• 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 #10 - Infrastructure

DD10.png


Hello again and happy Thursday! Today we’re going to follow up on last week’s dev diary about Markets, which touched on Infrastructure but did not explain how it works. Infrastructure is an important mechanic for the economic simulation of the game, simulating the cost of moving goods over land and creating the necessary, well, infrastructure to support wide-scale industrialization.

So what is Infrastructure then? Infrastructure is represented by two distinct values that each State has: Infrastructure and Infrastructure Usage, which together determine its Market Access. So long as the Infrastructure in the State is greater than or equal to the Infrastructure Usage, everything is fine and the State maintains a Market Access of 100%, but if usage starts exceeding the available Infrastructure, Market Access will be reduced by an amount proportional to how much of the usage is not being serviced.

For example, if a state has an Infrastructure of 45 with a usage of 90, its Market Access will only be 50%. Market Access and its effects is something we’ve already covered in the previous development diary, but to briefly go over it again, a low Market Access means that a State is unable to fully integrate its local market into the National Market, which can lead to adverse price conditions from local over-or undersupply of goods.

Minsk has somewhat overextended their local Infrastructure, but with a large population and mostly staple production both their industries and consumers will probably be fine until the railway arrives
image3.png

This imbalance goes in both directions. If you have one bread basket state and one iron mining state, and they both have perfect Market Access, the price of iron and grain will be the same in both. If the iron mining state’s Market Access is reduced, the market’s price of iron goes up while the local price of iron in the mining state goes down. But in addition to this the iron mining state will be unable to source as much grain, raising the local price there but reducing its price somewhat across the rest of the market.

If your consumption matches your local production, as is often the case in rural states where the production consists of staple goods your people require, this isn’t such a big problem! You could perhaps even build some simple Textile Mills and Livestock Ranches in the same underdeveloped state to provide cheap wool clothing if the local population is large enough to demand it in sufficient quantity. But if you’re looking to manufacture more complex goods (or use more demanding Production Methods) you need goods you might only be able to source from another state in your market, or which you can only import from a foreign nation. These goods in turn might be lucrative but only if there are buyers for them - buyers who can actually afford them. Your schemes to get rich off Luxury Clothes and Porcelain won’t work if you can’t reach all the far-flung wealthy Pops of your empire.

The Infrastructure Usage of a State is determined by which types of Buildings exist in a State and which level they are. Generally, the more urban and specialized the building, the more Infrastructure it uses per level, so Chemical Industries (a heavy industry building) will use several times more Infrastructure than a Rye Farms building of the same level.

Minsk’s urban buildings - the Furniture Manufacturies, Textile Mills, even the Government Administrations - account for 2/3rds of its Infrastructure usage despite employing the same number of people as the Logging Camps and Rye Farms. Subsistence Farms and Urban Centers do not use Infrastructure, the former because its production is nearly all for domestic use and the latter because the Infrastructure it provides cancel out the Infrastructure it requires.
image2.png

Infrastructure is provided and modified by numerous sources. Just about all States in the game have at least a little bit of Infrastructure based on the technology level of the country that owns it and its state of incorporation (colonies have lower infrastructure than incorporated states, for example). However, over the course of the game, the most crucial aspect of your Infrastructure is the size of your Railway network. As we’ve previously mentioned, Railways is a Building that produces Transportation, an intangible good sold to Pops, but they are also your main source of Infrastructure.

This means that if you want to industrialize a State, it isn’t enough to simply build those industries there and have the Pops available to work in them, you also need to ensure that said industries have enough infrastructure to support them. This of course has a variety of costs involved in that infrastructure-providing Railways need both Pops to work them and access to goods like Coal and Engines. There are alternatives that can be used in the short-term, such as using your Authority on a Road Maintenance decree to ensure the populace don’t allow the roads to fall into disrepair or become unsafe, but such options will never be sufficient in themselves for large-scale industrialization. Of course, Railways also grow more efficient over the course of the game with such inventions as Diesel trains and Electricity, requiring less levels of rail to support a certain number of Buildings.

This early Railway has rapidly become one of Minsk’s best employers, at least for Pops with the qualifications to become Machinists. Unfortunately few people do, so the Infrastructure production is not currently as high as it might be if the railway was fully staffed. Ticket prices, however, are sky high.
image4.png

Our intention for railways is that they must be able to find their way back to the market capital, or an exit port destined for the market capital, in order to be useful. In effect this means that any railway can only provide infrastructure up to the amount of infrastructure provided by the best adjacent railway that connects it to the market capital. If you want good access to the Sulfur Mines in Aginskoye for your Munition Plants in St. Petersburg, you best get started on that Trans-Siberian Railway sooner rather than later, because it will take a good long while to build.

Geography, of course, also plays a significant role in other ways when it comes to Infrastructure, and this is represented in Victoria 3 through State Traits. State Traits are bonuses and/or maluses given to a particular State representing particular geographical features, climate and so on. State Traits have a variety of effects, but the most common ones are to either affect the production of a particular resource (for example, if a State contains high quality coal this may be represented through a State Trait that makes coal mines in the state more efficient) or, more significantly for the topic on hand, to provide or modify Infrastructure.

The high-yield Russian Forests are of great benefit to the Logging Industry in Minsk, as long as there’s enough infrastructure available to ship the wood off to all the Russian factories and construction sites that demand it.
image1.png

States with significant rivers get a large boost to Infrastructure, making them excellent candidates for early industrialization
image5.png

Before we finish up for today, I also just want to mention that Infrastructure does tie into a number of mechanics besides Market Access, such as military logistics and migration, and that Infrastructure is only meant to simulate the cost of transporting goods on land - where the sea is concerned, there are other systems at play… but all of those are topics for another day, so for now I bid farewell and encourage you all to tune back in next week as Mikael returns with another economy-related dev diary about Employment and Qualifications.
 
  • 233Like
  • 94Love
  • 16
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
I do not mean that. When things are produced within the state, it's one thing. But there are different distances to other states and these can be shorter than the distance to the market capital. Will you still have to shop through the market capital? It is not clear.
You said within the same state, so that's what I answered. If you are thinking about nearby states, then I think the answer is clear - if you have no market access you only get the resources generated within the state. If there was local modelling of transportation, and things like it costs $X to move across N states, they would have mentioned that. The formulas they present don't have that.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Hi, I might have misunderstood, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I can see a potential massive flaw in this system. Say I'm getting added to someone else's market, for example say I'm Belgium getting added to the French market. My infrastructure may have allowed me to transfer goods perfectly between my own states previously, but imagine France has destroyed all infrastructure on my border. Surely that would mean that my states are now completely disconnected from each other as they cannot reach the market capital and so have no market access, despite the fact that they could transfer between themselves perfectly well before.
 
  • 7
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Say you're playing as Mexico, and you have good railroad access within your country to Mexico City. You join the United State's market through a customs union, but don't have a direct rail line to New York City yet. Does your infrastructure and market access suffer because your network is separated from the new market capital? I know ports can transport goods to New York City, but assume those don't have the same capacity as your rail networks had.
 
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
A question and a guess at the answer:

How will connections between states that don't connect to the capital work?

Theory: They don't?

Possible complaints about wanting to build out smaller sets of industry/more local connections/etc might exist?

My guess on the answer is that
A) in a lot of cases building to a port is not that hard?
B) For places like say, central asia, the disruption to the economy from moving the center of trade from their previous home to moscow(for example), is a change that's actually reflective of national policy as well as what it means to be part of one market, and if you want otherwise you should seek to control it as a vassal tag/state/puppet/etc whatever the word is?

That said, other tags can still be part of the market too i guess? Will you be able to promote infrastructure in other countries in your market to make sure they can get connected to your center of trade? Do they tend to do well enough? Can they still acess goods through their own centralized connected market if it exists but is simply not connected to the main market(think say, khazakhstan that has rails around itself but not to moscow again)?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Do resource modifying traits appear in provinces which actually have a particularly valuable source of resource production or is it just regions stereotypically associated with it? (the same approach as eu4 ideas).
Like the Ruhr is very associated with mining and produce a fair bit of iron but I don't think it should get bonuses since the iron mined there was actually poor quality, lots of potential slots for iron mining but no bonus. This is true for most of Europe tbh, the only part of the continent which really has lots of quality mineral resources (apart from coal) is Sweden which traditionally produced huge proportions of Europes good quality iron and copper.
I can't believe I am saying this but I hope the devs make Sweden OP enough.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
I do like the artwork, thanks for the weekly development diary.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Apart from using ur authority to allow proper road maintainance, are there any other ways to improve ur infrastructure other than building railways/giving ur people engines? For example, building more roads to ease congestion etc?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Say you're playing as Mexico, and you have good railroad access within your country to Mexico City. You join the United State's market through a customs union, but don't have a direct rail line to New York City yet. Does your infrastructure and market access suffer because your network is separated from the new market capital? I know ports can transport goods to New York City, but assume those don't have the same capacity as your rail networks had.
I know this is a hypothetical, but that last assumption doesn’t really make sense. Mexico is going to have goods ports way before it has good railroads. I’d assume that applies to most countries, actually.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Say you're playing as Mexico, and you have good railroad access within your country to Mexico City. You join the United State's market through a customs union, but don't have a direct rail line to New York City yet. Does your infrastructure and market access suffer because your network is separated from the new market capital? I know ports can transport goods to New York City, but assume those don't have the same capacity as your rail networks had.
That is extremely problematic. If all the goods have to be transported to New York first, it may suddenly be impossible for me to get to the goods that are in the province next to Mexico City.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Market Capital is usually the political capital at start but can be moved. The US is an exception, starting with New York as their market capital instead of Washington DC.
For Russia it would probably make some sense to make Moscow market capital, as it historically was the center of rail network. Of course you would want to connect Moscow and Saint Petersburg with your best rail line as a first priority, but if this line gets cut, it shouldn’t disable the Moscow-centered network
 
  • 3
Reactions:
The high-yield Russian Forests are of great benefit to the Logging Industry in Minsk, as long as there’s enough infrastructure available to ship the wood off to all the Russian factories and construction sites that demand it.
off topic, but this makes me wonder if there are any mechanics for modelling environmental destruction, eg through overexploitation of resources?
global warming probably isnt any concern, but deforestation, strip mining, smog, and general pollution seem like they could become quite relevant?
 
  • 6Like
Reactions:
Wonder if there would be Private-Owned Railways, more cheap than buying it yourself but if they bankrupt can cause a big crisis in the country production line. If not, wonder how hard could be to mod it
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
For Russia it would probably make some sense to make Moscow market capital, as it historically was the center of rail network. Of course you would want to connect Moscow and Saint Petersburg with your best rail line as a first priority, but if this line gets cut, it shouldn’t disable the Moscow-centered network
If such a problematic system is implemented, it is more logical to choose a province centrally. Something like Chicago for the USA or Rostov for Russia.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Moving your market capital doesn't cost anything per se, but it does create some temporary penalties in the market due to the resulting upheaval.
In case of a war or losing territory which causes trade routes to change a penalty would be justified, but its not like every good not sold locally in the russian market gets moved to St Petersburg or Moscow first (like from the far east Vladivostok to then be sent back to another province in the far east which happens to be a neighbouring state). The trade capital in this case is just a way to prevent (basically free) teleportation of goods within a nation that does not have the needed infrastructure and unfortunately a mechanic that as it seems does not consider that while the need of goods per province may require a certain amount of the infrastructure, the goods that get sent through this province would also require infrastructure, but they do only need infrastructure at the start and the end (or maybe just start or end (not sure based on the dev diary)).
 
So prices are calculated per state? That's amazing and great.

On infrastructure usage... I understand then that usage is only generated by producing facilities? So, pops do not add to usage? For example, transportation needs in heavily populated states. And imports? A state importing a lot of stuff from other states shouldn't add to usage? I guess I'm equating infrastructure to purely transportation means and I may be wrong.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm really interested on the state traits. Can this change over time, or be added or removed by events or decisions?

On the topics of canals there were talks in the past of the costruction of certain minor canals being represented as what today is described as state traits. The drying of marshes, deforestation of areas or devlopment of specific kind of cultives come to mind.

(I find this an interesting way to represent certain elements like the high production of copper on Chile, or the extreme fertility of the argentinean soil that allowed it to reach such richness during this era.)
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I love this idea.
In the older game, there were certain nations (Prussia for example) where you could just fill up an entire province (Silesia or Rhineland for example) full of 8 factories up to the limit right from the start in 1836, fill them all with a lot of skilled and obedient workers by 1840 using focus button. and suddenly you were the industrial giant of the planet before industrialization even became a norm. It would create many issues, but you would still easily beat everyone including UK in economic ratings.

This solves that cheesy strat, since building tons of factories in an area means nothing if they can't even request raw goods or push their products out using all those muddy dirt roads. :) An industrial province will need railways and canals (and probably late game highways) to function now.

I now hope for a DLC where people (tourists, migrants, just general internal travellers) move around the country for various reasons, and thus use infrastructure and buy all those tickets.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Do straits cut off railways? For example, assuming the market capital is Istanbul for the Ottomans, are they gonna have trouble with getting the infrastructure in their Asian and African provinces tied to their capital?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: