• 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 #65 - Patch 1.1 (part 1)

16_9.jpg

Hello and welcome to the second post-release dev diary for Victoria 3. Today we’ll be talking about the first major post-release patch, which we’re aiming to get to you before the end of the year. This patch (1.1) is going to primarily focus on game polish: bug fixing, balancing, AI improvements and UI/UX work, while the next major free patch (1.2) is going to be more focused towards making progress on the plans we’ve outlined in our Post-Release Plans DD by iterating on systems like warfare and diplomacy. With that said, there’s a few more significant changes coming in 1.1 as well, which we’re going to go over in this and next week’s dev diary.

The first of these changes is a rework of the interface for individual Pops, with a particular emphasis on improving the visualization of Pop Needs. In addition to the general overview, there are now separate tabs for Economy and Consumption, with Economy showing a more detailed breakdown of the Pop’s income and expenditure, as well as their top 5 Goods expenditures, and the Consumption tab showing a detailed breakdown of all their Goods expenditures, along with pricing information for the State and Market. We also plan to iterate on Pop Needs further in the future to give you a better idea of what your population needs are country-wide.

DD65_1.png


DD65_2.png

The next significant change in 1.1 is a rework of Legitimacy: some frequent criticisms we have received about the political system in Victoria 3 is that Legitimacy doesn’t matter enough and isn’t clear enough about its effects, as well as that elections don’t have enough of an impact. This rework aims to resolve all those problems by making several changes: First, legitimacy, while still a number from 0 to 100, is now divided into five categories with differing effects, some of which will increase or decrease based on the actual number and not just the threshold:
  • 0-24: Illegitimate Government: This government is considered blatantly illegitimate by most everyone in the country. This legitimacy level reduces the approval of all opposition IGs, makes it impossible to enact laws, and generates a steady stream of radicals in increased numbers the lower Legitimacy is.
  • 25-49: Unacceptable Government: This government is generally not considered acceptable to the people of the country. Laws can be enacted, but opposition IGs will disapprove and radicals will be created over time, though in amounts less than in an Illegitimate Government.
  • 50-74: Contested Government: This government is considered to have somewhat shaky foundations. Opposition IGs will disapprove slightly but otherwise there are no ill or good effects.
  • 75-89: Legitimate Government: This government is considered proper and legitimate. Over time a small number of Loyalists will be generated, with increased numbers the higher Legitimacy is.
  • 90-100: Righteous Government: This government’s legitimacy is considered to be unassailable. In addition to generating Loyalists over time, enactment time for new laws is cut in half.

The way you gain legitimacy has also been altered in democracies, with the share of votes (rather than just clout) represented in Government now having a direct effect on Legitimacy, the degree to which depends on the laws - under more restrictive voting systems, Clout can still be more important than votes, but as more of the population becomes enfranchised votes grow in importance and under Universal Suffrage it should be virtually impossible for a government that doesn’t have the voters behind it to be considered legitimate.

Despite being the largest party in terms of Clout, the Whigs alone are not considered Legitimate due to only commanding 47% of the votes in the last election.
DD65_3.png

Lastly for today, we’ve also made a balancing change to the Church and State and Citizenship laws - previously, the only balancing consideration for these laws was that less tolerance gave more Authority, which we felt was neither particularly balanced nor really a complete representation of the reasons that a country might want to discriminate against part of their population. To try and address this, we’ve made it so that by default, slightly more radicals are created by Standard of Living decreases than Loyalists from Standard of Living increases, but offset this with modifiers on the more restrictive laws that increase Loyalist and reduce Radical gain among the accepted parts of the population - the more restrictive your cultural/religious tolerance, the greater the effect on the part of the population that actually falls within it.

DD65_4.png

That’s it for today! Next week we’re going to continue talking about Patch 1.1, which as I said at the beginning of the dev diary is planned to be released before the end of the year. We’re also still working on another hotfix (1.0.6) which should hopefully include some late-game performance improvements and other fixes and which we are aiming to release sometime next week.
 
  • 272Like
  • 70Love
  • 16
  • 11
  • 5
  • 4Haha
Reactions:
  • 90-100: Righteous Government: This government’s legitimacy is considered to be unassailable. In addition to generating Loyalists over time, enactment time for new laws is cut in half.
Please please please don't do this. There's no reason for such a huge difference between full enactment time at 89% legitimacy and halved enactment time at 90%. It makes that cutoff far more valuable than any other marginal change in legitimacy for an entirely arbitrary reason. If you want high legitimacy to reduce enactment time, perhaps add a scaling modifier that goes from 0% at 90% legitimacy to -50% at 100% legitimacy. But the idea that there is no difference between 100% and 90% legitimacy but a huge difference between 90% and 89% is frankly just bad design.
 
  • 18Like
  • 6
  • 2
Reactions:
Currently there is a problem where the party that wins an election cannot become part of the government if they are angry.

For example, say the USA radicalizes the Southern Planters by abolishing slavery, and then the Democrats win the next election. It is not possible to put them into the government, the game forces me to continue playing with an illegitimate losing party.

Who are Interest Groups loyal to, happy with, angry with, etc? Is it the disembodied "spirit of the nation" or is it the government in power? Is John Calhoun mad at Henry Clay and the Whigs, or is he mad at me? Who am I playing as? This design philosophy does not seem to be consistent.
 
  • 20
  • 4Like
Reactions:
This looks good, although I do hope you might add "Electoral Laws" or "Anti-Corruption" categories in the future to represent the ability for non-majority governments will be able to enforce their will with sufficiently authoritarian policies.

Also, will you be making another pass over IG ideologies? It's really weird that the Roman Curia is a key supporter of secularizing the Papacy because they prefer Monarchy to Theocracy, especially when the Roman Landowners have a special ideology to make them prefer Theocratic governments.
Not too much comment on when its getting a pass but trust me this is something thats on our list of continual areas of improvment. I think Tolman has been working on it but I am not sure when its going to be vetted for a branch. The reason I am ignorant on this is because I've got my nose in economic balancing but more on that in the future. If you have specific suggestions, discord and forums is a great place to put it. Community and QA are regularly rounding up the feedback for us.
 
  • 18Like
  • 3
  • 2Love
  • 1
Reactions:
France does need to be nerfed, their growth rate is ridiculously high, and they usually are super stable politically for most of the game, with highest SoL in the world, which obviously should not be the case

If France gets 80 million population by 1900, I don't think a right solution is to make other countries also achieve their historical numbers doubled. The solution is to nerf France
Which will be handled by general balancing of other systems and methods which will result in nerfing France.
The trick is to not just nerf France but make the systems behave where they are disadvantaged and others see their value possibilities grow.

Everyone says to nerf France, I say I won't just "nerf france" and make them have a modifier that adds a negative and hampers them. I will get the systems to work better and with other nations being able to put up a challenge that will hamper them.
 
  • 11
  • 10Like
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1Love
Reactions:
This comment is reserved by the Community Team for gathering Dev Responses in, for ease of reading.


Ruck said:


The changes are nice, but i personally can wait for them even longer, those are not important things for now. What we really need as fast as possible is a performance patch or maybe even more than just one. Many can not play longer than 1870-1880 cause of the incredible slow down.

You should prioritize performance for now over absolutely everything else.
That's the fun thing, we can work on both at the same time. The Artists, Designers, UX Designers are not the one's dealing with performance issues.
The performance issue is known to us, we delayed putting it into the hotfix because it wasn't yet vetted. You will get it in 1.0.6 sometime next week.
And after that there will continue to be a developer working on performance.

But trust me when we show you UX work and maybe some of the stuff I might tease next week, you don't want me working on performance instead - I will actively make it worse since I don't know what I am doing on that front.


LucasG21 said:


This looks good, although I do hope you might add "Electoral Laws" or "Anti-Corruption" categories in the future to represent the ability for non-majority governments will be able to enforce their will with sufficiently authoritarian policies.

Also, will you be making another pass over IG ideologies? It's really weird that the Roman Curia is a key supporter of secularizing the Papacy because they prefer Monarchy to Theocracy, especially when the Roman Landowners have a special ideology to make them prefer Theocratic governments.
Not too much comment on when its getting a pass but trust me this is something thats on our list of continual areas of improvment. I think Tolman has been working on it but I am not sure when its going to be vetted for a branch. The reason I am ignorant on this is because I've got my nose in economic balancing but more on that in the future. If you have specific suggestions, discord and forums is a great place to put it. Community and QA are regularly rounding up the feedback for us.


DogTheBoss said:


Will the UI improvements be taken or inspired by current popular mods?
So, we try to not outright copy mods but we do take alot of inspiration from them. We are regularly keeping eyes on those things which are the top because that signals areas for us that could use improvement. Sometimes we do take them, make a few tweaks to make them meet our standards and implement them in a future patch.

Its a fun balancing act but if there's a cool mod, we see it.


Shake Appeal said:


All sounds good to me, especially getting another hotfix before 1.1.

Do the devs have a recorded stance on France's dominance and (relatedly) the extreme effectiveness of Treaty Ports?
A few short term solutions came to mind, I'm not sure which one we insitutied for 1.1
And yes I am away of France's current dominance. The trick is not nerfing France into oblivion but lifting the others to be able to challenge them. I am on it.


gkbba said:


can we expect some trade UI changes, its the most obnoxious part for me to navigate.
Planned for the future, but reworking an entire screen needs both myself and Aron to have time to stop assisting on other things.
UX Resources is as always at Paradox, a bottleneck. Don't be disheartened that you don't hear anything, we don't want to show it to you until its done and ready for feedback.


milliontonnez said:


Also, please make disasters like cyclone relief scale with province GDP and not the entire country's GDP.
Its ridiculous that a state with 58K pop needs a disaster relief of 4M just cuz its my late game Germany
I've got a code support request out for this, its in the queue but also folks want their perforance and crash fixes so its not the hightest priority relatively but my eyes are on it. I balanced the events down for 1.1 a bit until I get that support.


ryan404000 said:


Wonderful, besides my constant want for Warfare to be entirely overhauled, can we please get some sort of unemployment map mode? It's so frustrating trying to find where my unemployment is
Until I am able to get to this, open up the production lense and zoom in, the map will have a popup of unemployment and the maplist will assist.
 
  • 22Like
Reactions:
If there is a pet peeve that I greatly detest, it is the constant need to scroll through. Frankly, I think Victoria 3, while I enjoyed the game, is the classic example of what to NOT do in this respect. I personally find scrolling to be more time consuming and less time-effective than, say, clicking through tabs, even with mouse-wheel button on my computer mouse. I strongly encourage Paradox to look into ways to minimize the need for scrolling as much as possible, at least where it would make sense.

Some of the possible options to deal with this would be making more use of tabs or adding filters, especially for the Market interface. Another option is to remove unnecessary or extraneous content such as portraits from Military interface (since you can see their portrait by another mean anyway). There are probably other options that I have not thought of or forgot.
 
  • 19
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Does the UI show better the percentage of votes an IG is holding?

Can we get a popup for election results?

Generally, can we get pop ups when something we should care about happens?
 
  • 15
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Also, please make disasters like cyclone relief scale with province GDP and not the entire country's GDP.
Its ridiculous that a state with 58K pop needs a disaster relief of 4M just cuz its my late game Germany
 
  • 17Like
  • 2
Reactions:
I am not quite certain the analogy works here. Having a UI where people can easily find the relevant information (e.g., the vote share of each party) would lead to people wanting a good UI? and that's ... like ... a bad thing? Also, "we cannot hire people because that won't solve the problem instantly"... well, yes, and?

I am not sure what's the point here.
You're coming in on the end of the conversation, I stated earlier in the thread that the attention of a UX designer on X is usually a bottleneck so progress on some fronts is delayed until when they are not busy assisting other matters.

Someone decided to be a bit smarmy as if we should just hire more UX designers and boom, problems solved. And I like a fool decided to be smarmy back.

No one is saying that UI is not important, but our UX Designers are heavily outnumbered by the rest of the development team which is why sometimes you see more progress in bugfixing and polishing of X instead of Y. And folks on the forums tend to make the assumption because we aren't throwing a fix of Y at you immediately, we don't agree its a problem, which is untrue.
 
  • 9Like
  • 5
  • 4
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
Is it safe to assume the overflow bugs (Gdp, loyalists, clout,, and so forth) will be vanquished in 1.0.6? My trade unions are so happy they've collapsed into a hate-singularity, and so powerful they don't exist.
This phenomenon is well documented in "Das Kapital"
 
  • 16Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can’t wait to see how the new legitimacy system just get rendered irrelevant entirely by just simply adding another interest group in it via government reforms so you can get it above 50.
Wouldn't that simply be WAD?

Clearly the legitimacy changes aren't there to make players struggle to form legitimate governments - they're there to force players to either bring interest groups they don't want into government (because of votes or clout) or to maintain low legitimacy governments. It'll be an interesting choice.
 
Last edited:
  • 17
Reactions:
Wonderful, besides my constant want for Warfare to be entirely overhauled, can we please get some sort of unemployment map mode? It's so frustrating trying to find where my unemployment is
 
  • 15Like
Reactions:
Very, very happy to see these changes to elections and tying Votes and Legitimacy together :)

PLEASE make it so that the election screen actually shows us the votes though!
 
  • 14
Reactions:
Still waiting for a response on what the future plans are for the mess of a notification system. This isn't a niche concern, the notification system has been consistently called out as subpar. See here for example.
 
  • 14
  • 1
Reactions:
Will the way how IGs are added to parties also change? Because in two of my games I would have kind of a deadlock under the new system, as my legitimacy is low, but I basically cannot change the government as some of the IGs want to be in the parties, but are too angry to be in the government. And under the new system I would not even have the chance to change the laws to make them happier (not that I would actually want to do that).
 
  • 8
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Ok, so I do like the game and am enjoying it. But I am also continually frustrated by bugs and UI troubles. And the amount of changes coming immediately post-release seems to support the view that the game released too soon.

Also, I have some quibbles with the proposed changes to legitimacy. First off, illegitimate should not be barred completely from passing laws. And the legitimacy in democracies should be higher than just the count of votes. Are two-party systems inherently illegitimate just because each party only gets half the vote? There needs to be some accounting for system legitimacy and not just IG/party legitimacy.
 
  • 12
  • 11
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The changes are nice, but i personally can wait for them even longer, those are not important things for now. What we really need as fast as possible is a performance patch or maybe even more than just one. Many can not play longer than 1870-1880 cause of the incredible slow down.

You should prioritize performance for now over absolutely everything else.
 
  • 8
  • 5Like
  • 5
Reactions: