Your channel is THE channel for Vicky 3 content. Every other PDX TH-camr I follow flirted with the game on the pre-release and then moved away. One or two do play through's, but no one does current guides. I'm learning so much from your videos to understand the fundamentals, not just follow along with country walk-throughs. Thanks for the excellent content!
I think that I may have under-emphasized three things here: 1. Increasing Normal Wage will tend to drive up SoL. This will drive up migration. In short, LONG TERM the problem will tend to solve itself. You still want to proactively deal with it, and set out to have a smoother curve. Running out of peasants is what tends to cause a rather abrupt unexpected spike though. 2. Increasing taxes, in the long run, will give you a lower SoL relative to Normal Wage, which will negatively affect migration. I mention it, but this is why you don't want to respond to this (long term) by increasing taxes. For the most part, the time when high taxes is good is EARLY, BEFORE you run out of peasants - not right after. Once you're relying on migration it is often good to try and be lowering taxes. 3. Construction Centers don't take a lot of time to build. Slowly trickling down construction can be a good method to blunt the spike, because it's fairly easy to turn back up. I mean, if you're a coward that is.
@@pchdch4452 I've been thinking about this exact variable a bit and I think I need to rewatch the vod of this run, because I think that swapping over PMs might actually accelerate it if you swap over PMs too quickly, as the laborers whom you get rid of have the lowest wage (and, iirc, all wages are proportional to each other) and they pull down the normal wage. So, if you overswap labor saving PMs (might've in the Japan run) it might speed up the pain until you can make jobs, and the unemployed also stifle construction. I believe it helps though, yes, but only if you swap over slowly. I think doing it quickly might make the problem worse.
late game i start lowering taxes but i stay a lot higher than a lot of people personally, if you rush proportional taxation you're getting much more out of dividends which is very important since combined with investment pool lets you harness even up to like 50% of your GDP into construction
@@pelayla yeah I probably pull off construction a little early than optimal. After trying to fill a 69k construction queue in 1.1, I'm not really feeling keeping a 10k queue going.
@@generalistgaming It seems like it makes sense to swap PMs while there's still some peasants, then? It might kick out the laborers with the lowest wages, but then they'd end up bundling back into peasants and being smoothed out. I guess it'd only delay it rather than necessarily solve it for good, but that's not a bad thing.
Something I've noticed with your tutorials and playthroughs is that you're monitoring things that I never think to look at. You kind of touch up on that in passing with your discussion of how buried the normal wage is, UI-wise. I'm still going through your back catalog, so I may have missed it and you made one already, but I would love a video like "Top Ten Numbers You SHOULD be looking at, but AREN'T" In any case, thanks for everything you do, and helping me have even more fun with a game that I already have a lot of fun with! ❤
I've actually got some notes for a video similar to this, but am having difficulty striking a balance between having stuff that's more beginner oriented and also wanting to talk about deeper stuff Glad you're enjoying the content!
Thanks for the info I noticed this before but didn't know what was causing it so glad to know so I can try and prevent it. You mentioned using customs unions to siphon off pops, Is that something unique to customs unions or could I say puppet another country and siphon pops from them the same way?
Very nice insight, glad I came by your channel. Also, not a bad idea is to only lower SoL for the Lower Strata i.e tax clothes. (this tho will hit ur migration as stated). I think the best solution is not to get here in the first place by actually checking ur pop counts and decreasing their SoL increase if you're running out of them. (especially if you don't want to conquer other states).
It seems to me, the easiest way to preempt this problem would be getting a treaty port in China and Russia early on. That way you will continually suck out population over time and delay the issue as long as possible.
@@generalistgaming I'll be honest, I was operating on a misunderstanding of treaty ports. I thought treaty ports somehow linked markets, so therefore you'd get access to internal migration from the nations they are located in. That being said, there may be an indirect affect. As I understand it, migration targets are chosen based on a variety of factors including distance and trade routes. So at the very least they should be looking at a treaty-port state very favorably. Once there they would be subject to internal migration forces. I think. Obviously my grasp on this topic isn't as large as I'd thought lol
you never want to waste contruction points. if you outbuild your entire population you had too many construction buildings. If you ever stop building all the people in those buildings lose their wage and you enter a different death spiral. it is better to build empty buildings than it is to allow your construction sector to collapse.
@erdem, @xmrpersonx has the main idea for keeping to build. Increasing economoies of scale throughput is a nonzero consideration though. @scorpioneldar you don't want to waste construction points, but those people don't get fired. You still pay their wages. But the overall idea of it depressing your economy is correct as well. You stop paying for the construction goods if you're not building (this is how you save) and this decreases demand/profitability of those industries. It's generally preferable to downsize construction over not having the queue filled, because you'd rather fire the pops than pay their wages but not increase demand (other than through the employed pop's consumption).
capitalists will naturally increase wages paid if they have less than half employment in a labour shortage, so empty buildings can be useful if you want to get your sol up. at least it should, but right now it's majorly bugged so
@@generalistgaming Ideally you'll want to transition to consumer economy late game but throughput bonus is nice to consider. For big countries it's impossible to build everywhere to 75 but for small countries it's possible.
I believe it's good to have taxes on the fourth or fifth notch when you have a lot of peasants, yes. Although there are some times when this is not the case.
I don't quite understand this. If the normal wage goes up, shouldn't you get more taxes from the higher income pops? It seems like Vic3 forces us to accept infinite foreigners, which is fine with the current simulation since as soon as the law says "don't discriminate against these people" nobody does it. But that's just not a good simulation. Non-primary cultures should form voting blocs and turmoil without extreme governmental effort. I think they're implementing something like this in the 1.8 update, but I fear they'll just continue to represent it as "infinite migration = good"
Wages are much less dynamic than when this video was made tbf, now they're super sticky and don't just sprial up. But also it's harder to run out of pops.
Thank god I didnt play on that patch, forcing in new migrants to depress wages seems like a terribly annoying way to play the game (even if getting migrants is often what you strive to do in games), I did happen to play 2 migration heavy nations but I really dont think this issue exists in the same scope given how high my SOL is in my games without seeing any trace of high government wages being an issue
seems like you could lower your construction rate, too. No sense making tons of new jobs, when you don't have the workers (yet), also saves money. edit: (nm, saw your comment, but still valid).
how does high unemployment affect wages, surely it should depreciate wages, how is that modeled in the game and would it work to curb the high wages in the late game? Maybe shuffling around labor need PM's to require less workers for buildings could depreciate the cost of labor reducing gov wages too. I guess passing Poor Laws at the minimum, maybe Old Age is best since it reduces workforce ratio too, is also good to keep the unemployed pops alive unlike peasants who can sustain themselves with subsistence farms. I think the best course of action to curb high wages is driving subsistence peasants off the arable land making them into laborers who can't sustain themselves and reducing the available jobs in the nation with labor PM's to suppress wages while also increasing migration to your nation further suppressing wages and making sure you have as low as possible minimum wage while giving the bare minimum of welfare so the unemployed pops don't starve to death, holy shit I think I just invented neoliberal economics. Line must go up! Idk if this is modeled in the game though. Thoughts anyone? edit: and sorry for the rant lmao
It should, but there are a couple other factors. The labor saving PMs will get rid of all the cheaper labor, which will raise the proportion of middle/high wage pops in a building. Normal wage is based on avg wage of incorporated pops, so I believe if you cause a lot of unemployment with swaps will make the problem worse initially. Long term labor saving PMs will increase SoL, but will be worth because they're efficient. I also think old age is best, but I usally use those laws to massage IG approval now. The IG bonuses are huge. Migration seems to be the best solution, it's super overtuned. Labor PMs need to create a lot of unemployment to collapse SoL. I think the strat is to turn them on slowly, but I need to take a closer look at the PMs. If what's good is a representation of the underlying philosophy in the game, then it's probably more socialism than neoliberalism.
i played as great britain, and i colonized all sub-saharan africa. Late game, my welfare payments started to sky rocket and i don't know why? diden't i build enough in africa compared to britain? I incorporated all my colonies
If your welfare is coming from minimum wage it's probably also causing unemployment. Minimum wage is pretty broken (there are a lot of situations where it causes a death spiral). Difficult to diagnose w/o a closer look tho
Hi, can I ask a quick question, when you can establish colonies what is the reason not to establish them everywhere you can? Is there a penalty for colonizing, or does it take away resources?
You need an interest in an area in order to colonize there. You can declare them in the diplomacy tab to the left. As of 1.2, if another country has a claim on a region, you cannot colonize there (as is the case in South Amerca/Patagonia). The cost for colonizing is in the bureaucracy you pay for the institution. I suppose the approval modifiers you get from the institution, as well as the effects on unincorporated states you get from having the law in place are also a nonzero consideration, as well as the potential for native uprisings, but there is no added cost on top of that.
If you put them anywhere you can then it will be slow everywhere. Take a look at the days it takes to get another plot. It will increase if you set another one unless maybe when you are at max speed which I believe is 50 days. In short, you will not colonize faster.
And well the two levels of Malaria. If you try to expand into Malaria without Quinine you are only 10% efficient and without Malaria Prevention into Severe Malaria, you're only 5% efficient. So if there are regions without those, it probably makes sense to prioritize them if you don't have the techs. Unless maybe you want to go for a "cut off most of south and central africa" strategy, where Kenia in the east has Malaria and all the states in the west have Severe Malaria.
Your channel is THE channel for Vicky 3 content. Every other PDX TH-camr I follow flirted with the game on the pre-release and then moved away. One or two do play through's, but no one does current guides. I'm learning so much from your videos to understand the fundamentals, not just follow along with country walk-throughs. Thanks for the excellent content!
I really like One Proud Bavarian's gameplay cuz he has a great understanding of the game and he puts roleplay into his videos, same with Hammurabi.
@@eson1654 opb the king of all shills
Yea they were "flirting" because they were paid for to shill this game
Now that they fullfilled their contract they get to play other, better games
Quill 18 started another playthrough! Doing the Sikh empire
I appreciate the vote of confidence, but if I'm "the" guy, we might all be in bad shape xD
I think that I may have under-emphasized three things here:
1. Increasing Normal Wage will tend to drive up SoL. This will drive up migration. In short, LONG TERM the problem will tend to solve itself. You still want to proactively deal with it, and set out to have a smoother curve. Running out of peasants is what tends to cause a rather abrupt unexpected spike though.
2. Increasing taxes, in the long run, will give you a lower SoL relative to Normal Wage, which will negatively affect migration. I mention it, but this is why you don't want to respond to this (long term) by increasing taxes. For the most part, the time when high taxes is good is EARLY, BEFORE you run out of peasants - not right after. Once you're relying on migration it is often good to try and be lowering taxes.
3. Construction Centers don't take a lot of time to build. Slowly trickling down construction can be a good method to blunt the spike, because it's fairly easy to turn back up. I mean, if you're a coward that is.
You didn't mention that, but changing production methods on buildings towards those requiring less workforce may help as well.
@@pchdch4452 I've been thinking about this exact variable a bit and I think I need to rewatch the vod of this run, because I think that swapping over PMs might actually accelerate it if you swap over PMs too quickly, as the laborers whom you get rid of have the lowest wage (and, iirc, all wages are proportional to each other) and they pull down the normal wage. So, if you overswap labor saving PMs (might've in the Japan run) it might speed up the pain until you can make jobs, and the unemployed also stifle construction. I believe it helps though, yes, but only if you swap over slowly. I think doing it quickly might make the problem worse.
late game i start lowering taxes but i stay a lot higher than a lot of people personally, if you rush proportional taxation you're getting much more out of dividends which is very important since combined with investment pool lets you harness even up to like 50% of your GDP into construction
@@pelayla yeah I probably pull off construction a little early than optimal. After trying to fill a 69k construction queue in 1.1, I'm not really feeling keeping a 10k queue going.
@@generalistgaming It seems like it makes sense to swap PMs while there's still some peasants, then? It might kick out the laborers with the lowest wages, but then they'd end up bundling back into peasants and being smoothed out. I guess it'd only delay it rather than necessarily solve it for good, but that's not a bad thing.
Something I've noticed with your tutorials and playthroughs is that you're monitoring things that I never think to look at. You kind of touch up on that in passing with your discussion of how buried the normal wage is, UI-wise.
I'm still going through your back catalog, so I may have missed it and you made one already, but I would love a video like "Top Ten Numbers You SHOULD be looking at, but AREN'T"
In any case, thanks for everything you do, and helping me have even more fun with a game that I already have a lot of fun with! ❤
I've actually got some notes for a video similar to this, but am having difficulty striking a balance between having stuff that's more beginner oriented and also wanting to talk about deeper stuff
Glad you're enjoying the content!
This kept happening to me last night and suddenly here is this video with an explanation. Thanks!
Glad it helped! It's really more of a speedbump effect than anything, but it's REALLY pronounced on high peasant countries, in my experience
This is THE vic3 channel out there. Subbed just for that.
Thanks for the sub!
Nice to see channel is growing steadily!
Yeah, def happy watching it too!
Actually suffering from success
Basically xD
Should women's rights laws also be seen as a potential solution as 15% workforce ratio is pretty helpful.
Yes! I gotta do some testing though on this and labor saving PMs because I think there are some other variables as well
Now you know the secret of feminism. Seriously. Those in power never gave an f... about rights. Makes one wonder what goal modern policies have?
It's very useful. Keep up the good work.
Thank you, I will
Thanks for the info I noticed this before but didn't know what was causing it so glad to know so I can try and prevent it.
You mentioned using customs unions to siphon off pops, Is that something unique to customs unions or could I say puppet another country and siphon pops from them the same way?
Puppeting will also pull them into the customs union, yes
you can see normal wage by setting gov wages to medium and then clicking on a government administration buildings wage
Yes! I didn't think of this when making the video. I would still like it represented in the UI (actually preferably as a percentage of the SoL).
Very nice insight, glad I came by your channel. Also, not a bad idea is to only lower SoL for the Lower Strata i.e tax clothes. (this tho will hit ur migration as stated). I think the best solution is not to get here in the first place by actually checking ur pop counts and decreasing their SoL increase if you're running out of them. (especially if you don't want to conquer other states).
I think that you actually want to INCREASE your SoL when you're running out of pops, to drive more migration, but without increasing their wages.
It seems to me, the easiest way to preempt this problem would be getting a treaty port in China and Russia early on. That way you will continually suck out population over time and delay the issue as long as possible.
I do not believe you pull pop migration through treaty ports?
@@generalistgaming I'll be honest, I was operating on a misunderstanding of treaty ports. I thought treaty ports somehow linked markets, so therefore you'd get access to internal migration from the nations they are located in.
That being said, there may be an indirect affect. As I understand it, migration targets are chosen based on a variety of factors including distance and trade routes. So at the very least they should be looking at a treaty-port state very favorably. Once there they would be subject to internal migration forces.
I think. Obviously my grasp on this topic isn't as large as I'd thought lol
When you're out of peasants, it's better to dial down on construction sector actually. You don't gain anything by building empty buildings.
Open jobs increases immigration attraction.
you never want to waste contruction points. if you outbuild your entire population you had too many construction buildings. If you ever stop building all the people in those buildings lose their wage and you enter a different death spiral. it is better to build empty buildings than it is to allow your construction sector to collapse.
@erdem, @xmrpersonx has the main idea for keeping to build. Increasing economoies of scale throughput is a nonzero consideration though.
@scorpioneldar you don't want to waste construction points, but those people don't get fired. You still pay their wages. But the overall idea of it depressing your economy is correct as well. You stop paying for the construction goods if you're not building (this is how you save) and this decreases demand/profitability of those industries. It's generally preferable to downsize construction over not having the queue filled, because you'd rather fire the pops than pay their wages but not increase demand (other than through the employed pop's consumption).
capitalists will naturally increase wages paid if they have less than half employment in a labour shortage, so empty buildings can be useful if you want to get your sol up. at least it should, but right now it's majorly bugged so
@@generalistgaming Ideally you'll want to transition to consumer economy late game but throughput bonus is nice to consider. For big countries it's impossible to build everywhere to 75 but for small countries it's possible.
Good stuff!
Glad you enjoyed it
So if you don't care about sol/migration put taxes high?
I believe it's good to have taxes on the fourth or fifth notch when you have a lot of peasants, yes. Although there are some times when this is not the case.
I don't quite understand this. If the normal wage goes up, shouldn't you get more taxes from the higher income pops? It seems like Vic3 forces us to accept infinite foreigners, which is fine with the current simulation since as soon as the law says "don't discriminate against these people" nobody does it. But that's just not a good simulation. Non-primary cultures should form voting blocs and turmoil without extreme governmental effort. I think they're implementing something like this in the 1.8 update, but I fear they'll just continue to represent it as "infinite migration = good"
Wages are much less dynamic than when this video was made tbf, now they're super sticky and don't just sprial up. But also it's harder to run out of pops.
Thank god I didnt play on that patch, forcing in new migrants to depress wages seems like a terribly annoying way to play the game (even if getting migrants is often what you strive to do in games), I did happen to play 2 migration heavy nations but I really dont think this issue exists in the same scope given how high my SOL is in my games without seeing any trace of high government wages being an issue
seems like you could lower your construction rate, too. No sense making tons of new jobs, when you don't have the workers (yet), also saves money.
edit: (nm, saw your comment, but still valid).
Yeah, I think slowly lowering to throttle it a little is good, but also as below too.
how does high unemployment affect wages, surely it should depreciate wages, how is that modeled in the game and would it work to curb the high wages in the late game? Maybe shuffling around labor need PM's to require less workers for buildings could depreciate the cost of labor reducing gov wages too. I guess passing Poor Laws at the minimum, maybe Old Age is best since it reduces workforce ratio too, is also good to keep the unemployed pops alive unlike peasants who can sustain themselves with subsistence farms. I think the best course of action to curb high wages is driving subsistence peasants off the arable land making them into laborers who can't sustain themselves and reducing the available jobs in the nation with labor PM's to suppress wages while also increasing migration to your nation further suppressing wages and making sure you have as low as possible minimum wage while giving the bare minimum of welfare so the unemployed pops don't starve to death, holy shit I think I just invented neoliberal economics. Line must go up! Idk if this is modeled in the game though. Thoughts anyone? edit: and sorry for the rant lmao
It should, but there are a couple other factors. The labor saving PMs will get rid of all the cheaper labor, which will raise the proportion of middle/high wage pops in a building. Normal wage is based on avg wage of incorporated pops, so I believe if you cause a lot of unemployment with swaps will make the problem worse initially. Long term labor saving PMs will increase SoL, but will be worth because they're efficient.
I also think old age is best, but I usally use those laws to massage IG approval now. The IG bonuses are huge.
Migration seems to be the best solution, it's super overtuned. Labor PMs need to create a lot of unemployment to collapse SoL. I think the strat is to turn them on slowly, but I need to take a closer look at the PMs.
If what's good is a representation of the underlying philosophy in the game, then it's probably more socialism than neoliberalism.
i played as great britain, and i colonized all sub-saharan africa. Late game, my welfare payments started to sky rocket and i don't know why? diden't i build enough in africa compared to britain? I incorporated all my colonies
If your welfare is coming from minimum wage it's probably also causing unemployment. Minimum wage is pretty broken (there are a lot of situations where it causes a death spiral). Difficult to diagnose w/o a closer look tho
Hi, can I ask a quick question, when you can establish colonies what is the reason not to establish them everywhere you can? Is there a penalty for colonizing, or does it take away resources?
You need an interest in an area in order to colonize there. You can declare them in the diplomacy tab to the left.
As of 1.2, if another country has a claim on a region, you cannot colonize there (as is the case in South Amerca/Patagonia).
The cost for colonizing is in the bureaucracy you pay for the institution. I suppose the approval modifiers you get from the institution, as well as the effects on unincorporated states you get from having the law in place are also a nonzero consideration, as well as the potential for native uprisings, but there is no added cost on top of that.
If you put them anywhere you can then it will be slow everywhere. Take a look at the days it takes to get another plot. It will increase if you set another one unless maybe when you are at max speed which I believe is 50 days.
In short, you will not colonize faster.
And well the two levels of Malaria.
If you try to expand into Malaria without Quinine you are only 10% efficient and without Malaria Prevention into Severe Malaria, you're only 5% efficient.
So if there are regions without those, it probably makes sense to prioritize them if you don't have the techs.
Unless maybe you want to go for a "cut off most of south and central africa" strategy, where Kenia in the east has Malaria and all the states in the west have Severe Malaria.
this is like some fucking economics class i have no clue wtf you are talking about professor
Make the line go up. Stonks