• 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:
What will happen to my infrastructure in Siberia in 1908?
I'd hate to build up infrastructure and industry there just to see it smashed :)
I don't think this is a major concern.

I mean, the lower bound and upper bound on the total death toll from the Tunguska event (estimated energy: 10-15 Mt TNT equivalent) were zero and three respectively :)
 
I don't think this is a major concern.

I mean, the lower bound and upper bound on the total death toll from the Tunguska event (estimated energy: 10-15 Mt TNT equivalent) were zero and three respectively :)
thats what you think.
My goal as russia is to make tunguska the pearl of siberia.
The tsar has been given a sign by god himself to create a tsargrad there :)
 
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
thats what you think.
My goal as russia is to make tunguska the pearl of siberia.
The tsar has been given a sign by god himself to create a tsargrad there :)
its important that Russia is fleshed out properly so people gain a good insight in this country and will help them be more positive and understanding

as far as the infrastructure topic it just happened to me that i got this insight; paradx only convinces me this design choice is right, when they consult a historian from russia, who know when and why infrastructural development happened, and if did did impact say the amount of logs being able to transport.
 
paradx only convinces me this design choice is right
Since you've already said you're not interested in the game because of flow-based economics without stockpiles, why would they care? :)
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
its important that Russia is fleshed out properly so people gain a good insight in this country and will help them be more positive and understanding

as far as the infrastructure topic it just happened to me that i got this insight; paradx only convinces me this design choice is right, when they consult a historian from russia, who know when and why infrastructural development happened, and if did did impact say the amount of logs being able to transport.
I’m confused about what you mean because I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic. Are you saying infrastructure did or did not increase the amount of goods being transported?
 
Cheers, that's interesting info :) It'd probably be quite the case study to see how much of the decline in canals was anti-competitive behaviour from the rail companies as opposed to actual comparative disadvantage. And will we be able to see it happen in Vicky 3 as well?! :)
The case study would certainly be interesting, but for the schema outlined for V3 I think it would be fairly irrelevant; what is described is a case where Infrastructure total is greater than usage, so that some is "wasted". Now, if the "extra" infrastructure were to gradually decay where this was true...
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I’m confused about what you mean because I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic. Are you saying infrastructure did or did not increase the amount of goods being transported?
im confused 2.

didnt necessary increase the amount of good transported only the speed how

what does it matter if you asphalt a dirt road, u only speed up transportation and my biggest concern with this design is that this system doesn't scale well into late game

als if u have a river say its value is now 20 out 100 available infrastructure.
What does it matter?
Over time u get better ships more ships so why would its value stay on 20..
 
im confused 2.

didnt necessary increase the amount of good transported only the speed how
It made it viable to transport goods that wouldn’t have been exported out of the region before, and would have instead been confined to local markets. That’s what the system captures.
what does it matter if you asphalt a dirt road, u only speed up transportation and my biggest concern with this design is that this system doesn't scale well into late game
You’re advocating that the game model individual units of a good along the supply chain? That seems like it would hit some technical limitations. What exactly would you gain by modeling things this way? Increased turnover time would lead to higher profits, but that doesn’t seem like it’s worth the computational cost to me.
als if u have a river say its value is now 20 out 100 available infrastructure.
What does it matter?
Over time u get better ships more ships so why would its value stay on 20..
It’s unclear how steamer ships are modeled in game, but I’m sure it’s in there somewhere. I do hope they add on to how rivers are modeled, though, and not just economically. I’d like river gunboats in the Civil War.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
It made it viable to transport goods that wouldn’t have been exported out of the region before, and would have instead been confined to local markets. That’s what the system captures.

You’re advocating that the game model individual units of a good along the supply chain? That seems like it would hit some technical limitations. What exactly would you gain by modeling things this way? Increased turnover time would lead to higher profits, but that doesn’t seem like it’s worth the computational cost to me.

It’s unclear how steamer ships are modeled in game, but I’m sure it’s in there somewhere. I do hope they add on to how rivers are modeled, though, and not just economically. I’d like river gunboats in the Civil War.

i hope to they model rivers properly. Agree all these things like gunboats must be in game, no excuse to leave vital things out of game design. Time to hire some more content developers
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I haven't read the entire thread, so apologies if already mentioned - but with the way infrastructure is being explained here, the term Infrastructure Demand would be more intuitive, and so less confusing, than Infrastructure Usage.
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
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.
Is the modification just a straight-up bonus or malus to infrastructure or are there more intricate effects? Such as mountainous areas or plateaus making the building of railways more expensive - it would make sense that once these railways are built they would be just as good as any other railways, but getting the engineering done is the problem.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Is the modification just a straight-up bonus or malus to infrastructure or are there more intricate effects? Such as mountainous areas or plateaus making the building of railways more expensive - it would make sense that once these railways are built they would be just as good as any other railways, but getting the engineering done is the problem.
I would think that the cost of maintaining a railway in the mountains would be more than in the plains. In other words, I think that the effects of terrain should affect the initial and the on-going costs of railways (well, of any building as I would expect it is implemented).
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Will industries using goods produced in the same state have less infrastructure usage?

There is currently no such effect as we don't track exactly where individual units of goods go (see Market dev diary on that topic), though we could potentially apply some sort of a discount based on how much of a building's needed goods can be locally sourced. I'll give it some thought.
It could be cool if there was some kind of mechanism or effect that reduced or capped market access in relation to infrastructure. If for instance 100% (or higher) infrastructure to infrastructure-usage ratio only ensured a max of 95% market access, then it would mean that local raw materials would always be somewhat cheaper. That way it would still make sense to build up heavy industry in say, the american rust-belt states, rather than just on the east coast where there is already a great advantage in the size of the workforce and infrastructure at game start.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can the river in the game simulate the strong gunships sailing into the river of agricultural civilization? For example, the British fleet entered China's Yangtze River? It may be difficult to achieve, but I'm still curious.
 
Does this system account for domestic coastal trade? For example if I have a railroad to New Orleans, would that be considered connected to New York by boat even if theres no direct rail line?
 
  • 1
Reactions: