Victoria II: A House Divided

[Malakal]

I dont think that slavery was even one of the main reasons for secession (one of the confederated states was a non slavery one anyway) so its not strange that CSA can easily abolish it.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Well it's true that slavery wasn't the sole reason, but it was linked to many of the others (ie, economy). Moreso, in Vicky 2 the focus is on the slavery aspect when it comes to building up the civil war, so it's a bit odd when everyone and their dog in the South wants it abolished anyway.

 

[MasterSmithFandango]

I dont think that slavery was even one of the main reasons for secession (one of the confederated states was a non slavery one anyway) so its not strange that CSA can easily abolish it.

Bullshit... slavery was the main and primary reason for the civil war. The Economy argument is still directly tied to slavery, as is the States' Rights argument, etc.

 

[XenomorphII]

I dont think that slavery was even one of the main reasons for secession (one of the confederated states was a non slavery one anyway) so its not strange that CSA can easily abolish it.

Bullshit... slavery was the main and primary reason for the civil war. The Economy argument is still directly tied to slavery, as is the States' Rights argument, etc.

The economy argument ties back into slavery sort of (though part of that argument was that the South did not want high tariffs, so they could purchase European goods for less than what they were paying for Northern goods), but the states' rights arguments doesn't necessarily. Also looking at the years before the split, there was a pretty concerted effort by a few powerful southern leaders to create and build up the notion of an independent south (fire-eaters). Part of this was because of fear of abolition/tariffs/etc, but there was also significant amounts of good old greed and desire for more power and control.

 

[Comte]

I dont think that slavery was even one of the main reasons for secession (one of the confederated states was a non slavery one anyway) so its not strange that CSA can easily abolish it.

Bullshit... slavery was the main and primary reason for the civil war. The Economy argument is still directly tied to slavery, as is the States' Rights argument, etc.

+1 Slavery was the only reason the war started I agree.

 

[Malakal]

I dont think that slavery was even one of the main reasons for secession (one of the confederated states was a non slavery one anyway) so its not strange that CSA can easily abolish it.

Bullshit... slavery was the main and primary reason for the civil war. The Economy argument is still directly tied to slavery, as is the States' Rights argument, etc.

Slavery may be the primary excuse or the spark that started it all but the issue here was the role of the federal government. In theoretical scenario where the South is slavery free I can see them seceding anyway.

 

[MasterSmithFandango]

I dont think that slavery was even one of the main reasons for secession (one of the confederated states was a non slavery one anyway) so its not strange that CSA can easily abolish it.

Bullshit... slavery was the main and primary reason for the civil war. The Economy argument is still directly tied to slavery, as is the States' Rights argument, etc.

Slavery may be the primary excuse or the spark that started it all but the issue here was the role of the federal government. In theoretical scenario where the South is slavery free I can see them seceding anyway.

Sorry, I have to disagree. The debate was the role of the federal government in allowing the South to own slaves. Lincoln was a suspected abolitionist and a Northerner to boot, and the slave owners had been steadily losing ground on the debate for the last 10+ years.

 

[XenomorphII]

I dont think that slavery was even one of the main reasons for secession (one of the confederated states was a non slavery one anyway) so its not strange that CSA can easily abolish it.

Bullshit... slavery was the main and primary reason for the civil war. The Economy argument is still directly tied to slavery, as is the States' Rights argument, etc.

+1 Slavery was the only reason the war started I agree.

No. The war started because the Southern secessionists stupidly opened fire on Fort Sumter in S.Carolina after Lincoln refused to pull the troops out and told them he was going to resupply the fort via ships.

 

[Harpsichord]

I dont think that slavery was even one of the main reasons for secession (one of the confederated states was a non slavery one anyway) so its not strange that CSA can easily abolish it.

Bullshit... slavery was the main and primary reason for the civil war. The Economy argument is still directly tied to slavery, as is the States' Rights argument, etc.

As a pretty large proponent of 'The Lost Cause of the Confederacy,' I'm still of the impression that slavery was the fundamental underlying reason for the secession and subsequent civil war. Any other reason that gets brought up will lead back to that issue, the institution of slavery was of vital importance to the status quo of the Antebellum South and it's no coincidence that the battle lines were drawn at who owned slaves and who didn't. It's plain revisionist to say that the ACW was not about slavery.

 

[ironyuri]

Actually, it's fairly blinkered to focus simply on slavery.

As such and such says- the issue was the power of the Federal government. In this case it's manifest ability to exercise power over the South by abolishing slavery.

Slavery was the prima facie issue, while the power and reach of the Federal government and its ability to dictate law was the underlying and fundamental issue which resulted in the civil war.

 

[ironyuri]

The situation is both, and- not either, or.

 

[Comte]

I got a game related question here, If I do some foreign investments in another country lets say Baden and I'm playing as Austria do I make $$$ on the investments or do I just gain more influence when trying to keep them in my sphere?

 

[ironyuri]

I got a game related question here, If I do some foreign investments in another country lets say Baden and I'm playing as Austria do I make $$$ on the investments or do I just gain more influence when trying to keep them in my sphere?

I tried some foreign investments in one of my games, and while I noticed the diplomatic influence counter going up quicker if I set high/low priority with a country, I noticed no change with foreign investment.

I'm not sure how the mechanic works, so maybe others can answer this question more thoroughly-Vaarne_Arne most likely-but for my part, I noticed no postive effects on relations. That said, I was mainly building railroads, rather than factories, so I didn't notice much of an economic return either.

 

[Malakal]

Devs confirmed that its only influence for you.

Not sure about capitalists, but likely they get nothing too, only those in the country where investments went. A pity but well, perhaps thats too hard to implement properly.

 

[Comte]

Somebody posted this on the Paradox forum about Foreign investments

It increases your influence efficiency in that country, but it also increases the amount of that country's market that is controlled by you. Uncivilized nations will give you 100% of their resources before going to the world market, but civilized ones will only give you 75%, and secondary powers 50%. Investing will let you get nearly all their resources, which can be very useful... especially when combined with the other advantage of investing; building factories. Say you need lumber for a furniture industry, but only have spherelings with timber provinces; build and expand lumber yards in a sphereling, and you have a steady supply of lumber as long as you keep control of that country.

This can also be useful with late-game resources like electric gears and tanks if you're stuck with Interventionism and your capitalists won't build those factories.

It also raises your industrial score so can be a good way to raise this when you're already doing as much as you can at home. You do also get money back indirectly as once you sphere the country you'll benefit from their increased production when you go to buy things from your sphere.

 

[Oriental European]

I'm disappointed. My game as Naples in DW was a blast, but in AHD as Two Sicilies... mang, fucking Garibaldi simply gifted Italy to me, and before that all i could do diplomatically to unity Italy is fight with France for SOI over The Papal States. Pwning Uncivilized nations is easy as fuck. Not fun. Overall, AHD feels like a patch, but Paradox redeemed themselves with CK2.

 

[Kane]

Pwning Uncivilized nations is easy as fuck.

What's so surprising about that?

 

[Oriental European]

Pwning Uncivilized nations is easy as fuck.

What's so surprising about that?

Not surprising, no, but this part of the game could be more interesting. Can't propose anything complex right now, it's night and i'm tired, but maybe more risks for Civilized countries/Powers.
And maaaang, do Paradox even have testers? How the hell could they missed that population bug? Ugh, and those rebells in vanilla...

 

[Malakal]

Pwning Uncivilized nations is easy as fuck.

What's so surprising about that?

Not surprising, no, but this part of the game could be more interesting. Can't propose anything complex right now, it's night and i'm tired, but maybe more risks for Civilized countries/Powers.
And maaaang, do Paradox even have testers? How the hell could they missed that population bug? Ugh, and those rebells in vanilla...

The problem is the ONLY reason why uncivs werent conquered and colonized right away is attrition issues and difficulties with adapting for the climate. Expeditions were completely wiped out by diseases, and I am talking here about 95% casualty rate. So once vaccination appeared the only barrier stopping European powers from taking Africa fell... Hard to represent that accurately or interestingly.

Non African uncivs like Persia survived only because they served as buffer states between the powers.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Actually, with Africa the need for technology to survive is represented suitably well, since you can't colonize there on large-scale until 1870 at best.

 

[MasterSmithFandango]

2.2 Beta patch is out... Seems like it may fix radicalization and pop promotion, but we'll see.

Courtesy of Raw: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?587125-AHD-2.2-Public-Beta-Patch&p=13451868

 

[oscar]

What's the ideal mod for this at the moment? I've heard population growth is pretty messed up so fixing that would seem important.

The Pop Demand mod?
VRRP?

 

[Topher]

While I disagree that slavery was in any direct way a cause behind the civil war, I've come to see it as the symptom of a much greater issues and not really, from a moral standpoint as it is often portrayed, relevant in and of itself; however, I too find it odd that the CSA could easily abolish it. A reform of that nature during that timeframe should be all but impossible if not entirely impossible.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

While I disagree that slavery was in any direct way a cause behind the civil war, I've come to see it as the symptom of a much greater issues and not really, from a moral standpoint as it is often portrayed, relevant in and of itself; however, I too find it odd that the CSA could easily abolish it. A reform of that nature during that timeframe should be all but impossible if not entirely impossible.

Will put in limiter when I start working on modding Vicky 2 again, same as I put decision-driven limiters on democratic reforms in Russia.

 

[oscar]

So uh any recommendations for the essential mod to "fix" Victoria?

- Sort out population growth to a realistic level (heard people saying that immigration is pretty much the only way to get historical 19th century pop growth)
- Sort out the economy
- Perhaps give non-Great Powers (but not uncivs, who realistically should get slaughtered except for the odd Zulu moment) a better shot in things

Pod Demand?
VRRP?
Kustom Kodex Mod?