Marxism Simulator 2k22 stay winning
The likelihood is that a big war will occur eventually, and losing one of those just isn't something you can let happen. The problem is that once a war starts you need a lot of mobilized forces (especially if you draft), and those forces need arms, ammunition, war machines, and every resource for producing them. If those industries aren't profitable (and you can't directly subsidize then), then when you start mobilizing your entire economy will get fucked as they eat up all the iron, oil etc. This can cascade into complete economic collapse if you're not careful.
In order to prevent this, you need to indirectly subsidize those industries by paying for mobilized soldiers, who will then pay the arms industries for their goods, making them profitable. A good way to do this is join small wars against impoverished nations overseas that present no threat (and MAKE SURE you're not fighting a great power directly). As long as your infamy level stays low enough you don't lose trade, you're golden. You can even just stay in a 'forever' war without any major battles to maintain mobilization.
Anyways, enough about Iraq. I'm so hyped for the update I can't finish any games. Who are you guys going to play first? I know it's literally a France update but I just really enjoy playing nations that have a harder start, so I'll probably start with Sardinia-Piedmont.
The Vic3 sub is ripe for radicalization. That game is pretty much already a dialectical materialism sim.
Post title: Paradox should add this feature
Subtext: [unattributed 10 paragraph quote from Marx]
redditors: :soypoint-1: [the obvious] :soypoint-2:
Player's Guide to Victoria 3's Economy
[Das Kapital in its entirety]
Yo, but seriously, did the Victoria 3 developers write any articles or list their sources? Sounds like they have a significantly more detailed and realistic understanding of the capitalist economy than most neoclassical economists.
I've posted the link a few times in the past, but there's a 10's era GDC talk one of the Paradox guys did where they talk about how using a Historical Materialist perspective is essential in a deterministic approach to "gamifying" historical progression using Victoria II as the example. With a Karl Marx name drop and nervous collar-tugging.
2016 GDC talk (IIRC the Victoria II segment is somewhere around the middle my old posts all got eaten by the void)
21:30 is where he starts talking about colonies not paying, which then segues into Marx being necessary to explain why colonialism was a thing.
I love when a leftist quietly makes their way into a position where they can actually effect things materially.
But V2's classes were hilariously ahistorical and idealistic?
Yes actually, if standard of living drops enough huge swaths of your pops will radicalize and cause a massive civil war
Lol I just rush for command economy and absolutely steamroll the shit out of all the world powers, even if they all gang up on me.
I think my next goal is gonna be unifying Ethiopia then seeing if I can colonize Europe as the #1 power by the end date
I dunno if it's the recent expansions, but I've had a hard time getting communism my last couple of games. I do everything I can to boost trade unions but I'm in the 1880s and I'd still have to go to war with basically my entire country to make it happen.
I've funny enough had more success with the military or the peasants leading the way to communism than I have with the trade unions in more recent games.
Also yeah it's a bit of a pain in the ass to deal with all your incorporated states revolting against you for even letting women own property at times, but I've - also funny enough - relied on my unincorporated colonies to roflstomp the fancy lads of the imperial core to push through all the reforms I need to completely and totally liquidate the feudal remnants and the bourgeoisie.
I’ve funny enough had more success with the military or the peasants leading the way to communism than I have with the trade unions in more recent games.
Not to discredit unions' contributions to revolutions but yeah this checks out.
I bet Lenin would have loved this game. Maybe the real reason there haven't been large communist revolutions in the 21st century is that all the potential leaders are playing Paradox games.
Ok so obviously this is hillarious. But what I did in my italy campaign was just to increase my industrial capacity far beyond what was profitable. If i needed 10 small arms factories in peace time i would build 40. I would spread them out according to how many unemployed people there were in each province. So my reserve army of labour would fill in the factories in war time.
I would also export as much as I could so that when I declared war my enemies had a lack of supplies.
