Are goods created out of thin air?

[mightygaz]

Why did vic3 have to be more abstracted than vic2 when computers are that much more advanced nowadays

you mean like how they support newer better CPU instructions that can help improve performance? i mean no one is going to object to that, right? right?

 

[3arat]

Is it that difficult to imagine designing a, as you suggested, hammer in a way which produces an inferior tool but uses less raw iron?

The game clearly tells the player that 1/3 more iron ore is used. Are you really asking me to imagine a smaller different number in a game about economy? And then you back that up by comparing lack of iron in Japan 1841 to shortages in WW2 Germany, that's certainly a wide imagination...

 

[Rabid]

The game clearly tells the player that 1/3 more iron ore is used. Are you really asking me to imagine a smaller different number in a game about economy? And then you back that up by comparing lack of iron in Japan 1841 to shortages in WW2 Germany, that's certainly a wide imagination...

So your issue is with the fact that the UI reads 61 units consumed? If it read 40 units but charged you the same total amount that it currently does for 61 units would that be ok?

 

[FishieFan]

So your issue is with the fact that the UI reads 61 units consumed? If it read 40 units but charged you the same total amount that it currently does for 61 units would that be ok?

Its not the ui, its the engine and coding itself
In vic2, pops used rgos to make resources, artisans and factories use resources to make processed goods, technology affected how efficient all these processes were.

 

[Splorghley]

Why did vic3 have to be more abstracted than vic2 when computers are that much more advanced nowadays

You mean the game in which the only viable way to build a powerful economy was by switching to full-blown communism? The game where by game's end, the world economy was completely nuts?

Don't get me wrong, I loved Victoria 2. But all Vicky games are highly abstracted, and those abstractions will always require balancing and do wonky things. No computer is powerful enough to simulate the complexity of millions of individuals' purchasing decisions, not even close.

 

[mateusarc]

The way I see it, the abstraction could be interpreted as this: when the number of buy orders is higher than sell orders, it means that, beyond just raising prices, the factories need to increase production without increasing infrastructure, by either raising working hours, creating an extra shift, using subcontractors (for example, temporarily using the capacity of another factory) etc. In the opposite scenario, the industry will simply have to produce beneath their capacity, since stockpiling is not an option (and would be risky/expensive if this was real life). So there are no 100 units of tools being created or disappearing magically. We're dealing with flexible production capacities, so the production in the game will always meet the demand (inside of a range). I agree that the lack of a stockpile requires a strong suspension of disbelief. But we have to keep in mind that in real life creating a huge stockpile is avoided by the industry, because it's a stagnant asset that only generates costs.

 

[David29]

I had the same thought process during my play through. Same games (like the Anno series) have a direct 'input -> consumption -> output' model. As the OP noted, there is missing input that does affect prices but will still allow for production. My personal view for it is that the State supplies what it can through production and trade and then the deficit is made up by private purchase.

 

[johnty5]

I'm currently playing as Japan and my closed economy is trading with nobody. My iron mines produce 40 iron and my tooling workshops could consume 61. It makes perfect sense that the price increases because demand is higher than supply. As somebody who has studied economics that is the part, I understand . What I don't understand is why my tooling workshops still consume 61 units of iron. There are only 40. Where are the remaining 21 coming from?

I think the devs said that building's cash reserves are meant to represent stockpiles of goods as well as actual "cash".

So your situation with 40 iron sell orders and 61 iron buy orders means:

• less money going into the tooling workshops' cash reserves, representing using up of stockpiled input goods.
• the iron mines only get paid for 40 sell orders - as they're only selling 40 to the tooling workshop who are supplementing that with 21 from their stockpiles.

Similarly, if there were 61 iron sell orders and 40 iron buy orders, there'd be:

• more money going into the tooling workshops' cash reserves, representing that they're stockpiling input goods.
• the iron mines get paid for 61 sell orders - as they're selling 61 even if they're not immediately being used by the buyer.

 

[FishieFan]

You mean the game in which the only viable way to build a powerful economy was by switching to full-blown communism? The game where by game's end, the world economy was completely nuts?

Only viable implies theres only one way to play. The world economy was nuts irl in 1931, its one reason ww2 broke out

Don't get me wrong, I loved Victoria 2. But all Vicky games are highly abstracted, and those abstractions will always require balancing and do wonky things. No computer is powerful enough to simulate the complexity of millions of individuals' purchasing decisions, not even close.

The purchasing decisions were simulated in vic2, and ran quite well, better code with more powerful computer could have allowed the same for vic3

 

[FishieFan]

I think the devs said that building's cash reserves are meant to represent stockpiles of goods as well as actual "cash".

So your situation with 40 iron sell orders and 61 iron buy orders means:

• less money going into the tooling workshops' cash reserves, representing using up of stockpiled input goods.
• the iron mines only get paid for 40 sell orders - as they're only selling 40 to the tooling workshop who are supplementing that with 21 from their stockpiles.

Similarly, if there were 61 iron sell orders and 40 iron buy orders, there'd be:

• more money going into the tooling workshops' cash reserves, representing that they're stockpiling input goods.
• the iron mines get paid for 61 sell orders - as they're selling 61 even if they're not immediately being used by the buyer.

There are no national stockpiles anymore, goods merely appear rather than enter supply chain at start

 

[Cymsdale]

There are no national stockpiles anymore, goods merely appear rather than enter supply chain at start

Abstraction is a difficult concept to understand, I agree.

 

[johnty5]

There are no national stockpiles anymore, goods merely appear rather than enter supply chain at start

I think you misunderstood my comment. I know there aren't specific goods stockpiles like there were in V2. I'm saying that (if I'm remembering correctly) the devs said that's because those stockpiles are abstracted into buildings' cash reserves.

 

[kingsword]

To think that people lamented about "magical world market which buys everything" and after 15 years of hardware improvements and software design experience, we end up with factories that have a portal back to Vic2's dimension to use those as input materials. It was for this reason!

 

[csward53]

Because of how the Import/Export Markets works i am sitting at -9000 Coal right now. the only complaint i get is that it is expensive for the government.
I'm already at Protectionism and making +3XXk from tariffs.
Every time i try to expand my capacity the french and British also expand their demand.
This feels to outlandish. My economy is lacking like 25-40% Coal but its still running and its still making profit like crazy. I am already at lowest level of Taxes because i make so much money with the random Imports of other nations i have little to no control over. Only the +20% Tariffs. I could embargo the whole nation but i would just like to really really priories my national market before it gets exported.
It also makes very little sens as goods should ALWAYS be used up in the local market first as this does not add Tariffs+Transport costs.
Either that or the prices should not be capped. Maybe that's the reason why they are artificially capped? Because it does not work otherwise.

Isn't there an economic system in game where you can forbid exports of certain goods in the game? Or exports allowed only if domestic demand is satisfied? Hmm would be nice. Embargoing the British and French would raise prices in your market, lowering your pops standard of living and risking the wrath of great powers.

 

[Splorghley]

Only viable implies theres only one way to play. The world economy was nuts irl in 1931, its one reason ww2 broke out

The purchasing decisions were simulated in vic2, and ran quite well, better code with more powerful computer could have allowed the same for vic3

... did you even play Victoria 2? Because I'm starting to have some doubts here.

The purchasing decisions in Victoria 2 were made by a hamster on crack running across a ouija board. Governments hoovered up all existing cash into their vaults, never to be spent or seen again, causing a late game liquidity crisis. China westernised by hitting the magic "I am Western now" button, and its pops' skyrocketing demand overshot the hard coded cap on RGO production which doomed all other countries to a cycle of unrest and revolution. As should go without saying, none of this is why WW2 broke out in the real world.

 

[fadi_efendi]

You mean the game in which the only viable way to build a powerful economy was by switching to full-blown communism? The game where by game's end, the world economy was completely nuts?

Don't forget the railroads that ran on 0 workforce and 0 maintenance.

 

[johnty5]

Don't forget the railroads that ran on 0 workforce and 0 maintenance.

Victoria 2 railways being staffed and maintained out of thin air tells you everything you need to know about fan-betraying, casual-targeting, practically-mobile-game-making publically-traded 2009 Paradox.

 

[belechannas]

My take is that the OP's 40 coal sell orders represent the amount offered *at the initial price*.

The amount of coal in the ground is essentially infinite (the mines can produce for 100 years...) so if demand exceeds supply, as in Econ 101, the supply will increase to meet demand, and the price will rise.

It seems to me that the game produces the correct trends without necessarily depicting every detail of how they emerge.

 

[WARenie]

"Sell/buy orders" are just a confusing attempt to name "quantity of force which pushes prices down" and "quantity of force which pushes prices up". Industrial sector does not buy or sell anything, it pushes some prices up and some down while "stored wealth" changes depending on prices and current "strength" of industrial sector. I don't know why, but it often feels that paradox games are almost afraid of their own (usually quite smart and cool) abstractions and try to sugarcoat them via overly concrete naming, which only lead to confusion and unrealistic expectations.

 

[ero_sk]

It's a design decision for the reasons already mentioned by others. What's important to realise is that the same concept applies to other systems in the game as well. Things such as good are abstracted, meaning that they generate movements in the economy without the actual underlying "things". This is also why the stockpiles don't exist. They simply can't, because there are no "physical" goods to stockpile. It's an abstract system of supply and demand to generate price fluctuations. Once again- whether someone likes it or not, it's a deliberate design decision.

Similarly with the buildings. Some people ask for certain building types to be constructed at province level. This goes, once again, against the very framework of the game's mechanics. Buildings cannot be constructed at a province level, because they are state-level abstractions.

Yet another example- POP cultures and their representation on the map. There have been complains about certain groups not being represented on the map, but that's because of the level of abstraction that the game implements. POPs are state-level concepts, so it's simply not possible to accurately show POPs at province level.

Can people disagreeing with my post say why they disagree? If I said something invalid then I'd like to be corrected. If you disagree because you don't like the design decisions behind the system, then there is no point in disagreeing with me because I'm merely describing how the system works. I'm not its advocate, lol.

@Austregisel, @LikeAPhoenix