• 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 #3 - Buildings

ThumbnailTemplate_1920x1080.png

Hello again everyone! It’s Thursday again, and that means that it’s time to talk about Buildings. Buildings are a core mechanic of Victoria 3, as it is where the Pops work to produce resources such as Goods. Buildings represent a wide range of industries, businesses and government functions, from humble subsistence farms to complex motor industries and sprawling financial districts. In this dev diary, we’re going to broadly cover the main types of buildings and their function in Victoria 3.

To talk about buildings though, I first have to mention states! States are a concept that should be generally familiar to anyone who’s played some of our other games such as Victoria II or Hearts of Iron IV - a geographic unit of varying size in which much of Victoria 3’s gameplay takes place. States are where Pops live and (more importantly for our subject matter) where Buildings are located and built.

The State of Götaland in Sweden
dd3_1.png

We will return to states more in later dev diaries, but for now let’s keep talking about Buildings!

Before we start on Buildings, something that’s important to note is that Buildings are just places where Pops can work and generally do not represent a single building - a single level of Government Administration, for example, represents the necessary buildings and infrastructure to support a certain number of Bureaucrats. Buildings always need qualified pops to work in them to yield any benefit, and an empty building is just that - empty and completely useless. This holds true even for buildings like Railroads and Ports that did not need Pops to work in them in Victoria 2.

Most buildings are directly constructed, but some (like the Subsistence Buildings below) will appear automatically based on certain conditions. When Buildings are constructed, the construction uses Pop labor and goods, and the costs involved will be subject to market forces.

But onto the different building types! First out, we have Subsistence Buildings. These are a special type of highly inefficient Buildings that cannot manually be built or destroyed, but rather will appear anywhere in the world where there is Arable Land that isn’t being used for another type of building. The vast majority of the world’s population starts the game ‘working’ in subsistence buildings as Peasants, and much of the game’s industrialization process is about finding more productive employment for your Peasants.


Peasants eke out a meager living in these Subsistence Farms, contributing little to GDP and taxes per capita
dd3_2.png

Another special type of building is Urban Centers. Like Subsistence Buildings, these are automatically created rather than built, with the level of Urban Center in a State being tied to the amount of Urbanization generated by its other buildings. Urban Centers primarily employ Shopkeepers and provide a number of important local functions that we will get into at a later point.


The Urban Center is where you’ll find most of your middle-class Shopkeepers
dd3_3.png

Next up we have Government Buildings. These are buildings that are fully funded by the state (ie, you!) and provide crucial civil services required for the smooth running of a Victorian nation. Examples include Government Administrations where Bureaucrats produce Bureaucracy for the administration of incorporated states and funding of Institutions, and Universities where Academics produce Innovation for technological progression.


Bureaucrats work in Government Administrations to provide Bureaucracy - the lifeblood of the government
dd3_4.png

The counterpart to Government Buildings is Private Industries. The vast majority of Buildings in Victoria 3 fall under this category, which includes a broad range of industries such as (non-subsistence!) farms, plantations, mines and factories. Unlike Government Buildings, Private Industries are not owned by the state but rather by Pops such as Capitalists and Aristocrats, who reap the profits they bring in and pay wages to the other Pops working there (usually at least - under certain economic systems the ownership of buildings may be radically different!).

Many of these buildings are limited by locally available resources such as Arable Land for agriculture and simply how much iron is available in the state for Iron Mines. Urban Buildings such as Factories however, are only limited by how many people you can cram into the state, simulating the more densely populated nature of cities. In short, there is no system of building ‘slots’ or anything like that, as we want limitations on buildings to function in a sensible and realistic way.


Several different types of Private Industries are shown below
dd3_5.png

Finally there are Development Buildings. These are often (but not always!) government buildings that distinguish themselves by providing vital state-level functions. A couple examples are Barracks that recruit and train soldiers from the local population and Railways that provide the Infrastructure other buildings need to bring their goods to the Market.


From left to right: Barracks, Port, Naval Bases and Railway
dd3_6.png

To finish up this dev diary I just want to mention that building up your country is meant to be more of a hands-on experience in Victoria 3, as this is absolutely core to the society-building aspect of the game and forms a major part of the game’s core loop. This naturally also means that we need to give the player the necessary tools to manage their buildings in a large empire, which may involve some form of autonomous building construction, though we haven’t yet nailed down exactly what form that would take (and whether it will involve decision making on the part of the investor class). Ultimately though, we want the player, not the AI to be the one primarily in charge of the development of their own country.

Well, there you have it. There is of course a lot in here (such as Production Methods) that will receive further explanation in the many more dev diaries we have planned, so be sure to tune in next week as I talk about Goods. See you then!
 
  • 458Like
  • 204Love
  • 24
  • 17
  • 10
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Just curious are Post Offices one of the Government building types?

After the invention of the postage stamp in 1840 postal services would see dramatic expansion around the world, becoming in most nations one of the largest government-controlled employers by the turn of the century (In 1926, the USPS empolyed almost 250,000 people : https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-history/employees-since-1926.pdf ). The importance of postal services was such that even in the United States, control of the postal service was (and to this day still is for first class mail) a government monopoly. Not only did the rapid expansion of postal services via the development of a network of post offices increase speed and reach of communication, it also helped facilitate commerce via its parcel post delivery systems.

The revolution in postal services in the 19th and early 20th centuries is of course just one step in the wider communications revolution that would occur during the era covered by Victoria 3, and I would argue that having a separate government building to represent postal services (and the many thousands employed by the state via the Post Office) would a great example of a building at the State level.
You could even have Communications as a POP need. Generated by postal services and later the telegraph
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
"We want exploration to be a core mechanic in our upcoming Stellaris game, so it will be 100% manual" they said.
First thing community requested was automatic exploration.

Don't get me wrong, building your nation yourself is the most interesting part of the game for me. That said, some sort of automatization is necessary when you have a sprawling empire.
100%. Administration in real life became a more mechanical process over time and things can get too simplified to hold up a fully manual system.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Just curious are Post Offices one of the Government building types?

After the invention of the postage stamp in 1840 postal services would see dramatic expansion around the world, becoming in most nations one of the largest government-controlled employers by the turn of the century (In 1926, the USPS empolyed almost 250,000 people : https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-history/employees-since-1926.pdf ). The importance of postal services was such that even in the United States, control of the postal service was (and to this day still is for first class mail) a government monopoly. Not only did the rapid expansion of postal services via the development of a network of post offices increase speed and reach of communication, it also helped facilitate commerce via its parcel post delivery systems.

The revolution in postal services in the 19th and early 20th centuries is of course just one step in the wider communications revolution that would occur during the era covered by Victoria 3, and I would argue that having a separate government building to represent postal services (and the many thousands employed by the state via the Post Office) would a great example of a building at the State level.

This is a great idea - I'd be surprised if the development of a regular postal service didn't help support national cohesion as well, although that's an "off the top of my head" comment and could be rubbish.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I know we're playing as the "spirit of the country", but isn't the whole theme of Victoria playing as the government and ATTEMPTING (not always succeeding) to shape the politics, economics, and demographics of your nation?

For example, you cannot designate how your pops lean politically and who they vote for. In a democracy, you can't choose which party wins (unless you incur severe penalties). You can't choose which pops take which jobs. You can't choose which pops migrate where. You can't designate the culture or religion of your pops.

All of these evolve organically and can only be influenced by the policies you set, the whole idea is that you are trying to "tame" the beast of your nation. To influence the independent simulation according to your strategy.

By this reasoning, doesn't it make more sense that in a Laissez Faire economy you shouldn't be directly building the buildings. You should be incentivizing which buildings should be built (like with the Encourage X Industry focus in Vic2), but it's ultimately the investors (the simulation) that decides. You need to have some element of lack of control, otherwise the game will be entirely deterministic. In fact, in a Laissez Faire economy, there are tools you have to control the incentives. For example, you can subsidize buildings of that type, you can lower taxes on the Upper Class, you can implement more favourable business regulations, you can negotiate good trade deals to lower the price of raw materials.... All of these are ways you can encourage your buildings to be built.

And if you don't want to take away complete control, you can always leave a player the option to directly build buildings as the government even in a Laissez Faire economy. It would simply have to be 100% financed by the player, and not use any investors funds. I'm sure many Laissez Faire economies don't prevent their governments from directly issuing construction projects, the governments just prefer not to.
 
  • 7
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I know we're playing as the "spirit of the country", but isn't the whole theme of Victoria playing as the government and ATTEMPTING (not always succeeding) to shape the politics, economics, and demographics of your nation?

For example, you cannot designate how your pops lean politically and who they vote for. In a democracy, you can't choose which party wins (unless you incur severe penalties). You can't choose which pops take which jobs. You can't choose which pops migrate where. You can't designate the culture or religion of your pops.

All of these evolve organically and can only be influenced by the policies you set, the whole idea is that you are trying to "tame" the beast of your nation. To influence the independent simulation according to your strategy.

By this reasoning, doesn't it make more sense that in a Laissez Faire economy you shouldn't be directly building the buildings. You should be incentivizing which buildings should be built (like with the Encourage X Industry focus in Vic2), but it's ultimately the investors (the simulation) that decides. You need to have some element of lack of control, otherwise the game will be entirely deterministic. In fact, in a Laissez Faire economy, there are tools you have to control the incentives. For example, you can subsidize buildings of that type, you can lower taxes on the Upper Class, you can implement more favourable business regulations, you can negotiate good trade deals to lower the price of raw materials.... All of these are ways you can encourage your buildings to be built.

And if you don't want to take away complete control, you can always leave a player the option to directly build buildings as the government even in a Laissez Faire economy. It would simply have to be 100% financed by the player, and not use any investors funds. I'm sure many Laissez Faire economies don't prevent their governments from directly issuing construction projects, the governments just prefer not to.
The problem is that can the government actually shape the politics, economics, and demographics of your nation? Or those things shape the government instead? What is the role of the player? God? Or the representative of their political classes (which mean if you are the leader of a socialist state, you can only make anti-capitalist policies)?

You cannot designate how your pops lean politically, but you know that they will act upon their own interest. For example workers always want better wage, while capitalists want less tax. How can you simulate the capitalists' investing decisions? They always make the best optimal choices? Which mean the best you can do is as good as they do it themselves? Or they just make random decisions? Is that more realistic? Or they make it based on their attributes like "education", "IQ", "shrewdness", "patience", "greediness", "luck", etc...?

It would be like playing a RTS game as a general and you cannot order a tank about its specific target because it's the job of the tank commander, not the army commander.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
It would be like playing a RTS game as a general and you cannot order a tank about its specific target because it's the job of the tank commander, not the army commander.
Yes, i am still waiting for Majesty 3, thanks you for salting my wounds very much.
 
  • 4Haha
  • 2Love
Reactions:
I was gonna come and flame you cuz I assumed that buildings would be limited to slots, which I absolutely hate, but was pleasantly surprised. If I understand correctly, instead of having a hard, arbitrary limit on the amount and types of buildings you can put in one province you'll be soft limited by the type of province and amount of population qualified to operate said building. This is a much more satisfying way to limit the player.

I only wish you would call them something more fitting than buildings, since as you said yourself they are not singular buildings but rather whole, intricate developments and institutions spread througout the province. Perhaps Development might be a better word.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Honestly, while AI is of course a challenge the main reason for this is that which buildings are built in your country is so fundamental to the both the economic gameplay and society building aspect of Victoria 3 that we don't think it makes sense to not let the player interact with it. We don't want the game to play itself, so to speak.
As far as players' wishes are concerned, sometime you just have to stop and say - let them "Have Any Color So Long As It Is Black".
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
The problem is that can the government actually shape the politics, economics, and demographics of your nation? Or those things shape the government instead? What is the role of the player? God? Or the representative of their political classes (which mean if you are the leader of a socialist state, you can only make anti-capitalist policies)?

You cannot designate how your pops lean politically, but you know that they will act upon their own interest. For example workers always want better wage, while capitalists want less tax. How can you simulate the capitalists' investing decisions? They always make the best optimal choices? Which mean the best you can do is as good as they do it themselves? Or they just make random decisions? Is that more realistic? Or they make it based on their attributes like "education", "IQ", "shrewdness", "patience", "greediness", "luck", etc...?

It would be like playing a RTS game as a general and you cannot order a tank about its specific target because it's the job of the tank commander, not the army commander.

You can shape the politics, economics, and demographics of your nation. For example:

Politics: Changing laws to increase ruling party support, waging and winning wars to increase jingoism, investing in education to increase consciousness and grow liberalism and socialism, using national focuses to build support for certain parties, etc.
Economics: The examples I used in my post.
Demographics: Changing immigration/citizenship policies, changing the immigration attraction of your country and particular provinces, using national focuses to attract immigrants to a particular region, changing policies to increase assimilation rate, increasing education to increase assimilation rate, etc.

Though of course it's inevitable that those things will affect the government as well. It's the whole point of the tug-and-pull, "tame the simulation" theme of the Victoria franchise.

There's many options on how to simulate capitalists investing decisions. Worst case scenario, if we cannot think of anything, there is already Victoria 2 which modelled it. However, you can design a purely profit based approach, you can make them balance profitability with interests (like preferring to invest in industries that are seen as more culturally prestigious), or some other mish-mash. I mean I don't think designing the algorithm for simulation the investing decisions was ever a problem.

The RTS analogy doesn't really apply, cause Victoria 2 has armies and you can directly command them. Plus the military side of the game has different themes and design than the "organic" socio-economic simulation side of the game, which was all designed around having an organic simulation that fluctuates in response to the pressures (policies) you exert.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
This comment will be used over the next few days to collate developer responses for ease of reading.


We're not ready to discuss the map yet but we will definitely have a lot to share there in the future.



That is correct, as the Cash Reserves fill up more and more profits will be withdrawn as dividends.


If cash reserves are full, that money is paid out in dividends instead.


There may be sort of a 'practical limit' in the sense that you can't cram 5 million people onto St. Helena but it should certainly be possible to have huge cities anywhere there's enough land, infrastructure and jobs.


Which crops can be grown depends on the state, so coffee should only be able to be grown in places where it was either grown or plausibly would have been grown in the span of the era.


You can improve your agriculture by building farms and plantations (think enclosure systems and industrial agriculture as opposed to tiny subsistence farms).


Honestly, while AI is of course a challenge the main reason for this is that which buildings are built in your country is so fundamental to the both the economic gameplay and society building aspect of Victoria 3 that we don't think it makes sense to not let the player interact with it. We don't want the game to play itself, so to speak.


Yes, subsistence farms produce a small surplus, most of Peasants' labor is self-sustaining though so they're only marginally integrated into the wider economy.


Yeah, you can have numerous different mines, plantations, etc as potentials that you can exploit in the same state. As long as you have the people to work it and the infrastructure to support it, of course.


It depends on how many pops you have that are qualified for the jobs, whether those pops are willing to take the salary offered, etc. It's possible for instance for a mine to remain largely unproductive because there's almost nobody qualified to be an engineer in the state.


While buildings aren't just going to randomly shed workers, Pops are not obliged to take jobs and can leave a building to take a higher paying job elsewhere (which is one of the ways you can actually have standard of living go up in a state, as buildings hike wages to compete for labor).


Yep, you don't play as the government, you play as the 'spirit of the country'. It's hardly the only example of the player being able to do something that would be outside the purview or against the interest of the government in one of our games. That said, we've not completely set our mind on the investment pool as it works now and are discussing other ways we could do it.


Yes, with the caveat that it's not as simple as 'if the climate allows it' since then half the world would be covered in opium potentials. We try to strike a balance between climate, farming traditions and what feels like it could have been a potential grow site during the Victorian era.


We do not currently have any system for losing yields over time, but the use of fertilizer is for sure a big deal in making your agriculture more efficient in Victoria 3.


The state's contribution to national GDP.


I like this idea and may in fact end up stealing it.


Yes we don't hide any information when inspecting other nations States :)


This is for sure not the case! The country's different economic systems enable and prohibit both certain pop behaviors and actions the player can take, in addition to making it easier or harder to engage in certain playstyles. So both a set of hard locks/unlocks on actions and modifiers/cost adjustments. We'll get into more details on this in the near future.

Like @Wizzington has hinted at a few times already in this thread, a crucial bit of design intent behind our approach to never prohibit the player from engaging in new construction, or put construction wholly on AI autoplay, is that choosing which aspects of your country to invest into and expand - represented by different buildings - is the core of Victoria 3, informed both by economic and political concerns. Expanding an Iron Mine in a newly conquered unincorporated part of your country can have very different long-term knock-on effects from expanding one in your capital, and predicting or discovering these kinds of effects in retrospect is a big aspect of our enjoyment when playing. We don't want the player's choice of economic system to either make the game unplayable because of micromanagement requirements nor remove the society-building aspect from the experience.

To put this a different way, we want the decision to switch to a different economic system to be based on a play strategy that develops in response to the game. For example, the Industrialists (or the United States) might demand you open your market and you decide you're not in a good position to fight them, or perhaps you welcome the opportunity. This demands each system be a valid choice in its own right, without forcing the player into a kind of game they don't like playing. We never want to force the player to make a decision about which direction to take their country because the alternative is boring or impossible to manage.

But that for sure doesn't mean it should feel the same to play a Laissez-Faire country as one with a Command Economy.


Great feedback, our UX designers are on the case :)
Regarding Peasants, those are just the Workforce part of the equation, so in fact the vast majority of the total population are of the Peasant class. The intent is to show how much potential workforce you have available in the state, but side-by-side that is indeed very confusing and will also be addressed. Just wanted to clarify that the population are not actually made up of only 1/4 Peasants in 1836 Götaland!





This comment is meant as a convivence for those whom are only interested in reading the Devs responses to questions. You can access this functionality yourself at any time by clicking on the "Show only dev responses" button located at the top of any post.
Will certain civics allow private investment into railroads? Early British railways were private endeavours, only nationalised during World War One.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
If pops are needed to build the factories, railways and etc., would that be a temporary solution for not having enough jobs in the state or the country? Also is it possible to employ a bit more builders for said projects?
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
This looks absolutely terrible
Can you explain why?

"This looks absolutely terrible", without explanation, isn't actionable feedback, any more than clicking the Angry or Disagree reaction buttons is.
 
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Will you model the increasing availability of mineable material with the advance of steam engines? Just about the biggest use case for steam engines in their early phase was allowing mines to work below the water table, by draining water from mines, which was super important in say Britain, as roman mining had exhausted many deposits to this level, and it sparked a fresh mining boom in the country.

Will this increase 'reserves' of ore in a state (if indeed such a system exists?), or simply increase the number of mines which a state can host? Or will some deposits simply be locked behind reaching a certain technological level to exploit them, a bit like how coal acts as a 'latent' trade resource in EuIV?

On a related note, will researching say, 'agricultural tractors', simply magically increase the output of farms by some flat percentage as it does in Viccy 2, or will it make those farms, mines, etc, demand equipment which factories must produce, like steam engines, tractors, the like?

Sorry for the long question, but I really was always irked by Victoria II's system of instant invention-to-implementation. A huge part of industry, IMO, should be dedicated to producing goods to amplify the productivity of industries, rather then being simply universally chained down to pop consumption or construction
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
where can I sign in for the beta ? o_O
P.S: I bought paradox shares

If you bought enough to vote on the board, all you need to do is elect a board member that will ensure you can get on the beta and you're in :)
 
  • 3Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
What happens if a city's population drops, do the building remain but are just understaffed and you can't build more? Or will it work like Stellaris, where (last I checked), the newest building would be disabled when the population was too low? Also, if the former, could I choose to disable specific buildings without destroying them, to try to get the other buildings to run at full capacity? (Also also, will there be a "retraining time" for when people change to a new job?)
They will be understaffed. You can keep building if you so wish. Being understaffed the throughput is obviously penalized.
The player dosn't chose who works where, the market does. Employees will gravitate towards buildings with higher wages. Unprofitable buildings will loose workers if there are better paying jobs.
You can subsidize a building with government money to keep it afloat if it would be advantageous.
Staffing is capped per month so it isn't instant yes :)
 
  • 6Love
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions: