GC 1880 Issues

[Sir Garnet]

Wrinkles to be ironed out aside, it looks good and with Africa explored it really is opening the
gate for a mad scramble indeed. Especially with all those Erewhonese where it is easy to get MC>.



ISSUE 1. Ships can't pass the canal although the order to enter a port beyond can be given and it shows pathing through the canal - e.g., Italy 1880 has only 10% progress on the "Suez Canal" tech, which should not be required for passage. It is a British structure but do we need Passage Rights with Egypt or Britain to go through?


ISSUE 2. TRADE STARTUP

As with the 1850 GC, the lack of pre-existing trade and a starting point of de facto autarky for the first few turns means the economy starts out rocky and takes time to get going. Depending on the relative size of the internal market vs. production, this can mean the essential strategy is to shut down a lot of facilities and then start them up again as needed in order to reduce unneeded inventory creation and conserve Private Capital (PC), particularly if it is not GBR and so needs to build merchantmen to get world trade going.

The ratio of production and working PC to internal demand varies widely - some countries can't fill their internal demand while others have lots of excess production. Not knowing this issue can put starting players in trouble economically. Even more than in 1850, having some preset (scripted?) supply and demand orders for the first 2 or 3 turns so there is a trade economy going which the player can vary for itself will greatly help smooth transition. It could be on the low side, but market opportunities should still be met. Let it run for 3-4 turns or so and then let the AI do its thing. So if only GBR has a merchant off Ecuador, it will have some buy and sell orders to generate some trade for those countries. Only need to do it ONCE at the start of the game.

EXAMPLE OF WPCP issue.
Some data for WPCP - Working Private Capital in Production (the negative capital number on Line 2 of the F4 Commerce display, that tells you how much PC is needed to fund production).

Turn 1 Start:

France -2183 WPCP, 900 Internal Demand = ratio 2.4
Russia -1196 WPCP, 567 Internal Demand = ratio 2.1
Italy -487 WPCP, 98 Internal Demand = ratio 5.0
Japan -338 WPCP , 194 Internal Demand = ratio 1.7

A high ratio means production and WPCP used is high relative to internal demand, so overproduction is probably going on at the start. A low ratio suggest most production can be absorbed.

The smaller playable powers have fewer merchant ships and fewer resources, and also limited
internal demand, giving them a very limited geographic scope to try to promote the world economy. Playing Italy as a simple test, production needed to be halved or more overall and a half year in some of those shuttered facilities are coming back in but with merchant building capital is tight.

[Pocus]

No there is no need for passage right for the canal, except not being at war. Will double check.

Economy fine tuning might be required, but things also equilibrate themselves naturally over time (not for acute shortage, possibly)

[Kensai]

The game is very well designed in most aspects and the state of the world is much more mature. This means, Garnet, that in a couple of years you will witness a "well oiled world trade" which the AI majors (now including Japan and Italy as well) can only improve.

Regarding your Private Capital and Internal Consumption woes, the secret lies to taxes: play especially with Excise and Corporate (lowering them means Census taxes stay to the capitalists) and Tariffs (which influence internal consumption). It should be easier for the global economy to work better in 1880 than in 1850.

[Sir Garnet]

Got British passage rights but still stuck in the Nile Delta sea region.

[PhilThib]

Got British passage rights but still stuck in the Nile Delta sea region.

Send a save to Pocus

[squidelica]

i've noticed that no supply wagons are available to build in the 1880 scenario. ive tried disbanding some supply wagons and ive also tried the game on 'extended forces pool' but still none are available to build.....

[De_Spinoza]

Got British passage rights but still stuck in the Nile Delta sea region.

In our multi player game I needed passage rights with both France and Egypt to use the then French-controlled Suez Canal.

[Sir Garnet]

Same GC 1850 Multiplayer game but I don't need passage!

Yet in SP 1880, can't pass.

To try mutual passage, is this how to plug in the event?


StartEvent = evt_nam_HelpMePassSuez|1|0|Null|Null|Null|Null
SelectRegion = $Rome
SelectFaction = $ITA
AddDiploItem = $EGY;diMutualPassage
EndEvent

[Sir Garnet]

Declaring war on a third party and now the ships pass the canal - like the IsMajor effect, but for a Major power.

[Kensai]

Quite strange indeed, it should be further investigated by Pocus.

[Kronolog]

Is there any update on the issue of national leaders? They do not update to the correct version for every country after the first turn.

[Generalisimo]

Is there any update on the issue of national leaders? They do not update to the correct version for every country after the first turn.

We will provide a quickfix like the SOI's one...

[Pocus]

I'm checking for the canal problem yes. We are probably heading toward a small non official patch for now, that will be updated from time to time.

[Sir Garnet]

Being at war fixed the canal problem -

It's turning on ability to sell in trade for a human plalyer that would be the top simple fix/feature nice to have whether single or multiplayer.

For PBEM nd modding - the ability even if just by script to manipulate DAs to allow creation of guarantees, defensivie-only triggers. etc. and not just the DA.

[Pocus]

you mean a human, but non major faction? He would get same benefits as a major nation? Or you are speaking of something else?

for modding, I'm not sure what you mean, you want to alter what a defensive alliance does? This is done by code, and I don't see a way of allowing you to get creative without code work... Explain to me with an example perhaps.

[Jim-NC]

Currently, if there is a DA, when war is declared on your ally you get a CB, and lose prestige if you don't declare war.

What if France and Spain have a defensive alliance. We are both human players, so we know that we will only respond if the other is attacked. France declares war on Prussia. Prussia is allied to Austria. Austria gets a CB as Prussia was attacked. When Austria declares war on France what happens to Spain? Due to the current DA, Spain will either declare war or take a PP hit. We would want Spain to not have either option, as France attacked.

Option 2 -
Spain and Portugal sign a treaty that if either's homeland gets invaded the other gets a CB (only invasion of homeland, not delcaration of war).

Option 3 - Britain guarentees Belgium's neutrality. They don't have a DA, but we want Britain to get a CB due to the fact that Belgium was invaded.

These are some of the changes we would be thinking of.

[Pocus]

About case 1, I believe we can use a concept used in others games, i.e if you DOW you break all the DA you signed (with everybody).

option 2: right, but even by code that would be something tricky to pull out.

option 3 : diplomatic supports give you a CB (but you lose VP) in this case. DA works same, but you don't lose VP. Seems to cover what you want.

What is being asked goes beyond modding indeed, plus except for 1 where I can see a faulty logic to repair, we can't really invest time in improving the game whereas some issues remain... So bug fixes before the rest, as usual.

[Pocus]

Declaring war on a third party and now the ships pass the canal - like the IsMajor effect, but for a Major power.

Bug fixed, using your Italian save.

I also assume that any human player is considered having a major nation, whatever he plays, should help.

About your question about Brazilian structures still present in the Congo colony (of your I guess), the theory is that CP is lowered progressively until the building disappears.