• 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 #39 - Shipping Lanes

16_9.jpg

Ave and welcome to another Dev Diary! I am Johan (No, the other Johan) a tech lead on Victoria 3 and today I will be talking about Shipping Lanes. It is an interesting addition to maritime empires in that there is now a cost to overseas possessions and sending a military expedition halfway across the globe is no longer as straightforward as in some older Paradox titles.

But first we have to talk about Convoys which are an essential part in maintaining shipping lanes. They are produced from Ports, a government building which requires Clippers (or their era-equivalents) and possibly other goods.

Each country has a set number of required convoys and not having enough will incur penalties on all shipping lanes. This may for example occur due to an overstretched colonial empire or hostile convoy raiders.

Ports also fulfill an important role in connecting your overseas territories but more on that later.

“Aha! I told you the Clipper factory was a good investment!”
DD39 01.png

Shipping Lanes represents port-to-port connections and are established for three different reasons:
  • Trade Routes to an overseas market
  • Supply Routes for an overseas General
  • Port Connections to link states in a market

Each shipping lane must have its own origin and destination port. Once established it will span across a number of sea nodes and have its own individual cost in convoys which adds up to the country’s total convoy requirement.

It also tracks its own Effectiveness score which is based on the overall Supply Network strength (more on that later) and may be reduced by any local convoy damage done along the route.

While India provides Great Britain numerous benefits such as raw materials and population it is clear that the Crown Jewel of the British Empire is by no means cheap. A massive civilian and military naval industry is required to maintain it and keep it safe and thus it is by no means obvious whether such overseas possessions are always worth it.
Note that UI and values are very much WIP.

DD39 02.png

Trade Routes between two markets which do not share a common land border must be done overseas and will necessitate a shipping lane. Land adjacency is determined from where the two market capitals are located.

The convoy cost is influenced by the number of sea nodes, quantity of goods and any goods-specific modifier (if any). The effectiveness affects the trade route competitiveness and by extension the quantity of goods shipped.
It will use the two closest ports in the respective market capitals region. If either country lacks ports no overseas trade routes can be established.

Supply Routes are required when a general is sent to a front that is not reachable by land. It will use a friendly port connected by land to the generals headquarters and trace to the closest friendly port reachable from the front.
The convoy cost is based on the number of sea nodes, battalions supplied and any general traits. Low effectiveness reduces supply status of the general and his troops. If a front is landlocked no generals can be sent there.

Supplying troops over great distances is quite an enterprise. Rather than sending an expeditionary force from England all the way around the Cape to reach India perhaps Britain should consider building a standing army using either colonial settlers or locals?
DD39 03 v2.png

Lastly, Port Connections are a bit more complicated. In order for a state to access the goods within the market it needs to be able to trace a path back to the market capital. If this path requires it to go via the sea (meaning it is overseas) a shipping lane must be established to the market capital.
This must be done for every state within the market including foreign ones. Rather than a single state having its own shipping lane a group of adjacent overseas states can form a cluster with a single exit port to the market capital - such as Bombay in the case of British India.

This assumes such a port exists however. If the connection is severed from either end then the overseas states cannot access the market and thus forms its own isolated enclave. Likewise if the shipping lane effectiveness is strained it will lower the accessibility of goods to and from the overseas states. Reflect back on previous dev diaries and consider the cascading consequences that were to occur if a maritime empire reliant on its overseas possessions were to suddenly lose control of its shipping lanes.

It is the market owner which must establish and pay for the port connections to all overseas market states. To somewhat compensate for this its subjects must share a portion of their convoys with their overlord. Subjects are still required to pay for their own trade and supply routes however.

The convoy cost of a port connection is influenced by the number of sea nodes and the overseas infrastructure usage. By extracting your raw materials from overseas colonial plantations and mines, while the high-Infrastructure manufacturing industries producing finished goods are located near the market capital, you can keep your Port Connection cost down - though at the expense of the development and wealth of your colonies.

Connecting India to the British market means it has to go all the way around the Cape to reach the British Isles which significantly impacts costs. But what if Britain somehow managed to discover a shortcut?
DD39 04.png

And lastly when combining all the shipping lanes of a country we get its overall Supply Network. As outlined early on we derive its Strength score from the costs of all individual shipping lanes compared to the country's total supply.

That is all for today! Hope you enjoyed this dev diary and in the words of Admiral John Fischer you may sleep easy in your beds. In next week's Dev Diary, Daniel will be back to tell us about how the Opium Wars are represented in the game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 169Like
  • 50Love
  • 16
  • 14
  • 4
Reactions:
"Convoys" are not to be thought of as goods as such and cannot be traded; they represent the ability to move things overseas, including the ship, crew, dockworkers, etc. Ports consume ships (Clippers or Steamers) and turn them into convoys. You can trade Clippers and Steamers with other markets, but you have to turn them into convoys through ports yourself - you cannot outsource your shipping lanes to another country (that would be best thought of as waiting for another country to export their goods to / import your goods from your market).

Regarding ports being government owned with no option to privatize them like railways, we agree that's a bit suboptimal - having Port-based trading companies make big bucks selling goods transport to Trade Centers who make clever decisions whether it's cheap enough to buy them given the profit of the routes they manage etc sounds really neat, but also one step too far in complexity at the moment. Your supply network is crucial for your ability to operate an intercontinental empire, and seeing your overseas expeditionary forces go undersupplied because some Pops on the other side of the world decided to switch to coffee instead of tea, bringing the profit of trade centers and thereby ports down below the point where they can offer competitive wages with your Steel Mills... well, it sounds cool, but is not a UX challenge we want to try to tackle at this time.
Combined with the continuous consumption of clippers and steamers and lack of individual civilian ships this seems to abstract the merchant marine process ok; nations that produce ships will still get money for those that rely on buying them for transport, and in the event of war could throw a nation that relies too heavily on importing them into chaos. I think there's still some friction with the fact that the national merchant marines of this era were both private entities that operated across borders but also something that was nationalized and called in for military service in times of war. I would still like to see a bit more effort put into simulating the actual characteristics of economies from this era though, and having naval trade so heavily abstracted and non-privatized is definitely suboptimal as you put it.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
1. Are landlocked countries fully dependent on their neighbours to access goods through shipping lanes? If I'm Switzerland and I want to import silk from China - will I depend on France, Italy and Germany having these goods supplied, or is there anyway for me to autonomously arrange for the import of this good directly from the source country?

2. If three countries, of which one share borders with the other two, but these two do not share any border (Picture Brazil, Chile and Argentina), is there any way for these countries to trade with each other through land? In this example, would Brazil be able to trade with Chile through land if there is some sort of agreement with Argentina? I imagine customs unions will do this job, but there are other ways to do so? Or would Brazil be forced to trade with Chile through shipping lanes? nvm if realistically shipping lanes would be cheaper in this case because of the Andes or whatever, not the point of the question
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Don't tell me they aren't trying to stretch by making small dev diaries about small topics just so that we can reach a September release.
I got the same feelings, to be honest, but didn't want to be the first one to say so. If they are mentioning the Opium Wars as a diary topic, we will surely get one on the American Civil War. And the gates for topics are now wide open. We still don't have any diaries on Political Parties. September is probably the optimistic target, pending any future delays.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
Reactions:
So does this mean if e.g. Brazil is in the French market and Brazil wants to make a trade route to Argentina, France is forced to pay to supply a shipping lane from Brazil to Paris to Argentina instead of Brazil just trading with Argentina directly over their land border? How does that make any sense?

Edit: What if for example Argentina is also in the Japanese market, and then the trade route has to go Brazil > Paris > Tokyo > Argentina, this just seems like it's going to get absurd very quickly. If you're a junior partner in a market couldn't you just sabotage the senior member by creating intentionally convoluted trade routes that the senior is then forced to pay for?

Also, what happens if Brazil wants to trade with a landlocked country it borders but the market leader doesn't like e.g. Bolivia. How does the Brazil > Paris > Bolivia route function?

That's the downside of joining another countries market rather than merely trading with them. Especially overseas markets.

However since you are the one doing the trade route, not the market leader, it is Brazil that has to pay for the convoys to ship the goods to Paris (and then the convoys to ship it back again). Assuming junior partners are allowed to create trade routes anyway.

Paris can trade with Bolivia through Brazilian ports since your market is considered part of the French market so they have full shipping rights.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I got the same feelings, to be honest, but didn't want to be the first one to say so. If they are mentioning the Opium Wars as a diary topic, we will surely get one on the American Civil War. And the gates for topics are now wide open. September is probably the target, pending any future delays.
Can we get a Dev Diary for the Paraguayan War and the many rebel uprisings (who were not Jacobins, mind you) in Brazil?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
It seems like bilateral trade for port connections increases convoy use, but as long as the convoy usage in one direction doesn't exceed the convoy usage in the other shouldn't it not change, as you're just utilizing what would otherwise be empty ships sailing to pick up goods?
 
It will use the two closest ports in the respective market capitals region. If either country lacks ports no overseas trade routes can be established.​
If the US' market capital is in New york, wouldn't this make trade between Japan and the US establish a lane all the way around South America instead of more logically using a port in California?
 
  • 5
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
If the US' market capital is in New york, wouldn't this make trade between Japan and the US establish a lane all the way around South America instead of more logically using a port in California?
Even in the late 1800's, more stuff was traded between the east and west coast via shipping than transcontinental railroad; it makes more sense than you'd think.
 
  • 4
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Smaller dev diaries outlining some of the more complicated historical journal entries or how a country might play was always a given. They're probably doing this one now mainly because they need one more trade-related dev diary to finish out March next week while staying on theme for the month. It doesn't really mean anything with respect to release date, it's just that there's five Thursdays in March and the big overview of the topics only needed four diaries.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Do I read it correctly, that the shipping lanes alyways take the shortest route?
Like shipping from the West to the UK always ends in the West Country and From the East in East Anglia?
 
Hi. Nice DD. Could you clarify if its the player who sets the shipping lanes/routes or are they fixed since the game start? Thank you
It's a result of the players actions (sending a general overseas, setting up a trade route or building ports in overseas territory). The actual shipping lane path is the shortest/lowest cost possible.

Looks great! Really a big improvement over vic2's logistic system... one that doesn't even exist :p

Based on the dev diary I have two questions because two things are not entirely clear to me:
  • What happens what a country in a customs union (partially) loses its connection to the market capital? Lets take Canada as an example. What happens if the connection to London is severed? Does 'forming an enclave' mean that every state becomes isolated or that Canada functionally leaves the British market to form its own market? What happens if the connection only is partially disrupted?
  • Do all subjects have to share convoys with the senior member of the market, or only if they're overseas? If the first is the case, wouldn't Prussia have an overflow of convoys, while Britain would be at a relative disadvantage?
Other than that, great dev diary. Really cool stuff and completely clear to me.
If the connection is severed Canada is isolated from the British market and must rely on local goods and prices. Likewise the rest of the British market cannot access Canadian goods. No new market is automatically created but Canada can of course leave the British market and form their own should they wish.

A partially disrupted connection lowers Market Access. For example at 50% market access then the price of Wheat is based on 50% off the british market and 50% of the local price.

Can you mod a production method to reduce amounts of convoys required for a specific good or in the case of batallions for war,or it is not possible?
Thanks for any replies about this.
It's something we've discussed but not yet had time to implement
 
  • 25
  • 4Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
In regards to:
The convoy cost is influenced by the number of sea nodes, quantity of goods and any goods-specific modifier (if any).

Would you say more about "goods-specific modifiers," please? Could we have a few examples? What are these intending to model?

It seems pretty clear that distance (# of sea nodes) and bulkiness (quantity) would play a part in how costly in convoys any trade route would be.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Can you elaborate a bit how overland trade works? Am I right to assume that’s it essentially free in terms of transportation and doesn’t tax your infrastructure in any way? Is it the same for overland supply routes?
Also, it seems a bit counterintuitive that building processing industries in colonies would add to the strain of your shipping. Like, if UK builds textile mills in India to serve local demand instead of bringing cotton all the way to England and then bringing back the fabric, I’d expect their convoy usage goes down, not up
If two market capitals have a direct land connection then it will trade overland, for example Berlin and Vienna but not Berlin and Paris. Land connections dosn't cost anything at the moment no.

The Shipyard produces steamships or clippers, the Port consumes steamships or clippers. depending on production method. A Port consuming steamships will produce more convoys per level/employee
Correct!

Do I read it correctly, that the shipping lanes alyways take the shortest route?
Like shipping from the West to the UK always ends in the West Country and From the East in East Anglia?
We have played with a few different alternatives but currently thats how it works yes
 
  • 25
  • 4Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Some more questions:

1. Will the sealanes (their locations, throughput, speed of delivery) be affected by weather / primary sea winds and currents? IRL until steamships took over completely shipping routes were dictated by winds and currents. Sailing ships went with the wind, not along a shortest direct lines between two points. See Brouwer route or Clipper route for more info.

2. Will the sealanes and ports and trade routes in general be affected by season and weather? For example Saint-Petersburg port freezes in winter and until arrival of reliable icebreakers commerce stopped for cold months. In connection with previous questions - some trade winds are seasonal.

3. Will ports be logistical hubs only? Will there be separate buildings for fishing / seafood gathering / whaling / corals gathering / pearls gathering and other maritime pursuits?

4. Will ports provide revenue per visiting ships to represent harbour fees and other multitude of services provided in ports to ships (repair, fuelling, provisioning, R&R for the crews)?
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
If the connection is severed Canada is isolated from the British market and must rely on local goods and prices. Likewise the rest of the British market cannot access Canadian goods. No new market is automatically created but Canada can of course leave the British market and form their own should they wish.
Ok so when you say local goods and prices you mean in the state. So you could have a state starve while its land-connected neighboring state has a glut because the sea-connected Market center's connection is severed?
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Great dev diary, although I can't wait to see how it works in combination with other aspects of gameplay (mostly naval warfare....).

Two questions:
  1. You said that you can't send troops by sea to landlocked fronts. But say GB needs to send your army to quell a colonial rebellion in Niger, and Nigeria has a "friendly port". The frontline will be landlocked, but how can British troop even reach it if not by sea?
  2. How do ports work to establish market access between places that are also connected by land? Say that my sulfur from Sicily needs reach Naples where the explosive factory is located. Appennines in Sicily and Calabria make it hard to develop "land" infrastructure (I am here positing that the Messina Strait is considered as a "land" connection) - but sending them by sea would make much more sense, at least until the railway infrastructure is developed enough*. How would road, railway and port infrastructure combine in determining the market access?
* spoiler alert - it is still not very developed even as of today
1. If British troops can reach the Niger front from the friendly port in Nigeria then it's fine.
2. Unsure how a mixed scenario would work, perhaps @lachek can explain this one

Will there be a system to simulate piracy? And for fleets to protect sea-lanes for everybody else?
It would be a good way to simulate the pax britannica and an incentive for small nations to get a navy protecting their coasts
Convoy raiding exists but there is no separate piracy mechanic right now other than perhaps via events.

In regards to:


Would you say more about "goods-specific modifiers," please? Could we have a few examples? What are these intending to model?

It seems pretty clear that distance (# of sea nodes) and bulkiness (quantity) would play a part in how costly in convoys any trade route would be.
For example one unit of Automobiles consumes more convoys than one unit of Wheat. These are scriptable for each goods.
 
  • 22
  • 9Like
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
For example one unit of Automobiles consumes more convoys than one unit of Wheat. These are scriptable for each goods.
Previously convoy cost was calculated based purely on the number of nodes in the route. Does this mean that convoy cost has been adjusted to be proportional to goods in general now as well as have the good-specific modifiers? So a route trading 100 grain will take more convoys than one with 50?
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: