is it possible to change my agricultural or pre-industrial nation to an industrial or semi-industrial economy? by researching techs or something?
-
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.
no that is such a complex process that it is not possible for any of the countries in game to do so within the short period that the game covers.
you kidding? many nations started to industrialize right after the war, in the 50s
also some nations sort of went backward in their industrialization, like many communist countries in eastern europe
also some nations sort of went backward in their industrialization, like many communist countries in eastern europe
another example of rapid industrialization: china
in last 15 years china has become a major industrial power and in future will probably become the biggest of all
and the game covers, what, about 30 years? (with armageddon)
in last 15 years china has become a major industrial power and in future will probably become the biggest of all
and the game covers, what, about 30 years? (with armageddon)
give some examples of countries that went up the industrialization ladder in the mid 30's to 50. The game ends in 53 after all.
btw im playing with armageddon and the game ends in 64
but anyway, some examples:
germany in the 30s industrialized a lot (its maybe a bit before the games starting year)
west germany after the war, the country was really devastated but emerged pretty fast as industrial power
japan same as above
finland was mostly an agrarian economy before the war but because they were ordered war reparations they had to industrialize to pay all the ships, trains, trucks to soviet union (finland was the only country to pay the reparations)
and for the countries that went backwards, czechoslovakia and poland were really industrializing a lot before the war, but after total warfare and becoming soviet puppets their countries went into ruins
but anyway, some examples:
germany in the 30s industrialized a lot (its maybe a bit before the games starting year)
west germany after the war, the country was really devastated but emerged pretty fast as industrial power
japan same as above
finland was mostly an agrarian economy before the war but because they were ordered war reparations they had to industrialize to pay all the ships, trains, trucks to soviet union (finland was the only country to pay the reparations)
and for the countries that went backwards, czechoslovakia and poland were really industrializing a lot before the war, but after total warfare and becoming soviet puppets their countries went into ruins
I don't want to delve to much into the subject, but NONE of your examples is correct.
It was either recovery from the great crisis, wartime destruction or longer lasting process which ended far later than in 1953...
It was either recovery from the great crisis, wartime destruction or longer lasting process which ended far later than in 1953...
i guess my examples arent very good...but about finland (im being nationalistic)
i say that finland of the early 50s was not a "pre-industrial" economy...
i think i somehow could try imitate industrializing or something...perhaps just a tech with really big difficulty ration and after finishing it, i could just edit my save game and remove 5k of all resources and some manpower and then change my agricultural eco to industrial
i say that finland of the early 50s was not a "pre-industrial" economy...
i think i somehow could try imitate industrializing or something...perhaps just a tech with really big difficulty ration and after finishing it, i could just edit my save game and remove 5k of all resources and some manpower and then change my agricultural eco to industrial
A couple of points - Industrialising is not always a "good thing" for you, in game terms, since lower levels of Industrialisation tend to mean lower supply and build costs for units, amongst other things.
Secondly, the biggest benefit of Industrialisation is that you basically get more IC from a given population base - which you will just plain not see in-game.
Regardless of whether you use Armageddon or not, CORE won't go past 1953, basically (the timeline gets too long and unwieldy for (especially) techs).
Finally, as a game point, the "hardest" tech you can put into the game would still be researched far too quickly to simulate anything like the effort needed to upgrade your Industry. Building lots of IC probably simulates the effect far better, and is almost certainly far more useful to you in game.
Tim
Secondly, the biggest benefit of Industrialisation is that you basically get more IC from a given population base - which you will just plain not see in-game.
Regardless of whether you use Armageddon or not, CORE won't go past 1953, basically (the timeline gets too long and unwieldy for (especially) techs).
Finally, as a game point, the "hardest" tech you can put into the game would still be researched far too quickly to simulate anything like the effort needed to upgrade your Industry. Building lots of IC probably simulates the effect far better, and is almost certainly far more useful to you in game.
Tim
But they were already an industrial nation before the 1930s. Their economy was badly damaged by World War One, but it was still an industrial economy centered around factories and high technology, not around farms and low technology.swippy said:
Same thing. The Germans knew how to have an industrial economy. They still had plenty of trained, literate people to run it. All they had to do was rebuild the infrastructure that already existed. And the industrialization techs reflect the preexisting infrastructure already. To advance along the industrialization path would require your nation to completely rebuild its economy, not just to replace destroyed facilities.
The industrialization techs don't reflect how many factories you have. They reflect what percentage of your population is educated, what the average level of farming and industrial technology is in your country compared to global standards, and so forth.
Those are things that take at least a generation to change. They could change at least slightly in the 1936-53 time scale, but given the disruption caused by the war I don't think any nations actually accomplished it (except maybe for some of the South American and Caribbean ones that were able to stay safely out of the war).
You could actually make a case that a country which suffers massive looting might be knocked back a level of industrialization (so that Finland might go from being fully or semi-industrialized before the end of WWII to being semi-industrialized or pre-industrial afterwards.
Likewise, East Germany might be semi-industrialized because of how extensively the Soviets looted it and then crippled its economy by imposing controls on it.
However, that would have to be covered by scripted events. And I'm not sure if there's a way to give a nation a tech in Doomsday, rather than merely giving them a blueprint (which wouldn't cut the mustard in this case).
I think that it would be reasonable to allow nations to advance in industrialization, but it should be an incredibly hard process (say, a tech with section difficulties of 200 or more!), followed by a scripted event that takes an enormous amount of money and resources. So it would be nearly impossible for a country to advance more than one level of industrialization in the entire game, and doing so would cost so much time and resources that it would greatly reduce their ability to wage war. You'd have to tie up a research slot for several years and then make good a massive debt of cash and supplies (during which time your army might starve, come to think of it).
Similarly, it might be reasonable to reduce a nation's industrialization level by event.
The problem is that the AI should probably not be able to advance its industrialization level, because that would lead to anhistorical results and might totally cripple a nation like the Soviet Union or China if it starts a major industrialization drive instead of building up its war effort and researching other, easier and more critical technologies.
my point about finland wasnt about that they went backwards in their industrialization ladder, i meant that they had to industrialize in order to pay the war reparations
and their country wasnt looted, in fact helsinki was the only capital in europe alongside with moscow and london that wasnt occupied by enemy forces (in the nations that took part in the war)
with the countries that went backwards in their industrialization, i meant primarily the countries of eastern europe
and their country wasnt looted, in fact helsinki was the only capital in europe alongside with moscow and london that wasnt occupied by enemy forces (in the nations that took part in the war)
with the countries that went backwards in their industrialization, i meant primarily the countries of eastern europe
I misunderstood; probably because I was thinking more of East Germany and Poland and wasn't paying enough attention when you explained that Finland ended up with more factories because it had to produce reparations materials, rather than less because the Red Army carted away everything that wasn't nailed down and pried up everything that was to ship it away on a flatcar.
The point remains that it should be practically impossible to raise your nation's industrialization level by more than one during a game, nearly impossible to do so by even one, and effectively impossible to be a strong fighting nation while doing so.
If this were a game like Victoria, where industrial development was the focus and the era of the game was essentially peaceful (most nations were not dedicating all their resources to war for most of the period), then I'd almost insist on being able to upgrade your industrialization level. As things stand, it's an extra feature that I can easily see doing without. You can't really make a case that any nation managed to effectively upgrade its industry by a level or more during this period.
The point remains that it should be practically impossible to raise your nation's industrialization level by more than one during a game, nearly impossible to do so by even one, and effectively impossible to be a strong fighting nation while doing so.
If this were a game like Victoria, where industrial development was the focus and the era of the game was essentially peaceful (most nations were not dedicating all their resources to war for most of the period), then I'd almost insist on being able to upgrade your industrialization level. As things stand, it's an extra feature that I can easily see doing without. You can't really make a case that any nation managed to effectively upgrade its industry by a level or more during this period.
yes the timeline is a bit short for industrialization, but you gotta admit that most countries put their industrial capacity to full work because of the war and that mustve developed their industry a lot (if they werent ocupied during war)
well, i dont know how big disadvantage it is to play as a pre-industrial nation etc. but i hope you arent prevented from conquering the world because your nation doesnt have all the necessary techs
i guess i gotta try and take it as a challenge
well, i dont know how big disadvantage it is to play as a pre-industrial nation etc. but i hope you arent prevented from conquering the world because your nation doesnt have all the necessary techs
i guess i gotta try and take it as a challenge
Can you see a point in at least kicking communist china up from substinence to agriculture once it wins the civil war? And possibly the soviet union up to industrialized once it wins the war?
Well, the war caused so much damage that the Chinese economy was knocked really low, so that most of the Chinese people were subsistence farmers.Kinseek said:
And then the Chinese economic programs completely gutted the agricultural sector, so that they weren't even subsistence farmers.
So if we really want to accurately model the Chinese economy's evolution in the post war era we need something below subsistence: famine economy.
They still had lots and lots of peasant farmers after the war, though. An economy with lots of peasant farmers isn't fully industrialized.
swippy said:well, i dont know how big disadvantage it is to play as a pre-industrial nation etc. but i hope you arent prevented from conquering the world because your nation doesnt have all the necessary techs
i guess i gotta try and take it as a challenge
Hi,
That really depends. You'll be able to do just fine as a strong SI nation like SOV or JAP, but as FIN don't expect to "conqueor the world" with CORE. FIN just doesn't have the IC base to be a major power.
mm
Just for form's sake: have you all read (and understood) in the manual what the industrialization levels represents? Its the spread of industry throughout a country, as well as the quality of said industry (not the amount of it; that's IC).
Just so we're on the same level.
Just so we're on the same level.
dec152000 said:
well when i play as a minor, i tend to give myself more core provinces (with some major dissent hits), like if i play south american nation i give the whole south africa to me as national provinces
cheating? yes. fun? yes.
That may be, but that's not really what CORE is supporting - which is why we limit the ability to move up the industrialization ladder.
EDIT: I don't mind anyone changing their own files - just as long as you guys acknowledge and realize that we're not supporting that kind of play (officially). That said, I like to think of CORE as a base to build your own stuff for, if you want to.
EDIT: I don't mind anyone changing their own files - just as long as you guys acknowledge and realize that we're not supporting that kind of play (officially). That said, I like to think of CORE as a base to build your own stuff for, if you want to.
This seems to be a frequent question. No. It may be fun, but the focus of CORE is relatively historical game, with options to go ahistorical. If I remember correctly, most ahistorical choices are at max 10% probability. Different mods have different focuses. Hell, Armageddon has scenarios for multiplayer that are reasonably fun. But I bought it not because of that, but because of the added time and some of its other features.
Basically my tangent is that CORE is geared more towards history than fantasy.
Basically my tangent is that CORE is geared more towards history than fantasy.