|
Baronjutter posted:I'm curious if locally produced and consumed items, like food, will actually use up infrastructure? It would be nice if a reward for having a state-local production chain would be less infrastructure use. "Infrastructure Usage" doesn't get combined across states, or count against the amount of "Infrastructure" available in other states, so it doesn't appear an intra-market bottleneck is possible. The only mentioned interaction between states is that a state's railroad building can't provide more Infrastructure than provided by any of the other railroads along its route to the market capital (or exit port, presumably?). I think it makes sense for local supply satisfying local demand to not reduce infrastructure consumption, at least not by very much. The stuff still needs to be shipped, it still happens through railyards and wharves, tying up capacity that could be used for import/export.
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2021 04:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
I am extremely okay with not needing to check every twenty seconds whether I need to rotate in the 82nd Fusiliers to relieve the 81st Fusiliers during some colonial bush war, or else risk Playing Suboptimally. Looking forward to the coming dev diaries to find out more about the details.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2021 04:14
|
|
|
I want to see how the game takes to modding in a crap-ton of extra qualifications / professions. I think it'd be interesting if running, say, a foundry took 800 laborers and 200 "ironworkers" instead of just 1000 generic laborers, and the generally fastest (but still slow!) way to get an "ironworker" qualification was working in a foundry. These "expert" pops would naturally command a wage premium until the labor force is sufficiently trained up, so a healthy and well-established national industry would have a huge profit *and* throughput advantage over an upstart. On the flip side, subsidizing an industry with a relative shortage of expert pops would be a great way to attract migrants. On the flip-flip side, those migrants will get pissed as their skills become common-place and their wages and SoL plummet. Bootstrapping a new industry from whole cloth should be *really hard*. Even some production method changes should be drastic -- switching a huge shipyard from clippers to dreadnoughts should require a radically different skill set from the labor force and take years to get fully up to speed.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2022 06:35
|
|
|
They've said in the dev diaries they're deliberately omitting seasonal swings (lower farm production and labor in winter, higher demand for wood/coal for heat, etc) in favor of an economy design that can abstract away the necessary/rational stockpiling that would be required. So to model seasonal workers I think you'd need something like a pop being able to hold multiple jobs at once and split their labor/earnings between them. That seems potentially impossible to mod in without support, though, and it still wouldn't be a perfect model. Possibly it could be kludged through some effect provided by the state, or a law or production method -- Laborer requirements reduced by X% of Farmers working in the state, Farmers get an additional +Y% of a factory Laborer's wage.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2022 00:22
|
|
|
Eiba posted:fiddly and of unclear gameplay benefit Yeah absolutely, that was just me spitballing for how the effect might get considered. Really I think the devs have a crappy line to walk here. There's clearly a desire, both from devs and the playerbase, for "historical outcomes" to be at least vaguely likely as an emergent result of the modeling, but this seems like insane hubris. The systems need to be game-ified and grokkable to be any fun to interact with, and systems complexity is further limited by developer resources and consumer hardware. I think that it's probably best to realize it is going to be just a historically-inspired game, rather than any kind of simulator, and interact with it on those merits. There's just too many spherical cows involved.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2022 00:56
|
|
|
A lot of space 4x games (Stellaris included) suffer greatly from having the unit of production/force be "one {building/pop/ship}", a very early game where each {building/pop/ship} matters, and then another 80% of the game where the individuals stop mattering. They then give you either no tools, or very bad ones, for managing your 100s of individuals. IMO they would benefit from having something closer to V3 where you set up a strategic military-industrial stance and then pour resources into the furnace. If you're going to have me manage individual ships, they had better be some kind of hero super-unit and not just Corvette #7659 "CSS Dauntless", vaporized in one blast. eta: Civ (and co) falls into this same trap, but keeps you in the "each individual thing matters" phase substantially longer, generally well into the mid-game. They still give you absolutely crap tools to manage an end-game empire, and that combines really poorly with the game often being a forgone conclusion by then. CrypticTriptych fucked around with this message at 00:52 on May 14, 2022 |
|
#
¿
May 14, 2022 00:42
|
|
|
Clarste posted:Hero super-building. Exactly -- this is just Civ's "world wonders," which is actually a fun game mechanic.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2022 00:56
|
|
|
I enjoyed reading the Brazil AAR that happened recently (compiled on reddit). I think it was interesting how much you get to nudge the political system through event choices. It makes the system for enacting laws described in the dev diaries -- table a law, RNG happens, law eventually passes -- a bit less dry and abstract.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2022 20:13
|
|
|
As long as there's still some way to subsidize, like, imported grain. I know you can subsidize specific industries but I don't know if there's a way to subsidize goods that you import but that your pops consume raw. I need to crater the SoL of my peasantry through misguided aid programs!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2022 05:07
|
|
|
If the
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2022 19:14
|
|
|
Apropos of nothing, I hope they fix the "put electricity in boats and ship it overseas" thing for release. It was mentioned as still being a thing in the Canada AAR, but that was a while ago.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2022 21:22
|
|
|
Karl Monarx
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2022 21:39
|
|
|
Currently leaning Qing / China, it seems like they have good potential for "I'm a genius" / "Oh no!" moments. How bad could an opium war really be?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 06:34
|
|
|
This system seems like a pretty good stab at "what makes sense" and honestly even if the flotilla:Interest concept is kind of blundered it's almost certainly trivial to mod, since it's being provided by your nation's rank and also as A Thing A Building Makes. I'm sure you can make it so nations get extra interests for inventing the telegraph, lose them for having isolationist policies, or are capped at 2 unless you own the Vatican. IMO you should get free Interests from your flotillas, but also a small amount from convoys. You should also be able to spend influence to exceed the Interest cap and/or establish diplomacy with a nation you otherwise could not -- landlocked nations being absolutely locked out of basic diplomacy in some cases feels totally bizarre and it's going to make playing a lot of the landlocked tags totally miserable. Like, seriously? The Sikh's in the example can't even get an envoy to Persia?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2022 01:19
|
|
|
So one thing the dev diaries, AARs, and gameplay streams have never really clarified for me is -- do you actually need Aristocrats for some of the production methods? Like, if a plantation has 1/100 aristocrats employed but 10,000/10,000 laborers, does that " " "labor shortage" " " actually affect production? Or is the Aristocrat job so easy to qualify for that the situation is never likely to come up?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2022 23:49
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:That's something I don't understand, having certain production methods incompatible with certain ownership structures. Buildings have several categories of settings which are collectively called "production methods". "Ownership structure" is one of the categories. The term covers more than just switching from hand-weaving to powered looms or whatever. AFAIK there's no interdependencies between the categories, but some might exist if they required mutually-exclusive laws.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2022 23:25
|
|
|
Pakled posted:I think what Baronjutter was referring to was a thing we saw in the Japan stream where certain production methods force-changed the ownership structure of that industry. I forget the exact industry/production method that happened in the stream but it was something along the lines of "switching to more advanced sawmills automatically switched the ownership structure of the lumber industry from guilds (shopkeepers) to privately run (capitalists)" Oh, I missed that! Only caught the last half or so of the Japan stream which was mostly politics. Skimming through it -- yes, it looks like the most basic/artisanal primary method is generally not compatible with anything but the basic ownership method (guilds), and vice versa. I guess the concept is to model the concentration of capital from industrialization, but it is a bit weird that you can have an advanced industry owned by a small number of Capitalist pops or, eventually, a large number of Worker pops, but not ever a middling number of Shopkeeper pops.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2022 05:21
|
|
|
For all the "grain tax" memes I swear every screenshot and video I've seen, there's a grain shortage in the market. It's making me itch. Just build more farms, dammit! Having cheap grain seems like national stability 101.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2022 06:03
|
|
|
Xerophyte posted:[timg]I could probably find a petrostate to annex somewhere, but one thing that is remarkably difficult in a mostly good UI is figuring out which states have what special resources. I'm really enjoying the game so far, in 1875 or so as Chile. It's definitely a tad jank and I've had the game crash three times, plus a handful of less serious bugs. I feel a bit like I've paid full price for an early-access title so I'm holding off on giving it a positive review, but I'm having more *fun* than I ever did with Stellaris or my brief tries at CK3 and HOI3.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2022 07:52
|
|
|
The "profit impact" metric when building things is so very hosed and I wonder how badly it kneecaps the AI's industrialization, since according to the dev diaries it considers the same metric and it's almost always negative. So far I've found that it, at the least, -Doesn't take throughput bonuses into account -Doesn't take state modifiers (like +hardwood% or whatever) into account -Fudges wage cost estimates 20% higher I'm going to finish off my playthrough (currently in 1906) and enjoy circling back to this in 3-6 months.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2022 06:00
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:My big complaint about industry is that food processing and packing is very underbaked. Canned food isn't a military good, when it's critical to the increased reach of shipping and the increase in army sizes (and decrease in attrition) over this time period. A great many foods that were famously canned in this period aren't inputs for Groceries. Particularly meat and fruit, so the massive British tinned meat industry and early 20th century canned fruit imperialism like Dole and Standard Fruit can't really be represented. Livestock are all processed in the same place that they're farmed or ranched, so you don't have the massive centralization of American meatpacking that was enabled by the use of rail and refrigerator cars, so you can't really represent why Chicago became so important. There's a few things which really should have a "raw" form that requires further processing to be of much value. I think the only "raw" good right now is hardwood. Iron should be split up into mining and smelting, with smelting being nearly as coal-intensive as steel, with a PM that substitutes in a large quantity of wood. Fabric should also get another step to turn output of farming/ranching into usable fabric, which would be particularly relevant for Britain and the American south.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2022 04:53
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:Quite clearly there is something working that changes literacy, as there are actual differences in literacy and the high literacy countries are mostly historical The whole "surprisingly literate Zulus" thing should probably just be making base education access scale more steeply with wealth plus a flat penalty, so with no institution the SoL 10 peasantry have a literacy of ~0% instead of 20%. Change base education access from 2x wealth to 4x wealth - 40. SoL 10 goes to 0% education, SoL 20 stays the same at 40%, and SoL 30 goes up to 80%. This seems reasonable to me.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2022 00:09
|
|
|
The discrepancy in convoy needs for in-market ("port connection") vs between-market trade is totally ludicrous. Port connections take 2 convoys per infrastructure, so one level of end-game iron mine can push 30 iron through one convoy. Compared to trading between markets, where the same convoy carries one (1) iron. Just another reason to do an imperialism, I guess 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2022 07:29
|
|
|
Zeron posted:Think part of the problem there is that Capitalists never really feel relevant? They help get rid of landowers and stuff but then never really hate the socialist stuff much either. Even with maxed out capitalist laws they just don't seem to ever have meaningful political influence despite having insane wealth. I've never felt any sort of backfire from maximizing Capitalists. They can get pretty powerful on Wealth voting. I've had the industrialists up at ~40% clout. They should probably get angry about taxes the way the intelligentsia / armed forces get angry about wages. Paradox should define the relationships between IGs not just by which slate of laws they support, but have them be directly (un)friendly to each other. IGs should bolster friendly IGs (and themselves!) and suppress their enemies. IGs should be pleased when they're powerful or in government and be angered by their enemies being so. IGs in government also don't start political movements, for some reason. If anything being in gov't should result in *more forceful* political movements -- they're holding the reins, why are they sitting on their asses?!? Basically, IGs should actively seek to increase and entrench their own power.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2022 01:01
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:If that's the case then it probably should be a lot bigger than 25%. Look at other production methods. Like upgrading to sawmills literally doubles your lumber output. Some of the low-level techs are just really low impact. For example Paddle Steamers gives a fat 10% bonus to convoy production, a modifier that AFAIK nothing else in the game uses. They seem like they're filler techs that exist to make low-tech-start tags have more catching up to do. Or they exist as a technical proof-of-concept -- forcing some modifier to exist and be possible to apply.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2022 00:03
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:As China, I actually ran into a wall where I ran out of demand, despite the relatively low QoL of my population. I may have had 550M people, but when 70% of them are peasants, they don't generate much demand and my industry has nothing to do. This prevents me from expanding my industry further and giving the peasantry better-paying jobs. How do you break out of this rut? I tried setting up some exports to generate external demand, but that didn't go super far. It's 1905, and I'm struggling to find enough stuff to build for my current ~2300 construction points (and I'm sure my economy could support over 5000 construction points if I had the demand for such growth). Also, lead has become a pretty serious problem. I tried to alleviate the lead shortfall by invading the dutch east indies (who have a ton of it), but then spain came to their defense and made me a rival in the process, and they were giving me several thousand lead so now I'm in an even bigger hole. Oops. Just go ham building farms? Peasants consume something like 10 or 20% of the amount of goods a non-peasant at the same SoL does. If it craters the price of grain in the process that'll just give pops more money to spend on other things.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2022 07:19
|
|
|
Kagon posted:It feels like stuff like steam donkey/automated rollers etc. need a boost to throughput to incentivize them. For mines and farms that have a limited slot count, getting a throughput boost would be substantially better than just cutting headcount, even if the overall productivity/worker impact is the same. The difference wouldn't really matter for urban buildings though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2022 00:34
|
|
|
IMO the diplomacy and diplo-plays need the most help. Everything outside of a diplo-play feels totally useless since the AI never agrees to any meaningful deals ever, and will side against you in plays seemingly regardless of relationship. Diplo plays are a great conceptual spark but fall down in so many ways in their current implementation -- the constraints they add are generally way more frustrating than fun. I think more than anything there needs to be an ability to escalate a war, basically re-entering the diplo-play phase while the war is still being fought, or to allow immediately setting new war goals if one side capitulates.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2023 07:39
|
|
|
WhitemageofDOOM posted:Maybe all luxury goods(Wine, Coffee, Tea, Fruit, Meat, Furniture, Clothes, Porcelin) should have an exoticism bonus to the trade profits based on distance as a simple implementation. Why would this apply only to goods obtained by trade? Is coffee from a distant colony or puppet of mine not exotic? If you aren't careful this also just re-introduces the "trading the same chair back and forth" problem since now it's an -exotic- chair (exported to and reimported) from far-away lands. VostokProgram posted:For trade to be beneficial it requires a comparative advantage, and there just isn't very much of that. How so? I think there's plenty of comparative advantages, just not many that can't be easily eroded. Any time there's industries with different relative bonuses in different markets, there's a comparative advantage. ETA: that said, my econ 101 understanding of this assumes some labor or supply constraint -- that increasing production in one good requires a reduction in the production of others. But for a huge chunk of V3 production is only capital-constrained and there's no such thing as "shifting production" since any factory built will run at full tilt. I don't know what makes trade good or bad under that regime. CrypticTriptych fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2023 21:37
|
|
|
GreenMarine posted:for whatever reason my average SOL never went up and your everyday Fritz just wasn't any better off than when the game began. Not sure if  but it looks like you were conquering tons of poor people (including what looks like a chunk of china circa 1900...?) and it kept dragging your average down.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2023 23:11
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Speaking of which, you should be able to go negative on authority (and influence) whenever you want, just like with bureaucracy. It's kind of weird that you cant. I think this makes sense from a first-order game design perspective -- since the penalty for being in negative authority is IG unhappiness, and IG happiness effects are thresholded, there's an amount of authority which is negative-but-"free" that it's optimal to be in (compared to being at +0 authority). But staying in that region involves constantly micromanaging your decrees as IG happiness fluctuates, which is crappy gameplay. Also I think the authority penalty might only affect IGs in opposition? In that case, if the opposition is marginalized there'd be basically no penalty at all for being incredibly deep in authority debt. I feel like Bureaucracy is the only well-designed capacity based on the intentions laid out in the dev diary -- small bonus for being underbudget, pretty big penalty for being overbudget. The infamy reduction from influence is too good, and you have very little control over your influence supply in any case. I don't think I've even seen the penalty for being overbudget on influence (you'd have to drop a rank-tier while maxing out your spending, I think?). Authority's over/under budget effects are both kind of whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
The "top 3 legitimate governments" options are helpful sometimes but I hope they expand on it (and polish the UI a little bit... the buttons are kind of just there with no explanation). Since they're calculating the legitimacy for every combination anyways I'd really like to be able to pull up the whole list of options, with filters for (in gov't/out of gov't/don't care) for each IG. It seems the thing I spend the most time on on the government screen is checking if there's any good way of kicking the landowners out of power yet.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2023 16:19
|
|
|
AAR: After sleep-walking to #1 GP as Chile in 1.0 and as Russia in 1.1 I figured I'd try Japan for 1.2 and it went... poorly. It's 1899 and I've basically called it quits. The 2nd Shogun had god-rolled traits giving them +40% clout, and I never managed to get them under the 20% needed to even start the restoration timer, even with every +clout law removed (except Monarchy, which was basically a "start civil war" button). Threw basically my entire budget into industrializing for the first 30 years and never got to the point of full employment, let alone drawing down the peasantry. Average SOL peaked at 10. Private investment going psycho for art academies probably didn't help. I finally got out of isolationism in around 1880 in an effort to lower ever-climbing wood prices, and shortly after Russia (#3 GP) decided to play for a treaty port, which I countered with demand recognition. I've read the thread, just naval invade Alaska, right? Well, they also swayed proto-Germany (#4 GP) and mobilized 600 battalions. I mobilized about 500 battalions (almost all conscripts) and invaded Alaska, and they just shredded my convoys and kicked me out in about 8 months. Then nothing happened for a while as I spiraled into insane debt keeping the army going. Eventually they naturally fell to zero war support, I invaded Alaska again, and they bizarrely sent no troops. Nearing default despite The Most Taxes and facing no opposition, I switched all the conscripts to irregular infantry to balance the budget while the war ticked towards capitulation. However, noticing my sudden weakness, Russia and Germany promptly double-naval-invaded me. I had managed a big enough war score lead from occupying alaska to slam white peace before they realized I was completely screwed. Before the war was even over, the sick-of-these-taxes poors demanded welfare (or revolt) and the industrialists threatened no welfare (or revolt), and simultaneously the intelligentsia asked nicely for a republic, so I figured if we're going to have a civil war anyways it might as well be over that. The shogunate+samurai swung about 2/3rds of the country, but I had the capital where all the arms industries were. Unfortunately their numbers proved superior, winning the brief civil war and rolling back various progressive reforms. At that point I kind of just threw my hat on the ground. Tbh it was refreshing after the previous playthroughs to get pushed into the mud a bit.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2023 06:03
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Any amount of positive price modifier is a sign that you should make more of that good. Since that will be a lot of your goods, you should first prioritize your current construction goods, then any other important industrial goods, then consumer goods. For anyone who doesn't know -- the way V3 models markets, positive price modifiers delete money from your economy, and negative prices generate money for your industries/pops out of nowhere. If you have more sell orders than buy orders, the sellers are getting more money than the buyers spend, and vice versa. Consistently positive prices can be a huge brake on your economy. Pushing the price lower than -50% is also economically counterproductive -- after that point, the lost earnings from the price dropping are bigger the gains from having more sellers and the buyers spending less. There's one specific tooltip where you can see the total monetary result of this effect across your whole market but I don't remember where it is. I think it's the tooltip for the market itself (like for the phrase "British Market"). CrypticTriptych fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Mar 17, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2023 20:02
|
|
|
You've basically got the logic, but here's a reddit post that goes into a bit more detail: https://www.reddit.com/r/victoria3/comments/y7nzrb/economic_efficiency_goods_price_formula_pt_2/ The post is from pre-release but the "speculation" on the mechanics is all accurate and hasn't changed.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2023 20:52
|
|
|
After my last game where private industry became insatiable for art academies, I modded them to be sized more like regular buildings so they aren't ludicrously construction/infrastructure heavy. 5x the normal input, output, and employees, so they have the usual 5k employees per level. That gave them 750 upper strata employees per level which is ridiculously high compared to any other building, though, so I made it 250 upper strata and 500 laborers. Someone's gotta sweep the floors, after all!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2023 23:11
|
|
|
ro5s posted:I do wish this could be part of diplomatic plays, being able to see how the wargoals I'm adding will affect what makes war support drop below 0 for specific people involved in the play. It feels weird that adding war reparations can sometimes let a nation fight a hellwar until their capital is occupied and I'm never sure if it will or not. This might be a bugged? Right now it seems like war support is only clamped to 0 until your primary opposition (the tag you declared the play against) capitulates. After that it's allowed to drop for both sides. I've been bitten by this because generally the primary opposition's call-ins still have a lot of war support left after the primary has capitulated. War goals themselves are also definitely bugged in that wargoals that were enforced against a capitulating tag aren't taken out of the peace deal options, and the AI can get uppity about them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2023 00:31
|
|
|
If they're going to make the lockout period after cancelling an enactment attempt more strict, they should really try to make the chance prediction better reflect reality. The thumbs-up / thumbs-down /neutral meters feel a bit useless since often a large fraction of the +/- clout doesn't even get applied. The shown pass/advance/stall chance doesn't do anything to predict whether an opposing political movement will spring up the second you start trying to pass the law. "this will radicalize the X" isn't a good indicator for that, they'll start a movement without even being angry. A political movement also punches above its weight (for some reason) so something opposed by like 25% of clout can shoot from a 0% stall chance up to like 40% once the movement springs up. With no penalty until the first checkpoint you can just cancel a few days into the enactment when it becomes clear your chances are actually miserable, and have lost nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2023 23:25
|
|
|
Ichabod Sexbeast posted:They're up against the limit of what they can physically fit inside them, do they loving bathe in it or something? Fill the swimming pool with a new vintage every month? I think this is supposed to be handled by the "quality is quantity" abstraction and they're not consuming 200 times more wine, but 200 times worth of wine.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2023 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
Mandoric posted:I think that ship has sailed, though, which is sad. Refueling stations were a prime driver of how colonialism played out, but refueling stations imply game logic that deals with stocks rather than flows, something that's been steadfastly resisted in all other contexts. Did it ever even matter historically that these places have a finite pile of coal on hand at any given time? Presumably they'd be getting restocked regularly under anything except blockade conditions. Stockpiling is also modeled to some extent by the way that shortages ramp. I'd imagine putting a scaling penalty on naval operations and max sea-supplied army supply farther than X sea lanes from a friendly port would capture all this more or less adequately. Have the penalties be reduced by inventing canning and refrigeration (for supply) and switching to an oil navy (for operations).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2023 04:56
|
|