Victoria 3: WHEN to Go for INSTITUTIONS, and Which Are BEST
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 03. 2023
- Check out my main CZcams here:
/ @generalistideas
Other Strength/Fitness CZcams, Generalist Strength:
/ @generaliststrength7578
Instagram:
/ peter.curtiss
Tags:
Strategy Games, Victoria 3, Vicky 3, Interest Groups, Economics, Production Methods, Colonization, Playing Tall, Grand Strategy Games, Paradox Interactive, Laws, Passing Laws, Production Methods, Politics, Authority, IG Approval,
Internal Security, Guaranteed Liberties, Bureaucracy, Economies of Scale, Government Administrations, Elected Bureaucrats, Appointed, Hereditary, Education System, Private Public Religious Schools, Health System, Private Health Insurance, Public Health Insurance, Labor Rights, Regulatory Bodies, Workers' Protections, Poor Laws, Wage Subsidies, Old Age Pension, Local Police Force, Militarized Police Force, - Hry
I fear I might have underemphasized that the, let's call it "eb and flow" of bureaucracy that occurs throughout the game can inform the best timings of institutions a lot. In particular, anytime you get a new pm for Government Administrations, but also if you get a lvl 30-35+ Government Administration, going up to 51 to maximize throughput and then adding an institution can be a good idea. So can doing a canal survey. In particular, before you have like 200 construction, you also generally want to avoid adding too many government admins, because you're mainly looking to add construction, and this feeds into also not wanting to add institutions.
best victoria 3 channel for information and analysis on the mechanics. really appreciate it. you should have many times the amount of subscribers you currently do
Glad you like them!
To be fair to the other creators, if you value editing, man am I not your guy haha. I think I probably have a lot more play time than a lot of other people's content I've watched, or that's the impression I get
@@generalistgaming editing be damned. i spit on editing. real stoics just hit record for 30 minutes
I want to add that there are always pops going up in SOL, and always pops going down. Even if it’s rising overall , you’ll have about the same number of pops losing sol as you have pops gaining sol. In other words, “fewer radicals from sol going down” is always good.
I really like the sokoto series and also are you able to play beyond the end date?
You can - the Sokoto run goes like 2 yrs past the end date, mainly because I was mad about poorly structured mechanics not quite cooperating with me lol. Definitely some learning experiences w/ that one late game
Great video!
I would be really interested for a breakdown of how Politics works, I especially have a hard time understanding legitimacy and which Interest Group goes with which.
Could you clarify what you mean by "which interest group goes with which"? Are you talking about political parties, which sometimes have weird unions of multiple IGs?
@@generalistgaming To take the concrete example, why was the Industrialist more compatible legitimacy wise with the Shogunate than the Intelligencia, and why did the Monks getting a Jingoist leader lead to a decrease in my 3 party government Legitimacy instead of increasing it? (since my Shogunate leader was also Jingoist, I would think the convergence of interest would instead lead to an increase of legitimacy but instead it decreased)
@@LadCarmichael my guess is that the two might have been an ideology that caused even more compatibility, in this case probably traditionalist.
most helpful vic3 channel
Glad you think so!
Awesome
guaranteed liberties is good but prevent violent supression edict which i great to mitigate turmoil
so I say this: If you are relying on migration/normal colonization for pops then liberties is fantastic
otherwise if you rely on conquest I say don't take it because it will make building new states very difficult which means reducing turmoil by incrasing living standart there harder too
I should probably do more testing with that decree, but I have a hard time imagining it being better than encourage manufacturing in many contexts? Maybe when you take Oranje and Transvaal?
@@generalistgaming I didn't mean it like keeping it on there all the time
What I do usually is I stop manufactoring edict>activate violant supression>Build bunch of buildings there >disable supression and then return to previus edict
this way I incrase the consturction speed in a state with turmoil which is very expensive at late game
@@makaramuss makes sense. I'll probably take a closer look at this. More likely to axe a consumption tax to make room for it I thin kthough
@@generalistgaming or that yea either of it fine. usually when there is turmoil in an unincorporated state construction cost literally doubles and this reduces it to %25 instead. Since guaranteed liberties don't help at those lands supression is the only solution.
If you take liberties you want to get dominions everywere and drain pops of your subjects thats what I think is the optimal play.
@@makaramuss I just try not to build in newly conquered states for a while, and if I incorporate them then the police will decrease turmoil effects. I think this effect is worse when you have higher infamy though, and I generally keep under 25, so there's that too.
Played as Russia, public health care was very good very nice population growth
So nice
I'm interested in your opinion - so, I'm still trying Qing, but I run into the problem that there's not enough raw goods to import that I can make do without landowner buildings, does it make sense to go for mutual funds early to set agriculture to publicly traded and then having the agricultural production domestic? I believe publicly traded does not rempve LO ownership entirely, but that should alleviate LO clout through wealth
I think you should just try to import as much landowner goods as possible to slow down the internal auto construction as much as possible. Especially since the Subsistance Rice Farms getting built over, post 1.2 rice nerf, is going to shoot up unemployment. But yeah, Mutual Funds should be a little bit better than normal as well I think. So should the improved irrigation tech. Not necessarily rush worthy, but better than normal
Around 9 minutes in you mention colonial explootation is good in high pop high peasant states. But even though is has 10% throuput bonus in unincorperated states, it lowers the subsistence and thus the peasant output by 15%. Im a bit confused by this, because that suggests that is is worse for high peasant states.
I mean that high pop high peasant *countries* benefit a lot from conization in general, because the speed is based on incorporated pops, not from exploitation specifically (though exploitation is better), so they have a comparative advantage in terms of the usefulness of the institution. It is only lowering the peasant output in unincorporated states, not in your high pop high peasant base, which should be incorporated at the start of the game.
Hmm, I don't think big countries that start in appointed bureaucrats should to hereditary bureaucrats just to be able to have one or two institution levels early on without having to invest in building more government administration.
It's also going to destroy 20-25% of your tax income along the way.
And if you would have to spend years building more government administration to afford another institution, that's probably a sign you want that institution too early.
Now for any sparsely populated country (maybe
Yeah, agreed. Not only appointed bureaucrats give the tax capacity that many countries lack, but it also empowers the intelligencia from the beginning.
I may have not quite articulated myself properly in the video. It's not that I think countries that are on appointed should go back to hereditary, just to put in more institutions, it's that I think countries on hereditary should not go to appointed (and should STAY hereditary), especially early, because it will force you to build more gov admins, rather than putting your effort into increasing construction. More a matter of valuing controlling the queue more early on than anything else
@@generalistgaming It kinda make sense, because it's very difficult to transit from appointed to elected. So it would be better just go straight to elected from hereditary.
you're not giving the militarized police force armed forces political power bonus enough credit, it helps keep them powerful for the 30% bonus which is major for winning wars, and winning wars faster (good for big conquest runs)
Militarized police gives 30%? Damn, that's good indeed. I don't know why but I always choose dedicated police force and just never change it afterwards.
@@MiguelAbd no, the 30% i meant was patriotic fervor armed forces bonus, militarized is equal to dedicated police force in terms of turmoil reduction
technically even without any discrimination militarized police force decreases radicals more than dedicated police force, simply because the extra mortality from turmoil gives more radical reduction from pops dying
To contextualize a little, I was trying not to talk about nuanced differences too much between the institutions, as much as talk about the timing of implementing them. Let's unpack differences though:
So, your giving up 2 approval from intelligentsia and rural folk, and getting extra mortality (which I think is a bad modifier - I'm not sure that it also serves to decrease turmoil, as I believe the turmoil is about proportion rather than nominal figures, and that nothing in the tooltip seems to indicate that radicals specifically are the ones that are dying).
In exchange you're getting decreased radicals from discrimination (which I kinda don't count since meta is not discriminating), 1 approval on armed forces and petite bourgeoise, and the 10% boost on clout per level.
I see where you're coming from, and that maybe there is a particular IG balance where this is good, but I think you're giving up a lot for that 10-50% boost, with the intention of doubling the bonus from 15% to 30% off that. Don't get me wrong, it's a good bonus, but my general philosophy on the military, and experience in terms of play, is just have a bigger stick and try to dodge wars with people who are close in power (harder in 1.2). I think this bonus is pretty irrelevant if you have a huge stick (slightly faster enforcement), unless you're going 1k infamy, in which case council republic should get you a powerful Armed Forces anyway.
Intelligentsia, Industrialists, and Trade Unions all have bonuses that give you the ability to have a bigger stick, and I think are generally better in terms of bonuses. The boost to Armed Forces notably takes away from these three in terms of the clout pie, so I think if you DON'T get the doubled bonus (eg, falling short at 18%) then it's particularly bad.
To make the boost substantive (ie, take you from mid teens clout to over 20), I think you need a few levels, which means you're investing in this institution over others. That's a nonfree opportunity cost in the early game. This will also make it harder to get a powerful bonus from other IGs (which I think have better bonuses).
In general, I think most of the time you really want to go rampage mode, you just go council republic. Armed Forces will usually just have over 20% clout and be happy with you once they go red army. Sure, you can't go this super early, but the opportunity cost of the institutions is also more substantive early on.
I think I maaybe like it in the midish game? Or, as part of a temporary timing push? I think it's generally going to be niche though, where it's good. It's a fair strategy though. I mean I think if there wasn't the increased mortality I'd be a lot more on board, too, so maybe I'm overvaluing pop here.
Edit: Just realized that you can't go militarized very early, because tech.
Maybe I need to experiment with it a little more. The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of temporarily going it for a, in particular, big war before swapping back.
@@generalistgaming turmoil is about proportion, and it doesn't only increase mortality for radical pops, but the difference between a birthrate and mortality of 1% and a birthrate and mortality of 10% is very different for radicals even if though they both have an overall pop growth of 0%, you can see radicals lost from death, i'm not sure if it's 1:1 but increasing mortality in selectively high radical states (only states with turmoil) will result in a greater amount of radicals lost from deaths. pop growth is basically always desirable though - only case for me when it wasn't desirable is when i did a WC in 1.1, and i eventually gave up on economy entirely because of construction queue lag, so i didn't do any hospitals - less pops on welfare, from arable land overflowing into unemployment
Least fractured china
Absolutely shocking haha
Wait have you gotten a more fractured China event? I've annexed two countries here as Zhili, but I thought it seemed pretty broken up