coming up with some wacky populist schemes to win support.
Having corruption would also unload a lot of pressure on the stability value, as currently, a lot of actions cost stability; so you potentially can have a choice of either lowering stability or increasing corruption.
High corruption could lead to more negative estate buildings or even organized crime (smuggling, robbing,etc), represented by buildings.
Please no debase currency, obviously, but maybe the estates can try bribing you to get you to do something, rather than the other way around, and that also increases corruption.
Corruption should be very difficult to eradicate and nearly impossible to keep at zero.
You shouldn't be able to throw money at it to solve it like in EU4 either.
Corruption should be lowered through things like:
- a cabinet action that costs stability
- a parliament issue
- events
- maybe high pop satisfaction?
- any other suggestions are welcome
- 2
- 2
- 2
- 1
