Prohibit minors from owning companies.

[jbizon1998]

Basically title - prohibit minors from estabilishing companies

Why?

1. Small countries sometimes balloon their investment pool, It's 1892 and for example:

• Ionian Islands have a single company that has 392 buildings, 70k company profit, SOL is at 22!
• Assam: 32 buildings, 25k company profit, SOL 13.8;
• lots and lots of small companies from all minors around the world.

2. Many minors have base construction and not much else than that. When there are many minors in a single market, that causes problems in balance.

So, to show off an example:

• France has 400 construction
• Prussia has 300 construction
• "NGF minors" have 100 "base construction" combined - for simplicity's sake I am not adding extra construction from sectors, which they do build

Due to the fact that almost every "NGF minor" has at least 1 company and access to Prussian raw goods, it's really easy for that 100 construction to become 150 due to company construction bonus.
And then, due to throughput bonus, they make really huge amount of goods, get more profitable from using Prussia's trade centers, and build even more. I keep seeing "Saxony" region with really high GDP post-unification (I think there's 3 or 4 minors in "Saxony" state in 1836). Same stuff applies to Italy too.

So, the longer you wait with forming NGF, the more buildings you "inherit", this has always been the case due to base construction, but I really noticed this when I used "Companies" principle in my Prussia run. When I finally united Germany I had 2x the GDP of France, in Prussia's case it's busted aswell because Prussia has Internal Trade in Zollverein, getting even more company throughput buffs.

So you basically have 10 microstates pumping out a huge amount of buildings, while I am supplying them with raw goods, and I get all these extra buildings as Germany for free. This is like HRE swarm in EU4, but on economic side of things, rather than military.

The wildest stuff I saw was Hamburg producing 1500 tools, while I myself had something close to 6k!

The same applies to British Raj minors, there's just lots of tiny companies pumping out certain buildings with no drawback. Same with
As for other tiny states having companies - I also see no reason as to why Warsangali should get extra throughput and construction efficacy.

Pros to this:

• more balance in Europe;
• probably less lag;
• less clutter in company chart tab;
• no abuse of free construction by minors, which one way or another get gobbled up (either by Raj, Prussia/Austria/Rhine Confederation/during colonization etc, providing buffs to nations, that naturally "have to" gobble them up. France has no way to counterbalance this, unless it somehow forms Rhine Confederation first;
• less absurdly high SOL and GDP/capita in minors;
• less buildings, slower industrialization probably.

Proof from one of my observer modes, although it can happen in every game.
Ionian Islands!

 

[Helmut von Dandy]

Children are indeed too young to run corporations.

 

[Woifee]

Children are indeed too young to run corporations.

The title says owning and not running. Children can own companies. Mostly happens trough inheritance.

 

[Helmut von Dandy]

The title says owning and not running. Children can own companies. Mostly happens trough inheritance.

…It's a joke. The thread is about minor powers.

 

[Woifee]

…It's a joke. The thread is about minor powers.

I know.

 

[le cur]

I see the use for this but I think it's too extreme. I believe that sovereignty and rank should be the factors: if you're a minor power you have your company limit reduced, but if you're a minor power and a protectorate or below then you're unable to found any companies at all. Then regional powers are allowed to have a company, unless they're at puppet/colony level, and major powers are always allowed. Subject status could also reduce the number of free charters.

 

[Murthy]

I see the use for this but I think it's too extreme. I believe that sovereignty and rank should be the factors: if you're a minor power you have your company limit reduced, but if you're a minor power and a protectorate or below then you're unable to found any companies at all. Then regional powers are allowed to have a company, unless they're at puppet/colony level, and major powers are always allowed. Subject status could also reduce the number of free charters.

I have a different view, I think the minor Powers and Protectorates should be able to have companies. In my Japan Run, I have Vietnam as a Protectorate, they established a clothing company, and I gave them investment rights in my country. Soon this company was building 76 textile mills in my country, sky rocketed my clothing into world leader. There is price though, if I decrease their autonomy anything below that level, then they will loose investment rights and the textile company will not be able to build it. Sure, my financial markets can build in country, but not as efficiently as the Nam Dinh Company. Similar thing happened with Philippines, they had a grocery company, and they could not invest in my country as a colony, as such I had to increase their autonomy to make sure I can get them invest in my country.

There is a price though, both the Nam Dinh company and the Grocery company could not make prestige goods even though they are a flavored company and can start making the goods, as soon as they are prosperous.


So to bring it all together I think minor having company will make the player choose, too less autonomy or annexation, the they loose the company and bonus. Too much autonomy, then the player loose control but gain company. In think the game already does not do justice to the Protectorate/Puppet system Vs Annexation like that of VIC2, I think minors having companies would be a excellent tool to make the player lean more towards Puppeteering than annexation. The price of Hamburg making 15K tools is you not annexing it. Player can use the state more efficiently, but that's the price you pay.