• 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:
Let me take a step back I've been quite critical of these dev diaries posting concerns about specific elements of them that's not because I think these are all bad I actually like quite a lot in them I merely don't talk about it that much cause I want to make the game as good as possible with any critical feedback I can give force instance multiple rgos per province is a wonderful change I like.

This can come off as me complaining about everything but its mainly me focusing on the specific bits I'm worried about with that being said I hope an auto builder for larger nations is really well done and the ai works I personally feel when your economy is that large you should be less focused on individual buildings and more about securing the supply of resources for your economy.
 
  • 3
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.
I understand why this decision was made and that it probably won't be changed at this point, but I still think that direct control versus letting the game play itself is kind of a false dichotomy. There is a middle ground, which is an indirect control of the economy, through the usage of incentives, national focuses, state purchases, taxes, tariffs etc. I think this could be just as fun, if not more so than direct control as it challenges the player to work around the limitiations of the state in capitalist economy and creates a meaningful difference between capitalist and command economies.
 
  • 30
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Let me take a step back I've been quite critical of these dev diaries posting concerns about specific elements of them that's not because I think these are all bad I actually like quite a lot in them I merely don't talk about it that much cause I want to make the game as good as possible with any critical feedback I can give force instance multiple rgos per province is a wonderful change I like.

This can come off as me complaining about everything but its mainly me focusing on the specific bits I'm worried about with that being said I hope an auto builder for larger nations is really well done and the ai works I personally feel when your economy is that large you should be less focused on individual buildings and more about securing the supply of resources for your economy.
Im with you on this one

as someone who was accused of being a "forum warrior bloomer", I really wish wiz would reconsider not using the autonomous ai approach.

It's the free market, it should beable to run itself. The player should be able to influence it ofcourse, but it should be able to run itself.
 
  • 15
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Will there be other differences aside from "who reaps to profit", when it comes to private vs government owned (i assume any building can be government owned), to for example simulate the basically complete lack of any incentive to innovate and improve goods in communist nations?
 
I understand why this decision was made and that it probably won't be changed at this point, but I still think that direct control versus letting the game play itself is kind of a false dichotomy. There is a middle ground, which is an indirect control of the economy, through the usage of incentives, national focuses, state purchases, taxes, tariffs etc. I think this could be just as fun, if not more so than direct control as it challenges the player to work around the limitiations of the state in capitalist economy and creates a meaningful difference between capitalist and command economies.
I see both sides. Personally i love the idea of being involved in everything in a playthrough but could easily see myself wishing for a different, more passive style in another playthrough. different systems would be ideal.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
Im with you on this one

as someone who was accused of being a "forum warrior bloomer", I really wish wiz would reconsider not using the autonomous ai approach.

It's the free market, it should beable to run itself. The player should be able to influence it ofcourse, but it should be able to run itself.
I see it this way as well when your a small country say Belgium it makes sense to micro your states but when your nation is massive and the economy many times larger I feel like the gameplay should change from building micro to how can I secure access to these resources and markets for my economy
 
  • 3
Reactions:
The game urgently needs to have an auto-build mode where you may set some targets and let the AI do the micro. It will be necessary for huge states to be enjoyable and also calm down the people for whom the player building things breaks the immersion.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
Yes

Ruin your rivals by embargoing or manipulating the prices of paper so that his bureaucracy collapses!!!

This is Victoria at its best
The goods preference system needs to allow Pops that want to use paper to substitute parchment instead
 
how quickly do buildings fill up with workers? If I build an iron mine will it take months to employ the workers or will it be instant? Also is the bar under each building employment?
This is one of my biggest fears.

I hope it works in a organic and gradual way.

A building should lose and gain workers every month, not just use workers as if they were a stable manpower pool, workers should give this Vic2 organic feeling that they have their personal and individual circumstances.

I don't want to see "you click a button and you get an instant benefit" mechanics like EU4 has.
 
  • 19
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Can you please explain to us what the 2 arrows inside parentesis means?

Also, I think I'm getting a bit cofusing (just by seeing the pictures) by weekly/annual money data.

Isn't it productivity & employee - so the subsistence farm is producing more but the people are earning less (probably more farmers turned up stretching the money further) whereas the Urban center is producing more and the people are earning a lot more.

Gah - ninja'd. I wonder if the arrow is number of employees as InvisibleBison suggests or wages as I thought.
 
I see it this way as well when your a small country say Belgium it makes sense to micro your states but when your nation is massive and the economy many times larger I feel like the gameplay should change from building micro to how can I secure access to these resources and markets for my economy
you are absolutely right, that is typically the playstyle I employ back in 2. But at some point microing everything is not just tedious, it is also error prone.

The free market approach was the real life solution to that inefficiency, not having this facet represented in a game where capitalism/socialism is a strong theme seems odd.
 
  • 6Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
how quickly do buildings fill up with workers? If I build an iron mine will it take months to employ the workers or will it be instant? Also is the bar under each building employment?
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.
 
  • 59Like
  • 17
  • 11Love
  • 1
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.
Nobody's asking for a system where the player doesn't interact with buildings, just that the player actively building everything shouldn't be the default gameplay mechanic. There's inherent downsides to gameplay and plausibility to having to micro every building. The player should be more the gardener than the plant; shaping and directing the growth, sometimes with a light touch and sometimes with a heavy hand as opposed to growing every inch themselves.
 
  • 20
  • 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.
delegating repetitive mechanics to the AI doesn't have to be a bad thing. In Victoria 2 I usually started with state capitalism to start my industrialisation but after a while I switched to laissiez faire.

And I play a lot of games with extreme micromanagement: aurora 4x, dwarf fortress, dominions 5. Victoria 2 giving the posibilty to choose how the industry would go, and it also being tied to the policy (laissez faire, interventionism, state capitalism, planned economy) made Victoria 2 unique in their genre. Because all the city builders ask for the industry micromanagement (like the anno series)

Dominions 5 is a good example of AI doing things that the players usually execute, like the tactical battles that are automatic.

Aa I said I don't think your vision will change, but I also don't think there is some gain at repeting the same indutry mechanic to say Pharaoh, a 20+ years old game.
 
  • 14
  • 5Like
  • 1
Reactions:
This is one of my biggest fears.

I hope it works in a organic and gradual way.

A building should lose and gain workers every month, not just use workers as if they were a stable manpower pool, workers should give this Vic2 organic feeling that they have their personal and individual circumstances.

I don't want to see "you click a button and you get an instant benefit" mechanics like EU4 has.
I don’t think this a reasonable fear. We know POPs promote and we can see buildings that aren’t full in some of these screenshots.

I am curious about how unemployment is handled. One of the things I didn’t like in Victoria 2 is that unemployment was a straight up malus, and there wasn’t really any modeling of the effect on wages (and thus profits) of having either a full employment economy vs. an economy with a large reserve army of the unemployed.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Deforestation? Depletion of fish stock? (but if we dont overfish them, then the evil neighbours will..). Leading eventually to concepts like Exclusive Economic Zones, which helped somewhat but far from a complete solution. One more reason to own the north pole and say eastern med as inner seas. Or a british empire based in india, africas eastcoast and all the way via burma, thai arm, singapore and so on making indian oc.. sry British ocean a inner sea! Controlled by suez, indonesian straits around africa or australia the sole entrances. each controllable by forts and or navies. Private lake of Queen, stay out! Especially You frenchies, germans and slavs!!
Whales for one being pretty badly wiped out by the later stages of the 1836-1936 run.

Trees atleast can be replanted, and presumably is among the adoptable methods of production. Die Guter Der Erde by Juri Semjonov (1930?) has quite a bit about destruction of the forests and the wealth they provide for those that. Then again, the book covers every single resource from fish to pig to diamonds to phosphor to coal to lumber, coffee, chocolate and caoutchouc. Viewing railroads as a grand destroyer of forestry, with pictures of how the us eastcoast was all forests even 50 years after the beginning of the game more or less the whole way to missisippi. Railroads destroyed on their own and more with people moving inland.
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Yes, but it's a step back from the Victoria 2 system where capitalists built the factories. The way this reads you're building all of it.
Which is a very good thing. The vast majority of players don't want to be relegated to watch the game play itself, only to please the free market identity politics of an outspoken minority. That's not what I'm buying. You'll be roleplaying the investors too, so what.
 
  • 33
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions: