No.20713
>>20698Because with nationalized industry socialists usually keep a lot of people employed just for the sake of reaching full employment targets even if it would make the sector as a whole less productive. It's either that or divert funds away from the sector to the general budget thereby impairing future investment.
And no it doesn't give you more budget later on it's a net loss in-game which is just stupid.
No.20714
>>20698>>20673Nationalization doesn't by itself hurt economic development; Its only if you piss off both Tusk and Koronti that it does, without sticking the secret police on them that is.
You actually get an efficiency bonus from consistency if you picked planned economy.
No.20721
>>20713>Because with nationalized industry socialists usually keep a lot of people employed just for the sake of reaching full employment targets even if it would make the sector as a whole less productive. It's either that or divert funds away from the sector to the general budget thereby impairing future investment.Look, if you have to cover for high unemployment and budget deficit — you obviously have a full-on economic crisis. And yes, governments frequently try to remedy a crisis with nationalizations. By buying failed porky companies, usually. And trying to present cause as effect is exactly that: a neoliberal bullshit.
>>20709>>20713>>20714I see. I must have really botched that capitalist
run then.
No.20722
>>20721No that's not what I'm saying.
The neoliberal approach (what you're describing):
>Nationalize a company nearing bankruptcy because the CEOs donated to your political campaign and have the taxpayer fund it until it's profitable again whereupon it will be privatized again (examples: British Tories and the Railways, American Democrats/Republicans and bank bailouts)The critique of certain socialist approaches:
>Nationalize SUCCESSFUL/market leader companies, and then saddle them with additional employment targets (lowering productivity), as well as using the company money as a slush fund to be diverted to general national budget expenditures such as Healthcare, Education, Infrastructure, etc. (which hurts the enterprise as a whole because there is less to invest on active development of services/products, a rainy day fund, development for new services, etc.) You don't have to be in an economic crisis for the above to still be true. Socialist governments generally WILL mandate a certain amount of ""useless"" jobs in random sectors to ensure they reach their 100% employment goal, and since budget balancing is hard for literally everyone, even central planners will give in to the temptation of funneling money from the most productive enterprises into the general budget to mask or counter deficits. I'm not saying that doing this is bad or incorrect, but I do think socialists have to be realistic about certain drawbacks of state enterprises and the respective dangers.
No.20723
>>20722Also this ties into my critique of the actual game because nationalization would imply that governments can take money from the newly nationalized enterprises to plug holes in the annual national budget but the developers are such neoliberal retards they didn't even think of this very basic point that all socialist countries have exploited before. There is zero reason to not also give additional budget funds on the nationalization path for Suzerain besides ideological bias.
No.20735
>>20723It would be good perhaps if the game was clearer/gave the option on whether the nationalization was with or without compensation.
Maybe with the trade off being that with compensation doesn't trigger capital flight but has a one off costs budget cost whereas without is free but causes capital flight.
No.20786
>>20507Just confirming that you are correct. I even got the Bluds on board this time and spent 4 wealth points on lobbying and it only made a different of 10 votes in the Assembly. Good thing I had the ACP this time around
Everything was going well until that Graf lady challenged me for leadership of the Party, I think I pissed her off by letting Iosif keep the Gendarmie but it couldn't be helped because I defunded the military and didnt want to piss him off further.
Graf won the election, so I joined the commies and got BTFO (I assume it doesnt help that I raised the election threshold to 15%) and retired. Pretty sure i could've just stuck the ACP on the opposition (or is it the old guard) instead of the oligarchs to prevent that, but now I want to know how to win the elections after leaving the USP
No.21291
>>7861i pirated the game specifically cause of this thread
played it over the past day or so
it was okay, being able to larp as a dick takter was interesting, and i'm glad it didnt railroad into NOOOO NOOOOO YOU HAVE TO DO THIS PATH OR BAD ENDING
i dont think there's much replay value, though, and i most likely wont play it again
8/10
No.21945
>>20786Lileas is pretty nuanced she's probably the most far left Sollist and she's also religious so there are many minor things you can do to up her approval and stop her leadership challenge even if you go full Commie.
Funding her Ministry, allowing for creationism to continue to be taught in schools, veto-ing the anti-Blud Religious Harmony Bill, building the highway in the poor region instead of cucking to the oligarchs and their railway, etc. all gain approval from her.
On the other hand if you just want to stop the challenge without conceding a few things you can either sic the ACP on the Old Guard which gets rid of not only Lileas but every Old Guard in government, or start the war with Rumberg (which cancels not only the party congress but also any military coup attempt because of imminent attack).
You can win the election as an independent party after losing the ladership challenge. Winning the war against Rumberg pretty much makes you a shoo in. Otherwise getting economy to max and enough of a large voter bloc will do the trick.
No.29502
Big 2.0 update is out.
No.29503
>>29502So is it worth replaying?
No.29504
>>29503https://store.steampowered.com/app/1207650/Suzerain/Seems to be quite extensive update.
I am genuinely shocked the game is still worked on. Remember making the first Suzerain thread on this board years ago.
No.29505
>>29504It's cool, but, I would prefer to hear from someone before I sink a bunch more hours into it.
Some indie devs just prefer to keep updating their games if they made it a big success and can afford to keep working on it - very admirable, obviously. I am kind of looking forward to a sequel though.
No.29510
>>29503Seems pretty substantial from what I've played.
New scenes with Gus and Alphonso, intervening on a bludish rights court case, new economic decisions on tourism, energy industry, and environmental regulations, more reactivity to previous decisions (Leke/Bluds were big mad at the Whelen deal and more superficial gestures didn't appease them anymore).
No.29512
>>29510>more reactivity to previous decisions (Leke/Bluds were big mad at the Whelen deal and more superficial gestures didn't appease them anymore).Ugh, every game I took that free oil though
No.29519
Alphonso is now shown to be more of a bourgeois rat who stays in the country and runs his gas company in the poorest regions of Sordland instead of just being le heckin wholesome former president reformarino fella.
And when the communist guy and union lady stir up an angry crowd outside during your meeting with him, he and Gus offer to let you run away in a helicopter like Ceausescu instead of facing them
No.29539
>>29519Alphonso was always a bourgeois rat.
Soll and the Sollists represent state capitalism.
The reformists are the bourgeoisie-backed neoliberal puppets who want to decentralize to remove the power of the government and also push economic reforms for privatizations.
>>29502>>29503Kind of sucks. The developers are liberal rats who made it much tougher to run a planned economy. Funding ministries went up to costing -3 budget EACH. You start with 7 budget now but that's actually 5 in reality because you always have to do the stimulus bill in order to maintain your economy enough to raise corporate taxes for +3 to stop debt getting out of control. Then add in all the fucking new policies that cost money (Gaspom investment, Farm investments, Green bill, Tourism bill, etc.) and couple that with the fact that the amount of money raised hasn't changed from the old version (taxes remained the same and don't give more) and it's become a massively shitty neoliberal propaganda game where you either have to cut back on vital ministries and development initiatives or initiate privatization to stop from entering a debt crisis. Since free market runs have always been easier this will just force everyone to liberalize. Oh and did I mention that there are now severe penalties for being in debt in mid or late game even with the economy recovering that now affect welfare like healthcare and education? Ridiculous.
No.29540
>>29539>green billisn't this game supposed to be set in like 1950s-60s?
That sucks, free market run is basically just free money but if you want to do socialism you get stymied at every turn. I get that's partly realistic but at least you should be able to get more help from the left like merging with the socialist party and so on.
No.30472
>>16630yeah sollists are alright, we collaborated a lot in my playthrough. i still purged them, desollinizated the country and arrested soll because his conservative cult of personality and fetishism of the past is counterrevolutionary
No.30523
>>30472Gloria Tory will always be the best VP and the fact that she tries to screw you over hard if you privatize healthcare makes the Sollists the easiest domestic faction to colllaborate with in any socialist run. The most hilarious ending is losing to Lileas who then becomes president and then she immediately initiates a mass nationalization program to screw over the petite bourgeoisie. There is a latent and seething hatred towards capitalists that the conservative Sollists were indoctrinated into by Soll.
No.30525
>>30523I don't know how to thread the needle between conservative Sollists and liberal reformers. I end up automatically siding with the liberals every time even though I do nationalisation/funding for agencies. Maybe it's because I always side with my wife, but cmon, happy wife happy life.
No.30556
>>29539On the other hand it seems like you can take on more debt without too many issues? Or was it always like this. Im only on turn 7 but at one point had like -14 GB now down to -9 seemingly without any consequences. There was a trade war but idk if thats related
No.30618
>>30561Trade War can be avoided by balancing your budget between 6 and -6 the first few turns, I think Economics and Student Council backgrounds give you a bit more breathing room here. Debt crisis effects can be lessened by signing the central bank reinforcement act and later removing central bank independence if you have strengthened decrees.
>passed most of the bills except for the GREEN bill Green is good if you're siding with CSP. Tourism synergy + public opinion boost, the economic penalty is negated since Malenyev will later give you a free agriculture industry expansion.
>Some folks claim you can get away with not funding the first megaproject. First infrastructure project generally isn't worth doing anymore, yes.
>Alternatively I might've just fucked up early on and promised I'd align with the East or be neutralThis would be it, economic plans don't affect diplomacy unless you go through with either privatization or nationalization.
No.30726
>>30525>happy wife happy lifeall you have to do is pay her lip service, no need to enact reforms or actually give her a voice in anything
No.32053
>>32052Looks cool, I wonder if you will be able to abolish yourself
No.34688
Has anyone tried the new DLC yet?
No.34695
>>34688Yeah it's pretty good, I was a bit pissed off over certain things that can't really explain without spoilers but overall a fun time. The new war system seems incomprehensible at first but eventually makes sense. Overall good fun and much like the base game.
No.34721
>>34695You didn't really think the funny guy would make this easy, did you?
No.34727
>>34721Actually he was fine, it was stuff with Pales and the arbitration that pissed me off.
No.34729
>>34727Ya didn't suck up and didn't want to go to war? Got couped like the weak king you are?
No.34876
>>34868>small/medium… corporationsSo this is what the zoomers mean by "mom 'n' pop shops?"
No.34923
>>34868Radical are probably an Arcasian/Lespian psy-op.
No.34928
>>34923They support radical capitalism it seems. It's the Reason Magazine.
No.34951
>>34930Why do lolberts hate protectionism again? It localizes competition. Isn't that a good thing? Either that or you get American oligopolies trumping everything with aggressive marketing. Like, they say that they hate monopolies, that the blossoming free market provides more jobs, and yet with free trade we get the opposite (compared to, say, fair trade, which is much more based).
No.34952
>>34951Even Marx thought protectionism was bad.
>>34729I did go to war and I was winning too but I democratised and parliament peaced out, I got half the gas field out of it though. I was pissed that the gas field arbitration vote went against me even though I got every country to vote for me other than the religious schizo country and Lespia, which seems pretty unfair. Apparently you can get blackmail material which makes Lespia side with you but I didn't get that because I shared intelligence with Wiktor, even though it's not like he releases the information anyways so surely I should be able still use it surely? Oh well whatever. No.34959
>>34952>Even Marx thought protectionism was bad. He thought it was bad because it decreased the contradictions of capitalism, not because it's bad as in harmful. Besides, fair trade doesn't lock down all the trade. Only with economic superpowers. You can still have your contradictions. But hey, if welfare pacifies the workers then might as well support a libertarian party by this point, I dunno. Oh, wait, electoralism, I forgot.
No.34960
>>34959>He thought it was bad because it decreased the contradictions of capitalism, not because it's bad as in harmful.You said the same thing twice. It harms the proletarian movement and association by restricting the free flow of capital.
No.34975
>>34960Now that I think about it. Can Marxists potentially ally with lolberts?
No.35079
>>34952>it's not like he releases the information anywaysHe does. He literally does. It makes it easier for you to get Zillie through AN arbitration and pleases Wehlen, so you might not even have to.
If you send Titus after Su Omina and don't cooperate, you can use it as a chip against Lespia in negotiations. If you exhaust every option, but the last, you can bring up the spy, and either Lespia will give up Rusty to you, and you can nationalize RRG (for +5) or you can have them veto any sanctions against you, if you're going to war.
You will always lose AN arbitration, if you have a shit global image for being a racist asshole, accept ships from Valgsland, and keep ships in the field.
No.35080
>>34975>Now that I think about it. Can Marxists potentially ally with lolberts?And thus, the united front was born
No.35081
>>35079I don't remember him releasing the information. Even if he did I feel like that being public domain would help my case at the AN right?? That Pales' primary backer is sponsoring terrorism against me. I did manage to get Zille back though without the AN so that's something. Wiktor is a funny guy!
In seriousness the only reason I would prolly consider playing it again is to follow up on the fact that
if you pursue a pro-Valgsland foreign policy Hegel rings you up at some point and is like 'I think we may have a common interest which you have been keeping from everyone around you… is that right?' and you can be like 'assuming that was the case, now is not the right time, and I wouldn't admit it anyway', which makes me think there is some goofy Manchurian candidate path where you allow the country to have a socialist uprising. Possibly added to by the drinking game where you can be like 'sometimes I wish that the republican revolution had succeeded'. But no idea if that's a real fully fleshed out path or just a tease/an afterthought.
No.35082
>>35081If you note the curious "Flagship" unit that there is no way to obtain, it's safe to say the DLC isn't finished.
No.35107
>>35082I figured that was just to give the AI some advantage lol.
Unique IPs: 26