• 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 #110 - Building Ownership & Foreign Investment

16_9.png

Hello and welcome to another Victoria 3 Dev Diary!

After last week’s look at Power Blocs, we are going to take a look at another major set of changes that are going to arrive with Sphere of Influence and the free 1.7 update.

Namely, a revision of the Building Ownership system and what it allows us to do: Foreign Investment, a much requested feature which makes its debut in 1.7.

You will see that the changes we are making impact your visibility of ownership and the affected Pops throughout the game.

To understand all the mechanics we will be looking at an example country in the heart of Europe.

Ownership types​

It’s 1836. In Bavaria, a proud member of the Zollverein Power Bloc, all buildings are owned by the state or the workers themselves.

Capitalists, Aristocrats, and Clergymen no longer work in these buildings, and most of the Shopkeepers no longer work in production buildings directly. In addition, the Ownership Production Methods have been removed. Instead, ownership works on a per level basis, allowing a mixed ownership structure in the same building.

A popular Logging Camp it seems. Workers, a Financial District and a Manor House own a part.
DD110_01.png

In worker-owned buildings employees work for themselves basically. So any dividends they may accumulate, they split amongst themselves. This is the default at game start for many countries (not all) and is a state which you can more or less return to at a later stage of the game with the enactment of Cooperative Ownership, which will expropriate your privately owned buildings over time.

One major exception from the ownership situation at game start are subsistence farms which are owned by a new building we are introducing: Manor Houses.

Now they lounge around in luxury, instead of slumming it with the common folks in less refined taste buildings, we wouldn't want their shoes to be dirtied on a subsistence farm!
Manor Houses are able to own levels of other buildings, in our case at game start all the levels of Subsistence Farms in their own states. They pay their wages and dividends by collecting dividends from the buildings they own and distributing them among their employees.
What type and how many employees they have is determined by a limited set of PMs.

Clergymen or Aristocrats? You can’t get rid of both of them!
DD110_02.png

So you can see there are still jobs for Clergymen. What about the Shopkeepers and Capitalists?
Well, they work in the new Financial District buildings, which behave pretty much like the Manor Houses. They too have different employment PMs, can own levels of other buildings and pay their employees by collecting dividends from owned building levels.

Both new buildings expand automatically, depending on how many levels they own. For example if a new level of a privately owned factory is created, a corresponding new level of a Financial District is also generated.

All building levels that you construct are country-owned. Under certain laws, this status can change soon after they are finished constructing. Country-owned buildings come with reduced Economy of Scale bonuses and a bureaucracy cost for each level you own. But in return they can provide additional income based on the building’s dividends which partially get transferred to your treasury.

Not all buildings can be of any ownership type of course, for example barracks or government administrations will always be country-owned.

Summing up, there are now three types of ownership for any building level:
  • Worker owned
  • Privately owned (Financial Districts and Manor Houses)
  • Country owned

If all buildings in Bavaria are owned by the workers or the country itself, how do the first Financial Districts appear, you may wonder!

The main way to get that to happen is the next point on our agenda.

Privatization​

Enter Privatization, whereby you allow country-owned buildings to be sold to Pops.

If you are short on cash, Privatization might help you
DD110_03.png

This makes it possible for your Pops to acquire them. Depending on the type of building you are privatizing, they usually get bought either by Aristocrats or Capitalists, using the investment pool’s funds.
If you don’t have any capitalists in your country yet, other Pops may step up though, using the investment pool’s funds to buy a building you put up for sale and become Capitalists in the process, which in turn leads to the first Financial District appearing.

The money will be transferred from the investment pool to your country’s treasury once that happens. The cost of buying a level is determined by its construction cost and is modified by most of the Economic System laws. These laws also affect the efficiency of these transactions, meaning how much money is lost as overhead and how much is being reinvested into the investment pool or the treasury.
One particularly interesting law is Laissez-Faire which upon enactment forces all your country-owned buildings to be put up for sale and will automatically do so for every new building level you construct. Similarly, enactment of other laws like Cooperative Ownership and Command Economy doesn’t immediately change the ownership of all buildings, but rather can start a process that can convert your economy over time.

Insert witty joke about the free market here
DD110_04.png

Now let’s take a look at how the different ownership model affects investments from your Pops.

Investment​

The existing logic for how the private investment pool works remains similar to before. So, different Pop types still have different priorities and they will look at factors like estimated productivity, available workforce etc.
When a building is about to be constructed by private investment, we randomly determine who is building it, favoring already existing Financial Districts and Manor Houses over creating new ones.

In a worker-owned economy, the private investment pool will continue to function, but they will only expand their own buildings, not create new ones.

An important fact with this system is that investments do not need to be local. A Financial District or Manor House can invest in any of your country’s states, including your colonies overseas.
This system will create a flow of money from the colonies to your homelands, a stronger centralization of wealth and power and it will end the status of colonies’ Pops making more money than your Pops at home.

Of course the non-local investments also come with some challenges with regards to other countries.

It looks like Prussia has heard about that option and has started investing in your country!

“First they took our chairs, then the tables we used to eat at. What’s next? Our beds?!”
DD110_05.png

Foreign Investment​

There are a few ways to acquire Foreign Investment Rights.

First of all, overlords can always invest in their subjects. This is part of the free 1.7 update and will allow you to do Foreign Investment where it matters the most, even if you do not own Sphere of Influence.

Then there are three diplomatic pacts which you can use if you have bought the expansion:
  1. Mutual Investment Rights which allows both countries to invest in each other
  2. One-directional Investment Rights in either direction, so you either demand to be allowed to invest in their country or offer another country to invest in yours

The [redacted] has been [redacted]. We shall see its effects on the 11. of April.
DD110_06.png

There is also a Power Bloc Principle group that deals with Foreign Investment which on Tier 3 has the consequence of being able to invest in any member country.

No matter how you got the Investment Rights, you and also your Pops will be able to invest in the target country. Private investment does consider foreign states as potential targets for their expansions, allowing them to build profitable buildings more easily.

As nice as it is that Prussia has invested in new buildings in Bavaria, I don’t think we can let them get away with diverting the profits to Berlin instead of our own population!

Nationalization​

Nationalization allows you to take control of foreign assets in your country. You cannot nationalize other countries’ assets as long as they possess Foreign Investment rights in your country.

Once that is no longer the case, e.g. if Bavaria left the Zollverein Power Bloc, you can peacefully nationalize their building levels in your country. For that you need to pay a sum of money from your treasury. Similarly to Privatization, the sum is determined by the construction cost + modifiers from laws.

You will also be able to nationalize your own Pops’ building levels, both worker-owned and privately owned, if you’d like to take ownership. Nationalization is not seen positively by the affected Pops of course and will radicalize them.

“We should compensate them to reduce the quarrels.”
DD110_07.png

But what if the Bavarian coffers are empty yet you still want to take over that juicy productive Furniture Manufacturies that is owned by Prussia?

Well, there is always an alternative.

“Pay them? I don’t think so!”
DD110_08.png

You can demand nationalization of a country’s assets in your country. If they accept, their building levels’ ownership changes to your country. If they don’t, you can try and enforce it as a wargoal. If you are successful, you will also remove their Foreign Investment Rights for your country in addition to taking control of their buildings in your country.

Building Registry​

To visualize all these new mechanics, we are introducing the Building Registry, which allows you a customizable look at your country’s situation.

All the building data one could wish for
DD110_09.png

This is a major new UI, that similar to the Census Data window, comes with a lot of functionality to filter the available data. Only show buildings outside your country? Sure. See all buildings that are owned by Pops and which are currently not hiring but not fully employed? No problem.

Lots of filter groups to browse through
DD110_10.png

We hope you find this as useful as we do. You can access it via the button on the bottom of the Buildings panel.

Really recommend pressing that button
DD110_11.png

Implications for the Directly Controlled Investment Pool Game Rule​

As you can imagine, this new system of ownership, geographic wealth extraction, and privatization/nationalization has far-reaching implications on the economic foundations of Victoria 3. It enables a lot of interesting dynamics we haven't been able to model until this time and adds a whole new dimension to your economic laws.

It also comes with the consequence of making the Directly Controlled Investment Pool game rule that we introduced with 1.2 (as a legacy alternative to the new Autonomous Investment system) impossible to maintain. In 1.6 and prior, if this game rule was turned on, the player would be directing all construction efforts. As long as there was money in the investment pool and the construction queue was building a privately-owned building, the cost of construction goods would be coming out of the investment pool first before being carried by the state budget. With the new rules for building ownership, investment rights, and so on in 1.7 this no longer makes sense - there's now a very clear distinction between a building project initiated by a private investor and the state, a potential source of conflict innate to both foreign ownership and the privatization/nationalization mechanics, and even differences between owners in different regions that cannot be represented if all construction projects were player-initiated.

Because of this it no longer makes sense for players to be in charge of both public and private investments simultaneously, and as such the Directly Controlled Investment Pool rule has had to be removed for 1.7 and beyond. While we can't support non-default game rules to the same degree as the standard options, removing a game rule completely is not something we'd ever do without good cause. We know that a smaller fraction of you favored this setting so we want to be clear with why its removal was a necessity to move forward with these improvements to ownership and foreign expansion.

Outlook​

I would like to end today’s Dev Diary by providing a short outlook for what these changes also enable us to do in the future.

The main thing here is affecting Companies.

The way we have reworked ownership allows us to create Company headquarter buildings which can then own specific building levels of industries they care about, determining its profitability from and providing their throughput bonuses only to these. While we cannot provide a concrete timeline for that change at this point, it is something we would like to tackle for one of our next free updates.

That’s it for today. Check back next week when Mikael is going to walk you through what changes 1.7 and Sphere of Influence brings to relations and interactions between Overlords and Subjects, including how these foreign investment mechanics relate to your grip over your extended empire.

Overview for all upcoming Dev Diaries:
Date Topic
4th AprilSubject Interactions
11th AprilLobbies and More on Power Blocs
18th AprilThe Great Game
25th AprilThe Art of Sphere of Influence
2nd MayChangelog 1.7
 
  • 194Love
  • 128Like
  • 9
  • 8
  • 4
Reactions:
Global free trade should be a good thing right because countries will be investing in each other's economies. Is this how it will be? Or will this be a simple system?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
The other source I linked suggested low growth in per capita gdp prior to 1890.
The sources clearly contradict, and to be fair, yours looks more modern and better than wikipedia+school education (which tends to be politicised). It's unclear whether the output volume data the researchers used to estimate GDP is reliable, but we can assume it is, and then it's true that despite exponential industrial growth in the latest decades of the 19th century, the share of industry until 1900s was too little to make this growth affect the overall numbers significantly.

As to the general point of capitalist and state-regulated economy achieving similar results: I'm afraid, direct comparisons are very unfair. It's easier to grow from a low base, and it's easier to return to a pre-disaster growth trend. And there were a lot of disasters.
The numerical successes of the early Soviets are undeniable, but as I understand my proper-economist friends, free market solutions would lead to similar outcomes with much less loss of life. Russia was simply in a position for great growth, with its resource potential finally getting connected enough with railway advancement and ample labour.
Generally, economic growth relies on two factors:
1) technological innovation
2) the ability of the socioeconomic and political structure to create stable incentives for efficient distribution of resources of any kind
We can see that at least in the cases of growth from a low base, a state-managed economy's deficiencies in the latter point do not change the game completely, and state management can even be advantageous compared to very inefficient social structures, that's true.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Can I build a building that I have invented in another country when that country hasn't invented it? For instance, if I'm playing GB, can I negotiate an investment agreement with Persia and then build oil wells there?

If I can, what happens to PMs? Persia has control over the PMs on those buildings, not GB, right? But if they haven't invented oil wells, do they have access to even the base PM for those buildings?

Even if they do have the base PM, it would be nice if the buildings I have built can access the PMs I have invented, as otherwise it means that the US is the only country that get advanced oil wells.

The Devs have already stated that it uses the tech of the building country. So GB can build oil wells in Persia.

The PMs are set by the country the building is in (Persia in this case) so it's implied it will be base PMs (base PMs would have to be the default - no building can have empty PMs) until the country catches up in tech - but this has not been confirmed nor denied.

They haven't yet said anything about resources that need tech to find - so you might only be able to build existing resources and not find new stuff. Again this has not been confirmed nor denied.

But the building existing even at base PMs is better than the building not existing at all so the patch & DLC should hopefully improve the world economy.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Kind reminder that a building without labour it is not going to produce any output. Labour can be scarce in the state or have not enough qualifications.

Commercial contracts that require a nation to build factories but also have enough workers to work in them are the best public foreign investment.

Nation A guarantees buying X amount of trade goods from nation B that has to be able to supply them in Y years.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
How well this new system and UI will be in the game remain to be seen, but I'm optimistic. V3 struggled a lot with simulation of certain things, like capital concentration in metropoly, building downsizing in free market, etc, which more often caused by bad abstraction/simplification, than balancing. Now it should be fixed. Also, it look like most systems are in place to add full fledged stock market in next updates/dlc.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
The flat reduced economy of scale bonus for state owned feels like the kind of flat abstracted modifier the design of vic3 has been trying to avoid, such as removing the flat new world migration bonus from vic2 or the flat bonus's saying certain nations are better at 'a' then anyone else. True that a majority of the time state owned does tend to comply with this flat bonus but does this approach not remove the ability of the player to potential build a society that is state owned and incredibly efficient. Thus rail roading out the player agency that makes things game so great.

There are probably many ways to approach it but would of thought maybe tie it to other parts of the game that are being used to that represent national efficiency, like a scaling modifier based on excess bureaucracy, maybe where the top limit of the scale is the amount of bureaucracy cost of state owned businesses. Eg. if you are spending 160 bureaucracy to maintain state owned then you would need an excess of 160 to get the full economy of scale bonus , 0 being 50 % and past -160 you get no scale bonus.

This allows the player to build a situation where things are operating smoothly while having the growing bureaucracy of state owned business have a double effect pf effecting other state run institute and have roll on impacts on their efficiency, numerically it works out to you would need double cost to have it work efficiently which seems like a fair trade for reaping all the rewords, while having to make sure you can cover the cost of the maintain excess to run at your best.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Very very nice. Finally you can orchestrate the world and your subjects without having to full annex everything yourself. This will make rare resources so much more valueable and available.

The time to play truly tall has just begun.

To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their former shareholders.​

Conan Final PNG2.jpeg
 
  • 4Haha
  • 1Love
Reactions:
I'm guessing the funds for the private construct and investing into privatising existing buildings come from the same pool. How does it work in terms of prioritising one or the other and which one is cheaper?
PS if a building gets privatised and we're already at the maximum gold saved is that money lost for good?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Let's say I have the technology to discover oil, and a country has a discoverable reserve of oil but not the technology to do so. Would it be possible for me (as the state) or my Capitalists to discover the oil in the foreign country and begin exploiting it? If that country were in my Bloc/Customs Union or were giving me investment rights.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Let's say I have the technology to discover oil, and a country has a discoverable reserve of oil but not the technology to do so. Would it be possible for me (as the state) or my Capitalists to discover the oil in the foreign country and begin exploiting it? If that country were in my Bloc/Customs Union or were giving me investment rights.
I think not, my impression is that resource discovery is just a passive chance based on the local tech.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Can there be more incentive towards having police? I think that as countries urbanize more, there is more urban squalor and more crime due to low incomes/bad conditions. Therefore, having a dedicated police should be more important to decrease crime/turmoil. Currently, it is easy to avoid turmoil if you are not involved in any devastating wars. Also having higher dedicated police levels should cost money as well.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can extensive foreign ownership be used as a soft(-ish) means towards putting countries in your market? Eg, if Russia heavily invests in Persia, is Persia more amenable to joining Russia's market? Or can Russia use that to force the issue?

Will there be laws or law effects that faciliate foreign investment in my country? If I am Japan, and have just opened, and want foreign powers to develop me because they get dividends and I get industrialized, this seems like a win-win. Is there a way to incentivize that for foreign countries beyond simply making myself eligibile by having investment treaties (and getting rid of isolationism, since I dare to assume that's a hard block on foreign investment)? Are there ways to discourage it even if I am an eligible power? Is this somewhere that protectionism vs free trade plays a role? It sounded like there were ways to cheapen the costs of privatization (which in this hypothetical, I don't really care about, since what I want is the buildings to be built and the people brought out of peasantry), but not much about getting other countries to use their IC to develop buildings in my territory.

The game does not distinguish between production methods. There is always one PM active for a whole building, no matter who owns how many levels. The controller of the country where the building is located also controls the PM that is active.
One thing I can see becoming an issue is how this relates to tech. Foreign investment has often come up as a request as it relates to oil, which means there are
  1. limitations on being able to discover the resources at all
  2. limitations on being able to use pumpjacks
How will resource discovery work now? Is anything changing in this or are we still generally blocked by our subjects' lack of knowledge about their own territories? Can you gift tech to a country if it will help them enable a better PM for something, and/or encourage them to use that PM in some way? Is a change to how tech is discovered on the table (not now, but sometime in the future)? I think Vic3 has all the pieces in place to do some really neat things with technology, but I freely concede this is probably not the patch for it.

4th April | Subject Interactions
I'll say it now, two things on my wishlist for this:
  1. ability to independently add a wargoal that explicitly benefits my subject, eg Britain attacking the US with the goal of annexing New England as part of Canada. This especially comes up in places where countries get released without all their homeland states; Iraq for example does not get all Mashriqi states if liberated.
  2. ability to attack someone with a wargoal of "liberate & protectorate". It's a little silly that Japan cannot attack Qing for Manchuria (they would never, I know) and has to either outright conquer it all and then release, or force Qing to release a protectorate and then separately get Manchuria into their sphere. I guess this isn't a direct interaction per se but is a very obvious step towards having more subjects in a patch all about subjects and foreign relations.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Clearly resource discovery will/should extend now to all lands where a nation can build, ie foreign investment concessions included.


Alternatively, there could be a journal entry that sends out a team to do a geological survey. It could cost some bureaucracy or money for a certain amount of time, similar to the way the canals work, and then unveil the resources in that country.
Whatever mechanic can be made to work for the the game, because I agree that this is essential to make the whole resource-game work.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Alternatively, there could be a journal entry that sends out a team to do a geological survey. It could cost some bureaucracy or money for a certain amount of time, similar to the way the canals work, and then unveil the resources in that country.
Whatever mechanic can be made to work for the the game, because I agree that this is essential to make the whole resource-game work.
If you read the article, oil was scarce in WWI and it was not until the end of the game span that the biggest oil field in Saudi Arabia was discovered.

I like resources to be discoverable with the right technologies and require to have a concession to find them in other lands.

I do not like an event to limit or railroad the discovery of resources.

In most of my games with a fairly literate nation I am almost always able to get all techs required and control the discoverable resources regions myself before 1900. And I am not a very good player, I am sure other players can do better.

We will need data from PDX to show us what is the median outcome for players before nerfing techs again.

In any way, if a player is able to get the tech and access to the land, discovering the resource should be its reward.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
The only thing they messed up regarding Autonomous Investment was to have the community split by allowing the rule change in the first place. Everyone said: "don't make it a rule, it'll just cause problems for balancing and game design" and here we are. Good to see we're back to reason.
A little late, but I think the rule was an important patch until they had developed a better way to handle ownership. Before SoI, it's just the AI throwing down random buildings instead of a system that the player has the tools to properly interact with (hence my previous opposition to autonomous investment and my current cautious optimism).
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Does the resources (Oil etc) produced through foreign investment go to the host country or the country investing in the mine?

For example, let’s say as UK I build oil mines in and independent Mexico in California. Does the oil produced there split between the Mexican and UK governments depending on how many levels they own, or does all of the oil go to the Mexican Market?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Your country can own some levels, your Pops can own some levels. The country owner controls all PMs, no matter who owns each level.
Hopefully this can be changed so that the owner controls the PM, since IMO that makes far more sense and prevents players from griefing if you end up investing in multiplayer.

I’m a bit confused about Subsistence Farmers. Shouldn’t they be a mix of homesteaders, serfs, and tenant farmers depending on the laws of a country? From the sounds of it only manorialism is represented which seems fairly applicable to Europe, but it would seem odd that a country like the U.S. would have a such a dynamic outside the postbellum South.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: