• 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 #140 - 1.8 post-release thoughts

16_9.png

Happy Thursday everyone, it’s time for another Victoria 3 development diary. Today I’ll be talking about my thoughts on the release of 1.8 and Pivot of Empire, the feedback we’ve received, and also a bit of what’s in store next for Victoria 3.

As some of you might remember, 1.8 was actually meant to be two updates - a smaller 1.8 with bug fixes & polish, and a larger 1.9 with Pivot of Empire and the larger free features such as the Political Movement Rework and the Discrimination Rework. We ended up combining these into a single update because the release windows between the two were just too tight, and as a result 1.8 became a chonker of an update, with a lot of potential to cause bugs and balance issues.

On the whole, the feedback around the update (and in particular the Discrimination Rework) has been positive, and you seem to be enjoying the additional dimensions that the update adds to the economic and political sides of Victoria 3. However, there are a few issues and bits of feedback on the not-so-positive-side that I specifically want to address:
  • On release, we had a very nasty issue introduced by a backend change in the launcher, which caused users with a non-unicode character to crash when launching the game, which unfortunately slipped past our testing due to the fact that all of our work email addresses use only unicode characters. This one actually had us pulling our hairs a bit trying to find the cause, but with help from the engine team we were finally able to narrow it down and get a fix out just before the weekend (we don’t usually make a habit of patching at 17:45 on Fridays, but in this particular case it was warranted)
  • We’ve gotten a fair amount of feedback that the rework of companies to own and affect specific buildings has made them somewhat underwhelming compared to the way they worked in 1.7, and we agree that this is an issue. We have made some changes in the hotfixes since, and are continuing to read your feedback and make adjustments as needed. You can always @ Pelly directly on our social platforms for key feedback in this regard, especially on Discord, the Forums and Reddit!
  • Migration ended up far too non-restrictive and Assimilation ended up too restrictive as a result of the changes made to Discrimination. Both of these issues should now have been resolved in hotfixes.

I also want to take a moment to talk about the release and reception of Pivot of Empire. We’ve gotten a lot of positive feedback about the flavor it adds to India and how much more interesting playing in the region has become, which of course we’re very happy to hear! With that said, there’s also some things that didn’t work out quite as we wanted, which has resulted in some learnings for the Victoria 3 team going forward:
  • Most significantly, it’s clear that we need to spend more time testing and iterating on the balance of complex Journal Entries like The Unstable Raj before releasing them into the wild, to ensure the difficulty level and overall impact on game outcomes are where we want them to be.
  • We need to rethink how we set rewards for Journal Entries so that they feel appropriate to the challenge of completing them. We also need to get better about telling the player what those rewards are going to be so they don’t have to make a guess or check the wiki when deciding whether or not to try and complete a JE.
  • We need to ensure the AI can handle the content we add, particularly for complex/difficult Journal Entries.

Finally, I want to touch briefly on what’s coming next. I won’t spend too long on this, as next week’s dev diary is going to be the customary ‘what’s next after update 1.8’ which will be all about this topic, but I feel I would be ignoring the elephant in the room if I didn’t address the fact that a significant amount of the feedback we’ve gotten about 1.8 isn’t so much about what is in 1.8, but rather what wasn’t: namely, as a number of you would put it: ‘fixing the military system’.

There is of course a broad range of opinions on what exactly this phrase entails, but from my perspective, these are most significant issues we see with the Victoria 3 military system as it stands:
  • Front splitting causing wars to become unmanageable or frustrating
  • Units suddenly teleporting away when their front disappears
  • Supply isn’t impactful enough and armies win battles they should really lose when facing critical equipment shortages
  • Lack of a proper military access system, i.e. Prussia having to naval invade to reach Denmark
  • Troop allocation to offensive vs defensive battles causing unexpected outcomes (for example, a general using all local troops to defend against one naval invasion causing another naval invasion to just walk in unopposed)

For the next update (1.9), our ambition is to take a crack at all of these issues and in particular try to find a proper solution for the front splitting and troop teleportation woes once and for all. Finding good solutions for these issues is going to be a fairly major undertaking, so you might have to wait a while for 1.9, but I promise we’ll try to make it worth the wait!

With that said, we’re done for today. Join us again next week as I continue to talk about what’s next in updates 1.9, 1.10 and beyond. See you then!
 
  • 95Like
  • 44Love
  • 6
  • 4
  • 2Haha
  • 2
Reactions:
This comment is saved for developer responses!
 
  • 3Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Aw darn it. I thought we would get trade rework, not another military patch so soon.

Presumably though 1.9 will be a smaller patch and 2.0 will be a big one with a big expansion, which might be why you are leaving trade rework and navies for then.

As always, thank you for reading the feedback and acting on it so quickly. The game just keeps getitng better
 
  • 17Like
Reactions:
There's a timeline of my experience with updates to Paradox games. The initial "Bugfixes! New changes! Bugfixes! Content! Bugfixes! Balancing!". Which gradually progresses into "There's a few bugs here and there. I've gotten a bit used to this content. Some of this stuff probably needs balancing. Then, the teasers and sneak-peaks for the next update often get me to a point where I can't play the current version because "It's annoying having to put up with this knowng it'll be updated in a few weeks."

What I'm saying while I don't expect to stop playing 1.8 just yet,

military update confirmed for 1. 9

is going to be featuring prominently in a lot of my thoughts from now on. Consider me hyped for the next patch <3
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
For me the supply not affecting military performance enough would be the biggest military related issue. I liked in older versions that if I could mess up the inputs to a countries military buildings and reduce their convoys enough that it would give me a huge advantage in battle.

For example, if I was exporting a lot of military goods to a country I didn't have to fear them being involved in my wars because I would just take the hit economically to cut them off from their supplies.

Overall being able to wage war because my economy is more stable and I can wield that against other countries would be ideal.
 
  • 18
  • 3Like
Reactions:
For companies/journal entry rewards:

do we really need better "rewards" here? Yes, companies can probably be buffed a bit, but I'm not sure we need to layer on layers of rewards. Holding India (or winning the Great game/etc) are big rewards on their own.

Similarly, with companies, there's room for a bit of a buff, but I think adding challenge/flavor is good too. In the future it'll be cool to see companies leading to journal entries, contributing to politics, and other topics. I should choose to establish United Fruit because I think it's a fun way to get involved in Central America, not just for the fruit throughput.
 
  • 7
  • 6Like
Reactions:
Here’s hoping for an open beta for 1.9 so players have a chance to participate and help to thoroughly test all the edge cases for military.

Also, as many have posted in the 1.8.4 thread, assimilation seems very overtuned after the changes this patch. Hope this will be addressed, despite this post seeming to indicate that assimilation is now fixed.
 
  • 15
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Congratulations.

The overall tone of the DD is very honest and transparent with the mistakes made. I am very much thankful for this.

I have much faith in the team and your judgement, without it we would not be playing this wonderful game.

Again, Kudos!
 
  • 21
  • 8Like
Reactions:
  • Supply isn’t impactful enough and armies win battles they should really lose when facing critical equipment shortages
I feel like this really glosses over the core issue here- it's not that we need a simple *balance* tweak to make combat less effective when under shortage of military goods. Its that we fundamentally have no supply system or logistics system other than just a modifier. We need to see equipment goods originating in a military HQ then trying to move all the way across the map to a front and it being impacted by distance, rails and front size. A la hoi4...

Also our economy doesn't find itself under transportation shortage when all the trucks and trains are moving troops from warsaw hq to siberia. That's a huge issue.
 
  • 20
  • 8Like
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
Aw darn it. I thought we would get trade rework, not another military patch so soon.

Presumably though 1.9 will be a smaller patch and 2.0 will be a big one with a big expansion, which might be why you are leaving trade rework and navies for then.

As always, thank you for reading the feedback and acting on it so quickly. The game just keeps getitng better

Military has been the achilles heel of Victoria 3 since the system was elaborated on back in development and after two years I think we need to face the facts, the decision to go in this bold new direction (even if done for good motives) was probably the wrong call given how it is still the biggest complaint about the game and is widely perceived to be the element holding it back from wider audiences.

Given how critical the military aspect is to a grand strategy game and given how, well, borked it is right now, taking the time to properly sort it out once and for all is the right call even if that means delaying other content.

So long as the system IS fixed once and for all. I don't know if that will be in the form of an overhaul towards a more traditional system (though I think that is unlikely) or if they will try and refine the system they have to be far better (which I think is likelier) but whatever the outcome, they need to get war to a place where it stops being the thing everyone moans about.

Hopefully 1.9 accomplishes that.
 
  • 18
  • 13
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
I still haven't read any fixes regarding the interest bug where if you have subjects the game thinks you have a natural interest somewhere and then you still can't start diplomatic plays in the region and aren't part of any DPs there either.
 
  • Migration ended up far too non-restrictive and Assimilation ended up too restrictive as a result of the changes made to Discrimination. Both of these issues should now have been resolved in hotfixes.
My lord ! Giving in to the demands of the "make non-heritage assimilation possible" movement has created a movement to "make non-heritage assimilation impossible" !
 
  • 24Haha
Reactions:
Aw darn it. I thought we would get trade rework, not another military patch so soon.

Presumably though 1.9 will be a smaller patch and 2.0 will be a big one with a big expansion, which might be why you are leaving trade rework and navies for then.

As always, thank you for reading the feedback and acting on it so quickly. The game just keeps getitng better
I think it would be 1.10 after 1.9 cause of the goofy naming system devs chose, I feel like navy is possible in 1.9 if it focuses on military.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Aw darn it. I thought we would get trade rework, not another military patch so soon.

Presumably though 1.9 will be a smaller patch and 2.0 will be a big one with a big expansion, which might be why you are leaving trade rework and navies for then.

As always, thank you for reading the feedback and acting on it so quickly. The game just keeps getitng better
1.9 will not be exclusively military.
Check back next week where we talk more about what's coming up as mentioned in the post.
A 2.0 patch will not automatically follow the release of 1.9, this is a somewhat common misconception. We will likely do 1.10, 1.11, 1.12 etc. until we feel like a patch truly deserves a 2.0 label (which might be never, look at EU4 patch numbers going up to 1.37 at this point).
 
  • 43Like
  • 8
Reactions:
Aw darn it. I thought we would get trade rework, not another military patch so soon.

Presumably though 1.9 will be a smaller patch and 2.0 will be a big one with a big expansion, which might be why you are leaving trade rework and navies for then.

As always, thank you for reading the feedback and acting on it so quickly. The game just keeps getitng better
I think after 1.9 comes 1.10 and not 2.0 :D
But what you say besides sounds good indeed
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Removing pain points is good for the military, but I would also say adding more points of agency for the player is also important. Using the freed up time the player dedicated to micro towards macro concerns of supply, doctrines, generals, politics, tech, and diplomacy.
 
  • 9Like
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions: