News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Victoria 2

Started by Liep, August 19, 2009, 02:04:54 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Jaron

Winner of THE grumbler point.

Octavian

If you let someone handcuff you, and put a rope around your neck, don't act all surprised if they hang you!

- Eyal Yanilov.

Forget about winning and losing; forget about pride and pain. Let your opponent graze your skin and you smash into his flesh; let him smash into your flesh and you fracture his bones; let him fracture your bones and you take his life. Do not be concerned with escaping safely - lay your life before him.

- Bruce Lee

HVC

Quote from: Jaron on February 18, 2010, 12:53:25 AM
You should beat him anyway.  :homestar:
Threating me with violence is not the best way to intice me into buying a game :P

that being said i'll probably get it. i really like Vicky 1, and the MP (while very buggy) was fun.
Being lazy is bad; unless you still get what you want, then it's called "patience".
Hubris must be punished. Severely.

MadImmortalMan

"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

DGuller

#409
Now that units are tied to the soldier POPs, doesn't it make genocide easier to engineer?  Recruit units from the minority POPs, send them to patrol Sahara, and watch the undesirables melt away.

HVC

Quote from: DGuller on February 18, 2010, 07:25:24 PM
Now that units are tied to the soldier POPs, doesn't it make genocide easier to engineer?  Recruit units from the minority POPs, send them to patrol Sahara, and watch the undesirables melt away.
Planning your gulags already? Once a russian, always a russian :P
Being lazy is bad; unless you still get what you want, then it's called "patience".
Hubris must be punished. Severely.

HisMajestyBOB

Quote from: DGuller on February 18, 2010, 07:25:24 PM
Now that units are tied to the soldier POPs, doesn't it make genocide easier to engineer?  Recruit units from the minority POPs, send them to patrol Sahara, and watch the undesirables melt away.

Since you can no longer manually change pop jobs, it could be that minority pops are less likely to join the military.
Three lovely Prada points for HoI2 help

Fireblade

Quote from: Syt on January 30, 2010, 12:24:36 PM
Did Bismarck ever personally lead a battle? From the front?

Did Robert E. Lee ever lead a Confederate invasion of India to capture more niggers for the cotton fields?

Queequeg

Quote from: DGuller on February 18, 2010, 07:25:24 PM
Now that units are tied to the soldier POPs, doesn't it make genocide easier to engineer?  Recruit units from the minority POPs, send them to patrol Sahara, and watch the undesirables melt away.
To be fair, that's almost exactly what the Turks did, just replace "Sahara" with "Syria".
Quote from: PDH on April 25, 2009, 05:58:55 PM
"Dysthymia?  Did they get some student from the University of Chicago with a hard-on for ancient Bactrian cities to name this?  I feel cheated."

Habbaku

The medievals were only too right in taking nolo episcopari as the best reason a man could give to others for making him a bishop. Give me a king whose chief interest in life is stamps, railways, or race-horses; and who has the power to sack his Vizier (or whatever you care to call him) if he does not like the cut of his trousers.

Government is an abstract noun meaning the art and process of governing and it should be an offence to write it with a capital G or so as to refer to people.

-J. R. R. Tolkien

Liep

"Af alle latterlige Ting forekommer det mig at være det allerlatterligste at have travlt" - Kierkegaard

"JamenajmenømahrmDÆ!DÆ! Æhvnårvaæhvadlelæh! Hvor er det crazy, det her, mand!" - Uffe Elbæk

Tamas

Quote from: Habbaku on February 24, 2010, 05:27:45 PM
http://www.gamereactor.eu/grtv/?id=6855&l=Preview&sid=93da1d2857409ef9eb659d0048e3495f

Goddammit.  I'm going to have to buy this now.

Well, the screenies in the last dev diary regarding reforms do look promising, however, on that very topic, was one of my biggest caveats with Vicky1: namely that it was made by Swedes living in blissful scandweenian socialism. Besides monetary concerns there were no other negative aspects for reforming fully ASAP, and that was not the way it was.

The Minsky Moment

Quote from: Tamas on February 25, 2010, 02:18:53 AM
Besides monetary concerns there were no other negative aspects for reforming fully ASAP, and that was not the way it was.

Putting aside "monetary concerns" what exactly are the other negative aspects to the free press, safety regulations, the 12 hour workday etc.?
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Drakken

#418
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 25, 2010, 09:50:31 AM
Quote from: Tamas on February 25, 2010, 02:18:53 AM
Besides monetary concerns there were no other negative aspects for reforming fully ASAP, and that was not the way it was.

Putting aside "monetary concerns" what exactly are the other negative aspects to the free press, safety regulations, the 12 hour workday etc.?

The free press, through constant criticism and monitoring of the government as mudrackers, should cause higher militancy and consciousness for masses. Aristocrats, Capitalists, and Conservatives/Reactionaries would not be amused, and it would increase the chances of extreme ideologies taking hold among the population.

In theory, any work safety regulations should translate into a higher cost for building factories and producing goods, and thus lower profits from Capitalists. The problem, however, is that it didn't. The costs were merely fronted by the government as a money sink.

In Vicky1 I see no reason NOT to promulgate reforms, when in real life these reforms would have driven the Conservatives and Capitalists-lead parties completely nuts and up in arms to have these repealed off ASAP. 

The Minsky Moment

First of all, reforms do in fact piss off conservative pops: political reforms give higher militancy to aristocrats, officers and clergymen (and capitalist for the trade union reforms); social reforms give higher militancy to most of the above three plus the capitalists.

Second historically I think there is little evidence to demonstrate that regimes that pursued aggressive censorship proved more stable and less prone to riots than regimes that allowed free press.  A free press can be a useful safety valve, and historically, the 19th century free press was just as likely to give rise to jingoistic yellow journalism or gossipy sensationalism then to hardhitting investigative muckracking.

Third, some of the social reforms do impact factory efficiency.  Work hours definitely do, and I think safety may as well.  The other reforms don't have any obvious connection to lower production efficiency.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson