Quick question on Industrial Points

[Rosseau]

My home city is maxed at Level III and am out of IP points. I have a town connected by dirt road, but says must build Industry in city. Any way to get some IP? Currently, not using any IP and have none. Any workaround is appreciated!

[Grotius]

I ran into a similar problem in my first game: I didn't realize how many resources (including IP, machines and metal) would be required, and I ate up all my metal before starting the Industry. In my second game, I first built a metal mining asset, so I had a steady source of metal, and then just stockpiled IP for a couple turns until I could afford the IP for an Industry asset. I just bought the 3 machines via trade. And yes, you have to build the industry in your city. You should be getting a trickle of IP every turn, so if you have that plus some source of metal, sooner or later you'll have the resources to build industry. But it might take a while.

[Rosseau]

Thanks Grotius. I'm hoping to keep this particular game alive as I've invested a bit of time in it.

Not to be presumptuous, but based on your avatars, you might be interested in this excellent WW2 Pacific carrier game on Steam. It's sort of a modern version of SSI's old Carrier Strike or Carrier Force. There are a couple of good reviews on the Steam page to get more info as well.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1163 ... adalcanal/

[Jdane]

Grotius pretty much summed it all up, but to elaborate some.

Even if your regime does not control any public industrial Asset, it will get some Industrial Points from the private sector by means of the so called Service Tax.

(I don't know the word in english, but there used to be taxes in nature in the guise of mandatory work for a landlord or another authority, in rural France « corvées », even until 1945 for example, and which probably still exist nowadays in some parts of the world. Is chores appropriate? At any rate.)

You can see that at least in two places that I know of. The first is under the MNG tab, Assets Tab, select the relevant SHQ and zone in the left column, click on Expand on the top right of the Assets screen, and you'll see a table. If you mouse over the number of IP under ZONE PROD a tool tip will show up telling you some details.

(In my game it says : « 80 could optimally be produced. 80 was actually produced by Zone. Service Tax contributed 80 Industrial Points. » It also tells « Click to view only Assets that are concerned. » but if I do there are none showing, since the private sector has yet to build an industrial asset in that zone. It's a little abstract, and why I think of it as mandatory work.)

The same information is given when in MAP view the ITEMS tab is selected for the zone. It's more or less the same table, only displayed a little differently, and the tool tip is the same.

(Another place this information is displayed is under REP. -> ZONES -> NameOfYourZone news, where in the log I can read « Collected 80 Industrial Points by imposing Service Tax. »)

Anyway, the bottom line is, even if you don't have any public or private industrial Asset in a zone, you will get some over time, albeit maybe only a little each turn. And I believe if you have several SHQs you can transfer IPs between them, but you didn't mention you had more than one in your game.

[Grotius]

ORIGINAL: Rosseau
Not to be presumptuous, but based on your avatars, you might be interested in this excellent WW2 Pacific carrier game on Steam.

I appreciate the recommendation! I actually own the iPad version of the game. From the reviews I've read of the Steam version, I'm wondering whether I'm better off just sticking with the iOS version. One review said the port to Windows didn't work so well. That said, I haven't played it all that much on my iPad, perhaps because I started with the Midway scenario, which didn't seem that interesting. I think the Coral Sea scenario might be more fun.

Anyway, back on topic, what Jdane said.

[Laiders]

ORIGINAL: Jdane

(I don't know the word in english, but there used to be taxes in nature in the guise of mandatory work for a landlord or another authority, in rural France « corvées », even until 1945 for example, and which probably still exist nowadays in some parts of the world. Is chores appropriate? At any rate.)

I think you and others have given excellent answers to OP's question but I wanted to tackle yours briefly.

First, corvee (normally spelt without the accent because accents are tricky on English keyboards but formally the accent should be used) is an English word and term. It means, according to Wiktionary, unpaid labour required by feudal lord (I really don't like this definition) or labour, especially for roads or dams, in lieu of taxes (better). It's a term borrowed directly from French. You can use corvee or corvée and some English speakers will understand. It is a technical term in British English so will only be known to students of history but it is more widespread in American English. If you wanted to communicate the same idea to the broadest possible audience, the best imprecise approximate would be serfs and serfdom. This is incorrect because serfs are in some sense owned and unfree (IOW slaves) whereas corvee labourers are not necessarily slaves and generally working instead of or as taxation.

Corvee is more widely understood in American English than Britain (I cannot speak to the Commonwealth varieties of English) because corvee labour as a form of labour was used in the US until quite recently. It was only fully abolished in law in 1913. Whereas, England has no real tradition of corvee labour per se. Instead we have traditions of feudal serfdom that existed on a spectrum from outright slavery to all but corvee labour. With the fall of serfdom, the English started doing what we do best and allowing everyone to technically be free and have rights. Whereas, in fact labourers and tenant farmers were entrapped in a socio-economic and contractual situation that just so happened to effectively deny them the ability to exercise those rights and effectively leave the person so contracted enslaved. Various forms of technically corvee labour would fit into these socio-economic structures but they were never really primary to them. We have no real modern or early modern tradition of labour as taxation, which is what corvee is.

Second, 'chore' in English normally means that the task is: an obligation; effectively trivial (tidying a room is an hour or two's work at most and a trivial thing to ask someone to do); annoying, time consuming or menial to do etc.; and should be done routinely. Tasks of this nature are chores. They are mostly domestic nowadays though routine farm tasks might be called chores on a family or small farm and routine work tasks might be called chores, especially if complaining about them to a colleague. Any task fitting the above description could be called a chore. It would be quite unusual to seriously called a major undertaking a chore, such as the several days or weeks of labour that might be owed by corvee. This work might be called a 'chore', especially by a British English speaker, but this would normally be meant in a ironic or sarcastic sense to indicate the task is anything but a chore in scale but shares the same properties of being annoying and menial.

The key factors really are that the task is routine, the task is smallish and the task is annoying or unpleasant. Corvee fails this because it was neither routine work nor small.

[springel]

Corvée has entered the Dutch language from the French as well, but here today it means work that must be done, because you are part of a group. It mostly applies to cleaning and maintenance tasks, in the smallest scale in a household, further in schools, clubs, or the military. In this meaning I think it corresponds to chores.

Working as taxation was abolished here after the French Revolution, but before that time it was widely used for road and general infrastructure maintenance, like on dikes, canals, and fortifications.

In Groningen the Germans used it in 1945 to dig emergency trenches.

One of the largest examples of corvée here I have read about was in the 1490's when there was danger Burgundy would strike North. From every shire in the province, one after the other, the men were obliged to come two weeks to the city to dig new modern cannon-proof fortifications. They lived and ate with the families of the city during their turn. This way a whole new defence line was constructed within a few months. It would be used intensely during the following 90 years of attacks by Saxons, East-Frisians, Habsburgians and States General.

[Jdane]

Thank you both for your detailed and educative replies!

To make the hijacking of this discussion thread complete, I'll just mention briefly that in French, corvée now has both the meanings of 1. unpaid work in lieu of taxation (but it has become rare and mostly applies to feudal society) and 2. a chore. I was feeling though chore was not a good choice for what I was trying to convey, hence my question.

Also in a military context corvée is used much like in Dutch, such as for cleaning duty.

The term originates from feudal society but survived after the 1789 Revolution, in part because until the early 20th century it was a way for people to pay for taxes to the municipality (such as clearing the ditches) in rural areas where people didn't really have cash. I learned this from my grandmother who is born in the 1920s, grew up in a small village in a family of farm tenants, and did her share of those in her youth.