|
Gort posted:Wait, why does social security increase the political strength of industrialists? That seems backwards. Because the actual law activating it is Poor Laws, aka workhouses and so on, and the health institution is Charity Hospitals.
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2021 21:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 18:38 |
|
|
That makes more sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2021 22:26
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Don't end your sentences with a preposition!!! Absolutely no professionalism, cancelled my pre-order
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2021 22:40
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Don't end your sentences with a preposition!!! Linguistic Policy: Latinate Grammar Intelligentsia approval: +3 Goons approval: +5 All other approval: -2
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2021 23:30
|
|
|
Gort posted:Wait, why does social security increase the political strength of industrialists? That seems backwards. https://twitter.com/dnhamilton/status/1420391422172319750 Even workhouses were too much social security for some people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2021 23:58
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:https://twitter.com/dnhamilton/status/1420391422172319750 Its been ages since I read the research on it but iirc workhouses as practiced by the English/British governments were never actually profitable. They were intended to be a way to teach idle poor people the moral of hard work and to use the homeless/destitute population for something 'productive', but they lost money and mostly functioned as a form of punishment and a way to reduce the number of homeless people out in public. Make the Vic 3 workhouses money sinks that make the right wing voters happy, is what I am saying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 05:32
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/PDXVictoria/status/1420776379705032708?s=20 Choice quote: quote:Ways of decreasing the cost of providing Institutions to your people include:
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 18:46
|
|
|
To be honest, not very excited about this implementation. Social structure of the state is the last place I'd like to see stuff like "Police level 2", it's like researching Improved Farms in subpar 4X game. Maybe I don't get what it represents, but do you really need a big fancy separate screen for beuraucracy focus spread?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 21:22
|
|
|
I'm puzzled on the level of centralization having an effect in of itself on institutions; in some ways being highly centralized could make it easier to implement reforms, while a decentralized nation can more easily resist such reforms. I feel like there should be something like a political compass thingy, like having two axis's where something like a highly centralized by conservative bureaucracy is less interested in implementing reforms but an innovative one will do so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 22:07
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm puzzled on the level of centralization having an effect in of itself on institutions; in some ways being highly centralized could make it easier to implement reforms, while a decentralized nation can more easily resist such reforms. I think that's where interest groups come into play. If I'm reading this right, you have to pass laws to enact reforms and if your interest groups aren't playing ball it'll be hard to expand the bureaucracy. Also lol at your new av.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 22:11
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm puzzled on the level of centralization having an effect in of itself on institutions; in some ways being highly centralized could make it easier to implement reforms, while a decentralized nation can more easily resist such reforms. I think the implication is more that a highly centralized state, while possibly able to implement reforms more quickly, also bears a higher central bureaucratic cost to do so. Think Soviet Russia for example. Whereas a more decentralized state may reform slower, but if you delegate management to the locals (eg US state and county and city management) it requires a smaller federal government and lower bureaucratic cost to do so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 22:12
|
|
|
this is victoria 3 update: max weber edition and he's extremely pleased I can't parse exactly the why of it but I really do like "bureaucracy" as a quantitative capacity of state action. Maybe because I did an internship years ago at the state accounting court of law and could see the problem of "why our policies aren't working?" irl. Turns out most things needed more people to attack the problem, more people means you need to budget for govt hiring and doing admission exams, this requires working with the state government to see when public hiring processes will be available because of the budget, which will probably be insufficient anyway, so the judiciary administration asks the governor's office for an additive measure to the budget, which means seeing whether the legislative is going to approve that or not, then somebody remembers that we have people that are too green and need institutional support in form of training and research for the job... poo poo like that is obviously awfully boring to do it simulation-like and it is a hideous idea whenever it appears by a certain strand of degenerate pol-sci wonk, but fun gamey abstractions of that are absolutely on-point for stuff like these - there is a lot of material concerns that go beyond the purely financial in the matters of state and government (e.g.: the USA having boatloads of cash but absolutely no institutional volition to effect policies)
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 22:22
|
|
|
yikes! posted:I think that's where interest groups come into play. If I'm reading this right, you have to pass laws to enact reforms and if your interest groups aren't playing ball it'll be hard to expand the bureaucracy. Perhaps, something about it rubs me the wrong way, like many of the enlightenment era monarchs in order to implement reforms involved centralizing the state and transfering authority from the nobles to a newly minted meritocratic bureaucracy. I turned off ublock to take a look and lol yeah that's a perplexing AV but at least its more pleasing on the eyes than the last one. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 23:40
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:To be honest, not very excited about this implementation. Social structure of the state is the last place I'd like to see stuff like "Police level 2", it's like researching Improved Farms in subpar 4X game. Maybe I don't get what it represents, but do you really need a big fancy separate screen for beuraucracy focus spread? The social structure is determined by your Laws. Institutions represent implementing those laws. You may have “police level 2” but the function of those police (secret police, community policing, local sheriffs etc) will differ based on your country’s laws.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2021 23:49
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:The social structure is determined by your Laws. Institutions represent implementing those laws. You may have “police level 2” but the function of those police (secret police, community policing, local sheriffs etc) will differ based on your country’s laws. Yeah, it's a function of how well you pencil-pushers are implementing the policy of your lawmakers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2021 00:44
|
|
|
Will Laws and Institutions interact to create buildings and jobs based on the combination, or will they purely run off bureaucracy? E.g. Religious schooling laws and level 1 school institutions create Parish Schools (with a school building count relative to province pops and funding?) that employ Clergy pops. Level 2 institutions allow bigger schools or more per overall pop with higher throughput and employment. Public schooling laws create Public Schools that employ teacher pops, level 2 enables grammar schools etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2021 05:18
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Perhaps, something about it rubs me the wrong way, like many of the enlightenment era monarchs in order to implement reforms involved centralizing the state and transfering authority from the nobles to a newly minted meritocratic bureaucracy. Also it seems like "centralization" and "bureaucracy" are different things? So that could be represented by trying to build up more government infrastructure to keep up with the centralization.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2021 06:01
|
|
|
Yeah centralisation replaces the old civilised/uncivilised separation
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2021 14:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/PDXVictoria/status/1422195483288555529
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 16:23
|
|
|
God, imagine a Victoria 3 where people are complaining about too many Jingos instead of too few.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2021 22:29
|
|
|
Paradox better shape up and change that description, or make it explicitly the viewpoint of a proponent of realpolitik. This is the "I don't have an ideology" of political descriptions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 11:09
|
|
|
Isn't realpolitik basically just following your ideology while claiming you're being completely pragmatic and that it's the best way?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 11:23
|
|
|
Poil posted:Isn't realpolitik basically just following your ideology while claiming you're being completely pragmatic and that it's the best way?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 11:35
|
|
|
To be fair, given the time period we're talking about most of the moral and ideological justifications were also fig leaves for self-serving motivations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 20:41
|
|
|
yeah, sure, "given the time period"
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2021 21:30
|
|
|
Poil posted:Isn't realpolitik basically just following your ideology while claiming you're being completely pragmatic and that it's the best way? I thought it was following your interests without regard to commonsense understandings of morality, pace Palmerston “Britain has no permanent allies and no permanent enemies, only permanent interests.” Ideology is one of the things that goes into defining your interests, but not the only one. I get the feeling that what they are going for here is that you might want to take expedient decisions but doing so will piss off your population who want to see their government Standing Up To Johnny Foreigner.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 00:14
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:I thought it was following your interests without regard to commonsense understandings of morality, pace Palmerston “Britain has no permanent allies and no permanent enemies, only permanent interests.” Ideology is one of the things that goes into defining your interests, but not the only one. ...Kissinger being a famous proponent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 00:25
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:I thought it was following your interests without regard to commonsense understandings of morality, pace Palmerston “Britain has no permanent allies and no permanent enemies, only permanent interests.” Ideology is one of the things that goes into defining your interests, but not the only one. I always thought of it as saying in international affairs, there is no higher law than the law of the jungle, where might makes right. ...so, basically the same thing. Beefeater1980 posted:I get the feeling that what they are going for here is that you might want to take expedient decisions but doing so will piss off your population who want to see their government Standing Up To Johnny Foreigner. Yeah, I'm expecting a few incidents of "Ignore boorish insult that doesn't actually matter and piss of your pops" or "Rattle that saber for the honor of Queen and Country!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 00:37
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:I thought it was following your interests without regard to commonsense understandings of morality, pace Palmerston “Britain has no permanent allies and no permanent enemies, only permanent interests.” Ideology is one of the things that goes into defining your interests, but not the only one. Capfalcon posted:Yeah, I'm expecting a few incidents of "Ignore boorish insult that doesn't actually matter and piss of your pops" or "Rattle that saber for the honor of Queen and Country!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 07:06
|
|
|
Gort posted:Maybe you could have "law efficiency" with penalties based on how racist your pops are You're going to need a whole second pie chart to express just how loving racist a lot of these pops are. A Buttery Pastry posted:Yes. The word pragmatic is the clue, since it actually just means "I believe my goals are free of ideology". Or occasionally, "I believe I can convince you I'm right, by pretending ideological blinders are what prevents people from seeing the objective truth of my views". Ironically this kind of politics is also the most ideological kind of politics by far. So blinded by your ideology that you can not even conceive that your ideology is not the objective truth about the world and others might see things differently. Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 12:49 on Aug 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 12:37
|
|
|
A circle labeled "very fuckin racist"
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 12:47
|
|
|
Victoria 3: A circle labeled "very fuckin racist"
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 14:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Martin_Anward/status/1422920265407815683?s=19
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 15:17
|
|
|
Kind of weird the British isles have a unified market
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 15:19
|
|
|
Thats a weird color for Prussia. Would have preferred toothpaste blue or maybe yellow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 15:36
|
|
|
Was Hanover really so economically tied to Britain? I thought they stayed relatively decoupled despite the personal union
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 15:45
|
|
|
Not really no. They didn't join the Zollverein until '54 I think, which is probably why they aren't in the Prussian market, but by that logic Baden and Nassau should be out too.CharlestheHammer posted:Kind of weird the British isles have a unified market And especially weird that the Austrian Empire is one market. Though looking at Switzerland and Nice, it looks like markets do not necessarily have to reflect national borders, so that's interesting. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Aug 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 15:45
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:Not really no. They didn't join the Zollverein until '54 I think, which is probably why they aren't in the Prussian market, but by that logic Baden and Nassau should be out too. I come for this thread for this level of pro-tier posting, drat. wiz, get this poster for consultation immediately
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
Baden and Nassau either joined in 1835 or early 1836 IIRC. Splitting up countries into multiple internal markets was something we experimented with for a long time but basically it just didn't result in good gameplay no matter what solution we used so we nixed it and went for the system of Market Access that will be talked about tomorrow instead. Wiz fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Aug 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 18:38 |
|
|
Let's talk about the real poo poo: you made mostly good choices but the Ottomans should be red, not tan. And what the absolute gently caress is up with green Two Sicilies?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2021 16:01
|
|