Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Criptfeind]

The simplest way would be to make distance generate unrest, rather than autonomy.

The unrest from distance would push up autonomy, until that autonomy pushes the unrest back down to a stable equilibrium.

However, I fear that would result in way too many revolts. I mean, 5% unrest in 5 provinces is 25% chance of revolt per turn. So, maybe just create some high autonomy unrest creating events?

I think it'd be fine, an unrest event doesn't cause an immediate revolt, it causes them to start laying away money to buy troops so they can challenge you. Since a newly created colony will have no money, the unrest events caused by unrest would be meaningless, I've seen this myself with the plague, which causes massive unrest. It triggered an unrest event and they put away an absolutely meaningless amount of money towards their rebellion pool that will never ever matter because autonomy eventually increased to match unrest, driving it into the negatives, and now they won't rebel again.

Tbh, I had already assumed that distance caused unrest, not autonomy, except in that it then caused autonomy to grow from the unrest, that made so much sense in my head that's how I read it automatically, until this conversation came up.

[Tiruin]

Part of the problem is, for me, that y'all are seeing autonomy as COLONIES or whatever dissociated thing from yourself. -.- It can mean many things depending on the context of how you see your own nation--and for flexibility of GM narrative!

:I
I don't see why you have a problem at all. Do you think it makes sense from a flavour perspective that high autonomy provinces always have low (as in deeply negative) unrest, as opposed to low autonomy provinces which will tend to have higher unrest? The closer to the capital you get, the more likely people are to revolt?

It's more like y'all are seeing autonomy as if it's a negative factor when it is tied to other variables. So yes, it does make sense from a flavor perspective that high autonomy single province = low unrest. There's a "Other/Misc" % factor that Iituem has shoved in, and we don't know much other than what little we know.

You have high autonomy? Everything goes to factions--I don't see the problem there. You want unrest too? That makes it MORE insensible, especially from a flavor perspective when you have multiple factions fighting over YOUR stuff. That also includes the never-mentioned-by-any-of-you "requests" that factions give, like say, for decentralization or such.

[NUKE9.13]

Okay... I mean, I fundamentally disagree. Like I said, if high autonomy always meant low unrest, the United States wouldn't exist. But whatever.

[Tiruin]

Okay... I mean, I fundamentally disagree. Like I said, if high autonomy always meant low unrest, the United States wouldn't exist. But whatever.

I kinda agree too But autonomy doesn't create unrest. Being a jerk does. Like the British to generally every one of their colonies at different times.

...Which makes me nudge my previous and first post on this matter--faction influence and happies.

[Criptfeind]

The issue isn't that high autonomy doesn't always cause unrest, but rather distance from capital will always create low unrest. At a certain point you have to gameify things, being far from the capital doesn't realistically mean you'll always have high autonomy or unrest, but that makes sense as a general trend, which doesn't make sense as a general trend is being far from the capital always meaning low unrest.

[Tiruin]

The issue isn't that high autonomy doesn't always cause unrest, but rather distance from capital will always create low unrest.

Huh, I don't think I noticed that at all when I look at my own area of influence. Was it noted that faction influence increases (and thus their bonuses or otherwise) by distance? Because one single person can use one single province to incite revolts by intrigue that way for the whole faction.

[NUKE9.13]

Ah, no, see, we aren't talking based on observation of this actually happening. We're extrapolating based on observed mechanics. I don't imagine anyone owns any provinces that are getting much more than +6.0% autonomy growth by distance, so we wouldn't be seeing the sort of extremely low unrest that might emerge once you start getting into double digits. But we can still do the maths for what happens at higher autonomy levels.

I mean, unrest adds to autonomy growth at a 2:1 ratio (I think, though it seems to be based on last turn's unrest, maybe?). So setting all other factors aside, a province with +10% autonomy growth by distance is gonna end up with an equilibrium unrest of -20%. +20% by distance = -40% equilibrium. +50% (not sure that even a province on the other side of the planet would get this modifier) = -100% equilibrium unrest. Nobody is experiencing this yet, but that's no reason to ignore the issue.

E: No, wait, looking at it again, I'm not sure what the relation between unrest and autonomy growth is. It doesn't seem to follow a pattern? Okay, so, it does seem like unrest*0.5 is the default, but changing faction opinion modifies that in a strange way.
E2: Also, it looks like the autonomy tab doesn't add up properly. The stated change doesn't seem to include the population modifier (although the actual change does)

[Tiruin]

Ah, no, see, we aren't talking based on observation of this actually happening. We're extrapolating based on observed mechanics. I don't imagine anyone owns any provinces that are getting much more than +6.0% autonomy growth by distance, so we wouldn't be seeing the sort of extremely low unrest that might emerge once you start getting into double digits. But we can still do the maths for what happens at higher autonomy levels.

I mean, unrest adds to autonomy growth at a 2:1 ratio (I think, though it seems to be based on last turn's unrest, maybe?). So setting all other factors aside, a province with +10% autonomy growth by distance is gonna end up with an equilibrium unrest of -20%. +20% by distance = -40% equilibrium. +50% (not sure that even a province on the other side of the planet would get this modifier) = -100% equilibrium unrest. Nobody is experiencing this yet, but that's no reason to ignore the issue.

E: No, wait, looking at it again, I'm not sure what the relation between unrest and autonomy growth is. It doesn't seem to follow a pattern?
E2: Also, it looks like the autonomy tab doesn't add up properly. The stated change doesn't seem to include the population modifier (although the actual change does)

Hmm, I guess I'll disclose something I myself have little idea about--there is some kind of variance to distance between provinces, despite it 'technically' being an adjacent province. SOme of my provinces have a tiny bit higher autonomy in distance (again, despite being adjacent to the Capital), probably by their terrain or size. Unrest also matches that.

[NUKE9.13]

Huh? That's strange. All my provinces have a reported autonomy change due to distance of 2%*distance to capital, no matter their terrain type.

[Iituem]

Echoing my update in the Discord channel, Real Life is unfortunately pretty stressful right now, so I'm forced to put this on hiatus until mid-April, or thereabouts.  Regular updates will resume once possible, along with hopefully a ton of bugs fixed by then too.  My apologies to everyone - we will be baaack.