• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Victoria 3 - Dev Diary #10 - Infrastructure

DD10.png


Hello again and happy Thursday! Today we’re going to follow up on last week’s dev diary about Markets, which touched on Infrastructure but did not explain how it works. Infrastructure is an important mechanic for the economic simulation of the game, simulating the cost of moving goods over land and creating the necessary, well, infrastructure to support wide-scale industrialization.

So what is Infrastructure then? Infrastructure is represented by two distinct values that each State has: Infrastructure and Infrastructure Usage, which together determine its Market Access. So long as the Infrastructure in the State is greater than or equal to the Infrastructure Usage, everything is fine and the State maintains a Market Access of 100%, but if usage starts exceeding the available Infrastructure, Market Access will be reduced by an amount proportional to how much of the usage is not being serviced.

For example, if a state has an Infrastructure of 45 with a usage of 90, its Market Access will only be 50%. Market Access and its effects is something we’ve already covered in the previous development diary, but to briefly go over it again, a low Market Access means that a State is unable to fully integrate its local market into the National Market, which can lead to adverse price conditions from local over-or undersupply of goods.

Minsk has somewhat overextended their local Infrastructure, but with a large population and mostly staple production both their industries and consumers will probably be fine until the railway arrives
image3.png

This imbalance goes in both directions. If you have one bread basket state and one iron mining state, and they both have perfect Market Access, the price of iron and grain will be the same in both. If the iron mining state’s Market Access is reduced, the market’s price of iron goes up while the local price of iron in the mining state goes down. But in addition to this the iron mining state will be unable to source as much grain, raising the local price there but reducing its price somewhat across the rest of the market.

If your consumption matches your local production, as is often the case in rural states where the production consists of staple goods your people require, this isn’t such a big problem! You could perhaps even build some simple Textile Mills and Livestock Ranches in the same underdeveloped state to provide cheap wool clothing if the local population is large enough to demand it in sufficient quantity. But if you’re looking to manufacture more complex goods (or use more demanding Production Methods) you need goods you might only be able to source from another state in your market, or which you can only import from a foreign nation. These goods in turn might be lucrative but only if there are buyers for them - buyers who can actually afford them. Your schemes to get rich off Luxury Clothes and Porcelain won’t work if you can’t reach all the far-flung wealthy Pops of your empire.

The Infrastructure Usage of a State is determined by which types of Buildings exist in a State and which level they are. Generally, the more urban and specialized the building, the more Infrastructure it uses per level, so Chemical Industries (a heavy industry building) will use several times more Infrastructure than a Rye Farms building of the same level.

Minsk’s urban buildings - the Furniture Manufacturies, Textile Mills, even the Government Administrations - account for 2/3rds of its Infrastructure usage despite employing the same number of people as the Logging Camps and Rye Farms. Subsistence Farms and Urban Centers do not use Infrastructure, the former because its production is nearly all for domestic use and the latter because the Infrastructure it provides cancel out the Infrastructure it requires.
image2.png

Infrastructure is provided and modified by numerous sources. Just about all States in the game have at least a little bit of Infrastructure based on the technology level of the country that owns it and its state of incorporation (colonies have lower infrastructure than incorporated states, for example). However, over the course of the game, the most crucial aspect of your Infrastructure is the size of your Railway network. As we’ve previously mentioned, Railways is a Building that produces Transportation, an intangible good sold to Pops, but they are also your main source of Infrastructure.

This means that if you want to industrialize a State, it isn’t enough to simply build those industries there and have the Pops available to work in them, you also need to ensure that said industries have enough infrastructure to support them. This of course has a variety of costs involved in that infrastructure-providing Railways need both Pops to work them and access to goods like Coal and Engines. There are alternatives that can be used in the short-term, such as using your Authority on a Road Maintenance decree to ensure the populace don’t allow the roads to fall into disrepair or become unsafe, but such options will never be sufficient in themselves for large-scale industrialization. Of course, Railways also grow more efficient over the course of the game with such inventions as Diesel trains and Electricity, requiring less levels of rail to support a certain number of Buildings.

This early Railway has rapidly become one of Minsk’s best employers, at least for Pops with the qualifications to become Machinists. Unfortunately few people do, so the Infrastructure production is not currently as high as it might be if the railway was fully staffed. Ticket prices, however, are sky high.
image4.png

Our intention for railways is that they must be able to find their way back to the market capital, or an exit port destined for the market capital, in order to be useful. In effect this means that any railway can only provide infrastructure up to the amount of infrastructure provided by the best adjacent railway that connects it to the market capital. If you want good access to the Sulfur Mines in Aginskoye for your Munition Plants in St. Petersburg, you best get started on that Trans-Siberian Railway sooner rather than later, because it will take a good long while to build.

Geography, of course, also plays a significant role in other ways when it comes to Infrastructure, and this is represented in Victoria 3 through State Traits. State Traits are bonuses and/or maluses given to a particular State representing particular geographical features, climate and so on. State Traits have a variety of effects, but the most common ones are to either affect the production of a particular resource (for example, if a State contains high quality coal this may be represented through a State Trait that makes coal mines in the state more efficient) or, more significantly for the topic on hand, to provide or modify Infrastructure.

The high-yield Russian Forests are of great benefit to the Logging Industry in Minsk, as long as there’s enough infrastructure available to ship the wood off to all the Russian factories and construction sites that demand it.
image1.png

States with significant rivers get a large boost to Infrastructure, making them excellent candidates for early industrialization
image5.png

Before we finish up for today, I also just want to mention that Infrastructure does tie into a number of mechanics besides Market Access, such as military logistics and migration, and that Infrastructure is only meant to simulate the cost of transporting goods on land - where the sea is concerned, there are other systems at play… but all of those are topics for another day, so for now I bid farewell and encourage you all to tune back in next week as Mikael returns with another economy-related dev diary about Employment and Qualifications.
 
  • 232Like
  • 94Love
  • 16
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
Do land connections matter with regards to maximum possible market access? For example, if a state is surrounded by states that have 30%, 40%, 50% market access, will the maximum market access in the state be limited to 50%? Or would there be no limit, and the state could have 100% market access despite being surrounded by states with less than 100% access?

The major source of infrastructure is railroads, so if you need 100 railroad infra in your state, you need a line of at least 100 railroad infra to your economic center. That said, one of those states on the line could say need 200 infra and only have 100 (so 50% market access) and your original state would still be fine.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
If a state with different industries is limited by infrastructure, can we prioritise which industry will get prefered access to the infrastructure of the state,. reducing the negative effects for the prioritised industry and increasing these effects for the rest?
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
3 questions:
1) will railroads be counted on the state level or on the unit movement-level? (if they aren't counted on thr same level, like HOI4)
2a) Will goods' local prices be affected by distance the goods have to travel? (if you have your engine factories in siberia, transporting them to europe for infrastructure development will be costly, but if you want to build railways there it will be a little cheaper)
2b) will transportation of goods be instant or not? (meaning will certain goods have the ability to spoil or not, I don't think it was physically possible to transport food from India to the UK whithout additional costs in chemical preservatives, and even then not from the game start date, so maybe you could have the price increse over distance be dependent on the type of good, and have a hard limit on the distance a certain type of good can travel, related to the infrustructure development)
3) you mentioned intagible goods such as transportation, will you have other services be rapresented like that? (like Banking, insurance, etc.)
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Do buildings pay to use infrastructure, or do they only pay in purchasing tickets used in certain production methods?

I think this is a really important question, since if tickets are mostly passenger stuff, then railways are basically providing free long-distance freight. In places where the passenger market is weak, do they have trouble staying in business?
 
Will rivers' infrastructure bonus only apply in specific direction? It wouldn't make sense that the Amazon river apply infrastructure bonuses to goods moving north and south, right?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
3 questions:
1) will railroads be counted on the state level or on the unit movement-level? (if they aren't counted on thr same level, like HOI4)
2a) Will goods' local prices be affected by distance the goods have to travel? (if you have your engine factories in siberia, transporting them to europe for infrastructure development will be costly, but if you want to build railways there it will be a little cheaper)
2b) will transportation of goods be instant or not? (meaning will certain goods have the ability to spoil or not, I don't think it was physically possible to transport food from India to the UK whithout additional costs in chemical preservatives, and even then not from the game start date, so maybe you could have the price increse over distance be dependent on the type of good, and have a hard limit on the distance a certain type of good can travel, related to the infrustructure development)
3) you mentioned intagible goods such as transportation, will you have other services be rapresented like that? (like Banking, insurance, etc.)

I'm pretty sure the answers are:
1. State level
2a) No
2b) Instant
3) Maybe?
 
It's not that I exactly don't want minor canals in the game, it's just that if we're to have them I don't want them to fill the exact same role as railroads. They should either be a precursor in an earlier start date, or to for instance be a cheaper alternative that is only available in certain places. We'll likely not have them for release though.

Will they at least be modifiers? At least for more important barge canals, like the Erie?


Will there be any distinction between navigability?

Actually, in general, I think water-transport, be it rivers or canals, is worth devoting quite a bit of time to, even if it would require a DLC to devote the appropriate level of effort. After all, even in the 21st century, it is still cheaper to ship freight by barge than by rail.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
The major source of infrastructure is railroads, so if you need 100 railroad infra in your state, you need a line of at least 100 railroad infra to your economic center. That said, one of those states on the line could say need 200 infra and only have 100 (so 50% market access) and your original state would still be fine.
That's not the question I'm asking. I'm talking about situations where a state is surrounded by other states that are over capacity for their Infrastructure. It doesn't make sense for a state to be more integrated into the national economy if it's surrounded by other states above capacity- how are the goods shipments going to go back and forth between the trade capital when the traffic of goods in surrounding states is already congested?
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm not sure I understand the rationale behind buildings sharing the infrastructure rather than each building needing x infrastructure from this and that in order for it to achieve its maximum efficiency. In DD buildings represent a burden to one another and if infrastructure usage were to exceed the infrastructure level, they all suffer. Could you maybe expound on why this decision was made? No negative feelings or anything, genuinely curious haha!
 
Last edited:
Will it be the case that my factory will always have to go to the market capital to get resources?

Example: I need wood for my California factory. But wood is also available in the state. Will California then have to drive all the "way" to New York to get wood?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The idea is that if you have a rail 40 state that has to go through a rail 10 state to reach the market capital, it will be indeed be bottlenecked to 10 and that remaining 30 will be wasted.
I think the question was actually of state A connects to states B C D E, each of which has 10 infrastructure, would A need 10 infra or 40 infra to properly service them all?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
That's not the question I'm asking. I'm talking about situations where a state is surrounded by other states that are over capacity for their Infrastructure. It doesn't make sense for a state to be more integrated into the national economy if it's surrounded by other states above capacity- how are the goods shipments going to go back and forth between the trade capital when the traffic of goods in surrounding states is already congested?
I did answer the question. The answer is yes - a state can have high market access and be surrounded by states with low market access. Though that scenario is somewhat unlikely given the railway constraint.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Will it be the case that my factory will always have to go to the market capital to get resources?

Example: I need wood for my California factory. But wood is also available in the state. Will California then have to drive all the "way" to New York to get wood?
See previous DD. Every state has a local price of a good based on local supply/demand. The actual price is a mix of local and market price depending on market access percentage. So if California has poor market access but a local source of wood, the wood will be available for buyers in California. But not, presumably, Oregon.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Example: I need wood for my California factory. But wood is also available in the state. Will California then have to drive all the "way" to New York to get wood?
The factory will contribute to California's infrastructure requirement, because it still "wants" to buy and sell goods on the larger, more advantageous market even if it doesn't "need" to do so.

But the effects of low market access will be reduced, because there is a supply of wood on the local market. (However, the factory may still suffer from a lack of demand on the local market.)
 
See previous DD. Every state has a local price of a good based on local supply/demand. The actual price is a mix of local and market price depending on market access percentage. So if California has poor market access but a local source of wood, the wood will be available for buyers in California. But not, presumably, Oregon.

I do not mean that. When things are produced within the state, it's one thing. But there are different distances to other states and these can be shorter than the distance to the market capital. Will you still have to shop through the market capital? It is not clear.
 
I feel like we'll need some sort of map filter for these State Traits. If there's no way of seeing them without clicking on the state, that's really a bit of a pain.