I haven't done it yet and I haven't been able to figure out why I would want to
- 2
-
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.
I think at this stage, it's really just in for historical realism and to make companies feel more connected to the physical map. The IRL reason for handing colonization off to joint-stock companies was to minimize public costs, but in game colonization costs nothing so there isn't anything to defray onto the company and its investors.
If I were to speculate, I think this might signal that the devs are looking into adding real costs (in cash or goods) to colonization in the future. But for now- yeah, I don't see the purpose either.
If I were to speculate, I think this might signal that the devs are looking into adding real costs (in cash or goods) to colonization in the future. But for now- yeah, I don't see the purpose either.
- 10
- 3
- 2
Historically I don't think any new EIC style companies directly administering colonial territories were started in this period. Closest might be the Congo Free State which could theoretically be represented by a company with the monarch as the Executive, I suppose.
- 8
- 1
I would also like to know!
Maybe it's just a way of having additional colonization progress, as each colonization effort is entity-based. So having basically two entities (you and your company) colonizing might double the rate?
On the other hand, it would be a bit mad if it starts colonizing dead ends, competes with other countries it can't outmatch, or — even worse — starts colonizing in the same region as I do.
Oh, and clearly you can outsource the colonization and don’t have to bother, while still competing in the race.
Maybe it's just a way of having additional colonization progress, as each colonization effort is entity-based. So having basically two entities (you and your company) colonizing might double the rate?
On the other hand, it would be a bit mad if it starts colonizing dead ends, competes with other countries it can't outmatch, or — even worse — starts colonizing in the same region as I do.
Oh, and clearly you can outsource the colonization and don’t have to bother, while still competing in the race.
- 1
- 1
I guess, just a guess that it’s because adding a colony chapter to a company needs only a few lines of codes.
- 1
I colonized Alto Paraguay (the Chaco) with a Brazilian fruit company and it felt so stupid. A fruit company being depicted on the map. In the heart of South America. Oh my God.
Well afaik the major reason why these companies were formed was to minimize risk, but then afcourse you dont have risk withought having costs. Company's like the VOC offered shareholdership of a larger merchant fleet where if one of those ships sunk or was pirated well it wasnt as dramatic as when one would wholely own such a sunk or pirated ship. The motive for the state to often participate in these investments was similarly that it devided risk more and that you could involve more financiers. it was especially lucrative when such company's could attain monopolies, like the VOC's monopoly on nutmeg.
I guess for the game purposes normal company's should be more expensive than colonial ones given that the later will self establish its own growing economy based on regional resources it has control over. With other words, where you might have to pay to establish a company under normal circumstances here you would will it in existence by giving it some conquered land.
Last edited:
- 1
- 1
Question
Can you grant a company a colonization charter when you don’t have a colonial institutiony at all?
Can you grant a company a colonization charter when you don’t have a colonial institutiony at all?
I wouldn't. Subject interactions are still quite meh, and it's really annoying how every subject gets liberty desire from annexing any other subject, even if on other side of the world, of a completely different autonomy, and without a play. So I'd avoid generating subjects, unless it would be of better benefit, than holding it myself, and I can't imagine a situation when a company would match that criteria.
I haven't really seen any reason to have them. Giving land to subjects got buffed since you now receive a construction malus in non-integrated land, but even then I don't see much benefit in having a corporate vassal vs a normal vassal. It seems like a waste of authority overall.
And a waste of a company slot, frankly, given how powerful those can be
- 1
I actually quite like subjects for lands I don't plan to integrate. Particularly colonial administrations I like, since they can handle all the incorporation and bureaucracy. It can be annoying when they refuse to make any effort at building a military, though, since they end up being dead weight in plays.
- 1
Not sure what you are talking about. Subjects are insanely OP and easy to manage. The strongest British Empire runs involve creating subjects out of everything. Direct ownership is objectively less efficient.
For a subject you have all the benefits of direct ownership on top of the subject being able to build for themselves on top of them paying cash to their overload on top of their standard of living rising due cultural acceptance benefits. Win win win win
- 1
Also after discovering Civilizing Mission you can found vassal Colonial states in África... Whats for?? With the new global trade market such colonies trade with the world instead of giving the resources to your market. Don't see the benefit.
Biggest benefit is that they get all the states as incorporated and pay you a really healthy subject tax. In current patch is also means removing the 30% penalty to construction on all your African states.
Last edited:
- 2
I tried out making one to see if I could figure out any purpose to it and I came to the conclusion that there isn't any. It's extra effort to make a subject that seems worse than the other kinds of subjects you can make. Also it's weird that they can have a regional headquarter in their own territory and you can grant them monopolies in themselves.
From my experience I can say that the subject that you get from a colonization charter and from Civilizing Mission are pretty much the same.
Btw after the colonization finishes, the company charter is no longer used up, but you can't disband the company anymore.
Some non-obvious benefits of colonial subjects include the fact that for them state incorporation is twice as fast, so they can incorporate new states in 10 years instead of 20, and I think the ones that you release from Civilizing Mission decisions already start with all states incorporated.
Besides that, they start with the Extraction Economy law, giving a small boost to the resource buildings throughputs.
Btw after the colonization finishes, the company charter is no longer used up, but you can't disband the company anymore.
Some non-obvious benefits of colonial subjects include the fact that for them state incorporation is twice as fast, so they can incorporate new states in 10 years instead of 20, and I think the ones that you release from Civilizing Mission decisions already start with all states incorporated.
Besides that, they start with the Extraction Economy law, giving a small boost to the resource buildings throughputs.