• 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 #12 - Treasury

DD12.png


Hello and welcome to another development diary for Victoria 3! Today we’ll be covering a topic that tends to be very much in the mind of governments of all eras: Money! Specifically, we’re going to be talking about income, expenses and debt, and how they function on the national level.

As was mentioned all the way back in Dev Diary #2, Money is one of the principal resources you have to manage in Victoria 3. This in itself is of course nothing new (money of some form playing a role in almost every Grand Strategy game we’ve ever released), but the way money works is a little bit different than what you might be used to.

In most games, money tends to be a resource you accumulate for a specific goal, until you have enough of it to achieve that specific goal. For example, you might want to build a building that costs 100 money, and your monthly income is 10 money. That means in order to build said building, you have to wait for 10 months to accumulate the 100 money needed for the lump sum cost to order the construction of said building.

Now, you might be asking, why am I explaining such a simple and obvious mechanic that undoubtedly every single reader of this dev diary is completely familiar with? The reason for this is because in Victoria 3, there is no such thing as a lump sum cost - instead, it’s all about your weekly balance. At the end of every in-game week, your country’s income and expenses are tallied up and the result is then applied to your Gold Reserve or National Debt. This also means that all forms of expenses, such as construction, also work on a weekly basis - you do not need any cash ‘on hand’ to start construction of a dozen buildings at once, but if you don’t have the revenue to support it you may find yourself quickly going into debt.

America’s lack of an income tax in 1836 sharply limits its potential for government spending
dd12_1.png

The Gold Reserve is your country’s national stockpile of cash. If you are free of debt, any money that is left over in the weekly budget after expenses are subtracted is used to increase the Gold Reserve. Conversely, if your expenses exceed your income, this money is taken out of the Gold Reserve to balance the books.

Though it’s certainly never bad in itself to have a sizable Gold Reserve, it isn’t necessarily the best idea to continually run a large budget surplus - each country has a Gold Reserve Limit, which is a ‘soft-cap’ over which each surplus pound has diminishing returns on the Gold Reserve - if you have an enormous stockpile of gold, a surplus of £10k may only increase your stockpile by as little as £2k, meaning that you’ve simply wasted the rest of your money. Hence, a country that finds its gold reserves filling up may want to consider finding a way to reinvest some of that money to avoid such wastage.

The Spanish Gold Reserve has grown to the point where further stockpiling is becoming very inefficient, and they should really try to find better uses for some of that money
dd12_2.png

So what if you’re running a deficit and your Gold Reserve has all been tapped? Well, this is when debt comes into play. Beyond that point, each pound spent in excess of your income will result in automatically taking on debt. While this may sound like something that you should avoid at all costs, that isn’t necessarily true.

While you do have to pay interest on your loans, interest rates in Victoria 3 are relatively low, and so long as you avoid hitting your Debt Ceiling, growing your economy through deficit spending can actually be a very valid strategy. This is because the increase in revenues from minting and taxation may very well end up exceeding the interest payments, not to mention the benefits constructing new industries can have for your population.

The Debt Ceiling, unlike the Gold Reserve, is not a soft cap - once you hit it, your country will be in default, which is a terrible state to be in and can only be recovered from if you manage to slash your expenses enough to put your weekly expenses back in the black (or if another country steps in and takes on your debt, which can have its own undesirable outcomes for you… but more on that later). It’s also possible to simply declare bankruptcy, but because the money you are borrowing against is actually the cash reserves of your country’s buildings (which is actually what determines the size of your Debt Ceiling), this will have immensely negative consequences for your domestic industry.

Even though Britain has taken on several million pounds of debt, this isn’t too much of an issue - their advanced economy allows them a high debt ceiling, and the interest payments is only a small fraction of their spending
dd12_3.png


To wrap up this Dev Diary, I’m going to briefly touch on the main forms of income and expenditures, though this is by no means an exhaustive list! Some forms of income and expenses (taxes and salaries, specifically) also have a ‘level’ setting, where you can for example squeeze more taxes out of your population at the cost of reduced legitimacy and increased radicalization.

A massive hike of the tax level to the highest level is a sure-fire way to both raise money and create political radicals
dd12_4.png

Main Types of Income (not an exhaustive list):
  • Minting: All countries can generate some cash flow by printing or casting new currency in relation to their GDP. Minting provides all countries with some income - particularly those who have domestic Gold Fields - but is in itself insufficient for funding anything but the most minimalist of governments.
  • Income Taxes: A form of taxation collected on income, where a certain % of the wages paid to workers in buildings is paid to the government.
  • Poll Taxes: A form of per-capita taxation where a fixed sum of money is collected on each member of the workforce. Poll Taxes are very regressive since they collect the same amount regardless of income.
  • Land Taxes: A special type of Poll Taxes that are only collected on certain types of Pops, such as Peasants.
  • Consumption Taxes: A tax that is levied directly on a specific good that is consumed by Pops. Levying Consumption Taxes costs Authority.
  • Dividend Taxes: A tax that is applied to dividends paid to Pops with an ownership stake in a Building. Tends to be a very progressive form of taxation, as usually only well-to-do Pops have ownership of buildings.
  • Tariffs: Tariffs are something that we plan to have in the game as a way to profit from goods being exported from your market, but we’re not ready to talk about exactly how this will work yet.

Main Types of Expenses (not an exhaustive list):
  • Government Wages: The salary cost of employing Pops in your Government Buildings such as Government Administrations and Ports.
  • Government Goods: The material costs for your Government Buildings, for example the Paper needed by Government Administrations.
  • Military Wages: The salary costs of Pops serving in your army and navy.
  • Military Goods: The various goods needed by your army and navy, such as Small Arms for Barracks.
  • Subsidies: The cost of subsidizing specific buildings to ensure they remain competitive.
  • Interest: The cost of making interest payments on your loans, if you have any.
  • Construction: The cost of constructing new buildings, both in goods required for the method of construction and wages paid to Pops working in the construction industry.

Well then, that’s all for today. Next week we’re going to be talking about a topic that touches on both economics and politics - Standard of Living. See you then!
 
  • 229Like
  • 120Love
  • 16
  • 9
  • 7
Reactions:
An idea that was floated upthread is to treat the amount of the credit limit/debt ceiling a country is using as a measure of the market's trust in them - if you have modest debts, such as England in the DD, people are more confident you'll repay them than if you're running very close to the red line. So modest deficit spending might have its supporters among your pops but if it spirals out of control, they'll be steadily more worried.
Our first debt model during early prototyping did actually use escalating interest rates the closer to the debt ceiling you got, for exactly these reasons. In practice, since compounding interest and escalating interest rate becomes exponential, that made for terrible, unfun death spirals where if your investments didn't all pan out perfectly all you could do was sit and wait for bankruptcy. It discouraged players from deficit spending, which was the exact opposite we wanted from our loans system. So nice idea, but didn't work.
 
Last edited:
  • 61
  • 14Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I would think it's unrealistic. A Nation doesn't marginally change its taxes based on the effects of day-to-day life. They don't go from a 12% tax to a 12.3% in order to balance the budget. Along with the fact that a slider is too immediate, and governments rarely ever work that quickly in reaction to an economic incident
In the present day that's how governments typically change the taxes, like from 12% to 12.3%. Anything else would upset the voting public :)

I don't know the history of taxation details, but it seems unlikely that the government wouldn't be able to set tax rates to arbitrary values. In the game terms one would presumably operate the buttons by setting tax rate to 0% one week and change it to 25% next week and then back to 0% to approximate desired tax rate, which seems clunky to me.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Right now we don't have inflation mechanics, it's something we think we'll want in the game sooner or later but likely not for release.

Any chance of implementing fiat currency as something you can switch to during the game? And then try to have the economy model the effects of increasing the money supply on supply and demand of goods? Could open up some very interesting possibilities and be fun for economics nerds.
 
  • 2
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Question for the slider people:

If raising taxes by a 5% interval locks me out of changing taxes and still carries a political cost, why would I ever do it? Why wouldn’t I always hit the button twice and raise taxes by 10%?

Presenting a lot of options is not good game design if players only ever pick one of those options. Sliders in Vicky 2 were a great example of this: players always slam taxes up to 100% and keep them there for most of the game.

Your premises are wrong. There are many things you can do with sliders. They only add granularity and allow for your revenues to follow your expenses.

You definitely can add a cooldown on taxes rate fixation. You can also make it so that you can only jump a certain amount at a time, though I would far more like if instead the maluses to increase taxes were more or less scaled, meaning that the more you raise taxes, the more it’s hard to do.

That’s assuming that to raise taxes, you would need a law, which makes perfect sense. I don’t understand why Paradox (and some of their fans apparently) can’t see that in a game about managing an historical country it would be better if tax increase was in itself a challenge.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
  • Tariffs: Tariffs are something that we plan to have in the game as a way to profit from goods being exported from your market, but we’re not ready to talk about exactly how this will work yet.
no tariffs for imports?
 
Our first debt model during early prototyping did actually use escalating interest rates the closer to the debt ceiling you got, for exactly these reasons. In practice, since compounding interest and escalating interest rate becomes exponential, that made for terrible, unfun death spirals where if your investments didn't all pan out perfectly all you could do was sit and wait for bankruptcy. It discouraged players from deficit spending, which was the exact opposite we wanted from our loans system. So nice idea, but didn't work.
That makes sense! I was actually thinking of social rather than economic penalties - with investors being steadily more certain that your government doesn't know what it's doing - but I could see that ending up in the same kind of downward spiral. Positive feedback loops are economically accurate but they don't always make the best experience for the people in them...
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
Our first debt model during early prototyping did actually use escalating interest rates the closer to the debt ceiling you got, for exactly these reasons. In practice, since compounding interest and escalating interest rate becomes exponential, that made for terrible, unfun death spirals where if your investments didn't all pan out perfectly all you could do was sit and wait for bankruptcy. It discouraged players from deficit spending, which was the exact opposite we wanted from our loans system. So nice idea, but didn't work.
That's a pity, that sounds fun to me! Maybe that is something you could revisit in the future for some sort of financial markets DLC involving devaluing currency or some of the other more or less successful ways countries have gotten out of the debt spiral.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I hope the AI will be able to use deficit spending intelligently. In Vic2 AIs hoarding cash was one of the major economic issues. In the new system it will a great impediment for the AI if they always try to stay positive, or even start to burn cash at gold reserve limit
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I would think it's unrealistic. A Nation doesn't marginally change its taxes based on the effects of day-to-day life. They don't go from a 12% tax to a 12.3% in order to balance the budget. Along with the fact that a slider is too immediate, and governments rarely ever work that quickly in reaction to an economic incident

Having only 5 options will hopefully help the AI function properly. The more options on a slider, the more ways an AI can, presumably, mess up.
 
  • 5
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
If escalating bond interest rates aren’t in (which should only apply to new or rolled-over debt, right?) does defaulting at least prevent you from borrowing as freely in the future?
 
Does military spending (wages) go directly to pops?
Is it possible to reduce unemployment by simply expanding the military so that more people have a salary? (if you can afford it)
 
In the current build of the game, interest payments is purely a negative and disappear into a black hole. We're going to prototype paying that interest out proportionately to Shareholders, so with any luck that's how it will work on release. My only hesitation is that mechanics which favor Pops at the (temporary) expense of the player, or vice versa, aren't clearly "good" or "bad" for the player which presents certain challenges in framing, explanation, and game dynamics. For example, a country that's deep in debt would pay a lot of interest to its captains of industry, who are quite pleased with that as the payments afford them greater luxuries (when actually they should perhaps be worried the debt will be defaulted on, and encourage government austerity and repayment). But if the country manages to climb out of debt, they're now punished by the factory owners who are mad their piles of gold are slightly smaller today.
I see your point, but wouldn't it be equally true that the player would be rewarded by having happier segments of the population that were previously paying higher taxes to fund the interest payments? If the goal is to have deficit-spending be a viable strategy (which from how it has been framed thus far seems to be the case, especially since the debt limit seems to be several times larger than optimal gold reserves) then interest payments shouldn't "disappear." Like other government spending, it should simply be a case of treasury money going out to other portions of the economy.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
If escalating bond interest rates aren’t in (which should only apply to new or rolled-over debt, right?) does defaulting at least prevent you from borrowing as freely in the future?
As far as I understand, by going into default you will burn the reserves of all your industries (assuming you only borrow locally like the DD seems to say). I guess this means at least some of thoose industries will go into default themselves, those lowering your debt pool.

If the question instead is if there will be a "modifier" preventing you from regoing into debt as no one will whant to give you... I hope there is but time scaled (ie. like -80% day 0, -79% day 7 ect...). As :
1) I guess it would be a spiral if whith now less income you can't do anything to at least try to overcome the situation
2) You can't I think simulate "legal appropriations" of money in game. Be it by some sort of "one time pool tax" or by "having all pension founds having to take all state bonds if any are on the market unsuld (Italian policy early XXth)"
 
  • 1
Reactions:
'Though it’s certainly never bad in itself to have a sizable Gold Reserve, it isn’t necessarily the best idea to continually run a large budget surplus - each country has a Gold Reserve Limit, which is a ‘soft-cap’ over which each surplus pound has diminishing returns on the Gold Reserve - if you have an enormous stockpile of gold, a surplus of £10k may only increase your stockpile by as little as £2k, meaning that you’ve simply wasted the rest of your money.'

Will this have a deflationary effect on the world economy? I understand the in game advantage of this system as it encourages you to spend reserves. However, in this example would the game simply burn the £8k 'wasted' on gold, or would it be paid on to a gold producer? If the former takes place couldn't a successful economy start to struggle from a serious deflation issue after a few decades?

Does the gold reserve represent a collection of reserves (foreign exchange, foreign bonds etc) or an actual pile of gold? If the latter, will its value fluctuate with the world price of gold/precious metal?
 
In the current build of the game, interest payments is purely a negative and disappear into a black hole. We're going to prototype paying that interest out proportionately to Shareholders, so with any luck that's how it will work on release. My only hesitation is that mechanics which favor Pops at the (temporary) expense of the player, or vice versa, aren't clearly "good" or "bad" for the player which presents certain challenges in framing, explanation, and game dynamics. For example, a country that's deep in debt would pay a lot of interest to its captains of industry, who are quite pleased with that as the payments afford them greater luxuries (when actually they should perhaps be worried the debt will be defaulted on, and encourage government austerity and repayment). But if the country manages to climb out of debt, they're now punished by the factory owners who are mad their piles of gold are slightly smaller today.
I really like this system, even if it seems a bit counterintuitive. You hear a lot of grumbling about the national debt from the moneyed classes but they would be the first to freak out if the US actually tried to pay off its debt (and thus stopped selling them Treasury bonds).

It also captures Hamilton’s Financial plan, like I laid out earlier in the thread.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
The idea is generally that your income taxes, poll taxes and other such 'base taxes' are determined by laws and you can adjust levels, but you should not be doing this all the time, while you can use more flexible measures like consumption taxes and tariffs if you need to make up a smaller deficit or raise short-term revenue. It's also just a lot less important to have an 'optimal' revenue stream due to the removal of lump sum spending and generous loan system.
To what degree can you adjust levels? Going from 0% to 100% income tax rate would seem a much more radical change than changing from income tax to poll tax (or vica versa) at a more reasonable rates. And how exactly do you adjust levels - where the actual tax rate percentage is assigned to the button? Is it when you introduce the laws? Or is it pre-determined? If so, is it moddable?

I assume that the negative (or positive) effects of tax changes on population would manifest themselves via their ability to meet their needs. As a suggestion, I would probably add a monetary cost to changing tax rate. Realistically it would reflect administrative cost of change, but in the game play it would discourage players from adjusting tax levels all the time, which would be particularly important if players can't set accurate tax rate they want and are tempted to approximate it by switching back and forth between predefined rates.