• 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 #13 - Standard of Living

DD13.png


Hello again and welcome to yet another walkthrough of some interrelated systems fundamental to Victoria 3’s economic model: Standard of Living, Wealth, Pop Needs, and Consumption.

All Pops in Victoria 3 have a Standard of Living score between 1 and 99, which represents - by a perfectly scientific and objective metric, don’t @ me - precisely how great their life is. Pops with levels 1-4 are labeled Starving, levels 5-9 are Struggling, and so on through Impoverished, Middling, Secure, Prosperous, Affluent, Wealthy, Lavish, and at levels 60+, Opulent. We don’t really expect a lot of Pops to reach levels 60+ but - knowing you folks - we’ve left plenty of headroom to accommodate your mad economic experiments.

Standard of Living affects two major aspects of the game: birth- and death rate, and Pop loyalty.

Birth rate is simply the percentage of children born to Pops each year, while death rate is the percentage of Pops who die. Both values start out high and decline with increasing Standard of Living, but birth rate declines slower than death rate, leading to a net increase in population growth with increasing Standard of Living. This system models that increasing Standard of Living tends to lead to longer life expectancy but declining natality. Each parameter can be modified independently by a variety of effects.

Scratch your priesthood’s back and they’ll scratch yours. Note that Interest Group Traits can vary between Interest Group variants, so a different religion might provide a different benefit.
fruitful.png


There are side effects to emancipation! But while reduced population growth here initially appears to be a penalty, increasing the proportion of industrial workforce at the same time tends to lead to increasing Standard of Living, which provides a net increase in population growth.
women-workplace.PNG

Pop loyalty is altered whenever their Standard of Living increases or declines from its current value. Martin will get into much more detail on this in next week’s Development Diary on Political Movements.

A Pop’s Wealth attribute forms the foundation for its Standard of Living. Pops can also gain more intangible boosts or penalties to their Standard of Living from any number of sources.

Pops accumulate Wealth over time while their weekly income exceeds their weekly expenses. Conversely, if a Pop’s expenses exceed its income, Wealth will decline. How large their expenses are depends on what and how much they consume, which is also dependent on their Wealth. What this means is that as long as a Pop’s income remains the same, and the cost of the goods and services in their state and market remains the same, that Pop’s Wealth will over time drift towards exactly the level of consumption they can afford to sustain. Of course, as Wealth changes the consumption also changes, which affects the prices of the goods in the market, which might in turn affect their wages, dividends, etcetera.

This weekly shortfall of funds will eventually lead to a reduction in Wealth and thereby consumption, but since the shortfall is only a small fraction of its income it will take several months to have an impact on the Wealth score and thereby the Standard of Living.
peasant-net-income.PNG

Wealth has a number of functions in addition to forming the basis for Standard of Living. A Pop’s raw Political Strength (excluding any such power conferred by the country’s Voting Franchise, which is treated separately) is dependent on their Wealth. Some privately operated Institutions provide benefits to Pops only in relation to their Wealth. Many Professional Qualifications also require Pops to have a certain amount of Wealth.

Each Wealth level is defined by a set of Needs and an amount of “value” that needs to be spent on goods to fulfill that Need. This “value” is defined in goods base prices, such that the Need for Standard Clothing for a Pop of size 10,000 with Wealth level 14 might be fulfilled by buying £87 worth of Clothes, assuming perfectly balanced supply and demand. If the actual price of Clothes where the Pop lives is over-demanded, their cost to fulfill this need will also be higher. As a result, cheaper goods means wealthier, happier Pops.

This Peasant Pop’s Wealth is low (6), so it consumes only the basic necessities.
simple-needs.png

Many Needs can be satisfied by a variety of different goods. For example, the Need for Heating requires Wood, Fabric, Coal, Oil, and/or Electricity. These can be purchased in any combination assuming the total base prices add up to the required value. When given this option Pops will attempt to make a rational purchase decision based on which goods are the most available, satisfying their Need with some mix of these goods or even only one, if that’s the only one available. In this way an inland, isolated state might not consume any Fish at all as long as it has sufficient Grain, Fruit, Meat, or even packaged Groceries to satisfy their Need for food.

A breakdown of how the Peasants in Ceylon spent their heating budget this week.
heating-for-peasants-in-ceylon.png

Goods can also appear in several different Needs categories. Groceries, Meat, and Fruit can fulfil the need for both Basic Food and Luxury Food, but Grain or Fish can only fulfil the need for Basic Food. As a result, maintaining only Millet Farms and Fishing Wharfs to meet your food needs will mostly satisfy your poor Pops, while focusing on Livestock Ranches and Banana Plantations will cause wealthy Pops to inflate the price of the available food supply and further impoverish the poor. Operating productive Food Industries that can turn Grain and Fish into Groceries is good for everyone in your country, and frees up any available supply of Meat and Fruit to be consumed by those with a Need for Luxury Food.

A breakdown of who requires Basic Food and how it can be fulfilled.
basic-food-substitution.png

Lower Wealth levels have only a handful of Needs, such as Simple Clothing, Heating, Basic Food, and Intoxicants. The middle levels introduce more refined Needs like Household Items, Services, Luxury Drinks, and Free Movement. Really wealthy Pops consume increasingly vast quantities of Luxury Goods to impress and outdo their peers. In some cases Needs disappear entirely in favor of more diverse Needs. The Need for Simple Clothing which can be satisfied by both Fabric and Clothes will, as a Pop is raised from abject poverty, be gradually phased out by the Need for Standard Clothing which include only professionally sewn items.

Compared to the Wealth 6 Peasants, these Wealth 17 Bureaucrats are more diverse in their requirements.
middle-needs.png

Introducing new goods into your market will help you diversify your economy and alleviate the demand on crucial industrial goods. Importing Oil - either petroleum from newly discovered deposits or whale oil from the few places in the world that produce it - will cause your Pops to buy some quantity of it for heating instead of Coal or Electricity, which lowers the price of those goods and help make your industries more profitable. Introducing Opium into your market will decrease Pop demand for Liquor and Tobacco... for good or ill.

Some goods are favored over others by default if available. Once Electricity is available to them, due to its convenience Pops will prefer to buy it over Wood or Coal, even if they’re the same price. Some goods can be replaced by other goods entirely, while others will always be required to some bare minimum. Train travel can completely replace the need for having your own Automobile to drive around in, but having an Automobile doesn’t ever completely remove the need for an occasional train ride to see your cousin who lives all the way in Paris.

In addition to these factors cultures can develop Obsessions for certain goods, and some even have Taboos they must abide by. A country can also encourage or discourage the consumption of certain goods using Authority, perhaps in an effort to avoid enriching a hated enemy or entice Pops to buy something that’s heavily taxed over something that is not. This impacts the purchase habits of Pops affected despite this being irrational from a strictly financial perspective.

What if the Bengali were obsessed with the status afforded to them by Luxury Furniture? This could happen due to events, or organically because Luxury Furniture is a really prevalent luxury good in markets where a lot of Bengali Pops live. But even if this habit is developed around their homelands, Bengali Pops that migrate abroad - to the USA or Australia or Japan - will continue preferring Luxury Furniture to other luxury goods, and will suffer financially if the same level of access is not available there.
bengali-obsessions-taboos.png

Let’s close out by considering the difference between this and the consumption model from previous games. In Victoria 2, Pops have different Life, Everyday, and Luxury Needs based on their Type (what we call Profession in Victoria 3), both in types of goods and quantities. Pops in Victoria 2 always strive to get promoted into Types which require more advanced, luxurious goods in larger quantities, but will fail to do so if they cannot afford it. Since certain advanced Types of Pops in Victoria 2 perform their duties objectively better than their less advanced counterparts (e.g. Craftsmen, Clerks) it becomes important to retain access to advanced goods in order to ensure that your workforce is internationally competitive.

In Victoria 3 this formula is turned on its head. An Engineer is not intrinsically better than a Machinist who is not intrinsically better than a Laborer, and there’s no ideal national proportions between them you need to maintain in order to maximize your competitiveness. Different Professions do fulfil different functions, but it’s the Production Methods of the Buildings they work in that determine what function they serve. By choosing what Buildings to construct and which Production Methods to activate, you create the opportunities for these Professions which in turn impose changes to the population. What types of goods you need to ensure access to in order to keep your population satisfied is not driven directly by what professional opportunities you have created, but rather by what Wealth development and Wealth distribution these changes have resulted in.

Professions that are part of the Middle Strata in this state are considerably better off than those in the Lower Strata, and not far off from the Upper Strata. It’s very likely this state hasn’t started industrializing yet, since Shopkeepers - who run the pre-industrial economy - are Middle Strata, and Upper Strata Aristocrats aren’t always particularly wealthy if their income originates from exploiting the Peasantry on Subsistence Farms. Since the Middle Strata is already wealthy enough to demand Transportation, construction of Railways in this state is likely to be both profitable and beneficial for population growth and general happiness.
sol-breakdown.PNG

As a result, Pops in Victoria 3 won’t always strive to ascend to a higher social strata, nor will an Aristocrat always have a higher income or goods consumption Needs compared to a Clerk. All of this is driven by market forces - a qualifying Clerk would gladly become an Aristocrat on available land if that comes with a higher income than remaining a Clerk, and this increased income will gradually result in an increase in their Wealth and consumption demand. Conversely, Aristocrats don’t demote to Laborers because they can't acquire enough goods to sustain their lifestyle - they would only turn to such desperate measures if they become landless (unemployed) and are trying to avoid starvation, or if by some miracle taking on a relatively well-paid Laborer job in a particularly profitable factory would actually yield a greater paycheck than their failing farm provides them with.

In practice this means that it's important in both games to secure your populations’ basic needs to prevent starvation and dissent, followed by appeasing their desire for ever more advanced or exotic goods in larger and larger quantities to increase the size of your economy and power on the world stage. But while reaching this commonly pursued end goal in Victoria 2 often meant pursuing a certain optimal population distribution no matter what else happened throughout the game, the Professions of the Pops you end up with could be vastly different between games in Victoria 3! If you build a colonial plantation economy, your Aristocrats might remain as dominant by endgame as they were at start. If you're a manufacturing powerhouse on the cutting edge of technological progress, your middle strata Pops might come to rival the Capitalist class in wealth and power. If your high taxes are reinvested in vast Institutions your power base might be dominated by Bureaucrats and Academics. If your workers own the means of production, your Laborers might even be wealthier - and consume more luxuries - than your neighbor's Aristocrats.

These possibilities for diverse Pop distributions also result in very different political tendencies in your population, which lead to demand for different kinds of Laws. While in Victoria 2 it’s primarily the rising Consciousness of a greater ratio of more advanced and literate types of Pops that drives a desire for reform in a liberal direction, Victoria 3’s more open-ended consumption model and the diversity of Professions it can create could result in your population having very different political desires by endgame depending on the path you’ve taken. This requires your political machinery to be working in tandem with your economic engine, both to create the right conditions for your Pops and to satisfy their changing desires.

Next week, we will learn more about these desires as Martin introduces us to Political Movements, which themselves are strongly connected to Standard of Living. Until then!
 
  • 242Like
  • 156Love
  • 18
  • 5
Reactions:
You can discourage consumption of a good and embargo imports of it, but if there's a local supply you can never eliminate consumption of it entirely, as that isn't a feat even modern day states can achieve.
Does the act of discouraging a good drive up its price? Or will the price fall because POPs don’t put out as many buy orders for it?

I ask because Prohibition lead to decreasing consumption and higher prices. Though, alcohol is a pretty inelastic good.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Will consumption of certain goods have negative consequences? For example, will widespread consumption of Opium decrease productivity/increase death rates, or Tobacco increase death rates?

On the flip side, will consumption of other goods have possible positive consequences? For example, pops switching from Beer to Tea/Coffee as a beverage should increase productivity and eliminate alcohol's negative side effects.

I believe there's a theory that the wide availability of Tea in Britain was a factor in allowing factories to be more productive, especially combined with the fact that people were not routinely drunk due to consuming Beer every day at every meal
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Does the act of discouraging a good drive up its price? Or will the price fall because POPs don’t put out as many buy orders for it?

I ask because Prohibition lead to decreasing consumption and higher prices. Though, alcohol is a pretty inelastic good.
Decreases consumption over time, meaning increased prices if supply remains the same.
 
  • 25
  • 7Like
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
Will consumption of certain goods have negative consequences? For example, will widespread consumption of Opium decrease productivity/increase death rates, or Tobacco increase death rates?

On the flip side, will consumption of other goods have possible positive consequences? For example, switching from Beer to Tea/Coffee as a beverage should increase productivity and eliminate alcohol's negative side effects.
Achievement idea: Fu Manchu. As Qing, export enough opium to Britain to cause them to hit an especially dire penalty.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
There are side effects to emancipation! But while reduced population growth here initially appears to be a penalty, increasing the proportion of industrial workforce at the same time tends to lead to increasing Standard of Living, which provides a net increase in population growth.
This is a lie. We know that from the 60s on (around the time the largest push towards women going into the workforce happened) natality has been on the decline ever since. While I understand why it is balanced this way for gameplay reasons and the whole "what comes next should be better than what comes before" aspect of a gameplay loop, but fact of the matter is that this is not how it plays out in reality and is one of the reasons for why a strong immigration agenda is pursuit across the west. All to compensate for this effect. -5% does not cover it, it is more like -50% at a minimum.

I am also surprised that electricty has an automatic bias towards it coded in. From Real Life, we know that in home wall sockets had to spread via a deal that the eletricity companies had made with construction companies, not the costumers themselves wanting it. Only once it had widespread adoption, did it became a thing that people wanted and preferred to coal.
 
  • 20
  • 5
Reactions:
Great stuff! I think substitution system goes a long way to solve the issues there were in Vic2 and give a responsive economic model. I’m still a bit confused how exactly utility functions work within a category of goods in the absence of taboos, fascination and other special casesIs the utility of a good always assumed to equal its base price, so pops always follow supply and demand, or is there a default good and utility ratios like in the screenshot on food, so these utilities ratios can be different from base price ratios? Would a pop prefer the default good if buying something different is not significantly cheaper, or would he pursue ideal mathematical optimum? Would there be a preference for a diversified package if pops can afford it (which is suggested by classical utility function)? Would be great to get more details on specific mechanics like that.
 
Does the introduction of new goods into the market shift dynamically?

As in, does the supply/demand of goods curve over time or do they get set a certain price like in Victoria 2? Cheap oil at first, then more expensive over time as the rich pops have more bargaining power than peasants for goods they need?

Thanks
 
To address both these birds with one stone, we need the granularity of 100 levels instead of 10 to ensure that Pop needs don't flip-flop like that but remain at relatively stable Wealth due to market forces. Otherwise the sudden shift from Wealth 4 (40) to Wealth 5 (50) in a large Pop could cause demand to increase so much it devastates their ability to pay for it next week, causing them to drop back down to 4, etc. So the answer to why we don't see see-sawing and instability is because of careful tuning like that.


Also that.
I see, so that means needs aren't segregated together (like in Vic2, with life, everyday and luxury), but each and every need has its own individual wealth range, correct?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
This is a lie. We know that from the 60s on (around the time the largest push towards women going into the workforce happened) natality has been on the decline ever since.
In the game it's not natality that increases from increased Standard of Living, it's net population growth. So by enacting Women in the Workplace, natality immediately declines by 5% but will cause Dependents to gradually turn into Workforce, a process which can take many years to maximize. Assuming this leads to increased Standard of Living for most Pops over time, natality will decrease further, but mortality will decrease more, potentially leading to net population growth despite the two-pronged decreases to natality.

Between 1836 and 1936 the world's population doubled, largely due to industrialization and the increased Standard of Living it brought. Women's Suffrage and emancipation were also major aspects of the era in many countries that also experienced explosive population booms. We're attempting to model both these phenomena independently. How it turns out in your game might be different.
 
  • 48
  • 21Like
  • 8
  • 1Love
Reactions:
I'm usually a lurker, but after yet another Dev Diary which left me totally astonished, I felt the need to congratulate the DevTeam for the work done so far. Up until now, Victoria 3 seems to be on a great route, improving those parts of Vic2 that I myself considered in need of serious rework. The economic model and the possible interaction with the political level look really promising, with a good enough level of detail and interaction, while not loosing itself in a doomed exercise of trying to recreate reality. I do consider myself a history and economics nerd who is not easy to excite, but @Wizzington and his team nevertheless managed it. Keep up the good work, and don't let the sirene calls of the forums discourage you! ;)

I am no expert on this, but didn't the increase of women in the workforce mainly come about due to the two World Wars, rather than 'feminism'?
It's a complex topic, which is reflected in the rather simplistic explanation models of present day discussions regarding everything around 'feminism' (this is directed to both 'sides' of the discussion, to be clear).
To keep it short: Women were always part of the workforce. Ever since the start of industrialization, women were slowly making up a bigger part of the labour force (in the industries). This is due to technological advancement, better education and reduced requirements to physical strength in the labour force. Hygenic and medical advancements played a big role, too (the pill is probably the most famous example, but having reliable water supply, plumbing, electricity and sanitary equipment had an even bigger effect, just spread out over longer time). The massive loss of men during both world wars were accelerating this trend, but in no means were the source of it.

Should really birth rate ALWAYS decrease due to increasing standard of living? I thinknin many cases more money means better chances to start a family! Please reconsider, I think there should be situations where increasing standard of living, along with better infrastructure, will lead to huge population boom, especially in less developed nations that modernize
You are right in so far as that there is a jump in birth rates once you get out of "objective starvation" - meaning not having enough to eat. But after that, there is a constant decline in birth rates, even before the development of the pill, generally independent of the access to reliable birth control (these just strengthen the drop in birth rates). But if death rates and life expectancy are taking into consideration, it still ends up at "higher standard of living = bigger population growth". At least for most of that time frame. It becomes complicated in the 1920/1930, and especially from 1950 onwards.

[Birthrates and income levels of modern U.S.]
True for modern economies. Don't remember ever having read anything comparable for 19th century economies. So while the J-curve it might be valid back then, I simply don't know. But this only effects the very upper strata of the population (the 0,01%) so would in no means have any effect on overall population growth.
 
  • 9
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Heating also represents fuel for cooking, etc
still Sri Lanka is using fabric for heating. :D

In Victoria 2, Coffee was a good that increased the cosciousness in some pops. I liked that model where coffee shops were places for ideas to be shared, argued, debated and then it resulted in the enlightment.

Without consciousness it seems this scenario will not happen again.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Yes, I meant to write decreased prices!
Have you guys considered adding some kind of black market mechanic to capture the difficulties of trying to stamp out consumption through a punitive, legal approach?

And are organized crime syndicates in the game at all? They were present if a bit shallow in Vicky 2, though I imagine Turmoil might have filled that gap in Vicky 3. Might be good grist for DLC if it’s not in the base game.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Have you guys considered adding some kind of black market mechanic to capture the difficulties of trying to stamp out consumption through a punitive, legal approach?

And are organized crime syndicates in the game at all? They were present if a bit shallow in Vicky 2, though I imagine Turmoil might have filled that gap in Vicky 3. Might be good grist for DLC if it’s not in the base game.
I think organized crime, black markets and so on would be a really interesting thing to add to the game, but we don't have any plans to explicitly simulate them for release (I know I keep saying that in this thread, but there are so many things I want to add to the game but where we need to prioritize the core features that we do have and ensure they're as good as they can be on release).
 
  • 79Like
  • 18
  • 6
  • 1Love
Reactions: