• 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 #34 - Canals & Monuments

16_9.jpg

Good evening and welcome to this week’s Victoria 3 development diary! Today’s topic is Canals & Monuments, unique buildings with special inputs, outputs, and effects.

The Vatican City is the seat of the Catholic Church and a great asset to the Papal States in Victoria 3. As Europe developed and industrialized, the power of religious authority in national politics declined steeply but never lost its relevance. Can you change the course of history and renew the temporal power of the Pope?
DD34 01.png

Monuments are unique buildings only available in specific states, each with its own 3D model on the map. They make use of some of the more interesting aspects of the production methods system; just as buildings can output Goods, they can also output both national and local modifiers, Capacities, and effects on the pops working there. The Vatican City for instance outputs the Influence capacity as well as greatly increasing the political strength of the Devout Interest Group. Meanwhile the White House adds a multiplier to your national Bureaucracy output as well as increasing the amount of political strength Pops gain from votes. Not all Monuments are present at the start date. Some, like the Eiffel Tower, must be constructed, and Monuments are significantly more costly and time-consuming to construct than standard buildings. Monuments are subsidized by government funding, so if you decide that a Monument is unaffordable or that you aren’t interested in its effects (for instance if you as communist Italy no longer want to Church to wield so much power) you can simply defund them. On release we intend to have eleven different Monuments in total.

The Panama Canal links the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Finally completed in 1914 after decades of planning and construction, ships no longer had to take the long and treacherous route around South America to travel between the East and West. Yes, we can see the trees and houses in the Canal - we’ll fix it!
DD34 02.png

Like Monuments, Canals are unique buildings with a special set of inputs and outputs. But the true allure of constructing a Canal is that it allows you to create new connections between sea nodes, allowing ships to travel through the isthmuses of Panama and Suez. This significantly reduces the Convoy costs for trading and supplying armies across vast ocean distances, as well as your vulnerability to unscrupulous rivals trying to disrupt your supply lines.

We use the Journal Entry system to track the progress of your canal survey. Behind the scenes a variable is increased every month until the goal is reached, which triggers the completion event. The Journal Entry also acts as a reminder that you are spending a lot of Bureaucracy on this project, and that it will eventually be made available again once the survey is complete.
DD34 03.png

Constructing a Canal is far from trivial. Before any work can begin, an extensive survey of the region needs to be conducted, costing a hefty chunk of Bureaucracy for the surveyor for around 3 years. Either the owner of the state or a Great Power with an Interest in the region can conduct a survey. Any number of countries can potentially conduct their own surveys and compete to build the Canal themselves.

We’ve made the conscious decision to avoid starting wars or Diplomatic Plays through scripted content wherever possible, instead offering incentives for the player to start their own Plays and encouraging the AI to pursue Journal Entry goals. In this case, the player has the option to either gain a Claim on Sinai or to improve relations with the owner country, helping you along your chosen path but not locking you into a particular course of action.
DD34 04.png

Once you’ve completed your survey, the path diverges depending on whether you own the appropriate land. If you already own either a Treaty Port or the whole state region you can simply begin constructing the canal, but if not you’ll need to find a way to acquire it, either through monetary or coercive means. A Decision becomes available allowing you to purchase a Treaty Port in the appropriate State Region in exchange for a series of very large weekly payments, assuming you can convince the local rulers to part with the port. You might however decide that you’d rather keep your money and start a Diplomatic Play for a Treaty Port or the entire State Region (the former will cost you a lot less Infamy), which might lead either to a peaceful concession to your demands or to war.

And that’s all for today! Next week I’ll be handing you over to one of our Content Designers to talk about Expeditions and Decisions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 202
  • 172Like
  • 28
  • 17Love
  • 5
  • 3Haha
Reactions:
This may be the first DD that has given me pause on the direction of Vic3. This feels very "gamey" and will introduce a non-trivial amount of power creep (control these monuments to min-max) that I don't think has helped EU4 and didn't help CK2.
Exactly this. Magical Civilization-style wonders were a bad idea in EUIV and they’re a bad idea in Victoria 3.
 
  • 40
  • 2
Reactions:
My reading of the initial post was that it's up to the controller, not the owner, as to whether they want to demolish it. This means that if you take control of the province temporarily during a war, you can turn monuments into rubble. I also understood from the post that once the monument is gone, it's gone - you can build a copy of the Eiffel Tower, sure, but the original was the one that mattered and now it's gone.

On your point about expansion - I think it a) creates incentives for the defender to blow things up if they think they're going to lose them permanently, which is a dramatic story beat; and b) creates drama when a vital place falls even if you're not likely to be able to hold it in the peace deal. Washington DC, for example, was one of the most fortified places on Earth during the US Civil War, and it wasn't because it was a major population centre or production centre. If the Confederacy had burned it, it would have been a big dramatic moment.
An earlier dev diary mentioned that upon occupying a state, the occupier wouldn't be able to demolish buildings in that state, to prevent the gamey strategy of an opponent deleting all your factories if they managed to occupy a state.

If the monuments are indeed just another building, then I'd expect this limitation to demolishing would also apply. That said, I would appreciate a Big Red Button of sorts which did appear when you occupy a state containing a monument where you can blow it up.
 
  • 4
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Great point! You're right that some of the current effects of monument-type buildings are perhaps unsuitable for the game's theme. As usual the exact numbers are WIP and we definitely appreciate the feedback. I hear you on the White House's national Bureaucracy multiplier for example - will rework this into a larger bonus to local Government Administration buildings instead.

On the other hand, some monument buildings ought to have national effects, as symbols of the nation's accomplishments or identity - the Eiffel Tower or the Hagia Sophia are good examples of these. And if the Ottoman Empire conquers Rome and don't want their Devout IG to gain additional political strength from having taken control of the Vatican, they (or anyone who controls it) can certainly burn it to the ground. It is just a building, and follow all the normal building rules. Monuments don't have any special powers to affect the country in non-immersive, "magical" seeming ways - if they do, we may have made a mistake, and mistakes can be easily fixed. :)
But the Vatican shouldn’t have any impact on non-Catholic pops at all.
 
  • 19
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can I build the Pentagon? Can I spend stupid amounts of money on the Keil canal?
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
please tell me that big steel lady in long island won't make pops fell ways into immigrating there...
That's one that I think it should work that way, it was a symbol for a new life and many people sent letters back to their families in Europe talking about the big copper lady literally working as a beacon for the boats bringing immigrants.
 
  • 17
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The White House should not be any special because it's the White House. It's just the seat of power of a country. Otherwise, we need to to do this for every country and allow them similar bonus by having the Catete Palace if playing as Brazil, or Miraflores Palace, if playing as Venezuela, or the Elysée Palace if French, and so on and so on...
The White House is kind of misleading as a name, but a similar bonus it gives should be present in DC. Unlike most other national capitals except Brasilia (and that's out of timeframe), DC was purposefully constructed as a city to be a governmental and bureaucratic center. So it makes sense for it to have a government administration boost in the state. Plus with every single US state being its own state region now, the US is going to have more incorporated states than other comparable countries at game start and most of the time throughout the game, so it probably needs a bit of a bureaucracy boost just to realistically administer what it should have and act normally in most games. Whether that bonus in DC represented by a state modifier or a monument, and whether that monument is the White House, the Capitol, the Washington Monument, or the National Mall as a whole is really the less important part of what is being represented.
 
  • 10
  • 8
  • 1
Reactions:
That's one that I think it should work that way, it was a symbol for a new life and many people sent letters back to their families in Europe talking about the big copper lady literally working as a beacon for the boats bringing immigrants.
that iron lady was symbol thanks to existing laws not the other way so yes she was symbol of new life but not because she was simply there
 
  • 9
  • 7
Reactions:
Whether that bonus in DC represented by a state modifier or a monument, and whether that monument is the White House, the Capitol, the Washington Monument, or the National Mall as a whole is really the less important part of what is being represented.
I think changing the monument to be the National Mall could be a good idea, so as to represent everything there instead of weirdly limiting it to the White House which is just... a house.
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
I think White house should be penalty to United States. If you lose or defund it, people would no longer take the government quite as seriously as they used to. Same could be applied to some other monuments as well. Imagine Ottomans losing Hagia Sofia.
 
  • 4
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Can you list the 11 monuments or at least states that have them that you plan to have in the game? I guess at least 1 for every starting great power plus a few for the others?
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I think changing the monument to be the National Mall could be a good idea, so as to represent everything there instead of weirdly limiting it to the White House which is just... a house.
Agreed. I think it should at the very least be changed to the Capitol Building, but the Mall as a whole would be a much better representation.

Plus now that I think about it the Mall would be a good test for having improvable levels of monuments with being able to improve it with the Washington Monument, Smithsonian, and the Lincoln Memorial over time. :D
 
  • 6Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Agreed. I think it should at the very least be changed to the Capitol Building, but the Mall as a whole would be a much better representation.
A problem here is that the Capitol Building as we know it doesn't exist in 1836. Having it as the Mall allows it to be period agnostic while conferring bonuses through the whole game period.
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
The White House is kind of misleading as a name, but a similar bonus it gives should be present in DC. Unlike most other national capitals except Brasilia (and that's out of timeframe), DC was purposefully constructed as a city to be a governmental and bureaucratic center. So it makes sense for it to have a government administration boost in the state. Plus with every single US state being its own state region now, the US is going to have more incorporated states than other comparable countries at game start and most of the time throughout the game, so it probably needs a bit of a bureaucracy boost just to realistically administer what it should have and act normally in most games. Whether that bonus in DC represented by a state modifier or a monument, and whether that monument is the White House, the Capitol, the Washington Monument, or the National Mall as a whole is really the less important part of what is being represented.
What about Russia?
What about St. Petersbourg?
What if United South America will be made? Shouldn't they have a chance to build their own administratic center? Why they don't need burocracy boost?
 
  • 13Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Vatican, I can get behind. The building with its employees (only 200 of them though? really?) can encapsulate the institution of papacy. I can accept that it gives diplomatic influence bonus, because the papacy *is* special. The devout political strength should probably be a modifier conferred by being a theocracy, rather than by a monument. The building can be turned off for non-Pope or non-Catholics.

The White House on the other hand is a dumpster fire. To begin with, the White House's recognition in modern world is the consequence of the USA being a super power, not the other way around. It's not inherently all that special among government buildings, so the bureaucracy bonus seems undeserved. And don't get me started on giving voting strength for people. What if I want to play an oligarchy or dictatorship? Do I have to move out of the White House because for some reason it's making the nation more democratic?

I understand the need to create content for the game, and the desire to celebrate something in history as special. Unfortunately I think most monuments should be no more than a token of prestige.
 
  • 26
  • 5Like
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I think a good way to split the difference re:The White House is to one, shift to a "planned capital" monument, giving administrative bonuses, and two, allow other countries to develop the administrative center of their capitals in similar ways providing bonuses.
 
  • 6Like
  • 2
Reactions: