• 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:
1. Will education levels of pops affect demand for goods? I.e when only rich are educated, only rich consume paper to write letters or books or home work, but when poorer people also become educated - they also start to read and write. Or Introduction of compulsory education compels every social strata to spend on writing materials and books for their kids.
It doesn't sound like those fine details will be part of the model. Everything else aside, it would be annoying if educating your populace made them more expensive to support.

2. Will levels of laws/bureaucracy/taxes affect paper consumption by Pops? If you have to fill a form for everything and have to submit voluminous tax declaration every year - your level of demand for paper rises.
More invasive government -> higher Bureaucracy costs for institutions -> more Administration buildings -> more Paper consumed. So yes, your paper demands rise, but you're not nickle-and-diming (fivepence-and-tenpencing?) your citizens for every form.

3. What about such goods as education, medical services, public entertainment and culture? You have mentioned only bread, where are the circuces? ;)
Institutions (education, medicine) aren't goods. They may affect pops according to their wealth if they're set to the appropriate forms, but they don't reduce wealth (or if they do, it's not in the way Goods do).


What prevents gaming the wealth level system by cutting access to Needs goods? If a pop can access only a few goods, their expenses will be low, which will lead them to advance to the next Wealth level more quickly.
I'm not sure I follow - if they're all trying to satisfy their needs with a few specific goods, won't that raise prices and make it harder for them to advance?

(If you're heavily subsidizing certain industries to keep costs down, pops should migrate towards those goods without needing the extra incentive of cutting off the more expensive ones. That's a sound strategy but I wouldn't say it's "gaming the system".)


Hold on, so, pops generate money from nothing with subsistence, and then they spend money buying goods, and if they earn extra money it just bumps them up into the next needs tier so they spend more money and if they earn a net negative then it bumps them down?
Did... did you somehow turn money into a form of mana?
How do pops "generate money from nothing with subsistence"? Subsistence farm workers get paid for their work, just like everybody else (well, a lot less than everybody else).
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
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.

I'm confused by this. You mention that building banana plantations instead of grain farms is a risk because it opens the possibility that wealthy pops with advanced needs outbid poor pops with basic needs. Doesn't building grocery factories that turn basic-needs-only grain into basic-or-luxury groceries lead to the same problem?
 
I’ve been thinking about the automobile vs ticket section of this Dev Diary. Does the system distinguish between durable and non-durable goods? Does a rich POP need to buy automobiles every tick, or is he satisfied if he’s bought one recently?
 
Exactly, it should be in basic items. More logical.
Compensating lack of fuel (for heating) with buying more winter clothes sounds perfectly natural to me. Clothes are likely in both categories, too.
That's what I initially thought too, but why is there separate category for clothing then?


simple-needs.png
Winter clothes can replace heating but heating can't replace all clothes, so they need to be in separate categories.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I really hope we get a ledger for Victoria 3, as the massive amount of information that we are shown to have access to in these dev diaries scream be organized in some form of easily accessible overview. I don't want to have to click on provinces frantically trying to find out which is in the worst economic state, or which one is producing the most oil, which enemy state province would be the most valuable to grab, etc. I want pie charts, graphs, plots!! Please bring them back in some form!

Also please bring back message settings, playing Crusader kings III has made me go crazy with the amount of notifications I can never permanently dismiss.
 
  • 8
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Well i can foresee multiple experiments where we create utopias, dystopias or pure equality on Basic levels.
would be interesting how far you can push your pops and still habe a country going.
 
Well i can foresee multiple experiments where we create utopias, dystopias or pure equality on Basic levels.
would be interesting how far you can push your pops and still habe a country going.

As pop growth changes with Standard of Living, I guess we will have people trying to get their Pops to the exact level they grow the most, and not allowing them to get a cent richer.
 
Is V3 going to have full age demographics that vary over time due to changing birthrates and deathrates? In other words, in a low-SoL country, you'll have a lot of children and not many retirees, while in an industrializing economy, you might have fewer children and more working-age population (because they're not dying off in their 20s/30s/40s as much), and in an advanced economy you'll have even fewer children, but also a lot more retirees. These demographics will affect how much demand there is for schools vs. health care.
 
Is there some technical limitation to tooltips that does not allow proper formatting like this?
View attachment 752864
Other than time and resources, I don't think there are any technical limitations anymore! It used to be the case that our tooltip system only supported formatted text (the graphics you see in there are actually icons converted into text to embed it inline), but full layout in templated tooltips is now a possibility in the engine. But creating text-only tooltips is still about 10x faster, so particularly during this stage in development when things are still a bit fluid it's not top of the list.

All this feedback is appreciated and will be taken into consideration for the final product, though!
 
  • 40Like
  • 11
  • 8Love
Reactions:
At the moment Wealth levels are balanced such that 10k Workforce at Wealth 1 require a total weekly net income of £150, and each level is worth roughly 10% more than the level before it, so it's a quite gradual exponential increase that nevertheless gets astronomically high by levels 60+. Of course this is at base pricing, so specific market prices can impact how much money Pops need to have to achieve a certain Wealth level a lot. And even if the goods your population needs to buy are quite expensive, if many of them are made domestically they might have the wages to match on account of their industries producing high-value goods.

Also, it's not enough to just be able to afford Wealth 2 (at £165 base pricing) to advance to it - rather, the Pop's income is compared to its expenses, and it progresses in one direction or another until it switches to the new level. So assuming perfectly balanced supply and demand, a Pop of Wealth 1 that has a net income of £180 would gain 180/150 = 20% progress towards Wealth 2 per week.
Would this cause a pop to ping pong between two wealth levels, or just stay in one?

From what I read (ceteris paribus and everything at base price) a pop with 160$ income will start in wealth 1 and increase by (160/150 = 1.067) 6.7% each week, so after 15 weeks it will reach wealth 2. But now it will decrease at (160/165 = 0.970) -3% each week, so falling to wealth 1 again after about 33 weeks.

I mean, I think I'd rather see them stay at 1 or 2 (or in between? why is wealth not continuous?) than ping ponging, but I guess it's a decent and working compromise.
 
This is a great step up from previous games pop systems.



Why do people disagree with this post? These sounds like valid complains: numbers on many tooltips i had seen would really enjoy being forced into a straight column with fixed horizontal position of point. Is there some technical limitation to tooltips that does not allow proper formatting like this?
View attachment 752864

If it is so, would formatting option exist in release version or would be there an optional expanded view of a pop or anything else that could suffer from this?
I'm hoping this will happen. One of the PDS UX designers responded to a similar query a while ago: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...igits-in-the-interface.1476510/#post-27569438
 
I'm a bit concerned that I'm constantly reading in these DD's about "choosing what Buildings to construct", with no mention of free-market capitalists building factories. Please tell me that the game hasn't discarded V2's capitalists driving industrialization, in favor of the player micromanaging everything, and every country effectively having a planned economy. While V2's capitalist AI sucked, I liked the way idea of the player having a varying amount of direct control over capital investments, depending on the economic system their country was running. The solution is to write a better capitalist AI, not to require the player to micromanage everything.
 
  • 14
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm a bit concerned that I'm constantly reading in these DD's about "choosing what Buildings to construct", with no mention of free-market capitalists building factories. Please tell me that the game hasn't discarded V2's capitalists driving industrialization, in favor of the player micromanaging everything, and every country effectively having a planned economy. While V2's capitalist AI sucked, I liked the way idea of the player having a varying amount of direct control over capital investments, depending on the economic system their country was running. The solution is to write a better capitalist AI, not to require the player to micromanage everything.
The player directs investment, but different economic laws change how the investment pool works (who pays into it, what it can be spent on, etc.) and whether you can subsidize buildings.

Personally I think it’s a great change. Even if the Vicky 2 Capitalist AI had been better, I still would have been frustrated by not being able to direct the growth of my economy.
 
  • 9
  • 1
Reactions:
Hello just a quick question not sure it the best dev diary to speack about it but still ask ,


in that period a rely important factor was sex-work like prostitution courtesan (or "wife") and a lot of woman in city was work in that sector. i would like to know where is simulate this woman in the game. i don not seen it be a depency since that pop respond to a need and give that need to farmer and artistocrat and everything in betwen. And does law affect they for example does antiprostitution law existe in the game ? does polygamist law exist ( if they do that make prostitution less likely but made woman less free ? )
Another point like to this does the pop criminal exist ? fro exemple a job less guy may enter in a illecal job bassed of his education level for exemple low level education become bandit and hight level become drug baron bandit pop. and in that case why not a prostitution pop?
Another point a lot of non maried woman become maid for other pop so want to know wherethat be take into incount in farmer dependancy or in aristocrate dependanty?
Hoppe to seen a reply.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
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'?

Feminism unlocks the possibility of passing these laws, in that there will now be people agitating for more rights, while what happened during the World Wars would be actually passing those laws.
I think it was more a matter of labor-saving domestic technology freeing women's time up to pursue both social-activism and enter the workforce -- "feminism" was simply the inevitable result of changing technology and rising standard-of-living. Hopefully this will be captured in the game.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
At the moment Wealth levels are balanced such that 10k Workforce at Wealth 1 require a total weekly net income of £150, and each level is worth roughly 10% more than the level before it, so it's a quite gradual exponential increase that nevertheless gets astronomically high by levels 60+. Of course this is at base pricing, so specific market prices can impact how much money Pops need to have to achieve a certain Wealth level a lot. And even if the goods your population needs to buy are quite expensive, if many of them are made domestically they might have the wages to match on account of their industries producing high-value goods.

Also, it's not enough to just be able to afford Wealth 2 (at £165 base pricing) to advance to it - rather, the Pop's income is compared to its expenses, and it progresses in one direction or another until it switches to the new level. So assuming perfectly balanced supply and demand, a Pop of Wealth 1 that has a net income of £180 would gain 180/150 = 20% progress towards Wealth 2 per week.
So if I read this correctly a pop needs to save an equivalent of his one wage expense to progress to the next level. I’m assuming it works the other way round, I.e if he uses up an equivalent of one week wage of his savings, he demotes one level. So, assuming zero savings at level 1 a very affluent pop at level 60 would have weekly spending of 41,5K and total savings around 413K, little more than 10 weeks of spending, which is a very low figure. Of course, investment pool can be added to that, but I doubt the pops can draw upon it if things go south. It also means that an unemployed pop with no income would loose a wealth level per week, so even the richest pops will be completely broke in 1 year max. We need to see how it plays, but my first reaction would be to have a bit more inertia in the system - the pops need to have a larger cushion in savings so they react slower to both growth and decline of income.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Would this cause a pop to ping pong between two wealth levels, or just stay in one?

From what I read (ceteris paribus and everything at base price) a pop with 160$ income will start in wealth 1 and increase by (160/150 = 1.067) 6.7% each week, so after 15 weeks it will reach wealth 2. But now it will decrease at (160/165 = 0.970) -3% each week, so falling to wealth 1 again after about 33 weeks.

I mean, I think I'd rather see them stay at 1 or 2 (or in between? why is wealth not continuous?) than ping ponging, but I guess it's a decent and working compromise.
Simple way to solve ping-ponging would be having the wealth only increase if income is over (or under, if wealth is falling) of the next threshold.

So Pops with wealth of 1 and 2 will stay put if their income is between 150 and 165.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Compensating lack of fuel (for heating) with buying more winter clothes sounds perfectly natural to me. Clothes are likely in both categories, too.

Winter clothes can replace heating but heating can't replace all clothes, so they need to be in separate categories.
Yes I can see nobles wrapped into crude fabric to keep their schwanz "heated"

Wood: fuel, heats, used to cook stuff
Coal: fuel, heats, used to cook stuff
Oil: fuel, heats
=/=
Fabric: keeps warm. Lasts years. Raw material.
=/=
Clothes: keep warm. Last years. Manufactured goods.

As you can see, only three goods have something in common, the goods used as fuel. Therefore, putting fabric in that category is counter-intuitive, just as it is illogical putting it together with clothes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 7
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I believe that in the lower end of SoL, increasing SoL also increases birth rate (you have more kids if you're not starving and such).
I agree about the very-low-end having an increase in birthrate with increasing SoL (look at the exploding population in Africa today!), but I hope that you developers do some research on exactly what factors cause the decline in birthrate that tends to happen with increasing SoL -- it could be that there is a realistic way for the player to maintain relatively high birthrates even though their pops are "opulent".
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Oof, I had a real smoothbrain moment where I wondered who historically burned so much fabric they could afford to heat their homes with it in any meaningful sense.

Until I realized y'all meant blankets.

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.
Given that electricity is actually more convenient than wood or coal, will there be any accounting for preference for electricity if they are merely similar prices? If electricity costs one pound more but doesn't require trips out to the store, presumably a lot of people would opt for that even at that point.

And no real comment of substance but count me in as excited for the changes to population structure you described, that sounds so much better than in Vic2. I know there's a lot of vocal dissent at times around V3 but I'm 110% on board with this.