• 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 #13 - Standard of Living

DD13.png


Hello again and welcome to yet another walkthrough of some interrelated systems fundamental to Victoria 3’s economic model: Standard of Living, Wealth, Pop Needs, and Consumption.

All Pops in Victoria 3 have a Standard of Living score between 1 and 99, which represents - by a perfectly scientific and objective metric, don’t @ me - precisely how great their life is. Pops with levels 1-4 are labeled Starving, levels 5-9 are Struggling, and so on through Impoverished, Middling, Secure, Prosperous, Affluent, Wealthy, Lavish, and at levels 60+, Opulent. We don’t really expect a lot of Pops to reach levels 60+ but - knowing you folks - we’ve left plenty of headroom to accommodate your mad economic experiments.

Standard of Living affects two major aspects of the game: birth- and death rate, and Pop loyalty.

Birth rate is simply the percentage of children born to Pops each year, while death rate is the percentage of Pops who die. Both values start out high and decline with increasing Standard of Living, but birth rate declines slower than death rate, leading to a net increase in population growth with increasing Standard of Living. This system models that increasing Standard of Living tends to lead to longer life expectancy but declining natality. Each parameter can be modified independently by a variety of effects.

Scratch your priesthood’s back and they’ll scratch yours. Note that Interest Group Traits can vary between Interest Group variants, so a different religion might provide a different benefit.
fruitful.png


There are side effects to emancipation! But while reduced population growth here initially appears to be a penalty, increasing the proportion of industrial workforce at the same time tends to lead to increasing Standard of Living, which provides a net increase in population growth.
women-workplace.PNG

Pop loyalty is altered whenever their Standard of Living increases or declines from its current value. Martin will get into much more detail on this in next week’s Development Diary on Political Movements.

A Pop’s Wealth attribute forms the foundation for its Standard of Living. Pops can also gain more intangible boosts or penalties to their Standard of Living from any number of sources.

Pops accumulate Wealth over time while their weekly income exceeds their weekly expenses. Conversely, if a Pop’s expenses exceed its income, Wealth will decline. How large their expenses are depends on what and how much they consume, which is also dependent on their Wealth. What this means is that as long as a Pop’s income remains the same, and the cost of the goods and services in their state and market remains the same, that Pop’s Wealth will over time drift towards exactly the level of consumption they can afford to sustain. Of course, as Wealth changes the consumption also changes, which affects the prices of the goods in the market, which might in turn affect their wages, dividends, etcetera.

This weekly shortfall of funds will eventually lead to a reduction in Wealth and thereby consumption, but since the shortfall is only a small fraction of its income it will take several months to have an impact on the Wealth score and thereby the Standard of Living.
peasant-net-income.PNG

Wealth has a number of functions in addition to forming the basis for Standard of Living. A Pop’s raw Political Strength (excluding any such power conferred by the country’s Voting Franchise, which is treated separately) is dependent on their Wealth. Some privately operated Institutions provide benefits to Pops only in relation to their Wealth. Many Professional Qualifications also require Pops to have a certain amount of Wealth.

Each Wealth level is defined by a set of Needs and an amount of “value” that needs to be spent on goods to fulfill that Need. This “value” is defined in goods base prices, such that the Need for Standard Clothing for a Pop of size 10,000 with Wealth level 14 might be fulfilled by buying £87 worth of Clothes, assuming perfectly balanced supply and demand. If the actual price of Clothes where the Pop lives is over-demanded, their cost to fulfill this need will also be higher. As a result, cheaper goods means wealthier, happier Pops.

This Peasant Pop’s Wealth is low (6), so it consumes only the basic necessities.
simple-needs.png

Many Needs can be satisfied by a variety of different goods. For example, the Need for Heating requires Wood, Fabric, Coal, Oil, and/or Electricity. These can be purchased in any combination assuming the total base prices add up to the required value. When given this option Pops will attempt to make a rational purchase decision based on which goods are the most available, satisfying their Need with some mix of these goods or even only one, if that’s the only one available. In this way an inland, isolated state might not consume any Fish at all as long as it has sufficient Grain, Fruit, Meat, or even packaged Groceries to satisfy their Need for food.

A breakdown of how the Peasants in Ceylon spent their heating budget this week.
heating-for-peasants-in-ceylon.png

Goods can also appear in several different Needs categories. Groceries, Meat, and Fruit can fulfil the need for both Basic Food and Luxury Food, but Grain or Fish can only fulfil the need for Basic Food. As a result, maintaining only Millet Farms and Fishing Wharfs to meet your food needs will mostly satisfy your poor Pops, while focusing on Livestock Ranches and Banana Plantations will cause wealthy Pops to inflate the price of the available food supply and further impoverish the poor. Operating productive Food Industries that can turn Grain and Fish into Groceries is good for everyone in your country, and frees up any available supply of Meat and Fruit to be consumed by those with a Need for Luxury Food.

A breakdown of who requires Basic Food and how it can be fulfilled.
basic-food-substitution.png

Lower Wealth levels have only a handful of Needs, such as Simple Clothing, Heating, Basic Food, and Intoxicants. The middle levels introduce more refined Needs like Household Items, Services, Luxury Drinks, and Free Movement. Really wealthy Pops consume increasingly vast quantities of Luxury Goods to impress and outdo their peers. In some cases Needs disappear entirely in favor of more diverse Needs. The Need for Simple Clothing which can be satisfied by both Fabric and Clothes will, as a Pop is raised from abject poverty, be gradually phased out by the Need for Standard Clothing which include only professionally sewn items.

Compared to the Wealth 6 Peasants, these Wealth 17 Bureaucrats are more diverse in their requirements.
middle-needs.png

Introducing new goods into your market will help you diversify your economy and alleviate the demand on crucial industrial goods. Importing Oil - either petroleum from newly discovered deposits or whale oil from the few places in the world that produce it - will cause your Pops to buy some quantity of it for heating instead of Coal or Electricity, which lowers the price of those goods and help make your industries more profitable. Introducing Opium into your market will decrease Pop demand for Liquor and Tobacco... for good or ill.

Some goods are favored over others by default if available. Once Electricity is available to them, due to its convenience Pops will prefer to buy it over Wood or Coal, even if they’re the same price. Some goods can be replaced by other goods entirely, while others will always be required to some bare minimum. Train travel can completely replace the need for having your own Automobile to drive around in, but having an Automobile doesn’t ever completely remove the need for an occasional train ride to see your cousin who lives all the way in Paris.

In addition to these factors cultures can develop Obsessions for certain goods, and some even have Taboos they must abide by. A country can also encourage or discourage the consumption of certain goods using Authority, perhaps in an effort to avoid enriching a hated enemy or entice Pops to buy something that’s heavily taxed over something that is not. This impacts the purchase habits of Pops affected despite this being irrational from a strictly financial perspective.

What if the Bengali were obsessed with the status afforded to them by Luxury Furniture? This could happen due to events, or organically because Luxury Furniture is a really prevalent luxury good in markets where a lot of Bengali Pops live. But even if this habit is developed around their homelands, Bengali Pops that migrate abroad - to the USA or Australia or Japan - will continue preferring Luxury Furniture to other luxury goods, and will suffer financially if the same level of access is not available there.
bengali-obsessions-taboos.png

Let’s close out by considering the difference between this and the consumption model from previous games. In Victoria 2, Pops have different Life, Everyday, and Luxury Needs based on their Type (what we call Profession in Victoria 3), both in types of goods and quantities. Pops in Victoria 2 always strive to get promoted into Types which require more advanced, luxurious goods in larger quantities, but will fail to do so if they cannot afford it. Since certain advanced Types of Pops in Victoria 2 perform their duties objectively better than their less advanced counterparts (e.g. Craftsmen, Clerks) it becomes important to retain access to advanced goods in order to ensure that your workforce is internationally competitive.

In Victoria 3 this formula is turned on its head. An Engineer is not intrinsically better than a Machinist who is not intrinsically better than a Laborer, and there’s no ideal national proportions between them you need to maintain in order to maximize your competitiveness. Different Professions do fulfil different functions, but it’s the Production Methods of the Buildings they work in that determine what function they serve. By choosing what Buildings to construct and which Production Methods to activate, you create the opportunities for these Professions which in turn impose changes to the population. What types of goods you need to ensure access to in order to keep your population satisfied is not driven directly by what professional opportunities you have created, but rather by what Wealth development and Wealth distribution these changes have resulted in.

Professions that are part of the Middle Strata in this state are considerably better off than those in the Lower Strata, and not far off from the Upper Strata. It’s very likely this state hasn’t started industrializing yet, since Shopkeepers - who run the pre-industrial economy - are Middle Strata, and Upper Strata Aristocrats aren’t always particularly wealthy if their income originates from exploiting the Peasantry on Subsistence Farms. Since the Middle Strata is already wealthy enough to demand Transportation, construction of Railways in this state is likely to be both profitable and beneficial for population growth and general happiness.
sol-breakdown.PNG

As a result, Pops in Victoria 3 won’t always strive to ascend to a higher social strata, nor will an Aristocrat always have a higher income or goods consumption Needs compared to a Clerk. All of this is driven by market forces - a qualifying Clerk would gladly become an Aristocrat on available land if that comes with a higher income than remaining a Clerk, and this increased income will gradually result in an increase in their Wealth and consumption demand. Conversely, Aristocrats don’t demote to Laborers because they can't acquire enough goods to sustain their lifestyle - they would only turn to such desperate measures if they become landless (unemployed) and are trying to avoid starvation, or if by some miracle taking on a relatively well-paid Laborer job in a particularly profitable factory would actually yield a greater paycheck than their failing farm provides them with.

In practice this means that it's important in both games to secure your populations’ basic needs to prevent starvation and dissent, followed by appeasing their desire for ever more advanced or exotic goods in larger and larger quantities to increase the size of your economy and power on the world stage. But while reaching this commonly pursued end goal in Victoria 2 often meant pursuing a certain optimal population distribution no matter what else happened throughout the game, the Professions of the Pops you end up with could be vastly different between games in Victoria 3! If you build a colonial plantation economy, your Aristocrats might remain as dominant by endgame as they were at start. If you're a manufacturing powerhouse on the cutting edge of technological progress, your middle strata Pops might come to rival the Capitalist class in wealth and power. If your high taxes are reinvested in vast Institutions your power base might be dominated by Bureaucrats and Academics. If your workers own the means of production, your Laborers might even be wealthier - and consume more luxuries - than your neighbor's Aristocrats.

These possibilities for diverse Pop distributions also result in very different political tendencies in your population, which lead to demand for different kinds of Laws. While in Victoria 2 it’s primarily the rising Consciousness of a greater ratio of more advanced and literate types of Pops that drives a desire for reform in a liberal direction, Victoria 3’s more open-ended consumption model and the diversity of Professions it can create could result in your population having very different political desires by endgame depending on the path you’ve taken. This requires your political machinery to be working in tandem with your economic engine, both to create the right conditions for your Pops and to satisfy their changing desires.

Next week, we will learn more about these desires as Martin introduces us to Political Movements, which themselves are strongly connected to Standard of Living. Until then!
 
  • 242Like
  • 156Love
  • 18
  • 5
Reactions:
I think organized crime, black markets and so on would be a really interesting thing to add to the game, but we don't have any plans to explicitly simulate them for release (I know I keep saying that in this thread, but there are so many things I want to add to the game but where we need to prioritize the core features that we do have and ensure they're as good as they can be on release).
A black market and organized crime would be a large enough feature, but not one that’s crucial to the game, that I think everyone would be fine paying for that as a DLC
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Oh dear. Keeping women at home gonna raise the birth rate?

Sorry women. You had a good run.

What's that? Being religious makes the birth rate rise too?

From Coast to Coast and around the world! It's time to PRAISE THE LORD!

This game is gonna make me end up putting the Man back in Manpower.

I expect it to turn me into a terrible person.
 
  • 12Haha
Reactions:
I don't think the personal experience from anyone on the mod team makes weight on how they design the game, I know perfectly people in other latitudes use way more resources in heating, there are plenty of history and facts to know this, whether they are from Sweden or somewhere else.
The thing is making it work for a videogame. Yes, I know from experience some places have less heating needs, but think of this: I'm no programmer but imagine balancing the game so that 1 pop group living in a tropical zone spends the same amount of money, or at least a value close enough to not feel unbalanced, in Services (I'd imagine this means water), Medicine, Drinks, than 1 pop group in an artic zone spends on coal, fuel, whale fat (cool if they used this for heating, too). Sounds like if I were the pop I would need 1 coal but 5 drinks, and the other pop 1 drink but 5 coal, something like that.
The game works differently from Victoria 2 and we don't know the values behind, but this detail is way too insignificant to be an issue really, I will play Victoria 3 for bigger things.
Now, your opinion and proposal is good, in fact I liked the water consumption thing and hope they use that idea. But it was the delivery that sparked a long discussion, it was not constructive at all...
I see your point, bit it is not just a question of realism, but of resource scarcity. With all the world struggling for a heating source, I see how the concerned goods' prices could easily skyrocket.
 
A black market and organized crime would be a large enough feature, but not one that’s crucial to the game, that I think everyone would be fine paying for that as a DLC
Game isn't even out, and we're already discussing future DLC. Such is life at Paradox.

You're also forgetting circulation of counterfeit money. Considering it's estimated that after US CIvil War between a third and half of all banknotes were counterfeit, it has significant implications for the economic models. Hope your Vicky economy can handle money supply appearing and disappearing at random (but getting worse with war exhaustion), Wiz.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Is standard of living an absolute value (that is, every pop of every profession who reaches level 14 has level 14 demands) or is there some degree of profession dependence? I mean, a peasant at level 14 may not want the same things as a shopkeeper at level 14 does.
 
My question is, why the Bengali obsession luxury furniture but not luxury gold jewelry?

blog_25.jpg


and, the picture show that only wine and liquor will be the taboos of the bengali culture, so.... is this means that they can drink vodka ?
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
As far as I've understood, just like Vic2, there is no PoP-specific "ownership" of factories, so there are no shares or dividends to speak of.
If a building makes a profit, it is split between building up the financial reserves and dividends to the owners. Owners can be aristocrats owning the farm, the capitalist owning the factory or other pops depending on ownership structure.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Since mechanics related to the black market and organised crime will be coming (if they come) post-release, does that mean there won't be any smuggling in-game, particularly in states and nations with banned goods and imports/high tariffs/high goods taxes, until then? While I understand it's not a priority, smuggling would be an interesting mechanic in that it discourages attempts at complete social control, as well as allowing foreign states new ways to interfere in other nations' domestic affairs (by smuggling in narcotics or small arms for example). As an aside, do the laws in-game have the scope to allow for the creation of an Objectivist/ancap nightmare realm, with unrestricted access to gambling, narcotics, intoxicants, etc.? Or is that again something that would only be possible after later reworks to do with crime and entertainment?
 
What is being argued is the bizarre assumption people in hot climates don't use cloth for heating ever which is just absurd. We still use blankets at night, it is not hot 24h a day every day of the year.
Yeah I'm starting to think that poster has never even been to a desert. Because one of the big things about a desert climates, both hot and cold deserts, is that the temperature is highly variable and as hot as it is during the day, it cools down a bunch at night. So the idea that people in desert climates don't need blankets or fabrics is just ridiculously wrong.
 
  • 7Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Realistically? Absolutely. Would I like this to be in the game? For sure. However, this is also the kind of mechanical addition that I'm alright with not having in release and add in a at a later point, because it's more of a nice detail than a crucial mechanic (Heating is not a very significant part of expenses). I would also want a system like this to be used in other cases where it makes sense and I wouldn't just want to make it as simple as 'Pops in hot regions enjoy a higher average standard of living due to reduced heating expenses while Pops in cold regions are poorer'.
I think add 'climate' tags to regions would work in this case and would have various use. pops live in tropical regions tend to consume less on heat, but this tag could also be used in calculating agricultural output. Usually tropical regions have a higher agricultural output since the better precipitation and heat conditions they have. From military aspect, it's also plausible that the climate tag affects the battle power of soldiers just like what we see in HOI4. These are just examples, i am sure that there is more to explore.
 
I am no expert on this, but didn't the increase of women in the workforce mainly come about due to the two World Wars, rather than 'feminism'?
Women at work in the United States since 1860: An analysis of unreported family workers.
Women have worked for a long time to make family needs met. Part of the problem was the rights and privileges that Men gained during the era.
 
Oh dear. Keeping women at home gonna raise the birth rate?

Sorry women. You had a good run.

What's that? Being religious makes the birth rate rise too?

From Coast to Coast and around the world! It's time to PRAISE THE LORD!

This game is gonna make me end up putting the Man back in Manpower.

I expect it to turn me into a terrible person.
I mean, I know paradox devs take notes from other paradox titles about things to steal and improve, but maybe a little less stellaris next time?
 
  • 2Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Victoria 2 also had different variables for hot climates. the oversight now feels wrong.
Outside of Life Rating, which is more about "these were places last colonized by Europeans, so Life Rating must be smaller there", and certain resources being produced at certain provinces, I can't think of any climate specific variables in Victoria 2.

Any examples?
 
Not at the moment, it's something I've thought about but we probably will not have for release at least.
Pleeeeeease please pleeeease consider making conditional needs modable. It would open the door to so many possibilities.

Rough examples:

- education as an intangible local good, consumed by pops based on changes in government institutions (with higher public schooling institutions reducing pops need to pay for private education at certain wealth levels)

- colonists having different consumption patterns in a hostile environment

- settlers that conflict with native tribes needing firearms (to defend against raids) for a good standard of living

- "enforcement" as an intangible good, the need for which can be reduced by police institutions (and otherwise the rich will pay for enforcement from private sources, like the Pinkertons in real life)

There's no need to include these things in the base game, but I beg of you: give us the tools to mod it in by allowing for dynamic/changeable/conditional pop needs.

I'm on my knees, lord @Wizzington
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Pops don't have an aversion to working in industries producing a taboo right now. It's an interesting idea though, maybe it's something we can explore at a later point.
I hope this is looked into further. It is true that certain ethnicities concentrate in certain industries because of taboos and obsessions. There shouldn't be Muslims working in a pork abattoir. In Southeast Asian Muslim colonies, the Chinese were the ones who did it (they were Buddhist or Christian).
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Sorry if this has been asked already (gonna be honest, cbf reading 13 pages of comments).

Is it safe to assume that certain goods will more likely become an "obsession" than others? I mean for example, opium is a tad more addictive than say fancy furniture. (though, I am a sucker for some good lumbar support.). So if could you say get China addicted to opium by flooding the Chinese market with it?

Than if you're a big producer of said good and a culture is now obsessed with said good, you could rake in some of that sweet sweet drug money like you're Pablo Escobar himself? Further, can you go to war with a country if they have banned a certain good to allow access back to that good in their market? ie: Opium Wars or something a little more ahistorical like a victorious South bringing slavery back to the world?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
If I understood correctly, PoPs only save in order to smooth out consumption and if things are completely stable, wealth remains unchanged.

I assume capitalist PoPs work differently? Presumably some PoP has to be saving in order to invest, or is it some different system in play here?
Oh oh oh, I got an idea!

Part of the rich pops demand is financial services or shares. And the consumption of financial services or shares decides the growth of the investment pool.

Ok probably not how it works but it could be.
 
So how will taboos affect for example the total spent money for intoxication? For example muslims that are not allowed to drink alcohol, will they instead use more opium than an european pop that has alcohol available, but overall they spend about the same amount for intoxication if their wealth is similar?
I think intangible ways to meet certain needs were also mentioned... perhaps this could apply to intoxicants? For example, devout pops requiring fewer intoxicants, simulating them abstaining from them. In a sense, religion literally satisfying the same needs that opium would...
 
...Isn't this exactly what they're doing? Look at the Basic Food example, it lists Grain as the default good and then lists every good that could be used as a substitute for it, and the conversion rate for such substitution. Apparently that conversion rate is based on the usage, so a unit of Fabric could only be worth 0.25 units of Coal for Heating, requiring vastly more blankets to cook your food than Coal would. Fruit is already listed as being worth 1.5 units of Grain, but as a potential substitute for Luxury Food, would commonly be far more than just 1.5 times as expensive as Grain.

Edit to add: So it seems like within said Luxury Food category, 1 unit of Fruit might be worth (as an example pulled right out of thin air) 3 units of Meat to showcase how good Fruits are as Luxury Food, despite the fact that both 1 unit of Meat and 1 unit of Fruit are only worth 1.5 units of Grain as Basic Food.I
I hoped as much, but based on Lachek’s reply this ratios are just ratios of base prices, so they are not specific to a needs category. This would make the whole substitution much less flexible.