• 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 #5 - Production Methods

DD5 Thumb.png


Hello again and happy Thursday! Today we will be taking a deeper look inside Buildings to explore Production Methods. These determine the functions of the building, its inputs and outputs, and what employee types it requires to operate.

Many management games let you upgrade a building to increase its efficiency or expand its functionality. In these games, after the upgrade investment has been paid the impact is permanent and nearly always superior in every way to the building's previous functionality. But in Victoria 3 there are no actions without reactions, and novel innovations don't just make buildings better with no side effects. Improving industrial processes over time is to be expected, but in some cases those improvements might require goods as input that the country has scant access to, while others permit the output of a new type of end product at the expense of the old one. As a result, buildings in Victoria 3 require more flexible upgrade paths than what's afforded by permanent, linear, “no-brainer” improvements.

All buildings have several categories of Production Methods, usually between 2 and 5. Only one is active at any given time in each category. Most categories fall into one of these types:

Base: governs the general "tech level" and efficiency of the building, produces goods typical for the building type
Refining: reduces output of typical goods in favor of output of specialized or luxury goods, sometimes adding a special input
Automation: adds industrial goods as input to reduce the building's unskilled workforce requirement
Ownership: determines who owns shares in the building; typically governed by Laws

With the right technologies Food Industries can make Groceries from both Grain (Bakeries) and Fish (Canneries). They can also refine Grain and Sugar into Liquor (Distilleries). With advanced technologies Food Industries can be partially automated, drastically reducing the need for unskilled labor. Simple Food Industries are operated by Merchant Guilds (Shopkeepers), while more advanced and profitable Food Industries are owned by Capitalists who reinvest some of their dividends.

dd5_1.png

As one example, an Iron Mine's base Production Method determines if miners use only picks and shovels or if they also use some sort of engine-driven pumping mechanism. There are several different pumping technologies which also determine what fuel is used. The more advanced the pumping mechanism the more deposits can be accessed and the faster Iron can be mined, but the more Coal or Oil is used in the process. With higher tech pumps comes a requirement for more Engineers and Machinists to be on-site to control and oversee its operation. This creates more demand for qualified workers and also opens up a number of better paid positions to those Pops who meet the qualifications.

The revolution in chemical sciences of the era also enabled the use of explosives in mining, which is a secondary Production Method category used only in mines. Once Nitroglycerin is invented, it can be used in mines to generate even more minerals, at the expense of Explosives produced by the Chemical Industry but also with a higher rate of workplace accidents. By researching less volatile Dynamite, even more minerals are extracted at the expense of even more Explosives, with the additional benefit that far fewer workers will blow themselves up on the job.

Once invented, portable Steam Donkey engines can be deployed at mining sites to drastically reduce the amount of manual labor required just for hauling. This costs the building some money in the form of Coal and Engines, but reduces the amount of money they have to pay in wages. Perhaps more importantly it frees those Laborers up to do other work in other buildings if the state is running low on workers. But if wages are already very depressed it might not be a great idea to purchase expensive industrial goods just to increase the unqualified labor pool further, so this might not be a no-brainer decision for a player to make.

In most countries, simple mines are owned and operated by Merchant Guilds at game start. These are small-time purveyors of the goods produced represented by Shopkeepers. Once mines start to industrialize, Capitalists step in to take over ownership. In most cases these Capitalists will come from Shopkeepers promoted to these newly created positions, but some might come from other Pops in the state, even other Capitalists in buildings not quite as lucrative as these new mines. There are fewer Capitalists than Shopkeepers but they draw a higher wage, and more importantly they will reinvest some of their earnings into the country's expanding industry depending on how much profit their workplace is generating for them. As new ideas spread across your society you might be able to make the mining industry publicly traded instead of privately held, and later on in the game perhaps even nationalize them to be run by government bureaucrats or turn them into cooperatives where profit is split between workers.

dd5_2.png

Production Methods aren't limited to consuming and producing goods. Government Administrations employ Bureaucrats and Clerks who use Paper to produce Bureaucracy, one of the game's Capacities that let you govern more people and extend more state services to them. Railways consume Engines and a fuel such as Coal to produce both Transportation and Infrastructure, the former which is sold on the market and the latter which allows the state to support more buildings without loss of Market Access. Universities employ Academics that let the state guide research and development of new technologies and ideas. Virtually any kind of currency, modifier, or effect can be produced by Production Methods in buildings and can be applied in a variety of ways to the country, state, or even the building itself.

A basic Government Administration consumes 10 Paper and produces 50 Bureaucracy per fully-staffed level, but each additional level beyond the first adds a +2% Throughput bonus due to economy of scale. This increases both consumption of Paper and output of Bureaucracy, yielding more productivity from each of the Pops that work the building.

dd5_3.png

This of course adds a tremendous capacity for modding in new Buildings and Production Methods! Embassies that increase your Influence, but which can also be configured to consume Wine and Meat at state expense to increase the speed at which you Improve Relations? Shantytown Temples that can only be built on coastlines, that consume Fish and create jobs for pops qualifying for the Deep Ones profession, increasing state mortality but also the weekly rate of the global cthulhu_rising counter? We can't wait to see what madness you unleash!

If tweaking multiple Production Methods across several categories on every single building in the game sounds a bit complex compared to linear building upgrades - you're right! Thankfully we've built a number of tools to help with this process. Foremost among these are the Buildings panel, where you can get an overview of all buildings in your country organized by major and minor type. For example you could get an overview of all Rural buildings, or all Furniture Manufactories, or all Ports. If you have buildings of the same type in several different states, you can break it down further to view the individual building. On each level you can see how profitable the building is and adjust its Production Methods. You can even set all Production Methods for a certain building type to a specific setting all across your country with one click.

From the Buildings panel you can get a birds-eye view of all industries in your country and see at a glance how they’re doing financially. You can change Production Methods on an individual building or on all of them at once. You can even expand buildings directly from this screen if you so choose, or click on one to get an in-depth view of its balance sheet and workforce.

dd5_4.png

To minimize the requirement for mental math we have also created prediction tools that give you a breakdown of what to expect from choosing a certain Production Method, based on profitability predictions taking adjusted production and consumption into account, and summarizing which new job positions will be created and which will disappear. While it may on the surface seem obvious to just enable the Production Methods that make the buildings more profitable, keep in mind the societal effects as well - are there enough Pops in the state that qualify for the more advanced jobs this new process requires? Will the wage for these new jobs be sufficient to entice those Pops to switch professions? Will you inadvertently create a whole new class of well-to-do Machinists that may have pro-labor union sentiments? Or will the increased profits not lead to higher wages in the building because they're already competitive and fully employed, and will simply result in more dividends for the shareholders which will be funneled into increased luxury consumption? Which you choose might depend on your population’s social mobility, what politics you favor in your country (a socialist uprising may not be in your plans!) and whether you're able to supply luxuries yourself without benefiting your rival. More profitable domestic industries are never bad, but should be far from the only consideration when building your society.

Predictive tooltips will explain the anticipated impact on the building’s Balance as a result of changes in production, consumption, and wage requirements, as well as the changes in employment that could also impact the country’s politics over time. You will also be forewarned if there aren’t enough qualifying Pops to take on any new professions created, as this could limit your industry’s effectiveness.

dd5_5.png

That is all for this week. We will return to discussing more economic intricacies later, but for the next little while we'll be exploring domestic politics - starting next week when Martin will be presenting Interest Groups!
 
  • 338Like
  • 250Love
  • 21
  • 13
  • 2
Reactions:
will localized conditions effect output of buildings ? (for example the copper mountain in sweden producing either more or higher quality copper than say other mines) and will buildings that operate for long periods of time get higher efficiency due to experience ?
Buildings don't currently gain experience as such, but State Traits can impact Buildings in their state in various ways, creating local differences in viability and competitiveness. This is in addition to the resource potentials that determine how large industries of various types you can build there, of course.
 
  • 32
  • 13Like
Reactions:
I’m content to wait until you can answer this in more detail, though when you cover it, I’d love to know if there can be hybrids, such as publicly traded worker co-ops, basically simulating a company with a strong Employee Stock Ownership Program.

Also, please say that in more laissez faire governments, we’re not making the call on upgrading our factories. I’m already very down on the idea of building them in the first place, but upgrading? Ugh. Leave that to the capitalists! If I wanted to actively manage my economy, I’d play as a communist.
I would be extremely disappointed if they locked the player out of being able to change production methods based on the economic system. At this point it sounds to me that they aren't. It is also clear they aren't requiring the player to upgrade production methods for each individual building, as that building panel shows you can do it at a state or national level if you aren't interested in a high degree of micromanagement.

If it's a just a question of allowing the player the option to automate changes in Production Methods for those who don't want to do it manually, that would be better in my mind. I just don't know how it would work with the level of decision making this system requires.
 
  • 6
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Buildings don't currently gain experience as such, but State Traits can impact Buildings in their state in various ways, creating local differences in viability and competitiveness. This is in addition to the resource potentials that determine how large industries of various types you can build there, of course.
That brings up a good question about how pops retain work experience and how pops age out. Obviously it ties into the qualifications, but do different more experienced pops create higher quality labor rather than fresh new pop. Ie a machinist pop with 20 yr experience commands a higher wage with a better throughput than a new machinist?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Buildings orient themselves financially the same way under Command Economy as other economies, with the difference that all buildings are considered subsidized. So a building that's very profitable on its own doesn't burden the treasury, but any "profits" would (by default) be siphoned off by the Bureaucrats in charge. Meanwhile, buildings that can't carry their own weight will require regular (automatic) cash infusions from state coffers.
Wait, so in a Command Economy you don't really want to maximize profits (or surplus value...) but rather produce just the enough amount the state needs?

I mean, I'm not sure whether this is wrong or whatever, but seems an interesting difference to other government types.
 
Last edited:
Not to be naggy again but are their any, any at all, planned changes for the UI/GUI? Eg scaling or a "old version" (vic2). I really really don't like the look of this UI, while I'm sure I'd get used it to, it's really holding a lot of my hype up as a result.

Regardless, great work devs, the actual gameplay mechanics look really cool. Have we got a Political parties dev diary upcoming?

The UI is a constant work in progress. There are even things depicted in this Dev Diary that have been tweaked in the latest dev build of the game.

Constructive feedback on what you would like to see improved is always welcome!
 
  • 39Like
  • 19Love
  • 14
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Is there a reason worker co-ops are legally distinguished from "privately owned" concerns? Typically, especially in societies that are predominantly capitalist, worker co-ops *are* privately owned, just by the workers themselves. The obstacle to setting them up historically wasn't necessarily the legal regime (it's no matter whether a corporation of 10 capitalists or 100 workers owns something, after all, it's exclusive in both cases) as it was the difficulty workers had to acquire enough money to set something up.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
That brings up a good question about how pops retain work experience and how pops age out. Obviously it ties into the qualifications, but do different more experienced pops create higher quality labor rather than fresh new pop. Ie a machinist pop with 20 yr experience commands a higher wage with a better throughput than a new machinist?
My understanding was that a pop represents workers, retirees, and their spouses and children, so older workers are continually being replaced by new ones. But I think it does make sense for a community of workers to develop local expertise or traditions.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Seems like the more deeper you get into the industrial research tree, the more men are freed up to draft into the army! Great DD Wiz! My armies in Victoria 3 will be far greater than anything the internet has ever imagined.
 
  • 4Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Is there a reason worker co-ops are legally distinguished from "privately owned" concerns? Typically, especially in societies that are predominantly capitalist, worker co-ops *are* privately owned, just by the workers themselves. The obstacle to setting them up historically wasn't necessarily the legal regime (it's no matter whether a corporation of 10 capitalists or 100 workers owns something, after all, it's exclusive in both cases) as it was the difficulty workers had to acquire enough money to set something up.
I'm guessing that it is done with political regimes in mind as a sort of revolution from above (i.e. a democratic socialist or anarchist regime outlawing the commodification of labor).
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can aristocrats own mines and factories?
At the moment no, but I have been personally toying with the idea that maybe they should under certain economic systems. No promises that this will be in release though. The main problem with aristocrats owning mines at the earliest methods is that it doesn't transition in the same logical way as capitalists buying out and taking over merchant guild operations, and also ownership of mines is something that varied quite a bit between different countries so it wouldn't be accurate everywhere either.
 
  • 51
  • 17Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Buildings orient themselves financially the same way under Command Economy as other economies, with the difference that all buildings are considered subsidized. So a building that's very profitable on its own doesn't burden the treasury, but any "profits" would (by default) be siphoned off by the Bureaucrats in charge. Meanwhile, buildings that can't carry their own weight will require regular (automatic) cash infusions from state coffers.
Siphoned by bureaucrats ????
"Profit" of POE must go on cash reserves and/or to the state !
Bureaucrats who takes money made by a public buildings is thief/corruption !
If they do that, they MUST be a mechanic of corruption fighting !
 
  • 4
  • 3Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
At the moment no, but I have been personally toying with the idea that maybe they should under certain economic systems. No promises that this will be in release though. The main problem with aristocrats owning mines at the earliest methods is that it doesn't transition in the same logical way as capitalists buying out and taking over merchant guild operations, and also ownership of mines is something that varied quite a bit between different countries so it wouldn't be accurate everywhere either.
Just a thought: if you’ve got an aristocrat who owns a manor and a mine, and he has two sons, it’s likely that one of them will end up owning the manor and the other will end up owning the mine. But then, wouldn’t the branch of the family that invests its savings into a mine that it owns just have become capitalists?
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Yea but what about "Assembly Line" production and "Demand Dependent" production?

With increasing state centralization, unification, removal of trade barriers, common linguistic trade language (English for global market, regional language for separate states) brought about an increase to factory throughput and productivity.

Also, will you will be using Hoi 4's new railway and supply system to showcase how war and trade good transportation can be altered and how various places such as Suez Canal, Indian Ocean and Malacca Strait can become major trade junctions in the world and how trade can be disrupted?
 
...wait, so in a Command Economy you don't really want to maximize profits (or surplus value...) but rather produce just the enough amount the state needs?

I mean, I'm not sure if this is wrong or whatever, but seems an interesting difference to other government types.
That sounds like what you would expect from a Command Economy. The reason to have it in the first place would be so you can produce goods the state needs and not have to worry about their profitability. So if the game is modelling this that is great in my book, after all different economic systems should have tangible differences between how they operate.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I would be extremely disappointed if they locked the player out of being able to change production methods based on the economic system. At this point it sounds to me that they aren't. It is also clear they aren't requiring the player to upgrade production methods for each individual building, as that building panel shows you can do it at a state or national level if you aren't interested in a high degree of micromanagement.

If it's a just a question of allowing the player the option to automate changes in Production Methods for those who don't want to do it manually, that would be better in my mind. I just don't know how it would work with the level of decision making this system requires.

If I’m playing LF, I want the default to be that the owners of everything are in charge of, well, everything. I cannot emphasize enough how much I loathe the idea of being expected to do literally anything in the day-to-day operation of my economy if I’m playing LF. I don’t want to make these decisions on a case-by-case, regional, state, or national level. I detest the idea.

I want to set internal taxes, external tariffs, and maybe use my monopsony power to nudge the economy. Other than that, I want to let the economy do its own thing. It was one of my greatest loves of Vicky2, that playing hands-off was a viable way to play the game.
 
  • 13
  • 7
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Just a thought: if you’ve got an aristocrat who owns a manor and a mine, and he has two sons, it’s likely that one of them will end up owning the manor and the other will end up owning the mine. But then, wouldn’t the branch of the family that invests its savings into a mine that it owns just have become capitalists?

Imagine the second son then buys a manor, does he lose his ancient noble heritage going back centuries and just become a pleb capitalist with a manor?

Imo, the aristocracy should be a more exclusive club, pops can't easily jump in and out of it, it's more than just money.
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
Reactions:
The UI is a constant work in progress. There are even things depicted in this Dev Diary that have been tweaked in the latest dev build of the game.

Constructive feedback on what you would like to see improved is always welcome!

Rust-red steampunk and faded ledger vibes.
 
I don't know, this seems very micro management intensive. The player controlling every private building in the game seems, ugh, I don't know.

This has nothing to do with Vic2. I'll just have to wait to play it, maybe I'll love it or I'll hate it, it's hard to have an opinion right now.
 
  • 15
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
If I’m playing LF, I want the default to be that the owners of everything are in charge of, well, everything. I cannot emphasize enough how much I loathe the idea of being expected to do literally anything in the day-to-day operation of my economy if I’m playing LF. I don’t want to make these decisions on a case-by-case, regional, state, or national level. I detest the idea.
This is already kind of a dead horse, but: what I think would help me understand this point of view is if someone who holds it could give me a few examples of what they would consider a real-world “laissez-faire” economy from the time period. Then we could meaningfully discuss how a “laissez-faire” economy historically worked.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions: