Players should not be able to choose which buildings are constructed under Planned Economy.

[Aramel]

I've been pretty excited about Victoria 3 overall, but one feature that really concerns me is the ahistorical ability of the player to decide which industries get constructed under a planned economy. In real life, Lenin would not be personally deciding whether to build a lumber mill in Kamchatka; these decisions were left up to the relevant state planning agencies. Perhaps the player should be able to indirectly encourage or discourage certain industries, but the final say should rest with the central planners themselves. The ability to independently construct whatever buildings you want out of a magical "state revenue" fund totally destroys the historical dynamics that were so important to this period. If the player can just "choose" to build something like a luxury clothes factory, when an armaments factory would be objectively more useful, then historical verisimilitude is thrown entirely out the window.

I really hope the devs address this by allowing bureaucrat pops to decide on their own what gets built under planned economy, or at the very least punishing the player for constructing buildings that are not optimally useful to the government. If the player has the unlimited ability to construct whatever they want regardless of the opinions of central planners, then this will be just another arcadey resource management game instead of a real historical simulation.

 

[Spartakusbund]

Agreed. The Devs have tried to get around this by talking about the player being some sort of nebulous “spirit of the nation.”

This is insulting to our intelligence. I will not explain why, but I will to continue to insist that it’s the case in a more and more strident tone.

 

[Zavaleta]

I really hope the devs address this by allowing bureaucrat pops to decide on their own what gets built under planned economy, or at the very least punishing the player for constructing buildings that are not optimally useful to the government. If the player has the unlimited ability to construct whatever they want regardless of the opinions of central planners, then this will be just another arcadey resource management game instead of a real historical simulation.

 

[durbal]

I realize you're trying to be funny, but in a way I actually agree.

 

[wilcoxchar]

I realize you're trying to be funny, but in a way I actually agree.

In other words, "I don't actually want to play the game."

 

[durbal]

In other words, "I don't actually want to play the game."

No, I think that game mechanics involving things like internal politics with planning committees and subsidies directed toward capitalist investment (and in some economic systems, dealing with both) are more interesting than just clicking on a map and pressing 'build factory' under all economic systems.

 

[XeroSilver]

Ideally I think it would be a mix between the State's planning agencies and the decisions of the leader/player. There were many instances where both Lenin and Stalin gave specific orders to build factories or otherwise manage the economy on a large and comprehensive scale. While they did not do this single handedely they still had the ability to manage their economy.I also think it should be up to the player on how to limit and control how the ai would handle the economy. Capitalists and state planning bureacrats would have different priorities in what factories to build and where. It would be optimal for the player to decide how they would want it handled. Some other games like DWU would let you enable or disable automation to help manage your economy.

 

[Aramel]

In other words, "I don't actually want to play the game."

If the devs were any good they could make a game that was fun not to play.

 

[Zavaleta]

Ideally I think it would be a mix between the State's planning agencies and the decisions of the leader/player. There were many instances where both Lenin and Stalin gave specific orders to build factories or otherwise manage the economy on a large and comprehensive scale. While they did not do this single handedely they still had the ability to manage their economy.I also think it should be up to the player on how to limit and control how the ai would handle the economy. Capitalists and state planning bureacrats would have different priorities in what factories to build and where. It would be optimal for the player to decide how they would want it handled. Some other games like DWU would let you enable or disable automation to help manage your economy.

How dare you betray the global proletariat with your imperialist lies about great Comrade Stalin whose genius singlehandedly built the Worker's Paradise in the Soviet Union. Your words spread capitalist propaganda about selfish individualism! The Committee for Public Safety demands your complete admission of treason to the worker's state by 5pm.

 

[gustavotoniato]

Agreed. The Devs have tried to get around this by talking about the player being some sort of nebulous “spirit of the nation.”

This is insulting to our intelligence. I will not explain why, but I will to continue to insist that it’s the case in a more and more strident tone.

This kind of abstraction takes the brunt of the game completely. Where once seen to be the spirit of a nation, even more so in multi-ethnic states!

 

[Arizal]

The point about bureaucrats deciding as much as capitalists is very interesting. I didn’t see the question like that. I would also envision a semi-automatic system.

Maybe if the elites took autonomous decisions, but the player could also invest a part of the buildings, and past a certain value it would harm his relationship with the relevant interest groups?

 

[BrokenSky]

Agreed. The Devs have tried to get around this by talking about the player being some sort of nebulous “spirit of the nation.”

This is insulting to our intelligence. I will not explain why, but I will to continue to insist that it’s the case in a more and more strident tone.

As we will be playing as the spirit of the nation, I look forward to being able to tell pops exactly what they want. If pops have their own interests and desires it would get in the way of player agency and act as an obstacle to being able to roleplay the nation however we like from day 1. Giving the player direct control over the economy is a great idea - now they just need to make sure we have complete control of politics too.

 

[dwarf40]

As we will be playing as the spirit of the nation, I look forward to being able to tell pops exactly what they want. If pops have their own interests and desires it would get in the way of player agency and act as an obstacle to being able to roleplay the nation however we like from day 1. Giving the player direct control over the economy is a great idea - now they just need to make sure we have complete control of politics too.

I hate this "spirit of the nation" idea, players should play as a specific person, not some ghost possessing people. I want to play as Bismarck, not Germany.

Our pops should be the ones doing the research, building the factories, voting for reforms, and leading our armies. As Bismarck, I should be bullying Reichstag members, negotiating treaties, and promoting diplomats. I should not be spending so-called "research points" or be the sole source of new bills. And of course, when I inevitably get fired for disagreeing with the Kaiser, I should be able to retire to my country estate (after rejecting a seat in the Reichstag) and complain about how no one is asking for my advice.
Edit: And where are my politician pops?

 

[BrokenSky]

You are arguing in bad faith against the developers and you know it.

The argument that the player was the "spirit of the nation" was given when somebody said that controlling the investment fund is unthinkable because the state is unable to do that. Wiz then argued that the player is not the state, but some other entity, and therefore the state argument doesn't stand. The dev didn't say the whole game was build around the assumption that the whole game is around this notion of "spirit of the nation", but instead gave it as counter argument to the incorrect idea that the player was the state and the incorrect outcomes of this idea regarding the abilities the player should have.

I'm not arguing against the developers at all. This position has been around on the forum for far longer than the developers have been stating things like it (at least as far as I'm aware) and Wiz's posts on the topic specifically have been thorough and have treated both perspectives with respect. I am arguing that there are reasons why people might feel like gameplay was being removed or simplified by this change by providing a similar argument but on the topic of politics rather than economics (the main focuses of Victoria being as I see it Economics, Politics and Diplomacy).

I will admit that in responding in a similar manner to both the post quoted and the OP I am arguing in a manner which is fairly disingenuous and not making a best-effort attempt to encourage reasonable discussion, and for that I apologize, though I do feel it not more unreasonable than for the majority of posts above mine which are written in the same style.

 

[Mr. Wiggles]

I hate this "spirit of the nation" idea, players should play as a specific person, not some ghost possessing people. I want to play as Bismarck, not Germany.

Our pops should be the ones doing the research, building the factories, voting for reforms, and leading our armies. As Bismarck, I should be bullying Reichstag members, negotiating treaties, and promoting diplomats. I should not be spending so-called "research points" or be the sole source of new bills. And of course, when I inevitably get fired for disagreeing with the Kaiser, I should be able to retire to my country estate (after rejecting a seat in the Reichstag) and complain about how no one is asking for my advice.
Edit: And where are my politician pops?

What about scrapping everything they have done until now and turn Victoria3 into a mmorpg 19th century social simulator? This way capitalist premium players could tend to the economy as if it was a garden and the other players could work in a field or fill up boring papers for the bureaucracy

 

[dwarf40]

What about scrapping everything they have done until now and turn Victoria3 into a mmorpg 19th century social simulator? This way capitalist premium players could tend to the economy as if it was a garden and the other players could work in a field or fill up boring papers for the bureaucracy

Let's not go too far, I just wanna play as Bismarck. I never said everything about playing with other people. How horrid.

 

[Aramel]

Honestly the player should be allowed to control at most Bismarck's frontal lobe. Other sections of his brain should be simulated by the AI.

 

[captain beaver]

I really hope the devs address this by allowing bureaucrat pops to decide on their own what gets built under planned economy, or at the very least punishing the player for constructing buildings that are not optimally useful to the government. If the player has the unlimited ability to construct whatever they want regardless of the opinions of central planners, then this will be just another arcadey resource management game instead of a real historical simulation.

Hopefully, they restrict the player to only be able to issue "5 year plans" under planned economies which basically acts as small modifiers to what bureaucrats decide what to build. Influenced by how strong central party leadership is of course. Better start purging early on if you want to build your worker's paradise (instead of bureaucrats insisting on building boat factories in Siberia)

 

[Anic]

You jest but the system that will be implemented will be pretty close to how planned economies worked. Player can build whatever he wants, but as he doesn't have enough time to micromanage everything bureaucrats will decide some things in his steady trying to please him.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

How dare you betray the global proletariat with your imperialist lies about great Comrade Stalin whose genius singlehandedly built the Worker's Paradise in the Soviet Union. Your words spread capitalist propaganda about selfish individualism! The Committee for Public Safety demands your complete admission of treason to the worker's state by 5pm.

is that my 5pm or yours?