Victoria 3 | Monthly Update #1 | July

  • 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.
I think that it is meant to be like IRL where people only pay so much for a given good before choosing an alternative to it. The way they explained how pops consumed goods it seemed to be meant for them to take the cheapest available of a category, unless they had a preference for something else. So I can't see how it would be extermely inefficient, would you explain with more detail?

For all the goods at their price ceiling of £45 you can see that there are a lot more buy orders than sell orders. This means that there are many consumers that would be willing to buy the good at a higher price but can't because there is not enough supply. If the price is allowed to rise this would mean that demand would decrease and supply increase until eventually a equilibrium price is reached where the amount of sell and buy orders are equal. Price controls make markets inefficient because economic surplus is maximised at the equilibrium price.

I can think of a few reasons why the devs implemented price controls (if they actually exist!!!):
  1. Perhaps it's easier to design markets and trading this way and it's already familiar from vic2. The way prices are determined currently could be through some kind of percentage difference between buy and sell orders (fake prices).
  2. Protects the player against sudden price increases and market instability. One scenario is that the player forgets to upgrade production for a good resulting in a very high price.
  3. It informs the player when they need to produce less/more of a good. This is probably the main one because the player needs a feedback mechanism to know which buildings to build and a free floating price doesn't have that. However this could also be done using profitability metrics or comparing to global average prices.
  4. They are a temporary bandaid and will be removed once the market system is properly balanced.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
That implies that furniture, groceries, fruit, and clothing all have the same base price. I doubt that's true.

There might still be price ceilings and floors. I don't think we know enough to say for sure. I don't think it'd be the end of the world that there were, though.

View attachment 740745
Are those saplings as input goods? I wonder what produce those. Are there dedicated orchard buildings?

Pretty sure it is fertilizer
 
That Farm also produces Fruit, likely because of the Second Production method.

In the video one of the guys mentions "groceries" I think that's what that fruit icon is. And by the sounds of it you can have multiple productions per building. So you could produce a lot of grain, or you can produce some grain and some 'groceries' which is the luxury version of food. So that's what I mean by you could produce 'seeds', as in select it as a second option instead of say the groceries.
In saying that as Meanmanturbo suggests 2 posts above, I think he's right that it's fertilizer. Especially given fertilizer was in vicy2 and could be used to produce explosives as well as increase crop yields.
Makes more sense than saplings or seeds.

AKA, what we really need is just a list of all the goods in the game and their icons from Paradox themselves so we can stop speculating. I bet they're having a right laugh at our comments at times... :p

 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
In the video one of the guys mentions "groceries" I think that's what that fruit icon is.
Nah:
Pops.png

Source
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
"Seeds" maybe? seems a little weird you'd use saplings to produce wheat. Maybe you can divert some of your food production to seed production rather than a specialized building??? Maybe.
The building has an apple Production Method, though, and the number of apples and sugar being produced matches the number of saplings.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
For all the goods at their price ceiling of £45 you can see that there are a lot more buy orders than sell orders. This means that there are many consumers that would be willing to buy the good at a higher price but can't because there is not enough supply. If the price is allowed to rise this would mean that demand would decrease and supply increase until eventually a equilibrium price is reached where the amount of sell and buy orders are equal. Price controls make markets inefficient because economic surplus is maximised at the equilibrium price.

I can think of a few reasons why the devs implemented price controls (if they actually exist!!!):
  1. Perhaps it's easier to design markets and trading this way and it's already familiar from vic2. The way prices are determined currently could be through some kind of percentage difference between buy and sell orders (fake prices).
  2. Protects the player against sudden price increases and market instability. One scenario is that the player forgets to upgrade production for a good resulting in a very high price.
  3. It informs the player when they need to produce less/more of a good. This is probably the main one because the player needs a feedback mechanism to know which buildings to build and a free floating price doesn't have that. However this could also be done using profitability metrics or comparing to global average prices.
  4. They are a temporary bandaid and will be removed once the market system is properly balanced.
Excellent points. It’s likely that supply is inelastic in-game, but then a classical model should see the price rise. Maybe the cap is because there are a whole bunch of pops who aren’t willing to budget more than £45 for that good, so there’s a discontinutiy in the demand function along with inelasticity of supply. That still feels artificial—some middle-class families ought to be willing to pay a little more than others for furniture and practical (“rational”) clothing—but it isn’t necessarily an abandonment of the model.

It is odd that having more “buy orders” than “sell orders” doesn’t cause prices to adjust, followed by both supply and demand.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
I was talking about this image, which clearly says Iron Mines.

https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/727653/Iron1.png




I did specifically say I was talking about the Iron Mine.

Presumably that's some iron used to maintain the equipment, given the context. Mine carts, rails, winches, lifts, pumps, ventilation, atmosphere barrier doors... . Iron and tools to maintain them, coal/oil to power them later on.

ADD: Or it's just a very dodgy UI layout.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
Presumably that's some iron used to maintain the equipment, given the context. Mine carts, rails, winches, lifts, pumps, ventilation, atmosphere barrier doors... . Iron and tools to maintain them, coal/oil to power them later on.
It just show what it produces on the same row, like in this picture:

dd5_5.png
Source
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Presumably that's some iron used to maintain the equipment, given the context. Mine carts, rails, winches, lifts, pumps, ventilation, atmosphere barrier doors... . Iron and tools to maintain them, coal/oil to power them later on.
Are you sure that isn’t coal, to power the steam engines? I know, I know, before you let that steam drill beat you down, ....
 
edit, ok Baneslave posted the exat same thing

From the production methods dev diary

dd5_5.png



Do you use luxury clothes to make luxury clothes? Or is it more reasonable to think that the first icon the output?
 

Attachments

  • dd5_5.png
    dd5_5.png
    582,9 KB · Views: 0
  • 1
Reactions:
Are you sure that isn’t coal, to power the steam engines? I know, I know, before you let that steam drill beat you down, ....

The rocks shown with the pumps, or at the bottom left of the main page are coal, the ingot is iron. You can see it on the main image of the mine there.

There's also a real chance of a dodgy early design here.