yeah i definitely feel like u should be able to profit more from wars either by military-industrial complex or selling a bunch of shit to everyone else
@@CandleLover69better and more complex convoy systems would make navy gameplay a lot more important which it definitely should be in an era where seapower meant so much prestige, influence, and economic power
Yeah, having every revolution be a civil war is just stupid. Most of the time it would be a mob storming the government palace. In places like France for example, centralisation was very high, thus controlling Paris meant you had control over the nation. It would be cool if it was linked to a “centralisation level”. Say to get more powers you have to centralise, but that would make you more susceptible to being overthrown.
Foreign powers should, at least in late game, also be much more interested in supporting the side in a civil war that corresponds with their ideology, even if they dislike the nation that corresponds with their ideology. Historically you saw this during the Estonian and Latvian wars for independence, the Finnish civil war, the Russian civil war etc., which all saw a lot of volunteers and aid from other nations
@@DerFreiegedanke if we think Like that, maybe in later stages of the Game, we should build Up companies, instead of industries. For example, we build Up the company "Volkswagen" instead of Motorindustrie, that gets bonuses If Volkswagen-company is selected.
for wars, I think capitulation should be re-worked. right now you have to occupy all war goals in order to capitulate someone - meaning if you start a war to transfer Canada and add war reparations, even if all of Canada is conquered and under your defacto control, Britain won't capitulate until you occupy London. I think a cool system would be for wargoals to have individual progress, so not all wars end in total capitulation or a white-peace. this'd also help with the AI, since any war to transfer colonies always escalates into needing to occupy a capital to end the war currently
I like those ideas! Whatever the fix is, I think the very nature of the "exhaustion doesn't drop below zero unless certain things are true about the state of the entire war" principle needs to be overhauled. Whether that means separate exhaustion tracks per war goal, or a rebalancing of the triggers for going negative, or maybe just having exhaustion pile up indefinitely and balancing everything around that. It just seems better to cut losses and start fresh on that system rather than keep jury-rigging something that has now been shown to inherently have too many wonky edge cases to be worth saving.
@@maxsilva11i think i’d be nice if we also had technologies that affect war exhaustion, so that at the start of the game wars are relatively quick but by the end, as you unlock things like mass propaganda then you loose war support slower
This would be a major upgrade. In almost every game I have, I encounter a situation like that. I can occupy 70% of a country but if I don't have that one extra war goal it's a white peace for me! If this system was made to be more dynamic, I guarantee that would instantly make warfare a lot more strategic and immersive.
I also like the idea of conquering my enemies colonies in east Africa but them capturing my holdings in southeast Asia leading to more dynamic map changes.
@@SBezmy And if i want to pay burocracy, i can set up trades myself. That will ensure you can create demand/supply, but keeps us from of micromanaging world trade.
I think you guys hit every major point myself and others have been asking for on the reddit, so its super glad to see these on the docket! Super excited.
3:30 - regarding the Crimean War, one should note that, *diplomatically*, it absolutely involved all great powers around the globe. Austria occupied Wallachia and Moldavia to force out the Russians and to demilitarize the conflict in the Danube region. It had a partial mobilization that nearly bankrupted its economy, all so that it would not have a war on its doorstep that would unhinge its population in the Balkans. To simulate that, the game would need to be able to include the ability to exclude theaters of conflict as a war demand, as had Russia not acceded to the Austrian demand, they were prepared to go to war over it. The demand itself was agreed to after hostilities between Russia and Ottomans began, which bespeaks the need for more flexibility in war goals *after* the shooting starts. Which leads to the next point, that of German, Swedish, and American involvement. Napoleon III was prepared to re-draw the map of Europe as regards to Russia and was pressing for Sweden to join in as part of that plan - promising lots of Russian-held territory to the Swedes. The British, not really wanting that to happen, pressed Russia to agree to demands after the fall of Sevastopol so that the war would not spread to the Baltic region. Both Britain and France pressed Germany to enter against Russia, or face their hostility in the future. Germany, therefore, was relieved that Swedish pressure got the Russians to sue for peace. Finally, the USA was seen as a possible entrant on the Russian side, so the British had one more reason to get things over with before it got too hot. In the outcome of the war, Russia had to dismantle its Black Sea fleet, a massive humiliation for them and yet another war goal type that is not present in Victoria 3. It's also a war goal that arrived later on in the conflict. This was something that was sorted out by diplomats in Paris, an element missing from Victoria 3 warfare resolution. We need the ability to call general truces (with or without blockade enforcement) and then head to the negotiation table where we can pick and choose from existing wargoals that are pre-paid for in terms of infamy or create new goals out of whole cloth at a higher cost in infamy if pressed without there being an overall Great War going on. And that's where a Great War system can emerge, if diplomacy is done so that one cannot fight a war without frequently staying on top of the diplomatic situation. Replace moving commanders and stacks on the map with making deals and bolstering allies as the war continues. This would also open up cleaner Monroe Doctrine-like mechanics where we can see the British Empire use a declaration from the USA to bolster its position in the Western Hemisphere and eventually develop a solid working relationship with the USA. Not that it must be that way - I recently had a USA playthrough where the French Empire supplanted the British in that regard. But Victoria 3 needs that kind of constant statecraft mechanic going on so that wars aren't left in the hands of the generals.
hopefully the interception of convoys, which right now mainly serves to "soft blockade" countries, can be fleshed out more to properly naval blockade countries, which does tangible war support damage so you can properly "Anaconda Plan" countries which can lead more directly to their capitulation.
@@Ereshkigal616 Yes! Blockading could be a way bigger aspect,as you can completely ruin a country's economy by doing so. I hope it doesn't make GB an even greater menace... Shore bombardments aswell,a lot of conflits were resolved by having an ironclad pointing it's guns at the foe's capital
And after all this is done: Parliaments! One or two houses? different electoral/appointment systems when having two Houses? Different responsibilities? Laws pass in one or both? change funding for institutions needing approval in one but not the other? constitutional changes needing special support? I wanna be able to have the 1836 Swedish Riksdag as well as the 1936 one. And the Westminster Parliament. And the US houses of congress. etc etc.
I want parliaments in this game so badly. To have a proper cabinet would also be nice Also imo interest groups should have more characters attached to them, not only their leader. We could then assign those characters to ministries
@Myx_wieczorem I'm thinking 3 characters per IG. Leader dies? One of the other two takes over 95% of the time. Cabinets? Yes! That would have different sizes & powers based on laws.
The best part of this game are the stories that are shaped by this game’s systems - adding more complexity to political figures, movements, and companies helps to make what are essentially the “recurring characters” of the story more interesting. I’m happy to hear your plans with movements and discrimination. EDIT: and I’m excited about your plans with companies too!!! I hope you implement company presidents that can make deals with the government.
Regarding a more autonomous trade, would love for there to be some way to manage tariffs and specific policies in a more macro way rather than having to look at every single trade route to determine if I should encourage exports or limit them. Perhaps some button that would have the routes automatically be set to a profitable tariff if I chose a more protectionist option. And with so many trade routes, maybe there could be a way to tell the trade ai to not put any tariffs on particular nations if I wanted to maintain good relations.
2:30 Army mentoned, good, supply mentioned, good, and the mil access too, but would have liked if u would have developped a bit more on that. Would there be a military stockpile? With the supplies will the armies be more tangible, no TP ing after naval invasions or being forced back when frontline disappears because too slow to travel to the frontline? Some changes to the combat itself? There is a lot to be tweaked upon... Can't wait the naval update tho.
I am not a speech of English but I translate this message to congratulate them for the unbeatable affection and dedication that you are getting to this game. From CK 2 that had no love for a paradox game. Thank you for dedicating yourself to giving you a face washing and a new prespective to each update. It is very interesting in multiplayer campaigns that we do
It’d be good if the ‘religious IG was split if there is more than one religion in the nation. Currently there’s no way to represent the different agendas of different religions, catholic vs Protestant etc.
One thing I'd love is possible is to make better colonial borders and less bordergore or weird claims/colonial territories where they wouldn't historically make sense (like the British colonizing Algeria and Tunisia every game...). Incorporating a journal entry or event chain for European powers regarding the Scramble for Africa/Berlin Conference would also be really cool.
I think a rework to infamy gain is a bit needed. My biggest issue is that Sokoto, an unrecognized African Power that I guarantee very few if any of the in game Great Powers would actually care about, costs more infamy to conquer than it would take to conquer Paris. I think for unrecognized powers in general, infamy gain should be reduced significantly.
@@Little_Compy that's right (Colonial office in power bock). However, because they can only be unlocked late in the game, their infamy reduction is countered by the increase of infamy due to the population growth, so it's not that interesting.
The system is ok, it's dependent on the population of stat or subject, you have few techs to improve and colonial specialisation to power bloc. If not it will be too cheap, now it's 16 inf to subjugation of Persia late game +10Millions pops,you want less?
I really hope that you are able to make changes more gradual in a nation. Such as when a law changes it takes time to fully implement, when a nation that has no or a limited history of colonization that colonization is more difficult to initiate and can't go crazy, same with warring, if a nation doesn't have a recent history of warring, they just wouldn't start attacking their neighbors. I like the idea that revolutions take time to mature and actually break out but when they do, more drastic changes can be made in the nation. I am kind of hearkening back to the days of Pride of Nations where the diplomacy came in stages and took time. Everything sounded good though and I think you are on the right track.
Absolutely I think the biggest problem with the current game is the randomness of the way ideologies appear and disappear in your country. While there is a weighted factor based on the state of your country it's still way too random. An IG should not be wholly determined by the leader. So everything you talk about from 10:00 on is very good sounding to me!
Yup, I had a devout leader who strongly wanted Theocracy like the main IG wants, great, we're enacting it. He dies and is replaced by a royalist. All of a sudden, the 70% pass chance changes to 0 and the devout group now hate me for starting to enact the law that they originally wanted.
I think war it’s a feature you guys would need to rework because it lacks of flavor and it doesn’t rely on strategy or some smart movement. It’s whoever has more soldiers wins and technology wins
I think the discrimination is not very representative of the time. Right now, the META is to be as open and multicultural as possible. Even if that’s contemporarily popular, I don’t think that’s very appropriate for the Victorian age. Maybe more discriminatory/ethnocentric countries have a greater sense of “national pride” that you mentioned, which makes them comparatively more legitimate than a multicultural country all else equal. Its strange seeing people trying to make Japan or Russia with open borders and multiculturalism in 1844 when the actual countries aren’t even like that in 2024
I am very excited to see the new features, specially about trade and companies. I hope you will look into the goods and their numbers as well, because as it is, some market goods are perma low price, like hardwood, sugar, Coffee and generally anything non escencial has no demand. That limits profitable trade options severely. Also there might be a housing good, like services that will be effected when there are too many migrants there and there can be some events which can be tied to that
love these updates, both the navy and the army and regional wars are all key for me. Playing as USA having the civil war and getting russia, france, GB and Austria all involved in my mess is frustrating. Glad you're looking into that.
I really love the foreign investment mechanic. Glad to see you are looking to integrate them with company mechanics. Btw, i cannot understate how going from this game with nested tooltips and then playing any other GSG without it is like going back to the stone age.
Please change sea nodes to be sea zones. In fact, please try and copy as much of HOI4's navy system as you can. Having sea zones and assigning fleets to multiple sea zones cuts down on tedious naval micro significantly. Vic 3's current naval implementation was a disappointing step back from what other PDX projects have accomplished over years of experimentation.
Can you please add the Songs of the Civil War from Victoria 2 to the game? I keep hearing them in these videos but they aren't in game :(. They're personally my favorite songs from the whole Victoria 2 sound track and them not making it over with the rest of the sound track into Victoria 3 makes me sad
I beg you to please make it easier again to join custom unions of great nations. It’s so much harder and tedious to play nations besides the strong nations
I can not express how unhappy I will be with the game if I can never remove the Landowners from power and reform because I can't kick them out of government. If you plan to make it harder to switch out governments you need to re-balance the entire government mechanics to allow for the possibility of modernizing and liberalizing. I suggest adding movements like the Spector haunting the world and positivists. Maybe utilize new events like the "Corn Laws" to spawn new leaders with good/viable ideologies?
We need more depth war rework. War exh system need to change. War goals cant add on war time also in diplo play we can only give 1 wargoal per allies this is really killing ally gaming.
Also please bring back vic2 style blockades. Blockades doesnt matter (ex doesnt give war exh) like vic2. Killing convoys sometimes people dont even feel it.
Collectivised agriculture and cooperate ownership needs to be reworked! Going communist late game, just to have the strongest class be the bourgeois sucks. Maybe transferring private owned international industry to state/ nation owned?
12:20 trade is definitely a bit frustrating when in late game you simply don't have enough convoys even with all the ports maxed out so you're forced to conquer a bunch of coastal states just so you could build more ports. Also I'm not completely sure on that but it seems like in absence of convoys the most productive trade routes don't want to grow even if convoys are allocated to lower productivity trade routes, so you need to cancel low productivity trade routes manually. It would be interesting if there was a price to convoys so that more productive trade routes outbid the lower productivity ones. I think current rules that decide if trade route should grow or shrink attempt to do this, but it feels a bit unreliable and tedious.
If the descrimination is going to have a new mechanic are we going to have the chance to commit or stop an event akin to the Armenian Genocide? I want the trade rework, but, after hear you all, I want it all!!!
Please focus on performance,great games but i have never been able to finish one game due to low FPS, having many trade routes i found decrease drastically the performance.However amazing game.
You should rework migration laws. Roleplaywise it doesn’t make sense for colonial powers to gain plenty of immigrants from not accepted colonized people. As long as you can’t change something about this as a player it becomes unplayable for me
Companies have so much potential! They are one of my favorite improvements over Vicky 2. I think CEOs as characters would be a very interesting thing as well
These guys never played the game, like, how can you think of adding all these new features and not even mentioning how the warscore system and the frontline system sucks, it's the most invalidating problem of the game at the moment, but of course, if you don't play the game, you can't notice
I really like the possibility of having "World Wars" with major powers possibly joining most battles. Maybe to balance you could make wars more costly? I use the Slower Battles mod which kind of does that and makes wars more costly especially for major powers. Maybe smaller wars could be generally disinteresting to major powers but they may still be able to join especially if a rival is involved or one of the sides has great relations with them.
I firmly believe that some of the historical characters should have the ability to grant you historical decisions that have a huge impact. Also the game could use more historical characters.
One big thing that diplomacy needs is more direct nation interaction and ways to make demands or requests without requiring to go to a diplomatic play, some other things that would be good would also be diplomacy that isn't a direct treaty or relationship (such as diplomatic visits that could cause lobbies to be created or relations to improve or worsen depending on events that happen during the trip), also more direct character impact on diplomacy especially for monarchies with an interaction to ask for a royal marriage and some kind of mechanic where new nations who are monarchies or nations that become monarchies have a choice to elect a new monarch increasing relations with the specific country the new dynasty comes from, there should be ways to make deals with countries to say swap or even sell territory, also a real more concrete sphere of influence system (or various mechanics which functionally create it) such as ways to put pressure on other countries to enact certain laws or to break relations with other nations and your strength and relations determine how willing other nations are to interefere in what's considered your sphere of influence and having various ways to gain influence over a country such as the amount of investment you have in them or if you are bankrolling (also perhaps allowing the player to choose how much to give with the bankroll interaction?) or if allies if you are much stronger etc. another thing is a feature from vic1 where alliances could actually specifically target or exclude certain nations (for example an alliance between prussia and austria that only concerned war with russia or an alliance between france and britain that wouldn't invoke if either were at war with spain), also actually having an international conference system where certain things (such as a monarch for a new nation or demand for territory) could be brought to where all the great powers and powers involved could come to an agreement and then enforce it if the losing party rejects it (basically a fully fleshed out crisis system from vic 2)
Please please PLEASE add the option to turn off event-specific music when opening events! The music in the game is amazing and I would like to keep hearing the track I'm currently on when I deal with events!
I really enjoy victoria 3 the mechanics and simulation just give it a certain feeling which you do not get from other strategy games. The game still has some rough edges but I am so excited about what you will do with the game in future update. Since, it seems to continually get better and better.
I'm really excited about the changes to companies. They sound great! In general Victoria 3 is going into really good direction thanks to the work of all of you. Thank you!
absolutely gigantic side note, but paradox game is one of the only place on the internet where you hear such a wide variant of accents speaking in english, its kind of crazy, its even affecting the devs as they get bit by a swedish man giving them a swedish accent
You should add some mechanics around Absolutism. Even though it started to decline after Napoleon lost, it should give players some sort of better control of their nation. Maybe a flat bonus to pass any law would be a good start, it is the King's will, let it be done.
Regarding the discrimination mechanic. I've long wondered if it was intentional that discriminated religions can move to countries that have migration controls. The tool tip says otherwise, but discriminated pops and migration has been worked on so much I really doubt that it's merely an oversight.
please do NOT make this into a HOI4 based naval system, that is so complicated and unapproachable that it ruins anything that touches it. The current implementation is fine as is, not everything needs to be "special"
It could never be HOI4 naval system. Complication doesn`t mean worse. I am still very sad about army system in VIC3, it just feels afk gameplay with no involvement
If my navy is large enough i should be able to blockade all trade flow from a countries ports aka British blockade of Germany WW1, or blockade of smaller countries ports such as Siam, plus this should affect the navies currently stationed in port, the navy in holland shouldn't be able to just leave to convoy raid another part of the world if it is completely blockaded by another nation. Fix the frontlines please, units teleporting home after those same units didnt't have time to move to the new front on the land they occupied is just game breaking
Also, just a minor thing, but I think it would be a massive improvement to the US Civil War mechanic if the US proper could have an option to forcibly annex Maryland during the Civil War if it goes to the Confederacy. Per History, Lincoln suspended the right of habeas corpus for Maryland precisely to prevent the issue which I will now discuss. Which is that Maryland ALWAYS ends up in Confederate hands creating a ridiculous frontline where D.C. is all on its own, which of course results in way too many wars being won by the Confederacy, since it can just waltz into D.C. and gain warscore. This would add historical flavor, and be a massive QOL improvement to my eyes which have to endure seeing far too many KaiserReich style 4-way Civil Wars in America.
The fact that the developers focus on the nitty gritty like companies is nice but for me the biggest problem with vicky3 is still that almost every country feels the same and must follow the same path to be succesfull. Therefor I am kind of dissapointed to hear there is no focus on historical emersion which could improve doversity in gameplay. Anyway, any free content is appreciated! And im thankfull that more than a year after release we still get free stuff!
I would like there to be a system where you can make a convention, for example to divide Africa or redefine borders (as in the Congress of Vienna and the Treaty of Berlin), so that the player can choose the nations with which he wants to divide or remake the borders, and negotiate, in addition to choosing the territory you want to divide, and for dividing the territory, as in Africa, the player who initiated the negotiation and the division of the territory, chooses the parameters and rules to divide a territory. (For example, Brazil wants to divide Africa with European nations, and for this division the country must abolish slavery, accept the local population, etc.) The nation that initiated the negotiation defines the rules and borders with the other nations. a Parameter to be able to start the negotiation to be a Super power and to participate to be either a great power or a regional power. I love Victoria 3, I haven't bought it yet because my computer doesn't run it and the game is a little expensive here in Brazil. Keep it up working with lots of love on the game!(Forgive me for the text)
9:21 i am glad you guys are talking about it. Historically, multi ethnic countries (i.e. Austria, russia, ottomans, and some others) suffered due to the rise of nationalism. Heck, the idea of a nation-state itself is a relatively new phenomena. There should also be a way to stop the rise of nationalism (or at the very least minimize its effects). Instead of nationalism being a requirement to make progress in the journal entries. Religion also needs more flavor. There should be more religions. For example, the religion of the taiping rebellion, prussian calvinism, british anglican, and lutherans from minor german tags are all categorized as protestantism. Eventhough there are serious doctrinal differences between them. All of the devout groups seem to support the same laws regardless of the religion they belong to. That should not be the case.
Excellent update! All these innovations are particularly appreciable, especially those on internal politics (for me). I can't wait to read a more precise timeline on update 1.8. Good work :)
Would love to see companies follow their own political agenda and lobbying, both in their origin country and foreign places where they have a significant control of the GDP. The big evils of this world.
Hey guys. I was playing as Belgium and as soon as I defeated The Netherlands, The East Indies left as my protectorate. Note that I had a war with netherlands before and took the indies as my protectorate, so it was under my control. This has to be a bug, I think. Please help
ABC islands Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao need to be back under dutch control, they have never been part of Venezuela. I hope you fix it. Status of Dutch underlying ownership, since the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1814 ceded them back to the Kingdom of the Netherlands, as Curaçao and Dependencies from 1815. They are a short distance north of the Falcón State, Venezuela.[1] Aruba and Curaçao are autonomous, self governing constituent countries of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, while Bonaire is a special municipality of the Netherlands. Territories of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
First of all. Improve this army system. Add Great Wars. You should be able to change the peace deal after the war. Make it easier for a player to understand weather it is worth to build government administration buildings to improve taxation capacity. Sometimes it's better to have wasted taxes than have government administration buildings. Like when playing Qing for example. It's not worth to build administration buildings because the cost will be higher than the wasted taxes. Therefore the game should be more clear when it's worth to build government administration buildings.
Please rework the front system, How come when my units move in a front they disengage it? It makes no sense, I can't count the wars I've lost because they would just move around for 80 days just to join the front they previously PUSHED. Thank for the game though.
I think you should expand or fix the military system right now, the status of a battle is based on commander traits, terrain, weather, and logistics I think the logistics and status of the army should be different, where you can have a secure supply, but also be in mud, and have the army in the pursuit status, it would add a lot of depth and allow for more close battles, and more traits that allow the commander to either increase the chances of them getting good logistcs or terrain also can there just be a button to set the standard for all types of mobilization I hate having to individually change the supplies of each army forests as a type of arable land would also be useful, since wood is so hard to come by in this game, where forests produce less wood than wood farms, but also reduce pollution and provide so meat from hunters Companies also would be fun to be added on to, like their ability to pay taxes, which you control with another tab Companies should also be able to individually invest in the private sector, which increases overtime with their productivity, you should also be able to gift a company territory or allow them to expand land be colonized themselves (like the East India Company) which increases their productivity, employment in the region, and essentially functions like a puppet nation (It can't back out of war like other puppets, has to pay the most taxes out of any group, but has very little desire to rebel unless productivity is low) I also have an idea for the Qing The Qing suffered from legitimacy issues due to being run by the Manchus who oppressed the majoirty han population, through events, your debuffs are a legitmacy debuff (down to 50), more radicals from discrimination, taxation issues, your emperor is disliked, and less authority and bureaucracy You get rid of this overtime by events that slowly increase loyalists or national supremacy, han loyalists, or by improving your emperor's approval After a certain extent you gain 2 options: replace the current emperor: depending on how much he was liked before the event, it can range from good buffs like more authority, loyalists, and taxation capacity, or the opposite. The new emperor has the trait "inexperienced" which reduces Legitimacy (not as much as before, but not enough to be Righteous Government), reduces bureaucracy, authority, and taxation capacity, but will go away after a few months or years, afterwards it's replaced with a significant amount of buffs until his death Keep the current one: also depends on popularity, if disliked, he will add more radicals, not as much Legitimacy, and the debuffs will stay, but get better, if he's liked, all the debuffs go away, but nothing else
Loving the culture plans, I've been playing around with religion, as discrimination has been so immovable for an "conserative" gameplay. So looking forward to seeing just how my north italian pops position in Austria will affect my gameplay :)
When are you fixing the atrocious warfare system? I really want to enjoy Vicky 3, but warfare is abominable and genuinely overshadows the rest of the gameplay experience since it’s such a core feature. No strategy, wonky casualty stats, bugged to hell “combat” where 1 guy will defend and beat literal thousands, teleporting HQs, frontlines as a whole, zero player agency, etc. I could go on but it’s been almost 2 years and that horse has been beaten past death and turned to glue. You guys are THE grand strategy war game developer, yet you seem determined to not only do nothing to make combat and warfare even remotely enjoyable, but double down on a broken, buggy system. It’s a shame because the economics and industrial aspects of Vicky 3 are genuinely fun
Companies should be able to do Banana republic shenanigans. Additionally the Tinto team recently mentioned that with Project Caesar about player banks which are not yet planned to be playable. This leads me to two thoughts... 1. Banks should be made into their own companies which do bank things like banking and hedging on things that banks do whatever that is, aside from getting government handouts of course. 2. PLAYABLE CORPORATIONS! Now of course the main issue with this is optimisation. But not to worry big companies like mergers so perhaps mergers and the natural capitalist tendency towards monopoly should reduce late game lag from this. Lol This would include cartels, monopolies, duopolies, etc. I think this doesn't need to be playable immediately but I do think it would be really cool. Companies should aim to try and control the entire production process. Corperate shareholders should have voting powers. On this same note unions should actually be real organisations, this could be part of interest group mechanics. Unions in a way also need to rally and congeal into larger and larger organisations able to do general strikes if possible. General strikes should actually be represented too in this should be represented in the form of a diplomatic play. If you're a socialist country with an interest in the region... You may wish to 'socialise' with these unions (probably with the pro x-y relationship groups) and even be able to involve yourself in those diplomatic plays just out of solidarity. Bonus Thought: It would also be nice to extend this feature to legacy power structure groups, especially the landed aristocracy. The landed aristocracy should be capable of converting their assets into capital and do funny things like enclosing the commons and getting stinky rich from making the switch. This should also apply to influencial slave owner families. Peoples slave owners could have owners associations in each state which has slave pops. Obviously this would take... A lot of work and time. And I imagine giving these groups AI could have disastrous effects on game performance. But were it possible to simplify it in a way and make it doable... IT WOULD BE MY BIGGEST FEATURE REQUEST! Who knows maybe I should wait for Vicky 4 on that one when we have consumer grade quantum computers. You know what that means... Might wanna catch up on your quantum mechanics over there at Paradox. I am sure folks who work/ed on Stellaris already have that in the bag.
